The Iranian Terrorist and Nuclear Threat

On Monday, the local Iranian consulate wrote into the SCMP to say that Iran does not harbour any ambitions for nuclear weapons. Yesterday an Iranian think tank (The Institute for Trade Studies and Research in Tehran) says that we should not fear Iran if they do acquire nuclear weapons. Since free speech is restricted in Iran, one can only assume that there is an inherent contradiction in these two officially sanctioned views.

Iran does have a history of state sponsorship of terrorist organizations such as Hezbollah and Hamas. They have regularly called for death to America and Israel and they have referred to a war against the West. The current president has labeled the Holocaust a myth and for Israel to be wiped off the map. So too has it called for the end of America. (Link provided to a translated speech by the Iranian president for last point). He notes as follows:

"Unfortunately, the Islamic world has been withdrawing in the past 300 years. I do not want to examine the reasons for this, but only to review the history. The Islamic world lost its last defenses in the past 100 years and the world oppressor established the occupying regime. Therefore the struggle in Palestine today is the major front of the struggle of the Islamic world with the world oppressor and its fate will decide the destiny of the struggles of the past several hundred years."

Clearly the Iranian president sees it as a long-term centuries plus war. He continues: (Note the reference to the Palestinian "nation" adopting Islamic behaviour – i.e. blowing themselves up to kill innocents.)

The Palestinian nation represents the Islamic nation [Umma] against a system of oppression, and thank God, the Palestinian nation adopted Islamic behavior in an Islamic environment in their struggle and so we have witnessed their progress and success.

Finally, he says the struggle is between all infidels (anyone who is not a Muslim) and specifically names the US and Israel as two nations the world can do without. Here it is, a specific stated goal to eliminate both.

Many who are disappointed in the struggle between the Islamic world and the infidels have tried to spread the blame. They say it is not possible to have a world without the United States and Zionism. But you know that this is a possible goal and slogan.

If one looks at all the evidence, the conclusion is that Iran is trying to acquire nuclear weapons, that it will use on Israel and the West (they are already trying to build missiles that will reach Europe). If one remembers that the most virulent form of Islam is suicide bombings, then they aren’t going to care too much about their own well-being either.

The Iranian’s are right on one thing though – this matter should not be resolved by a United Nations talkfest.

Iran’s Contemptible President

Is there no end to the contemptible remarks that flow from the mouth of the Iranian President. Breitbart reports that Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is now saying that setting up Israel was part of the Holocaust plan (note: he previously denied that the Holocaust ever existed, so either he was just lying the first time, or suddenly became aware of the truth of the Holocaust.) Brietbart notes:

Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Iran’s hard-line president who has said the Holocaust was a myth, now has charged that European countries sought to complete the genocide by establishing a Jewish state in the midst of Muslim countries. "Don’t you think that continuation of genocide by expelling Jews from Europe was one of their aims in creating a regime of occupiers of Al- Quds (Jerusalem)?" the official Islamic Republic News agency quoted Ahmadinejad as saying Sunday. "Isn’t that an important question?"

Breitbart also notes:

In October, Ahmadinejad called for Israel to be "wiped off the map."

And:

Last month, Ahmadinejad said the Holocaust, in which Nazi Germany killed six million Jews, was a myth. After global outrage over the comments, he said that Europeans, if they insist the Holocaust occurred, should cede some of their territory for a Jewish state.

Meanwhile in North Korea (According to the UK Times):

NORTH KOREA is working to restart a reactor that would produce enough plutonium to make 10 atomic bombs a year, a leading American nuclear scientist has revealed.

Siegfried Hecker, former director of the US government’s top secret Los Alamos laboratory, also said the North Koreans reprocessed 8,000 fuel rods to make up to 14kg (30lb) of plutonium last summer, despite taking part in six-party talks hosted by China to end their weapons programme.

“They have the plutonium,” he said. “We have to assume the North Koreans can and have made a few nuclear devices.”

One can only imagine what would happen if North Korea started selling its nukes to Iran.

Ratzinger’s New World Order

If anyone is any doubt that religion does not try to influence governments and politics in a broad, grand scale, hopefully this post will help. Last year John Paul II called for a new world order in his New Year’s message and it appears that the new pope, Mr. Ratzinger is calling for his version of a new world order in his 2005 Xmas message.

At the end of of 2004, John Paul II is quoted as saying he wants …:

"an order that is able to give adequate solutions to today’s problems based on the dignity of the human being, on an integral development of society, on solidarity among nations rich and poor, on the sharing of resources and the extraordinary results of scientific and technical progress."

Except for the points I have put in bold type, we already have such a system – it is called capitalism and it is not just an adequate system, it is the only efficient and moral system that allows men to lead a dignified life, based on the moral premise that their life is the proper standard of moral value. (However even here, the former pope uses a bad choice of words, for example, I think sovereignty would be a better word than dignity.)

The idea of solidarity for the sake of solidarity is a terrible idea though. It is a sick person indeed who wishes to have solidarity to with regimes like North Korea, Iran or the former Taliban in Afghanistan. The former pope also contradicts the idea of adequate solutions when he calls for the sharing of resources – He appears vague in this call, but it sounds like socialism to me.

The new pope, Mr. Ratzinger was equally vague in his call for a new world order. He is reported as saying:

"The life-giving power of his light is an incentive for building a new world order based on just ethical and economic relationships," the Holy Father added. [Holy Father Indeed!]

However Ratzinger is 1000 times worse than John Paul II and given the chance would take us back to the dark ages. To get a full idea of what Ratzinger would think is a new world order, one would have to read St. Augustine (Ratzinger’s favourite philosopher). To get a full idea of what that would be like, just think about what happened during the dark ages, when the Popes had their new world order – it was a time of religious persecution where life was nasty, brutish, lonely and short.

Economically, our world is doing pretty well right now, at least in the West. (Radical Islam is still the biggest threat and that needs to be eliminated). In general, calls for more religion, any religion will harm our prosperity. This includes calls from Ratzinger’s Catholics or George Bush’s evangelical appointees.

We need more capitalism and no religion.

Update:

According to the SCMP, Ratzinger is quoted as saying:

"The modern age is often seen as an awakening of reason from its slumbers, humanity’s enlightenment after an age of darkness," the leader of the world’s 1.2 billion Catholics said. "Yet without the light of Christ, the light of reason is not sufficient to enlighten humanity and the world."

They also say:

Since his election in April, the Pope has repeatedly reminded Catholics not to give in to an "ethical relativism" where circumstances can be used to justify actions that should be considered wrong in all cases.

Let’s take the first bit first – reason as the age of awakening from an era of slumbers. Let’s not forget that age was not age of slumber but rather of irrational persecution fueled by religious persecution of anyone who chose not to believe the church’s fairy tales. Unbelievers were tortured and justice was dispensed according to such ideas as "trial by fire". That is what he calls the "light of Christ" helped perpetuate. Indeed by calling it the "light of Christ" he is really trying to cloak an incredible evil. Reason, through science, production and capitalism have provided many, many modern achievements that the "light of Christ" would have denied. (Even today Mormons refuse blood transfusions.)

Now with regard to ethical relativism. I agree that we should not be blinded by relativism in ethics. If one holds that man’s life is the proper standard of moral value, then there can be no room for any kind of religious mysticism in a man’s realm of ethics. They would be guilty of just the kind of ethical relativism that Ratzinger seems to condemn. In this sense men should not use religion in ethics, they should not to give in to not consider an "ethical relativism" [such as religion]where circumstances can be used to justify actions that should be considered wrong in all cases.

Catholic Inversion of Justice

According to the SCMP Catholic Bishop Joseph Zen has judged the Korean rioters innocent even before a trial. It appears he has also saved his critisisms for the police, not the rioters. From my own experience newspapers have a tendency to misquote, I am putting this quote in from Zen, but leave it open to clarification by him or his spokesmen. From the SCMP Zen is quoted about the rioters:

"They are children of the Catholic family, I hope their appearance in court today will run smoothly, because they have not committed any offence," the bishop said yesterday, after visiting three Koreans and a Japanese suspect held at Wong Tai Sin Police Station

Zen is also apparently offering accomodation:

Mr Clancey said Bishop Joseph Zen Ze-kiun would provide accommodation and surety to 12 detainees, though not a Taiwanese student and a mainland designer.

He also clarified previous critisisms of the police. Again the SCMP says:

But he clarified an earlier remark about police treatment of the protesters.

"The press may have mistaken my meaning as criticising frontline officers. I was not, I appreciated them very much and expressed my sympathy to them. It is the high-ranking ones who are confused and irresponsible. I repeat, they are very irresponsible and incompetent."

It appears that Mr. Zen is critisizing the good and rewarding and making excuses for the bad.

Mr. Zen, the police including the high-ranking officers all acted responsibly. They handled a difficult situation well. Your remarks and actions are an inversion of the idea of justice.