Governing by Viscera

Apart from being governed by shallow men who know nothing of First and Last Things and who take a purely worldly and utilitarian view of themselves and both domestic and world affairs, we are governed in all too many instances by who are guided almost solely, although not quite entirely, by visceral instincts, many of which are complete without rational foundation and some of which are just completely irrational.

Consider the fact that almost all of those in public life who say that they are "pro-life" support the direct, intentional taking of innocent human lives in their mothers' wombs conditionally. Such people cannot see the contradiction represented by claiming to be "pro-life" while supporting the direct killing of babies in some instances.

To wit, then Texas Governor George Walker Bush simply shrugged his shoulders as he smirked during a televised debate in December of 1999, saying the following with a sense of exasperation after Dr. Alan Keyes asked him how he could be said to be opposed to abortion while supporting it in some circumstances: "I can't explain it. It's just how I feel."

God's law is not a matter of feeling.

Yet it was this same moronic George Walker Bush, who spent his lunch hour as Texas Governor playing video golf, who said as the forty-third president a few weeks after the tragic events of September 11, 2001, that he believed, without any evidence whatsoever, Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein, the then reigning “Hitler du jour,” shall we say, was responsible for the attacks. Addressing a Cabinet meeting in the White House, Dubya said, “I just feel it in my bones” that Hussein was responsible. Quite a basis for undertaking an unprovoked, immoral, illegal, and unconstitutional invasion and occupation of another sovereign nation.

Similarly, the ever-mercurial President Donald John Trump is dismissing Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard’s assessment that the Islamic Republic of Iran is not currently in the process of developing a nuclear weapon:

President Trump broke with Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard’s prior suggestion in March that Iran was not actively pursuing a nuclear weapon and warned that the theocratic regime is “close” to having one.

Back in March, Gabbard had testified before the Senate Intelligence Committee that Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei hadn’t “authorized the nuclear weapons program that he suspended in 2003.”

“I don’t care what she said. I think they were very close to having one,” Trump told reporters aboard Air Force One early Tuesday during his return flight from the Group of Seven summit in Canada.

President Trump concluded that Iran was “very close” to a nuclear bomb.

Gabbard, who testified before the Senate Appropriations Committee in a closed-door session Tuesday, later told reporters that she and Trump are “on the same page.”

“President Trump was saying the same thing that I said in my annual threat assessment back in March. Unfortunately, too many people in the media don’t care to actually read what I said,” Gabbard said, according to CNN.

In March, Gabbard told lawmakers: “The IC [Intelligence Community] continues to assess that Iran is not building a nuclear weapon and Supreme Leader Khamanei has not authorized the nuclear weapons program he suspended in 2003.” 

She also cautioned at the time that the IC is still monitoring if “Tehran decides to reauthorize its nuclear weapons program” and “Iran’s enriched uranium stockpile is at its highest levels and is unprecedented for a state without nuclear weapons.”

Last week, Israel fired off preemptive strikes on Iran, targeting the regime’s top military brass, scientists, missile capabilities and nuclear facilities.

Those attacks came under the assertion that the threat from Iran was imminent. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu defended the unprecedented assault on Tehran by warning that “if not stopped, Iran could produce a nuclear weapon in a very short time.”

However, on Sunday, Netanyahu clarified on “Special Report with Bret Baier” that the Israelis believe Iran “would achieve a test device and possibly an initial device within months and certainly less than a year.”

Tulsi Gabbard has been a top ally of President Trump, though back in 2020, she ripped his decision to kill Quds Force leader Gen. Qassem Soleimani.Getty Images

“The intel we got and we shared with the United States was absolutely clear, was absolutely clear that they were working in a secret plan to weaponize the uranium,” Netanyahu claimed when pressed about Gabbard’s assessment.

“We saw enough uranium, enriched uranium for nine bombs.”

A senior Trump admin official told The Post Tuesday: “At the highest levels of the US government, we believe that Iran is as close to having a nuclear weapon as one can get. They have all the components necessary to put one together.”

Trump’s support of Israel’s attack on Iran has splintered much of the MAGA base, with traditional allies such as right-wing pundit Tucker Carlson and Steve Bannon decrying the move and warning against joining the war effort.

Vice President JD Vance in a Tuesday post on X sought to allay concerns from Trump supporters who are “worried about foreign entanglement after the last 25 years of idiotic foreign policy.”

“He may decide he needs to take further action to end Iranian enrichment,” Vance said. “But I believe the president has earned some trust on this issue. And having seen this up close and personal, I can assure you that he is only interested in using the American military to accomplish the American people’s goals.”

Gabbard has been strikingly quiet in the public eye — and was apparently left out of a Camp David strategy session on Tehran’s nuclear ambitions — amid Israel’s large-scale offensive. This year’s unclassified Intelligence Community’s “Annual Threat Assessment” report noted that “pressure has probably built” on Khamenei to pursue a nuke.

As the DNI, Gabbard is tasked with overseeing and coordinating the work done by the country’s 18 intelligence agencies. Prior to assuming that role, Gabbard had been a staunch skeptic of “forever wars” and war hawks.

Just prior to Israel’s attack, Gabbard ominously warned that the world was on the brink of “nuclear annihilation,” though her bone-chilling remarks did not seem related to the Israel-Iran conflict.

Last week, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) released a 22-page unclassified report about Iran’s nuclear program that did not provide evidence that the regime was after a nuke, but raised concerns about its enrichment levels.

“The Agency has no credible indications of an ongoing, undeclared structured nuclear programme
of the type described above in Iran and notes the statements of the highest officials in Iran that the use
of nuclear weapons is incompatible with Islamic Law,” the report said.

“While safeguarded enrichment activities are not forbidden in and of themselves, the fact that Iran
is the only non-nuclear-weapon State in the world that is producing and accumulating uranium enriched
to 60% remains a matter of serious concern.”

Typically, 90% enrichment is seen as the weapons-level threshold, but scientists at the IAEA have noted that it’s easier to get from 60% to 90% enrichment than it is to get to 60%.

Since the inception of his 2016 presidential campaign, Trump has been emphatic that Iran cannot be allowed to obtain a nuclear weapon, which experts fear could trigger a nuclear arms race in the Middle East.

In 2018, Trump withdrew from the Obama-era Iran nuclear agreement, known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, which featured sanctions relief in exchange for Tehran making concessions on its nuclear programs and submitting to more oversight.

Israel’s preemptive strikes on Iran and subsequent domination of the regime’s airspace came ahead of another planned round of negotiations over Tehran’s nuclear program. Those talks were later canceled.

“Iran should have signed the ‘deal’ I told them to sign. What a shame, and waste of human life. Simply stated, IRAN CAN NOT HAVE A NUCLEAR WEAPON. I said it over and over again! Everyone should immediately evacuate Tehran!” Trump posted on Truth Social Monday evening.

A mass evacuation of Tehran ensued.

There are lingering questions about Israel’s ability to fully obliterate Iran’s nuclear program, particularly the Fordow fuel enrichment plant, which is buried about half a mile under a mountain. Many analysts believe the Israelis would need US bombers and heavy-duty bunker-buster bombs to take out the facility.

The president rushed back to the White House early Tuesday from the G7 summit in Canada, though he has denied that it was related to a cease-fire proposal from Iran.

“I have not reached out to Iran for ‘Peace Talks’ in any way, shape, or form. This is just more HIGHLY FABRICATED, FAKE NEWS! If they want to talk, they know how to reach me. They should have taken the deal that was on the table – Would have saved a lot of lives!!!” Trump said on Truth Social. (President Trump splits with Tulsi Gabbard's assessment that Iran isn't pursuing a nuke: 'Don't care what she said'.)

In other words, do not confuse me with evidence. The Israelis claim that Iran is “close” to developing a nuclear weapon, and we must believe them without question because they are, after all, the Israelis, the “chosen people” who know what it is they are doing.

Sure, I will concede the Zionists of Israel know exactly what they are doing by making one histrionic claim after another in their quest to complete their “Greater Israel” project, which demands the “pacification” of Iran and the complete “ethnic cleansing of the Palestinians in Gaza, many of whom are starving to death because of the Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s monstrously cruel decision to deny international relief efforts to feed the victims of his genocidal madness.

No rational human being can believe a single word uttered by “intelligence experts” whose infallibly false information has led the United States of America and other nations into needless wars that provide excuses for social control, censorship and surveillance of law-abiding citizens at home and endless wars abroad, especially in the Middle East for the benefit of politically connected contractors, the expansion of the military budget, and the realization of Israel’s own imperial designs.

The misinformation, misdirection, and outright fabrication of “reliable reports” was summarized by writer Sean Davis of The Federalist as follows:

A lot of people don’t know this, but if you say “nuclear weapons” into a mirror three times, you can ignore every lesson of history—the corruption and incompetence of the Western intel apparatus, the failure of Middle East military interventionism (Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Syria, Ukraine), the cost in lives and money of failed wars based on lies—and you magically won’t have to deal with any of the consequences.

I mean sure—Western interventionism in Iran in the 1950s, or Vietnam in the 1960s, or Iran again in the 1970s, or Iran again in the 1980s but this time with drug cartels, or Iraq and Bosnia in the 1990s, or Iraq and Afghanistan in the 2000s, or still Iraq and Afghanistan in the 2010s plus Libya and the whole moronic Arab Spring thing, or Ukraine in the 2020s—those were disasters that cost trillions of dollars and countless lives.

And yes, our military-intel-industrial complex lied about Vietnam, and killed Kennedy, and ran a coup against Nixon, and then killed another Kennedy, and tried to get MLK Jr. to kill himself, and ran drugs all throughout the Americas to fund shenanigans in the Middle East, and funded bin Laden and the Taliban, and missed 9/11, and lied about Iraq WMD, and got an ambassador murdered in Benghazi, and turned Libya into slave market run by terrorists, and created ISIS, and ran the Russian collusion hoax, and tried to overthrow Trump with the Ukraine hoax, and weaponized a bat virus that killed millions of people and lied about it, and used the virus they made to steal an election, and arrested Trump, and tried to bankrupt him, and tried to make him die in prison, and when that failed denied him adequate security leading to him being shot in the head. Yes, they said and did all those things.

But you can trust them now. Because if you just say “nuclear weapons,” all of that history goes away and the war they’re demanding will be totally awesome with no downsides. (https://x.com/seanmdav/status/1934823451346227641.)

Yes, that is an excellent summary of the abject lies that officials of the government of the United States of America have told over and over and over again. How sad it is that many people, including many traditionally-minded Catholics, are stupid enough to keep falling for this deception when it is presented anew.

Let me provide a review of the falsehoods were fed to the American people by George Walker Bush, Richard Bruce Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, Condoleezza Rice, and Colin Powell in 2002 and early 2003:

The push on the part of the neoconservative war hawks in the administration of then President George Walker Bush to use the attacks that took place on September 11, 2001, as the pretext to plan a war with Iraq had its roots in the "Project for the New American Century," which was cooked up by some of those who would later plan and execute the Iraq War as a means of effecting a "regime change" in Iraq that would benefit "America's only ally" in the Middle East, Israel, by creating a peaceful, democratic Arab nation that world conform to the principles of American "exceptionalism" (which contends, of course, that the American "way" is the and only model for all countries in the world in order to know true "progress" and social and economic growth and stability, that it is the "mission" of the United States of America to spread its "way" around the world).

Among the charter signatories of the "Project for the New American Century," which released its statement of principles on June 3, 1997, were John Ellis (JEB!) Bush, Richard B. Cheney, I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby, Norman Podhoretz, James Danforth Quayle (yes, that James Danforth Quayle), Donald Rumsfeld, the Catholic neocon war hawk and mocker of the Social Reign of Christ the King named George Weigel, and Paul Wolfowitz. Among those who made contributions to the work of the "Project for the new American Century were Richard Armitage, John Bolton, William Kristol, and Richard Perle. Readers will surely recognize that several future officials in the administration of President George Walker Bush were very active in an organization which sought to promote "regime change" in Iraq as the means to "stabilize" the Middle East as to make the region safe for the country that persecutes Palestinians and sees fit to invade the sovereign country of Lebanon and to bomb its civilians at will, Israel. 

Richard Cheney, of course, was Vice President of the United States of America, from January 20, 2001, to January 20, 2009.

I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby was the Chief of Staff for Vice President Cheney from 2001 to 2005.

Donald D. Rumsfeld was the United States Secretary of Defense from January 20, 2001, to December 18, 2006.

Richard Perle was the Chairman of the Defense Board Advisory Committee in the White House of President George Walker Bush from 2001 to 2003.

Paul Wolfowitz was the Deputy Secretary of Defense of the United States of America from January 20, 2001, to June 1, 2005.

John Bolton was the United States Ambassador to the United Nations from August 1, 2005, to December 9, 2006, and in a remarkable display of Donald John Trump’s poor judgment of personnel, served as the forty-fifth president’s National Security Adviser from April 9, 2018, to September 10, 2019,

Richard Armitage was the United States Deputy Secretary of State from March 26, 2001, to February 22, 2005.

Mind you, this is only a sampling of the individuals whose neoconservative war hawk roots who served in the George Walker Bush administration who had an association with the "Project for the New American Century."

It was on January 26, 1998, that several of the participants in the "Project for the New American Century" sent an open letter then President William Jefferson Blythe Clinton to urge "regime change" in Iraq:

We are writing you because we are convinced that current American policy toward Iraq is not succeeding, and that we may soon face a threat in the Middle East more serious than any we have known since the end of the Cold War.  In your upcoming State of the Union Address, you have an opportunity to chart a clear and determined course for meeting this threat.  We urge you to seize that opportunity, and to enunciate a new strategy that would secure the interests of the U.S. and our friends and allies around the world.  That strategy should aim, above all, at the removal of Saddam Hussein’s regime from power.  We stand ready to offer our full support in this difficult but necessary endeavor.

The policy of “containment” of Saddam Hussein has been steadily eroding over the past several months.  As recent events have demonstrated, we can no longer depend on our partners in the Gulf War coalition to continue to uphold the sanctions or to punish Saddam when he blocks or evades UN inspections.  Our ability to ensure that Saddam Hussein is not producing weapons of mass destruction, therefore, has substantially diminished.  Even if full inspections were eventually to resume, which now seems highly unlikely, experience has shown that it is difficult if not impossible to monitor Iraq’s chemical and biological weapons production.  The lengthy period during which the inspectors will have been unable to enter many Iraqi facilities has made it even less likely that they will be able to uncover all of Saddam’s secrets.  As a result, in the not-too-distant future we will be unable to determine with any reasonable level of confidence whether Iraq does or does not possess such weapons.

Such uncertainty will, by itself, have a seriously destabilizing effect on the entire Middle East.  It hardly needs to be added that if Saddam does acquire the capability to deliver weapons of mass destruction, as he is almost certain to do if we continue along the present course, the safety of American troops in the region, of our friends and allies like Israel and the moderate Arab states, and a significant portion of the world’s supply of oil will all be put at hazard.  As you have rightly declared, Mr. President, the security of the world in the first part of the 21st century will be determined largely by how we handle this threat.

Given the magnitude of the threat, the current policy, which depends for its success upon the steadfastness of our coalition partners and upon the cooperation of Saddam Hussein, is dangerously inadequate. The only acceptable strategy is one that eliminates the possibility that Iraq will be able to use or threaten to use weapons of mass destruction. In the near term, this means a willingness to undertake military action as diplomacy is clearly failing. In the long term, it means removing Saddam Hussein and his regime from power. That now needs to become the aim of American foreign policy.

We urge you to articulate this aim, and to turn your Administration's attention to implementing a strategy for removing Saddam's regime from power. This will require a full complement of diplomatic, political and military efforts. Although we are fully aware of the dangers and difficulties in implementing this policy, we believe the dangers of failing to do so are far greater. We believe the U.S. has the authority under existing UN resolutions to take the necessary steps, including military steps, to protect our vital interests in the Gulf. In any case, American policy cannot continue to be crippled by a misguided insistence on unanimity in the UN Security Council.

We urge you to act decisively. If you act now to end the threat of weapons of mass destruction against the U.S. or its allies, you will be acting in the most fundamental national security interests of the country. If we accept a course of weakness and drift, we put our interests and our future at risk.

Sincerely,

Elliott Abrams    Richard L. Armitage    William J. Bennett

Jeffrey Bergner    John Bolton    Paula Dobriansky

Francis Fukuyama    Robert Kagan    Zalmay Khalilzad

William Kristol    Richard Perle    Peter W. Rodman

Donald Rumsfeld    William Schneider, Jr.    Vin Weber

Paul Wolfowitz    R. James Woolsey    Robert B. Zoellick  (See Letter to President Clinton on Iraq,)

There was, therefore, a predisposition on the part of the neoconservative war hawks in the administration of then President George Walker Bush to use the tragic events of September 11, 2001, as the pretext to launch an immoral, unjust, unconstitutional invasion of a sovereign nation that posed no immediate or any kind of real, legitimate threat to the national security of the United States of America. This unjust war has cost the lives of nearly five thousand American citizens, including three thus far this year 2023,, including civilians, and has been responsible for the deaths of somewhere between 100,000 and 600,000 thoroughly innocent Iraqi civilians (estimates vary), some of whom have died as a result of American military actions, others of whom have died as a result of terrorist attacks launched by various warring Mohammedan factions within Iraq and by those who used the country's porous borders after the invasion as a sieve to seek to attack American forces in Iraq that they could not otherwise reach from their home countries.

The financial costs of the war have been staggering. The social costs for Americans at home have been staggering as the family lives of regular military service personnel and, most especially, of reservists in the United States National Guard have been disrupted and, in all too many instances, entirely broken, shattered. As I wrote The Remnant on early-2003 in in anticipation of these costs of the pending war, "for what?" To make Iraq safe for a "democracy" it did not want and will always be threatened by rival factions? For what?

Here is a brief synopsis of the misrepresentations that were made in the propaganda build-up to the Iraq War in 2002-2003 here in the United States of America: 

1) Saddam Hussein had no "weapons of mass destruction." He destroyed his stockpile of biological weapons in the 1990s. The biological agents that he used on the Kurds in 1991 were sold to him by the United States of America in 1985 to be used in the then ongoing Iran-Iraq War. Hussein, who was certainly a brutal thug responsible for the deaths of about 1.5 million Iraqis between 1969 and 2003 (about the same number of innocent human beings put to death under cover of the civil law by means of surgical abortions each year) simply stockpiled those weapons to be used in his own country at a later date. Who was the American envoy who arranged for the sale of these biological and chemical weapons of mass destruction. Look for yourselves:

Shaking Hands: Saddam Hussein greets Donald Rumsfeld, then special envoy of President Ronald Reagan, in Baghdad on December 20, 1983.  (National Security Archive, http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB82/ There is an interesting, fact-based article, replete with links to national security documents, available at: Shaking Hands with Saddam Hussein.)

As noted just above, Hussein stockpiled these weapons sold to him by the United Sates of America, choosing not to use them in the war against Iran, which did not end until 1988, and used them instead on the Kurds in northern Iraq following the conclusion of the Persian Gulf War in 1991, a war that was launched to expel Iraq's forces from a country, Kuwait, which Hussein believed that American Ambassador April Glaspie on July 25, 1990, had signaled to him was not of significant enough interest for the United States of America to do anything other than express a verbal condemnation in its behalf should he, Hussein, decide to reclaim Iraqi land that was taken away from it following the end of World War I.

2) The Iraqi government had no involvement in the September 11, 2001, attacks upon the World Trade Center towers in the City of New York, New York, and upon the Pentagon in Arlington, Virginia.

3) The Iraqi government had no involvement with Osama bin Laden or al-Qaeda. Saddam Hussein was a thug who governed Iraq in the style of a Mafioso don. Mobsters protect their territories very carefully. Saddam Hussein, a very secular and non-observant Mohammedan and a xenophobe who had no use for foreigners of any type (saved for the Soviets when it served his purposes to have them train his military forces), never wanted a rival gang of mobsters to enter and possibly destabilize his country.

4) According to then President Bush, in an address given on October 7, 2002, Saddam Hussein's Iraq had a "growing fleet of manned and unmanned aerial vehicles that could be used to disperse chemical or biological weapons across broad areas" (see George W. Bush: Address to the Nation on Iraq From Cincinnati, Ohio). This last point was particularly laughable. Growing fleet? How about two unmanned aerial vehicles? That's right, two. Their range? About 650 miles, which means that these unmanned aerial vehicles would had to have been transported by the nonexistent Iraqi navy undetected by satellite reconnaissance in order to get close enough to the United States to drop the nonexistent "weapons of mass destruction" that Saddam Hussein was alleged to have possessed or was in the "process" of developing. Absolute absurdity designed to frighten the American public and win international support for his scheme of "regime change" to aid the not-so-"democratic" State of Israel and American corporate interests.

5) Saddam Hussein was not attempting to purchase enriched uranium from the country of Niger to foment another attack on the United States of America, contrary to the claim made by President George Walker Bush in his State of the Union Address on January 28, 2003: 

The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa.

Our intelligence sources tell us that he has attempted to purchase high-strength aluminum tubes suitable for nuclear weapons production.

Saddam Hussein has not credibly explained these activities. He clearly has much to hide.

The dictator of Iraq is not disarming. To the contrary, he is deceiving. (President Bush's 2003 State of the Union Address.) 

No, it was George Walker Bush and his neoconservative war hawks who were deceiving the world. Saddam Hussein, caught up in his delusional world of paranoia and thuggery, was content to rattle the cages of the United States of America. He had no credible means to attack this country whatsoever.

The unjust, immoral, unconstitutional invasion of the sovereign country of Iraq to impose upon its people the "American way" so as to make the Middle East safe for Israel has also devastated Iraq's population of Christians, including Chaldean Rite Catholics. Mohammedan violence against Catholics and members of various Orthodox sects has been relentless in the past seven years. As bad as Saddam Hussein was, and he was a brutal thug, to be sure, he was a clever politician who wanted to have the support of as many groups as possible in Iraq, which is why he protected the small Christian minority in that country. One of the consequences of Hussein's overthrow has been to make Christians "fair game" for Mohammedan murderers, who have long desired to kill off or to drive into exile the "infidels."  (See More Christians Killed in Iraq, Chaldean bishop says U.S. accountable for death of Archbishop of Mosul, and Go Tell Iraq's Catholics--and American Babies--About The "Lesser of Two Evils".)

Saddam Hussein had a vested interest to protect the lives and the rights of Eastern rite Catholics in Iraq. As a secular Mohammedan, Hussein's Baath Party and his clan from Tikrit mattered far more to him than making Iraq into what it has become, a stronghold of Shiite Mohammedanism that has pitted Shiites against the Sunnis in pitched battles that were impossible during his brutal, autocratic rule (just as Josip Broz Tito held the warring ethnic and religious factions in the artificial entity known as Yugoslavia together by brute force until his own death in 1980, at which point the Balkans began to collapse and then dissolve into warfare and "ethnic cleansing," following by William Jefferson Blythe Clinton's NATO intervention and bombing of Serbia in behalf of the Mohammedans in Bosnia and Kosovo). Catholics are protected in Iraq no more. Their ranks have been decimated by the largely unreported, at least in the Western press, of attacks upon them by Mohammedans (that "religion of peace" George Walker Bush, the "lesser of the two evils," talked about endlessly) and by the exodus of many thousands of them into other Middle Eastern countries to flee from the violence and destruction.

That which is false can never bring good results, and the lies being told currently to whip up war fever without, I should add, even a though of an actual Congressionally approved Declaration of War in accord with Section 8, subsection 12 of Article I of the Constitution of the United States of America, will cause even more death, destruction, and instability in the Middle East than is being  caused at this time.

Nothing good has ever come out of Western meddling and nation-building in the Middle East, something that a secular writer explained in a very concise history of such meddling that explains the Iranians’ deep hatred of the United Kingdom and the United States of America that goes beyond the boundaries of the Shiite sect of Mohammedanism:

Iran’s Enemies in the 20th Century

All demonstrations in Iran against external enemies end with the inevitable “Death to the United Kingdom! Death to the United States! Death to Israel!” It is a cry that comes from the depths of the suffering of the Persians since the First World War.

• Indeed, while we in the West are not aware of it, Iran was the victim, in 1917-1919, of the largest genocide of the First World War  [ 1 ] . 6 to 8 million people died of hunger out of a population of 18 to 20 million inhabitants, that is to say between a quarter and a third of Iranians. Iran, although neutral, was crushed by the British armies, against a backdrop of rivalry with the Bolsheviks and the Ottomans. This horror left a traumatic memory that is still very present in Iran. There is no doubt for an Iranian that the United Kingdom is the first enemy of his country.

• The British, who had colonized Iran behind one of their officers, Reza Shah (1925-1941), overthrew him to place his son in power, Mohammad Reza Pahlavi (1941-1979). Behind these screens, they plundered the country’s oil. However, in 1951 the Shah chose Mohammad Mossadegh as Prime Minister. The latter nationalized the oil to the detriment of London. A quarrel ensued during which the British showed bad faith and organized a color revolution with the help of the United States. This was “Operation Ajax”. The new regime was no longer held by London, but by Washington. The United States Embassy, ​​which installed the telephone, placed derivations of the lines of all the ministers to listen to them without their knowledge, live. This system was discovered during the 1978 revolution. There is therefore no doubt among Iranians that the United States is their second enemy.

• When Mossadegh was overthrown, the British imposed General Fazlollah Zahedi in his place. Zahedi was a Nazi whom they had imprisoned in Cairo, but London was counting on him to restore “order.” So he set up a secret police force modeled on the Gestapo. He recruited former Nazis to train it, and several hundred “revisionist Zionists” were sent by Yitzhak Shamir (then working for Mossad) to supervise them. The horrors of the Savak, the most terrible secret police in the world at the time, can still be seen in the museum dedicated to it in Tehran. So there is no doubt among Iranians that Israel is their third enemy.

Israel’s only enemy in the 20th century

Contrary to what the Israeli population believes after 25 years of “revisionist Zionist” propaganda, Iran – neither that of the Shah nor that of the Islamic Republic – never had the objective of annihilating the Jewish population of occupied Palestine. As President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad had made clear, the objective was to destroy the State of Israel as Russia had destroyed the USSR.

No, the only enemy of the State of Israel is the one that, for 80 years, has sabotaged every attempt at peace between Jews and Arabs: the United Kingdom. As I have often explained, when the Foreign Office drafted its plan, The Future of Palestine  in 1915, it specified that a Jewish state should be created in Mandatory Palestine, but that it should under no circumstances be capable of ensuring its own security. It was only two years later that the government of David Lloyd George drafted the Balfour Declaration announcing the creation of the Jewish National Home, and that the Woodrow Wilson administration made a commitment to create an independent state for the Jews of the Ottoman Empire.

The author of this text, Lord Herbert Samuel, became British High Commissioner to Palestine. True to form, he favored Jabotinsky’s “revisionist Zionists” on the one hand and, on the other, appointed the anti-Semite Mohammed Amin al-Husseini as Grand Mufti of Jerusalem. He was subsequently appointed Home Secretary in Archibald Sinclair’s government.

This policy continues unabated to this day: the United Kingdom still supports the “revisionist Zionist” Benjamin Netanyahu on the one hand and the Muslim Brotherhood, of which Hamas is the Palestinian branch, on the other.

The continuation of the conflict between the “revisionist Zionists” and Iran

Just after World War II, US President Dwight Eisenhower became concerned that his Israeli counterpart, Chaim Weizmann, was creating a “Greater Israel”—that is, not the reconstitution of the Kingdom of Jerusalem (which was already largely included in the State of Israel), but of the ancient Assyrian Empire (i.e., from the Nile to the Euphrates). He asked his Secretary of State, John Foster Dulles, to organize an alliance between Syria and Iran to balance Israeli influence.

It was at Washington’s request that Syrian President Adib Chichakli (PSNS) (1953-1954) signed a military cooperation agreement with Iranian ruler Mohammad Reza Pahlavi on 24 May 1953. It is therefore foolish today to denounce this same alliance (now called the “Axis of Resistance”) on the sole grounds that both regimes have been decolonised.

Yet that is what we are doing. In 1979, President Jimmy Carter ousted the Shah of Iran and his claim to Middle East domination by acquiring an atomic bomb supplied by French President Valéry Giscard d’Estaing and his Prime Minister, Jacques Chirac. To replace him, on the advice of his security adviser, Zbigniew Brzeziński, he moved Imam Ruhollah Khomeini from France to Tehran. Israel initially supported Iran against Iraq, supplying it with weapons as needed. Tel Aviv even organized the Iranian part of the Iran-Contra scandal. Then, it gradually changed its strategy while retaining some remnants of the Shah’s period. Thus, the EAPC-B consortium, half-owned by each of the two states, continues to operate the Eilat-Ashkelon pipeline, which is essential to the Israeli economy. In 2018, the Knesset adopted a law punishing any publication about the owners of this company with 15 years of imprisonment.

Starting with the Anglo-Saxon invasion of Iraq in 2003, allegedly because of its role in the September 11, 2001 attacks, London and Washington began to spread rumors about an alleged Iranian nuclear weapon, just as they had about alleged Iraqi weapons of mass destruction.  At the time, London and Washington hoped to force Iran to help them against Iraq.

These intoxications led to the vote of resolutions 1737 (December 23, 2006) and 1747 (March 24, 2007) of the United Nations Security Council  [ 12 ] . The leader of the Israeli opposition, Benjamin Netanyahu, then seized on this propaganda. For twenty-five years, he continued to denounce the “imminent” manufacture of an Iranian atomic bomb, even though Tehran submitted to the United Nations a proposal for a resolution creating “a nuclear-weapon-free zone in the Middle East”.

In any case, in 2013, William Burns (Joe Biden’s CIA director) negotiated the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPoA) with Iran in Oman on behalf of President Barack Obama. It was staged at the 5+1 meetings (i.e., the five nuclear powers of the Security Council plus Germany) in Geneva. But it was not signed in Vienna until two years later, with the United States and Iran reserving a long suspension to conclude a secret supplementary annex.

In a very long interview, just before the end of his second term, Barack Obama explained that he refused, as a precaution, to prevent Iran from embarking on the race for the atomic bomb, but that he was ready to intervene if Tehran pursued a military nuclear program. His Security Advisor, Susan Rice, declared: “The Iran deal was never primarily about trying to open a new era of relations between the United States and Iran. It was much more pragmatic and minimalist. The goal was very simply to make a dangerous country considerably less dangerous. Nobody expected Iran to become a benevolent actor.”

The US position  has not changed. While during his first term, President Donald Trump unilaterally withdrew from the JCPoA and the secret annex that Barack Obama had negotiated, he only verbally refused to allow Iran to enrich uranium, not during negotiations.

During this period, Iran began mobilizing Shiite communities across the Middle East to ensure its security. Then, with General Qassem Soleimani, Tehran returned to the Khomeini doctrine of aid rather than instrumentalization. Iran already had no more “proxies” before Israel destroyed Hamas, Hezbollah, and many others. Each had become independent.

The events triggering the confrontation

It turns out that on June 7, Esmail Khatib, Iranian Minister of Intelligence, made public an operation by his secret services. They managed to steal confidential documents on the Israeli nuclear program, just as the Mossad had managed, in April 2018, to steal Iranian documents on their nuclear research.

On 12 June, the IAEA Board of Governors—under the chairmanship of Rafael Grossi—adopted a resolution  [ 17 ] in which it noted that “the Director General, as stated in document GOV/2025/25, cannot provide assurance that Iran’s nuclear programme is exclusively peaceful.” It therefore considered that “Iran’s numerous failures since 2019 to comply with its obligations to cooperate fully and timely with the Agency regarding undeclared nuclear material and activities at multiple undeclared locations in Iran, as specified in document GOV/2025/25, constitute a breach of its obligations under its Safeguards Agreement with the Agency within the meaning of Article XII.C of the Agency’s Statute;.” Accordingly, it referred the matter to the United Nations Security Council.

But while the Iranian documents seized by the Mossad did not reveal any military nuclear program  despite the statements of Benjamin Netanyahu, the first Israeli documents seized by the Iranian Ministry of Intelligence called into question the neutrality of the Argentinian Rafael Grossi, director of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). They show that he transmitted observations from his organization to Israel, even though Israel is not a member. Among the IAEA governors, Russia, China and Burkina Faso opposed this resolution.

Laurence Norman, the Wall Street Journal’s special correspondent at the Davos forum on Iranian nuclear power, reported Rafael Grossi’s statement on Ukrainian nuclear power on Twitter, but did not publish an article on the subject. The information was confirmed by another journalist, this time from the New York Times, also on Twitter.

As it happens, Rafael Grossi has already been criticized for his strange silence during the Russian special operation in Ukraine: he revealed, during a speech at the Davos Forum in 2022, that the Ukrainian regime had stockpiled 30,000 kilos of plutonium and another 40,000 kilos of enriched uranium at the Zaporizhzhia power plant. Then, nothing more, despite Russian objurgations.

The day after the Iranian-seized documents were published, Tel Aviv attacked Iran. This is exactly the same behavior as during the 2006 war against Lebanon. Israel claimed to be acting after several of its soldiers had been captured by Hezbollah. In reality, it intervened to stop the Lebanese police and judicial investigations into a vast Israeli spy and terrorism network in Lebanon; investigations that could have led to a new interpretation of the assassination of former Prime Minister Rafik Hariri, as I showed in my book The Terrible Imposture 2. (Israel - Iran: the Confrontation.)

The Iranian “nuclear threat” is thus as illusory as the deception about Iraq’s “weapons of mass destruction.”

The history of Anglo-American meddling in the Middle East that was documented in the very fine history quoted just above is very similar to the history of American meddling in Mexico, which I discussed in Then, Now and Always: Viva Cristo Rey!, part two, Then, Now and Always: Viva Cristo Rey, part three, Then, Now And Always: Viva Cristo Rey!, part four, and Then, Now And Always: Viva Cristo Rey!, part five.

As I have noted so many times in the printed pages of Christ or Chaos from September of 1996 to February of 2004 and, after I ceased publication of the printed journal because of a lack of subscriptions to subsidize the printing and mailing costs, on this website from February 20, 2004, to the present, the government of the United States of America, having been founded upon a witches’ brew of Calvinist and Judeo-Masonic naturalistic, anti-Incarnational and Pelagian falsehoods, has been led by men who do not the just judgment of God upon their immortal souls when they die nor have the slightest qualm about governing in a completely Machiavellian manner as the “people” are fed spoonful upon spoonful of sweet sounding nothings designed to program to accept the current “party line” without any dissension and using the full might of their own Leviathan to crush those who dare to point out that the emperors have no clothes and are nothing shamelessly corrupt liars.

There are times, though, when a person or two within the bureaucratic behemoth breaks free of the Leviathan’s tethers and speaks the truth clearly to expose how, in the current instance, the leaders of the Zionist State of Israel literally are calling the shots of American foreign and national security policy. One such person, Colonel Nathan McCormack, was the chief planne for the Levant and Egypt branch of the Joint Chiefs of Staff within the United States Department of Defense:

Col. Nathan McCormack, the Levant and Egypt branch chief at the Joint Chiefs of Staff’s J5 planning directorate, has referred publicly to “Netanyahu and his Judeo-supremacist cronies,” to Washington having “overwhelmingly” enabled Israel’s “bad behavior” and pro-Israel activists in the United States prioritizing “support for Israel over our actual foreign interests.”

JNS has learned that McCormack, who according to his LinkedIn account has held his current role since June 2024, has also bashed Israel as a “death cult” that is America’s “worst ally” on a semi-anonymous social-media handle, where he has written hundreds of posts since the Oct. 7 terrorist attacks about Jews and Israel.

“The Western states go to great lengths to avoid criticism of Israel, much out of Holocaust guilt,” McCormack wrote on social media in April. “Israel’s actions over decades have prompted the accusations of ethnic cleansing and genocide.”

“Netanyahu and his Judeo-supremacist cronies are determined to prolong the conflict for their own goals: either to remain in power or to annex the land,” he wrote on social media in May.

“I’ve lately been considering whether we might be Israel’s proxy and not realized it yet,” he wrote in April 2024. “Our worst ‘ally.’ We get literally nothing out of the ‘partnership’ other than the enmity of millions of people in the Middle East, Africa and Asia.”

“The U.S. has not been an honest broker,” he wrote in June 2024. “We have overwhelmingly enabled Israel’s bad behavior.”

In one post replying to the idea of Gazans potentially finding refuge outside the Gaza Strip, McCormack wrote that Israel wants “to expel them and cleanse ‘Eretz Israel’ of ethnic Palestinians.”

On Oct. 11, 2023, five days after Hamas’s terror attack, McCormack wrote that “Israel has an absolute right to respond militarily” and “civilians may legally be caught in the crossfire” but that “Israel’s responses always (always—not hyperbole) disproportionately target Palestinian civilians.”

Despite some attempts to anonymize his account, McCormack has repeatedly revealed his name and job title on the platform and has posted photos of himself that match his LinkedIn profile and that include his uniform name tag. (JNS sought comment from the Pentagon and McCormack.)

“How so? What data? This is literally what I do at work every day,” he wrote to someone in May. “I’m the Joint Staff J5 Israel branch chief.” His LinkedIn profile indicates that he is also responsible for Egypt and the wider Levant.

On Aug. 3, 2024, he posted a photo of a meritorious service medal certificate issued to “Lt. Col. Nathan E. McCormack” on June 1, 2022. He has since been promoted to full colonel.

Other posts include descriptions of his conversations with generals in the Israel Defense Forces, briefings from Israel’s coordinator for humanitarian aid into Gaza and aborted plans to send emails over the Pentagon’s Secret Internet Protocol Router Network for sharing classified information.

A DoD contractor who has interacted with McCormack described the postings as “dangerous.”

“This is the kind of bitter oversharing I’d expect from someone who doesn’t know better,” the contractor said. “But at his level and under his own name and likeness? It’s mind-boggling. We have enough opsec and public perception problems as is.” (Opsec refers to operations security.)

The contractor raised the question whether McCormack’s personal politics influence the advice his team provides to senior leaders.

“If this is what he’s publicly sharing, who knows what he’s saying behind closed doors,” the contractor said.

“Who else has seen this? He’s an easy mark for foreign intelligence agencies,” the contractor said. “Publicly expressing such radical views that undermine the president’s policy opens the door for bad actors to exploit.”

“Posting discussions he’s having with colleagues and details about conversations with foreign partners? I’m gobsmacked,” the contractor said. Blake Johnson, director of communications at the Jewish Institute for National Security of America, described the tweets as “disappointing.”

“There should be lots of room in the U.S. decision-making process for vigorous and honest debate, but these anti-Israel rants seem out of place in a Pentagon that has such a strong working relationship with Israel’s Ministry of Defense,” Johnson told JNS.

That’s particularly the case for “someone entrusted with the role of chief of the Levant and Egypt branch of the Joint Staff’s Strategy, Policy and Plans Directorate,” he said.

One theme of McCormack’s posts is that U.S. support for Israel undermines the United States.

In August, McCormack wrote on social media that “the problem with pro-Israel political activism in the United States is that it prioritizes support for Israel over our actual foreign interests.”

Instead, he has called John Mearsheimer and Stephen Walt’s 2007 book The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy, which the Anti-Defamation League called “a classical conspiratorial antisemitic analysis invoking the canards of Jewish power and Jewish control,” a “very good” book.

“The argument, that the pro-Israel lobby in the United States has shaped U.S. foreign relations to support Israel in ways that are strategically harmful to both the United States and Israel still holds, even though the book was published in 2007,” he wrote.

“I also particularly like the attention they pay to efforts to silence criticism of Israel’s policy through claims of antisemitism, but also acknowledge actual antisemitism and condemn it,” he said.

The J5 directorate of the Joint Staff is tasked with providing assessments and recommendations directly to the chairman of the Joint Chiefs, per the Joint Chiefs of Staff website. “The Joint Staff J5 proposes strategies, plans and policy recommendations to the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff to support his provision of military advice across the full spectrum of national security concerns to the president and other national leaders,” it says.

McCormack’s profile includes a disclaimer noting that his tweets “do not represent the position of the Department of Defense or any of its components,” in line with the Army’s online personal conduct guide. (Chief Israel planner at Pentagon bashes Jewish state publicly, extensively.)

Colonel McCormack’s observations were very correct, of course.

However, in making them so openly as he did Nathan McCormack quickly became the former chief planner for the Levant and Egypt at the Joint Chiefs of Staff:

Hours after JNS broke the news that Col. Nathan McCormack, the Levant and Egypt branch chief at the Joint Chiefs of Staff’s J5 planning directorate, has long posted anti-Israel statements on a semi-anonymous public social-media account, a Joint Staff official at the Pentagon told JNS it is “aware of the situation” and “looking into the matter.”

“The information on the X account does not reflect the position of the Joint Staff or the Department of Defense,” the Pentagon official told JNS. “The individual is being returned to his service while the matter is being investigated.”

Returning to service means that “he will no longer be on the joint staff while the matter is being investigated,” the official said.

“We went through and looked at the hyperlinks and the content, so we were able to see the content, and we’re essentially assigning an investigating officer to look into the matter,” the official told JNS. “Our global alliances and partnerships are vital to our national security, enhancing our collective defense, deterrence and operational reach.”

The Pentagon official told JNS about the probe shortly after the social media account was disabled. (Pentagon removing Israel planner from Joint Staff, launching probe after JNS scoop.)

No, those who are honest about the murderous policies of the Zionist State of Israel usually do not have a long shelf life in government service.

For the time being, however, people such as Nathan McCormack are not subject to imprisonment in the United States of America yet, but that day may be coming.

In the Zionist State of Israel, however, governmental goons imprison people such as Nathan McCormack regularly, including journalists and researchers who expose and then document Israel’s stockpile of nuclear weaponry:

The Israeli nuclear program began in the late 1940s under the direction of Ernst David Bergmann, “the father of the Israeli bomb,” who in 1952 established the Israeli Atomic Energy Commission.

It was France, however, which provided the bulk of early nuclear assistance to Israel culminating in construction of Dimona, a heavy water moderated, natural uranium reactor and plutonium reprocessing factory situated near Bersheeba in the Negev Desert.

Israel had been an active participant in the French Nuclear weapons program from its inception, providing critical technical expertise, and the Israeli nuclear program can be seen as an extension of this earlier collaboration. Dimona went on line in 1964 and plutonium reprocessing began shortly thereafter. Despite various Israeli claims that Dimona was “a manganese plant, or a textile factory,” the extreme security measures employed told a far different story. In 1967, Israel shot down one of their own Mirage fighters that approached too close to Dimona and in 1973 shot down a Lybian civilian airliner which strayed off course, killing 104.

There is substantial credible speculation that Israel may have exploded at least one, and perhaps several, nuclear devices in the mid 1960s in the Negev near the Israeli-Egyptian border, and that it participated actively in French nuclear tests in Algeria. By the time of the “Yom Kippur War” in 1973, Israel possessed an arsenal of perhaps several dozen deliverable atomic bombs and went on full nuclear alert.

Possessing advanced nuclear technology and “world class” nuclear scientists, Israel was confronted early with a major problem- how to obtain the necessary uranium. Israel’s own uranium source was the phosphate deposits in the Negev, totally inadequate to meet the need of a rapidly expanding program. The short term answer was to mount commando raids in France and Britain to successfully hijack uranium shipments and, in 1968, to collaborate with West Germany in diverting 200 tons of yellowcake (uranium oxide).

These clandestine acquisitions of uranium for Dimona were subsequently covered up by the various countries involved. There was also an allegation that a U.S. corporation called Nuclear Materials and Equipment Corporation (NUMEC) diverted hundreds of pounds of enriched uranium to Israel from the mid-50s to the mid-60s.

Despite an FBI and CIA investigation, and Congressional hearings, no one was ever prosecuted, although most other investigators believed the diversion had occurred. In the late 1960s, Israel solved the uranium problem by developing close ties with South Africa in a quid pro quo arrangement whereby Israel supplied the technology and expertise for the “Apartheid Bomb,” while South Africa provided the uranium.

South Africa and the United States

In 1977, the Soviet Union warned the U.S. that satellite photos indicated South Africa was planning a nuclear test in the Kalahari Desert but the Apartheid regime backed down under pressure.

On September 22, 1979, a U.S. satellite detected an atmospheric test of a small thermonuclear bomb in the Indian Ocean off South Africa but, because of Israel’s apparent involvement, the report was quickly “whitewashed” by a carefully selected scientific panel kept in the dark about important details.

Later it was learned through Israeli sources that there were actually three carefully guarded tests of miniaturized Israeli nuclear artillery shells. The Israeli/South African collaboration did not end with the bomb testing, but continued until the fall of Apartheid, especially with the developing and testing of medium range missiles and advanced artillery. In addition to uranium and test facilities, South Africa provided Israel with large amounts of investment capital, while Israel provided a major trade outlet to enable the Apartheid state avoid international economic sanctions.

Although the French and South Africans were primarily responsible for the Israeli nuclear program, the U.S. shares and deserves a large part of the blame. Mark Gaffney wrote (the Israeli nuclear program) “was possible only because (emphasis in original) of calculated deception on the part of Israel, and willing complicity on the part of the U.S..”

From the very beginning, the U.S. was heavily involved in the Israeli nuclear program, providing nuclear related technology such as a small research reactor in 1955 under the “Atoms for Peace Program.” Israeli scientists were largely trained at U.S. universities and were generally welcomed at the nuclear weapons labs. In the early 1960s, the controls for the Dimona reactor were obtained clandestinely from a company called Tracer Lab, the main supplier of U.S. military reactor control panels, purchased through a Belgian subsidiary, apparently with the acquiescence of the National Security Agency (NSA) and the CIA.(11) In 1971, the Nixon administration approved the sale of hundreds of krytons(a type of high speed switch necessary to the development of sophisticated nuclear bombs) to Israel.(12) And, in 1979, Carter provided ultra high resolution photos from a KH-11 spy satellite, used 2 years later to bomb the Iraqi Osirak Reactor. Throughout the Nixon and Carter administrations, and accelerating dramatically under Reagan, U.S. advanced technology transfers to Israel have continued unabated to the present.

The Vanunu Revelations

Following the 1973 war, Israel intensified its nuclear program while continuing its policy of deliberate “nuclear opaqueness.” Until the mid-1980s, most intelligence estimates of the Israeli nuclear arsenal were on the order of two dozen but the explosive revelations of Mordechai Vanunu, a nuclear technician working in the Dimona plutonium reprocessing plant, changed everything overnight. A leftist supporter of Palestine, Vanunu believed that it was his duty to humanity to expose Israel’s nuclear program to the world. He smuggled dozens of photos and valuable scientific data out of Israel and in 1986 his story was published in the London Sunday Times.

Rigorous scientific scrutiny of the Vanunu revelations led to the disclosure that Israel possessed as many as 200 highly sophisticated, miniaturized thermonuclear bombs. His information indicated that the Dimona reactor’s capacity had been expanded several fold and that Israel was producing enough plutonium to make ten to twelve bombs per year. A senior U.S. intelligence analyst said of the Vanunu data, “The scope of this is much more extensive than we thought. This is an enormous operation.”

Just prior to publication of his information Vanunu was lured to Rome by a Mossad “Mata Hari,” was beaten, drugged and kidnapped to Israel and, following a campaign of disinformation and vilification in the Israeli press, convicted of “treason” by a secret security court and sentenced to 18 years in prison. He served over 11 years in solitary confinement in a 6 by 9 foot cell. After a year of modified release into the general population (he was not permitted contact with Arabs), Vanunu recently has been returned to solitary and faces more than 3 years further imprisonment. Predictably, The Vanunu revelations were largely ignored by the world press, especially in the United States, and Israel continues to enjoy a relatively free ride regarding its nuclear status. (Israel’s Nuclear Arsenal and Weapons of Mass Destruction: A Threat to World Peace. History and Analysis.)

Lovely people.

Well, as I have mentioned on this site very frequently, this is what must happen when the souls of men are held captive to the devil by means of Original Sin and also by their own Actual Sins.

Just as a person with an undiagnosed case of diabetes suffers the effects of the disease without his knowing the cause, so is it the case that those who are steeped in the ravages of Original Sin suffer the consequences therefrom even though they are ignorant of why they are so hateful, belligerent, vengeful and, if deemed necessary, violent. What is unjust even the Order of Nature (Creation) may not seem so to those who are convinced of the rectitude in cruelly punishing and torturing political opponents, scholars, and researchers who dare to expose Leviathan’s secrets and/or condemn its use of genocide against all those they deemed to be subhuman.

As Catholics, of course, we must continue to pray for peace as we consider the following words of Pope Pius XII in his last encyclical letter, Meminisse Iuvat, July 14, 1958:

Meminisse Iuvat was Pope Pius XII’s review of his pontificate, which began with the reminder that he had attempted to engage in a holy crusade of prayer by seeking the intercession of the Mother of God in all the dangers of the moment, dangers that were only exacerbated, not resolved by the ineffectiveness of human plans and resources:

1. It is helpful to recall, when new dangers threaten Christians and the Church, the Spouse of the Divine Redeemer, that We — like Our Predecessors in bygone days — have turned in prayer to the Virgin Mary, our loving Mother, and have urged the whole flock entrusted to Our care to place itself confidently under her protection.

2. Thus, when the world was rocked by a terrible war, We did not simply preach peace to citizens, peoples, and nations, nor did We merely work to restore to mutual agreement — under the standard of truth, justice, and love — those whom strife had divided. On the contrary, when all human resources and human plans proved ineffective, in many letters of exhortation and in a holy crusade of prayer We invoked heaven’s help through the mighty intercession of the great Mother of God, to whose Immaculate Heart We consecrated Ourselves and the whole human race.[1]

3. By now, of course, that war is over, but a just peace does not yet prevail, nor do men live in concord founded on brotherly understanding. For the seeds of war either lurk in hiding or — from time to time — erupt threateningly and hold the hearts of men in frightened suspense, especially since human ingenuity has devised weapons so powerful that they can ravage and sink into general destruction, not only the vanquished, but the victors with them, and all mankind. (Pope Pius XII, Meminisse Iuvat, July 14, 1958.)

Interjection:

Consider how this lament is similar to that of Pope Pius XI when he issued Ubi Arcano Dei Consilio, December 23, 1922, at the beginning of his pontificate just four years after the end of World War I and three years after the Paris Peace Treaty negotiated at Versailles by the Judeo-Masonic agents of the New World Order had taken effect:

20. Peace indeed was signed in solemn conclave between the belligerents of the late War. This peace, however, was only written into treaties. It was not received into the hearts of men, who still cherish the desire to fight one another and to continue to menace in a most serious manner the quiet and stability of civil society. Unfortunately the law of violence held sway so long that it has weakened and almost obliterated all traces of those natural feelings of love and mercy which the law of Christian charity has done so much to encourage. Nor has this illusory peace, written only on paper, served as yet to reawaken similar noble sentiments in the souls of men. On the contrary, there has been born a spirit of violence and of hatred which, because it has been indulged in for so long, has become almost second nature in many men. There has followed the blind rule of the inferior parts of the soul over the superior, that rule of the lower elements “fighting against the law of the mind,” which St. Paul grieved over. (Rom. vii, 23) (Pope Pius XI, Ubi Arcano Dei Consilio, December 23, 1922.)

The words of our last true Successors of Saint Peter thus far describe the world in which we live presently just as much as they did when they were written, respectively, eighty-nine and sixty-four years ago. Men must fall into states of abject barbarism when their hearts do not beat as one with the Most Sacred Heart of Jesus and the Immaculate Heart of Mary to which Pope Pius XII had been so dedicated as to establish a fast in its honor as a direct response to Our Lady’s Fatima Message.

Writing in Meminisse Iuvat, Pope Pius XII reminded Catholics that human plans, human, resourcs, and human endeavors are futile and will fail when Almighty God is esteemed little, denied His proper place, or even completely disregarded:

4. If we weigh carefully the causes of today’s crises and those that are ahead, we shall soon find that human plans, human resources, and human endeavors are futile and will fail when Almighty God — He who enlightens, commands, and forbids; He who is the source and guarantor of justice, the fountainhead of truth, the basis of all laws — is esteemed but little, denied His proper place, or even completely disregarded. If a house is not built on a solid and sure foundation, it tumbles down; if a mind is not enlightened by the divine light, it strays more or less from the whole truth; if citizens, peoples, and nations are not animated by brotherly love, strife is born, waxes strong, and reaches full growth.

5. It is Christianity, above all others, which teaches the full truth, real justice, and that divine charity which drives away hatred, ill will, and enmity. Christianity has been given charge of these virtues by the Divine Redeemer, who is the way, the truth, and the life,[2] and she must do all in her power to put them to use. Anyone, therefore, who knowingly ignores Christianity — the Catholic Church — or tries to hinder, demean, or undo her, either weakens thereby the very bases of society, or tries to replace them with props not strong enough to support the edifice of human worth, freedom, and well-being.

6. There must, then, be a return to Christian principles if we are to establish a society that is strong, just, and equitable. It is a harmful and reckless policy to do battle with Christianity, for God guarantees, and history testifies, that she shall exist forever. Everyone should realize that a nation cannot be well organized or well ordered without religion. (Pope Pius XII, Meminisse Iuvat, July 14, 1958.)

Interjection:

One will note that Pope Pius XII was careful to make the same distinctions as had been made by previous popes concerning the fact that Christianity and the Catholic Church are coextensive. This is a distinction made by Pope Leo XIII in his own last encyclical letter and by Pope Pius XII himself in Mystici Corporis Christi, June 29, 1943:

Just as Christianity cannot penetrate into the soul without making it better, so it cannot enter into public life without establishing order. With the idea of a God Who governs all, Who is infinitely Wise, Good, and Just, the idea of duty seizes upon the consciences of men. It assuages sorrow, it calms hatred, it engenders heroes. If it has transformed pagan society--and that transformation was a veritable resurrection--for barbarism disappeared in proportion as Christianity extended its sway, so, after the terrible shocks which unbelief has given to the world in our days, it will be able to put that world again on the true road, and bring back to order the States and peoples of modern times. But the return of Christianity will not be efficacious and complete if it does not restore the world to a sincere love of the one Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church. In the Catholic Church Christianity is Incarnate. It identifies Itself with that perfect, spiritual, and, in its own order, sovereign society, which is the Mystical Body of Jesus Christ and which has for Its visible head the Roman Pontiff, successor of the Prince of the Apostles. It is the continuation of the mission of the Savior, the daughter and the heiress of His Redemption. It has preached the Gospel, and has defended it at the price of Its blood, and strong in the Divine assistance and of that immortality which has been promised it, It makes no terms with error but remains faithful to the commands which  it has received, to carry the doctrine of Jesus Christ to the uttermost limits of the world and to the end of time, and to protect it in its inviolable integrity. Legitimate dispenser of the teachings of the Gospel it does not reveal itself only as the consoler and Redeemer of souls, but It is still more the internal source of justice and charity, and the propagator as well as the guardian of true liberty, and of that equality which alone is possible here below. In applying the doctrine of its Divine Founder, It maintains a wise equilibrium and marks the true limits between the rights and privileges of society. The equality which it proclaims does not destroy the distinction between the different social classes. It keeps them intact, as nature itself demands, in order to oppose the anarchy of reason emancipated from Faith, and abandoned to its own devices. The liberty which it gives in no wise conflicts with the rights of truth, because those rights are superior to the demands of liberty. Not does it infringe upon the rights of justice, because those rights are superior to the claims of mere numbers or power. Nor does it assail the rights of God because they are superior to the rights of humanity. (Pope Leo XIII, A Review of His Pontificate, March 19, 1902.)

If we would define and describe this true Church of Jesus Christ — which is the One, Holy, Catholic, Apostolic Roman Church— we shall find nothing more noble, morre sublime, or more divine than the expression “the Mystical Body of Jesus Christ” – an expression which springs from and is, as it were, the fair flowering of the repeated teaching of the Sacred Scriptures and the holy Fathers. . . .

Actually only those are to be included as members of the Church who have been baptized and profess the true faith, and who have not been so unfortunate as to separate themselves from the unity of the Body, or been excluded by legitimate authority for grave faults committed. "For in one spirit" says the Apostle, "were we all baptized into one Body, whether Jews or Gentiles, whether bond or free." As therefore in the true Christian community there is only one Body, one Spirit, one Lord, and one Baptism, so there can be only one faith. And therefore, if a man refuse to hear the Church, let him be considered - so the Lord commands - as a heathen and a publican. It follows that those who are divided in faith or government cannot be living in the unity of such a Body, nor can they be living the life of its one Divine Spirit. (Pope Pius XII, Mystici Corporis, June 29, 1943.)

Moreover, Pope Pius XII’s discussion of the futility of human actions to resolve the problems caused by sinful men who are intent on persevering in their sins of one kind or another was identical to what Pope Pius XI had written in Ubi Arcano Dei Consilio:

24. The inordinate desire for pleasure, concupiscence of the flesh, sows the fatal seeds of division not only among families but likewise among states; the inordinate desire for possessions, concupiscence of the eyes, inevitably turns into class warfare and into social egotism; the inordinate desire to rule or to domineer over others, pride of life, soon becomes mere party or factional rivalries, manifesting itself in constant displays of conflicting ambitions and ending in open rebellion, in the crime of lese majeste, and even in national parricide.

25. These unsuppressed desires, this inordinate love of the things of the world, are precisely the source of all international misunderstandings and rivalries, despite the fact that oftentimes men dare to maintain that acts prompted by such motives are excusable and even justifiable because, forsooth, they were performed for reasons of state or of the public good, or out of love for country. Patriotism -- the stimulus of so many virtues and of so many noble acts of heroism when kept within the bounds of the law of Christ -- becomes merely an occasion, an added incentive to grave injustice when true love of country is debased to the condition of an extreme nationalism, when we forget that all men are our brothers and members of the same great human family, that other nations have an equal right with us both to life and to prosperity, that it is never lawful nor even wise, to dissociate morality from the affairs of practical life, that, in the last analysis, it is "justice which exalteth a nation: but sin maketh nations miserable." (Proverbs xiv, 34)

26. Perhaps the advantages to one's family, city, or nation obtained in some such way as this may well appear to be a wonderful and great victory (this thought has been already expressed by St. Augustine), but in the end it turns out to be a very shallow thing, something rather to inspire us with the most fearful apprehensions of approaching ruin. "It is a happiness which appears beautiful but is brittle as glass. We must ever be on guard lest with horror we see it broken into a thousand pieces at the first touch." (St. Augustine de Civitate Dei, Book iv, Chap. 3)

27. There is over and above the absence of peace and the evils attendant on this absence, another deeper and more profound cause for present-day conditions. This cause was even beginning to show its head before the War and the terrible calamities consequent on that cataclysm should have proven a remedy for them if mankind had only taken the trouble to understand the real meaning of those terrible events. In the Holy Scriptures we read: "They that have forsaken the Lord, shall be consumed." (Isaias i, 28) No less well known are the words of the Divine Teacher, Jesus Christ, Who said: "Without me you can do nothing" (John xv, 5) and again, "He that gathereth not with me, scattereth." (Luke xi, 23)

28. These words of the Holy Bible have been fulfilled and are now at this very moment being fulfilled before our very eyes. Because men have forsaken God and Jesus Christ, they have sunk to the depths of evil. They waste their energies and consume their time and efforts in vain sterile attempts to find a remedy for these ills, but without even being successful in saving what little remains from the existing ruin. It was a quite general desire that both our laws and our governments should exist without recognizing God or Jesus Christ, on the theory that all authority comes from men, not from God. Because of such an assumption, these theorists fell very short of being able to bestow upon law not only those sanctions which it must possess but also that secure basis for the supreme criterion of justice which even a pagan philosopher like Cicero saw clearly could not be derived except from the divine law. (Pope Pius XI, Ubi Arcano Dei Consilio, December 23, 1922.)

That last paragraph, number twenty-eight, says it all. The gist of the two hundred thirty-seven articles linked at the top of this article can be summarized in the following words written by Pope Pius XI nearly one hundred years ago:

They waste their energies and consume their time and efforts in vain sterile attempts to find a remedy for these ills, but without even being successful in saving what little remains from the existing ruin. (Pope Pius XI, Ubi Arcano Dei Consilio, December 23, 1922.)

Pope Pius XII went on to explain in his last encyclical letter how great numbers of citizens, especially the uneducated, are won over by errors, something that applies very much in our world today because even those who believe they are “educated” are not truly such as they have brainwashed into believing every ideological “‘ism” imaginable, including being trained today to believe that there are more than two genders and that those of a certain race should feel guilty for the past injustices done those of different races and, quite indeed, should understand when they and “their kind” are subjected to violent assaults, which their masters have taught them, are fully justifiable and to be encouraged. Pope Pius XII’s prophetic insight in this regard has been ignored even by most fully traditional Catholics:

7. As a matter of fact, religion contributes more to good, just, and orderly life than it could if it had been conceived for no other purpose than to supply and augment the necessities of mortal existence. For religion bids men live in charity, justice, and obedience to law; it condemns and outlaws vice; it incites citizens to the pursuit of virtue and thereby rules and moderates their public and private conduct. Religion teaches mankind that a better distribution of wealth should be had, not by violence or revolution, but by reasonable regulations, so that the proletarian classes which do not yet enjoy life’s necessities or advantages may be raised to a more fitting status without social strife.

8. As We reflect on this subject, from a vantage point that enables Us to transcend the tides of human passion and to love as a father the people of every race, two matters come to mind which cause Us great worry and anxiety.

9. The first of these is that there are some countries in which Christian principles and the Catholic religion are not given their proper place. Great numbers of the citizens, especially from the ranks of the uneducated, are easily won over by widely published errors, particularly since these are often colored with the appearances of truth. The seductive allurements of vice, which tend to corrupt minds through all sorts of publications, motion pictures, and television performances, are a special menace to unsuspecting young people.

10. There are writers and publishers whose goal is not to turn their readers to truth, virtue, and wholesome entertainment, but to stir up vicious and violent appetites solely for the sake of gain, and even to assail and defile with lies, calumnies, and accusations all that is holy, beautiful, and noble. Unfortunately, the truth is often distorted; lies and scandals are published abroad. The obvious result is damage to civil society and harm to the Church. (Pope Pius XII, Meminisse Iuvat, July 14, 1958.)

Interjection:

Pope Pius XII was referring specifically to countries such as the United States of America and elsewhere in the supposedly civilized “West” that specialized in the dissemination of error and vice, and there are more relevant today than they were sixty-four years ago given the complete descent of motion pictures and television programs into an abyss of licentiousness and amorality that entice people to live in a debauched, depraved manner while their legitimate liberties are being stripped away by the modern caesars intent on distracting the masses with bread and circuses.

The Pope of the Immaculate Heart of Mary, Pope Pius XII, exhorted Catholics to have great confidence in the August Queen of Heaven, Our Lady, and in her intercessory power:

29. And since We have great confidence in the intercessory power of the Virgin Mary, Mother of God, it is Our ardent wish that, during the novena customarily held before the Feast of the Assumption, all Catholics throughout the world raise public prayers to heaven for the Church, which is — as We have said — afflicted and harassed in certain lands.

30. We confidently hope that Mary will not refuse or leave unfilled Our entreaties and the unanimous prayers of all Catholics — she whom We, with divine approval, decreed and proclaimed, in the Holy Year of 1950, to have been taken up, body and soul, into the abode of blessedness in heaven;[16] she whom We solemnly declared and ordained to be properly venerated by all mankind as the Queen of Heaven;[17] she, finally, whose maternal graces We invited a multitude to enjoy on the centenary of her appearances, as a gracious giver of gifts, in the grotto of Lourdes to an innocent girl.[18]

31. By your entreaties and your example, Venerable Brothers, may the flocks entrusted to you approach the altars of the Mother of God prayerfully and in great numbers on the days named. May they pray with one voice and one spirit that she who “became a cause of salvation to the whole human race”[19] might obtain for the Church the freedom she needs if she is to bring men to eternal salvation, reenforce just laws with the mandates of conscience, and bolster the bases of civil society.

32. Through Mary’s maternal intercession, they should pray particularly that shepherds kept far from their flocks, or otherwise restrained from the free exercise of their ministry, may be restored as speedily as possible to the positions they formerly, and properly, held; that the faithful who are beset by intrigues, falsehoods, and dissension, might find strength in the full light of truth and in unqualified union and charity; that the wavering and weak might be so strengthened by God’s grace that they will be ready and able to bear up under any hardship without abandoning Christian faith and Christian unity. (Pope Pius XII, Meminisse Iuvat, July 14, 1958.)

Interjection:

We are lost without Our Lady. Lost. Doomed. Damned.

Anyone who thinks that the problems which beset the world-at-large and the Church Militant on earth at this time can be ameliorated without a firm reliance upon, confidence in, and an unapologetic public proclamation of devotion to her and her intercessory power, and by this I means to call out all “conservative” Catholics in public life who write as naturalists (Americanists, American exceptionalists, founderologists, libertarians) and who refuse to make any public reference to Our Lady, her Most Holy Rosary, and to the fact that no one can save their souls without being devoted to her and cooperating with the graces she sends to them to do so.

Pope Pius XII called upon Catholics to pray to Our Lady so that all Catholics could have their lawful shepherds again, and we should do so now so that we can have a true pope restored to the Throne of Saint Peter to which each of us will readily and humbly submit in all of his decisions and declarations without a moment’s hesitation:

33. We ardently pray that every diocese might soon have its lawful shepherd again. May Christian principles be taught freely in all lands and among all classes of citizens.

34. May the young, in grade schools and high schools, in workshops and on farms, escape the snares of materialistic, atheistic, and hedonistic doctrines, which cripple the wings of the mind and cut the sinews of virtue. May they rather be illumined with the light of the wisdom of God’s gospel, which will rouse, raise, and direct them to what is best.

35. May the gates of truth be everywhere unobstructed; may no one bar those gates unjustly. May all men realize that nothing can withstand for long the force of truth or charity.

36. And, finally, may the heralds of the gospel soon seek out again the peoples whom they once led to Christ with apostolic zeal and exhausting toil, and whom they ardently desire to raise to a richer Christian and civil culture, even at the cost of difficulty, toil, and adversity.

37. May all the faithful ask these favors of the dear Mother of God; and for those who persecute the Christian religion may the faithful implore forgiveness in that spirit of charity which led the Apostle of the Gentiles to say, “Bless those who persecute you.”[20] They should also be mindful to pray that these men be given God’s grace and heavenly light, which alone can scatter the shadows of error and set consciences aright. (Pope Pius XII, Meminisse Iuvat, July 14, 1958.)

Interjection:

Yes, we must forgive others as we are forgiven.

The life of a Catholic is not that of revenge and hatred. It is not that of willing ham to those who persecute us. It is about forgiving others and seeing in our persecutors our best friends as they have been chosen by God to be the means by which we may humbled, brought low before men, made the laughingstock of all, and to be held contemptibly even by complete strangers. This is, after all, what Our Blessed Lord and Saviour chose to do when He effected our Redemption during His Passion and Death:

Who hath believed our report? and to whom is the arm of the Lord revealed? [2] And he shall grow up as a tender plant before him, and as a root out of a thirsty ground: there is no beauty in him, nor comeliness: and we have seen him, and there was no sightliness, that we should be desirous of him: [3] Despised, and the most abject of men, a man of sorrows, and acquainted with infirmity: and his look was as it were hidden and despised, whereupon we esteemed him not. [4] Surely he hath borne our infirmities and carried our sorrows: and we have thought him as it were a leper, and as one struck by God and afflicted. [5] But he was wounded for our iniquities, he was bruised for our sins: the chastisement of our peace was upon him, and by his bruises we are healed.

[6] All we like sheep have gone astray, every one hath turned aside into his own way: and the Lord hath laid on him the iniquity of us all. [7] He was offered because it was his own will, and he opened not his mouth: he shall be led as a sheep to the slaughter, and shall be dumb as a lamb before his shearer, and he shall not open his mouth. [8] He was taken away from distress, and from judgment: who shall declare his generation? because he is cut off out of the land of the living: for the wickedness of my people have I struck him. [9] And he shall give the ungodly for his burial, and the rich for his death: because he hath done no iniquity, neither was there deceit in his mouth. [10] And the Lord was pleased to bruise him in infirmity: if he shall lay down his life for sin, he shall see a long-lived seed, and the will of the Lord shall be prosperous in his hand.

[11] Because his soul hath laboured, he shall see and be filled: by his knowledge shall this my just servant justify many, and he shall bear their iniquities. [12] Therefore will I distribute to him very many, and he shall divide the spoils of the strong, because he hath delivered his soul unto death, and was reputed with the wicked: and he hath borne the sins of many, and hath prayed for the transgressors. (Isaias 53: 1-12.)

We cannot imitate Our Lord’s self-abnegation without Our Lady’s help and without imploring her to be virtuous as we climb the heights of personal sanctity, something that Pope Pius XII emphasized as he concluded his last encyclical letter, Meminisse Iuvat:

38. But, as you well know, Venerable Brothers, a renewal of Christian life must accompany these public petitions. Otherwise such prayers are idle words, which cannot be wholly pleasing to God.

39. And so, out of that ardent and zealous charity with which all Christians are bound to love the Catholic Church, they should address their prayers to heaven, but they should also offer interior acts of penance, works of virtue, sacrifices, inconveniences, and all the pains and hardships under which we labor, of necessity, in this mortal life, but which we should occasionally, take upon ourselves voluntarily, in a spirit of generosity.

40. Through this sound renewal of their way of life, joined with suppliant prayers, they will win God’s favor for themselves and for holy Church, whom they must embrace as they would a loving mother.

41. The faithful should present the sort of picture — as often as circumstances require — which is described so wonderfully, beautifully, and meaningfully in the Letter to Diognetus: “The Christians . . . are in the flesh, but do not live by the flesh. They dwell on earth, but they are citizens of heaven. They obey valid laws, and even go beyond the demands of law in the conduct of their lives. They love all men, and yet all men persecute them. They are not understood, and yet they are condemned; they are put to death, and yet their life is quickened. . . They are dishonored, and yet in the midst of dishonor they find honor. Their good name is railed at, and yet is presented as evidence of their justice. . . When they conduct themselves like honest men, they are punished like criminals; while they are being punished, they rejoice as though they are being exalted…[21]

42. “To express all this briefly: what the soul is to the body, Christians are to the world.”[22]

43. If a Christian way of life flourishes again, as it did in the age of the Apostles and martyrs, then we can reasonably hope that the Blessed Virgin Mary — who longs with a mother’s heart that all her sons should live virtuously — will graciously heed our prayers and will soon grant, in response to our petitions, happier and more peaceful times for the Church of her Only Begotten Son and for the whole human society.

44. We wish, Venerable Brothers, that you will make Our wishes and exhortations known on Our behalf, in the way you think best, to the faithful entrusted to your care. Meanwhile, as a pledge of heaven’s blessing and a witness of Our paternal good will, We lovingly impart Our Apostolic Benediction to each of you, to the flocks entrusted to you, and individually to each of those who suffer persecution and torment because they defend the rights of the Church and give evidence of the love they bear her.

45. Written at Rome, in Saint Peter’s, on the fourteenth day of July, in the year 1958, the twentieth of Our Pontificate. (Pope Pius XII, Meminisse Iuvat, July 14, 1958.)

We need to give a Catholic witness at all times. We cannot live in fear nor can we permit ourselves to be agitated by the babbling, blathering ignoramuses of naturalism who know nothing of First and Last Things and believe in the “salvific” nature of politics and elections despite all the evidence that things always get worse no matter how elections turn out as those of the “left” and the “right” continue to sin unrepentantly and put material prosperity above all things. No one can enjoy physical safety when God’s Holy Laws are ignored or derided and when men make war upon their own souls by their persistence in sins of one kind or another.

It is only Catholicism that can true peace within the souls of men and thus within the world, and it is only the light of the true Faith that illumine the minds, strengthen the wills, and open the hearts of men to see the world and everyone within it through the eyes of the true Faith.

Thus, we pray our Rosaries today and every day to console the good God, to make reparation for our sins and those of the whole world, and to pray for the day when the hostilities and hatred driven by Original Sin and the Mortal Sins of men will be replaced with a world when men are consecrated to the Most Sacred Heart of Jesus, which beats for us with such unmatched love in the Most Blessed Sacrament, through the Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart of Mary.

Viva Cristo Rey!

Our Lady of the Most Blessed Sacrament, pray for us.

Saint Joseph, pray for us. 

Saints Peter and Paul, pray for us. 

Saint John the Baptist, pray for us.

Saint John the Evangelist, pray for us. 

Saint Michael the Archangel, pray for us.

Saint Gabriel the Archangel, pray for us.

Saint Raphael the Archangel, pray for us. 

Saints Joachim and Anne, pray for us. 

Saints Caspar, Melchior, and Balthasar, pray for us. 

Saint Ephraem the Deacon, pray for us.

Saints Mark and Marcellianus, pray for us.

Saint Juliana Falconieri (whose feast is superseded on the Feast of Corpus Christi), pray for us.