Showing posts with label The Iranian Revolution. Show all posts
Showing posts with label The Iranian Revolution. Show all posts

Thursday, 3 September 2009

The Nexus Of Evil : Part Seven (A Pre-emptive Strike On Humanity).

By Philip Jones 28th August 2009.





The Story So Far.

This series of articles actually began as nothing more than an `addendum` to my `To Kill A Tree` article[2] with a view to tracing the progress of designed and orchestrated conflict as outlined by General Albert Pike[1] in his letter to Giuseppe Mazzini [2], dated August 15, 1871. But as I delved ever deeper into the underworld of Secret Societies and their clandestine intrigues, and those personages who have dictated the course of world events over the past century and a half, the whole project took on a life of its own, and so what was to be a short summary of our `Age Of Conflict,` has developed into something of a semi major project in it's own right.

In Parts One to Four, we examined how the Age Of Conflict in which we live is the product of a dark alliance of `magic,` money and intellect, with intellect almost invariably subordinate to, and in the service of money, with money similarly being in the service of magic; the infernal forces of Lucifer manipulating both money and intellect to their will, with money being since the 20th century the primary overt source of it's visible power. I have showed how deep-rooted changes occurred primarily in two quite separate realms; those of money and intellect, and how this `Nexus Of Evil,` in the service of the very darkest of forces, has here in the first decade of the 21st Century, built a global control grid around all our lives, and how, by its hegemony over money, politics, religion, the media, big business, and education, it has subverted culture, rewritten history, falsified science, and manipulated and coerced humanity to the very precipice of disaster.

In Parts Five and Six, we examined the root of the `Islamic question` and how it connects into the `Nexus Of Evil. ` We revisited those turbulent events surrounding the Islamic Revolution in Iran back in 1979, and saw how contrary to the `fairy tale` broadcast to the world by the bought and paid for global media; the `revolution` was anything but a spontaneous uprising inspired by religious fanaticism. Behind the revolutionary zeal witnessed in Iran, we can recognise the `fingerprints` of those usual suspects where international skulduggery is concerned; the CIA, MI6, and Mossad, all working to Albert Pike's `timetable for that `Clash Of Civilisations` between the West and Islam, which he intended would be necessary to usher in the `New World Order.`

Here in Part Seven, and beyond, we will continue to follow the `money trail` up to the present day and hopefully show that a solution to our planet's woes is possible, if people of good heart and true faith will renounce petty doctrinal differences, come together and cease to give, give, give to the great force of evil which stalks our world, everything it wants to swallow.

Introduction : Why The West Fears Islam.

When one examines the West's fear of Islam, and tries to relate it to the reasons usually given -- Islamic fundamentalism, militancy, radicalism, terrorism, totalitarianism etc.-- it is difficult, if not impossible, to justify this fear on the basis of those reasons given. One has to believe, however, given all the facts and expertise available to the West, that the fear has to be founded on something more than mere xenophobia. What is the basis of this fear that causes the enemies of the Muslim world to play not so subtly on the theme of Pike's `Clash Of Civilisations` in order to demonize Islam and Muslims? Let us first examine what it is not, before we draw our conclusion as to the real reason why the leaders of the West fear Islam.

The fear of Muslim fundamentalism, militancy, radicalism, terrorism, totalitarianism, and the West's timely discovery of the so called `rogue states,` coincided most conveniently with the fall of the Berlin Wall, and the disintegration of the Soviet Union. Former Defence Secretary McNamara, in his 1989 testimony before the Senate Budget Committee, said US defence spending could safely be cut in half. It became clear that the US had to either undergo massive shifts in spending, a painful and unwelcome prospect for the defence establishment, or find new justification for continuing high levels of military expenditures. To provide this justification the Pentagon manufactured the threat of "rogue states and nuclear outlaws." The Gulf War was a contrived opportunity to sell this justification to the American people, to protect oil company profits, and to control the flow of oil to Europe and Japan who need it much more than does the US.

The International Institute for Strategic Studies calculates that the $262 billion US defence budget accounts for about 37 percent of global military expenditures. Russia, Japan, and China each will spend about $80 billion, $42 billion, and $7 billion. The six "rogue states" -- Cuba, Iran, Iraq, Libya, Syria, North Korea -- have a combined annual military budget of $15 billion. The US budgets for covert operations (US terrorism?) alone is double this amount. Given the paltry defence expenditures of all the "rogue states" combined, even after correcting for differences in costs, one has to believe that the "rogue states" are no match, militarily, for the West.

And, setting aside the morality of US covert operations that invite retaliation, so called Muslim terrorists should not be a major fear. Far more acts of terrorism and violent crime in the US, according to government statistics, are committed by non-Muslims than Muslims. And if, as propagated throughout the mass media, Muslims do pose a terrorist threat to the US, one hears very little discussion of what it is that these mysterious figures really want.

Islamic totalitarianism, an oxymoron to anyone with even a rudimentary knowledge of Islam, should not be a Western concern either. A Muslim ruler may be totalitarian, but then his rule would not be Islamic. Furthermore, the Western record on supporting totalitarian Muslim regimes -- Iran under the Shah, Iraq before the Gulf War -- and doing business with non-democratic regimes -- China, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia -- speaks for itself.

As for Islamic fundamentalism, Islamic law is based upon the Quran, examples and sayings of the Prophet Muhammad, analogical deduction, consensus among the learned and individual reasoning. Strict interpretation of the Prophet's words lead to the conclusion that all who believe in one God are Muslim, and their faith is Islam; be they Muslim, Christian, Jew, or anyone else.

Fundamentalism is defined purely in terms of Christian thinking not Muslim. There is no parallel in an Islam that stresses the use of reason and logic. Absent a definition, the label Islamic fundamentalism serves only to obscure issues, rather than to resolve them. Meanwhile, the Christian Coalition, and the Zionists with their biblical claim to Palestine appear fundamentalist to many; yet both are courted by US politicians, and not viewed as a threat.

One can go on eliminating Western arguments against Islam and Muslims. Eventually, one has to ask, what then is the source of the West's fear of Islam and Muslims?

The late Marshall G. S. Hodgson, in "Rethinking World History", states: "[Islam's] conscious hopes for a godly world order represent one of the most remarkable undertakings in world history and because its less self-conscious general cultural heritage is laden with human values."

Muslims see the West beset with broken families, violent crime, and drugs. They see a society divided by race, religion, and huge disparities in income. They long for a peaceful life in which they may provide for the basic needs of their families, and enjoy the respect due to all mankind regardless of their race, religion, position, or wealth.

These Muslims see their goals for a more just and compassionate society thwarted by a corrupt often Masonic Muslim elite whose primary purpose in life appears to be the accumulation of wealth and power, and the furthering of a common globalist agenda, regardless of the cost to their fellow human beings. They see these so called `Muslim` elites, who govern not by consensus as Islam prescribes, but by force and coercion, backed up by their fellow conspirators in the West, permitting dark outside powers to exploit their country, while they themselves derive few if any benefits, and find themselves subordinated by corrupt and decadent Western influences driving them down the same troubled road taken by the West. They see few opportunities to earn a decent living because most opportunities are withheld for the elite, their families, friends and their sycophants. And they see these elite remaining silent when their faith, which is about all they have left, is denigrated in the very same propaganda which serves to maintain the elite cabal.

The Muslim elite' allies are the defence establishment and the neo-imperialists in the West. Islam's mandate for justice and compassion opposes the primary objective of these neo-imperialists who seek to follow policies outlined in 1948 by "the leading dove and peace prize winner" Mr. George Kennan, for the US Department of State. In his top secret "Policy Planning Study 23", Mr. Kennan stated:

". . . we have about 50% of the world's wealth, but only 6.3% of its population . . . Our real task in the coming period is to devise a pattern of relationships which will permit us to maintain this position of disparity . . . To do so, we will have to dispense with all sentimentality . . . We should cease to talk about vague and . . . unreal objectives such as human rights, the raising of living standards, and democratization."

To avoid exposure, these neo-imperialists and their allies in the defence establishment, spurred by the enemy within, divert attention by demonizing Islam and Muslims, thereby fanning the fires of bigotry and raising unrealistic fears among the people of the West.

This is the Hegelian Dialectic[3] in action. Just as Albert Pike indicated was needed in order to bring in the Luciferian Age, the `architects` of the Illuminati have `lined` up the `liberal` West as Thesis (the good guys), a western `intel op` created Islamism as Antithesis (the bad guys), with the `proposed `Clash Of Civilisations achieving the desired synthesis, namely the Luciferian Order.

I have written this so many times previously, and must reiterate that without a clear understanding of this diabolical trap, humanity's opportunity to finally live in peace and harmony will never be realised. The below diagram should be studied and digested by the reader, who will discover that it can be liberally applied in order to `decipher` almost every `geopolitical` situation or event and much more, right down to domestic arguments and petty squabbles.


The Jihad And the Dialectic.

Before proceeding with its plan for World War III, the Illuminati had by necessity to end the `Cold War,` with the Soviet Union, reducing in the process its status as a Superpower militarily and economically, thereby rendering the American military free to pit itself against the Muslim World. In a Time magazine cover story, published on Jan. 15, 1979, Z. Brzezinski proclaimed Iran, Afghanistan, and the Indian subcontinent as an “arc of crisis” that supposedly posed a grave challenge to the West, though one that could also spell the end of the Soviet empire. Within the auspices of the overall Illuminati agenda, the Arc of Crisis was used as a pretext to `foment` a wave of Islamism across Central Asia, that could firstly be used to bankrupt and destroy the Soviet Union, and then secondly, to recruit and engage Islamic `fundamentalists,` to later be used as the `bogeymen` of International Terrorism, with which to frighten the Western world.

On December 24th 1979, [5]after being `invited` by the Afghani government, the Russian military entered Afghanistan, and took up positions to protect government assets from rebel attacks.

The CIA’s support of the Mujahideen war in Afghanistan was its largest covert operation thus far, funded by a web of clandestine and illegal activities, known as the Iran-Contra Affair[7] which involved the complicity of the Muslim Brotherhood [4]and the Saudi regime as well. Essentially, the huge wealth created in Saudi Arabia through the orchestration of the Oil Crisis, would be used to fund the CIA’s covert operations. When Ronald Reagan became president, his administration immediately set about engaging in an expansion of the relationship already begun by Roosevelt, whereby Saudi Arabia would build a massive network of naval and air defence facilities that could sustain U.S. forces, under the pretext that they would be needed to protect the region or wage war against an aggressor. The program also involved a new understanding that Saudi Arabia would become a partner in covert operations, but not just in the Middle East. The Saudis agreed to fund anti-communist guerrillas in Afghanistan, Angola, and elsewhere, who were supported by the Reagan administration, including the Contras of Nicaragua.

Iran-Contra notwithstanding, when hostilities commenced between Iran and Iraq in 1980, the U.S (as the Illuminati always do) secretly backed both sides of the conflict, and further became involved in an operation which came to be known as Iraq-gate. The Reagan administration used proceeds from arms sales to Iran to fund the right-wing Contras, in an effort to overturn Nicaragua’s left-wing, but democratically elected, Sandanista government. Both actions were contrary to acts of Congress, which prohibited the funding of the Contras, and the sale of weapons to Iran, which it regarded as a “Terrorist state”. Furthermore, both actions also violated United Nations’ sanctions.

Throughout this period, until the death of Khomeini, (who we have seen previously was an ipso facto creature of the CIA) in 1989, Iran was portrayed as being at the very epicentre of `international terrorism,` calling on all Muslims to fight the Jihad against the Western nations, which Khomeini had categorized as “greater and lesser Satans.” But as ever the reality od events was quite a different matter. At the behest of the Americans, and using the local Shiah communities as intermediaries, Iran had supported and financed a number of `liberation` movements and other armed factions, from Palestine to Northern Ireland, to Sudan, and the Ivory Coast.

Intent on side-stepping Congress, the U.S. approached Prince Bandar[6] to solicit Saudi aid in funding the Contras. In his capacity as Saudi Ambassador to the US, Prince Bandar was allowed unprecedented access to Presidents and senior American officials since the Reagan era and was a close family friend of the Bushes. Bandar was also used as an intermediary with Saddam, when he made known his readiness to accept American aid. The U.S. had also been aiding the Iranians, primarily to gain their influence with militant groups that held several American hostages in Lebanon, and who supported bombings in Western European countries. However, the U.S. was also concerned with supporting Saddam, to protect the Saudis and its oil reserves. Though Congress would not have approved, the Reagan administration secretly allowed Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, and Egypt to transfer U.S. weapons, including howitzers, helicopters, and bombs, to Saddam.

The running of the Iran-Contra operation, and the arming of the Mujahideen in Afghanistan, was coordinated by the then director of the CIA William Casey, whose `unaccountable and invisible,` operations, involved arms being traded with the Contras for cocaine, and profits from its sale to Black street gangs of Los Angeles, funds from which were then used for the various covert CIA campaigns.

The U.S. government’s involvement in drug-trafficking for the financing of covert activities can be traced back at least to the Office of Strategic Service (OSS), the forerunner of the CIA. During the Vietnam Conflict, the CIA, working together with the assistance of the hill tribes of Vietnam, smuggled untold amounts of Heroin from the `Golden Triangle` region of South-east Asia. Even before that, the French had controlled the Opium trade in this part of the world, an operation which would subsequently become known as the `French Connection.`[8] Following their defeat at Dien Bien Phu, in 1954, the French began to withdraw their forces from Indochina, the Americans thereby taking over the Opium trade, facilitated through the CIA’s `Air America` network of aircraft (No apologies to Mel Gibson fans).

The CIA continued to be an important player in the Golden Triangle heroin trade, long after the war in Vietnam was over. In his book, `Terrorism And The Illuminati,`[5] David Livingstone writes:

“This fact was corroborated Colonel Bo Gritz, a legend in the Special Forces community, after whom Sylvester Stallone modeled himself in the movie “First Blood”. During 1989, Gritz and two others traveled to the Shanland region of northern Burma, controlled by warlord Khun Sa, who runs the Golden Triangle Opium business. Gritz videotaped a meeting with Khun Sa, in which he revealed that the US government official he dealt with was Richard Armitage, the US Assistant Secretary of Defence. Khun Sa said that Armitage, in turn, used the services of a “traffic manager,” who he named on camera as Santos Trafficante, Florida’s notorious Mafia “Boss”.

Richard Armitage, a thoroughly distasteful character and probable psychopath, had been a professional assassin in Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia during the Vietnam war, and lead teams similar to the Phoenix program[9] that killed and tortured tens of thousands of Asians. He has been accused of links to illicit gambling, drug smuggling and the expansion of organized crime in Russia, Central Asia and the Far East. As Assistant Secretary of Defence in the Reagan Administration, Armitage was responsible for coordinating covert military operations, and was in close liaison with Oliver North[10]. Armitage’s deputy and chief anti-terrorist official, Noel Koch, was part of the team set up by North, in addition to Richard Secord, George Cave, a former CIA station chief in Tehran, and Colin Powell, military assistant to U.S. Defence Secretary Caspar Weinberger.

(I invite the reader to do some research on the above named individuals, who will be seen to have performed acts of perfidy and treachery against the American people which in a just society would have resulted at the very least in their incarceration for life).

It was William Casey, the former CIA Director, in collaboration with Armitage in the Pentagon, who `ran` the Mujahideen covert war operations in Afghanistan. Stinger missiles, mountain caves equipped as operation centres, military training camps for internationally recruited Islamic combatants, as well as training and recruitment inside the United States, were all a part of what was funded, using the profits from the sale of opium and illicit drugs, channelled through the BCCI, at the suggestion of Saudi Arabia, working closely with the CIA, who in turn used the Pakistani ISI[11] as a proxy to cover its own involvement.

The Bank Of Crooks And Criminals International.

From the very commencement of hostilities in Afghanistan, the CIA, partnered itself with Pakistani Intelligence, in organizing the rebel Mujahideen fighters. Pakistan’s Inter-Services Intelligence, or ISI, was established in 1948, by British Intelligence with whom it has continually maintained close ties. The power of the ISI increased incrementally for its first twenty years, until the emergence of Pakistan’s first popularly elected leader, the socialist Zulfikar Ali Bhutto in 1971. Bhutto eventually fell out of favour with the British, and was overthrown by General Zia Ul-Haq, who had been appointed Chief of the Army Staff by Bhutto in 1976, at the insistence of Gulam Jilani Khan, the Director General of the ISI.

In his book, `If I Am Assassinated,` penned in prison, Bhutto relates how Henry Kissinger threatened him for pushing forward on Pakistan’s nuclear energy program, telling him, “We will make an example of you!” Bhutto was executed in 1978. A spokesman of the Muslim Brotherhood boasted, “The Brotherhood has taken over in Iran and Pakistan. Bhutto stood for intrusion of the West into Islam. Bhutto was everything that Pakistan was not. That is why we killed him. And we will use his death as a warning to others.”

The main `artery` for CIA funds to the Mujahideen fighting in Afghanistan was the Bank of Credit and Commerce International, or BCCI[12]. Created in 1972 by Pakistani banker Agha Hasan Abedi, it was initially funded by Sheik Zayed of Abu Dhabi, in anticipation of the petrodollar bonanza of the oil crisis. In their book `The Outlaw Bank,` Beatty and Gwynne describe that, “BCCI had been built from oil, from the enormous wealth that flowed into the Middle East after the huge OPEC oil price increases of the 1970s. Though Abedi could not claim full credit for it, the timing of BCCI’s launch was nothing short of miraculous , particularly since the American speaker at the 1973 Bilderberg[13] meeting stated that, once oil prices would have increased, “serious problems would be caused by unprecedented foreign exchange accumulations of countries such as Saudi Arabia and Abu Dhabi.”

In 1976 BCCI purchased 85% of the Banque de Commerce et Placements of Geneva, Switzerland. After taking over the bank, BCCI installed Alfred Hartmann as manager. Hartmann then became the chief financial officer for BCC Holding, and thus one of BCCI’s most influential directors. Hartmann maintained connections with the Rothschilds,[14] being president of Rothschild Bank AG of Zurich. Hartmann was also vice-chairman of NY-InterMaritime Bank of Geneva, run by Mossad operative Bruce Rappaport, who was on the board of N.M. Rothschild and Sons in London.

“Black funds” for the CIA travelled through BCCI for the Contra war, the Iranian-Israeli pay-off's, and large covert wars in Afghanistan and Angola. William Casey had intended all along to establish an offshore entity capable of conducting covert operations that was “stand-alone”, financially independent, and free from congressional oversight. BCCI was the solution.

BCCI became the bank of choice for Middle Eastern terrorists, arms and drug runners, South American drug cartels, organized crime lords, and intelligence services such as the ISI, Mossad, MI6 and the CIA. A branch was set up in Panama, for the cash that Manuel Noriega was funnelling out of his country. Noriega, who had been a long-standing U.S. intelligence asset, was also an informant for the Mossad. He had undergone military and intelligence training in Israel, and-like Uganda’s dictator Idi Amin, wore his Israeli paratrooper wings on his uniform for years afterward.

The BCCI `whitewashed` money for the drug trade and assisted Third World dictators loot their nation's treasuries. BCCI also operated an undercover division of the bank, labelled the “black network,” which functioned as a global intelligence operation and a Mafia-like enforcement squad. It used sophisticated spy equipment and techniques, along with bribery, extortion, kidnapping, prostitution, and even, by some accounts, assassination. The black network operated a lucrative arms-trade business and transported drugs and gold.

The Mujahideen.

The primary purpose of the BCCI, and the reason behind its spectacular rise in fortunes, was its connection to the ISI, and the Mujahideen fighting the Soviet Union in Afghanistan. After Zia replaced Bhutto as Pakistan’s president, he appointed his friend Fazle Haq to be the governor of Pakistan’s North-West Frontier Province in 1978. This is the area that borders Afghanistan, through which drugs and weapons were smuggled over the Khyber Pass. Fazle Haq was an important friend and backer of BCCI’s founder Hasan Abedi, and the BCCI was used to launder untold millions of ISI narcotics revenue.

Under National Security Directive 3, signed by President Reagan in 1982, the then Vice President George Bush Snr. was given charge of the entire global covert action program. It was Bush’s Special Situation Group (SSG), and Crisis Pre-Planning Group (CPPG), at the White House, that employed Oliver North, Richard Secord, “Public Diplomacy” head Walter Raymond, and the entire Iran-Contra operators. Throughout the 1980s, the Afghan War was the largest single program under this Bush chain of command.

As indicated by a series of articles in the Executive Intelligence Review, titled “the Anglo-American support apparatus behind the Afghani Mujahideen”, the City of London also played a leading role in promoting the Afghan `Jihad.` Following the Soviet invasion, Lord Nicholas Bethell, a career British Intelligence agent, and close friend of British double agent Kim Philby, formed Radio Free Kabul, as a voice for the Mujahideen. Other members included Winston Churchill III, former Foreign Secretary Baron Chalfont, Lord Morrison of Lambeth, the former head of the Foreign Office, and British Intelligence official Ray Whitney.

Another British creation was the Afghan Relief Committee (ARC) was established in 1980 by Wall Street investment banker and spy John Train. From its inception, the ARC worked closely with Freedom House, chaired by Leo Cherne, and which was has also included among its board of trustees, Zbigniew Brzezinski and Samuel Huntington, author of The Clash of Civilizations.

Heavily involved in providing safe refuge for the Mujahideen, and also in facilitating their dispersal throughout the world, was Ismaili Prince Sadruddin Aga Khan, the second son of the hereditary Imam of the Ismailis. The Prince was also coordinator of the U.N. Humanitarian and Economic Assistance Programs for Afghanistan, working with John Train, in `Operation Salam,` which although officially intended to organize the repatriation of Afghan refugees after the Soviet withdrawal, was also reportedly involved in the training and supply of the Mujahideen, who often operated out of U.N. refugee camps situated on the Pakistan-Afghanistan border.

Prince Sadruddin has also been a key figure in Prince Philip’s World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF), which, according to the EIR, is “the British royal family’s most important intelligence agency”. Since its creation in 1961, Prince Sadruddin has been one of is primary funders, as has his nephew, the current leader of the Ismailis. Through the London-based Aga Khan Foundation, and the Geneva-based Belle-rive Foundation, he has become a luminary in the environmental movement.

In 1983, the WWF successfully `persuaded` the Pakistani government to create two national parks directly on the Afghan border, an area known for the quality and abundance of its opium poppy, which was assiduously cultivated by the Mujahideen. It was also a primary staging area for smuggling weapons into Afghanistan. Before the Soviet-Afghan war, opium production in Afghanistan and Pakistan was channelled to small regional markets, and there was no local production of heroin. However, within two years of the CIA operation in Afghanistan, border between Pakistan and Afghanistan became the world’s top heroin producer, supplying sixty percent of U.S. demand. In Pakistan, the heroin-addict population went from near zero in 1979, to 1.2million by 1985, a much steeper rise than in any other nation. CIA assets again controlled this heroin trade, but once the heroin left Pakistan’s laboratories, the Sicilian Mafia managed its export to the U.S., which according to the DEA , it then distributed to street gangs through a chain of pizza parlours.

Gulbuddin Hekmatyar, the main recipient of CIA funding among the Mujahideen groups, and affiliated with the Muslim Brotherhood, was at the centre of the drug trade laundered through BCCI to fund the Mujahideen campaign. Over time it has emerged that Hekmatyar was not only an ISI asset, who laundered his money through BCCI, but that he also cooperated with the KGB to ensure his status as the most powerful warlord among many rivals. Human rights groups alleged that he was responsible for murdering more Afghans than the Soviet Union killed.

Al Qaeda.

The Muslim Brotherhood has been highly successful in its efforts to recruit a substantial `pool` of `agent-provocateurs` for the Illuminati. Although the `foot soldiers` who `sign up` to Jihad [15]may sincerely believe they are defending Islam, and confronting `Western imperialism,` in truth the various groups they are recruited into, though representing diverse factions, are a part of a single network serving the same Illuminati agenda as the supposed enemy. When we explore the political and financial connections of the terrorists, we find that these are not merely wayward fanatics, operating in isolation, but that their channels lead to the upper reaches of power, in both the British and American governments, and further into the dark `underworld` of the occult and criminal underworlds.

According to Svali, a former member of the cult, “The Illuminati “.... are truly an international group, and the group’s agenda supersedes any nationalistic feelings.”

Canadian author David Livingstone explains in his book `Terrorism And The Illuminati,` “That members of this network could share a common goal, despite adhering to apparently conflicting ideologies and religious creeds, is explained by the fact that the Illuminati believe there is no truth. This reality, according to them, is too difficult to handle for all but the `elite.` As for the masses, however, they require religion. It is therefore perceived as necessary by the Illuminati to don the façade of religion to lead them.”

As Robert Dreyfuss clarifies:

“The real Muslim Brothers are those whose hands are never dirtied with the business of killing and burning. They are the secretive bankers and financiers who stand behind the curtain, the members of the old Arab, Turkish, or Persian families whose genealogy places them in the oligarchical elite, with smooth business and intelligence associations to the European black nobility and, especially, to the British oligarchy. And the Muslim Brotherhood is money. Together, the Brotherhood probably controls several tens of billions of dollars in immediate liquid assets, and controls billions more in day-to-day business operations in everything from oil trade and banking to drug-running, illegal arms merchandising, and gold and diamond smuggling. By allying with the Muslim Brotherhood, the Anglo-Americans are not merely buying into a terrorists-for-hire racket; they are partners in a powerful and worldwide financial empire that extends from numbered Swiss bank accounts to offshore havens in Dubai, Kuwait and Hong Kong.”

In January 1981, when Ronald Reagan became President, he was told that a Mujahideen fighting force of no less than 150,000 trained and well-equipped troops was needed in Afghanistan. William Casey arranged for a worldwide recruitment effort, to be organised through the CIA and exercised through the Muslim Brotherhood. It was intended to reach out to the Afghan exile communities in Europe, North Africa, other parts of the Islamic world, and America. This recruitment drive to attract Muslims from across the globe was of course a pretext. The Mujahideen were able to attract only a few thousand volunteers. In reality, the recruitment effort was aimed at indoctrinating an international pool of terrorists to serve beyond the war in Afghanistan, to be later used to instigate the phony `War On Terror.`

Meanwhile, these would be regarded as “Freedom Fighters”, but the war in Afghanistan provided the Illuminati with the opportunity to gather together an international army of terrorist recruits, whose directives would later be changed to attack the US. The prime recruiting ground for these dupes, of course, was Saudi Arabia, the bastion of that fanatical version of Islam known as `Wahhabism,` created by the British in the eighteenth century, a country which was now, following the orchestration of the oil crisis, in a financial position to fund these covert operations on behalf of their co-conspirators in London and Washington.

In order to gain Saudi support for the effort, Casey contacted Bandar, who subsequently arranged a meeting with King Fahd, as a result of which, the Saudis guaranteed to match America dollar for dollar in supporting the Mujahideen. For the royal family, the war was not just part of the cornerstone of the burgeoning Saudi alliance with the United States, but served other purposes as well. Contributing to the war effort placated the militant clerics and helped accommodate the growing unrest and the more radical elements at home.

The ISI suggested that the presence of a Saudi prince to lead the “Jihad” in Afghanistan would be helpful, but as no volunteers were forthcoming, the Saudi leaders recommended Usama bin Laden, who hailed from a wealthy Saudi family with close affiliation to the monarchy. Although bin Laden became responsible for the organization and training of new recruits, it was Sheikh Abdullah Azzam who formulated the ideological argument, according to Islamic law, in order to justify the war in Afghanistan as `Jihad,` by which recruits were to be motivated unwittingly to serve US interests against the Soviets.

Like Abdul Wahhab[16], and typical of Muslim Brotherhood ideology, Azzam's ideas depended on an interpretation of Islamic law derived from Ibn Taymiyyah[17]. In Ibn Taymiyyah’s time, the Islamic world had come under the sway of the Mongols.[18] Despite the fact that the Mongol invaders had accepted Islam, Ibn Taymiyyah insisted that their religion was tainted, and therefore that they were unbelievers. By categorizing the Mongol rulers as infidel invaders, Ibn Taymiyyah argued that it was obligatory for the Muslims to fight them. Azzam cynically employed similar arguments, claiming that once a Muslim land is invaded, the Muslims of the world must unite the defend it. Ultimately, what Azzam did was to convince his Muslim brethren that, despite the rampant corruption in their own countries, it was incumbent upon them to fight the unholy infidels in Afghanistan, omitting to mention the fact that it was not at that time a Muslim country anyway, but rather, one which had already been subjected to Communism.

Azzam was assassinated in a car bomb attack in late 1989. Unsubstantiated reports have inferred that some US intelligence officials believe bin Laden ordered the killing.

Osama bin Laden : The New Saladin?

“Through his own personal reputation as a pious Muslim who favoured the cause of Wahabi Islamism, and through involvement of the bin Laden companies in construction and renovation at the holy shrines of Mecca and Medina, he seemed to both Saudi Intelligence and the CIA an ideal choice for the leading role he began to play. Bin Laden began to pay, with his own company and funds, for recruitment, transportation and training of the Arab volunteers who flocked, first to Peshawar, and to Afghanistan... By 1995 bin Laden had collected enough millions from his family and company wealth... to organise al Qaeda. “ John Cooley, ABC Correspondent.

Whilst attending King Abdul Aziz University in Jeddah, Osama bin Laden through his relationship with Mohammed Qutb, was initiated into the Muslim Brotherhood. He had also attended Azzam’s classes and became absorbed into his militant ideology. In 1979, Azzam left Saudi Arabia to join the Afghan Jihad, and bin Laden, at just twenty-two years of age, followed soon after. Together, they founded the MAK, or “Maktab al-Khidamat”, or the Mujahideen Services Bureau, based in Peshawar, Pakistan. According to John Loftus, however, it was George Bush Sr., as vice president, who was actually in charge of the covert operations that supported the MAK. The MAK was nurtured by Pakistan’s ISI, and linked up with Pakistan’s Muslim Brotherhood organization, the Jamaat-e Islami, founded by Abul Ala Maududi, to recruit fighters.

By the late eighties, MAK branches could be found in around fifty countries worldwide, by means of which young Muslims from around the globe, deceived by the call of Jihad, travelled to fight in Afghanistan. Recognising that many of the prospective Mujahideen lacked training, Azzam and bin Laden established the Bayt Al-Ansar in Peshawar, as a central training base, or `Al Qaeda,` set up with the assistance of the resident CIA chief in Peshawar.

That same year, bin Laden flew to the US under the false name of “Tim Osman,” where he met with three men in Sherman Oaks, California. Among them was Ted Gunderson[19], a retired FBI agent, who had been approached by a high-level official in the administration of President Ronald Reagan to provide, outside of government channels, assistance to the Afghan Mujahideen.

The `project` supplied the Afghani resistance with an estimated 600 stinger surface-to-air, shoulder-fired missiles, which had been modified to prevent their use against American aircraft if captured. Gunderson would later confirm that it was these weapons that turned the tide of battle in Afghanistan against the Soviets, whose aircraft, and particularly attack helicopters, fell victim in large numbers to the missiles.

In 1991, bin Laden, having briefly spent some time in Saudi Arabia, travelled first to Pakistan and then Afghanistan, before finally settling in the Sudan, where General Omar Hassan al-Bashir had recently taken power in a military coup. A few months later, at a meeting of the Muslim Brotherhood held in London, it was decided that Sudan would be the new base for the Islamist movement, and a Muslim Brotherhood leadership council of nineteen members was subsequently established in Khartoum under Hassan al Turabi, who was soon to emerge as the real power in the Sudanese regime.

At the end of 1991, as the war in Afghanistan was winding down, CIA leaders in Peshawar held top secret meetings with bin Laden under the authority of Prince Turki al Faisal, the head of Saudi intelligence. As a consequence, many of the fighters who had trained and volunteered in Afghanistan were relocated to Sudan. Bin Laden still however, continued to finance training camps, in Afghanistan, for the purposes of which he often returned. On each of these visits, it is said that he met with the local CIA experts.

Together with the management of weapons shipments to Sudan, bin Laden is also known to have organised and managed an opium supply chain that was established before he departed for Afghanistan with Hekmatyar. The DEA[20] confirms having received multi-source information of Bin Laden's involvement in the financing and facilitation of heroin trafficking activities. It is believed that Al Qaeda reportedly earns as much as six billion a year from illicit drug-trafficking.
It was in Bosnia, during the war there, that Al Qaeda operatives, working with the US, established connections with Bosnian organized crime, creating a route for the trafficking of heroin from Afghanistan into Europe through the Balkans.

February 26, 1993.

The charge that Sheik Omar Abdur Rahman operated with CIA sanction originates from various sources, including an anonymous government official, who leaked that it was a CIA officer assigned as a consular official that approved the Sheik’s visa from the Sudan. A New York Times article on July 14, 1993 reported that the Egyptian President Mubarak had suggested that the visa had been issued to Rahman as a payoff for “services” rendered. “The sheikh has been a CIA agent since his days in Afghanistan,” Mubarak told Egypt’s al-Gomhuria newspaper. “He still earns a salary.”

In the aftermath of the 1993 World Trade Centre bombing, literally thousands of suspected terrorists were incarcerated, including one Omar Abdul Rahman, who was eventually convicted of a conspiracy to blow up New York City landmarks. Egyptian Emad Salem, an FBI informant, and bodyguard for the Sheikh was the key prosecution witness in the trial. Salem revealed under questioning that he had received a quarter million to one million dollars for his services as an FBI informant. He testified that the FBI had prior knowledge of the attack and told him they intended to substitute a harmless powder for the explosives. However, as events that fatal day attest to, this plan was called off by an FBI supervisor, and the bombing was not stopped. Defence attorney William Kunstler discovered that not only was Salem a lieutenant colonel in the Egyptian army, he remained in the employment of the Egyptian government. Apart from the money he received from the FBI, Salem was also funded, according to Kunstler, by other sources connected to foreign regimes, including an organization founded by Rabbi Meir Kahane.[21]

Mossad agent, Victor Ostrovsky, who left Israel’s secret police agency and wrote his best-selling book, By Way of Deception, told the Village Voice that Israeli intelligence may well have been behind the World Trade Center bombing. Mossad had motive and opportunity, says Ostrovsky, though he readily admits he doesn’t have “a shred of evidence” to support his theory. Ostrovsky says that the Mossad would have infiltrated the radical mosques in New Jersey and Brooklyn, where Abdul Rahman preached and disciples like El Sayyid Nosair prayed, and almost certainly recruited a close associate of the Blind Sheikh. The insider is recruited in what Ostrovsky calls a “false flag operation.” The Arab “thinks he is being recruited by an Iranian agent or a Libyan,” says Ostrovsky. He never suspects he is actually being “run” by Mossad.

Ostrovsky also points out that Mossad has effectively used this modus operandi on previous occasions. According to accounts given by Ostrovsky, in 1984 Mossad detonated bombs outside of the U.S. embassy in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia’s capital city, claiming credit in the name of an unknown radical Saudi resistance group. A member of Mossad at the time, Ostrovsky says the purpose was to weaken U.S./Saudi relations, by demonstrating to the U.S. that the regime was fragile and about to fall.

According to Israeli intelligence sources Ahmad Ajaj, one of the men accused of conspiring to bomb the World Trade Centre, is thought to have been a Mossad `mole.` The FBI had already identified Ajaj as being a senior Intifada activist in the occupied territories, having close ties to both El Fatah, and Hamas.

However, Kol Ha’ir, a highly regarded weekly in Jerusalem reported that Ajaj was never involved in Intifada activities, or with the PLO, or Hamas. Citing court papers and other sources, the pape maintained that Ajaj was only a petty crook, and that during his prison stay, after having been sentenced in 1988 for counterfeiting U.S. dollars, he was recruited by Mossad. Strangely or not, considering this particular field of enquiry, following his release a year later, he had undergone a radical metamorphosis and become a devout Muslim.

It wasn't long after, that he was arrested for smuggling weapons into the West Bank, allegedly for El Fatah. Israeli intelligence sources say however, that the arrest for weapons smuggling, and Ajaj’s supposed torture and deportation, were staged by Mossad to establish his credentials as an intifada activist. Mossad allegedly `tasked` Ajaj to infiltrate radical Palestinian groups operating outside of Israel's borders. Israeli intelligence sources say that it is commonplace for Mossad to recruit from the ranks of common criminals.

The Carlyle Connection.

The Carlyle Group’s relationships with prominent Saudis is particularly shady when one considers that despite assertions that Osama is estranged from the family, the documentary records clearly and emphatically contradict the claim. The Wall Street Journal reported that:

“Among its far-flung business interests, the well-heeled Saudi Arabian clan - which says it is estranged from Osama - is an investor in a fund established by Carlyle Group, a well-connected Washington merchant bank specializing in buyouts of defense and aerospace companies. Through this investment and its ties to Saudi royalty, the bin Laden family has become acquainted with some of the biggest names in the Republican Party. In recent years, former President Bush, ex-Secretary of State James Baker and ex-Secretary of Defense Frank Carlucci have made the pilgrimage to the bin Laden family’s headquarters in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia. Mr. Bush makes speeches on behalf of Carlyle Group and is senior adviser to its Asian Partners fund, while Mr. Baker is its senior counselor. Mr. Carlucci is the group’s chairman. Osama is one of more than 50 children of Mohammed bin Laden, who built the family’s $5 billion business, Saudi Binladin Group, largely with construction contracts from the Saudi government.”

Frank Carlucci, the perennial Chairman of the Carlyle Group, was a former Secretary of Defence in the Reagan Administration and a Deputy Director of the CIA during the Carter Administration. As the Second Secretary in the US Embassy in the Congo during the time of the reign and consequent assassination of Patrice Lumumba, Carlucci was believed to have been intimately involved in US efforts to undermine Lumumba’s government. In 1974, Carlucci took charge of the CIA operation to overthrow the Portugese government. He had been Chief of Sears Roebucks international operations, an actual espionage operation, and later became a top official of the American intelligence community.

The Libyan Affair: The Silencing Of The Lambs?

In 1984, At the request of the Liberian government, Charles Taylor[22] had been arrested and imprisoned in the U.S. Yet mysteriously, fifteen months later he somehow escaped from the Plymouth House of Corrections, and returned to Liberia to lead the revolt that toppled Doe. Taylor’s escape, which it is believed was organised in part by the CIA, greatly enhanced his reputation in Liberia as a `major player,` protected by a great foreign power.

In Terrorism And The Illuminati, David Livingstone writes:

“Douglas Farah asked his source, “CR”, a member of Taylor’s entourage, “Do fighters in the bush really offer human sacrifices and eat the hearts of their victims to gain their strength?” CR didn’t blink an eye. Yes he said, but only a few “really big men”, like Taylor, Foday Sankoh, and their senior commanders carried out the practice because it was such powerful magic. The main organ that gave one spiritual power was the heart. So it was often roasted and eaten.”

During the 1980s, Taylor and Sankoh attended the terrorist training camps of the World Revolutionary Headquarters in Libya, operated by Libyan leader Colonel Muammar al Qadhafi. It will come as no surprise to those reading this now familiar with the intrigues of the Illuminati that despite all his revolutionary and anti-Western rhetoric, Qadhafi is a Freemason and a One World conspirator. In 1980, Ronald Reagan accused Libya of sponsoring international terrorism, and in 1986, he ordered major bombing raids against so-called “terrorist sites”, murdering approximately sixty people, including Qadhafi’s adopted daughter.

Libya allegedly exacted revenge in 1988 by bombing Pan Am flight F103, thereby bankrupting that corporation. Pan Am’s own investigation however, discovered that U.S. government employees of the CIA had blown up the aircraft, in order to prevent a U.S. Army “hostage rescue team” on board from blowing the whistle on a Syrian heroin-dealing operation being used by the White House for its illegal Iran-Contra weapons sales.

It was in Libya that Charles Taylor met Ibrahim Bah, whom the FBI identify as the RUF’s [23]main diamond dealer with Al Qaeda. Senegalese born Bah speaks fluent French, Arabic, and English, as well as several local dialects. By the late 80s, he was a seasoned veteran in the Senegalese revolt, had studied Muslim theology in Egypt, trained in special warfare in Libya for four years, and served with the Mujahideen in Afghanistan. Following his return to Libya, he joined the Hezbollah in southern Lebanon where he fought against Israel. Upon his return to Libya, he served as Quaddafi's bodyguard and trainer.

In 1998 Al Qaeda’s Abdullah Ahmed Abdullah arrived in Liberia to make arrangement with Bah and the RUF, for Al Qaeda to purchase illegal Sierra Leone diamonds on a regular basis. The Bah network has been traced directly to Antwerp Belgium, the largest diamond centre in the world. Bah arranged the diamond transaction between al Qaeda and the RUF, the Charles Taylor-supported rebel army that controlled much of neighbouring civil-war-torn Sierra Leone. “The rebels used the cash from al Qaeda to buy the weapons. The stones gave al Qaeda a fail-safe way to hide its assets outside banks and other financial institutions,” writes Farah. “Belgian investigators later traced $20 million through a single account they believe was used by al Qaeda to purchase diamonds.”

As usual. the CIA has been reluctant to confirm or deny any evidence of a link between themselves and the operations mentioned above. Liberia had been a main CIA base throughout the Cold War. Charles Taylor himself was a CIA informant for years, and the U.S. backed his anti-Doe activities in the eighties and his bid for power in the nineties. This fact, along with the reality of Liberia having been a safe haven for Al Qaeda operatives, like Ahmed Khalfan Ghailani, who was held in connection with the 1998 bombings of two US embassies in Africa, would explain why the US prevaricated in supporting Taylor’s usurper, and continues to refrain from using its influence to bring him before a UN war crimes tribunal. Taylor, is believed to be living in exile in Nigeria under a deal brokered by the United States.

The key player in the entire operation interfacing Al Qaeda, Sierra Leone’s RUF and Taylor’s Libya, was retired Israeli army Lt. Colonel, Yair Klein. According to one report in the Israeli newspaper, Yedioth Aharonoth, in 1996, Klein began a contract to provide weapons and training in Taylor’s Liberia, and to the RUF in Sierra Leone which controls the wealthy diamond district. Klein, though ostensibly a retired and so-called renegade intelligence free agent, enjoys the highest-level of protection from Israeli authorities. In the early 90s, he trained the forces of the Colombian drug cartels in assassination, bombings and other covert operations.

Also Involved in the Liberian diamond trade was Victor Bout, a notorious Russian arms dealer originally from Tajikistan. Bout supplied maintenance for Ariana Airways, Afghanistan’s national airline, which was taken over by al Qaeda, and began transportation for their illegal trade network. Passenger flights became few and infrequent, with the airline instead flying drugs, weapons, gold and personnel mostly between Afghanistan, the United Arab Emirates (UAE) and Pakistan. In 1999 by order of the UN, Ariana’s international flights were finally banned.

In 2002, the Belgian government, through Interpol, issued a warrant for Bout's arrest, on charges of illegal weapons trafficking. At the same time the Russian government was assuring Interpol, “we can say for sure Bout is not in Russia,” Bout was in the middle of taping a two-hour interview for a Moscow radio station. Intelligence officials stated that Bout had flown US clandestine operatives into Afghanistan, as well as badly needed ammunition and other supplies to the Northern Alliance. In exchange, they said, his past activities would be ignored.

In the following part, we will continue to put together the pieces in the puzzle that draws together the web of seemingly diverse, yet ultimately interconnected elements which constitute the `Nexus Of Evil` and further identify the personages and organisations driving humankind towards a third and undoubtedly final global cataclysm.

Comments to : http://righteousalliance.blogspot.com/

Reference:

1]
http://www.rense.com/general86/pikeknew.htm

2]
http://righteousalliance.blogspot.com/2009/07/to-kill-tree-part-one.html

3]
http://nord.twu.net/acl/dialectic.html Hegelian Dialectic
4]
http://www.terrorism-illuminati.com/muslim-brotherhood

5]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_war_in_Afghanistan

6]
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&domains=rense.com&sitesearch=rense.com&ei=qp2fSrexA4vM-Qad--DrDw&sa=X&oi=spell&resnum=0&ct=result&cd=1&q=prince+bandar&spell=1

7]
http://www.terrorism-illuminati.com/guns-drugs-jihad

8]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_Connection

9]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phoenix_Program

10]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oliver_North
11] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inter-Services_Intelligence

12]
http://www.terrorism-illuminati.com/guns-drugs-jihad

13]
http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/esp_sociopol_bilderberg.htm

14]
http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/esp_sociopol_rothschild.htm

15]
http://www.mediamonitors.net/ahmedmotiar1.html

16]
http://www.terrorism-illuminati.com/wahhabis

17]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ibn_Taymiyyah

18]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Mongol_Invasions

19]
http://www.google.com/search?q=ted+gunderson&rls=com.microsoft:en-gb:IE-SearchBox&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&sourceid=ie7&rlz=1I7GPEA_enDK310

20]
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&rls=com.microsoft%3Aen-gb%3AIE-SearchBox&rlz=1I7GPEA_enDK310&q=DEA&btnG=Search&aq=f&oq=&aqi=g10

21]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meir_Kahane

22]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Taylor_(Liberia)
23] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revolutionary_United_Front


Sunday, 23 August 2009

The Nexus Of Evil : Part Six (A Pre-emptive Strike On Humanity).

By Philip Jones 23rd August 2009.





Introduction:

We must now take into consideration the revolutionary change in the nature and character of imperialism which occurred in the 20th Century. We shall examine its repercussions as far as the Islamic Revolution in Iran is concerned, and (in Part 7) its relationship to more recent events as witnessed in the brutal and immoral wars of aggression, being waged against the peoples of Palestine, Iraq, and Afghanistan, by the `Neocon` [2]Zionist forces of the Illuminati cabal, which although acting in the guise of US Imperialism, are in reality the visible and physical manifestations of a concerted Luciferian assault against the Umma.

It is now impossible for all but those whose hearts have been hardened by the evil one, not to discern the ultimate goal of this aggression as being the complete destruction of Islam as a comprehensive belief system, removing from Muslims their moral anchor and compass, thereby substituting a perverse Satanic mirror image of what has already happened here in the West in its stead.

The New Imperialists:

To the uninformed mass of humanity, it appeared as if a British imperialism which had prevailed in Iran without interruption since the end of World War I, was supplanted after the end of World War II by an American one - or, rather, by one consisting of an alliance of Rockefeller America and Rothschild Israel. Indeed, from quite early in the 1950s an American-Israeli presence was the dominating foreign influence in Iran; and yet strangely, it was almost exclusively against the Americans that the hostility of the Mullahs and the masses was directed, culminating in the invasion of the US embassy and the subsequent hostage drama, and it's accompanying media circus.

However, the reality was very different from the fiction, for what looked like an American-Israeli alliance, was in fact only the public picture presented by the `Hidden Face` of an altogether different model of imperialism, which had come into existence, displacing and replacing all the separate national imperiums. What began quite early in the twentieth century, and proceeded at a much accelerated pace after the end of World War II, was the progressive dismantling of all the separate national imperiums, including the American, and their subsequent absorption into something unprecedented in recorded history -- a global financial imperialism.

Instead of the moral illegitimacy, or political pathology of parasitical conspiracies of `special interests` inside the different Western nations, henceforth, a vast cosmopolitan parasitism of `special interests` would operate on a global basis, and with an endgame that was far more ambitious, being nothing less than a world economic and political imperium; a New World Order. Nationalist imperialisms were thus subsumed in a single international imperialism in the same way as we have seen very large commercial, industrial and financial enterprises swallowed and ingested into the concentrated ownership and control of vastly bigger, mainly financial conglomerates.

The overthrow of the Tsarist regime in Russia in 1917, along with the dispossession of all the European powers of their colonial empires, and the setting up of the United Nations as a world government-in-waiting, were all part of a power-concentrating process which began in the nineteenth century and visibly can be seen to be continuing at an accelerating pace to this day.

This metamorphosis in the nature of imperialism was one of the consequences resulting from a radical change in the realm of high finance, which can briefly be explained as follows: For a long time after the beginning of the modern industrial era, finance-capital (not to be confused with private enterprise capital) existed almost entirely in national concentrations: there was a British finance-capitalism, nominally answerable to a British government, which was in turn nominally answerable to an electorate; a German finance-capitalism, a French one, a Dutch, and so on, each joined to a national government and each government nominally answerable to a national electorate.

These nations were, in fact, plutocracies; each one an instance of what Hobson calls "social pathology," capable of maintaining themselves in power with a public opinion not sought and consulted, as before, but created as required, by news-media propaganda, patronage and other rewards of the business world. Money had become the measure of all things, with a ruling elite drawn less from the land and more and more from the factory and the counting-house. From around about the middle of the nineteenth century and well into the twentieth, these national concentrations of financial power were in vigorous competition, a major example of this being the scramble for colonies and markets in the so-called underdeveloped world. What then happened was that the many national vortices of financial power were drawn into a global vortex of financial power.

There can be no doubt that a major factor in bringing about this change in the realm of high finance was the long-continued existence within the different nations of Europe of Jewish banking families or dynasties which had always specialized in transnational operations. The story of how these financial dynasties consolidated their power on an international basis is explained at some length by Prof. Carroll Quigley in his 1300-page "History of the World in Our Time," Tragedy and Hope.[1]

It all began with what Quigley called "the third stage in the development of capitalism ... of overwhelming significance in the history of the 20th century, and its ramifications and influences subterranean and even occult." He adds:

"Essentially what it did was to take the old disorganized and localized methods of handling money and credit and organize them on an international basis."

But it was in the 1930s that the truly revolutionary change was to occur, when the control of this international financial system appeared to essentially pass out of the hands of those who had visibly created it -- the likes of J.P. Morgan in America and Montagu Norman in Britain – and at last openly into the hands of a `cosmopolitan` elite, no longer `high Episcopalian, Anglophile, and European-culture-conscious.` The shift occurred at all levels, says Dr. Quigley, and was evident in the decline of J.P. Morgan, which had hitherto dominated Wall Street.

It can thus be reasonably said that much of what was to happen in Iran and in many other parts of the world after the end of World War II had its parallel in the United States, where the ostensibly episcopalian Illuminati Bloodline families, [3]found themselves without the power to control their own universities, and where their national newspaper, the New York Herald-Tribune, fell into irreversible decline and died, like a ring-barked forest giant. The use of words like America and American in any discussion of world politics can thus be grossly misleading unless it is clearly understood that `American power` has ceased to be essentially American.

The dismantling of what was an essentially British oil empire in Iran, and its reorganization thereafter, on an international basis (as was done with Belgium's copper empire in the Congo in 1960) was therefore to be expected, having much the same effect as that produced by supposed `decolonization` in so many other parts of the world. The Anglo-Iranian Oil Company (AIOC) had been exploiting the oil fields in Khuzistan since 1901, and the demarcation of those fields, covering an area of 15,000 square miles, has been set out in a 1933 agreement. This giant company, writes Vincent Monteil, trained British subjects to take an interest in Iran's internal affairs, and "took pleasure in appointing the number of votes in the 'free' elections." In return -- to take only one year as an example -- AIOC paid Iran royalties or rent of £10 million in 1949, compared with £28 million paid in tax on profit alone to the British treasury.

In 1950, following the Shah's visit to the United States, where he held talks with President Truman and Secretary of State Dean Acheson, the `Americans` began to display an increased interest in the Iranian oil industry. A contingent of oil experts, businessmen and technicians visited Iran, and began to lay the `powder-trail` for a political explosion which was to take place less than twelve months later.

By making it widely known how much more generously they treated their partners in Saudi Arabia, Venezuela and elsewhere, an incendiary atmosphere was thus created as AIOC began negotiating for a further renewal of its contract. In the wildly confusing situation that ensued, all likelihood suggests, that it was the British who were initially instrumental in persuading the Shah to appoint the army chief-of-staff, Ali Razmara, as prime minister, charged with the task of handling these negotiations. However, typically, the British were soon conducting a furious campaign of character-assassination against Razmara, while at the same time, the Americans sought to bolster his regime with aid and by upgrading their own embassy as a visual display of sincerity. This little drama within a drama ended suddenly, and murderously when Razmara was assassinated, supposedly as a warning to any politician who dared to frustrate the growing demand for nationalization of the oil industry.

The killing was said to have been carried out by the `Fedayen of Islam` (Martyrs for Islam), but it was generally believed, and was undoubtedly the case, that orders for the assassination had come from the British by way of one of their former employees. But the question why begs asking? A draft bill for the renewal of the agreement with AIOC, introduced by Gen. Razmara, was defeated and a few weeks later, another bill introduced by Dr. Mohammad Mussadeq, [4]nationalizing the oil industry, was passed. Mussadeq was then appointed prime minister and Iran found itself involved in a titanic struggle with the ever furtive and treacherous British at the World Court and the United Nations. A great British company with many years of experience in Iran evidently had no intention of surrendering without a struggle.

Writes Amir Taheri: "That the United States wanted Mussadeq to succeed was demonstrated by the increase in American aid from $500,000 in 1950 to nearly $24 million two years later." [19] However, if the Iranians expected the Americans to help them to re-establish the oil industry on a national basis, they were soon to be disappointed, for American policy was to be dictated by considerations of a kind wholly inaccessible to the scrutiny of ordinary politicians and journalists. Whether, therefore, it was the Rothschild British or the Rockefeller Americans who were responsible for the small army revolt which dislodged Mussadeq has continued to this day to be a debatable question in Iran.

As a sincere nationalist politician enjoying much support from the religious class, himself being a practising Muslim, Mussadeq had performed the task required of him and had now to be removed. The Americans, therefore, joined willingly enough in the world-wide champaign, engineered by the British, to make it impossible for the Iranians to make a go of their nationalized oil industry. In the ensuing turmoil the shah hurriedly left the country, and as quickly returned after order had been established by the army.

The Point 4 Plan:

The Iranians may have found a key to the riddle of one of the most troubling periods in their much-troubled history in something that happened in Washington in 1949. This was a speech by Mr. Truman in Congress inaugurating his first full term as President, in which he unveiled a grandiose plan to "save the world from Communism" (so soon after America had saved the Soviet Union from Hitler!). This plan proclaimed a "bold new program for underdeveloped areas," a program "to greatly increase the industrial activity in other nations" and "to raise substantially their standards of living." The executors and agents of this plan, which came to be known as `Point 4` and Agency for International Development" or AID, were soon afterwards pressing for American assistance and advice on all the so-called `underdeveloped` countries, including Iran. What President Truman had presented, as we now can see more clearly, was the prefiguration of a new global financial imperialism whose primary purpose would be to dismantle and dislodge all the national economic imperialisms of the preceding 150 years.

A Washington report at the time said that American officials Concerned with President Truman's "Point 4" were working to the principle of "a new type of benevolent imperialism designed to spread prosperity without exacerbating political nationalism." Put more simply; if the project was initiated, "American nationals will serve on the governmental as well as the technical level in the politically independent countries concerned." Although seen in many quarters as being a disturbing innovation with regards to Asia and Africa, in Washington, it was to be regarded as only an extension of a system which was already in operation in Latin America.

Following President Truman's speech, former London Times foreign correspondent Douglas Reed wrote that he had a strong feeling that he had read it all before somewhere. And so it turned out he had, in a book by Earl Browder, leader of the American Communist Party, entitled ` Tehran, Our Path in War and Peace.` In Browder's words: "Our government can create a series of giant industrial development corporations, each in partnership with some other government or group of governments, and set them to work upon large-scale plans of rail-road and highway building, agricultural and industrial development, and all-round modernization in all the devastated and undeveloped areas of the world. Closely related socially, economically and politically with Africa are the Near Eastern countries of Arabia, Iraq, Iran, Syria, Lebanon, Palestine and Trans-Jordan. Here also a broad program of economic development is called for.”

Significantly, it was a capitalist America and not a Communist Soviet Union which the Communist Party boss called on to undertake this ambitious program of financial and economic imperialism. Douglas Reed could only marvel:

“There must be in America under President Truman, as under President Roosevelt, some group or force strong or persuasive enough to sell Communist aims to political leaders and simultaneously to convince them that these will stop Communism.”

And it is to the same `hidden` source must be traced the true intentions of the architects of American state policy both during and after WWII, as being entirely distinct from that policy as publicly stated; namely, the promotion of two causes that were never publicly declared, but simply came to pass: the unhindered advance of the Red Army into the heartland of Europe and to the Pacific coast of Asia, and the continuous pouring of billions of financial aid every year into the then-new state of Israel.

Grand Design and Counter-Revolution:

The Ayatollah Khomeini's [5]`angry young men` who seized the American embassy after the revolution, did not fail to notice that many of the most telling policy directives from the State Department in Washington failed to tally with reports and interpretations from those men on the spot, who afterwards had to bear the full impassioned brunt of Iranian animosity. Members of the American embassy in Tehran, says Taheri, were led to understand that they should not report what they saw but, rather what Washington wanted them to report. What this meant was that a grand strategy and system of tactics were being implemented to which only a small inner core of policy-makers at the top were privy, creating an environment in which deeply clandestine purposes were heavily masked with an ostentation of innocent and benevolent intentions. The effect was an utterly baffling melange of contradictory utterances and actions. As Taheri put it:

"The behind-the-scenes drama enacted over more than eight years in Tehran, Washington, Jerusalem, London, Cairo and a dozen other cities reflected the realities of a secret world which obeyed few rules either of international conduct or of individual morality. It is in this broader context that the Iran-gate fiasco might be properly understood."

This `viper's nest` of intrigue outside Iran had its own parallels inside the country. In the aftermath of the Revolution, all Free-masonic Lodges in Iran were closed, and their archives seized, confirming what many had suspected. Many of them were controlled by Jews or Bahais[6] of Jewish origin, providing another channel of secret communication with Israel and Zionism in general.

So, how did the American Communist Party leader come to present in broad outline an ambitious program for Third World development, to be undertaken later at great cost by the United States and a wide network of international agencies? Another question: How did it happen, and how was it possible, for Armand Hammer, son of Julius Hammer, one of the founders of the American Communist Party, to proceed to Russia immediately after the Bolshevik Revolution and begin at once to organize a massive transfer of finance, industrial equipment and technology from the capitalist West to its supposed enemy, the Communist East?

The short answer to both questions will be found in what the German historian Oswald Spengler wrote immediately after the Bolshevik Revolution: "There is no proletarian movement, not even a Communist one, which does not operate in the interest of money, in the direction indicated by money and for the period permitted by money, and all this without the idealist in its ranks having the slightest suspicion of the fact."

Those who have penetrated the mystery of the strangely ambivalent relationship of high finance and Communism will not be surprised to learn that the Soviet Union supported the Shah to the end, and that articles in Pravda about events in Iran were almost exactly the same in tone and content as those in the New York Times.

If the unfolding history of our century can be said to be the product of an alliance of money and intellect, in the service of `Magical Forces.` (The Luciferian Conspiracy), it was the role of Earl Browder and very many of his kind, only a few of them to be identified as Communists, to take care of the intellectual half of this alliance. Writes Professor Hamid Algar:

"The return of the shah in 1953 inaugurated the intense period of a quarter of a century of unprecedented massacre and oppression, the intensive exploitation of the resources of the Iranian people by the imperialism of the East and West, the Western camp being headed then by the United States rather than Britain."

This then was the new imperialism, `American` and Israeli in appearance but international and `cosmopolitan` in character, drawing into its orbit power-wielding elements from all the previous national imperialisms, financial, political and intellectual. The Iranian oil industry, hitherto a British monopoly, was thus `internationalized,` the nominal national ownership of it left intact but its management entrusted to a consortium owned by AIOC, renamed British Petroleum (40 per cent), eight United States oil trusts (40 per cent), Shell (14 per cent) and French Petroleum (6 per cent).

The Great Satan:

We must now try to make some sense out of the phantasmagoria of confused and seemingly contradictory facts which emerged in the struggle between the Shah and his people that was to ensue.

The thrust of the Iranian struggle following World War II can be seen in the broadest terms as being a confrontation of mutually antagonistic hierarchies of ideas, values and vortices of power, actual or potential, the one belonging to the West and the other to the East, the one having modern America as its grand symbol of human progress and welfare, and the other regarding America as the arch-symbol of political illegitimacy, `The Great Satan.` And the Shah, because he was unable imagine any form of future for Iran except one modelled on the industrialized West, and because he, too, regarded his country's religious class as the great obstacle to progress in that direction, allowed himself to become, in every way, the puppet of the foreign powers being amassed by the Illuminists.

An assortment of ideological forces came into existence after 1953 intended to combat the dictatorship of the Shah and his subservience to the foreign powers; but behind all of them, a religious influence was increasingly becoming discernible; so much so, that even socialism, a secular ideology borrowed from the West, reappeared in Iran as "The Movement of God-fearing Socialists." This increase in religious influence came to a `head` in 1963 with the sudden emergence of the Ayatollah Khomeini, who was to play a role in the revolution resembling I some ways,if only superficially that of the Prophet Muhammad (SAW) in the seventh century, combining in a remarkable way the functions of a religious and secular leader.

The Shah's increasing determination to enforce his will on the Iranian population, was met with a corresponding increase in the power and influence of a religious class which symbolized the will and instinct of the mass of the people. The Shah's power to enforce his will was enormously increased by:

1) an increase in the amount of money at his disposal as oil production was resumed, and again as the price of oil rocketed;

And;

2) close cooperation with the external power, especially with its Israeli component, in the sophisticated use of secret police and prisons as instruments of terror and compulsion.

After 1963, even moderate opposition would result in either forced exile, imprisonment, torture and even murder, and the army was utilized to crush mass demonstrations mounted by the Ulama[7] in Tehran and other cities, when thousands of people were killed. In 1975 the director of Amnesty Internationals British section described Iran as the "world leader" in torture, executions after sham trials, and widespread political imprisonment. The cutting edge of the power which the Shah was able to bring to exert on his internal opponents was almost entirely provided by the United States and Israel; these were in reality however, never really separate entities in this regard, but only two aspects of one and the same world-revolutionary force.

The facts prove that American and Israeli influence were at all times inseparable. Prof. Algar says that after the coup of 1953, which ousted Mussadeq, there was cooperation at all levels, especially in intelligence and security work. He adds:

"After a certain point it appears that the task of staffing the Savak was taken over by Mossad, the Israeli security, from the CIA although the CIA always retained the right of supervision over the operations of Savak. I know of many people who report having been interrogated and tortured by Israelis while in the custody of Savak."

Algar continues: "There was overwhelming similarity between the two of utter dependence on the United States. Israel is hardly independent of the United States-or, rather, the matters are the reverse, Israel certainly commands more votes in the Senate than does the White House."

Corrupting Power: “Lie In Peace Cyrus For We Are Awake.”

The career of Shah Mohammad Reza [8]illustrates to perfection Lord Acton's maxim that "power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely." Through the process of unrestrained personal ambition the Shah became wholly separated from his own people- the corruption of leadership in its ultimate form. He believed in what he was doing, enjoyed the support of the greatest concentration of power outside his own country, and was able to draw from his oil industry so much wealth that he needed nothing from his people except their utter submission.

From 1970 he was even able to expand his influence abroad by giving away vast quantities of money, having raised his own country to a position of power and influence unprecedented in centuries. Writes Taheri: "Between 1968 and 1978 Iran earned more than $100,000 million from oil exports. More than 10 percent of that was used in the form of loans or outright gifts to friendly countries. The United Kingdom received from $1,200 million in loans ... In West Germany Iran purchased substantial shares in Krupps and Benz as a means of saving them from financial difficulties... More than seven hundred "key personalities" in some 30 countries were on the secret Iranian payroll from 1979 onwards."

Iran's huge arms expenditure in the wake of the 1973-74 oil-price rise helped Western economies to avoid recession. At the same time, under the Nixon-Kissinger doctrine [9], Iran was seen as the regional power that would defend Western interests and act as policeman in the Persian Gulf and Indian Ocean. The Shah had assigned to himself a role in history comparable, in his imagination, only with that of the founder of the Persian Empire in 600 BC. Of this he informed the world in October 1971 when, flanked by his generals, he presented himself before the tomb of that great monarch, now little more than a pile of stones in a vast arid plain, and ceremoniously read a eulogy which began with the words: "Lie in peace, Cyrus, for we are awake!" This was followed by a party among the grandiose ruins at Persepolis attended by more than five hundred dignitaries, including kings, presidents and prime ministers from sixty countries. All this, as the Shah remarked at the time, was intended to mark "the rebirth of the Persian Empire and Iran's return to the forefront of human experience."

Other products of the Shah's megalomania were the proposed 1,200-acre Shahestan-e-Pahlavi architectural extravaganza at Tehran and 20 planned nuclear power plants. This kind of development favoured Western economics and Western contractors who shared the pickings with a new class of Iranian monopolists and technocrats, but did little or nothing for the Iranian economy as a whole. Carried away by this dream of national greatness, what the Shah seemed unable to understand was that the role he had assigned to himself was wholly subordinate to another which had been assigned to him by those who were encouraging him in his ambitions. In other words, that the Iranian national drama, so impressive when viewed separately, was intended to be no more than an episode in a vastly bigger world-historical drama.

So, it is the motivational system of the likes of Henry Kissinger - during most of the 1970s the Shah's warmest `friend` and most trusted adviser -- that calls for some consideration. How and for what purpose were these powerful individuals trying to use the Shah? A short but inadequate answer is that the new international cosmopolitan imperialism, spearheaded by Israel, had come to regard the Arab world and its Islamic religions as being by far the greatest hindrance to the attainment of its great objective, a one-world government which it could control at all levels; and Iran, with its considerable non-Arabic population and huge oil wealth, was seen as a possible countervailing force which could be used against the Arab world.

The first step was to make Israel virtually synonymous with America in terms of foreign support in all fields, and then, by steady progression, provide the Shah with a means of suppressing all internal opposition. In fact, the Shah's security forces were virtually taken over by the Israelis and reinforced with non-Islamic personnel, largely recruited from non-Muslim population elements, especially the Bahais, largely people of Jewish descent no longer practising the Jewish religion. This gave the Shah an instrument which could be used with the utmost ruthlessness against the population and against the religious class in particular.

The commanding importance attached to Iran as a piece on the chequerboard of global power politics was emphasized shortly after the fall of the Shah when support from both sides of the so-called Iron Curtain was given to Iraq, and when the most flagrant violations of international law by Iraq, including the first attacks on neutral shipping, and even the use of poison gas, were disregarded or excused. The external powers, the USSR included, also doggedly refused to name Iraq as the aggressor. Then when it had become clear that Iraq could not win, the combined efforts of the external powers had to be used to prevent an Iranian victory -- an exercise which eventually called for direct American military action in the Persian gulf.

The `Mind`field:

The Iranian struggle was won and lost on the battleground of the mind. All the ideas which the Shah could muster in favour of the visible benefits of the Western social model, supported with a maximum application of force and terror, proved to be no match for a system of ideas, promoted by the Mullahs, which united the people as never before and infused them with death-defying courage. This was something the Shah could never understand: an invincible unity of the people which embraced old and young, uneducated and educated, including even those who had received their schooling in the West. Thus, we learn that the Shah's last visit to Washington at the invitation of President Carter in November 1977, was marred by unprecedented demonstrations by Iranian students, and that the tear-gas used by the police drifted across the White House lawns and caused the Shah to shed a few tears.

For the purpose of study and discussion, this victorious system of ideas can be considered under two headings: populism and religion. The use of the word populism, however, calls for an explanatory note: it means what democracy used to mean and is still assumed to mean -- namely, government by the people, direct or representative. However, since the word democracy is now almost universally applied to states which are not democracies as defined in the dictionaries, it can only be said to have ceased to be "legal tender."

The nations of the West are, in fact, plutocracies, or special-interest oligarchies, wearing many of the trappings of democracy -- political parties, the ballot box, etc. As Thomas Jefferson is quoted as having said, “Democracy; two wolves and a sheep discussing what's for dinner.”

All populist movements have their origin in a deeply rooted instinct, a social or political instinct, which prompts people to react negatively to any rule which, judged by the results produced, they do not feel to be truly their own. Primitive societies which have endured down the ages can be regarded as models of legitimate rule and an example to the huge sophisticated societies of the modern world, in which the factor of legitimacy has become wholly absent. The actual system matters very little: it could be a monarchy, or a dictatorship, or an oligarchy or a conventional democracy; there is no system of rule which has not been known to work to the satisfaction of those ruled; any system acceptable provided that it is implemented by those who can be regarded as the legitimate nominees of those ruled, leaders who are sensitive to the feelings, values, beliefs and group memories of the ruled.

Amir Taheri, a West-oriented Iranian journalist and no friend of the Mullahs, says of the Shah in 1976: "He did not need the people for their votes in a general election. He was there by divine right and parliamentary elections, organized every four years, were little more than ritualistic exercises in futility." And the Shah had long since abandoned the practice of travelling around the country to make direct contact with his people.

Other populist resistance movements in Iran since before the turn of the century, some of them modelled on similar movements in the West, were all influenced in some degree by the religious class, but the one that finally triumphed was religious to its core, inspired by a great religious leader and organized and managed throughout by the Ulama. From all of which it would seem to follow that for the West, with all its illusionary democracies and its Christian church fallen into disarray and demoralization, there should be much to learn from the role of religion as a mobilizer of mass political action, and about politics in general. However, any consideration of the role of religion in Iran - a role which would to most be unthinkable in the West today; needs to be preceded by a few thoughts about religion in general, not this or that manifestation of it, but religion as a factor of commanding importance in human affairs everywhere and at all times of which we have any record.

Religion:

Religion can be said to have two main aspects: personal and social. Religion can be a strictly personal phenomenon, joined to or wholly independent of any prevailing orthodoxy or doctrine. A sound attitude towards the totality of existence, a submission of the will to a system of cosmic law external to and superior to the intellect, no matter how such an attitude may have been acquired, is all that is needed for what C.G. Jung describes as "a religious attitude to life," or state of psychic well-being. For most people at all times, a taught religion has provided the easiest access to such an attitude, for which the only proof needed is that it works.

Religion can, therefore, also be a social phenomenon, a system of consensus belief having its origin in some prophet and offering spiritual security and some measure of creative release to an entire community, even to an epoch. Consensus religions, like all other human artefacts, are exposed to the vicissitudes of time and change and thus are liable to lose some of their pristine efficacy, their power to fulfil the purpose for which they came into existence.

So, what is the purpose of a consensus religion, if any, apart from that of helping the individual to find psychic orientation?

One simple but of course insufficient answer is that a consensus religion serves as a repository of values and a system of tested knowledge in respect of what is `right` and `wrong` in human relations. This implies that certain cosmic laws which are relative to what people do, or what is done to them, are somewhere encoded in human nature, not as ready-made ideas, but only as instinctual intimations which must then be conceptualized and verbalized as ideas capable of being communicated and discussed. These we categorize as being `moral` or `metaphysical` laws of a most volatile and elusive kind which are easily lost and are continually having to be rediscovered reinforced, consolidated and verbalized anew. And it is precisely these laws which if observed and applied in whatever form, keep a society as it were `on course,` preserving it against disintegration and disorder; more simply put, providing it's moral compass.

Islam And Christianity:

Only blind prejudice can prevent anyone who has gone to the trouble of studying even a summary of the contents of the Quran[11]from realising that the Prophet Muhammad (SAW) [10]was a moral genius. A man who, under pressure of a personal crisis of the mind, gained a quite extraordinary insight into those metaphysical laws, so hard to grasp, which prevail inexorably inside the human mind and in human relations. And it was the circumstances then prevailing that made it possible, even inevitable, that one man's breakthrough to a rare state of enlightenment via divine revelation, would expand quickly into a consensus religion destined to spread very quickly over most of the then known world.

Muhammad (SAW), like Jesus Christ (SAW) about 600 years earlier, was living in what can be described as `end times` -- much like conditions present in the Western world today -- when civilisations, no longer sufficiently in `tune` with the unalterable realities of human nature, have begun to disintegrate. Social existence degenerates into a frantic scramble for personal survival and advantage as people cease to find in their social group a sense of shared security and mutual obligation and duty, and very many begin to suffer within the recesses of their minds.

What is most significant is that the Church in the West is disintegrating along with everything else, compounding rather than counteracting the process of decline in the West. Here a clear distinction must be drawn between two aspects of Christianity as a consensus religion: the Church Extant and the Church Invisible; the church as a great property-owning and power-oriented institution and the church in its nascent form as a message of personal deliverance. Both Christianity and Islam spring from the same insights and share with Judaism the same even more ancient monotheistic symbolism. The Quran says: "Jesus the Messiah, the son of Mary, was a Messenger of God, His word which He placed in Mary, and His spirit" (IV.171). There was, and remains therefore, no fundamental antagonism between Islam and Christianity.

The major difference between the two religions is that Islam did not create a church or its equivalent, and that the Christian Church, obedient to the laws of worldly growth, was everywhere inclined to make common cause with centres of worldly power. The failure of the church in the West is summed up in Balzac's trenchant remark that "there can be no universal application of Christianity until the money problem has been solved." Alas, the church has never been at odds for long with "Caesar" in the ultimate form as concentrated financial power.

It is mainly for this reason that Islam, with its determined prohibition of usury, is now seen as a major threat to the Illuminati structure of power in the West, challenging the very moral foundations on which it has been raised. The code of conduct, both for rulers and ruled, explicit in Islam's Sharia, was once largely implicit in Christianity's basic teaching ("Do unto others as you would be done by"). The main difference between the two faiths arose out of the fact that Muhammad (SAW) was compelled by the circumstances of his time to become a political leader, administrator and soldier, as well as religious leader. The meanings belonging to "a kingdom not of this world" were thus brought into close relationship with meanings more directly relevant to the unavoidable actualities of "this world."

Perhaps the most important aspect of all, when taken in the context of the present world situation, is that Islam presents in clear outline the moral configuration of Economic Man: worker, owner, dealer in the products of labour, his duties, obligations and rights. The injunction on the subject of usury may not have seemed all that important at the time when few, if any, of the Prophet's followers might have been interested in the lending of money. But, today, usury is the linchpin without which the greatest concentration of diabolical worldly power ever seen would simply collapse, and therein lies our only hope for earthly salvation.

Centuries of antagonism between the Christian and Muslim worlds can be traced to a great variety of causes, but one of its main effects, as we can now see more plainly, was that of preventing the people of the West from recognizing and getting to grips with a corrupting principle which had been planted in their midst; USURY!

The Shia:

For an explanation of the Iranian Revolution, it is not Islam in general but a particular version of it called Shi'ism [12]that needs to be more closely examined, a kind of fundamentalism which, besides setting Iran fiercely at odds with the Western world, has had the effect of driving Iran into isolation, separated also from the rest of the Islamic world. Professor Algar writes:

"The revolution in Iran and the foundation of the Islamic Republic is the culmination of a series of events that began in the sixteenth century of the Christian era with the adherence of the majority of the Iranian people to the Shi'i school of thought in Islam. Indeed, one of the important factors that sets the Iranian Revolution apart from all the other revolutionary upheavals of the present century is its deep roots in the historical past."

What has happened can be stated in a few words: Shi'ism has presented in sharper and clearer outlines the religious configurations of what we might call `Political Man.` This has entailed the politicization of the Ulama and its involvement in public affairs to a degree unequalled anywhere outside Iran. The secular leaders of the other Islamic states, many in thrall to the same Luciferian forces, at work here in the West, view what happened in Iran as a usurpation by the religious class that could place their own corrupted regimes in danger. But this involvement in politics by the Muslim clerics has deep roots in history and is supported with considerable scholarship. Writes Prod Algar:

"With the hindsight provided by the Islamic Revolution, it will be more appropriate to write the Iranian history of the past three or four centuries not so much in terms of dynasties as in terms of the development of the class of Iranian ulama. Dynasties have come and gone, leaving in many cases little more than a few artefacts behind to account for their existence. but there has been a continuing development of the class of Shi'i Ulama in Iran which has been totally without parallel elsewhere in the Islamic world."

Prof. Algar explains briefly how the burdens of state came to be placed on the shoulders of the religious scholars and how they learned to cope:

"With the decline of the Safavid dynasty in 1724, a period of anarchy began in Iran. At one point within the 18th century we find no fewer than 13 different contestants for the throne doing battle with each other. The total disintegration of the political authority accelerated the process of divorce between the religious institution and the monarchy. We can say that in the absence of an effective centralized monarchy throughout the 18th century the ulama came in a practical fashion ... to assume the role of local governors, arbitrators of disputes, executors at law and so forth."

This experience over an extended time period produced a change in Shi'ism; for there had to be some change in theory and scholarship to accommodate an expanded range of duty and mental activity. And so a great debate arose about the duties of the religious scholar, whether he should confine himself to the sifting of the teachings of the Prophet and its interpretations, or whether it was permissible for him to engage in independent reasoning in respect of legal questions. The first position acquired the Arabic name akhbari and the other the usuli.

It would be difficult indeed to exaggerate the profundity and far-ranging implication of this debate; the question at issue is whether a consensus religion can be a `total way of life` for any society unless its scholars and teachers are also experts in jurisprudence and other affairs of state and have been trained to exercise their intellects in secular as well as religious matters, thereby acquiring competence to monitor the performance of the rulers. Were it not for the triumph of the usuli position in the 18th century, the religious scholars would have been reduced to an extremely marginal position in society and the Iranian Revolution of 1978 would have been impossible. The whole significance of the Ayatollah Khomeini arises from the fact that he was the living embodiment of this activist tradition, the fruition of long years of political, spiritual and intellectual development.

As the mass of the Iranian population was instinctively repelled by the conditions of existence created in the name of Westernisation and progress, and after the failure of many attempts by various popular movements, like Mussadeq's National Front, to place some curbs on the Shah's dictatorial power, all turned to the Ulama and accepted it unreservedly as the sole legitimate authority and thereafter responded unquestioningly to its commands. Khomeini could, therefore, feel secure in the knowledge that he had the mass of the population firmly behind him when early in 1963 he virtually launched the revolution with a series of public declarations at Qum, in which he accused the Shah of having violated the constitution and the oath he took when enthroned that he would protect Islam.

He further attacked the Shah for his subordination to foreign powers, naming the United States and Israel, whom he associated with political and imperialist Zionism. The secret police `Savak` had permitted some qualified criticism of America but had always rigorously enforced the rule that not even the name of Israel must ever be mentioned in public discussion. After one of these addresses, Khomeini's centre at Qum was stormed by paratroopers and Savak members, a number of people were killed and the Ayatollah arrested. Released a few days later, he continued to attack the Shah, with the result that there followed on June 5th 1963 a vast uprising in many Iranian cities. This was repressed with great force and it was estimated that within a few days at least 15,000 people were killed in the shooting ordered by the Shah. Khomeini was arrested again and sent into exile in Turkey, whence he moved later to Iraq and then to Paris.

Two features of the ensuing revolution which culminated in the final explosion of public anger towards the end of 1978 call for special notice. The more important of these was the factor of martyrdom, that is resistance of a kind undeterred by the fear of death. The other was the communications factor, the apparent ease with which the leader of the revolution, even from distant Paris, could reach a widely distributed population with information and instruction.

The communications factor is more easily explained: the Ulama represented a nationwide communications network with its mosques and Madrassas (religious schools), its Mullahs and its students, vastly expanded and expedited by two products of modern technology, the telephone and the tape-recorder. A declaration by the ayatollah, spoken into a telephone in Paris, would be recorded in Tehran or some other Iranian city, copied and transcribed and retransmitted to other parts of the country, where the process would be repeated until within a few hours it would have reached even small and widely separated villages.

All this was made possible however, only by reason of the accumulated learning and preparatory work of four centuries which had equipped the Ulama for such a role, so that all knew exactly what they were expected to do and why, a rare condition in any society. This communications system, wholly dependent on the zealous participation of thousands of individuals, proved in the end to be more than a match for a powerful press, radio and television, all vehemently supportive of the Shah's regime. All that needs to be said about the highly abstruse martyrdom factor is that in Shi'ism the concept has been more thoroughly elaborated as a main component of the Islamic faith. It is something ever present in the consciousness of the Iranians. Hence the Shi'i maxim: "Every day is Ashura and every place is Karbala" - referring to the martyrdom of the Imam Hussain.

It was this factor that gave to mass political action in Iran, especially throughout 1978, a `diamond-hardness` that was proof against all the ruthless and sophisticated physical force which the Shah and his close Israeli ally could mount against it. During the first days of December 1978, a large number of people appeared in the streets of Tehran and other cities wearing their shrouds, prepared for martyrdom and advancing unarmed on the rows of machine guns ready to be used to deadly effect.

Notwithstanding the part in the drama played by the intelligence agencies of the `western` powers, and the massive, if hidden, and apparently prejudicial (to their own interests) financing by the International Bankers, (as was the case with the Russian revolution) by no other means could the people of Iran have overthrown one of the 20th century's most powerful and ruthless tyrants.

In Part Seven, we will follow the `money trail` up to the present day and hopefully show that a solution to our planet's woes is possible, if people of good heart and true faith will renounce petty doctrinal differences, come together and cease to give, give, give to the great force of evil which stalks our world, everything it wants to swallow.

Comments to: http://righteousalliance.blogspot.com/

Reference Notes:

1] http://sandiego.indymedia.org/media/2006/10/119975.pdf Tragedy And Hope
2] http://www.oldamericancentury.org/pnac.htm
3] FrtizSpringmeier : http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/bloodlines/index.htm
4] http://www.mohammadmossadegh.com/biography/
5] http://www.iranchamber.com/history/rkhomeini/ayatollah_khomeini.php
6] http://www.bahai.org/
7] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ulema
8] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mohammad_Reza_Pahlavi
9] By the last years of the Nixon administration, it had become clear that it was the Third World that remained the most volatile and dangerous source of world instability. Central to the Nixon-Kissinger policy toward the Third World was the effort to maintain a stable status quo without involving the United States too deeply in local disputes. In 1969 and 1970, in response to the height of the Vietnam War, the President laid out the elements of what became known as the Nixon Doctrine, by which the United States would "participate in the defense and development of allies and friends" but would leave the "basic responsibility" for the future of those "friends" to the nations themselves. The Nixon Doctrine signified a growing contempt by the U.S. government for the United Nations, where underdeveloped nations were gaining influence through their sheer numbers, and increasing support to authoritarian regimes attempting to withstand popular challenges from within. In the 1970s, for example, the CIA poured substantial funds into Chile to help support the established government against a Marxist challenge. When the Marxist candidate for president, Salvador Allende, came to power through free elections, the United States began funneling more money to opposition forces to help "destabilize" the new government. In 1973, a U.S.-backed military junta seized power from Allende. The new, repressive regime of General Augusto Pinochet received warm approval and increased military and economic assistance from the United States as an anti-Communist ally. Democracy was finally re-established in Chile in 1989.
10] http://www.islamweb.net/ver2/archive/index2.php?vPart=74&startno=1&thelang=E
11] http://www.quranexplorer.com/quran/
12] http://www.islamfortoday.com/shia.htm