Beyond the thick iron curtain of Western censorship, Zionism is often regarded as the epitome of Western imperial movements. There is a good reason for that. This is not the result of the size of the territories gained by the Zionists. This is not the result of the number of people enslaved, tortured, or even killed by the Zionist army. Several European countries have outperformed Zionism by orders of magnitude on every imaginable parameter, except for one. Zionists were the only ones to begin with no territory at all. On pure mathematical terms, they improved their situation by an infinite ratio. That’s an unbeatable world record!

Western Blueprint

Western Blueprint

Poor Goliath!   One of the most astounding descriptions of the Spanish conquest of Mexico (“Meshiko” in the original Nahuatl) was given by Nicholas Ostler in Empires of the Word: A Language History of the World (see link at bottom of the page). He quotes words from the Florentine Codex, which describes the meeting between Hernán Cortés—the Spanish conquistador—and Aztec ruler Moctezuma II. Moctezuma welcomed his guest warmly:

My lord, you have become fatigued, you have become tired: to the land you have arrived. You have come to your city: Mexico, here you have come to sit on your place, on your throne. Oh, it has been reserved to you for a small time; it was conserved by those who have gone, your substitutes... This is what has been told by our rulers, those of whom governed this city, ruled this city. That you would come to ask for your throne, your place that you would come here. Come to the land, come and rest: take possession of your royal houses, give food to your body.

To some extent, this is a very pompous form of “mi casa es su casa” (“my house is your house” in Spanish”). When visiting a Bedouin, one may be greeted with similar pleasantries even today. Yet, no one in the world—except for a European self-defined-noble conqueror—would mistake such a warm welcome with an ownership transfer ceremony.

Astonishingly, Cortez assumed exactly that. Hernán Cortés savage answer was a request to provide gold gifts. After his demands were met Cortés seized Moctezuma in his own palace and made him his prisoner as insurance against Aztec revolt. Then he demanded an enormous ransom of gold, which was duly delivered. Following the two subsequent years of extreme violence, the last Aztec emperor, Cuauhtémoc, surrendered to Cortés.

Free Commerce Doesn’t Mean Freedom!

Western Blueprint

The Brits got envious from their neighbors to the south. Repeating the Mexican feat on the same fashion would have been impossible. Thus, they turned to commerce. The English East India Company was founded in 1600, as The Company of Merchants of London Trading into the East Indies. In 1612 Mughal Emperor Jahangir granted it the rights to establish a factory and trading post, in the port of Surat on the western coast of India. The company soon became very successful, establishing many similar outposts.

Following Robert Clive's victory in the 1757 Battle of Plassey, the British enclaves became independent and begun being consolidated into a new empire. Where there wasn’t a strong local government, the British simply took over the Indian states. In stronger areas, Indian rulers acknowledged the company’s hegemony in return for limited internal autonomy. After the empire was consolidated, all pretensions were dropped. The company was replaced by the British Raj, a ruthless colonial regime which lasted until India got independence in 1947. An empire based on wild capitalism, the British provided minimal freedom to their subjects.

First Zionist Congress | 1897

Western Blueprint

Related to the Spanish and the Brits in a truly complex story, the Dutch also wanted an empire of their own. The Dutch East India Company (VOC) began the conquest of the Indonesian archipelago from 1603, when the first trading post was established. In 1800, the bankrupted party was dissolved, and its possessions nationalized as the Dutch East Indies. The Dutch East Indies colony became modern Indonesia following World War II. Needless to say, also here the conquerors were after material profits and kept their colonies underdeveloped. A similar analysis can be offered for North America, South America, Australia, Africa and other parts of Asia. Europe became rich by enslaving the rest of the world. Following this, the Zionists had in the late 19th century a large volume of historic experience on which to base their violence. That explains also the tacit support that Zionism enjoyed in Europe. After all, who were the Brits, or the Spaniards, or the Dutch, to oppose the conquest of foreign lands?

When European tricks stopped working—though their final failure would take many decades—the Americans appeared on the stage. Americans tried a bit of everything: brutal military conquest and annexation of what now is known as the USA, thinly disguised military control of all other American countries (see The Cross of Bethlehem II on this; it would be published soon), and commercial control by using economic power to impose unfair trading agreements. Eventually, in the years since the end of the Cold War all this is not working too well anymore (see Venezuela, Iran, China and the Axis of Piracy for recent related events). Resourceful as ever, America launched the next step in the conquest of the world.

The War on What?

There is no better sign that an empire is approaching its end that when it begins attacking everything that moves. It happened in Europe, now in America. Like Israel, America bases its economy on constant war, as predicted in George Orwell’s 1984 (see American Led Apocalypse). The recent “War on Terror” (regardless of its locations) is nothing but the almost final song of a very violent dying swan. Despite the recent popularity of the term “terrorism,” there is no formal definition and various legal systems and government agencies use different definitions of "terrorism.” Under this circumstances, of special interest is the definition given by Bruce Hoffman: “terrorism is a pejorative term. It is a word with intrinsically negative connotations that is generally applied to one’s enemies and opponents, or to those with whom one disagrees and would otherwise prefer to ignore. (...) Hence the decision to call someone or label some organization 'terrorist' becomes almost unavoidably subjective, depending largely on whether one sympathizes with or opposes the person/group/cause concerned.” He is the Director of the Center for Peace and Security Studies at Georgetown University’s Walsh School of Foreign Service and a specialist in the study of terrorism and counter-insurgency. Thus, it is pretty safe to assume that the government of the USA knows that the “War on Terror” is nothing but a Mickey Mouse McMockburger fast meal aimed to control the ignorant masses of American voters. A few years after its beginning, this war is dwindling. How many more innocents can be slaughtered? After all, the entire world is watching in horror the truly inexplicable American extreme violence. Against all odds, at this stage the interests of the Israeli and American administrations began converging. After the War on Terror, the War on Iran is to become the next aim of colonialists and weapons producers.

There is little doubt that much of what is said by Israeli and American sources on Iran is misinformation, a repetition of the Dodgy Dossier and the Weapons of Mass Destruction lies that led to the Iraq War in 2003. Iran poses a singular problem to Israel and America, a problem which is not related to the strength of explosive charges.

Western Blueprint

The Islamic Republic of Iran never attacked any other country. The eighteenth largest economy in the world by purchasing power parity (PPP) is based on mining, manufacturing, and agriculture, with 45% of the Iranian government’s budget coming from oil and natural gas revenues. In order to keep its profitable oil business going, Iran needs peace. Thus, it is unlikely to attack any other country in the future. Yet, American and Israeli journalists keep claiming otherwise in increasingly hysterical tones. Israel may be even attempting to Wag the Dog, a situation in which the “tail” (Israel) is attempting to wag the “dog” (USA) into attacking Iran, as some say was done in the Iraq War. These lies are aimed not only for internal consumption by the Western electorate, but also towards Iran. Some of them are clear attempts to create fear among Iranian leaders in a desperate attempt to deter them from continuing the development of their society. This is odd. Why would the West care about a proven peaceful society? Is that for the compulsive need by Western, 1984-oriented societies, in having an enemy? Is Iran the perfect enemy of the West because it is peaceful and thus can be safely provoked to death? Are the coward Western generals attacking because they know there would be no Iranian preemptive attack? This claim is less ridiculous than it sounds at first; in Armageddon’s Trigger I showed an impressive–yet partial–list of Israeli failed casus belli provocations during 2011. At this point in time, Iran is the colonizers and enslavers perfect enemy.

But, Goliath was the Victim!

While reading Western mainstream media, one gets the eternal impression that regardless what reality is, Goliath was the victim, where Goliath represents the West. Reality is different, the blueprint is clear. For 500 years, we are watching a well consolidated and evil club of enslavers running amok around the world and pillaging every attractive corner and person. The actual War on Terror and the future War on Iran are just modern variations on the theme. This is possible because the electorate of these societies—mostly honest people—is kept unaware of their respective governments’ violence.

The moral rhetoric of Iran is what scares the pagan West, not its weapons. If the Western electorate awakens from its coma and understands the West is still basing itself on the pillage of others, revolution would follow. The fall of the Western countries may take place after their citizens realize their governments are still responsible for worldwide evil. 500 years later, the Conquistadores are still here, their metal helmets having been replaced by hedge funds in the City, their pikes by nuclear warheads. Hysterical to delay the end of this pleasant empire, Western media obscures the role of morals (they reduce it to sexual morals, and then dismiss the topic). When was the last time you heard a Westerner official truly assessing “goodness?” American officials talk about “financing the war,” as the most relevant parameter while considering their next rape of humanity. That’s evil. It’s not just America. The last sentences can be rephrased to mention the UK, France, Israel or any other Western bastion. The West—and its Chinese ideological offspring—is pragmatic, golden calf-oriented. A moral political discourse cannot be accepted by Washington and Tel Aviv because it would melt their golden calf. Beyond the thick iron curtain of Western censorship, Zionism is often regarded as the epitome of Western imperial movements; in fact, it is just another member of a bad, very bad club.

+
+ +

Subscribe to Roi Tov

KIDNAPPED BY BOLIVIA!—I am being tortured by the Bolivian Government I have been declared a Political Prisoner of Bolivia, a country which does not respect human life. I am held in Bolivia illegitimately, violently and against my will. I am violated daily; please make this public in any possible way. Before writing to me, please read 15-Day Execution Order and the Bolivia section of the website.