1
An Anatomy of Terrorism (April 2004)
Terror is a feeling of extreme fear felt by a human being or any being, animal or plant, when its most valuable or vital possession, its bodily integrity or life, is threatened and it cannot see how it can possibly avert its demise.
For the human being, most instances of such terror are caused by the actions of one group of people upon another. Such terror has two distinct sources, (a) by the strong and dominating group upon the weaker group and (b) by the weaker or suppressed group upon the dominating one. However, the first instance of terror, though it causes much more senseless killing and much more destruction and Terror, is not called ‘Terrorism’. This is partly because the strongest or dominating group decides what is called whatand partly because the term ‘Terrorism’ is logically reserved for actions that have as their main purpose not the destruction or the killing of as many as possible but the causing of a feeling of insecurity among the mighty who would otherwise feel safe, due to their might, to treat the weaker of the World as they saw fit. And it may be quite apt to call this second instance ‘Terrorism’ because it strikes unseen, ‘in the dark’. People are afraid of the dark; hence the term ‘Terrorism’. It is obvious that the weaker group or what I would call the ‘Desperados’ cannot hold their ground and satisfy their own sense of justice in an open confrontation or war and have to resort to striking in the dark.
Thus, though Alexander the Macedon caused real terror to the people he conquered, to the extent that even today mothers in countries beyond Persia threaten their misbehaving children with the phrase “Eskander will get you” instead of “the bogyman will get you”, Alexander is not called a ‘Terrorist’ but a ‘Civilizer’! (Beyond Persia, Alexander used the tactics of massacring refugees and other civilians before pending battles in order to terrorize or demoralize the soldiers of the opposing armies). Similarly with other instances of human terror, as caused by the Mongols marauding westward and piling human skulls in pyramidal heaps, by the Islamic Saracens, by the Crusaders upon the people of the Middle East, by the Conquistadors upon the native Americans both North and South, by the Inquisition and the Witch hunt, by all the persecutions against the Jews, from those in England through to the Pogroms and the Holocaust, by the ‘Blitz’ of London and the carpet bombings in Germany, like the bombing of Dresden, by the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, after burning with incendiary bombs 67 other Japanese cities and between 50% and 90% of their civilian population, 100000 in Tokyo alone in one single air raid;(as McNamara confessed, a war crime if the Americans lost the war. The Americans had no need to use the bombs but this was their chance to test them in real situations). The Japanese were lucky that America had no more bombs ready yet. (They surrendered before the third one was assembled on Tinian). The Americans intended to use them as soon as they were ready. (Even today, the Americans can be aptly labeled as ‘people of the gun’). Certainly there were hundreds of thousands of children killed, in the Mongol drive west and in the Holocaust, in the Blitz, in Dresden and in Hiroshima-and-Nagasaki but, though these instances of insane destruction and killing and the terrorizing of civilian population are called by various names, albeit bad names, they are never called ‘Terrorism’.
‘Terrorism’ is a newly coined term, used originally after World War II, to describe the actions of groups of ‘rebels’ that were fighting for Independence against Colonial Rule. Similarly today, the term ‘Terrorism’ is applied to the actions of weaker groups that have no other wayof ever getting their own sense of justice satisfied, like the Islamists, the Basque, people in Chechnya and other regions in the Caucasus, in Shrilanka, in Indonesia and other places that resent external rule and external domination. For the Americans and the rest of the Dominating World, these rebel groups are definitely ‘Terrorists’ and ‘Evil’. The said terrorists consider themselves as ‘patriots’ or ‘martyrs’ or even ‘saints’ in the cases of suicide attacks and they reflect the adjective ‘Evil’ upon the Americans and other dominating groups. I would call them neither ‘terrorists’ nor ‘martyrs’ but ‘Desperados’.
Though humanly caused terror has two distinct sources, as I already mentioned, it has only ONE CAUSE. This single cause is the feudal syndrome of ownership and domination over others and has its origin in the predator idiosyncrasy of the Nordic race, the survivors of the ruling caste of Atlantis. The ‘terrorism’ of the ‘Desperados’ comes from those that do not wish to be owned or exploited or ruled or dominated by the strong and mighty. Apart from the ownership, domination and exploitation exercised by the Nordic Christian nations, the latter are further responsible for this ‘terrorism’ because, in their ‘democratic’ preaching of ‘liberty’ and ‘the justification to do what one considers RIGHT even against laws and regulations’, they unwittingly incite such ‘terrorist’ action on behalf of the suppressed and, further, in their greed for material gain, they provide most of the means for these ‘terrorist’ acts of violence.
Having given the definition and Anatomy of this terrorizing, whether called ‘terrorism’ or not, I would consider it appropriate to run briefly through its history:
The first recorded instance was the descent of the Nordic Danaans into the Greek peninsula in the 17th century BCE. Those slave swine herders or goat herders we read about in the Odyssey were once their own masters and owners of their herds, though the land on which they grazed their herds was not privately owned. The descent of the more aggressiveNorsemen with superior longer swords, as well as the compound laminated bow(of Scythianingenuity), and the horse-driven chariot, (aCeltic ingenuity), put an end to their freedom and placed both people and land under private ownership. (See ‘Synoptic History …’ for this glorious marauding by the Spartans and the Athenians to forage for slaves and booty). After they settled west of the Aegean, these same Danaans moved to ransack the lands on the other side of the Aegean. In the ten years of the Trojan War, the pretext of this marauding, how do you think this army of more than 100 thousand well-armed freemen, (not counting their more numerous slave archers or light brigade), as well as the Trojans, secured their logistics and booty during the ten-yearwar? All the peaceful Adamite/Ionian settlements of Western Asia Minor, (as far south as Lycia/Phoenike*), towns, villages and religious sanctuaries, wereraided for supplies and booty;(*see book 21 of the Iliad).
At the same time, another branch of the same Nordicconquerors and marauders,the Aryans, (with someProto-Europeans in their caboose), ransackedKhorasan (NE Persia), Central Asia and the Indus Valley and proceeded to dominate the area from Iran to India; hence the Indo-Europeanmix and the Scythians and Huns, considered later as originating in Central Asia.During the Aryan invasion massacres,these Asians,whohad no weapons anddid not know war, fled into the mountains. (In some towns, like Mohenjo-Daro, there were no survivors, or none returned, to bury the dead).
[The Danaans and the Aryans, were Vikingswithout ships; before they interacted with the Ionians/Phoenicians.]
A few centuries after this, the World did have some respite in the form of the Persian Empire, which was not actually an Empire but a ‘Kingdom-over-kingdoms’ or ‘Overlordship’. This Empire exercised a system of government similar (but better) to the one attempted today by the European Union. There was extensive regional autonomy throughout the Empire. The city-states retained their autonomy, minted their own money, kept their own armies and retained exclusive ownership of their lands. Their obligations to the Empire, which provided them with better collective security, was their contribution to the Commonwealth or Imperial budget and the contribution of a regiment of soldiers in the Imperial Army. This regiment kept its allegiance to its own city-state as well as the Empire. There was no split loyalty in the Imperial army. To secure this singularity of loyalty, princes and other nobles of the city-states were invited to serve in the Imperial Court as administrators and advisors. Unfortunately for the Persian Empire, many of the kings of the city-states on the Western frontier were either of Danaan-Hellenic origin or areas where the Empires of Athens and Sparta did their marauding and slave foraging. The Persians abolished slavery throughout their Empire and this alarmed theEmpires of Athens and Sparta. In their intent to place these city-states under their domination, (without autonomy), they incited the kings of Asia, (the Phrygian Croesus first), to rise against the Persians. So, the Greco-Persian wars started, with the Persians failing repeatedly to overcome the Danaan-Hellenic tenacity.
(The following example speaks for itself: Athens and Egypt incited the king of Salamis in Cyprus, Evagoras, to revolt against the Persian king and then abandoned him. Evagoras was utterly defeated. However, instead of cutting him off, the Persian king asked Evagoras what was his grievance! Evagoras said that he wanted to be treated as ‘the Persian king’s equal’ and not to have to bow to the Persian king and also to mint gold coins, – hitherto the exclusive privilege of the Persian king –, as well as silver coins that were minted by the other autonomous kings. Nothing else, (about taxes or freedoms etc)! The Persian king said, “Ok”, and promptly granted him these privileges. He treated Evagoras as a son with an inflated ego, a member of the family, and not as a subordinate, a rebel that had just been defeated. Notice that, other than having the general command of the Empire’s affairs, (he had advisors and administrators but it was no democracy), the only other differences between the Imperial Persian king and peripheral autonomous kings were merely a matter of etiquette, like father sitting at the head of the table at dinner.)
Then came Alexander the Macedon, the real ‘king of terror’. Alexander did not unite the Greek city-states but subdued them by force and terror, having razed Thebes to the ground and threatened to do the same to Athens if it was not surrendered unconditionally. It is indicative of this that, in spite of their enmity with the Persians, the Athenians and other Greeks were so abhorred by this barbarian‘Son of the Dragon God’ ─ as Olympias called her son ─ that they fought on the side of the Persians against Alexander. Some Greek history teachers support that Alexander was not an ordinary conqueror but a ‘Civilizer’ (!), who brought the superior Hellenic language and culture to the barbarian Easterners. The truth is that, apart from destroying completely the three cities –Thebes, Tarsus and Tyre – that gave Greece and Western Europe their language, and apart from putting a final end to the Ionian culture of Athens, after he settled in BabylonAlexander forbade his soldiers to speak Greek. When he decided to abolish the use of the Greek language in the meetings of his commanders and replace it with the Macedonian language, some of his commanders headed by his boyhood companion and propaganda ‘historian’ Callisthenes, a nephew and pupil of Aristotle, disagreed because the Macedonian was not a written language to keep records of the meetings. Alexander executed Callisthenes by crucifixion for conspiracy. The main reason why Alexander’s relation with his Macedonian commanders, especially his boyhood companions, soured, is that the latter considered his demand to be worshiped or bowed to in the manner of the Persian kings as somewhat ridiculous. So he decided to get rid of all his Greek commanders (except for his closest and most loyal or diplomatic lickers) and replace them with Persians. He ‘suggested’ that they should return to Greece for retirement, “as a reward for their ordeal in the grueling campaign”. The commanders, reading his real purpose, declined the ‘offer’. Alexander executed those of higher rank for ‘mutiny’, in order to scare those of lower rank. The Persian Prince whose Empire he vanquished, had taken over Alexander’s mind. Hence, Hermes moved Olympias’ priests to suggest to her to have him poisoned to death, “for the good of everyone concerned”, which she did.
The main purpose for which Alexander was raised by Thoth-Hermeswas to destroy or uproot the Adamite people and the Jevian culture from the Middle and Near East and, second, to put an end to the Persian Empire, as punishment of the Persian Prince for helping Jhwh/Zeussecure a further 490-year lease for the kingdom of Judea; (Daniel, Ch. 9).
Alexander was followed by his ‘Diadochi’, who abolished all autonomies and exercised direct rule upon all the provinces of the Hellenistic Empire. (If you read ‘2-Maccabeans chapter 7’ in the Septuagint Bible, you will see how Antiochus IV, one of Alexander’s Diadochi, tortured Jewsby frying them publicly in huge pans or cutting their tongues off or submitting them to other tortures, for the mere offence of not consenting to eat pork. Lamar, the Essene ‘Teacher of Righteousness’, was also executed on his command).
The Romans followed the Hellenistic Era, similarly exercising strict direct rule over the Dioceses of their Empire. Though the Romans were culturally rougher than the more refined Greeks, who were more directly exposed to the Ionian spirit, their rule was less corrupt and fairer than the Hellenistic. However, with the transformation of the Eastern Roman Empire to Byzantine, (and Christian), the latter’s intrigues and treachery became proverbial. The Western Empire followed suit to its own decline and utter ruin.
Then came the Crusaders whom, if it were not for Alexander, I would consider the worst scourge in human history. May be they are on the same level. [Alexander the Macedon and Arthur Pendragon, (whose knights and their religious quests, like that of the Holy Grail, were the leaven of Christian knighthood that fermented into the Crusades), both attributed the title ‘Great’, are spiritual brothers, sons of the Dragon god, through the Hermetic wizards Nectanebo and Merlin respectively]. We have already mentioned in last September’s article on ‘Competition’how these Champions of Christianity raped Moslem and Jewish children of the age of 12 and 13, cut their heads and stuck them at the end of their lances and paraded the streets of Jerusalem to demonstrate how the Champions of Christ had humiliated the children of Satan. We also mentioned the incident in which king Richard ordered the killing of 2700 women and children hostages at Acre and had their guts opened out in search of jewels that the prisoners might have swallowed.(In contrast to the raping and massacre of Jews and Moslems in Jerusalem by the Champions of Christ in the Fist Crusade, when Saladin took Jerusalem back he strictly forbade any killings of Christians but ordered instead the washing of the streets of the city with rose water).
The more recent chapters of humanly caused terror, of the Conquistadors of the New World, the Inquisition, the persecution of the Jews and the inhumanity of the two World wars, as well as the ‘Terrorism’ of the ‘Desperados’ are fairly well known to most and, apart from their analysis in the first part of this article, I need say no more.
The Nordic European Christians, who until World War II ruled the World through Administrative Colonialism, now dominate the World through Economic Colonialism, a much worse form of World control and domination. Money is proving itself to be the most treacherous and most effective weapon, against which no defense is raised, due to Man’s needs or innate greed. This exploitation is achieved by organizing World Economy with a huge disparity of wages in internationally exchanged goods and services in favor of the older Colonial powers, the present Industrial nations. With their surplus of higher income, the people of the industrial Northwestern Europe are now buying all the choice land of the poorer periphery of the European Union and the rest of the World and, soon, all good land and profitable businesses in the EU periphery and the World will come under the ownership or the control of the Northwestern Europeans or the Japanese.
As I mentioned in last September’s article these people, descendents of the Crusaders and the Colonialists, have not changed, even if now they are wearing silk gloves instead of gauntlets. As an example, I will recount here the dirty intrigues behind the situation in Iraq: