President Barack Obama’s official response to the San Bernardino shooting, delivered in a Sunday evening address from the Oval Office, focused mostly on the question of how to defeat Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant (ISIL). But as part of his broader anti-ISIL strategy, the president called for some modest gun control measures.

Obama urged Congress to pass additional restrictions on the purchase of assault weapons and to “make sure no one on a no-fly list is able to buy a gun.” He framed the latter measure, in particular, as an act of common sense.

“What could possibly be the argument for allowing a terrorist suspect to buy a semiautomatic weapon?” said Obama. “This is a matter of national security.”

Just who is this war all about and who are the terrorists?  (See copy below video)

   “The people who are prone to blame Islam and Muslims for this recent [Paris] terror episode should not be oblivious of the fact that ISIS had committed the same kind of atrocity in Beirut, resulting in the killing of scores of Muslims just one day before the terror attacks rocked Paris.

“Muslim Casualties in Terrorism

“The figures show that ISIS has perpetrated far more atrocities against the Muslim world than it has caused death and destruction in the West.

“According to a report by the United Nations, ISIS was responsible for 9,347 civilian deaths only in Iraq in 2014. It seems ridiculous that their ambition is to create an Islamic state; hence, its members are feeding on the blood of Muslims. The question arises that if ISIS supposedly upholds the true Islamic ideology, why do they kill Muslims at all? Do they intend to create an ‘Islamic state without Muslims’?

“Same goes with Al-Qaeda which has killed a large number of Muslims in its wild pursuit of the West and the ‘infidels’. According to a report published by Spiegel, “Between 2004 and 2008, al-Qaida claimed responsibility for 313 attacks, resulting in the deaths of 3,010 people. And even though these attacks include terrorist incidents in the West — in Madrid in 2004 and in London in 2005 — only 12 per cent of those killed were Westerners.”

“Here again arises a simple question: if terrorism is synonymous with Islam, why do Muslims sustain the largest number of victims?

“The need is to understand that Muslims constitute the second largest religious group in the world. If Islam teaches terrorism, every 6th person in this world should be a terrorist. Be honest and ask yourself, how terrifying is it to hang out with Muslims in your daily life? The terror groups which hardly constitute 1% of total Muslim population cannot be the representative of Islam and Muslims by any scientific definition.”

Just as the whole of the West cannot by any stretch be likened to the Ku Klux Klan.

ISIS’ Un-Islamic Gestures

“Islam has set some ethics of war by prescribing: never fight against non-combatants, women, children and elderly people; and never destroy property unnecessarily. Not a single instance could be quoted from reliable sources of history about the violation of any of the above terms in the era of Prophet Muhammad. How can ISIS supporters justify their barbarity, inhumanity, rape and slaughtering in the light of the above teachings?

“The fact of the matter is that ISIS is the composition of criminal elements and newly converted Muslims who have scant or no knowledge of Islam at all. This fact is corroborated in a recent news story in media about the extremely ‘liberal’ lifestyle of the female suicide bomber Hasna Ali Boulahcen who was involved in the November, 2015 Paris attacks. According to her brother, as revealed in news reports, Hasna was a ‘party girl’, ‘heavy drinker’ who hung out with drug dealers. She started wearing hijab (head covering) a month ago and was “never interested in studying her religion.”

“Same goes with many other members of ISIS, who proclaim themselves as true Muslims while living an un-Islamic lifestyle. The mockery is that those characterless figures of ISIS claim to be the Caliph of Muslims, which is considered a pious position in Islam. They are perhaps not aware of the fact that Shur’ah (consultation) and Bay`ah (pledge of allegiance by the Muslims) are the two most important principles of appointing a Caliph for the Muslims in Islam. On the other hand, the fact of the matter is that a large majority of Muslims and Islamic scholars all over the world have categorically denounced ISIS and its leader as the Caliph, which makes no room for this terror group to proclaim its Islamic identity. This has also happened in early the Islamic era when the deadliest enemies of Islam disguised themselves as Muslims, (called hypocrites).

“Islam ordains strict punishment for those who create chaos and disorder on earth. Since ISIS terrorists are causing death and destruction around the world, they deserve strict punishment according to true Islamic teachings. Muslims scholars from Al-Azhar, Cairo have already called for the extermination of ISIS terrorists as a religious obligation.

Who Supports this never-ending war?

It is interesting to note that six thousand years ago the Babylonians discovered that farmers worked harder if they were in debt … hence the “Babylonian Curse of Usury”, a practice banned by all societies throughout history as so destructive to society it has been deemed ‘evil’ in the worst sense of the word.

The first recorded destruction by usury was written by Roman historian Tacitus around the time of Christ, A.D. 20 – 30, who was given credit for throwing the moneylenders out of the temple, but history, through Tacitus, tells us that it was Tiberius Caesar who threw them out of Italy:

Tacitus’ description of the eviction of money lenders from Italy in A.D. 27 by Tiberius Caesar (it was not Jesus, BTW; that story was I believe embedded in the Bible assembled at the Council of Nicaea in A.D. 300 because the Word of an angry Son of God would carry more weight against the Ancient Curse of Usury than that of a rather obscure Roman Emperor.

Churchill’s terse account of Edward the First’s doing the same thing to the United Kingdom’s money lenders thirteen hundred years later for the same reasons as Tiberius does not lend much weight to the argument against usury as it only affected wealthy UK nobles, but then Churchill was a warrior not an economist and seems to avoid Tiberius and Edward as well as the Biblical angry Jesus in his ‘History of the English Speaking Peoples’.

(Somewhere in the next few paragraphs, a great “Anti-Semite” outcry will be heard, the tried and tested red herring thrown onto the usury trail, so far successfully; so leave conspiracy theories behind and call it fiction. But I think it’s a good, plausible and verifiable story… throwing money lenders out of the Temple is still the name of the global debt game today.

The history of the Jews in England goes back to the reign of Edward I. “The first written record of Jewish settlement in England dates from 1070. The Jewish presence continued until King Edward I’s Edict of Expulsion in 1290.

“After the expulsion, there was no Jewish community, apart from individuals who practiced Judaism secretly, until the rule of Oliver Cromwell. While Cromwell never officially readmitted Jews to Britain, a small colony of Sephardic Jews living in London was identified in 1656 [but] allowed to remain.

“The Jewish Naturalization Act of 1753, an attempt to legalize the Jewish presence in England, remained in force for only a few months. Historians commonly date Jewish Emancipation to either 1829 or 1858 when Jews were finally allowed to sit in Parliament, though Benjamin Disraeli, born Jewish, had been a Member of Parliament (and Prime Minister) long before this. At the insistence of Irish leader Daniel O’Connell, in 1846, the British law “De Judaismo”, which prescribed a special dress for Jews, like the yellow star of Nazi Germany was repealed.

Due to the lack of anti-Jewish violence in Britain in the 19th century, it acquired a reputation for religious tolerance and attracted significant immigration from Eastern Europe. In the 1930s and 1940s, some European Jews fled to England to escape the Nazis.

“Jews faced anti-Semitism and stereotyping in Britain and anti-Semitism “in most cases went along with Germanophobia” to the extent that Jews were equated with Germans in the early 20th century. This led many Jewish families to Anglicize their often German-sounding names.

“Jews in Britain now number 300,000, and England contains the second largest Jewish population in Europe and the fifth largest Jewish community worldwide.”  – Wikipedia.

Edward discovered that the Babylonian / Roman Curse had been in effect in the United Kingdom for almost two hundred years before his reign and threw the moneylenders out for the same reasons as Tiberius: because of disputes over “matters of Usury”, basically the theft of nobles’ property through compounded interest rates.

What is unique about this work-in-progress is that I believe it contains a very possible and plausible unraveling of the economic forces behind the Tulip Mania phenomenon just over 600 years after Edward’s usurers were thrown out of the United Kingdom. (There is a persistence in history that they were not of course Jews, but Khazarian money lenders posing as Jews, but that’s something that may only be entering the narrative today).

My detailing of Tulip Mania may bring the enigma to where it can be considered as a Pivotal Point” in history, the true beginning of Capitalism and the foundation upon which money merchants ended their 2000-year role as persona non grata throughout the world and became part of the innermost circles of political power and rulers of the global economy.

“Give me control of a nation’s money supply and I care not what laws it makes.” Amschel Mayer Rothschild

The subsequent economic control of the Capitalist boom/bust money system began with the very first demonstration of stock market ‘pump and dump’ manipulation using tulip bulbs. This was, I believe, a practical demonstration put on for the crowned heads of Europe who I believe then finally accepted money lenders into the mainstream of government so the rulers could share the wealth derived from Capitalism: credit-driven boom times followed by equity market busts which harvest all future debt-wealth signed over by borrowers and mortgagees in exchange for their commitment to future work and pledges of existing and future-built collateral if the work was not done or the debt not paid.

This system of Capitalist boom/bust commodity market manipulation between the bursting of the South Sea Bubble in 1720 and the Great Depression on to now, was reduced to economic and mathematical detail in a book called ‘The Reckoning’ by journalist James Dale Davidson and Lord Reese-Mogg, Sidgewick & Jackson, 1996, which I believe was nothing less than a guide for the wealthy through the bust brought about by the Japanese property market collapse in 1978. The common enemies of Humanity, warmongers and war profiteers were identified by President John F. Kennedy at the Waldorf-Astoria Hotel, in New York City, April 27, 1961.

An excerpt from his speech that day:

“… I want to talk about our common responsibilities in the face of a common danger. The events of recent weeks may have helped to illuminate that challenge for some; but the dimensions of its threat have loomed large on the horizon for many years. Whatever our hopes may be for the future–for reducing this threat or living with it–there is no escaping either the gravity or the totality of its challenge to our survival and to our security–a challenge that confronts us in unaccustomed ways in every sphere of human activity.

This deadly challenge imposes upon our society two requirements of direct concern both to the press and to the President–two requirements that may seem almost contradictory in tone, but which must be reconciled and fulfilled if we are to meet this national peril. I refer, first, to the need for a far greater public information; and, second, to the need for far greater official secrecy.

The very word “secrecy” is repugnant in a free and open society; and we are as a people inherently and historically opposed to secret societies, to secret oaths and to secret proceedings. We decided long ago that the dangers of excessive and unwarranted concealment of pertinent facts far outweighed the dangers which are cited to justify it. Even today, there is little value in opposing the threat of a closed society by imitating its arbitrary restrictions. Even today, there is little value in insuring the survival of our nation if our traditions do not survive with it. And there is very grave danger that an announced need for increased security will be seized upon by those anxious to expand its meaning to the very limits of official censorship and concealment. That I do not intend to permit to the extent that it is in my control. And no official of my Administration, whether his rank is high or low, civilian or military, should interpret my words here tonight as an excuse to censor the news, to stifle dissent, to cover up our mistakes or to withhold from the press and the public the facts they deserve to know.

But I do ask every publisher, every editor, and every newsman in the nation to reexamine his own standards, and to recognize the nature of our country’s peril. In time of war, the government and the press have customarily joined in an effort based largely on self-discipline, to prevent unauthorized disclosures to the enemy. In time of “clear and present danger,” the courts have held that even the privileged rights of the First Amendment must yield to the public’s need for national security.

Today no war has been declared–and however fierce the struggle may be, it may never be declared in the traditional fashion. Our way of life is under attack. Those who make themselves our enemy are advancing around the globe. The survival of our friends is in danger. And yet no war has been declared, no borders have been crossed by marching troops, no missiles have been fired.

https://mail.google.com/mail/u/1/#inbox/15151dc243767