American Herald Tribune | �ALI SALAAM: Over 40 years of American overt and covert subversion against Iran, regardless who is U.S. president, proves that not only can America not be trusted, they have been actively at war with Iran the entire time.

If Iran did to America what America did to Iran, then Americans would have engaged in the same tactics against an Iranian-backed puppet dictator that the Iranians did against the American-backed puppet dictator known as the Pahlavi Shah, especially if this hypothetical American resistance was led by a revolutionary Archbishop motivated by Jesus� principled stance against usury in the same way that Iran was motivated by Imam Khomeini, who was motivated by the principled anti-tyranny stances of Islam�s Prophets Moses, Jesus, and Muhammad as well as Muhammad�s grandson Imam Hussain against the Pharaoh, the Pharisees, the pagan Meccans, and the Ummayad Caliphate respectively.

If a hypothetical Iranian-occupied America had an Iranian embassy in Washington D.C. and, after the success of the hypothetical Archbishop�s revolution, the embassy�s spies began concocting plots to overthrow the new revolutionary government as well as engage in all kinds of soft war tactics such as brainwashing the public to remove revolutionary politics from Christianity, then the Americans would be morally, legally, and strategically justified in taking over the embassy.

In that light, the same legal, moral, and strategic justifications apply to Iran and the U.S. Embassy takeover.

The feat of the embassy takeover was a display of the spiritual and ethical restraint of Islamic Iran. No embassy worker was killed and Imam Khomeini even had Afro-American, Native American, and other embassy workers from marginalized groups set free because they are already oppressed by America.

Compare that to a Pakistani embassy takeover attempt that occurred in the same time period. Lots of blood was spilled � and the Pakistani group who performed the operation didn�t even reach their goals! The Iranians reached every goal in cementing their formidability on the international stage to show the world that there should not be two sets of laws: one set of laws that exonerates and favors the oppressor and another set that subjugates the oppressed.

To my fellow Americans: do not get mad at Iranians for exercising their legal, moral, and strategic right to take over the American embassy without spilling a drop of blood. Rather, get mad at the Zionist lobby, the ethno-centric Jewish banking mafia led by the Rothschild family, the big oil companies, and the corrupt American generals who put the interests of Israel and multinational corporations before that of the American people � it was they who had the U.S. stick its nose in Iran�s business in the first place.

What business did we have in meddling in Iran�s internal affairs by ousting Mossadegh and installing the puppet Pahlavi Shah? Such a policy only benefits those who profit off of oil sold to them well below the fair market value and from suppressing the revolutionary Shi�a ideology of Iran which has awakened the Islamic world into resisting those who oppose God�s love, mercy, and justice on this earth that He codified in the revelations He sent to Moses, Jesus, and Muhammad.

When Iranians took over the embassy, they painstakingly re-assembled CIA documents that had been put through the paper shredder so they can discover what plots America, Israel, and Gulf countries were up to. What they found should provide greater insight into�Iran�s rational distrust of America.

The documents discovered were merely an extension of centuries-old tactics of removing the revolutionary principles of God�s prophets from the religions they established, especially in the case of Shi�a Islam, who takes example from Muhammad�s grandson Hussain who refused to submit before a despotic tyrant named Yazid who usurped the Islamic rulership for his own worldly gain. Of course, Islamic Iran has been steadfast in promoting Islamic unity between Sunnis and Shias. Real Sunnis also share love for Hussain and his sacrifice. Iran opposes the Wahabbi ideology spread by Saudi Arabia that is a threat to all of humanity: Sunni, Shia, Christian, etc.

In the book�Islam & Revolution, a collection of speeches by Imam Khomeini translated by Dr. Hamid Algar, the late leader of the Islamic Revolution describes that as long as the British have been involved in Iraq and Iran, they had always tried to control the Shiite seminaries by either bribing scholars or heads of departments to adopt a colonialist mindset and abandon the true principles of their religion which calls for standing for the oppressed and establishing a system of governance not built on usury and tyranny, or the agents of the colonizers would simply use the allure of Western hedonistic culture to brainwash people into becoming mentally enslaved to their own oppressors without bribing them with one dime. In fact, the latter approach is not only more cost effective for the oppressor, its effects are more long lasting than a bribe, as those who are mentally enslaved to their oppressor will pass such a shameless, subservient mentality down to their children, and if they are in positions of religious authority, they will prevent the Muslims from standing up for their rights, dignity, and self-determination by saying that religion is just limited to the superficial, exoteric rituals of praying, fasting, and empty, robotic recitation of Qur�an and supplications without understanding the deep meaning of what is being recited.

Imam Khomeini says that the British agents would not care if you prayed and fasted all day, every single day for the rest of your life. In fact, they would want the volume of the loudspeakers playing the�adhaan�(call to prayer) to be even louder. These superficial, surface level aspects of religion are acceptable to oppressors because it makes it look like the occupiers are merciful and tolerant towards your culture and let you act in the way that is native to your peoples. But in reality this is a ruse.

The �Den of Spies� CIA documents pieced together by Iranian students after the hostage takeover showed that the Americans believed they could not control Imam Khomeini and the revolutionary spirit of the awakened Muslims of Iran. Instead, they laid out plans of a soft war, to get the Iranian people as well as Iranian leaders to drop their mistrust and enmity towards American policies, to believe that Israel has no significance in Iranian policy, that the Islamic Revolution only pertains to Iran, and not to the Muslims of the world and the oppressed/downtrodden of the world.

Through psychological and cultural warfare, the U.S. wanted to return the Islam of Iran back to a superficial religion of empty rituals where the believer pays no attention to the deeper meaning of the rituals they are engaging in.

Sadly, throughout the Muslim world, both Sunni and Shia, religion has become a set of empty rituals that are viewed as a painful chore. This has enabled much colonization of the Middle East because the consciousness level of the people has been dumbed down and is easily manipulated by the powers that be. When Muslims are focused on worldly matters instead of spiritual matters, they are willing to sell their soul for the sake of hanging on to the life of this world rather than sacrificing their money, comfort, and even their own lives for the sake of justice, mercy, dignity, equity, and compassion.

If you look into the Den of Spies documents, you will find even worse plots against the newly-formed Islamic Republic. Yet, in the midst of all this, America and its allies put on the pretense of diplomacy, yet in the background, they were ready to stab a knife into the back of the people of Iran and their revolution.

America�s actions from at least 1953 and onwards demonstrate why they cannot be trusted: they orchestrated the ousting of Mossadegh through Operation Ajax in order to protect the ability of oil conglomerates to steal Iranian oil for well below fair market value.

In addition to that, the U.S. created apathy among the people of Iran by having them be concerned with lowly material desires like money and sex. Orientalist media outlets like to show pictures of Iranian women wearing short skirts as signs of �freedom,� yet fail to mention that women had very little educational opportunities in Iran in general, and such a lack of education was worsened by the fact that the cultural atmosphere encouraged women to focus on being sexually attractive rather than seeking knowledge and education.

Ayatollah Khamenei said that �during the era of despotism in Iran, it was due to the negative influence of Western culture that women began to focus on cosmetics, vanity, ostentation, and flaunting themselves in public. All this, of course, was a sign of the rule of men. In the West, one of the signs that men are in control, is that they want women for their satisfaction; hence, they encourage them to dress up because it gives them pleasure! This is a form of male control, not female freedom. If anything, it is freedom for men! They want the freedom to take pleasure in seeing women, which is why they encourage a woman to cast aside her coverings and beautify herself publicly for them. This is a kind of selfishness that many men who lived in irreligious societies displayed in the past and continues to this day. The West is the clearest example of this."

Then when the Iranian people had the audacity to stand up for their independence, the US instructed the Shah to use live ammunition on the people. On many occasions throughout the late 1970s, unarmed Iranian protesters were gunned down on the streets in cold blood. The number of dead reached the thousands.

In the BBC documentary �Iran and the West,� it describes how in order to lift the sanctions, Iran sent negotiators to meet with American diplomats in [West] Germany, using the hostages as leverage. Specifically, Warren Christopher, the Deputy Secretary of State of the U.S. was present.

Mr. Christopher left Germany on Sept. 22, 1980, the same day that Iraq started to bomb Iran. Saddam did not invade Iran alone � he got the blessing from the US, Israel, Saudi Arabia, and the UK, who supplied him with intelligence and weapons. This means that either 1) Mr. Christopher knew about the impending invasion and was deceitfully putting on the face of diplomacy while working to stab the other side of the diplomatic table in the back, or 2) Mr. Christopher was not informed of the plot to invade Iran, but Christopher�s superiors certainly knew of the invasion and sent Mr. Christopher to the negotiating table in bad faith.

Then America supported Saddam with chemical weapons which took a deadly toll on the Iranian people.

Towards the end of the war, America shot down a civilian airliner belonging to Iran Air. Even though they knew it was a civilian airliner, they covered up their crime with lies and even awarded the people in charge of this act of premeditated mass murder with military medals.

Israel was also working on their own plots to destroy the Islamic Republic. Ariel Sharon�s�Operation Oranim�had a goal to take out Lebanon and Syria so they can have a base to aim at Iran. When Hezbollah and the Syrian Arab Army stopped them short at south Lebanon, which Israel occupied until the year 2000, the Zionists regrouped and Israeli strategist Oded Yinon authored �A Strategy for Israel in the Nineteen Eighties.�

The strategy laid out a long term objective of dividing Iraq and Syria into smaller nation states based on ethnic and sectarian lines, such as Sunni, Shia, Kurdish, Christian, etc. and that every kind of inter-Arab conflict is to Israel�s benefit. Zionist gatekeepers in the alternative media, such as those who tout Kurdish separatism, erroneously suggest that the Oded Yinon plan�s original intent only lasted until the end of the 1980s, but these disinformation peddlers ignore the reality of how Israel�s foreign policy, which is also backed up by America�s foreign policy, has sown the seeds of discord along ethnic and sectarian lines well beyond the 1980s, from Iraq to Syria.

Even if Oded Yinon expired in the 1980s, which it didn�t, former Israeli official and future Bush administration official Richard Perle authored the�Clean Break�strategy in the mid 1990s, a report prepared specifically for Benjamin Netanyahu. Clean Break stated that Israel should not make peace with the Arab world, but should instead work with select countries in the Arab-Islamic world that are willing to submit themselves to the Zionist agenda, specifically Turkey and Jordan, and that those countries would be used as a wedge against hostile countries like Syria and Iran.

This strategy was further extended by the Project for the New American Century, an American think tank comprised of mostly dual-national Israeli-American Jewish neoconservatives who would later go on to take key positions in the Bush administration. In the year 2000, PNAC authored a white paper called �Rebuilding America�s Defenses� which stated that in order for America�s military budget to be boosted and for the US to engage in multiple theater wars with Syria, Iran, Iraq, and North Korea, they needed a �new Pearl Harbor.� These psychopaths actually called for the blood of Americans to be spilled so that they could justify their global domination agenda.

Using the pretext of 9/11, the U.S. invaded Iran�s neighbors: Iraq and Afghanistan. Iran�s president at the time, Mohammad Khatami, took the na�ve approach of trusting the U.S. There is nothing wrong with diplomacy, but nowhere in the thesaurus is naivety a synonym of diplomacy. Maybe Khatami didn�t realize America had supported Saddam and provided him chemical weapons. Maybe he wasn�t aware of Oded Yinon, Clean Break, or PNAC.

While Khatami was schmoozing with Americans and giving interviews to mouthpieces of the U.S. State Department like Christiane Amanpour, who admitted in the�Iran and the West�documentary series that she was dating a member of the State Department at the time of her interview with Khatami, Iran tested the waters with the United States. The IRGC shared information on the Taliban with the U.S. The U.S. then used that to take out certain segments of the Taliban which eventually led to the U.S. occupation. This was done not out of naively trusting the United States, but to once again prove what happens when you give the U.S. a bone.

It's worth noting that Osama bin Laden�was once a CIA employee. Under Jimmy Carter, the same deep state globalists Henry Kissinger and Zbigniew Brzezinski who pushed Carter to defend the Shah and order him to crack down on Iranian protesters had also armed the Mujahideen in Afghanistan in order to draw the Soviets into a war that would cripple their economy. The Taliban and al-Qaeda grew out of the CIA support for the Mujahideen and Osama Bin Laden.

The U.S. took over Afghanistan, and while the terrorist Taliban was merciless in its crimes against the people of Afghanistan, one thing they did was eradicate the cultivation of opium which is processed into heroin and sold on the black market. When the U.S. took over, CIA Special Forces were�guarding the opium fields. Opium production was at near zero under the Taliban, but under the CIA Afghanistan grew to supply a majority of the world�s heroin.

Not only did the increase of opium supply reduce the cost, making it more accessible to poor and vulnerable populations, its close proximity to Iran and Pakistan made it even more cheaper as the shipping costs and dealing with smuggling is far less burdensome than shipping to the West. Of course there is much evidence to suggest that the CIA is the largest drug cartel in the world, and that the U.S. War on Drugs is a sham to keep drug prices high so that the CIA and its pet drug lords can profit immensely off of human suffering, addiction, and overdose deaths.

My experience as an American going to high school was than an abnormal level of kids between the age of 15-18 were using heroin.

The U.S. occupation of Afghanistan has directly caused the opioid crisis, in both the legal and illegal markets. This is what kind of trust, or lack thereof, the U.S. demonstrates.

The heroin crisis bolstered by CIA protection of opium production, in addition to building military bases near Iran and the war crimes against Afghanistan�s civilians, is one of many reasons why trusting the U.S. with even a small thing such as intel on the Taliban makes them untrustworthy. The IRGC and Ayatollah Khamenei were proven right by this carefully controlled test of America�s so-called �trust.�

The Bush administration, mostly made up of dual-national Israeli-Americans, unleashed a slew of lies to justify an invasion of Iraq. Over a million innocent civilians were killed, the nation was put into turmoil, chemical weapons and depleted uranium have resulted in cancers and birth defects, occupation soldiers raped Iraqi women and killed children, and they bombed holy sites like Wadi al-Salaam in Najaf. They purposefully instigated sectarian strife and even proposed a plan to divide Iraq into 3 parts: Sunni, Shi�a, and Kurdish.

The Iraqi people resisted against the American troops. If you are an active duty soldier or a veteran and are reading this article, you shouldn�t be angry at me or the Iraqi people, rather you should take a look at your oath to the U.S. Constitution which tells you to defend America from enemies foreign and domestic. It is only natural for Iraqis to defend their homeland when someone invades. Your enmity should be directed at the traitors in the U.S. government who sent you to invade Iraq and be in harm�s way from the Iraqis defending their homeland, because this war was only meant to benefit Israel. Benjamin Netanyahu said��We are benefiting from one thing, and that is the attack on the Twin Towers and Pentagon, and the American struggle in Iraq.� The entire war was orchestrated by Zionist neocons who have more loyalty to Israel than they do to the United States, so it is clear who benefited: it was not the American people nor the Iraqi people.

While at first the Iraqi government was a loyal puppet of their American installers, eventually they became somewhat independent minded, although not perfect, and began to work closer with Iran. America�s plan to contain Iran via a puppet state in Iraq failed.

America will still have enmity towards Iran even if the president is someone like Khatami. Unless Iran becomes their direct puppet, the U.S. will continue to show unyielding hostility towards Iran.

Then history was made in July 2006. Hezbollah had hoped to engage in a small operation targeting Israeli occupation soldiers on the border with Lebanon for the sole purpose of engaging in a prisoner swap. No war, no escalation, nothing else. Israel had tons of Hezbollah resistance fighters in horrific dungeons. In their sadistic nature, Israel decided to take revenge by killing thousands of people and using white phosphorous chemical weapons. But in all of that murderous rampage, Israel was actually defeated by Hezbollah! It is without a doubt that Israel had hoped to re-establish occupation of South Lebanon as it did prior to 2000, in accordance with the strategy of Operation Oranim. But with the support of Iran and Syria, the people of Lebanon defeated the Zionist regime.

It was in this context that Israel and America had to get back to the drawing board to decide what else they can do to uproot the Axis of Resistance. Wikileaks�released a cable�from US Ambassador William Roebuck from 2006 which showed a Washington-Tel Aviv plot to topple the Syrian government.

The main reason for trying to topple the Syrian government was to stop the weapons line from Iran to Lebanon�s Hezbollah. Syria is Iran�s only major Arab ally aside from Lebanon, so taking out Syria also weakens Iran. The strategy to finance sectarian Salafist opposition groups is well in line with Oded Yinon and Clean Break.

Additionally, the Washington Post�reported on a cable�released by Wikileaks showing how the U.S. State Department was supporting Syrian opposition groups and even an anti-Assad satellite channel going back to 2009.

A Pentagon document obtained by the organization Judicial Watch revealed that the United States knew they were arming Salafist/Wahabbi extremists in Syria and that the intention of these terrorists was to establish a Salafist principality in Eastern Syria, which is another word for a so-called �Islamic� �caliphate.� They knew this and yet they kept intentionally arming them, believing that a Salafist caliphate in Eastern Syria would take out Assad. This document was issued before ISIS came on the scene. The United States literally wanted a group like ISIS to rise so that Assad could be taken out. Do not take such an issue lightly, this is a serious crime against humanity and yet the U.S. has not been taken to account for it.

While the US opposition claimed to be separate from ISIS in name, in ideology and practice they were merely competing rivals in who could shed the most blood or petty semantics over ideology or political structure.

For the civilians of Syria, they didn�t notice the petty differences between the rival terrorist groups. The International Business Times�featured a Reuters photo�of the Saudi-backed Jaysh al-Islam, the CIA-backed Free Syrian Army, and the Israeli-backed Al-Nusra Front (the Syrian affiliate of al-Qaeda), showing that these dangerous terrorist groups may not associate with ISIS, but they do associate with al-Qaeda. Although, ISIS grew out of these various opposition groups which are backed by the regional superpowers and their Zionist-NATO allies.

Israel has also been caught�giving hospital treatment to al-Qaeda�terrorists on the Syrian border. They claim it is for humanitarian purposes, but in an interview with Mehdi Hasan, the Israeli spokesman said that Israel would not treat Hezbollah for humanitarian purposes. That is a grave double standard and proves Israel is using al-Qaeda as a proxy army against Hezbollah.

What does this mean for Iran? Just like former Deputy Secretary Warren Christopher put on the guise of diplomacy with Iran despite the U.S. planning Iraq�s invasion of Iran in the background, former President Barack Obama put on the guise of diplomacy with Iran, yet in the background he was arming the most dangerous terrorists on the planet in order to weaken and destroy Hezbollah, Syria, and Iran in order to protect Israel�s existence from the Axis of Resistance.

Since ISIS was born out of US support of rebels in Syria, the US is indirectly at fault for the murder of martyr Mohsen Hojaji as well as the recent ISIS attacks against Iran.�I wrote an article�for the American Herald Tribune to elaborate as to why the US is engaged in a hostile covert war against Iran, using takfirist as a proxy as well as a buffer to deflect any blame from the U.S.

The Iran Deal is merely a soft war tool of the Zio-NATO empire. Soft war includes psychological, economic, and cultural warfare. For example, just as the US funded anti-Assad satellite channels, the US funds a whole host of anti-Iran channels such as the Pentagon-funded Manoto.

While it is important for Iran to have diplomacy and to show transparency, the nuclear weapons charade was busted�when leaked cables�from the CIA and Mossad proved that Iran is not developing nuclear weapons nor has the intention to. Additionally, Iran�s leader has issued a fatwa against nuclear weapons and other nefarious instruments of death. This was demonstrated by Iran choosing to not use chemical weapons against Iraq even though Saddam had used it against them.

The Iran Deal was a tool of soft control and cultural invasion. It brought in a few airplanes and some business deals, but these corporations do not have the best interests of Iran at heart since they donate heavily to the U.S. political establishment that is hawkish against Iran. Boeing is one of those companies, as they produce military equipment, not just civilian aircraft. While Iran should be open to trading with Europe and America, it should be done smartly and cautiously so that an American business doesn�t come into Iran and then infect Iran�s systems with another Stuxnet type virus because the corporation has more loyalty to the U.S. and Israel than to Islamic Iran.

Iran is not an isolationist country, it just knows who is their friend and who is their enemy, and who is their enemy pretending to be their friend. Iran is continuing to boost its domestic economy, known as an economy of resistance, so that it is not entirely chained to oil production. Just as Russia cut off agri-chemical giants like Monsanto by banning genetically engineered seeds, Iran can do the same, either importing mass-produced organic food from Russia or beginning to produce its own food, which itself would be a snub against Monsanto as Iraq�s agriculture was dominated by the seed and pesticide giant after the illegal US invasion. Agriculture is just one of many aspects of a resource-based economy that Iran can pursue in contrast to America�s consumer debt based system. Iran is also producing a highly-educated population with tons of PhDs pouring out of their ranks, men and women alike.

Iran has been able to survive 40 years of some of the harshest political and economic subversion, and with their new strategy of economic independence, they are bound to strengthen their roots.

Iran is also creating independent culture. Contrary to the orientalist propaganda against Islam, the true principles of Islam which Iran tries its best to implement does not oppose cinema, music, art, or other forms of cultural expression. Rather, Islam is against vice � art is just a medium, a neutral tool, and in the hands of the evil powers has been used systematically to dumb down the population and spread immorality. In Iran, the opposite is true. They have their own rock stars, except they wouldn�t be considered stars as Islam stresses humility and not idolizing human beings. Hamed Zamani is one such popular singer whose songs carry revolutionary Islamic themes and deep spiritual and philosophical motifs. He even has�music videos�of his rock songs which are anti-ISIS, depicting an Iranian soldier blowing the head off ISIS terrorists while a guitar solo goes off in the background. Zamani is such a powerful cultural force that the Pentagon-funded Manoto TV channel sought it necessary to lampoon him.

However, the United States Zionist Occupied Government has been waging war against this economy of resistance through sanctions and other acts of sabotage.

A member of the Carnegie Council, a powerful Washington think tank, admitted that the sanctions under Obama were the worst yet, cutting off Iran from global banking systems as well as causing massive inflation in Iran, and that the United States reserves the ability to use the inflation as a tool to foment another color revolution like the Mossad-backed Green �Revolution� of 2009:

While gharbzadegi (Farsi for West-toxified, coined by Iranian author Jalal al-e Ahmad) Iranians sell out their sense of self-respect and dignity to bow down before the altar of Obama and lambast Khamenei at every chance they can, the reality is that Obama is the wolf in sheep�s clothing pretending to be about peace, yet he facilitates the rise of ISIS and creates an artificial economic crisis in Iran.

The naivety of trusting the United States, especially when a sly fox like Obama or Clinton is in office, has dire consequences. As per the Iran Deal, the U.S. was to lift some sanctions, but Obama�slapped a set of new sanctions�on Iran directly after. The United States has broken their end of the deal with Iran under both Obama and Trump, which doesn�t include America�s side activities of financing terrorist groups in Syria, selling weapons to Saudi Arabia, and other covert and overt military policies to contain Islamic Iran.

Now that Donald Trump is president, America has simply switched from the soft war to the hard war. The Zionists control both sides, so that the liberal Democrat �resistance� to Trump is merely a call for the Obama days, where liberals were silent about war or even tacitly supporting Obama�s soft war against Iran.

Ultimately, much of the orientalist propaganda against Islam and Iran comes from the secular liberal perspective, referring to Islamic life as �oppressive.� Much of the soft war is involved in taking Iranians away from decent moral values and pulling them towards lives of apathy, debauchery, depravity, and enslavement to their lowly, materialistic base desires. As Malcolm X noted about the residents of Harlem, NY, it was their attachment to vices that prevented them from ever taking their liberation from oppression seriously, if they even realized that they were oppressed to begin with.

What does the McResistance against Trump have to offer in the area of Iran relations? Trita Parsi of NIAC is a perfect example of someone who opposes the hard war, yet endorses the soft war of cultural liberalism so as to �free� Iran from its Islamic revolutionary principles. To channel Malcolm X once more, his paradigm of the house slave vs. the field slave is quite apt. During African slavery, the most mentally enslaved person usually lived in the house with the master. He ate better food and wore better clothes, so he didn�t think slavery was all that bad, after all, he had it good, and that was all that mattered. Those who were mentally liberated in spite of their physical chains were the field slaves, who lived in huts and had nothing to lose.

�Resistance� activists like Trita Parsi are like the house slave. He is a lapdog for the neoliberal elites. He has no problem with Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama, even though they both helped to bring ISIS to power through their arming of rebels in Syria. As long as Obama puts out a sofreh (festive table spread) for the Nowruz holiday, these mentally colonized soft war supporters are content. They take the Thurgood Marshall approach to politics: they think that if they please the oppressors enough, they will get some sort of conciliatory prize. Yet in spite of all the shoe-shining of the Democrats by NIAC, they couldn�t even get Obama to veto the Visa Waiver law, despite getting comedian Maz Jobrani to join in on their political ad campaign. All that humiliation and loss of dignity for nothing, despite the political climate being the most suitable for them due to the supposedly �liberal� and �friendly� Obama being in office.

From Washington D.C. to Tehran, it is clear that when Iranians trust America, they get screwed.

"Your slogan, 'death to America,' does not mean death to the people of America. It means death to American policies and to arrogance,� said Ayatollah Khamenei.

Several decades of American policies that do not benefit the American people, in fact harm the American people as money is sucked into destroying foreign countries when it could be used to fix crumbling cities like Detroit, are becoming more and more visible to the American public and those among the Iranian public who may have forgotten.

Much of America�s history is littered with the slave trade, in which�Jews�and whites kidnapped and traded Africans and Irish as slaves, or the Native American genocide, and that many of the Founding Fathers of America were among these slave owners, belonging to occult secret societies, and even being direct agents of the Rothschild banking dynasty like Alexander Hamilton.

There were a few rebels like Thomas Jefferson and the anti-federalists who opposed the Rothschilds� private central banking cartel and safeguarded basic freedoms and civil liberties for Americans through the Bill of Rights. Not all of the colonialists were racist, the original pilgrims who sought religious refuge from the Anglican church did not rape and pillage the natives, unlike banker-funded criminal Christopher Columbus as well as the Rothschild-backed capitalists who came to America after the pilgrims did who began the centuries long genocide of Native Americans that continues to this day.

That spark that Jefferson and the anti-federalists implanted into the Constitution, which are the freedoms that America claims to stand for, was ultimately destroyed in 1913 when the Federal Reserve Act and income tax amendment were signed into law.

The Rothschilds, Rockefellers, Morgans, and Warburgs established a private banking cartel which obtained exclusive right to print America�s only legitimate currency, as legal tender laws protect the dollar�s domestic monopoly. They print money and loan it out at an interest, either to other banks or to the U.S. government, which it then collects principal plus interest from either the banks or from U.S. taxpayers. This institutionalized usury is by far the biggest form of slavery in the modern era. What makes it so evil is that the people do not realize they are slaves � the easy credit enables them to live decent materialistic lives by taking on debt. It has also turned our culture into a hedonistic, gluttonous, and selfish society. Money is god and Rothschild is its prophet in modern day America.

With all its flaws, the real America lies within the civil liberties guaranteed by the Bill of Rights and its historic opposition to usurious central banking cartels. That real America died in 1913.

Since 1913, the banker-controlled government that has committed treason against the U.S. Constitution is enabled by the Federal Reserve�s easy lending policies to wage wars around the globe and stick its hand into almost every nation�s business, and if that nation doesn�t follow along, then they get a covert or overt war to put them into place. Iran is a perfect example of this.

Iran�s problem is with the post-1913 America; with Rothschild America. If the American people ever woke up and elected a true Constitutionalist like Ron Paul into the oval office and his policies were to be actually implemented, which would be tough given the pernicious plots of the Zionist deep state running American politics, Iran would without the shadow of a doubt extend a hand to this newly restored America that is at peace with the world instead of at war with it. Under this hypothetical scenario, America could even join the Axis of Resistance to stop Zionist and takfiri terrorism and even bring an end to the usurious banking practices of the international money changers.

But until that time, Iran has every right to not trust the American government.