Tuesday, October 21, 2008


Islamics whine "we are the victims!" until they get in control. And then, watch out!

The three phases of Islam: (1) victim, (2) demanding, rioting, terror bombing, and (3) in full control of the host nation.

Islam is a parasite. It must be surgically removed, without squeamishness, without mercy. "Kill or be killed," must be the motto of our times. They use it on us; they are asking for it to be used on them.

Be sure to read . . .

The Long Decline of Islam, Part One

Monday, October 20, 2008

The Mystery of Senator Barack Obama:

In the Wake of Herbert Marcuse

Prof. Paul Eidelberg

Herbert Marcuse was the philosopher of the New Left, which surfaced in academia in the 1960s and has since permeated American higher education.

Marcuse’s philosophy is an amalgam of existentialism and Marxism with a dash of Freud. I limit myself to existentialism which more readily solves the mystery of Senator Barack Obama.

The most well-known existentialist in the 20th century was Jean-Paul Sartre. Sartre was a moral relativist who chose to become a Marxist—not because Marxism is true, but because he deemed Marxism a convenient suit for the “nothingness” of his soul—a tabula rasa inherently devoid of identity. Sartre is famous for his philosophical dictum existence precedes essence. This dictum raises the question of an individual’s authenticity. To be authentic, one must choose one’s essence, that is, one’s own identity, which may also be called one’s “narrative.”

Of course, the fact that Obama is biracial has intensified his quest for identity. But Obama has also been influenced by existentialism, which requires the individual to mold or create himself. He cannot be authentic by affirming and living according to the principles of his nation’s heritage.

Besides, in this postmodern era of multiculturalism, the heritage of each nation appears arbitrary, another “narrative.” For almost a century, America has been immersed in a partisan, “liberal-conservative” narrative. Obama transcends this narrative, or so he would have us believe. His views of government have much in common with Progressivism. Progressives rejected the rigid constitutional system of checks and balances. They were inclined toward statism and were therefore skeptical of American individualism. Obama, it seems, offers Americans a post-liberal-conservative doctrine of CHANGE. In fact, however, he believes, or would have us believe, that CHANGE has ever been the essence of the American narrative, that is, from the very birth of the Republic.

This contradicts the Declaration of Independence. Obama is of course aware that the Declaration affirms the existence of “self-evident truths.” Since these truths are derived from the “laws of nature and of nature’s God,” they must be deemed immutable, contrary to Obama’s apotheosis of CHANGE. The Declaration is not the emergence of a narrative. Thomas Jefferson and other signers of the Declaration never thought of this document as a “story,” or as the nation’s mythology.

Nor did Abraham Lincoln (with whom Obama has the audacity to compare himself). Contrary to Lincoln, Obama regards the Declaration as well as the Constitution as fundamentally racist. The junior senator from Illinois has obviously been tainted by revisionist (or “abolitionist”) historians who even portray Lincoln as a racist. This cynical but actually simplistic view of the Great Emancipator was rejected by no less than his admirer, the great negro slave Frederick Douglas. Consider this passage from Thomas L. Krannawitter’s recent book, Vindicating Lincoln (2008):

As Frederick Douglas explained in an 1876 speech at the dedication of the Freedman’s Memorial Monument to Abraham Lincoln in Washington, D.C.’s Lincoln Park, “Viewed from the genuine abolitionist ground, Mr. Lincoln seemed tardy, cold, dull, and indifferent.” Douglass understood, however, that Lincoln was more political, therefore more effective in bringing about an end to slavery, than the abolitionists: “But measuring him by the sentiment of his country, a sentiment he was bound as a statesman to consult, he was swift, zealous, radical, and determined.”

Lincoln regarded the principle that all men are created equal—equal in their unalienable rights to Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness—as a self-evident truth, absolute and immutable, indeed, the foundation stone of Republican government.

In contrast, Obama’s The Audacity of Hope rejects any absolute truth, political or theological, that binds future generations. Change for Obama is not only a political but a philosophical principle. But from this it follows that Obama can say or be one thing today and something quite different tomorrow. Recall his flip-flop regarding Jerusalem: undivided one day, and divided the next.

Obama’s apotheosis of change is conducive to opportunism, indeed, to Machiavellianism. To be authentic, however, one must not lay down any set of principles as if they were immutable. This goes quite well with the Marxism of Herbert Marcuse’s book Repressive Tolerance. Even a regime based on tolerance (such as America) is repressive if it does not undergo revolutionary change.

Obama has been called an “empty suit”—which fits the dictum existence precedes essence!

Sunday, October 19, 2008

We Won in Iraq, but the Media keep that under wraps. Why?

Winning Isn't News

Iraq: What would happen if the U.S. won a war but the media didn't tell the
American public? Apparently, we have to rely on a British newspaper for the
news that we've defeated the last remnants of al-Qaida in Iraq .

London's Sunday Times called it "the culmination of one of the most
spectacular victories of the war on terror." A terrorist force that once
numbered more than 12,000, with strongholds in the west and central regions
of Iraq, has over two years been reduced to a mere 1,200 fighters, backed
against the wall in the northern city of Mosul.

The destruction of al-Qaida in Iraq (AQI) is one of the most unlikely and
unforeseen events in the long history of American warfare. We can thank
President Bush's surge strategy, in which he bucked both Republican and
Democratic leaders in Washington by increasing our forces there instead of

We can also thank the leadership of the new general he placed in charge
there, David Petraeus, who may be the foremost expert in the world on
counter-insurgency warfare. And we can thank those serving in our military
in Iraq who engaged local Iraqi tribal leaders and convinced them America
was their friend and AQI their enemy.

Al-Qaida's loss of the hearts and minds of ordinary Iraqis began in Anbar
Province, which had been written off as a basket case, and spread out from

Now, in Operation Lion's Roar the Iraqi army and the U.S. 3rd Armored
Cavalry Regiment is destroying the fraction of terrorists who are left.
More than 1,000 AQI operatives have already been apprehended.

Sunday Times reporter Marie Colvin, traveling with Iraqi forces in Mosul,
found little AQI presence even in bullet-ridden residential areas that were
once insurgency strongholds, and reported that the terrorists have lost
control of its Mosul urban base, with what is left of the organization
having fled south into the countryside.

Meanwhile, the State Department reports that Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri
al-Maliki's government has achieved "satisfactory" progress on 15 of the 18
political benchmarks "a big change for the better from a year ago."

Things are going so well that Maliki has even for the first time floated
the idea of a timetable for withdrawal of American forces. He did so while
visiting the United Arab Emirates , which over the weekend announced that
it was forgiving almost $7 billion of debt owed by Baghdad, an impressive
vote of confidence from a fellow Arab state in the future of a free Iraq.

But where are the headlines and the front-page stories about all this good
news? As the Media Research Center pointed out last week, "the CBS Evening
News, NBC Nightly News and CNN's Anderson Cooper 360 were silent Tuesday
night about the benchmarks "that signaled political progress."

The war in Iraq has been turned around 180 degrees both militarily and
politically because the president stuck to his guns. Yet apart from IBD, Fox
News Channel and parts of the foreign press, the media don't seem to
consider this historic event a big story.

Copyright 2008 Investor's Business Daily. All Rights Reserved.

Addendum: The reason you haven't seen this on American television or read
about it in the American press is simple--journalism is "dead" in this
country. They are controlled by Liberal Democrats who would rather see our
troops defeated than recognize a successful Republican initiated response to

Friday, October 17, 2008

They Are Killing Christians. Who Cares?

From Political Islam - News and Comments
Of Interest
1,000 Christian Families Flee North Iraqi City: Governor
Houses Blown Up As Christians Flee Iraq's Mosul
500 Christian Families Flee Iraq's Mosul: Official
Muslim Threats Force Assyrians to Flee From MosulIraqi Group Urges End of Campaign Against Christians in Mosul
Violence in Mosul Forces Iraqi Christians to Flee

In Mosul, Iraq, the Muslims are threatening and killing Christians. Now this is under the occupation of America. Have you noticed the Christian George Bush and any other leader being outraged and speaking out? Our leaders have no basis to speak from. The political dogma about Islam is to never study its history, so every event about Islam comes without a historical reference. The historical dots are never connected; hence, leadership wakes up every morning in a new world without any memory.

The ignorance is profound--

The Rev. Bolis Jacob, of Mosul's Mar Afram Church, told AP he couldn't understand the attacks.

"We respect the Islamic religion and the Muslim clerics," he said. "We don't know under what religion's pretexts these terrorists work."

This Christian lives in Iraq, a Christian nation 1400 years ago, one of the oldest Christian communities in the world. Today Iraq is about 2% Christian. Even a modern political or religious leader can tell a drop from 100% to 2%. The drop is called annihilation. How far will it go? Let’s look at another annihilation in Iraq.

The oldest Jewish community in the world is in Iraq. The Jews of Iraq go back to the Babylonian captivity. Today there are fewer than 20 Jews in Iraq. They are old and have no children. In about 10 years there will be no Jews in Iraq.

Political Islam is a ratchet; its power increases and never falls back. Translation: there will never be an increase in the numbers of Jews or Christians in Iraq. Their numbers will only get smaller until total annihilation.

So that is the political history that is behind the killing of Christians in Mosul. The beauty of Islam is how completely its history (actions) and doctrine align. Political Islam is the world’s most logical political system. It adapts, but never varies its grand strategy—annihilation of all kafir civilizations.

But let’s go back to the quote: "We don't know under what religion's pretexts these terrorists work." Hmm. Islam has been annihilating Christianity for 1400 years and this man does not have clue about the political doctrine of Islam. He does not even know how to distinguish politics from religion.

On that basis he is not much of a Christian. When Christ was asked about whether a religious person should pay taxes: “And he said to them, Render therefore to Caesar the things which be Caesar's, and to God the things which be God's.” Luke 20:25. Hello, what does that imply? That a Christian should be able to distinguish between religion and politics. Unfortunately, this Iraqi is a member of the great majority of humanity. Not one person in a thousand even thinks of Islam of being a political system.

Notice that he even seems to be denying that the annihilation process is even Islamic. If a kafir even bothers to remark on the killings he will say, “That is not Islam.”

It is pure Islam.

Mr. Jacob is the perfect dhimmi (a kafir who submits to Islam). Even in the face of 1400 years of persecution, he is totally ignorant of Islamic doctrine with regards to Christians. When you see his deliberate ignorance, you can understand a little more the grotesque ignorance of our religious and political leaders.

But in short, here is Islam’s doctrine towards Christians. It starts off with how Islam and Christians are brothers in the religion of Abraham. (That is as much as a normal religious leader can understand.) Then it progresses to say that Christians must be politically inferior, pay a special tax to be protected from harm by Muslims and they must be humiliated. In short, Christians must politically submit to Islam.

Now comes the religious demands. If you believe in the divinity of Christ, the Trinity, the death and resurrection of Jesus, then you are not a Christian. Only Christians who believe that Jesus was a prophet of Allah, there is no Trinity and Christ was not resurrected are true Christians.

So it turns out there are no real Christians in Iraq (or America or any other country) at all. But Mr. Jacobs does not know this. Dhimmis know nothing about the doctrine of Islam.

Here is a question: has anyone heard this prosecution of Christians condemned by any pastor or political leader in any setting? Let us know.

It is not that Islam is so strong; it is that kafirs are ignorant, fearful and weak. Islam has a plan—make kafirs submit. Dhimmis have a plan—be nice.

Bill Warner

Permalink http://click.icptrack.com/icp/relay.php?r=11266401&msgid=185999&act=Y1TQ&c=162528&admin=0&destination=http://www.politicalislam.com/blog/they-are-killing-christians-who-cares/
copyright (c) CBSX, LLC
Use and distribute as you wish; do not edit and give us credit.

Saturday, October 11, 2008

1276th Anniversary of the Battle of Tours

. . . where Charles Martel (the Hammer) and his Franks turned back the Saracen (Mohammedans) and kept them from taking over France and the rest of Europe

October 11, 2008
Raymond Ibrahim's "Today in History": Charles the Hammer saves the West from Islam at Tours

Precisely 100 years of Islamic conquests after Muhammad's death (632), the Muslims, starting from Arabia, found themselves in Gaul, modern day France, confronting a hitherto little known people—the Christian Franks. There, on October 11th, 732, one of the most decisive battles between Christendom and Islam took place, demarcating the extent of the latter’s conquests, and ensuring the survival of the former.

From and Continued at

Thursday, October 9, 2008

How to Win in Afghanistan

It's time to adjust the strategy.
by Christopher D. Kolenda
The Weekly Standard
10/13/2008, Volume 014, Issue 05

How is it that we find ourselves unable to dispatch the Taliban seven years after their downfall? Winning in Afghanistan requires us to understand the changed nature of the war we are fighting and to adapt our strategy appropriately. Simply killing militants is not enough.

The war in Afghanistan is no longer purely a counterterrorism effort against al Qaeda and the senior Taliban leadership. It bifurcated long ago, and its second branch is a counterinsurgency against a range of groups who are flouting both the central government and the traditional authority of village and tribal elders and moderate mullahs. Often well funded by the Taliban or other enemies of the Afghan government and the coalition, and sometimes incorporating foreign fighters, these groups use money and guns to recruit from the vast pool of illiterate young men who see only continued poverty in the village and tribal status quo. The militants find their opportunity in the unraveling of the social and economic fabric since the Soviet invasion.

Against this shifting alliance of convenience between well-funded extremists and local malcontents, the Afghan government is fighting for its life. Historically decentralized, Afghanistan is a polyglot state made up of myriad ethnic groups and tribes. The present collapse from within, therefore, will not likely be defeated from the top down. While building up the central government is important, that effort will be in vain without a complementary effort to build systems and institutions at the local level, which can eventually be connected to the national government. Accepting and working within the decentralized reality of Afghan society is essential to defeating the insurgents.

Beyond that, the changed nature of the war makes necessary four key strategic adaptations.

(1) Increase the local and international security presence and its intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance capabilities; focus on population-centric operations.

More international security forces, particularly in the east and south, are crucial. The increase must be accompanied by an intensified effort to raise and develop Afghan forces. Furthermore, we must devote more intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance assets to the contested areas. As a rule, each battalion-sized task force should have constant unmanned-aerial-vehicle and close-air-support coverage.

These forces must concentrate on protecting the population. To that end, they must build allies among the people; reduce the friction associated with the presence of foreign forces; work with local leaders to promote security in villages and on roads; promote local solutions to local problems; crush the militants when they reveal themselves; and give people compelling reasons to support the government and the counterinsurgency.

(2) Invest in bottom-up capability; attack the problem from both ends. Decentralization can be a powerful force on the side of the government if used responsibly. Afghan identity works from the inside out: Family, clan, village, and tribe are far more compelling to the individual than the nation. Afghans regard their elected village, district, and tribal shuras (councils) as their true representatives, not the appointed district administrators or provincial governors. Empowering these local councils to bring effective governance, basic services, and economic opportunity to their people in a manner integrated with national efforts is the best way to connect people to their government.

Local governments desperately need to draw on the expertise of civilian partners from the international community to develop durable systems relevant to everyday life. The military cannot do this alone. Ensuring these efforts are properly distributed and aligned with the national government will mitigate the very real risk of a return to the warlordism that racked the country after the Soviet war.

(3) Fix critical economic and fiscal policies at the national level. A functional economy, coupled with social and political institutions at the local level, would destroy the Taliban. The overwhelming majority of military-aged males in contested areas are unemployed outside subsistence farming. They fight for money. The economic logic of violence must change.

Afghanistan has considerable natural resources that could be harnessed to spur business and other economic growth. Sadly, national policy hamstrings efforts to do this. For instance, the timber trade has been virtually outlawed, preventing the development of local businesses while creating a black market that feeds the insurgency and resistance to the government. The underground timber economy has also resulted in significant deforestation. A smart timber policy would create incentives to manage forests in addition to generating business opportunities consonant with local interests and capabilities.

Tax policy is another study in dysfunction. According to local officials, a district is authorized to collect taxes on sales, but it must send all of the money to Kabul, which then redistributes it on the basis of perceived need. This encourages district officials to collect no taxes and claim poverty, thereby securing money from the national government. Enabling local governments to retain most of the taxes they collect, and creating systems to ensure transparency and accountability for how the money is spent, would end up bringing more money into the national coffers as well as providing better for the localities. Getting the economic and fiscal incentives right while improving local governance would also reduce the problem of government banditry.

Building systems and institutions that make local governments robust enough to earn the loyalty of their people while remaining tied to the national government is the heart of the matter in the long run. If this is done, local militant groups will die on the vine.

(4) Work with Pakistan to apply the same full-spectrum approach across the border. The socioeconomic dislocation seen in Afghanistan is similarly endemic in the Federally Administered Tribal Areas and North-West Frontier Province of Pakistan. Working with our allies in Pakistan to eliminate insurgent safe-havens is critical, but so is investment in local governance and development in the impoverished areas that have become breeding grounds for militants. Here too, potential recruits to the militant groups need a reason to support their government. The insurgencies must be defeated on both sides of the border in order for Afghanistan (and Pakistan) to have peace. Progress on these fronts, of course, would also support the counterterrorism campaign against the senior al Qaeda and Taliban leadership.

Afghanistan is worth winning. Adapting our strategy to the realities of the war we now find ourselves fighting would enable us to defeat the enemy's strategy and not just his forces. Strategy trumps tactics in counterinsurgency: As we saw in Vietnam and, until recently, in Iraq, we can win every battle and still watch the war slip away. Adjust the strategy, align the tactics, and we will regain the initiative in Afghanistan.

Christopher D. Kolenda, a U.S. Army colonel, returned recently from Afghanistan, where he was a task force commander. The views expressed here are his own and do not reflect official Department of Defense policy.


© Copyright 2008, News Corporation, Weekly Standard, All Rights Reserved.

EuropeNews Roundup - Wednesday, October 08, 2008

[If you want to see more of these news from Europe Roundups, I would suggest that you subscribe to this service - instructions on how to do that are given, in red letters, at the foot of this post.]

EuropeNews Roundup - Wednesday, October 08, 2008
United Kingdom
Former Llanelli doctor on trial for terror bomb attacks
Muslim pupil planned to blow up BNP
Synagogue angered by Mosque expansion plan in East End
Jobless Afghan mother of seven gets £170,000 benefits and lives in £1million council house
Labour's Young Muslim Advisory Group is patronising and divisive
Terror code tells teachers to watch pupils
UK hate preacher takes a bride younger than his pole-dancing daughter
more ...
The Anti-Racist Witch-Hunts
Honor Killings and the Struggle of Moderate Islam
Police Release Terror Suspects in Bonn
Bosnia to deport former Muslim fighter
Minister Moroccan Criminals Pose No Threat Whatever
Finland Muslim Headscarves Unveil Attitudes and Opinions
Malta Imam on immigration problem
A Pro-Church Law Helps a Mosque
French Authorities Punish Police Officer
more ...
Cologne Mayor Presses Turkish Premier to Back Christian Shrine
Turkey Says They'll Retaliate Only Against PKK
Turkish forces keep mandate to fight Kurds in Iraq
Arab League's Moussa to head for Turkey over coop meeting
Turkey served notice over Ilisu dam
Germany warns Turkey over Ilisu dam
more ...
Canada's religious tolerance put to test
We're losing ground fast to the soft jihad
Outrage over Muslim ideals
Canadian Forces to recruit at mosque
Obama Wages War on Freedom of Speech
Educated Muslim youths are linked with bomb explosion
Size of Islamist menace
Former officials say Iranians helped on al-Qaida
FBI - CAIR is a front group, and Holy Land Foundation tapped Hamas clerics for fundraisers
Taliban rebuild children’s suicide camp in South Waziristan
Mosul, another targeted murder against the Christian community
Hamas Puts Market Manipulation on List of Jewish Sins
U.S. to collapse within 2 decades Islamic cleric warns America facing destruction
The Ayatollahs Z(B)ig Dhimmi, Obama, and Iran
more ...
Islam Professor Converts from Believer to Non-Believer
The Blackhoods of Antifa
YouTube censors Pat Condells latest video
Fourteen Centuries of War Against European Civilization
The Great Turkish Rip-off
Chaos in Cologne
The Role of the Mosque in Society
Speech by Geert Wilders Sept. 17th 2008
Islam at face value
Islamism is the Racism of Our Time
Islam is a Violent Faith
Fjordman Reparations From Muslims?
more ...
English Edition
German Edition
No tolerance for intolerance - No apology for being free!
Monday-Friday the latest news on world affairs: compact, objective, international
- EuropeNews represents the principles of freedom of the press, clarification & human rights against canons of religious intolerance and terrorism.
- EuropeNews articles, topics & facts. EuropeNews media monitoring stands for transparent democracy.
- EuropeNews Press Review gathers independent day-by-day news regardless of political standpoints or ideologies.
- We select the best articles from the most credible of thousands of information sources, to show the diversity of viewpoints and information available with modern media.
- EuropeNews is a neutral media service run by volunteer effort. Our editoral and financial independence is important to us. The editorial staff followes no political or economic interests, but offers daily updated a wide selection of articles, topics & facts about controversial subjects.
Holger DanskeHenrik R ClausenPublisher EuropeNews
Editorial Essay: Why so much bad news?

English http://europenews.dk/en/rss.xml
German http://europenews.dk/de/rss.xml
Send an e-mail to europenews@web.de with "Subscribe EN-Newsletter" in the subject field.
The opinions expressed in articles highlighted in the EuropeNews Newsletter are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of EuropeNews.

Wednesday, October 8, 2008

EuropeNews Roundup - Tuesday, October 07, 2008

EuropeNews Roundup - Tuesday, October 07, 2008

United Kingdom
Islamic school unfair admission
London to host 2nd int l confab on religious affinity
Young Muslims to advise ministers
Radical Islam’s Greatest Deception
Brown promotes two Muslim ministers
Pat Condell/VIDEO - Stop sharia law in Britain
more ...

A Pro-Church Law Helps a Mosque
French Authorities Punish Police Officer
Denmark calls for fight for freedoms after cartoons row
Denmarks Naser Khader on anti-Islamism efforts
See how & why France’s Muslim Council doesn’t work
Former Bosnian Mujaheddin leader arrested
Bosnias former mujahedin leader in custody, faces deportation
Iran sends nuclear protest to EU foreign policy chief
Islamist movement banned in Bulgaria
Islamic states draw new battle lines over Freedom of Expression
Robert Spencer interviews Geert Wilders
more ...

Islamic leaders condemn Turkey attack
more ...

Islam: Prophet bride novel published in US
Monitoring Lawful Jihad In Prisons
Human rights - Pick a ruling, any ruling?
Islamic Group Gains Power in Indonesia
Poet accused of being enemy of Islam
Israeli Approvals for Medical Entry in the Shadow of Terror Attacks at the Erez Crossing
Interview with Brigitte Gabriel
The Third Jihad - New Movie Exposes Danger of Radical Islam
more ...

Islam Professor Converts from Believer to Non-Believer
The Blackhoods of Antifa
YouTube censors Pat Condells latest video
Fourteen Centuries of War Against European Civilization
The Great Turkish Rip-off
Chaos in Cologne
The Role of the Mosque in Society
Speech by Geert Wilders Sept. 17th 2008
Islam at face value
Islamism is the Racism of Our Time
Islam is a Violent Faith
Fjordman: Reparations From Muslims?
more ...

English Edition
German Edition
No tolerance for intolerance - No apology for being free!

Monday-Friday the latest news on world affairs: compact, objective, international

- EuropeNews represents the principles of freedom of the press, clarification & human rights against canons of religious intolerance and terrorism.

- EuropeNews articles, topics & facts. EuropeNews media monitoring stands for transparent democracy.

- EuropeNews Press Review gathers independent day-by-day news regardless of political standpoints or ideologies.

- We select the best articles from the most credible of thousands of information sources, to show the diversity of viewpoints and information available with modern media.

- EuropeNews is a neutral media service run by volunteer effort. Our editoral and financial independence is important to us. The editorial staff followes no political or economic interests, but offers daily updated a wide selection of articles, topics & facts about controversial subjects.
Holger Danske
Henrik R Clausen
Publisher EuropeNews

Editorial Essay: Why so much bad news?

English http://europenews.dk/en/rss.xml
German http://europenews.dk/de/rss.xml

Monday, October 6, 2008

Islam an Ever-Present Danger to Western Civilization

Islamic Danger

Islam is a religion still grounded in principles formulated by its prophet in the 8th century. Then it spread like wildfire by conquest and subterfuge, which Mohammed preached and practiced. He justifies lying to unbelievers when this furthers the Moslem cause. Ever since, the desire to extend Islamic rule to non-Moslem areas has been deeply embedded in the minds of Moslems - the masses attending mosques and their rulers no less than fundamentalist extremists. Islam is by far the most political of all religions because the realization of this desire depends on concrete political and military action by Moslem regimes. However, Islam’s injunction to Moslem rulers to extend their rule to non-Moslem territory is limited by the pragmatic proviso that those too strong or too distant to be conquered can be left alone until circumstances are more propitious. This is why Moslem aggression ceased to trouble Europe after the 17th century.

It is in the forefront of Moslem minds today precisely because the United States recreated Moslem power by its policy of decolonization, accompanied by the developing of natural resources in Moslem states which were then allowed to be partially or wholly expropriated. It is important to understand why these policies and the Western encouragement of Moslem territorial expansion have not only made all Moslem rulers and their Moslem subjects more aggressive but have caused a revival of fundamentalist Islam. The idea that Moslems can be propitiated and kept peaceful by economic development and political concessions is the reverse of the truth. Their reaction is that concessions by unbelievers prove that Allah has begun to favor the believers. So the more powerful Moslem states become, economically and/or politically, the greater will be their religiously motivated appetite for territorial expansion at the infidel’s expense.

The US belief that its generosity to Moslems would be rewarded by loyalty was mistaken. Loyalty to unbelievers is not a Moslem trait. Pragmatism is. And pragmatism prescribes that when dealing with fools one milks them for all one can get, demoralizes them until they are incapable of protecting their interests, and then deprives them of any influence they have left. The Moslem world today has no love and very little respect for the Western powers in general and the United States in particular. It was for many years a bitterly divided world, where individual rulers competed with each other for wealth, influence and sometimes territory. This was why the wealthy states of the Gulf Cooperation Council were ready to accept protection from American and other Western forces. But four decades of prattling about decolonization and "globalism" have made their mark. If globalism is a good reason for uniting Europe, preventing it is a better reason for uniting Moslem states (which have much more in common than the Europeans) on a policy to wrest power from the unbelievers.

For this purpose, the Moslems enjoy one crucial advantage over the Chinese. Many millions of Chinese live outside China. A fair proportion of them may wish to encourage trade with China. But very few sympathize with Chinese communism or are ready to serve the political aspirations of Beijing. In the ideological sense, the opposite is true of Moslems. Even before the policies of Moslem states have been more or less coordinated, the Moslem dispersion, including Moslems in the US and Western Europe, will provide plenty of volunteers for an active fifth column and for terrorism serving the cause of Islam. Indeed, it has already begun to do so.

Thorough knowledge of US foreign policy during the 1946-2000 period is of vital importance to anyone attempting a serious diagnosis of the weaknesses threatening Western civilization from this direction. Whatever happens to the only superpower is likely to affect the fate of Western Europe. The Europeans only make matters worse by trying to compete with the US for Moslem favors. But perhaps the most serious problem of the West is that the Moslem states are aware of Western greed and its political repercussions. They had very good reasons to believe they will not be punished for increasing their military, political and economic capacity to a point at which they can blackmail the West into accepting their political, cultural or religious demands. Today, after the terrorist attack on New York and Washington, they are hoping that the US will settle for destroying Bin Laden and the Taleban and gradually resume its oil-dictated pro-Moslem policies.

For during the post-World War II era, the United States has tended to support authoritarian Moslem dictatorships on vital territorial issues when their interests conflicted with those of non-Moslem states, needlessly increasing their self-confidence and strategic importance. Israel was compelled to return the Sinai Peninsula (which it had occupied during a defensive war in 1967) to Egypt and may yet be told to cede the strategically vital Golan Heights to Syria – one of the main sponsors of radical and fundamentalist Islamic terrorism. Lebanon, created to provide self-determination for its Christians (then a majority), was allowed to fall under Syrian rule, causing the destruction of the Christian power structure and mass Christian emigration. In the Balkans, the US intervened militarily and falsified election results to maintain a Islamic regime in Bosnia-Herzegovina. Then it used massive military strikes to help Moslem Albania separate the Kosovo province from Serbia, of which it has been an integral part for centuries, disregarding the anarchy in Albania where armed gangs compete for power and trade in drugs. Now it is trying to help Albanians obtain additional rights and influence in Macedonia.

The only identifiable motive behind this long-term US policy is the greed of American business circles determining it and the profits they reap in oil-rich Moslem states. Promoting democracy abroad is certainly not on the US agenda. Even the occupation of democratic India’s territory by communist China has been ignored for the past 39 years, mainly for reasons already stated, but partly because China was an ally of Moslem Pakistan. Consistency is also not a US hallmark. Its media and "globalist" politicians decry ethnic or ethno-religious nationalism when dealing with West European allies but treat it as almost sacred when Moslems invoke it on behalf of their territorial claims.

The erosion of nationalist and/or religious motivations in the West - especially after the bipolar world and the rival superpower disappeared in 1991 - is another important factor affecting the assessment of the dangers facing Western civilization. At the beginning of this century, the US was still very much a Christian state. Since World War II, it is increasingly gravitating towards agnostic liberalism and cynical materialism. The argument that religion was a great rallying cry for war throughout human history is often used against it. However, few have dared to criticize Islam (as distinct from Islamic fundamentalism) on this account, though the question how to motivate power-wielders and populations in democratic states to deal with Moslem aggression and Moslem terrorism must clearly be faced. Patriotism motivated by ethnic nationalism can be a good substitute for religion in this respect. But agnostic liberalism cannot fulfill this function, especially when it is laced with pacifism and globalism. For a superpower, it is a source of weakness and a serious handicap in dealing with terrorists or religiously motivated aggressors.

Not a single Moslem state is a democracy. When there is serious internal opposition to a Moslem ruler, his rivals sometimes demand "democracy" during their bid to topple him, but never maintain it if they gain power. So there is an obvious contradiction between promoting democracy and supporting Moslem states. The contradiction between supporting globalism with ostensibly equal rights for all races, religions or nations and across-the-board support for Moslem territorial and cultural expansion should be no less obvious. These contradictions are a grave American weakness, as ideological confusion hamstrings the ability to act logically and firmly.

The US advocates globalism because it is a means of imposing on the world economic hegemony by a select group of supra-national corporations and big banks, the large majority of which are American. The assumption is that economic hegemony maintains political hegemony. A few big British, German, Japanese and French companies are allowed to share the profits, partly to keep them quiet, but chiefly because their influence on business circles in their countries may limit opposition to American plans or activities. However, since a goodly proportion of the spoils is in oil-rich Moslem states, the Europeans - and especially France - have not always cooperated. They remember the 1956 Suez crisis and, conscious of the US attempt to gain Moslem goodwill by means of political and territorial concessions, have upped the ante by offering more of the same.

Perhaps the most crucial aspect of assessing the only superpower’s prospects of maintaining its status relates to the impact of its policies on the Moslems. These quickly understood that the American talk about promoting democracy was propaganda for internal consumption and that the US preferred to deal with autocratic rulers, who are much easier to bribe. They also understood that they were in no danger of losing US support for their territorial claims against non-Moslems regardless of how they behaved. Syria is perhaps the outstanding example. It has occupied Lebanon. It has long been on the US list of states supporting terrorism and maintains training camps for 10 terrorist organizations operating against Turkey, Israel, Western Europe and the United States. There is clear evidence that the June 1996 bomb which blew up the USAF quarters in Dhahran, killing 19 Americans, was made in the Syrian-controlled Beka’a Valley and transported to Saudi Arabia by truck through Syria and Jordan with the knowledge and approval of Syrian officials. Moreover, Syria is an ally of Iran and has been doing everything possible to help Iraq outwit the embargo the UN imposed upon it. Yet the US still wants Israel to cede the Golan Heights to Syria!

When dealing with Moslems, this kind of political masochism has a heavy price. It promotes terrorism and it encourages the oil-rich Moslem states to buy off the sponsors of terrorism with political and/or financial support. For the burgeoning of Moslem terrorism - radical as well as fundamentalist - the United States, Britain and France have only themselves to blame. It is safe to predict that this terrorism will be one of the main American security concerns in the 21st century. But the political ambitions of the Moslem world may turn out an equally serious problem.

This analysis began by recalling that throughout human history empires rose by military conquest and fell when their rulers took their power for granted and that the basic cycle of war, occupation, exploitation, negligence and collapse has not changed. It noted that greed has always blinded power-wielders to danger. The greed of the business tycoons promoting globalism is far greater in scale and its impact on humanity than any greed history has known - and just as blind. It has nurtured an enemy who cares more about land than about money and has a profound religious urge to prove his superiority to the infidel. The message of history is that the United States will be unable to stem the tide of Islam in the 21st century unless it abandons globalism and begins to treat Moslem states as potential enemies whose strategic assets and importance must be reduced before it is too late.