Want to know what’s in store for Israel, look at Serbia

24 Comments / 24 Comments

1. Bill,

   You answered me like this:

   First, I offered the possibility, not the certainty of a simple answer bound up in oil.

   Well, since you offered ‘the possibility’ of a simple answer and nothing else, then your reader has only two choices: either consider that your ‘possibility’ is your thought or completely ignore what you say because you are not certain. What you like us to do?

2. No Bill, I’m not wrong. You didn’t get what I meant.

   The power of OPEC countries is subordinate to the power of Western oil traders. They can only impose conditions on the West if Western oil companies agree to their conditions, which the latter always do, as they make a lot of money out of crises. Of course there is always a price to be paid for everything. The cost of political force or ultimately military force against OPEC countries is always higher than blackmailing Israeli corrupt leaders. So Western leaders always prefer the latter way.

   The fact of the matter is that Western dependency on oil is a Western creation and choice, to which Western leaders submit their citizens. Also you should remember that the West is not only made of rich countries like the US and Canada. The ‘economic pain’ you refer to about the OPEC price rise related to the 1973 war is child’s play as compared to the degree of suffering and poverty inflicted by the World Bank and the IMF on Latin American countries (and others worldwide) by means of the latter’s corrupt elites. The WB and the IMF, both controlled by the same criminals who own the US Federal Reserve, have been imposing extremely harsh austerity policies on poor countries and blackmailing them into selling all their governmental services to multinational corporations, thus weakening said governments to the point that they become mere pawns of the IMF and the big corporations. And the governments that do not comply are either commercially boycotted or simply militarily occupied or destroyed (precisely as the US, Germany and Western Europe did to Yugoslavia).

   We do not live in a free world, Bill. All the freedom talk is bs. We live in total submission to oligarchs who determine the stabilities and instabilities of markets, and what you may or may not produce and consume. This is why you depend on oil for transportation and other utilities. And things are getting worse every hour, as governments worldwide are pressured to privatize their central banks, as the US has done long ago.

   In ancient Greece democracy meant oligarchy. Today oligarchy means democracy…

   Other than that, thank you for thinking I am young. That’s always flattering at my age.

3. Hi Bill,

   many thanks for the clarification of what you really meant. I think Julia Gorin, based on her most recent posts on her blog, appears to be moving more towards my position and what Felix describes as the US and EU capitalist political elites being the great big dog that controls the radical (read genuine) Islamist tail and NOT vice versa.

   I agree with you totally Bill, that it does not make any sense to suggest or imply that all these Western leaders and their so-called “expert” advisers are all retarded imbeciles whom are “being duped by radical Islam” which appears to be the position of Fitzgerald’s & Spencer’s “Jihad Watch” website.

   Felix describes it accurately where he wrote:

   “In using a Fascist Islam the ruling powers are dealing with a very nasty beast indeed, and this is a beast that while it can be used has to be kept on a leash. Otherwise it can get out of control.“

   I also agree with you Bill that Western leaders and their “expert” policy planners/advisers know full the nature of the Beast of Islamist Fascism but carry on supporting it regardless of the adverse consequences. Why do they continue to do it? Is it all just simply about oil and appeasement, or is there more to it than that? That is the key question we should all be contemplating and much more importantly, investigating through our own research efforts.

   Based on public statements by Western officials, policy papers, leaked government documents, interviews to the press, and so forth over several decades, a picture emerges that points to the deliberate use of this Islamist fascist beast – this dangerous dog that has to be kept on a leash, lest it mauls us to death – as a useful tool – or weapon to be more precise.

   The reason for its use as a weapon against secular states in the Middle East, Central Asia and the Balkans (e.g.,Kosovo, Bosnia) that the US and EU empire wish to destabilize and ultimately control, is because secular governments generally tend to be more liberal, democratic, progressive and tend to want to promote freedom and prosperity for their people. Whilst conversely, Islamist regimes are backward, totalitarian, primitive and regressive and keep their people in abject poverty and oppression with a religious-fascist clique at the top.

   This enables the US and EU political elites to exploit the natural resources or crucial geostrategic position of these countries (and so resource-rich neighboring secular states can also be destabilized),whilst keeping the population of those countries in check by having a ruthless Islamofascist regime crush any opposition.

   If a neighboring secular state starts to be too independent and nationalist minded in the eyes of US & EU political elites, and refuses to be exploited by Western corporations, then Islamist elements in that country are covertly stirred up, armed, trained, funded and so forth by Western governments, until the secular government is destroyed, and the Islamist factions put into power instead – a compliant Western client regime (even if despotic and brutal) is the object of this game.

   If the Islamists who have been put into power by the West get out of control or don’t do the job they are expected to do by the US & EU political elites, then they are either overthrown by another Islamist faction in a military coup or the country is invaded by Western military power.

   This is precislely what happened in Afghanistan. The old Taliban government was overthrown and a new Islamist administration (with a cosmetic facelift for “democratic” effect on Western audiences) was installed in its place.

   This is what has been happening for decades all over the Middle East, Central Asia (former Soviet republics) and in the Balkans. This sustained policy over several decades of supporting the Islamists has resulted in horrendous terrorism against Western targets (the so-called “blowback effect”). This was NOT unforseen by Western leaders and their “expert” policy advisers – since these people are NOT stupid or retarded.

   And yet these Western leaders and their so-called “expert” policy advisers continue supporting the creation of these Islamist regimes all over the world: taking us down their road to Islamofascist hell – all “paved with good intentions” of course.

4. Enigmax, it is now apparent to me that you completely missed the point I made, given your following statement :

   My point is this: why is it that on the issue of Kosovo you imply Julia Gorin to be mistaken but Western leaders and their advisers not mistaken? You wrote:

   I have not suggested that at all.

   I have simply stated that those writers, including Gorin who suggest that Western leaders, play into the hands of radical Islamists of various stripes, do so because they misunderstand Islam, Islamists and the fundamental forces underlying geopolitical realities, are wrong.

   I cannot believe Western leaders and their expert advisers are not as knowledgeable, intelligent and understanding as Gorin and these writers. I also believe they understand the problems facing the West just as well as Gorin and other writers warning the West of the dangers of radical Islam.

   The problem Western leaders are having in confronting and trying to defeat radical Islam, is not that they are unaware of the threat, but they simply do not know what to do about it beyond staying the course with policies of appeasement and hoping against hope that these policies will ultimately do the trick.

   The West knows full well the adverse results their appeasement policies.

   I imagine that the prospect of trying something new and different that is reality based as regards their radical Islamist enemy’s intransigence and intractability, raises fears that such direct kind of policy and action designed to confront and defeat the enemy will lead to even worse unintended and unexpected consequences then what staying the course is now producing.

5. Bill

   The point you made in post 3 was;

   The problem I have with Gorin’s writings, is the same as I have with those writers who say Western leaders’ efforts to defeat radical Islam are being undermined by their their misunderstanding of the true nature and intent of radical Islam and Islamists and their inability to distinguish Muslim friend from Muslim foe.

   But this point was answered by Enigmax above when he refers to the interview with Brzezinski above;

   Le Nouvel Observateur: Former CIA director Robert Gates states in his memoirs: The American secret services began six months before the Soviet intervention to support the Mujahideen [in Afghanistan]. At that time you were president Carters security advisor; thus you played a key role in this affair. Do you confirm this statement?

   Zbigniew Brzezinski: Yes. According to the official version, the CIA’s support for the Mujahideen began in 1980, i.e. after the Soviet army’s invasion of Afghanistan on 24 December 1979. But the reality, which was kept secret until today, is completely different: Actually it was on 3 July 1979 that president Carter signed the first directive for the secret support of the opposition against the pro-Soviet regime in Kabul. And on the same day I wrote a note, in which I explained to the president that this support would in my opinion lead to a military intervention by the Soviets.

   I am not sure of what Gorin thinks, whether she thinks that the US and EU power tops are confused and lacking in understanding of what they are doing with Islam, but Enigmax is saying that the very top leadership is anything but confused. That is the WHOLE point of his contribution.

   These are terribly important questions and well worth this space on Israpundit.

   The question is which is the tail and which is the dog, to coin an expression.

   Enigmax, and also others especially Jared Israel and Francisco Gil White, have maintained that US and EU Imperialism is the dog and the tail is Islam.

   Why this is so important is that here we have a division. One of the most positive groups would be Jihadwatch by Hugh Fitzgerald but he and John Spencer seem to me to be saying that Islam is the dog and it is wagging the tail which is US Imperialism.

   Another variation of this is what Jared called the Bumbling Bear metaphor, where the US is well meaning but is always making mistakes.

   That is challenged by Enigmax above and it just has to be addressed because it is going to determine how everybody, including you Bill, certainly Ted, are going to address the Jewish issue.

   So for example it was put down as a “mistake” that Miss “Bumbling Bear” Rice and Bush insisted on the elections taking place where Hamas won out. Enigmax is saying that these are not mistakes at all and that there is a conscious strategy to create Islamofascist states in the world.

   If I could add a little bit to what he has said.

   Boom and bust the nature of the capitalist system. There may be a very big crisis lying ahead which may involve struggles in many countries where Fascist forces emerge.

   To maintain power the capitalist class may be gambling on an alliance with Islam. Islam has all the qualities for Fascist rule. It is inherent in that religion itself and it can morphe into modern Fascism very simply.

   That may be the attraction of Islam for our ruling capitalist classes.

   Now Spencer and Fitzgerald dismiss the class issue totally and essentially they are supporters of American Imperialism, it is just that they think that big stupid bumbling bear should stop making those silly mistakes.

   But if it is what we are saying, and Enigmax is very good on this, then we are in real danger.

   If that is the case, Bill, just say if it is the case, you can see immediately what great danger Israel is in, and the Jews are in, with the possibility of a Holocaust there, or alternatively Israel striking at the Iranian bomb as Bolton urges, but with that strike an incredible ratcheting up of the antisemitic pressure.

   It will colour our attitude to what US and EU Imperialism are up to in the world, at least what the driving powers in these entities are up to, because there are different levels of consciousness in these ruling circles.

   Actually what Enigmax has written above is a challenge not only to us all but to himself because it is meaningless without building a large leadership party.

   Why the wars then? Well >I do not dismiss them. In using a Fascist Islam the ruling powers are dealing with a very nasty beast indeed, and this is a beast that while it can be used has to be kept on a leash. Otherwise it can get out of control.

   It is a very comprehensive answer to the lies and destructive obfuscation of Oliver Kamm and Attila Hoare, and also a whole generation of journalists, in what as all on Israpundit will realise is a very corrupt Media. But it has to be acted upon, because to make this live and have any real signifance in the political situation we need an organization initially of a few hundred cadres, who are fully conversant with the issues that Enigmax describes.

   One other thing strikes me. It is one thing for these planners in the US and EU Government to sit about in their plush offices, in highly paid sinecures, working on all of these schemes for world control of their country over all others, but it is another thing entirely when poor people in an area pay the price. People should have a look at the images which are on the site http://real-srebrenica-genocide.blogspot.com/
   and which show Islamist thugs brought into Bosnia by Izetbegovic and his American backers kicking the severed heads of young Serb boys about. I often think that the agony of a mother or father in this, how can they continue their life and have this in their mind, that their dear relative had this happen to them. It is hard for the Father of Daniel Pearl but in these cases these are poor, unheard of Serbian small farming people. What cruelty to these simple people.

   It is what I mean that we are descending into barbarism. And the link with what I am writing about now is Kosovo. There is no doubt that this is illegal and that they (in these plush offices including the offices of the Media) are tearing up the legal rule book. When a system starts to tear down its own international laws then

   Perhaps Yugoslavia and Kosovo is most seriousand important in this regard. It shows the way that the system of Capitalism or Imperialism is moving. I feel that this system will drag humanity down into the gutter if it is not ended

6. Alex, you are wrong on two counts.

   First, I offered the possibility, not the certainty of a simple answer bound up in oil.

   Secondly, it is astonishingly wrong for you to say the West has no oil problem for the last 50 years.

   Much of the world economy has been transformed into an oil based economy and thus the oil consumers, of which America is the greatest consumer, are vulnerable to the oil producers.

   The West has not forgotten the economic pain that hit a number of Western societies very hard when the OPEC nations using their power announced in during the October 1973 Yom Kippur war, an oil embargo to all nations supporting Israel and also using their leverage to manipulate the price of oil to rise to 4 times the then current price.

   Maybe you are too young Alex to remember that, but I am not.

7. Bill,

   Your comment no.3 is very curious. This is how you closed it:

   I am left to ponder what other reasons would account for why Israelis and the West do find it politically attractive to support radical Muslims in Kosovo and why Western leaders continue to act as if they do not understand radical Islam and Islamists, which I have to assume they do understand full well.

   The reasons for this might just boil down to something as simple as the power of oil that has greased the slippery slope the West has set itself on.

   You asked yourself a crucial question. Then you give yourself the most common-place, easy and evasive answer I could possibly imagine for that question. Please explain what sense it makes to acknowledge the truth that Western
   leaders must know what they do when going to bed with radical Muslims, and at the same time evading any plausible answer by choosing the “simple oil issue.”

   The West has no ‘oil problem’ for over 50 years. And the oil-rich Middle Eastern countries live under the Western boot for about 100 years (in fact the West created the current Middle Eastern boundaries), and the West has always been incisive in keeping Middle Eastern ruling families in power and wealthy, which is what has been necessary for the oil to flow. And, no less importantly, Western ruling clans have been profiting from the oil trade nonstop for decades. It is a universal fact of life that economy determines the rise and fall of nations. The Middle East has experienced different types of rule, except democracy. None of those rules – secular dictatorships like Saddam’s Iraq and Pahlavi’s Iran, or Wahhabi Arabia and Khomeini’s Iran – have ever made any difference to the oil flow, as those countries need it to survive regardless of ideology. And there is no doubt as to Western military superiority to those countries, not to mention Western capacity to develop and implement alternative fuels (my car, for one, runs on sugar cane for the same price as gasoline, sometimes less).

   So if there is one answer which is plainly implausible, that’s precisely the oil issue. Please give us a better one.

8. Felix,

   You are not a simpleton, so when it comes to me, why do you think like one?

   Enigmax speaks against an independent state of Kosovo and Western efforts to see that happen. I questioned not his opinion in that regard, but what what relevance his comment was to the point I was making.

   It seems every time you notice that I do not salute anyone who speaks out against an independent Muslim Kosovar state, regardless of my reason and in this case it was questioning the relevance of that position to the point of my post #3, you are quick to fly off the handle, jump in, excoriate me and accuse me of being in league with Muslim radicals, in favor of an independent state of Kosovo, that I wrongly blame the Serbs and defend Kamm, Lantos, Lieberman and now Attila Hoare, whoever the hell that is.

   The one that needs to get their head out of the clouds and get a grip on realities Felix is none other then yourself!

9. Do not confuse me will Bill. As my title incidcates I get it.

10. Ted

    When I opened up Israpundit a few mos ago I thought it was an advertisement for the American Republcian party with a gaudy poster in support of McCain, and not what it is, a famous and important Jewish site

    “Bumper Sticker Ideas

    by Bill Levinson

    Anyway Ted I had no trouble indeed in understanding the gist of Enigmax re Julia Gorin.

    Enigmax was using a quite effective stratagem by making the link between Kosovo and Palestine in the minds of readers who may be new to the site. Because Kosovo IS palestine.

    (By the way I refuse to be drawn into all this stuff about evil etc. I had enough of that when I was in St Columbs College in Derry for 6 years as a boarder so I am sure you can understand that after leaving there I eventually took a cold dip in a beautiful Irish lake and felt all the guilt just run off. I have felt better ever since. By the way I do believe Bill Narvey is easily the equal of Oliver Kamm and Attila Hoare for downright obfuscation. So no thanks Bill. Finished with you, ain´t going there)

    MY MAIN POINT

    Palestine IS Kosovo.

    Debate that and it may bring Israpundit down to reality on this terribly important for Jews Balkan issue, important not least for the simple and not hard to understand reason that JEWS AND SERBS AND HANDICAPPED died together there in the Nazi Holocaust.

    Enigmax is devoted to exploring just that. So get some perspective.

    These Albanian Kosovons or as they call themselves Kosovans, as if a letter change does it, do you imagine that having gained independence they will be in the slightest interested in “Kosovo”.

    No, they are Albanians. They will never be Kosovons, or even Kosovans.

    It is a non runner because it is an ideological impossibility. Kosovo for them is a stratagem for destroying Kosovo which is a real place for the Serbs and lies at the very heart of their culture and Orthodox Christian religion.

    Now everything I have written there, instead of Kosovo replace with “Palestine” and you have the exact same result.

    That is what Enigmax was saying.

    Give over Bill. Get a grip. It is far too late for your endless obfuscation of issues and truths.

11. Enigmax

    You have me wrong. I am a big fan of Julia and often post her very well informed articles.

    About a year ago we focussed on Serbia and Kosovo and had many informed people making us smart. Do a search on Israpundit for kosovo or Gorin or Serbia. You will be surprised.

12. Ted, Bill, I wasn’t taking a swipe at Israpundit writers/contributors. You and Bill misunderstood my comment. And no, I wasn’t trying to imply that Israpundit writers/contributors are all scholars and experts. And no, I wasn’t trying to be “clever” Bill, by substituting the Muslim Albanians for the Muslim Arabs of so-called “Palestine”.

    I was making a point.

    My point is this: why is it that on the issue of Kosovo you imply Julia Gorin to be mistaken but Western leaders and their advisers not mistaken? You wrote:

    The problem I have with Gorin’s writings, is the same as I have with those writers who say Western leaders’ efforts to defeat radical Islam are being undermined by their their misunderstanding of the true nature and intent of radical Islam and Islamists and their inability to distinguish Muslim friend from Muslim foe.

    To accept the views of Gorin as regards the Muslims of Kosovo and those writers that deride Western leaders for misunderstanding radical Islam and Islamists, one is left to conclude that Gorin and these various writers are smarter and more knowledgable then all these Western leaders and their many expert advisers.
    I have trouble accepting that idea.

    From your comment above, why do you think that Western leaders and their advisers can be so wrong on Israel and the “Palestinian” Muslim-Arabs of PLO/Fatah and Hamas (you say its because of “Arab oil”) but not clearly mistaken on forming a new Islamofascist state in Europe at the expense of Serbia?

    Why do you feel that “…one is left to conclude that Gorin and these various writers are smarter and more knowledgable then all these Western leaders and their many expert advisers.”

    From what you have written, you imply that Western leaders and their many “expert” policy advisers are not prone to lying and corruption. You also imply, by bringing up the issue of “Arab oil” and since there is no oil in Kosovo, then Western leaders can’t possibly be doing wrong there, even if they are creating a new Islamofascist state at the expense of 15% of Serbia’s terrirtory.

    Said US foreign policy and that of the EU above is also clearly against the founding Charter of the United Nations, the Helsinki Final Act of 1975, as well as all other international law dealing with the territorial integrity and sovereignty of UN member states, so how could they be so right and not wrong, according to you?

    If that is NOT your position, pray tell, exactly what is Bill?

    Do you believe that Western leaders are just merely deluded, shortsighted fools when it comes to enacting foreign policies harmful to Israel with regards to their appeasement of the muslim-Arabs in Gaza and the West Bank – the appeasement of PLO/Fatah and Hamas – at the expense of Israel?

    But then on the other hand, do you really believe that they are NOT deluded and NOT misguided fools when it comes to the appeasement of Islamofascists in the Balkans: i.e., the al Qeada-trained and funded terrorist KLA whom incidentally cleansed Kosovo of its entire Jewish population and are now running Kosovo thanks to Washington and the EU?

    Why should we treat the al Qaeda-funded Islamofascists of the Albanian KLA any different to the Islamofascists of PLO/Fatah and Hamas by rewarding their terror with a new state?

    The Kosovo Albanians come primarily from Albania and the “Palestinian” Arabs come primarily from Jordan and other Arab states.The Kosovo Albanians don’t deserve a new state – they already have one: it is called Albania.Since this is where they originally came from, why should they be rewarded with a new state created out of organized crime, drug trafficking, forced prostitution and slavery, mass murder, ethnic cleansing and terrorism?

    Do you believe the “Palestinian” Arabs deserve a new state based on that principle? Yes or no?

    You seem to be defending Tom Lantos’ indefensible comments for some reason by attacking my introduction to his speech as a “clumsy segway”[sic].

    Do you find what he said acceptable by your standards? If not, then do you find that what he said below can be explained by Lantos being deluded, misguided, naive, shortsighted, etc. with regards to appeasing the muslim and Islamofascist world at the expense of Serbia and international law?

    Do you really believe doing so – as US government officials clearly do with their public statements – will appease the Islamofascist and muslim world into not hating the US so much and stop committing their terrorist attacks against the West?

    Just a reminder of what Lantos said:

    “Just a reminder to the predominantly Muslim-led governments in this world that here is yet another example that the United States leads the way for the creation of a predominantly Muslim country in the very heart of Europe. This should be noted by both responsible leaders of Islamic governments, such as Indonesia, and also for jihadists of all color and hue. The United States’ principles are universal, and, in this instance, the United States stands foursquare for the creation of an overwhelmingly Muslim country in the very heart of Europe.”

    What Lantos said is inexcusable. And in answer to your question Bill, yes, Lantos is corrupt for making such a comment and for supporting the creation of a new Islamist state in order to mollify and appease the muslim world.

    And in answer to your other question, yes, any US government official who agrees with his position is also corrupt – even if it is because as popularly believed, “we need to continue to get cheap muslim-Arab oil in abundance”.

    Mind you, Tom Lantos is just one of many like-minded individuals in the US government’s foreign policy apparatus who think that we should do precisely what he is advocating – create new Islamist states in order to appease and placate the muslim world. A policy which will have deadly repurcussions and backfire terribly on the Western world with more terrorist attacks – NOT less.

    In answer to your question where you quote me here below, where I wrote:

    …these Western politicians and their so-called “advisers” are highly intelligent people whom openly argue in interviews,press releases,policy papers and other official government documents that Islam can be mollified and appeased by creating new Islamist states all over the world and that radical Islam can be utilized as a powerful geo-political weapon against target countries that the Washington foreign policy establishment wishes to de-stabilize and ultimately control.

    To that you wrote:

    …you have gone so far afield that I doubt anyone would agree that what you state resembles irrefutable fact.

    Well it is an irrefutable fact Bill, and it is not I personally who is making that claim, it is the senior policy planners in Washington’s foreign policy establishment who make that claim. Jared Israel has exposed these government officials with their very own words – both verbal and written – in numerous press reports and government documents, as has Julia Gorin with her brilliant research.

    Whether we want to believe that our government leaders could be so indelibly corrupt to commit to such disgraceful policies over several decades because of “Arab oil” or think that they are all hapless fools and merely misguided idiots who are clueless and don’t know what the hell they are doing doesn’t change their deliberate sustained policies over several decades and doesn’t change the end result: more Islamofascist terror attacks against the West- and NOT less.

    Previously, I have exposed these people with the following research material below. I ask you Bill to read all of the research material provided in the links provided when you have the time. Thanks in advance for doing so.

    A lot of people have wondered about how it is possible that the US government can covertly support fascist-racist Nazis and Islamist terrorists while simultaneously claiming to be fighting against them. People often wonder why US politicians like Joe Lieberman, John McCain, Joe Biden and Tom Lantos can say they are against Islamist terror whilst simultaneously supporting it in the Balkans (ex-Yugoslavia).

    The US government foreign policy establishment has supported the creation of Nazi & Islamist fundamentalist states and backed the perpetrators of terrorism in numerous countries (not just in the Middle East) spanning several decades.

    It is also beyond dispute that the US government has cooperated with Iran for decades in spreading Islamist terror against target countries. The “US dependence on Arab oil” rationale to explain these sustained policies of supporting Islamist terror and the creation of fundamentalist Muslim states all over the globe over several decades falls flat on its face for a whole host of reasons.

    We are analysing policies made by US officials, who presumably are fully grown adults intelligent enough to know the consequences of their policies (actions);policies that have been the result of systematic and painstakingly constructed geostrategic planning by expert specialists in the field of geopolitical grand strategy and psychological operations warfare departments over many years.

    We are not analysing the acts of a hapless naive teenager who has fallen into a bad crowd and got caught smoking crack, mugging old ladies and stealing cars who naively could not forsee the consequences of his actions or at least somehow (inexplicably) had good intentions or benign ulterior motives in committing these acts, but somehow “screwed up”.

    How for example can it make any sense that the U.S. foreign policy establishment intended to support and strengthen fundamentalist Iran well before the beginning of the Iran-Iraq war?

    Did it make sense to first nurture and support al Qaida during the 1980’s in Afghanistan and the 1990’s in Europe (Balkans, i.e. Bosnia, Kosovo) without expecting adverse consequences in the future like 9/11 and the train bombings of Madrid and London?

    Or are the US foreign policy establishment planners all just incredibly stupid imbeciles who could not have foreseen such consequences, or if they were intelligent enough to see the consequences of their actions, did their “cost-benefit” analysis deem a few thousand civilian deaths in the US and Europe “the price of doing business” for political elite self-interests (often confused with the “national interest” of America and its people)?

    Does it make sense for the American political establishment,which claims to be an avowed enemy of Islamism and terrorism, to steep an entire generation of Afghanis in Islamist terrorist violence by shipping millions of US made fundamentalist Jihadist textbooks into Afghanistan’s Islamic religious schools for the last 26 years: all funded and paid for by American taxpayers?

    Does it make sense to continue to ship these millions of fundamentalist textbooks despite the terrorist atrocity of 9/11?

    Does it make sense that the media doesn’t discuss this? Does it make sense that the “neocons” – the supposed enemies of Islamism – never halted this policy and never called for an immediate government investigation? And why did Bush lie about it if he is genuinely opposed to the spread of Islamism in Afghanistan and elsewhere?

    Does it make sense that the above is not a major media scandal the likes of Watergate, BCCI,Savings & Loan and Iran-Contra, but is instead kept quiet?

    Oops,”we have screwed up”, “unintended consequences”, or “benign ulterior motives”?

    Does it make sense that the US planned Islamist fundamentalist rule – complete with repressive Sharia law – for Afghanistan long before the Soviet invasion of 1979 and that this is now being already implemented despite the terrorist atrocity of 9/11?

    Does it make sense that the US government has the same plan of Islamist fundamentalist rule for Iraq as they have in Afghanistan?

    Does it make sense that the US is doing the same in neighboring Central Asian states like Uzbekistan, Tadjikistan, Turkmenistan, Kyrgyzstan?

    Fundamentalist Iran happens to be right next door to the above states as is Afghanistan itself – well what a coincidence! (You know, that supposedly “former” Taliban place where the Taliban form part of the new government and where we shipped millions of Islamist fundamentalist textbooks for the last 26 years at taxpayers’ expense and why we also backed a conference in December of 2002 in Rome advocating Sharia law for Afghanistan.)

    Does it make sense that we never heard anything about this on the evening news?

    Oops, “we have screwed up”, “unintended consequences”, or “benign ulterior motives” again?

    See map of Central Asia here

    Does it make sense that Islamists from all over the world hold anti-Western Jihadist terrorist conferences in US-controlled Afghanistan (and the Balkans,i.e., Bosnia & Kosovo) right under the noses of US officials and military without anything being done to prevent such a conference from taking place?

    Does it make sense that US government officials in co-operation with Iran, have backed the creation of TWO Islamist terror states right in the heart of Europe for nearly the last 20 years?

    Oops, “we have screwed up”, “unintended consequences”, or “benign ulterior motives” (yet again)?

    None of it makes sense unless you understand the geostrategic grand strategy plans that the US foreign policy establishment has been implementing for the last three decades in Central Asia, Europe and the Middle East.

    These officials have bragged openly about how the US needs to take over Central Asia on the first step to conquering the giant resource rich continent of Eurasia in order to rule the world. They have bragged openly about how they created,nurtured and developed Islamist terrorism as a geopolitical weapon of destabilization against states that the US wishes to conquer and control.

    The major obstacle to taking over the giant resource-rich continent of Eurasia is, you guessed it: Russia. Hence the need to surround Russia with hostile US created fundamentalist Islamist states in Central Asia. Remember, the Chechen Muslim terrorists who murdered all those Russian school children a while back? The very same Chechen fundamentalist terrorists have been covertly aided by the US government and that of NATO. Terrorist attacks like the Beslan school atrocity against the Russians will be the norm rather than the exception if US policy planners have their way in Central Asia.

    Similarly,the massive ethnic cleansing and mass murder of Serbs and Jews in Kosovo, Croatia/Krajina and Bosnia could never have occurred without covert US government support of the drug running,child-sex slavery racketeering Thaci-Ceku fascist dominated KLA in Kosovo,Tudjman’s Holocaust-denying Nazi “Ustasha” regime in Croatia & Izetbegovic’s Islamofascist Iranian & al Qaeda-backed SDA regime in Bosnia;covert US support, which by the way, began with the Republican George Herbert Walker Bush (Bush Snr) and not Bill Clinton.

    Aiding and abetting Islamist fundamentalist terrorists and pouring billions of dollars of US financial aid, military training and advanced weaponry to put these very same terrorists into state power (as occurred in Bosnia, Kosovo, Afghanistan, Iraq, Iran & Central Asian states like Uzbekistan, Tadjikistan, Turkmenistan, Kyrgyzstan,etc.) is a bi-partisan affair which transcends party lines.

    In order to conquer Eurasia (of which Russia is an integral part) US policy planners say they need to control Central Asia, but in order to control Central Asia, Washington says it needs to control neighboring Afghanistan and Iran [see map here].

    The US policy planners know that they can’t crush Iran militarily as easily as they did Iraq and Afghanistan, hence the need for cooperation with Iran’s mullahs (what some people call “appeasement” or “cowardice”)and the need for setting up fundamentalist Islamist states in Central Asia which can be used to destabilize Russia (just as they openly boast about how they destabilized the Soviet Union via al Qaeda – aka “Mujaheddin” – in Afghanistan during the 1980’s, causing the USSR’s eventual collapse) and eventually break up Russia into much smaller and more manageable statelets that Washington can control.

    None of this is “conspiracy theory” speculation or conjecture because these officials have bragged about it openly in their own policy papers, books, lectures and in interviews with the European press(which interestingly enough,for some “strange” reason, do not get picked up in any major way by the US establishment media).

    I will leave you with the words of the United States’ top geopolitical grand strategist,Zbigniew Brzezinski, who boasts about the US plan for takeover of Eurasia by first taking over Muslim Central Asia (formerly part of the Soviet Union); he also boasts about the fact that Islamism was created in Washington.

    Remember, despite having no official cabinet position, Zbigniew Brzezinski (along with Zalmay Khalilzad) is the US foreign policy establishment’s chief geopolitical grand strategist, so it is not just Brzezinski’s mere “opinion” or “personal views” we are examining here in this interview, but rather, the current policies of the US foreign policy establishment.

    Watch Brzezinski’s response to the question posed by the French reporter that, is it not true that fundamentalist Islam represents a dire world wide threat?

    What does Brzezinski say to this?

    “RUBBISH!”

    Brzezinski’s Interview with Le Nouvel Observateur

    Le Nouvel Observateur: Former CIA director Robert Gates states in his memoirs: The American secret services began six months before the Soviet intervention to support the Mujahideen [in Afghanistan]. At that time you were president Carters security advisor; thus you played a key role in this affair. Do you confirm this statement?

    Zbigniew Brzezinski: Yes. According to the official version, the CIA’s support for the Mujahideen began in 1980, i.e. after the Soviet army’s invasion of Afghanistan on 24 December 1979. But the reality, which was kept secret until today, is completely different: Actually it was on 3 July 1979 that president Carter signed the first directive for the secret support of the opposition against the pro-Soviet regime in Kabul. And on the same day I wrote a note, in which I explained to the president that this support would in my opinion lead to a military intervention by the Soviets.

    Le Nouvel Observateur: Despite this risk you were a supporter of this covert action? But perhaps you expected the Soviets to enter this war and tried to provoke it?

    Zbigniew Brzezinski: It’s not exactly like that. We didn’t push the Russians to intervene but we knowingly increased the probability that they would do it.

    Le Nouvel Observateur: When the Soviets justified their intervention with the statement that they were fighting against a secret US interference in Afghanistan, nobody believed them. Nevertheless there was a core of truth to this…Do you regret nothing today?

    Zbigniew Brzezinski: Regret what? This secret operation was an excellent idea. It lured the Russians into the Afghan trap, and you would like me to regret that? On the day when the Soviets officially crossed the border, I wrote president Carter, in essence: “We now have the opportunity to provide the USSR with their Viet Nam war.” Indeed for ten years Moscow had to conduct a war that was intolerable for the regime, a conflict which involved the demoralization and finally the breakup of the Soviet Empire.

    Le Nouvel Observateur: And also, don’t you regret having helped future terrorists, having given them weapons and advice?

    Zbigniew Brzezinski: What is most important for world history? The Taliban or the fall of the Soviet Empire? Some Islamic hotheads or the liberation of Central Europe and the end of the cold war?

    Le Nouvel Observateur: “Some hotheads?” But it has been said time and time again: today Islamic fundamentalism represents a world-wide threat…

    Zbigniew Brzezinski: Rubbish! It’s said that the West has a global policy regarding Islam. That’s hogwash: there is no global Islam. Let’s look at Islam in a rational and not a demagogic or emotional way. It is the first world religion with 1.5 billion adherents. But what is there in common between fundamentalist Saudi Arabia, moderate Morocco, militaristic Pakistan, pro-Western Egypt and secularized Central Asia? Nothing more than that which connects the Christian countries…

    [End of Brzezinski’s interview with Le Nouvel Observateur]

    An examination of selected quotes from the blueprint of the US foreign policy establishment’s geopolitical grand strategy: Brzezinski’s book “The Grand Chessboard,” written in 1997.

    “…The last decade of the twentieth century has witnessed a tectonic shift in world affairs. For the first time ever, a non-Eurasian power has emerged not only as a key arbiter of Eurasian power relations but also as the world’s paramount power. The defeat and collapse of the Soviet Union was the final step in the rapid ascendance of a Western Hemisphere power, the United States, as the sole and, indeed, the first truly global power… (p. xiii)

    “… But in the meantime, it is imperative that no Eurasian challenger emerges, capable of dominating Eurasia and thus of also challenging America. The formulation of a comprehensive and integrated Eurasian geostrategy is therefore the purpose of this book. (p. xiv)

    “The attitude of the American public toward the external projection of American power has been much more ambivalent. The public supported America’s engagement in World War II largely because of the shock effect of the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor. (pp 24-5)

    “For America, the chief geopolitical prize is Eurasia… Now a non-Eurasian power is preeminent in Eurasia – and America’s global primacy is directly dependent on how long and how effectively its preponderance on the Eurasian continent is sustained. (p.30)

    “America’s withdrawal from the world or because of the sudden emergence of a successful rival – would produce massive international instability. It would prompt global anarchy.” (p. 30)

    “In that context, how America ‘manages’ Eurasia is critical. Eurasia is the globe’s largest continent and is geopolitically axial. A power that dominates Eurasia would control two of the world’s three most advanced and economically productive regions. A mere glance at the map also suggests that control over Eurasia would almost automatically entail Africa’s subordination, rendering the Western Hemisphere and Oceania geopolitically peripheral to the world’s central continent.

    About 75 per cent of the world’s people live in Eurasia, and most of the world’s physical wealth is there as well, both in its enterprises and underneath its soil. Eurasia accounts for 60 per cent of the world’s GNP and about three-fourths of the world’s known energy resources.” (p.31)

    It is also a fact that America is too democratic at home to be autocratic abroad. This limits the use of America’s power, especially its capacity for military intimidation. Never before has a populist democracy attained international supremacy. But the pursuit of power is not a goal that commands popular passion, except in conditions of a sudden threat or challenge to the public’s sense of domestic well-being. The economic self-denial (that is, defense spending) and the human sacrifice (casualties, even among professional soldiers) required in the effort are uncongenial to democratic instincts. Democracy is inimical to imperial mobilization.” (p.35)

    “Two basic steps are thus required: first, to identify the geostrategically dynamic Eurasian states that have the power to cause a potentially important shift in the international distribution of power and to decipher the central external goals of their respective political elites and the likely consequences of their seeking to attain them;… second, to formulate specific U.S. policies to offset, co-opt, and/or control the above…” (p. 40)

    “…To put it in a terminology that harkens back to the more brutal age of ancient empires, the three grand imperatives of imperial geostrategy are to prevent collusion and maintain security dependence among the vassals, to keep tributaries pliant and protected, and to keep the barbarians from coming together.” (p.40)

    “Henceforth, the United States may have to determine how to cope with regional coalitions that seek to push America out of Eurasia, thereby threatening America’s status as a global power.” (p.55)

13. I agree Bill, evil is not the right word. Maybe “nefarious”. Essentially we must conclude that the consequences are intended and not mistakes or due to misunderstandings.

14. Jeff,

    You cheapen the word evil by lowering the bar as to when and to whom it is an appropriately used adjective.

    I disagree with you on that point. I reserve my use of the adjective “evil” to those who hold the more or most extreme, depraved and inhuman beliefs and who commit atrocities in the name of those beliefs.

    I have your point about radical Islam, but it was not my intent before or now to debate you as to whether commonly called radical Islamists are really the true Muslims and the Muslim reformers are the true radical Muslims.

    There are those, who hold that the religion and politics of Islam are one and the same and those who say they are distinct and that the religion of Islam has been politicized by the radical Muslims. It might make for an interesting debate.

15. Enigmax

    I expect you thought yourself very clever to substitute the phrase Israpundit writers for Gorin as if that brought greater clarity to my words in my post #3.

    It doesn’t. My words were specific and in respect of a specific context. You have not only changed the meaning, but do so by implicitly saying that all Israpundit writers consider themselves scholars and experts. Most are well informed and intelligent enough, but do not make that claim, so why do you?

    If there is a point you want to make, make it!

    You then say:

    Once this irrefutable fact is accepted, you will have trouble accepting the idea that “all these Western leaders and their many expert advisers” are honest and ethical,full of moral fiber,have integrity and are not corrupt to the core.

    Just what irrefutable fact are you speaking of?

    1. Is it that Western leaders are “clearly not retarded imbeciles” ? Or is it that:

    2.

    these Western politicians and their so-called “advisers” …..are people whom openly argue …..that Islam can be mollified and appeased by creating new Islamist states all over the world and that radical Islam can be utilized as a powerful geo-political weapon against target countries that the Washington foreign policy establishment wishes to de-stabilize and ultimately control.

    If your answer is yes to question 1, that is what I said and so what is your point in stating the obvious?

    If your anser is yes to question 2., you have gone so far afield that I doubt anyone would agree that what you state resembles irrefutable fact.

    Thirdly, if you are going to talk about Western leaders in relation to some corruption index, you have failed to explain to whom that applies and where you say all are corrupt or only some and if so, just what specific corruptive factor are you applying?

    As for your clumsy segway into speaking of Tom Lantos, your point is what? That he stands alone as corrupt or alone in having an inherently insane policy in your view or is Lantos the personification of all Western leaders you seem to be suggesting are given to corruption or insanity?

    Enigmax, your pseudonym suits you because like enigmas, you are tough to figure out.

16. Bill writes

    First of all, I disagree with your characterizing these Western governments as evil. Misguided or foolish would be a far better word.

    For the reasons given, and many of my own, if I had to choose between “evil” and “misguided”, I would choose the later.

    I fail to understand why Enigmax took a swipe at Israpundit readers. I submit we know full well.

17. Bill,
    If our governmental leaders and Israel’s governmental leaders know what they are dealing with, aside from being obtuse and in denial, they are evil. The consequences of their actions and lack of action has and will continue to result in the death of innocent Israeli Jews and Jews worldwide.
    I disagree that our leaders are misled and therefore continue to pursue the same failed strategies out of fear of trying something different.
    The leaders of Israel and the U.S. are part of a ‘ruling oligarchy.’
    President Bush’s policies toward Israel and Olmert’s/Kadima’s policies for Israel are inherently evil and, frankly speaking, obscene. While I do not agree with everything that professor Franciso Gil-White may espouse, I do agree with much of what he does write – based upon his research.
    The reason I think the term ‘radical Islam’ is damaging is that it obfuscates the truth about pious Muslims, and true, authentic, Muhammaden Islam.
    There is nothing ‘radical’ about what Muslim terrorists do if you understand the Qur’an, Sunnah and Sira.
    Muhammad was one of the most evil men that ever lived. The Qur’an is terrorist manifesto. The Hadith is a declaration of war against non-Muslims.
    The basic tenets of Islam, founded upon the so called revelation that Muhammad received from the angel, Gabriel, are what they are. You may consider what the Qur’an and Hadith mandate and espouse as being radical, but the examples set by Muhammad and his companions are quite clear. Islamic jurisprudence, sharia law and Islamic history are quite clear. In this instance, semantics and terminology is important.

    Jeff

18. Let’s re-phrase comment #3 by replacing
    “Gorin” with “Israpundit writers”:

    “The problem I have with Israpundit writers, is the same as I have with those writers who say Western leaders’ efforts to defeat radical Islam are being undermined by their their misunderstanding of the true nature and intent of radical Islam and Islamists and their inability to distinguish Muslim friend from Muslim foe.

    “To accept the views of Israpundit writers as regards the Arab-Muslims of Gaza and Jerusalem, those writers that deride Western leaders for misunderstanding radical Islam and Islamists, one is left to conclude that Israpundit contributors and these various writers are smarter and more knowledgable then all these Western leaders and their many expert advisers.

    “I have trouble accepting that idea.”

    Now we have some clarity and context.Western leaders are clearly not retarded imbeciles who perpetually screw up over several decades in favor of Jihadist terror groups and Islamist states all over the world. On the contrary, these Western politicians and their so-called “advisers” are highly intelligent people whom openly argue in interviews,press releases,policy papers and other official government documents that Islam can be mollified and appeased by creating new Islamist states all over the world and that radical Islam can be utilized as a powerful geo-political weapon against target countries that the Washington foreign policy establishment wishes to de-stabilize and ultimately control.

    Once this irrefutable fact is accepted, you will have trouble accepting the idea that “all these Western leaders and their many expert advisers” are honest and ethical,full of moral fiber,have integrity and are not corrupt to the core. Yes oil plays a big part in their planning, but the big geo-political/geo-strategic picture – according to the US’ foreign policy establishment’s top “grand-strategist” policy planner – is splitting the huge Russian federation up into small,weak statelets and subsequently dominating the gigantic resource-rich continent of Eurasia which contains enormous reserves – not just of oil and natural gas – but virtually every other natutal resource you can think of.

    “A prominent US legislator declared over the summer that granting Kosovo its independence would please the Muslim world and would show that America is not anti-Islamic.”

    No prizes for guessing who that “prominent legislator” of such an inherently insane policy is: none other than Rep. Tom Lantos (D-CA).

    America: enabler of jihad

    Rep. Tom Lantos, at an April 17 hearing of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, of which he is (gag) the chairman (yes, folks, that’s what happens when Democrats are the majority in the House), by way of explaining his support for Kosovo independence, said the following:

    Just a reminder to the predominantly Muslim-led governments in this world that here is yet another example that the United States leads the way for the creation of a predominantly Muslim country in the very heart of Europe. This should be noted by both responsible leaders of Islamic governments, such as Indonesia, and also for jihadists of all color and hue. The United States’ principles are universal, and, in this instance, the United States stands foursquare for the creation of an overwhelmingly Muslim country in the very heart of Europe. [Italics added.]

    Well, gosh all mighty, the jihadists of the world, especially the Albanian jihadists, sure are taking note of the great favor we’ve been doing for Albanian Muslims these last few years as we’ve pushed for the creation of an Albanian Muslim state in Kosovo. Of the six Muslim men arrested in the plot to attack the Fort Dix, New Jersey U.S. Army base and mass murder U.S. servicemen, four are ethnic Albanians.

    Yep. Telling Muslims that we just love the spread of Muslim power and the establishment of Islamic states in the West sure is a smart way to make jihadists feel all warm and cuddly toward us and stop wanting to spread Muslim power and create Muslim states in the West!

    Now consider again this sentence:

    The United States’ principles are universal, and, in this instance, the United States stands foursquare for the creation of an overwhelmingly Muslim country in the very heart of Europe.

    The explanation for Tom Lantos’ behavior is due to his taking “campaign contributions” over several decades from the Albanian American Civic League: the front group in the US for the fascist al Qaeda-funded & trained terrorist KLA: who have ethnically cleansed nearly 350,000 people out of Kosovo (mainly Serbs,Jews,Romany) and murdered over 6,000 more since June 1999 when the UN & NATO took over the province.

19. Jeff, I did not question Julia Goren’s sincerity or her scholarship. I used the phrase radical Islam as a convenient label and leave for another day debating what one properly should label Muslims that hate and commit terrorism on the West and Israel or those Albanian Muslims who seek, with the support of the U.S., a new Muslim independent state of Kosovo.

    As to America and other Western nations continuing to play ball with the Muslim Middle East and the OPEC nations in particular, you say:

    These evil governments have made calculated decisions under the assumption that they can somehow ‘work’ with evil incarnate and continue to keep the oil flowing and – hence – their economies running smoothly. This is, of course shortsighted. Islam seeks to dominate and not be dominated.

    First of all, I disagree with your characterizing these Western governments as evil. Misguided or foolish would be a far better word.

    Secondly, you say Western nations playing ball with the Arabs and in particular OPEC is shortsighted, does not really address the issue of why they haven’t changed strategies.

    The Western strategies employed over the last 30 – 40 years to try to work with and accomodate the wants and needs of Arab/Muslim nations have not been very successful in getting the Arab/Muslim nations to accomodate the West.

    American influence and prestige for instance in the Middle East has waned, not waxed in spite of what many characterize as policies of appeasement. These policies logically would likely work within the context of Western to Western negotiations and dealings. That Western logic does not apply well to Western to Muslim negotiations and dealings.

    As I pointed out, it is virtually certain that Western leaders and their advisers are more then aware that their various strategies and policies have not worked.

    That they persist in them is probably due to their having no clue as to what else to try, their fear of unexpected consequences by trying something new and different and their uneasy comfort level of staying the course with the same tried and failed strategies and policies in the hope that at some point they will ultimately succeed.

    The reason for the West to persist in sticking with failed strategies and policies is therefore more likely due to suffering from an excess of wishful thinking, given that their jar of new ideas set within the box of conventional thinking is empty, then it is a case of myopia.

20. This a very important Post.
    Thank you, Ted. Moreover, thank you for including the link to Julia Gorin’s article.
    I would like to address Bill.
    Bill, Julia is no smarter than anyone who takes the time to study Islam, the life of Muhammad, the legacy of jihad and the institution of dhimmitude. Couple this with taking the time to understand recent and remote history and what you might come to realize is that the U.S. Government as well as many EU Governments are very, very nefarious. Of course they know the truth about Islam, Arabic Muslim Imperialism, jihad, etc. These evil governments have made calculated decisions under the assumption that they can somehow ‘work’ with evil incarnate and continue to keep the oil flowing and – hence – their economies running smoothly. This is, of course shortsighted. Islam seeks to dominate and not be dominated. Islamists will wait it out while the west withers away.
    Julia has taken the time to study and understand the history of the Balkans.
    She also understands a great deal about Islam.
    Julia is very honest and up front, unlike most U.S. or E.U. government officials and leaders.
    I would also like to opine that the term ‘radical Islam’ is a misnomer. More accurate terms include:
    authentic Islam, Muhammaden Islam, fundamental Islam. The term ‘radical Islam’ is a western invention.
    While we in the west may consider many elements of Islamic theology and jurisprudence ‘radical,’ it is basic and fundamental to Muslims. Moreover, if you look up the word radical in the Merriam-Webster dictionary, you will see how this term is being misused.

    Ted, I think this post should be forwarded to all of the newspapers in the U.S. and Israel.
    The future is now and the Balkans provides a ‘crystal ball’ of what may happen to Israel.

    Jeff

21. Bill, how about the Stockholm Syndrome. Patti Hearst came to embrace her captors. ie if you can’t fight em, join em.

    Or maybe they feel if we are nice enough to them they will love us. Much of this dynamic underlies not just leftist thinking but also US policy. We try to set an example to them by accommodating them. Look how liberal we are etc.

    Or, the squeeky wheel gets the grease. The more Muslims yell the more they get.

    The belief held by many is that the Palestinians are entitled to a state and the Kosovarians are entitled to a state has taken held even though there is no historical or legal right to such states.

    Or maybe we are just feeding the alligator.

22. Ted, if you are right, Israel may as well turn off the lights and leave.

    I think you are being overly pessimistic.

    Gorin says Jews and Israel are being duped into believing that the radical Muslim Albanians that seek an independent state of Kosovo are not radical Jew hating Muslims at all, but are all from the Albanian Righteous stock of WWII.

    Gorin writes with seeming expertise on this subject.

    The problem I have with Gorin’s writings, is the same as I have with those writers who say Western leaders’ efforts to defeat radical Islam are being undermined by their their misunderstanding of the true nature and intent of radical Islam and Islamists and their inability to distinguish Muslim friend from Muslim foe.

    To accept the views of Gorin as regards the Muslims of Kosovo and those writers that deride Western leaders for misunderstanding radical Islam and Islamists, one is left to conclude that Gorin and these various writers are smarter and more knowledgable then all these Western leaders and their many expert advisers.

    I have trouble accepting that idea.

    That said, I am left to ponder what other reasons would account for why Israelis and the West do find it politically attractive to support radical Muslims in Kosovo and why Western leaders continue to act as if they do not understand radical Islam and Islamists, which I have to assume they do understand full well.

    The reasons for this might just boil down to something as simple as the power of oil that has greased the slippery slope the West has set itself on.

23. Welcome Roger.

24. You may be right, but don’t forget, there are many of us out here in this blogosphere who are ardent and vocal supporters of the beleaguered State of Israel and of the Jews, and who deplore your treatment by the United Nations and unfortunately by our own government. We are watching and we care. And we are doing what we can.

    First time on your great blog; but not the last.
    Thanks,
    Roger G.