This battle is not a "clash of civilizations." That phrase implies a kind of longstanding reciprocal hostility between all sorts of groups (do Buddhists war on Chris- tians? Do Hindus kill Jews? Do Sikhs want to take over Japan, or France?) In fact, the only world-wide clash is that being conducted by the Jihadis of Islam against all others. Nor can one call this a "war of the West (or of America) on Islam." If it were that, the West would not have protected, at great cost, the Muslims of Bosnia and Kosovo. Nor would it so trustingly have allowed the entry of tens of millions of Muslim immigrants. It is only now, in order to achieve a modicum of security, that Infidel states and peoples are beginning to realize they must halt Muslim immigration, and even, in such places as Italy and France, possibly reverse it.

Meanwhile, a small army of apologists, both Muslim and non-Muslim, attempts to convince Infidels that Jihad does not mean what it clearly means, that if only certain matters are settled to Muslim satisfaction there will be no further threat, and that Islam itself has always shown "peace" and "tolerance" toward other faiths. This can be believed, but only if one ignores the teachings of the Koran and the hadith, as well as overlooking what more than 1300 years of history teaches us, about Muslim attitudes toward, and treatment of, infidels.

Yet Muslim spokesmen have even found some Christian and Jewish clergy willing to uncritically accept, and transmit to their trusting congregants, the most sanitized and misleading versions of Muslim teachings. Muslims are only too happy to exploit such "useful idiots"; from their point of view, it is far better to have Christians and Jews in positions of religious authority echo, and thereby validate, such remarks as "we all worship the same God" or "all religions are the same" or "we respect you, and ask only that you respect us" and others of that ilk -- deceptive, treacly, and untrue.

Whatever their faults and imperfections, Infidel societies are far more relaxed, tolerant, various, open to the interplay of intelligence, reason, imagination, in conditions of maximum freedom, than has ever been possible under Islam, and indeed, than is even conceivable in Islam. Those Infidels in the Western world who exploit their clerical collars, or their possession of a pulpit, to deceive their congregations, are not only silly, but sinister. Were he alive today, De Witt Talmage would not be among them.  

Hugh Fitzgerald is a lecturer on the manipulation of language for political ends.

The Road Map: Assisted
Suicide in the Middle East

Doomsday prophecies aren't my thing.

However, there are times when, left with no choice, reality must be faced head on. And now is one of those times. The state of Israel, led by Ariel Sharon, is on a crash course with major catastrophe. This unmitigated disaster is known as "the Road Map," or in its full glorious title, "The Road Map for implementation of a permanent solution for two states in the Israel-Palestinian Dispute."

Rather than mince words, let me lay out the basic elements, as presently known, of the 'road map.'

1. The central goal of the 'road map' is creation of a Palestinian state. This state is to be sovereign and independent, including "maximum contiguous territory." Totally rejected are Ariel Sharon's preconditions including Israeli control of borders, arms limitations, Israeli control of air space, and more.

This state will be created in two stages: Following elections in the Palestinian Authority, declaration of a state with temporary borders, by the end of 2003, that will receive international recognition and a seat in the United Nations. Permanent borders will be established after determining solutions to issues such as Jerusalem, refugees, and 'settlements.'

Here again, Ariel Sharon's stipulation of a 'long-term process' lasting for at least ten years, falls by the wayside.

2. The Road Map involves two international conferences, the first in 2003 following PA elections, with the marked goal of "initiating negotiations leading to declaration of a Palestinian State with temporary borders."

The second international conference is scheduled for 2004, to give final approval to a Palestinian state with temporary borders, and to initiate negotiations for a permanent agreement.

It should be noted that past Israeli governments have always avoided international conferences at almost any cost, because the deck was always stacked against us. So why now, is Ariel Sharon willing to risk such a precarious symposium?

The so-called Quartet is the instrument by which a sovereign Palestinian state will take form. Composed of representatives from the United States, Russia, the European Union and the United Nations, this group has supreme decision-making control. For instance:

(A) The quartet decides when conditions have ripened for progress, taking into consideration achievements of all of the sides involved. In other words, this foreign body will decide when to recognize a Palestinian state. This bypasses Ariel Sharon's precondition that all progress be determinant on Israeli judgment, taking into account factors such as cessation of terror, collection of illegal armaments, cessation of incitement, etc. In other words, Israel's decision-making control is severely restricted, if existent at all.

Outpost               - 8 -               March 2003