Summary: On 18th August 2010 the Wall Street Journal brought an article by Ayaan Hirsi Ali, who has described the horrors she had to undergo as a Muslim woman, before she escaped to the West, made the film Submission with the therefore murdered Theo van Gogh and was a Dutch parliamentarian until Netherlands no longer dared to protect her further against a similar death fatwa. She now lives in the US. In her article Hirsi Ali writes that the West's survival is threatened in Huntingdon´s clash of civilizations if we do not stick to our common Western values and defend them together against an increasingly radicalized Islam - which Pres Obama is opposed to. Even Turkey has been dramatically radicalized - and the guarantor of secularization, the army, is losing power. Democracy does not exist in the Muslim world. We must abandon the illusion of the one-world society, for according to Huntington´s assumption there are 3 rivaling, incompatible cultures: the West, Islam, Confucianism. These three cultures will come together around their leading nations and collide with or keep each other at bay. The advantage of Huntington's assumption is that one can distinguish friend from foe - which you cannot do in the one-world society. In a recent article in the Danish newspaper, Information, former Minister Karen Jespersen and ex-Prime Minister-spin doctor, Ralf Pittelkow,   wrote the same. For good reasons. The Mail reports that net immigration to Britain in 2009 was 196,000 and that every 4 birth is an immigrant child. Only 5,000 persons of the net immigration were East European. It appears that the forces behind the Ground Zero mosque in New York, opposed by 70% of Americans but supported by the closet Muslim, Pres. Obama, - who has even abolished the term "Muslim extremism/terrorism", thus indirectly admitting the 9/11 tale - are the one-world organization, the U.S. Council on Foreign Relations - and that first and foremost Rockefeller money is behind the purchase of the building site.

Ayaan-hirsi-ali.jpg-4

By AYAAN HIRSI ALI Wall Street Journal 18 Aug. 2010  
What do the controversies around the proposed mosque near Ground Zero, the eviction of American missionaries from Morocco earlier this year, the minaret ban in Switzerland last year, and the recent burka ban in France have in common? All four are framed in the Western media as issues of religious tolerance. But that is not their essence. Fundamentally, they are all symptoms of what the late Harvard political scientist Samuel Huntington called the "Clash of Civilizations," particularly the clash between Islam and the West.

Huntington's argument is worth summarizing briefly for those who now only remember his striking title. The essential building block of the post-Cold War world, he wrote, are seven or eight historical civilizations of which the Western, the Muslim and the Confucian are the most important.

The balance of power among these civilizations, he argued, is shifting. The West is declining in relative power, Islam is exploding demographically, and Asian civilizations—especially China—are economically ascendant. Huntington also said that a civilization-based world order is emerging in which states that share cultural affinities will cooperate with each other and group themselves around the leading states of their civilization.

The West's universalist pretensions are increasingly bringing it into conflict with the other civilizations, most seriously with Islam and China. Thus the survival of the West depends on Americans, Europeans and other Westerners reaffirming their shared civilization as unique—and uniting to defend it against challenges from non-Western civilizations.

Huntington's model, especially after the fall of Communism, was not popular. The fashionable idea was put forward in Francis Fukuyama's 1989 essay "The End of History," in which he wrote that all states would converge on a single institutional standard of liberal capitalist democracy and never go to war with each other. The equivalent neoconservative rosy scenario was a "unipolar" world of unrivalled American hegemony. Either way, we were headed for One World.

President Obama, in his own way, is a One Worlder. In his 2009 Cairo speech, he called for a new era of understanding between America and the Muslim world. It would be a world based on "mutual respect, and . . . upon the truth that America and Islam are not exclusive and need not be in competition. Instead, they overlap, and share common principles."

The president's hope was that moderate Muslims would eagerly accept this invitation to be friends. The extremist minority—nonstate actors like al Qaeda—could then be picked off with drones.

Of course, this hasn't gone according to plan. And a perfect illustration of the futility of this approach, and the superiority of the Huntingtonian model, is the recent behavior of Turkey.

According to the One World view, Turkey is an island of Muslim moderation in a sea of extremism. Successive American presidents have urged the EU to accept Turkey as a member on this assumption. But the illusion of Turkey as the West's moderate friend in the Muslim world has been shattered.

A year ago Turkey's President Recep Erdogan congratulated Iran's Mahmoud Ahmadinejad on his re-election after he blatantly stole the presidency. Then Turkey joined forces with Brazil to try to dilute the American-led effort to tighten U.N. sanctions aimed at stopping Iran's nuclear arms program. Most recently, Turkey sponsored the "aid flotilla" designed to break Israel's blockade of Gaza and to hand Hamas a public relations victory.

Recep Tayyip Erdogan´s Turkey is turning very Islamistic, nationalist and has a dream of reviving the Osman empire. Here is more.

True, there remain secularists in Istanbul who revere the legacy of Mustafa Kemal Ataturk, founder of the Republic of Turkey. But they have no hold over the key government ministries, and their grip over the army is slipping. Today the talk in Istanbul is quite openly about an "Ottoman alternative," which harks back to the days when the Sultan ruled over an empire that stretched from North Africa to the Caucasus.

If Turkey can no longer be relied on to move towards the West, who in the Muslim world can be? All the Arab countries except Iraq—a precarious democracy created by the United States—are ruled by despots of various stripes. And all the opposition groups that have any meaningful support among the local populations are run by Islamist outfits like the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood.

In Indonesia and Malaysia, Islamist movements are demanding the expansion of Shariah law. In Egypt, Hosni Mubarak's time is running out. Should the U.S. support the installation of his son? If so, the rest of the Muslim world will soon be accusing the Obama administration of double standards—if elections for Iraq, why not for Egypt? Analysts have observed that in free and fair elections, a Muslim Brotherhood victory cannot be ruled out.

Algeria? Somalia? Sudan? It is hard to think of a single predominantly Muslim country that is behaving according to the One World script.

The greatest advantage of Huntington's civilizational model of international relations is that it reflects the world as it is—not as we wish it to be. It allows us to distinguish friends from enemies. And it helps us to identify the internal conflicts within civilizations, particularly the historic rivalries between Arabs, Turks and Persians for leadership of the Islamic world.

But divide and rule cannot be our only policy. We need to recognize the extent to which the advance of radical Islam is the result of an active propaganda campaign. According to a CIA report written in 2003, the Saudis invested at least $2 billion a year over a 30-year period to spread their brand of fundamentalist Islam. The Western response in promoting our own civilization was negligible.

Our civilization is not indestructible: It needs to be actively defended. This was perhaps Huntington's most important insight. The first step towards winning this clash of civilizations is to understand how the other side is waging it—and to rid ourselves of the One World illusion.

Ms. Ali, a former member of the Dutch parliament, is the author of "Nomad: From Islam to America—A Obama-bow-to-saudi-kingPersonal Journey through the Clash of Civilizations," which has just been published by Free Press.

Right: Obama groveling before Saudi-Arabia´s Muslim king, Abdullah. He does not before UK Queen Elizabeth II.  

But who has an interest in this clash of civilizations – inevitable when Muslims are to be mixed with infidels?
Prisonplanet 20 Aug. 2010The Imam of the now infamous “Ground Zero mosque” is a member of the ultra elitist Council On Foreign Relations and receives financial backing from powerful globalist sources including the Rockefellers, the Carnegie Corporation and the Ford Foundation. The proposed mosque, to be known as Cordoba House is the project of the Cordoba Initiative, an organisation founded by ‘Imam’ Feisal Abdul Rauf (pictured above), who, in addition to being a member of the World Economic Forum’s Council of 100, is an active member of the Council on Foreign Relations’ Religious Advisory Committee. The Cordoba Initiative’s website cites “Christian support for the Cordoba House” in the form of Christian publication, “Sojourners”, which is owned by evangelical Christian writer and political activist Jim Wallis (funded by George Soros´Open Society), also coincidentally a sitting member of the CFR’s Religious Advisory Committee.

The CFR, as regular readers know, is populated exclusively by major players with the biggest corporations, banks and defence contractors in the world – all of whom are making vast profits and securing more power from continued global conflict. The CFR also exerts far reaching influence over the U.S. government. Feisal Abdul Rauf also heads up the American Society for Muslim Advancement (ASMA) which enjoys a partnership with the Cordoba Initiative and provided $100 million to secure the site close to ground zero for the mosque to be built.

That $100 million came directly from the back pockets of ASMA’s financial backers. They are:  * Carnegie Corporation of New York
 * Rockefeller Brothers * Rockefeller Philanthrop * Rockefeller Brothers Fund  * Global Fund for Women * William & Mary Greve Foundation
 * The Sister Fund * The Russell Family Foundation * Danny Kaye & Sylvia Fine Foundation * Graham Charitable Foundation * Deak Family Foundation  * Henry Luce Foundation * The Elizabeth Foundation * The Ms. Foundation * Hunt Alternatives.
This story is a perfect microcosm of the new world order agenda (Hegelian dialectics with thesis and antithesis).

The connections to 9/11 are clear, and also serve to enforce the mythical notion that 19 radical muslims controlled by some guys in a cave in Afghanistan were able to direct military precision Yes,we canattacks on America with devastating consequences.

Meanwhile behind all of this are the global elite, rubbing their hands in glee as a manufactured “clash of civilizations” unfolds and the whole of humanity lunges at each other’s throats.

 Review in the Danish Newspaper, Information, of a book by former Social Democratic (S) and Liberal Minister Karen Jespersen and Ralf Pittelkow, previous S-Prime Minister Counselor
Islam's power - Europe's new realities.
Jyllands-Posten Publishing:
"The combination of strong growth in the Muslim population and the development of more radical positions in the younger generations is a recipe for very serious problems of integration in European societies."
"The solution is not to downplay European values and community traditions. The solution is rather to stand by them and show strength in them … It requires that the Europeans do not react timidly, indulgent and self-denying to the pressures on their communities, coming both from inside and outside. On the contrary,
UK-immigration-2009European countries need an increased effort to maintain their national and European identity - and make the Muslim immigrants part of it."

In 2009 the net immigration to England and Wales was 196.000 persons. Eastern Europeans contributed just 5.000 persons to the net immigration. 25% of births were derived from immigrants. The UK government is very worried. Source:
The Mail 27 Aug. 2010.

Discussion
Pres. Obama, an admitted Muslim with Kenyan birth certificate and grown up as Barry Soetoro im Muslim Indonesia, is truly said to be a One Worldler like all his Illuminist colleagues. What is amazing about his advocating the building of a mosque near ground zero, the place, where 3.000 innocent people were murdered in the 9/11 attacks said to have been committed by muslim terrorists, therefore, is not that he thereby violates the sentiments of 70% of his electorate. What is really baffling is that he has first abolished the term Muslim extremism/“terrorism” – and then allows representatives of Islam to take over that neighbourhood. Does not even Obama believe the tale of 9/11 being a Muslim crime? Apparently not!
Nevertheless, in the case of Islam, the clash of civilizations is inevitable, given the commandments of the Koran, the Hadiths and Islamic history. All over the world a wave of Islamic radicalization is taking place. What Ayaan Hirsi Ali, who has a death fatwa over her head, really means is that the Muslim immigration is an integral part of the New World Order vision of a world government – as also being expressed in the financiers of the ASMA: the old One World pioneers around the Rockefeller and Carnegie Funds as well as the Russel Family Foundation – another of Fritz Springmeyer´s Illuminati bloodlines. Therefore, it is no wonder that Pres. Obama´s government consists of a long row of Bilderbergers and Trilateral Commissionists.

For the truth is that Islam is no more dangerous to us than our corrupt politicians and media – and thus in the end the blind, brainwashed populations of the West – allow it to be.  Furthermore, that the West just Youth-unemployment-immigrationdoes not confirm or defend its own values and culture – but is making such efforts criminal offences. That is why the West is committing suicide – even paying for it with our money. The West is morally sick and obsessed with the one-world madness – due to Rockefeller´s mental hygiene and the communist 68 Revolution.

Besides, the West is destroying its own economic foundation through its mass immigration policy: Migration Watch  An analysis of the relationship between youth unemployment and migration shows that, as immigration becomes more intense into an area, the greater is the level of youth unemployment. In those local authorities outside London which have experienced the highest rates of immigration, the relationship is particularly significant.