“Obama has deep emotional ties to Islam. His attachment to the Muslim world is hurting the USA. The Obama Administration’s greatest failure is allowing the Islamic terror group ISIS to run wild. ISIS is killing innocent people in order to impose a radical version of Islam on the world.” [Bill O’Reilly – American TV host, historian, author and journalist].

As reported in late 2011 in an article entitled “Israel and the war on terrorism”, Elena Bonner the famed Soviet dissident and human rights activist ,wife of the noted physicist Andre Sakharov, also a famous Soviet dissident, was reported as saying that “the whole idea of the so-called ‘peace process’ for resolving the Israeli-Palestinian conflict was in need of rethinking by the US and other Western nations. This was occasioned by the barbaric acts of terror in Jerusalem and Haifa. In the given month a total of 36 Israelis were killed and 258 were injured from suicide terrorist attacks directed at buses. So much for the Oslo Accords of September 13, 1993 which clearly had yielded a peace of the grave. The World Trade Center terrorist attack on September 11, 2001 in which 2,996 deaths and 6000 + injured occurred obviously compounded Ms. Bonner’s judgment.

To Elena, the US and the Western nations required to pressure the PA, without equivocation, to withdraw its consistent support of the terrorist organizations Hamas and Hezbollah ; and additionally to recognize that Israel in consequence of the US September 11 attack experience, had the right to use any available means, including armed force to protect its civilian population.

She also asserted that money which had been poured into the PA “cause” could have created a prosperous society rather than being used to reinforce terrorist bases and to spread violence. Between the two intifadas thousands of young Palestinians were indoctrinated with the ideology of Hamas and Hezbollah who denied Israel’s right to exist and that the only good Jew was a dead Jew. There was no difference between Palestinian terrorists and the Muslim terrorists who destroyed the twin towers of the World Trade Center and who crashed into the Pentagon.

“The long drawn-out and shameful game which Western politicians have been playing with the fate of Israel in the so-called ‘peace process’ had to date cost more lives than September 11.” Bonner noted the endless meetings at Camp David, the shuttle diplomacy of several Secretaries of State and other officials in addition to negotiations in Oslo. All had not brought peace any closer, but produced concessions to the Palestinians in return for un-kept promises.

Sadly, 15 years later it is De Jevu, with Obama and his two useful idiots, Kerry and Hillary Clinton pursuing the same two state non – solution.

On December 31, 2004, Commentary published David Pryce-Jones’ “The Islamization of Europe.” The author is a British political analyst, a senior editor of National Review and the author of the notable “The Closed Circle an Interpretation of the Arabs.” The subject paper is an explicit exposure of an energizing phenomena which regrettably escaped national leadership at the time. The world is presently paying a heavy price for the lack of judgment and extraordinary errors then. Pryce-Jones introductory remarks looms large. “Only a few years ago, mass murder attacks on the West in the name of Islam, like those of September 11, would have seemed like a thriller writer’s fantasy.” Moreover, one recalls how rapidly this horrendous act was forgotten as its ramifications was lost in mundane daily existence.

Interestingly, the writer recalls what to the world dismissed as isolated incidents. And yet, the WTC terrorist attack by radical Muslims did influence the result of an European election and was followed by a Dutch movie maker being shot dead in a street for a film about the abuse of Islamic women and TV openly displayed beheadings of Western hostages by men crying out ‘Allah Akhbar’ over their savage deeds. Pakistan announced its development of a nuclear bomb, widely described as an Islamic bomb. “——-the Islamist leaders of Iran can hardly wait to perfect and use their derivative of it.”

According to Pryce-Jones, he viewed what was happening in Europe as indeed a “clash of civilizations”, while many rejected such thoughts. Not so French philosopher and analyst , Yves Charles Zarka, writing: “—-there is taking place in France, a central phase of the more general and mutually conflicting encounter between the West and Islam, which only someone completely blind or of radical bad faith, or possibly of disconcerting naiveté, could fail to recognize.” Even more so, Bassam Tibi, an academic of Syrian origins living in Germany: “Either Islam gets Europeanized, or Europe gets Islamized.” No less alarming is the prediction of eminent historian Bernard Lewis: “—–if present demographic trends continue, Europe itself will be Muslim.”

Upon reflection, the year 2004 was by no means a commencement period for Islam’s developing strategy. Winston Churchill was not blind to the encounter between Muslims and the West but a watchful observer, recording in his, The River War [1899];

“No stronger retrograde force exists in the world. Far from being moribund, Mohammedanism is a militant and proselytizing faith. It has already spread throughout Central Africa, raising fearless warriors at every step, and were it not that Christianity is sheltered in the strong arms of science—–the civilization of modern Europe might fall, as fell the civilization of ancient Rome.” Hilaire Belloc had similar premonitions 30 years later in his The Great Heresies [1938]: “—-of Islam return and with it the menace of an armed Muhammadan world which will shake the dominion of Europeans – still nominally Christian—-we are in the presence of an unstable equilibrium.”

The period under discussion is the conclusion of the year 2004, approximately 11 years to date. Pryce-Jones points to Europe having hastened the very “clash of civilizations” that they foolishly claimed to have avoided. He also is of the opinion that contemporary Islamism might be summed up as the effort to redress and reverse the long ago defeat of Muslim power by European [i.e. Christian] civilization. This may well be a factor, but one cannot dismiss theology dating back to a much earlier period.

Ibn Warraq, regarded as a worthy Islamic scholar and author, in a Foreword to The Legacy of Anti-Semitism, recalls the observations of Maimonides [Rambam], universally recognized for his preeminence as a philosopher and thinker; a committed Jewish leader [rabbi] of his generation, 1135. The Epistle to the Jews of Yemen gives a clear view of what he thought of Muhammad, the Prophet, “The Madman” as he called him, and of Islam generally. He points out that persistent persecution of the Jews by the Muslims amounts to forced conversions —-causing many to drift away from their faith—and noted the triumph of their adversaries and dominion over the Jews.

“After him , arose the Madman who emulated his precursor since he paved the way. But he added the further objection of procuring rule and submission, and invented his well known religion.” Maimonides noted the depth of Muslim hatred of Jews, stating that “Never did a nation molest, degrade, debase and hate us as much as they.”

Contrary to present day thinking, Islamic anti-Semitism did not commence with the emergence of the State of Israel. Nor for that matter was there a shortage of early warnings on the chaos which pervades our very existence today. The most blatant example of this was surely the re-election of a failed president, viz. Barak Obama.

Obama’s 2012 reelection campaign was built on claims that he was not just tough on terrorists, but was successful in fighting them. The slogan, “Osama bin Laden is dead and General Motors is alive” was heard with some frequency. All the more remarkable when one recalls that at the time there were ongoing investigations on the September 11, 2012 Benghazi attack, hardly a success story.

Prior to this period, on March 19, 2011, Obama had unilaterally authorized the US military to begin “a limited military action in Libya” to protect civilians. It was indeed limited resulting in the collapse of the state and the merciless killing of Muammar Gaddafi. During September 21, 2011 speech to the UN Obama declared, “Forty two years of tyranny was ended in six months. From Tripoli to Misurata to Benghazi—-today Libya is free—Yesterday the leaders of a new Libya took their rightful place besides us , and this week, the US is reopening our embassy in Tripoli.”

Subsequently, Obama has said the worst mistake of his presidency was a lack of planning for the aftermath of the 2011 toppling of Libyan strongman Muammar Gaddafi. One must surely question his confusion, for sanity would have suggested a greater value in exterminating Assad to Gadaffi.

In 2012, Obama , expected Syrian leader Bashar al Assad, previously classified by Hillary Clinton as a “reformer” to step down and informed him that the use of chemical weapons against rebel forces would constitute crossing a “red line.” Assad obliged, the last shipment out of Syria occurred on October 31, 2013. Obama did little else and the civil war resulted in the death of of 250,000 people, approximately 4 million fleeing refugees and around 8 million internally displaced. Obama vetoed a plan developed by Hillary Clinton, and David Petraeus, supported by Leon Panetta and Martin Dempsey to vet Syrian rebels and train a cadre of fighters who would be supplied with weapons. Speaks volumes about a champion of human rights! On the other hand, he would foolishly allow a considerable number of the refugees aimlessly into the US.

In Egypt Obama chose to oppose US ally Hosni Mubarak, calling him to step down and making the way for the radical Muslim extremist, Dr. Morsi, the Muslim brotherhood leader to be empowered. Fortunately the people rebelled, overthrew him, facilitating the appointment of Abdel Fattah el-Sisi to assume power. By all accounts, he demonstrates having the judgment and moderation akin to Sadat.

Iraq has been yet another disaster given the premature withdrawal of US armed forces, while the policy governing Iran is a cause for much concern. Favoring enemies over allies has been representative of a flawed characteristic of the Obama era.

The history of the US obsession in pursuit of a 2 state solution to the Israel-Palestine conflict must surely be regarded as the greatest foreign policy failure in modern times. In its defined parameters, it never ever had the possibility of success. Whether at Madrid, Camp David, Wye River, or Sharm el-Sheikh, to all intents and purposes the framework never changed. The refusal to engage in history dating back to San Remo and to seriously consider all relevant international laws, enabled fictitious arguments to dictate negotiations.

Bottom line – in the words of Professor Albert Einstein, “Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.”