[This article, containing many unpopular and relatively unknown truths was written some time shortly before the attacks of 9/11, which is why it wasn't discussed here.]

    I recently read: "the swastika is the anti-Semitic emblem of Nazi Germany." This presentation is wrong on more than one count, of course. The swastika is an almost universal symbol representing the forces of renewal, rebirth, and re-creation. The swastika is often depicted as a sun wheel. The sun wheel can be found in virtually every ancient culture, with that of the Indo-Aryan peoples most prominently among them. The German NSDAP adopted the swastika as a beacon of hope for the depressed post-WWI German nation. After 1933, the swastika adorned the official German banner, thus heralding the cosmic destiny of the Third Reich on behalf of the entire Indo-Aryan race. Up until 1945, the swastika was widely used in designs in the Western world. For example, the swastika is used in the decorative stone banner that encircles the outer wall of the Department of Agriculture building in Washington, D.C. Today, the swastika is still used by the religious communities of India and Tibet. The Chinese also continue to use it.

     The label "anti-Semitic" is commonly (and excessively) used to describe anyone who opposes Jewish interests; and like many such labels, it is erroneous. The ancient Semitic peoples, of whom the Arabs are descendents, populated North Africa and the Middle East. They can't be equated to the Jews, even though the Jews originated from this race some 3000 years ago (according to their records). The Jews however developed traits that firmly set them apart from the Semites. Indeed, the Jews became a race of their own, different from all other races. The popular Jewish sentiments, voiced by their prophets, scholars, and leaders, affirm their uniqueness -- and their view that they are "the chosen ones" to be bestowed world domination by their tribal God YHVH. As the result of intermarriage with "Gentiles," the physical features of many contemporary Jews resemble the features of the peoples amongst whom they live. But there is nevertheless a strong racial sense that forges Jews everywhere together. What else is behind the Zionist apartheid and aggression against the Arabs in the Middle East, especially the Palestinians? One might be justly called "anti-Judaist" or "anti-Zionist" for one's opposition to the Jews, but "anti-Semitic?" Never! It would be far more accurate to charge the Jews who engage in Zionism with anti-Semitism, as it is they who organize ethnic cleansing against the native Palestinians. And it is likewise anti-Semitism that may account for the deception of Western peoples by their elected governments and the controlled media in regard to Islam.

     The public is deliberately misinformed by both the "American" and the "European" press about the affairs in Islamic nations, and deliberately mislead about the intentions of Muslim leaders. The disinformation is so persistent, yet sublime, that even the skeptically inclined segments of our societies -- White Racialist and Nationalists -- have profoundly misunderstood Islam. It often appears to them just as threatening as Zionism. I'm not a scholar of religious history, or of the Middle East, but I'll sketch the rough outlines of the historic coexistence between the Christian Occident and the Islamic Orient. This may be helpful for illustrating the alleged "hereditary feud" between the West and the Middle East as a hoax and for revealing the mutual foe who intends to reap the harvest of this artificial strife.

     Many people regard Islam as just another offspring of Judaism. Since the destructive effects that Christianity wrought on Europe are widely acknowledged, and commonly attributed to the Jewish roots of this religion, Islam is likewise regarded with wariness. There is certainly a large amount of lore which can be found in both the Bible and the Koran, but nothing could be as incorrect as concluding that Judaism, Christianity, and Islam are therefore equal. Without elaborating on the respective religious views, it suffices to point out that the founder of Islam, Muhammad, was not a Jew. This detail alone sets Islam apart from Christianity, which was founded and fostered in Jewish circles and then flourished in them. The ancient Greeks and Romans considered Christianity to be a "Jewish heresy." The Jewish origin of Christianity is proven and well reported. However, even close scrutiny can't reveal the alleged "Jewish traits" of Islam.

     Coincidentally, the advent of Islam in the Orient corresponds with the decline of the Occident into what are known as the "Dark Ages." It speaks volumes of the character of those early Muslims to have salvaged and preserved the scientific knowledge and scholastic tradition of Mediterranean civilization, while Christians instigated superstition and forgot much that was known to their heathen forebears. The lamentable looting and burning of the invaluable library at Alexandria, the renowned "Serapeion," the greatest library of this era, was perpetrated by Christian fanatics. But they have had the gall of charging Muslims with this "crime against reason."

     A careful look at the Occident and the Orient at this time reveals two detrimentally opposed currents. While the Christian nations plunged back to semi-barbarism, suffering under the terror of the Grand Inquisition, the Muslim nations benefited from the social and cultural reforms inspired by a benevolent Islam. This comes as no surprise, since Islam was skillfully devised to unite and further the progress of the nomadic tribes of the Arabian peninsula. Europe wasn't even fully Christianized when Muslim realms were first established in the Mediterranean area (Spain and Southern France). Unlike others, who infiltrated and subverted nations with stealth and deceit, the Muslims confronted European nations in open battle and with the valor of arms. Grueling wars have been fought until the Muslims were eventually defeated in, and expelled from, the European mainland. In a similar manner, the Muslims overcame ill fated Christian kingdoms in Palestine and Lebanon. It was the legendary Kurdish Muslim, Salah-al-Din Yusuf ibn-Ayyub, known to the West as Saladin, who fought against Richard Coeur de Lion and forced the Crusaders to abandon Palestine except for a few coastal forts. Despite this strife, and the propaganda about "savage heathens," sensible Europeans always knew to appreciate the accomplishments of Muslim scholars and warriors. This attitude is probably best demonstrated by the relations between the monastic Order of the Knight's Templar and the Muslim mystics known as Assassins.

     The vast bulk of Christian citizenry remained ignorant of Islam, an attitude that changed little during the successive centuries. Does the contemporary denizen of the West, with all his means of a globalized media, have a better and improved understanding of Islam than his medieval ancestors? He watches reports about the Muslims, and he reads the editorials about the Middle East, but his knowledge pitifully resembles the superstitious fears of his forebears. He is told lies about "Islamic fundamentalism" which aims to defend traditional society with its religious values and reject the encroachment of the "Western" values that come along as Middle Eastern nations undergo modernization. The target of "Muslim fanatics," he is told, is the West -- the Western man, that is. Islam is portrayed as a drawback into medieval customs which prescribe that women must go veiled and be subjugated to a patriarchal order. And isn't the very outpost of "Western values," Eretz Israel, under siege, assailed by vile terrorists who kill innocents?

     Doesn't OPEC, the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries, constitute a threat to the Western nations dependent on oil imports, should a "hostile" power such as Iraq assume control? After all, OPEC already attempted to "blackmail" the West back in 1973, did it not? All of that is a good and compelling reason to cast a wary eye on Islam, and to keep military power present in the Arabian peninsula, the West is made to believe. We can't let Saddam Hussein export oil lest he acquire "weapons of mass destruction" which most assuredly will "threaten the West." Did Osama bin Laden not declare war on the USA and its allies? Well, you have observed, and perhaps even felt, how the elected governments, along with the controlled media of the West, are skillfully and constantly causing a certain uneasiness among their denizens when the state of affairs in the Middle East is considered.

     There is an antagonism between Western and Muslim society, an antagonism too severe to overcome: that is the party line. The massive economic and military aid to Israel and the war and skirmishes fought by Western forces in the Persian Gulf are for our benefit, for the welfare of the West, we are told. But this is a lie and the media is trying to trick us into hostilities and an enmity which are not necessary at all.

     The issue at the bottom of the alleged Western/Muslim antagonism is Israel. The controlled media carefully portrays Israel as the "only democracy of Western style in the Middle East" and elected governments emphasize this notion by entertaining friendly, diplomatic relations with Israel. However, Israel could more accurately be described as a semi-fascist state with a outspoken policy of apartheid, imperialism, and chauvinism.

     The history of Israel is a history of successive wars and of aggression against their Arabian neighbors. The Muslims know that. The average Westerner doesn't. You might be astonished to learn how during World War I, Great Britain promised the Arab leader, Sherif Hussein, the independence of Palestine (among other Arabian territories) in return for Arabian support of the British. Consequently the Arabs, who constituted more than 90% of Palestine's population, launched a revolt. However, after the war, Palestine became a British protectorate instead. The British furthermore stated in the Balfour declaration that the Jews, i.e. their Zionist wing, would be allowed to immigrate to Palestine, to settle there, and to buy land. The British pledged support for a Jewish state in this area.

     After World War II, the United Nations General Assembly voted 33-13 to partition Palestine into separate Jewish and Arab states, with an international Jerusalem. All the Arabs refused to accept this division of their land, and the Jews rejected the plan also. The latter unilaterally declared the independence of "their" country: Eretz Israel. From this day on, the Jews never ceased to steal more land from their neighbors and to fortify their position in the Middle East. They couldn't have done this without the consent and support of Europe and the USA, both of which are tightly controlled by the mass media and by very influential lobbies representing alien interests. The newly born state of Israel had many midwives in Western governments. This situation, of which the average Western citizen is purposely kept unaware, is well known in the Muslim nations. Israel, which Western nations perceive as victim, Muslim nations perceive as an aggressor. This clash of different perceptions of reality is a tragic irony. It is this unfortunate situation that is poisoning the relations between the Occident and the Orient. This situation can only be resolved by immediate and unreserved acknowledgement of Israel as the culprit who is playing the West against the East. A critical reevaluation of Western intervention in the Middle East since 1948, and of the foreign aid flowing from the USA and Europe to Israel, can reveal the magnitude of the falsehood and deceit that has tricked the West. Let us just talk of two examples: Lebanon and Iraq.

     Israel invaded Lebanon in 1982, allegedly to quash the Palestinian "terrorists" who were "hiding there." Subsequently, the Lebanese government and civil order all but collapsed and several religious factions struggled for power in a war that ravaged this once pro-Western country. Israel permitted Christian militias to slaughter many hundreds of Palestinian women, children, and men who lived in the refugee camps in Lebanon. The situation got so much out of control that a "multinational peace keeping force," in which US Marines participated, was sent to Lebanon. Over time, the Marine's mission changed from "keeping peace" to enforcing the pro-American (read pro-Israel) government. This meant that the United States was supporting one side in an ongoing civil war. Consequently, the US forces became targets of Muslim factions, and a suicide bombing of a barracks killed 241 Marines. US forces were withdrawn, the civil war raged on, and Israel occupied south Lebanon (despite UN resolutions that called for their immediate withdrawal) until 2000.

     The West was drawn into a conflict instigated by Israel, the West battled Muslims for the sake of Israel, and the West suffered casualties to save Israeli lives. Did the West thus protect Western interests? Not at all! Western interests would have been served far better by restraining Israel from assailing her northern neighbor in the first place!

     When Iraq annexed her former province of Kuwait in 1990, several seemingly crucial arguments called for decisive intervention by the USA and its allies. For one thing, it was said that with the additional oil from Kuwait, the role of Iraq in OPEC would become too powerful. After all, Western civilization depends on imports of oil and the potential "blackmail" of the West by a Muslim nation had to be avoided at all costs. "Don't you remember the Energy Crisis in 1973?" our elected governments and controlled media were asking us. Well, I'm too young to remember it, but I still know the background of this "Energy Crisis".

     In 1973, when Israel waged another war in the Middle East, the Arab members of OPEC began to apply severe economic pressure on the industrialized countries they perceived as supporting Israel, especially the United States. On October 16, six Persian Gulf states announced a 10 percent increase in the price of oil, and the next day issued a declaration that exports would be reduced by 5 percent a month until three conditions were met: (a) the Israelis withdrew from all occupied territories; (b) the legitimate rights of the Palestinians were restored; and (c) all appropriate UN resolutions were implemented. Two days later Libya proclaimed a total embargo on oil exports to the United States, and by October 21 all the Arab oil producers had followed suit. More price rises followed, eventually quadrupling the price of oil. What was commonly called "blackmail" was in fact a completely legitimate sanction against the allies of an enemy: Israel. It is ridiculous to presume that a "powerful Iraq" would have necessarily been hostile to the West. All the Persian Gulf states urgently need to export their only asset, oil, and who else but the West purchases oil en masse?

     This is a most rational quid pro quo between the Orient and the Occident: oil for Western products and military hardware. The economy of Iraq is in shambles since it has been barred from selling oil to the West. It goes without saying that the West would never have had to fear the uninterrupted supply of oil by OPEC, provided the West didn't intentionally harm OPEC members. That is however what Western aid to Israel does.

     A second argument that urged Western nations to attack Iraq was the much conjured horror of "weapons of mass destruction" allegedly aimed at Western targets. "Iraq could posses the A-bomb and use it!" our elected governments and controlled media were crying. Well, there was no credible evidence that the Iraqi military possessed, or even came close to possessing the capability for the military use of nuclear energy. And as far as I know, Iraq never produced nuclear warheads or the carrier system needed for striking European capitals.

     I know one nation in the Middle East however, that most assuredly has this capability. This nation is Israel. Through either overt Western aid or covert intelligence operations, Israel has managed to stockpile a vast arsenal of weapons. Israel is said to possess approximately 200 nuclear warheads, to produce Sarin and other lethal chemicals, and to experiment with hideous bacteria such as Anthrax. With such terrifying potential, Israel could unleash devastation upon the entire Middle East -- and upon Europe and America too!

     Our elected governments and controlled media not only openly tolerate, they encourage Israel's breach of every international treaty and regulation for decreasing the threat of such warfare. It is completely rational behavior for the Muslim nations to seek ways of arming themselves against this menace -- especially since Israel is known for its warlike character. Instead of curbing the Jewish state's efforts to build an ever more menacing war machine, the West is interfering with the Muslim nations' right of self defense.

     As in Lebanon earlier, the USA and Europe fought a surrogate war for Israel. They attacked Iraq and compelled the Iraqis to withdraw from Kuwait in 1991. How does it serve Western interests to have Iraq bombed into submission killing countless civilians? How does it serve Western interests to have US aircraft carriers stationed in the Persian Gulf? How does it serve Western interests to keep Iraqis starving through UN sanctions (thus killing at least a million children since 1991)?

     The Western policy in the Middle East since 1948 has been anti-Arab (Muslim) even though Western interests clearly are with the Arabian members of OPEC. This paradox can only be explained by critically scrutinizing Western relations with Israel. It is for Israel's benefit only that Western nations antagonize the Muslim world and thus jeopardize their steady influx of oil from the Persian Gulf and North Africa. Why does Israel have such power over our decision makers? Why do Western nations give such incredibly generous economic and military aid to Israel? Why does the Western press ignore or whitewash Zionists atrocities in Palestine? Why is Israel so successful in espionage against our military and our industry? You really ought to carefully contemplate these questions!

     Israel is draining Western assets and growing and festering ever more hideously in the Middle East. If the Western governments indeed feel a certain "moral commitment" to Israel, they should refrain Israel from its reprehensible behavior. This behavior upsets and destabilizes a region of great geopolitical importance to us. However, the West does no such thing!

     White Racialists and Nationalists ought to keep a safe distance from the present "Western" policies implemented in the Middle East on behalf of Israel. Indeed, they ought to keep a safe distance from anything that is even remotely associated with policies of their elected governments. They must understand that these governments have deliberately forsaken the welfare of the West.

     How can we, who witness the decline and destruction of our societies by the governments which ought to represent our peoples, not understand the earnest desire of Muslim leaders to safeguard their nations from the disintegrating and degrading forces they see at work in the West? The abomination that the West has (alas!) become in the 20th century is the enemy of every decent man -- racial, cultural, and religious differences notwithstanding. The loathsome "New World Order", which aims for "One World" originates in the West. It seeks especially to subvert the traditional Islamic nations of the Orient. We who denounce the satanic scheme for a "multiracial and multicultural one-world," devised by the sinister adversary of free mankind, must fraternize with every other opponent of this global abomination. To quote an old phrase: "the enemy of my enemy is my friend!"

     This has never been understood better than in the Third Reich. National Socialist Germany had excellent relations with the Muslims in the Middle East. They, after a century-old domination by the Turkish Ottomans, still strived for national independence in a land colonized and subdivided by England and France. Influential National Socialists, Adolf Hitler prominently among them, had a great respect for Islam. The Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, Mohammed al-Husseini, lived for many years in National Socialist Germany. He also helped recruit Muslim volunteers for the Waffen SS, which eventually enlisted 60,000 Islamic soldiers.

     The Waffen SS respected their way of life, their customs, and their religious beliefs. During the war, a pro-German insurgence was unsuccessfully staged by Arabs in Iraq. The remarkable and peculiar comradeship between National Socialism and Islam belies the unceasing barrage of propaganda by our controlled media nowadays. This propaganda incites racial and religious hatred between the Occident and the Orient. David Myatt, British folk culturalist, summarized the similarity of National Socialism and Islam. In his words: "I understand both Islam and National Socialists as striving to create a better world based upon noble ideals and encouraging individuals to change themselves through a triumph of the will. Both upheld the noble ideals of honor, loyalty, and duty." (Autobiographical Notes, davidmyatt.net) National Socialism is a spiritual expression of the Occident, while Islam is a spiritual expression of the Orient. They both are set against each other by the mutual enemy whose destructive and subversive labor ultimately created Israel. The grievance of the Muslim nations against the West derives from the indirect and direct support the West is giving to Israel. This has gone so far that the West, and especially the USA, is universally hated and feared by Muslims as the chief agent of Zionist aggression.

     However White Racialists and Nationalists can, and must, address several problem areas that involve Muslims also: the Islamic insurrection in the Caucasus and the Balkans, the expanding presence of Islam in Western cities, and the increasing number of immigrants from the Middle East and North Africa. These problems are all a cause for concern. Perhaps, however, solutions to such problems can be found together with Muslims who understand our own desire for self preservation, just as we understand theirs. Indeed, we both need to acknowledge and respect the racial, cultural, and religious diversity between the Occident and the Orient.

     Together, we can lay the foundations for our own New Order, in which the sovereignty and integrity of nations is sanctified and defended. No power has the right to interfere and meddle with the internal affairs of independent nations. No power is justified in imposing an alien way of life upon a nation that has its own organic tradition. No power should be permitted to coerce and force a nation to abandon or change a particular form of government and society. I'm confident that Nationalists everywhere, no matter whether they live in North Africa, Russia, Europe, North America, or Asia, can agree on these fundamental principles of international policy and conduct.

     With that said, it should be understood that no reconciliation between the Occident and the Orient can be achieved as long as Israel and her Zionist agenda stand between us. We Europeans and European-Americans must deal with the alien forces that keep our societies in their death grip, while our Muslim allies can finally and decisively take care of Israel. An Arab-Aryan coalition for accomplishing this monumental task is not only feasible, but necessary.

     The Swastika and the Crescent Moon, representing the splendor and valor of the Occident and the Orient respectively, must join an alliance for the mutual welfare and progression of our nations! Once the global threat of Zionism and world Jewry is vanquished, the strife and discord between the different civilizations on this world can cease.

Back to Articles