NATO AND MEDITERRANEAN DIALOGUE: On 7 December 2007, NATO Foreign Affairs Ministers and their counterparts from Algeria, Egypt, Israel, Jordan, Mauritania, Morocco and Tunisia met at NATO Headquarters in Brussels.

This was the second meeting of NATO and Mediterranean Dialogue Foreign Ministers. Since the Istanbul Summit in 2004, the enhanced political dimension has gained both in regularity and substance.  (my emphasis added)

This is a report of the meeting:
Since the June 2004 Istanbul Summit, the annual Mediterranean Dialogue Work Programme for practical cooperation has been gradually expanded from more than 100 activities in 2004, to 200 activities in 2005, to 400 in 2006 and to more than 600 practical activities and events in the year 2007.

An ever increasing number of officers from MD countries participate in courses, seminars and exercises, reaching the number of 781 military officers in 2006, thus contributing to promote interoperability between the armed forces of NATO and MD countries.

During today’s press conference at NATO Headquarters the Secretary General Mr. Jaap de Hoop Scheffer said: “The presence of these Ministers is, in itself, a strong signal of shared interests between MD partners and NATO, and of the ability to work together to tackle common challenges. Ministers agreed that our political dialogue and practical cooperation must go hand in hand. And we also had, today, a good political dialogue.”

“In reviewing international issues, Ministers welcomed the outcome of the Annapolis conference, and they looked forward to the start of negotiations between the Israelis and the Palestinians. Even if this is not a NATO issue, we all share a desire to see lasting peace in that region.”

Many peoples eyes glaze over when they see this kind of thing. Just another bureaucratic get together. I think they may be wrong.


Let me turn to the writings of the wonderful Jewish writer, born in Egypt, Bat Yeor to see if we can make any sense of why this is happening, and why NATO and what they call here “MD” countries are getting together with Israel on the table, perhaps in more ways than one, when you consider the participants.

 In a visit to Israel in December 2003 Bat Yeor spelled out that there was more behind these meetings than meets the eye. That stands to sense, otherwise why would so much expense and effort involving precious man hours in having so many meetings and events as described above. Jihadwatch described the visit of Bat Yeor like this:

Europe’s Arab gambit

According to the pioneering historian of dhimmitude, Bat Ye’or, Europe’s current explosion of anti-Semitism and rapidly rising Muslim population are the results of a strategy implemented long ago. Caroline Glick has the story in today’s Jerusalem Post: “The poll conducted recently by the EU which found that Europeans consider Israel to be the single greatest threat to world peace shocked many and caused the EU’s political leadership to cringe with embarrassment. And yet, according to Geneva-based historian Bat Yeor, the results are the culmination of a European policy now three decades old.

“Yeor was born in Egypt and as a Jew was forced to renounce her Egyptian citizenship in 1955 when she fled with her family to Britain. In 1960 she settled in Geneva and has, over the past 30-odd years been a trailblazer in the study of how Muslims have, throughout Islamic history, mistreated their non-Muslim minorities and indeed, how Muslims today attempt to take over non-Muslim societies.

“Bat Yeor was in Israel last month giving a series of lectures on her newest book, Eurabia. In it she presents her thesis that today Europe is both consciously and unconsciously surrendering its Judeo-Christian roots and embracing new cultural and political identities in which Arab and Islamic traditions, including the tradition of dhimmitude (the subservience of non-Muslims to Islamic culture and expansionism), are its central unifying themes. In line with her analysis, Yeor defines the new anti-Semitism in Europe as ‘an expression of the mutation of Europe into a new culture and society linked with profound cultural and religious transformations.’ During her visit, she discussed with the Jerusalem Post what she sees as the results of Europe’s abandonment of Israel.

“‘After the [1962] French withdrawal from Algeria, [French President Charles] De Gaulle, who up to that point favored Israel, completely changed France’s policy toward the Arab and Muslim world. There was a convergence between France’s embrace of the Arabs and its attempt to weaken the Atlantic alliance with America. The Arabs were to give France strategic independence from the US. France’s attempt, first through the European Economic Community and now through the European Union to create a unified European foreign policy, in competition with the US and led by France, sees European alliance with the Arab world as one of the primary sources of this strategic independence.’

“While, in Yeor’s view, ‘De Gaulle’s strategy was in the abstract,’ the European embrace of the Islamic and Arab at the expense of Israel and the US became a concrete policy in the wake of the 1973 Yom Kippur War and the subsequent OPEC oil embargo of the West.

“In November 1973, French president George Pompidou and German chancellor Willy Brandt met in Paris and proclaimed a joint resolution aligning EC policy with the Arab demands against Israel. This, according to Yeor was the first official European declaration of a unified foreign policy.

 The centre of the work done by Bat yeor is to suggest that the EU and the Arab world are linked together in enmity mainly against Israel, and Bat Yeor claims also against America.

 Here I feel that Bat Yeor makes a mistake. It is correct to say the alliance of these EU antisemites is against Israel. It is not quite correct to say that it is against America. There are problems with this formulation of the issue.

 * Why did the US Government under all recent presidents, Reagan, Bush Snr, Clinton, George Bush all join with Islamofascists in Bosnia and Kosovo to destroy the Othodox Christian culture, to destroy Yugoslavia. Bat Yeor has actually described this well.

 * Why then in that case was it a unity of Islam, the US Governm,ent and the EU all against Yugoslavia?

 The answer to this puzzle I think is quite clear. The EU and Islam are against America, but it is a very particular aspect of America. It is that they are against the achievements of the American Revolution which established along with the French revolution and the Enlightenment definite forms of peoples democracy, such as in one brief example, The First Amendment.

So I do agree with Bat Yeor if read in that specific manner.

This tends to emphasise the reality, that the American ruling cvlass, of both and all parties, are betraying their own heritage and this fact explains their close alliance with Islam.

Jihadwatch writes further quoting Bat Yeor:

“In a continuous flow of joint resolutions, Arab and European officials called for the diffusion of Arabic and Islamic culture in Europe through European universities. A pinnacle of these efforts, Yeor argues came during French President Jacques Chirac’s 1996 visit to Cairo.

“‘During that visit Chirac proclaimed that Europe and Muslims should write history together.’

“As to Arab cultural autonomy in Europe, the resolution of the 1975 conference of the Parliamentary Association for Euro-Arab Cooperation anchored this effort by calling for the European governments to facilitate ‘the creation of generous means to enable immigrant workers and their families to participate in Arab cultural and religious life.’ The results of these policies on Europe have, according to Yeor, been nothing short of disastrous.

I think Bat Yeor is absolutely correct here.

In the late 1930s Leon Trotsky was much troubled by the plight of the Jews. With his keen understanding of the realities of Fascism, a new phenomenon which he analysed endlessly in great detail, Trotsky as far as I understand was the first to spell out precisely the fate of the Jews. He did not say the Holocaust might happen, he said that it would happen. In those conditions Trotsky broke with the old “socialist” dogma which is so prevalent today in movements on the NeoLeft, and stated that Jews should get out of Europe and set up their own, meaning Jewish, state in Palestine. There he said they must make a space for themselves where they could defend their existence and carry on their own culture unmolested from antisemitism.

 As Nathan Pearlstein has said the whole essence of the EU is the very opposite of “your own culture” or “nation”. This is the essence also of Islam, which seeks to break down all nation state barriers. This is their Jihad. So, for example, Hamas is so full of hatred against Israel because it is a Nation, which exists on Islam territory Dar el-Islam.

 So written into the very being of the EU is an antagonism to nationalism. All nationalism as far as these EU bureaucrats and EU mentality is bad. So then can it be that they are proceeding to use Islam to break down the whole idea of nation states? I think so!

So with the agreement of the EU, even with their urging, the millions of Arab immigrants are advised not to integrate but to use every opportunity to maintain their identity as Arabs and Muslims. When millions are told not to integrate into a nation which welcomes them, or in many cases does not welcome them, this becomes a very serious matter.

 The formality of the NeoLeft groups cannot face these questions. This is why they have deliberately hidden the Trotsky experience with the Jewish people in the 1930s.

It is also why the Serbs were so hated by many in the Left. Oliver Kamm and Attila Hoare are not in any way left, but the point is they claim to be. Yet they have carried on a long campaign to say that Izetbegovic was not an Islamist, or if you like a reactionary Muslim, and that Milosevic was a Nazi. Hoare is now calling the radical opposition to the EU over the issue of Kosovo “Fascists”.

But perhaps the reason why the Serbs are hated so much by this layer around Kamm and Hoare is that the Serbs are a proud nation and they have a history which goes back a long time.

 But of course the centre of all ideas of nation are centred in the Jewish people. Here we are talking about an identifiable nation which goes back all of 3300 years. I mean the Irish are only some hundreds of years old and we always thought our civilization was very ancient. Could this fact be one of the origins of antisemitism. I think so.

The American nation state, its national consciousness, springing out of its very historical American national revolution against the British is also a very strong entity. The hatred for America inside Islam, inside the EU and inside the shallowness of the NeoLeft is also very notable.

The meeting above also emphasises another big danger for Israel. That the issue there will be settled , eventually by the destruction of Israel, by Arab and NATO troops working together against the Jewish people.

2 thoughts on “NATO AND ARABS PLOT

  1. Hello Felix!

    My dear friend. This article is brilliant and really hits the truth more than you can imagine. I just read Hoare’s idiotic piece on his latest blog implying that Izetbegovic was not an Islamofascist Nazi but just a misunderstood secular muslim!! And what’s his evidence for this? The West’s support of Izetbegovic!! Duhhhhhhh.

    This Marko Attila Hoare character is really a sick joke of a man. He tries to use the confusion between the two different Islamofascist cohorts of Izetbegovic: Halid Cengic (the father) and Hassan Halid Cengic (the son) by using ridicule: he invokes the comedy team, Monty Python, several times in an attempt to discredit Yossef Bodansky, Neil Clark and others! Yet the error and confusion between Cengic, the father and Cengic, the son is understandable since their names are so similar sounding.

    Halid Cengic (the father) was a member of the “Young Muslims” Islamofascist group (who acted as a recruiting arm of Himmler’s SS) in Bosnia in the late 30’s and early 40’s and according to Yossef Bodansky was an active member of the Waffen SS Handschar (Handzar) Nazi division.Bodansky confuses Halid Cengic with Hassan Halid Cengic and hence Attila Hoare has a field day with this error.

    Hassan Halid Cengic (the son) was supposedly born in 1957 and therefore could not possibly have been in the SS. Hoare uses this confusion -the understandable mix up in names between father and son – to great effect by invoking ridicule and Monty Python sketches in order to attempt to discredit his crirtics.

    This ploy of using ridicule against your political opponents is one of the oldest in the book, but the facts of Izetbegovic’s Islamofascism (and that of Halid & Hassan Cengic) are definitely NOT on Hoare’s side!

    This guy Hoare really hates ALL the Serbs (not just Milosevic or Karadzic or Mladic) and it shows. It probably has to do with the fact that his mom is an ultra-nationalist Croatian (who in all likelihood probably has photos of Ante Pavelic and his Ustasha troops in her bedroom!)

    If you read Hoare’s piece he contradicts himself by implying that old Tito’s Socialist Yugoslavia was good because it was “multi-ethnic”and yet he supports old Socialist Yugoslavia’s destruction because it suited the agenda of Germany, the EU, US and NATO!!

    Hoare then goes on to imply that the state of Israel is racist, apartheid, oppressive, nationalist, xenophobic, blah,blah,blah and all those other colossal shibbeloths and canards because Israpundit’s Ted Belman supported the Serbs in a few of his article postings vis-a-vis Kosovo & Bosnia!!

    This guy Hoare is a completely whacko nutcase as is his imperialist phony “left” friend of Islamofascists like Izetbegovic: Oliver Kamm!

    These two British imperialist idiots Hoare and Kamm are even more of a danger to Israel and the Jews than they are to Serbia and the Serbs, since they pretend to be pro-Israel but in reality work for Israel’s destruction!

    Yes you are spot on about the EU too, Felix. The EU is totally anti-nationhood, anti-culture, anti-Christian and anti-Semitic (but 100% pro-Islamofascist: just like NATO and US governments)!

    Keep up the brilliant work, Felix!!

  2. Nathan

    I am afraid that both Markie and Kammie are a little sick and do need to enquire about some treatment for their very grievous problems, obviously a problem with telling the truth.

    So let me be clear here on what you are saying about Hoare, Kamm as well, because he has not contradicted Hoare on this issue, and Cengic.

    So Peter et al were talking of course about Cengic snr, that is the associate of Izetbegovic in the Young Muslims. This is mighty important because the Young Muslims organization as set up by Izetbegovic in the Bosnian Nazi arena was the branch of the Muslim Brotherhood.

    Of course the Nazi (but also Palestinian Arab) Hajj Amin el Hussein was a brother member with Izetbegovic of the Muslim Brotherhood.

    So they were closely allied.

    Now when the Nazi Palestinian Arab butcher of Jews and Serbs came to the Balkans to create Nazi forces on the direct instruction of Hitler is it likely that Izetbegovic

    1. did not realize Hajj Aminwas in the country

    2. Knew he was there but Izetbegovic stayed away from him.

    I think the likelihood is that they were closely linked through their common membership of the Nazi Muslim Brotherhood.

    Bin Laden is also from the Muslim Brotherhood stable so then as an aside is it any wonder that he was present in Bosnia in the 90s and built up Al Qaida there under the Umbrella of Izetbegovic, and then of course the horror of 9-11 followed.

    Now Hajj Amin is the key to all of this. Neil Clark in his debate with Kamm and Hoare could not deal with this because Clark is a supporter of the Fascist movement fouinded by the Nazi Hajj Amin el Husseini, the Palestinian Arabs, Fatah and Hamas.

    Kamm escaped you see due to the weakness of Clark and treachery of the stalinists and Fascist Lefts towards the Palestinian Arabs.

    Now Kamm has referred to his associate Hoare as an expert historian.

    So taking Kamm’s word is there any possibility that Hoare is confused about Father and Son Cengic? No, on Kamm’s high stated opinion of Hoare as an historian there is no chance.

    So therefore in the case of Hoare, and Kamm´s silence, to try to confuse over the issue of Father and Son, and to use this as a cheap debating trick, and to try to make little of other people in that way.

    Well Nathan what CAN I say?

    We are dealing really with the lowest of the lowest forms of political life. Which reflects terribly on others such as Nick Cohen etc associated with Kamm.

    Perhaps we can get some answer from either Hoare and Kamm. Were they really confused about Father and Son Cengic? If they were confused surely they need to say so now. And if not confused then they should accept that they are political low lifes.

    Either way they should be in apologetic mode!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s