I recall September 11, 2001 as clearly as the proverbial “where were you when Kennedy was shot?” Never have I had such a feeling that justice was being dealt to a bully of world-straddling proportions. As the old Chinese proverb goes, or might go if it exists: “Don’t spit into the wind, or you will get your own back.”
Naturally, I am well aware that this was probably a false flag scenario instigated by vested interests other than those of the Jihad or, more likely, that the event was – like Pearl Harbor – known of in advance but allowed to take its course. However, despite the way that 9/11 is used to justify the “global war on terrorism” — a neo-Trotskyite/neo-con version of “permanent revolution” — as a euphemism for the de jure establishment of the Judaeo-American Imperium by force of arms, it created a ferment among Islam that might be — despite the contrived “Arab Spring” — a force unleashed, that is impossible to control. While neo-con strategists such as Ralph Peters talk of “constant conflict” as a means of world domination, to what extent can the US afford to stay in this a continual state?
A society that is based on pluralism — or pleurisy — and debt-finance, cannot endure in a permanent state of tension. While the recent European colonial empires fell more by conspiracy than degeneracy, to pave the way for the US world empire, the latter is based on greed rather than any higher Idea, and contains its own negation. The historical analogies are the Greek and Roman empires that collapsed through over extension and inner decay.
Conflict with Islam Stems from “Western Duplicity,” Zionist Intrigue
Arab friendship with the West could have been cultivated and maintained from World War I onward. There is no reason to think that that friendship would not have endured to the present. The roots of conflict between the “West” (in its cycle of decay, where “West” means anything and everything but “Western”) and Islam go back to “Western” duplicity instigated by Zionist interests.
The manner by which Zionists pushed the US into war in Europe in 1917 in return for support for a Jewish state in Palestine, and the way the Arabs were betrayed while they were fighting for the Allies, is documented by one of the principals of the backroom machinations, British War Cabinet adviser James A Malcolm, whose family were close to the Sassoon dynasty. T. E. Lawrence wrote of this betrayal and of his shame at British duplicity in his Seven Pillars of Wisdom.
Clash Between the Fellaheen and the Diseased
What emerged in the 9/11 aftermath is not a “clash of civilizations,” but the last gasps of two historically-spent forces: one that entered the Fellaheen stage centuries ago, and one that is in the process of doing so. The danger is that while both tumble across the world like psychopathic clowns they are destroying what vestiges remain of the “West.”
It is possible that, without Zionist machinations, Anglo-French duplicity, and American toadying, the Fellaheen might have come into a genuine “Arab Spring” (in the Spenglerian sense); it is probable that if the Zionist and messianic Judaic sinkhole had not been imposed in the middle of Islam, the Mad Mullah would never have been awakened and, on the basis of what T. E. Lawrence had cultivated, Islamo-Western friendship would have endured.
Can anything be salvaged from this, in regard to a “Western Spring”? It would seem reasonable that so far from Judaeo-American hegemony being secured globally, Ralph Peters’ scenario of “constant conflict” will catch up with America on its home soil, like toadying to Israel caught up with the US on its home soil when the Twin Towers of Babel were hit.
The result might be what W. B. Yeats referred to in a broader perspective: the center cannot hold; everything falls part under the dead weight of debt, and a depraved system that is reliant on a populace whose stamina has been broken by decades of multiculturalism, liberalism, hedonism, egotism, banality, and “the ethical syphilis of Hollywood,” i.e., “American culture.”
A state as organically diseased as the US, which was never established on organic foundations to begin with, will fall apart given a sufficient poke at the right time and place and will Balkanize, the latter having been suggested by Russian scholar Professor Igor Panarin.
Every Civilization that has collapsed through internal decay and/or an “outer enemy” has been the prelude for the rise of another Civilization. The question at this historical juncture is what might succeed “The American Century?” Russia? China, Eurosiberia…?
1. K. R. Bolton, “America’s ‘World Revolution’: Neo-Trotskyist Foundations of U.S. Foreign Policy,” Foreign Policy Journal, May 3 2010, http://www.foreignpolicyjournal.com/2010/05/03/americas-world-revolution-neo-trotskyist-foundations-of-u-s-foreign-policy/ 
2. As distinct from de facto world domination, that has usually been more discreetly exercised via cultural and economic subversion. The de jure announcement of the Judaeo-American Imperium was made by President George H. W. Bush to US Congress on March 6, 1991, in his “new world order” speech.
3. K. R. Bolton, “Tunisian Revolt: Another Soros/NED Jack-Up?,” Foreign Policy Journal, January 18, 2011, http//:www.foreignpolicyjournal.com/2011/01/18/Tunisian-revolt-another-sorosned-jack-up/all/1/ K. R. Bolton, “What’s Behind the Tumult in Egypt?,” Foreign Policy Journal, February 1, 2011, http://www.foreignpolicyjournal.com/2011/02/01/whats-behind-the-tumult-in-egypt/all/1 
K. R. Bolton, “Is Egypt’s Labor Movement Being Co-opted by Globalists?,” Global Research, February 21, 2011, http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=23305 K. R. Bolton, “Post-Qaddafi Libya’: On the Globalist Road,” Foreign Policy Journal, February 26, 2011, http://www.foreignpolicyjournal.com/images/fpj_banner.jpg 
4. R. Peters, “Constant Conflict,” Parameters, US Army War College Summer 1997, pp. 4–14. Online at: http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article3011.htm 
5. James A Malcolm, “Origins of the Balfour Declaration: Dr Weizmann’s Contribution,” p. 1; reprinted in The Barnes Review, Vol. VI, No. 1, January/February 2000, pp. 20–31.
6. Francis Parker Yockey, “Program of the European Liberation Front” (5).
7. The current rapport between Russia and China is inorganic and will fall apart through geopolitical pressures such as control of water resources. See: K. R. Bolton, “Russia & China: An Approaching Conflict?,” The Journal of Social, Political & Economic Studies, Vol. 34, No. 2, Summer 2009. China as the “outer enemy” might result is the re-alliance of Russia with Europe and the formation of a new Russo-European civilization and geological bloc. Peripheral states aligned to such a bloc might include the Arabs, India, and Pacific and Asian states dubious about the rise of China in the Pacific region.