Comparing U.S. President George Bush with Winston Churchill may seem a stretch. Yet there's a parallel -- not with Churchill of the war years, when he was the "free" world's most admired leader, but with Churchill of the 1930s when he stood alone, warning about the rise of Nazism.

Then, pacifism was rampant in Britain and Europe. Hitler's aggression was rationalized by wishful thinking. Peace at any price.

Except for Churchill. He began warning that the Nazis must be stopped when they occupied the Rhineland in 1936. He urged an alliance of Britain, France and the Soviet Union to stop Hitler's expansion. He was called a warmonger, an enemy of peace, reviled in print and in speeches. Few stood with him.

History has proven Churchill right.

Despite enormous and continuing denial on the part of left and liberal ideologues and the media, we are facing an exceedingly pathological strain of Islamofascist terrorism. So a crucial question must be asked: from a psychological and anthropological point of view, what kind of culture produces human bombs, glorifies mass murderers, and supports humiliation-based revenge?

According to Minnesota based psychoanalyst and Arabist, Dr. Nancy Kobrin, it is a culture in which shame and honor play decisive roles and in which the debasement of women is paramount.

In Moslem culture, during the Daheyah (Sacrifice) feast, Moslems bring a lamb into the home for a ritual slaughter accompanied by the invocation Allahu Akbar, “God is great,” in the presence of the family and the children. Now we see the Daheyah of radical Islam to be Jews such as Nick Berg and Daniel Pearl, who were beheaded with no mercy, accompanied by the same pious invocation. This is a perversion of Islam, but don’t expect an apology.

To expect the Arab and Moslem leadership to apologize for the barbaric murder of Nick Berg is a reflection of the West’s naive and wrong expectations of Arab culture. In the Arab world to take responsibility and say “sorry” is taken as an unmanly sign of weakness that may get one into more trouble.

This is the transcribed text of a speech Newt gave to a private meeting of conservative leaders I attended in Washington last week. --JW


Thank you very much. This is a very important group which is a big part of how we ended up beginning to be - I emphasize beginning to be - the natural governing majority of the country and so it’s a thrill for me to be here.

I want to give you a very brief outline and then I’m going to take questions for most of my time because just looking around the room I know how many interesting personalities are sitting out here. It’ll be more fun to interact with all of you.

Here’s my outline. I have a book that’ll be coming out next month called Winning the Future: A 21st Century Contract with America

It makes the following core argument: that we are entering the fourth cycle of a growing conservative movement. The first cycle was Reagan defining the majority. The second cycle was the Contract With America creating the majority. The third cycle was President George W. Bush deepening and reaffirming the majority. The challenge now is to have this fourth phase growing the majority out so it becomes a more natural governing majority.

I have been asked to talk about what I consider the most important challenge facing mankind, and I have a fundamental answer. The greatest challenge facing mankind is the challenge of distinguishing reality from fantasy, truth from propaganda. Perceiving the truth has always been a challenge to mankind, but in the information age (or as I think of it, the disinformation age) it takes on a special urgency and importance…

[Marc Sageman, M.D., was a CIA case officer in Afghanistan between 1987-89 and is now a forensic psychiatrist. He is the author ofUnderstanding Terror Networks(University of Pennsylvania Press:2004), and is a Senior Fellow at the Foreign Policy Research Institute. Dr. Sageman’s research, based on 400 psychiatric case histories of Moslem terrorists provides a fascinating insight into the cause of Islamofascist terror. -JW]

Most people think that terrorism comes from poverty, broken families, ignorance, immaturity, lack of family or occupational responsibilities, weak minds susceptible to brainwashing - the sociopath, the criminals, the religious fanatic, or, in this country, some believe they’re just plain evil.

Taking these perceived root causes in turn, three quarters of my sample came from the upper or middle class. The vast majority—90 percent—came from caring, intact families. Sixty-three percent had gone to college, as compared with the 5-6 percent that’s usual for the third world. These are the best and brightest of their societies in many ways.

Al Qaeda’s members are not the Palestinian fourteen-year- olds we see on the news, but join the jihad at the average age of 26. Three-quarters were professionals or semi- professionals. They are engineers, architects, and civil engineers, mostly scientists. Very few humanities are represented, and quite surprisingly very few had any background in religion.

The natural sciences predominate. Bin Laden himself is a civil engineer, Zawahiri is a physician, Mohammed Atta was, of course, an architect. A few members are military, such as Mohammed Ibrahim Makawi, who is supposedly the head of the military committee.

Far from having no family or job responsibilities, 73 percent were married and the vast majority had children.

At the time they joined jihad, the terrorists were not very religious. They only became religious once they joined the jihad.

[The following letter was written by a lady on the staff of a United States Senator. She has asked that we only use her first name, Laura. TTP has personally confirmed with her the veracity of her account, which took place on February 8, 2004.]

I'm at the 8:00 am service at my church, St. Johns at Lafayette Square, across from the White House. (I wanted to go early because I was going with Alice and Brent for breakfast at the Cracker Barrel in Manassas.) Much of the service was uneventful--nice, but uneventful--until it comes to the part of the service when the priest says, "Greet one another in the name of the Lord." I turn to my right to exchange the peace with my friend Amy, who was on the other end of my pew. I then shake hands with the person in front of me, and turn around to say hello to the person behind me.

The person behind me was our 43rd President George W. Bush

My view has been that this man, who is a quasi-traitor and anti-American as well as a vacuous, arrogant snob, could not be elected president, unless perhaps his opponent were falling apart before our eyes, and Bush hasn’t reached that stage yet. Regardless of the polls, regardless of what’s going on in the world of politics, it would be unimaginable and unprecedented for the U.S. to elect such a man.

That’s been my position. But now it occurs to me that there is another way of seeing it: