Esau's Empire, Foundation: the psychobiology of religion

This article or essay was originally written on September 3, 2001 for Niven Sinclair (of Niven Corporation associated with BBC London), Maureen Ali (Producer, OR Media London), Phillip Crawley (Publisher of the Globe and Mail, Toronto), Ed Greenspon (Managing Editor of the Globe and Mail, Toronto), Adam Trombly (Environmentalist and Associate of the late Buckminster Fuller) and Guy Adams, one of my e-mail correspondents.

The text was substantially revised between November 24-30, 2002 for the usage and interest of Dr. Noam Chomsky, M.I.T. linguist and prominent U.S. foreign policy critic (who spoke in Toronto and Hamilton, Ontario, on November 11-14), and for Dr. Syed Mustafa Ali of London.

Thanks for sending me all those words by the oh-so-progressive Islamic savant, Niven Sinclair, but few of his words were at all relevant.

Two of my books (The Cronos Complex, 1974; re-stated in The Iceman Inheritance, 1978, 1992, 2001) have adequately demonstrated the biological insight that humanity differs from other animal species in just one fundamental respect.  At least, this work was nominated for a Nobel Prize back in 1979 (and most years since) by those who have thought so.

Obviously, being nominated is not nearly so good as actually winning the prize, but it is nonetheless an honour.  It indicates that the work may be worth something in terms of understanding human behaviour and history.

The fundamental difference between ourselves and other animals, especially other closely-related "Anthropoids", is deceptively simple to state.  It is very difficult to grasp biologically, emotionally and philosophically.

We somehow conceived of the dimension of time as another kind of territory to be asserted and defended in the interest of individual and group identity.

Other types of "territory", when asserted by aggression, confer group and/or individual identity. This is true of a bull seal's patch of beach, a robin's front lawn, a squirrel's three trees or the few hectares of forest claimed by a troop of howler monkeys.

And, being like some other mammals and most other primates,  individual howler monkeys then compete inside their troop(s) for "social territory" or dominance, an individual's position in the "pecking order" of the group.  Both geographical territory and social "territory" or dominance yield identity.

Among purely animal species, this nebulous term "identity" (as humanity generally uses it) has utterly relevant and very cut-and-dried biological repercussions.  Among purely animal species, the "identity" or relative dominance of an individual has a direct and crucial effect on the number and quality of offspring that will carry the individual's genes.

But the completely abstract conception of "time as territory" is a uniquely human idea, apparently, and one that is not replicated anywhere near as fully in the non-abstract world of all other known terrestrial animal species.  Such an abstract conception may become realizable only once the brain reaches a certain size and synapse complexity.

It is possible that some of the known species of small toothed whales have reached this brain-size and synapse threshold, but our study of their psychology and culture is presently at an exceedingly primitive stage.  It may also be possible that some presently unknown atmospheric or marine-dwelling species has attained this "time as territory" conceptual threshold on our planet.  We simply do not know at our stage of ignorance.

On the basis of naturalists' observations, given roughly human height and weight among the existing so-called "Anthropoids", I figured that about 500-750 cc of brain was necessary for a dim "past-present" realization.  This conclusion is based on the behaviour of some, not all, gorillas observed by George Schaller and Dian Fossey.  And from 750 cc to 1000 cc of cranial capacity seemed necessary for a complete conception of a "past-present-future" continuity of humanity.  All "modern humans" are supposed to have at least 1000 cc of brains... although this is also the completely arbitrary boundary that separates Homo erectus from "us", Homo sapiens sp.

My own suspicion, just for the record and not that I hold the position strongly, is that the relatively large brains combined with the small stature of some Australopithicines may well have shoved them over the "time as territory" threshold of conception even before some examples of Homo arrived at it.  Cranial capacity is not the only criterion for so-called "intelligence" because both stature and body weight, in relation brain size, seem to have something to do with "intelligence" -- although no one is quite sure what the relationship may be.

The most fundamental way that humanity conceives of and defends this new type of territory in the dimension of time is by the development of religion.  That is to say, beliefs were developed by a clan or tribe that linked an individual's social identity before birth with his or her actual lifetime and that also extended the individual's identity into an "afterlife" which preserved a human continuity beyond the purely biological past or future of any given generation.

Religion is not the only way, though, by which humans assert their territory of time.

There are also many other types of "culture" traits that are used to assert and defend "time as a special kind of territory" and, of course, there is writing ("non-biological communication with the future").  Writing, by the way, can give us an insight into the fact that the dimension of time is a very odd and paradoxical kind of "territory" for any biological creature to attempt to assert and inhabit in the search for identity.  The normal rules of the purely animal world can be turned upside down when time is viewed as a kind of "territory".

A modern, living author might try to write a better novel than, say, Moby Dick in order to be acclaimed in the present and future as a writer equal to or surpassing Herman Melville who lived in the past by more than a century.  Visual artists, scientists, poets, sculptors and, to some extent, all modern humans, try to assert their identity "against" the past in order to be relevant in both the present and in the future.

But this sort of "relevance" has little to do with biological relevance in the purely animal world of existence.  Offspring bearing the individual's genetic contribution are the only criterion for "identity" in the purely animal world.

But among humans, these "offspring" can be cultural creations that communicate non-genetically with many and successive human generations.  And, among humans uniquely, the creators of these cultural creations can often be, and often have been, biological failures in purely biological terms.  Many of them left no offspring and many more lacked the means to care for their children.  Therefore, as Robert Ardey observed, much of human cuture has been created by biological failures.

Using a rough analogy to our hypothetical modern author, Moby Dick and Melville introduced above, no lion would ever be so foolish as to struggle against the ghost of some dead lion to chase and kill an antelope that would be a meal "sometime" in the future.  On the other hand, lions have not conceived of existence before birth and beyond death.  Humans have.  And, by doing so, humanity has to some degree defeated death with culture.  Lions have not accomplished this feat.  Humanity conceived of time as a kind of "territory" to be inhabited and asserted.

I want to stress that I defined all this in strictly biological terms, and did not use words like "consciousness" or "spirituality". That's what the Nobel Prize nomination (originally by Konrad Lorenz, author of On Aggression and himself a Nobel laureate) was for.

The specific tenets of any religion are absolutely irrelevant. No religion represents the "truth" more than any other.

Religion exists only to give a group surety of identity within the "territory" or dimension of time, and that doesn't depend upon the specific dogma or specific beliefs of any given religion.

The reason why religious wars have always been so notoriously vicious is that they are really struggles over who will have human identity in the dimension of time.  Therefore, in an actual biological and literal sense, the antagonists in "religious" wars do not recognize each other as being "human", that is...belonging to the same species.  Any cruelty is justifiable  because the identity-territorial goal of each side is truly the absolute extinction of the adversary anyway.  This is what we are witnessing in the Middle East.  Differences of religious customs and doctrine have been mere excuses for this fundamental identity- territorial conflict.

Now, this psychologically slippery, paradoxical and confusing conception of "time itself as territory" promoted an "extra and additional level of aggression in humanity" compared to all other animal species.  For instance, knowing that offspring will inevitably try to usurp and supercede the parents' identity, well, why would humanity, once conceiving of "time as identity-territory", bother to reproduce?

Or, knowing in advance of the reality of our eventual deaths and knowing of our childrens' inevitable adventures in a world we will never experience, why strive for life?   These realizations must have caused, and they still cause, much psychosexual aggression, frustration and aggression -- as well as manic depression -- among all of us (i.e. every normal human)  who conceives of time as a "territory" for human habitation.

Added to all that, at first (at least) humanity faced all the drudgery, pain and challenges of daily biological survival in the purely animal world and we must also have seemed much less well-equipped to survive than many of our animal competitors.

The totality of these aspects of a higher level of aggression compared to other animals is usually called "human culture", although it has always been badly defined because the avoidance of biological terms and roles has prevented us from understanding it. But this complex and largely aggressive matrix of time-asserting "culture" was why we came to dominate the planet, in spite of our obvious physical vulnerability, in competition with other animal species.

But, generally, this "extra" amount of aggression was "absorbed" by sexual and psychosexual "aggression displacement mechanisms" before it could compromise humanity's own survival by too much psychosexual ambivalence, confusion and violence.

It is interesting to note that one exceptionally intelligent gorilla observed by Dian Fossey appeared to have crossed at least a part of the "time as territory" threshold.  But it was a confused and disjointed intimation of the human situation.  He recognized the offspring of one female as being the children of a former rival (past-present realization).

But because he lacked all of those specifically human "physical sexual and psychosexual aggression displacement mechanisms", the results were tragic.  He murdered the two babies and injured the female in repeated attempts to "erase" his rival's identity by brutally raping her so that she would bear his child (present-future realization).

Given the precarious continued survival of ever-fewer wild gorillas, such behaviour was potentially fatal for the local representatives, or troop, of the species.  Three individuals carrying genetic diversity and viability were wiped out by a display of psychosexual violence and not because of normal natural hazards.

Obviously, as was the case with this gorilla and as is reflected in human crime statistics, aggression and psychosexual violence are much more prevalent among males than among females.  Males of most species are more territorial in any case and, in the special case of humanity's conception of "time as territory", the female capacity for reproduction threatens male identity much more directly than in other species.

Without the development of all-important physical and psychological "psychosexual aggression displacement mechanisms", precariously surviving small groups of early humanity might have committed acts of genetic suicide analogous to those of the murderous gorilla.

I have described these "aggression displacement mechanisms" in very great detail in The Cronos Complex, The Iceman Inheritance and Chosen People from the Caucasus.

The reason why Western humanity is more aggressive than other "major genetic groups" is really very simple.

The last so-called "Ice Age" came upon these Western people ("Neanderthal-Caucasoids"... i.e. Homo sapiens neanderthalis) about 80,000 BC in Europe and Western Asia. Urgently-required physical adaptations that were necessary to compensate for the onset of relatively sudden cold weather completely nullified some of their sexual "aggression displacement mechanisms", compromised the effectiveness of most others and exaggerated a few.

All so-called "Caucasians" bear traces of these glacial adaptations to a greater or lesser extent.  That's why Caucasians are called Caucasians -- their characteristic physical traits that distinguish them from other major genetic groups are these glacial adaptations, or vestiges of them, that marked people from the Caucasus Mountains where glacial conditions lingered longer than elsewhere in populated Eurasia.

The net result of their glacial adaptation was that less of their aggression was absorbed or "displaced" and was therefore directed outward against other groups and even directed against the environment in general. This has been proved several times by various forensic-style studies of violence-inflicted injuries among Neanderthal-Caucasoid ("Caucasian") bones. There's no argument about this.  Much of this aggression was directed against women, as many ancient "Caucasian" cave paintings depict, because female reproductive capacity posed a threat to individual male identity.  Identity-stealing offspring could result.

Most modern and well-mixed Neanderthal-Caucasoids, or "Caucasians", retain sufficient psychosexual "aggression displacement mechanisms" to manage reproduction and child-rearing without too much "domestic violence" toward women and children -- although "domestic violence" is an acknowledged phenomenon and problem in all advanced Western societies.

Among some of the more extreme genetic Neanderthal-Caucasoids, however, the situation is different.  Among those Caucasians presently in the Middle East and among those originally from the Middle East -- that is, among those people originatingg nearest to the Caucasus Mountains Neanderthal-Caucasoid heartland -- violence against women and the disenfranchisement of women in society is an ancient way of life institutionalized by religious law.

Even after thousands of years since the end of the last "Ice Age", some groups remain much more "Neanderthal-Caucasoid" than others. These are invariably groups that originated in the known Neanderthal refuge of the high Caucasus and related mountains where the glacial climate to which they had adapted was preserved by a higher altitude after the so-called "Ice Age" ended about 11,500 BC.

These groups include many relatively small tribes or "nations". But three crucially important ones historically were the biblical Hebrews, the original Vandal-Arabs and the post-biblical Huns, Khazars or "Ashkenazi" from the Caucasus steppes of Russia who were converted to Judaism in AD 740.  All of these people were, and are, highly aggressive. This is presently understood as "religious conflict", but this phrase is merely a convenient and misleading specific label for generalized Neanderthal-Caucasoid aggression.

Because of the Great Black Sea Flood of 5600 BC, these highly Neanderthal-Caucasoid people were dispersed throughout Europe and Western Asia in successive waves of ethnic migration.  The biblical Hebrews trekked out of the Caucasus Mountains and into Sumeria and on into Palestine by about 2000 BC.  The Vandal-Arabs surged out of the Caucasus about AD 400 and over-ran the "Middle East" (as the media uses that term) and North Africa.  The Huns invaded Europe as the "Scourge of God" about AD 450 and as Khazars or "Ashkenazim" they ruled the Ukrainian steppes at the foot of the northern Caucasus between AD 372 and AD 1225.  All of these people developed or adopted religions and cultures that severely limited the status of women and their enfranchisement in worship and society.

We modern "Westerners" tend to see this established anti-feminism most clearly among the fundamentalist Islamic nations (all of which radiate outward from the Caucasus Mountains).  Hollywood has always been prone to depict harems and slave-girls in its Arab-oriented film productions, as in Desert Song, Kismet and Sinbad.  But since 9/11 and the resulting "open season" against the Arabic-Islamic world, pro-Israeli CNN has produced documentaries like Behind the Veil emphasizing the brutal life of women under the Taliban in Afghanistan.

At first glance, both the genuine biblical Jews and the later European Ashkenazi converts to Judaism would seem to have escaped much Neanderthal-Caucasoid psychosexual aggression toward women.

It is worth noting that although they stridently insist that they are truly Jewish, the Ashkenazim were converted to Judaism about AD 740 and have with no genetic relationship to "Abraham" of the Old Testament.  These Ashkenazim "Jews" now constitute the vast majority of the so-called "Jewish" population of North America and Israel.

A careful look at them reveals that their Caucasus-steppe psychosexual aggression towards women has only been disguised and sublimated by cultural pressures beyond their control.  The old Neanderthal- Caucasoid anti-feminist injunctions are still a vital part of Judaic religious law which the Ashkenazim so readily adopted because it suited their own Caucasus psychobiology so well.

From about AD 1225 and the Mongol invasion of Eastern and Central Europe, these slave-raiding Ashkenazi "Jews" lived as hated refugees among their former Slavic victims (our modern word slave comes from the word "Slav").  The refugee Ashkenazim therefore had to conserve their women and treat them decently because their very ethnic survival depended upon it.  Although Judaic religious law permits and even encourages polygamy (both Moslem and Mormon polygamy rest squarely on Judaic injunctions), after about AD 1300 the Ashkenazim gradually adopted monogamy in order to appear less different from their Christian neighbours and enemies.  Eastern European Christians were all too eager to use any cultural difference as an excuse to indulge in a pogrom or massacre of local Ashkenazi "Jews".

When many thousands of these Ashkenazi "Jews" emigrated to Western Europe and North America, they found themselves subject to Western European civil law that extolled the virtues of monogamy.  Unlike the Mormons, who caused countless scandals (and still do) with their "multiple marriages", the Ashkenazi "Jews" were smarter and, to be respectable and therefore to be enfranchised in North American society, accepted the prevailing civil law instead of insisting on abiding by their religious law.

In North America, latent Neanderthal-Caucaoid anti-feminism emerged as the "sex and violence" of Hollywood, pornography, "White Slavery", prostitution and various forms of strip-tease clubs.  To be sure, Ashkenazi "Jews" were not the only entrepreneurs engaged in these activities.  But the Jewish sociologist Edward Bristow (Prostitution and Prejudice, 1958) gives evidence that Ashkenazi "Jews" were by far the major players in these fields of endeavour.  It is ironic, therefore, that largely Jewish producers, writers and researchers produced CNN's Behind the Veil.  Most of these Jewish media people must have known that Moslem religious law derived directly from Judaic religious law.

Any movie-goer can see that the old Neanderthal-Caucasoid psychosexual ambivalence, aggression and frustration toward women is still alive and well and is expressed in the films of, just for example, American Woody Allen and Canadian David Cronenberg.  But there are, of course, many other "Hollywood" products depicting psychosexual aggression.

Anti-feminist injunctions are still very much a part of Judaic religious law and could be revived at any time.  As many thousands of Central European and North American Ashkenazi "Jews" relocated to form the population of modern Israel, it is perhaps noteworthy that "domestic violence" has surfaced as an increasingly serious social problem there.

But the corollary to a higher level of psychosexual ambivalence and violence must also be that, in addition to a higher degree of aggression manifested outwardly, these very extreme Neanderthal-Caucasoids (i.e. Ashkenazi "Jews" and near-the-Caucasus "Vandal-Arabs") were subjected to a psychobiological craving to claim time itself as their territory. They needed to have existed in the past "from the beginning", to control the present and thus mould, represent or actually be the only genetic future of all humanity.  This would represent the "ultimate identity in the territory of time".  The religions that they invented, first Judaism and then Islam, faithfully reflect their psychobiological male-dominant psychosexual chauvinism and racial xenophobia.

Christianity, which has usually been been included with these other two major "monotheistic" religions of the Western World, is actually much older than, and very different from, Judaism from which it only supposedly derived.

Although some scholars of religion have always suspected it, mounting anthropological and archaeological evidence since the 1950s has now demonstrated that Christianity actually derived from the old fertility religion of the Atlantic coast of Western Europe and dates from at least 10,000 BC if not much, much earlier.  In fact, there is considerable similarity between the truly ancient Upper Paleolithic "Venus Figurines" of about 20,000 BC and Neolithic votive offerings (from about 8000 BC to about AD 1000 in some European places) depicting the Great Fertility Goddess.  This original form of Christianity, involving also worship of the Great Goddess's husband-son or "Messiah", was spread from the Atlantic coast of Europe to western India by about 6000 BC.

That's why, for example, there are so many parallels between the sayings and lives of "Jesus Christ" and "Lord Krishna".  That's why the British Druids revered their teacher "Yesu" centuries before "Jesus" was supposedly born.  That is why worship of the Good Shepherd was well established, as so many pre-Christian statues prove, from Ireland to India before the "proto-Hebrews" even trekked out of the Caucasus.  That's why even modern Christian theologians have been forced to invent the doctrine of the "Pre-existent Christ" in order to explain so much evidence of a Jesus-like figure who lived long before the New Testament could have been written.

And, as Judaic scholars know only too well, this Western "Jesus" and ancient reverence for this Messiah, deeply affected many of the Old Testament prophets who were exposed to this body of originally Western religious belief.

Christianity took its firmest root in Egypt, however, from about 6000 BC in the Nile Delta and persisted in a form more or less like its original one until 31 BC.  That is why so many Jewish prophets of the Old Testament, who lived in the Sinai "wilderness" near Egypt, learned about "the Messiah".

Finally, something was done about this too-obvious threat to Judaism in the region.  It was given a bogus and concocted Judaic origin and foundation between 3-4 BC and about AD 50 by the Jewish writer Saul/Paul who authored most of the first version of the so-called "New Testament", then known as  "Marcion's Canon".  After this attempted hijacking, which was always only partly successful anyway, Christianity reverted largely to type.

The strict monotheism of Judaism (and, later, Islam) was rapidly modified into a "Trinity" and, as many scholars have not failed to notice, Christianity in many countries is just embroidered "Mary Worship".  The three Christian Marys together represent the old Western Fertility Goddess and Jesus is really only the Goddess's Neolithic husband-son.

So, it is important to realize that although Christianity has had its historical indulgences in extreme anti-feminism, and especially when "fundamentalists" seeking a return to its supposed Judaic origins (like  modern Mormons, for example) have gained a substantial following, Christianity is not truly or wholly a product of the Caucasus mentality and it never was.

I suspect also, from my particular psychobiological perspective on the desperation of Middle East violence, that just as with the murderous gorilla observed by Dian Fossey, many extreme Neanderthal- Caucasoids harbour an unconscious or subconscious urge to prefer the total genetic destruction of all humanity if they cannot be the sole future representatives of it.  This is the legacy of an almost metabolic craving for "ultimate identity in the human territory of time" that is not mitigated by effective "aggression displacement mechanisms".  If my suspicions have any foundation in fact, the situation is not very hopeful for peace in the Middle East.  And there may even be a psychobiological compulsion toward a nuclear Armageddon.

Although fiercely aggressive against outsiders, within their local groups, tribes or clans, these same extreme Neanderthal-Caucasoids were at the same time extremely supportive mutually. This has also been proved by several analysis of geriatric ratios -- at Shanidar, Skuhl, La Chapelle, etc. There's absolutely no doubt about this, either.

This may be the place to mention the notoriously "loving" and "supportive" nature of Jewish homes -- I know nothing about the domestic realities of Arab-Islamic homes.  We can plainly see that this "loving" and "support" depends entirely upon the child's willingness to obey parental wishes -- and even to become, in appearance and dress, exactly like the father or mother.  This is most obvious when we see Orthodox Jewish fathers with their black hats, side-curls and black suits being accompanied by sons who are dressed in an absolutely identical way.

The only difference among the boys is that they have not yet grown the full-bearded Neanderthal-Caucasoid growth of facial hair.  But they have already been marked, eight days after birth, with an indelible and lifelong psychosexual mutilation that was performed without their adult consent on the supposed injunctions of a God who faithfully reflects the group's psychosexual maladaptations.

We know where this comes from.

It is yet another cultural adaptation or "maladaptation" to an extreme conception of "identity-territory in the dimension of time".  The offspring may be tolerated, "loved and supported" only if they become physically identical to the father and so offer no identity-threat to the parental generation.  That's one way of asserting territory in the dimension of time, to ensure no significant differences between generations.  Other ways, in less Orthodox milieus, involve unremitting pressure to adopt a certain avocation or profession, to marry an approved mate and to uphold certain approved lifestyles and values.

The cost of this culturally assertive mechanism is, however, anything but "loving" to the young of each generation.  Jewish literature is mostly a ceaseless chronicle, alleviated only by the variety of individual details, of the neuroses, lack of identity and psychosexual confusions and ambivalences caused by this ethnic and cultural adaptation to time as territory.  It may be worth mentioning also that repressive Jewish family life is the reason why so many Jews grow up with an almost metabolic craving for "self-expression" and are represented so disproportionately among the Western world's writers and creators, except visual artists.

Pure Neanderthals left no cave art, unlike the renowned Western European cave artists who lived near the Atlantic coast.  Highly Neanderthal-Caucasoid peoples have little visual artistic ability (or appreciation of it).  That's why there are all the injunctions against visual representations of animals and human figures in both Judaic and Arab-Islamic religion and culture (i.e. "Idolatry").  That's why Arab-Islamic visual art is purely geometric and why so-called Western "modern art" had to be invented, rationalized and revered so that "Jewish" people could participate in all forms of Western culture by being "visual artists" too.

The "more extremely Neanderthal-Caucasoid" a group is genetically, the more aggressive it will be toward outsiders (people who look physically different and who are culturally different) in order to control them if they cannot be exterminated and the more supportive (with strong in-group expectations) they will be among themselves.

For the record, Niven, "Western humanity" -- most of it not so extreme as the few truly Caucasus-bred ethnic groups -- or Neanderthal- Caucasoid "Caucasians", extend from Atlantic Europe eastward to about the middle of India where Far Eastern humanity or "Mongoloids" begin to intermix strongly.  So, Niven, your Middle Eastern Arabs are definitely within the family of "Western humanity".

It is this Western "Euro-Arabic" major genetic group that has expanded throughout the world, that has drawn or dictated every political boundary on earth, that has conquered and/or enslaved every other major genetic group when they have not completely exterminated such groups and that has specialized in "progress".  We children of the 21st century tend to forget now that the Arab world, during its expansive heyday, was in the forefront of most areas of human cultural and technological progress.

All of Western humanity is "Neanderthal-Caucasoid" to a greater or lesser degree, according to the world-class anthropologists who have studied the matter in depth, and this alone (I believe) explains the inexorable expansion of Neanderthal-Caucasoid "Caucasians" all over the world at the expense of other "races". And our aggression against the environment also (I believe) explains our penchant for "progress".

This cannot be explained by a higher average Neanderthal-Caucasoid so-called "intelligence" because, insofar as we can measure it on our own IQ tests, Far East Asians ("Mongoloids") are on average about 10% more intelligent than Western humanity.

The supposed "religious conflict" between Jews and Arabs in the Middle East has, admittedly, been exacerbated by the completely non-psychobiological fact that since oil became important to Western industrialism, almost all Western nations have tried to grab Arab oil by hook, crook and political chicanery (like the creation of Kuwait by the British and the creation of Israel by the U.S.). Also, of course, Jewish industrial, financial and banking interests in these Western nations, and especially in the United States (1870-present), have lobbied continually for the West to control this vital resource.

Indeed, isn't it rather obvious that Western financial, military and cultural aggression against the Arab world since about 1850 has largely created the modern phenomenon of "Islamic fundamentalism"?  It certainly wasn't nearly so popular or influential in Haroun al Rashid's time when the Arab world was in a position of undoubted military strength; it also enjoyed unquestioned cultural, mercantile and scientific respect and prestige.

In fact, reading from the accounts of Ibn Batuta, a 14th century Arab globetrotter who travelled from China to West Africa and commented in detail on the Arab World of his day, we can appreciate the departures from "Islamic fundamentalism" that were tolerated in his time. The now-all-powerful Islamic mullahs had a hard time even getting a polite hearing back then.

The Western trick or tactic has always been to apply unremitting pressure on a people and culture until they finally crack and strike back... and then charge them with the infamy of "aggression!"

This was precisely Japan's untenable strategic position before December 7, 1941, and their particular "day of infamy" at Pearl Harbor. Where that real "infamy" actually originated was in surprising places in Washington and London government offices.  And these American and British government policies, in turn, were prodded by the influence of Rothschild, Kuhn, Loeb and Warburg banks.  The truth will remain classified for a very long time.

Mostly because of the long-term pattern of Western history, I suspect that the more recent 9/11 "day of infamy" also had its origins in Washington, London and Jerusalem government offices.  And we must all more than just suspect that national policies were and are influenced by precisely the same financial institutions, but now operating under bland corporate designations.  Perhaps this should be clarified somewhat.

An analysis of the facts such as they are presently known (and analysis not only by me), indicates crucially important differences between the Washington 9/11 attacks and the more dramatic double-strike against the World Trade Center in New York on the same date (but an earlier hour).

There was apparently a "genuine" Arab terrorist attack planned against two targets in Washington, one of which was the Pentagon. This Arab plot was infiltrated and the details of it were known at least eleven weeks before 9/11 when the World Trade Center left the scrutiny of public ownership under the New York Port Authority and was sold to two Jewish businessmen.  This placed the matter of WTC security into private hands.

However, steps were taken to limit the effeciveness of the Washington attacks simply because both Americans and Israelis needed a shocked, but fully functioning, U.S. government in order to carry out Israeli plans.

The possibly or probably genuine Arab plot against Washington was apparently used to plan and disguise the destruction of the New York World Trade Center on 9/11, but at an earlier hour, by collusion between the U.S. and Israeli governments with the involvement of domestic U.S. Jewish financial interests using mainly Mossad (Israeli intelligence service) assets.

The World Trade Center in New York was apparently considered expendable because it would have had to have been demolished eventually anyway. Its extremely complex and waterproof below-sea-level foundation was known to be defective.

As it turned out, following 9/11 and the massive propaganda blaming the Arabs for both the Washington and New York attacks, the considerable cost of demolition and removal of debris was borne, not by the private owners of the WTC, but by the entire U.S. public. Therefore, not only did America's Ashkenazim influence U.S. foreign policy to attack Israel's potential enemies, but they saved tens of millions of dollars doing it.  And they will make much, much more money in a wartime economy.  Again, the whole truth about 9/11 will be concealed from us for a very long time.

By the way, it may be of interest to you that the American Mormons, as a nominally fundamentalist "Christian" sort of neo-Israelite religion, seem to have played an important role in 9/11 on behalf of Israeli Intelligence.

Sen. Orrin Hatch of Utah, a prominent Mormon, first publicly accused Osama bin Laden and Islamic terrorists of being responsible for the WTC destruction in a CNN interview about four hours after the airliners crashed into the twin towers.  The American media and government immediately picked up on this accusation and identification.  Otherwise, of course, we don't know who these supposed "Arab terrorists" really were or know whether this "Osama bin Laden" even exists outside of media hype.

Barbara Olsen, wife of U.S. Solicitor-General Bob Olsen and thus intimately related to the "Olsen" Elders of the Mormon Church, may have played some role in the politically necessary disruption of the Washington attack.  She died in the Pentagon crash when some passengers supposedly resisted the hijackers and caused the plane to be slightly off-target.

Because the January-February 2002 Winter Olympics were being held in the Mormon stronghold of Salt Lake City, air traffic across the U.S. by the many "Olympic officials", both before and after 9/11, was not subjected to such intense security scrutiny as for other people.  This might have been very useful to the Israeli secret service, or "Mossad".

As we can tell by the average 10-to-1 "kill ratio" in favour of Israelis since 1947, Jewish aggression has not yet been diluted as much as Arab aggression because of Judaic religious injunctions against marriage outside the "tribe". Instead, Jewish aggression has been enhanced by what amounts to selective breeding within their once-Caucasus genetic stock.

By contrast, the initial 7th-8th century Arab conquests from West Africa to China (and Indonesia) converted many "non-Neanderthal- Caucasoids" to Islam. The custom of polygamy further and rapidly diluted originally Caucasus Neanderthal-Caucasoid physical and behavioural traits among some Moslems by inter-breeding with other racial types.  This happened mostly around Indian Ocean and Mediterranean coastlines where trade and commerce flourished, not so much in the continental interior.

That is why today's "Islamic fundamentalism" is most strongly concentrated in countries near the Caucasus Mountains and specifically in mountain ranges within those countries that are actually connected with the Caucasus Mountains themselves: the Caucasus in Chechnya, the Elburz Mountains in Iran, the Zagros range in Iraq, the Hindu Kush in Afghanistan and the Pamirs in Pakistan, etc.

Indeed, I think it can be argued (but I'm not sure how successfully) that the Arab world's decline in sheer geopolitical power, technological and scientific leadership, culture, etc. (compared to Europe) during the 12th-20th centuries could be correlated more or less directly with the dilution of Neanderthal-Caucasoid racial characteristics.  The majority of Arabs (the largest Arab population concentrations were, of course, coastal) lost that  psychological and genetic "edge" of aggression to be able to compete systematically, economically, technologically, culturally and ruthlessly against Europeans.  And this happened during exactly the same historical period that witnessed the ever-increasing influence of genuine Jews and Ashkenazi "Jews" in European finance and colonialism (from roughly AD 1600 to the present).

There seems to be a genetic difference in the degree and quality of aggression distinguishing contemporary Islamic militants and today's "Israelites".  The tactic of suicide bombings by individual Palestinians is, for example, a rather pathetic and desperate response to wholesale and well-planned aggression by Jewish-Israeli media propaganda in all Western nations and by Israeli bulldozers, jet fighters, smart missiles and tank warfare in Palestine itself.

Hence the 10-to-1 kill ratio in favour of Israelis, according to a New York Times chart (reprinted in The Toronto Star).

It is as simple as that, and words (however many of them and however apparently erudite, Niven) are not going to change these biological facts. There's no "Anti-Semitism" here, no "white-hating" and no bias. Just an objective assessment of the available facts.

I do confess, however, that I'm getting rather tired of being labelled "Anti-Semitic" and being blacklisted by the major North American newspapers (almost all are Jewish-owned or edited) because I have drawn attention to objective anthropological facts that challenge Israeli-Jewish geopolitical propaganda about the Middle East confrontation. This blacklisting has crippled my income as a freelance writer and actual threats have caused emotional stress that has affected by health.

So, Niven, thanks for the erudite Moslem analysis of the present Middle East conflict, but it is largely irrelevant to what's really happening "psychobiologically" and what will happen psychobiologically in the Middle East and in the world.

A much more detailed exposition of this letter is available as "Study Outline/Overview of The Cronos Complex, The Iceman Inheritance and Chosen People from the Caucasus" as a pay-for-view document.

In conclusion, Niven (et al.), you may be quite right in thinking that "mankind has already passed the point of no return". There's much to be said in favour of this perspective, but I am not quite so pessimistic!

I think that we have a bare chance of survival if we can accept the actual biological role played by all religions instead of remaining blindly and chauvinistically loyal to one or another set of religious tenets.  This psychobiological perspective will, of course, be hard to sell among Jews and Moslems, but it is essential to any hope of lasting peace in the Middle East.  It would be nice to sell it to some European and North American Christians, too, especially since most of them haven't the foggiest notion of where their own religion came from or what its original beliefs were.

Then, of course, we simply have to do something to promote, encourage or even enforce mixed marriages among the Israelis and the domestic Jews in developed Western nations. The legacy of extreme Neanderthal-Caucasoid aggression toward outsiders and Neanderthal- Caucasoid in-group favouritism leading inexorably to social control must be curbed and genetically diluted no matter what the ensuing outrage and/or charges of "bedroom genocide".

This is not to infer that Israeli and North American Ashkenazi "Jews" are any "worse" than Islamic fundamentalists from near-Caucasus regions of Iran, Iraq or Pakistan.  Both come from precisely the same originally Caucasus genetic stock.

These mountain Moslems remained more or less isolated in their highlands and intermarried locally.  Not even the custom of polygamy had too much effect in diluting their Neanderthal-Caucasoid physical and mental characteristics because their women came, for centuries, mostly from the same regional  genetic pool.

However, what is undeniable and what must be faced is that the Israeli and North American Ashkenazi "Jews" have immensely greater influence in Western European and U.S. finance, industry, education, mass-media and government than Arab Islamic fundamentalists in Middle Eastern mountains.  These Ashkenazi "Jews" significantly influence, almost dictate, American foreign policy, and especially in the Middle East.  That's why there's the media-hyped hysteria for the "Attack on Iraq".  Iraq can threaten Israel's existence and possesses 112-billion barrels of proven petroleum reserves that "America's" Wall Street wants to control.

It seems fairly obvious that if this initial assault on Afghanistan and Iraq proves successful -- these countries offering the most cohesive Arab-Islamic opposition to the American Ashkenazi-Israeli "Axis of Evil" (as Noam Chomsky would have it) -- then the overt and arrogant military, financial and cultural conquest of the entire world must follow.

This would be the unmitigated and logical culmination of so-called globalization by "corporate America", so much of which is really Ashkenazi-controlled.  And this eventuality would not bode well for Black Africans or for Far East Asians.  They would sooner or later be genetically exterminated or assimilated as well as having been financially and culturally subjugated.  Western humanity has already exterminated the Australian aborigines, the Amerindians and the South African "Bushmen" for all practical purposes (i.e. genetic competition).  The popular Ashkenazi folk saying would then come true..."all the world is really Jewish".  It would also be the triumph of that Neanderthal-Caucasoid craving for ultimate identity in the human dimension of time.

That is, it would be if the environment can avoid destruction by industrial pollution and the world can avoid nuclear annihilation during this process of genetic confrontation.

If they are to survive, the world and its people can simply not accept the super-aggressive behaviour of less than 5% of the world's population whose insatiable craving for control and psychobiological addiction to "ultimate identity in the dimension of time" has subjected humanity to one crisis after another over the past 7600 years since the Great Black Sea Flood.

These crises have sometimes involved technological and scientific innovations (like the use of fission and fusion bombs).

Often they have involved inordinate influence in the "military- industrial complex" to guide or promote wars beneficial to Jewish/Israeli geopolitical goals (as we are witnessing now with the so-called "War Against Terrorism" that targets Israel's potential enemies).

More frequently, now, we are encountering the intellectual crisis of educational and historical distortion under the banner of "political correctness". This "revision" or "sanitizing" of history itself is presently a powerful tool justifying Western expansion by military means.

Finally, there has always been slavery or economic exploitation imposed on other genetic groups by Westerners, sometimes leading to the actual or virtual extermination of some groups and certainly involving the extermination of their cultures, and this continues under globalization of multinational corporations.

Michael Bradley