Given the premodern inequities of Sharia, the notion of one enlightened law and constitution for all should be a simple, desirable state of Western affairs. But no. As the West tilts Islamic to accommodate aspects of Sharia ranging from diet to sexual segregation to polygamous marriage to Sharia banking to censorship regarding Islam itself, Freysinger's point of view becomes, to appeasers, an increasingly controversial and dangerous one, reliably eliciting catcalls and worse from world media and political establishments. In their postmodern parlance, to be opposed to the totalitarian tenets of Sharia is be an "extremist." My only question is, How do you say, Ich bin ein extremist?

One litmus test I applied to the many politicians on the European Right I've recently interviewed concerned their views on Israel. As supposed "extremists," "fascists," even "neo-Nazis," what would they say?

I asked Freysinger where Israel fits into his worldview. "Our party has always defended Israel because we are well aware that if Israel disappears, we lose a vanguard," he replied. "They are fighting now our fight in fact; and as long as the Muslims are concentrated on Israel, it is not so hard for us. But as soon as Israel will have disappeared, well, they will come to get the other part."

I think by "the other part" he meant the rest of the West. In this outlook, Freysinger is by no means alone on the European Right: members of other such parties -- for example, Belgium's Vlaams Belang, the Danish People's Party and Holland's Freedom Party -- explained to me how they find in Israel's struggle against both Islamization and jihad common cause.

"The right-wing parties should join their forces to fight Islamization," Freysinger said.

Good idea.