Someone (an American, sorry I don't recall their nick) wrote here not long ago that we didn't need to get too worried, Bush was toast, Cheney and Rumsfeld were cooked, the neo-cons were through, and an increasing majority of American citizens were wise to their game.

I'm not in a position to contest that view of the state of American opinion. I'd be relieved to find it was true. The Economist is an opinion-maker, and a journal with the means to maintain its independence. The simple fact (and this is one) of this FP plainly shows that the unilateralist kick-ass imperialists and the neo-con imperialists don't consider themselves as done for yet. Simply the use of the heavily-connoted term "Eurabia" (an anti-European and anti-Arab racist slur used by the far right) is proof enough: Europe conflated with Arabs conflated with Islam (as if all Muslims were Arabs, as if all Muslims were practising, as if all practising Muslims were Islamist fundies).

The use of that header with the Eiffel Tower and the Crescent is blatantly slanderous and, alone, constitutes a burning mark of shame on the reputation of a once-excellent publication.

What more are they saying within, that is not said by the FP title and graphics? Not much beyond the attempt, noted in comments above, to open up a "Fifth Column" meme: anti-war demonstrators = anti-Americans = collaborators with (or dupes of) the Muslim enemy.

For "Muslim", 35 or so years ago, read "Communist".

So what? Isn't it laughable? Do we have to take The Economist seriously? Since it's a conventional-wisdom builder, I'm afraid we do.