…by Jonas E. Alexis
Last March, Zachary Keck of the National Interest declared that no U.S. president “can stomach” Benjamin Netanyahu. Why?
Keck basically detailed that Netanyahu does not care whether his ideas will be in conflict with what the United States stands for; he only cares about propagating his own ideological plan, “carving out a high public profile for himself,” and even pulling out the Holocaust or anti-Semitism card whenever U.S. officials disagree with him. Keck wrote:
“Bibi began conjuring up Holocaust imagery long before the Iranian nuclear threat emerged… Indeed, when the Bush administration called on the Shamir government to halt all Jewish settlements on Arab land, Netanyahu told an Israeli news outlet that, ‘the meaning of the American demand is to return Israel to the borders of Auschwitz.’
“Netanyahu’s bombast during this period would also land him in Secretary of State James Baker’s doghouse. Specifically, in 1992 the State Department announced that the Palestine Liberation Organization had honored its pledge to renounce terrorism. Netanyahu, who actively opposed Washington’s dealings with the PLO, responded by telling reporters, ‘It is astonishing that a superpower like the United States… is building its policy on a foundation of distortion and lies.’
“Baker was so outraged by the accusation that he took the unusual step of banning Netanyahu from the State Department. ‘His language was unacceptable for a senior diplomat from a friendly country,” Baker later wrote in his memoirs. “I promptly banned him from the State Department.’
“Baker wasn’t the only Bush administration official who wanted Bibi banned from government premises. Robert Gates, who served in the administration as deputy national security advisor and later as CIA Director, advocated barring Netanyahu from the White House.
“Writing years later in his own memoirs, Gates recounted that after he first met Netanyahu in 1991, ‘I was offended by his glibness and his criticisms of U.S. policy—not to mention his arrogance and outlandish ambition—and I told national security adviser Brent Scowcroft that Bibi ought not be allowed back on White House grounds.’
“Gates and Bibi would go on to work together extensively over the following decades. Yet Gates was never able to shake his first impression of Bibi. In fact, in one of his last National Security Council meetings as Obama’s secretary of defense, Gates delivered a diatribe against Bibi, telling President Obama that he is an ‘ungrateful’ ally, among other criticisms.”
Netanyahu didn’t get along with Bill Clinton either. He knew pretty well that Clinton wouldn’t let him get away with the concentration camp that Israel has created in the Gaza Strip. The Times of Israel reported last year:
“An activist said of Netanyahu, ‘If we don’t force him to have peace, we won’t have peace.’ ‘First of all, I agree with that,’ Clinton said. ‘But in 2000, [former Prime Minister] Ehud Barak, I got him to agree to something I’m not sure I would have gotten Rabin to agree to, and Rabin was murdered for giving land to the Palestinians.’
“‘But Netanyahu is not the guy,” suggested the activist.
“‘I agree with that, but…I had him [Arafat] a state… He would have gotten 96% of the West Bank, land swaps in Gaza, appropriate water rights and East Jerusalem, something that hasn’t even been discussed since I left office,” Clinton replied.’”
So, Netanyahu used the Monica Lewinsky debacle to blackmail Clinton and shut him down. When weak men like Clinton fall into their own lust and sexual passion to the exclusion of morality and practical reason, Netanyahu comes along and politicizes the issue for his own ideological purpose.
Netanyahu even used the Monica Lewinsky debacle “to leverage the release of Jonathan Pollard,” the Jewish spy who was caught red-handed passing classified documents to Israeli officials while working as a civilian analyst for the U.S. Navy. What was quite interesting was that the Israeli Mossad was highly involved in the Monica Lewinsky affair. The Mossad
“began to intercept explicit phone calls from the president to Lewinsky. The recordings were couriered by diplomatic bag to Tel Aviv. On March 27, Clinton once more invited Lewinsky to the Oval Office and revealed he believed a foreign embassy was taping their conversations…
“In Tel Aviv, Mossad’s strategies pondered how to use the highly embarrassing taped conversations; they were the stuff of blackmail—though no one suggested any attempt should be made to blackmail the president of the United States.
“Some, however, saw the recordings as a potent weapon to be used if Israel found itself with its back to the wall in the Middle East and unable to count on Clinton’s support.”
Andrea Peyser of the New York Post declares that Lewinsky did not blame Clinton for what happened. Lewinsky herself said: “Sure, my boss took advantage of me. But I will always remain firm on this point: It was a consensual relationship.’’
So, the big questions which probably will never get a conclusive answer are simply these: was Lewinsky a honey trap? There is no serious evidence to suggest that she was, but I wouldn’t be surprise if the Mossad contacted her. The Israeli regime has a history of doing just that. Back in 2010, Haaretz reported:
“An Israeli rabbi has given his blessing to female agents of Israel’s foreign secret service, Mossad, who may be required to have sex with the enemy in so-called “honey-pot” missions against terrorists. Rabbi Ari Shvat’s ruling appeared in a study, ‘Illicit sex for the sake of national security,’ published by the Tzomet Institute, which studies the interface between religion and modernity.
“There is a catch, however, for married honey-pots. ‘If it is necessary to use a married woman, it would be best [for] her husband to divorce her. … After the [sex] act, he would be entitled to bring her back,’ Schvat wrote. ‘Naturally, a job of that sort could be given to a woman who in any event is licentious in her ways.’”
Zachary Keck did not go into the metaphysical issues at all in his article. He never told us the essentially Talmudic ideology that is driving Netanyahu. He never pointed out the fact that Netanyahu is the chairman of the Likud Party, which grew out of the terrorist organization known as the Irgun.
“Two of the operations for which the Irgun is best known are the bombing of the King David Hotel in Jerusalem on 22 July 1946 and the Deir Yassin massacre, carried out together with Lehi on 9 April 1948.
“The Irgun has been viewed as a terrorist organization or organization which carried out terrorist acts. In particular the Irgun was described as a terrorist organization by Britain, the 1946 Zionist Congress and the Jewish Agency. Irgun’s tactics appealed to a certain segment of the Jewish community that believed that any action taken in the cause of the creation of a Jewish state was justified, including terrorism.
“The Irgun was a political predecessor to Israel’s right-wing Herut (or ‘Freedom’) party, which led to today’s Likud party. Likud has led or been part of most Israeli governments since 1977.”
One Zionist historian even acknowledged, “Irgun and Lehi terrorism inevitably provoked a tough British response, which included the beating and torture of terrorist suspects.” Irgun, or Etzel,
“was founded in Jerusalem in April 1931 and steadfastly reflected the ideas of Jabotinsky, who regarded political violence solely as a means of achieving the goal of establishing a sovereign and democratic Jewish state.
“On the other hand, the people of Lehi, which splintered off from the Etzel in June 1940, considered the use of violence and terrorism a crucial component in the evolution of the Jewish nation.”
The crucial point here is that “Although the majority of the members of these two groups were secular, their ideology gave prominence to the affinity between religion and nationalism. Leaders of the groups tended to embrace Jewish mythology and to draw a direct line between the stories from the Bible and their own struggle for Jewish independence.”
Jewish scholars Ami Pedahzur and Arie Perliger argue that those terrorist groups “incorporated messianic elements” in their terrorist acts. Pedhzur and Perliger move on to document that
“The ‘Essentials of Revival,’ Lehi’s public platform, gave preeminence to the aspiration of building a Third Temple. Lehi leaders even declared themselves the successors to the Jewish zealots from the Second Temple era. It therefore comes as no surprise that the doctrine of the Lehi organization…became one of the principal sources of inspiration for future national-religious terrorist groups in Israel in the following decades.”
So, Netanyahu’s political ideology stemmed from those terrorist groups, which essentially are Talmudic in their orientation. The reason that no U.S. president can stand the man in Tel Aviv is because he lives in this Talmudic colony, which has no respect for reason and order and morality. Some Israeli officials sometimes cannot stomach the ideological outlook of that world either. Meir Dagan, former head of the Mossad, declared that Netanyahu’s world produces “bullshit.” In the same vein, Yuval Diskin, former head of the internal intelligence agency Shin Beth, lamented back in 2012,
“My major problem is that I have no faith in the current leadership, which must lead us in an event on the scale of war with Iran or a regional war.
“I don’t believe in either the prime minister or the defense minister. I don’t believe in a leadership that makes decisions based on messianic feelings. Believe me, I have observed them from up close … They are not people who I, on a personal level, trust to lead Israel to an event on that scale and carry it off. They are misleading the public on the Iran issue.”
What Dagan and Diskin could not seem to grasp is that Netanyahu’s ideology is consistent with Talmudic mores. In fact, the Talmudic position is quite clear: “It is permitted to deceive a goy.” If this is too hard to believe, remember the words of Rabbi Ovadiah Yosef:
“Goyim (gentiles, non-Jews) were born only to serve us. Without that, they have no place in the world – only to serve the People of Israel. Why are gentiles needed? They will work, they will plow, they will reap. We will sit like an effendi and eat. That is why gentiles were created.”
If the Goyim are comparable to “donkeys,” which was exactly what Yosef said, then lying to them is a very small price to pay. After all, donkeys are just too stupid enough to understand lying. When Yosef passed away last October, Netanyahu said: “The Jewish People have lost one of the wisest men of his generation.”
The fact is that Netanyahu never repudiated Yosef for denigrating the Goyim. Hence, it is perfectly legitimate to say that Netanyahu’s ideology includes lying to dumb Goyim or “donkeys.” To give a classic example, Netanyahu explicitly wrote in his 1995-book Fighting Terrorism:
“The best estimate at this time place Iran between three and five years away from possessing the prerequisites required for the independent production of nuclear weapons. After this time, the Iranian Islamic republic will have the ability to construct atomic weapons without the importation of materials or technology from abroad.”
Netanyahu never cited the sources for this extraordinary claim. In fact, serious documented account tell us a completely different story.
In any event, more than twenty years later, Iran still does not have the bomb. In fact, it is generally agreed among U.S. and Israeli intelligence that Iran abandoned its nuclear weapons program.
Did Netanyahu start rethinking about his relentless lies and fabrications? Did he apologize to the world for slandering Iran? Did he listen to the head of the Israel Defense Force Lieutenant General Benny Gantz, who said that “the Iranian leadership is composed of very rational people” and are not interested in building nuclear weapons?
The answer is no. Why? Well, pretty simple. Netanyahu’s world, as St. Athanasius would have said, is Satanic precisely because it is against metaphysical reason, political order, and harmony. Netanyahu, like Satan or “the infernal Serpent” in Milton’s Paradise Lost, seems to be saying, “evil, by thou my good!” Milton’s Satan “stirred up with envy and revenge, deceived the mother of mankind” with one of his biggest weapons known as “pride.”
Netanyahu wants to deceive much of the Western world with his lies and deceptions. In fact, he has been doing exactly that for more than twenty years. This is another reason why his essentially Talmudic system is Satanic because it uses deliberate lies as its foundational weltanschauung. In short, Netanyahu is actually against Logos.
“St. Athanasius established the principle that being against Logos is synonymous with being Satanic.”
Moreover, Netanyahu doesn’t care if you live or die. He only cares about marshalling lies and deceptions. This is why when thousands upon thousands of people lost their lives in the 9/11 attack, his cogent response was that the attack would be good for Israel! “We are benefiting from one thing, and that is the attack on the Twin Towers and Pentagon, and the American struggle in Iraq,” said Netanyahu. Those events, he continued to say, “swung American public opinion in our favor.”
How is that not Satanic? How can he sit down in front of a TV screen and watch people die by the hundreds and then laugh about the whole event? Here Netanyahu reminds me of some of Karl Marx’s poems. For example, in “Oulanem,” Marx “smiles pleasantly, roars outrageously, consigns the entire human race to damnation, and all the time he is watching himself cynically.” Historian Robert Payne declared that Marx “will squeeze the life out of the world, and then watch it sinking away into utter nothingness.” Paul Johnson came to similar conclusions.
If you doubt that Netanyahu isn’t pursuing this Satanic activity, look again at the Iraq War. Look at how he is willing to take the world down with him if he doesn’t get what he wants. In fact, he has made it very clear that Israel is not bound by the Iran deal.
What we are seeing here is that Israel, as Paul Craig Roberts has pointed out, is part of the “axis of evil.” That “axis of evil” has a number of colonies in the United States, and those colonies are laden with ideologues. One of them is none other than Thomas Friedman, who has said recently that:
“Congress should pass a resolution authorizing this and future presidents to use force to prevent Iran from ever becoming a nuclear weapons state. Iran must know now that the U.S. president is authorized to destroy — without warning or negotiation — any attempt by Tehran to build a bomb.”
Why can’t Friedman follow this political gyration to its logical conclusion? Why doesn’t he apply it to Israel, which has hundreds of nuclear bombs and which even threatens to annihilate parts of Europe? Once again, it is pertinent to bring in Israeli military historian Martin van Creveld, who said:
“We possess several hundred atomic warheads and rockets and can launch them at targets in all directions, perhaps even at Rome. Most European capitals are targets for our air force…. We have the capability to take the world down with us. And I can assure you that that will happen before Israel goes under.”
Well, that is certainly an infallible sign that Israel is under a Satanic ideology. So if Friedman wants to be serious and wants to keep his ideas intact, then America would be bombing Israel because the regime does not even allow international inspections. It gets worse. Business Insider has recently reported:
“Israel is also believed to have some of the most advanced cyberwarfare capabilities of any country on earth, to the point where the National Security Agency reportedly considered Israel to be a potential electronic warfare proliferator.”
Will Friedman check this cyberwarfare thing out for us? Will he ever tell us what the Israeli regime has been up to?
The answer is a resounding no. Should we take him seriously? The answer again is no.
 Zachary Keck, “Netanyahu: The Israeli Leader No President Can Stomach,” National Interest, March 2, 2015.
 Yes, Gaza is a concentration camp, and Israeli officials have suggested that Israel ought to annihilate “all the fighting forces and their supporters.” “Israeli official calls for concentration camps in Gaza and ‘the conquest of the entire Gaza Strip, and annihilation of all fighting forces and their supporters,’” Daily Mail, August 4, 2014.
 Lewis Rosen, “Did Bill Clinton Really Say That about Netanyahu?,” Times of Israel, September 18, 2014; see also “Netanyahu ‘not the man’ to make peace: Bill Clinton bashes Israeli prime minister in candid remarks caught on tape,” Daily Mail, September 16, 2014; “Bill Clinton takes a shot at Benjamin Netanyahu,” Politico, September 16, 2014
 This again goes back to E. Michael Jones’ thesis that sexual liberation is a form of political control. As he puts it,
“It is no secret now that lust is a form of addiction…the current regime knows this and exploits this situation to its own advantage. In other words, sexual ‘freedom’ is really a form of social control. What we are really talking about is a Gnostic system of two truths. The exotic truth, the one propagated by the regime through advertising, sex education, Hollywood films, and the university system—the truth, in other words for the general consumption—is that sexual liberation is freedom. The esoteric truth, the one that informs the operations manual of the regime—in other words the people who benefit from ‘liberty’—is the exact opposite, namely, that sexual liberation is a form of control, a way of maintaining the regime in power by exploiting the passions of the naïve, who identify with their passions as if they were their own and identify with the regime wich ostensibly enables them to gratify these passions.” E. Michael Jones, Libido Dominandi: Sexual Liberation and Political Control (South Bend: St. Augustine’s Press, 2000), 2.
 Rebecca Shimoni Stoil, “Netanyahu said to have offered Lewinsky tapes for Pollard,” Times of Israel, July 23, 2014.
 Pollard’s wife has recently declared that the Israeli government should hire an attorney and to fight for his swift release. The laughable and inexorable conclusion is that we Americans give Israel at least $3 billion every year, and now we are being told that the Israeli government should use our money to release an Israeli spy.
 Gordon Thomas, Gideon’s Spies: The Secret History of the Mossad (New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1995 and 2015), 103.
 Andrea Peyser, “Monica Lewinsky should shut up and go away, NY Post, May 7, 2014.
 See for example “The History of Honey Trap,” Foreign Policy, March 12, 2010; Stephen Miller, “An Israeli Spy Whose Snares Included the ‘Honey Trap,’” Wall Street Journal, July 22, 2009.
 “Israeli rabbi: Honey-pot sex is kosher for female Mossad agents,” Haaretz, October 5, 2010.
 Michael Burleigh, Blood & Rage: A Cultural History of Terrorism (New York: Harper Perennial, 2008), 103.
 Ami Pedahzur and Arie Perliger, Jewish Terrorism in Israel (New York: Columbia University Press, 2011), 11.
 “Ex-Mossad chief pans Netanyahu’s ‘bulls—‘ speech to Congress,” Jerusalem Post, March 6, 2015.
 Quoted in Harriet Sherwood, “Ex-Israeli spy boss attacks Netanyahu and Barak over Iran,” Guardian, April 28, 2012.
 For a full expose on this, see Michael Hoffman, Judaism Discovered (Coeur D’Alene: Revisionist History, 2008).
 Quoted in Dan Murphy, “Rabbi Ovadia Yosef, in his own words,” Christian Science Monitor, October 7, 2013.
 “5 of Ovadia Yosef’s most controversial quotations,” Times of Israel, October 9, 2013.
 Murphy, “Rabbi Ovadia Yosef, in his own words,” Christian Science Monitor, October 7, 2013.
 Benjamin Netanyahu, Fighting Terrorism: How Democracies Can Defeat Domestic and International Terrorists (New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 1995), 121.
 “‘US, Israel agree Iran abandoned nuclear bomb,’” Jerusalem Post, March 18, 2012; James Risen and Mark Marzetti, “U.S. Agencies See No Move by Iran to Build a Bomb,” NY Times, February 24, 2012.
 Julian Borger, “Israel army chief contradicts Netanyahu on Iran,” Guardian, April 25, 2012; “Israeli military chief: Iran will not decide to make nuclear weapons,” Guardian, April 25, 2012.
 John Milton, Paradise Lost (New York: Dover Publications, Inc., 2005), 71.
 Ibid., 4.
 Scott Peterson, “Imminent Iran Nuclear Threat? A Timeline of Warnings Since 1979,” Christian Science Monitor, November 8, 2011.
 Cited in E. Michael Jones, “The Great Satan and Me: Reflections on Iran and Postmodernism’s Faustian Pact,” Culture Wars, July 2015.
 “Report: Netanyahu says 9/11 terror attacks good for Israel,” Haaretz, April 16, 2008.
 Robert Payne, Marx (New York: Simon & Schuster, 1968), 68.
 Ibid., 72.
 Paul Johnson, Intellectuals (New York: HarperCollins, 1987), chapter 3.
 Barak Ravid, “Netanyahu: Iran nuclear deal makes world much more dangerous, Israel not bound by it,” Haaretz, July 14, 2015; “Reactions to the Deal on Iran’s Nuclear Program,” NY Times, July 14, 2015.
 Paul Craig Roberts, How America Was Lost: From 9/11 to the Police/Warfare State (Atlanta: Clarity Press, 2014), 19.
 Thomas Friedman, “Backing Up Our Wager With Iran,” NY Times, July 22, 2015.
 Quoted in “The War Game,” Guardian, September 21, 2003.
 Amin Rosen, “John Kerry gave a revealing answer on whether the US will help protect Iran’s nuclear program from an Israeli cyber-attack,” Business Insider, Jully 24, 2015.
Posted by Jonas E. Alexis on July 26, 2015, With 6440 Reads Filed under Government & Politics, History. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0. Both comments and pings are currently closed.