…by Jonas E. Alexis
Benjamin Netanyahu’s son, Yair Netanyahu, has officially joined the Neo-Nazi and anti-Semitic club by posting on his Facebook page that Jews overwhelmingly control the United States. Yair called this “the food chain.” The Washington Post, a thoroughly Zionist outlet, said:
“Over the weekend, his actions drew praise from neo-Nazi groups in the United States as well as from Holocaust denier David Duke, a former grand wizard of the Ku Klux Klan. ‘Yair Netanyahu is a total bro,’ wrote Andrew Anglin in the neo-Nazi Daily Stormer. ‘Next he’s going to call for gassings.’”
Let’s again do some serious reflection and ignore name-calling here precisely because those tactics are quite cheap and essentially get nowhere. I have particularly spent an entire evening with a number of friends of mine explaining to them very clearly that in our reasoning, we have to be extremely careful to follow the basic rules of logic, which allow us to talk about deep and important issues that govern the moral and political landscape. I also pointed out that this is one reason why I am in favor of Kant’s categorical imperative.
If logic, evidence, and consistency are deliberately abandoned or dismissed, then there is no need for dialogue or discussion whatsoever. I also had to explain to them that they have to be morally and intellectually honest, otherwise dialogues are meaningless. This applies to politics in America, North Korea, Japan, etc.
Going back to Yair, do we have enough evidence to say that a small group of people has been able to control much of America? Furthermore, when people posit claims such as “Jews control Hollywood,” do they mean to say that every single Jewish person is guilty?
The answer is absolutely and positively no. If a person happens to say that the Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor in 1941, that does not mean that every single Japanese person did actually bomb Pearl Harbor. That would indeed be insane.
So, where does the evidence point when it comes to Jewish or Israeli or Zionist control over America? Well, the scholarly sources are basically an embarrassment to riches. In fact, no serious scholar with an ounce of historical honesty would put his credibility on the line denying this fact. Consider the following scholarly titles (no, these people are not conspiracy nuts):
Paul R. Pillar, Intelligence and U.S. Foreign Policy: Iraq, 9/11, and Misguided Reform (New York: Columbia University Pres, 2011).
Michael MacDonald, Overreach: Delusions of Regime Change in Iraq (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2014).
John M. Schuessler, Deceit on the Road to War: Presidents, Politics, and American Democracy (New York: Cornell University Press, 2015).
John J. Mearsheimer, Why Leaders Lie: The Truth About Lying in International Politics (New York: Oxford University Press, 2011).
Muhammad Idrees Ahmad, The Road to Iraq: The Making of a Neoconservative War (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2014).
Stefan Halper and Jonathan Clarke, America Alone: The Neo-Conservatives and the Global Order (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004).
Murray Friedman, The Neoconservative Revolution: Jewish Intellectuals and the Shaping of Public Policy (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005).
John J. Mearsheimer and Stephen Walt, The Israel Lobby and US Foreign Policy (New York: Farrar & Straus, 2007).
Bob Woodward, Plan of Attack: The Definitive Account of the Decision to Invade Iraq (New York: Simon & Schuster, 2004).
Michael Isikoff and David Corn, Hubris: The Inside Story of Spin, Scandal, and the Selling of the Iraq War (New York: Random House, 2006).
These writers overwhelmingly declare that the Neoconservative ideology, which they know is a Jewish political movement, has been detrimental to America and much of the West. Stefan Halper and Jonathan Clarke themselves declare that the Neoconservative movement “is in complete contrast…to the general cast of the American temperament as embodied in the Declaration of Independence.”
Moving on to flaming Zionist Thomas Friedman, he told the Israeli paper Haaretz way back in 2003 that the plan for war in Iraq
“was disseminated by a small group of 25 or 30 neoconservatives, almost all of them Jewish, almost all of them intellectuals (a partial list: Richard Perle, Paul Wolfowitz, Douglas Feith, William Kristol, Elliott Abrams, Charles Krauthammer), people who are mutual friends and cultivate one another and are convinced that political ideas are a major driving force of history.
“They believe that the right political idea entails a fusion of morality and force, human rights and grit. The philosophical underpinnings of the Washington neoconservatives are the writings of Machiavelli, Hobbes and Edmund Burke.”
“is believed to exercise considerable influence on the president, Vice President Richard Cheney and Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld; he is also perceived as having been instrumental in getting Washington to launch this all-out campaign against Baghdad…because what happened on September 11, 2001, Kristol says, is that the Americans looked around and saw that the world is not what they thought it was. The world is a dangerous place.
“Therefore the Americans looked for a doctrine that would enable them to cope with this dangerous world. And the only doctrine they found was the neoconservative one.”
We are certainly confronted with a fundamental situation here. If the scholarly sources are right, then one ought to conclude that there is indeed a small minority of groups that controls much of the United States.
This is not to say that this is ipso facto bad, but what have they been doing for the past sixty years or so? Where have those people been leading America? Have they made America great again?
Or are they desperately pushing us all into an evil world where practical reason plays little or no role? Why have these people never been tired of drinking the blood of the Goyim in the Middle East and elsewhere? Why do they even want America to deal aggressively with North Korea, a country that has never invaded another country?
Sure, Kim Jung-un has been making a lot of noise, but this has been going on for more than a decade.
Here is the thing. I am going to quote a statement and before you read the answer, try to guess the origin of the statement. Here it is:
“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…….goes under.”
If you were asked to replace the ellipses with a specific country or group, would you say North Korea? Perhaps Iran? Hezbollah? How about the legendary Osama bin Laden and his henchmen? Here is how the last sentence should be read: “And I can assure you that that will happen before Israel goes under.”
The statement is from Israeli military historian Martin van Creveld. If North Korea is bad, then Israel is bad too. If North Korea needs to be nuked, then what about the country that has been pushing America and much of the West into the abyss? The same people who metaphysically and sexually terrorized Germany after World War II are actually terrorizing much of the world with perpetual wars. And no one is even challenging that country to abide by the moral and political law.
 Ruth Eglash, “Netanyahu’s son removes anti-Semitic meme from Facebook following outcry,” Washington Post, September 10, 2017.
 Stefan Halper and Jonathan Clarke, America Alone: The Neo-Conservatives and the Global Order (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004), 12.
 Ari Shavit, “White Man’s Burden,” Haaretz, April 4, 2003.
 See for example Zev Chafets, “Israel Has a Playbook for Dealing With North Korea,” Bloomberg, September 8, 2017.
 Quoted in “The War Game,” Guardian, September 21, 2003.