Philip Giraldi has long been an excellent observer of the Israel Lobby and its power over the American political establishment. It strikes me that his latest column, “The War Inside the Beltway,” breaks new ground for him with his comments on the wider context of Jewish power in America.

I was watching CBS morning news last Wednesday, the day after it was announced that convicted Israeli spy Jonathan Pollard would be released from prison in November. The “real news,” as the network describes it, recounted what Israeli officials had said about releasing Pollard, which was basically “all right, finally…but we still have to destroy Iran.” You have to hand it to the Israelis, they certainly know how to accept a bribe completely ungraciously. That straight from the heart advice from America’s best friend and closest ally was followed almost immediately by an interview segment with former CIA Director James Woolsey. Woolsey obligingly informed the interviewer that Pollard had in fact not disclosed any classified information, completely contradicting the results of the Pentagon investigation that had been conducted after the fact. Woolsey is, for what it’s worth, a fully owned parasite hovering in a regular neocon orbit who spoke at the recent “Stop Iran” rally in New York City. He has also claimed falsely that Israel does not spy on the United States. So why would anyone sane pick Woolsey to provide commentary instead of someone who actually knew what he was talking about? To mitigate the Israeli role in spying on the U.S., of course. It had to be a deliberate decision.

Right. I forgot about Woolsey in my article on cuckservatives when I listed Randy Scheunemann, John Bolton and Frank Gaffney as cuckservatives who are part of the neocon foreign policy establishment. I am sure there are many others. Fred Barnes of the Weekly Standard and Fox News comes to mind. Again, the key to understanding Jewish power is that they are able to establish incredible infrastructure giving career opportunities for ambitious, unscrupulous non-Jews willing to promote Jewish interests at the expense of their own people. Giraldi’s term ‘parasite’ is particularly apt given the cuckservative meme — the term ‘cuckold’ derives from the cuckoo birds’ practice of parasitizing other species by getting them to rear its young. Woolsey et al. are willing cucks.

The link from ‘parasite’ goes to a 2014 article in Counterpunch by David Macary stating “it was reported that former CIA Director James Woolsey, forced to resign during the Clinton administration for his bungling of the Aldrich Ames affair, was going around telling people that the reason Jonathan Pollard, the notorious Israeli spy, was still in prison after 29 years is because the U.S. government is anti-Semitic. In short, Pollard remains in prison because he’s a Jew.” Woolsey is a cuckservative’s cuckservative.

Make no mistake, the U.S. media and inside the beltway punditry boast about their professionalism and integrity but it all goes out the window when Israel is the topic. Many of those involved are themselves Jewish and identify as “strong Israel supporters” and for those who are not of the Tribe the understanding that criticism of Israel is a quick ticket out of town frequently prevails.

This is the flip side of Jewish power. There’s the carrot and the stick. Whereas Woolsey et al. eagerly consume the carrots, everyone in Washington is also aware of the stick: Opposing Jewish interests is career death. And after you have have your 15 minutes of being in the spotlight for calling attention to Jewish power, you can look forward to a life on the outside looking in; and you’ll probably have to sell your house and go on food stamps.

This twisting oneself into knots to deny what is clearly visible has been never as evident as during the past two weeks with the launch of the hate Iran agenda to derail President Barack Obama’s negotiated agreement relating to that country’s nuclear program. The public has been fed a steady diet of alarmist nonsense cranked out by journalists like Jennifer Rubin and Charles Krauthammer, depicting the Iranians as suicidal religious fanatics, liars and thieves, terrorists and, of course, Jew haters who also run around chanting “Death to America.”

While non-Jews are confronted with stark choices between the carrot and the stick in thinking about whether to pursue Jewish interests or the interests of their people, Jews are able to freely and overtly pursue their ethnic interests. And they do so in the elite media — Jennifer Rubin in The Washington Post, and one can’t turn on Fox News without seeing Charles Krauthammer expound on behalf of his favorite country. I emphasized Krauthammer’s Jewish and Israeli identification in “Neoconservatism as a Jewish Movement” (pp 40-41):

Krauthammer is a Jew and his Jewish identification and pro-Israel motivation are typical of Jewish neoconservatives, as is his obeisance to the idea that America is a proposition nation, rather than a nation founded by a particular ethnic group—an ethnocultural creation of Western Europe that should attempt to preserve this heritage. The same attitude can be seen in Irving Kristol’s comment that the U.S. is an “ideological nation” committed to defend Israel independent of national interest (see above). This ideology was the creation of leftist Jewish intellectuals attempting to rationalize a multicultural America in which European-Americans were just one of many cultural/ethnic groups. Krauthammer is a regular columnist for the Jerusalem Post and has written extensively in support of hard-line policies in Israel and on what he interprets as a rise in age-old anti-Jewish attitudes in Europe. In 2002 Krauthammer was presented with Bar-Ilan University’s annual Guardian of Zion Award at the King David Hotel in Jerusalem. His acceptance speech reveals an observant Jew who is steeped in Jewish history and the Hebrew tradition. The 1993 Oslo Accords are termed “the most catastrophic and self- inflicted wound by any state in modern history”; this disastrous policy was based on “an extreme expression of postZionistic messianism.” Krauthammer rejected the “secular messianism” of Shimon Peres as more dangerous than the religious messianism of Gush Emunim (a prominent settler group with a message of Jewish racialism and a vision of a “Greater Israel” encompassing the lands promised to Abraham in Genesis—from the Nile to the Euphrates) or of certain followers of the Lubavitcher Rebbe because of its impact on shaping contemporary Jewish history.

So we have the typical situation of Bill O’Reilly and Sean Hannity, the Fox News cuckservatives, featuring Charles Krauthammer, the Jewish/Israeli patriot. Back to Giraldi:

The Republicans will block vote on the Iran deal to spite Obama but the process being engaged in by the Democrats who are sitting on the fence is far more excruciating to watch [JTA (8/4/2015): “3 top Jewish Democrats oppose Iran deal“]. They are being lobbied hard, sometimes directly by and even in Israel: “Some members of Congress are going on trips to Israel, with some arranged by the American Israel Education Foundation, a charitable organization affiliated with AIPAC, a deal foe.”

Again, the incredible Jewish ethnic infrastructure, just packed with carrots. And the stick always looms: If they cross the Israel Lobby they can expect a very difficult reelection campaign with very well-funded opponents.

Most of the Congressmen being quoted in the media are Jewish and are openly stating their concern for Israel while the media is uncritically accepting that as a reasonable position. Rarely does the issue of any actual American interest come up. Nor is there much discussion of the reality in the Middle East, which is that a U.S. armed and funded Israel is the regional superpower, not Iran, and that if there is a nuclear threat locally it comes from Tel Aviv.

Jewish Congressmen are free to openly assert their ethnic interests, while non-Jews assiduously avoid talking about American interests. Perish the thought! The non-Jews are cuckholded, whether Democrat or Republican. The Jews are looking after their ethnic interests. They are not cuckolded.

The reality is that we owe the Israelis nothing and the constant process of bribing them and deferring to their alleged interests so they will behave is demeaning to us as a country and also self-defeating as they couldn’t give a tinker’s damn for the American people except insofar as it is possible to take our money and otherwise exploit us.

This is, implicitly at least, a charge that Jewish Congressmen are disloyal. Any impartial observer of the US-Israel relationship over the last 50 years would have to agree that the US derives no benefit from its subservience to Israel while it pays a huge cost — a theme, for example of Mearsheimer and Walt’s The Israel Lobby. Could one possibly argue that Jewish Congressmen are honestly pursuing American interests when they promote the interests of the Jewish ethnostate, especially when American interests have been removed from the discussion because of the power of the Israel Lobby?

Giraldi then launches into a wide-ranging survey of Jewish power, noting Jewish power in the media, but focusing especially on Jewish power over the political process.

To be sure, Israel benefits enormously from its powerful fifth column inside the United States and there is already far too much deference by the federal government to what are manifestly Jewish issues. Though only 2% of the population, American Jews nevertheless wield enormous economic and political power which understandably translates into media access and influence over policies. That would be a given for how representational politics actually work under capitalism but there is something disturbing about how this plays out in practice. The Obama Administration has an Associate Director for Jewish Outreach in the White House Office of Public Engagement named Matt Nosanchuk but there is no designated outreach director to the nation’s 77 million Catholics. President Obama meets repeatedly with Jewish leaders, many of whom are hostile to his policies, but I have yet to read about him meeting with groups of Catholics or mainline Protestants. Many of them might well be supportive of what Obama is doing but there is no “outreach” office for them and no attempt to obtain their adherence to proposed programs. The federal bureaucracy has for many years included numerous American Jews in the upper level positions relating to national security, Middle East policy and counter-terrorism. Most are responsible individuals who are serious about their commitment to impartial government service. But some are not so scrupulous. Dennis Ross, former Middle East negotiator, is not called “Israel’s lawyer” as a compliment. And there were also Douglas Feith, Richard Perle, Paul Wolfowitz and Scooter Libby, all of whom were actively engaged in bringing about the disastrous invasion of Iraq, intended in part to benefit Israel. And then there are the neoconservatives to include the State Department’s Victoria Nuland [see also here] who somewhat inexplicably are advanced in their careers by Democrats as well as Republicans while having strong ties to Israel and its leaders. Does their religion or perceived ethnicity matter? It certainly does for those of them who, like the Jewish Congressmen unable to decide how to vote, cannot compartmentalize their own personal baggage when participating in the crafting of U.S. foreign policy. Washington inexplicably gives a wealthy and militarily powerful Israel $3 billion annually for defense spending, a sum that it now wants to raise to nearly $5 billion as a bribe for good behavior, which will not in any event be forthcoming. Meanwhile, within the federal government there exist special bureaucracies and benefits that are little known to the public, created in response to narrowly construed Jewish interests. Apparently successful efforts made by Congresswomen Ileana Ros-Lehtinen and Debbie Wasserman-Schultz to fund special health care benefits for Holocaust survivors constitute little more than a bid to create a two tiered system that provides extra financial support for a favored group. As near as I could determine, any European Jew who was not killed during the Second World War is considered a “Holocaust survivor.” Every American who has diligently paid into the Medicare trust fund should find the proposal for special benefits based on religion offensive in the extreme. Washington’s Holocaust Museum, undeniably a political statement vis-à-vis Israel, was built using private contributions but the taxpayer covers its operating costs, $52 million in 2014, making it the most expensive museum in Washington. The State Department has a Special Adviser to the Secretary on Holocaust Issues as well as a Special Envoy for Holocoaust Issues. The two offices are headed respectively by Stuart Eizenstat and Nicholas Dean. There is also a Special Envoy to Monitor and Combat Anti-Semitism, a position held by Ira Forman, a former American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) Political Director. All three are senior Foreign Service Ambassador level positions with full staffs, first class travel expenses and additional funding. Foreign Service Executive Schedules top out at $203,700 plus benefits which is presumably what the trio are being paid. Eizenstat, who reports to Victoria Nuland, has had a particularly long career as a Holocaust specialist having served as Deputy Secretary of the Treasury and as Bill Clinton’s Special Representative of the President and Secretary of State on Holocaust Era Issues. As the Second World War ended seventy years ago and took place in Europe, not the United States, when does it become time for the rest of us to say “enough” regarding the Holocaust and its consequences? And why are contemporary genocides in Africa not worthy of a “Special Adviser?” And then there is combatting anti-Semitism. The increase in anti-Semitism in many countries is directly linked to actions undertaken by the Israeli government, which could itself be reasonably described as anti-Christian and anti-Muslim. Is Ambassador Forman going to address any of that? His most recent fact finding trip was to Sweden and Denmark in March where he met with “Jewish leaders.”

As often noted at TOO, Jewish power extends far beyond issues directly related to Israel, and it is gratifying to see others call attention to this. Although Giraldi is correct when he points out later in his article that surveys indicate that most American Jews favor the Iran deal, it is important to note that the wider Jewish community has also vigorously pursued its ethnic interests in other areas of policy in which there is far more of a Jewish consensus than the Iran deal: the entire program of immigration, multiculturalism, and the dispossession of White America. Positive attitudes toward immigration and America as a proposition nation with no ethnic connotations (noted above with respect to Charles Krauthammer) span the Jewish political spectrum even as American Jews vigorously cling to the idea that Israel must remain a Jewish state. These attitudes range from the numerically dominant left to the neoconservative right which, despite its relative minority status among American Jews has managed to dominate US-Israel policy.

Moreover, as also emphasized at TOO, Jewish power in the areas promoted by the left stems from the same basic institutional infrastructure that makes the Israel Lobby so powerful — vast media influence resulting from Jewish ownership of media and as providers of content, intellectual influences in the academic world, as well as political influence deriving from their ability to create a powerful infrastructure that incentivizes the anti-White revolution, the latter ultimately enabled by Jewish wealth. All these aspects of Jewish power were on display in the long Jewish battle to alter US immigration policy away from an ethnic status quo favoring Western Europe to a policy which will make Europeans a minority with a few years.

While it’s gratifying to note that many are waking up to the reality of Jewish power in the US and throughout the West, we are clearly a long way from really making a dent in that power. The Iran treaty situation is unique in that there is a president put into office as “the first Jewish president” who is the darling of the Jewish left because he is a harbinger of the much-longed-for non-White America. Obama, as an honest leftist, has pursued policies on Israel and Iran that are a breath of fresh air, but the rest of his policies are anathema to White interests; he is a hint of the political future of the US with its emergent non-White majority. The Lobby may well fail in the effort to derail the Iran deal but may well have a resurgence of power after the 2016 election. In any case, whatever the outcome of the Iran deal in Congress, it will do nothing to dislodge the forces that are dispossessing White America.