>>2752767Senator Fulbright - The canary in the coal mine
Senator William Fulbright (US Senator, 1945-1974; longtime chairman of Senate Foreign Relations Committee) was one of the first major political figures to call out Zionist infiltration of the US political system.
He said, on the CBS show, Face the Nation, in early 1973, that “The Senate is subservient to Israel, in my opinion, much too much. We should be more concerned about the United States interest rather than doing the bidding of Israel. This is a most unusual development.”
He went on to say, “The great majority of the Senate of the United States–somewhere around 80 percent–are completely in support of Israel, anything Israel wants. This has been demonstrated time and again and this has made it difficult for our government.”
He expanded on his views in a major speech in 1974 in which he talked of Zionist “domination” of the power structure:
"So completely have the majority of our officeholders fallen under Israeli domination that they not only deny the legitimacy of Palestinian national feeling, but such otherwise fair-minded individuals as the two current candidates for Senator from New York engage in heated debate as to which one more passionately opposes a Palestinian state. We have nearly allowed our détente with the Soviet Union to go on the rocks to obtain an agreement on large-scale Jewish emigration – a matter of limited relevance to the basic issue of human rights in the Soviet Union, and of no relevance to the vital interests of the United States."
Since then, many major figures from both parties (Fulbright was a Democrat) have endorsed or extended this analysis, including
1985 - Paul Findley, a Congressman from Illinois, in his 1985 book They Dare to Speak Out: People and Institutions Confront Israel's Lobby
1990 - Pat Buchanan (White House Communications Director under President Reagan; Republican presidential candidate in 1992, 1996, and 2000) “Capitol Hill is Israeli-occupied territory.” (15 June 1990, on the television show The McLaughlin Group)
2006 - Chuck Hagel (US Senator, R-NE, 1997-2009; later Secretary of Defense under President Obama): “The political reality is that … the Jewish lobby intimidates a lot of people up here. I’m a United States senator. I’m not an Israeli senator.” (2006 interview, Aaron David Miller).
2007 - Ron Paul (US Representative, R-TX, multiple terms through 2012; Republican presidential candidate): “AIPAC is very influential in our political process … the assumption is that AIPAC is in control of things, and they control the votes, and they get everybody to vote against anything that would diminish the war.” (May 22, 2007)
2007 - Jim Moran (US Representative, D-VA, 1991-2015) “AIPAC had been pushing the [Iraq War] from the beginning … I don’t think they represent the mainstream of American Jewish thinking at all, but because they are so well organized, and their members are extraordinarily powerful—most of them are quite wealthy—they have been able to exert power.” (interview with Tikkun magazine, September 2007).
2019 - Ilhan Omar (US Representative, D-MN, 2019–present) “It’s all about the Benjamins baby” (referring to campaign money; she clarified the next day that she meant AIPAC). She also stated there is “political influence in this country that says it is okay to push for allegiance to a foreign country.”(February 2019).
2024 - Thomas Massie (US Representative, R-KY, 2012–present): “Everybody but me has an AIPAC person. It’s like your babysitter. Your AIPAC babysitter who is always talking to you about AIPAC. … They’ve got your cell number and you have conversations with them.” Date: June 7, 2024 (interview on The Tucker Carlson Show).
Angleton’s legacy - Institutionalised infiltration
Angleton’s influence lingered, shaping US policy toward West Asia in multiple ways, and becoming more institutionalised despite Mossad intelligence ops breaching a mutual no-spying agreement on many occasions.
Collaboration grew with the Kilowatt network in which 18 Western agencies (including CIA, MI6, Mossad) shared raw intel on Palestinian resistance operatives, enabling Mossad’s so-called “Wrath of God” assassinations.
Collaboration stepped up in the 1980s under Reagan when a memorandum of understanding on counterterrorism included proposed joint programs and assassination authorizations.
Unequal alliance: Intel sharing and persistent spying
Former CIA officer John Kiriakou highlighted the lopsided US-Zionist intelligence pact. The regime receives near-total access yet spies relentlessly.
"Mossad gets the best intel cooperation from the US, including 99% of secrets, but they still spy on the US for the remaining 1%," Kiriakou asserted in his podcasts.
Evidence abounds: In the 1990s, Israelis wiretapped White House lines during Clinton's era, according to reports in the Guardian. Under Trump, StingRay devices near the White House mimicked cell towers, linked to Mossad by FBI forensics, as Politico reported.
These operations targeted presidents and aides, not the action of an ally, but of a hostile power.
Mossad's Pentagon infiltration post-9/11
After 9/11, Mossad agents roamed the Pentagon unchecked, as retired Colonel Lawrence Wilkerson revealed. They bypassed security, accessing high-level officials like Douglas Feith.
"I watched Mossad take over the Pentagon in 2002. They did not need any identification to get through the river entrance… They went upstairs to Douglas Feith, the Undersecretary of Defence for Policy… Occasionally, they went to… Paul Wolfowitz… Donald Rumsfeld said to my boss one time ‘Hell, I don’t run my building, Mossad does!" Wilkerson stated in interviews.
This access, circulated widely online, exposed Zionist overreach amid heightened US vulnerabilities.
Neocons' Iraq war: A campaign for the Zionist entity
As leading commentators affirm, neoconservatives engineered the 2003 Iraq invasion primarily for the settler colony's benefit.
John Mearsheimer and Stephen Walt argued in their seminal essay that the lobby pushed regime change to reorder West Asia, surrounding the Israeli-occupied territories with compliant states. “Pressure from Israel and the Lobby was not the only factor behind the decision to attack Iraq in March 2003, but it was critical.”
They also noted: “Within the US, the main driving force behind the war was a small band of neo-conservatives, many with ties to Likud. But leaders of the Lobby’s major organisations lent their voices to the campaign.”
They added that the war was “motivated in good part by a desire to make Israel more secure,” citing Philip Zelikow’s 2002 statement that the “unstated threat” from Iraq was primarily against Israel.
“Clearly, it would be wrong to blame the war in Iraq on ‘Jewish influence’. Rather, it was due in large part to the Lobby’s influence, especially that of the neo-conservatives within it.”
They further note that the lobby was a “necessary but not sufficient” condition, citing a February 2003 Ha’aretz report: “the military and political leadership yearns for war in Iraq.”
They specifically highlighted the following statements from Zionist leaders:
Shimon Peres (September 2002): “The campaign against Saddam Hussein is a must. Inspections and inspectors are good for decent people, but dishonest people can overcome easily inspections and inspectors.”
Ehud Barak (New York Times op-ed, September 2002): “The greatest risk now lies in inaction.”
Benjamin Netanyahu (Wall Street Journal op-ed, September 2002): “Today nothing less than dismantling his regime will do… I believe I speak for the overwhelming majority of Israelis in supporting a pre-emptive strike against Saddam’s regime.”
The duo notes that Israeli intelligence acted as a “full partner,” providing alarming (often exaggerated) WMD reports and urging no delay.
Zionist leaders lobbied against UN inspections and delays but were cautious about public over-visibility to avoid perceptions of pushing the US into war.
Some (e.g., Ariel Sharon) initially saw Iran as the bigger threat and had reservations, shifting support only after American plans solidified.
Breaking the chains: Against Pax Judaica
These infiltrations reveal a parasitic dynamic, where Zionist agendas hijack and direct American might. Dismantling such entanglements demands vigilance and determined action over the course of years. However, it cannot be done in isolation.
Defeating the Zionist colony is only the beginning. After that comes the need to push back against the Zionist capture of Western states and the rest of West Asia as well.
The most effective and decisive strike against the Zionist colony and its US proxy is currently being struck by the Islamic Republic of Iran and the Axis of Resistance.
According to available and credible evidence, Iranian armed forces have decimated Israeli military infrastructure across the occupied territories as well as American military bases scattered across the Persian Gulf region in the past three weeks.
The next few weeks would be decisive for the US presence in the region and the future of the Zionist entity that is reeling under unprecedented retaliatory strikes.
https://www.presstv.ir/Detail/2026/03/21/765639/zionist-takeover-trump-war-iran-reveals-who-really-dictates-us-foreign-policy