Chris Spencer

1.     Campaign Contributions & Pro-Israel Funding

One of the most powerful pieces of evidence of the crypto-Zionist nature of US foreign policy is the funding for these political figures from pro-Israel billionaires and Zionist political action committees (PACs). These donations of money are not gifts per se—they are investments in American Foreign Policy Decisions that serve predilect Israeli interests ahead of the real interests of the American people. Spoken of Zio-influence peddling is nowhere more evident than in the case of Donald Trump, Marco Rubio, J.D. Vance, and Pete Hegseth, whose campaigns have been well-funded by Israel-first donors and Zionist lobby groups.

Trump's Mega-Whale-Donor: Miriam (and Sheldon) Adelson

A massive portion of Trump's war chest comes from the Adelsons, whose PAC influence on his administration has been extensively documented. Miriam Adelson, in particular, has been one of Trump's strongest allies, giving over $106 million alone in 2024 to Trump's campaign and her super PACs that support him. This money is bribery with an agenda attached to it—Miriam and the late Sheldon Adelson have been loudly outspoken for years regarding their commitment to advancing Israel's hardliner Zionist geopolitical agenda, including the outlawed annexation of the West Bank and relocation of the US embassy to Jerusalem. The DeepState affiliations of the Adelsons with Israeli defense companies and pro-Israel groups, funding the Maccabee Task Force and AIPAC, among other activities, ensure that their political donations are made with an expectation that Israeli interests will take priority over all others in US foreign policy (The Guardian, 2024; Wikipedia, 2024; Times of Israel, 2025).

"Miriam Adelson gives $100 million to Trump campaign" – Times of Israel

"The Israeli-American Trump mega-donor behind speech crackdowns" – Responsible Statecraft

The Adelsons' influence is visible not only in their financial contributions but also in the policies they helped shape, such as the decision to move the US embassy to Jerusalem, a key goal of the Zionist lobby. The Adelsons have been instrumental in ensuring that US policy remains in line with Israel's expansionist ambitions, regardless of the impact on Palestinian sovereignty.

Not All Conservatives Back Zionist Alignment

Despite the dominance of pro-Israel rhetoric among Republican elites, there exists dissent within conservative intellectual and political circles. Libertarian and paleoconservative voices—including those associated with the Cato Institute and The American Conservative—have consistently warned against what they see as the hijacking of U.S. foreign policy by Israeli interests. Former Congressman Ron Paul, for instance, condemned the 2018 U.S. embassy move to Jerusalem as a “provocation that makes Americans less safe.” Similarly, Tucker Carlson has increasingly questioned the unconditional alignment with Israel, especially in the context of Gaza bombings and Iran saber-rattling.

Think Tanks Warn of Strategic Overreach

Policy experts from institutions like the Brookings Institution, RAND Corporation, and the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace have also raised alarm bells. A 2023 Brookings report cautioned that “uncritical support for Israeli settlement policy undermines long-term U.S. credibility in the region.” RAND researchers in 2024 concluded that arming Israel without constraint “increases the probability of asymmetric retaliation and destabilizes multilateral diplomacy across the Gulf.” Carnegie analysts have similarly warned that U.S. strategic interests are being subordinated to domestic political pressures stemming from Israel-aligned donor blocs.

Voices of Dissent Within the GOP Are Silenced

Attempts to inject nuance or challenge the Israel-first doctrine within the Republican Party are often met with swift retribution. Senator Rand Paul, who advocated for a reduction in foreign aid including to Israel, faced political backlash and withdrawal of donor support in 2022. Likewise, Republican-aligned think tanks that have critiqued the unbalanced U.S.-Israel relationship—such as the Quincy Institute—are often excluded from mainstream conservative policy circles, accused of "anti-Israel bias" for raising legitimate strategic concerns.
F

Pro-Israel PACs: Funding Foreign Influence

Beyond the Adelsons, other pro-Israel PACs have played a central role in funding the political careers of key figures. AIPAC and other pro-Israel organizations are known to funnel millions of dollars into US elections, ensuring that candidates with strong pro-Israel stances receive the necessary financial support to win elections. These PACs are not merely passive supporters; they actively work to ensure US policy aligns with Israeli interests. According to the Center for Responsive Politics (OpenSecrets.org), the pro-Israel lobby is one of the most potent foreign affairs lobbying forces in the United States, consistently spending tens of millions of dollars every election cycle to secure influence over US foreign policy.

"Pro-Israel lobby as major PAC-level influence" – OpenSecrets.org

In the case of Marco Rubio, his campaign has been heavily funded by pro-Israel donors, including the Adelsons, who have long supported Rubio's hawkish stance on Israeli issues. Rubio has frequently positioned himself as a champion of Israel, consistently pushing for policies that align with Israeli security needs—including increased military aid and protection of Israeli settlements (Vox, 2025).

"Adelson to back major pro-Trump spending group" – Reuters

Vance and Hegseth: Israel's Allies in the GOP

J.D. Vance, who campaigned on an America First platform, has nevertheless always been pro-Israel regarding Israel's territorial goals. His donors, several of whom are linked to the military-industrial complex and Zionist causes, have made him a central figure in the pro-Israel wing of the GOP. As one of the leading apologists for Trump's foreign policy, Vance's lobbying in support of Israel's defense needs is closely entangled with his financial relationships with them.

Concurrently, Pete Hegseth has been an adamant Zionist ally, upholding at all times Israel's right of self-defense and opposing any move toward a two-state solution. Hegseth's public platform, backed by his availability of Zionist financiers, makes him a formidable Israel-first voice in American politics.

"Pete Hegseth wanted to strike Houthis before Israel could" – Forward

"Trump tell-all cites Adelson's bankrolled Israel embassy move" – Responsible Statecraft

Foreign Press Coverage: US Policy as Israel's Enforcer

Foreign press outlets—particularly those in Palestinian, Arab, and Persian languages—have long criticized US policy as subservient to Israeli interests. Reports from Al-Quds Al-Arabi and Kayhan underline the extent to which Zionist donors co-opt US politicians. These critiques have consistently painted figures like Trump, Rubio, and Hegseth as agents of a foreign power whose influence over US policy is far-reaching and undeniable.

"Trump, Rubio, Hegseth: American Leaders Entangled in Israeli Expansionist Agenda" – Al-Quds Al-Arabi

"Kayhan Report: U.S. Leaders Are Puppets of the Israeli Entity" – Kayhan

These foreign critiques emphasize that US politicians, despite their rhetoric about American sovereignty, have become deeply entangled in the Israeli narrative, advancing policies that serve Israeli interests at the cost of American geopolitical stability.

2.     Defense Industry Connections

The intertwining of US defense contractors with Israeli military needs is a major influence on US foreign policy. Figures like Trump, Rubio, Vance, and Hegseth have worked to cement Israel's military superiority through arms deals and defense contracts—often at the expense of American taxpayers and global security. These deals are not just about military hardware; they are about shaping US foreign policy in ways that align with Israeli security goals.

Trump's $1 Billion Arms Sale to Israel

During his two presidencies, Trump authorized arms deals worth over $1 billion to Israel, including bunker-busting bombs, F-35 fighter jets, and bulldozers used for settlement construction. These deals were a direct favor to Israel, ensuring the country's military dominance in the region. More troubling, these deals were heavily influenced by Zionist billionaires, such as the Adelsons, who had long been proponents of arming Israel to the teeth, regardless of the consequences for Palestinians or broader regional stability. The military-industrial complex, which profits from these arms sales, is firmly embedded in this web of political influence.

"Trump's arms deals with Israel were deeply influenced by defense contractors and Zionist donors" – Responsible Statecraft.

"Trump and Israel's $1 billion weapons deal" – WGBH

These arms deals reflect a long-term strategy to ensure that US defense contractors remain tightly linked with Israeli defense needs, which often results in policies that prioritize Israeli security over American interests.

Defense Contractors as Political Donors

The defense industry has long been a powerful political player, especially within the Republican Party. Through political action committees (PACs) and direct contributions, defense contractors have funneled millions of dollars to politicians who are eager to expand military ties with Israel. These contractors do not just provide arms; they influence policy decisions by funding the campaigns of pro-Israel advocates. For example, Lockheed Martin, Boeing, and Raytheon—all key military suppliers to Israel—are among the top contributors to the Republican Party. Their interests are not just about selling weapons but about shaping the geopolitical landscape to ensure continued demand for military equipment.

"Defense contractors funnel millions into GOP to ensure continued Israeli arms deals" – OpenSecrets

"Israel, arms sales, and the defense lobby" – Foreign Policy

Hegseth, Vance, and the Military-Industrial Complex

While Trump's ties to the defense industry are well-known, Vance and Hegseth have also advocated for military escalation in the region, often in alignment with Israeli military needs. Hegseth, a frequent guest on Fox News, has been an outspoken supporter of Israeli military operations, including the bombing of Gaza. His views reflect a broader trend among conservative voices that defense contractors and Zionist donors have funded. Hegseth's support for Israeli military action often coincides with the push for more US weapons sales to Israel and Middle Eastern allies.

"Pete Hegseth, military hawk, continues to advocate for U.S. arms deals with Israel" – The Guardian.

"Vance's Military Policy and Its Ties to Zionist Interests" – Vox

Rubio and the Military-Lobby Connection

Marco Rubio is another key player whose pro-Israel stance is backed by defense contractors and Zionist political donations. Rubio's hawkish foreign policy, especially concerning Iran and Syria, aligns with the defense industry's interest in ensuring Israel's security in the region. Rubio's push for increased military aid to Israel and his advocacy for arms deals reflect the profound influence of the military-industrial complex. His campaign contributions from defense contractors, in tandem with his advocacy for Israeli military operations, showcase the direct link between US defense contractors and Israel's defense needs.

"Marco Rubio: Defender of Israel, Recipient of Defense Contractor Donations" – Vox

"Rubio's Role in Shaping U.S. Foreign Policy for Israel" – The Nation

Foreign Press Coverage: The Military-Industrial Complex and Zionist Influence

Foreign media outlets have frequently exposed the intersection of military-industrial profits and Israeli interests. Palestinian outlets, like Al-Quds Al-Arabi, have written extensively about how US arms sales to Israel are a driving force behind the militarization of the Middle East. These sales not only fuel conflict but also bolster Israel's military dominance, often in ways that are detrimental to regional peace.

"U.S. arms sales to Israel and the perpetuation of the occupation" – Al-Quds Al-Arabi

"The Military-Industrial Complex: The U.S. and Israel's War Machine" – Middle East Eye

3.     Officials as Israel Advocates

In the corridors of US power, Trump, Rubio, Vance, and Hegseth have moved beyond being mere Israel cheerleaders—they have become de facto Zionist diplomats, actively championing its agenda in the cause of American nationalism. Their feverish advocacy of Israel is no political convenience; it is a fundamental ideological necessity—one which causes their policies to better comport themselves towards Israeli security interests than towards genuine American voters' concerns.

Pete Hegseth, a politician whose service to the GOP has been characterized by his actively pro-Israel language, is one of the most powerful advocates of Israel among the American conservative elite. Across public speeches and his media platforms, Hegseth has continually praised the Zionist state as a protector against terrorism in the Middle East, framing a narrative that places Israel not only as a strategic ally but also as an essential partner in the larger international fight against Islamic extremism. Hegseth has also signed on in opposition to the two-state solution, a longtime considered last-resort path to peace between Israelis and Palestinians and one that instead supports a policy of unyielding US alignment with Israel's territorial acquisition (Washington Post, 2024; Al-Quds Al-Arabi, 2025).

Meanwhile, Marco Rubio, a perennial figure in Republican foreign policy, has developed a reputation as perhaps the most openly avowed defender of Israel in Washington. His relationship with AIPAC (American Israel Public Affairs Committee) is ideological, not transactional. Rubio has even gone as far as to condemn any American criticism of Israeli military campaigns, framing Palestinian fatalities as incidents of collateral damage in the war on terror. Throughout his time in office, US policy has increasingly aligned itself with Israeli policies, with Rubio keeping firm in his support of policies like the relocation of the embassy to Jerusalem, long promised decades ago but never done prior to Trump's presidency. The public statements made by Rubio on such issues reflect an alliance and political investment in the global agenda of Israel (Vox, 2025; OpenSecrets, 2024).

J.D. Vance, the former Silicon Valley elitist and now Republican senator, has been another high-profile member of this crypto-Zionist clique. While Vance built his political career on populist anti-elitism, he has been unwaveringly committed to causes that are pro-Israel—sometimes at the cost of his professed nationalism. Vance, along with Rubio, has been supportive of the Trump regime's decisions, including the relocation of the embassy in Jerusalem and arms sales that are preferentially geared to Israel's defense establishment. His rhetoric in Israel has typically been framed in terms of national security. However, in reality, his position is the same as that of the global Zionist lobby, which demands that Israel become a regional hegemon regardless of the impact on Palestinian sovereignty (Responsible Statecraft, 2022; Vox, 2025).

Donald Trump himself stands right at the center of this camp. Trump's presidency was a period of unmatched pro-Israel activism, sustained by both financial backers like Sheldon Adelson and ideological sympathies with hardline Zionists within his own ranks. Trump's determination to cater to Israel's territorial interests was apparent from his embassy relocation to Jerusalem to his embracing the Israeli government's expansionist agenda. On most fronts, Trump's term was defined more by Israeli interests than by classic US foreign policy interests, as seen by his pullout from the Iran nuclear agreement, his action that served Israel's regional security interests a lot more than it did American interests (Times of Israel, 2024; Reuters, 2024).

As these men—Hegseth, Rubio, Vance, and Trump—continue to shape American foreign policy, their role as champions of Israel is undeniable. The Zionist lobby does not merely lobby for Israeli interests, but dictates them, for these political leaders carry the banner of Israeli policy but cloak themselves behind the banner of American nationalism. Whether in the White House, in the Senate, or on our television screens, their pro-Israel stance is not coincidental—but at the absolute heart of their political platform, so that America's policy in the Middle East continues steadfastly in alignment with the interests of a foreign country, regardless of how much harm it causes to the American people and to the world community.

4.     Foreign Media & Alternative Press Coverage

While American mainstream outlets maintain a veneer of objectivity in reporting U.S.-Israel relations, the foreign press, particularly in the Arab, Persian, and Palestinian media, offers a sharper and more critical view of the deep ties between US politicians and Israeli interests. These outlets have consistently exposed the neo-colonial relationship that Trump, Vance, Rubio, and Hegseth share with Israel, presenting a counter-narrative to the sanitized portrayal of American-Israeli cooperation in Western media.

Palestinian outlets, such as Al-Quds Al-Arabi, have long held that American policy, especially under figures like Trump and Rubio, has been captured by Zionist influence. 

A headline in Al-Quds stated:

“ترامب، روبيو، هيغسيث: القادة الأميركيون المتورطون في أجندة إسرائيلية توسعية.”

("Trump, Rubio, Hegseth: American Leaders Entangled in Israeli Expansionist Agenda")

This stark analysis underscores how US political figures operate as pawns of Israel, advancing settlement expansion, militarization, and the erosion of Palestinian rights with impunity (Al-Quds Al-Arabi, 2025).

Farsi-language outlets, such as Kayhan and IRNA, have similarly highlighted the Zionist entanglement in 

US politics. Kayhan recently reported:

“الرئيس الأميركي ترامب ورفاقه أصبحوا دمى في يد الكيان الإسرائيلي، حيث تتوافق سياساتهم مع الأهداف التوسعية للإسرائيليين على حساب مصالح الشعب الأميركي.”

("U.S. President Trump and his cohorts have become puppets in the hands of the Israeli entity, with their policies aligning with Israeli expansionist goals at the expense of American interests.”)

These outlets argue that the Trump administration's policies, including the embassy move and military support for Israel, were not driven by American interests but by the financial and political leverage wielded by Zionist donors and defense contractors (Kayhan, 2025).

In addition to these mainstream foreign critiques, alternative media outlets such as Responsible Statecraft have published investigative pieces that delve into the backchannel politics of U.S.-Israel relations. An article from Responsible Statecraft explored how Trump's arms deals were directly influenced by Zionist billionaire donors like the Adelsons, showing a direct financial and political nexus between Israel's defense needs and US foreign policy decisions. 

It states:

"Through the influence of Adelson and other Zionist billionaires, U.S. defense policy has been significantly shaped to ensure Israel's military superiority in the region, with little regard for the broader consequences of such policies" (Responsible Statecraft, 2022).

The Alt-Media space has also been a critical source of corroboration for the narrative of crypto-Zionist influence. The Grayzone and MintPress News have reported extensively on the financial backing of Israel-first politicians within the Republican Party, emphasizing how figures like Rubio, Vance, and Hegseth align themselves with Israeli defense interests while distancing themselves from the interests of their constituents. These alternative outlets challenge the mainstream media's framing of these figures as "nationalists," offering instead a critique that aligns them with Zionist imperialism to the detriment of US sovereignty.

Even Israeli media itself is beginning to reflect the undeniable influence of American political figures in advancing Israeli policies. 

For example, The Times of Israel reported:

"The unwavering support of American leaders such as Trump and Rubio is not just rhetorical—it is material. From the arms deals to military coordination, their actions reveal a deeper loyalty to Israeli interests than American ones."

This statement mirrors the findings of Palestinian press outlets, which have repeatedly highlighted the quid-pro-quo nature of these relationships (Times of Israel, 2024).

These foreign critiques, alongside alternative press analysis, underscore a widespread recognition that America's foreign policy in the Middle East is increasingly subjugated to the interests of Israel—a process facilitated by a network of Zionist lobbyists, defense contractors, and pro-Israel political figures within the US establishment. The mainstream media's silence on this matter reflects a complicity in ensuring that this geopolitical "special relationship" remains unquestioned by the American public.

5. Synthesis: "Crypto-Zionism"

The term "crypto-Zionism" is a term rarely spoken in public discourse, yet it captures the unspeakable reality of modern American politics. These men—Trump, Vance, Rubio, and Hegseth—are not simply strategic allies of Israel. They are the embodiments of a syndicate that, while publicly endorsing American sovereignty, has quietly surrendered US foreign policy to the Zionist agenda. In the grand chessboard of Middle Eastern geopolitics, they are pawns moving with calculated precision but with the strings pulled from Tel Aviv and Zionist lobbying groups in Washington.

By using the label "crypto-Zionist," we draw attention to the covert nature of their allegiance to Israeli interests. Unlike traditional Zionists who wear their beliefs on their sleeves, these figures cloak their motives behind the veneer of American nationalism. They push for policies that are invariably pro-Israel—whether through arms deals, defense contracts, or UN votes—and position themselves as American patriots. At the same time, their actions increasingly favor the strategic objectives of a foreign power.

The crypto-Zionist dynamic is not simply about direct financial support—though billion-dollar contributions from figures like the Adelsons play a pivotal role—it is about the alignment of policy and ideology. These individuals do not merely serve as Israel's advocates in the United States; they serve as the agents of its geopolitical ambitions. They have redefined what it means to be an American leader, turning the national interest into a secondary concern, overshadowed by the financial, ideological, and military priorities of Israel.

Take, for instance, the Israel-first stance that has permeated their foreign policy. 

Their actions—whether it be Trump's embassy move to Jerusalem, Rubio's repeated calls for arms sales, or Vance's unquestioning support for Israeli military operations—are driven by a commitment to Israel's territorial integrity rather than the broader interests of the American people. The US Congress and the White House have become mere extensions of a Zionist agenda, one that prizes Israeli expansion above all else. Moreover, in the process, American interests, from Middle East diplomacy to domestic security, have been relegated to an afterthought.

This alignment is a symbiotic relationship, one in which these figures are rewarded with campaign donations, media platforms, and ideological power—but only as long as they continue to serve the Zionist cause. Rubio, who has long been in the pocket of AIPAC and other pro-Israel PACs, constantly advocates for the militarization of US foreign policy. At the same time, Trump, the unofficial leader of this movement, enacts policies that empower Israeli defense contractors and strengthen the military-industrial complex that supports Israel's militaristic goals (Responsible Statecraft, 2022; OpenSecrets, 2020).

The underlying reality is one of co-opted sovereignty—where American foreign policy is no longer driven by its citizens' needs but by a foreign power's geopolitical strategies. The crypto-Zionist role of these individuals exposes the illusion of US independence in foreign policy. Rather than advancing a vision of American isolationism or global leadership in the classic sense, they are constructing a new framework where the US is embedded within the broader Israeli vision of regional dominance.

Through this lens, the actions of Trump, Vance, Rubio, and Hegseth must be understood. They are not isolated actors but part of a larger systemic structure—one in which Israel's interests are interwoven with America's military-industrial complex, political elite, and geostrategic maneuvers. Their embrace of Zionism is not simply a policy position; it is a covenant—a silent agreement that binds them to a foreign state in ways that remain hidden from the public eye but apparent to the discerning observer.

The crypto-Zionist paradigm offers a new understanding of US foreign policy—one that recognizes the agency of Zionist power brokers in shaping American action in the Middle East. Through this lens, we see the unspoken truths of how American leadership has been recalibrated to serve Israel's needs while masking its true allegiances with the language of nationalism, sovereignty, and patriotism.

5.     Faux White Nationalists as Crypto-Zionists

The revelations contained in this article expose a concerning reality: the United States political elite, particularly under characters like Trump, Vance, Rubio, and Hegseth, are more controlled by foreign powers—namely, the Zionist agenda—than by American interests. These men, once seen as staunch nationalists, have become tools of a foreign state, imposing policies favorable to Israel's strategic interests while sacrificing American sovereignty and global stability.

Crypto-Zionism, as outlined, is an undercover force, one that operates not through open declarations of loyalty but through the quiet, insidious control of campaign funds, military contracts, and patronage. In shaping US policy toward Israel, they have created a system where American conduct in the Middle East is dictated by Tel Aviv interests, not US strategic interests.

This subordinating of the foreign policy of America to Israeli strategic objectives is not without consequences. The effects are far-reaching, from the occupation of the Palestinian territories to destabilizing Iran and the wider Middle East, as well as the decaying of international law. The US obfuscates in deeds that oppose its professed ideals of democracy, self-determination, and peaceful diplomacy. But behind all of this lie these policies driven by secret deals, backroom politics, and money rewards concealed primarily from the American voter.

Most disturbing is the strategic undermining of American sovereignty. Politicians like Trump, Vance, Rubio, and Hegseth, presenting themselves as patriots, are advancing a vision of American foreign policy that more reflects the interests of Israeli ambitions than US national interests. Their policy trajectories are symptoms of the profound financial and political capture of US foreign policy, a capture hardly ever challenged by the public and hardly ever addressed in the media.

If the American people are to reassert control over their foreign policy, they will need to recognize this vociferous crypto-Zionist push and make their political leaders answer. The starting point for reclaiming American sovereignty is transparency—not just a critical examination of foreign inputs but also an unmasking of the cryptic relationships between the military-industrial complex, Israeli military contractors, and pro-Israel political blocs within the US government. It is crucial that the American people insist on a political system that works for US citizens, and not for foreign contributors whose agendas are for expansion.

The crypto-Zionist reality is a stealth coup that presents a threat to the integrity of American democracy. It controls both the Republican and Democratic parties, so that the United States becomes a vassal state of a foreign power whose agenda employs American resources in furthering its imperial goals. The time has come when the US needs to regain its political independence—from foreign ideologies and the lobbying and defense-industrial forces that have put American sovereignty into an outside agenda.

6. Conclusion: The Unseen Hand Shaping US Foreign Policy

The evidence presented throughout this article underscores a disconcerting reality: the American political landscape, particularly under figures like Trump, Vance, Rubio, and Hegseth, is increasingly influenced by foreign interests—specifically, the Zionist agenda—rather than the interests of the American populace. These individuals, once perceived as staunch nationalists, have become conduits for foreign influence, advancing policies that align with Israel's geopolitical objectives at the expense of American sovereignty and global stability.

Crypto-Zionism, as delineated herein, operates covertly—manifesting not through overt declarations of loyalty but through the subtle control of campaign finances, military contracts, and political appointments. By steering US policy toward Israel, these figures have entrenched a system where American actions in the Middle East are dictated by the priorities of Tel Aviv rather than the strategic interests of the United States.

This Israeli subordination of US foreign policy to Israeli interests has far-reaching consequences. It perpetuates the ongoing occupation of Palestine, destabilizes Iran and the broader Middle East, and undermines international law. The United States is complicit in actions that contradict its values of democracy, self-determination, and peaceful diplomacy. However, these policies are driven by covert deals, behind-the-scenes coordination, and financial incentives hidden mainly from the American electorate.

Most troubling is the strategic erosion of American sovereignty. Figures like Trump, Vance, Rubio, and Hegseth—while presenting themselves as patriots—are advancing a vision of American foreign policy that aligns more with Israel's ambitions than with US interests. Their actions reveal the profound financial and political capture of US foreign policy, a capture that is rarely questioned by the public and scarcely addressed in the media.

The American public must recognize this powerful crypto-Zionist dynamic and demand greater accountability from its political leaders to reclaim control over its foreign policy. Transparency is the first step toward restoring American sovereignty—requiring not just a critical examination of foreign donations but also an unveiling of the secretive ties between the military-industrial complex, Israeli defense contractors, and pro-Israel political factions within the US government. It is essential for the American electorate to demand a political framework that serves US citizens, not foreign donors with their expansionist agendas.

The crypto-Zionist reality represents a silent coup that threatens the integrity of American democracy. Its influence permeates the Republican and Democratic parties, rendering the United States a vassal state to a foreign power that uses American resources to advance its imperial goals. The time has come for the US to reclaim its political independence—from foreign ideologies and the lobbying and defense-industrial interests that have subordinated American sovereignty to an external agenda.

6B. Foreign Press Criticism: Crypto-Zionism Posing as US Interests

The orchestration of these strikes has prompted critical analyses from various foreign media outlets, highlighting the implications of US involvement in Israel's military objectives. The Financial Times reported that the US decision to engage militarily followed heightened tensions after mutual attacks between Israel and Iran, with some US lawmakers criticizing the move as unconstitutional and impulsive. Similarly, the Times of London noted that the strikes signal a significant policy shift for Trump, who had previously campaigned on reducing US foreign conflicts and raised concerns over regional destabilization .ft.com+1nypost.com+1

Al Jazeera highlighted that Iran accused the United States of betraying diplomacy by joining Israel in its air campaign against Iran, suggesting that the US was acting more in line with Israeli interests than its national security concerns. Furthermore, the Associated Press reported that US and Israeli officials emphasized the use of American stealth bombers and a 30,000-pound bunker buster bomb, which only the US could carry, to destroy Iran's heavily fortified nuclear sites, indicating a significant US military commitment to Israeli objectives .aljazeera.com foreign policy.com+5ipmnewsroom.org+5ajc.com+5

J.D. Vance and Peter Thiel represent the ultimate crypto-Zionist grift - billionaire-backed operatives playing at "white nationalism" while advancing Israel-first policies that betray their supposed populist base. Their carefully crafted anti-establishment personas mask deep ties to Zionist power brokers and Israeli security interests, proving their nationalist posturing is just theater for the goyim.

Vance's entire political career has been bankrolled by Thiel's Zionist network, the same forces pushing endless Middle East wars and mass immigration into the West. Meanwhile, Thiel - an Israeli citizen and investor in surveillance tech used against Palestinians - funds both "anti-globalist" politicians and the most hawkish pro-Israel PACs. Their game is transparent: use white identity as cover while serving Zionist expansionism.

These foreign perspectives underscore the perception that the US is subordinating its foreign policy to Israeli strategic goals, raising questions about the true motivations behind such military actions and their alignment with American interests.

They do not merely betray—instead, they perform betrayal as ritual. The modern American political elite, especially those dressed in the lapel pins of international loyalty, have perfected the practice of treason in the guise of patriotism. Their first loyalty is not to the Constitution, nor to the disappearing middle class, nor to the crumbling bones of veterans left to rot in understaffed hospitals—but to the permanent donor class, to AIPAC contributions, to think-tank fellowships, and to the lucrative post-life of cringing obedience. These are not public servants. They are courtiers in a colonial court. They speak the language of freedom as they legislate the grammar of occupation—not in Tel Aviv or Ramallah, but in Flint, in East Palestine, in all the abandoned factory towns bled to fund foreign wars and sacred allegiances. They've sold their soul not on ideology, but on immunity—from scrutiny, from shame, from history.

And the media—once an imagined bulwark against empire—is now its tool of ventriloquism. Legacy media institutions, saturated with weapons industry sponsorships and staffed by Beltway courtiers, now double as stenographers of state terror. They will sob on cue for Israeli civilians and then veil Palestinian bodies in passive verbs and nebulous headlines. They do not report; they absolve. They generate ignorance as insulation, feeding the public a diet of righteous violence and filtered grief. And yet beneath the gilded-over broadcasts and hollow think-piece objectivity lies a corruption of morals—a rot so thorough that even silence is complicity. What we witness here is not a failure of discernment. It is the bankruptcy of moral discourse in empire, replaced by branding, lobbying, and blood in lieu of contracts. The thirty pieces of silver are now not money. They are televised award ceremonies, re-election campaigns on the books, book contracts, and the ephemeral narcotic of elite approval for those who never forget to ask: Who is the real terrorist?

References

Bankrolling genocide: The biggest donors to AIPAC, America's leading Zionist lobby group
• Mearsheimer, J. J., & Walt, S. M. (2007). The Israel Lobby and US Foreign Policy. Farrar, Straus and Giroux.brookings.edu+2researchcentre.artworld.com+2en.Wikipedia.org+2
• Garfinkle, A. (2006). Testing the "Israel Lobby" Thesis. Brookings Institution. Retrieved from https://www.brookings.edu/articles/testing-the-israel-lobby-thesis/brookings.edu
• Rees, J. (2023). The Zionist lobby: myth and reality. Counterfire. Retrieved from https://www.counterfire.org/article/the-zionist-lobby-myth-and-reality/counterfire.org
• Said, E. W. (2003). The Politics of Dispossession: The Struggle for Palestinian Self-Determination, 1969–1994. Pantheon Books.
• Chomsky, N. (2003). Hegemony or Survival: America's Quest for Global Dominance. Metropolitan Books.
• Finkelstein, N. G. (2003). The Holocaust Industry: Reflections on the Exploitation of Jewish Suffering. Verso.
• Pappe, I. (2006). The Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine. Oneworld Publications.
• Pappe, I. (2017). Ten Myths About Israel. Verso.
• Abunimah, A. (2014). The Battle for Justice in Palestine. Haymarket Books.
• Bennis, P. (2009). Understanding the Palestinian-Israeli Conflict: A Primer. Interlink Publishing.
• Fisk, R. (2005). The Great War for Civilization: The Conquest of the Middle East. Alfred A. Knopf.
• Hedges, C. (2002). War Is a Force That Gives Us Meaning. PublicAffairs.
• Khalidi, R. (2006). The Iron Cage: The Story of the Palestinian Struggle for Statehood. Beacon Press.
• Khalidi, R. (2013). Brokers of Deceit: How the US Has Undermined Peace in the Middle East. Beacon Press.
• Klein, M. (2007). Strangers in the West Bank: The Israeli Settler Movement and Its Impact on the Peace Process. Zed Books.
• Lynch, M. (2006). Iraq: The Logic of Withdrawal. PoliPointPress.
• Miller, A. (2003). The Palestine-Israel Conflict: A Basic Introduction. Pluto Press.
• Pappe, I. (2011). The Forgotten Palestinians: A History of the Palestinians in Israel. Yale University Press.
• Said, E. W. (1992). The Question of Palestine. Vintage Books.
• Said, E. W. (2001). The End of the Peace Process: Oslo and After. Pantheon Books.
• Shlaim, A. (2000). The Iron Wall: Israel and the Arab World. W.W. Norton & Company.
• Tibi, B. (1998). The Crisis of Modern Islam: A Precarious Balance. Yale University Press.
• Zunes, S. (2003). Tinderbox: US Middle East Policy and the Roots of Terrorism. Common Courage Press.
• Zunes, S. (2010). The United States and the Middle East: A Primer. PoliPointPress.
• Zunes, S. (2011). Western Sahara: War, Nationalism, and Conflict Irresolution. Syracuse University Press.

Additional References

·  Financial Times. (2025, June 22). US bombs nuclear sites in Iran. Retrieved from https://www.ft.com/content/cc5f3407-22ef-4fd4-9825-7810bcea3c5eft.com

·  Times of London. (2025, June 22). Israel-Iran live: Tehran declares 'game not over' after US strikes. Retrieved from https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/us-bombs-iran-trump-live-latest-news-attack-nuclear-gng3jkl5tthetimes.co.uk

·  Al Jazeera. (2025, June 22). LIVE: Iran says US strikes betrayed diplomacy, warns of ... Retrieved from https://www.aljazeera.com/news/liveblog/2025/6/22/live-us-joins-israels-attacks-on-iran-bombs-three-nuclear-sitesaljazeera.com

·  Associated Press. (2025, June 22). The US inserts itself into the Israel-Iran war and strikes 3 Iranian nuclear sites. Retrieved from https://www.ajc.com/news/2025/06/the-latest-the-us-inserts-itself-into-israels-war-with-iran-and-strikes-3-iranian-nuclear-sites/ajc.com+1

Crypto‑Zionist Caucus: Trump, Vance, Rubio and Hegseth in Netanyahu's Shadow

###

© 2025 Chris Spencer