Challenging conspiracies about the US-Israel Relationship

This is Vincent with RTN Broadcasting. I have Ami Horowitz here. One of the biggest questions that I have is presently the US-Israeli relationship when I look at demographics the younger the generations are, the lower the support is for US-Israeli relationship. I'm curious to know why that is. Why is it that like the baby boomers significantly higher numbers in their in their support for Israel. Why is it that the younger generations are increasingly not as supportive? I think it's less about what Israel's doing and the American Israel relationship at all and then rather what they're not doing for their own selves and their own lives. And remember, you're raising a generation where you're told as a young white male disaffected, you're the worst person on the planet. Some of them are owning that label and saying, "Fine, I'll be the bad guy. I'll play into this group identity politics." Jordan Peterson warned about this years ago saying, "You know, if you keep playing this bloody game on the left, you know, you're going to get a rise in the identitarian right." You know, and that's what's going to happen. And it's not pretty. It's not. And it's not pretty. I will also say that That was a really good impression of Jordan Peterson. I like it. >> Not my first time. When you brand yourself as going against the grain years ago in the in the sort of rise and excess of woke leftism which dominated the culture at every level from media, academia, entertainment how do you go against the grain? You go to Young Americans for Freedom, Turning Point and you become a traditional conservative. Low taxes, perhaps you're pro-life, you're pro-American. That's enough. And then you're against the grain and you're part of the counterculture and that feels good and that gives you an orientation. What happens when those things are victorious? All of this idea in their victory post-2024, you need an orientation now go against the grain. Grain, feel like you're part of a new edgy rebellious community. So, what's the new thing to play with? The heterodox. You can't go left. So, you go further and further right. Anti-Semitism, anti-Israel. And it's not just anti-foreign aid to Israel, but we wish Israel well. No, Israel well, it's uh Israel's controlling our government. They're co-opting. They're uh nefarious and sneaky behind the scenes pulling the strings. As if a country of what, 8 million people is controlling a country of 300 some odd million people, the most powerful country in the world is being controlled by the tiniest state of New Jersey, the size of New Jersey. I don't think so. But they're not thinking about it that deeply. And of course, they are not fans of radical Islam and jihadism. That's what Israel is fighting, and for some reason they get that confused because I think you got to go against the grain, and that's the new grain. Now, what's unique to me is that when you look at the history of the state of Israel, when you look at especially the CIA as it was introduced, so we saw with the JFK documents that were released back in January of 2025, we see a lot of connections between the CIA and Israel. And we see that the head of the CIA at the time, Sydney Gottlieb, his direct liaison was with Israeli intelligence, and a lot of the redactions in those documents were specifically citing the Israeli intelligence assets. So, to me, that's a little bit of a concern. Why is it that Why is it that the CIA was so heavily redacting for many, many years their direct connection to Israeli intelligence? And now, in 2025, what is that, 60, 80 years later, we're finally getting some disclosure that this that not only did the CIA have direct correspondence with Israeli intelligence, but the information went directly to the head of the CIA and only the head of the CIA. He was the direct liaison for it, and it went to nobody else. I'll, for the sake of argument, assume what you're saying is accurate. I'm not sure. I don't follow it at that level, but to what extent do you think that that's unusual? That intelligence agencies that work behind the scenes, rather secretly by nature, don't operate in all those sorts of ways. So, If asking me? I'm I'm saying why why would you think that's unusual necessarily? Cuz it's not necessarily unusual. MI6, the United States, I'm sure there's decades of secret correspondence and redactions for the sake of national security that you can find amongst all sorts of Western intelligence agencies. That's not unique to Mossad, Israel, or the US. I think it's unique to see mainly because for many, many years there was a lot of speculation, especially regarding the JFK assassination. There was a lot of speculation that there was some involvement by the Israeli government. >> Like, you know, of course there's the far right out there that might say, "Oh, it was the Jews that did it. It was Israel." But there was a lot of speculation that there was some hand in that assassination with JFK. And like I say, back 2025, January, we finally get the disclosure that that there was a little bit of intelligence shared between the governments and that Israel had a little bit of a part in it. I there I can actually show you the CIA documents which I generally cannot. Yeah. But there was there was correspondence between them. Not only correspondence, but there are even some citations that specifically, and I'm going to directly quote one of the citations, specifically says Israel is no good, Israel's not to be trusted. So that is a really unique thing to keep redacted for 80 years and finally show on a declassified CIA document. >> said that about Israel, too. He had his frustrations. Trump has said [ __ ] about Bibi all the time. He's like, "You they don't know what the [ __ ] they're doing." He said that all the time. World leaders have frustrations with each other all the time at all that level. And if you have a conclusion and you're looking to find evidence to support a conclusion, that's not the way we get to the truth. You look for evidence that finally supports a conclusion. But if you have a preconceived conclusion, like, "I need to make sure Israel's culpable in the JFK assassination," then everything's going to look like a clue. And I just don't think that's a rational way to do a any kind of investigation. >> And the way one thing that I know a lot of the younger generation gets really concerned about, they get really concerned about the USS Liberty incident. Of course, that was 60-plus years ago. >> Right. And one thing that concerned me what what Shapiro said, Shapiro said that was a long time ago, why does it matter? >> Mhm. Why are we so dismissive about such a significant historical event? Oh, Shapiro answered the question. He wasn't dismissive about the event. He was clarifying that its relevance to the current US-Israel relationship is very, very minimal, which is true. Just like our relationship with Britain in the Revolutionary War and the war and World War or Vietnam is very different than it is today. You know that Israel has friendly fire incidents on its own soldiers all the time. Soldiers get killed in accidental uh accidental practices when they're doing things. There's a term for that, blue-on-blue. Yeah, military term? Yeah, military term. Blue-on-blue. >> Well, it happens all the time, but somehow when it happens involving Israel and America, it's this unique crazy conspiracy out to make Israel look like the villain. And what's different about Israel than any of these other scenarios? Cuz the motivation in asking that question isn't oftentimes pure intellectual curiosity. >> Right, the framing of the question. The whole topic. Mhm. There's a nefarious intention there, and I think we both can agree on that if we're being honest. To bring up Are Are you saying Are you saying from me or from that question from that person? >> and that person. In the culture. Who's bringing up that question? Dan Bilzerian? Jake Shields? Mhm. Myron Gaines? Do they have good intentions? Does Nick Fuentes have good intentions? I don't think so. And so when you say when you say >> is from is because of their behavior, not Zionist behavior. And to clarify on the USS Liberty, we can we can talk about any historical subject of any kind. But be honest with yourself, are are the people asking that question continually? Do they have good intentions? And is it all is it all in So that >> And so the suspicion gets arisen from anyone who's curious, which is unfair. It You can talk about anything, and I think Ben answered the question that oftentimes in the fog of war, allies make mistakes against each other, against their own country. Um and there were no-go zones in that uh in the area where this incident took place. And Israel went It's very easy, and hindsight's 20/20. What if it was a secretly an Egyptian from land secretly flying an American flag that began attacking and killing Israelis? So, it's very easy to judge in hindsight in the fog of war. Douglas Murray said on the Joe Rogan podcast, right? He's like uh um it's like when you look back in history, it's like in the fog of war when you look back, there is no fog. You only see the path that you took. So, in the fog of war, looking back hindsight, it's, you know, you don't see you don't see the fog, you only see the line you took. In the social media sphere, I've seen a unique anomaly. I I don't know if it's come up within the past year, maybe past 2 years. But uh Laura Loomer as example >> Okay. has brought up influence from Qatar. Okay. I don't quite understand what this is going on about, but it almost seems like it's a direct counter to certain people that are saying that there's Israeli influence in the United States government. Somebody like Laura Loomer comes out and says, "Oh, look at, you know, Tucker Carlson." And he he's funded by Qatar. Why is there this battle, it seems like back and forth between who's pulling the strings? It seems like on one end you have people saying that the nation of Qatar is pulling the strings. On on the other side you have people saying it's Israel. Why is there this dichotomy going on? I think it's less relevant why there's a dichotomy of sorts. The question is what's true? Now, it's certainly true that Qatar, Iran have funded think tanks in Washington in the United States that have turned all the universities into radical left bastions that have radicalized students to hate the West. Because if you can't defeat your enemies militarily, what can you do? You can turn your enemies against each other. And that's what they've been doing, and it's actually pretty precise and pretty easy to see. You can demonstrate it. Think tanks uh that get funded by these foreign adversaries to push ideas out into the universities, into the Middle Eastern Studies departments, far left radicals that all of a sudden come out stumping for Hamas. Where did this all come from? It came from that. As far as the online space goes, there has clearly been an infiltration of bought accounts that uh say dissident media or America First or MAGA or some hot chick in a with a cleavage and a MAGA hat, and it's based in Bangladesh and Pakistan. Yeah. That's the truth of what's going on. Is Tucker funded by Qatar? I don't know. I don't have substantial evidence to claim that. I don't think he needs the money. But his messages that are demoralizing and confusing certainly get amplified. And then you have this effect where a video seemingly goes viral because of uh inorganic, manufactured virality. And then people see it and say, "Wow, there must be something here." There's an effort to do that. So, I just don't want people to be manipulated and propagandized. Uh I I On the Israel side, where's the distortion coming from? The fact is the standard has always been that Israel and America have been aligned to fight for Western values and principles. You'd much rather live in Tel Aviv than in Syria with the values that you have. And so, people who are supporting Israel already support Israel. There's no There's no pro-Palestinians getting getting manipulated to change their mind. >> Yeah. And so, any effort to do that online is fighting because of values they already pre-supported. The departure from that is what's been going on now. The departure, the distortion, the all of a sudden wedge issue is somehow on the right not supporting a bastion of Western democracy and liberalism in the West to fight radical Islamic terrorism. I can't see how on the right that makes sense at all. I see why it makes sense on the left. They have the same enemy, the United States and the West. The left's got no love for the West or the US. But on the right, they're supposed to. Pro-military, pro-freedom, pro-liberty, pro- anti- uh radical Islamic terrorism. I thought that's what we were about. So, that's why it's been confusing. So, out of respect for your time, last question that I have for you. Yeah. If you were to speak directly to the younger generation, and like we discussed, it's already like lowest point of support for Israel-US Yeah. There's there's a huge divide between the generations. So, if you can speak directly to them, give them your best pitch for why they should support this relationship that's been long-standing for many decades. Okay, support is an interesting word. There's different kinds of support. You don't have to say America must be the sugar daddy of Israel. There are are staunch Zionists historically that are totally against foreign aid. Because foreign aid actually compromises Israel's security too in certain ways. It makes them entangled. [music] The fact that the entire north of Israel and its civilian population had to be evacuated when Hezbollah was firing rockets, they couldn't move back in for 11 months. Why? My sources and the people I talked to who serve in the military in Israel, the reason they weren't allowed to is because there's an aircraft carrier, a US aircraft carrier under the Biden administration that said, "We will not give you the go ahead to retaliate." So, the fact that America controls So, how does this answer the question? Because you're allowed to have certain positions when it comes to foreign aid and apply that equally across the board. If you just focus on Israel, and that's the only one that bothers you and gives you a a sting, then there's something strange about your selective outrage. But, you're allowed to hold positions about foreign aid, it doesn't make you anti-Semitic. There's a difference between ignorance, curiosity, and hate. Um don't confuse the two, and just remember, it's the actual hateful nefarious actors on the far right fringes that are anti-Western and anti-American, and they make the conversation for you being curious much harder than any Zionist Jew or any Zionist Christian. Those are the people that will engage with you honestly. It's these folks on the call it the far right. I don't even call them that because they're not to the right. They're not pro-Western, not pro-American, they're anti, and they make that conversation much, much harder to have, the honest ones like we just did. Thank you, my friend. Pleasure to meet you. >> Yes, you too.