Could Hollywood’s movies such as Red Dawn, Olympus Has Fallen and Team America: World Police Be Partly Responsible for North Korea’s Recent Provocation?
“Blessed are the peacemakers: for they shall be called the children of God” (Matthew 5:9)
…by Jonas E. Alexis
I have tried to contact you to no avail. Since we have much to discuss, let’s cut to the chase. I understand that some of the language here seems to be harsh, but if it is an apt description of what the neoconservatives are doing, I make no apology for it. This is a critique of your work, not an ad hominem attack.
You acknowledged last week that the United States has been supporting the Syrian rebels through Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Turkey and Jordan. You moved on to say that “These are significant steps in the right direction–toward helping to overthrow Bashar Assad–even if they do raise questions about why the U.S. isn’t maximizing its influence by providing arms directly.”
You continue to say that we have to allow those rebels to “defend themselves,” and that “the U.S. and our allies” have “to take action” in order “to stop the Syrian air force.”
Mr. Boot, we both agree that the U.S. has been supporting those rebels. Can we agree on the widely documented fact that those rebels are largely terrorists and have committed serious terrorist acts? This point is even acknowledged by one of your neoconservative colleagues, Elliott Abrams.
Even the New York Times acknowledged that the Syrian rebels has “an explicit stamp of approval from Al Qaeda,” and the group itself “is a direct offshoot of Al Qaeda in Iraq, Iraqi officials and former Iraqi insurgents say, which has contributed veteran fighters and weapons.”
If you do not believe Abrams and the New York Times on this issue, then you are going to disagree with Israel’s Defense Ministry Amos Gilad as well, who recently made it clear that there is a growing presence of al-Qaeda elements among the rebels, and those jihadists are “waiting for the opportunity to take over the state.”
But Gilad absolved himself from any moral responsibility by saying that this element is a very small price to pay “with the menace posed by the Iran-Syrian-Hezbollah axis before the Syrian civil war…”
Gilad unapologetically said, “with all due respect to that threat, [the al-Qaeda element] is not the same threat as one posed by Iran, Syria and Hezbollah together, which is much more difficult.”
When Assad it out of the equation, Gilad continued to say, “You can look now and see al-Qaida in Syria, economic lows, instability, the lack of one address, huge refugee problems. his all presents new types of challenges that are not similar to the military challenge [Syria posed to Israel before the civil war]. In reality this is a blow to Iran and Hezbollah together.”
Just one day before you publish your article, the British newspaper The Telegraph reported that “British Muslims fighting in Syria could commit terrorist attacks in U.K.” It has been declared that jihadists joining the rebels have doubled over the past few months.
There were about 300 to 400 jihadists in the movement, but now it is estimated to be almost 1,000. Time magazine even acknowledged that there was a covert “master plan” by the rebels “to seize Damascus” by any means.
Just recently, it has been reported that the rebels were using chemical weapons. The Telegraph came out with a report entitled, “Syria chemical weapons: finger pointed at jihadists,” meaning the Syrian rebels—the people you admire. The attack actually killed 25 people. In less than five days, the rebels attacked the University of Damascus, killing fifteen students.
Because chemical weapons have been used by the rebels, “born-again neocon” President Obama was quick to come up with this pathetic rationalization: no immediate chemical weapon was used. The Syrian rebels were quick to put the blame on al-Assad. Israel has fired at the Syrian government and again blamed Assad for all the upheavals.
Our beloved president had previously made it clear that if the Syrian government uses chemical weapons, the United States would be vindicated in attacking al-Assad. (Should the Obama administration now attack the Syrian rebels?)
Mr. Boot, you are a trained historian and unquestionably a scholar of some sort. Therefore the next point should not be that difficult to grasp. If the Syrian rebels are largely terrorists—and you are supporting them—that means that you and your neoconservative gangsters cannot say that you are fighting against terrorism. It also means that you are an accomplice in producing terrorist acts in the Middle East. As Gordon Duff recently puts it, talking heads like you “fight under al Qaeda command in Syria.”
This is an elementary point and you have the intellectual skill and training from Yale and the University of California to understand common sense. If recognizing an obvious contradiction was not part of the curriculum in the history department, you need to go back to those schools and tell them to get your money back, for they have failed you.
Yet, my instincts keep telling me that there is still an academic remnant at schools such as Yale. In other words, you and your neoconservative gangsters summon the word “terrorism” and frame it in such a way that the vast majority of Americans are scared to death when you folks mention it. That is how you have been getting America’s attention over more than twenty years.
Lest you forget the words of Avner Cohen, let me reproduce them here: “Hamas, to my great regret, is Israel’s creation.”
Cohen, as you well know, is not some crackpot theorist out there. He has worked in Gaza for more than a decade and is a well-known Israeli historian, philosopher, and has taught at prestigious schools such as Washington University, Ben-Gurion University, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Harvard, etc.
In addition, Cohen has written two important and groundbreaking books on Israel’s nuclear warheads. In other words, he doesn’t seem to take the statement that Hamas is Israel’s creation lightly. What would you say to Professor Cohen, Mr. Boot?
If you still think that the war against terrorism isn’t a joke, I will buy you a copy of Ami Pedahzur and Arie Perliger’s book Jewish Terrorism in Israel if you promise me you will read it.
The book was published by the University of Columbia in 2009. Pedahzur is at the University of Texas and Perliger is a professor at the United States Military Academy, West Point. Can you tell me one neoconservative in the history of the movement who has the moral and intellectual courage to say that Israel has committed terrorist acts? When you find one, give me a call.
The issue becomes even more interesting when Elliott Abrams himself admits that the Syrian rebels are fraught with jihadists from abroad. Yet, instead of saying that we need to fight all jihadists, Abrams declares, “Because the jihadi [sic] groups continue to grow day by day, bringing the war to a close and getting Assad out is an important goal.” This is absolutely crazy. Even though we know they are jihadists, we are going to use them to oust Assad! This is on the borderline of a psychopath.
Moreover, you have the ministry of propaganda—Hollywood—that produces films such as, Argo (2012), Olympus Has Fallen (2013), G. I. Joe Retaliation (2013), which demonize other nations such as Iran and North Korea and create psychological terrorism and fear in the minds of precious Americans in the name of entertainment.
I certainly would not be pleased if other nations start making fun of Americans in their movies or burn the American flag, so why should I be pleased if the ministry of propaganda is doing the same thing to other nations? I thought we are no longer living in the Bolshevik era anymore?
Aren’t the neoconservatives saying that America is exceptional? If they are making fun of us, we ought to be making fun of them as well? So two wrongs now make it right? Is that what exceptional means? If you cannot rise above the nonsense of your enemy, what is exceptional? Dropping drones at densely populated civilian areas? Torturing prisoners and forcing them to have sex with each other?
Or should we drop the neoconservative dream which you and your colleagues have forced upon us all and treat our enemies with dignity and respect, like George Washington (one of my esteemed men in history) would have done? Why is it that one of the countries that has been saying that both the United States and North Korea need to refrain from entering the zone of no return is Russia?
Max Boot Meets the Founding Fathers
John Quincy Adams–sixth president of the United States
Mr. Boot, what would you say to the Founding Fathers of America if they were alive today? What if they were sitting next to you and ask you about our foreign policy? Let us not forget that they built this country and spent their lives defending it, articulating principles upon which America has rested for more than two centuries. In other words, you owe them a decent answer.
Mr. Boot, Do you think John Quincy Adams was wrong in saying that “America should not go abroad in search of monsters to destroy…She might become the dictatress of the world: she should be no longer the ruler of her own spirit”? If yes, can you explain to the American people why? If no, why are you subverting this principle and replacing it with your detrimental agenda? Why are you being disrespectful to the vast majority of the United States presidents?
Since the principles as articulated by the Founding Fathers have been replaced by the neoconservative ideology, the United States has become “the dictatress of the world” and in the process has been hated specifically in the Muslim world. Even David A. Stockman, former President Ronald Reagan’s budget director from 1981 to 1985, has recently declared that former George W. Bush has contributed to the economic collapse in America.
Manifestations of the Neoconservative Dream
Mr. Boot, there is no doubt that the neoconservative/Zionist agenda has produced chaos, destruction, and mayhem in the Middle East. The New York Times declared in 2012 that “Syria’s pluralistic society…is now faced with civil disintegration and ethnic cleansing.”
One Christian doctor of Palestinian origin lamented, “My father came to Syria as a refugee I made it my home. Now I am having to uproot my two young sons.” Moreover, under Assad, Christian has enjoyed the freedom of worship. The New York Times continued:
“Syria’s 2.3 million Christians, constituting about 10 percent of the country’s population, have generally known a more privileged existence under the Assad dynasty than even the Shiite Alawi sect to which President Bashar al-Assad belongs. Yet their allegiance to Assad was never absolute. Some Christians openly clamored for political change in the early months of the anti-government uprising. But as the rebellion became suffused with Sunni militants sympathetic to or affiliated with Al Qaeda, Christians recoiled.”
The New York Times declares just recently,
“Easter weekend is usually the year’s most festive for Syria’s Christians, but this year, it is infused with grave uncertainty. Christians here say they primarily fear the general chaos enveloping the country as the war enters its third year. But like members of Syria’s other religious minorities, many Christians also fear what they see as the rise of extremists among the mainly Sunni Muslim rebels fighting the government of President Bashar al-Assad.”
When Jews were being persecuted in Europe, Jewish organizations were the main vehicles to tell the entire world that something ought to be done. But when Christians are being persecuted and uprooted from their homes in places like Iraq and Syria, you and your neoconservative friends say that the terrorist groups are “defending themselves.”
As a result of this Zionist war, 80,000 Christians, the New York Times acknowledged, have been “cleansed” from their precious homes. And this is just in Syria, a very small country. It is possible that at least 100,000 people have been killed in that particular region alone.
I know numbers of dead people means little to people like you and Jewish psychologist Steven Pinker of Harvard, but this is the type of argumentation that Jewish organizations used to attack Germany. They were declaring that 6 million Jews were being liquidated long before World War II even started!
Mr. Boot, the rebels’ conduct was so corrupt that some Sunnis who had previously supported the rebels have turned around and pledged “renewed loyalty to Assad. Many who once regarded the regime as a kleptocracy now view it as the best guarantor of Syria’s endangered pluralism.”
Mr. Boot, if you don’t see all of this as a crime, then I am perfectly within my own right to say that you are part of the “Synagogue of Satan,” a theological phraseology found in the book of Revelation which specifically refers to Jews who were persecuting Christians and terrorizing the Roman government. In the Old Testament, a book which rabbis superficially claim as their theological text (they actually pervert it), it states that this entity, Satan, “weakens the nations!” (Isaiah 14:12); some translations say he “destroyed the nations of the world.”
Mr. Boot, if you cannot see that a six-trillion dollar bill will weaken America and much of the world,  then you have left the world of reason and you are currently living in an implicitly Talmudic world which promises heaven on earth but delivers chaos on earth.
More recently, the Guardian released a report detailing other torture camps such as Nama in Iraq. A British witness who was at that particular camp testified, “Everyone’s seen the Abu Ghraib pictures. But I’ve seen it with my own eyes.” He continued, “I remember talking to one British army officer about what I had seen, and he replied: ‘You didn’t see that – do you understand?’ There was a great deal of nervousness about the place. I had the impression that the British were scared we would be kicked off the operation if we made a fuss.”
Mr. Boot, you and your neoconservative crowd simply have to take a look at yourselves in the mirror and admit that you folks have contributed to the demise of nations. If that is too harsh, then look at the millions of people who are still carrying the wounds of the Iraq war; look at the American and Iraqi families who have lost their lives and even jobs just for a war that was based on lies. And you are still looking for more fresh blood in Syria!
If Syria falls, you and your neoconservative crowd will look for other blood in Iran. In fact, ex-CNN reporter Amber Lyon (kudos for Amber) declared that she was asked to report false information to the American people in order to create a massive outrage against Iran.
Recently, it has been reported that bank depositors in Cyprus could lose 60% of their savings. Italy is facing a similar situation. If Cyprus seems to be of no interest, how about Stockton, California, where it has been ruled that the entire city has entered bankruptcy? Or how about Europe, where unemployment continues to rise? And this has not been an improvement from last year.
Do you care about these issues at all? Do you honestly think that what we need right now is more wars in the Middle East? More support for the Syrian rebels/terrorists? More blood in the name of democracy?
Mr. Boot, thousands upon thousands of our precious men have already lost their lives. Those men had a dream, but you and your neoconservative gangsters destroyed the future of those people all in the name of spreading democracy, freeing the Iraq people, and protecting American citizens.
4,000 soldiers died for a lie.
And if that is not enough, it has been reported this year that our precious ladies “are going to get to serve in combat.” So who is next? American Children who have been psychologically trained to kill through video games? Have some mercy!
Yet even after all that, you declared in an article that there is “no need to repent for support of Iraq war.” Neoconservative hawk Richard Perle, commonly known as “the Prince of Darkness,” said the same thing.
Mr. Boot, are you seriously saying that people like yourself should not even pronounce a word of apology to the American and Iraqi people for the six trillion dollar war? How about the many thousands upon thousands of both Iraqis and Americans who lost their precious lives fighting the neoconservative war?
“Another 200,000 of those who served in Iraq may suffer from Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder…. The Iraq Body Count, which relies on published death accounts, figures between 130,000 and 144,000 killed…
The IBC estimates 40,000 combatants of all nationalities also were killed. Moreover, hundreds of thousands of Iraqi civilians have been injured. IBC lists 135,000, but noted that “official Iraqi figures are consistently higher.” The Iraqi Human Rights Ministry figures 250,000.”
Is this a video game that you guys are playing? You folks are playing dice with people’s lives and I do not think that is nice. What is so appalling and morally disgusting is that the Syrian rebels/terrorists have been using children “as young as 14 to serve as soldiers,” and none of you has the courage to write about this and say that it is wrong.
The Prosecution of Neoconservative Gangsters
Ten years after the invasion, it was widely declared that Iraqis “have no future.” Trial lawyer Vincent Bugliosi has argued in The Prosecution of George W. Bush that our former president should be put on trial. He should not be the only one. Doug Bandow, who served in the Reagan administration, recently wrote: “America will pay for its Iraq mistake for years, perhaps decades, to come. Yet the most fervent neoconservative war-makers are like the French Bourban royalty who when restored to power in 1815 were said to ‘have learned nothing and forgotten nothing.’”
Mr. Boot, since you still want to drink more innocent blood in the Middle East for Israel, I think you are worse than a terrorist and you should be put on trial for your crime against humanity. Gleaning from what you have written so far, it is pretty clear that you are indirectly an agent of Al Qaeda in America, since you support the Syrian terrorist groups.
Jose Garibay, one of our first servicemen, wrote to his girlfriend before he died in Iraq, “We are freedom’s answer to fear. We do not bargain with terror. We stalk it, corner it, take aim and kill it.” Sir, if Mr. Garibay knew that you were an Al Qaeda supporter, he would have been upset about that.
You keep mentioning Osama bin Laden in your recent book Invisible Armies, but you never quote bin Laden contextually because to do so would prove that much of what you have propounded in the book would turn out to be worthless. Bin Laden, as you should know, was largely against the neoconservative madness which you and your cohorts have unleashed in the Middle East.
Speaking to America, bin Laden declared that “the bitter truth is that the neoconservatives are still a heavy burden to you.” Bin Laden even asked all Americans to stay away “from the fear and intellectual terrorism being practiced against you by the neoconservatives.”
Mr. Boot, you are a proven example that bin Laden was right on this issue. As already suggested, you pretend to fight against terrorism, but you have given your full allegiance to the Syrian rebels/terrorists. By deduction, you are indirectly a spy and supporter of terrorism.
And as it turned out, your books seem to be propaganda for more terrorism in the Middle East. Give us some good reasons as to why America should not treat you as an agent of Al Qaeda. If you cannot do so, then give us some good reasons as to why you should not be arrested.
Mr. Boot, I firmly believe that America should put you on trial for inciting terrorism in the Middle East and for supporting terrorist groups. You should be able to have a decent lawyer, a decent trial, and a decent jail if found guilty. Spending the rest of your natural life in jail is not necessarily a bad thing, given the nature of your crime. Bernie Madoff is spending some time in jail probably reflecting on what he had done to the American people.
Here and there you have said things that are true. For example, you declared that “Ten years ago, we were wrong not just about whether Saddam Hussein possessed weapons of mass destruction (we now know that he had stopped his weapons of mass destruction program but didn’t want anyone, not even his generals, to know for fear that it would dispel his aura of power).”
Mr. Boot, you should know that this is half-true. Yes, you (not “we”) were wrong about Iraq, and yes the intelligence agency did tell the Bush administration long before they went to Iraq that Saddam had shut down his nuclear program.
You continue to propound half-truths throughout your article. You say, “The Bush administration was convinced not only that Hussein had WMD (this was an error, not a lie) but also that the people of Iraq would somehow be able to govern themselves after he was removed from power. As it happened, the entire Iraqi government crumbled when Hussein fell, and the U.S. had neither the resources nor the know-how to pick up the pieces.”
No, Mr. Boot, it was not an error. It was a lie. In 2002, Iraqi officials released a 12,200 page document to the United Nations in which they declared that they were not building weapons of mass destruction. Yet former Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice stated in a New York Times article that Iraq was lying. You know too well that Bush wanted to invade Iraq and was looking for any evidence to do so. Much of the “evidence” that Bush used to invade Iraq came from the neoconservatives and Israeli officials.
You further move on to say,
“Critics are right to note that the ‘surge’ — shorthand for an increase in U.S. troop strength, a change in how the troops were deployed, and an active program of outreach to the Sunni tribes that helped bring them over to our side — did not solve all of Iraq’s problems. But by engineering a 90% drop in violence, the surge offered an opportunity to make headway…
Iraq was never going to live up to the fondest hopes of Bush that it would become a model democracy and transform the Middle East. The post-Hussein years were too messy, chaotic and violent serve as inspiration for anyone. But at least Iraq appeared to be on its way to becoming a functioning democracy by the end of 2011”
Are you serious? The war engineered a 90% drop in violence? I honestly would like to know whether you are living on planet earth. Maybe I have misunderstood your point. Do you mean to say that violence almost every day in Iraq actually means a drastic drop in violence itself?
Even your own neoconservative colleague Fouad Ajami of the Hoover Institution, who called the invasion “an honorable war,” declared that as the U.S. began to pull out of Iraq, Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki “was beginning to erect a dictatorship bent on marginalizing the country’s Kurds and Sunni Arabs and even those among the Shiites who questioned his writ.” Ajami concludes with this damning statement:
“Two weeks ago, Stuart W. Bowen Jr., the special inspector general for Iraq reconstruction, issued his final report, called ‘Learning from Iraq.’ The report was methodical and detailed, interspersed with the testimonies of American and Iraqi officials. One testimony, by an Iraqi technocrat, the acting minister of interior, Adnan al-Asadi, offered a compelling image: ‘With all the money the U.S. has spent, you can go into any city in Iraq and you can’t find one building or project built by the U.S. government. You can fly in a helicopter around Baghdad or other cities, but you can’t point a finger at a single project that was built and completed by the United States.’”
Mr. Boot, with all honesty, you are partly responsible for anti-Jewish reactions in America and in the Middle East. I am prepared to fight anti-Semitism everywhere, and we need your cooperation on this. Please do not give the anti-Semites justifications to mouth their virulent hatred toward decent Jews around the world. Your neoconservative magazine Commentary needs to start to rethink things in order to ameliorate the situation we are having in the Middle East and America. Please do not disappoint us any further.
Former Secretary of Defense Robert Gates declared, “Any future defense secretary who advises the president to again send a big American land army into Asia or into the Middle East or Africa should ‘have his head examined,’ as General MacArthur so delicately put it.”
Shortly after the war in Iraq, Jessica Stern of Harvard’s School of Public Health declared that “Iraq acted as a laboratory for terrorists to hone and perfect their techniques.”
Mr. Boot, if you are going to ask for more troops in the Middle East, I would agree with Gates that you should have your head examined.
Who Provoked North Korea?
Mr. Boot, I have been paying close attention to your magazine Commentary and other neoconservative propaganda such as the Weekly Standard and FrontPage. None of those magazines actually assert that America needs to quickly bomb North Korea. In fact, throughout last week, Commentary only talked about other issues such as “Time to Redefine Public Education.” The Weekly Standard was busy talking about “The Lost of Economic Growth,” and North Korea was not even part of their programs.
You eventually came out and say that both South Korea and the United States must be on their guard against the North, but you never said that we have to go ahead and bomb the North immediately. You even declared that no one wants a war! Similarly, Joseph Klein of FrontPage declared that an attack on North Korea should be our last resort.
Seventy-four percent of Americans supported sanctions against the North, but not an immediate attack. Slightly 51 percent of Republicans supported a military action. Jim Walsh of MIT sees little evidence that the U.S. will strike any time soon. The question is: Why not a strong move against North Korea?
The answer is very simple: the neoconservatives in particular know very well that North Korea is very good at rhetoric. It has been pointed out by the Washington Post that North Korea does not even have the technological resources to deliver its promises. Press secretary for the White House Jay Carney himself declared,
“I would note that—despite the harsh rhetoric we’re hearing from Pyongyang—we are not seeing changes to the North Korean military posture, such as large-scale mobilizations and positioning of forces. We haven’t seen action to back up the rhetoric.”
James Hardy, Asia-Pacific editor of HIS Jane’s Defense Weekly, wrote an article declaring, “No, North Korea Can’t Hit Hawaii.” I am currently living in South Korea and apparently not a whole lot of people are losing any sleep over Kim Jong-un’s wild rhetoric. What perhaps drives North Korea to the edge is Hollywood’s depiction of the country in movies such as Red Dawn (November 2012).
If the North does get nasty, the ministry of propaganda is partly responsible for this. With movies such as Die Another Day (2002), Team America: World Police (2004), Stealth (2005), Behind Enemy Lines II: Axis of Evil (2006) and Salt (2010),78] the North was bound to react.
The South, sad to say, has been following the Hollywood’s propaganda as well by producing anti-North Korean films. Lee Woo Young, a professor of North Korean films at the University of North Korean Studies in Seoul, wrote,
“North Korea is a bad guy in the real world, since the country is always making trouble on a global level through its development of nuclear weapons, its exporting of weapons of mass destruction to the Middle East, its being involved in illegal drug trafficking and so on.”
Johannes Schonherr, author of North Korean Cinema: A History, tells us something about film propaganda in the region: “Which moviemaker wouldn’t love an enemy like that [North Korea]? It offers everything a movie bad guy needs to be convincing.”
Jay Soh, a film professor at the Seoul Institute of the Arts in Ansan, adds: “The Soviet Union has dissolved and there’s no more communist bloc in Eastern Europe, so Hollywood needed to look for another bad guy. Hollywood was looking for a new enemy that was not going to inflame people … so they chose North Korea as the enemy of the U.S. (The movies) show North Korea as the last stronghold of ‘The Iron Curtain,’ and the sort of ‘totalitarian evil’ that existed before, in the movies of the 1980s”
After years of Hollywood’s propaganda, North Korea returned the favor by producing a ballistic video just last week. South Korea’s new president, Park Geun-hye, could have gotten some of her answers if she would come out and say that both the Zionist machine in the U.S. and some of the films produced by the South have been demonizing the North. Instead, she declared in the Korea Times,
“If any provocations against our people and country take place, the military has to respond quickly and strongly without any political consideration … I will trust the decisions of the military”
In a short review of both Red Dawn and Olympus Has Fallen, Geoffrey MacNab of the British newspaper The Independent declares that Hollywood’s depiction of new villains “is profoundly depressing” and Hollywood is not interested in understanding “the psychology or problems of ‘the enemy.’”
Perhaps the most “depressing” movie in this genre is Team America: World Police, a semi-pornographic propaganda film produced by Jewish producer Matt Stone.
The late Kim Jong-Il asked the Czech Republic to ban it. Brian C. Anderson of neoconservative magazine National Review and a writer for the Manhattan Institute for Policy Research could not make up his mind about the movie. In the end, he ended up saying that the movie was one the best conservatives movies in the last twenty five years!
In other words, neoconservative pundits like Anderson support pornography and oral sex (which is part of what Team America is about).
Mr. Boot, these are complicated issues, and I wish that America would wake up from her “dogmatic slumber,” to use Emmanuel Kant’s words. I wish that they would know what the neoconservative ideology has done.
Finally, Mr. Boot, I am quarreling with the neoconservative madness which you and other neoconservatives have unleashed upon America and much of the West. I am not quarreling with you as a person. As a Christian, I love you as a human being. The simple fact is that the neoconservative price is too high for us, and it is about time that decent Americans everywhere just say, “No, we’re not gonna take it.”
Jonas E. Alexis
Jonas E. Alexis has degrees in mathematics and philosophy. He studied education at the graduate level. His main interests include U.S. foreign policy, the history of the Israel/Palestine conflict, and the history of ideas. He is the author of the new book Zionism vs. the West: How Talmudic Ideology is Undermining Western Culture. He teaches mathematics in South Korea.