Tucker appears to have his sights on the end of the State of Israel.
Tucker Carlson's strange behavior has puzzled many, including people who actually know him. Some of his recent material:
- Churchill was the bad guy. The U.K. should not have attacked Germany after Hitler's entry into Poland. Germany had no interest in attacking the U.K., though the Battle of Britain and Operation Sea Lion for the invasion of the Isles would suggest otherwise.
- Carlson claims that he doesn't know Tommy Robinson and called him a fraud. People immediately uploaded Carlson's Fox interview with the British firebrand. This behavior does not surprise me, as I recall Carlson saying at the beginning of an interview with Marjorie Taylor Greene that they had never met. Yet, I had seen a picture of the two of them with Donald Trump on a porch several months earlier.
- Carlson recently called Zionism a threat to the West and Bibi Netanyahu the "main enemy" of the West. While I am sure that Bibi has rubbed some world leaders the wrong way, I doubt that any of them would see him as more of a threat than, say, Putin or Xi. Zionists make no claim on any land outside of the present state of Israel, and even those who whip out maps showing a Biblical Israel stretching to Iraq are quickly told to forget it.
- Carlson has platformed a parade of lunatics who praise Hitler, claim that the Führer really didn't plan to kill all of those Jews (just ran out of food to feed them….), tell lies that Israel badly treats its Christian population, and suggest that Israel is trying to get the U.S. into World War III. Pretty much every guest he brings, and his views, can be debunked as being historically illiterate. Carlson's recent talk with Piers Morgan had him praising Pakistanis in England and completely glossing over the million British girls abused by Pakistani rape gangs.
So is Carlson going off the reservation due to Qatari checks or a Jew-loathing version of Christianity? I am not privy to Carlson's bank details, and I do not hear his private conversations with his wife in their kitchen. So, in short, I don't know. But it doesn't matter. He has made every effort to attack Israel, Zionists, prominent American Jews, and politicians who are pro-Israel. He has brought on clowns whose claims are easily debunked by professional historians. Why? What is Tucker's endgame? My guess-and it is only a guess: to set up the political underpinning for the destruction of the State of Israel.
The giveaway is the World War II stuff. Why does he have to do backflips to make Churchill the bad guy and Hitler pretty okay? He knew that his Groyper guest, Fuentes, had stated that he was on "Team Hitler," yet still had him over for dinner and a long interview. When the young basement dweller said that he was a big fan of Stalin, Carlson made no effort to bring up the Soviet dictator's record of bloodshed and destruction. Why did he give a Hitler-lover a pass when he could have used the full hour to attack Fuentes and his idol, Stalin?
One of the arguments made by Arabs and their apologists is that Israel is an unfair outcome of World War II and the Holocaust. Millions of Jews were killed (and news flash to Fuentes and others, Yad Vashem has over 5 million recorded names of Jews murdered by the Nazis and their friends), and Israel was allowed to be set up as a form of guilt removal for the world. The fact that Jews have always lived in and been associated with the land of Israel was irrelevant. The fact that Jews pre-1948 bought large tracts in the land of Israel and developed them was irrelevant. The fact that Israel fought and won a war against a far superior enemy and declared a state, as many had done before, was irrelevant. Israel was illegitimate, and the intransigence was ingrained both in the Arab mind as well as the Western leftist heart. One of Carlson's most recent interviews was with George Galloway, who has throughout his political career been an antisemtic Israel basher. Carlson presented him as a British conservative, something that no Brit would ever accept.
So Carlson is going for the jugular. If he can reframe World War II and the Holocaust as being not Hitler's fault and really caused by Winston Churchill and the British following through on their treaty obligations with Poland, then he can start to chip away at the historical legitimacy of the state of Israel. The Holocaust was a feeding problem, and it was Churchill and not Hitler who caused the war—there really is no basis for the Jews having their own state. Every historian knows that Hitler was shocked when Chamberlain declared war, as he had previously rolled over on Austria, the Sudetenland, and all of Czechoslovakia. Carlson seems offended that the Brits answered an invasion by declaring war! In Carlson's reading of things, the Brits were wrong to have a treaty with Poland and were even more wrong for honoring it.
The delegitimization of Israel would serve both Qatar's and Carlson's theological ends. The Qatari leadership wishes to push Muslim Brotherhood ideology onto the world. Getting rid of the state of Israel and eventually all of the Jews is Job 1. So Carlson's constant attacks on Zionism and even Christian Zionists would fit in well with the "Carlson is being paid by Qatar" argument. But Carlson's Christianity appears to be one that does not accept a successful Jewish people in its historical, Biblical homeland. Whereas Charlie Kirk was a great friend of Jews and Israel, Carlson aligns with Fuentes, who wants to corrupt TPUSA. Israel in no way attacks or harms Christians living in the country. Anyone with an IQ of 2 could see that only in Israel is the Christian population actually growing. Several times, we were stymied from going to the Western Wall because local Christians were having a parade in the Old City, and we were told in no uncertain terms that the roads were blocked to foot traffic. Nobody pulled out a "Jew Card" and said, "Let me through!" Christian Arabs had a parade, and the rest of us had to make do.
Carlson is a dangerous demagogue due to his residual popularity from his days at Fox. He claims not to be an antisemite, but no less than Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. stated unequivocally that anti-Zionism is antisemitism. More recently, Professor Victor Davis Hanson has put out a very simple rule: if you accuse Israel of something but do not do so for other countries doing the same or worse, then your motives are probably antisemitic. As I have noted, there is no BDS movement against Turkey for holding half of Cyprus for half a century. There is no BDS movement against China for its internment of Uighers. There is no BDS movement against Russia for grabbing parts of Ukraine and Georgia during the Obama years. If Carlson had dedicated an entire episode to all of the Middle Eastern governments harming local Christians, then maybe one might call him a fair broker. But his ire is always directed at Israel and its American supporters, however patriotic the latter truly are.
After interviewing the Iranian president and giving him softball questions, maybe Carlson can find the burned bones of Hitler and ask him a couple of questions about how he loved the Jews. Carlson is on a mission to destroy the legitimacy of the state of Israel. He won't succeed, but that does not mean that we can sit complacently by as he threatens the lives of 10 million Israelis.