Thursday, June 19, 2008

2 anti semites go to Israel...

If you have read my blog, but have not bought the The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy by John J. Mearsheimer, Stephen M. Walt, then may I respectfully advise you to do so.

According to the media narrative on the op/ed pages of various newspapers, Mr. Mearsheimer and his co-author of this book, Mr. Walt, are evil, bigoted, racist white power advocates... and of course, hateful anti-semites.

Here's Washington Post:

The title of the piece is Yes, It's Anti-Semitic.

Academic papers posted on a Harvard Web site don't normally attract enthusiastic praise from prominent white supremacists. But John Mearsheimer and Stephen Walt's "The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy" has won David Duke's endorsement as "a modern Declaration of American Independence" and a vindication of the ex-Klansman's earlier work, presumably including his pathbreaking book, "Jewish Supremacism."

Well, of course David Duke praising this book makes it racist. Guilt by association. So, if a neonazi, by some chance, praised some aspect of my life (for example, "You are a good family guy, always taking care of your parents,and I respect that, AmericanGoy!), that would immediately turn me into an anti semite.

Great logic there, Washington Post!

Walt and Mearsheimer contend that American national security dictates distancing ourselves from the state of Israel; that U.S. support for Israel has led to such disasters as America's status as the No. 1 target for Islamic terrorists; and that such an otherwise inexplicable departure from good sense can be accounted for only by the power of "The Lobby" (their capitalization), an overwhelmingly Jewish force abetted by some Christian evangelicals and a gentile neocon collaborator or two, who have hijacked American foreign policy and controlled it for decades.

I don't see anything that is not factual in the preceding paragraph. Neither do I see exposing the truth about the power of the pro-Israel Lobby (MY capitalization) as anti-semitic, the same like calling attention to the close ties of the Saudi royals to the Bush family an anti-Arab rant.

One of Mearsheimer's University of Chicago colleagues has characterized this as "piss-poor, monocausal social science."

Which one, pray tell? Names please.

Inept, even kooky academic work, then, but is it anti-Semitic? If by anti-Semitism one means obsessive and irrationally hostile beliefs about Jews; if one accuses them of disloyalty, subversion or treachery, of having occult powers and of participating in secret combinations that manipulate institutions and governments; if one systematically selects everything unfair, ugly or wrong about Jews as individuals or a group and equally systematically suppresses any exculpatory information -- why, yes, this paper is anti-Semitic.

I like how the author states that the 'The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy' is an inept and kooky work. Nice smears there, Mr. hack writer!

"If by anti-Semitism one means obsessive and irrationally hostile beliefs about Jews; if one accuses them of disloyalty, subversion or treachery"
Now hoooooooooooooold on there just a minute my fine pro Likud American writer fella!

If two academics accuse pro-Israel Jewish (and, non-Jewish - some Christians do support the Israel Lobby for their own, religious, reasons) of being guilty of "disloyalty, subversion or treachery", and then they bring hundreds and hundreds of footnotes, anecdotes, facts, proofs, then perhaps there is something in it?

Also, the author equates anti-semitism with having obsessive and irrationally hostile beliefs about Jews. How about having REALISTIC beliefs about PEOPLE, as I wrote in my Dual Loyalty - another example article. Simply put, it is EXPECTED of different ethnic people to have a degree of loyalty to their homeland countries - Mexicans have patriotic feelings toward Mexico, Polish immigrants toward Poland, Chinese-Americans toward China (proof? Have you seen Puerto Rican, German, Polish, Chinese New Year parades in NY, Chicago, Philly?).

So questioning a loyalty of a government employee based on his or her voting record is not bigoted, or racist - but simply a necessity for Americans.

Especially since these days some American (?) Congressmen are openly admitting that they became members of Foreign Affairs Commitee to help out Israel.

Mearsheimer and Walt conceive of The Lobby as a conspiracy between the Washington Times and the New York Times, the Democratic-leaning Brookings Institution and Republican-leaning American Enterprise Institute, architects of the Oslo accords and their most vigorous opponents. In this world Douglas Feith manipulates Don Rumsfeld, and Dick Cheney takes orders from Richard Perle. They dwell on public figures with Jewish names and take repeated shots at conservative Christians (acceptable subjects for prejudice in intellectual circles), but they never ask why a Sen. John McCain today or, in earlier years, a rough-hewn labor leader such as George Meany declared themselves friends of Israel.

By all means, let us discuss exactly WHY Mr. McCain was wearing a yarmulka (he is NOT Jewish) and praying at the Wailing Wall in Israel. In fact, the question should be asked: Why was John McCain campaigning in Israel for the position of a United States president?

In fact, one should ask more questions. Like, why is president Bush wearing a yarmulka? I realize that when visiting other countries, it is a nice thing to do for our dignitaries to wear clothing styles of those countries. But the yarmulka is a RELIGIOUS piece of clothing, and I simply cannot fathom why self proclaimed Christians would wear one - I don't think when Bush or any other American politician visit Greece or Russia that they wear an Orthodox cross? Or when visiting Arab countries that they wear the Arab students religious headgear?

But enough with this Washington Post hack writer.

Lets move on...

To another hack writer, this time from the New York Times.

The title of the piece is "A Prosecutorial Brief Against Israel and Its Supporters".

Sounds juicy.

But it wants me to log in for free to view the complete article.

Fuck that - I am not gracing that trash piece with my email, and the price they ask of me (it's free) is too much.

OK, third article: the lesser known

This is a part 2 (forgive me for not bringing up part 1 - I am sure it is hackalicious).

At the end of last week’s cliffhanger, we promised to answer this week the question: Is Professors Stephen Walt and John Mearsheimer’s book The Israel Lobby anti-Semitic? But we have changed our minds.

Changed your minds?


Anti-Semites today are, in any event, generally careful to stress that they are merely anti-Israel. And even if they talk about "the Jews," they always have a fallback position: We meant the Jewish establishment. Very rarely is anything to be gained by accusing someone of being an anti-Semite. And the charge, once made, usually ends with the accuser thrust into the role of the accused for having attempted to stifle legitimate debate with charges of anti-Semitism.

Well of course - questioning the Jewish establishment, especially some of its parts, such as AIPAC and its power, are simply tactics used by anti-semites, bigots and white power racists to camouflage their rednecks with the writing equivalent of white hoods.

"And the charge, once made, usually ends with the accuser thrust into the role of the accused for having attempted to stifle legitimate debate with charges of anti-Semitism."

And this is a bad thing HOW?
If a person writes or speaks something that is anti semitic, PROVE it. Dissect it, explain exactly WHY the person is an anti semite, what was it he or she said or wrote.

Calling somebody an anti-semite and stifling free speech - it no worky no more, AIPAC.

So let us just say, following Jeffrey Goldberg in The New Republic, that Walt-Mearsheimer are peculiarly Judaeocentric. They have geneology on the brain. Thus they feel it important to inform readers that Democratic National Chairman Howard Dean is married to a Jew and his children are being raised as Jews (whatever that might mean)

Hold on.

I didn't know that - did you?

Would you expect, if Howard Dean was married to a Moslem woman, and his children were raised as Moslems, that this would be raised in the American media?

Say, to opinionate that Howard Dean would be sympathetic to Arab counries and causes?

Of course it would!

But, bring it up and imply that perhaps this makes Howard Dean sympathetic to Israel and Israeli causes - and you are an anti-semite, bigot, racist, etc etc etc...

David Remmick, editor of New Yorker, noted that Walt-Mearsheimer have undertaken to provide Americans distraught about the war in Iraq with a scapegoat: the Israel lobby. "They conclude that the United States was, in fact, tricked into a disastrous war in Iraq by a domestic Fifth Column and that the ranks of that subversive formation are filled with Jews, their friends and willing dupes." Remmick labels the book "sinister."

"They conclude that the United States was, in fact, tricked into a disastrous war in Iraq by a domestic Fifth Column and that the ranks of that subversive formation are filled with Jews, their friends and willing dupes."

Well, I see nothing wrong with this statement.

I came to the same conclusion when I was researching my blog - just go to my Neocons and Israeli Lobby in the USA tag on the right hand side, click on the articles and start reading.

No doubt the two professors have Jewish friends, perhaps even many of them. (That itself should have alerted to them to the weakness in their working premise that American Jews are all enlisted in the Israel lobby, and that they are far and away the most influential element of that lobby.)

I too have many Jewish friends. However, this has nothing to do with anything. Simply put, neither the book nor my blog ever, EVER, state that ALL American Jews are all enlisted in the Israel lobby.

Walt-Mearsheimer may not be anti-Semites, but they have written, in the words of Walter Russell Mead of the Council on Foreign Relations, "a book anti-Semites will love." Jeffrey Goldberg made a foray into, and discovered that purchasers of the book were also likely to purchase other works with names like The Power of Israel in the United States; Beyond Chutzpah: on the Misuse of Anti-Semitism and the Abuse of History; They Dare Speak Out: People and Institutions Confront Israel’s Lobby, and, of course, Jimmy Carter’s Palestine: Peace not Apartheid.

My goodness!

Americans educating themselves on the role of the pro-Israel Lobby in the runup to the Iraq War 2, and its power over American politicians.

This is terrible - all of these books should be on the verbotten! list, starting with that terrifying anti-semite, hateful bigot, Jimmy Carter!

I think I have read enough...


What have these two anti semites, terrible bigots, the academic version of a David Duke, been doing lately?

Burning crosses on Jewish lawns, I presume?

Well no...

They went on a book tour in Israel.

Gush shalom:
Contrary to some expectations, the visit of the two controversial American professors was a great success.

John Mearsheimer and Stephen Walt, whose book "The Israel Lobby" has caused an uproar in the United States and was boycotted there by the Jewish establishment, were cordially received in Israel and aroused a lively debate.

Imagine that - those two bigots, anti-semites, Jew haters, people who hate Israel and want the Arabs to kill and rape all Israelis (not necessarily in that order) went to Israel and... it was entirely normal.

Contrary to the fears of some, they did not encounter any difficulty in crossing into Israel - unlike another American professor, Norman Finkelstein, who was recently detained at the airport and deported.

Another worry that proved groundless was that the visit would be killed by silence, as happened to the visit of former President Jimmy Carter. On the contrary, they were overwhelmed with requests from the media, both Israeli and foreign, for interviews. Since the visit lasted for less than 48 hours, it was impossible to grant all the requests.

The next is a key paragraph from the Gush Shalom article:
During the entire visit, there was not a single negative incident. The professors expressed their satisfaction with the fact that the Israeli public was ready to listen and discuss, while such a debate is impossible in the United States.

This is stated as fact, as a commonly known fact. While a rational discussion of the Lobby is possible in Israel, such is not possible in the United States.

Quick question - that Israel Lobby in the USA - do you think it has any sort of power and influence on the political process in this country?

Before the event, an anonymous group distributed in the hall a pamphlet of the Israel lobby, including diatribes against the professors by extreme right-wing historian Benny Morris, Allan Dershovitz and others of their ilk.

Imagine - the Israel Lobby is ashamed and afraid... in Israel.

The visit began with a lecture at the Hebrew University in Jerusalem before a crammed lecture hall. In the evening they appeared at a Gush Shalom event at the Journalists' club in Tel-Aviv, where the hall was again crowded. For two and a half hours they spoke and answered questions from the floor. The discussion continued in the street after the event. The entire event was held in English, with simultaneous translation into Hebrew.

The positive attitude towards the guests was also due to their personality. If anyone expected dry and tough savants, they were proven wrong. They were seen to be warm, open and modest, eager for debate and without a trace of fanaticism or hostility, extremely well informed about Israeli affairs.

A normal, sane, and well mannered discussion of the pro-Israel Lobby?

Only possible in Israel.

JTA article on the visit:
TEL AVIV (JTA) – American professors Stephen Walt and John Mearsheimer, authors of a critical book on the pro-Israel lobby, had just finished their lecture Thursday in a packed, airless Tel Aviv hall when audience members rushed the stage, engulfing the pair with a mix of accusation and praise.

Assailed by the American Jewish establishment as having written a poorly researched and reasoned book with an anti-Israel agenda that taps into age-old, anti-Semitic stereotypes about Jewish power, Walt said he and Mearsheimer had not encountered a markedly different reception in Israel.

In addition to the Tel Aviv event, the two spoke at Jerusalem’s Hebrew University, and Walt spoke at Al-Quds University, an Arab school in eastern Jerusalem.

"Some people come who agree with us and some people come who don't agree with us, and we have a lively conversation,” Walt, a professor of international affairs at the John F. Kennedy School of Government at Harvard University, told JTA. “I think some people who don't know Israel very well would think it radical or brave or controversial to come to Israel, but there is a vital discussion here in Israel and I don't find it surprising that we've had a very interesting and enjoyable time.”

Funny, and yet very sad - I wish we could have an interesting and enjoyable discussion on the topic of the Israel Lobby in the USA.

In their talk in Tel Aviv, which was organized by the Israeli peace group Gush Shalom, the two authors took turns defending the central thesis of their book: that a coalition of pro-Israel groups succeed in pushing through policies in the United States that often are at odds with America's and even Israel's best interests. They cite the Iraq war as one example, a claim critics have called patently untrue and poorly argued.

Echoing that claim, the pair argued in Israel that the same forces are now pushing the country into attacking Iran.

"There is only one country in the world that is putting any pressure on the U.S. to attack Iran, and that is Israel," Mearsheimer told a packed lecture hall at Hebrew University, according to the Jerusalem Post. "And it is putting enormous pressure on the US."

He added, "Inside the United States, it is pro-Israel individuals and groups who are almost wholly responsible for pressure being brought to bear on Bush and Cheney to use military force on Iran. The idea that the lobby and Israel don't put huge amounts of pressure on the U.S. is contradictory to the evidence."

"There is only one country in the world that is putting any pressure on the U.S. to attack Iran, and that is Israel," Mearsheimer told a packed lecture hall at Hebrew University, according to the Jerusalem Post. "And it is putting enormous pressure on the US."

"The idea that the lobby and Israel don't put huge amounts of pressure on the U.S. is contradictory to the evidence."

As an example of his thesis, Mearsheimer, a political science professor at the University of Chicago, talked in his Tel Aviv lecture about how Israeli settlement building in the West Bank, though contrary to U.S. policy, continues because no U.S. president has the temerity to stand up to Israel and the pro-Israel lobby in Washington to stop it.

Point to the two anti-semites then?

"They are very convincing in terms of presentation because they are very articulate, but their argument that Israel has caused so much damage to America does not stand up and is causing anti-Zionism around the world," Michael Dickson, director of the group's office in Israel, said. "They used the academic freedom Israel provides to all to attack Israel and those who support her. So we made sure we were there to speak up against their lies.”

The authors say they have learned to shake off such criticism.

"When you cannot attack someone's facts or evidence, you call them names," Walt said.

Well said... you bigoted, racist, white power, Jew hating anti semite!

A young Israeli who recently completed his service in the IDF’s strategic planning division talked to Walt after his lecture about Israeli checkpoints in the West Bank, saying he regretted having to restrict the free movement of Palestinians, but for the time being checkpoints are necessary security measures.

He walked away disappointed with Walt’s response. "The Israel lobby is successful and strong,” he said Walt told him. “All I could think was: It's not strong enough.”

My God man.

Not strong enough?

What more do you want us, America and Americans, to do for Israel?
(I am afraid that I asked this question, actually).

Bonus Material:
The incomparable Phillip Weiss, Hollings Says Iraq War Was Launched in Large Part to Secure Israel:
Former S.C. Senator Ernest Fritz Hollings voted for the disastrous Iraq war resolution in '02 because he bought the WMD malarkey, he says in his new memoir (from Univ. of South Carolina press). Hollings writes that the real reasons for the invasion were Oedipal (doing what daddy couldn't) and oil-fed, but that neoconservative plans to democratize the Middle East were the driver. "He [Bush] was determined to invade and democratize Iraq to secure Israel pursuant to Richard Perle's plan of 'Clean Break.'" Hollings studies the Clean Break plan that Perle, Doug Feith and David Wurmser tried to sell to Netanyahu.

When George W. Bush was elected president, proponents of "Clean Break" hit pay dirt. Suddenly, those who favored striking at Iraq held seats of power.

Guess we have yet another anti-semitic liar who is also a bigot, a closet KKK member and loves terrarists and hates that blooming flower in the desert, the most democratic of democracies, Israel...

Funny, but I remember writing on the Clean Break and how it all ties up with American policies now in my blog - this is a must read article as it ties it all together, 'Clean Break', AIPAC, PNAC and the pro-Israel Lobby and our(?) government.

And now I am proved by no less than a former Senator.


And all that done with just google!


And 99% of Americans are ignorant of this issue due to the media blackout.


Bonus Material 2: another important upcomming book
Phillip Weiss again, he of the many connections in the world which make me jealous, writes:
Douglas Feith refused to appear before a congressional committee yesterday, apparently because Col. Lawrence Wilkerson was also set to testify. And Wilkerson has been sharply critical of the neocons.

I'm amazed that Feith even has the status that he does. His rise and inclusion in foreign-policy councils is testimony to the tremendous people-moving abilities of the neoconservative movement, which transformed the Washington establishment and allowed loons to become respectable. This is the thesis of Stephen Sniegoski's fine new book, The Transparent Cabal. I'm on page 40 and it's superb, calm, analytical, slightly hackademic, to use Avi Shlaim's expression. Sniegoski's achievement thus far is showing how the neocons left the Democratic Party, which of course was mother's milk to all Jews, and joined the Republicans over the issue of an aggressive foreign policy; and then performed a great service to Reagan: made Reagan's craziness (I remember those days) seem respectable in establishment east coast circles, by giving him the imprimatur of intellectuals with fancy degrees and media connections. Wonderful, true. And thus the neox' virulent non-conservative foreign-policy agenda, of militant transformation, got its nose under the camel's tent. You know what I'm saying. Then when they were in, the tough old battlescarred neocons gave position and status and jobs to effete young escargot-quaffing armchair neocons.

So what we have here is this: the neocons are a political movement, whose members when they got a foothold in the American government, pulled in other like minded neocon thinkers.

The words 'cabal' or 'conspiracy' come to mind?

Or do you feel like screaming 'anti semite' again?

The book is not yet released, but watch this space.

I also like how straightforward Sniegoski is about the neocons' Jewishness and Israel-centric agenda. Of course they're Jewish, though there have been plenty of fellow travelers from across the religious aisle, he says. And Israel is not the be-all and end-all of their vision of foreign affairs, he says in fairness. But when it comes to the Middle East, they're completely Israelcentric, and Likudnik

Neocons are of course Jewish?

And this new book states that without any ifs nor buts?

Anti semite!

"But when it comes to the Middle East, they're (the neocons -AG) completely Israelcentric, and Likudnik"

So there is one issue that unites the neocons in power in the American establihsment (which includes newspapers, TV, government) - Israel and their (right wing) vision of it.

I'm stunned that we have had no open discussion--i.e., media lynchmob--of these Jacobins who hijacked our foreign policy. I wonder whether Sniegoski will get on "Fresh Air," with Terry Gross, or on any NPR show. I feel that his last name will hurt him. There is prejudice against people who Jews believe are Polish. Just ask Zbig Brzezinski

Come now Mr. Weiss - there will be no public discussion in the US media of Bill Sniegoski's book. His book and name, perhaps even his family, will be vilified, called bigots, racists and anti-semites, among other names.

There is only one place in the world where such anti-semites are welcome - Israel.

advanced web statistics

1 comment:

Anonymous said...

Here's another "anti-semitic" article. Guess after we attack Iran, on orders from AIPAC and when gasoline hits 8-10 dollars a gallon and people start complaining about the cost, they'll be considered "anti-semitic."

Iran War Resolution May Be Passed Next Week

June 23, 2008 in Iran by Eric Garris | 43 comments
Introduced less than a month ago, Resolution 362, also known as the Iran War Resolution, could be passed by the House as early as next week.

The bill is the chief legislative priority of AIPAC. On its Web site, AIPAC endorses the resolutions as a way to ”Stop Iran’s Nuclear Program” and tells readers to lobby Congress to pass the bill. In the Senate, a sister resolution, Resolution 580, has gained co-sponsors with similar speed. The Senate measure was introduced by Indiana Democrat Evan Bayh on June 2. It has since gained 19 co-sponsors.

The bill’s key section “demands that the president initiate an international effort to immediately and dramatically increase the economic, political, and diplomatic pressure on Iran to verifiably suspend its nuclear enrichment activities by, inter alia, prohibiting the export to Iran of all refined petroleum products; imposing stringent inspection requirements on all persons, vehicles, ships, planes, trains, and cargo entering or departing Iran; and prohibiting the international movement of all Iranian officials not involved in negotiating the suspension of Iran’s nuclear program.”

“Imposing stringent inspection requirements on all persons, vehicles, ships, planes, trains, and cargo entering or departing Iran” can be read to mean that the president should initiate a naval blockade of Iran. A unilateral naval blockade without UN sanction is an act of war.

Resolution 362 has already gained 170 co-sponsors, or nearly 40 percent of the House. It has been referred to the Foreign Affairs Committee, which has 49 members, 24 of whom, including the ranking Republican, are co-sponsors. The Iran Nuclear Watch Web site writes, “According to the House leadership, this resolution is going to ‘pass like a hot knife through butter’ before the end of June on what is called suspension – meaning no amendments can be introduced during the 20-minute maximum debate. It also means it is assumed the bill will pass by a 2/3 majority and is non-controversial.”

Our national legislators deem it non-controversial to recommend to a president known for his recklessness and bad judgment that he consider engaging in an act of war against Iran. Those of you who consider this issue controversial can go to the Just Foreign Policy Web site and tell your representative to oppose this resolution.


Can we please have an American Congress that puts American needs and wants first and that cuts Israel off the American teat or is that considered "anti-semitic?"