Israel Lobby Too Powerful?

[William Joyce]

Why, yes, it is.

Sound like something ol' David Duke would say? Yes, but also Harvard and the University of Chicago. A Jewish paper reports on the struggle the authors had to even find a publisher:

http://www.forward.com/main/printer-friendly.php?id=7550

Jews have the power to shut down university studies in the U.S. and to JAIL their critics in Europe. Kinda makes ya wonder about how "oppressed" they really are...

 

[shepherdboy]

Why, yes, it is.

Sound like something lo' David Duke would say? Yes, but also Harvard and the University of Chicago. A Jewish paper reports on the struggle the authors had to even find a publisher:

http://www.forward.com/main/printer-friendly.php?id=7550

Jews have the power to shut down university studies in the U.S. and to JAIL their critics in Europe. Kinda makes ay wonder about how "oppressed" they really are...

The day of the Jewish people being oppressed are over. Remember the saying
"Never again!" With their enemies surrounding them and the countless calls for their existence to be wipe off the face of the Earth, I am pretty sure they are gonna do what ever it takes to prevent them from being vulnerable to "ANY" attack. (verbal, social, military, you name it.) It just a survival mechanism that has evolved from centuries of persecution.

 

[dilloduck]

The day of the Jewish people being oppressed are over. Remember the saying
"Never again!" With their enemies surrounding them and the countless calls for their existence to be wipe off the face of the Earth, I am pretty sure they are gonna do what ever it takes to prevent them from being vulnerable to "ANY" attack. (verbal, social, military, you name it.) It just a survival mechanism that has evolved from centuries of persecution.

You got it--they will even use thier power to influence the US government to survive.

 

[BaronVonBigmeat]

Israel lobby? Powerful?

Why, that's preposterous!

Next thing you know, someone's going to try and tell me that Clinton took campaign money from China. Sheesh!

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Why, yes, it is.

Sound like something ol' David Duke would say? Yes, but also Harvard and the University of Chicago. A Jewish paper reports on the struggle the authors had to even find a publisher:

http://www.forward.com/main/printer-friendly.php?id=7550

Jews have the power to shut down university studies in the U.S. and to JAIL their critics in Europe. Kinda makes ya wonder about how "oppressed" they really are...

THough I support Israel, it's interesting to note that only jews are allowed past certain levels in their government, by law. Then they have the temerity to say a nativity on a town square in the U.S. is a "slippery slope toward theocracy".

 

[Annie]

Why, yes, it is.

Sound like something ol' David Duke would say? Yes, but also Harvard and the University of Chicago. A Jewish paper reports on the struggle the authors had to even find a publisher:

http://www.forward.com/main/printer-friendly.php?id=7550

Jews have the power to shut down university studies in the U.S. and to JAIL their critics in Europe. Kinda makes ya wonder about how "oppressed" they really are...

There are more:

http://www.boston.com/news/educatio...srael_lobby_critique_roils_academe/?page=full

'Israel lobby' critique roils academe
Some assail paper by a Harvard dean

By Charles A. Radin, Globe Staff | March 29, 2006

A paper co-written by the academic dean of Harvard University's John F. Kennedy School of Government is setting off a firestorm in academic and political circles because of its assertions that US foreign policy is dominated by an ''Israel lobby" that ignores US national interest and makes the United States a target of Muslim terrorists.


According to the paper by Kennedy School academic dean Stephen M. Walt and University of Chicago political scientist John J. Mearsheimer, American Jewish groups, leading Christian evangelicals, The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal, the Brookings Institution, and other think tanks have all contributed to sacrificing of US security needs to the interests of Israel.

''Saying that Israel and the United States are united by a shared terrorist threat has the causal relationship backwards," the authors of the paper write. ''The United States has a terrorism problem in good part because it is so closely allied with Israel. . . . US support for Israel is not the only source of anti-American terrorism, but it is an important one."

The authors say that Israel long ago outlived its strategic usefulness to the United States and has become a strategic burden.

The paper first appeared two weeks ago in the Kennedy School website's ''working papers" section, where faculty members routinely post work in progress. It has received attention far beyond academia, drawing praise from former Ku Klux Klan leader David Duke and Arab world media, and condemnation from many intellectuals and Israel advocacy groups.
PDF Download the paper as a PDF

But as challenges to the accuracy and evenhandedness of the authors have grown, the school removed the Harvard University-Kennedy School logo that originally appeared on the opening page, and inserted a strong disclaimer stating that the paper ''should not be interpreted or portrayed as reflecting the official position" of Harvard or the University of Chicago.

The paper is a broad synthesis of criticisms and charges against Israel long heard on the fringes of American politics and renewed in the debate over the Iraq war, allegations that also form the core of Arab world critiques of the Jewish state. The authors assert that Israel has not acted as an ally of the United States, that it has received inexplicably large amounts of US support, and that even in Israel's earliest days there was no moral case for the United States to support it.

The Israel lobby's activities ''are not the sort of conspiracy depicted in anti-Semitic tracts like the 'Protocols of the Elders of Zion,' " Mearsheimer and Walt say. ''For the most part, the individuals and groups that comprise the lobby are doing what other special interest groups do, just much better."

But then they assert that the American Israel Public Affairs Committee ''is a de facto agent of a foreign government [and] has a stranglehold on the US Congress," that major newspapers, including The New York Times (which is owned by the same company as The Boston Globe), are biased toward Israel, and that ''pro-Israel forces dominate US think tanks, which play an important role in shaping public debate, as well as actual policy."

The significance of the paper, according to those who condemn it, as well as those who embrace it, lies in the Harvard and University of Chicago credentials of the authors and in the fact that it has been presented in a high-level academic forum, in a heavily footnoted style associated with accurate, objective scholarship.

Duke, a white supremacist whose website is dominated by articles and tape-recordings condemning Jews and Israel, devoted his entire half-hour Internet radio broadcast on March 18 to the paper, reading from it at length and suggesting that it confirms his long-stated views.

''Now it is finally revealed by some of the top academic sources in the country," Duke said. ''It is not just David Duke anymore. None other than researchers at Harvard and the University of Chicago" have said that ''the Israel lobby controls US foreign policy and is responsible for this war" in Iraq. ''What a fantastic step forward this is."

The paper is also getting heavy play on websites operated by the Arab satellite television network Al Jazeera, the Islamic extremist group Hamas, and the Palestine Liberation Organization.

In a brief telephone interview yesterday, Walt said: ''My coauthor and I stand behind our paper, and we welcome serious scholarly discussion of its arguments and evidence. Period." He would not respond to questions about Duke's use of the paper or to critics' comments made to the Globe.

In response to a Globe inquiry about the controversial paper, Kennedy School spokeswoman Melodie Jackson said in a statement that ''the Kennedy School is firmly committed to academic freedom and supports the practice of scholars introducing ideas into the public arena where they can be discussed and debated."

Mearsheimer did not return a call to his office in Chicago.

Ronald A. Heifetz, the King Hussein Bin Talal lecturer in public leadership at the Kennedy School, said in a telephone interview yesterday that Mearsheimer and Walt had exceeded the bounds of academic freedom and that the dean of the Kennedy School should look into the matter.

''When a member of the Harvard faculty speaks, people are inclined to view us as credible sources of analysis and insight," Heifetz said. ''We have a special responsibility to clarify the difference between voicing an opinion and presenting a work of scholarship. . . . It behooves us to be careful about what we say . . . if we express a point of view that can be embraced by David Duke and the Muslim Brotherhood to justify racist, terrorist activities."

Marvin Kalb, a veteran journalist and longtime faculty member at the Kennedy School, said the article contained factual errors and was written on the assumption that the United States should side with Muslims rather than Jews in the Middle East because of the much greater number of Muslims.

''I was disappointed that a paper of this quality appeared under the Kennedy School label," Kalb said. ''I understand this is no longer the case. That was a good move."

Alex Safian, associate director of the pro-Israel Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting, said that there were numerous factual errors, detailed on his organization's website, such as overstatement of the proportion of US foreign aid received by Israel. Safian also asserted that the authors' real issue is that US foreign policy is subject to public politics and the give and take of interest groups.

''Their problem is not that a cabal is running US foreign policy," he said. ''It is that they would like to be in the cabal."

Charles A. Radin can be reached at [email protected].

 

[Annie]

Links at site. This 'study' is hooey':

http://powerlineblog.com/archives/013600.php

March 31, 2006
Alan Dershowitz on deck

In a column for the New York Sun, Alan Dershowitz discusses his challenge to the Mearsheimer/Walt's execrable "Israel Lobby" paper: "High stakes at Harvard." The Boston Globe reports that Dershowitz's request to post a response to the paper on the Kennedy School site has resulted in the adoption of a new policy: "Harvard dean opens faculty papers to rebuttal." On the subjects of Israel, American foreign policy, and the other issues on which Mearsheimer and Walt touch in their paper, Dershowitz is more or less an inspired amateur. Although Mearsheimer and Walt seem to me to make mistakes reflecting their own amateurishness, animus and partiality -- such as referring to the 1948 Arab war of extermination on Israel only as an "opportunity" on which Israel allegedlly seized -- I wonder if there isn't anyone on the faculty with a professional interest in the subjects who would like to step up to the plate and give the Mearsheimer/Walt paper the whack it deserves.

The good folks at CAMERA have posted an interesting piece on Mearsheimer: "Will the real John Mearsheimer please stand up?" The allusion to the old "What's My Line?" television show seems apposite in more ways than one.

UPDATE: I knew I was at risk on this point and should have hedged. Freelance copywriter Bruce Goldman writes:

"Will the real John Mearsheimer please stand up?" alludes not to the old "What's My Line?" television show but to the slightly less old "To Tell the Truth," from the same producers (Goodson-Todman). In it, three contests purported to be the same person, and two of them were imposters. When the panel finished guessing who was who, the moderator asked the question, after some false starts for suspense the real person stood up, and finally the other two contestants revealed who they really were.

Now I remember it, along with such other Goodson-Todman gems as "Beat the Clock," "Match Word" and "I've Got a Secret."

 

[rtwngAvngr]

That's it. Jews have no influence in america. There's nothing to see here. Move along. WHat are you looking at?!

 

[Annie]

That's it. Jews have no influence in america. There's nothing to see here. Move along. WHat are you looking at?!

And it says that where?

 

[rtwngAvngr]

And it says that where?

I said it, here.

 

[Annie]

I said it, here.

okey dokey.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

okey dokey.

Replying to overt sarcasm just leads nowhere. I figured thought out dealing with dillo!

 

[jillian]

THough I support Israel, it's interesting to note that only jews are allowed past certain levels in their government, by law. Then they have the temerity to say a nativity on a town square in the U.S. is a "slippery slope toward theocracy".

There's a difference. Israel never professes to be anything but a "Jewish State". IMO, the appropriate measure isn't what a heterogeneous society like the U.S. does in its governmental system. The proper measure is what do the States around Israel do? In Israel, unlike the Islamic states surrounding it, non-Jews are allowed not only to live in peace, but to participate in the governmental process.

The question I always ask is why people are so quick to object to a little teeny Jewish State when it's surrounded by countries in which a Jew can't even set foot?

 

[José]

I have an even better question to pose to the typical super patriotic american clown of the US Message Board:

Would you support the existence of a tiny Jewish state founded in a minuscule american state like South Carolina surrounded by refugee camps inhabited by millions of american refugees whose only crime is the fact they do not belong to the “official” ethnicity of the state?

Would you call the american resistance against this racial dictatorship terrorism if it resulted in civilian deaths or would you call them freedom fighters fighting for their right to live in their own homeland?

You all know the answer to these two questions and so did my mother when she gave me this wise advice:

“Son... never underestimate the stupidity of a super patriotic american clown.”

 

[theHawk]

Freedom fighters form an army and fight like men. They don't blow themselves up with women and children. So I'd call them cowards.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

There's a difference. Israel never professes to be anything but a "Jewish State". IMO, the appropriate measure isn't what a heterogeneous society like the U.S. does in its governmental system. The proper measure is what do the States around Israel do? In Israel, unlike the Islamic states surrounding it, non-Jews are allowed not only to live in peace, but to participate in the governmental process.

The question I always ask is why people are so quick to object to a little teeny Jewish State when it's surrounded by countries in which a Jew can't even set foot?

It's fine with me. I just asking the adl call off abe foxman. That man's a menace.

 

[jillian]

It's fine with me. I just asking the adl call off abe foxman. That man's a menace.

Like most people with an agenda, Foxman can be totally OTT sometimes and makes the ADL look bad, and himself silly, on occasion, but he also says common sense things once in a while:

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/pages/rosnerGuest.jhtml?itemNo=688487

Sometimes one has to separate the wheat from the chaff...

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Like most people with an agenda, Foxman can be totally OTT sometimes and makes the ADL look bad, and himself silly, on occasion, but he also says common sense things once in a while:

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/pages/rosnerGuest.jhtml?itemNo=688487

Sometimes one has to separate the wheat from the chaff...

Yep. And foxman=chaff.

http://www.truthtellers.org/alerts/foxmanhatecriminal.html

Christianity Bashing by Foxman

How does Foxman show contempt for an identifiable group (Christianity)?

Let's start with his Baptist bashing. Foxman says "to target Jews for conversion is disgraceful, insulting, and dangerous." He contends the Southern Baptist Convention is "part of a deceptive movement ... whose real goal is to convert Jews to Christianity. These efforts should be stopped once and for all ... the Southern Baptist leadership continues to show its disrespect and disregard for the validity of Judaism and the Jewish people." (www.adl.org)

In Foxman's latest book, No Place for Hate? The New Anti-Semitism, he says the lies of the New Testament are responsible for the death and suffering of countless Jews throughout history, culminating in the Holocaust of World War 2.

"Every annual reading or reenactment of the story of the death of Jesus in Christian churches ... has been used to justify hatred of Jews and violence against them, including from Christian pulpits. Through the centuries, these denunciations have led to countless outbreaks of violence against Jews, including murderous pogroms ... For almost 2,000 years, Christian leadership drove the spread of anti-Semitism throughout Europe and beyond" (p. 48).

Foxman believes there is "a direct line from ancient Christian teachings on Jews and Judaism to the death camps of Hitler" (p. 48). The Christian mission to evangelize Jews, Foxman says, is inherently anti-Semitic (p. 138).

Could it be that Jewish youths, believing Foxman's words, would burn down churches in righteous anger? It's easy to imagine, considering how Foxman paints Christian churches as temples of hate.

For example, Foxman's book says for nearly 2,000 years the Catholic church has been the "cradle of hatred ... the arch-enemy of the Jews -- our most powerful and relentless oppressor and the world's greatest force for the dissemination of anti-Semitic beliefs and the instigator of violent acts of hatred" (p. 75). He says the Catholic church has "a legacy of incredible shame and horror" (p. 74).

Is Foxman exposing an "identifiable group" to contempt -- the ADL's definition of a "hate crime" in Canada and many other countries? Judge for yourself.

Foxman's Hate Mongering

It probably can't be proven in Canada or Alabama that Foxman directly incited church burnings. And we don't need to prove it! In his diatribes against Christians, Foxman lives up to his own definition of a hate criminal perfectly. Throughout Canada, a growing number of Holocaust reductionists and Christians have been dragged through the courts and severely fined for inciting far less contempt for other religions than Foxman has against Christianity.

In Canada, Foxman's widely circulated book should, under ADL's Canadian hate law, be considered "hate literature." His writings could well "incite to violence" overzealous Jews. The Canadian government could at least ban his books, exclude him from the country (as they did to David Irving), and filter his internet outreach to the country, as they are trying to censor right-wing websites today. All this, of course, would only happen if hate crimes enforcement were even-handed in Canada -- which it is not.

Real Hate Crimes Do Exist

Of course, ADL's definition of a hate crime is a farce. It is skewed for one ultimate purpose: to entrap and persecute Christians and those who criticize matters Jewish.

In reality, thoughts and sincere words are not crimes. It shouldn't be a crime for Foxman to criticize the Southern Baptist Convention or for me to criticize evil Jewish leaders.

There does exist, however, such a thing as a bona fide crime of hate. When, from extreme hostility, one uses government to criminalize people for expressing their opinions -- and exhausts, bankrupts, and finally imprisons them -- that is a hate crime of the vilest sort.

Recent examples of such government-sponsored acts of terrorism against innocent persons are:

• Deportation of Holocaust reductionists Germar Rudolph and Ernst Zundel to Germany. They questioned the accuracy of the 6-million figure of alleged Jewish dead. Theirs was a violation of ADL/B'nai B'rith's German anti-hate laws.

• Imprisonment of David Irving for three years. He also questioned the Holocaust figures and methods, violating ADL/B'nai B'rith's Austrian anti-hate laws.

• The 2004 arrest and imprisonment of the "Philly 11" Christians by ADL's national executive board member, Philadelphia DA Lynne Abraham. Abraham incarcerated them for 21 hours, threatening each person with 47 years in prison and a $90,000 fine. By peacefully witnessing to homosexuals, she claimed, they had violated ADL's Pennsylvania anti-hate law.

A Higher Court

What would be the verdict of educated and fair-minded persons? Are Abe Foxman and his ADL hate criminals according to the truest definition of the term?

The verdict of this court is unanimous.

"Guilty as charged."

 

[dilloduck]

There's a difference. Israel never professes to be anything but a "Jewish State". IMO, the appropriate measure isn't what a heterogeneous society like the U.S. does in its governmental system. The proper measure is what do the States around Israel do? In Israel, unlike the Islamic states surrounding it, non-Jews are allowed not only to live in peace, but to participate in the governmental process.

The question I always ask is why people are so quick to object to a little teeny Jewish State when it's surrounded by countries in which a Jew can't even set foot?

How do you explain to you objector friends the billions of dollars that American taxpayers spend on such a "little teeny Jewish State" with monstrous military power to include nukes? Somehow "because they are our only ally in the mideast" doesn't quite cut it.

 

[jillian]

How do you explain to you objector friends the billions of dollars that American taxpayers spend on such a "little teeny Jewish State" with monstrous military power to include nukes? Somehow "because they are our only ally in the mideast" doesn't quite cut it.

I respond that we have also given billions in aid to the Palestinians to "encourage" them to go to the peace table. It is in our interests to have stability in the region and that costs, same as we spread money around in other places around the globe.

The difference is that Israel remains our ally where others just take the money. Also, no funds we ever gave to Israel ended up in the foreign bank account of the prime minister's wife.

I have far greater objections to the tax dollars we've spent on Iraq.