Comments on: The Times Says the Israel Lobby Doesn’t Go Back to Truman. What About Wilson? http://mondoweiss.net/2006/11/the_times_says_.html The War of Ideas in the Middle East Mon, 13 Feb 2012 19:51:12 +0000 hourly 1 By: Bill http://mondoweiss.net/2006/11/the_times_says_.html/comment-page-1#comment-74622 Bill Mon, 29 Nov 1999 23:00:00 +0000 http://www.philipweiss.org/mondoweiss/2006/11/13/the_times_says_.html#comment-74622 <p>yes, we were so fucking powerful back in the Roosevelt to Wilson era that 6 million of us, a THIRD of world Jewry mangaged to get incinerated. The British blocked Jewish immigration into the Palestine mandate from the moment that Allenby entered Jerusalem. But, little Phil I guess you know best. OK, you've cracked the case, we run it all, we know all, and there is not a thing that happens in the world that we're not behind. We all get the information packet at our Bar Mitzvahs, Did you lose yours asshole.</p> yes, we were so fucking powerful back in the Roosevelt to Wilson era that 6 million of us, a THIRD of world Jewry mangaged to get incinerated. The British blocked Jewish immigration into the Palestine mandate from the moment that Allenby entered Jerusalem. But, little Phil I guess you know best. OK, you've cracked the case, we run it all, we know all, and there is not a thing that happens in the world that we're not behind. We all get the information packet at our Bar Mitzvahs, Did you lose yours asshole.

]]> By: thewiseking http://mondoweiss.net/2006/11/the_times_says_.html/comment-page-1#comment-74623 thewiseking Mon, 29 Nov 1999 23:00:00 +0000 http://www.philipweiss.org/mondoweiss/2006/11/13/the_times_says_.html#comment-74623 <p>Overstating Jewish Power<br /> Mearsheimer and Walt give too much credit to the Israeli lobby.</p> <p>By Christopher Hitchens<br /> Posted Monday, March 27, 2006, at 1:47 PM ET </p> <p>It's slightly hard to understand the fuss generated by the article on the Israeli lobby produced by the joint labors of John Mearsheimer and Stephen Walt that was published in the London Review of Books. My guess is that the Harvard logo has something to do with it, but then I don't understand why the doings of that campus get so much media attention, either.</p> <p>The essay itself, mostly a very average "realist" and centrist critique of the influence of Israel, contains much that is true and a little that is original. But what is original is not true and what is true is not original.</p> <p>Everybody knows that the American Israel Public Affairs Committee and other Jewish organizations exert a vast influence over Middle East policy, especially on Capitol Hill. The influence is not as total, perhaps, as that exerted by Cuban exiles over Cuba policy, but it is an impressive demonstration of strength by an ethnic minority. Almost everybody also concedes that the Israeli occupation has been a moral and political catastrophe and has implicated the United States in a sordid and costly morass. I would have gone further than Mearsheimer and Walt and pointed up the role of Israel in supporting apartheid in South Africa, in providing arms and training for dictators in Congo and Guatemala, and helping reactionary circles in America do their dirty work—most notably during the Iran-Contra assault on the Constitution and in the emergence of the alliance between Likud and the Christian right. Counterarguments concerning Israel's help in the Cold War and in the region do not really outweigh these points.</p> Overstating Jewish Power
Mearsheimer and Walt give too much credit to the Israeli lobby.

By Christopher Hitchens
Posted Monday, March 27, 2006, at 1:47 PM ET

It's slightly hard to understand the fuss generated by the article on the Israeli lobby produced by the joint labors of John Mearsheimer and Stephen Walt that was published in the London Review of Books. My guess is that the Harvard logo has something to do with it, but then I don't understand why the doings of that campus get so much media attention, either.

The essay itself, mostly a very average "realist" and centrist critique of the influence of Israel, contains much that is true and a little that is original. But what is original is not true and what is true is not original.

Everybody knows that the American Israel Public Affairs Committee and other Jewish organizations exert a vast influence over Middle East policy, especially on Capitol Hill. The influence is not as total, perhaps, as that exerted by Cuban exiles over Cuba policy, but it is an impressive demonstration of strength by an ethnic minority. Almost everybody also concedes that the Israeli occupation has been a moral and political catastrophe and has implicated the United States in a sordid and costly morass. I would have gone further than Mearsheimer and Walt and pointed up the role of Israel in supporting apartheid in South Africa, in providing arms and training for dictators in Congo and Guatemala, and helping reactionary circles in America do their dirty work—most notably during the Iran-Contra assault on the Constitution and in the emergence of the alliance between Likud and the Christian right. Counterarguments concerning Israel's help in the Cold War and in the region do not really outweigh these points.

]]>