Comments on: Walt & Mearsheimer Are Honored In England. Disgraced Here.

By: David

David — Mon, 29 Nov 1999 23:00:00 +0000

Antony Loewenstein reviews the book in the country with probably the second-strongest Israel lobby, Australia–
link to antonyloewenstein.com
/>

By: Richard Witty

Richard Witty — Mon, 29 Nov 1999 23:00:00 +0000

From the American Prospect.

I posted the URL from this on another thread.

Missing the Conversation About the Israel Lobby

Mearsheimer and Walt's The Israel Lobby lacks scholarly thoroughness -- and misses the debate among Jews over Israel.

Gershom Gorenberg | November 6, 2007 | web only

After giving a lecture in San Francisco, I drove to a friend's house where I'd arranged to pick up a copy of The Israel Lobby during my swing through the States. Curiously, it took just a few pages of John Mearsheimer and Stephen Walt's book to induce the disjointed feeling I usually get from reading an all-out defense of Israeli policy from precisely the right-wing Jewish groups they find so pernicious: I recognize dates, main events, sources of information, yet they are put together to create a world wildly simpler than the one in which I live -- an alternate reality neat and devoid of complexity, as if late at night I'd accidentally entered a subdevelopment's model home instead of my family's house down the street. The floor plan is the same, but the mess of being lived in is missing

By: Richard Witty

Richard Witty — Mon, 29 Nov 1999 23:00:00 +0000

By urgint that "The Israel Lobby" is your primary basis of dissent, in many ways you end up HINDERING convincing dissent.

By: NOMOREWAR_FORISRAEL

NOMOREWAR_FORISRAEL — Mon, 29 Nov 1999 23:00:00 +0000

The above is pure Zionist propaganda posted against Mearsheimer and Walt intended to distract from the truth conveyed in their excellent book (see www.israellobbybook.com) about the war for Israel agenda in Iraq which is about to be expanded to Iran before long. See the following Dutch documentary (in English) about AIPAC for comments by former Colin Powell assistant Lawrence Wilkerson (note the mention by Colin Powell's former assistant Lawrence Wilkerson near the end of the following documentary about WW 3 if Iran is attacked next - for Israel):

AIPAC's Push for War with Iran:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h6SQ02gqqao

Colonel Wilkerson mentioned in the following article as well:

Teflon Alliance with Israel:

http://www.itszone.co.uk/zone0/viewtopic.php?t=79679

Comments for USA Today correspondent Barbara Slavin (who has the new book out about Iran) are included via the following link from http://neoconzionistthreat.blogspot.com

Re: AIPAC is Pushing US to War with Iran for Israel (see the Scott Ritter youtubes in the comments section for how he mentioned AIPAC and that nukes might be used on Iran as well):

http://neoconzionistthreat.blogspot.com/2007/10/re-aipac-is-pushing-us-to-war-with-iran.html

'Invade and Bomb With Hillary and Rahm'
Why war with Iran is likely

http://antiwar.com/justin/?articleid=11846

AIPAC, Espionage, and Legal Sabotage
Has the AIPAC spy trial been derailed?

http://antiwar.com/justin/?articleid=11856

By: Apologist MM

Apologist MM — Mon, 29 Nov 1999 23:00:00 +0000

Yes, by essentially labeling Lobby lapdog Marty Peretz a shameless Zionist hack, Philip, you are just relegating yourself to the tiniest minority of marginal, all-but-ignored political opinionaters, like Matt Yglesias, Spencer Ackerman (who both worked for Marty), Eric Alterman, Ezra Klein, Roger Ailes (the good one), and maybe a few dozen others.

You're really going off the deep end, Phil. I'm concerned for you.

By: Apologist MM

Apologist MM — Mon, 29 Nov 1999 23:00:00 +0000

Phil, I am really, truly concerned for you. You have a very worrisome condition, and I just want to help you with it.

You seem unable to resist the lure of simple answers, despite obviously complex problems.

The other day I heard you told somebody that the solution to global warming was massive investment in air conditioning. Phil, that's really over-simplifying it. (But I used to combust massive quantities of organic matter and exhale it into the atmosphere as part of my daily routine, so I am not going to lecture you, Phil, on that.)

The Palestinian problem is a complex one. All of your posts treat this as a black and white issues, as if Palestinians either have human rights, or don't. That is really over-simplifying it. Rights cannot exist without responsibilities, Philip.

It's just not that simple.

I am very comfortable with the slogan, "Never again." Never again will I let this complex problem, demanding analysis of many different contexts, to be answered in a simple, essentialist way. Never again will I allow the notion that Palestinians are a people and they deserve a future better than Ariel Sharon's Bantuplan, go unchallenged.

Now, I have spoken out against the war in Iran, in fact I am one of its principal critics. But I also believe that Tipzi Levni's statement that Iran presents no risk to Israel must be seen for the multiple shades of gray that permeate it. "Iran" could mean the national football club, for instance. We just don't know.

I'm going to go get my milk out of the microwave now, I think it's boiling.

By: Richard Witty

Richard Witty — Mon, 29 Nov 1999 23:00:00 +0000

You can't tell a fanatic to not be a fanatic.

Three components of political sobriety (in contrast to fanaticism).

1. Kindness
2. Reason
3. Acceptance

By: MM

MM — Mon, 29 Nov 1999 23:00:00 +0000

Richard, I think you've confused politics with dinner parties.

When blood is being spilt, in such great volume, on a daily basis, without any end in sight, to the tune of billions of soon-to-be-worthless dollars, the appropriate volume is loud, the appropriate tone is hostile, and the appropriate action is unrelenting, uncompromising resistance.

You, Mr. Witty, are just in the way. You ought to go drink your milk.

By: Richard Witty

Richard Witty — Mon, 29 Nov 1999 23:00:00 +0000

"When blood is being spilt, in such great volume, on a daily basis, without any end in sight, to the tune of billions of soon-to-be-worthless dollars, the appropriate volume is loud, the appropriate tone is hostile, and the appropriate action is unrelenting, uncompromising resistance."

We differ then. I believe that ONLY reason, kindness and acceptance are valid and sustaining means of political process.

By your logic, you would be LOUD all the time, and for thousands of years.

Hard to know what you advocate FOR.

By: MM

MM — Mon, 29 Nov 1999 23:00:00 +0000

Simple: UN Dec of Human Rights. For everyone. Everywhere. And to the extent that my tax dollars subsidize the violation of those rights, I am for an immediate end to that policy.

Domestic politics are hardly governed by the same sort of diplomatic code to which you seem to be alluding. But you knew that, if you thought for a second. No one cares the supposed standards to which you limit your
discourse, because you don't demonstrate any integrity to begin with.

In fact, you are pushing "kindness," "acceptance," "context," and all your other distracting bullshit, because you are content with the status quo (of endless, unconditional material support and apologia for Israel's transgressions), while Philip, god bless him, apparently is not.