The Israel Lobby has entered the political discourse in a big way. The problem is that it is completely ignored as a factor in the mainstream media, and completely glommed by the outsider media. Here is Paul Craig Roberts, a former Reagan Administration Treasury official, describing the lobby as powerful interest in the presidential race:
Obama might not bring any change either. But he is the only
candidate in the running who has expressed concern over Israel’s
mistreatment of the Palestinians and who voted against the Iraq
invasion….If Obama were to appoint people opposed by the
military-security lobby, the Israel Lobby or the offshoring
lobby, the Senate would be unlikely to confirm them. No
president wants to nominate people who cannot be confirmed.
Presidents have to staff their administrations according to who
can get the approval of powerful interest group.
And here is author Antony Loewenstein writing in the Australian Age about a nefarious, octopus-like lobby that permeates American politics:
American professors John Mearsheimer and Stephen Walt hypothesise
that pro-Israeli advocates have so thoroughly infiltrated the
American body politic that the US government is no longer capable
of recognising its national interests in the Middle East. [Weiss's emphasis. Cool!] On Friday
[November 30] Israeli diplomats demanded that the US withdraw a resolution to the
UN Security Council endorsing the Annapolis summit on the grounds
that the UN is insufficiently pro-Israeli to be involved in the
peace process. The resolution was promptly withdrawn.
There’s a real problem here: that people who are outside the mainstream/Establishment believe something fervently, and people in the Establishment insist this is not the case, or it is exaggerated, or delusional. Still the knowledge creeps in on little cat feet. Years ago only leaders in the Arab world subscribed to this "conspiracy theory," as Tom Friedman once smeared talk of the lobby, after a whirlwind tour of Arabia. Now it is thoroughly in our discourse, on the right– Roberts– and the left, Loewenstein. Still it is marginalized, the Times and the New Yorker and ’60 Minutes’ and the CFR saw to that. Respectable people stay away. The marginalization of such an important idea is unhealthy. The establishment must integrate this understanding, or at least have an honest discussion of it.
Or I suppose the establishment could collapse around it. The same kind of dislocation of narratives occurred after Vietnam, our last great war, and a social order fell. Somehow this worldview feels more tenacious, as it is entwined with globalization and hedge funds, all the engines of the American economy, such as it is…
"There's a real problem here: that people who are outside the mainstream/Establishment believe something [the power of the Lobby] fervently, and people in the Establishment insist this is not the case, or it is exaggerated, or delusional. Still the knowledge creeps in on little cat feet."
Apparently there's a cynical calculation on the part of the 'Establishment' that as long as they can program half the population — the half which passively accepts opinion molding by mainstream media feeds — it simply doesn't matter that knowledge is creeping in on little cats' feet to the other half. At least, not until there's a tipping point.
This morning CNN was showing scenes at the Rafah border, as Egypt attempts to reclose it. The anchor asked CNN's Israel correspondent, Ben Weideman, whether the border should be regulated like a normal international crossing, or closed. From the Israeli and U.S. point of view, he replied, it should be closed completely. Yes, replied the female anchor, it looks they're having a lot of trouble (referring to the Egyptian forces); it's getting awfully chaotic there.
Doesn't that just sum up U.S. media bias in a nutshell? They view their role as being a mouthpiece for Israeli and U.S. policy (in that order). They sympathize with Islamic states, such as Egypt, when they cooperate with U.S./Israeli demands. And the desperate Gazan crowds are disparaged as 'chaotic.' This isn't news; it's corporate video for sovereign clients.
This has to be hammered again and again and again:
All this is thanks to American professors John Mearsheimer and Stephen Walt's scholarly study of the Jewish lobby in USA.
Off topic – it is not just AIPAC. America seems uniquely vulnerable to well organized political (racial ?) minority (can I say that about Jews? Or religious minority if you prefer…I still do not know how to classify y'all).
Just think how Cuban exiles in Florida shape presidential elections. And they are only in one state. To wit: the economic blockade of Cuba, which (in my opinion) is extremely counterproductive, will never be lifted or even talked about, due to career minded presidential candidates.
So it is not just the Jewish lobby – it seems American system of government encourages such well organized minorities.
Movie star Jon Voight sent this letter to the Jews of Florida:
Every Jew Should be Voting for Giuliani
"Israel is in worse danger than ever. Israel's enemies are many, and speak arrogantly and blatantly about how they want to destroy all Jews and Israel. Let us not forget the Holocaust. We will need a strong president, one who will be committed to the safety and survival of Israel; one who can stand up to the terrorists and extremists.
"Rudy Giuliani will not be bullied. Every Jew should be voting for Giuliani. He understands the importance of Israel to America, as well as it's importance to the rest of the world. Rudy Giuliani grew up in New York City, which has the largest Jewish population outside of Israel. There is no other candidate running who has closer ties and understands, respects, and loves the Jewish people as does Rudy Giuliani. He is a man of his word, and his promise to protect Israel is sacred."
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/pages/rosnerBlog.jhtml?itemNo=865078
No question of dual loyalties there.
"it seems American system of government encourages such well organized minorities."
Racial/religious/ethnic demagoguery has a long history in the US (and really, in the world.) The problems really start, however, when an overly powerful central government, out of political correctness and moral cowardice, panders to the ethnic demagogues to ridiculous extremes — for example, the way the US government went to war in Iraq in a large measure at the prodding and behest of the Israel lobby.
That example marks a failure of character not only among the Jewish-American Israel lobby (which betrayed the best interests of America on behalf of Israel) but a failure of character among the Washington establishment, including Hillary Clinton and many Democrats, which knew exactly what was going on and proceeded anyway out of political expediency. But it also represents a failure of character among the "elite" of the Bush-Cheney-Clinton generation of Americans, which by and large has proven itself too narcissistic, compartmentalized and pretentious to inconvenience itself with anything so pedestrian and mundane as to stand up for the interests of average Americans. They're just too cool for that.
There is no "THE" Israel lobby.
There are multiple, with very varying perspectives and objectives.
Richard, where is the one that calls for withholding US support until Israel meets US demands?
That's the one I want to support.
A good conspiracy is unprovable. I mean, if you can prove it, it means they screwed up somewhere along the line.’
Jerry Fletcher (played by Mel Gibson) in the 1997 movie Conspiracy Theory.
High profile scientist David Bellamy was not led to the mythic rocks of destruction, but to the cold hard reality of glaciers. He was unwittingly seduced by the sirens of conspiracy theory. His 2005 letter to New Scientis magazine questioned the reality of global warming and made false assertions about glacier melting rates. Guardian columnist George Monbiot traced Bellamy’s flawed claims back to a conspiracist website run by a group of addled crackpots led by Lyndon LaRouche.
Columnist John Naughton wrote that it was a lack of scepticism toward this type of ‘codswallop that lured Bellamy to his professional doom’. We can nod about how silly this all is when our political adversaries make such dubious claims and shrill predictions revealing their gullibility; but what about when it is our political allies who embrace conspiracy theories? Belief in them is rampant around the world, and increasingly among activists working for peace, a safe environment, social equality, civil liberties and economic justice. Conspiracism in these human rights movements, in my view, distorts accurate strategic analysis and undermines effective action.
Criticizing the flaws in conspiracy thinking, however, has made me part of the conspiracy – as a simple internet search will confirm. Critics like me are dubbed ‘Left Gatekeepers’ who are tools of the ruling élites and the CIA. The Canadian journalist Barrie Zwicker suggests we are all part of the ‘Conspiracy Theory Conspiracy’. Zwicker produced a DVD The Great Conspiracy: The 9/11 News Special You Never Saw, and wrote Towers of Deception.
‘An entire industry has sprung up about the speculation of the events of 9/11,’ reports the Canadian Broadcasting Company’s flagship public affairs programme The Fifth Estate. After thoroughly researching numerous 9/11 conspiracy claims, it ‘found no credible evidence in the public domain to prove the US Government had any specific advance knowledge of exactly what would happen on 11 September 2001’. According to the programme: ‘The most infamous conspiracy theorist of them all is Thierry Meyssan. His book The Big Lie was a bestseller in Europe.’ One English journalist stated: ‘Meyssan’s theories are often circumlocutory and warped. They contain huge gaps.’ The less formal Canadian journalists just called them ‘wild allegations’.
It’s not just about 9/11. Conspiracy theories flourish in many areas. As if the documented erosion of civil liberties in the United States were not bad enough, conspiracy hysterics such as Alex Jones and Jeff Rense feature forecasts of élite conspiracies presaging tyranny and massive waves of destruction. In Britain, David Icke warns of humanoid lizard aliens plotting really bad things, and fills auditoriums around the world when he tours. In Japan – a country with an infinitesimal Jewish population – antisemitic conspiracy theories are widespread. In parts of Africa, conspiracy theories about what causes AIDS have resulted in needless deaths.
9/11 fantasies
Sonali Kolhatkar hosts a radio news programme in Los Angeles. Her specialty is the war in Afghanistan. When she speaks in public she is heckled by vocal audience members who bring up ‘the 9/11 attacks as some sort of “inside job” which implies [that] I should really be talking about the “much bigger story”’.’ Kolhatkar objects when ‘serious journalism is mixed in with conspiracy theory’ in a way that draws in ‘innocent listeners’. This is ‘hard to resist unless you are a complete sceptic and willing to do lots of homework’.
We are all attracted to conspiracy theories. Forensic psychologist Evan Harrington suggests that to some extent ‘suspiciousness is part of human nature’. Part of ‘our evolutionary heritage’, he says, is that humans are ‘efficient at organizing social information’. This ability and the ‘need to see patterns, or to resolve ambiguity, is not always detrimental’, but can lead to errors of judgement and ignored evidence. This is especially true when traumatic events make it difficult to find an explanation to fit the drama and scale of our memories. Conspiracy is the easy answer.
Conspiracy theories are stories with a plot revealing who is villainous and who is virtuous. As an overly simplistic perceptual frame, conspiracism is rooted in the age-old dualist view of a battle between the forces of good and evil. This easily becomes a narrative form of scapegoating which leaves real problems unresolved by directing attention away from the legitimate targets of our organizing.
Why is trying to argue with conspiracy theorists so frustrating? ‘Once an individual makes such a deep investment in a belief system,’ says Harrington, ‘it can be very difficult to dissuade them. Experiments have shown that we all, to some extent, have a “disconfirmation bias” in which we try to explain away information that doesn’t fit what we already believe.’ This selective perception allows conspiracy theorists to latch on to eccentric crumb-sized claims while ignoring mountains of easily documented evidence. Harrington notes that ‘some people have a greater need for resolution of puzzles than others’, while some ‘have a greater intolerance for ambiguity than others’. Lacking information, these folks connect the dots with speculation without finishing their research homework.
Conspiracy theorists are correct about one thing: the status quo is not acceptable. They have accurately understood that there are inequalities of power and privilege in the world – and threats to the world itself – that need to be rectified. What conspiracy theorists lack is either the desire or ability to follow the basic rules of logic. Their claims, however, are compelling. Conspiracy books are top sellers on the online US Amazon bookstore, including a range of 9/11 conspiracy books by Jim Marrs, Webster G Tarpley, Michael C Ruppert and the theologian David Ray Griffin.
Not all scholars accept that conspiracism is fatally flawed. Michael Parenti, Peter Dale Scott, David Ray Griffin and Michel Chossudovsky promote the use of conspiracy theories as a form of analysis. Scott and Griffin attended a Vancouver 9/11 Truth Conference along with Tarpley. Chossudovsky, a Canadian academic, sent a video. As of August 2007 you could still visit Chossudovsky’s Global Research website and read a 2004 screed by Tarpley – a former LaRouche acolyte – who warned that the ‘Bush Regime was working out Procedures for postponing November Election’. I’m an optimist, so I went to vote anyway.
Real problems, phoney solutions
Professor G William Domhoff, the dean of Power Structure Research, argues against conspiracism because ‘there are powerful élites, but the individuals are interchangeable’. With conspiracism, questions of race, class and gender are almost always shoved aside. Political and economic policies are framed as controlled by a handful of powerful and wealthy secret élites manipulating elections, foreign and domestic policy and the media. This sets the stage for resuscitating historic antisemitic claims of Jewish plots. The fixation on sinister individuals leads us astray. It is precisely those forms of analysis that explore the structural, institutional and systemic aspects of power that provide ‘deep research’ and help activists avoid historic bigotry and make effective strategic and tactical decisions.
There actually are real conspiracies. Political and economic power is frequently abused. There are plenty of documented scandals based on uncovering corporate and governmental abuses: ‘there may be some very good reasons to distrust authority figures’. When information is not forthcoming, however, ‘the situation is ripe for rumour and gossip. Rumours tend to grow when people feel strongly about the issue… I see gossip, rumours and conspiracy theories as a sort of continuum.’
Ironically, government secrecy feeds the process. Kit Gage, director of the Defending Dissent Foundation in Washington DC, tells people who raise various conspiracy theories about 9/11 or other tragedies in recent years that ‘regardless of who did what to create those tragedies, the civil liberties results are the same’. Therefore, she concludes, ‘it is restoring and bolstering those civil liberties that we must pursue, now and vigorously. History will take care of the rest.’
We should focus on the abuses we can plainly see, rather than endlessly searching the shadows. The same can be said for any issue: conspiracy theories spotlight lots of fascinating questions – but they seldom illuminate meaningful answers.
Chip Berlet is a senior analyst at Political Research Associates near Boston, and awaits his paycheck from the reptilian synarchist cabal.
For more resources and the full interviews with Harrington, Kolhatkar, Domhoff, and others, visit: link to publiceye.org
One of the most surprising things I learned early on as far as a non-Jew trying to discuss Jewish/Zionist issues was how much more freedom (as in how much gatekeeping is done) there was for discussion in Israel than in the US. This very fact indicates a truly "unhealthy" state of affairs.
Oscar, was "Jewish Bolshevism" documented by Winston Churchill (among thousands of others) a "conspiracy theory"?
Are the millions of Russians murdered by Jewish Bolshevism a conspiracy theory?
Is 'The Israel Lobby and US Foreign Policy' by Walt and Mearsheimer a conspiracy theory?
Is the fact that the Neocons who were instrumental in lying America into the Iraq war are primarily Jewish Zionists a conspiracy theory?
Quote, unknown origins: "Your ignorance does not make me paranoid."
Updated: Your denial and intellectual sloth does not make documented facts conspiracy theories.
KMac update
"The Neocons as a Hostile Conservative (!!) Elite"
http://www.kevinmacdonald.net/Blog.htm
"There's a real problem here: that people who are outside the mainstream/Establishment believe something fervently, and people in the Establishment insist this is not the case, or it is exaggerated, or delusional."
Well, Phil, this is true on so many different fronts!
Rather than wall off the border with Mexico, I have thought the US would be well served by walling off the border around the District of Columbia!
Michael Blaine
www.rudelystamped.blogspot.com
"To wit: the economic blockade of Cuba, which (in my opinion) is extremely counterproductive, will never be lifted or even talked about, due to career minded presidential candidates.
Posted by: americangoy January 25, 2008 at 10:15 AM"
Oh, I disagree. I am almost certain that if a Democrat takes the White House this year, that will be the end of the embargo.
Michael Blaine
www.rudelystamped.blogspot.com
"Giuliani is a man of his word, and his promise to protect Israel is sacred."
That alone should disqualify the candidate from running for president of the US. Perhaps, though, he'd like to campaign in Israel?
Again, I'm from Minnesota (10 electoral votes), and I don's see how the interests of Israel (0 electoral votes) are critical to my home state.
Michael Blaine
www.rudelystamped.blogspot.com
Kudos to David for the hilarious and yet right on the money post!
Witty: "There is no "THE" Israel lobby.
"There are multiple, with very varying perspectives and objectives."
Yes, and despite their varying perspectives and objectives they all support Israel first.
I agree, there is no THE Israel Lobby. I've been following israel-lobby-talk since long before W+M's article and book, so I follow news of it quite obsessively now. W+M are a bit too narrowly focussed for me–a function of the Realist paradigm and not a problem of their scholarship per se. I still like Daniel Levy's 2006 article on it, and it's the one I give to my students. Not enough attention is paid to the Christian Zionists, or the influence of the neocons; thus "the lobby" is seen as exclusively Jewish, which only encourages the "antisemite!" bombers. The conversation needs to get more sophisticated.
So Delia you think that there is no Israel Lobby and not enough attention is paid to the Christian Zionists. Do you also believe in flying elephants and unicorns?
As for the Antisemite Bombers, I am a little confused, is that the name of a new Boeing aircraft, because I know that their Semite Bombers are quite effective? Or is this a new theory in particle physics, like if you take a semite and an anti-semite and you collide them you get an explosion of energy? Can you clarify please because I am truly confused by your shocking stupidity.
I apologize for the above post. I think I understand what you are saying now. I totally misinterpreted and thought you were saying that focusing on the Jewish Zionists encourages suicide bombing, and that you were calling suicide bombers antisemite bombers. Which could only make sense if you lived in the US where elements in the MSM call them "homicide bombers". I apologize for my mockery. Thats it for me, I'm going back to Guitar Hero.
The 'Lobby' encompasses so many areas of American society, and that word 'lobby' is very limiting in scope. I use the better term "House of Israel" to describe the phenomenon.
" Not enough attention is paid to the Christian Zionists,…"
Yeah, those dumb hicks (constant and perennial sources of ridicule) are the evil geniuses behind the current disaster.
(constant and perennial sources of ridicule)
shd have been "objects of ridicule"
dawn is just coming up here
Zaid Khalil – Better to stick with your video games. We are all "impressed" by your "shocking stupidity" and your wonderful manners.
I apologize when I'm wrong or when I speak out of line. And the last time I checked I wasn't talking to you.
Most people don't take the "Christian" Zionists seriously because it is generally understood that they are mere dupes of the Israeli Lobby which uses deception to conflate Israeli and US interests.
Most people don't take the "Christian" Zionists seriously because it is generally understood that they are mere dupes of the Israeli Lobby which uses deception to conflate Israeli and US interests.
Posted by: Chuck | January 26, 2008 at 08:21 AM
What he meant to say:
I don't want people to take the "Christian" Zionists seriously because it would interfere with my agenda to make it appear that they are mere dupes of the Israeli Lobby which I want to convince you uses deception to conflate Israeli and US interests.
Posted by: Chuck | January 26, 2008 at 08:21 AM
Mr. "Crawford" (hehe), the Washington head of James Hagee's Christians United for Israel is David Brog, who studied law in Jerusalem and describes himself as a "committed Jew". He is the one who represents the Christian Zionists in meetings with White House staff.
The American House of War unequivocably sponsors the Zionist folly; its vehicles are currently the American Jewish community's attachment to its Holocaust guilt, and the American Christian Evangelical community's complete suspension of logic (allowing for the Rapture to take hold).
It does this in the interest of ensuring the necessity of future contracts.
Zionists have insisted on a military solution for far longer than rational self-interest would dictate. The safety of Jewish people–the naive Richard Witty explanation for Israel–is not the mainspring of Zionism. That is expansionist militarism and development, and that is why it has been embraced and sanctioned by the American power elite.
"The safety of Jewish people–the naive Richard Witty explanation for Israel–is not the mainspring of Zionism. "
Read some, rather than parrot.
There are zionists that are expansionistic, too many of them for my liking. But Zionism is at root the desire for home, in a world in which Jews had been chased and harrassed for millenia and by those that "knew better".
Zionism originated in waves, but most pronounced as a response in Eastern Europe to the pogroms instituted by czars to distract criticism from their administrations.
In Western Europe the trial of Dreyfus in France occurred at about the same time, and communicated to "safe" cosmopolitan Jews that they were still persecuted and would likely NEVER be accepted as full and equal citizens popularly.
Those fears were confirmed in fascist Italy, Hungary, and Germany in the 30's (and not through some "self-fulfilling" behavior).
A homeland, a haven, is the primary motivator and objective of Zionism. It was mostly promoted by secular Jews, and not theocratic in origin or in application.
Even if the current definition of Zionism is/has slid from its former have appeal to other current, it is possible to restore the original meaning and then criteria of policy.
Historically, Likud only won elections after the 73 war (in which Arab states invaded Israel proper unilaterally) and the chain of international terror of the mid 70's, and even then it took years for them to acquire a majority.
Ron Paul: He actually took the floor in congress and told us all why the Iraq War would be a disaster–in 2002. Plus, he has more knowledge about the economy in his pinky finger than Obama has in his whole body. Of course, Americans will dismiss RP. They deserve fully what they will get.
I've noticed, in talking to Gentile Zionists, that they usually have no Jewish friends they've known a long time as personal friends or at least acquaintances. I am only one person, but I know my Jewish friends pretty well–they all feel very uncomfortable around Christian Evangelists, the end-time sort.
Given the way our government has increased its secrecy under Bush, the way it has multiplied classified black ink on all FOI attempts, how can anyone totaly disparage conspiracy theorists?
They are all trying to connect the dots, at least. Why is it wrong to attempt to figure out why we attacked Iraq, and who did it?
Gee, I feel left behind.