The Times has now published two very important op-ed pieces on "The Israel Lobby," by Stephen Walt and John Mearsheimer, both of them basically endorsing the authors’ view. Two years ago the Times ran a fabulous piece by Tony Judt, largely endorsing Walt and Mearsheimer’s thesis, a month after they’d published in LRB, that shot heard round the world. The piece had a huge effect: Judt is an eminent New York Jewish intellectual, and he gave a lot of people in progressive circles permission to say they agreed with W&M. And yesterday we got Jeffrey Goldberg’s piece on the Israel lobby. Yes, Goldberg peed on Walt and Mearsheimer in the piece, but the central idea in his article, that the Jewish leadership has fostered Israel’s settlement policy and prevented American politicians from criticizing same, W&M had boldly stated two years ago.
Both these writers are Jews. Why can’t we hear from the goyim on this subject? They also have something at stake here. The Times could strike a great blow for open debate by asking non-Jews to hold forth on this subject–and by lifting its ban on John Mearsheimer, a regular contributor to the Op-Ed page for many years, till he made the CLM (that’s Goldman Sachs argot: career limiting move) of opposing the Iraq war.
And let's not forget the review of M&W book in the NYT by Leslie Gelb.
well, phil, only jews know dont you know.
apparently at several surrounding counties libraries, only jews are qualified to select the books.
tons of books on the holocaust. many editions of little ann frank's diary. or is it otto's diary? books by the score on islamic terrorism, arab perfidy, and palestinian non-existence. unknowable number of books of praise on the "golden state". every title and author giving jesus a wife and family is purchased. cant find a thomas l. thompson volume. israel shahak? no. edward said? a volume about music or literature or similar. nothing by khalid rashidi. does joseph massad have a book? if he does, it too is not on the selves. forget finding a ward churchill volume.
so, the libraries are basically offerers of fiction.
From "thefreedictionary.com"
"n. pl. goy·im (goim) or goys Offensive
Used as a disparaging term for one who is not a Jew."
Phil? Disparaging?
In response to "5 dancing shlomos":
Libraries usually get the books that people request. If you live in a predominantly Jewish area, then there will be a lot of books that cater to those topics. I am sure that in Dearborn, Michigan and other areas in the country where there are large Muslim populations, that the contents of the libraries similarly change.
Why not make requests to your libraries to bring in the books you want to read instead of just complaining about it?
It must be Jews who deconstruct this thing. Only Bill Cosby could tell African Americans to get their act together and provide leadership with the underclass.
Shlomo- I sympathize about the library. Ours too.
"Why not make requests to your libraries to bring in the books you want to read instead of just complaining about it?" –
Chris | May 19, 2008 at 01:33 PM
that comment is from dreamland re israel, palestine, ME, holocaust.
my area definitely not high % but very low % jews. but still jewish librarians doing the purchasing. and they purchase from the zionist/jewish interest.
i have made many requests. none purchased. i have donated new hard bound books. i have never seen one on a shelf. i have donated vhs and dvds. none on the shelves. you will find all kinds of crap israeli titles.
some of the authors donated are listed earlier.
Further to your point, the Sunday Times (West Coast edition) has a long piece by Robert Worth and Nada Bakri, Hezbollah's Actions Ignite Sectarian Fuse in Lebanon, describing current clashes, and also providing a lot of detailed history about how the Sunni led government and its backers are in a downward spiral with the Shi'a Hezbollah toward sectarian hell. In the detailed discussion, there is no mention of Israel. "Tensions began to rise in 2005 . . ." "In late 2006, sectarian street battles began taking place . . . " How can the enormous blow to Lebanon inflicted by Israel not merit mention. It destroyed the government's infrastructure and totally usurped its role as the supposed wielder of legitimate power in the region. The formerly model government was reduced to making weak and futile protests while Israel pounded the countryside, with US backing. Hezbollah was much enhanced and emboldened by its survival against that onslaught. How can that not have been important in the development of the currect strife?
"Why can't we hear from the goyim on this subject?"
Taboo subject.
One becomes an anti semite instantenously.
I am a goy writing on these things, because:
1) I am anonymous
2) I am small enough not to matter
"Why can't we hear from the goyim on this subject?"
Um, are you serious? Because we'll be accused of anti-semitism, Phil. And ruin our chances of ever being elected President, apparently.
'Shlomo- I sympathize about the library. Ours too.'
Mine as well (Waverley, NSW, Australia). And it's not so much the librarians here, it's the donors. Holocaust-heavy and Nakba-light.
Good to see the Times coming to it's senses on M/W, even if they can't yet bring themselves to allow Mearsheimer himself to make his case.
The Sydney Morning Herald was mentioned here the other day, in relation to their running a piece by Ali Abunimah. I said it was probably to balance a piece of Zio-puffery by ex-Hawke govt minister Barry Cohen, but at least they ran Abunimah.
Today comes news that they have folded under local Lobby pressure not to run the final article by their Middle East correspondent for the last 5 years, Ed O'Loughlin. What's weird is that the Herald's sister publication in Melbourne, the Age, did run it.
The whole brouhaha can be perused at the Media Watch site (Media Watch is a national weekly 15-minute program on the Aust Broadcasting Corporation which harrasses lazy or corrupt journalists and/or media outlets)
http://www.abc.net.au/mediawatch/transcripts/s2249539.htm
O'Loughlin was to my mind so 'balanced' he ended up biased against the Palestinians half the time, in his efforts not to offend local Jews. His last piece, linked to on the MWatch page, was a bit more raw than usual, but was comment, not reportage. Somehow, the Lobby sayanim in Sydney got wind of it prior to publication and managed to intimidate the editor Alan Oakley into bumping the piece.
Nice going away present for 5 years on every paper's toughest assignment.
"goy", a sign for antisemitism.
Happened to me, not long ago. One shouldn't write comments, when one has not much time. Not even enough time to let the main question: "Why can't I read the whole interview. Is he [Jeffrey Goldberg] citing here, quoting selectively? Were is the whole interview?" get forceful enough to trigger the search for answers. [thank you Phil!]
In a book on American antisemitism, I read, the author estimates that 50% of Americans are antisemites.
Since I my central interests are its deeper mythoi (sources), I have to admit that I somehow agree with the author, that the central basis of antisemitism must be religion.
Now if these percentages are true, why shouldn't they be similar, maybe even worse in Europistan, or Germany? So for the average non-Jew chances are high, she in fact is an antisemite. If so, he has two general options:
a) He can turn into an "philosemite" [vs antisemite], which I probably was till very recently.
b) She can remain true to her feelings.
And my feelings considering the set of questions and answers Goldberg presented were:
"Down on your knees, goy, and confess"
I surely could have written:
"Down on your knees, American non-Jew, and confess".
That would have been a less controversial way of giving expression to my feelings.
See above. Heat of the moment. That I immediately repented, admittedly.
http://themagneszionist.blogspot.com/2008/05/leon-uris-influence-on-barack-obama.html