The answer to much of this is that there is a confluence of interest Buster, it is a subterfuge that is all to commonly practiced after years of use with various power centers – it is what a diaspora uses. The answer is always that there are many served by the practice, which serves as plausible denial. It is like someone who does well at work, they not only make their immediate boss look good but make themselves more attractive. It is this and both, one and many.

Just like putting Arabs in a bad light is used to serve as a mask for the occupation by coupling it with the so-called “war on terror,” and yet it serves other interests in this said war on terror. Media and news in particular is also reciprocal, it covers a multitude atrocities with deceptive clothing (as I have said before) and gets a green light to do the same for the occupation. Yes and both, one and many.

Just the opposite is true. They were careFUL, so careFUL in fact that many have since argued that they didn’t go deep enough in their expose.

“We all want attention.”

A proven way to get attention is to write a positive account of Israel. Or a book about the fate suffered by much of the European Jewish culture during WWII.

Negative accounts of Israel and its adherents and apologists do not fare well (in the U.S.) The reason Walt and Mearsheimer got so much attention was because they could not be ignored, their academic positions being what they were. Many have done excellent work on the subject before and since, but none have come close to getting the attention W&M received, again for the reasons given.

Frankly, W&M should have gotten even more attention. There are still A LOT of otherwise well-read people in this country who have no clue about The Israel Lobby.

And the site appearance and layout is much more appealing now, too. Nice job Phil and Adam!

It’s like we could be having a nice conversation in a very nice and quiet country club and Witty is turning it into a war zone.

Yes, and, as Michael Medved points out in a recent Commentary Symposium, there is even more bigotry by mainstream Jews against Christianity, if Witty were to open his antennae a bit.

1. It must be carried out in the name of Jewish interests.
2. It must be part of a policy.
3. It must be done with the support and connivance of official Jewish institutions.
4. It must not be condemned by the majority of the Jewish public.

Of course, these conditions are very difficult to verify in the case of the media, because jorunalists, as different from settlers in the West Bank who stone Arab schoolgirls, don’t usually publicize their agendas. All you can do is make inferences.

To give an extreme example, Arabs are the only nationality consistently ridiculed and vilified in Hollywood pictures. Does this have anything to do with the large numbers of Jewish screenwriters? We can’t tell for sure, we’re not in their heads. But it would be utterly dishonest to claim that the inference is so far-fetched as to constitute antisemitism.

Now, there’s a shiny declarative sentence.
Warrants a Witty headliner: “Anti-semites Abound Around”
“To attribute some nefarious conspiracy to those events, is to misrepresent the events.” What events, Mister Witty?
Why, those under the surface.

It is a criticism of one’s intellectual capabilities, intellectual process.

While there have been conspiracies, and there have been organized genocidal efforts, the majority of what is called those by the left and left/right are more accurately allignments’ of interest, common individual concerns.

To attribute some nefarious conspiracy to those events, is to misrepresent the events.

The danger with Walt/Mearsheimer’s thesis and Phil’s, invoking the old fascist conspiracy theories “the Jews control the media”, is that unless presented carefully (full of care), the effect is primarily to invoke the conspiracy theory mentality, and only secondarily to inform on degree and manner of influence (which is what they say they are doing).

When they (Walt/Mearsheimer) presented their thesis in rhetorical form in the London Review of Books article and defensive and polemical subsequent public presentation, they demonstrated careLESSness in a moral maze that required careFULness. Similarly for Phil with his headlining.

We all want attention.

And, Phil and Walt/Mearsheimer so far is lucky that the thesis and presentation have only resulted in a few publications of David Duke and colleagues.

Phil feels vindicated, that the danger did not rear its head (yet), in more actual conspiratorial racist expression.

It IS under the surface. There still is a lot of anti-semitism around, if Phil were to open his antennae to it.