Trending Topics:

Stephen Walt: publishing ‘Israel lobby’ ended any thought of serving in US gov’t

Israel/Palestine
on 71 Comments
Stephen M. Walt

Stephen M. Walt

At Haaretz, Chemi Shalev has posted a long, hostile, and fascinating interview with Stephen Walt that raises the question of why Walt has never been offered such a platform in the U.S. to expound on his views.

Under a redbaiting headline– “I’m not anti-Israel” says the author of the “notorious” book on the Israel lobby — it includes one great moment, when Shalev asks the question I’ve always want to ask Walt, about the cost of taking on the Israel lobby, and the Harvard professor answers sincerely that he had to rule out service in government, and higher academic appointment, too.

[I]t’s made it impossible for me to serve in the U.S. government, because it would be just too politically controversial. Even if someone wanted me, say, to work on U.S. policy in Asia, it would just be not worth it. I’m not so valuable that a president or a secretary of state would want to deal with the political fallout. It has probably had some impact on my upward mobility in academia – if I wanted to be a dean or something like that.

So a black ball at Harvard, too.

Shalev is openly angry at Walt for even identifying the lobby as a problem, and his piece rehashes familiar criticisms of the Walt-Mearsheimer thesis from years ago. When he says that Walt makes the lobby out to be an octopus with tentacles, he displays his ignorance of recent and sharper criticisms of the lobby in this country. Tom Friedman has said that Congress is “bought and paid for by the lobby” and that George W. Bush courted the lobby because his father had taken it on and lost the presidency in ’92 (and just two days ago: “the Israel lobby in Washington has effectively shut down any pressure from the White House or Congress”). John Judis writes in his new book that Zionist lobbyists with racist views of Arabs overcame Truman’s instincts to oppose a Jewish state and oppose Israel’s landgrabs in ’48 — a pattern repeated, Judis says, when Obama declared that settlements should stop and promptly caved to the lobby.

Shalev’s response to Walt is frankly emotional; the book “upset” him, he needed to beat Walt up lest readers say he was too “cozy” with him. Walt triggers Shalev’s anxiety about Jewish safety in the west. Thus the bizarre epiphany at the end, when Shalev says he had just spent time with an anti-Semite who pretended not to be one:

On my way back to New York, I suddenly remembered my mother, of blessed memory, who grew up in the Sudetenland, in Czechoslovakia, before World War II in a very small Jewish community in a German-speaking town. In those circumstances, she would say, Jews developed a sixth sense that allowed them to detect both Jews and anti-Semites who may have been pretending to be something else. It is a shame, I thought, that I have not inherited her gift.

This is reminiscent of Dana Milbank of the Washington Post saying 8 years ago that Walt was blue-eyed and had a Germanic name (it’s actually Danish).

Here are some other excerpts from the piece.

Shalev keeps going after Walt’s conclusion that without the neoconservatives, there wouldn’t have been an Iraq war:

Walt: “We documented pretty carefully that AIPAC quietly supported going to war, and the [executive director] of AIPAC, Howard Kohr, said as much. That that was one of his major accomplishments in 2002. This is in the period where I think Bush has already made the decision, right? But he’s got to get public support for it, he wants to get congressional approval, and the interesting question is what if all these [Israel lobby] organizations had been completely neutral? Or, God forbid, what if a few of them had opposed the war?”

There still would have been a war.

“Not so sure.”

Not so sure is one thing, writing a book is another.

“I have to pound this into your head: We do not say the Israel lobby was solely responsible for the Iraq war. We say it would not have happened if the lobby had not existed and had not pushed forth.”

That’s very close.

“No, excuse me. If 9/11 had not happened, I don’t think we would have invaded Iraq. If we’d had more trouble when we went into Afghanistan, if that campaign had gone badly from the beginning or if we’d had the kind of trouble we had later in Afghanistan, I think Iraq would have been put off. Major decisions like this involve a whole series of things coming together….”

There’s this exchange about whether Israel lobbyists can work inside.

“Paul Wolfowitz, four days after 9/11, at Camp David, said that our first response should be to overthrow Saddam Hussein. So the idea is put in front of – “

But Paul Wolfowitz is part of the administration. He’s the deputy secretary of defense. Why is this the Israel lobby?

“Wolfowitz is part of the Israel lobby. It’s been clear throughout his career.”

Here I would note that there were several Zionist lobbyists inside the Truman administration, per Judis. And Louis Brandeis was lobbying for President Wilson to endorse the Balfour Declaration when he was on the Supreme Court. And Dennis Ross is co-chair of the pro-Israel Jewish People Policy Institute and has served in countless administrations, including Obama’s, as Israel’s lawyer.

There is some Israel-centric provincialism in Shalev’s comments. This is amusing:

“I would make American support for Israel much more conditional on an end to settlement construction. A more serious willingness to engage with the Palestinians before it’s too late to actually get a peace deal.”

But the Israeli people may have chosen a government that is not amenable to those demands.

“Countries don’t always have the same interests, and if our interests are in [there being] a two-state solution, and if Israel decides it wants to go a different way, so be it. That’s Israel’s choice, and they can do that. But then the United States should be able to make its own choices, too.”

Shalev has to check Walt’s visa:

Do you support the two-state solution?

“Yes. Which unfortunately means that I’m now a supporter of something that I think is less and less likely. And I don’t know quite what to do with that.”

This is the best part. How has writing this affected Walt’s life?

“It was literally going to bed one night and getting up the next morning in a rather different world. I didn’t fully anticipate that.

“How has it affected my life? I think it has altered the trajectory I might have had. I think it’s made it impossible for me to serve in the U.S. government, because it would be just too politically controversial. Even if someone wanted me, say, to work on U.S. policy in Asia, it would just be not worth it. I’m not so valuable that a president or a secretary of state would want to deal with the political fallout. It has probably had some impact on my upward mobility in academia – if I wanted to be a dean or something like that.

“But it has not a major impact on my friendships or my relations with other scholars.”

This is also a good exchange. Does it bother you that people call you an anti-Semite?

“Nobody should like being accused of being an anti-Semite, so I don’t enjoy that aspect, but I know it’s false, so I’m sorry that people have a mistaken view of my attitudes. That’s all I can do. I can’t correct them. I’ve said what I’ve said, and if they have an erroneous view of what my character is really like, that’s unfortunate.”

Good honest bracing answer. We don’t control our reputations, that’s a basic law of a democratic discourse; and anyone who takes this issue on must accept the risk that he or she will be labeled an anti-Semite at some point. That was always the courage of these endowed profs for me: they accepted that risk out of a larger understanding of civic and global duty.

The excellence of Shalev’s interview is that he comes off as petty and Walt seems big. You get to hear a highly-intelligent man who has obviously been deeply wounded but doesn’t take it personally; it hasn’t made him bitter. No, he is out there willing to make his case to doubters in a forceful but polite and good-natured manner. Read his comments on the Ukraine. Very in tune with Stephen Cohen’s.

So: When is the American press going to give him such a platform? When will Americans get to reckon the loss of Walt’s service as another cost of the special relationship?

philweiss
About Philip Weiss

Philip Weiss is Founder and Co-Editor of Mondoweiss.net.

Other posts by .


Posted In:

71 Responses

  1. Little_Shih_Tzu
    Little_Shih_Tzu
    April 17, 2014, 3:17 pm

    Hnmm, does the phrase “prophet without honor” come to mind?

  2. DaBakr
    DaBakr
    April 17, 2014, 3:21 pm

    i don’t see how one can judge Walts ‘character’ from an interview with an Israeli left-wing paper. He is surely intelligent enough to know how to come off to a public that he may or may not want to expose himself to. Especially in the Israeli press. I am not questioning Walts character either. Simply stating that its easy enough to present yourself as one wishes. Or don’t you believe that you can’t believe everything you read
    in the press? I have heard many interviews with past PM Sharon where he came off as measured, reasonable, non-bigoted, pragmatic and willing to sacrifice for peace but I doubt you would consider him as “big”.

    Walt said nothing new other then that now that he wrote what he wrote his own prospects are also compromised because of the ‘lobby’ but of course he wouldn’t take that personally would he? Not that a controversial book about Jews that is taken as serious work is ever bad for business.

    • adele
      adele
      April 17, 2014, 4:07 pm

      Surely debakr, Sharon’s war crimes surely must be taken into consideration when assessing the man, no? Are you equating Walt’s book to Sharon’s military actions? Has Walt committed the same crimes against a defenseless population?

      • DaBakr
        DaBakr
        April 17, 2014, 4:54 pm

        No. I am saying that unless one knows Walt personally-and well-its hard to assess character from an obviously hostile interview. You are free to do as you chose and judge Walt as upstanding as you please. You can admire his work, his motivations, his politics, etc. Of course by your standards Lincoln, both Bushes, Obama, Sharon, Begin, Sadat and any other so-called ‘peacemaker’ like Stalin, Mao and one and on has to be judged as a war criminal. I don’t know in what world you are living in but it is usually not the innocent that make hard and long lasting peace treaties. Most, if not all leaders of powerful nations (and org’s) have blood on their hands.

        And I have no idea if if Walt has any blood on his hands but that is not the criteria for character that is being referred to here. And as far as I know, Walt may be a great guy-but its hard to believe he worked on such a large thesis and then was completely surprised there were any-both positive and negative-repercussions.

        If it makes you feel any better-I doubt Walt hates Jews but that is kind of like constantly pointing out that Jews are over represented in powerful organizations and complaining that it has nothing to do with Jew-hatred. Its nice and fine to actually beleive that but not so fine to divorce yourself from the reality that hyper-focusing creates. Its a conundrum.

      • adele
        adele
        April 17, 2014, 5:11 pm

        Points well taken debakr. I was too quick on the trigger there, thanks for explaining :-)

      • Woody Tanaka
        Woody Tanaka
        April 17, 2014, 5:14 pm

        “And as far as I know, Walt may be a great guy-but its hard to believe he worked on such a large thesis and then was completely surprised there were any-both positive and negative-repercussions. ”

        And why should there be any repercussions — aside from the thanks of a grateful nation — from a factual account of the effect that a lobby for a foreign power has over the US’s foreign affairs?? Sure, that lobby might be miffed that it’s plans were sent awry, but he shouldn’t have any fear from fellow Americans, right? And certainly, if they disagree with him, they will simply politely note their disagreement, right?

      • puppies
        puppies
        April 17, 2014, 6:34 pm

        Bakr – “constantly pointing out that Jews are over represented in powerful organizations and complaining that it has nothing to do with Jew-hatred. Its nice and fine to actually beleive that but not so fine to divorce yourself from the reality that hyper-focusing creates. Its a conundrum.”

        Never mind about big fancy words. Just prove that the massive, giant overrepresentation is not true.

      • American
        American
        April 17, 2014, 9:21 pm

        I believe DaBakr that it is you who doesnt understand the real world.

        For a patriot, corny as that sounds, or even a ‘realist’ like Walt who is troubled by illogical and damaging FP policies “–writting about the Jewish Lobby and Israel influence wasnt ‘about the Jews’—it was about an Orwellian US policy for a tiny troublesome state that is if no value to the US—and that is supported only due to ‘domestic demand and the Lobby.

        That that lobby happens to be mainly Jewish is not something you can avoid when writting about the Jewish State and the Lobby.
        The Jews or more accurately their lobby for Israel are talked about only in the context of that Lobby for the Jewish State

        Any hyper focusing on it is because it causes the US harm. Everything Walt described has only been further validated and exposed the past few years by the lobby’s actions—and by Israel’s actions—- like demanding we attack Iran for Israel—and by the actions of Netanyahu swaggering around the US like he owns it and inserting himself in our last Presidential election, by the farce of US peace brokering with Israeli insults thrown in our face every week. And inteference in our politics just like the Israel centric Adelson is doing again.

        Its not a Buddhist Lobby doing this, and there is no way to avoid the Jewish connection…so to imply its ‘only a topic’ because of Jews or Jew hatred is absurd.
        And saying no one should write about the harmful effects of the Lobby just because it is Jewish connected is also absurd.

      • Kathleen
        Kathleen
        April 18, 2014, 5:21 am

        “Its not a Buddhist Lobby doing this, and there is no way to avoid the Jewish connection…so to imply its ‘only a topic’ because of Jews or Jew hatred is absurd.
        And saying no one should write about the harmful effects of the Lobby just because it is Jewish connected is also absurd.”

        Some great articles written before and during the Iraq war and who lobbied hard. Who created, cherry picked and disseminated the false intelligence.
        Wednesday, Mar 10, 2004 01:13 PM MDT
        The new Pentagon papers
        A high-ranking military officer reveals how Defense Department extremists suppressed information and twisted the truth to drive the country to war

        http://www.salon.com/2004/03/10/osp_moveon/

        One of the very best articles about this group of war pushers

        The Men From JINSA and CSP
        They want not just a US invasion of Iraq but “total war” against Arab regimes.
        Jason Vest
        http://www.thenation.com/article/men-jinsa-and-csp#

        Also
        Weekend Edition Feb 28-Mar 02, 2004

        Serving Two Flags
        Neo-Cons, Israel and the Bush Administration
        by STEPHEN GREEN
        http://www.counterpunch.org/2004/02/28/neo-cons-israel-and-the-bush-administration/

      • Kathleen
        Kathleen
        April 18, 2014, 5:24 am

        The reality

        English subtitles

      • DaBakr
        DaBakr
        April 17, 2014, 5:14 pm

        Surely

    • traintosiberia
      traintosiberia
      April 17, 2014, 11:25 pm

      Sharon will be judged by what he did and what he did not. Sharon should not be judged by what he said or did not say.
      Walt would be judged what he said and what he wrote not what he could do for he could not do anything .pen is sharper and durable than the sword. Sharon’s sword is rusting. There are fresh inks in Walt’s pen. Someone else is writing. Yes ,Walt made that possible.

      • DaBakr
        DaBakr
        April 18, 2014, 2:31 am

        another convoluted point of rebuttal. So…now Walt would be only judged on waht he said or wrote in this life while Sharon, (and Lincoln, Sadat, Begin, Stalin, FDR, Truman, etc) is only to be based on what he ‘could have’ done or maybe it was what he ‘did’ or didnt’ do. And why this would be………dont have a clue. I already forgot again. I think I know whats bugging you but its hard to spit out it would seem

      • traintosiberia
        traintosiberia
        April 18, 2014, 10:13 am

        The thing that is bugging me the attempt on your part to look for dirt in the life and works of Walt. The thing that is bugging me is that you are looking for some kind of silver lining in the life of Sharon.
        Sure Martin Luther King can be accused of infidelity and Bin ledeen admired for his love of his race,religion,and family.

      • Kathleen
        Kathleen
        April 18, 2014, 4:51 am

        Ding ding

  3. chuckcarlos
    chuckcarlos
    April 17, 2014, 3:47 pm

    Mearsheimer is a West Point Grad and did his time in “government service”

    comes in useful

  4. Philip Munger
    Philip Munger
    April 17, 2014, 3:51 pm

    I read the interview avidly early this morning. I couldn’t have described my impression of Shalev’s failure to be fair to Walt any better than you just accomplished here.

    Having just passed the ten-year mark of being falsely and loudly denounced as an anti-Semite, I feel glad that I’m no more bitter about the effects of that smear on my professional life than Walt seems to be. Only, I’ll add that when one stands up for Palestinian rights, as Walt, you, I and thousands of others have, one gets the opportunity to meet, respect and know many, many courageous people who have more concern for justice than for religious myths or demographic excuses, and that many of these new friends and colleagues happen to also be Jewish. I’ve made a few enemies, but a helluva lot of friends.

    http://archive.today/o2Zrr

  5. American
    American
    April 17, 2014, 4:10 pm

    ” So: When is the American press going to give him such a platform? When will Americans get to reckon the loss of Walt’s service as another cost of the special relationship?”

    When more and more people are just as honest about Israel, the Lobby and its agents in our government as Walt is.
    And more are —maybe not in Washington but at least out here in the real world where saying what you think doesnt carry any threat of losing anything.
    I’ve seen more of that here lately from people commenting on the ads the Emergency Committee for Israel is running in our district against our congressman—-they are asking why Israel should figure in our congressional election.
    One good thing about the political ads now is the party paying for them has to identify itself—so every attack ad on Jones has announced that the Emergency Committe’ for Israel’ paid for it.

    • April 17, 2014, 7:26 pm

      If Jones wins, basically thumbing his nose at the Lobby, it will be a bit of a game changer.

      If the folks in Congress see that not towing the AIPAC line is not a career ender –in fact, it may improve their chances of being elected — the paper tiger will be exposed.

    • pabelmont
      pabelmont
      April 17, 2014, 8:36 pm

      American: If you want to charge loss-of-service-of-good-men against The Lobby, then the list becomes quite long. All the academics who were denied tenure and jobs. The terrific nominee for National Security Advisor, Chas Freeman, and I believe other nominees for high posts. All the nominations never made in the first place.

      And looking to other lobbies, all the great economists not appointed to SecTreas because they did not bear the imprimatur of Goldman Sachs. Etc., other lobbies.

      Oligarchy does not produce good government, only predictable government.

      • Kathleen
        Kathleen
        April 18, 2014, 4:55 am

        Was thinking about Charles Freeman as I read this piece and comments. Thanks.

      • American
        American
        April 18, 2014, 4:22 pm

        @ pablemont

        Several weeks ago there a report on the news about Vet suicide rates—averaging 6 a day since Iraq, I forgot what that totaled up to, maybe I forgot on purpose.
        So senseless.
        If it was up to me all the people that helped gin up the lies for that war would be executed for mass murder.

  6. RudyM
    RudyM
    April 17, 2014, 4:14 pm

    “I have to pound this into your head: We do not say the Israel lobby was solely responsible for the Iraq war. We say it would not have happened if the lobby had not existed and had not pushed forth.”

    That’s very close.

    Necessary causes, sufficient causes, contributory causes. Philosophy 101.

    • Feathers
      Feathers
      April 17, 2014, 5:13 pm

      Benjamin Netanyahu pounded THIS into my head:

      September 12, 2002
      Benjamin Netanyahu before a Congressional Subcommittee chaired by Dan Burton,

      http://www.c-span.org/video/?172612-1/israeli-perspective-conflict-iraq

      Netanyahu said Iraq was the “keystone” in a network of “terrorists” and that Iraq should be the first of the terror network to be taken down. The rest would follow.

      The hearing was the same day that Geo W Bush was at UN stating why he believed US had the right to attack Iraq. Netanyahu said the US Congress should endorse the position of Geo Bush.

      It seems ineluctably unambiguous that Israelish interests were in favor of an invasion of Iraq.

      It’s ludicrous to claim otherwise, against evidence such as Bibi’s appearance before a (shameful & fawning — except for Watson, Morella, & Kucinich) panel of US Congressmen.

      – – –
      Having just read a biography of Cicero, I’m in a Roman empire frame of mind. The machinations, political risk, corruption, quest for power, mendacity, propaganda, manipulation of the masses are universal behavior, not limited to zionists or Israeli advocates in USA. That’s one more reason why the people of the USA should and must think of themselves as empowered and even responsible — against all risks — to call out those who would undermine their values and Constitutional legacy, even against zionists or Israeli interests: those adversaries should be considered no different from the threats that Cicero perceived that Cataline and Caesar posed to the Roman constitution and the Roman people. “Antisemite” and “denier” are merely two weapons than an adversary uses, but the fundamental agenda is the same. The people of the USA should NOT be pusillanimous and should demand to be heard in defense of their Constitutional principles.

  7. seafoid
    seafoid
    April 17, 2014, 4:17 pm

    Taking on Zionism is career toxic. It is far more complicated than it should be. Zionism is just another dud ideology. It is not going anywhere.

    Walt is one of so many who have had their options reduced by the bots. I imagine they have a lot of silent enemies in the US waiting for the tide to turn.

  8. Nevada Ned
    Nevada Ned
    April 17, 2014, 4:31 pm

    The article quotes Walt as saying that

    “It [publication of The Israel Lobby] has probably had some impact on my upward mobility in academia – if I wanted to be a dean or something like that.”

    In fact, Walt was the Academic Dean of the Kennedy School of Government (KSG) at Harvard at the time of the publication of The Israel Lobby. When the book ignited a firestorm, Walt stepped down as Dean. It is possible that the Academic Dean works for a higher-level Dean at the KSG.

    Readers at Mondoweiss should know that at Harvard University, the Deans control about 99% of the money. The University President only controls about 1% of the money. Each academic unit raises its own money and pays its own bills. “Each tub on its own bottom” is the slogan. This means that the Deans have a lot of power at Harvard.

    (In contrast, at other universities, the Deans are middle management, and control very little of the budget. The central administration controls nearly all of the budget, and tells the deans what to do.)

    So Walt was a Dean at KSG, and stepped down when the furor over the book ignited.

    • Citizen
      Citizen
      April 18, 2014, 5:40 am

      @ Nevada Ned

      Thanks for info. Care to speculate on why Walt stepped down? Didn’t he have substantial leverage as you described as dean KSG at Harvard? Surely, when he was co-writing The Israel Lobby he knew what to expect. What’s your informed personal view of why he and Mearsheimer forged ahead? Just being unAmerican, not exclusively concerned about their careers? Too altruistic?

  9. HarryLaw
    HarryLaw
    April 17, 2014, 5:27 pm

    Telling the truth at whatever cost to your academic career or social or monetary advancement, has more rewards in this life, I am sure Phil Weiss could have had a far easier life had he just kept his counsel, and his political head down and not involved himself in this blog. Moreover I am sure he has regretted it on occasion at some stage, but then some individuals, being political animals are compelled to act regardless of the consequences.
    Responsible people do need to speak the truth and although attacked by unscrupulous people, know that eventually, the truth will out, and even after all your efforts, political failure does occur, your own conscience is not troubled.

    • puppies
      puppies
      April 18, 2014, 12:08 am

      In fact, it’s a good thing for him and his audience. No one associated with the US Government can have any credibility nowadays. Possibly the same goes for Harvard Deans.

      • lysias
        lysias
        April 18, 2014, 12:24 pm

        Paul Craig Roberts, a professional economist who is not employed by an academic institution, goes on and on in his recent book The Failure of Laissez Faire Capitalism and Economic Dissolution of the West about how corrupt academic economists and academic institutions in general have become in their pursuit of dollars from donors and donor institutions.

      • puppies
        puppies
        April 19, 2014, 12:29 am

        @lysias – Roberts is not likely to become a Harvard Dean anymore…

    • jackal
      jackal
      June 9, 2016, 4:55 pm

      “… eventually, the truth will out.”
      A very belated comment, but as a non-American, I would be very interested in getting at the truth, shall I say, of JFK, 9/11, the death of Arafat, and on and on.
      Not in my life time unless the dumbing down of the Americans is discontinued within the next 10 years.
      When, and if, the people of Israel ever allow the Palestinians to return to their promised land given to them by the United Nations (again vetoed by the US), then perhaps we can live in peace — at least for a while. while the US gov’t (controlled by the corporate giants and its military) searches for a new war someplace else.

  10. lysias
    lysias
    April 17, 2014, 5:59 pm

    Interesting item from New Yorker piece on Elizabeth Warren:

    In 2008, Warren joined a five-person congressional-oversight panel whose creation was mandated by the seven-hundred-billion-dollar bailout. She found that thrilling and maddening, too. In the spring of 2009, after the panel issued its third report, critical of the bailout, Larry Summers took Warren out to dinner in Washington and, she recalls, told her that she had a choice to make. She could be an insider or an outsider, but if she was going to be an insider she needed to understand one unbreakable rule about insiders: “They don’t criticize other insiders.”

  11. pabelmont
    pabelmont
    April 17, 2014, 6:06 pm

    lycias: Very interesting. Here’s my comment. I believe Summers was a Goldman Sachs agent in government (and at Harvard).

    Joseph Stiglitz couldn’t believe his ears. Here they were in the White House, with President Bill Clinton asking the chiefs of the US Treasury for guidance on the life and death of America’s economy, when the Deputy Secretary of the Treasury Larry Summers turns to his boss, Secretary Robert Rubin, and says, “What would Goldman think of that?”

    Huh?

    Then, at another meeting, Summers said it again: What would Goldman think?

    See: http://www.gregpalast.com/larry-summers-goldman-sacked/

    In a sense, ALL lobbies act against the national interest. If the lobby wanted what everyone else wanted, there were no need to impose a view, there would be no need for the lobby to exist or to act.

    So: Look at BIG-BANKS (possibly aka Goldman Sachs) which seems always to cause to be appointed one of its own to USA Sec Treas. And look at the horror of the debacle that began with the securitization of mortgages, progressed to the real estate bubble and the horrendously unjustified issuance of [yikes, variable rate] mortgages to people unable to understand them or, more importantly, to make the payments, and onward to the invention and massive issuance (by AIG) of pseudo-insurance-like derivatives which ended with the crash of 2008. Thanks you BIG-BANKS, a lobby.

    So BIG-ZION is not alone in acting against the USA’s national interest, the lobbies all do. That is the oligarchic nature of big capital these days. It was once said that, “What’s good for General Motors is good for America”. I doubt anyone would say that today for ANY of our large industries, sending jobs to Asia and refusing to pay taxes.

    But this is not to diminish the evil that is BIG-ZION.

    • lysias
      lysias
      April 17, 2014, 6:50 pm

      Paul Craig Roberts has a great deal to say about our degeneration into plutocratic rule by lobbies in his recent book The Failure of Laissez Faire Capitalism and Economic Dissolution of the West , which I am currently reading. Of course, he constantly mentions the business lobbies, given the subject of his book, but he also frequently mentions AIPAC when talking about the lobbies.

      (Oddly enough, although the author is of course an American, the book first appeared in German, as WIRTSCHAFT AM ABGRUND. Der Zusammenbruch der Volkswirtschaften und das Scheitern der Globalisierung , in July 2012, before the English-language version appeared in America in February 2013. Roberts happened to mention in that English-language version that his book was just then also being translated into Chinese.)

    • traintosiberia
      traintosiberia
      April 18, 2014, 7:15 am

      1 I can call another lobby as a lobby- – 1 can’t do same in case of Israel lobby

      2 I can run an election by naming and shaming another lobby. 2. – 1 can’t do same in case of Israel lobby

      3 I can regulate another lobby 3. 1 can’t do same in case of Israel lobby

      4 I can investigate another lobby 4, – 1 can’t do same in case of Israel lobby

      5 I can accept money from another lobby and blast it 5. Can’t dream that in case of Israel lobby

      6 I can call lobby as powerful and inimical to US interest – 6 not in case of Israel lobby
      7 lobbies have no ethnic bond or attachment 7. Israeli lobby is ethnic

      8. A lobby will look for the interest of its members ,of its causes,of its succeess -/8 Israeli lobby does not care for all of Israeli citizen It works against the new member ,excludes the new members ,and discriminates the new members unless it is Jews . Israel Libby is not sbout the development of Israel . It is about the development of Jewish person in israel
      9 other lobby can’t act with impunity and openly discriminate on the basis of race and religion 9 Israeli lobby do and a prima facile case could be made against them that they do.
      10 no lobby had made America go for war. 10 Repeatedly Israeli lobby openly advocated for war
      11 no lobby has sent its members to administration ,who has worked openly and exclusively for the interest of the lobby 12 Israeli lobby does it all the time
      12 no lobby member has required presidential pardon and gone back to work for the government again 12 Israeli lobby has done
      13.other lobby get named and shamed by media. 13 Israeli lobby never
      14 other lobby has not been always successful to disable its critics 14 Israeli lobby has

      15 no other lobby has openly said that it or its individual member work within US to safeguard and promote the interest of the lobby using US as the best place to do 15 Adelson, Schumer , Kirk and other have done that
      16 no lobby ever claimed that it’s interest is the interest of US 16 it is the main plank of Israel lobby
      17 people can make a career out of fighting any other lobby 17 no American can stand up against Israeli lobby.

      18 no lobby influences church,school,college,UN,local and federal administration,libraries, media,billboard and excludes its competitor 18 Israel I lobby does.

      • JeffB
        JeffB
        April 18, 2014, 9:02 am

        @traintosiberia

        1 I can call another lobby as a lobby- – 1 can’t do same in case of Israel lobby

        AIPAC calls itself “America’s Pro-Israel lobby”.

        2 I can run an election by naming and shaming another lobby. 2. – 1 can’t do same in case of Israel lobby

        Not true. JStreet identifies itself as the opposition to AIPAC and:
        https://donate.jstreetpac.org/candidate/allcandidates

        3 I can regulate another lobby 3. 1 can’t do same in case of Israel lobby

        Most lobbies have strong constitutional protections. But AIPAC for example has to file all the elections documents of other lobbies.

        4 I can investigate another lobby 4, – 1 can’t do same in case of Israel lobby

        Investigate for what?

        5 I can accept money from another lobby and blast it 5. Can’t dream that in case of Israel lobby

        Huh?

        6 I can call lobby as powerful and inimical to US interest – 6 not in case of Israel lobby

        See answer to #2.

        7 lobbies have no ethnic bond or attachment 7. Israeli lobby is ethnic

        U.S.-China Working Group
        Irish National Caucus
        UNICO (Italian lobby)

        8. A lobby will look for the interest of its members ,of its causes,of its succeess -/8 Israeli lobby does not care for all of Israeli citizen It works against the new member ,excludes the new members ,and discriminates the new members unless it is Jews . Israel Libby is not sbout the development of Israel . It is about the development of Jewish person in israel

        This is just weird. The Israeli lobby in the USA is mostly American Jewish. Of course it backs American Jewish interests.

        9 other lobby can’t act with impunity and openly discriminate on the basis of race and religion 9 Israeli lobby do and a prima facile case could be made against them that they do.

        Lobbies, and any other non-profit for that matter, most certainly can discriminate if race or religion is critical to their functioning. A Jewish lobby can discriminate.

        10 no lobby had made America go for war. 10 Repeatedly Israeli lobby openly advocated for war

        Lots of lobbies advocate for wars. The energy lobby, the weapons manufacturing lobbies and the fruit lobby being examples.

        11 no lobby has sent its members to administration ,who has worked openly and exclusively for the interest of the lobby 12 Israeli lobby does it all the time

        Really? What American official says they work exclusively for AIPAC?

        12 no lobby member has required presidential pardon and gone back to work for the government again 12 Israeli lobby has done

        I don’t know what you are talking about with respect to Israel. But certainly lots of people in the peace movement got pardoned regarding VietNam. You should take a look at the people on the casino lobby.

        13.other lobby get named and shamed by media. 13 Israeli lobby never

        Yeah they never get mentioned and disagreed with ever.

        14 other lobby has not been always successful to disable its critics 14 Israeli lobby has

        Seems to me this website is still running.

        15 no other lobby has openly said that it or its individual member work within US to safeguard and promote the interest of the lobby using US as the best place to do 15 Adelson, Schumer , Kirk and other have done that

        Can’t parse this one.

        16 no lobby ever claimed that it’s interest is the interest of US 16 it is the main plank of Israel lobby

        Almost all lobbies claim their policies are in the best interests of the United States.

        . 17 people can make a career out of fighting any other lobby 17 no American can stand up against Israeli lobby.

        JSteet has professional staff.

        18 no lobby influences church,school,college,UN,local and federal administration,libraries, media,billboard and excludes its competitor 18 Israel I lobby does.

        I think the people opposing the NRA, AARP or Agribusiness lobby might beg to differ.

      • traintosiberia
        traintosiberia
        April 18, 2014, 11:09 am

        AIPAC is not a pro -Israeli lobby. It is Israeli lobby. It should be called a foreign lobby and be registered.
        Have you forgot attempt for investigation, lack of investigation on Harman ( what is the difference between ( Blagovich of Illinois offering senate seat for money and Sherman taking call for similar deal?)
        Why Fullbright’s call for investigation was torpedoed with obfuscation and change of name and by the indifference of Justice dept?
        When did J Street shame AIPAC or any congressmen?when did anybody supporting AIPAC criticize J Street ( Jews lonby will not be criticized ) ?
        People blast bank,oil,agribusiness lobby.
        When did so e one blast AIPAC or J Street for political reason or to get vote ?

      • traintosiberia
        traintosiberia
        April 18, 2014, 11:15 am

        Perle , Wolfowitz, Abrams got pardoned after being found guilty of doing something about US foreign policy. They came back to the administration to take the charge of the foreign policy again.
        So who is the banking,casino,military,intelligence guys that you are talking about ?

      • traintosiberia
        traintosiberia
        April 18, 2014, 11:34 am

        Yes the website is running. Try it in France or Germany or now in Canada.
        The lobby would like the anti nazi posture be called Nazi posture if it could.
        Again there is the hope that websites of these nature will educate the congress and senators and they will be able to quote the mondoweiss one day . That will be more prudent,informative,useful,and will serve US interest . That will be positive departure from what these congressmen and intelligence do now- cite Israeli sources on Saddam,on Iran, on Syria.and try US to get into war.

      • traintosiberia
        traintosiberia
        April 18, 2014, 11:37 am

        ” All lobbies ” might claim any thing every thing. But they get shouted down in the partisan media or by the political hopefuls or by guests on C Span or by the speakers in town hall meetings and by the student in the campus.
        Try that on a israeli lobby and be labeled as ” extreme, beyond the pale, unAmerican, Antisemitic ” and hears the end of the story.

      • traintosiberia
        traintosiberia
        April 18, 2014, 11:42 am

        J Street is standing against AIPAC is like saying Sharon is standing up against Shamir or Bennett against A Liberman.

      • traintosiberia
        traintosiberia
        April 18, 2014, 12:14 pm

        JeffB
        ” it backs Ametican Jewish interest”
        It does . Actually it does back the interest of the Jewish all over the world and the state of Israel . For according to Israeli lobby and the state of Israel , these are the same things. But it does not backUS interests – how many times Obama, Bush jr onetime,and Bush sr been called not to pressure Israel, not to challenge Israeli PM, and not to ask Israel to do what it does not want to.

  12. Daniel Rich
    Daniel Rich
    April 17, 2014, 6:23 pm

    Q: At Haaretz, Chemi Shalev has posted a long, hostile, and fascinating interview with Stephen Walt that raises the question of why Walt has never been offered such a platform in the U.S. to expound on his views.

    R: And the answer is…?

    • traintosiberia
      traintosiberia
      April 18, 2014, 10:07 am

      Answer is Israel will not and never will take the lesson and change it behavior. It will not ask US listen to Walt. It will not ask US citizen to listen to Walt. In reality ,Israeli supporters have made sure that Walt is not heard or listened ( that’s why the media that trumpets everything Israel does in positive light from Qana bombing to Gaza blockade to Haiti relief to the demand for release of Pollard ) .
      The same media (US) can’t allow Walt a platform for precisely same reason . Like Israeli ,US citizen will hear and they will hear same story but they will react differently . They will slowly bring the edifice of the appeasement complex down. They will shame the congressmen,senators,media,pundit,and force US do what is good for US. This is why one can be allowed to be critical of Israel in Israel and not in US.
      Second Israel knows that like any other country US citizen absorb and accept the news and the information provided by the media from within the country.

      Third – Israeli citizen is conscious of the facts but knows that the system has favored Israel ,helped Israel,and has promoted Israel . It has no collective desire to behave ethically and morally for moral and ethic are not collective or I should say people can be moral ,honest,ethical and righteous in personal individual life but they also can go to bed each night kissing their daughters and sons a good night kiss with a prayer for peace ,enrichment, and forgiveness but can can live and prosper in the corrupt,unethical,immoral,racist and violent country.

  13. crone
    crone
    April 17, 2014, 7:44 pm

    A look at the Israeli control of UK polilticians

  14. Daniel Rich
    Daniel Rich
    April 17, 2014, 8:11 pm

    And Jesus tweeted earlier this morning, ‘You can lead a bloodied body to the bathtub, but you can’t make it splash.’

    News @ 11

  15. April 17, 2014, 8:43 pm

    “So: When is the American press going to give him such a platform? When will Americans get to reckon the loss of Walt’s service as another cost of the special relationship?” It is sad that many Jews have continued to belittle Walt over the years and lately in this ad hominem attack in Haaretz. This cheap shot merely proves the thesis of the book yet again and shows that the distortions of the special relationship represent a fatal millstone around the necks of both Jew and Gentile. Many Jews think that the special relationship is good for Israel but it is clearly a short term advantage and it is not good for America; more Americans are figuring this out every year. Walt is a brilliant guy and this attack by Shalev is notable for its lack of argument and reason. It is the standard irrational and emotional accusation of antisemitism by an Zionist against any and all criticisms of Israel. The fact that such insubstantial and insincere statements by such Zionist sycophants can affect the careers of academic giants like Walt is a sad reflection on the integrity of Jewish organizations in the USA.

  16. Kathleen
    Kathleen
    April 17, 2014, 10:32 pm

    Walt and Mearsheimer did the world a huge favor writing that fact based book

  17. traintosiberia
    traintosiberia
    April 17, 2014, 11:57 pm

    US could have behaved all along the way it had over the years in the I-P conflicts and Israeli Arab conflicts even without AIPAC,WINEP ADL,ZOA and the influence of Israel government. But the record does not support that impression.
    Ametica has cut it losses and left or changed course when the decision was influenced by the self interest. It has changed even sides and dumped friends and embraced enemies
    China to Taiwan to a china again, Japan
    of pre WW2 to Japan of WW2 to post WW2 , Ethiopia to Somalia to Ethiopia , Philippine ,Argentina,Venezuela and Libya – all prove that the self interest of US guided the policies . We may agree or disagree and question the morality ethics,legality but those were not done to bolster self interest of any country other than that of US.
    That was not the case between US and a Middle East. It was the interest of Israel that have guided and forced US policies . How did that happen?

  18. Daniel Rich
    Daniel Rich
    April 18, 2014, 12:32 am

    @ Kathleen,

    Q: Walt and Mearsheimer did the world a huge favor writing that fact based book

    R: I think it was witnessing one of those real watershed moments in life, the day their book hit the shelves.

  19. wondering jew
    wondering jew
    April 18, 2014, 1:25 am

    “Thus the bizarre epiphany at the end, when Shalev says he had just spent time with an anti-Semite who pretended not to be one:” Shalev’s comment is actually given here as : “Jews developed a sixth sense that allowed them to detect both Jews and anti-Semites who may have been pretending to be something else. It is a shame, I thought, that I have not inherited her gift.”

    I think Phil’s interpretation is a bit off. Shalev is saying (IMHO), “I fear he is antiSemitic, but I wish I could know it for sure.” His missing antiSemite detector is somewhere in the attic and instead he can only guess whether or not Walt is a Jewhater.
    This is bad enough. But it is not what Phil wrote. It is different.

    I think that Walt has been vindicated over the last 8 years and the role of Israel in US-Iran relations specifically has shown that the Israel lobby’s power is outsized. Also, it makes no difference if the neocons only represented one strand of what is best for Israel, when the towers were hit, these people whose coloring may have been tainted by a specific type of support for Israel Likud Netanyahu policy led us into a war that was in fact against American interests. I think that 2006 was too soon after the intifada and maybe too early in the history of the conflict, as in there was a change of heart that occurred during Cast Lead that placed me or the conflict in a different light. I do not wish to reread Walt with an eye to try to sense whether he is an antiSemite.

    Israel’s policy vis a vis the West Bank is wrongheaded and has been for a long time. It is choosing delay, when it should either annex the West bank or withdraw. (if the settlement enterprise had been at 1973 levels today Israel could claim its hold on the territory was purely security oriented, but the settler levels of 2014 are of a different magnitude and such a contention will not cut it on the world stage. at the very least it does not pass the test of marit ayin. Meaning it looks treif, even if to some Israelis their hearts are pure.

    And a wrongheaded Israel getting veto and military support from the US based on a compass that is being ignored, not out of common values, but out of financial campaign patterns that show democracy at its lowest most vulnerable vulgar and undemocratic point rather than any reflection of ideals.

    So Walt was right and I don’t need to look him in the eye and test his heart. God can do that.

    • seanmcbride
      seanmcbride
      April 18, 2014, 9:23 am

      yonah fredman wrote:

      I think that Walt has been vindicated over the last 8 years and the role of Israel in US-Iran relations specifically has shown that the Israel lobby’s power is outsized. Also, it makes no difference if the neocons only represented one strand of what is best for Israel, when the towers were hit, these people whose coloring may have been tainted by a specific type of support for Israel Likud Netanyahu policy led us into a war that was in fact against American interests.

      So Walt was right and I don’t need to look him in the eye and test his heart. God can do that.

      Yonah,

      You have been surprising me and making several reasonable statements lately that boost your general credibility — they haven’t gone unnoticed and unappreciated.

      If you were currently the Israeli PM, Israel might have a chance to save itself before it is too late.

    • American
      American
      April 19, 2014, 10:17 am

      ‘And a wrongheaded Israel getting veto and military support from the US based on a compass that is being ignored, not out of common values, but out of financial campaign patterns that show democracy at its lowest most vulnerable vulgar and undemocratic point rather than any reflection of ideals.

      So Walt was right and I don’t need to look him in the eye and test his heart. God can do that.”…yonah

      OMG!…..Hell just froze over and pigs are flying!

      yonah has just demonstrated some objectivity and common sense and didnt call a Israel critic a anti semite.
      congratulations yonah!

  20. Citizen
    Citizen
    April 18, 2014, 5:52 am

    Nobody can figure out why Walt and Mearsheimer wrote The Israel Lobby? I’d chalk it off to being educated in history/intellectually honest, empathic, and having tenure. The trinity, eh? If I am wrong, please explain. Thanks.

  21. Kathleen
    Kathleen
    April 18, 2014, 5:54 am

    Lots of experts back up the not so new findings of Walt and Mearsheimer and warn against the decades long consequences.

    http://www.c-span.org/video/?291033-3/terrorism-homeland-security

    How Israel’s illegal and immoral actions have and continue to effect U.S. National Security even mentioned in the 9/11 Commission report
    http://www.9-11commission.gov/report/911Report.pdf

    http://rt.com/usa/brzezinski-us-israel-obligations-851/

    • American
      American
      April 18, 2014, 9:26 am

      @ kathleen

      That 9-11 report is startling—I am surprised so much about Israel made it into the report. I counted at least 5 terrorist operations around the world in which the terrorist’s reason given for them was resentment of Israel. So a lot of innocent people, not even Americans, have been killed in plane bombings and other attacks over Israel.
      Even made clear that OBL’s reason for attacking the US in his own words was …’ to go for the head of the snake’, that was enabling Israel…the snake being the US.
      Reading this reminded me of what Eric Alterman said about his being willing for ‘the US to take the hits for Israel’…well we have taken the hits already and so have other people that were killed in various terrorist attacks as revenge for what Israel does.
      Everyone has taken the hits for Israel except Israel.

      • lysias
        lysias
        April 18, 2014, 3:24 pm

        Allen Dulles on the American people:

        Allen Dulles summarized his opinion about the American public at a Congressional meeting: “But nobody reads. Don’t believe people read in this country. There will be a few professors that will read the record… the public will read very little”.

        If people actually read the 9/11 Commission Report, complete with the footnotes, they would see that all the commission’s account of the operational details of carrying out 9/11 rests on the testimony of detainees, some of whom we know were tortured, all of whom we know were subjected to severe pressure. Anybody who reads that cannot escape concluding that this is the reason why torture was used. Torture is notorious for eliciting the testimony that the torturers want, not for eliciting truth.

    • pabelmont
      pabelmont
      April 18, 2014, 1:29 pm

      Kathleen — thanks for Juan Cole’s essay, a lovely essay and photos.

      There was indeed a Palestine, it died (in a way), its body was removed from the tomb (in a way), but it lives on. The deniers (of Palestine, of Nakba, etc.) deny in vain. And they build on sand who do not build on the rock of decency, human rights, truth, and justice.

    • adele
      adele
      April 18, 2014, 3:48 pm

      Thanks for the link Kathleen, awesome reading and photos. The comments (especially toward the end) were very enlightening.

  22. Boomer
    Boomer
    April 18, 2014, 10:58 am

    Regarding “The Lobby,” there is a nice summary of its early days at Counterpunch. I’m not enough of a historian to assess it as well as many others here can, but it may be of interest:

    http://www.counterpunch.org/2014/03/21/the-origins-of-the-israel-lobby-in-the-us/

  23. traintosiberia
    traintosiberia
    April 18, 2014, 11:28 am

    Schumer and Haim think that they are doing what they do are for Israel.their main concern is Israel.
    Feith sees the war in ME is war against another holocaust not for the interest of US
    Abrams wants himself and his tribe remain separate from the broader issues of American cultural and political issues but work within the system even as cabinet member and then pursue policy that hurt US and benefit Israel.
    Joe Liberman sees in Iran enemy of Israel Amalek . He does not and could not see any American relevance unless he has to come up with something to support his only concern that is Israel
    Zelikow said the war against Saddam was war for Israel not for US security or necessity. Did Zelikow do other. I am sure he did.
    Sure they do other things. So does anybody . Only robot does one thing during its shelf life.

  24. traintosiberia
    traintosiberia
    April 18, 2014, 11:51 am

    Jeff B this one and the one above are to address your points

    NRA and Agribusiness have branches . But the same place will see demonstration . Same place will see boycott . Same place will either allow opposite views or be basically lumped with NRA or Agrobusiness concern as some corrupt,indoctrinated,inflexible elitist ,moneyed whose interest be anounced loudly don’t agree with the broader US anymore. The boycott ,the demonstration will be seen in the TV and be discussed in the print media.
    Blumberg can come with challenging NRA . Ask any official to murmur similar challenges against Israeli lobby. There is Kristol
    still enjoying the perks after declaring success in getting rid of all ” Arabist”

    The infiltration of the society by NRA or Agrobusiness is minimal compared to the say of AIPAC in the type of books library can have,text book can teach, classes can discuss,church can showcase or feature speakers,or the congress can have hearings or listen to the testimony of the victims ( from Gaza, from WB,from 1996 or 2006 Lebanese war victims or the from the relatives of the Flotilla murder)

  25. traintosiberia
    traintosiberia
    April 18, 2014, 1:34 pm

    JeffB
    Italian lobby?
    Irish Lobby?
    Us-China working lobby?
    Sure they exist and so do thecCAIR ( isamic organization)and its charity organization and outreach .
    Did any of them ever do anything that come close to what AIPAC has threatened to do or has achieved doing so far at very conceivable level.

  26. James Canning
    James Canning
    April 18, 2014, 1:35 pm

    Great piece! The efforts of the ISRAEL LOBBY to suppress free speech in America, is so readily perceived by looking at the experience of Steve Walt.

  27. Herb Glatter
    Herb Glatter
    April 18, 2014, 1:49 pm

    Here’s another view from Gaza – “Happy” from Gaza what do you see?

  28. PilgrimSoul
    PilgrimSoul
    April 18, 2014, 2:49 pm

    To help readers with this Orwellian dilemma, I offer these “12 Commandments of the Israel Lobby,” to be memorized if possible in a venue featuring the theme song of “The Twilight Zone” in the background.

    1. The Israel Lobby does not exist. In those cases where it does exist, its conclusions cannot be questioned.

    2. All criticisms of Israel are false. They are invented by anti-Semites, self-hating Jews, and terrorists. Also by crypto-Nazis, apostates and liars.

    3. All critics of Israel must be punished by extracting a public apology. Some offenders may be required to apologize more than once, if they do not grovel sufficiently the first time around.

    4. Those who criticize Israel and do not publicly apologize must be endlessly harassed, and fired from their jobs if possible. In academia they must be denied tenure.

    5. Any Arab or Muslim that criticizes Israel is a terrorist, and deserves to die.

    6. To praise anybody who ever criticized Israel is the same thing as criticizing Israel. Just as all things Israeli are good, anybody that criticizes Israel is bad.

    7. In any conflict involving Israelis and Palestinians, the Israelis are always the victims. If an Israeli hurts a Palestinian, the Israeli is still the victim because the Palestinian is trying to make the Israeli feel bad.

    8. Israel/Palestine is never debated. That implies another side to the issue, and there is only one side. Therefore debate is suppressed or disrupted.

    9. The United Nations, the World Court, the various UN agencies, every human rights organization and non-governmental organization in the world that isn’t approved by the NGO Monitor [an Israeli screening operation] is anti-Semitic. That is because these organizations are likely to criticize Israel’s human rights record—and as any fool knows, that means they’re anti-Semitic.

    10. The interests of the US are exactly the same as the interests of Israel. If they aren’t, the interests of Israel take precedence.

    11. Any war that the US is likely to be involved in must be evaluated from the point of view of its helpfulness to the current government of Israel.

    12. Anybody who threatens to make sense while criticizing Israel must be immediately shouted down. If shouting doesn’t work, screaming and crying are recommended. As a last resort, one must declare that criticisms of Israel are making one feel “unsafe.”

  29. American
    American
    April 19, 2014, 10:41 am

    Something very interesting overlooked in the Walt interview. I dont remember his ever saying anything about being asked to write the I-Lobby book before.
    This part:..

    “We didn’t ask to do this – we were asked,” Walt says of his sudden interest in the domestic aspect of U.S. foreign policy, an angle of observation usually shunned by contemporary realists.

    “But we felt that we were in an unusual position to do this. One, we were a couple of boring, mainstream academics. We weren’t Noam Chomsky. We weren’t Norman Finkelstein. We weren’t easy to dismiss. We weren’t married to Palestinians. We’d never taken any money from the Saudis. We had a certain amount of credibility in the sense that we had nothing to gain from doing this. And therefore, if we weren’t willing to, with tenure at two major universities, who would?”>>>

    Whoever asked W&M to write this book I would bet are not ‘visible’ to the Lobby. And have to be someone(s) with more potential clout than Israel objectors within the government agencies or the private groups like CNI’s Weir, and Grant.
    A long time ago Steve Clemons at TWN wrote about ‘traditional Americans” needing to step up and correct abnormalities like the I- influence and said some ‘private individuals’ had recongized this. I have wondered ever since then who or what private ‘loosely formed” like- minded people or ‘circle’ he was referring to. I dont think its any of the individuals or groups we see actually making any statement about Israel.
    I dont think Walt or anyone else is going tell us who they are either.

Leave a Reply