The Israel Lobby

Discussion in 'Politics & Religion' started by kissanmakeup, Apr 10, 2006.

  1. it didn't come as a surprise to me but i have never contemplated the level of penetration these people achived in the american administration.

    "John Mearsheimer is the Wendell Harrison Professor of Political Science at Chicago, and the author of The Tragedy of Great Power Politics."

    "Stephen Walt is the Robert and Renee Belfer Professor of International Affairs at the Kennedy School of Government at Harvard. His most recent book is Taming American Power: The Global Response to US Primacy."
  2. "Instead, the thrust of US policy in the region derives almost entirely from domestic politics, and especially the activities of the ‘Israel Lobby’. Other special-interest groups have managed to skew foreign policy, but no lobby has managed to divert it as far from what the national interest would suggest, while simultaneously convincing Americans that US interests and those of the other country – in this case, Israel – are essentially identical.

    Since the October War in 1973, Washington has provided Israel with a level of support dwarfing that given to any other state. It has been the largest annual recipient of direct economic and military assistance since 1976, and is the largest recipient in total since World War Two, to the tune of well over $140 billion (in 2004 dollars). Israel receives about $3 billion in direct assistance each year, roughly one-fifth of the foreign aid budget, and worth about $500 a year for every Israeli. This largesse is especially striking since Israel is now a wealthy industrial state with a per capita income roughly equal to that of South Korea or Spain.

    Other recipients get their money in quarterly installments, but Israel receives its entire appropriation at the beginning of each fiscal year and can thus earn interest on it. Most recipients of aid given for military purposes are required to spend all of it in the US, but Israel is allowed to use roughly 25 per cent of its allocation to subsidise its own defence industry. It is the only recipient that does not have to account for how the aid is spent, which makes it virtually impossible to prevent the money from being used for purposes the US opposes, such as building settlements on the West Bank. Moreover, the US has provided Israel with nearly $3 billion to develop weapons systems, and given it access to such top-drawer weaponry as Blackhawk helicopters and F-16 jets. Finally, the US gives Israel access to intelligence it denies to its Nato allies and has turned a blind eye to Israel’s acquisition of nuclear weapons.

    A final reason to question Israel’s strategic value is that it does not behave like a loyal ally. Israeli officials frequently ignore US requests and renege on promises (including pledges to stop building settlements and to refrain from ‘targeted assassinations’ of Palestinian leaders). Israel has provided sensitive military technology to potential rivals like China, in what the State Department inspector-general called ‘a systematic and growing pattern of unauthorised transfers’. According to the General Accounting Office, Israel also ‘conducts the most aggressive espionage operations against the US of any ally’. In addition to the case of Jonathan Pollard, who gave Israel large quantities of classified material in the early 1980s (which it reportedly passed on to the Soviet Union in return for more exit visas for Soviet Jews), a new controversy erupted in 2004 when it was revealed that a key Pentagon official called Larry Franklin had passed classified information to an Israeli diplomat. Israel is hardly the only country that spies on the US, but its willingness to spy on its principal patron casts further doubt on its strategic value."

  3. FredBloggs

    FredBloggs Guest

    this is disgraceful.

    how can you say these things?

    clearly, you are a nazi, you deny the holocaust ever happened, and you deny israels right to exist.

    oh yea - and you are an anti-semitic or something like that.

    hapabitch and doodoodogshit will be on yer back for this.

    has no one ever told you that criticising a GOVERNMENT is the same as being a RACIST? clearly not.

    whats wrong with you? surely you understand that israel has the right to murder innocent women and children (and journalists that report them) who have been living there for like 300 years previously. why cant you get your head around the fact that it is fine for israel to commit HUNDREDS of human rights abuses because they have suffered so much in the past, yet it is utterly deplorable for an arab to chuck a few stones at each other, chop off a few hands, or attack those who invade their country and insult their religion.

    and before you print any more outlandish comments about poor innocent israel, you may want to do a bit more research.

    try this - find out who OWNS the federal reserve and other western central banks. then find out the names of the people who own those companies that own the central banks. then find out what country they are from. interesting stuff.
  4. Harvard to remove official seal from anti-AIPAC 'working paper'

    WASHINGTON - Harvard University has decided to remove its logo from a study that denounces the pro-Israel lobby's impact on American foreign policy, in order to distance itself from the study's conclusions.

    The university also appended a more strongly worded disclaimer to the study, stating that it reflects the views of its authors only. The former disclaimer said merely that the study "does not necessarily" reflect the university's views.

    The controversial study, published this week, was authored by Professor Stephen Walt of Harvard's Kennedy School of Government and Professor John Mearsheimer of the University of Chicago. It charged that American foreign policy has been subordinated to Israeli interests and accused the pro-Israel lobby of responsibility for America's invasion of Iraq.

    The study's many critics claim that its academic quality is poor, and that it is essentially a political polemic rather than genuine academic research. Well-known researchers such as Marvin Kalb, also of Harvard's Kennedy School, said this week that the study fails to meet minimal academic standards.

    However, it has aroused great interest among the Arab media and been widely quoted there. The Palestine Liberation Organization's office in Washington distributed it by email to thousands of subscribers, and lobbyists for Arab states have been passing it around. The study also earned praise from former Ku Klux Klan leader David Duke.

    According to one such academic, who asked to remain anonymous, "the study obviously contains many correct facts, but their presentation is skewed and the conclusions [the authors] derive from them are unfit for publication. For instance, it completely ignores the enormous influence of the Arab oil lobby on American policy, and presents a one-sided and utterly politically biased picture of the world."

    Other academics - some of them not known as fans of AIPAC - also cited many professional flaws in the study, such as omitting relevant facts, relying on unofficial sources (including Haaretz), and leaping to conclusions that are not necessarily supported by the facts.

    Oops, antisemites with egg on their faces once again.
  5. no eggs on my face. your like intimidated harvard into pulling their endorsement.

    aside from that, you guys couldn't refute any of the fact in this paper aside from sayin, "oh yeah, but what about the other lobbies" and accusing everyone who come close to criticizing israel as antisemites.

  6. "I do not regard this as a Kennedy School Research Paper, because it clearly does not meet the academic standards of a Kennedy School research paper," Mr. [Marvin] Kalb, who is also the faculty chair for the Kennedy School's Washington programs, told The New York Sun in an e-mail yesterday after reading the paper.

    "It is a rather sensational example of 'realist' journalism," he continued. "My sense is that Dean Walt would be better advised to stick to scholarship and leave journalism to journalists, who generally check their 'facts' before publishing them."

    Also critical of the paper's academic quality was one of the figures mentioned in it as part of the "lobby," President Clinton's special Middle East envoy, Dennis Ross, who said the authors displayed "a woeful lack of knowledge on the subject."

    "The part I've read I find remarkable for its lack of seriousness," Mr. Ross told the Sun yesterday. "It is basically a series of assertions. They quote only those people who basically have this point of view and don't take a serious look at anything in a more profound way. It is masquerading as scholarship.

    "I would say this is an effort to take a point of view and give it academic legitimacy," he continued.
  7. that still does not mean that you did not intimidate harvard into pulling their endorsement.

    beware the might of the jewish lobby.

    one thing is for sure, the future of these scholars is finito.
  8. dennis ross was more israeli than barak was.

  9. John Mearsheimer and Stephen Walt are more pro-palestinian and pro-arab than arafat was. Two pro-arab individuals with academic credentials wrote an anti-israel article full of omissions, distortions and assertions. What else is new? Most scientists and political experts disagree with their conclusions, on the positive side the study was approved by David Duke and Hamas.

  10. who is most? can you name your most?

    by the way, against all your attempts to scilence it, this thing is spreading.

    one last thing, stop lying ddddoo...I have noticed that about you!
    #10     Apr 11, 2006