How is it “vicious” to defend fundamental principles of modern Western democracies and Americanism?

Americanism:

1. checks and balances
2. due process
3. entrepreneurialism
4. ethnic tolerance and diversity
5. free enterprise
6. freedom of assembly
7. freedom of religion
8. freedom of speech
9. government accountability
10. government transparancy
11. individualism
12. meritocracy
13. reason
14. religious tolerance and diversity
15. universalism

And didn’t you take great pride in Michael Bloomberg’s defense of Americanism in his recent speech on the mosque controversy?

Japan’s policies are not presently embroiling Americans in self-destructive trillion dollar wars — I haven’t paid any attention to Japan’s immigration policies. I will try to inform myself about them.

(I hope callie enjoys the list.)

I would love to hear your thoughts on Japanese immigration policy. I’m sure you are just a vicious toward them as are Israel. Right?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f4zyjLyBp64

BEGIN QUOTE

Israel will expel 400 native-born children of non-Jewish foreign workers to help safeguard the country’s JEWISH IDENTITY….

”On the one hand, this problem is a humanitarian problem, we all feel and understand the hearts of children,” Mr Netanyahu said. ”But on the other hand, there are Zionist considerations and ensuring the JEWISH CHARACTER of the state of Israel.”

END QUOTE

How are Netanyahu’s views any different from those of KKK members who want to ensure the WHITE CHARACTER of the United States or Nazis who want to safeguard the GERMAN IDENTITY of Germany?

Israel is a stridently ethnic nationalist state that is radically out of step with modern Western democracies. It is circling the same drain as the Confederacy and apartheid white South Africa.

By “Americanism,” I am referring not to the crude jingoism of Rush Limbaugh, Newt Gingrich, John Hagee or Glenn Beck, but to the thoughtful defense of the U.S. Constitution and Bill of Rights by voices like Michael Bloomberg (see his speech on the Park51 controversy) and Glenn Greenwald.

Israel’s problem is that it has formed a close alliance with un-American and anti-American players in American politics — neo-Confederates and white nationalists essentially who have never gotten over losing the Civil War and the institution of slavery. Christian Zionism is an Old Testament cult which is associated mostly with embittered Southern white Christian males who hate our freedoms. In the 19th century, this cultural bloc attempted to destroy the United States of America.

Ethnic nationalism is out of step with the culture and values of all modern Western democracies. Unfortunately, Israel is a stridently ethnic nationalist state. It is increasingly turning to the most reactionary and anti-Enlightenment forces in American and European politics to shore up its dwindling international support.

Israel (and Likud in particular) has done an excellent job of alienating Americans and Europeans from its cause without the need for sinister machinations from the Wahhabi lobby to explain its political decline.

“According to the new criteria, children will be allowed to remain in Israel if their parents entered the country legally, they were born in Israel or arrived in the country before the age of 13 and have lived in Israel for five years continuously, they learned in the Israeli school system in the most recent academic year and are registered to continue their studies in the 2010-2011 year, and they speak Hebrew.”

In other words, if their parents were in Israel legally, even if they were not admitted for permanent residency, and their children, even those not born in Israel, have been integrated into Israeli society, they can stay. If not, not.

Now does the U.S. treat the children of temporary workers born outside the U.S. any better? No. Worse. They are all subject to deportation, and many of them are deported. However, the story is under-reported here, because it makes the U.S. look bad. So, as usual, the anti-Semites are applying a double-standard to Israel. No surpise.

People loathe Israel because Israel, to any right thinking human being, has made itself utterly loathsome.

Their tastelessness and stupidity, their clumsy lies, their tiresome howls, of “anti-Semitism” will not change that fact.

Are ultra-conservatives who advocated for Israel and against the Obama Administration on the settlement expansion issue, the likes of Rush Limbaugh, Ann Coulter, Glenn Beck, and Liz Cheney, also dupes of the Zionist Lobby? If that is so on this issue, how much of the fog they are spewing on other issues is being programmed by the Jews to confuse otherwise clear-thinking Christians? Who can you trust? Where does classic Western anti-Semitism leave off and Wahhabi-influenced Eastern anti-Semitism begin? Can’t tell your friends from your enemies in the anti-Semitic blogosphere? Precisely!

One wonders if the Americanists of which we speak are truly committed to protecting and defending the U.S. Constitution as a beacon of Western Enlightenment. Or is that code for committed to defending Christian America from all enemies, foreign and domestic, by purging the U.S. of those not fully inculcated in the philosophy and embracing the values of the Western Enlightenment, e.g., those who have rejected Christ and are under the influence of the Torah, Talmud, or the works of Baruch Spinoza?

Not all Americanists are anti-Semites, but all anti-Semites empathize with, if not actively support, the Americanist agenda as it regards the alleged threat posed by the Zionist Lobby. Many commenters seem to enjoy blurring the distinction between unbiased and biased commentary. Sadly, all they are doing is advancing the Wahhabi Lobby agenda by driving a wedge between the Jewish Left and the Christian Right on the one issue on which there is now general agreement– Israel’s right and need to exist.

Follow the Big Oil money trail, and connect the dots. Until you can do that, trust the motives and agenda of no one in the anti-Semitic blogosphere. Using enlightened Western logic, the enemy of your enemy is not always your friend.

The trouble is that the comments to anti-Israeli posts are like all other comments on the web. They are anonymous .
And being anonymous, they can not be said to represent real views. To coin a term, they could be “comment provocateurs.” Anti-Israeli screeds written by pro-Israeli writers so that Lee Smith can write even more pro-Jewish hatred.

Far fetched? Are we not now living in the age of Andrew Breitbart and James O’Keefe? There’s no doubt there’s going to more to come. Keep you’re airplane sickness bag handy.

The trouble is that the comments to anti-Israeli posts are like all other comments on the web. They are anonymous .
And being anonymous, they can not be said to represent real views. To coin a term, they could be “comment provocateurs.” Anti-Israeli screeds written by pro-Israeli writers so that Lee Smith can write even more pro-Jewish hatred.l

Far fetched? Are we not now living in the age of Andrew Breitbart and James O’Keefe? There’s no doubt there’s going to more to come.where we’re were headed. Keep you’re airplane sickness bag handy.

Its been enlightening and certainly proves the point of the original author.

Pablo I agree that the Saudi lobby is quite powerful. I know in Afghanistand from speaking with my students they are building ‘school’s’ or madrasses all over Afghanistan and Pakistan and now are making serious inroads in East Africa in places like Uganda and Tanzania. Very its discussed very little. I had never thought of that before, you made an excellent point that Fox news does indeed seem focused on that from what I hear. Good point.

Tips on effective debating:

1. Focus on high quality and carefully documented sources and facts.

2. Don’t engage in personal attacks.

The more you emphasize 1. and de-emphasize 2., the more effective you will be in making whatever points you want to make. I trust you will instill these values of effective communication and writing in the the minds of whatever students you teach. Several memorable professors of mine took care to drill these basic principles into the heads of their charges.

Most of your posts so far would receive failing grades at any first-class graduate school, without exception. They do not even rise to the level of an undergraduate effort.

1. Please explain why you disagree with Dana Milbank’s statement: “Four months ago, the Obama administration made a politically perilous decision to condemn Israel over a controversial new settlement. THE ISRAEL LOBBY reared up, Netanyahu denounced the administration’s actions, Republican leaders sided with Netanyahu, and Democrats ran for cover.”

You must at least admit that the use of the term “the Israel lobby” is common in mainstream media outlets like the New York Times and the Washington Post.

And why did Milbank use the expression “politically perilous decision” in the above passage?

2. You keep mentioning Gilad Shalit, like that is supposed to be a big deal of some kind. Americans are dying and suffering grievous injuries in Iraq and Afghanistan every day. There are no conceivable circumstances under which they would *ever* become focused on the Shalit story. The Israel lobby hasn’t tried to push that story among Americans, and never would.

3. The Israel lobby continues to be the only major lobby in American politics that is agitating for a war against Iran that would probably be catastrophic for Americans. It’s a very big story. Americans are going to discuss it, regardless of offenses to your sensibilities.

And once again, if the so called Israel Lobby is all powerful why is Shalit not being seen by the Red Cross? Why? You make no sense.

I am not ‘vaguely’ insulting you, I am telling you that you are an obsessed person who needs help.

Why are you accusing Americanists of being antisemites? What is antisemitic about Americans revering the U.S. Constitution and Bill of Rights and focusing like a laser beam on the American interest in the making of American foreign policy all around the world?

My main point stands: leading American and European critics of Israel, like Sullivan, Walt, Weiss, Greenwald and Lobe, are not the least bit influenced by Wahhabism. What drives them is a strong commitment to basic American and Western Enlightenment values, and a concern for the American interest on the international stage.

You gave up engaging in substantive discussion and debate days ago — you haven’t answered any of the points in my last posts. If you continue directing vague and insulting comments towards me with no content, I will respond with more evidence demonstrating the reality of the Israel lobby.

Notice this passage from a Dana Milbank article in the Washington Post from July 7, 2010 — he is not referring to the Loch Ness monster, the Easter bunny or the tooth fairy. Milbank (and the Washington Post) are asserting that a unified Israel lobby forced Obama to back off from his confrontation with the Israeli government over settlements:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/07/06/AR2010070604005.html

BEGIN QUOTE

A blue-and-white Israeli flag hung from Blair House. Across Pennsylvania Avenue, the Stars and Stripes was in its usual place atop the White House. But to capture the real significance of Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu’s visit with President Obama, White House officials might have instead flown the white flag of surrender.

Four months ago, the Obama administration made a politically perilous decision to condemn Israel over a controversial new settlement. THE ISRAEL LOBBY reared up, Netanyahu denounced the administration’s actions, Republican leaders sided with Netanyahu, and Democrats ran for cover.

So on Tuesday, Obama, routed and humiliated by his Israeli counterpart, invited Netanyahu back to the White House for what might be called the Oil of Olay Summit: It was all about saving face.

END QUOTE

Perhaps you could write a note the Washington Post complaining about their use of the term “the Israel lobby” which makes repeated references to the Loch Ness monster. I am sure they will be impressed. Good luck.

Except of Arabs, fringe left/right wing-nuts and other people in the Third world who know nothing about Jews and Israel. Other than that you are right.

Your Blog is quite interesting. Nice revisionism history.
Are you for real? Or do you assume most people outside your cocoon do not have basic grasp of XX century history and you are trying to basically rewrite history as it suits you.

“Morality is not an outdated concept”, quite a problematic statement when you play the role of the victim.
But, You are not a dishonest individual, Callie. Calling you dishonest is like saying Hannibal Lecter had an eating disorder. …..
By the way, I have a scoop for you, “‘The Protocols of the Elders of Zion’”, No one takes this crap seriously

You never answer anyones questions but just spout the same kind of automated answers again and again like a bot.

The issue isn’t whether there is an Israel Lobby but whether it has hijacked American foreign policy regarding Israel and the Middle East. The reality is that our foreign policy has been hijacked by Arab Oil. The petro dollars that are not spent on the upkeep of the palaces of the House of Saud or gifts for the House of Bush are diverted to the Wahhabi schools and their teaching of hate for and the inevitable jihad against the Judaeo-Christian West. Why stop there when you can attack America on the cheap using the anti-Semites in the blogosphere to drive a wedge between the Jewish Left and the Christian Right over the one issue on which they agree — Israel’s right to exist?

Ignorance of the existence of the Wahhabi Lobby and its alliance with their Americanist anti-Semite fellow travelers in the blogosphere is no excuse. You are pawns in their game. To play their game is to commit Judaeo-Christian suicide. Connect the dots and get out of their game.

The government of the great leader Bibi is expanding to 70 years the prohibition of secret archives release.
http://tinyurl.com/2bpsx8w (ref: Le Monde,a notorious antisemitic newspaper…)

The Nazis, the antisemitics, the Islamo-Fascists, the secular lefties & everything in between, are going to claim that “they” (the Israelis) have something to hide.
Which is of course ludicrous and antisemitic…

Yes indeed, we all know there is some cosmic antisemitic conspiracy, the secular “Euro Left” and the dark armies of
Islamo Fascists have joined hands in their crusade against the Jewish people. Do you also believe in alien abductions?.

The universe is expanding & its is antisemitic…..Lol

Why? Is it your job? What are you doing with yourself and your life? Turn off your computer, get a girlfriend, make yourself some dinner, watch a movie.

make a grocery list, walk your dog. Turn it off, its over the top!

A peer reviewed journal of internatinal relations would probably be above your reading level since simple lists and sites like Judeofacist are more your cup of tea but you prove nothing.

And you never answered my question, you are playing a game of childhood Candy land with yourself on this thread just talking about your own strawman points.

If the Israel lobby is so powerful why is Gilad Shalit in the situation he is in? My guess is that the vast majority of Americans have never heard of him let alone realize he has not been allowed Red Cross visits since his kidnapping. Why is that?

The silence is deafening. There are lobby groups for Israel. They all have different ideas.

You need some new hobbies. I am sure your friends are getting worried about the obsessive posting online. You might want to get some help from the health center of the college you are at. You really need it!

Really comparing China/Tibet to Poland/Germany? Would love to see that.

And of course Americans/natives, at this point I think you have been sipping too much kool-aid.

Your points are defined well, but your inability to state clear examples makes me wonder about your other references you make.

Regarding sorted lists — anyone involved with developing data mining methods and technologies deals with sorted lists all the time. In fact, sorted lists are the heart and soul of data mining.

I don’t know what text editor you are using, but I favor Textpad — it can sort long
lists of items in a split second, the blink of an eye. Almost no effort required — just a keystroke or two.

Sorted lists are a method for cutting through huge swathes of messy text to the clear, crisp heart of the matter.

Clearly your mind doesn’t work this way, but don’t presume that others should operate within your mental boundaries.

If you would like to learn more about the list-based approach to information processing in general, take a look into the history of the AI-oriented programming language LISP. Lists rule.

http://www.google.com/#q=site:nytimes.com+“israel+lobby”

A fix would be welcome.

For those who might need more details about how to use Google to analyze the use of that phrase in mainstream American politics, and in the New York Times in particular:

1. Google [site:nytimes.com "israel lobby"]

http://www.google.com/#q=site:nytimes.com+“israel+lobby”

2. Click on Show Search Tools

3. Click on Timeline

4. Browse the phrase in context from 1969 to the present

5. Zero in on a particular year, say 1975

6. One will notice items like this:

a. 1975: Jun 30, 1975 – While their efforts have not yet approached the effectiveness of the pro-Israel lobby….

b. 1975: Aug 8, 1975 – The Israel Lobby in Washington Is Small and Effective

A small observation: the term “pro-Israel lobby” (instead of the more simple “Israel lobby”) was often used in previous decades in media outlets like the New York Times.

One could perform the same exercise with a wide variety of mainstream publications for this historical period.

1)”Fools make assumptions”
You are protecting…..

2)”For the rest, Devil’s rage means I have hit the mark in challenging his fabricated self-history”
You are protecting…..again

Lol, do I look angry to you?, I am ridiculing you, its priceless. Besides Shabbos Goy, I know exactly how funny little characters like you operate & what they expect. I won’t give you the pleasure of getting into a pissing contest with you.The name calling game, the slander and the baseless accusations, that’s your cup of tea.

How entertaining the average moron who toils in obscurity.

Provide some examples of American oil industry leaders who been agitating for an American or Israeli war against Iran. Curiously these lobbyists (if you can name them) have had no influence on the American military and intelligence establishments, which have repeatedly expressed their opposition to such a war.

On the other hand, one can easily turn up dozens of statements from neoconservatives and pro-Israel activists agitating for a war against Iran.

How well do you think the wars against Iraq and Afghanistan have gone? Have Americans been net beneficiaries of those wars? How do you think a war against Iran would turn out?

I didn’t describe Christopher Hitchens as a neocon — I don’t think he is. You are playing on a tennis court against yourself.

Stephen Schwartz, on the other hand, describes himself as a neocon, and I think we can take him at his word. If you have a problem with his self-description, take it up with him.

But you are losing sight of the main line of debate here: I don’t think that Wahhabism has had any influence whatever among the group of intellectuals that Lee Smith singled out for attack. They are all hardcore Americanists in the tradition of Jefferson, Paine, Madison, Franklin, Washington, etc.

Israel (and Zionism) face a much greater challenge from Americanism and the Western Enlightenment tradition than they do from Wahhabism. Deal with it. Get real. Show some Jewish intellectual seriousness for once and stop flailing around.

Nearly all the harsh criticism of the ADL emanating from Jewish circles in recent days has been motivated by Americanism, not Wahhabism. See, for instance, Paul Krugman’s article in the New York Times on the subject, and the commentary which follows.

Funny though, the quote you state, it seems Mr. Schwartz is still a Trotskyite at heart which wouldn’t make a him a true ‘Neocon’ since all the self-avowed ‘Neocons’ from Podhoretz to Kristol have renounce Trostsky.

BTW, Christopher Hitchens was a Trotskyite too and he would not consider himself a Neocon and if you call him one to his face he probably knock you to the ground. Game, set, match.

Do you use the handle JSLeFanu on Friendfeed?

http://friendfeed.com/jslefanu

What I would like to see is some evidence that Wahhabism has influenced the thinking of John Mearsheimer, Stephen Walt, Andrew Sullivan, Philip Weiss, Glenn Greenwald or Jim Lobe. The notion is absurd on its face.

They are all hardcore Americanists, firmly situated within the Western Enlightenment tradition.

What I find troubling about your posts is your lack of intellectual precision and general flailing about, which strikes me as being very un-Jewish. (I associate Jewishness with the very highest intellectual standards.)

If you had taken the trouble to read the Wikipedia entry on Stephen Schwartz, you would have been pointed to his article “Trotskycons?” in National Review from June 11, 2003:

http://article.nationalreview.com/269089/trotskycons/stephen-schwartz

In that article we find the following revealing passage by Schwartz:

“We are almost alone among younger neoconservatives in boasting such credentials.”

Straight from the horse’s mouth: Schwartz identifies himself as a neoconservative.

Schwartz also seems to be a die-hard admirer of Leon Trotsky:

BEGIN QUOTE

To my last breath I will defend the Trotsky who alone, and pursued from country to country, and finally laid low in his own blood in a hideously hot little house in Mexico City, said no to Soviet coddling of Hitlerism, to the Moscow purges, and to the betrayal of the Spanish Republic, and who had the capacity to admit he had been wrong about the imposition of a single-party state, as well as about the fate of the Jewish people. To my last breath, and without apology. Let the neofascists, and Stalinists in their second childhood, make of it what they will.

END QUOTE

Schwartz is a neoconservative in the Trotskyite tradition apparently.

I share his concerns about Muslim fundamentalism (if not his neoconservatism or Trotskyism), but those concerns extend to problems with Abrahamic fundamentalism in general — Muslim, Christian and Jewish.

What idiocy. The Euroleft-Islamofascist alliance is well-entrenched. Respect is just an arch-typical example.

Fools make assumptions.

For the rest, Devil’s rage means I have hit the mark in challenging his fabricated self-history.

David, your posts are good but debating Sean is a waste of time.

Allen, French, English, and Turkish Jews are all buying bolt-holes in Israel. Your post is ludcrously self-centred.

I don’t deny that there is a strain of Saudi-based Wahhabi proselytizing that bears inspection and investigation.

What I find preposterous is the suggestion that Wahhabism has had a significant influence on American and European critics of Israel. Most of them despise all forms of religious fundamentalism — Muslim, Christian and Jewish.

1. Which religious tradition has most influenced your thinking about Mideast politics?

2. Which authors have most influenced your thinking about Mideast politics?

3. Which books over your lifetime have most influenced your thinking about Mideast politics?

4. Which books have you read recently about Mideast politics?

1. How often was it said?

2. Where was it said?

3. When was it said?

3. Who said it?

5. How was it said?

You would think Sean and all of his great wisdom he would want to use academic databases instead of Google. I mean its a known fact that most Middle East departments are completely hostile to the idea of Israel actually existing. So he could rant and rave about the Neo-Con/Israel lobby under the guise of academic research all he wanted. Then he could go on and say these people are the experts in the field and know more any than anyone else about ‘the truth’ of Israel and the Jewish people and we have no idea what we talking about since neither of us have PhD in a Near East subject.

Seriously Sean, wikipedia? Are you kidding me? Come on man, I almost was taking you seriously (just kidding) about your scholarly research practices. Wikipedia is the WORST place go to go for scholarly research since anyone can write anything about anybody. If you wrote a paper for a class and used Wikipedia as your reference source I would hope to G-d your prof would knock you down a grade (or just failing you) for using them.

“If you Google [site:nytimes.com "wahhabi lobby"] you won’t produce a single hit — the New York Times hasn’t used the term even once.”

Gotcha, since the NYT doesn’t use the term ‘Wahhabi lobby’ that means it doesn’t exist. Glad to know that, I’m sure Marc Tracy would agree with you. Whether you want to believe it or not Saudi Arabia’s greatest export hasn’t been oil, but their extreme strain of Islam. Just because the liberal intelligentsia doesn’t want to discuss the issue, doesn’t mean Saudi’s proselytizing doesn’t exist.

You wrote: “One can add to that the considerable power and monies of the “Arab Lobby,” ranging from the oil industry to the Saudi-bribed Arabists at the State Deartment.”

The American government has cultivated close relations with Saudia Arabia since the administration of Franklin D. Roosevelt for reasons American national *self-interest*. Do you realize what an economic disaster for the United States it would be if it lost access to Saudi oil? Do you know anything about the history of American relations with the oil-producing nations in the Mideast?

Did you say that you are not even an American citizen, by the way?

The discussion concerning the use of Google as a data mining tool is going way over your head. Sheer number of hits doesn’t tell one a whole lot about a topic. Examining the patterns within those hits can tell one a very great deal.

Try viewing a Google search on ["israel lobby"] with the Timeline filter, and study the evolving usage on the expression *in context* over time. You’ll learn something.

You still haven’t addressed most of the points I raised with you. Why is there so little controversy in American politics about the Irish, Italian, Swedish or French lobbies? Think about it. You’re underwater. You need to wake up.

Its actually funny that someone would claim to be an intellectual and use Google search hits as evidence of the truth.

I came up with close to a million google hits for the Loch Ness monster, doesn’t make it so! How about Santa? The Tooth Fairy?

Anyhow this thread was educational in a sense since it really proved Lee’s point.

Yes, I knew all those facts about Stephen Schwartz. I also know that he describes himself as a neoconservative (see his Wikipedia entry).

I Googled around a bit more on “Wahhabi lobby” and edited the previous list of propaganda outlets for the term:

1. American Thinker
2. Campus Watch
3. Center for Security Policy
4. Fox News
5. Free Republic
6. Frontpage Magazine
7. Israpundit
8. Jihad Watch
9. Middle East Forum
10. National Post
11. National Review
12. New York Post
13. New York Sun
14. Weekly Standard
15. Worldnetdaily

All of these entities are closely connected to the Israel lobby.

If you Google [site:nytimes.com "wahhabi lobby"] you won’t produce a single hit — the New York Times hasn’t used the term even once.

Using the Timeline view of a Google search on ["israel lobby"] is also revealing: the expression has been in wide usage in the mainstream media for quite a few years — long before Mearsheimer’s and Walt’s book.

Google is a superb data mining tool for resolving all kinds of subtle questions in the social sciences and humanities, particularly relating to language usage over time.