All in the Family

At Salon.com, Juan Cole reviews a new book which looks very interesting:

John Mearsheimer of the University of Chicago and Stephen Walt of Harvard University's Kennedy School of Government have put their hands into a hornet's nest with their paper in the London Review of Books, titled "The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy." As political scientists who routinely analyze U.S. foreign policy, they have gained a reputation for lucid and principled argument, but outside the halls of academia are not exactly household names. In daring to simply describe the well-known operations of the Israel lobby, however, they have made themselves targets of a massive smear campaign. Ironically, this reaction is just what their paper predicted.

Fair and gentlemanly to a fault, and widely respected in their discipline, the two professors are impossible to imagine as fire-breathing racial bigots, devious purveyors of blatant falsehoods or wild-eyed conspiracy theorists prone to ignore obvious evidence, but these are the sort of epithets being hurled at them by their critics.

In "The Israel Lobby," Mearsheimer and Walt argue that U.S. policy toward the Middle East has been dangerously skewed by a powerful pro-Israel lobby, which inhibits free discussion of the issues and has made the pro-Israeli position a political sacred cow. Congress, they point out, virtually never criticizes Israel: It is an untouchable subject. And this taboo has had enormous consequences, which are themselves off limits for discussion. Because America's blank-check support for Israel arouses enormous Arab and Muslim rage, Israel is a strategic liability, not an asset.

Nor, Mearsheimer and Walt argue, is there any moral reason for America to act against its own interests by supporting Israel come what may. Citing distinguished Israeli historians and journalists, they demythologize Israel's history, demonstrating that the root of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict is the historical fact that "the creation of Israel entailed a moral crime against the Palestinian people" -- a crime that Israel's founders explicitly acknowledged, and that has never been rectified. They discuss Israel's illegal, almost 40-year-old occupation and colonization of Palestinian land, and its flawed democracy, which explicitly discriminates against Arabs.

They do not raise these points to smear Israel or single it out for special criticism -- as political realists, they are well aware that no state is perfect -- but simply to argue that it is not entitled to special treatment. America's self-interest dictates that the Jewish state should be approached like any other nation, which it manifestly is not.

Mearsheimer and Walt are at pains to point out that there is nothing sinister or conspiratorial about the Israel lobby: Lobbying is a legitimate political practice and Israel is entitled to be defended by interest groups as much as any other nation. What they do argue is that the Israel lobby has extraordinary power, and that some of the policies it espouses are inimical to America's national interests. Above all, they seek to end the taboo, enforced by knee-jerk accusations of anti-Semitism, that has prevented a full and open discussion of these issues.

Read the rest here...
http://www.salon.com/opinion/feature/2006/04/18/taboo/

------------

There is a second review of the book by Michelle Goldberg in which she says that the authors have clumsily laid out their arguments and left themselves open to anti-semitic charges which have been swift in coming....

~snip~
This doesn't prove that oil was the only factor in the war, and that Israel had nothing to do with it. But it does suggest that oil was at least a factor, casting some doubt on Walt and Mearsheimer's assertion that "the war was due in large part to the lobby's influence, especially the neoconservatives within it."

Perhaps they don't find any of the available evidence about the role of oil compelling, but that's not what they argue -- they simply ignore it. A similar pattern repeats throughout "The Israel Lobby." There is little nuance and few caveats; facts that run contrary to their thesis are simply left out or, in a few cases, twisted. In his response, Dershowitz finds several factual errors that make the authors seem strangely careless. Most relate to the moral case against Israel.

As realists, Walt and Mearsheimer generally oppose giving idealism an important role in foreign policy decision-making. But because they argue in "The Israel Lobby" that considerations of morality can't account for America's support for Israel, they have to engage in moral arguments. "Viewed objectively, Israel's past and present conduct offers no moral basis for privileging it over the Palestinians," they write.

As Walt and Mearsheimer surely know, that's a striking and hugely controversial claim. So it's odd that they weren't more careful in trying to back it up. Much of their case is compelling, but it is undermined by their own errors.
~snip~
Worse still is the way Walt and Mearsheimer sometimes subtly twist the historical record to make their case against Israel even more damning. Dershowitz catches them quoting David Ben-Gurion strikingly out of context: "Ben-Gurion is ... quoted by Mearsheimer and Walt as saying that 'it is impossible to imagine general evacuation [of the Arab population] without compulsion, and brutal compulsion,' making it seem as if Ben-Gurion was advocating a 'brutal compulsion.' But they omit what Ben-Gurion said after that: 'but we should in no way make it part of our programme.' By omitting Ben-Gurion's critical conclusions, they falsely suggest that Ben-Gurion was proposing the opposite of what he said."
~snip~
And this gets at the real problem. It's not that the lobby supports Israel, it's that it consistently supports right-wing, irredentist factions in Israel. In doing so, it is out of step with most American Jewish opinion as well as much Israeli opinion, and yet it manages to act as if it speaks for both groups. The result is American policies that tacitly accept Israel expansionism, despite the fact that most American Jews favor territorial concessions. There are structural explanations for why the Israel lobby has been able to amass such influence despite how unrepresentative it is. Walt and Mearsheimer, unfortunately, lack the subtlety to explore them.
~snip~

read the rest here...
http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2006/04/18/lobby/index.html

Another interesting set of sources to follow up on...

from Howard Kurtz at WaPo via TPM Muckraker:

After a quarter-century in the journalistic shadows, Murray Waas is getting his day in the sun.

The freelance investigative reporter has racked up a series of scoops. He's been cited by New York Times columnists Frank Rich and Paul Krugman. And New York University journalism professor Jay Rosen calls him the new Bob Woodward.

But Waas -- whose blog is called Whatever, Already -- doesn't toot his own horn much and only reluctantly granted an interview. "My theory is, avoid the limelight, do what's important and leave your mark. . . . If my journalism has had impact, it has been because I have spent more time in county courthouses than greenrooms," he says.

When journalists are seen as pursuing stories to get "television appearances or million-dollar book contracts, it becomes much more difficult for us to play our role."

Waas is currently attached to National Journal, but over the past decade he's written for the Los Angeles Times, Boston Globe, the Nation, the New Yorker, Salon and American Prospect. By staying independent, Waas says, he may benefit from the "lack of bureaucracy."
~snip~
Once a teenage legman for columnist Jack Anderson, Waas is intense, speaks just above a whisper, and has a knack for prying information out of prosecutors, as he did during Kenneth Starr's probe of Bill Clinton. He was a Pulitzer Prize finalist in 1993, with Douglas Frantz of the Los Angeles Times, for reporting on clandestine U.S. efforts in Iraq. Says Frantz, now the paper's managing editor: "He's a dogged reporter with an amazing capacity to get sensitive documents."

---------

Also via TPM Muckraker, check out Jay Rosen's crowning of Murray Waas as the Woodward of Now posted at HuffPo.

Jay's summary has a lot more meat to it with embedded links so check it out. Of most value is a footnote at the bottom that gives direct links to all of Waas's current publishing sites.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jay-rosen/murray-waas-is-the-woodwa_b_18875.html

Speaking of all in the family...

Separately, talk that longtime White House press secretary Scott McClellan will be replaced continues. One possible replacement: Dan Senor, who served a similar role in Iraq as spokesman for the Coalition Provisional Authority and became a familiar face to many Americans for his briefings. Senor recently married NBC’s Campbell Brown, a “Today” show weekend co-anchor and primary correspondent for “NBC Nightly News With Brian Williams.”

http://www.rawstory.com/news/2006/McClellan_could_be_replaced_by_Iraq_0418.html

Bush: 'I'm the decider'

President Bush today forcefully defended his defense secretary, saying Donald Rumsfeld is doing a fine job. "I hear the voices, and I read the front page and I know the speculation," the president said. "But I'm the decider, and I decide what's best. And what's best is for Don Rumsfeld to remain as the secretary of defense."

Somehow I missed this story -- I apologize for the length but I think you'll all be interested in it.

From Rawstory:

Retired colonel claims U.S. military operations are already 'underway' in Iran

Ron Brynaert
Published: Saturday April 15, 2006

During an interview on CNN Friday night, retired U.S. Air Force Colonel Sam Gardiner claimed that U.S. military operations are already 'underway' inside Iran, RAW STORY has found.

"I would say -- and this may shock some -- I think the decision has been made and military operations are under way," Col. Gardiner told CNN International anchor Jim Clancy (as noted by Digby at the blog Hullabaloo).

(Crooks and Liars has a video clip of the interview)

Gardiner, who designed a war game in November of 2004 for Atlantic Magazine ("Will Iran be next?") which simulated "preparations for a U.S. assault on Iran," also claimed that Aliasghar Soltaniyeh, the Iranian ambassador to the United Nation's International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), told him a few weeks ago that units who had attacked the Revolutionary Guard had been captured and confessed to working with Americans.

"The secretary point is, the Iranians have been saying American military troops are in there, have been saying it for almost a year," Gardiner said. "I was in Berlin two weeks ago, sat next to the ambassador, the Iranian ambassador to the IAEA.

And I said, 'Hey, I hear you're accusing Americans of being in there operating with some of the units that have shot up revolution guard units.'"

"He said, quite frankly, 'Yes, we know they are. We've captured some of the units, and they've confessed to working with the Americans,'" said the retired Air Force colonel.

Last Thursday, Raw Story's Larisa Alexandrovna reported (On Cheney, Rumsfeld order, US outsourcing special ops, intelligence to Iraq terror group, intelligence officials say) that, according to former and current intelligence officials, the Pentagon has been using a right-wing terrorist organization known as Mujahedeen-e Khalq (MEK) as an operational asset "to create strife in Iran in preparation for any possible attack."

"[I]nstead of securing a known terrorist organization, which has been responsible for acts of terror against Iranian targets and individuals all over the world – including US civilian and military casualties – Rumsfeld under instructions from Cheney, began using the group on special ops missions into Iran to pave the way for a potential Iran strike," Larisa reported.

"They are doing whatever they want, no oversight at all,” an intelligence source told Larisa.

Larisa reported that the MEK soldiers were told to "quit" their organization and were "renamed" in accordance with a plan conceived by Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld so that they could be "converted" into a military special ops team.

According to a UN official close to the Security Council whom Larisa interviewed, the "newly renamed MEK soldiers" were being employed in the place of U.S. military advance teams to commit "acts of violence in hopes of staging an insurgency of the Iranian Sunni population."

“We are already at war,” the UN official told RAW STORY.

http://www.rawstory.com/news/2006/Retired_colonel_claims_U.S._Military_operations_0415.html

Two Democratic Congressmen have written letters to President Bush on the heels of a growing number of news reports that American forces may have already begun military operations in Iran, RAW STORY has found.

Both House members express concern that if the stories are true, then the president may have acted unilaterally without first obtaining proper authorization from Congress.

"Recently, it has been reported that U.S. troops are conducting military operations in Iran," wrote Dennis Kucinich (D-OH) last Friday. Kucinich is the Ranking Democrat on the House Government Reform Subcommittee on National Security, Emerging Threats and International Relations.

"If true, it appears that you have already made the decision to commit U.S. military forces to a unilateral conflict with Iran, even before direct or indirect negotiations with the government of Iran had been attempted, without UN support and without authorization from the U.S. Congress," Kucinich continued.

Congressman Peter DeFazio (D-OR) intends to introduce a resolution "expressing the sense of the Congress that the President cannot initiate military action against Iran without congressional authorization" soon, and is forwarding his letter to other House members to collect additional signatures.

"We are writing to remind you that you are constitutionally bound to seek congressional authorization before launching any preventive military strikes against Iran," DeFazio writes.

Citing Article II, Section 2 of the U.S. Constitution ("The President shall be the Commander-in-Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into actual Service of the United States..."), DeFazio attacks the administration's frequent interpretation of the clause to historically justify unilateral military actions by presidents without authorization of Congress.

"Contrary to your Administration's broad reading, nothing in the history of the "Commander-in-Chief" clause suggests that the authors of the provision intended it to grant the Executive Branch the authority to engage U.S. forces in military action whenever and wherever it sees fit without any prior authorization from Congress," writes DeFazio.

"The founders of our country intended this power to allow the President to repel sudden attacks and immediate threats, not to unilaterally launch, without congressional approval, large-scale preventive military actions against foreign threats that are likely years away from materializing," DeFazio adds.

Text to both letters follow:

http://www.rawstory.com/news/2006/Democratic_Congressmen_ask_Bush_about_reports_0417.html

Does THIS sound familiar???

(CBS/AP) President Bush said Tuesday that "all options are on the table" to prevent Iran from developing atomic weapons, but said he will continue to focus on the international diplomatic option to persuade Tehran to drop its nuclear ambitions.

"We want to solve this issue diplomatically and we're working hard to do so," Mr. Bush told reporters in the Rose Garden.

Deja Boo!

U.S. Will Take Action Against Iraq, Bush Says
'All Options Are on the Table' Against States That Pose Threat

By Dana Milbank and Mike Allen
Washington Post Staff Writers
Thursday, March 14, 2002; Page A01

President Bush declared yesterday that "all options are on the table" -- including nuclear weapons -- to confront states that threaten to use weapons of mass destruction, as he issued his strongest warning to date that his administration plans to take on Iraq's Saddam Hussein.

"He is a problem, and we're going to deal with him," Bush said of the Iraqi leader.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagename=article&node=&contentId=A22091-2002Mar13¬Found=true

Benson on the WH Easter Egg hunt...

http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/opinions/benson/

Todays' Scottish jig...

Questions about the White House response to criticism from retired generals over Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld continued to plague the White House at Tuesday's press briefing.

Rumsfeld occupied most of the press' attention --and reporters repeatedly hammered White House Press Secretary Scott McClellan on why Bush came out with a strong defense of Rumsfeld, and why the White House isn't engaging the retired generals.

In response, McClellan said, "I think that their views have been expressed."

The transcript follows.

http://www.rawstory.com/news/2006/White_House_signals_it_wont_engage_0418.html

Cheney's shady charitable contributions net $2 million refund

by clammyc
Tue Apr 18, 2006 at 08:54:45 AM PDT

Last week, Darth Cheney released his 2005 tax return, and while this type of thing doesn't generally make waves in the news unless it is a Democrat who is releasing the return, there was something that jumped out at me which prompted me to do a bit of digging, where I found this snippet that led me to do a bit more digging.

Being the tax geek that I am, I noticed something that caught my eye as, shall we say, "interesting" - charitable contributions in excess of $6,800,000 on income of just under $9,000,000. For those who are not familiar with tax rules, let's just say that this is a very high, an unusually high number.

While this is not illegal, by exploiting a loophole in the Katrina tax relief laws passed regarding charitable donations, Dead Eye Dick was able to obtain a refund of at least $1,000,000 MORE than he would be able to get in any other year.

The best part? None of the charities were Katrina related at all.

More below:

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2006/4/18/115445/192

Dick:

Thanks for the thread header. This Administration has always felt as thought its been run by the mob, like the Sopranos, with the conservative congressionals as its capos.

The only difference is Tony Soprano sees a therapist. The President talks to God.

Halliburton's Immigrant Detention Centers
By Ruth Conniff
April 17, 2006

While thousands of people were celebrating the contribution America's undocumented immigrants make to our economy, and demanding justice and recognition for workers who are denied basic rights, the government was making plans for large-scale detention centers in case of an "emergency influx" of immigrants.

KBR, the Halliburton subsidiary recently reprimanded for gross overcharging in its military contracts in Iraq, won a $385 million contract to build the centers. According to the Halliburton website--www.Halliburton.com--"the contract, which is effective immediately, provides for establishing temporary detention and processing capabilities to augment existing ICE Detention and Removal Operations Program facilities in the event of an emergency influx of immigrants into the U.S., or to support the rapid development of new programs."

What new programs might those be?

The web was abuzz with speculation after the contract was awarded on January 24. Pacific News Service gave the most detailed analysis.

It connected the new "immigration emergency" plans with older plans that involved imposing martial law.

Certainly the detention centers raise the specter of WW II Japanese internment camps.

The new facilities could be used for round-ups of Muslim Americans or other American citizens tagged as "enemy combatants.”

The use of military personnel and military contractors in the event of a Katrina-like disaster, which the Halliburton contract provides for, brings us closer to martial law, whether it is officially declared or not.

It also means record profits for Halliburton, which declared 2005 "the best in our 86-year history." David Lesar, Halliburton's chairman, president and CEO, declares on the company website, "For the full year 2005 we set a record for revenue and achieved net income of $2.4 billion with each of our six divisions posting record results."

Not bad for a company that has been repeatedly cited for inflating charges and wasting taxpayer money in Iraq.

The immigration detention centers ought to raise a red flag, not just about nepotism and waste among military contractors, but about what our government has in store for us.

Perhaps the same energy that propelled immigrant rights into the national headlines could be harnessed to demand an explanation for what, exactly, Halliburton is helping to prepare for with this latest big chunk of taxpayer largess.

http://progressive.org/mag_rcb041706

Listening to NPR now...they just played a bit of Georgie talking today about how he's still the "decider..."

Aside from his usual gaffs, he sounds really testy -- even testier & more petulant than usual. Guess the pressure of low polls, incompentent cronies, more war bad news, etc., etc., etc. are getting to him... Either that or he didn't get to bed at his usual 9pm last night...

Posted by: madame defarge at April 18, 2006 04:22 PM

No, I think the putz just doesn't like to be questioned... period.

I'm a Decider, not a Uniter.

The more I think about it, the more sense it makes:

Bush is the anti-Christ.

Boy, are those Dispensational Christians going to really upset when they figure this out...

Cyrano-just now? it seems so logical, if I can use that word in this context....

Have you ever read The Story of B?

good book.

To quote the legendary Megaphone Mark Slackmeyer, from lo those more than 30 years ago:

"He's guilty. Guilty, guilty, GUILTY, GUILTY!!"

As is the whole stinkin' lot of 'em, too... but the Dubble-Bubblin' Shrubya who's still sittin' and smirkin' up there at the top of the neotheogreedocon food chain has still got to take more of the dubious credit for that sorry-asterisk state of affairs than any of the rest of 'em, when it all comes right down to it.

And, of course, "it all comes right down" is the operative concept here... *ahem*

-----------------

Yeah baby, I've been drinking,
And I shouldn't come by I know
But I found myself in trouble, darling,
And I had no place else to go.

Got some whiskey from a bar man,
Got some cocaine from a friend,
I just had to keep on moving
Till I was back in your arms again

Well I'm guilty, yeah I'm guilty
I'll be guilty for the rest of my life
How come I never do
What I'm supposed to do
And nothing that I try to do
Ever turns out right?

Well you know how it is with me, baby
You know I just can't stand myself
And it takes a whole lot of medicine
For me to pretend to be somebody else.

-----------------

randy newman know'd it and bonnie raitt know'd it and we all knows it too,
Otter

I'm a Decider, not a Uniter.

Posted by: monkey at April 18, 2006 04:41 PM

Maybe he's really the Central Scrutinizer...(with apologies to Frank...)

This is the CENTRAL SCRUTINIZER...it is my responsibility to enforce all the laws that haven't been passed yet. It is also my responsibility to alert each and every one of you to the potential consequences of various ordinary everyday activities you might be performing which could eventually lead to *The Death Penalty* (or affect your parents' credit rating). Our criminal institutions are full of little creeps like you who do wrong things...and many of them were driven to these crimes by a horrible force called MUSIC!

Our studies have shown that this horrible force is so dangerous to society at large that laws are being drawn up at this very moment to stop it forever! Cruel and inhuman punishments are being carefully described in tiny paragraphs so they won't conflict with the Constitution (which, itself, is being modified in order to accommodate THE FUTURE).

And, BTW, the white zone is for loading & unloading only...

So Boy George actually had the truthful temerity to admit on the electronic airwaves today:

"I hear the voices..."

Well, yeah, like, *duh*.

It's just nice to hear him finally admit in public what the rest of us already figured out years ago.

and my head's little voices can beat up his head's little voices anyway,
Otter

Posted by: Otter at April 18, 2006 06:39 PM

"I hear the voices..."

Sort of like "I see dead people..."

Maybe this is grounds to have him committed rather than impeached...

Posted by: madame defarge at April 18, 2006 06:45 PM

He doesn't see dead people, his Mommy says it will ruin his beautiful mind?

Causing dead people, now thats another story entirely.

Killjoy.

"I'm a defrauder, not a marauder."

*fnord*,
Otter

That was Prezzydint Doh!'s first confrontation with The Law.
Naturally, we were easy on him.
One of our friendly counselors gave him a do-nut...
And told him to stick closer to church-oriented social activities.

we would jam up GI Joe's mirage,
Otter

A very creative person at Daily Kos has come up with a poem, "I'm the Decider", provided here in its entirety for your evening pleasure...

I'm the decider.
I pick and I choose.
I pick among whats.
And choose among whos.

And as I decide
Each particular day
The things I decide on
All turn out that way.

I decided on Freedom
For all of Iraq.
And now that we have it,
I'm not looking back.

I decided on tax cuts
That just help the wealthy.
And Medicare changes
That aren't really healthy.

And parklands and wetlands
Who needs all that stuff?
I decided that none
Would be more than enough!

I decided that schools
All in all are the best
The less that they teach
And the more that they test.

I decided those wages
You need to get by
Are much better spent
On some CEO guy.

I decided your Wade
Which was versing your Roe
Is terribly awful
And just has to go.

I decided that levees
Are not really needed.
Now when hurricanes come
They can come unimpeded.

That old Constitution?
Well, I have decided
As"just goddam paper"
It should be derided.

I've decided gay marriage
Is icky and weird.
Above all other things,
It's the one to be feared.

And Cheney and Rummy
And Condi all know
That I'm the Decider -
They tell me it's so.

I'm the Decider
So watch what you say
Or I may decide
To have you whisked away.

Or I'll tap your phones.
Your e-mail I'll read.
`cause I'm the Decider -
Like Jesus decreed.

Yes, I'm the Decider
The finest alive
And I'm nuking Iran.
Now watch this drive!

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2006/4/18/185016/217

"While President Bush was doing his taxes, under dependents he listed Scooter Libby, Tom DeLay and Jack Abramoff. Then he caught himself, 'Dependents? Oh, I thought it said defendants.'" --Jay Leno

Madame:

With respect to the reference to "central scrutinizer" and "Frank," would that be Zappa? Which album was that? Old synapse-paths trying to re-connect, you know....

Chuck in Houston

Posted by: chuck at April 18, 2006 10:50 PM

Indeed it is...Joe's Garage...

http://www.science.uva.nl/~robbert/zappa/albums/Joe_s_Garage/

Madame:

Thanks!

Chuck in Houston

Posted by: Fe at April 18, 2006 04:05 PM

Thanks for the link. Ever since I first read about those so-called "immigration detention centers" a few months ago (before immigration legislation was proposed, long before any marches were done), I've been wondering WHY there would be any need for them, since Halliburton got the open ended $385 Billion dollar contract to build them quite some time ago. (Halliburton also built additional "detention centers" at Gitmo.)

It's illogical to build "immigration detention centers" (aka concentration camps) first, then propose the immigration legislation after that....

And, yes. I do believe the "immigration" concentration camps could be built to illegally detain non-immigrants, such as anyone who disagrees with the dictatorial fascist regime that's currently installed.

The other big mystery to me is why our senators and representatives approved the contract, and why they haven't spoken out against such insanity. Their silence makes no sense whatsoever.

Lamestream Media is, of course, silent as a tomb regarding the "immigration detention centers" that are being built by Halliburton, right here on our own soil....

Laff of the day:

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/uclickcomics/20060418/cx_ga_uc/ga20060418
Garfield

{{{Imagine Garfield as the US citizenry patting Jon's head and saying THAT to Dumbya.... :-)}}}

Chuck:

It was a Stratocaster with a whammy bar...

deet-doot-deet-doot-deet-doot-deetle-deetle-dee,
Otter