Small Differences

Jeff Goldberg, still talking sense about AIPAC and West Bank settlements, is throwing increasing quantities of hysterical accusations at John Mearsheimer and Steven Walt in order to guard his right flank as Max Boot flings hysterical accusations at him. Says Goldberg:

The second point concerns Walt and Mearsheimer: One of their many sins, perhaps one of their bigger sins, was to make impossible an open conversation in the Jewish community about the impact of pro-Israel lobbying. By accusing American Jews of acting against the best interests of their country, they not only made themselves worthy heirs to Father Coughlin and a long list of antique Jew-baiters, they sent us into a defensive crouch.

But of course Walt and Mearsheimer didn't say that all Jews are acting against the best interests of their country (which would be outrageous) nor did they say that some Jews are acting against the best interests of their country (which would be trivial -- Jews disagree about lots of stuff and some of us must be wrong). Rather, they said certain "pro-Israel" institutions, including AIPAC, are harming American interests.

Goldberg, meanwhile, charges AIPAC with preventing the United States from putting any meat on the bones of its policy against Israel's West Bank settlements. Walt and Mearsheimer agree with this. Goldberg argues that unless Israel removes those settlements, it will increasingly find itself becoming an apartheid-style country where a Jewish minority rules over a disenfranchised Arab and Muslim minority. Walt and Mearsheimer think so, too. The difference is that Goldberg primarily sees this as bad for Israel whereas Walt and Mearsheimer primarily see it as bad for the United States but surely it can be bad for both! And even if not, the disagreement here is about something relatively minor with both sides agreeing that the American failure to apply pressure is a bad thing, and both sides pointing the finger at AIPAC.

Surely there should be room for some difference of interpretation here that doesn't involve either party to the dispute being motivated by racial hatreds.

Comments

Goldberg's increasing venom towards Waltz and Meirsheimer is comical -- calling them "vile", "odious ... Waltsheimer", "odious spector", "heirs to Father Coughlin and anrique Jewbaiters", all in one post!

He seems to think that this will somehow make Max Boot be less mean to him? I guess Goldberg is new to the "self-hating Jew" game. He seemed genuinely upset at being called a "Jewhadi" by some right-wing hate blog.

If Goldberg intends to continue being part of the reality-based community, he should get used to this stuff.

Posted by Ikram | May 22, 2008 9:43 AM

The problem with M&W's views is not their attitude to the settlements - everyone on the planet, except for Likkudniks, agrees with them there. It is their overall thesis that the "Jewish Lobby" - way too broadly and vaguely and inconsistently defined - manipulates American foreign policy to suit Israeli interests, and was the key driver of our invasion of Iraq. Agree with that or not, it's not at all hard to understand why Goldberg doesn't want to be associated with their views, even though they may share some agreement on the issue of the settlements. That is a relatively non-controversial and hardly original element of their overall thesis.

Posted by Winston | May 22, 2008 9:45 AM

Worse than that, Goldberg is accusing them of bigotry outright, absurdly caricaturing their views in doing so--which is its own tribal form of bigotry. Father Coughlin? Please. I suppose they love the Protocols of the Elders of Zion, too, or act like it, or don't act enough NOT like it, or something.

This whole conversation over Israel is clinically deranged at this point.

Posted by elle loco | May 22, 2008 9:45 AM

Goldberg manages to sound deranged and pathetic at the same time. He concludes his outrageous attacks on Walt and Mearshimer by whining that they have forced him into a defensive crouch. Who is this clown, anyway?

Posted by Jim W | May 22, 2008 9:54 AM

Majority? Minority?

Posted by John Emerson | May 22, 2008 9:55 AM

Matt,
You need to re-read Walt and Mearsheimer. You are just using your well oiled reflex to point out that "Israel can do no right".

Under the broad expanse of people they consider in the Israel Lobby Walt and Mearsheimer even include liberals like Martin Indyk and Dennis Ross, who are clearly against the settlements. Most likely Matt Yglesias would be considered part of the Israel Lobby because he doesn't support the right of return of millions of palestinians to Israel.

You seem to have read the parts of W&M you agree with and then decided not to read the notorious conspiracy theories they throw out.

Posted by Dave | May 22, 2008 10:07 AM

Goldberg, a soldier for a foreign country whose allegiance is to that same country, should not disparage patriots like Walt and Mearsheimer.

John Mearsheimer graduated from West Point and swore an oath to defend and uphold the United States Constitution. Jeffrey Goldberg decided to join the IDF and hit Palestinian youth with rubber hoses. Wich man do you think has America's best interests in mind? Which man is more honorable?

Jeffrey Goldberg is loyal to Israel and only sees America as a conduit for cash, loan guarantees, military hardware and political interference at the UN.

Posted by del | May 22, 2008 10:08 AM

It is their overall thesis that the "Jewish Lobby" - way too broadly and vaguely and inconsistently defined - manipulates American foreign policy to suit Israeli interests, and was the key driver of our invasion of Iraq. - Winston

Bull's-eye. America's primary motive for aggression in the Middle East is to get control of the oil trade. There was no pro-Israel lobby involved in talking America into overthrowing the Iranian democracy in 1953. America now supports Israel the same way it supported the Shah, as a pitbull puppet ally against Arab nationalism. America's secondary motive for supporting Israeli expansion and aggression is satisfying 100 million Bible fundamentalist Christian Americans and 2 or 3 million Jewish American fundamentalists and nationalists. Like the religious element in the Crusades 1000 years ago, this is half propaganda to get support for American militarism in the Middle East for the oil and half domestic politics to get these people's votes. The idea that big dumb America is being tricked or led by clever little Israel is absurd. It is true that Don Williams' favorite billionaire makes big donations to the Democrats. Obviously that doesn't help temper American foreign policy, but it's far from the primary reason for American militarism in the Middle East or anywhere else.

Posted by Gary Sugar | May 22, 2008 10:09 AM

Dave - your problem with W&M is that Dennis Ross isn't a plausible member of the Israel Lobby? Now there is a weak critique.

Posted by Kalkin | May 22, 2008 10:17 AM

The idea that big dumb America is being tricked or led by clever little Israel is absurd.

I wish you were right, but I think foreign policy thinking is based much more on sentiment and emotion than it is on rational calculation.

Do you also think the Crusades were all about economic self-interest rather than religious sentiments?

Posted by Jim W | May 22, 2008 10:18 AM

Because Walt & Mearshimer are political scientists rather than pundits, they don't speak regularly in defense of their work. This allows people like Goldberg to distort and misquote them at will.

Matt's right. Walt, Mearshimer, and Goldberg are all making the same main point. Goldberg is making things up to obscure the fact.

Posted by glasnost | May 22, 2008 10:23 AM

Because Walt & Mearshimer are political scientists rather than pundits, they don't speak regularly in defense of their work. This allows people like Goldberg to distort and misquote them at will.

Matt's right. Walt, Mearshimer, and Goldberg are all making the same main point. Goldberg is making things up to obscure the fact.

I don't think that Walt and Mearshimer are right about Iraq, but that's an error in a single specific corollary to the point, not the point itself.

Posted by glasnost | May 22, 2008 10:35 AM

The difference is that Goldberg primarily sees this as bad for Israel whereas Walt and Mearsheimer primarily see it as bad for the United States but surely it can be bad for both!

It's also, it might be pointed out, bad for the Palestinians. I know, I know, they're not supposed to count. But even before they officially become the oppressed majority under an Israeli apartheid regime, it's pretty fucking clear they're an oppressed minority under an Israeli apartheid regime. This was intolerable in the American South, and it's intolerable in America's favorite pretend democracy in the mideast.

Posted by strasmangelo jones | May 22, 2008 10:41 AM

Take this Israel bashers. I'm sure that Mr. Hack, Mr. Trevor, Mr. Williams, Mr. strasmangelo jones, etc. will now throw their Windows computers in the trash can. Unfortunately, since Intel also has facilities in Israel, switching to MacIntoshes won't solve the problem either.

"'Microsoft is Israeli almost as much it is American'
Sharon Wrobel , THE JERUSALEM POST May. 22, 2008

Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer arrived in Israel on Wednesday for a three-hour visit to inaugurate Microsoft's new research and development center in Herzliya. The ceremony was attended by President Shimon Peres and leading hi-tech representatives.

"Microsoft is as much an Israeli company as an American company," Ballmer said, adding that the proportion of Microsoft employees per capita in Israel was similar to that in the United States.
Over the past two years, Microsoft bought five companies in Israel, adding to its two R&D centers in Haifa, which employ a total of 600 people.

The new R&D campus in Herzliya has two buildings stretching over 13,000 square meters. Over the next year, Microsoft plans to add another 150 employees, bringing its total number of R&D staff in Israel to 750.

Ballmer praised the IT sector in Israel for being very advanced, and said Tel Aviv, as the birthplace of many start-ups, was a type of Silicon Valley.

"I know very few places around the world that offer such a variety of start-up opportunities, and we intend to continue to invest in Israel," he said.

Commentng on Microsoft's battle for Yahoo, Ballmer said the software giant was not looking to bid to buy all of Yahoo, but was in talks about other types of deals with the second-largest search engine, after Google.

"We are not bidding to buy Yahoo," he said. "Yet, we are trying to have discussions about deals with Yahoo that might create value, but not a whole acquisition of the company." "

Posted by SLC | May 22, 2008 10:47 AM

But of course, W+M aren't Jews so they really shouldn't be talking about this anyway.

Re: Dave, please clue us into some of the "ridiculous conspiracy theories they throw out." I've read the book and don't remember any patently absurd theories mentioned.

Re: Winston and Gary - One of America's primary motives in the ME is oil. However, support for Israel is up there as well and often times trumps it. After all, why did the Oil Embargo of 73 occur - US support for Israel.

And though America's overthrow of Mossadeq in 53 wasn't especially Israel related - anti-communism was the idea at the time - the current effort to bomb/overthrow the Iranian government largely is the result of the Israel lobby.

Pro-Iran war Freedom's Watch, funded by billionaire Sheldon Adelson and fronted by Ari Fleischer - both neo-conservative American Jews - just one small example of the pro-Israel lobby lobbying for war. Watch the unflinching anti-Iran rhetoric coming from all political angles at the AIPAC dinner coming up.

That's not to say that the only people looking to fight Iran are the pro-Israel lobby, but a lot of the support for the idea is coming from that group.

Posted by Bill J. | May 22, 2008 10:51 AM

Hey, that's great they make computers in Israel. However, Israel also has thousands of Christian women from Eastern Europe held captive as sex slaves and prostitutes. What's your point?

Posted by del | May 22, 2008 10:51 AM

"Dave - your problem with W&M is that Dennis Ross isn't a plausible member of the Israel Lobby? Now there is a weak critique."

My critique is that Matt is a selective reader. He likes that W&M are against the settlements so he defends them without realizing that, according to them, people whose policies he agrees with are part of their lobby. Not to mention that under the wide conspiracy they weave, so is Matt because he is not in favor of a full right of return.

Posted by Dave | May 22, 2008 10:56 AM

But of course, W+M aren't Jews so they really shouldn't be talking about this anyway.

Re: Dave, please clue us into some of the "ridiculous conspiracy theories they throw out." I've read the book and don't remember any patently absurd theories mentioned.

Re: Winston and Gary - One of America's primary motives in the ME is oil. However, support for Israel is up there as well and often times trumps it. After all, why did the Oil Embargo of 73 occur - US support for Israel.

And though America's overthrow of Mossadeq in 53 wasn't especially Israel related - anti-communism was the idea at the time - the current effort to bomb/overthrow the Iranian government largely is the result of the Israel lobby.

Pro-Iran war Freedom's Watch, funded by billionaire Sheldon Adelson and fronted by Ari Fleischer - both neo-conservative American Jews - just one small example of the pro-Israel lobby lobbying for war. Watch the unflinching anti-Iran rhetoric coming from all political angles at the AIPAC dinner coming up.

That's not to say that the only people looking to fight Iran are the pro-Israel lobby, but a lot of the support for the idea is coming from that group.

Posted by Bill J. | May 22, 2008 11:03 AM

Re Dave's comment "Under the broad expanse of people they consider in the Israel Lobby Walt and Mearsheimer even include liberals like Martin Indyk "
--------------
1) Marty Indyk!!! Isn't that the former US Ambassador to Israel and high AIPAC elder who went to work for Israeli Billionaire Haim Saban's think tank at Brookings? The "Saban Center for Middle East Policy"

2) Wasn't Marty the guy who joined with Kenneth Pollack (also of the "Saban Center") in telling us in 2002 that we needed to take out Saddam Hussein before he used his "Weapons of Mass Destruction"? (Pollack had made clear in his best-selling book "The Threatening Storm" that WMD = NUKES).

3) Here is Marty and Kenneth's 2002 LA Times Op Ed: http://www.brookings.edu/opinions/2002/1219iraq_indyk.aspx

4) By the way, Haim Saban has publicly stated that (a) He's a "one issue man and that issue is Israel" (b) America is one of two pillars of Israel's security (the other is Israel's nukes) and (c)Haim feels it's his job to us his influence to ensure that NOTHING interferes with America's protection of Israel. Citations available on request.

5) Given no WMDs were found, why should we not conclude that this was a clever little con game designed to have the US Military take out a man judged to be a threat to Israel, not to the USA?
At the cost of 4000 dead American sons -- and thousands more crippled for life by horrible wounds.

5) While that's not exactly drinking the blood of Christian babies, isn't it getting in the ballpark?

Sounds like the Israel Lobby to me.
Which is why two professors at two of our top universities had to go to BRITAIN to get their observations published.

Posted by Don Williams | May 22, 2008 11:13 AM

Jeffrey Goldberg - the Hillary Clinton of Atlantic Voices.

Posted by ndm | May 22, 2008 11:16 AM

Goldberg is an IDF alum and patriot and Mersheimer is a Westpoint alum and a traitor!

Orwell would be proud!

A day will come when the Hillary Appalachia crowd and the Buchannen paleos get wind of this....and it could get ugly!

Posted by TAC | May 22, 2008 11:33 AM

Re Goldberg's statement "By accusing American Jews of acting against the best interests of their country, they not only made themselves worthy heirs to Father Coughlin and a long list of antique Jew-baiters, they sent us into a defensive crouch"
---------------
Actually Mearsheimer and Walt have merely pointed out the facts. A group of people -- some of whom are Jewish Americans -- have been betraying America.

The "defensive crouch" results from two facts. One, we have 4000 of our kids killed in an unnecessary war -- and thousands more horribly crippled for life.

Fact Two: Scotter Libby, Judith Miller, the owners of the New York Times, Paul Wolfowitz, Douglas Feith, Richard Perle, William Kristol, and Charles Krauthammer are NOT Methodists.
Neither are Haim Saban and S Daniel Abraham.

Jewish American Tom Friedman, of the New York Times, noted to Haaretz that the Iraq War would not have occurred if not for the efforts of 25 influential people. Haaretz noted that "most of them Jewish".
Haaretz also unkindly noted that Tom Friedman is "not in the group".

See http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/pages/ShArt.jhtml?itemNo=280279&contrassID=2&subContrassID=14&sbSubContrassID=0&listSrc=Y

I do not think that America's 6 million Jews support --or even know of -- the acts of the above Jews. But I think America's Jewish community is endangered by the acts of a few egotistical renegades.

America has been a sanctuary of Jews for over 250 years. Multiple Protections for them is enshrined in our Constitution. Certainly, an America with 500 Minuteman silos is a better fortress than tiny Israel surrounded by a sea of hostile neighbors.

But your fellow countrymen demand some loyalty in return.

Maybe the Jewish community should send a delegation to visit the Neocons some dark night. Next Passover would be nice.

You can leave Rupert Murdoch and the Gentiles to us. Conrad Black is already enjoying prison.

Posted by Don Williams | May 22, 2008 11:42 AM

The novelty in Goldberg ‘s blog was the statement that Mearsheimer and Walt made “impossible an open conversation in the Jewish community about the impact of pro-Israel lobbying.”

If, by Jewish Community, Goldberg means Commentary and The New Republic I would agree that open conversation about Israel is impossible. But that is not the fault of Mearsheimer and Walt it is the fault of magazines which oppose to any world view of Israel significantly different from their own. And where did Jeffrey Goldberg place his review of the book –in The New Republic .

The most likely reason Goldberg finds open conversation closed down is that people don’t find it possible to have an open conversation with a Goldberg who describes Mearsheimer and Walt as "odious" and "vile." And they don’t find it possible to have an intelligent conversation with a Goldberg who insinuates they are "Jew- baiters."

The reality is that the Mearsheimer and Walt article has made possible an open conversation about the impact of Likudnik lobbying on American foreign policy. And that has scared the living daylights out of people like Jeffrey Goldberg.

Posted by ndm | May 22, 2008 11:48 AM

Well, "enjoying" is a word of nuance, no?

Posted by Don Williams | May 22, 2008 11:51 AM

Failed wars, debased currency, internel incidents like 911/burning of the Reichstag inciting fear and suspension of civil liberties have scary implications. The American people of ALL backgrounds are rejecting this path of BUSH AIPAC and Haggee.

Posted by centrist | May 22, 2008 12:25 PM

Re Don Williams

Has Mr. Williams shitcanned his Windows computer yet?

Posted by SLC | May 22, 2008 12:39 PM

Re SLC's comment "Has Mr. Williams shitcanned his Windows computer yet?"
-----------
Why should I? I have Redhat Linux installed if my Zionist slave ever failed to do what I tell it to do.

Ah, possibly SLC is referring to idea of backdoors. Well, I assumed that a long time ago -- it was the only reason why the US government would let Microsoft have the monopoly. Anyone who thinks any computer is secure is a fool.

Posted by Don Williams | May 22, 2008 12:54 PM

Re Don Williams

But Intel also has a large research and development program in Israel so Mr. Williams can't get around those Zionists by using Linux.

Posted by SLC | May 22, 2008 1:05 PM

Re Don Williams

Ah, I see what the problem is. Mr. Williams failed to see my comment above relative to a speech given by Steve Ballmer on the occasion of the opening of a Microsoft research facility in Israel. So I will repeat it for his benefit.

"'Microsoft is Israeli almost as much it is American'
Sharon Wrobel , THE JERUSALEM POST May. 22, 2008

Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer arrived in Israel on Wednesday for a three-hour visit to inaugurate Microsoft's new research and development center in Herzliya. The ceremony was attended by President Shimon Peres and leading hi-tech representatives.

"Microsoft is as much an Israeli company as an American company," Ballmer said, adding that the proportion of Microsoft employees per capita in Israel was similar to that in the United States.
Over the past two years, Microsoft bought five companies in Israel, adding to its two R&D centers in Haifa, which employ a total of 600 people.

The new R&D campus in Herzliya has two buildings stretching over 13,000 square meters. Over the next year, Microsoft plans to add another 150 employees, bringing its total number of R&D staff in Israel to 750.

Ballmer praised the IT sector in Israel for being very advanced, and said Tel Aviv, as the birthplace of many start-ups, was a type of Silicon Valley.

"I know very few places around the world that offer such a variety of start-up opportunities, and we intend to continue to invest in Israel," he said.

Commentng on Microsoft's battle for Yahoo, Ballmer said the software giant was not looking to bid to buy all of Yahoo, but was in talks about other types of deals with the second-largest search engine, after Google.

"We are not bidding to buy Yahoo," he said. "Yet, we are trying to have discussions about deals with Yahoo that might create value, but not a whole acquisition of the company." "

Posted by SLC | May 22, 2008 1:11 PM

Do you also think the Crusades were all about economic self-interest rather than religious sentiments?

There were about a half-dozen different military campaigns known as “The Crusades”, none of them were identical.

The first Crusade, arguably the most famous and effective one, illustrates the point being made. For the nobles leading the armies, the motivation was economic. They were mainly the second and third sons of various European lords. As their eldest brothers were in line to receive all of their father’s wealth, these second and third sons needed to find a way to make their own fortunes if they ever wanted to have their own courts. In earlier times, it would have been possible for these nobles to fight wars in Europe and gain wealth there. But by that time Europe was largely civilized and Christian and the still-powerful Roman Pontiff frowned upon Christians killing Christians for no other reason than sheer monetary gain. That’s why the First Crusade was organized; killing is wrong but kill Muslims if you must kill for money and power, not Christians.

Of course, the ordinary peasant farmer, the one who would make up the bulk of the army, wasn’t going to get much out of this deal. That’s why the religious component was factored in. Sure, it was about reconquering the Holy Land, for the poor man it was.

Posted by Raindog | May 22, 2008 1:18 PM

Do you also think the Crusades were all about economic self-interest rather than religious sentiments?

There were about a half-dozen different military campaigns known as “The Crusades”, none of them were identical.

The first Crusade, arguably the most famous and effective one, illustrates the point being made. For the nobles leading the armies, the motivation was economic. They were mainly the second and third sons of various European lords. As their eldest brothers were in line to receive all of their father’s wealth, these second and third sons needed to find a way to make their own fortunes if they ever wanted to have their own courts. In earlier times, it would have been possible for these nobles to fight wars in Europe and gain wealth there. But by that time Europe was largely civilized and Christian and the still-powerful Roman Pontiff frowned upon Christians killing Christians for no other reason than sheer monetary gain. That’s why the First Crusade was organized; killing is wrong but kill Muslims if you must kill for money and power, not Christians.

Of course, the ordinary peasant farmer, the one who would make up the bulk of the army, wasn’t going to get much out of this deal. That’s why the religious component was factored in. Sure, it was about reconquering the Holy Land, for the poor man it was.

Posted by Raindog | May 22, 2008 1:22 PM

Re SLC's comment "But Intel also has a large research and development program in Israel "
------------
What about an AMD chip, SLC? I hate to pay retail.

What do you think about Michael Dell's situation? He outsourced parts to China and within a few years, China's native computer company Lenovo is eating his lunch.

What is Michael going to tell his mother?

Posted by Don Williams | May 22, 2008 1:26 PM

Matt, I am so glad you made this point. While I agree with some of Jeff's argument, I found it odd that he kept attacking Walt and Mearsheimer for making what is essentially the same argument, almost as if to say, "look over there, they are the real anti-semites, not me."

Posted by Jackie | May 22, 2008 1:30 PM

Re Don Williams

1. Before beating up on Michael Dell, let's recall the Lenovo got where they are by buying IBMs' personal computer line.

2. Mr. Williams still hasn't commented on Steve Ballmer.

3. Unfortunately for Mr. Williams, AMD is also making investments in Israel. See attached link.

http://www.moit.gov.il/NewTamatFiles/1D8E9370_9B21_476E_844F_6E1981759DF9.html

Posted by SLC | May 22, 2008 1:40 PM

Re SLC's comment "Before beating up on Michael Dell, let's recall the Lenovo got where they are by buying IBMs' personal computer line."
-----------
Er..no. They got where they are with the help of some of Michael's OWN Executives.

From http://www.iht.com/articles/2006/08/25/business/lenovo.php

" SHANGHAI: Lenovo, the world's third-largest computer maker, hashired its fourth Dell executive in little more than a week as it continues to poach top officials from one of its biggest competitors.

Lenovo, the Chinese computer maker that paid $1.25 billion last year to acquire the personal computer business of IBM, has been moving aggressively in recent months to strengthenits executive ranks as it attempts to transform itself into a global computer giant in a fiercely competitive market.

Recently, Lenovo has been doing that at the expense of Dell, the world's largest maker of personal computers. Dell has struggled with a series of setbacks, including souring profit growth, a stumbling stock price and the largest safety recall in the history of the consumer electronics industry."
-------
ha ha ha ha. Those Fucking Philistines.

Posted by Don Williams | May 22, 2008 2:03 PM

Hey, SLC. Dell stock was at 54 around 7 years ago -- today it is down around 20.

Normally you have to look into the book of Job to see that kind of a fucking.

http://finance.yahoo.com/echarts?s=DELL#chart2:symbol=dell;range=my;indicator=volume;charttype=line;crosshair=on;ohlcvalues=0;logscale=on;source=undefined

Posted by Don Williams | May 22, 2008 2:15 PM

"My critique is that Matt is a selective reader. He likes that W&M are against the settlements so he defends them without realizing that, according to them, people whose policies he agrees with are part of their lobby. Not to mention that under the wide conspiracy they weave, so is Matt because he is not in favor of a full right of return.

Posted by Dave | May 22, 2008 10:56 AM"

In MY's defense, he isn't saying every single part of the M & W thesis is right. He did have actual criticisms of the book when it came out (not enough, in my opinion, but many of the problems with their work revolved around word choice that they didn't seem to understand you can't use when you start discussing ethnic politics, especially when the accusations of being part of a cabal were so prevalent in the history of anti-Semitism). He's just saying that on the clear substantive issues, M&W and Goldberg all agree but that Goldberg prefers to rant about the aesthetics of their work.

Posted by Reality Man | May 22, 2008 2:15 PM

Re Don Williams

So Mr. Williams is now claiming that Lenovos' progress has nothing to do with their purchase of IBMs' personal computer line? Lenovo would be nowheresville in the US without that purchase and the Dell executives wouldn't have joined them on a bet.

Posted by SLC | May 22, 2008 2:22 PM

What ndm said.

To the degree that it's possible to have an open conversation, in the Jewish community or out of it, about the impact of pro-Israel lobbying, it's Walt and Mearsheimer who have a substantial responsibility for making it so.

Posted by otto | May 22, 2008 3:33 PM

Don Williams,

As for the "owners of the New York Times", the children of Punch Sulzberger (including the current publisher) were raised in their mother's Episcopalian faith. Granted they're half-Jewish ethnically (and would qualify for Israeli citizenship) but they're not Jewish in the religious sense.

Posted by beowulf | May 22, 2008 3:36 PM

From Philip Weiss's blog:
http://www.philipweiss.org/mondoweiss/2008/05/we-are-all-mear.html

We Are All Mearsheimerites Now: Jeffrey Goldberg Joins the Anti's

Jeffrey Goldberg, surely the most powerful Jewish print journalist in the country right now, wrote a vicious review in The New Republic last fall of Walt and Mearsheimer's book, The Israel Lobby that I never blogged about because I found it so unpleasant. The piece said that the two scholars were anti-semites who had purposely put themselves in the tradition of Father Coughlin and David Duke. The tone was supercilious, the name-calling was unrelenting and sophomoric. They were "tourists" in the area of Israel policy, knew nothing about Washington, on and on and on. A Nazi reference or two. And always putting himself forward as sager...

Well, we are all Keynesians now. We are all Mearsheimerites.

Today on the Times Op-Ed page, Goldberg adopted Walt and Mearsheimer's line. He said that the only thing that can save the Jewish state is the two-state solution, and the only thing that can save the two-state solution is if the stranglehold of the Israel lobby is broken.

Posted by otto | May 22, 2008 3:39 PM

SLC: "Take this Israel bashers. I'm sure that Mr. Hack, Mr. Trevor, Mr. Williams, Mr. strasmangelo jones, etc. will now throw their Windows computers in the trash can."

Hey, SLC! I run LINUX! (Well, I dual-boot since I have to support Windows clients. But most of my day to day personal work is done in openSUSE.)

Eat me!

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!

And citing Microsoft as if they were somebody I RESPECT?

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!!!

Microsoft sucks rocks, Bill Gates is an asshole almost as big as you, and Ballmer is as well. And Microsoft software is crap.

Posted by Richard Steven Hack | May 22, 2008 5:21 PM

Jeffrey Goldberg, surely the most powerful Jewish print journalist in the country right now

That's meant to be a joke, right?

Posted by SoCalJustice | May 22, 2008 5:35 PM

SLC : "But Intel also has a large research and development program in Israel so Mr. Williams can't get around those Zionists by using Linux."

What has Intel got to do with Linux, you moron? Or IBM, for that matter. While both support Linux, Linux is OPEN SOURCE, nitwit.

Christ, the only thing worse than a Zionist freak is an ignorant Zionist freak.

If SLC wants to talk about Israeli technology, how about the Israeli technology that USED to run the FBI's wiretap program - until the company was found to be selling wiretap information to drug dealers in Los Angeles. Not to mention that the FBI was seriously concerned that the Mossad had way too much possible access.

Or the Israeli company who sells the camera surveillance system to the LONDON UNDERGROUND - the one that got bombed? Giving your Mossad boys the ability to access secure areas sure was a neat trick.

Israel long ago learned that the best way to spy on the world was to be the country that sells most of the surveillance gear to every other country. Most of those Israeli companies have close ties to the IDF which specifically has a program to invest in, develop and promote those companies.

Meanwhile, Israeli spies run around the US stealing US nuclear secrets and selling them to Pakistan via Turkey, according to Sibel Edmonds - financed by Marc Rich, the scumbag that the Israelis pressured Clinton to pardon.

Israel also wants to sell its "Wall" technology to North Korea so NK can hem in its defectors.

Nice people, Israel.

Let's call SLC, AIPAC, and the rest of the Zionist freak scumbags here in the US what they are - traitors to this country and spies and foreign agents for another country. And Israel itself is an enemy of the US, using this country for its own purposes at whatever cost to Americans.

Posted by Richard Steven Hack | May 22, 2008 5:38 PM

SoCalJustice: whether it's a joke or not, I also very much doubt it is accurate.

Posted by otto | May 22, 2008 5:45 PM

Re Richard Steven Hack

1. I am well aware of the fact that Linux is open source. Since virtually all personal computers, now that Apple has converted to Intel, run on Intel or AMD based systems, of which both companies have investments in Israel, on what Israel independent platform does Mr. Hack propose to run his Linux system?

2. Mr. Hack is really a funny fellow, bad mouthing Bill Gates, Steve Ballmer, Matthew YKglesias, etc. Mr. Hack is a total failure in life, a man who stuck a gun in a bank tellers' face and threatened to blow him/her away if the contents of the tellers cage wasn't handed over forthwith, a man who spent 9 years in the federal penitentiary in Leavenworth getting his ass reamed by the brothers on a regular basis. He likes to make fun of Mr. Yglesias who graduated from Harvard while he graduated from Leavenworth. I very much doubt that Mr. Hack could have been admitted to Harvard or UC Berkeley where I graduated from on his best day.

Posted by SLC | May 22, 2008 6:28 PM