- "Mearsheimer and Walt's paper
leaves absolutely no doubt that Israel not only controls our entire government,
our Pentagon, our foreign policy and our political parties, but our media
as well."
-
-
- It's all coming together so quickly now,
but never should we even remotely consider relaxing our assault. In federal
government circles, selection by upper management of a candidate to attend
the senior management program offered to upwardly mobile government executives
as offered by the John F. Kennedy School of Government of Harvard University,
is in and of itself a high privilege and an honor. It clearly signifies
to all that an attendee and graduate of the program is destined for the
highest ranks of government service; namely, the Senior Executive Service.
-
- During my employment with the federal
government, virtually every high-level executive I reported to was an SES
that graduated from this high-power school. The John F. Kennedy School
of Government of Harvard University is, therefore, a very prestigious center
of learning, both in terms of academic ranking and in terms of its ranking
by the highest levels of management within the United States government.
Professor Stephen M. Walt is a professor at JFK, while John J. Mearsheimer
is a professor in the Department of Political Science at the University
of Chicago.
-
- As with all institutions of higher learning,
professors at these colleges and universities are continuously urged, if
not actually pressured, to produce essays, technical reports, and books
expounding upon their respective areas of expertise based on their concentration
of educational and research disciplines. The JFK School provides just
such a vehicle for technical reporting and essay writing in their "Faculty
Research Working Papers Series." It was through this venue, that
Mearsheimer and Walt published their latest eye-opening report, entitled:
"The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy." Needless to say,
at this time in our nation's history, it couldn't come at a more critical
time.
-
- As Americans feverishly attempt to understand
the workings of the twisted mind of a totally out-of-control genocidal
lunatic and mass-murdering warmongering buffoon and his gang that has hijacked
the government of the United States, explanations for his unilateral and
unnecessary invasion abound in limitless speculation and inquiry. However,
the most frequently offered rationale, if that is what it can be called,
is that it was primarily about oil. But considering the hostility of Israel,
its penchant and perfected planning and execution of terror, it becomes
increasingly clear that the foreign policy of the United States is dictated
by Israel. I have often pointed out that assessment in this space.
-
- Mearsheimer and Walt's paper leaves absolutely
no doubt that Israel not only controls our entire government, our Pentagon,
our foreign policy and our political parties, but our media as well. Digressing
a moment from the natural order of topics in their magnificent paper, let's
move immediately to the report's treatment of Israeli control of the American
corporate mainstream establishment media, as it will be the intention of
that un-American element and institution to work hard and feverishly to
spike and cover up this damaging report that exposes the motivational madness
of the Bush regime.
-
- Addressing the section, "Manipulating
the Media," Mearsheimer and Walt offer: "In addition to influencing
government policy directly, the Lobby [AIPAC] strives to shape public perceptions
about Israel and the Middle East. It does not want an open debate on issues
involving Israel, because an open debate might cause Americans to question
the level of support that they currently provide. Accordingly, pro-Israel
organizations work hard to influence the media, think tanks, and academia,
because these institutions are critical in shaping popular opinion."
-
- The report goes on: "The Lobby's
perspective on Israel is widely reflected in the mainstream media in good
part because most American commentators are pro-Israel. The debate among
Middle East pundits, journalist Eric Alterman writes, is dominated by people
who cannot imagine criticizing Israel., He lists 61 columnists and commentators
who can be counted upon to support Israel reflexively and without qualification.,
Conversely, Alterman found just five pundits who consistently criticize
Israeli behavior or endorse pro-Arab positions. Newspapers occasionally
publish guest op-eds challenging Israeli policy, but the balance of opinion
clearly favors the other side."
-
- Certain key elements of the Alternative
Media, this site among them, have consistently exposed the one-sidedness
of the MSM in protecting Israel and extending this protection therefore
to the Bush administration. That is precisely what empowers the administration
as a regime. And what it doesn't say in the report, is the astonishing
control that Jews sympathetic to Israel, and therefore supportive of the
Bush crime machine, overwhelming own, manage and operate print and TV and
cable electronic news reporting. This subject wasn't even touched on.
-
- The report then turns to a brief analysis
of the New York Times. This is "America's newspaper of record"
and as Bernie Goldberg has revealed, is the national editorial gatekeeper
and assessor of what is newsworthy and what is not. It is the Times that
decides what news will be on TV and cable later in the evening, and you
may rest comfortably sure that this Mearsheimer and Walt report will not
make it, nor will Charlie Sheen. It is the Times, that blocked the Downing
Street Memo report and is now also dedicated to blocking a full, open investigation
of the Bush 9-11 plot.
-
- Concerning the Times, Mearsheimer and
Walt offer: "Editorial bias is also found in papers like the New York
Times. The Times occasionally criticizes Israeli policies and sometimes
concedes that the Palestinians have legitimate grievances, but it is not
even-handed. In his memoirs, for example, former Times executive editor
Max Frankel acknowledged the impact of his own pro-Israel attitude had
on his editorial choices. In his words: I was much more deeply devoted
to Israel than I dared to assert., He goes on: Fortified by my knowledge
of Israel and my friendships there, I myself wrote most of our Middle East
commentaries. As more Arab than Jewish readers recognized, I wrote them
from a pro-Israel perspective.,"
-
- The report goes on to give examples of
the organized manner in which the Israeli Lobby encourages the supportive
consumers of newspaper, radio and television news, to literally bombard
news entities with protest letters and e-mails in the true and time-worn
fashion of Zionist agitation to stifle news and views they don't like,
and to urge for propaganda favoring Israel. Examples of Zionist rank and
file pressure on CNN and NPR are cited. The report concludes this section
on the media offering, "These factors help explain why the American
media contains few criticisms of Israeli policy, rarely questions Washington's
relationship with Israel, and only occasionally discusses the Lobby's profound
influence on U.S. policy."
-
- It should be crystal clear that my labeling
of the MSM as being "The Zionist Media" is now virtually proven
fact, especially coming from this highly regarded institution of government
studies and from trainers of candidates for the Senior Executive Service.
And you can count on the fact that the Zionist media is burning the midnight
oil to feverishly suppress this critical exposé.
-
- The report's opening remarks now: "U.S.
foreign policy shapes events in every corner of the globe. Nowhere is
this truer than in the Middle East, a region of recurring instability and
enormous strategic importance. Most recently, the Bush Administration's
attempt to transform the region into a community of democracies has helped
produce a resilient insurgency in Iraq, a sharp rise in world oil prices,
and terrorist bombings in Madrid, London, and Amman. With so much at stake
for so many, all countries need to understand the forces that drive U.S.
Middle East policy.
-
- The U.S. national interest should be
the primary object of American foreign policy. For the past several decades,
however, and especially since the Six Day War in 1967, the centerpiece
of U.S. Middle East policy has been its relationship with Israel. The
combination of unwavering U.S. support for Israel and the related effort
to spread democracy throughout the region has inflamed Arab and Islamic
opinion and jeopardized U.S. security.
-
- This situation has no equal in American
political history. Why has the United States been willing to set aside
its own security in order to advance the interests of another state? One
might assume that the bond between the two countries is based on shared
strategic interests or compelling moral imperatives. As we show below,
however, neither of those explanations can account for the remarkable level
of material and diplomatic support that the United States provides to Israel."
Now we may all rest more than comfortably assured that virtually all organized
Jewry, and all levels of American government, political parties, and especially
the media, will violently explode with outrage and spring into overwhelming
unified and coordinated action over this 83-page unabashed truthful report
which exposes the horrific damage Zionism has already perpetrated against
our once free and beautiful nation. This Zionism required "the Pearl
Harbor of the 21st Century," and it is becoming increasingly clear
that such an amount of plotting and execution as serves the immediate interests
of Israel likely generated the compliant action on the part of the traitors
in our own government that engineered and made 9-11 happen. It makes the
likelihood of 9-11 less an act of random terrorism and more a deliberate
action considering all the key Pentagon players who have dual citizenship
with Israel.
-
- How could any thinking American anywhere
in our government entrust our most powerful military might and its top
secret sensitivity to individuals with dual citizenship with the 106th
ranking nation in terms of population, and a ranking as fourth as a world-leading
nuclear power, a rogue nation that is actively waging terrorism upon other
nations? How can such power be turned over to citizens of a nation that
lusts for the destruction of the entire Arab world and Islam, a race, people
and nations that control the Earth's most vital oil supplies? How can
politicians calling themselves "Americans" put their entire nation
at risk of reprisal for the terrorist outrages that Zionist criminals in
Israel have perpetrated against all the peoples of the Middle East? How?
Ask Bush!!!
-
- Need one raise more obvious questions?
Where did WE learn how to become terrorists and turn on our own? Why
did we turn against the whole world and ignore human decency and morality,
and ignore the Geneva Conventions and begin campaigns of torture and mass
terror, and slaughter unarmed captive men, women and children? Who showed
US how to do this and get away with it? Who? Ask Israel!!!
-
- Mearsheimer and Walt summarize: "It
is not surprising that Israel and its American supporters want the United
States to deal with any and all threats to Israel's security. If their
efforts to shape U.S. policy succeed, then Israel's enemies get weakened
or overthrown, Israel gets a free hand with the Palestinians, and the United
States does most of the fighting, dying, rebuilding, and paying.
-
- But even if the United States fails to
transform the Middle East and finds itself in conflict with an increasingly
radicalized Arab and Islamic world, Israel still ends up protected by the
world's only superpower. This is not a perfect outcome from [AIPAC's]
perspective, but it is obviously preferable to Washington distancing itself
from Israel, or using its leverage to force Israel to make peace with the
Palestinians."
-
- The report concludes: "Can the [Israeli-AIPAC]
Lobby's power be curtailed? One would like to think so, given the Iraq
debacle, the obvious need to rebuild America's image in the Arab and Islamic
world, and the recent revelations about AIPAC officials passing U.S. government
secrets to Israel. One might also think that Arafat's death and the election
of the more moderate Abu Mazen would cause Washington to press vigorously
and evenhandedly for a peace agreement. In short, there are ample grounds
for U.S. leaders to distance themselves from the Lobby and adopt a Middle
East policy more consistent with broader U.S. interests. In particular,
using American power to achieve a just peace between Israel and the Palestinians
would help advance the broader goals of fighting extremism and promoting
democracy in the Middle East.
-
- But that is not going to happen anytime
soon. AIPAC and its allies [including Christian Zionists] have no serious
opponents in the lobbying world. They know it has become more difficult
to make Israel's case today, and they are responding by expanding their
activities and staffs. Moreover, American politicians remain acutely sensitive
to campaign contributions and other forms of political pressure and major
media outlets are likely to remain sympathetic to Israel no matter what
it does." <<Theodore E. Lang
-
- 3/25/06 © THEODORE E. LANG 3/25/06
All rights reserved
-
- Ted Lang is a political analyst and freelance
writer.
|
