'Anti-Semitic' label curbs talk about Israel

[Henny]

By Michael Smerconish
http://www.philly.com/inquirer/currents/20070909_Head_Strong___Anti-Semitic_label_curbs_talk_about_Israel.html

One year after 9/11, I visited Israel as a guest of the Jerusalem Post. In the midst of the intifadah, the hard-line newspaper arranged for me to broadcast my daily radio show from Jerusalem. At the time, I was also filing one-minute commentaries for KYW-AM (1060). One of them caused some consternation at home. Here is what I said:
"Yesterday, an Israeli guide was anxious to show me the community called Gilo.

" 'Look,' he said, 'at the sandbags that these people have to place in their windows to shield them from sniper fire from a neighboring village called Beit Jala.'

"Sure enough, there were sandbags in windows and bullet holes in walls. Thinking of my kids, I said, 'That's no place to raise a family.'

"Today, I had a different guide with a different perspective. He wanted me to tour an Arab neighborhood in the West Bank.

" 'Look at where Israeli tank fire has destroyed these homes,' he said to me. I looked. The devastation was terrible. 'This is no place to live,' I said to myself.

" 'Where are we?' I asked.

" 'This is the village called Beit Jala,' he told me, 'and the tank fired from over there, in Gilo' - where I had been the day before."

I ended the commentary by saying: "And so it goes."

My intention was only to present a form of geopolitical glass half empty/half full, not to assert any moral equivalency. But that didn't spare me an onslaught of e-mail from Jewish listeners disappointed in what I had said, or what they thought I was implying. Some told me my "comparison" was anti-Semitic, which stunned me, given that my entire trip had a palpable, pro-Israeli tone.

I was reminded of that experience this week while considering the backlash against the release of The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy, by John J. Mearsheimer and Stephen M. Walt. Mearsheimer is a political scientist at the University of Chicago. Walt is a professor at Harvard University's John F. Kennedy School of Government.

Their book is an outgrowth of their lengthy online article on the same subject, and of a 40-page essay published last spring in the London Review of Books. Their premise is that the United States has set aside its own security to advance the interests of Israel, owing to the existence of a "lobby," which they define as a loose coalition of individuals and organizations who actively work to steer U.S. foreign policy in a pro-Israel direction.

Among their observations is that anyone who criticizes Israel's actions or argues that pro-Israel groups have a significant influence over U.S. policy stands a good chance of being labeled anti-Semitic.

Labeling has become all too common in today's political debate, overlooking that few of us can neatly be compartmentalized under words such as liberal or conservative. Speak against same-sex marriage? You must be a "homophobe." Oppose affirmative action? That sounds "racist."

Similarly, to question U.S. support for Israel runs the risk of being branded "anti-Semitic." Perhaps it's only a small minority who assign the labels. Still, each debasing generalization stifles conversation about issues of the day. The shame is that some people, who already have a seat at the table, resort to such language as a way to prevent those of different views from even getting to the table at all.

Here's hoping that, six years removed from 9/11, Mearsheimer and Walt can initiate a reasonable conversation about Israel. No subject with implications for U.S. security should be off-limits. Among their words worthy of debate are these: "aying that Israel and the U.S. are united by a shared terrorist threat has the causal relationship backwards: the United States has a terrorism problem in good part because it is so closely allied with Israel, not the other way around."

Of course, others conclude that the origins of America's terror problem are much wider in scope than Israel alone; they argue that disdain for America's relationship with Israel long preceded the modern terrorist threat. I say let's air it out.

Mearsheimer and Walt's arguments sound similar to words spoken to me by Michael Scheuer, author of the book Imperial Hubris and a man who spent 22 years with the CIA. From 1996 to 1999, he ran "Alec Station," the Osama bin Laden tracking unit at the CIA's Counterterrorist Center. He told me he agreed with Mearsheimer and Walt that the Israeli lobby had "distorted and burdened" U.S. foreign policy.

"The most dangerous aspect of the Israel lobby," Scheuer said, "is that it threatens free speech in America. Very few Americans will exercise their right to free speech if criticizing Israel earns them identification as an anti-Semite."

Which reminds me that after I recently interviewed Scheuer, a blog posting said: "He won't out-and-out claim he hates Jews, but everything he criticizes centers around Israel and the 'dual loyalty' of neo-cons. You would be smart to avoid using this man as a reference. Soon he will reveal himself to be the true anti-Semite he is."

Scheuer argues that he was hired by the CIA not to be guardian of the world, but to be a guardian of the American people, and that our foreign policy should be designed to protect Americans first. This is exactly what Mearsheimer and Walt say we have abdicated.

Hardly an anti-Semitic view, and these well-credentialed academics have gone to great lengths to defuse any accusations of personal animus toward Israel.

"In its basic operations, the Israel Lobby is no different from the farm lobby, steel or textile workers' union, or other ethnic lobbies," they write in the London Review of Books. "There is nothing improper about American Jews and their Christian allies attempting to sway U.S. policy; the Lobby's activities are not a conspiracy of the sort depicted in tracts like the Protocols of the Elders of Zion."

Their words are falling on deaf ears in certain quarters. A number of potential forums for discussion with the authors have turned down or canceled events. According to the New York Times, these include the Center for the Humanities at the Graduate Center at the City University of New York, the Chicago Council on Global Affairs, a Jewish cultural center in Washington, and three organizations in Chicago.

This would seem only to strengthen their argument.

[Mr_Perceptive]

Again, a non-balanced article. Do we detect a position here you maintain, Henny?

I have lived in the Middle East many times over the years. I have friends who live there now(dumb but they do).

MY experience tells me that contrary to this article the average Arab would like nothing more than to kill every Jew they can find.

I realize that many say this is due to injustices suffered by them, but the Jews have that argument as well and yet many Jews I know only want to be left alone.

Have I met "moderate" Arabs who do not share this view? Yes. Are they predominant among their brethren? No. That alone tells me a great deal about the culture. 

One of te REAL truths about the many and varied "issues" in this area of the world is that the "issues" have a helluva lot less to do with Israel than the multitude of political, cultural, socio-economic  and even religious "issues" and divisions present throughout the Arab world. To be frank, Israel is really not a central issue, contrary to what the mainstream media wants you to see. In fact, Isreal is used frequently as no more than a excuse used by the many Arab governments in the region to cover their own serious faults. The real problem lies in the many autocratic governments in that region from Syria to Jordan (yes, even Jodran), and others. These tyrannical governments ruled by people who think of themsleves as gods are the real source of unhappiness throughout the Arab world. They treat many of their citizens are no better than dogs.

Basically, there is an inherent flaw in the underlying Arab culture. To think otherwise, is simply naive.

[Henny]

Again, a non-balanced article. Do we detect a position here you maintain, Henny?

MY experience tells me that contrary to this article the average Arab would like nothing more than to kill every Jew they can find.

Good Lord. Are you quite serious with that remark?

Kill? Give me a break.

My own experience living there showed me that the average Arab will disagree wholeheartedly with Israelis on regional issues, but it is the extermist minority that would KILL.

I also think that this article is honestly balanced as is the Mearshimer reports.

[Mr_Perceptive]

You are entitled to your opinion. I happen to disagree with it.

There is a flaw in the culture, in my opinion. Instead of working toward moderation, I find they do the opposite.

Just my view.

[Henny]

One of te REAL truths about the many and varied "issues" in this area of the world is that the "issues" have a helluva lot less to do with Israel than the multitude of political, cultural, socio-economic  and even religious "issues" and divisions present throughout the Arab world. To be frank, Israel is really not a central issue, contrary to what the mainstream media wants you to see. In fact, Isreal is used frequently as no more than a excuse used by the many Arab governments in the region to cover their own serious faults. The real problem lies in the many autocratic governments in that region from Syria to Jordan (yes, even Jodran), and others. These tyrannical governments ruled by people who think of themsleves as gods are the real source of unhappiness throughout the Arab world. They treat many of their citizens are no better than dogs.

Basically, there is an inherent flaw in the underlying Arab culture. To think otherwise, is simply naive.

Again, I disagree, but only partially. I believe that Israel is a central issue because it unites despite all of the other divides.

Yes, autocratic governments are a problem, yes even in Jordan. Constitutional Monarchy? Sort of, but not really when you examine how the government really works. They are, however, a very mild example. Point in fact is that these countries were created not so very long ago by the West. That hand has been stirring the pot in the region since the early 1900s. The West played a large part in creating the mess, messing it up more, and then trying to fix it and messing it up even more.

[Henny]

You are entitled to your opinion. I happen to disagree with it.

There is a flaw in the culture, in my opinion. Instead of working toward moderation, I find they do the opposite.

Just my view.

I've observed different flaws than you in my observations. I see tribalism as one of the biggest societal flaws they have. While I can also admire some of the family aspects of tribalism, I think that it causes deep problems in all other aspects of their lives.

[Mr_Perceptive]

I find this is more of the mainstream as opposed to your view. Bin Laden may be depicted as an extremist over here, but many Arabs would love for him to succeed. Moderates are not as revered there.

Bin Laden Wants 'Caravan' of Martyrs
 


Sep 11, 9:59 AM (ET)

By LEE KEATH

CAIRO, Egypt (AP) - Osama bin Laden urged sympathizers to join the "caravan" of martyrs as he praised one of the Sept. 11 suicide hijackers in a new video that emerged Tuesday to mark the sixth anniversary of the attacks on the World Trade Center and Pentagon.

Al-Qaida traditionally issues a video every year on the anniversary, with the last testament of one of the 19 hijackers involved in the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks. This year's video showed hijacker Waleed al-Shehri addressing the camera and warning the U.S.: "We shall come at you from your front and back, your right and left."

The new message, which AP Television News obtained from the IntelCenter monitoring group in suburban Washington, came days after the world got its first current look at bin Laden in nearly three years, with the release of a video Saturday in which the terror leader addressed the American people.

Later in the day it appeared on militant Web sites, with a note from al-Qaiada's media production wing al-Sahab saying it was intentionally sent to television stations before being placed on the Internet.

It begins with an audiotape introduction by bin Laden. While his voice is heard, the video shows a still image of him, raising his finger. In the image, bin Laden has the same dyed-black beard and the same clothes - a white robe and cap and beige cloak - that he had in Saturday's video.

But it was not known if the audiotape was recently made. In the past, al-Qaida has used footage and audio of bin Laden taped long ago for release later.

In the tape, bin Laden praised al-Shehri, saying he "recognized the truth" that Arab rulers were "vassals" of the West and had "abandoned the balance of (Islamic) revelation."

"It is true that this young man was little in years, but the faith in his heart was big," he said.

"So there is a huge difference between the path of the kings, presidents and hypocritical Ulama (Islamic scholars) and the path of these noble young men," like al-Shehri, bin Laden said. "The formers' lot is to spoil and enjoy themselves whereas the latters' lot is to destroy themselves for Allah's Word to be Supreme."

"It remains for us to do our part. So I tell every young man among the youth of Islam: It is your duty to join the caravan (of martyrs) until the sufficiency is complete and the march to aid the High and Omnipotent continues," he said.

At the end of his speech, bin Laden also mentions the al-Qaida leader in Iraq, Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, who was killed in an U.S. air strike there. Al-Zarqawi followed in the footsteps of al-Shehri and his brothers who "fulfilled their promises to God."

"And now it is our turn," bin Laden says.

After bin Laden speaks, the video of al-Shehri appears. Al-Shehri - one of the hijackers on American Airlines Flight 11, which hit the World Trade Center - is seen wearing a white robe and headscarf, with a full black beard, speaking in front of a backdrop with images of the burning World Trade Center.

"We shall come at you from your front and back, your right and left," al-Shehri said, asserting that America would suffer the same fate as the Soviet Union.

He also praised the losses the United States suffered in Somalia in late 1993.

"As for our own fortune, it is not in this world," he said. "And we are not competing with you for this world, because it does not equal in Allah's eyes the wing of a mosquito."

Al-Shehri warned Muslims who strayed to return to their religion and deplored the state of those who abandoned Muslim holy war, or jihad.

"The condition of Islam at the present time makes one cry ... in view of the weakness, humiliation, scorn and enslavement it is suffering because it neglected the obligations of Allah and His orders, and permitted His forbidden things and abandoned jihad in Allah's path," he said.

Suicide attacks for al-Qaida and other militant groups often videotape last testaments before carrying out their attacks. Every Sept. 11 anniversary, al-Qaida has used the tapes in a bid to rally its supporters by glorifying its "martyrs."

Bin Laden's new appearances underline the failure to find the terror leader that President Bush vowed in the wake of the Sept. 11 attacks to take "dead or alive."

On Sunday, Bush's homeland security adviser Frances Fragos Townsend sought to play down bin Laden's importance - and added a taunt, saying he was "virtually impotent."

But terrorism experts say al-Qaida's core leadership is regrouping in the lawless Pakistan-Afghanistan border region. The latest National Intelligence Estimate says the network is growing in strength, intensifying its efforts to put operatives in the United States and plot new attacks.

Bin Laden's video on Saturday was his first message in over a year - since a July 1, 2006 audiotape. The images came under close scrutiny from U.S. intelligence agencies, looking for clues to the 50-year-old's health and whereabouts.


http://apnews.myway.com/article/20070911/D8RJ9V900.html

[Mr_Perceptive]

One of te REAL truths about the many and varied "issues" in this area of the world is that the "issues" have a helluva lot less to do with Israel than the multitude of political, cultural, socio-economic  and even religious "issues" and divisions present throughout the Arab world. To be frank, Israel is really not a central issue, contrary to what the mainstream media wants you to see. In fact, Isreal is used frequently as no more than a excuse used by the many Arab governments in the region to cover their own serious faults. The real problem lies in the many autocratic governments in that region from Syria to Jordan (yes, even Jodran), and others. These tyrannical governments ruled by people who think of themsleves as gods are the real source of unhappiness throughout the Arab world. They treat many of their citizens are no better than dogs.

Basically, there is an inherent flaw in the underlying Arab culture. To think otherwise, is simply naive.

There is some validity in what you say, but you make a central error and that is blaming osmeone else for your problems, e.g the Arabs blaming the West. I see this in our society here as well. People seem to want to blame others for thier misfortune. Bullshit! My parents had ZIP. I went into the Corps at 18 in order to not be yet another mouth to feed. I worked my ass off my entire career and earned what I got, the hard way. I have never blamed anyone else when things went wrong and it would have been worng to do so anyway.  The arabs needo t get on with their collective lives instead of blaming the West or Isreal or God or whomever. To do otherwise is pure bullshit and immature.

Again, I disagree, but only partially. I believe that Israel is a central issue because it unites despite all of the other divides.

Yes, autocratic governments are a problem, yes even in Jordan. Constitutional Monarchy? Sort of, but not really when you examine how the government really works. They are, however, a very mild example. Point in fact is that these countries were created not so very long ago by the West. That hand has been stirring the pot in the region since the early 1900s. The West played a large part in creating the mess, messing it up more, and then trying to fix it and messing it up even more.

[Mr_Perceptive]

You are entitled to your opinion. I happen to disagree with it.

There is a flaw in the culture, in my opinion. Instead of working toward moderation, I find they do the opposite.

Just my view.

I've observed different flaws than you in my observations. I see tribalism as one of the biggest societal flaws they have. While I can also admire some of the family aspects of tribalism, I think that it causes deep problems in all other aspects of their lives.

This concept does indeed pose problems but you cannot hide behind it either as justificaiton for your actions.

[Henny]

I find this is more of the mainstream as opposed to your view. Bin Laden may be depicted as an extremist over here, but many Arabs would love for him to succeed. Moderates are not as revered there.

And here I disagree as well.

Some Arabs would want him to succeed. But all? Come on. In all of the regions? Countries? Socio-economic levels? Tribes?

It is impossible to put the whole Arab world into a "nutshell" as suggested.

[Henny]

You are entitled to your opinion. I happen to disagree with it.

There is a flaw in the culture, in my opinion. Instead of working toward moderation, I find they do the opposite.

Just my view.

I've observed different flaws than you in my observations. I see tribalism as one of the biggest societal flaws they have. While I can also admire some of the family aspects of tribalism, I think that it causes deep problems in all other aspects of their lives.

This concept does indeed pose problems but you cannot hide behind it either as justificaiton for your actions.

Clarify?

[Mr_Perceptive]

I find this is more of the mainstream as opposed to your view. Bin Laden may be depicted as an extremist over here, but many Arabs would love for him to succeed. Moderates are not as revered there.

And here I disagree as well.

Some Arabs would want him to succeed. But all? Come on. In all of the regions? Countries? Socio-economic levels? Tribes?

It is impossible to put the whole Arab world into a "nutshell" as suggested.

This is a typcial strategy of the Left, attempting to make an issue more complex than it really is in order to minimize alternative views. Nice try, but I stand by my view.

[Mr_Perceptive]

You are entitled to your opinion. I happen to disagree with it.

There is a flaw in the culture, in my opinion. Instead of working toward moderation, I find they do the opposite.

Just my view.

I've observed different flaws than you in my observations. I see tribalism as one of the biggest societal flaws they have. While I can also admire some of the family aspects of tribalism, I think that it causes deep problems in all other aspects of their lives.

This concept does indeed pose problems but you cannot hide behind it either as justificaiton for your actions.

Clarify?

Indicating tribalism as a cuase for action implies a justificaiton for future action becuae theyare just abiding by their internal customs due to the concept of tribalism.

If you murder someone, for example, an innocent at 9-11, you kstill murdered someone and all their rationaliizations in the world won't change the fact that you committed murder and deserve to be hanged untril you are dead dead dead. No incarceration at $30K+ per year. No supposed rehabiliation. A quick death. More than you probably deserved.

[Henny]

This is a typcial strategy of the Left, attempting to make an issue more complex than it really is in order to minimize alternative views. Nice try, but I stand by my view.

That is a total cop out and a typical strategy of the right to ignore all of the more complex facets in an argument.

[_JS]

MY experience tells me that contrary to this article the average Arab would like nothing more than to kill every Jew they can find.

Blatant racism.

This is a typcial strategy of the Left, attempting to make an issue more complex than it really is in order to minimize alternative views. Nice try, but I stand by my view.

No one is saying that you cannot stand by your view, but your view is overly-simplistic and quite stupid. The issue is complex. No one or group is making it so. You cannot fit the entire Arab population's views into one easy blanket statement, no more than you can all blacks, or all Jews.

You don't have the data to back up your view either. It is an off the cuff remark which you hold valid for no real reason.

Indicating tribalism as a cuase for action implies a justificaiton for future action becuae theyare just abiding by their intenral cusotmes due to the concept of triblaism.

And you'll notice that Ms. Henny never once claims that tribalism is an acceptable defense for murder. That is a statement you made and not the argument she is making. If you'd listen, instead of constructing strawmen, then you might learn a little.