From two researchers from Harvard and Chicago University, a report on the Israel Lobby.

Though it is easy to dismiss talk of influence on the American government from foreign sources, especially with a country like Israel that we may inherently feel an ideological bond to, this paper does an excellent job of examining the United States foreign policy in the Middle East. The Middle East, as we know, has been a host to problems across the spectrum: corruption, violence, and zealotry have reigned supreme in the past fifty years. So in an arena marked by shades of greys, Mearsheimer & Walt do an excellent job of exposing how and why we have choosen our principle ally in the region.

By the numbers comes the greatest basis of support, right off the bat:

Since the October War in 1973, Washington has provided Israel with a level of support dwarfing that given to any other state. It has been the largest annual recipient of direct economic and military assistance since 1976, and is the largest recipient in total since World War Two, to the tune of well over $140 billion (in 2004 dollars). Israel receives about $3 billion in direct assistance each year, roughly one-fifth of the foreign aid budget, and worth about $500 a year for every Israeli. This largesse is especially striking since Israel is now a wealthy industrial state with a per capita income roughly equal to that of South Korea or Spain.

The thrust of the paper actually comes two paragraphs in:

Instead, the thrust of US policy in the region derives almost entirely from domestic politics, and especially the activities of the ‘Israel Lobby’. Other special-interest groups have managed to skew foreign policy, but no lobby has managed to divert it as far from what the national interest would suggest, while simultaneously convincing Americans that US interests and those of the other country – in this case, Israel – are essentially identical.

And at the end, a powerful message about the affect when a lobbying group becomes too strong for our own good:

There is a ray of hope, however. Although the Lobby remains a powerful force, the adverse effects of its influence are increasingly difficult to hide. Powerful states can maintain flawed policies for quite some time, but reality cannot be ignored for ever. What is needed is a candid discussion of the Lobby’s influence and a more open debate about US interests in this vital region. Israel’s well-being is one of those interests, but its continued occupation of the West Bank and its broader regional agenda are not. Open debate will expose the limits of the strategic and moral case for one-sided US support and could move the US to a position more consistent with its own national interest, with the interests of the other states in the region, and with Israel’s long-term interests as well.

There is a full, unedited version of this paper available at Harvard.

{ 0 comments }

Roses are Red.
Violets are Blue.
All my base,
are belong to you.

{ 0 comments }

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2004/01/20040122-5.html

Q Can we buy some questions?

THE PRESIDENT: Obviously these people — they make a lot of money and they’re not going to spend much. I’m not saying they’re overpaid, they’re just not spending any money.

{ 2 comments }

And yet all he can do is fail miserably:

{ 0 comments }

DUR DUR DUR DUR.

The dogs detected the package inside a 4-by-6-inch condiment container in a vendor cart outside Cox Arena at San Diego State University. A bomb robot was sent to the scene, FBI spokeswoman Jan Caldwell said.

So a dog smells something in a fucking HOT DOG vendor before the game began. Maybe it was a… HOT DOG? Jesus christ, can you imagine some fat, overpaid loser walking their dog only to have it ‘react’ to something suspicious? Welcome to American homeland security!

{ 0 comments }

From Zionism from the Standpoint of its Victims, taken from the book The Question of Palestine by Edward Said and available on JSTOR if you have an account or are in college:

The task of criticism, or, to put it another way, the role of critical conciousness in such cases is to be able to make distinctions, to produce differences where at present there are none. To write critically about Zionism in Palestine has therefore never meant, and does not mean now, being anti-Semitic; conversely, the struggle for Palestinian rights and self-determination does not mean support for the Saudi royal family, nor the antiquated and oppressive state strutures of most of the Arab nations.

One must admit, however, that all liberals and even most “radicals” have been unable to overcome the Zionism habit of equating anti-Zionism with anti-Semitism. Any well-meaning person can thus oppose South African or American racism and at the same time tacitly support Zionist racial discrimination against non-Jews in Palestine. The almost total absence of any handily avaiable historical knowledge from non-Zionist source, the dissemination by the media of malicious simplications (eg Jews vs. Arabs), the cynical opportunism of various Zionist pressure groups, the tendency endemic to university intellectuals uncritically to repeat cant phrases and political cliches, the fear of treading upon the highly sensitive terrain of what Jews did to their victims, in an age of genocidal extermination of Jews–all this contributes to the dulling, regulated enforcement of almost unanimous support for Israel.

{ 0 comments }

Poverty-Stricken Africans Receive Desperately Needed Bibles

“You say you’re suffering. I say, let the good Lord do the suffering for you,” she said. “You say you’re exhibiting the deleterious effects of severe dehydration and chronic malnutrition. And I say that no matter what ails you, the Holy Bible is the best medicine there is.”

{ 0 comments }