Israel & intelligence (merged thread)

[Render]

http://www.camera.org/index.asp?x_co...x_article=1446

http://www.camera.org/index.asp?x_co...x_article=1105

http://www.camera.org/index.asp?x_co...x_article=1099

http://www.nysun.com/national/harvar...i-sites/29741/

http://articles.latimes.com/2006/mar...nion/oe-boot29

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1143...ays_us_opinion

http://arab-lobby.blogspot.com/

http://www.tau.ac.il/Anti-Semitism/asw2007/usa.html

http://www.think-israel.org/plaut.cockburn.html

http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles...6-C50822DE1FBC

http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/g...asp?grpid=6444

http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/m...-disciple.html

http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/i...asp?indid=1894


There might be a few valid reasons for the labels.

JUST
A
FEW,
R

[selil]

snippage...

There might be a few valid reasons for the labels.

JUST
A
FEW,
R

For or against, a bunch of activist websites, blogs, and opinion pages aren't going to change many people minds.

The original article as quoted was filled with heavy citations (trust me when I say that is just as suspect). For or against, the level needed to answer or criticize the Kennedy organizations article must be of at least the same quality.

[Render]

http://www.hks.harvard.edu/research/...owitzreply.pdf

"In his response, Professor Alan Dershowitz demonstrates that the paper contains three types of major errors: quotations are wrenched out of context, important facts are misstated or omitted; and embarrassingly weak logic is employed. One of the authors of this paper has acknowledged that “none of the evidence represents original documentation or is derived from independent interviews.”

SERIOUSLY,
R

[Ken White]

...There might be a few valid reasons for the labels.

JUST
A
FEW,
R

It would be much better if you were to post a comment in your own words to explain why you thought so. Just posting a slew of links that may or may not support a position you appear to espouse is a poor technique and is discouraged here; that kind of stuff belongs on the juvenile political blogs.

It would be appreciated if you'd refrain from the practice in the future.

Thanks

Ken

[Tom Odom]

Rather than wade through the links offered, let me just say that in trying to debate the idea that an Israeli Lobby exists and has extraordinary effect on US policies in the region, offering a series of counterpoint articles from CAMERA or a Neocon like Max Boot is a predictable tactic, one that largely buttresses what the two authors originally had to say.

Central to most of those critics is the idea that it is anti-semitic to criticize Israeli policies in the US. One of Israel's strengths has been an active debate on the very same issues within Israeli society.


It is also useful to look at the authors' rebuttal to what their critics put forward.

The Israel Lobby
From John Mearsheimer & Stephen Walt

We wrote ‘The Israel Lobby’ in order to begin a discussion of a subject that had become difficult to address openly in the United States (LRB, 23 March). We knew it was likely to generate a strong reaction, and we are not surprised that some of our critics have chosen to attack our characters or misrepresent our arguments. We have also been gratified by the many positive responses we have received, and by the thoughtful commentary that has begun to emerge in the media and the blogosphere. It is clear that many people – including Jews and Israelis – believe that it is time to have a candid discussion of the US relationship with Israel. It is in that spirit that we engage with the letters responding to our article. We confine ourselves here to the most salient points of dispute.

Tom

[bourbon]

Former Senior CIA Operative Says Spy Agency, State Dept. Are Antisemitic, By Jeff Stein. Congressional Quarterly: Spy Talk, October 23, 2008.

Clare M. Lopez, who spent 20 years as an operative in Africa, Latin America and the Balkans, charged in an interview that "a terrible strain of anti-Semitism...has taken root and grown in the ranks of our State Department and CIA in particular."

"U.S. Middle East policy is woefully misguided, in my opinion. How could it be otherwise?" Lopzez said in an interview with the Canada Free Press web site.

"Thirty-five years of graduates from Saudi-Wahhabi-Salafi-funded Ivy League Middle East Studies programs now occupy top positions throughout our Department of State, Intelligence Community, think tanks, media, and academia itself," Lopez said.

Secretary Rice anti-Israel? Not to sound crass, but its too bad she isn't.

Syria has a proven track record of destroying Salafi Jihadists and provided intelligence that saved American lives in the wake of 9/11. Their cooperation in the reconstruction of Iraq could have easily been secured. So if Secretary Rice were indeed anti-Israel, we would not favoring regime change in Syria and subsequently not be on the side of the same guys responsible for 9/11.

[120mm]

Oddly enough, the folks I've met from State who deploy are apparently neither, to talk to them. Most are too busy protecting their own hide to care about the agit-prop.

But I've met both rabid Pro-Arab and Pro-Israel types who inhabit various analyst and leadership positions and sit on their keesters in the DC area and bloviate....

I'd say the answer is "C", way too many who are radically for one side or the other.

[Tom Odom]

Former Senior CIA Operative Says Spy Agency, State Dept. Are Antisemitic, By Jeff Stein. Congressional Quarterly: Spy Talk, October 23, 2008.



Secretary Rice anti-Israel? Not to sound crass, but its too bad she isn't.

Syria has a proven track record of destroying Salafi Jihadists and provided intelligence that saved American lives in the wake of 9/11. Their cooperation in the reconstruction of Iraq could have easily been secured. So if Secretary Rice were indeed anti-Israel, we would not favoring regime change in Syria and subsequently not be on the side of the same guys responsible for 9/11.

Funny she showed up as a center point of discussion on the AKO intelligence discussion email circuit because of this article:

Hizballah – and by extension, Iran – owns Lebanon

Former CIA Ops Officer on Hizballah
By W. Thomas Smith Jr. Wednesday, October 22, 2008

Among my sources for a recent piece, “Are We Funding the Lebanese Army or Hizballah?” (Human Events, Oct. 20, 2008), was my friend and colleague, Clare M. Lopez, who – when I mentioned to her my concerns regarding Hizballah’s having wormed its way into the legitimate Lebanese Defense apparatus as an official component of the army – said to me, “It’s actually the other way around. The army now appears to be part of Hizballah.”

Lopez – a former operations officer with the Central Intelligence Agency who is today a widely sought expert in the interconnected realms of strategic policy, counterintelligence, and counterterrorism – clearly understands the dynamics of Lebanon, its strategic importance in the war on terror, and its increasingly dominant kingdom within the state, Hizballah.

My comments were:

Many words come to mind but they are not suitable for here.

I am glad she is a former CIA Ops Officer.

Anyone who thinks Hizballah is a direct extension of Iran with no end state or agenda of its own does not understand Lebanon.

Best

Tom

and

First I think the article is electioneering hyperbole and I will not go beyond that statement.

Second Lebanon is a microcosm of the Middle East in its ethnic quilt. Agendas fold within agendas and simple just does not apply. Hizballah is a Lebanese--hence Arab--Shia fundamentalist organization that has consistently expanded its social networks in Lebanon even as it expanded its military capacities.

Iran is also complex and its role in Lebanon is not simpy to have a foothold on the Mediterranean. The image of such a geostrategic posture is more valuable than actually trying to maintain such a posture. Certainly Tehran sees benefit in expanding its ties to Hizballah as a challenge to Israel and
the US. But the Iranians are not Arab and that means a lot in just how close those ties can become. To declare that Iran owns Lebanon is simply too simple and certainly too short sighted. Syria tried to own Lebanon and I would hazard a guess that the old school in Syria still want to control Lebanon.

Tom

[Ken White]

...My comments were:

I am glad she is a former CIA Ops Officer.

Anyone who thinks Hizballah is a direct extension of Iran with no end state or agenda of its own does not understand Lebanon.

True on the latter.

On the first, is it just me or are a lot of those 'former' types crawling out of the woodwork saying strange and wonderful things -- that make little sense...

[Render]

http://www.hks.harvard.edu/research/...owitzreply.pdf

Read it again.

Nobody is debating the existence of AIPAC. That's a pathetically transparent strawman argument.

I showed you where the water is, I cannot force you to drink.

Selil: Note the well known and self admitted biases of the websites (counterpunch, antiwar dot com) that others had mentioned previous to my first comment. They both repeatedly publish the works of known Holocaust deniers. The Cockburn family (counterpunch) has three generations of anti-Semitic history only thinly veiled as anti-Zionism. Justin Raimondo (antiwar) is a 9/11 truther who claims that both the US and Israeli governments commited 9/11.

=

It should also be noted that the Kennedy School pulled its name off that paper, in 2006.R