CHOMSKY/BLANKFORT DEBATE ABOUT "ISRAEL LOBBY"
ENOUGH | 05.04.2006 11:53 | Analysis
BLANKFORT:"The rest of his comments on the Mearsheimer-Walt essay are the standard boilerplate that Chomsky has repeated in a half a dozen or more books over the years as one can tell from the age of his references. "
The article of Noam Chomsky :
THE ISRAEL LOBBY ?
Noam Chomsky
ZNet, March 28, 2006
http://www.chomsky.info/articles/20060328.htm
********************************************************
Comment on Chomsky’s "Israel Lobby?" by Jeff Blankfort
Chomsky: "there are far more powerful interests that have a stake in what happens in the Persian Gulf region than does AIPAC [or the Lobby generally], such as the oil companies, the arms industry and other special interests whose lobbying influence and campaign contributions far surpass that of the much-vaunted Zionist lobby and its allied donors to congressional races."
This claim can not be substantiated simply because it isn’t true. In 2002, for example, Haim Saban, the Israel-American who funds the Saban Center at the Brooking Institute and is a big contributor to AIPAC, gave $12.3 million to the Democratic Party, almost as much as the $14 plus million the arms manufacturing PACs gave to both parties. In 2001, Mother Jones listed on its web site, the 400 leading contributors to the 2000 national elections. Seven of the first 10 were Jewish, as were 12 of the top 20 and 125 of the top 250. I didn’t go any further. Were all these Jews supporters of Israel? To some degree it is quite likely, but, as a number of observers over the years have said, in the eyes of Congress, there is only one key issue for American Jews and that is Israel. Now, if "ME Scholar Stephen Zunes," who Chomsky quotes, or Chomsky himself, has evidence that contradicts this, let them present it. I have sent copies of this email to both of them.
The rest of his comments on the Mearsheimer-Walt essay are the standard boilerplate that Chomsky has repeated in a half a dozen or more books over the years as one can tell from the age of his references. The passage of time doesn’t make them any more valid. If people wish to find out more about Chomsky’s position on this issue from a critical standpoint they can read an article I wrote a year ago entitled,
"Damage Control: Noam Chomsky and the Israel-Palestine Conflict".
http://www.leftcurve.org/LC29WebPages/Chomsky.html
Chomsky has not commented, at least publicly, on that article even though he received many requests to do so while acknowledging that this was the reason he elected to respond to the Mearsheimer-Walt essay.
(*AN OTHER ARTICLE FROM JEFF BLANKFORT
The Israel Lobby and the Left: Uneasy Questions
Jeffrey Blankfort
http://www.leftcurve.org/LC27WebPages/IsraelLobby.html
THE ISRAEL LOBBY ?
Noam Chomsky
ZNet, March 28, 2006
http://www.chomsky.info/articles/20060328.htm ********************************************************
Comment on Chomsky’s "Israel Lobby?" by Jeff Blankfort
Chomsky: "there are far more powerful interests that have a stake in what happens in the Persian Gulf region than does AIPAC [or the Lobby generally], such as the oil companies, the arms industry and other special interests whose lobbying influence and campaign contributions far surpass that of the much-vaunted Zionist lobby and its allied donors to congressional races."
This claim can not be substantiated simply because it isn’t true. In 2002, for example, Haim Saban, the Israel-American who funds the Saban Center at the Brooking Institute and is a big contributor to AIPAC, gave $12.3 million to the Democratic Party, almost as much as the $14 plus million the arms manufacturing PACs gave to both parties. In 2001, Mother Jones listed on its web site, the 400 leading contributors to the 2000 national elections. Seven of the first 10 were Jewish, as were 12 of the top 20 and 125 of the top 250. I didn’t go any further. Were all these Jews supporters of Israel? To some degree it is quite likely, but, as a number of observers over the years have said, in the eyes of Congress, there is only one key issue for American Jews and that is Israel. Now, if "ME Scholar Stephen Zunes," who Chomsky quotes, or Chomsky himself, has evidence that contradicts this, let them present it. I have sent copies of this email to both of them.
The rest of his comments on the Mearsheimer-Walt essay are the standard boilerplate that Chomsky has repeated in a half a dozen or more books over the years as one can tell from the age of his references. The passage of time doesn’t make them any more valid. If people wish to find out more about Chomsky’s position on this issue from a critical standpoint they can read an article I wrote a year ago entitled,
"Damage Control: Noam Chomsky and the Israel-Palestine Conflict".
http://www.leftcurve.org/LC29WebPages/Chomsky.html Chomsky has not commented, at least publicly, on that article even though he received many requests to do so while acknowledging that this was the reason he elected to respond to the Mearsheimer-Walt essay.
(*AN OTHER ARTICLE FROM JEFF BLANKFORT
The Israel Lobby and the Left: Uneasy Questions
Jeffrey Blankfort
http://www.leftcurve.org/LC27WebPages/IsraelLobby.html
ENOUGH
Comments
Display the following 20 comments