"I agree with Maureen Dowd in nearly all of her criticism of the foreign policy team around Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan. In specific I agree with her (a) that since there is so little there, there to Romney's own expressed foreign policy views, it is fair to observe that he has surrounded himself with advisors whose well-established past opinions are now reflected in his policy statements, and (b) that those advisors were deeply involved in leading the United States into its costliest foreign-policy error of at least the past 40 years, the invasion of Iraq. Some of the people who fit categories (a) and (b) are Jewish. Some of them are not -- notably including Dick Cheney, who still speaks up regularly to disparage the current administration; Condoleezza Rice (despite her successful service as Secretary of State), who lambasted the administration at the Republican convention; John Bolton; and many others. - Therefore I really disagree with Jeff Goldberg's casting of Dowd's column as one millimeter away from outright anti-Semitism, and I agree with the counter-arguments by Kevin Drum at Mother Jones and by another friend and former colleague, Andrew Sullivan, at the Daily Dish." James Fallows
------------------------------------
I know a little something about being "suppressed," having been there myself. When I used to do foreign policy media appearances, I several times experienced the phenomenon of journalists contacting me to say that their editors or producers or network corporate executives had been contacted by prominent neocons (most of whom worked at right wing think tanks) who told these people various untruths about me. The most common one was that I was or had been a FARA registered agent of the Syrian or Lebanese government and that if the media outlet wanted to quote me, etc. they should state that I was a foreign country's agent. On one occasion a reporter called me from L.A. to angrily demand why I had not told him that I was a foreign agent. On another occasion the director of a major Washington "think tank" (an immigrant from abroad) called to demand that I confess to my "agentry." When I said I would add it to my CV he said he was happy and hung up.
None of this was true. At one point I ran the family foundation of a rich Middle Easterner. The foundation contributed money to the Council on Foreign Relations in New York City for the purpose of funding studies to support the Israeli-Palestinian Peace Process. Henry Siegman was in charge of the process. The resulting papers were given to the State Department and NSC to assist the process. The FARA law specifies that if a foreign entity does anything that seeks to influence US foreign policy then the Americans involved must register under FARA. Corporate counsel advised me that to be in strict compliance with the law I should register under FARA. I took his advice and registered as the "agent" (like any business agent) of the named individual who was the proprietor of the foundation. I was never the "agent" of anything but this man for whom I worked. I de-registered when I ceased to work for the man in 2006.
On another occasion a prominent civilian historian of military/strategic matters confronted me in the Green Room of the Newshour to say that I must be an Anti-semite because I used the term "neocon" and according to this fellow that was mere code for "foreign policy Jew."
So, I know a little something about suppression of freedom of expression and press freedom. The problem with people who do such things is that they act without regard to any sort of code of honor, and indifferent to the truth or falsity of their charges. They are concerned only with controlling "the narrative." Nothing else matters to them.
Maureen Dowd got a taste of it. They will continue to pursue her. pl
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2012/09/maureen-dowd-is-not-an-anti-semite/262485/
The insidious attacks on anyone to deviates from the 'Israeli/neocon" grows and will continue to grow. The uninhibited shamelessness of this campaign has much to do with the failure of too many "responsible parties to call them out. There are several reasons for this, but this is but one instance of a broader trend toward 1) conformist thinking; and 2)sheer cowardice in our public life. I have encountered it myself on a more modest scale since I began "blogging." Yesterday, I had a story put on hold and then buried by the Huffington Post despite having contributed 170 pieces, pro bono, over the past 3+ years. The topic was domestic but touches on some sensitive issues and sensitive toes. The topic and my position are immaterial. It is the intolerance and the readiness to declare beyond the pale even the factually correct and most closely reasoned unconventional analysis that is so worrisome.
Posted by: mbrenner | 18 September 2012 at 08:07 PM
Any sort of code of honor
has left the building.
Posted by: steve g | 18 September 2012 at 08:11 PM
Is not that oft-mentioned insanity quote attributed to Einstein entirely relevant here?
Why on earth would anyone - including Romney - want the same neocon advisors again? The same ones who set this country back decades, not to mention the many lives their ham-handed and maladroit policies and advice cost! That “repeat” would indeed be insanity.
Shooting the messenger, be it Ms. Dowd or our kind host here, is a fallacies’ tactic that all too often works, despite its mendacity. But it becomes ever more effective and egregious when certain groups of people with connections and power – and lack of ethics – attempt to bury the story and truth by trying to damage one’s livelihood by assaulting their integrity. Disgusting at best; indeed extremely dangerous at worst.
Posted by: John | 18 September 2012 at 10:10 PM
Perhaps you should publish the piece on a blog yourself. I have read many of your pieces and would like to read that which is deep-sixed.
Posted by: WP | 18 September 2012 at 10:53 PM
Again, I hope there are enough people in our education system to seriously consider the ancient Confucian Chinese approach - When there are civil matters one must consider the military and when there are military matters one must consider the civil - this is an approach that encourages consideration of all the factors related to survival of the nation. We should include this in our High School curriculums to at least establish an intelligent citizenship that seriously views the directions our so-called leaders take us. We are currently being cheated and this is what resulted in the deaths of our soldiers in Iraq , trillions of dollars wasted, and the ignorant view that the Iraqi's would support our views.
Lets get a life and do away with the Yes sir syndrome in our foreign policy. Finally, we are not Israel and we are not required to follow their policies.
Posted by: stanleyhenning | 18 September 2012 at 11:51 PM
Jewish zionist and the I-Firsters operate like the Mafia.
I ceased caring about the anti semitic slur long ago.
As Jeff Blankford says... 'if it's true it isn't anti semitic'.
Practice calling the zios ''Anti- American''. Play offense, not defense.
Posted by: Cal | 19 September 2012 at 12:19 AM
Actually IMO it is not the suppression of critical thinking that is limited to certain persons who have misled the country in the past that worries me but the fact that the unanimity of most Americans in the ignorance of most in their past and the history of others and their cultures and languages.
Personally I read this blog and its wonderful range of comments to learn not to teach. But hey only 70 so I do have time brother to still distill meaning from my various existences.
What Dowd has hit on is that Romney really has demonstrated by his selection of advisors is that he is just another in the long line of unprepared Presidential "Candidates" who think that ignorance of foreign policy is a strength and they can learn it all on the fly.
The proof of course is how fast the USA has discarded the advantages it held in its world position in August 1945 and by 2045 few will even be mentioning the USA on the world stage. Many many both Republicans and DEMS have contributed to this state of affairs perhaps stating with those who pretended that only the oil and not the people and cultures and languages and religions of MENA were of continued significance to human history which of course has NOT ended.
Posted by: William R. Cumming | 19 September 2012 at 12:30 AM
Neocon means foreign policy Jew?
Well that works for the Millibands, but it doesnt work as well for William Hague. It works for Pearle but doesnt work for Dick Cheney. Let me know when you see a Bush in a kipur.
Posted by: Harry | 19 September 2012 at 08:34 AM
IMO , President Obama must be re-elected solely on the basis that a neocon ascension to power will once again plunge us into death & chaos in another unholy & bloody misadventure overseas. IMO the coming conflict with Iran -should the neocons get to pull the levers again will make Irak look like a walk in the park .
Maureen Dowd is wonderful - and I bet she can give out as good as she gets .
Posted by: Alba Etie | 19 September 2012 at 09:41 AM
Col Lang
Given the way the neocons strive to suppress any dissent - is there any meaningful way to push back against their agit prop ?
Posted by: Alba Etie | 19 September 2012 at 09:43 AM
Suppressed - Maureen, come on, after that column implicating that fast talking slithering cheese nibbler she comes out today with a gem on Mittens and the line I liked "Romney once more showed his foreign policy jejuneness". The woman is a Wordsmither from way back taught by the Catholic Nuns who will eat you alive for crap like this, I actually feel bad now for the cheese nibbler trying to rally under his mothers skirt.
Posted by: Bobo | 19 September 2012 at 11:36 AM
Col Lang, straight from the horse's mouth Bishop Romney speaking at private equity manager Marc Leder estate,he felt at ease with those who are destroying what's left of our "free markets" with high frequency trading and naked short selling. Here are his views on Iran: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z5nptkXZ7UQ&list=UUbWB33FQvFiV0Pq9Calkgzw&index=7&feature=plcp
Furthemore, I think it's fair to ask if Bibi's "consultants" will run more than just his campaign:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X8g3ZqTqKs4&list=UUbWB33FQvFiV0Pq9Calkgzw&index=12&feature=plcp
Regarding economic affair Mittens seems to think Bain slave wages are the way to go. It puts into context his plan (Ryan plan) to cut the american standard of living by 25 to 30 percent: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l2J61379sEs
Posted by: Augustin L | 19 September 2012 at 12:14 PM
Having read Dowd in the past, I am sure she will take on "dull" Romney's pals now until the election, as "Heaven has no rage...nor Hell a fury like a woman scorned." (Wm. Congreve, 1697) With her red hair aflame!!!
Posted by: Al Spafford | 19 September 2012 at 12:24 PM
Here is the link http://www.centredaily.com/2012/09/19/3341726/maureen-dowd-let-them-eat-crab.html
Posted by: Al Spafford | 19 September 2012 at 12:32 PM
Harry,
Actually does does not work for 'the Millibands' (sic). While David Miliband is certainly a Zionist, I have seen no evidence whatsoever that his brother is.
According to the Wikipedia entry on Ed Miliband:
"His mother, Marion Kozak, a human rights campaigner and early CND member, survived the Holocaust thanks to being protected by Roman Catholic Poles."
AS 'New Left' intellectuals, Marion and her husband Raph Miliband were old enemies of mine. But it seems to me probable that they were honest people, according to their lights. I can see no evidence that their younger son is one of those who turned from a rabid communist radical into a Zionist fanatic.
And nothing that Ed Miliband has done, since he became Labour leader, seems to me to merit his being bracketed along with serious scum like Richard Perle.
Posted by: David Habakkuk | 19 September 2012 at 01:20 PM
WP
Glad to learn that I have at least one reader. I'd be glad to sent you (or anyone else) these pieces directly. The Colonel understandably frowns upon anyone using SST for self-promotion, much less advertising. So I'll just mention that you can find my address at the University of Pittsburgh site or the University of Texas site.
To legitimize this post, here's one small topical point. The neo-con perspective on American foreign relations gains strength from its overlapping in some critical respects with the hard nationalist perspective personified by Cheney and Rumsfeld. They are less Woodrow Wilson than Teddy Roosevelt. Look at the members of the American foreign policy establishment generally and you'll find a remarkable similarity of outlook as to the American indispensability, exceptionalism, virtue and interest in managing the affairs of the globe. Despite the flux in the world over the past 22 years, none of this has been seriously rethought. 9/11 affects this reality in 2 ways: it provided an all-embracing justification for an assertive across-the-board foreign policy; and it demonized Muslims in ways that established an identity among the terrorist threat, Islamic extremism, and Israeli interests. Obviously, that blurred the line between neo-cons and other tendencies - not just but especially the hard nationalists.
Posted by: mbrenner | 19 September 2012 at 02:33 PM
Relevant:
http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2012/09/18/bibis_blunder
"And if the myth survives the drubbing the facts are giving it this fall, well, then it will at least prove once and for all that it is what many of us, like Jeff Goldberg and I, have been arguing for a long, long time: The Israel Lobby is just another boogie monster cooked up to serve the nasty agenda of people all too eager to sacrifice the truth on the altar of their prejudices. "
The people pulling the levers don't like being pointed out.
Posted by: Tyler | 19 September 2012 at 03:25 PM
Also: that's Maureen Dowd? If I wasn't married, I'd look into how to become her cabana boy.
Posted by: Tyler | 19 September 2012 at 03:50 PM
Tyler: Notice the author of that piece defeats the ultimate strawman ("the Israel Lobby controls everything") to deflect the real argument/complaint: "The Israel Lobby is too powerful."
Posted by: Matthew | 19 September 2012 at 05:24 PM
One of the few posts you've done here that I agree with! lol
Posted by: Al Spafford | 19 September 2012 at 08:59 PM
Ah yes Tyler she is Red Headed Beauty ..
Posted by: Alba Etie | 20 September 2012 at 04:32 AM
Henning 先生的見解果然是鶴立雞群。
[Mr. Henning, your insight truly stands out, that of a crane amongst a coop of chickens.]
Posted by: YT | 20 September 2012 at 09:27 AM
RE: "the unanimity of most Americans in the ignorance of most in their past and the history of others and their cultures and languages."
Mr. Cumming, sir,
The tragedy of many folks not only in America.
These days, [the imparting of History] only a tool for politicos.
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/world_now/2012/09/protests-hong-kong-national-education-classes.html
Posted by: YT | 20 September 2012 at 09:31 AM
"Heaven has no rage...nor Hell a fury like a woman scorned."
Really Al?
I recall a certain 1/4 Jew, 3/4 German (Austrian, really) guy who sparked a conflict so horrid & led to the misery of millions that now we still fear the neo-inheritors of his 'legacy'.
& he was a dude who had not the love of even a woman in his youth, so sayeth the Historians....
THAT was hellava RAGE/FURY.
Women unloved, IMO, just destroy themselves.
Posted by: YT | 20 September 2012 at 09:39 AM
I thought Blondes have all the fun?
Posted by: YT | 20 September 2012 at 09:42 AM