Does the Israeli lobby have too much power?

[Algorem]

Article published Monday, April 10, 2006

http://www.toledoblade.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060410/COLUMNIST12/604090313/-1/NEWS

Does the Israeli lobby exert undue and unfair pressure on our government and on our lawmakers to extract concessions that would ordinarily be considered against the interests of the United States?

This question has been raised often, but considering its very sensitive nature it is seldom discussed in public let alone debated in Congress. The recent publication of an article by two respected senior academics has brought the issue into focus again. It has caused a predictable stir and raised considerable stink in the rarefied world of American politics and international relations. Why should a foreign country, through its heavily funded and well-greased lobby, dictate American Middle East policy?

The answer is complex and is based on the premise that Israel is a weak and small - but democratic - country surrounded by hostile enemies, that Jewish people have suffered from past crimes and therefore deserve special treatment, and that Israel's conduct has been morally superior to its adversaries' behavior.

However, according to the paper by John Mearsheimer of the department of political science at the University of Chicago and Stephen Walt of the John F. Kennedy School of Government at Harvard University, some of those premises are not valid anymore. Israel is strong economically and militarily and its perceived enemies are weak and in disarray. Some of them of them are dependent on handouts from generous donors. Israel's economy is robust and rivals South Korea and Spain. And it just does not make any sense to keep pumping American taxpayers' dollars into a country that has, against the aid agreement, channeled aid money to finance illegal settlements on occupied Palestinian land. While there was and continues to be a valid moral case for the existence and survival of Israel, the country cannot be given carte blanche beyond that premise...



Dr. S. Amjad Hussain is a Toledo surgeon whose column appears every other week in The Blade.
» E-mail him at [e-mail]
» Read more Dr. Hussain columns at www.toledoblade.com/hussain

[Coastie for Truth]

1. There are lots of powerful lobbies

Here's an example from the powerful on -- if you really want to see misrepresentation of the facts-- check out Wojick's study (paid for the American petroleum Institute)

David E Wojick, Ph.D., PE, offers An Assessment of the Strategic Plan of the U.S. Climate Change Science Program in his December 2003 report on Key Uncertainties, Milestones and Issues: " . . . the Strategic Plan of the U.S. Climate Change Science Program is a significant piece of work. The Strategic Plan successfully targets many of the key uncertainties in climate science, but with significant gaps in the Plan that still need to be filled. Consideration of certain mechanisms of natural variability needs to be expanded, and the network of critical dependencies needs to be defined."

and the conservative Heritage Foundation report on 20th Century Climate Trends

Harvard-Smithsonian scientists Willie Soon and Sallie Baliunas examined the repeated claim that 20th century climate was unusual compared to that of the last 1000 years in the recently published study, "Reconstructing Climatic and Environmental Changes of the Past 1000 Years: A Reappraisal". The study, published in Energy & Environment, analyzed numerous climactic indicators, and specifically notes that many parts of the world showed medieval warming that exceeded the warming observed in the 20th century.

Just this one page on the American Petroleum Institute's web page is a treasure trove of mega-business, anti-environmental lobbying

As an energy professional, I am more concerned about the API then about AIPAC.

[katty]

2. o, such a humorous question! gee, ya think??!!