Adverts/Promotions

CHL Properties When Slaves Become the Masters Journalism Diversity Fund Stop War On Iran

Disclaimer: MPACUK does not select these automated ads.


Subscribe to our newsletter:


'Jewish Lobby monopolize American policy' says Oxford Professor Print E-mail
Wednesday, 10 October 2007

israel_lobby.jpgA top British scientist drew fire from American Jewish organizations on Monday, after remarking that the American Jewish lobby is "monopolizing American foreign policy."


Professor Richard Dawkins, a leading evolutionary biologist at Oxford University, was quoted by the British Guardian newspaper as saying last week: "When you think about how fantastically successful the Jewish lobby has been, though, in fact, they are less numerous I am told - religious Jews anyway - than atheists and (yet they) more or less monopolize American foreign policy as far as many people can see. So if atheists could achieve a small fraction of that influence, the world would be a better place."


Dawkins is currently touring the US to promote an atheist organization he helped set up. His visit is aimed at curbing the influence of religion in America.


Responding to the remarks, Abe Foxman, National Director of the ADL, told Ynetnews: "This is classical anti-Semitism. Just because it's wrapped around an issue of atheism doesn't make it any less virulent, anti-Semitic and dangerous."


Malcom Hoenlein, Executive Vice Chairman of the Conference of Presidents of Major American Organizations, said that Dawkins' comments show "that even great scientists can demonstrate ignorance and fall victim to disinformation and misinformation, either willingly or unwillingly."


"I can't judge whether it's anti-Semitism," Hoenlein told Ynetnews, "but this shows the danger of what I call the poisoning of the elite, and how this impact spreads within the intellectual community, and then trickles down to the general populace," he added.


Hoenlein drew parallels between Dawkins's comments and a recent attack on the American Jewish lobby by US academics Stephen Walt and John Mearsheimer, who co-authored a book on 'the Israel lobby.'


"We see it in the Walt-Mearsheimer phenomenon. The marginal fringes are increasingly acceptable in mainstream. That he would express such a view is a reflection of this," Hoenlein said.

London Times columnist Daniel Finkelstein, who is Jewish, also expressed concern at the apparent mainstreaming of Judeophobic sentiments. "I have just come across the most extraordinary statement by Richard Dawkins. It is right there on the Guardian website without a sentence even questioning it... Dawkins, a liberal hero, believes that Jews control world power. And, judging from the Guardian, it is now a part of mainstream debate to say so. Perhaps you think I am overreacting, but I am a little bit frightened," Finkelstein wrote.


Five years ago, Dawkins reportedly added his name to letter calling for an academic boycott against Israelis, and was quoted by the Guardian then as saying that he "can no longer in good conscience continue to cooperate with official Israeli institutions, including universities."

Source: http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7...457718,00.html




Digg!Reddit!Del.icio.us!Live!Facebook!Technorati!Spurl!Furl!Blogmarks!Yahoo!

Readers have left 32 comments.
JWD: Quote

MPAC UK is an organisation concerned with promoting to rights of Muslims.

Why are you so obsessed with Jews?
(1) 2007-10-10 00:56:58
@ JWD: Quote

why are so obsessed with mpac?

man, i hope your boss at work doesn't catch you.

Hmm, i wonder who your boss is...
(2) 2007-10-10 07:20:51
you muppet: Quote

JWD: Why ar mpacuk obsessed with Jews? way before MPACUK came about did you ever read a positive article from Melanie Phillips about Muslims?

Or how about the constant demonisation by the Jewish owned Express aimed at Muslims.

Or Barbara Amiels, attacks on Muslims when her crook husband owned the Telegraph?

I can go on, the Jewish community have allowed its membes to demonise Muslims for decades and now MPACUK tell Muslims what is going on, you have the nerve to point at MPACUK?

Perspective please.

(3) 2007-10-10 09:34:51
JWD: Quote

"I can go on, the Jewish community have allowed its membes to demonise Muslims for decades "

Antisemitic bile. You are trying to convey that demonisation of Muslims is a Jewish policy and that part of this Jewish Conspiracy has been to put forward Jews who carry out the policy.

I happen to notice that comments about Islam appear ALL OVER THE PRESS - unless you are next going to state that "Jews control the media".

Since MPAC UK is to do with the rights of Muslims in the UK then what have three articles about Jews got to do with it.

Since you suggest that Jews write articles disparaging Muslims (by conspiracy) then all your defence of MPAC UK conveys is "we are doing to Jews what we say Jews are doing to Muslims".

Would you like to confirm that YOU believe this is why MPAC UK has published three articles about Jews?
(4) 2007-10-10 10:02:30
roadkill: Quote

Is MPACUK so obsessed with Jews, OR is it obsessed with American foreign policy influenced by the powerful US Jewish lobby?
American foreign policy that directly effects millions of Muslims. After all, MPACUK is concerned with Muslim affairs.
(5) 2007-10-10 10:31:42
Rob: Quote

The reason why mpac has started a blog on this is to show that despite the best efforts of zionists to restrict freedom of speech.
there are people who still have the courage to say things as they see them.
what mpac is doing is highlighting the hypocrisy of zionists who claim eternal victimhood to be their right,yet they go about slandering muslims the way they accuse others of doing to jews.
as soon as you show the clout that jewish groups carry the big stick of anti-semitism is waved about.
freedom of speech is a two way street,so it is best to think before engaging the mouth or hands.
(6) 2007-10-10 10:31:58
you muppet: Quote

[quote=JWD]"I can go on, the Jewish community have allowed its membes to demonise Muslims for decades "

Antisemitic bile. You are trying to convey that demonisation of Muslims is a Jewish policy and that part of this Jewish Conspiracy has been to put forward Jews who carry out the policy.
quote]

Are you mad? Al Qaida is a organisation set up and run by Muslims? their ideolgy the same, you are not Islamophobic if you state that, you are are islamophobic if you try to equate them to all Muslims.
In which case, saying that the Jewish community have allowed its writers, politicians and thought leaders to demonise Muslims is not Anti semetic, it is a fact.

And regardless of what you think MPACUK should or should not do, Palestine is an issue for Muslims and if Jews, Christians, or Martians influence policy towards that then Muslims have a legitimate interst.

This article clearly talks about the baleful influence that Jews have when it comes to supporting Israel, and how organised they are. Nothing anti semetic about that, just factual.

For once get a grip and accept that the Jewish lobbies have had an effect on Policy.
(7) 2007-10-10 10:33:47
JWD: Quote

Is MPACUK so obsessed with Jews, OR is it obsessed with American foreign policy influenced by the powerful US Jewish lobby?
American foreign policy that directly effects millions of Muslims. After all, MPACUK is concerned with Muslim affairs.
— roadkill


You answered your OWN question when you mentioned "powerful US JEWISH Lobby".

You could have said "Israeli Lobby" like Mearsheimer's book coded it. He made plain on a recent TV programme he NEVER said "Jewish Lobby". But you did? Why?
(8) 2007-10-10 10:34:51
JWD: Quote

why are so obsessed with mpac?

man, i hope your boss at work doesn't catch you.

Hmm, i wonder who your boss is...
— @ JWD


If you do that then I will tell your mum you are spending all your pocket money in Internet cafe's!
(9) 2007-10-10 10:36:51
you muppet: Quote

JWD when did saying Jewish Lobby become anti semetic?

Are you part of a jewish lobby trying to silence debate and deny their is a jewish lobby?

If the world can use the word Muslim lobby, Muslim terrorist, Islamist this and that. Then to call an organised group of Jews a lobby is not anti semetic. It is a fact.
(10) 2007-10-10 10:41:48
Syed: Quote

When people talk about a 'lobby', they're not talking about a single monolithic entity (or 'conspiracy' in JWD's language), but rather it's a convenient phrase that represents the various organisations that have similar goals (but which may not agree on methodology).

Thus the term 'Jewish Lobby' is used when members of these groups are exclusively Jewish, and 'Israel Lobby' is used when there is a mixture.

There is nothing anti-Semitic about either term, but especially in the context of this article which quotes Dawkins and is related to his 'religion vs atheism' debates.
(11) 2007-10-10 10:50:54
George: Quote

Professor Dawkins' views are opinions only - not facts. He is entitled to air them, lthough from the quote in the article they wouldn't pass any serious academic test. Similarly,others are entitled to dismiss him as being wrong.

It's an age-old accusation (or at least from the days of the forged Protocols of the Elders of Zion) that there is a world conspiracy of Jews to undermine the non-Jewish world. This translates into modern times in there being an overly powerful lobby, particularly in the US. If anyone had studied US politics they would know that it is based on lobbying. Congressman on Capitol Hill are pursued by interest groups. Sounds democratic? No.
But there are many lobby groups in the US many of them far more powerful than the Israel/Jewish lobby. The National Rifle Association is the biggest. Then there are the arms dealers in the Military Industrial Complex, the Irish lobby, Choice lobby, anti-abortion lobby (lethal and impossible to ignore by Republican or Democrat), the Christian (Bible Belt ) lobby, and let's not forget the Oilmen. That's US politics. All these groups lobby on behalf of their interests. Why should it be so sinister therefore if Jews/pro-Israelis lobby too? Are they supposed to be above this kind of thing? They lobby to ensure the continued support of the US - moral, financial and military. So? Plenty of other countries get that kind of support from the US - both Muslim and non-Muslim.

The problem is when people exaggerate the degree of influence and use it to push a racist agenda (that Jews control the media, banks etc etc) because it fits in with their prejudices about the Jews.
And if the Jews were so powerful how come there are only a few left (when the population had it not been for the Nazis should be around 250 million)? How come they are in a constant fight for their survival (at least as far as Israel is concerned)?

There is no sinister plot to take over the world - just using the same methods as others to maintain support. Or is it that the US would act completely differently were it not for the lobby? I don't think so.
(12) 2007-10-10 11:41:43
JWD: Quote

The meaning of words and phrases evolves to take on different definitions based on colloquial use and common useage at different times.

The "Israeli Lobby" cannot be called "The Jewish Lobby" because MORE non-Jews lobby in favour of supporting Israel than do Jews.

Hence, the reason why "Jewish Lobby" has become part of teh current useage is to actually hitch on to the usual Antisemitic hooks of "money, power, control" ascribed to being Jewish.

"Jewish Lobby" is ascribed super-human powers BECAUSE it is staffed exclusively by Jews, is the implication.

Perhaps someone would like to explain to us what a "Jewish Lobby" does that is different to an "Israeli Lobby".

If you say "Jewish Lobby calls for war with Iran" then you suggest that ONLY Jews call for a war with Iran.

If you say that "The Israeli Lobby calls for war with Iran" you are signalling that many non-Jews are calling for it.

There is a big difference in how you use those organisation names and with what intent.
(13) 2007-10-10 11:57:28
Taz: Quote

JWD - A Zionist "trolls" on MPACUK's website whinging about exposing the Zionist looby and then plays the semantics game to infer that MPACUK are anti-Semitic. Hmm - interesting that JWD ignores the actual topic of the article and tries to play the victim. A classic Zionist ploy. Defend the illegal occupation of Palestine JWD. Let's see how far yu get now that the goys know your game.
(14) 2007-10-10 12:56:33
you muppet: Quote


George,


Thanks for your responce, it beats some of the paranoid rants of JWD.

Nobody is saying Jew's can't have a lobby, the question is what is its effect? If the Jewish lobby dictate policy in this case in regards to Palestine. What is the consequence for Britian? For British Muslims and Palestinians? Those people who try to silence a legitimate debate on a Jewish, in fact only end up perpetuating the myths about Jews.

Some people do exagerate the influence of the Jewish Lobby, but at the same time a flippant disregard of its influence is not accurate either. In regards to Iraq

(15) 2007-10-10 13:05:11
you muppet: Quote


George
sorry posted with out finishing
(16) 2007-10-10 13:05:31
you muppet: Quote

IN regards to iraq the Jewish lobby worked to ensure America did go to war, it is also working hard to ensure that America confront Iran. That dosnt mean it is monolythic, it dosnt mean all Jews, and certainly dosnt mean ónly´ Jews. But an awful lot of Jewish Zionist are involved in pushing policies that are pro Israeli and anti Muslim.
(17) 2007-10-10 13:07:28
JWD: Quote

IN regards to iraq the Jewish lobby worked to ensure America did go to war, it is also working hard to ensure that America confront Iran. That dosnt mean it is monolythic, it dosnt mean all Jews, and certainly dosnt mean ónly´ Jews. But an awful lot of Jewish Zionist are involved in pushing policies that are pro Israeli and anti Muslim.
— you muppet


The false claim that Israel lobbied for the USA to attack Iraq was exposed by Mearshiemer himself, the author of the Israe;o Lobby book.

On National Public Radio he gave away the fact that Israel did NOT lobby for Iraq. They lobbied for Iran.

Quote:
But in an interview on NPR’s On Point program, hosted by Tom Ashbrook, Mearsheimer lets the truth slip out – early on the administration itself was determined to go to war against Saddam, and once the Israelis understood the die was cast, they decided not to contradict their most important ally. After admitting this, Mearsheimer suddenly remembers that for more than a year he has been making exactly the opposite case, and so he immediately tries to backtrack, but there is no doubt about what he said. Here is the segment (click here to listen):

Ashbrook: The argument’s been made that Iran is Israel’s greater fear, so if the Israel Lobby were so powerful, why would the US have gone into Iraq? That’s not the number one Israeli concern. Is there a contradiction then John, in you having described Iraq as the result of Israeli lobby influence?

Mearsheimer: No, Tom. It’s quite clear that in early 2002 – now remember we went into Iraq in March 2003. In early 2002 when the Israelis caught wind of the fact that we were seriously thinking about doing Iraq, that they came to Washington and told us that they would prefer that we do Iran first. The Israelis very clearly thought that Iran was a greater threat than Iraq. It’s not that they were uninterested in having us effect regime change in Iraq and Syria, it’s just that they preferred Iran. But once they came to understand that Iraq would be the first operation, and we would subsequently deal with Iran and Syria, they embraced the idea of attacking Iraq, although they continually reminded us that we had to do Iran and Syria afterwards.
----------------

So, they told the USA not to waste time with Iraq. But when the USA couldn't be presuaded then Israel went along and supported its ally, just at the UK did.

If the "Israeli/Jewish Lobby" is so powerful how come they couldn't presuade the USA NOT to attack Iraq?

How interesting when myths get busted by the person who created the myth.
(18) 2007-10-10 13:19:08
JWD: Quote

IN regards to iraq the Jewish lobby worked to ensure America did go to war, it is also working hard to ensure that America confront Iran. That dosnt mean it is monolythic, it dosnt mean all Jews, and certainly dosnt mean ónly´ Jews. But an awful lot of Jewish Zionist are involved in pushing policies that are pro Israeli and anti Muslim.
— you muppet


Name me a policy that is pushed by the Israeli/Jewish lobby that is 'anti-Muslim'.

Of course, you will perceive ANY policy that has an effect on Muslims as being 'anti-Muslim'.

Would taking-out Iran be 'anti-Muslim'?
(19) 2007-10-10 13:21:14
you muppet: Quote

IN regards to iraq the Jewish lobby worked to ensure America did go to war, it is also working hard to ensure that America confront Iran. That dosnt mean it is monolythic, it dosnt mean all Jews, and certainly dosnt mean ónly´ Jews. But an awful lot of Jewish Zionist are involved in pushing policies that are pro Israeli and anti Muslim.
— JWD


Name me a policy that is pushed by the Israeli/Jewish lobby that is 'anti-Muslim'.

Of course, you will perceive ANY policy that has an effect on Muslims as being 'anti-Muslim'.

Would taking-out Iran be 'anti-Muslim'?
— you muppet


Yes.
(20) 2007-10-10 13:35:17
George: Quote

you muppet (an awkward form of address)

I do think, however (and despite my reasonable tone) that the strength of the Israel lobby is exaggerated. Bush went to war in Iraq (so we are told) to free up oil supplies, finish off the job his old man had started and generally kick some butt after 9/11. The US won't attack/nuke Iran at Israel's behest - Israel will have to do it herself if it looks necessary - and will no doubt be villified by many (muslim countries and non) for their aggression (as happened when they rightly took out Saddam's fledgling nuclear capability)
A very good example of how the lobby doesn't work as is claimed - the Lebanon war last year. Israel lost it because of public opinion fuelled by gross media bias (fake photos etc) and the resulting pressure from western governments.

Also I do think it is possible to go to war with a Muslim country without it being an anti-Muslim war. Or not?
(21) 2007-10-10 14:04:23
shan: Quote

As muslims we have a problem with the policies being used by the zionists in palestine to steal and oppress the palestinians.
in regard to zionists who happen to be jews having a agenda against muslims or following a agenda which is anti-muslim,then that point can be given credence as some papers who sensationalise and exxagerate news itemns in relation to issues which effect the muslims are headed by or articles written by zionists who happen to be jews.
if i am right rose flemimg or vice versa he is of jewish extraction,the daily express has writers and editors who belong in the same category.
as fellow human beings i have nothing against people of the jewish faith,its a pity zionists jews do not recognise what they are doing with their blatant propaganda.
(22) 2007-10-10 14:05:04
JWD: Quote

As muslims we have a problem with the policies being used by the zionists in palestine to steal and oppress the palestinians.
in regard to zionists who happen to be jews having a agenda against muslims or following a agenda which is anti-muslim,then that point can be given credence as some papers who sensationalise and exxagerate news itemns in relation to issues which effect the muslims are headed by or articles written by zionists who happen to be jews.
if i am right rose flemimg or vice versa he is of jewish extraction,the daily express has writers and editors who belong in the same category.
as fellow human beings i have nothing against people of the jewish faith,its a pity zionists jews do not recognise what they are doing with their blatant propaganda.
— shan


How interesting that you read an article you don't like and then get out your "Jew" and "Zionist" stickers.

I see you outed "Rose Fleming". Is that like MPAC UK 'outing' Lorna Fitzsimons as a Jewish MP during an election - when she is in fact NOT!

Why are you so obsessed with discovering "Jews" and "Zionists". I think I know why.
(23) 2007-10-10 14:29:50
George: Quote

Shan:

You said: "...rose flemming is of Jewish extraction, the daily express has writers and editors who belong in the same category [jewish extraction]"

What you seem to be saying (correct me if I am wrong) is that a Jewish writer can't be trusted unless he/she is anti-zionist? That it is their Jewishness which renders their views invalid?
Does that also apply to some Muslim commentators too, that they are not to be believed because of their 'extraction'???
(24) 2007-10-10 14:36:10
JWD: Quote

As muslims we have a problem with the policies being used by the zionists in palestine to steal and oppress the palestinians.
in regard to zionists who happen to be jews having a agenda against muslims or following a agenda which is anti-muslim,then that point can be given credence as some papers who sensationalise and exxagerate news itemns in relation to issues which effect the muslims are headed by or articles written by zionists who happen to be jews.
if i am right rose flemimg or vice versa he is of jewish extraction,the daily express has writers and editors who belong in the same category.
as fellow human beings i have nothing against people of the jewish faith,its a pity zionists jews do not recognise what they are doing with their blatant propaganda.
— shan


You seem very concerned with articles that you say show Muslim in a bad light, and that they are mostly/generally written by Jews/Zionists.

What do you make of this BBC report of a current terrorist trial? Is it BBC/Zionist biased, or reporting the facts from court http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7037525.stm
(25) 2007-10-10 14:41:11
JWD: Quote

Shan:

You said: "...rose flemming is of Jewish extraction, the daily express has writers and editors who belong in the same category [jewish extraction]"

What you seem to be saying (correct me if I am wrong) is that a Jewish writer can't be trusted unless he/she is anti-zionist? That it is their Jewishness which renders their views invalid?
Does that also apply to some Muslim commentators too, that they are not to be believed because of their 'extraction'???
— George


If we were to provide the examples of Mohammed Al Dura fake and "500 killed at Jenin" falsehood then we might be led to a conclusion about honesty in reporting.
(26) 2007-10-10 14:43:23
RSD: Quote

Did any of you actually read this article? Mr. Dawkins is calling for Atheists to dominate US Foreign Policy for the betterment of the world.
(27) 2007-10-10 15:07:52
shan: Quote

I am sure people would read the article and comment if zionists such as jwd would allow people to stick to the topic.
instead of turning every blog into a slanging match.
everything that shows jews as criminals is fake, everything that shows up muslims as suspects is proven guilt.
the question was asked can you show proof of anti-muslim behaviour by jews,when that is shown as usual zionists as trained do not accept the point but move onto further points.
(28) 2007-10-10 15:39:16
RSD: Quote

Shan et al.
If Mr. Dawkins comments are anti-semitic, they are also Islamophobic and anti any religiously based political values. He chose to identify the Jewish Lobby to illustrate his claims for atheism and to get attention without offending too many people.
(29) 2007-10-10 17:10:01
JWD: Quote

I am sure people would read the article and comment if zionists such as jwd would allow people to stick to the topic.
instead of turning every blog into a slanging match.
everything that shows jews as criminals is fake, everything that shows up muslims as suspects is proven guilt.
the question was asked can you show proof of anti-muslim behaviour by jews,when that is shown as usual zionists as trained do not accept the point but move onto further points.
— shan


The 2nd comment of the thread isn't mine and it says "Does you boss know you post here".

So who changed the topic?

How do Zionists get 'trained'?

Shall I ask how Islamists get brainwashed?
(30) 2007-10-10 17:27:42
shan: Quote

go to your first comment on this blog and you shall see instead of talkign about what dawkins said.
you stated why are you so obsessed with jews,this being addressed to mpac.
at least have the courtesy to check your own comments as it seems you engage your hands before your brains and thus forget what you said.
neve rto answer a question but iwth another question,always keep moving the boundaries of the debate thus attempt to muddyt he waters and forget the real topic.
to keep changing names on blogs and never to admit your own short comings at all times.
(31) 2007-10-10 17:39:32
JWD: Quote

go to your first comment on this blog and you shall see instead of talkign about what dawkins said.
you stated why are you so obsessed with jews,this being addressed to mpac.
at least have the courtesy to check your own comments as it seems you engage your hands before your brains and thus forget what you said.
neve rto answer a question but iwth another question,always keep moving the boundaries of the debate thus attempt to muddyt he waters and forget the real topic.
to keep changing names on blogs and never to admit your own short comings at all times.
— shan


Yes, I checked my opening comment and the article is about "The Jewish Lobby" and my question was "Why are you obsessed with Jews".

What is your point about?
(32) 2007-10-10 20:43:06
The author or administrator has closed this item for comments.