Sunday, May 20, 2012

This Week's MJR

It's become a Sunday tradition for us to respond to a MJ Rosenberg article, I have come to notice. He wrote a few over the last week but it's the usual complaining about Netanyahu's politics, which is boring. However on Friday he posted his usual disingenuous article about cutting aid to Israel. Unsurprisingly, he is in favor. Even more unsurprisingly, he pretends that it isn't because he simply hates Israel. Let's begin with the most obvious section:
"U.S. "aid to Israel is, by far, the largest chunk of our foreign aid budget. That portion of the budget is increased (an extra billion in this year's budget) while real aid programs to the sick, hungry and impoverished in Africa, Asia, and Latin America is always on the budget cutters' chopping block."
I do not believe, for even one second, that MJ Rosenberg cares one whit for the sick, hungry and impoverished in Africa, Asia and Latin America. Allow me to prove it: Enter "MJ Rosenberg Africa" into Google and what pops out? An article about you-know-who's ties to apartheid-era South Africa. Rosenberg is such a humanitarian he couldn't even spare a single article about the suffering of these poor people in between endless rants about "The Lobby."

Furthermore, if Rosenberg actually cared about the sick hungry and impoverished he would also demand that America cut aid from Arabs such as Egyptians and Palestinians. But he doesn't. Let's not forget either that Israel has sick, hungry and impoverished people, not to mention America! As I have said before, I'm not militantly in favor of American aid to Israel but if you are going to argue against it try to do so from a position of honesty and integrity, if you can. The truth is that aid to Israel from America has value not only in monetary terms but also political. It's a symbol of the friendship between the two countries, a friendship that MJ Rosenberg obviously wants to destroy.

But let's not get distracted. This isn't about the aid at all it's about Rosenberg's favorite punching bag:
"It's no secret why Israel's gifts from the U.S. are immune. The Israel lobby uses its power to direct campaign contributions to ensure that no Member of Congress, or president for that matter, ever dares suggests that Israel take a hit as Americans do."
That's interesting, since I seem to remember a certainly Presidential candidate saying that we should end aid to Israel altogether. Of course he didn't win but he never had much of a chance to begin with. I must once against refer Rosenberg to "The Much Too Promised Land" for many examples of America using aid to Israel as leverage against them.

Though to be perfectly honest I know there isn't much of a point. Rosenberg and his amen corner clearly have adopted this "woe is me" attitude as absolute truth and no amount of fact will ever convince him otherwise. No Congressperson will ever be able to look favorably upon Israel again without Rosenberg declaring that there is a Jew Zionist "AIPAC agent" behind him or her pulling the strings.

Ready for some more spin?
"Anyone who doubts that the lobby keeps the money flowing to Israel through the selective use of campaign contributions should read this transcript. It is from 1992 and it comes from a tape in which the president of AIPAC explains to a potential donor (who is secretly recording the conversation) how AIPAC buys members of Congress -- and more."
There's another term for "buying members of Congress," and "selective use of campaign contributions." Do you want to know what it is? It's called lobbying. Ever since the USA started the process of campaign contributions all kinds of people, businesses and organizations have used their money to get what they want. A small business owner gives his money to whichever candidate he thinks will help him grow his business. But when Jews give money to whichever candidate will help the Jewish state suddenly we get this "buying members of Congress" business.

As for the damning transcript, as Rosenberg admits it's from 1992. The transcript itself is super long so if you have a life just read Thomas Friedman's analysis of it in the second link. Friedman comes right out and says that Steiner was bragging about how exaggerated abilities, and obviously there is no proof that anything Steiner said was actually true. But Rosenberg falls victims to Wizard's First Rule yet again and instantly believes Steiner because Steiner is telling him exactly what he wants to hear. Who cares whether or not it's the truth? That's not so important.

The next bit of the article is devoted to undermining Rosenberg's own claims that no one is allowed to criticize Israel, as he quotes a journalist who thinks that aid to Israel should be reduced or removed. Especially aid given as "extra' for projects like missile defense. Toward the end Rosenberg's hate of Israel cracks for just a second:
"I have no problem with the U.S. helping to fund the Iron Dome project, a missile defense system that has proven effective in defending Israeli civilians from missile attacks. I have a weakness for systems that defend civilians anywhere against missile attacks, including Palestinians who are defenseless against Israeli attacks."
More "buts" follow of course but it's nice to see that Rosenberg hasn't totally lost it. And as for the crack about the Palestinians, you know what's a good defense against Israel? A peace treaty. Just ask Jordan and Egypt. You never know until you try it.


  1. I found this amusing
    My Family's History with Nakba

    He mentions a 44 legged centipede twice as some sort of symbol of defiance. The problem is centipedes always have an odd number of pairs or legs, so you can have 21 pairs for 42 legs or 23 pairs for 46 legs but not 44 legs or even 44 pairs.

    Demonstrates how liars feel the need to embellish stories with concocted details.

  2. I am completely convinced that "MJ" is really an Arab, masquerading as a self hating Jew.


Hey guys we've started to employ a slight comment policy. We used to have completely open comments but then people abused it. So our comment policy is such: No obvious trolling or spamming. And be warned: unlike the Huffington Post we actually enforce our comment policy.