26 March, 2006

Scholarship Denier Mercer Vents Loxist Rage as Truth About Sick, Vicious Israel Spreads Around the Globe

Posted by alex in academia, double standards, jewish hate & hypocrisy, loxism, media control, Neocons, studies at 6:16 pm | Permanent Link

Jew Mercer (Israeli, S. African, Canadian, American … and Jew evermore …)

However you slice it, the half-baked folderol that is “The Israeli Lobby” isn’t “scholarship.” Scholarship appeals to evidence and reason. Theirs is a randomly yoked together bit of pamphleteering in the postmodern tradition – its authors don’t reason or argue. Instead, they propagandize …


What, again, is that quote from Hitler suggesting that a day you’re not vilified in the media is a day wasted …?

Harvard hucksters hype Israeli pseudo-historians
Worldnet Daily ^ | 3-26-06 | Ilana Mercer

Posted on 03/26/2006 7:00:42 AM PST by SJackson

Harvard hucksters hype Israeli pseudo-historians

Stephen Walt and John Mearsheimer, authors of “The Israeli Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy,” have been touted by some in the press as “two of America’s top scholars.” The academic dean of Harvard’s Kennedy School of Government and his co-author of the University of Chicago may occupy prized perches, but that doesn’t make them scholars.

However you slice it, the half-baked folderol that is “The Israeli Lobby” isn’t “scholarship.” Scholarship appeals to evidence and reason. Theirs is a randomly yoked together bit of pamphleteering in the postmodern tradition – its authors don’t reason or argue. Instead, they propagandize, promoting as axiomatic a belief in the superiority of certain moral or political positions, one of which is the idea of Israel’s foul founding.

A scholar, moreover, builds his case. These two declare their case open and shut on page 2 of the screed. “Readers may reject our conclusions,” they grandiosely state, “but the evidence on which they rest is not controversial.”

The logically invalid argument from authority undergirds “The Israeli Lobby” – and in particular, our authors’ assertion that the facts they present “are not in serious dispute among scholars,” because these rely “heavily on the work of Israeli scholars and journalists.”

Jews – Israelis included – are leaders of the new anti-Semitism, which consists in the demonization of Israelis (often described as Nazis vis-à-vis the Palestinians) and the delegitimization of the Jewish state. Blaming Israel or the Israeli lobby for America’s foreign policy blunders and alleging that Israel was founded through systematic ethnic cleansing and land theft are the centerpieces of their campaign.

Because a Jew – Israeli or other – has espoused these positions against Israel, Harvard’s Tweedledumb and UChicago’s Tweedledumber would like their readers to believe that they must be true. The Capos of the concentration camps were Jews; did their Jewishness make their depredations against their own people correct or commendable?

While our “scholars” both demonize and delegitimize Israel, they are mere dwarfs standing on the shoulders of Jewish giants. Noam Chomsky, “The Godfather,” Steven and Hillary Rose, Norman Finkelstein, Joel Kovel, Tanya Reinhart in Tel Aviv, and Michael Cohen in Britain – these are but a few of the new anti-Semitism’s leading Jewish lights.

The real rock stars of the Israeli intelligentsia – Israel’s own Ward Churchills – are the pretentiously self-styled “New Historians.” This is a group of popular far-left fabricators (one of whom facetiously boasted: “We perform at weddings and bar mitzvas”), who’ve cocked a snook at the liberal country in which they’ve thrived, so as to gain admittance into the fashionable Palestinian pantheon.

They claim “Zionist imperialists” cheated Palestinian peasants out of their land (which was, in fact, bought fairly and legally), and that these interlopers conducted a systematic and deliberate policy of ethnic cleansing with respect to the “indigenous population.” (There undoubtedly have been sporadic acts of aggression and even terror against Palestinian Arabs by Jews during the War of Independence. But there is simply no historical evidence that they have been the result of a concerted or systematic campaign.)

The “New Historians'” rendition is fast becoming the received wisdom on Israel’s history in the court of public opinion. This historical revision of Israel’s birth, incidentally, resembles the way the left has distorted and reduced America’s history to a narrative of the oppressed and the excluded. As Efraim Karsh, professor of Mediterranean Studies at the University of London, has noted, “Partisan rewriting of history has apparently become the accepted norm in those fields of research dealing with highly contentious political, social and historical phenomena, such as the Arab-Israeli conflict.”

The Harvard philippic defers to the “New Historians'” most flamboyant and fishy associate, Benny Morris. In fact, it was Morris’ bowdlerization of Prime Minister David Ben-Gurion’s words that first prompted Karsh to investigate the fraud perpetrated by these hip historians and expose it in his masterful book, “Fabricating Israeli History: The ‘New Historians.'”

While perusing the English-language version of Morris’ doctored-to-death book, “The Birth of the Palestinian Refugee Problem,” Karsh happened upon a quote from a letter Ben-Gurion wrote to his son, allegedly stating that, “we must expel the Arabs and take their places.” Karsh “recalled the letter saying something quite different.” On examination, it transpired that the Hebrew text read as follows: “We do not wish, we do not need to expel Arabs and take their place. … All our aspiration is built on the assumption that there is enough room in the country for ourselves and the Arabs.”

Initially Karsh, a gentleman and a scholar, read Morris charitably, attributing the mangled citation to an innocent mistranslation or typo. Still, to allay his worst fears, he proceeded to plumb all primary source-material Morris used to shore-up his allegations.

Parroted by Walt and Mearsheimer, Morris has charged that the “Zionists” systematically “drove Palestinians into exile,” and “that the Zionist and Israeli establishments have systematically falsified archival source material to conceal the Jewish state’s less-than-immaculate conception.”

It turns out Morris was projecting. For, as an incredulous Karsh discovered, “Morris not only fails to show rewriting by [the Israeli founding fathers], but he himself is the one who systematically falsifies evidence.”

Indeed, “there is scarcely a document that he does not twist.” As Karsh demonstrates in detail, Morris and his cohorts have “violated every tenet of bona fide research”: They misrepresent documents, resort to partial quotes, withhold evidence, make false assertions and rewrites original documents. Such is the incompetence of these Arabists that they even neglect Arab archival material, relying almost exclusively on Western – often only secondary – sources.

“Through documentary manipulation,” observes Karsh, the Israeli “scholars” (lauded by Walt and Mearsheimer) have turned “Israeli history on its head.”

Although Karsh has been attacked personally and stigmatized, the blistering, textual bitch-slap he dealt these charlatans remains unassailable. A dejected Morris even wrote to the Times Literary Supplement to admit that “Karsh has a point. My treatment of transfer thinking before 1948 was, indeed, superficial.”

The Arab-Israeli debate, however, doesn’t hinge on the “professional and intellectual integrity” of the interlocutors. Irrespective of whether they are true or false, certain positions in contemporary Middle Eastern studies and history departments are automatically deemed virtuous, and veracity be damned. Their proponents are published in prestigious journals and by distinguished publishing houses and become media darlings.

Popularity, fashion and the booming “bash-Israel business” account for the “new historians'” tenure, not scholarship. Ditto the Harvard hucksters who promote them.

  1. Similar posts:

  2. 03/25/06 God Damn The Jews Who Control Our Country 28% similar
  3. 04/17/06 The Truth About Israel and Its Supporters 22% similar
  4. 03/25/06 Next on FOX: When Scholarly Papers Attack 21% similar
  5. 07/16/18 Coming Soon: Racism in Outer Space 21% similar
  6. 03/28/06 Jewish Tyranny 20% similar
  7. 12 Responses to “Scholarship Denier Mercer Vents Loxist Rage as Truth About Sick, Vicious Israel Spreads Around the Globe”

    1. Fenrir Says:

      “Scholarship denier” – now that’s a term I could see “catching” in the public mind.

    2. Olde Dutch Says:

      That is GOOD.

    3. Will Says:

      A jew recoils from the truth about him like a vampire from garlic. FUCK ISRAEL. This one managed to keep the ad hominems toned down but you’ll notice with jews, they always attack the person rather than provide arguments against what the person writes or says.

      Always. Attack the messenger, ignore the message.

    4. Socrates Says:

      No matter how you view it, the Jewish community is very nervous about that paper, heh, heh.

    5. Jim Says:

      Slowly, people are beginning to catch on. The other day I got a dollar bill in my change. Across the back, written in red marker was the message – ” Don’t believe jew lies, the holocaust never happened “. I was amazed. Is the resistance growing bigger than we realize? At any rate, it was heartening to know that there is a resistance out there. Lets hope itz coming.

    6. Harry Tuttle Says:

      Where’s Hymie’s counterargument? I missed it amidst all the ad hominem.

      I never ceased to be stunned at how poor the wonderful scholarly people are at holding their own in a fair debate. They always try to put together three sputtering rational sentences at the beginning … and surrender by the end of the first paragraph and just start attacking the messenger.

      Read it again. The guy drifts all over the place, mostly on subject that have nothing at all to do with the article. He ends up denouncing a dozen other people, mostly yoos, whom he accuses of encouraging these filthy goyim. A couple half-hearted stabs at attacking the scholarship. Sounds like he suffered a stroke he is gradually recovering from.

      Total semantic content = (remember, a Jew) = ZERO.

    7. Carpenter Says:

      Seems like Jews in Israel are losing their will to fight the Pals. A major development. I just heard on the news that for the first time ever, a majority of Israelis are in favor of abandoning the settlements and the land in the occupied territories. No wonder Mercer is nervous. Note how he places even Zionists in quotation marks, “Zionists,” as if even the existence of the Zionist Movement that founded Israel would be an anti-Semitic lie. That alone shows his agenda.

      (which was, in fact, bought fairly and legally)

      Yet another lie by Mercer. Hundreds of Palestinian villages were levelled by tanks, thousands of Palestinians were shot to death by Jews, thousands more died of starvation in the freezingly cold mountains while Israeli soldiers guarded their crop fields just a few miles below.

      Who would seriously believe that Palestinians would sell their land and voluntarily move to live in the overcrowded West Bank and Gaza Strip?

    8. sumarian Says:

      It’s a Great article by Ilana. She writes, “Steven and Hillary Rose, Norman Finkelstein, Joel Kovel, Tanya Reinhart in Tel Aviv, and Michael Cohen in Britain – these are but a few of the new anti-Semitism’s leading Jewish lights. ”
      I’ve read Finkelstein. But I’ve never even heard of these others. So that’s FIVE new New-Anti-semites to look forward to.
      What’s not to like?

    9. James Morden Says:

      “Jews – Israelis included – are leaders of the new anti-Semitism”

      Well, I think we saw that coming.



    10. CONFEDERATE Says:

      illana mercer is a south african jew female. moved to canada. and, now living in the united states. do you see a pattern? hint: south africa is done. canada is done. the u.s. is just about done. where do you think she’ll move next?

    11. N.B. Forrest Says:

      “Theirs is a randomly yoked together bit of pamphleteering in the postmodern tradition – ITS AUTHORS DON’T REASON OR ARGUE. INSTEAD, THEY PROPAGANDIZE….”

      Just who the fuck do they think they are? Kikes?

    12. Stronza Says:

      Confederate – funny observation! Maybe Ilana will want to move to next door to the Jimmy Choo shoe factory, wherever that might be. In any case, we don’t have to worry about what the poor dear will do when the USA finally hits the dirt – by some godforsaken twist of fate, those creatures ALWAYS land on their feet. Anybody know how the heck they do it?

      And then there’s Barbara Amiel! She of the $3,000 shoes, this is the nose-jobbed gal who married Conrad “Tubby” Black, disgraced, awaiting-trial for bigtime jiggery-pokery ex-owner of Hollinger. She’ll land on her Manolo Blahniks, too, never fear.