US Indymedia Global Indymedia Publish About us
Printed from Boston IMC :
IVAW Winter Soldier

Winter Soldier
Brad Presente

Other Local News

Spare Change News
Open Media Boston
Somerville Voices
Cradle of Liberty
The Sword and Shield

Local Radio Shows

WMBR 88.1 FM
What's Left
WEDS at 8:00 pm
Local Edition
FRI (alt) at 5:30 pm

WMFO 91.5 FM
Socialist Alternative
SUN 11:00 am

WZBC 90.3 FM
Sounds of Dissent
SAT at 11:00 am
Truth and Justice Radio
SUN at 6:00 am

Create account Log in
Comment on this article | View comments | Email this article | Printer-friendly version
News :: Education
Harvard's anti-Israel Quacks
26 Mar 2006
Harvard's Paper on Israel Drew From Neo-Nazi Sites
Harvard's Paper on Israel Drew From Neo-Nazi Sites
BY MEGHAN CLYNE - Staff Reporter of the Sun
March 24, 2006

WASHINGTON - A prominent Harvard law professor, Alan Dershowitz, is alleging that the authors of a Harvard Kennedy School paper about the "Israel lobby," one of which is the Kennedy School's academic dean, culled sections of the paper from neo-Nazi and other anti-Israel hate Web sites.

"What we're discovering first of all is that the quotes that they use are not only wrenched out of context, but they are the common quotes that appear on hate sites," Mr. Dershowitz, who is identified in the paper as part of the "lobby," told The New York Sun yesterday.

"The wrenching out of context is done by the hate sites,and then [the authors] cite them to the original sources, in order to disguise the fact that they've gotten them from hate sites."

The paper, "The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy," was written by the Kennedy School's Stephen Walt and a political science professor and the codirector of the Program on International Security Policy at the University of Chicago, John Mearsheimer, and published by the Kennedy School.

In the 83-page "working paper," the professors suggest that a vast network of journalists, think tanks, lobbyists, and largely Jewish officials have seized the foreign policy debate and manipulated America to invade Iraq.

The paper has drawn sharp criticism from prominent Harvard faculty, Harvard students, and a member of Congress, with many critics alleging that the document is riddled with factual inaccuracies and suffers from bias and faulty research.

According to Mr. Dershowitz, one of the paper's most prominent critics, Messrs. Mearsheimer and Walt not only demonstrated "shallowness" in their analysis,but also based that analysis on quotes and viewpoints widely available on the Web sites of hate groups.

The paper, the law professor said, was "simply a compilation of hateful paragraphs lifted from other sources and given academic imprimatur." Mr. Dershowitz said that he and his research assistants were currently working on a comparative chart showing the parallelism between parts of the Walt-Mearsheimer paper and quotes available on neo-Nazi Web sites.

While Mr. Dershowitz stressed that the comparison project was a "work in progress," one particularly noticeable example of the authors' alleged culling from hate sites was found in the Walt-Mearsheimer paper's use of a quote from a former executive editor of the New York Times, Max Frankel.

Under the section "Manipulating the Media," on pages 19 and 20 of the paper, Messrs. Walt and Mearsheimer write: "In his memoirs, for example, former Times executive editor Max Frankel acknowledged the impact his own pro-Israel attitude had on his editorial choices. In his words: 'I was much more deeply devoted to Israel than I dared to assert.' He goes on: 'Fortified by my knowledge of Israel and my friendships there, I myself wrote most of our Middle East commentaries. As more Arab than Jewish readers recognized, I wrote them from a pro-Israel perspective.'" The footnote cites Mr. Frankel's 560-page book, "The Times of My Life and My Life with the Times," published in 1999.

Yet the Frankel quote used by Messrs. Mearsheimer and Walt, Mr. Dershowitz said, is nearly identical to the quote used by a neo-Nazi Web site in its own take on Jewish press influence, "Jewish Influence in the Mass Media." The document, posted on, quotes more extensively from the same section in Mr. Frankel's memoir.

"Here's Max Frankel [for years the Executive Editor of the New York Times] and his thoughts about Israel in his work," the document proclaims. "'I was much more deeply devoted to Israel than I dared to assert. ... Fortified by my knowledge of Israel and my friendships there, I myself wrote most of our Middle East commentaries. As more Arab than Jewish readers recognized, I wrote them from a pro-Israel perspective....'" also cites Mr. Frankel's memoir.

"He quotes Max Frankel, as if he read the whole 500 pages of Max Frankel?" Mr. Dershowitz said. "I promise you they did not read Max Frankel's whole book," the law professor said of the paper's authors. "How do I know that? We found the same exact quote on various hate sites."According to Mr. Dershowitz, other parts of the Walt-Mearsheimer paper bear striking similarities to postings on other anti-Jewish Web sites, including, which purports to be the Web site of the "National Socialist Movement Northwest."

"They didn't do direct research, they didn't do primary research," Mr. Dershowitz said of the paper's authors. "They're just taking ideas that already existed out there in hate sites - in the work of Chomsky, in the work of Buchanan, and in the work of David Duke - and they're claiming it as their scholarship."

Phone and e-mail requests from the Sun for comment about the ongoing "lobby" paper situation to Messrs.Walt and Mearsheimer since Tuesday have not been returned.

Meanwhile, concern over the paper is continuing to mount at the Kennedy School, where a professor told the Sun yesterday that the faculty are buzzing with questions about whether a Harvard investigation will be launched into the paper's "poor scholarship," "in the same way poor scholarly work and plagiarism have generated past investigations and, on occasion, the stripping of tenure."

The professor also told the Sun that one of the Kennedy School's most prominent faculty members, David Gergen, had been contacting prominent Jewish donors to allay concerns about the furor generated by the Walt-Mearsheimer paper.

Last night Mr. Gergen told the Sun that he had "been in conversations, at my own initiative, with a number of people on the outside, including some of our benefactors."

"Because obviously there are some people out there who are concerned," Mr. Gergen continued. "People read the newspapers, they watch the blogs, and they call and say 'What's going on at the Kennedy School? What's going on at Harvard,'" he added.

Still, the professor said he had "been very impressed with how supportive and understanding people are, about the situation, and about recognizing the importance of academic freedom even as they disagree with the contents of the article."

Related articles & editorials:

A Harvard School Distances Itself from Dean's Paper, March 23, 2006
The Belfer Declaration, March 23, 2006
Harvard's Paper on Israel Called 'Trash' By Solon, March 22, 2006
Kalb Upbraids Harvard Dean Over Israel, March 21, 2006
David Duke Claims to Be Vindicated By a Harvard Dean, March 20, 2006
Discredited Dean, March 20, 2006.
Harvard, Chicago, and the 'Lobby', March 17, 2006

March 24, 2006 Edition > Section: National > Printer-Friendly Version

This work is in the public domain
Add a quick comment
Your name Your email


Text Format
Anti-spam Enter the following number into the box:
To add more detailed comments, or to upload files, see the full comment form.


Dershowitz is a hateful libelist.
26 Mar 2006
"they are the common quotes that appear on hate sites"

Many hate sites quote the bible as well. If a writer were to quote some of the same parts of the bible, would it be surprising? Many people quote the same text and draw different conclusions or do so for differnet motivations. That Dershowitz, advocate of torture (and therefore a man with NO credibility) would pull this out of his ass show how low of a libelist he is.

Dershowitz and his Zionist friends will stoop to any depth to smear anyone who criticizes Israel.
Dershowitz should be arrested for instigating war crimes.
26 Mar 2006
>>>Alter also made respectful reference to Harvard's pride, Alan Dershowitz, then running around the country promoting the idea of "torture warrants" issued by judges and recommending needles under detainees' fingernails, and to Israel, where (in Alter's terms) "until 1999 an interrogation technique called 'shaking' was legal. It entailed holding a smelly bag over a suspect's head in a dark room", a decorous way of referring to how Palestinians were nearly suffocated by having their heads stuffed in sacks of excrement by Israeli toturers.<<<
Quote by the monster Alan Dershowitz
26 Mar 2006
Dershowitz is very sick man, here he is trying to convince Americans to stick needles under the fingernails of Arabs and Muslims:

>>>When you torture somebody to death … everybody would acknowledge that’s torture. But placing a sterilized needle under somebody’s fingernails for fifteen minutes, causing excruciating pain but no permanent physical damage—is that torture?<<<
Re: Harvard's anti-Israel Quacks
26 Mar 2006
"Liberals" bend over backwards to appease anti-semites and arabists...hey appeasement worked during WWI...didn't it?
Re: Harvard's anti-Israel Quacks
26 Mar 2006
freedom fighters support the people of palestine!
Re: Harvard's anti-Israel Quacks
26 Mar 2006
Extreamists are alwasy the first to see the problems. And they are usualy the first to write/talk about it. hat doesn't mean they are the last to write/talk about it.

Anti-affermative action was a rant used by neo-nazis to recruit new members. THEN the Republicans stole thier thunder by taking up the issue themselves. And the neo-nazis lost the best recruitment tool they have had in a long time. Neo-nazis then took up the anti-establisment selling out America's peace by supplying murderous thieving zionist crusaders with the means to destroy oru Palestinian neighbors. But there are too many others who are also upset that whore politicians have been sacrificing thier fellow Americans lives by selling out America's peace for a special interst's votes and campain contruibutions. And the neo-nazis haven't been very succesfull with a rant that so many others are also making.

But for Dershowitz to suggest that because neo-nazis also make the same points that the profesors should be trashed just showcases how vacant Dershowitz (AND his agenda ) is and how he is limited to attacking the messanger because he CAN'T attack the message. People who are prejudiced will always accept such vacant scapegoating. But many people are not so blind.
The Muslims are Terrorists
27 Mar 2006
Al Qaeda conspirator Zacarias Moussaoui testified at his sentencing trial Monday that he knew about the terrorist group’s plan to crash airplanes into the World Trade Center.

“I had knowledge that the two towers would be hit, but I did not have the details,” Moussaoui told jurors after taking the stand in his own defense. He said he was supposed to pilot a plane into the White House, with convicted shoe bomber Richard Reid as a member of his crew. Moussaoui said he did not know in advance the precise date of Twin Towers attack, which unfolded the morning of September 11, 2001.

The only person tried in the United States in connection with the 9/11 attacks, Moussaoui testified against the advice of his court-appointed lawyers.
Previous poster has low IQ.
27 Mar 2006
Let's see, one person confesses to terrorism (and we don't know whether he was telling the truth) and you infer, because he is a Muslim, that all Muslims are terrorists? That is like concluding that all males are canibals based on observations about Jeffery Darmer.
Re: Harvard's anti-Israel Quacks
27 Mar 2006
"Sure hes a poet but a poets cloak can conceal bombs" -Alan Dershowitz, justifing the imprisonment and torturt of an arab writer in an israeli prison camp.
Re: Harvard's "Tortureman" Dershowitz
27 Mar 2006
Lately A. Dershowitz is probably best known as an advocate of legalized torture. He is also a “liberal” lawyer who can get anyone off for murder, as long as the murder was not committed against an Israeli - then he advocates knocking down the accused’s relatives homes and killing anyone standing near the accused. Lawyers included….go figure…

Dershowitz claims that he only wants to torture Israel’s opponents to find out what they know, and what their plans are.

Torture is not wrong because someone else thinks it is wrong or because others, in retaliation for torture by Americans, may torture Americans. It is the torture that is wrong.

Torture is wrong because it inflicts unspeakable pain upon the body of a fellow human being who is entirely at our mercy. The tortured person is bound and helpless. The torturer stands over him with his instruments. There is no question of "unilateral disarmament," because the victim bears no arms, lacking even the use of the two arms he was born with.

The inequality is total. To abuse or kill a person in such a circumstance is as radical a denial of common humanity as is possible. It is repugnant to learn that one's country's military forces are engaging in torture. It is worse to learn that the torture is widespread. It is worse still to learn that the torture was rationalized and sanctioned in long memorandums written by people at the highest level of the government

This is torture's true purpose: to terrorize--not only the people in Guantánamo's cages and Syria's isolation cells but also, and more important, the broader community that hears about these abuses. Torture is a machine designed to break the will to resist--the individual prisoner's will and the collective will.

This is not a controversial claim. In 2001 the US NGO Physicians for Human Rights published a manual on treating torture survivors that noted: "perpetrators often attempt to justify their acts of torture and ill treatment by the need to gather information. Such conceptualizations obscure the purpose of torture....

The aim of torture is to dehumanize the victim, break his/her will, and at the same time, set horrific examples for those who come in contact with the victim. In this way, torture can break or damage the will and coherence of entire communities."
Re: Harvard's "Tortureman" Dershowitz
27 Mar 2006
And the hits just keep on coming. On February 7, Harvard law professor Alan Dershowitz, a rabid Zionist who recently and infamously championed the use of torture as part of the "war on terror," was sponsored on campus by Columbia Students for Israel; Columbia Law School's Israel advocacy club; Columbians for Academic Freedom and others.

Dershowitz urged students to cooperate with the committee "investigating" allegations against MEALAC and Massad, denounced critics of Israel as "encourag[ing] the terrorists," and threw in his defense of "regulated" torture (Columbia Spectator, 8 February).

Dershowitz also used the "anti-Zionism means anti-Semitism" slander typically used by Zionists. In the statement defending himself against the charges in Columbia Unbecoming, Massad eloquently refuted this assertion:

"Unlike the pro-Israel groups, I do not think that Israeli actions are ‘Jewish' actions or that they reflect the will of the Jewish people worldwide! All those pro-Israeli propagandists who want to reduce the Jewish people to the State of Israel are the anti-Semites who want to eliminate the existing pluralism among Jews.

The majority of Israel's supporters in the United States are, in fact, not Jews but Christian fundamentalist anti-Semites who seek to convert Jews.... Therefore, it is not anti-Semitism that offends pro-Israel groups; what offends them is anti-Israel criticism."

Equating anti-Zionism with "anti-Semitism" has the effect of cheapening anti-Semitism, which is a very real phenomenon needing to be fought both in the West and the Islamic world. In fact, the Zionists have always reserved special venom for Jewish historians who defend Palestinian rights like Joel Beinin and Norman Finkelstein.
Harvard's Hucksters
28 Mar 2006
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 two 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 Swansea—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’s 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.
Re: Harvard's anti-Israel Quacks
28 Mar 2006
Israel is a “failed state” and the biggest “terrorist haven” in the Middle East. Jewish people have a right to oppose this Capitalist State from claiming to operate in the name of all Jewish people. Jewish workers in Israel and Arabic speaking workers throughout the Middle East should join together and overthrow ALL the Capitalist states. This is not an easy thing to do, but the first step is to call for it. Workers of All Nations Unite.

Israel itself routinely lumps together legitimate hostility to its treatment of the Palestinians with anti-Semitism. Any objective appraisal of what Israel has done is depicted as anti-Semitism. This serves a very definite purpose, in obscuring political understanding.

The present economic, social and political conditions in Israel and Palestine are an indictment of the Zionist project and the nation state as the solution to the oppression of the Jews. The Zionist state was conceived as the answer to the problem of the European persecution of the Jews—a state where the Jews would find a safe haven, social justice and equality.

It was realized in the form of a capitalist state created by the dispossession of another people (ethnic cleansing) and maintained through war and repression, and social inequality at home. Indeed, it is impossible on a leftist web site like this , to avoid pointing out that the Jewish people, sections of whom have a long history in every progressive movement, not least the international socialist movement, are now themselves widely regarded as oppressors with blood on their hands.

In its early years, Israel was kept afloat by the Diaspora, which contributed $200 million a year before 1967 and a massive $700 million a year in the following six years. Even today, Israel receives $1.5 billion a year from private US donations. In the 1950s, German reparations money provided another important source of finance: $125 million a year before 1966. Even after the reparations money came to an end, West German aid continued at a higher level than before.

But by far the most important source of economic assistance has been the US government. While before 1967, US provided very little, at $50 million a year, this had risen to a massive $3 billion a year by 1986 (split between $1.2 billion economic and $1.8 billion military assistance), plus some $500 million a year aid from other parts of the US budget or in some cases, off-budget. It has continued at this level ever since, making Israel the highest per capita recipient of US aid in the world.

But this aid to Israel differed from most US aid. Firstly, normally US aid is tied to specific projects and the purchase of US goods and services, and overseen by the government agency, USAID. Most US aid to Israel goes straight into its Exchequer as a cash transfer. Secondly, aid is a bit of a misnomer. It usually comes in the form of loans that have interest and repayment obligations. But most of the military loans were converted into grants and the remaining military loans were “forgiven” by Congress. Only the economic aid had to be repaid with interest.

To put US aid to Israel into perspective, direct aid to Israel is more than six times all US aid to sub Saharan Africa. But even these annual $3.5 billion grants were insufficient. In 1992-96, the US stepped in to provide $10 billion in loan guarantees and a similar amount in 2002-03. Without such guarantees, Israel would have been bankrupt. Its external debt is now much greater than its GDP.

Israel also provided valuable services as a subcontractor for the US. It has served as a conduit for US arms to regimes that the US could not be seen to be assisting: apartheid South Africa, Khomeini’s Iran during the Iran-Iraq war, and numerous military dictatorships and right-wing rebel forces, particularly in Latin America. Israel’s intelligence service, Mossad, provides Washington with intelligence gathering and can be relied upon to carry out illegal and covert operations on behalf of the US that the US itself either does not want, or be seen, to carry out. It trialed novel forms of interrogation and torture, later to be used in Iraq.

In other words, Israel acts as a mercenary for US imperialism, a situation that its own commentators have likened to “the Godfather’s messenger”. This is because Israel carries out the “dirty work” of the Godfather who “always tries to appear to be the owner of some large respectable business”. One Israeli intellectual noted that the state had gathered in three million Jews into Israel and transformed them into “parasites of America”.

As a result of all these factors—a small unviable and autarkic economy, the failure of the economic perspective that underpinned Oslo, the uprising, the military and settlement costs, cheap foreign labor, unemployment and the gutting of social welfare—Israeli workers and their families have seen their living standards plummet. The Zionist dream of a national home for the Jews and escape from oppression and persecution within Israel has turned into its opposite.

anti-reality quacks
28 Mar 2006
whether or not Harvard is the Enron of academia (it is, in fact...) it is still nauseating to read the "hipster" self-worship from Ilana Mercer, the Ann Coulter of the Libertarians. here is her description of herself:

follower of Ann Rand, well, she must be right!

perhaps we might all just step back a pace and ask ourselves "is there any objective sign of overdue iinfluence of certain Zionist influences in the US government today?" if anyone seriously thinks there is no such influence they must be free-basing crack 24 hours a day.

harvard blowhards aside, let's get real: these people are traitors: Richard Perle, Dov Zakheim, Douglas Feith, Silverstein, Chertoff, Zelikow, Abrams, Kristol, Libby...the list goes on and on.

great work miss "liberty," these traitors sure got their two bits worth from you.