Laughter, Hamlet’s Ghost, and the Insanity of Our Present Age

Ghost: “Pity me not, but lend thy serious hearing
To what I shall unfold.”
–Hamlet, Act 1, Scene 1

By Barry Rubin

This is a test. Does this story make you laugh or cry?

A friend of mine wrote an article that, while it did make fun of a left-wing group, was a pretty sober and factual presentation on a simple point. My concern here is NOT the specific story involved but the ending.

Some people pointed out that Herman Cain, a presidential candidate, in apologizing to Muslims for something he said, just happened to do the apologizing to a specific group that’s a front for the Muslim Brotherhood in America. A site that’s part of President Obama’s favorite thinktank and is well funded by a certain billionaire (no extra credit for guessing) ridiculed this claim.

So what did this author do? Research! In the finest scholarly tradition, he found some U.S. court judgments that concluded, based on documentary evidence, that the group in question is indeed a front for the Muslim Brotherhood.

So he proved his argument to be correct. The result? Retraction? Apology? Hey, it’s 2011!

How, then, did a non-profit group–not the one he was responding to but one of similar ilk–respond to the article? See below:

Response 1: “Take your head out of your ass….You live in America, even though you don’t deserve to.”

Response 2: “Hey…how’s your application to the Nazi Party going?”

Now you have to laugh, right? Here’s an author who irrefutably proves his case and that’s the response he gets. This is the level of sophistication of our adversaries. They cannot come up with good arguments so they either have to name-call or distort. A lot of them sound more sophisticated than the above two quotes but what they say basically amounts to the same thing.

What’s especially ironic is that the author of the article comes from a family persecuted by the Nazis (response 2), and arrived in America–legally–as penniless refugees from Communism (response 1).

Remember that those responses did not come from some deranged individual hiding behind an alias but a non-profit organization whose name isn’t concealed and that is given exemption from paying taxes because it serves an “educational” purpose. Fortunately, since the Federal budget is balanced, America doesn’t need its tax money!

So please be civil when you respond to people you disagree with; provide facts and good arguments; try to avoid insults. If you have facts and good arguments on your side that should be enough in a democratic country that’s ultimately a free marketplace of ideas (even if considerable sections of that marketplace have been hijacked and turned into propaganda organs). You won’t convince the haters and extremists but you will convince the openminded majority even if it takes a while.

Going back to the exchange above, you either have to laugh or cry. I suggest laughter. It’s more fun and he who laughs last laughs best. Become a historian; live long; and write about this era in 30 or 40 years. Sure, many people won’t believe these things happened but show them the quotes and documents.

Ghost: “Do not forget: this visitation
Is but to whet thy almost blunted purpose.”
–Hamlet, too.

Durban III

Italy joins the Czech Republic , United States, Israel, the Netherlands and Canada, all of which have already announced that they will not attend Durban III. The Durban II Conference in 2009 was boycotted by nine countries including Israel, the United States, Germany, Australia, Canada, Italy, Netherlands, New Zealand, and Poland.

Amy Winehouse, May Her Memory Be For a Blessing

Thanks to Israel National news for this article. MBeed

The tragic headline story is all over the Internet. Here’s a sample:

Amy Winehouse, the British pop singer whose hard-partying ways often overshadowed her soulful singing, has died at just 27, police confirmed. The tortured songstress, who had a history of substance abuse and shot to fame with the song "Rehab," was found dead Saturday in her London flat, according to police. Winehouse, with her trademark beehive hairdo and sailor-style tattoos, went global when her 2006 album "Back to Black" won five Grammy's. The album featured the song "Rehab," which includes the chorus: "They tried to make me go to rehab, I said, 'No, no, no.'"
Similarly, I have tried to make our brothers and sisters in the Diaspora go to rehab, but they say, “No, no, no,” just like Amy Winehouse.
Up until yesterday, I never heard of Amy Winehouse. Nor am I familiar with her songs. But my heart goes out to this sad Jewish lady who is just one of the millions of Jewish tragedies in the Diaspora. This never would have happened had she grown up in Israel. Yes, there are drugs in Israel too. And I suppose that some people have died of overdoses. But the larger-than-life grotesqueness of Amy’s life and death is a product of the terrible distortion of the Diaspora and how its addiction poisons all those who live there.
Amy is a symbol of this perversion. Of growing up in a place you don’t belong. Of trying to be someone you’re not. Her sensitive soul felt is so strongly, it killed her. Too bad I never had the chance to meet her and explain to her who she really was, and how she wasn’t to blame for her tormented craziness, that she was simply a beautiful Jewish soul who didn’t belong in the crazy world of London. She killed herself trying to fit in with the sickness and craziness around her, trying to be what she wasn’t.
If her death helps people understand just how pernicious the Diaspora is, then I don’t think she’ll mind that we have used her as a symbol.
May her memory be for a blessing. 

Tvzi Fishman

The Arab lobby in America

One of the most important distinguishing characteristics of the Arab lobby is that it has no popular support. While the Israeli lobby has hundreds of thousands of grass root members and public opinion polls consistently reveal a huge gap between support for Israel and the Arab nations/Palestinians, the Arab lobby has almost no public sympathy.

by Alan M. Dershowitz

While the media and politicians engage in frenzied debate about the virtues and vices of building—or preventing the building of—a Muslim community center (cum mosque) near the "sacred ground" of 9/11, Iran continues to build a nuclear weapon, as the Israelis and Palestinians take a tentative step toward building a peaceful resolution to their age-old conflict. Inevitably, whenever Middle East issues take center stage, the question of the role of lobbies, particularly those that advocate for foreign countries, becomes a hot topic. This book by longtime Middle East authority, Mitchell Bard, is a must read for anyone who cares—and who doesn't?—about the role of lobbies in influencing American policy in the Middle East. Its thesis, which is sure to be controversial, is easily summarized:

Yes Virginia, there is a big bad lobby that distorts US foreign policy in the Middle East way out of proportion to its actual support by the American public. Professors Stephen Walt and John Mearsheimer, author of the screed, The Israel Lobby, are right about that. But the offending lobby is not AIPAC, which supports Israel, but rather the Arab lobby, which opposes the Jewish state.

Both the pro-Israel and pro-Arab lobby (really lobbies because there are several for each) are indeed powerful but there is a big difference — a difference that goes to the heart of the role of lobbying in a democracy. Bard puts it this way:

With almost unlimited resources, they try to buy what they usually cannot win on the merits of their arguments.

"One of the most important distinguishing characteristics of the Arab lobby is that it has no popular support. While the Israeli lobby has hundreds of thousands of grass root members and public opinion polls consistently reveal a huge gap between support for Israel and the Arab nations/Palestinians, the Arab lobby has almost no foot soldiers or public sympathy. It's most powerful elements tend to be bureaucrats who represent only their personal views or what they believe are their institutional interests, and foreign governments that care only about their national interests, not those of the United States. What they lack in human capital in terms of American advocates, they make up for with almost unlimited resources to try to buy what they usually cannot win on the merits of their arguments."

The Arab Lobby: The Invisible Alliance That Undermines America’s Interests in the Middle East. By Mitchell Bard. 432 pages. Harper. $27.99. This is a critical distinction for a democracy. The case for Israel (though not for all of its policies) is an easy sell for pro-Israel lobbyists, especially elected representatives. Voting in favor of Israel is popular not only in areas with large concentration of Jewish voters, but throughout the country, because Israel is popular with Evangelical Christians in particular and with much, though certainly not all, of the public in general. Lobbies that reflect the will of the people are an important part of the democratic process. Thus, the American Association of Retired People (AARP), the principal lobbying group for the elderly, is extremely powerful because there are so many elderly people in this country who want to protect social security, Medicaid, and other benefits. The National Rifle Association (NRA) is a powerful lobby precisely because so many Americans, for better or worse, love their guns. And The American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) is a powerful lobby because Americans, in general, support the Middle East's only democracy and reliable American ally.

But why is the Arab lobby, and most particularly the Saudi lobby, also powerful? Saudi Arabia has virtually no support among Americans. Indeed, it is widely reviled for its export of terrorists such as Osama Bin Laden, its manipulation of oil prices, its anti-Christian and anti-Semitic policies, its total deprivation of any semblance of freedom of speech or dissent, and its primitive forms of punishment that include stoning and amputation. Yet, as Bard demonstrates, the Saudi lobby has beaten the pro-Israel lobby over and over again in head to head conflicts, such as the sale of sophisticated weapons to a regime that doesn't even have the technical skills to use them, and the conflict over whether to move the United States' Embassy to Jerusalem. Even now, Saudi Arabia is lobbying to obtain a multi-billion dollar arms deal , and it is likely to succeed over the objections of Israel.

How then does a lobby with no popular support manage to exert influence in a democratic country? The secret is very simple. The Arab lobby in general and the Saudis in particular make little effort to influence popularly elected public officials, particularly legislators. Again, listen to Bard:

"The Saudis have taken a different tact from the Israeli lobby, focusing a top-down rather than bottom-up approach to lobbying. As hired gun, J. Crawford Cook, wrote in laying out his proposed strategy for the kingdom, 'Saudi Arabia has a need to influence the few that influence the many, rather than the need to influence the many to whom the few must respond.'"

The Saudis spend enormous amounts of lucre to buy (or rent) former state department officials, diplomats, White House aides, and legislative leaders.

The primary means by which the Saudis exercise this influence is money. They spend enormous amounts of lucre to buy (or rent) former state department officials, diplomats, White House aides, and legislative leaders who become their elite lobbying corps. Far more insidiously, the Saudis let it be known that if current government officials want to be hired following their retirement from government service, they had better hue to the Saudi line while they are serving in our government. The former Saudi ambassador to the United States, Prince Bandar, who was so close to the President George H.W. Bush that he referred to himself as "Bandar Bush," acknowledged the relationship between how a government official behaves while in office and how well he will be rewarded when he leaves office. "If the reputation then builds that the Saudis take care of friends when they leave office, you'd be surprised how much better friends you have when they are just coming into office."

Bard concludes from this well known quid pro quo that: "given the potential of these post-retirement opportunities, it would not be surprising if officials adopted positions while in government to make themselves marketable to the Arab lobby."

The methodology employed by the Arab lobby is thus totally inconsistent with democratic governance, because it does not reflect the will of the people but rather the corruption of the elite, while the Israeli lobby seems to operate within the parameters of democratic processes. Yet so much has been written about the allegedly corrosive nature of the Israeli lobby, while the powerful Arab lobby has widely escaped scrutiny and criticism. This important book thus contributes to the open marketplace of ideas by illuminating the dark side of the massive and largely undemocratic Arab lobbying efforts to influence American policy with regard to the Middle East.

This article originally appeared on The Daily Beast.