US Politics

The Israel Lobby made it to the NY Times best seller list
http://www.hawes.com/2007/2007-09-23.pdf

Which is about as good a list as you're going to get for what people are reading in the US.

Oh, and some more recent MSM coverage of the Israel issue, in case you take issue with the fact that Walt/Meirsheimer's book came out a while ago.

https://www.thenation.com/article/aipac-omar-israel-congress-anti-semitism/
https://www.wsj.com/articles/pro-israel-group-lobbies-for-u-s-aid-funds-congressional-trips-11550174834
https://www.washingtonpost.com/gdpr-consent/?commentID=washingtonpost.com/ECHO/item/e69b6324-ac8a-4b27-a1a8-b6532fe61603&destination=%2fnews%2fmade-by-history%2fwp%2f2018%2f03%2f06%2fthe-dark-roots-of-aipac-americas-pro-israel-lobby%2f%3foutputType%3dcomment%26commentID%3dwashingtonpost.com%2fECHO%2fitem%2fe69b6324-ac8a-4b27-a1a8-b6532fe61603&outputType=comment&utm_term=.6637ad25fb9f

(here's that WaPo article without having to go through the paywall
https://aladinsmiraclelamp.wordpress.com/2018/03/08/the-dark-roots-of-aipac-americas-pro-israel-lobby/
)

Dude, I don't know how many ways I can tell you this, but giving us a bunch of links does absolutely nothing for your arguments. Every day, hundreds of articles by hundreds of different media outlets are being published. I don't doubt you can find stuff by searching for a few keywords on Google, but that's not the point.

As to the book, yes that is one book on that general topic. It was 12 years ago, though I'm sure you can find another book on the topic if you go looking for it. Most importantly though, you know bestseller lists such as the NYT one don't require the book to actually be sold in the millions, right? Or to actually be one of the most popular books overall.

Thanks for answering a question nobody asked.

How do these stories compare (in column-inches / air-time etc) to Russia Collusion over the last couple of years?

I've selected articles some of from the most-read outlets in the US - the NYT, WSJ, WaPo, Vanity Fair, the Nation,- and your reaction is pure cognitive dissonance. These are articles in the mainstream media about things you say the mainstream media is ignoring.

Have fun with your little 'in-the-know' circle-jerk.

I never said those subjects were being completely 'ignored'. Nice strawman though.

your reaction is pure cognitive dissonance

Yeah thanks, you too.

I don’t think your list demonstrates what you think it does.

Whether the quantity of coverage is proportional is subjective. But the quantity of coverage can be measured, and your high if you think these stories rank anywhere near the Russia Collusion stories.

MAKE LUFGUSS GREAT AGAIN!

I said before that I don't disagree that the Russian stuff is sometimes overdone. I said that the other topics were still being covered by the MSM. Which they are. Perhaps you're just not paying close enough attention.

so the hookers did or did not pee on trump?

I'm confused

Nah he paid them to piss on the bed because Obama stayed there once

My point, though I'm sure you and others will willingly misrepresent it, is that the genuine documented interference by Israel and Saudi Arabia in U.S. foreign policy dwarfs the allegations about Putin/Trump. The MSM has been screaming to the high heavens about collusion for the past two years, the foundation of which I still think is substanceless, but there is nowhere near the kind of hysteria (which would be fully warranted) about other foreign powers interference.

Here's a prior question for you again:

Remember Netanyahu's address to Congress in 2015? Would any other country be allowed to circumvent the president and communicate covertly with the U.S. opposition to arrange that and directly influence U.S. foreign policy?

Also, I'm not just talking about the media but the U.S. political establishment too.

I get stage fright, can only jerk off alone.

soz

I joined a cult once. It was formed by my mate Ben who had a mystical experience after eating a two month out of date corned beef pasty. He was convinced that mould under his stairs bore the visage of Jacob Boehme and spoke to him in rhyming couplets.

We struggled to recruit, funnily enough.

You've got to be a bit careful about how and what you allocate to the race angle.

The majority of wealthy/powerholding Latin Americans are Spainish decent rather than indigenous. The majority population of most of those countries are not white Spanish decent. That's a historical reality.

Therefore, any shift in power will inevitably be from "whites" to "non-whites". But I'm not sure that trying to hold on to your family's farm/mine/oil rights etc. makes it a white supremacist thing. It is much more about haves and have nots imo. The US was pretty anti-Cuban when it was almost exclusively ruled by white guys.

Sure, you could well be right. Which is why I qualified the information as potential.
But it seems there is definite cultural and political divide between the wealthy ruling class and the working poor that is ethnically based, at least as the "Spaniards" regard themselves.
I'm more interested in the possible Trump racist angle owing to his support of the Koch brothers in Venezuela.

True, but it's worth pointing out this varies a bit by country. For example in Paraguay (that I happen to have quite extensive personal experience with), the population is very much 'mixed' with the exception of a few actual 'indígena' tribes (which are properly fucked every which way). Meaning that while you have the usual tensions related to wealth, the extra 'racial' tensions that neighbouring Bolivia has are all but absent.

That's not to say however that there isn't racism - for example, if you're black, you better be Brazilian and good at football.

Also, the argument is that the general narrative in the MSM (particularly in the U.S.) is to push the "ZOMG! Russian collusion! Trump is a Putin puppet!!" angle in a heavy way. Rachel Maddow made a career out of this on MSNBC for the past two years.

But no-one in a similar position makes anything of the Israeli and Saudi connections and their influence which are concrete. And wide ranging. And actually powerful.

Instead they have harped on about unproven allegations for two years.

If it's true on a deeper level of analysis by good researchers and investigative reporters then it'll still be equally true in the wider scale in prime time television news, if somewhat simplified.

Does that make any more sense for you?

I said that the other topics were still being covered by the MSM.

That’s agreed. It was never disputed. I’m going to spell this out for you for the third time ... relative and in the context of ’Russian Collusion’ these other stories are not covered widely. If you think your list shows otherwise, then we disagree.

No, you're recently 'enlightened' and you think that you and those who agree with you are the only ones who can see the light, man. Except - there is in fact a whole bunch of stuff out there in the mainstream talking about precisely these issues, just in ways that I'm guessing aren't ideologically pure enough for you.

Perhaps you're just not paying close enough attention.

Some projection going on here? It’s not helpful.

#friday

Why is that so many people in this thread, when confronted with a contrary opinion or dissenting voice, find themselves unable to argue a point or debate rationally without throwing out logical fallacy after logical fallacy, frame the discussion in such a way that the dissenting voices are victims of a cult mentality or are tin foil hat wearers and should be subjected to ridicule? And going on the attack like zealots?

Can't these people simply have a discussion?

Sure, I've been guilty of bad tempered responses but it's always after a prior bad tempered volley from someone else.

I'm fully prepared for being wrong about my opinion but I thought that's the main point of such discussions: to learn through other people and test ideas.

Erm, because the way you frame your argument comes across exactly how you describe. Projection backatcha.

I think we agree, actually, that the Russia obsession has reduced focus on other, potentially more important angles. I read your previous comments as implying the MSM wasn’t covering it at all. So on that, I think let’s agree that online communication is imperfect and perhaps we can moderate the tone a tiny bit - me definitely included.

Okay, cool.

I appreciate the link you posted (amongst others) about the Israel Lobby. I'll look into that book.

This is a really interesting pice on the college admissions scandal in the US.

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2019/04/what-college-admissions-scandal-reveals/586468/

It’s not really related to Trump except for a discussion at the end about the impact of equal opportunities policies...

Trump's Dad...

https://twitter.com/JaneyGodley/status/1114661986741178368