Malkin vs. AIPAC

Michelle Malkin seems perplexed as to why most bloggers (with the noted exception of conspiracy theorists and anti-Semites) are ignoring the so-called “scandals” involving AIPAC. I will attempt to help her out on this: First, it's not a gigantic conspiracy of Jews and Christian Zionists controlling bloggers through telepathy; simply put, most bloggers, right and left, instinctively know what the deal is with these “scandals,” which explains the lack of enthusiasm to play into the hands of those who wish Israel ill. They also know that there are forces in Washington, in every government agency in fact, which do not support a strong US-Israel alliance, are weak on the war on terror, are inherently suspicious and resentful of Israel in general and of Jews specifically and will do anything they can to undermine the alliance.

To the allegations specifically: The leaking of information (sometimes even classified information) from a US government employee to a lobbyist or journalist happens, for the better or worse, every single day in Washington. Context and intent are keys to assessing the seriousness of any leak allegation. By any measurement, the known material passed on by Pentagon employee Larry Franklin (who is not Jewish) to the former AIPAC employees (who were approached by Franklin, not the other way around) was not threatening to US national security and was related entirely to Iran, which is threatening the very existence of Israel. Although he clearly violated the law, Franklin did not intend to damage US national security, and the former AIPAC employees had no such intention either. Certainly, they used bad judgment in passing on that Iran-related material to a journalist and Israeli Diplomat. But no matter how one tries to spin this, it’s not a case of even a minor threat to US national security, unless one is motivated for some reason to engage in intellectual gymnastics to try to make it so.

As for the latest “scandal” that Congresswoman Jane Harmon is “rumored” to have received AIPAC support for her appointment as the ranking Democrat on the Intelligence committee; I doubt it. But even if true, so what? You mean a lobby attempted to influence an appointment? Wow! Stop the presses! Would we rather have Barbara Lee? The accusation is that a few citizens who also happen to be AIPAC contributors exercised their right to free expression and called Nancy Pelosi in support of Harmon’s appointment. Really? Wow!

So, Michelle, that is the short version. You are normally a strong supporter of Israel, and I understand that it’s important not to appear as though you are supporting Israel blindly or without criticism. There are plenty of opportunities to criticize Israel: its socialist ways; its inappropriate past exchanges of terrorists for hostages; its bizarre embrace of Yasser Arafat in the 90’s; the whole concept of “territory for peace”, etc… But to play in to classic images of the scheming Jew pulling the strings of power and manipulating the unsuspecting goy is… well… unseemly, which also helps explain why most bloggers simply don’t go down that route. I hope that you will avoid that trap as well.

de Borchgrave: Korea's Dr. Strangelove
Security Council to Iran: Go for it
Britain's race chief warns of violence over veil row