With regard to Jewish World Review, it's part of the Communist/Trotskyite mostly Jewish group of "intellectuals" which through their handlers like Sidney Hook and James Burnham supported magazines like Commentary and Partisan Review--giving birth to the Neocons.
http://www.jewishworldreview.com/0204/tobin_2004_02_24.php3 The enduring value of a journal that rallied intellectuals against anti-Americanism http://www.jewishworldreview.com | The label "anti-American" is not a particularly useful term. Loaded with the baggage of the McCarthy era, using it evokes a political confrontation that most Americans would like to forget. It is a pejorative that clouds rather than clarifies policy debates. But as the United States goes to war in the face of opposition from most of the chattering classes, it is hard to escape the fact that behind much of the opposition is the notion that America, and not its foes, is the focus of evil in the world. If this sounds familiar, it should. Listen to the voice of many of the anti-war demonstrators and "enlightened" opinion coming from abroad, and it isn't hard to evoke the memories of the Vietnam era and its protests. BREAKING RANKS While many people of a certain age look back to those protests with nostalgia, for the editor of Commentary magazine, the flood tide of an anti-American mindset caused him to break ranks with fellow liberals. The editor's name was Norman Podhoretz [his stepdaughter, Rachel Decter, is married to Elliott Abrams], and his decision to change the political orientation of the monthly published by the American Jewish Committee is still being felt in the Jewish community, as well as in the halls of power in Washington, D.C. It was to be one of the most momentous switches in American Jewish intellectual history, as well as that of American political discourse. Podhoretz through his monthly would become godfather to a new movement of political thought: neoconservatism. Based in a bedrock belief that opposition to communism was the first duty of the intellectual, neoconservatives represented American Jews who understood that liberalism had lost touch with this essential truth. Donate to JWR It was no coincidence that the rise of neoconservatism coincided with the increasing attacks upon the State of Israel. In the aftermath of the Yom Kippur War, it became apparent that the left was abandoning Israel just as it had abandoned the anti-communist cause that it had once led. The realization that anti-Semitism and anti-Zionism were now more at home on the left than on the right was also a powerful force in molding the neoconservatives. Thus a serious study of the influence of the magazine is particularly timely. Filling that void was a conference on "Commentary, the American Jewish Community and American Culture," held in New York last year, that was co-sponsored by the Myer and Rosaline Feinstein Center for American Jewish History of Temple University and the City University of New York's Graduate Center. As many of those at the conference said, Commentary was more than a place where leading Jewish literary lights found a home. It was, for more than one generation of Jewish students and writers, a sort of correspondence graduate school where they were introduced to an exciting world of thoughtful political analysis, history, literary, music and art criticism; and new fiction; Commentary was founded in 1945 under the leadership of Podhoretz's predecessor Elliot Cohen as a liberal anti-Communist journal. In the 1960s, Podhoretz and Commentary had drifted to the left. But under his leadership, Commentary, and the growing coterie of intellectual voices such as writer Irving Kristol, soon began the long march to the right in defense of the freedoms that their fellow liberals had forsaken. FOUNDING A MOVEMENT This was a difficult transition for a group that had grown up speaking the language of the left. But, by the time Podhoretz and Commentary found themselves backing Ronald Reagan, something had changed in the culture. They, and many other Jews, were no longer dissident liberals, but a new and important branch of American conservatism. Unlike other literary civil wars which generally have little impact on the real world of politics, the neoconservative revolution was a force to be reckoned with. An article in Commentary on the dangers of appeasing totalitarians and dictators led to the appointment of author Daniel Patrick Moynihan as U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations by President Gerald Ford. Less than a decade later, a similar piece in Commentary propelled Jeane Kirkpatrick from academia into the same post. More than that, the ideas that percolated in its pages found expression in some of the Reagan administration's foreign and domestic policies. Commentary neoconservatives were more than a faction of Jews focussed on the Soviet threat. The pages of the magazine were also a source of criticism of the urban agenda that had led to the moral bankruptcy of the liberal welfare state. Just as the founding of William F. Buckley's National Review helped jump-start American conservatism in the 1950s, so too can Commentary lay claim to the transformation of that same movement decades later. As Podhoretz has himself written following his retirement, the term neoconservative is itself now an anachronism. Those who are now labeled neocons are actually either former liberals who are today conservatives of long standing or young conservatives who were never liberals. Commentary and Podhoretz have their critics. Liberal revisionists are still prepared to dispute the magazine's courageous stand against the totalitarian Soviets. Far-right paleoconservatives such as Pat Buchanan lament the fact that the neoconservatives have eclipsed the influence of the old anti-Semitic forces of the right in conservative circles. Indeed, for these paleos, neoconservative is virtually synonymous with "Jew," and their opposition to neo-con policies is more a function of anti-Semitism than anything else. This is particularly important today. Despite the brickbats of ex-friends and rivals, Podhoretz and Commentary won the intellectual arguments of the 1970s and 1980s. But the magazine's voice, today raised against the terrorist threat of Islamist fascism, is needed more than ever. Fortunately, that message is heard not only in Commentary, but in publications such as The Weekly Standard (led by Irving Kristol's son William), and in the thinking of prominent Bush administration figures such as Elliot Abrams (Podhoretz's son-in-law) and others. The proof of the enduring importance of this slim monthly whose pages boast no pictures cannot be measured solely in the resumes of its writers, but in the power of its ideas. Those ideas, rooted in a rejection of anti-American leftism, have found expression in the rhetoric of the current Bush administration, and helped to revive the spirit of a principled and idealistic foreign policy dedicated to promoting democracy, and implacably opposed to totalitarians. In the past, Commentary rallied intellectuals and general readers to the defense of American democratic values. Today, the growing chorus of vituperative anti-American critics should remind us that this fight is not over. Such ideas matter. Whether they fully understand it or not, all those who speak up for these principles are the children of Commentary. Every weekday JewishWorldReview.com publishes what many in Washington and in the media consider "must reading." Sign up for the daily JWR update. It's free. Just click here. JWR contributor Jonathan S. Tobin is executive editor of the Philadelphia Jewish Exponent. Let him know what you think by clicking here. In June, Mr. Tobin won first places honors in the American Jewish Press Association's Louis Rapaport Award for Excellence in Commentary as well as the Philadelphia Press Association's Media Award for top weekly columnist. Both competitions were for articles written in the year 2002. Jonathan Tobin Archives --- In cia-drugs@yahoogroups.com, "mark urban" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Why don't we just let Fitzgerald figure out how full of shit Wilson > is? > > I promise that innocent men who have done nothing wrong do not > scramble like Rove and Co. > > This piece is part of a campaign to spin this item in the > administation's favor. > > If you want to see how the effort is being coordinated, then just go > and read ann coulter's garbage on this. > > > --- In cia-drugs@yahoogroups.com, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > > > > > > _http://www.jewishworldreview.com/0704/peretz_turning_tale.php3_ > > (http://www.jewishworldreview.com/0704/peretz_turning_tale.php3) > > Turning Tale > > By Martin Peretz > > > > > > (http://www.jewishworldreview.com/0704/peretz_turning_tale.php3? > printer_friendly) > > > > (http://www.jewishworldreview.com/templates/email2.php? > article_title=Turning+Tale+++&article_author=Martin+Peretz&article_da > te=July+22,+2004+&article_url=h > > > ttp://www.jewishworldreview.com/0704/peretz_turning_tale.php3&sent=fa > lse&ccMe= > > no) > > > > Joseph Wilson's story unravels; Sandy Berger's makes little sense > > > > > > The tale spun by former Ambassador Joseph Wilson that Iraq did > not ever try > > to buy uranium yellowcake from Niger is now in the process of > unraveling. > > And, of course, the phalanx of anti-war journalists is > desperately trying to > > stop the bust-up. But it can't be done. The flying apart began > with two stories > > in the Financial Times (London), one on June 28, the other on > July 4. > > > > Relying on information ultimately sourced to three European > intelligence > > services â" none of them British and one of them that had > monitored clandestine > > uranium smuggling to Iraq over three years â" Mark Huband > reported that the > > network also serviced or was to service Libya, Iran, China, and > North Korea. A > > tell-tale element of the story is that the mines in Niger from > which several > > thousand tons of uranium had been extracted and sold were owned > by French > > companies. Apparently, after a time, they had abandoned the mines > as economically > > unviable. But, as a counter-proliferation expert told Huband, > this does not > > mean that extraction stopped. In any case, Lord Butler's > altogether > > independent panel in the United Kingdom concluded that Tony > Blair's claim about > > Hussein being in the market for uranium was "well-founded." These > are the same > > claims made by George W. Moreover, the U.S. Senate report > undercuts Wilson's very > > believability. I myself had wondered why the CIA had been so dumb > â" such > > dumbness is something to which we should have long ago become > accustomed! â" as > > to send a low-level diplomat to check on yellowcake sales from > Niger to Iraq > > when it should have dispatched a real spook. > > Well, it turns out that a "real spook" had recommended him to her > boss, that > > spook being Valerie Plame, who happens also to be Wilson's wife. > He has long > > denied that she had anything to do with his going to Niger and > that, alas, > > was a lie. It appears, in fact, that this is the sole reason he > was sent. > > Still, in a lot of dining rooms where I am a guest here, there is > outrage that > > someone in the vice president's office "outed" Ms. Plame, as > though everybody > > in Georgetown hadn't already known she was under cover, so to > speak. Under > > cover, but not really. One guest even asserted that someone in the > vice > > president's office is surely guilty of treason, no less â" an > offense this person > > certainly wouldn't have attributed to the Rosenbergs or Alger > Hiss, Daniel > > Ellsberg or Philip Agee. But for the person who confirmed for > Robert Novak what he > > already knew, nothing but high crimes would do. > > > > (https://www.kerenyehoshuavyisroel.com/keren/jwr/donate.cfm) > > > > I confess: I do not like Sandy Berger; and I have not liked him > since the > > first time we met, long ago during the McGovern campaign, not > because of his > > politics since I more or less shared them then, but for his > hauteur. He clearly > > still has McGovernite politics, which means, in my mind, at > least, that he > > believes there is no international dispute that can't be solved > by the U.S. > > walking away from it. No matter. Still, here's his story about > the filched > > classified materials dealing with the foiled Al Qaeda millennium > terrorist > > bombing plot from the National Archives: He inadvertently took > home documents and > > notes about documents that he was not permitted to take from the > archives; > > secondly, he inadvertently didn't notice the papers in his > possession when he > > got home and actually looked at them; and, thirdly, he > inadvertently discarded > > some of these same files so that they are now missing. Gone, in > fact. One of > > his lawyers attributes this behavior to "sloppiness," which may > better > > explain his career as Bill Clinton's National Security Adviser and > certainly > > describes his presentation of self in everyday life. But it is not > an explanation > > of his conduct in the archives or, for that matter, at home. > Personnel at the > > archives actually noticed him stuffing his pockets with papers as > he left, > > which is how the FBI found out about this bizarre tale in the > first place. > > Inadvertence, then, doesn't do it either. > > Maybe Sandy wanted souvenirs from his career in the White House > that was > > punctuated by so many catastrophes for the United States. > Nonetheless, he has > > had ambitions tied to John Kerry's, ambitions that clash with > those of Richard > > Holbrooke and Joe Biden, who decisively do not have McGovernite > politics. But > > Berger did run the Kerry foreign policy team at the writing of > the > > Democratic Party platform a few weeks ago (when the only > opposition, easily pacified, > > came from a handful of Dennis Kucinich loyalists) and has been > deeply > > involved in crafting how the candidate presents himself on these > issues. So my > > question is: Did Berger, who knew that he was under scrutiny > since last fall, > > alert Kerry to the combustible fact that he was the subject of a > criminal probe > > by the Justice Department and the FBI? My guess is not. Kerry is > far too > > smart, too responsible to have kept him around had he known. But > if Kerry didn't > > know, it tells you a lot about Berger, too much, really. A more > important > > question, of course, is: What was contained in the papers that > Berger snatched? > > The answer to that question might answer another. Maybe Clinton's > top national > > security aide didn't want others to see what they documented. > > French President Jacques Chirac has let it be known that Israeli > Prime > > Minister Ariel Sharon is not welcome as a guest in Paris. Mazel > tov! Can you > > actually imagine Chirac putting out a genuine welcome mat for the > Israeli leader > > who has shown that all of France's interventions in the area have > brought > > nothing good: more of terror, more of Arafat, worst of all, more > of Palestinian > > suffering, all to succor the illusion of French influence in the > region. But > > this latest donnybrook between the two leaders focused not on the > dispute with > > the Palestinians but about anti-Semitism in France itself. Chirac > has for > > years been denying that the ugly phenomenon even exists. Finally, > when day > > after day, evidence mounted that the country has not expelled the > virus of > > Jew-hatred from the body-politic and that it is now becoming more > malignant, even > > Chirac himself has had to sound the tocsin. And Sharon sounded > it, as well, > > when this week he called on French Jews to make aliyah or "go up" > to Israel. > > (Would that some Israeli leader had a quarter century ago called > on the Jews > > of Argentina to immigrate.) > > This really got Chirac's goat. But not before he demonstrated in > an off-hand > > remark that, for him, neither Jews nor Muslims, for that matter, > are really > > genuinely French: "we are witnessing racial events involving our > Jewish and > > Muslim compatriots. ... Sometimes just simple Frenchmen are > attacked." This is > > an ugly dichotomy. But it is not new. After the terrorist bombing > of the rue > > Copernic synagogue on October 3, 1980, Raymond Barre, the French > prime > > minister, alluded to this "odious act which intended to strike > Jews [and] struck > > innocent Frenchmen." > > Of course, Chirac and Barre are from the center-right and right > where > > anti-Semitism has always nested. But such views are now a staple > of the oh, so > > enlightened left, as well. French hatred of Jews now goes wall-to- > wall. And > > French hatred of Israel, too. A few days ago, France went into a > frenzy to > > mobilize the countries of the European Union at the UN to > vote "yes" on the General > > Assembly resolution calling on Israel to take down the security > barrier it is > > building against Palestinian terror. Many fatuous reasons were > mustered to > > support this demand. But the real reason that France and some > others oppose > > the fence is that it works. > > A new book by Christopher Andersen will hit The New York Times > bestseller > > list this week. It is called American Evita, and it is about > Hillary Rodham > > Clinton. She pushed herself into a prime time, opening night spot > at the > > Democratic convention after the Kerry folk had relegated her to > just one in an > > "all-the-girls" appearance of the party's women senators, with > Barbara Mikulski > > doing the speaking. How Rodham Clinton maneuvered herself out of > this is hard > > to tell. But one clue is that the Democratic National Committee > is still run > > by Clintonians. And, while we're mentioning arch names, there is > Teresa Heinz > > Kerry, more than a bit on the haughty side herself. Heinz Kerry > has certainly > > put John Edwards in his place in announcing that he is her > husband's "second > > running-mate." This is fair warning of how she sees herself as > first lady. > > On the day that the 216th General Assembly of the Presbyterian > Church (USA) > > voted to begin divesting its holdings in corporations that do > business with > > and in Israel, there was a pitched street battle in and around > Bethlehem. It > > was not a battle between Jews and Arabs or between Hamas and > Fatah. It was a > > battle between Christians and Muslims. Bethlehem used to be a > largely > > Christian city. It is, after all, where Jesus was born, so where > the Church of the > > Nativity stands. Roman Catholics, Armenians, and Greek Orthodox > have lived and > > flourished there since the first centuries of early Christianity. > No longer. > > As soon as the Palestinian Authority took over in 1994, the > Christians of > > Bethlehem began to leave, many in an understandable panic. For > all its secular > > pretenses, the PA is a militant Muslim jihadist show. A Christian > population > > that not so long ago stood at roughly 75 percent may now be as low > as 30 > > percent. Many of them have come to the U.S. But American churches > have averted > > their eyes from what is really tantamount to an expulsion of > Christians not only > > from Bethlehem but from the Holy Land itself. The Presbyterians > have also > > turned the other cheek by siding with those who torment their own. > And they > > have disavowed Christian Zionism as a heresy. Of course, there are > only two and > > a half million Presbyterians in the U.S. â" way down from what > once made up > > this proud church. Moreover, there is growing alienation between > the political > > leadership of the church and lay believers, as there is in the > Episcopal > > communion, much of this revolving around the implicit support of > the clerisy for > > Palestinian terror. > > Postscript > > The Kerry campaign has accused the White House of having leaked > Sandy > > Berger's troubles to the press, and I wouldn't be a bit surprised > if it did. As The > > New York Times pointed out today (July 22), however, this would > not at all > > have been illegal or even unusual. It smells nonetheless. But > most recent news > > answers another question that I asked yesterday: Did John Kerry > know that > > Berger was under investigation by the FBI and the Justice > Department. As I > > surmised, neither Kerry nor his staff was at all "witty," as it > is called in the > > intelligence trade, and they were caught completely off guard. > Kerry was > > probably rip-shit. Nonetheless, he issued a gentlemanly, even > statesmanlike, > > comment saying, "Sandy Berger is my friend, and he has tirelessly > served this > > nation with honor and distinction. I respect his decision to step > aside as an > > adviser to the campaign..." But Berger's behavior in clinging to > his role as > > Kerry's foreign policy guru shows that he is anything but a > friend. Hoping that > > the disgrace of pilfering from the National Archives what were > actually > > documents with the very highest security coding would somehow > pass unnoticed in > > public, Berger was even willing to put his candidate at risk. > This is a disti > > nction of sorts. But it is not at all honorable. > > Every weekday JewishWorldReview.com publishes what many in > Washington and in > > the media consider "must reading." Sign up for the daily JWR > update. It's > > free. Just click _here._ > (http://www.jewishworldreview.com/subs.php) > > > > > > JWR contributor Martin Peretz is editor-in-chief and chairman of > _The New > > Republic._ (http://tnr.com/) Comment by clicking _here._ > > (mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Peretz) > > > > © 2004, Martin Peretz > > _http://www.jewishworldreview.com/0704/peretz_turning_tale.php3_ > > (http://www.jewishworldreview.com/0704/peretz_turning_tale.php3) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > LENIN is supposed to have referred to blind defenders and > apologists for the > > Soviet Union in the Western democracies as "useful idiots." Yet > even Lenin > > might have been surprised at how far these useful idiots would > carry their > > partisanship in later years -- including our own times.-Thomas > Sowell: > > _www.jewishworldreview.com/cols/sowell090100.asp_ > > (http://www.jewishworldreview.com/cols/sowell090100.asp) > > > > _http://groups.yahoo.com/group/The_Useful_Idiot_Society/_ > > (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/The_Useful_Idiot_Society/) > > (TUIS is a non-member *personal* posting board. No membership > request please) > > > > > > > > - > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ____________________________________ > > _Start your day with_ > > (http://us.rd.yahoo.com/evt=34442/*http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs) > > > > ____________________________________ Complete archives at http://www.sitbot.net/ Please let us stay on topic and be civil. OM Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/cia-drugs/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
