October 24, 2005
PROTOCOLS OF THE REALISTS OF FOGGY BOTTOM:
U.S. Magazine Prints Anti-Jewish Slur (Press Release of the Wyman Institute, 10-23-05)
As scholars prepare to mark the 100th anniversary of the antisemitic 'Protocols of the Elders of Zion,' a U.S. magazine has published a Protocols-style "dual loyalty" slur against Ambassador Henry Morgenthau Sr., one of the most prominent Jews in early twentieth-century American politics.The Washington Report on Middle East Affairs, a glossy magazine published by two former U.S. government officials, has printed an article in its November 2005 issue blaming Morgenthau and Zionism for prolonging World War I. The article falsely suggests that Morgenthau's 1917 peace mission to Turkey could have brought an early end to the war, but that Morgenthau allowed Zionist leader Chaim Weizmann to talk him out of the effort because Morgenthau chose to "show more loyalty to Zionism than to his president or his country." (In fact, Morgenthau was an opponent of Zionism.)
The article also falsely claims that "a [U.S.] Senator" testified at congressional hearings in 1922 that the Zionists were to blame for prolonging World War I. In fact, that testimony was made not be a Senator but by an Arabist professor, Edward B. Reed, and his statement at the time was denounced by American Zionist leaders as reminiscent of The Protocols of the Elders of Zion. [...]
The Washington Report's article was authored by "John Cornelius," whom it identifies as "the nom de plume of an American with long-standing interest in the Middle East."
The Washington Report often publishes articles comparing Israel to the Nazis and alleging inappropriate Jewish influence on Congress or the media. It also opposes U.S. government support of the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum, and in 1998 printed an article claiming there is new evidence that "would cut in half the Zionists' original claim that six million Jews had died under the Nazi regime." U.S. Congressman Steven Rothman (D-NJ) has described the Washington Report as "extremely anti-Semitic" and urged his congressional colleagues to boycott it.
Anti-Semitic State Department vets? Wonders never cease. Posted by Orrin Judd at October 24, 2005 9:47 AM
"Anti-Semitic State Department vets?"
Are there any other kind?
Posted by: Robert Schwartz at October 24, 2005 8:54 PM