CiF attacks anti-Hagel war agitators: Israel lobby, bond dealers & arms manufacturers

‘Comment is Free’ contributor Stephen Kinzer, much like fellow contributors Glenn Greenwald and Michael Cohen, is angry with the foes of Chuck Hagel.

Hagel, a far-right Republican hostile to abortion rights, gay rights and civil rights, and who has come under fire for his views on Israel, the Middle East and the Islamist regime in Tehran, has strangely become a progressive cause celeb among the Guardian-style left.

At the heart of the case against Senator Hagel’s nomination, according to Kinzer, is the Nebraska Senator’s opposition to the powerful pro-war movement. 

He writes:

“What do Nebraska and Iran have in common? Not much – but enough to cause big trouble for former Nebraska Senator Chuck Hagel, whose possible nomination to be secretary of defense is being challenged by the powerful bomb-Iran-yesterday lobby.”

Also troubling Kinzer are the “militarists” controlled by the pro-Israel lobby.

Militarists in Washington, taking their cue from pro-Israel lobbyists, are trying to derail the appointment because Hagel doubts the wisdom of starting another war in the Middle East.”

Kinzer helpfully contextualizes the political debate in Washington by evoking a political debate in the US which took place 95 years ago.

“Nebraska Senator George Norris, who voted against both United States entry into first world war and American membership in the League of Nations…told Americans that the push toward global engagement was the project of “munition manufacturers, stockbrokers, and bond dealers“; and he warned that it “brings no prosperity to the great mass of common and patriotic citizens.”

Hagel is in the great American tradition of the prairie populist. He has sought to speak a word or two of truth to power. Power is not amused. That is why his nomination is in trouble before it has even been announced.”

An isolationist who warns of the hidden hand of militarists, unpatriotic Zionists, the military industrial complex, and monied classes?

The fact that such hysterical, sophomoric agitprop – which manages to evoke the nativist fear-mongering of Charles Lindbergh and Henry Ford – has found its way onto the pages of ‘Comment is Free’ would only come as a surprise to those who still entertain the fanciful notion that the Guardian is a liberal institution. 

19 replies »

  1. So, the Guardian thinks Jews are war-monger who must secretly be behind any and every hostility? The last “journal” to so prominently espouse such a thesis was the Nazi “Sturmer”.

    How far the Guardian has fallen.

    • The Guardian does not think ‘Jews are war-mongers’!Even though Mr Greenwald may!
      The Guardian provides a forum for discussion and debate.
      Consequently some very queer fish may appear on it’s pages from time to time.
      Only recently I have had to stomach articles by David ( call me Dave) Cameron,George( Gideon) Osborne and Ian Duncan Smith.
      They have even given space to Michael Portillo who famously claimed that the poll-tax was the best thing since sliced bread!
      This is not evidence of a departure from ‘Liberal’ principles.
      Rather an indication of dumming-down. Try as I might I cannot recall a word of the aforementioned Tory scribblings.
      Comparison with Nazi rag Die Sturmer is a bit like asking how many angels can fit on the end of a pin.(i.e nonsense)

        • “On CifWatch, the whole world agrees with every word written in the Guardian.”

          Oh come on. You should have saved your fingers from typing that one instead of inching that much closer to arthritis for nothing.

    • So, the Guardian thinks Jews are war-monger who must secretly be behind any and every hostility?

      What a load of delusional nonsense. Where on earth did you get that from?

      And then the ludicrous Nazi/Sturmer comparison for good measure!

      • It’s funny how wacky statements like Observer’s get plenty of agrees – but no comments to actually them back. Likewise plenty of disagrees with my challenge – but no posts of any substance.

    • Do you agree with what Kinzer wrote?
      Do you agree with Hagel that congress is intimidated by the “Jewish Lobby?”

      • That’s a strange answer to my question.

        I was hoping for a reply from CiFWatch, to be honest.

        • Do you get as exercised about the Arab lobby pressurising senators and Congressmen? Or is it just the “Jewish”, i.e. Israel lobby that bothers you?

          Besides which, the Israel lobby did not have much to say in any organized fashion about Hagel’s nomination. The criticism of his nomination came from various quarters, some of them quite unexpected, e.g. the feminist movement and homosexuals for a start. Are you going to protest their pressure too?

          • most of the actual written criticism was in regard to Israel’s security concerns. Daily Kos and a few others phoned in some things but Dan Senor, the Republican Jewish Committee Commentary and Weekly Standard are the ones who are freaking out.

    • Sez the knee-jerk reactor as soon as he thinks he hears the words “Jewish lobby”. Talk about dog whistles and undignified. Look in the mirror.