Bromwich Goes Off The Deep-end

Bromwich generously concedes, "the evidence of Mearsheimer and Walt suggests that Israel was never the prime mover of the Iraq war" -- and, although their article gave a distinctly different impression, we Jews appreciate Bromwich's magnanimity. Oh, wait: "But now the American war with Iran they [Israel] originally wanted is coming closer." "The hottest cries for another war have been coming this summer from Joe Lieberman," inspired by "his appetite for multiple theaters of conflict," "the congealed memory of all the wars he never fought" and "his crusty lust for con-qwust" (guess which one I made up). But he wouldn't push for war without permission from "Vice President Cheney, a close and admired friend." So the Jew is the bloodthirsty henchman and the gentile the bloodthirsty behind-the-scenes manipulator? Oops, sike: Cheney wouldn't "permit a high-profile lawmaker whom he partly controls to set the United States and Israel on so perilous a course unless he had ascertained its acceptability to Ehud Olmert." Ah, so the Israelis have secret veto power over American policy. My world makes sense again. According to Mearsheimer and Walt, one of the ways "the Lobby" menaces American democracy is by "put[ting] pressure on particular academics and universities" -- presumably by bringing those academics' ugly comments to public light. Well, Yale students and alumni: Here we have a Yale professor touting a book that has been derided as a failure of scholarship and a retread of ancient blood libels as something that "deserves to be widely read and discussed" and "could not be more timely" -- apparently because we're on a Jew-set course for war with Iran. Contrary to Mearsheimer and Walt's wishful thinking, of course, there's no unitary Lobby (or, again, Evil Jew Super-Conspiracy) to resort to here. In the real world, there's not much we can do about professor Bromwich's article -- save be embarrassed that Yale's name is somehow attached to it.