Here is a link to an hour long interview on NPR's On Point. In it, Walt and Mearsheimer respond to the kind of criticisms offered by the author of this Slate article.

<link>

Of course NPR would do something like that.

They've been wanting the Muslims to have free reign over this country for a while because they feel its the only way they can get recompence for America even existing.

Such self loathing is disgusting.

What do Muslims have to do with any of this? Is this some sort of guilt by association? And is it that whenever anyone tries to give a balanced views of Muslims (which NPR has done, and done well by also being both critical of Islam/Muslims), then somehow they are lying and/or letting Muslims have free reign over the country? If you criticize Walt and Mearsheimer for inducing antisemitism, then you too should be criticized for inducing warrant-less fear of Muslims.

BigSky, NPR has wanted the Islam religion to become dominant in America because they hate the fact that the nation was founded by Christians.

Its not an attack on Islam.

Its an attack on NPR for having really sleezy reasons for doing what they do.

San, you're fucking nuts. I can't believe how some people have lost their freaking minds in the US.

...BigSky, NPR has wanted the Islam religion to become dominant in America because they hate the fact that the nation was founded by Christians...

LOL! You have to be the stupidest motherfucker on this board, hands down. Yeah, that's it--NPR wants Islam to have "free reign" in this country. That's their big plan. LOL! Get back in the trailer, retard.

If you can't understand how they support Islam because they feel it is the best way to destroy the traditionalist understanding, then you are an extremely ignorant moron.

Walt and Mearsheimer also offer a 60 page point-by-point rebuttal of criticisms and some minor error correction on their book's website. It's worth the read and it's free.

<link> (PDF document)

To sum up, they politely demolish all of their detractors' points without cheap shots - although near the end they do call Alan Dershowitz an "apologist" again. I like the word "tool" better.

By demolish, you mean their poor use of language represents them bending over and admitting how awful of people they are?

Because anyone looking at the bs that they are producing sees that they are admitting to having no legitimate argument than just a bunch of racist bull crap.

Notice how they single out the Israeli lobby, when that lobby is the slimest minority lobbying group in DC.

They actually do address that point in their book and their rebuttal. There is understandably very little in the way of a Palestinian lobby, and other other groups and interests focus on domestic law and politics, and don't concern themselves much with foreign policy. Thus, the Israeli lobby has free reign in Congress to push its world-view and agenda in that arena. How is that rascist?

"here is understandably very little in the way of a Palestinian lobby, and other other groups and interests focus on domestic law and politics, and don't concern themselves much with foreign policy."

Only if you pretend that the anti Muslim discrimination league does not do a large amount of lobbying against Israel and the Jewish anti discrimination league.

But we all know that there is a lot of pretending going around to justify such anti-Israel bs.

And free reign? Are you saying that the AARP has free reign? Ever wonder why they are responsible for the biggest spending programs in the US?

I'm completely confused by your comment.

What does the AARP, an organization representing retired senior citizens, have to do with Muslims? And what is the Muslim discrimination league? I've never heard of it in the US.

rlritt:

And what is the Muslim discrimination league? I've never heard of it in the US.

He means the ADC

Part of the Arab Lobby

No cohesive Arab lobby has ever come to existence, with the closest being the American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee. This organization, which started in the 1970s, gained considerable support from politically active Arab Americans until the headquarters of the organization was bombed in the early 1980s. Even in its heyday it focused on serving the interests of Arab Americans within the confines of domestic politics. Today, this organization does little in terms of pressing to change foreign policy that is against "Arab" interests, though they do serve as a source of protection and advice for Arab Americans who fall victim to civil rights abuses and intimidation by government and private agents. - WIKPEDIA

wayhey1:

This organization... gained considerable support from politically active Arab Americans until the headquarters of the organization was bombed in the early 1980s.

The California branch was bombed by a radical Jewish group in 1985. See Jewish Defense League. That taught them not to provide a counterpoint to APAIC, though, a lesson they apparently took to heart.