SIGN IN to access Harper’s Magazine
Need to create a login? Want to change your email address or password? Forgot your password?
1. Sign in to Customer Care using your account number or postal address.
2. Select Email/Password Information.
3. Enter your new information and click on Save My Changes.
Subscribers can find additional help here. Not a subscriber? Subscribe today!
A number of people wrote with comments about the item I posted last week, “Obama Wins Coveted Hamas Un-endorsement with AIPAC Speech”. Here are two different takes, both that make a lot of sense. First, is part of a letter from Marcus Wofford, who writes:
Let’s be honest here, it ain’t hard to figure out why Obama’s stand has changed. Judging from all the media outlets over the last
couple of months, Obama was in serious danger of losing the Jewish vote…It is really questionable whether or not it’s possible for a Democrat to be elected without Jewish support. So, ipso facto, Obama makes a hawkish speech catering to the Zionist movement. Reining in Israel will take a movement from within American
Jewry. And, honestly, that doesn’t look like it’s anywhere in the pipeline.
However, one thing is certain, McCain is as likely to
antagonize the Religious Right segment of his base by negotiating
with the Palestinians as he is to sprout wings and fly. Obama may have flip-flopped, but he’s still our only hope.
The second letter is from Joel Harvey, who said:
A guy that you thought would be honest about the situation in Israeli-occupied Palestine does what every other major party politician has to do, murder his own values and belief system…A shameful display by a man who somehow seemed larger to me than maybe he should have in retrospect. The Democratic Party and Obama are behind the curve on every issue of importance to thinking people in this country and in the world, this type of pandering only goes to demonstrate the inadequacy of the two
More from Ken Silverstein:
Perspective — October 23, 2013, 8:00 am
How pro-oil Louisiana politicians have shaped American environmental policy
Postcard — October 16, 2013, 8:00 am
A trip to one of the properties at issue in Louisiana’s oil-pollution lawsuits
Acres of hemp grown by “patriotic‚” U.S. farmers in 1942 at the behest of the U.S. government:
A study suggested that the health effects of exposure to nuclear radiation at Chernobyl were no worse than ill health resulting from smoking and normal urban air pollution.
Greenpeace apologized after activists accidentally defaced the site of Peru’s 2,000-year-old Nazca Lines when they unfurled cloth letters reading “time for change” near the ancient sand drawings. “We fully understand,” the group wrote in a statement, “that this looks bad.”
Subscribe to the Weekly Review newsletter. Don’t worry, we won’t sell your email address!
“I hope that after reading the following pages the leaders of the Y. M. C. A. will start a campaign to induce good young men to do nothing. If so, I shall not have lived in vain.”