When Walt & Mearsheimer posted their tendentious “Working Paper” about the “Israel Lobby” last year on the Harvard website, one needed only to look at “Footnote 40” to see their methodology: ignoring well-known primary sources and relying instead on tendentious secondary sources that supported their view, and calling the result “research.”
In their new book-length argument, they have followed the same methodology — this time in Footnote 122 on page 104 — but at a time when the issue is more serious than a mere failure to observe common academic standards: see “Walt, Mearsheimer and the Peace Process.”
Lenny Ben-David has an article that indicates pretty clearly there were two important sources for Walt & Mearsheimer’s argument that they did not acknowledge in their footnotes.