Best-selling journalist Antony Loewenstein trav­els across Afghanistan, Pakistan, Haiti, Papua New Guinea, the United States, Britain, Greece, and Australia to witness the reality of disaster capitalism. He discovers how companies such as G4S, Serco, and Halliburton cash in on or­ganized misery in a hidden world of privatized detention centers, militarized private security, aid profiteering, and destructive mining.

Disaster has become big business. Talking to immigrants stuck in limbo in Britain or visiting immigration centers in America, Loewenstein maps the secret networks formed to help cor­porations bleed what profits they can from economic crisis. He debates with Western contractors in Afghanistan, meets the locals in post-earthquake Haiti, and in Greece finds a country at the mercy of vulture profiteers. In Papua New Guinea, he sees a local commu­nity forced to rebel against predatory resource companies and NGOs.

What emerges through Loewenstein’s re­porting is a dark history of multinational corpo­rations that, with the aid of media and political elites, have grown more powerful than national governments. In the twenty-first century, the vulnerable have become the world’s most valu­able commodity. Disaster Capitalism is published by Verso in 2015 and in paperback in January 2017.

Profits_of_doom_cover_350Vulture capitalism has seen the corporation become more powerful than the state, and yet its work is often done by stealth, supported by political and media elites. The result is privatised wars and outsourced detention centres, mining companies pillaging precious land in developing countries and struggling nations invaded by NGOs and the corporate dollar. Best-selling journalist Antony Loewenstein travels to Afghanistan, Pakistan, Haiti, Papua New Guinea and across Australia to witness the reality of this largely hidden world of privatised detention centres, outsourced aid, destructive resource wars and militarized private security. Who is involved and why? Can it be stopped? What are the alternatives in a globalised world? Profits of Doom, published in 2013 and released in an updated edition in 2014, challenges the fundamentals of our unsustainable way of life and the money-making imperatives driving it. It is released in an updated edition in 2014.
forgodssakecover Four Australian thinkers come together to ask and answer the big questions, such as: What is the nature of the universe? Doesn't religion cause most of the conflict in the world? And Where do we find hope?   We are introduced to different belief systems – Judaism, Christianity, Islam – and to the argument that atheism, like organised religion, has its own compelling logic. And we gain insight into the life events that led each author to their current position.   Jane Caro flirted briefly with spiritual belief, inspired by 19th century literary heroines such as Elizabeth Gaskell and the Bronte sisters. Antony Loewenstein is proudly culturally, yet unconventionally, Jewish. Simon Smart is firmly and resolutely a Christian, but one who has had some of his most profound spiritual moments while surfing. Rachel Woodlock grew up in the alternative embrace of Baha'i belief but became entranced by its older parent religion, Islam.   Provocative, informative and passionately argued, For God's Sakepublished in 2013, encourages us to accept religious differences, but to also challenge more vigorously the beliefs that create discord.  
After Zionism, published in 2012 and 2013 with co-editor Ahmed Moor, brings together some of the world s leading thinkers on the Middle East question to dissect the century-long conflict between Zionism and the Palestinians, and to explore possible forms of a one-state solution. Time has run out for the two-state solution because of the unending and permanent Jewish colonization of Palestinian land. Although deep mistrust exists on both sides of the conflict, growing numbers of Palestinians and Israelis, Jews and Arabs are working together to forge a different, unified future. Progressive and realist ideas are at last gaining a foothold in the discourse, while those influenced by the colonial era have been discredited or abandoned. Whatever the political solution may be, Palestinian and Israeli lives are intertwined, enmeshed, irrevocably. This daring and timely collection includes essays by Omar Barghouti, Jonathan Cook, Joseph Dana, Jeremiah Haber, Jeff Halper, Ghada Karmi, Antony Loewenstein, Saree Makdisi, John Mearsheimer, Ahmed Moor, Ilan Pappe, Sara Roy and Phil Weiss.
The 2008 financial crisis opened the door for a bold, progressive social movement. But despite widespread revulsion at economic inequity and political opportunism, after the crash very little has changed. Has the Left failed? What agenda should progressives pursue? And what alternatives do they dare to imagine? Left Turn, published by Melbourne University Press in 2012 and co-edited with Jeff Sparrow, is aimed at the many Australians disillusioned with the political process. It includes passionate and challenging contributions by a diverse range of writers, thinkers and politicians, from Larissa Berendht and Christos Tsiolkas to Guy Rundle and Lee Rhiannon. These essays offer perspectives largely excluded from the mainstream. They offer possibilities for resistance and for a renewed struggle for change.
The Blogging Revolution, released by Melbourne University Press in 2008, is a colourful and revelatory account of bloggers around the globe why live and write under repressive regimes - many of them risking their lives in doing so. Antony Loewenstein's travels take him to private parties in Iran and Egypt, internet cafes in Saudi Arabia and Damascus, to the homes of Cuban dissidents and into newspaper offices in Beijing, where he discovers the ways in which the internet is threatening the ruld of governments. Through first-hand investigations, he reveals the complicity of Western multinationals in assisting the restriction of information in these countries and how bloggers are leading the charge for change. The blogging revolution is a superb examination about the nature of repression in the twenty-first century and the power of brave individuals to overcome it. It was released in an updated edition in 2011, post the Arab revolutions, and an updated Indian print version in 2011.
The best-selling book on the Israel/Palestine conflict, My Israel Question - on Jewish identity, the Zionist lobby, reporting from Palestine and future Middle East directions - was released by Melbourne University Press in 2006. A new, updated edition was released in 2007 (and reprinted again in 2008). The book was short-listed for the 2007 NSW Premier's Literary Award. Another fully updated, third edition was published in 2009. It was released in all e-book formats in 2011. An updated and translated edition was published in Arabic in 2012.

Desperation sets in

The New York Post on February 21 defames Norman Finkelstein:


  • edward squire

    Finkelstein is obviously the odd one out: while all the others either deny or down-play the scale of the Nazi holocaust, Finkelstein demands that all people recognise its systematicity and it massiveness.

    (Where he gets into trouble of course is over definition of "all" – he includes in this definition the various Jewish organisations that collect money on behalf of, but also independently of, actual Nazi holocaust survivors.)

  • Chris

    It seems the ChronWatch has also defamed him, possibly.….

    Academic Witch-Hunt at Depaul University

    Written by Steven Plaut

    Tuesday, March 22, 2005

    Depaul University is a large, if not particularly renowned academically, Catholic college in Chicago. Until recently the main cause of controversy surrounding Depaul was its insistence on employing notorious anti-Semite Norman Finkelstein as an assistant professor in its political science department. But recently Depaul took a giant step in implementing Orwellism and anti-democratic suppression of political incorrectness on its campus.

    The immediate target of Depaul's campaign against political incorrectness was Thomas Klocek, a part-time adjunct professor at DePaul University's so-called "School for New Learning". ("New learning" evidently is not something Depaul confuses with learning, as the events there show.) Klocek's crime? He was guilty of expressing support for Israel. Evidently Holocaust Denial is ok at Depaul, but not expressing support for Israel.

    After 14 years of continuous employment at the Chicago-based college, Klocek was suspended with pay last September, and then stayed suspended – this time without pay – through the winter quarter. Klocek is guilty of nothing more than expressing pro-Israel views in the face of extremist Palestinian propaganda on Depaul's campus, including students and non-students proliferating the usual lies and canards about Israel and Rachel Corrie. Klocek's courses have ranged from Critical Thinking to College Writing to Languages and Cultures of the World. By all accounts, he was a popular teacher and his classes were always full.

    Despite having an unblemished record during that span, DePaul summarily dismissed him from his duties after the school learned that he had .insulted. and .demeaned. several Muslim students at a campus fair for extracurricular groups. Klocek had publicly expressed his belief that, "strictly speaking, right now there is no such place as Palestine on the map. The Palestinian people were simply Arabs who lived in the West Bank and Gaza." We seem to recall that Galileo was also persecuted by Church institutions for daring to tell the truth! Klocek, by the way, is Roman Catholic.

    With no current income and facing the possibility of losing the health insurance he desperately needs for a serious kidney condition, Klocek, the 21st century Galileo of Depaul, decided to go public with his fight. The Chicago Jewish news runs a large expose of Depaul's auto da fe against Klocek this week. The university contends that Klocek's case "is not a case of academic freedom but a situation of inappropriate behavior outside the classroom by a university employee," according to Mattson, the university spokesperson. Yeah, right, while another Depaul professor has made a career out of promoting and cheering Holocaust Deniers and serving as the darling of neonazi web sites!! HIS "behavior" does not disturb the Depaul Inquisitors.

    Large numbers of bloggers have come out in favor of Klocek and against his Inquisitors from Depaul. The university itself has been forced to acknowledge the growing outrage over its conduct.

    Depaul's sudden horror at the supposed "unprofessorial behavior" by Klocek (they allege he made an impolite hand gesture to Muslim students who had been calling him names) stands in sharp contrast with the university's record regarding Norman Finkelstein, the most openly anti-Semitic Jew on the planet. Depaul employs Finkelstein as anassistant professor in political science, this after Finkelstein got fired from two NY area adjunct teaching jobs (at NYU and Hunter College) because of his pseudo-scholarship and fraudulent rantings against Jews and Israel.

    Finkelstein is a disciple of Holocaust Denier David Irving and claims Irving is an authoritative historian. Finkelstein refers to the six million Jews murdered by the Nazis as the "Six Million" in quotation marks and says that nearly every Holocaust survivor is a fraud and a thief and a liar. (Finkelstein's own parents are Holocaust survivors, and Finkelstein has long tried to capitalize on this as a way to legitimize his own anti Semitism. The psychiatry department at Depaul might have interesting

    things to say about this.)

    Finkelstein routinely libels Holocaust survivor, philosopher, and writer Elie Wiesel in scurrilous terms. Finkelstein is the star on every Holocaust Denial neonazi web site on earth, serving as the "Jew who proved there was never any Holocaust."

  • Chris

    It appears that Harvard defames Norman:

    The Committee to Expose Norman Finkelstein’s Close Connections to Neo-Nazism, Holocaust Denial, and His “Big Lie” of an “International Jewish Conspiracy”

    The Marketplace of Ideas:

    Know Who You Are Listening To or Reading

    The Norman Finkelstein Top Ten Lists

    (If you come across more, please feel free to add them to the ever-growing list. As Einstein said: “The difference between genius and stupidity is that there are limits to genius.”)

    The 10 Nuttiest Things Finkelstein Has Said

    10. …on Finkelstein’s “International Jewish Conspiracy”

    “All opinion-leaders, from the left to the right, are Jews…The Silence around my book in the US—if this is not a conspiracy, then what is one?” (NRC Handelsblad, August 5, 2000)

    Finkelstein’s “international Jewish conspiracy” includes Steven Spielberg, Leon Uris, critics of Andrew Lloyd Webber, and NBC:

    …on Steven Spielberg’s “Schindler’s List”

    “Give me a better reason!…Who profits [from the movie]? Basically, there are two beneficiaries from the dogmas [of Schindler’s List]: American Jews and the American administration…” (NRC Handelsblad)

    …on Leon Uris’ “Exodus”

    “The name of the character is Ari Ben Canaan because Ari is the diminutive for Aryan. It is the whole admiration for this blond haired, blue eyed type.” (Norman Finkelstein, “The Holocaust Industry,” March 10, 2004)

    “[T]he Israeli establishment likes the blue eyed, blonde haired Aryan types as a racial group. (Don Atapattu, “How to Lose Friends and Alienate People: A Conversation with Professor Norman Finkelstein,” CounterPunch, December 13, 2001)

    …on Andrew Lloyd Webber’s “Cats”

    “Some people [who support the thesis of a new anti-Semitism think the musical] Cats is a codeword for K-A-T-Z, Katz.” (Catalyst Radio Interview With Dr. Finkelstein.)

    …on the NBC series “Holocaust”

    “In 1978, NBC produced the series Holocaust. Do you believe, it was a coincidence, 1978? Just at this time, when peace negotiations between Israel and Egypt took place in Camp David?” (NRC Handelsblad)

    9. …on David Irving

    David Irving, the notorious Holocaust denier who claims there were no gas chambers and that Hitler was “the Jews’ greatest friend,” is “a good historian” who has “made an ‘indispensable’ contribution to our knowledge of World War II.” (Anne Applebaum, “The battle for the Holocaust Legacy,” Sunday Telegraph, July 16, 2000; and “The Holocaust Industry,” p. 71)

  • Chris

    Now FrontPageMage defames Norman. Can we say there is a Norman Finkelstein Defamation Industry?

    Counterpunch's Self-Hating Jews

    By Steven Plaut | June 21, 2005….
    During World War II, there were Jewish "kapos" in Nazi concentration camps who were forced by the threat of immediate death to collaborate with the Germans and performs jobs involved in the murder of other Jews. We should not be too fast to judge them, given their dire circumstances and desperate desire to stay alive.

    There are today, however, Jewish leftists who would like nothing better than to assist Jew-hating Arabs in creating a Second Jewish Holocaust, and their slavish and servile collaboration with genocidal Islamo-fascists has nothing to do with threats to their own lives.

    Almost every self-hating Jew on the planet capable of banging on a keyboard is today either a columnist for the anti-American web magazine Counterpunch, run by Alexander Cockburn, or is an object of Counterpunch’s celebration. Counterpunch runs Norman Finkelstein, whom even the Anti-Defamation League has declared a Holocaust denier. It regularly runs the anti-Israel lecturer Neve Gordon, a deep admirer of Finkelstein who has turned out dozens of articles attacking Israel for Cockburn, as well as Israel’s Lord Haw-Haw Uri Avnery, and dozens of other anti-Israel Jews.

    Now Counterpunch has decided to celebrate Gilad Atzmon, proudly proclaimed by Cockburn to be a “CounterPuncher”. Who is Atzmon?

    Atzmon is a subliterate ex-Israeli saxophone player living in Britain, where he is active in numerous anti-Semitic organizations. He is one of the ultras in the UK trying to organize boycotts of Israel, and is well-known for his defense of the burning down of synagogues. He is a communist; the Socialist Workers Party (SWP) has just invited Gilad Atzmon to appear at their annual convention this July, "Marxism 2005". He has already spoken before the pro-Castro “Trots” twice and tooted his saxophone for them. (Wouldn’t these “Trotskyites” be surprised to hear that Trotsky’s own grandson is a militant Zionist “settler” in the West Bank today?)

  • Addamo


    3 longwinded posts. The fact that Filnestein and Chomsky have been quotee by holocaur deniers does not mean anytyhing in itself does it"

    "Finkelstein routinely libels Holocaust survivor, philosopher, and writer Elie Wiesel in scurrilous terms. Finkelstein is the star on every Holocaust Denial neonazi web site on earth, serving as the “Jew who proved there was never any Holocaust.”"

    Thi sis typpical trasjh talk one would expcted to find from David Horowitz or the bloggers he hosts on his lunatic web site.

  • Chris

    Just attempting to prove that there is an entire industry devoted to defaming Norman Finkelstein. Which is the subject of this thread.

  • Chris

    The ADL defames Norman. But I think everyone expected that:
    Like some of the more extreme Palestinian ideologues whose cause he has made his own, Norman Finkelstein has built his career on two things: an obsessive, vitriolic hatred of Zionism and Israel, and a penchant for distorting the history of the Arab-Israeli conflict. Unlike his compatriots in Ramallah and Jenin, however, Finkelstein uses his academic credentials and proficiency with scholarly forms to cast as "research findings" what would otherwise be recognized as propagandist bunk.

    It is the sign of a true obsessive that he sees the subject of his obsession everywhere. For Finkelstein, everything he sees is filtered through the prism of his anti-Israel animus, with results that would be merely absurd were they not so often used to incite hatred against Israel and undermine efforts to diminish anti-Semitism in the world.

    An essential component of Finkelstein's obsession is the assumption that anything that in his view benefits Israel must be a calculated attempt to cover up Israel's essential depravity.

    In his first book, The Holocaust Industry, he applied this "logic" to Holocaust education initiatives and attempts to obtain compensation for survivors, insisting that these be viewed not as efforts to learn from history or obtain justice for survivors, but as cynical efforts by powerful Jewish groups to somehow "immunize Israel from criticism" for its alleged human rights abuses. Along the way, Finkelstein skewered some of the hagiographic components that had developed around the Holocaust, a move that was applauded by some. But his shrillness and faulty logic left most of us scratching our heads.

    In his new book, Beyond Chutzpah: On the Misuse of Anti-Semitism and the Abuse of History (University of California Press, 2005), Finkelstein confirms his obsession with the "evil" of Israel and Zionism. This time his target is anti-Semitism, insisting that efforts of Jewish organizations and other concerned bodies to oppose anti-Semitism around the world are really nothing more than an effort to "exploit" or "manufacture" claims of Jewish suffering in order to "immunize Israel against criticism" for its "racist" and "Nazi"-like treatment of Palestinians and its "unprecedented assault on international law."

  • Chris

    I can't prove it, but this article shows that the New York Times possibly defamed Norman:
    There is one other interesting fact you should know about the Zundelsite. It carries at least two articles published by Neve Gordon, the leftist extremist lecturer in political science at Ben Gurion University, best known for his pronouncements that Israel is a fascist, terrorist, apartheid state. One of these Zundelsite pieces is Gordon's article praising Norman Finkelstein, who himself is almost universally seen as a neo-Nazi, Holocaust denier, fraud and anti-Semite. The book by Finkelstein reviewed in Gordon's article was compared by the New York Times to the Protocols of the Elders of Zion. Note how Gordon compares Finkelstein ethically to the Prophets of the Bible (last sentences of the review). The other Zundelsite publication of a Gordon article is here.

  • Addamo

    The ADL defames a lot of peole and frequently get's succesfully sued for doing so.

    Peope who question the staus quo, like Filkenstein, wil always be marginalised. That's tjhe nature of the beast.

    Those who propose that the Earth was not flat also were ridiculed and persecuted.

  • Chris

    Unless you'd like to try to prove, or better define your term frequently, you seem to have made up another 'fact'. The ADL has successfully sued over defamation very few times. In fact, a google search pulls up very few cases, let alone those that were successful.

    Perhaps you have insider information that the rest of us are not privy to. Based on previous posts, you intimate knowledge that is not available to the rest of us.

    Finkelstein is marginalised because he is wrong.

  • rhross

    People who take a position with passion, like Finkelstein, will always be somewhat subjective but that does not mean the gist of what he posits is incorrect.

    He probably does his cause a disservice in being so broad in his approach but it is refreshing all the same to have someone defend the other side so vigorously.

    I suspect, as a Jew, he feels angry and ashamed and that accounts for his passion.

    But, at the end of the day, it doesn't matter if vested interests seek to defame him, the Truth is a redoubt that will always hold.

  • Addamo

    If Filkenstein was wrong he would be ignored, not marginalised. No one would spend so much time attacking him if he wre wrong.

    But RhRoss makes a good point. His passion get's the better of him.

    On the othr side of the spectrum, peope like David Horowotz has a penchant for accusing those areound him of being fans of saddam or Bin Laden.

  • Chris

    Is he totally incorrect? Not totally. Many defend the otherside vigorously. What Finkelstein has to say is not particularly refreshing.

  • Addamo

    Refreshing? No it may not be, but that doesn't make them false either.

    Filkenstein is largely a historian and fact checker with a very good memory. That tends to frustrate his critics becase he is alway prepared with a strong rebuttal in a debate.

  • Antony Loewenstein

    And his critics are so pathetic they feel they have to compare him to Irving and other Holocaust deniers.

  • orang

    Chris, since we're clogging up cyberspace I kind of like these ones, what do you think?:

    Why an Economic Boycott of Israel is Justified

    by Norman G. Finkelstein
    Aftenposten | 01.14.2006

    The recent proposal that Norway boycott Israeli goods has provoked passionate debate. In my view, a rational examination of this issue would pose two questions: 1) Do Israeli human rights violations warrant an economic boycott? and 2) Can such a boycott make a meaningful contribution toward ending these violations? I would argue that both these questions should be answered in the affirmative.

    Although the subject of many reports by human rights organizations, Israel's real human rights record in the Occupied Palestinian Territory is generally not well known abroad. This is primarily due to the formidable public relations industry of Israel's defenders as well as the effectiveness of their tactics of intimidation, such as labeling critics of Israeli policy anti-Semitic.

    Yet, it is an incontestable fact that Israel has committed a broad range of human rights violations, many rising to the level of war crimes and crimes against humanity. These include:

    Illegal Killings. Whereas Palestinian suicide attacks targeting Israeli civilians have garnered much media attention, Israel's quantitatively worse record of killing non-combatants is less well known. According to the most recent figures of the Israeli Information Center for Human Rights in the Occupied Territories (B'Tselem), 3,386 Palestinians have been killed since September 2000, of whom 1,008 were identified as combatants, as opposed to 992 Israelis killed, of whom 309 were combatants. This means that three times more Palestinians than Israelis have been killed and up to three times more Palestinian civilians than Israeli civilians. Israel's defenders maintain that there's a difference between targeting civilians and inadvertently killing them. B'Tselem disputes this: "[W]hen so many civilians have been killed and wounded, the lack of intent makes no difference. Israel remains responsible." Furthermore, Amnesty International reports that "many" Palestinians have not been accidentally killed but "deliberately targeted," while the award-winning New York Times journalist Chris Hedges reports that Israeli soldiers "entice children like mice into a trap and murder them for sport."

    Torture. "From 1967," Amnesty reports, "the Israeli security services have routinely tortured Palestinian political suspects in the Occupied Territories." B'Tselem found that eighty-five percent of Palestinians interrogated by Israeli security services were subjected to "methods constituting torture," while already a decade ago Human Rights Watch estimated that "the number of Palestinians tortured or severely ill-treated" was "in the tens of thousands – a number that becomes especially significant when it is remembered that the universe of adult and adolescent male Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza is under three-quarters of one million." In 1987 Israel became "the only country in the world to have effectively legalized torture" (Amnesty). Although the Israeli Supreme Court seemed to ban torture in a 1999 decision, the Public Committee Against Torture in Israel reported in 2003 that Israeli security forces continued to apply torture in a "methodical and routine" fashion. A 2001 B'Tselem study documented that Israeli security forces often applied "severe torture" to "Palestinian minors."

    House demolitions. "Israel has implemented a policy of mass demolition of Palestinian houses in the Occupied Territories," B'Tselem reports, and since September 2000 "has destroyed some 4,170 Palestinian homes." Until just recently Israel routinely resorted to house demolitions as a form of collective punishment. According to Middle East Watch, apart from Israel, the only other country in the world that used such a draconian punishment was Iraq under Saddam Hussein. In addition, Israel has demolished thousands of "illegal" homes that Palestinians built because of Israel's refusal to provide building permits. The motive behind destroying these homes, according to Amnesty, has been to maximize the area available for Jewish settlers: "Palestinians are targeted for no other reason than they are Palestinians." Finally, Israel has destroyed hundred of homes on security pretexts, yet a Human Rights Watch report on Gaza found that "the pattern of destruction…strongly suggests that Israeli forces demolished homes wholesale, regardless of whether they posed a specific threat." Amnesty likewise found that "Israel's extensive destruction of homes and properties throughout the West Bank and Gaza…is not justified by military necessity," and that "Some of these acts of destruction amount to grave breaches of the Fourth Geneva Convention and are war crimes."
    Judge Deeds, Not Words

    By Norman G. Finkelstein

    On the night of August 24, 2005, Israeli troops shot dead three teenage boys and two adults in a West Bank Palestinian refugee camp. An army communiqué claimed the five were terrorists, killed after opening fire on the soldiers. An investigation by Israel's leading human rights organization, B'Tselem, and its leading newspaper, Haaretz, found, however, that the teenagers were unarmed and had no connection with any terrorist organizations, while neither of the two adults was armed or wanted by the Israelis.[1]

    In Israel, as elsewhere, it's prudent to treat official pronouncements with skepticism.

    This is especially so when it comes to the "peace process."

    Israel's announcement that it would withdraw from the Gaza Strip won high praise in the American media as a major step toward ending the occupation of Palestinian land. Human rights organizations and academic specialists were less sanguine, however.

    In a recent study entitled One Big Prison, B'Tselem observes that the crippling economic arrangements Israel has imposed on Gaza will remain in effect. In addition, Israel will continue to maintain absolute control over Gaza's land borders, coastline and airspace, and the Israeli army will continue to operate in Gaza. "So long as these methods of control remain in Israeli hands," it concludes, "Israel's claim of an 'end of the occupation' is questionable."[2]

    The respected organization Human Rights Watch (HRW) is yet more emphatic that evacuating troops and Jewish settlements from inside Gaza will not end the occupation: "Whether the Israeli army is inside Gaza or redeployed around its periphery, and restricting entrance and exit, it remains in control."[3]
    In the case of Israel, Dershowitz justifies the resort to sanctions such as house demolitions on the ground that, judging by poll data, Palestinians overwhelmingly "supported continuing terrorist attacks," and accordingly are "themselves complicit" in these attacks. Indeed, he advocates not only individual house demolitions, but "the destruction of a small village which has been used as a base for terrorist operations" after each Palestinian attack. "The response will be automatic." Such massive destruction, he concludes, will further the "noble causes" of reducing terrorism and promoting peace. Israel categorizes attacks on its military personnel as terrorism; the Czech people undoubtedly supported the assassination of the Nazi officer. It is hard to make out any difference between the policy Dershowitz advocates and the Nazi destruction of Lidice, for which he expresses abhorrence – except that Jews, not Germans, would be implementing i
    Raul Hilberg comments on the first edition of The Holocaust Industry:

    "When I read Finkelstein's book, The Holocaust Industry , at the time of its appearance, I was in the middle of my own investigations of these matters, and I came to the conclusion that he was on the right track. I refer now to the part of the book that deals with the claims against the Swiss banks, and the other claims pertaining to forced labor. I would now say in retrospect that he was actually conservative, moderate and that his conclusions are trustworthy. He is a well-trained political scientist, has the ability to do the research, did it carefully, and has come up with the right results. I am by no means the only one who, in the coming months or years, will totally agree with Finkelstein's breakthrough."

  • Addamo

    Yes it's interesting how his critics and and otehr Israeli appologists take it upon themsleves to compare their opponents to Hitler and the Nazis a the drop of a hat, but when their critics do it, liek a certain mayor for example, he is pexpected to appolgise and punished publicly.

  • Addamo

    The delusional bandwagon he si referring to are those that are trying to convince the world that Jews are facifn an impeding repeat of the holocaust. So yes, he’s rabosolutely right.

  • Agisthos

    Its always interesting to read Finkelstein books and see him interviewed, and then compare how he is portrayed and misquoted by his critics.

    It really is a perfect lesson in character assasination.

    If you were just to come across one of the 10 point smear sheets without hearing Finkelsteins side, it would be very easy to be convinced he was an evil person and deranged anti-semite.

  • captain

    yes, it is very easy to be convinced.

  • Addamo

    Yes I agree with you. Well put.

    I don’t think Noa was hiding anything either. On the contarry, the writer revealed a great deal abtou themselves.

  • Chris

    It is almost too easy to be convinced. Perhaps because he so proudly displays this quote »"If everyone who claims to be a survivor actually is one," my mother used to exclaim, "who did Hitler kill?"«

    Here Lipstadt kind of defames Norman:
    "A very different type of extremist is Norman Finkelstein, who claims that the memory of the Holocaust has been made into an industry. Had he not been a child of survivors, his book would not have received any attention. "

  • Chris

    Here Yale defames Norman:

    Finkelstein and the YCIAS: Misusing Yale, abusing students

    by Rachel Bayefsky-Anand, Ari Evans and Rena Traube

    Yale Daily News

    October 24, 2005

    Imagine sitting in a room with respected Yale professors, listening to a Yale-invited speaker humiliate fellow students and deride American Jewry's "level of mental hysteria" about Holocaust denial. You needn't stretch your powers of imagination too far; such a scene unfolded last Thursday night in Linsly-Chittenden Hall, where Norman Finkelstein expounded on "Israel and Palestine: Misusing Anti-Semitism, Abusing History."

    Finkelstein, an assistant professor at DePaul University, presents himself as an expert on Middle Eastern affairs and world Jewry.

    But let's examine the facts. Norman Finkelstein was fired from New York University and Hunter College after the publication of "The Holocaust Industry," which The New York Times called a "novel variation" on the "Protocols of the Elders of Zion," a century-old anti-Semitic forgery. In the same review, Finkelstein was called "juvenile, arrogant and stupid." However, Finkelstein isn't totally bereft of admirers. In fact, the neo-Nazi and Holocaust denier Ingrid Rimland has said that reading his book made her "feel like a kid in a candy store."

    His lack of academic credentials was borne out in his speech at Yale last week. Again and again, Finkelstein resorted to ad hominem attacks and outlandish claims to combat those who dared challenge his views. He called renowned author and human rights crusader Elie Wiesel a "Nobel laureate for who-knows-what" and referred repeatedly to the nefarious "Jewish lobby" manipulating U.S. foreign policy. When a student asked how Finkelstein would respond to a quote posted on his own Web site, Finkelstein angrily proclaimed the student an "imbecile" for asking such a "stupid question."

    In a neat bit of willful ignorance, Finkelstein declared the Israeli-Palestinian conflict a "simple one." He claimed that it is unanimously accepted that Israel has perpetrated ethnic cleansing and uniquely egregious human rights violations since its birth in 1948. He urged us not to ignore the instinctive revulsion we all feel when faced with Israel's demolition of Palestinian houses. Curiously, Finkelstein did not mention the revulsion some of us feel when faced with the news of innocent children blown to pieces on their way to school or carefree cafe-goers murdered while sipping espressos. In fact, he never mentioned the words "terrorists" or "militants" at all, an omission that allowed him to ignore the cause-and-effect relationship between Palestinian suicide bombings and the defensive actions Israel is forced to undertake in response.

    Finkelstein also belittled current threats to Jews worldwide, stating that the widely accepted phenomenon of "the new anti-Semitism" is a construct invented by Jewish organizations. When a student confronted Finkelstein with unassailable evidence of the alarming rise in French anti-Semitic hate crimes, Finkelstein simply shouted her down. Evidently, crime statistics are not rigorous enough for him. No, for Finkelstein, only blatant falsehoods and crude innuendo will suffice.

    But all this pales in comparison to Finkelstein's morally repugnant comments about the Holocaust. He treated his audience to a barrage of shocking and hurtful claims and implied that hundreds of thousands of Jews are misrepresenting themselves as Holocaust victims. Such statements make liars of our grandparents and render their suffering a mere figment of the imagination. But maybe we should give Finkelstein the benefit of the doubt. After all, he does have sound reasoning: As his mother put it, "If all those who say they are survivors are telling the truth, then who did Hitler kill?"

    Finkelstein's recurring theme was exploitation. He accused American Jewish organizations of exploiting the Holocaust for monetary gain and political influence, and alleged that Israel uses the Holocaust to deflect criticism. But the ultimate irony is that it is Finkelstein who is the one doing the exploiting. Thursday night, Finkelstein never failed to remind us that he is Jewish and the son of Holocaust survivors, in an effort to inoculate himself against any charges of anti-Semitism and racism. Finkelstein has made a career out of the Holocaust; he counts on his controversial claims to garner publicity and speaking engagements.

    If this were merely a matter of one man's irrational views, we would agree to disagree. Finkelstein has a constitutional right to speak, no matter how bizarre and offensive we find his opinions. At the heart of this matter are the people who subsidized, sponsored and publicized Finkelstein's speech. Who provided him with a soapbox from which to propound his racist views? The Yale Center for International and Area Studies' Council on Middle East Studies, along with the New Haven group The Struggle and the Arab Students' Association.

    It is deeply disturbing that the YCIAS would choose to affiliate itself with a group as extreme as The Struggle. Last week, when we logged on to the YCIAS Web site to find more information about Finkelstein's visit, we were directed to, where we had the opportunity to glean valuable insights about the motives behind the war in Iraq: "anti-Arab racism" and "Israel's desire to dominate its Middle East neighbors." The views this group espouses seem patently laughable, and any speakers such a group would sponsor are suspect. And yet, somehow, we found ourselves sitting alongside respected, tenured members of the Yale faculty, including current and past department chairs, listening to this man command a Yale-subsidized bully pulpit. The experience was discomfiting, to say the least.

    Would a Yale department sponsor a speaker who criticized the African-American community for "exploiting" slavery and segregation? Would the YCIAS sponsor an event in which Bosnian Muslims were condemned for using the genocide in Yugoslavia for monetary gain?

    The answer is clear. But the YCIAS apparently felt compelled to affiliate itself with an irresponsible demagogue and a fringe group. Student tuition funded this event, and YCIAS must be held accountable.

    Rachel Bayefsky-Anand '09, Ari Evans '09 and Rena Traube '09 are members of the Yale Friends of Israel.

  • Addamo

    Chris, you and Captian don't need convincing.

    But Filkenstein has hit onto a mot point, "“A very different type of extremist is Norman Finkelstein, who claims that the memory of the Holocaust has been made into an industry. Had he not been a child of survivors, his book would not have received any attention. “

    That's why he is so hated. He is the child of holocasut survivors and those that seek to exploit the holocaut for ideologicla gain are furious that he refuses to join the delusional bandwagon.

  • Chris

    He is reviled for suggesting that there is some so-called "delusinal bandwagon", unless you are referring to the loose knit society to deny the holocaust occurred.

  • Chris

    Another defamation of Norman:

    Norman Finkelstein Speaks at Buffalo

    By Noa Borsie

    Much talk is still brewing over the April 28, 2005 lecture by

    DePaul University professor, Norman Finkelstein, which was sponsored by the Marxist-Leninist Student Organization and Department of English faculty; Bruce Jackson and James Holstun. I am referring specifically to an article by Steven Watson that appeared in the Buffalo News 9/6/05.

    From the picture presented in the news depicting the lecture as an example of free speech, it is difficult to believe the UB professor whose comments were featured in the article attended the same lecture as I. I was there and I can state unequivocally, the lecture was a sustained diatribe against the Nation of Israel and Jews.

    People often ask how the Holocaust could happen. Attending this lecture, one would easily understand not only how it happened, but could happen again. As an African-American and a woman, I must say of that evening, had I closed my eyes and translated Finkelstein's words to German, I could easily have imagined myself transported back to 1938 and a lecture by Josef Gobbles, Hitler's propaganda minister, or could just as easily have found myself on a campground in the heart of Dixie amongst white supremacists.

    Spend ten minutes on Finkelstein's website and everything I assert here will become moot. His vitriol against Jews in general and Israel in particular is all the more insidious because his parents are Holocaust survivors. The moral clout of that relationship serves as a perversely convenient prop to his image as a morally outraged son of concentration camp victims now championing the cause of an Arab David to an Israeli Goliath. It is shocking to see how this fact is mortgaged about like so much cash to buy the hearts and minds of those who don't need much persuasion to hate Jews and to further galvanize those in Europe, Asia, the Arab world, – and, yes, right here in our little corner of the world – who are already deeply predisposed to such hate filled sentiments.

    The very foundation upon which this man has built credibility amongst haters of the Jewish people is riddled with self-loathing and Holocaust denial. Whatever the nature of his dysfunction, it is painfully obvious that Norman Finkelstein is above all things, a Jew who hates Jews.

    Finkelstein stated to the audience gathered that evening, "…the protagonist in the novel, Exodus, was named 'Ari', which is short for 'Aryan' – an example of the Jew's true intent and Jewish racism." "[Most] reports of anti-Semitism in Europe have been greatly exaggerated

    or outright fabricated to generate sympathy for Jews."

    "In the last fifteen years, there has not been a single death attributed to anti-Semitism in Europe." Equally revealing are Finkelstein's friends and associates who include other known Holocaust deniers from Paris to Cairo.

    Norman Finkelstein and those at the University of Buffalo who sponsored this lecture, like Bruce Jackson and James Holstun, members of the English Department faculty at UB, would love people to perceive them as exposers of conspiracies, truth-seekers, and righters of a wronged people. They are not. They are men who hide behind a thin patina of

    scholarship and exploit their status as academics to indoctrinate, intimidate, and disseminate half-truths cloaked in rhetoric. They should be defined by what they produce; the vilification of the Jewish people, their culture, their homeland, and the stage for the promulgation of the idea that Jews and the Nation of Israel are inherently evil and must be annihilated. The lecture was not free speech in action, but hate speech incarnate.

  • Addamo

    Sustained diatribe?

    What was the "report's" name again? Noa. Hmmmmm, yes entirely independent and non biased report that one.

    Borsie gives himself away immediately by crediting Filkenstain with heightening the likelihood of Holocaust Mark II.

    The alarmist tendency of the writer to hit the Josef Gobbles switch also goes to show how for this authors, substance and specifics come a poor second to hyperbole and hysteria. The writer takes great care to avoid actually rebutting Filkensteins points, rather inferring that it is self evident that Filkenstein’s arguments must be flawed.

    When an israeli applogist, never let facts get in the way of a smear.

    There is the predictable ad hominem that as a child of Holocaust is obligated to pander to the status quo or risks being labeled the worst kind of tractor otherwise. Surely Filkenstian must be a self hating Jew for not swallowing the Zionist agenda hook line and sinker.

    This article finishes on a high note as Borsie summons his inner David Horowitz by dismissing the event as an example of hate speech, sugar coated in freedom of expression.

    That you Chris for giving us a window into your mind, You have repealed a great deal about yourself and you r very questionable reassign habits.

  • Chris

    I'm not sure there are any objective reports when it comes to Norman. Many writers who claim to favor Norman also use references to Josef Gobbles, and as for predictable ad hominem attacks, Norman stands guilty as well.

    I am merely providing Antony with additional evidence of defamation of Norman.

    I don't know that I have repealed anything. Or that I have anything to repeal. As for Noa giving herself away, I didn't know she was hiding anything. What do you think she was hiding?

  • Chris

    I think the organization she writes for reveals what she stands for.

  • Leo Braun

    Antony: "And his critics are so pathetic they feel they have to compare Norman Finkelstein to Irving and other Holocaust deniers"… Courtesy of the close-knit Zionist connivers ingenuity knack of adherence to the charlatan's doctrine … bait-n-switchsmear-n-deceitlie-n-repeat … and most importantly never ever admit any wrong!

    What was reflected via irrefutable observations formed an opinion that much of the Zionist stooges interaction on the internet forums was not to find out the truth and to be better informed, yet what actually happened was that the Zionist mercenaries were besieging the blogosphere to corral public opinion. As a result decent folks visiting antony-loewenstein-blogsite to endure Zionist chutzpah-propaganda in the extreme.

    JohD: "This level of Zionist discourse gets tiresome and is designed to prevent intelligent discussion about the issues. It is simply a poisoning of the well exercise. I seriously suggest that Chris should be booted since it is a forlorn hope that significant counter opinion will appear anytime soon. I move that Orang's complaint be upheld, and Chris: be dismissed forthwith as an Idiotarian (not that there's anything wrong with that). Let him find some other ghetto to babble-on in".

    JohD: "I really believe that Chris should be booted, there is no excuse for this level of Idiocy. It can’t be ignorance, the man is not illiterate, so it must be stupidity. I realize that people are reluctant to appear to be censorsing opinion, but really, is it opinion? I fear that Zios are deliberately and systematically dumbing down discussion of the ME to a point where it becomes meaningless nonsense. I have watched numerous discussion for a degenerate into mindless twaddle as a result of the purile comment that passes for so much Zio discourse. We let them get away with it on the misguided belief that we, at least, are open minded and tolerant of opposing views. But can we be so open-minded that our brains fall out"?