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.

The terror state

Gideon Levy outlines what the Jewish state has become:

A black flag hangs over the “rolling” operation in Gaza. The more the operation “rolls,” the darker the flag becomes. The “summer rains” we are showering on Gaza are not only pointless, but are first and foremost blatantly illegitimate. It is not legitimate to cut off 750,000 people from electricity. It is not legitimate to call on 20,000 people to run from their homes and turn their towns into ghost towns. It is not legitimate to penetrate Syria’s airspace. It is not legitimate to kidnap half a government and a quarter of a parliament.

A state that takes such steps is no longer distinguishable from a terror organization. The harsher the steps, the more monstrous and stupid they become, the more the moral underpinnings for them are removed and the stronger the impression that the Israeli government has lost its nerve. Now one must hope that the weekend lull, whether initiated by Egypt or the prime minister, and in any case to the dismay of Channel 2’s Roni Daniel and the IDF, will lead to a radical change.

Meanwhile, Australia’s belligerent Zionist agitators, AIJAC, claim that their bullying tactics are fair, reasonable and legitimate in a democracy:

There is no doubt that those who believe that the Jews alone are not entitled to a country in their homeland may be motivated by antisemitism. But neither we nor anyone else in the Australian Jewish community’s leadership label people as antisemitic simply because they criticise the policies of Israel’s government.

As for bullying the media, we exercise our democratic right to complain about inaccuracies or bias, and at times press newspaper editors or opinion editors – not to withhold articles with which we disagree, but to also run articles that provide a balance by reflecting alternative points of view.

My forthcoming book provides greater detail to refute these allegations. Simply put, AIJAC actively smear (and try to censor) any individual or group that dares challenge their God-given interpretation of Zionism. Sadly for them, this perspective is resulting in Israel being seen as an aggressor state, more than willing to impose collective punishment on an entire, Palestinian population. States that engage in such behaviour eventually learn that their arrogance results in the ultimate price being paid.

30 comments ↪
  • captain

    Ant, there is a difference between your wishes and reality. There is just no evidence for your assertion that there is a changed perception of Israel. Increasingly governments in the west understand Israel as the canary in the coal mine and that we are fighting a common battle with the islamofascist empire. This is of course the empire that you are unwilling to talk about.

    It is only collective punishment if the population is being punished for something they did not do. Electing a terrorist government and providing succor to terrorists, supporting the kidnapping and murder of young israels and calling for Israel's destruction as their raisen detre is makes peace impossible.

    And Ant, the "ultimate price" was paid, by many of our ancestors.

  • orang

    Has that fucking canary fallen off the perch yet?

    Hey didja see this one, "Hamas threatens attacks in Israel" http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/5139108.st

    Ha haaaa. Why that's a Causus Belli if I ever saw one, we have no partner for peace roll on the D9's ..sonic boom the terrorist killers

    "It is only collective punishment if the population is being punished for something they did not do"..

    Oh right. See that's what happens when you give democracy to these types of people. But wait, there was a few who voted for the other guys …ahh fuckit they're all the same to me…

    Roll on , we have the moral authority, make them suffer.

  • viva peace

    What a bizzare and delusional world AL must line in. MY reading is that the globe has never been more on Israel's side! When was the last time the US, UK, EU, and Russia were all in agreement!?

    Angela Merkel's decision to make Jerusalem her first visit to a foreign leader sums it up I think.

  • orang

    Yep, you boys have got it all sewn up-business is business.

  • Comical_Ali

    ?? scuse me?

    wonder if sensitive Ant is gonna moderate that last virulently racist & anti-semitic comment by addamo? after all he's quite good at moderating, deleting and censoring out people's comments – generally people whom he doesn't agree with. Given Antony's tolerance of past Jew-hatred on his blog, do we expect more of the same complacency?

    and did someone say that we shouldn't place certain people in the same boat with neo-nazis?? And no guilt by association? Oh thats right, "some of your best friends are Jewish."

    Meanwhile, Australia’s belligerent Zionist agitators, AIJAC, claim that their bullying tactics are fair, reasonable and legitimate in a democracy…

    AIJAC is being creative with the truth (and my forthcoming book provides greater detail to refute their allegations.) Simply put, AIJAC actively smear (and try to censor) any individual or group that dares challenge their God-given interpretation of Zionism.

    LOL!

  • Comical_Ali

    unfortunatley it had to take some prodding to get that racist comment removed. If no one had said anything, Ant would have quietly let it slip – just like he did with other blatantly vile, anti-Semitic comments. And that I'm afraid, speaks for itself.

  • ed squire

    Comical_Ali Jul 4th, 2006 at 12:34 am

    unfortunatley it had to take some prodding to get that racist comment removed.

    If you're referring to orang's comment,

    Yep, you boys have got it all sewn up-business is business.

    You'll note he's referring to the state of Israel and its mindlessly dogmatic supporters, not Jewish people. Nation-states and intellectually enfeebled 'yay-crowds' are not racial groupings. And since the comment isn't directed at a racial grouping, it isn't racist. QED.

    I know you have difficulty deliniating the categories of race, ethnicity, religion, culture and nationality, but at lease try to get your categories straight.

  • Keith

    No ed squire, he's referring to the comment that is no longer there because Addamo lost control and showed his true colours as he often does but Antony deleted it for a change. That's why Comical_Ali said that it was removed. That means it is no longer there. I bet you wish he would delete your comment now?

  • orang

    What about those Swiss antisemites eh?

    "Switzerland says Israel has clearly violated international law by imposing collective punishment on Palestinians over the capture of an Israeli soldier."

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/5145654.s

  • Comical_Ali

    I actually now regret that Addamo's "money grubbing, dirty yids" comment was removed. Just another "legitimate critcism of criticism of the state of Israel…"

  • Comical_Ali

    & not only was this the first time he bothered to delete a blatantly anti-Semitic comment (i.e. after abit of prodding) from his blog, but Addamo's last comment generated no response from him. Just silence. Interesting.

  • orang

    Hey what about those big fucking rockets from the Pali's into Ashkalon eh? I saw it on TV – I reckon it broke two bricks in Ashkalon! This is unacceptable!!! We need to level Gaza!!!!!!!!!!

  • ed squire

    Keith Jul 5th, 2006 at 2:09 am

    No ed squire, he’s referring to the comment that is no longer there because Addamo lost control and showed his true colours as he often does but Antony deleted it for a change.

    Oh right.

    I bet you wish he would delete your comment now?

    Not particularly. My pride doesn't hang on your opinions. Devistating, I know, but there it is.

    Incidentally, what are your "true colours"? When are you going to reveal them?

  • JohD

    A state that takes such steps is no longer distinguishable from a terror organization. The harsher the steps, the more monstrous and stupid they become, the more the moral underpinnings for them are removed and the stronger the impression that the Israeli government has lost its nerve

    I am a bit at a loss understanding what "moral underpinnings" Levy is talking about here? Is it the moral underpinnings of the Jews-only State, or the "moral underpinnings" of "the steps"? The latter are nothing short of crimes against humanity and war crimes a lack the slightlest whiff of moral or ethical "underpinninbgs". The Jews-only State has the morality of Apartheid – ie. none whatsoever.

  • captain

    and what about Arab only states: does that have any moral underpinning? Is a Gaza free from Jews an Apartheid state?

  • JohD

    What Arab State do you know of that only allows Muslims to immigrate? I am interested to know. Please don't say Saudi Arabia, because you will only demonstrate that you don't know what you are talking about.

    As for Gaza, I am unaware that they have a no-Jews policy. As far as I know, the former frontier colonizers elected to be forcibly returned to Israel, rather than live as equals in a Palestinian Gaza.

  • Comical_Ali

    What Arab State do you know of that only allows Muslims to immigrate?

    err…every single one of them. Actually they don't accept any foreign immigrants – muslim or not muslim – at all.

    And Israel only allows to Jews to immigrate? What a load of shit. Israel has a natrualisation policy for foreigners no different to any other western country. In addition, they fulfill their international UNRWA refugee obligastions by accepting thousands of aslyum seekers(plenty of muslims included) from countries such as Rawanda, Albania, Kurdistan, Bosnia, Vietnam, etc, etc.

    Does the fact that most of these countries are muslim & that a large proportion of the refugees muslim, tell you anything? And why on earth would they be seeking aslyum in an apartheid state? And why aren't they all flocking to Syria, Iran or Saudi?

    And if you are refering to Israel's law of return for Jews (which in no way affects and is separate to its law of naturalisation for other foreigners) as "racist," then how do you explain the law of return in other western countries, with Germany being a prime example?

  • JohD

    I didn't say that Israel is the only Racist country on Earth. But your suggestion that Arab States do not allow non-Muslims to immigrate is hogwash. Saudi Arabia just last year allowed the naturalization of 30,000 long term (more than 10 years) foreign workers – many of them Hindus and Christians.

    You wouldn't be fibbing about being able to immigrate to Israel even if you are not Jewish, would you? Of course it would be nice if it were true. But somehow I don't believe a word of it.

    Naturally, there are exceptions to every rule. Chinese & Japanese were honorary Whites in Apartheid South Africa, as were the Lebanese & Syrians. Where it mattered, South Africa had a 'Whites-only' policy. Where it matters, Israel has a 'Jews-only' policy.

    That Israel accepts some refugees hardly indicates an immigration policy on par with other countries. The direct question is whether Israel accepts immigrants with no Jewish ties at all – i.e. married to a Jew or other such relationships? MKore importantly, does Israel have a policy of allowing inhabitants of the Land become Israeli citizens, or does it deprive some native born people of the right to citizenship rights based upon their non-Jewishness?

  • Keith

    JohD:

    You wouldn’t be fibbing about being able to immigrate to Israel even if you are not Jewish, would you? Of course it would be nice if it were true. But somehow I don’t believe a word of it.

    Yes it is correct. And as Comical said Israel has also taken in many refugees from around the world most recently from Dafur. Over the last 15 years about half of the hundreds of thousands of Russian immigrants that moved to Israel were not Jewish, many with no Jewish connection whatsoever.

    MKore importantly, does Israel have a policy of allowing inhabitants of the Land become Israeli citizens, or does it deprive some native born people of the right to citizenship rights based upon their non-Jewishness?

    All those born within Israel have Israeli citizenship.

  • Comical_Ali

    I already answered your last question – i.e. Israel has a naturalisation policy no different to other western countries.

    Under the Law of Entry to Israel (1952) and the Law of Citizenship (1952),

    foreigners must have resided in Israel for three years out of five years preceding the day of submission of the application; they are residing legally in Israel and have settled permanently or intend to settle permanently in Israel; they have renounced their prior nationality, or have proved that they will cease to be foreign nationals upon becoming Israeli citizens.

    Under this policy thousands of foreigners (i.e. non-Jews who have had no relation to Jews) have been naturalised including refugees from vietnam and foreign workers from Africa.

    on the contrary Israel's refugee policy should give you a very clear indication suggesting that it indeed does have an immigration policy on par with other civilised countries.

    And from its creation in 1948, all non-Jews who resided in Israel were automatically granted citizenship by the government. Children born to illegal foreign workers in Israel who overstayed their visas have also been granted citizenship.

    Israel's law of return in no way impacts on its naturalisation process for other foreigners. And neither is this law of return unique or exclusive to Israel – Germany, Greece, Finland, the Czech republic, Ireland, India (to name but a few countries) all have their own laws of return in addition to a seperate law of naturalisation for foreigners (with the possible exception of India).

    Naturally, there are exceptions to every rule. Chinese & Japanese were honorary Whites in Apartheid South Africa, as were the Lebanese & Syrians. Where it mattered, South Africa had a ‘Whites-only’ policy. Where it matters, Israel has a ‘Jews-only’ policy.

    I'm curious to find out if Black people had the right to vote, sit in parliament, form political parties & claim the dole (among other rights) under the apartheid regime of South Africa? Because this is what you're effectivley suggesting when you compare Apartheid South Africa to Israel.

  • Comical_Ali

    I didn’t say that Israel is the only Racist country on Earth. But your suggestion that Arab States do not allow non-Muslims to immigrate is hogwash. Saudi Arabia just last year allowed the naturalization of 30,000 long term (more than 10 years) foreign workers – many of them Hindus and Christians.

    Since this is the first I've heard of this, I decided to do a little research & from what I gathered found out that the changes were very limited & applied to Muslims only. These sources might be wrong – but then again, Saudi Arabia granting citizenship to non-muslims? i.e. the holy islamic land of Mecca & Medina – where infidels are not allowed to set foot unless they come to work & are confined in special compounds?

    I would like to see a source which indeed proves what you are saying is true. I'd be very curious.

    Here's an interesting article by Khaled Waleed detailing Saudi Arabia's "policy of naturalisation" for the kafir –

    http://www.faithfreedom.org/oped/KhaledWaleed2062

    And if you compare Israel to Saudi Arabia, do refugees – of all nationalities & religions – seek and are granted asylum in the latter?

  • JohD

    Come on guys, a few thousand refugees does not make Israeli naturalization non-discriminatory. Almost every country in the world allows spousal immigration. Nobody said that Israel was the only country that practices a racial 'right of return', but it certainly is the only country that practices a 'right of return' for people that have no historical links to the country.

    As for Saudi Arabia, it is certainly the case that non-Muslims can become citizens, although I am not sure how difficult that is. It is difficult nowadays for anybody wanting to become a citizen but historically it was much easier a decade or two ago, even for non-Muslims.

    As for Black people in South Africa; they had the right to vote, could sit in parliament, certainly did get the useless dole availbale then in South Africa; but it was F*cking meaningless, just as it is meaningless to be an Arab and vote, or sit in parliament in Israel.

    You better believe that there is more than just a fleeting resemblance between Apartheid and Israeli Zionism. In fact, the prevailing consensus amongst Black South Africans is that they had it good, compared to the Palestinians. If you want to talk differences, then be prepared for a shock, because Israeli Zionism is worse by a considerable margin.

    As for the Russian immigrants, my understanding was that they came in based on their historical ties to Judaism, even though few were practicing Jews any longer; and many had converted to Christianity. It was all about making up the demographic numbers, and they are classified as Jews in the Jews-only State, even if they are buried beyond the fence.

  • orang

    Yes but they have good genes, they are desperate and they can be counted on to hate Arabs.

  • Comical_Ali

    Black people had the vote & sat in parliament (among other rights) under apartheid? Well I guess we learn new things every day. Or are we just making "little facts" up here & there as we progress this "debate"?

    And there is no resemblance to Apartheid in South Africa to Israeili Zionism because Israeli Zionism is worse? I never knew black people under apartheid – in addition to having the vote, sitting in parliament, claiming the dole & getting access to free health care- recieved the highest amount of aid per capita in the world, had fully armed militias, a free & functioning media, universities leaders who owned expensive villas & apartments all over europe in addition to swiss bank accounts with billions of USD stashed away. And I never knew black people had tried to mass murder all white people in countless wars and terror attacks.

    Previously, in response to my raising the possibility that you were a neo-nazi or white supermacist, you claimed that you were a black person who lived under apartheid. Ya think?

    And once again you claim that non-muslims could apply for Saudi citizenship, yet offer no evidence to such an astonishing claim. You do however link to an article which makes no mention of this. It does however mention that Palestinians would be excluded from Saudi citizenship & also proves that whatever changes they made to naturulisation of foreigners is very limited.

    I think this is another example of you making up "little facts."

    Come on guys, a few thousand refugees does not make Israeli naturalization non-discriminatory. Almost every country in the world allows spousal immigration. Nobody said that Israel was the only country that practices a racial ‘right of return’, but it certainly is the only country that practices a ‘right of return’ for people that have no historical links to the country.

    Yes a few thousand refugees is the first indicator that makes Israel's naturalisatoin process non-disciminatory. But its not the only indicator. As I said Foreign workers, economic migrants etc have all been naturalised – i.e. non jews who have had no family connection to Jews.

    And its the only country that practices a "right of return" for people that have no historical link to the country? How does that work? I might as well say that Muslims have no historical links to Mecca.

  • JohD

    Well you have a lot to learn Comic, especially about ersatz political 'representation'. For the first few decades of the last century, Blacks were allowed representation in South Africa's parliament, albeit one rep for every 3 million or so Black people. by the 1920's even this representation became the providence of white people. White people were allowed to represent Black people in Parliament. With the advent of Apartheid in 1948, things 'improved' and Blacks were given their 'own' parliament – supossedly separate, but equal. By the time of Apartheid demise in 1994, Black people had no less than 4 'parliaments'; supposedly representing different ethnic groups. As well, there existed the Nation 'tri-cameral- parliament in which the 'Colored' & Indian populations were suposedly represented. None of this meant they had the actual ability to control or influence anything, much like Arab Israelis cannot possible influence anything in Israel.

    You then suggest that it is me who makes things up while blithely ignoring the fact that it was you who asserted that only Muslims were allowed to be Saudi citizens. Are you even aware that many foreign workers in Saudi Arabia are non-Muslim? It is like the 'Jews are not allowed to go to Saudi Arabia' crap that we constantly hear. Many Jews have been, and are allowed into Saudi Arabia. The claims are bogus, and no amount of links from the hate-site 'Faith Freedom' is going to change that fact. It is only 'astonishing' for a died-in-the-wool bigot like you. A Jewish Supremacist perhaps? How about a Jewish Nazi? Don't F*cking presume to debate whether I am a Nazi or not, you don't have the moral standing, in view of your apologia for the nazi-like atrocities of Israel.

    Palestinians get the highest amount of Aid per capita in the world? I think you are mistaken, that dubious honor belongs to Israel.

    Since you know so little about South Africa, and insinuate that I am an imposter, let me set you straight on a few facts.

    1. South Africa did not have much of a dole, with any unemployment contributions coming out of a compulsory fund wherein every worker contributed. The funds were only distributed for a limited period – I think it was 6 months, and was based on your last wage. So yes, Black people did get the dole.

    2. Health Care was free in South Africa. For Black people as well as White. Separate and not equal, but it was free.

    3. Jews were White folk in South Africa.

    4. Yes, we did try to kill every white person in South Africa for a considerable time. Perhaps you don't remember. Even our popular songs contains words to the effect that "we are coming to kill you".

    5. Yes, we did bomb the shit out of them – Pizza parlours included.

    6. Yes, the regime was despicable, practiced torture, used live ammunition to suppress protests, arrested tens of thousands a year without trail; but they never sent missiles into crowded ghettos, nor did they target the entire population. Just those that resisted. Not once did they use explosive ordinance against anyone. No tanks, no helicopters, or artillery was used. Belatedly, I have to concede that those Afrikaners did have a sense of morality vastly superior to Israeli Jews, and their non-Israeli apologists. That is saying a lot, because those Afrikaner nationalists were Nazis.

    7. Yes, they controlled the movement of people, but on a macro, not a micro scale as Israel does. People could move freely between townships, but not freely between provincial districts. Still, there were no checkpoints to enforce it. Steve Biko was picked up because he was outside his province, before they discovered who he was. More Black people were routinely to be found daily in White Suburbs than White people. There was separation, but it was not all that encompassing. There were no checkpoints and militia guarding White suburbs, and preventing Black people form going there.

    8. Desmond Tutu, Ronnie Kasrils, Raymond Louw and numerous other prominent South African leaders have commented that Israel's Apartheid is much, much worse than anything we experienced in South Africa.

    Put that in your pipe and smoke it. There is nothing lower than a Jew who is also a Nazi. And you are a Jewish Nazi because of your support for oppression and your lack of common decency and concern for the downtrodden and oppressed.

  • JohD

    And its the only country that practices a “right of return” for people that have no historical link to the country? How does that work? I might as well say that Muslims have no historical links to Mecca.

    Are you supid or something? What relevance is the question to the original statement? Of course Muslims have no historical links to Mecca. They have no inherent right to go live there by virtue of their religious beliefs. The German right of return applies to Germans, with a demonstrable historical link to Germany. It does not apply to the second generation of a German/French union, for instance. It does not apply simply because you can demonstrate some German ancestry – like that you granfather was a German, but nobody else in your heritage. Israel's right of return applies simply because you are Jew, even if you have had no familial link to Israel. A big difference.

  • Captain

    JohD, you have obviously never even stepped foot in Israel. Calling Jews who support Israel Nazis is the oldest bigoted trick in the book.

    Christians, Muslims and Jews of all colours have immeasurably more freedom and protection in Israel than in any despotic arab regime. (pal territories included: have you asked a christian arab lately about their freedoms?) Have you spoken with any Coptic Christians or Lebanese Christians lately about how they are treated? Or what about the suppression of religion generally in China? The list of those countries where there is no freedom of movement, expression or association is enormous. Israel has a healthy free press, democratic structure and a separation of state and judiciary. Which arab country holds a similar standard?

    Your description of the Apartheid apologetics with their fake parliamentary system is exactly the same kind of tokenism that is practiced in Iran with their Jewish representative. As a Jew I am not even allowed into Mecca and Medina, similarly even in Israel it is considered provocative to walk on the temple mount as a Jew even though this is Judaisms holiest site. My family were dispossessed of their property in Poland and Russia. Does that entitle me to anything? Not according to those governments and I haven't kept fake keys to fake houses to trot out to sympathetic journalists. Nor have I even had a thought to kill innocent Poles or Russians because of this. Unfortunately arabs have become stuck in a quagmire in which they would prefer to suffer and fight than to move on.

    The Islamic world is the embodiment of intolerance in a medieval manner. It is the bigger picture of their intolerance of having a Jewish state in the midst of the Caliphate that is so offensive. The rest is cause and effect. From its inception, Israel has been fighting for survival. Those who did so were mostly refugee from countries that had almost entirely eradicated their Jews.

    You obviously know nothing about Nazism at all to make even the most oblique comparisons between Israel and that monstrous regime. It is a legacy of the neo-left that on top of poor judgement is a devastating historical ignorance.

  • Comical_Ali

    None of this meant they had the actual ability to control or influence anything, much like Arab Israelis cannot possible influence anything in Israel.

    I've got news for you – rather than sit in separate parliaments – Arab-Israelis actually sit in the Israeli parliament & get all the parliamentary perks that go with that. There are at least 11 of them in parliament with at least two separate political parties. Both parties openly call for the destruction of Israel. Not bad for an oppressive apartheid state.

    How is Israel an aparthied regime? Are there

    "Jew-only" toilets and beaches? Where is the evidence?

    Are you even aware that many foreign workers in Saudi Arabia are non-Muslim?

    How does that prove that Saudi Arabia is willing to naturalise them? are you just spinning good yarns?

    Not only do they have non-muslim foreign workers (who primarly work in IT) but they keep them (i.e infidels) locked away in compounds. Hows that for apartheid?

    On the topic of Germany –

    It does not apply simply because you can demonstrate some German ancestry – like that you granfather was a German, but nobody else in your heritage

    .

    my uncle-in-law (who is ukrainian) somehow obtained German citizenship because he managed to trace his lineage to Germans who settled in the Ukraine & russia over 250 years ago from his father's line. So how does that work?

    Jew are not just a religious group of people, they are an ethnic group of people who can trace their origins to Israel.

    Cant be bothered responding to the rest – too time consuming.

  • JohD

    Jews who support Israel are not Nazis, people who support the Nazi-like tactics of Israel are Nazis. You are a Jewish Nazi – simple as that.

    Palestinians have absolutely nothing to do with Iran, or Saudi Arabia or 'despotic Arab Regimes'. This characterisation is simply another Racist tactic Nazis like you employ – demonization by ethinic and religious association.

    Nevertheless, I don't recall that Arab regimes routinely bomb their subjects. Oh yeah, I forgot, remember Hama; remember Black September? The problem with Nazis is that everyone has to be saints before they will deign to admit that what is occuring in Israel is naked oppression.

    The point of the comparison with South African Black parliamentary representation is not that it is the same, but that it is similar. If Israel had the same demographics, it would be infinitely worse, and Arabs would have no representation whatsoever. The majority of Palestinians have no representation in Parliament because the legal fiction of the 'Occupation'. It is only because of this legal fiction that Palestinians have some representation, but absolutely no power or influence at all.

    As for your introduction of red-herrings – that Iran has the same system (it does not, Jews get to vote twice, with one guaranteed rep), or going on about the Kurds, or Copts, or Lebanese Christians – it is replete with racist cant, the kind we have come to expect from nazi apologist.

  • orang

    "Jew are not just a religious group of people, they are an ethnic group of people who can trace their origins to Israel."

    – really?

    So they are pure then are they? Must be nice. Being pure I mean.