Following my article in yesterday’s Australian, the paper has today published these letters:
MOST TALKED ABOUT
LOEWENSTEIN’S OPINION
Antony Loewenstein has had his third piece in The Australian – to go with his various media appearances – all about how views like his are never heard (Opinion, 7/8). Loewenstein’s real complaint seems to be not that views like his aren’t heard, but that they are criticised. This is not suppression of debate, it is debate.
He even wants Hezbollah and Hamas given equal time to Israel. Hezbollah and Hamas are terrorist organisations proscribed in Australia. It is a crime to belong to or support them. So Loewenstein wants criminals to be given equal time to those they attack.
Loewenstein probably won’t like this criticism either, but his ideal world seems to be one where he and those with whom he agrees are immune from criticism, not one of robust debate, as he claims.
George Greenberg
Malvern, Vic
Antony Loewenstein certainly doesn’t like being criticised. Strangely enough though, he’s happy to dish it out, often unfairly. For example he claims that the “Zionist lobby” was keen to ban notorious Holocaust denier David Irving because they were worried he may cast doubt about the Holocaust. Surely it was more that Holocaust deniers tend to incite hatred towards Jews among anti-Semites such as neo-Nazis by claiming the Holocaust was a con.
He excoriates Isi Leibler for his comments about Palestinian society without explaining Leibler was referring to the pernicious effect of constant anti-Israel and anti-Jewish incitement from all levels of the Palestinian Authority, including schools, mosques and the media. He also attacks opponents of the awarding of a peace prize to Hanan Ashrawi. Maybe he could explain what she has actually done for peace, other than criticise Israel. Then he could explain why it’s taboo for anyone to criticise him, but fine for him to criticise anyone.
Bradley Tempelhof
St Kilda, Vic
Antony Loewenstein is being precious in his assertions that the “Zionist Lobby” is trying to silence him. Apparently this attempt at “censorship” takes the form of vigorous criticism of his work. If Loewenstein is truly a champion of free speech, he ought to be in favour of the efforts of others to expose his numerous errors of fact and logic.
Peter Wertheim
Sydney, NSW
The fact that Antony Loewenstein has once again been given space in The Australian provides further evidence his views are not being denied a hearing in Australia.
Loewenstein claims I compared him to “fraudulent writer and accused anti-Semite Helen Demidenko”, when in fact what I canvassed in my review was that The Hand that Signed the Paper was discussed as a symbol, rather than initially being judged on its merits, adding: “While Antony Loewenstein is not a pseudonym and did not intentionally write a work of fiction, it is already clear that his book is being treated as a symbol, rather than on grounds of quality or originality, let alone insight or integrity.”
The one sentence he quoted from my review, in which I said that his book has “already garnered a fan club among other anti-Semites, anti-Israel extremists and others who are treating the author as a Jewish ‘useful idiot’ who serves anti-Jewish agendas” might not make Loewenstein happy, but as followers of Australia’s anti-Semitic fringe groups can attest, is undeniably true.
Jeremy Jones, AM
Darlinghurst NSW
In his article, Antony Loewenstein makes mention of Deborah Lipstadt in his defence of author David Irving’s right to be heard. He writes of Lipstadt in a way that implies she took an action against Irving, as if to silence him, accusing him of Holocaust denial.
In fact Lipstadt was sued by Irving for merely naming him as a denier, and she was forced to defend herself in court. It was Irving who tried to silence Lipstadt, not the reverse. Irving lost in a remarkable case where Lipstadt’s team revealed for the first time just how badly, and effectively, Irving had misrepresented European history in the 20th century.
Lipstadt’s team did not bother to prove the Holocaust happened. Instead, they engaged in an intricate investigation of Irving’s historiography. Lipstadt’s chief witness, Richard Evans from Cambridge, began believing it was not possible to condemn Irving, who had written more than 20 books of history, as not a historian. By the time Evans had finished his report he had demonstrated that, in no way, could Irving be considered a historian. Once Irving was proved to have fabricated history, as he had, it was obvious his evidence for his Holocaust denial was untrue. And so his case collapsed.
Anne Henderson
North Sydney, NSW
Antony Loewenstein continues to insist he is a victim of a conspiracy to silence him. Most first-time authors could only dream of being so “silenced”. How many times will he need to be published before he realises he is disproving his own point? Loewenstein claims he has “received hundreds of messages from Jews and non-Jews . . . who are yearning for a more honest discussion about the Middle East and Israel’s role within it”. I assume he includes my name in that figure. I sent a message to his blog calling him on several inaccuracies, expecting an honest reply. Instead, he deleted the message.
Daniel Lewis
Rushcutters Bay, NSW
Suffice to say, it’s intriguing that the paper has published only critical letters in response to my article. My central thesis remains, as ever, unchallenged. The Zionist lobby, through aggressive and counter-productive tactics, is undermining the Jewish community and the wider community view towards Israel. They have been warned.
Some victory.
Suze
Am I too expect a note to parents chastising me from HREOC?
Crikey eh viva? A review – again by our friend Ted. How many goes does he need before he gets it right eh?
And he must have had the Zionist legal eagles to point out yet again why Israel doesn’t “legally” have to get out of the occupied territories because the wording doesn’t say “all” – aren’t we so clever.
Another anti-semitic slur: the Jews for Jesus shop front is somehow being damaged by Jews?? Proof anyone?
Jews for Jesus is a slimy organisation that attempts to dupe Jews into Christianity. They fill their shop-front with Jewish items and try to seduce Jews into evangelical Christianity.
It is the long held position of the JBOD that the shop be left alone, despite being offensive. I walk past it evey day and have never seen it damaged.
I think you’ll find that you are the only one saying that they were- Andrew didn’t
Ewwwww grossss. Sounds like a paesophile offering boioled lyllly’s to kids. What self respecting Jew would ever want to become a Goy right Captain? Kinda like becomming unchosen isn’t it?
Those slimy Evangelical Christianits – aren’t they the ones who boast about being Zionist Chritians?
Sorry guys,
That last post was fom me not Addam.
I would like to think that we could ALL
god damn tab key…
I would like to think that we could ALL agree atleast that Murdoch is filth and his media monopoly will bring nothing but shit to the News industry.
Im with you Addamo/Adam… not sure which one you are this time!
does anything about Jewish superiority complexes remind you of Hitlers pure german race ideals?
Probably not, you have a massive Zionist tumor growing on your brain that seems to have shut down all rational thought processes.
Speaking of Bitchslappings, UNSC res 242 if you care to read it (its not very long) DOES NOT SAY “SOME” OF THE OCCUPIED TERRITORIES.
to Lapkins credit it doesnt say all either, but then why dont we look at it for ourselves and realise whats obvious.
“Withdrawal of Israeli armed forces from territories occupied in the recent conflict”
I think its pretty clear what the UNSC wanted Israel to do.
M.Mayes,
This was deliberately worded this way to make it a contentious issue so that Israel could maintain that it will return “territories occupied” subject to negotiation. So as long as negotiations fail (ie. no partner for peace) Israel can maintain it’s presence, at least that’s their rationale.
Taking drugs and blogging is bad for our health.
Shamefully, Ant allows such blatant racism on his site.
Truth hurts doesn’t it Captain? Who was it that said 1000 Arab lives was not worth a fingernail of a Jew?
Yes I often wonder how Ant tolerates your bile. But tolerance is somethign you coudl learn.
Captain,
Apologies for my tardy reply. I can confirm that initially, The Jews for Jesus shopfront was regularly being egged, I’ve seen the disheartened sales folks cleaning up the mess the next day and chatted with them about it. This was also reported in the local newspaper The Bondi View.
Gotta love that upstanding example of religious tolerance.
Bondi should have pictures of that made into postcards to send to Israelis. Come to Bondi and enjoy a little piece of Israel.
You’ve got to think that this is what is happening with the current UN resloution- somehow Israel wants to maintain a claim over the Litani River, but Lebanon is not having it.
Oh yeah, there was a rock through the window as well.
Andrew- was it you who was involved in a committee for truth in reporting of Middle East? Is there any organization that conducts letter campaigns to counter media bias in Australia? It would be good to have something systematic, so that whenever an outlet publishes untrue or misleading info, or fails to report things that are true but uncomfortable (eg Gaza on a daily basis) they get a barrage of letters.
Hi Suze,
I am a recipient of emails from ACTME, the Australian Committee for Truth in the Middle East. They do a mail out to 100 media and political contacts. You can check out some of their work on the latest Media Watch program (transcripts available on the web, sorry you’ll have to Google that). Feel free to get in touch with them and get on their mailing list: “ACTME”
Yes, I agree that something needs to be done on this front. When you have operations like GIYUS.org using specially designed so-called megaphone software to alert their subscribers to online discussions they can influence, news organisations they can complain to en masse, etc, well, the rest of us need to speak up too. It’s kinda fun responding to provocateurs like Captain and VivaPeace, but it arguably doesn’t make any difference to the bigger picture.
Sorry Suze,
I need to learn how to post an email address (don’t include the arrows at either end I think)
Contact ACTME at: actme@bigpond.net.au
A big problem in my experience is that so much criticism of Israel is automatically branded anti-semetic. No rational debate is permissible as long as this automatic trump card is applied yet underlying arguments are ignored. To be called an anti-semite is the ultimate smear and it is unacceptable. Only when Jews accept that not all criticism of Israel is anti-semetic can a proper debate be held. Not accepting this truth casts doubt on the entire Zionist argument. You have clearly suffered this fate Antony.
I really feel sorry for you as a result. Sorry that you have been bullied and sorry you’ve clearly been ostracised by those in your own community for your beliefs.
Australia is a tolerant place as we all know, however a big part of this is tolerance of debate, even if you totally disagree with the argument.
Crying “anti-Semite” helps nobody. Usually, the response to an argument is a counter-argument. Not an automatic catcall. This is my first post to this blog, sorry if it’s a bit long
See I am glad you brought up the loose wording of UNSC 242 Addamo because that allows us to bring up the fact that Israel is the one being IMMORAL here by using such loopholes to their advantage.
Captain or viva or someone, Please tell me again how Israel wants nothing but peace.
M.Mayes
We are all dying to hear you expand on your “analysis” of 242.