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.

Parochialism, courtesy of your tiny Jewish member

This week’s Australian Jewish News (AJN) selects a story of world-shattering importance for its page one yarn:

The ABC is facing a major Jewish community backlash on two fronts after featuring outspoken Israel critic Antony Loewenstein in a program on Islam that screened on first-night Pesach (Monday).

With the national broadcaster already under fire from the community’s antisemitism watchdog over a segment on its Religion Report radio show last month, Jewish MP Michael Danby said the decision to include Loewenstein on a television panel this week was “culturally insensitive” and offensive to most Australian Jews.

While the majority of Australia’s 100,000-plus Jews were attending seders on Monday night, Loewenstein, author of a controversial book on Israel and the co-founder of the Independent Australian Jewish Voices group, was the sole Jew on a four-person multi-faith panel on the ABC TV’s Difference of Opinion.

Addressing the topic “Australia and Islam: a collision course?” the show, which featured an Islamic feminist as its Muslim representative, examined tensions between the Muslim and general communities and discussed the controversial call by visiting Israeli academic Professor Raphael Israeli to cap Muslim immigration to Australia.

But in a draft letter to ABC managing director Mark Scott and head of television Kim Dalton, Danby said he had been inundated with complaints over the use of Loewenstein, who he described as an “unrepresentative extremist”.

“I can assure you that tens of thousands of your fellow Australians will consider it a particular insult that you had this ratbag masquerading as representing us, particularly on that night,” Danby wrote.

“Surely you or your producers have enough experience to know that Mr Loewenstein’s views represent an infinitesimal group. It would be totally laughable for the vast bulk of the Australian Jewish community that you picked this Loewenstein to speak on behalf of the Jewish community.

“I am writing … to publicly record what at the very least seems to be a culturally insensitive insolence, which offends and antagonises the overwhelming bulk of the 120,000 Australian Jews, that seems to permeate many programs at the taxpayer-funded broadcaster.”

The parochialism of Danby’s “complaint” is laughable. But a few points for anybody, including Melbourne clowns, who want clarification.

I was invited onto Difference of Opinion as an alternative perspective on a complex issue, and I was not speaking on behalf of the Jewish community. Appearing on Passover (that most holy of nights!) is surely a matter of personal choice, for both the ABC and myself. It was simply co-incidence that the program was filmed and screened on that evening. In fact, Israel and Jews was barely mentioned during the program. As usual, Danby claims to speak on behalf of all Jews, when in fact his belligerence, arrogance and cluelessness actually contribute to anti-Semitism. The far-right, welcome to your best friend.

Finally, if he wants to describe me as a “ratbag” and “unrepresentative extremist” – does that mean that I’m worse than a terrorist, or simply more guilty than the average IDF general? – he has to expect public ridicule, at the very least. I claim to speak solely on behalf of myself, and as a spokesperson for Independent Australian Jewish Voices (IAJV). No more and no less. It’s becoming terribly clear that the Zionist establishment, of which Danby is one of its “leaders”, believes that the tried and true method of bullying the national broadcaster or the media in general is the best way to ensure “fair” coverage of Israel. In fact, the opposite is achieved.

I hope these figures continue pursuing this line of action, because Israel has never been more internationally isolated and hated. Mission accomplished, lads.

37 comments ↪
  • AJ

    You are something of a stirrer to Zionists and other religious conservatives.

    But its a mixed up world – on the scale of things Irgun (1946 style) would probably be legal in Australia (in 2007) because its not Muslim.

    Pete

  • viva peace

    The ABC's "Difference of Opinion" was very telling on Monday night. Basically Ant made a fool of himself. He came across as the illiterate hillbilly unable to keep up with two sassy and smart Muslims and the perceptive and charasmatic Christian former SAS officer. Clearly the deabte has left Ant behind.

    As I have always said.

  • viva peace

    Actually Ant, you most certainly did present yourself as a Jew. I thought thatw as gutless.

  • Andre

    Viva,

    It's clear from your comments that Ant was so bad in fact that you watched he whole show from start to end, and probably even recorded it so that you could analyze it word for word.

    George Galloway get's hundreds of mails and text's on his radio show from Zionists informing him how bad his show is, which he gets quite a kick out of, because they cannot prevent themselves from tuning in.

  • Most statistics of Jews in Australia put the numbers at somewhere between 100,000 and 102,000. Danby in his usual display of ignorance makes up some figure of 120,000 – probably wishful thinking – as if size matters!

    The AJN (aka Israel Zionist Times) says most Jews were having seder on Monday night when that dreadful ABC programme was on. I take it that the AJN and Danby had done a door-knock of Australian Jewry to determine how many were celebrating Pesach!

    These days Antony's views are representative of more Jews than Danby's views. Danby and his mates – Viva and others – seem to have been here for Pesach and not in Israel.

    In the old days in South Africa at the seder they used to say "next year in Jerusalem." I wish Danby and viva and their friends a similar fate. My cousin, who for health reasons, had to move from Haifa to Jerusalem, says the worst thing about Jerusalem is the growing number of religious fanatics. However, that is just what the doctor ordered for the likes of Danby and his ilk.

    And the sooner the better!

  • viva peace

    Poor old Mannie de Saxe. Still can't accept that his own religion – International Socialism – was so thoroughly defeated in the twentieth century. During the same time period, Israel rose and flourished. Poor Mannie.

    Andre

    If you can, get a copy. One of the Muslims – a psychiatrist – compares much of Islam today to a mental illness! Ant was so far out of his depth, I felt sorry for him.

  • Andre

    Viva,

    Yes I can appreciate why you woudl lap up a suggestion by a "psychiatrist " (which proves everything) that compares Islam of today with mental illness. You are prone to cling to views expressed by Muslims against Muslims as being unequivocal, but dismissive of any criticism of Israel by Israelis or Jews as being poor scholarship.

    Ant wasn't out of his depth, he just refused to jump on the vitriol bandwagon. Glad you could appreciate it though.

  • Leo Braun

    AJN: "The ABC is facing a major Zionist community backlash on two fronts after featuring outspoken Israel critic Antonio Loewenstein in a program on Islam that screened on first-night Pesach. With the national broadcaster already under fire from the powerful Zionist lobby antisemitism-watchdog over a segment on its Religion Report radio show last month:

    • Zion-Nazi collaboration evidence presented to the (1979) Australian Broadcasting Tribunal Inquiry into Melbourne Community Radio Station 3CR

    • ABC transcript portraying Zionist historian Professor Raphi Israeli bigoted criticism Muslim immigration to Australia

    • ABC transcript portraying anti-Zionism Part 1

    • ABC transcript portraying anti-Zionism Part 2

    • ABC transcript portraying anti-Zionism Part 3:Zionism in the Age of the Dictators

    AJN: "Zionist MP Michael Danby said the decision to include Loewenstein on a television panel this week was 'culturally insensitive' and offensive to most Australian Jews"… Uttered disinfo hypocrite! When as a matter of fact the presumptuous Michael Danby certainly didn't speak on my behalf (enthusiast of ABC & SBS) and many such others, independent Jews.

    Devoted primarily to the civil society betterment in this marvellous nation. If not for its archaic vast wastage industries and colonialist decadence perseverance, courtesy of the maligned "Australia/Israel & Jewish Affairs Council", acting in a mafia like style to drive our Jew lesser brethren into unthinking conformity, for a sole purpose to deflect focus from the Zionist evil-doers totalitarian ideology consequences.

    How about a glimpse at the entrenched parochialism and contours of the Zionist power? Prominent of the Senate and Legislative Assembly benches array, resembling Ü shaped silhouette. Moulded into significant menorah image (with a shamash – House Speaker's throne placed at the helm). When such a seven-branch candlestick symbol was quoted as given by God to the children of Israel. Hence the Zionist state of Israel in its search for the Jew authenticity symbol, had chosen precisely such an official menorah insignia.

  • viva peace

    Andre

    As you did not watch it, aren't you just a little embarrassed? There was no vitriol. 3 of the panel members were highly sophisticated, educated, accomplished and good-looking people. Ant sounded like some rube and looked like a feral fresh from Byron Bay.

  • BenZ

    Mannie is clearly still bitter that his family disowned a fegeleh…

    If you go to the video of the program at http://www.abc.net.au/tv/differenceofopinion/ and skip to the third video at about: 1m54s you'll hear Loewestein say:

    We do have a tendency in Australia and many Western countries to simply rely on commentators and journalists who have never say been to a Muslim country and write about Islam or pontificate on a subject to which they know virtually nothing.

    Change the word Muslim to Jewish and he's summed himself up perfectly, considering how much he had written about Israel having never been there. Indeed even having been, its amazing how often he gets his facts wrong. Repeat after me: Tzipi Livni is a woman.

  • Andre

    Viva,

    Given your novel take on reality and how much effort you invest trying to spin the threads here to your liking, I am confident that your assessment of what actually transpired is the exact opposite of reality. Your quote from the said "psychiatrist" which compares Islam of today sophistication, education, and accomplishment of the individuals you hold in such esteem. I suspect that had Ayaan Hirsi Ali appeared, you woudl have been equally gushing in your praises.

    BenZ,

    You seem to have missed the essential part about Ant having indeed been to Israel. The fact that you have to refer to a typo Ant made 2 years to score points shows how dour your position is, but by all means, keep trying.

  • BenZ

    Andre,

    You seem to have missed the essential part about Ant having indeed been to Israel.

    Hardly. Antony had been writing about Israel for years before he ever set foot in the place. It is not a huge stretch of the imagination to assume he had commenced writing his book about Israel before ever setting foot there as well. Indeed having formed his opinions pre-departure, and having not changed them before leaving Israel, I wonder whether he went for no other reason than to prevent the obvious criticism that he'd never been there.

    Regardless, the total amount of time he has spent in Israel is considerably less than the average for a Jewish dayschool student in year ten.

    The fact that you have to refer to a typo Ant made 2 years to score points shows how dour your position is, but by all means, keep trying.

    Typo eh? Was it also a typo that his book contained a map of Israel showing Lebanon between Haifa and Tel-Aviv? Were numerous other errors also "typos"? Was it a "typo" when on page 91 of My Israel Question, Antony wrote

    “Ominously, Palestinian suicide bombing commenced in 1994, the year after Arafat and Rabin’s famous appearance on the lawns of the White House.”

    Anyone with a clue (or alternatively any author who bothered to research his subject material) would know the Palestinian suicide bombing campaign began in April 1993, five whole months before the Oslo accords were signed.

    Let me guess… A "typo".

    Of course, let's assume the Tzipi Livni thing was a typo. Why did Antony never publish a correction? It's certainly the done thing in respectable publications and even more so within blogs. Could it be because he refuses to acknowledge that his opponents actually have a point?

    He has never responded to a well-researched (and easily verified) list of errata published by his nemesis AIJAC, here. Let me guess… That was just a shed-load of typos as well…

    The fact that you have to refer to a typo Ant made 2 years to score points shows how dour your position is, but by all means, keep trying.

    Are you really sure you want me to?

    I suspect this comment isn't long for the world anyway…

  • BenZ

    "Mannie is clearly still bitter that his family disowned a fegeleh…"

    viva and benzine seem to have a problem with the fact that I am gay and Jewish and anti-zionist, so everything I write is tempered by my homosexuality!! Homophobia seems more prevalent in these posts than anti-zionism, Wonder when BenZ and viva last went to Israel? What do they know? And when are they moving there to join in the fight helping the IDF?

    NO! NO! NO! Safer by far in Australia – protected by Danby and the AIJAC!!! and the ABC!!! And John Howard!

  • BenZ

    Wonder when BenZ and viva last went to Israel? What do they know?

    Travel there annually. Not that it should matter though, as I don't put myself forward to the media as a commentator on Israel. In that you asked however…

    So should I take your rant (and it was a rant) as acceptance of my suspicion you are still bitter? I am surprised by your conflation of myself, Viva, AIJAC, Danby and John Howard into some grand scheme… It does smack of some manner of psychiatric disorder but I'm sure you don't want to talk about it here. That's okay. Suffice it to say Mannie, my problem isn't with gays at all, rather what you personally are – an angry, angry old man who happens to be gay. This might also explain why plenty of Jewish gays also dislike you immensely.

    Want to discard Judaism totally? Fine, that's your call and what you have done. But if so Mannie, enough already with running around prefacing all your anti-Israel bashing with a convenient mention that you are Jewish. You can't have it both ways and retain any credibility. You really strike me as just an angry, angry old, gay version of Antony.

    If you still believe in God however, you should thank him daily that you aren't a gay apostate Muslim…

  • viva peace

    Does anybody know when these so-called "independent Jewish voices" are going to actually contribute anything new?

  • Andre

    Benz

    It is not a huge stretch of the imagination to assume he had commenced writing his book about Israel before ever setting foot there as well. Indeed having formed his opinions pre-departure, and having not changed them before leaving Israel, I wonder whether he went for no other reason than to prevent the obvious criticism that he’d never been there.

    What a perfect example of the paranoia and suspicion that is so prevalent among Israel’s defenders. Your argument is absurd in the extreme. Ant’s opinion does not exist in a vacuum but is shared by many before him, both of whom have had a first had experience of the situation in Palestinian and not.

    You seem to be of the opinion that the fact that Ant’s position did not changed but was confirmed by his trip to Israel is proof that he did not go there for legitimate research. There have been equally vacuous and baseless arguments put forth that his not being well versed in Yiddish also precludes him from having a legitimate opinion.

    No ,matter how much or little time Ant spent in the region, I would guess that it would never have been sufficient in your opinion. The reality is that in the end, this comes down to the fact that your position is indefensible, and thus, your only option is to conflate the issue and pretend that it is more compelled than it really is.

    Yes I am aware of the mistakes in Ant’s first printing, which is why it went into a second printing to address those errors. You obsession with such minutia is emblematic of someone who is unable to actually debate the bigger picture.

    As for the Tzipi Livni “typo” Antony did indeed acknowledge the error. As I recall, it was in a post on this blog. Just because you were not here to witness it does not mean he never acknowledged his mistake. I take it, you are not up to speed over the latest talking points you are supposed to be using when attacking Ant

    He has never responded to a well-researched (and easily verified) list of errata published by his nemesis AIJAC, here. Let me guess… That was just a shed-load of typos as well…

    More pedantic nit-picking. Ninee issues for a whole book is hardly a comprehensive dissection of Ant’s credibility. Indeed, point 9 is vacuous given that the roads are referred to Jewish only roads within Israel itself.

    Like I said earlier, keep trying. Not one point you made so far counters the central theme of Ant’s book, and I can say without a doubt that given more time, you would have no more success in achieving this aim.

    Good luck

    Viva,

    Does anybody know when these so-called “independent Jewish voices” are going to actually contribute anything new?

    Why are you so anxious to change the subject? It's not like the Palestine isseu has been resolved now is it?

  • viva peace

    One of the shocking things about reading Ant's book is just how much historical and legal misrepresentation Louise Adler allowed in. Very unprofessional.

  • viva peace

    Andre

    No, it hasn't. So what is their original contribution?

  • viva peace

    Andre

    He certainly has no right to expect people to respect his views "as a Jew." He is just another cliche International Socialist.

  • Andre

    Viva,

    Were Ant not a Jew, his views would be dismissed out of hand a anti-Semitic.

    Take you for example. You have pounced on statements by Muslims that are critical of Islam as being credible because they are made by Muslims, yet you deny Ant that same privilege.

    No, it hasn’t. So what is their original contribution?

    Why does a contribution have to be original to be significant?

  • Andre

    Viva

    One of the shocking things about reading Ant’s book is just how much historical and legal misrepresentation Louise Adler allowed in.

    You must have been incensed therefore at the cascades of frauds, plagiarisms and errors in Dershowitz's book, especially coming from a Harvard Law professor?

  • BenZ

    What a perfect example of the paranoia and suspicion that is so prevalent among Israel’s defenders. Your argument is absurd in the extreme. Ant’s opinion does not exist in a vacuum but is shared by many before him, both of whom have had a first had experience of the situation in Palestinian and not.

    You are conveniently overlooking the original reason I raised the point, further to Antony's stated views against people who write about Muslim countries having never been to one. My original point was that he is a hypocrite, and you have failed to disprove that.

    As for the Tzipi Livni “typo” Antony did indeed acknowledge the error. As I recall, it was in a post on this blog.

    Link please… It came as no surprise that a site search for "correction" and "Livni" yielded nothing. Andre, generally when one is in a hole, it's best to stop digging.

    As for the rest of your comment, you may write off all the fact-checking on his book as "pedantic nitpicking" but the fact remains they represent are major factual inaccuracies which call into question Antony's ability to provide worthwhile commentary. Indeed the nine listed in the article I linked to are far from an exhaustive list.

    I am disappointed you place such a low emphasis on mere "facts" regarding them as trivial. Perhaps you too could have an error-riddled book published by Louise Adler.

  • Andre

    You are conveniently overlooking the original reason I raised the point, further to Antony’s stated views against people who write about Muslim countries having never been to one.

    OK so let me address this point.

    What is written about Muslim countries by non Muslims who have never been there is often overwhelmingly contradicted by those that have been there. Given that few of these counties have an English press to speak of, those self appointed critics are forced to rely on hearsay for their information.

    The most notable example of such disinformation was Ahmadinejad's alleged statement about wiping Israel off the face of the eart/map. In spite of this being debunked over a year ago, the MSM continues to repeat this carnard.

    The same cannot be said for Israel, which does have a remarkably free press that prints in English.

    Link please… It came as no surprise that a site search for “correction” and “Livni” yielded nothing. Andre, generally when one is in a hole, it’s best to stop digging.

    The post took place well over a year ago. If memory serves, it was before Ant's blog site was overhauled, so I doubt the original thread even exists anymore.

    But by all means, feel free to dig all you like.

    I am disappointed you place such a low emphasis on mere “facts” regarding them as trivial. Perhaps you too could have an error-riddled book published by Louise Adler.

    That's a fair argument, and indeed, errors of any kind reflect poorly on a book that addresses historical subject matter. Having said that, it also stands to reason that any publication can be made to look slip shod should you invest enough resources into investigating the minute details.

    Take the disastrous book by Allan Dershowitz for example. Having been exposed as a fraud and a plagiarist, has he retracted or reprinted his book?

    Like I already pointed out, Ant did address these errors in the subsequent printing of his book.

    What is mot significant is that not one of the
    rebuttals address the fundamental subject matters that of teh dispossession of Palestinian land, the occupation, and the plight of the Palestinain refugees.

  • BenZ

    The post took place well over a year ago. If memory serves, it was before Ant’s blog site was overhauled, so I doubt the original thread even exists anymore.

    Sorry Andre. I am well and truly calling bullshit on you.

    Antony's current site is fully searchable since its beginning. His prior sites are as well. You are clutching at straws and I think you know it too. Of course Antony is perfectly welcome to chime in here. Somehow, like every other time he's been caught out, I expect he'll go quiet.

    He must be heavily distracted at the moment considering these comments are even still visible.

    it also stands to reason that any publication can be made to look slip shod should you invest enough resources into investigating the minute details.

    Perhaps, though his errors are so basic, most of them were roundly rebuked without readers even needing to do any research. You're convinced they are minutiae. The reality is they were clangers, which could well be avoided if he knew what he was talking about. He does not.

  • Andre

    BenZ,

    I'm afraid it is you buddy that is trying to make a case out of whole cloth. I don't expect you to take my word for it, but I well remember the thread where a couple of your fellow travelers piled on Ant over the Livni gender issue. Ant responded by acknowledging his error, but he didn't make a song a dance about it.

    Tell me, how did you come to learn of this huge blunder? Did you hear of this thread from a third party, or did you participate in the discussion at the time? If you did, then surely, you would have no problem finding that link to refute my claims.

    Ant’s detractors tried to squeeze every ounce of mileage they could out of this issue. I recall that Austen Taishus even raised it during his debate with Ant on the ABC.

    You’re convinced they are minutiae. The reality is they were clangers, which could well be avoided if he knew what he was talking about. He does not.

    Errors are often portrayed as “clangers” by critics, who's agenda is served by insisting that any error "discredits" those they oppose. The Jewish roads issue is purely a question of semantics. The same charges were leveled at Carter for daring to suggest the conditions in the occupied territories represents apartheid, even though main stream sources like Haaretz have used this term on numerous occasions.

    As a case in point, you only have to read every second post from Viva, who’s raison d’etre is to dismisses any critic of Israel as being discredited, unreliable, marginalized, what have you, while selectively turning a blind eye to the clangers put out by those he considers credible.

    Again, these errors do not in any way detract from the fundamental issues at the core of Ant’s book, yet you are predictably doing your best to extrapolate their significance to imply that they preclude Ant from having a credible opinion on the Israeli – Palestine issue.

    You probably believe that Iran has a nuclear weapons program or that Ahmadinejad called for Israel to be wiped off the map, both of which as false arguments, yet many journalists in Israel and the West, continue to make these fraudulent claims. Does that mean that these people have no idea what they are talking about?

  • BenZ

    Andre,

    I well remember the thread where a couple of your fellow travelers piled on Ant over the Livni gender issue. Ant responded by acknowledging his error, but he didn’t make a song a dance about it.

    Would you like to borrow my shovel? I have a spare…

  • BenZ

    You probably believe that Iran has a nuclear weapons program or that Ahmadinejad called for Israel to be wiped off the map, both of which as false arguments, yet many journalists in Israel and the West, continue to make these fraudulent claims.

    Actually, I might take that shovel back. Indeed I think everybody in this thread should run and put on wellington boots, as you are leaving so much bullshit lying around.

  • Andre

    BenZ,

    Right on cue – the all to familiar and predictable Zionist dummy spit.

    And you wonder why Israel's reputation is taking such a hit.

  • BenZ

    Right on cue – the all to familiar and predictable Zionist dummy spit.

    Oh good one Andre…

    Err… Right on cue, the predictable smear against Zionists and Israel from a person who has been well and truly caught out talking rubbish and is attempting to distract others.

    Every second you fail to directly quote Loewenstein's apology/correction or provide a link to same – or admit you are wrong – is one more step you take towards negative credibility. Right now, it's already zero. How's that digging going?

  • BenZ

    Having still not provided any evidence at all to back his claim, Andre is following the classic Loewesnstein technique.

    Step 1: Say something completely untrue.
    Step 2: When challenged on this error, refuse to admit your mistake and instead insist the person is a typical Zionist and hope this ends the discussion.

    See alsoLapkin versus Loewenstein:

    TONY JONES: Let me bring Mr Lapkin back in here. You've read Antony Loewenstein's thesis. You've actually read his book, My Israel Question.

    TED LAPKIN: Correct.

    TONY JONES: How do you respond to it coming from a young Australian Jewish person?

    TED LAPKIN: Well, I think that it is a far-left anti-Zionist book. It's rife with factual errors, beginning with the map that appears on page nine of the preface even before you get into the meat of the book. If you look at that map, Antony Loewenstein has Lebanon placed midway between Tel Aviv and Haifa, so he suffers from some geographical confusion. But even worse are the factual errors and the factual confusion that really renders the book a piece of very shoddy scholarship at best.

    ANTONY LOEWENSTEIN: It is interesting how I was expecting this kind of response. This is exactly the kind of response that Mearsheimer and Walt got in the US. They were accused of being extreme. They were accused of making factual errors. They were accused of being anti-Israel, anti-Zionist, anti-Semitic. This is the kind of tactics that we expect.

    Needless to say he doesn't address a single one of the errors pointed out. Apparently it's a Zionist "tactic" to point out a shoddy error.

    Well come on Andre, we're all still waiting for you to pull a rabbit out of your hat. I am sure you are also wholly incapable of admitting error, but at least you only have one error to apologise for (so far). Antony has pages and pages of them.

  • BenZ

    Lapkin vs. Loewy continues:

    TED LAPKIN: If I can point out that I haven't uttered the word anti-Semitism tonight. The only person who has been uttering it is Antony Loewenstein. You talk about factual errors – he talks about Jewish only roads. That's one of the errors that he makes in the book. What you have in the West Bank are roads that are limited to Israelis and Arab Israelis can use them and the reason why they were built is because Israelis driving through the West Bank were subjected to gunfire and sniping attacks and so to portray this as some kind of apartheid when, in essence, these roads were built after many Israelis, including Israeli rabs who were using, them were shot to death using the regular road system I think is just absurd and it's factually incorrect. These are not Jewish only roads. They are roads that are limited to Israelis for security reasons.

    ANTONY LOEWENSTEIN: Exactly. This is the thing – everything is for security. In other words, when there is a town which is cordoned off, it's for security. When there are roads only for Israelis, it is for security. My point is, this kind of rhetoric is always used to justify security measures, which in reality means that the Palestinian people don't actually have…

    TED LAPKIN: Do you concede your error that these are not Jewish only roads.

    ANTONY LOEWENSTEIN: No, I don't.

    TED LAPKIN: I'm sorry but you are mistaken.

    ANTONY LOEWENSTEIN: Far from it.

    TED LAPKIN: Israeli Arabs use them all the time.

    Dig dig dig……

  • Andre

    BenZ,

    You are getting really desperate mate. I didn't take this all so personally.

    Please explain how I have been caught lying? From what I recall, this started out as a dispute over whether Ant addressed the error he'd made with regard to Tzipi Livni's gender. I told you that Ant admitted he'd made a typo during that thread, which took place more than a year ago.

    In order to prove your assertion that I lied, you would have to produce a link to that thread. I take it that you have not been able to find that link, and given that you were no participating during that discussion, you do not know what was said first hand.

    That makes you the liar my friend. It is incumbent upon you to produce the evidence of a lie, not me,

    As for Ant's debate with Lapkin, yes, we have covered all of that already. Ant's book was reprinted to address the errors, though your obsession with the Jewish only roads argument is rather pathetic, given that we both agree, the roads are referred to a Jewish roads inside Israel.

    Needless to say he doesn’t address a single one of the errors pointed out. Apparently it’s a Zionist “tactic” to point out a shoddy error.

    Lapkin brands the book from the outset as a "far-left anti-Zionist book" from the outset, which is a pure ad hominem, then resorts to hit picking irrelevant details while ignoring the entire subject of the book.

    Meanwhile, throughout the entire debate, Lapkin did his best not to address anything to do with the occupation, expansing Israeli settlements or the Palestinian refugees. For that matter, neither have you. I wonder why that is?

    I am sure you are also wholly incapable of admitting error, but at least you only have one error to apologise for (so far). Antony has pages and pages of them.

    I'll do you a deal. You link to the thread that proves Ant made the error but did not address it and I'll apologise.

    In the mean time, may I suggest you return to your mother ship with new material BenZ. All you are doing is soiling yourself in public.

  • Andre

    Ahhh… There you go. My earlier comment is now “awaiting moderation”.

    Relax young warrior. The “awaiting moderation” flag has has nothing to do with your post. Unless I'm mistaken, it is automatically scheduled to pop up after hours so that trolls can;t run amok while no one is looking.

    As someone who posts from the Northern Hemisphere, I have had seen that warning appear many times when posted.

  • Pingback: The same, tired story is back again at Antony Loewenstein()

  • BenZ

    Okay Andre. Thanks for the explanation.

    I don't suppose you can also explain why my comment, which you have quoted, is now deleted, as is the original comment held in moderation?

  • Andre

    BenZ,

    I will look into it. I can't see why anything you have posted deserves to be removed. In fact, I am personally opposed to posts being blocked or deleted unless they severely cross the line in terms of personal attacks on other posters.

    I do hope you are not discouraged by this. Your input is most valued and welcome, and I do hope to see more of you on this blog.

  • BenZ

    I do hope you are not discouraged by this. Your input is most valued and welcome, and I do hope to see more of you on this blog.

    Aww Gee, Andre, I'm touched, however there's a problem: Your friend Antony Loewenstein keeps deleting my comments. At least two so far in this thread, one of which was quite an effort typing.

    Rather surprising behaviour for a guy who claims he is censored for his opposing views and even claims to want more debate. Very surprising indeed…

    [presses submit, wondering if this message will actually get through Antony's moderation of doom]