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 right of return

The latest Doha Debate:

“The House believes the Palestinians should give up their full right of return.”

More here.

UPDATE: Gideon Levy discusses one of the most-right governments in Israeli history.

38 comments ↪
  • viva peace

    What a silly debate. How you can give up something – “fully” or otherwise – that has never existed?

  • viva peace

    Andre

    You have already been shown that Ilan Pappe is irrelevant as he freely admits to be only interested in ideology and propaganda, NOT facts.

  • viva peace

    Andre

    Ah, there is no such crime as “ethnic cleansing” and as no ethnicity has been cleansed it is irrelevant.

  • viva peace

    Andre

    You anti-Semites just crack me up. You calim there was “ethnic cleansing” and then this howler:

    why did Ben Gurion implore the Arabs not to flee

  • Andre

    Viva,

    Your racism gives you away when you refer to the “the Muslims” as a collective, thereby implying that there is no disparity between any of the Arab states. For someone of your intellect that is particularly shabby.

    The poverty of the Palestinians has been widely recognized as being a direct consequence of them being denied the ability to access their land, which is their primary source of income. The withholding of hundreds of millions in taxation revenue has not helped either.

    Given that it has been Israel that has stolen land, partitioned the bantustans, not to mention destroying thousands of homes, and killing thousands of Palestinians, it’s pretty obvious that it is Israel who owed the billion is reparations to the Arabs. You know this too, but are clay being deliberate obstinate today.

    Ethnic cleansing and genocide are both crimes against humanity, you of all people should know this. The Holocaust itself was both a genocide and an ethnic cleansing, so I am surprised that you are so cavalier in dismissing it’s reality and it’s significance. As for whether it took place or not, as I already pointed out, the official Israeli government position does not even deny it, so I am at a loss as to why you continue to do so.

    You anti-Semites just crack me up. You calim there was “ethnic cleansing” and then this howler:

    why did Ben Gurion implore the Arabs not to flee

    I have no idea what’s gotten into you Viva, but you seem to be on a bender today, quoting statements out of context and within non related threads.

    Just to recap, I argues that if you were to accept Benny Morris’ version of events, then it seems incredibly contradictory that Ben Gurion would implore the Arabs not to leave, but then refuse to allow them to return o their homes.

    You used to be quite lucid in the past Viva, but you appear to have spiralled into some psychotic loop. Everything ok?

  • Andre

    Yes Viva,

    You seem to be on a streak of kicking own goals today.

    You have placed these quotes before, as though they were to represent some basis for your argument, yet you turn around and label the sources of these quotes as “whackjobs in the PLO”.

    Talk about self defeating!

    We could engage in a futile tennis match of throwing quotes at one another, but we’ve been there before.

    I’ll leave you with your favourite from Moshe Dayan:

    Jewish villages were built in the place of Arab villages. You do not even know the names of these Arab villages, and I do not blame you because geography books no longer exist, not only do the books not exist, the Arab villages are not there either. Nahlal arose in the place of Mahlul; Kibbutz Gvat in the place of Jibta; Kibbutz Sarid in the place of Huneifis; and Kefar Yehushu’a in the place of Tal al-Shuman. There is not one single place built in this country that did not have a former Arab population.

  • viva peace

    Andre

    Nobody said they were not Arabs. As your PLO friend said above

    The Palestinian people do not exist.

    Or how about this one:

    In reality today there is no difference between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. Only for political and tactical reasons do we speak today about the existence of a Palestinian people, since Arab national interests demand that we posit the existence of a distinct “Palestinian people” to oppose Zionism

    And the land was not “stolen.” It was one fair and square in a war started by the Muslims. As they sow, let them reap.

  • Andre

    Viva,

    So proving quotes from them is pretty futile is it not?

    BTW, I forgot to add that even former Israeli foreign minister Shlomo Ben Ami, states , in accordance with the fundamental principle of international law, it’s inadmissible to acquire territory by war.

    He states it three times in his book and he’s hardly a whackjob.

  • viva peace

    Andre

    You just called hese PLO individuals whackjobs, so why should anyone give credence to what they said?

    I don’t. But you people seem to. Except you think the views of Jews are more significant.

  • Roslyn Ross

    Andre,
    the Viva’s of the world exist to waste your time. They repeat the same lies and distortions over and over again and always avoid responding to what is posted to them. You have better things to do with your time than encourage VP.

  • Marilyn

    In 1951 the world powers got together to write a convention called the Refugee convention. It was written and ratified by over 140 nations because in 1938 those western powers took a vote in Evian France not to accept Jewish refugees.

    We know the result of that decision so I will only point out that the Australian representative said at the time (in a Liberal government) that “as we don’t have a racial problem, we are not desirous of importing one”.

    In 1945-whenever we stopped it over 700 nazis were allowed to migrate to Australia and it took until 1988 to get legislation to try them. Of course they are all old men or dead now.

    IN that convention is guarantees that all refugees from any country have a right to return if they choose. Israel has taken that to mean any refugees except the 800,000 or so they ethnically cleansed from Palestine in the 1948 Plan Datel. 531 villages, 13 large urban centres and 3 million hectares of land bulldozed with the civilian population kicked into the sea.

    I suspect that’s why Israel keeps bleating that the arabs want to kick them into the sea, because they did it to the Palestinians.

    As Andre will attest the pictures and maps in Pappe’s sickening book speak for themselves and should open the eyes of the world while Israel buries her head further in the sand.

    Now Israel has just been ordered to stop spraying chemicals on the Bedouins – the Israeli’s think their neighbours are bugs in jars waiting to be picked off at will.

    All refugees in every country of the world have the right to return to their homes, except the Palestinians by order of the very people the refugee convention was written for.

    Bizarre

  • Andre

    Very easily Viva,

    Many of the buildings continuing the homes made vacant by the 1948 ethnic cleansing are still standing today.

    You are so far behind the curve Viva. Even the Israeli government, nor the Likud party are as extreme in their views as you.

  • viva peace

    Andre

    First of all, there was no "ethnic cleansing." And second of all there never has been a "right of return" to Israel.

  • Andre

    Viva,

    Of course there was an ethnic cleansing. Illan Pappe wrote an entire book on the subject. Even if you insist on the Benny Morris version of events, why did Ben Gurion implore the Arabs not to flee, but then not allow them to return to their homes?

    Secondly, the reason there is no right of return is because Israel has refused to allow it. After all, it is a violation if international law to seize territory through military means and to deny a population the right to return to their homes.

    You are on the wrong side of the debate my friend, It's high time you accepted it and moved on.

  • viva peace

    Andre

    Please show us all where this mythical "right of return" comes from? And if it is a "right," what Israel wants would be irrelevant.

  • Andre

    On the contrary Viva,

    Illan Pappe has been honest enough to admit that like any historian, he too is not entirely impartial. Benny Morris has stated as much about his own position.

    In fact, Morris has been accused of falsifying information by his peers.

    As for right of return, it is enthic cleansing is a violation of international law and a crime against humanity. Right of return is implied by international law. Any people that are displaced from their homes and their homeland must be entitled to return.

    Israel has prevented that from happening, but even Olmert has stated that Israel's rationale for refusing to back don is not because they dispute the Arabs were removed from their land, but because the influx of so many Arabs would result in the Jewish population not longer being in the majority within Israel.

  • viva peace

    In fact when we consider it was the Muslims who started the 1948 War and thus the refugee problems of both Jews and Arabs, combined with the Muslims deliberately keeping the Palestinians in poverty, I think it is fair to say that the Arab states owe Israel and the Pals hundreds of billions in compensation.

  • viva peace

    Don't you people think it is time to drop the whole "Palestinian" charade. Let us here from them:

    The Palestinian people do not exist.

    Or how about this one:

    In reality today there is no difference between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. Only for political and tactical reasons do we speak today about the existence of a Palestinian people, since Arab national interests demand that we posit the existence of a distinct "Palestinian people" to oppose Zionism

    And as for not being motivated solely by the destruction of Israel

    The creation of a Palestinian state is only a means for continuing our struggle against the state of Israel for our Arab unity.

    All of these quotes come from whackjobs in the PLO.

  • viva peace

    Andre

    There is no such crime as "ethnic cleansing" and even if there were, the "Pals" are not an ethnicity. For christ sake, the term did not even come into existen until the 1990s.

    They are not even a unique people. As for "genocide" now we know you have been smoking too much Patrick Buchanan

  • viva peace

    Andre

    That quote has absolutely no bearing on anything I have argued. Nor does it support anything you argue. Even Dayan knew there is no such as "Palestinians." The quote you continually use does not even use the word!!! ROFL.

  • Andre

    Viva,

    The quote recognizes that land was stolen from Arabs and that there was indeed an Arab community.

    That says it all.

    It's a relief to know you're laughing though, You're been uncharacteristically manic of late.

  • Andre

    Viva,

    You just called hese PLO individuals whackjobs, so why should anyone give credence to what they said?

    It was one fair and square in a war started by the Muslims. As they sow, let them reap.

    There is no such thing a land being won fair and square in during war.

    BTW. The Israelis started the conflict with the Syrians during th 1967 war in which they seized the Golan Heights.

  • viva peace

    Andre

    ALL Islamists are whackjobs. Hullo?

  • viva peace

    Andre

    Let us hope the Muslims have learnt from this, then. But I doubt it.

  • Mike

    Viva you should try reading Ilan Pappe's book first before dismissing it so easily. It proves comprehensively that it is a myth that Arabs fled Palestinian villages (like Deir Yassin) of their own accord due to the impending Arab invasion. The Jewish Agency actively pursued a policy of displacement and used terrorist groups such as the Stern Gang and the Hagana to empty village after village and to appropriate them into Jewish hands. In May 1947 (note the date please), the Agency handed a plan, complete with a map, to the UN Special Committee on Palestine (UNSCOP), proposing the creation of a Jewish state over 80 per cent of Palestine – more or less Israel today without the Occupied Territories. In November 1947 the Committee reduced the Jewish state to 55 per cent of Palestine, and turned the plan into UN General Assembly Resolution 181. Its rejection by Palestine surprised no one – the Palestinians had been opposed to partition since 1918. The Jewish leadership turned to its May 1947 map, showing clearly which parts of Palestine were coveted as the future Jewish state. The problem was that within the desired 80 per cent, the Jews were a minority of 40 per cent (660,000 Jews and one million Palestinians). But the leaders of the Yishuv had foreseen this difficulty at the outset of the Zionist project in Palestine. The solution as they saw it was the enforced transfer of the indigenous population, so that a pure Jewish state could be established. On 10 March 1948, the Zionist leadership adopted the infamous Plan Dalet, which resulted in the ethnic cleansing of the areas regarded as the future Jewish state in Palestine.

  • And didn't Israel accept the return of Palestinian refugees in exchange for acceptance into the UN?

  • BenZ

    Wait,

    You are contrasting Benny Morris with Ilan Pappe?

    You've just demonstrated how narrow your view is. To compare those two would be like comparing the respective attitudes towards Jews of Nazis and Hamas, and claiming you've covered the whole political spectrum.

    Keep reading…

    Of course as far as narrow views go, the "Doha Debates" have to take the cake. Whilst they were probably a baby-step toward open discussion in the Arab world, by our standards I'm surprised they even appeared on the BBC and not simply al-Jazeera.

    Needless to say, there were no Jews in the audience for question time.

    It was interesting to see someone stand up and say "umm hi, I'm a third-generation Palestinian refugee".

    Excuse me?

    That would be like nearly every Australian Jew under thirty calling themselves a "third generation European refugee". Pathetic.

    The reality of course is that the majority of Arabs care less about the Palestinians than even the most hardened Israeli. Remember, Jordan killed more Palestinians in one day than Israel has in 505 years.

    And yet, I doubt many of you will even know what I'm talking about.

  • Andre

    BenZ,

    Please fell free to elaborate, without your reflexive use fo hyperbole.

    Benny Morris argues the ethnic cleansing of 1948 was an accident of war, while Pappe argues the ethnic cleansing was pre-planned.

    What are the other theories relating to the 1948 purging of Arabs from Israel?

  • Marilyn

    Well the new information that Pappe had was not available to Morris when he wrote his book and said the cleansing was an accident.

    Pappe got the details and maps and photos when the Israeli archives for 1948 were opened in 1998.

    In those archives it came clear that Plan Dalet had begun with Ben Gurion aka David Gruen, Polish zionist, in 1937 from the Red House pictured in the book.

    Like Andre and Mike I have the book and I don't think any book has ever made me so ill. Sandra Kanck is currelty reading it.

  • BenZ

    Secondly, the Palestinian birthrate is irrelevant to the argument,

    No it isn’t.

    A number of people make accusations that Israel has been, or is responsible for “genocide” and “ethnic cleansing”. The Palestinian birthrate roundly disproves such specious arguments.

    No doubt it is because they do not help your argument, that you regard these facts as irrelevant.

    Palestinians in occupied territories are being forces into smaller and smaller Bantustans and open air prisons

    Again, more slogans with no basis in reality. Can you please point me to a single “open air prison” in any country, where the inmates can run around with guns and bombs, shooting both each other and their ‘guards’ (i.e. Israel)?

    Of course not. It is a meaningless argument simply not borne out by facts. I’m sure that won’t stop it appearing on endless articles and protest signs…

  • BenZ

    Benny Morris argues the ethnic cleansing of 1948 was an accident of war, while Pappe argues the ethnic cleansing was pre-planned.

    What are the other theories relating to the 1948 purging of Arabs from Israel?

    The most popular 'theory' (read: history) is that the Arabs, who invaded Israel in 1948 (unless you are Marilyn and believe that never happened) had advised the local Arabs (who would go on later to rename themselves "Palestinians") to flee until the Jews had been eradicated.

    'Sadly' for them, the Jews prevailed and the Arabs lost, albeit trying again several times over the next 50 years.

    As a result, the Arabs who had planned to come home to 'Judenrein', suddenly found themselves displaced. As we know, the other Arabs e.g. the Jordanians didn't want to know about them, neither did the Egyptians or Lebanese.

    The problem of Palestinians being used as an anti-Israel pawn by the Arabs continues to this day.

    There was, and is, no "ethnic cleansing" as is easily demonstrated by the fact that the Palestinian birthrate outstrips any other figure. That you choose between only Morris and Pappe, who are in an absolute minority who believe this myth, but ignore the far greater body of evidence (including Arab history) demonstrates how narrow the sources you choose are.

    Then again, you are reading Loewenstein, so it comes as no great surprise.

    Marilyn, I'm still waiting for your correction of basic history rather than a list of all the books you've read…

  • Andre

    Benz,

    No one has said anything about a genocide being perpetrated against the Palestinians. Enthnic cleansing refers to the forceful removal or relocation fo people from one territory to another, and this is clearly taking place. rThe birthrate remains entirely irrelevant.

    Can you please point me to a single “open air prison” in any country, where the inmates can run around with guns and bombs, shooting both each other and their ‘guards’ (i.e. Israel)?

    Can you point to a single country that demands to be recognized, yet still refuses to declare it;s borders? Does that mean Israel does not exit?

  • Andre

    The theory you cite is actually a myth. Common sense easily debunks such a shoddy thesis.

    Firstly, you state that the Arabs who planned to return found themselves displaces, which is patently false. Not only do many of those homes remain vacant to this day, but the Arabs that tried to return were never allowed to return in the first place.

    It is true that Jordan, and Egypt turned their back on this population and even though there is some truth to the suggestion that Arab states are exploiting the plight of the Palestinians to score points against Israel, there is no denying that the Palestinians do want their own state and that the refugees want to return to their homes.

    We cannot also ignore that the creators of Israel envisaged a Jewish state, which would have been impossible before 1948, due to the fact that the Jewish population in Israel was vastly outnumbered by the Arab population. As early as he 1930’s, the Zionist movement reached a consensus that the way to resolve the dilemma is the way of transfer. This could not be done without the right pretext however, but the right moment came in 1948. Under the cover of war, you have the opportunity to expel the indigenous population.

    Former Israeli foreign affairs minister not only acknowledges that the Palestinians were ethnically cleansed in 1948, but in his book, states that it was pretty clearly that Israel intended to expel the Palestinians all along.

    And to deny there was and is no ethnic cleansing falls flat on it's face for number of reasons, Firstly, Israeli politicians have spoken openly about ethnic cleansing being government policy, a notion that was solidified by the assimilation of Avigdor Lieberman (a devout advocate of ethnic cleansing) into the Olmert government.

    Secondly, the Palestinian birthrate is irrelevant to the argument, for it makes as much sense as arguing that the fact that people are dying is somehow proof the human population is under threat. Palestinians in occupied territories are being forces into smaller and smaller Bantustans and open air prisons, while Israel continues to expand it’s settlements.

    As for suggesting the Benny Morris is somehow on the fringe of historians is ridiculous. Even VivaPeace holds Morris in high regard.

  • viva peace

    Marilyn

    Well the new information that Pappe had was not available to Morris when he wrote his book and said the cleansing was an accident.

    Pappe got the details and maps and photos when the Israeli archives for 1948 were opened in 1998.

    Gee, I wish you'd told me this before I read Benny Morris' "The birth of the Palestinian refugee problem revisited" published in 2004.

    Also, you would do well to know that Plan Dalet had absolutely nothing to do with ethnic cleansing or the Irgun and Stern Gang. And it has been publicly available in English since at least the 1960s.

    Plan D was a Hagganah military contingency plan developed in March 1948 only after four months of Muslim terrorist and regular army attempts to oust the Jews. Military plans like this are a dime a dozen in any military on the planet since the dawn of time.

    Its purpose was to deal with possible military developments in the upcoming invasions promised by the Muslims.

    One of the major, major ethical and scholarly failings of Pappe and to a lesser extent Morris, is the near total silence on military plans, meetings, and strategies of all the various Muslim players. I have read a hell of a lot of this stuff. If you are only reading Morris and Pappe, you are not even getting 50% of the truth. With Pappe alone, you are getting less than 10%

    On Pappe versus Morris, you are much better off with Morris. Morris is the key expert on Israel IDF, Hagganah archives. Of Pappe's work on the archives, Morris had this to say:

    Ilan Pappes book is appalling…..most of what Pappe tries to sell his readers is complete fabrication

    Many other historians have also revealed Pappe changes quotes and even makes them up. His most egregious fabrications were about David Ben-Gurion. But Pappe is not alone in this. Morris himself doctored Ben-Gurion's writings. However, Morris has admitted his errors. Pappe has not.

    In fact, Pappe no longer works as an historian. He quite openly confesses:

    My bias is apparent despite the desire of my peers that I stick to facts and the `truth’ when reconstructing past realities. I view any such construction as vain and presumptuous.

    Introduction to “A History of Modern Palestine: One Land Two People”

    He is a Communist propagandist. But his methodology is very screwed up as he uses (very badly) aspects of postmodernist gobbledegook to twist reality to paint the Arabs as basically having nothing to do with the war, which of course is just hysterical"

    Indeed the struggle is about ideology, not about facts, Who knows what facts are? We try to convince as many people as we can that our interpretation of the facts is the correct one, and we do it because of ideological reasons, not because we are truthseekers.

    Marilyn, I get the picture you are not an educated historian. if you were, you would not be seeking to understand this conflict through Pappe.

  • viva peace

    Andre

    Oh dear. Back to Logic 101 you go.

    Can you point to a single country that demands to be recognized, yet still refuses to declare it;s borders? Does that mean Israel does not exit?

    How does an answer one way or the other effect the fact that Gaza is not a prison, open or otherwise?

    Also, correct me If I am wrong, but Australia recognizes Israel.

  • viva peace

    Andre

    As you failed every time you are challenged to prove that israel is guilty of "ethnic cleansing" you really should give it away. perhaps you should turn your attention to REAL ethnic cleanings, such as the Jews from Muslim countries after WW2.

  • Andre

    Viva,

    Interesting summary, but in the end, you reveal that when it come to Morris vs Pappe, you just happen to agree more with Morris' version of events.

    Your attacks on Pappe are all to familiar and hollow. Similar criticisms have been made about Morris, some going so far as accuse him of Nazi like tendencies.

    Now, it is apparent that Benny Morris has abandoned the realm of academic honesty to rabidly join the legions of Jewish fascism. A series of interviews with him published in the Israeli and western press leaves no doubt as to the Nazi-like propensity Morris is harboring toward the Palestinian people. Sometimes, his fascistic outlook is so outpouring that one can’t distinguish him form the likes of Meir Kahana, Benjamin Elon, Eifi Eitam, and the terrorists of Kiryat Arba. On other occasions, he tries to package his repulsive views with a thin layer of academic jargon. But in both case, he makes no effort to hide or even extenuate his fascistic discourse.

    He goes on to say:

    In an article titled “Israel revisited”, published by the Washington Post Foreign Service on 11 March, 2007, Morris argues remorsefully that “had the war ended more definitely and logically demographically, every one would have been better for it. Not only Israel and the Palestinians, but all of the Middle East.”

    It is not difficult to translate Morris’s ghoulish words into simple language. In plain English, he says that in 1948, Israel should have expelled and/or massacred the entire Palestinian people between the River Jordan and the Mediterranean. In other words, he wishes Israel had “completed the job” employing whatever means necessary, including, conceivably, genocide and ethnic cleansing.

    And the piece de resistance

    He says that “Ben Gurion should have expelled more Palestinians during the 1948 war to leave a stronger Jewish majority between the Mediterranean Sea and the Jordan River.”

    Which pretty much puts your flowery these to bed, but most certainly puts your regard for this man in perspective.

    How does an answer one way or the other effect the fact that Gaza is not a prison, open or otherwise?

    The fact you say? One could argue that Goulburn jail is not a prison but a facility surrounded by high walls and fences and secured by armed guards. It is what it is Viva.

    As you failed every time you are challenged to prove that israel is guilty of “ethnic cleansing” you really should give it away. perhaps you should turn your attention to REAL ethnic cleanings, such as the Jews from Muslim countries after WW

    Given that we are talking about events that took place in 1948, so proving anything one way or another simply comes down to one historians work against another. After all, you are not proving anything, nut just putting forward the version of events you prefer, are you not?

    The trouble with your argument Viva, is that you cannot deny that 700,000 Arabs lived in Israel before 1948. Whether they left of their own volition or not is irrelevant. Under international law, they should have been allowed to return once the war was over and they were not. Since the, the only argument Israel has ever made against their return is that is would change the status quo of Israel being the Jewish majority inside Israel.

    This has to be the single most blatant admission that the purging of Arabs in 1948 served an fulfilled an ideological purpose.

    Just as telling is that the ethnic cleansing is accepted as mainstream history within Israel. Even former Israeli foreign minister, Shlomo Mr. Ben-Ami (a self professed ardent Zionist) supports what many Israeli historians acknowledge. In fact, he goes further, and insists that is pretty clearly that Israel intended to expel the Palestinians. The opportunity came along, and they did so.

    But you raise a good point, many Jews were indeed expelled from Arab countries after WWII. The ethnic cleansing of 1948 however is a focus because both Israelis and Palestinians are both dealing with the consequences to this day.

  • Andre

    Viva,

    One thing is for sure. The closer to the truth the posts are, the more hysterical your responses.

    Cutting and pasting from your prior posts is well and good, but merely exposes you as a one trick pony.

    At least Marilyn has read this books. All you rely on are fifth-hand commentaries!

    While I admit I have only just acquired a copy of Pappe's book, I have listened to every lecture and transcript of from Pappe since his book was published, so it’s definitely not fifth hand, but keep trying.

    Also, you would do well to know that Plan Dalet had absolutely nothing to do with ethnic cleansing or the Irgun and Stern Gang. And it has been publicly available in English since at least the 1960s.

    According to Wikipedia:

    Yitzhak Levi, head of the Jerusalem Shai (Hagannah intelligence service) did not include operation Nachshon in his account of the implementation of Plan D in his book, Nine Measures (in Hebrew, Tish'a Kabin). MidEast Web

    Now you have made this argument more than once.

    One of the major, major ethical and scholarly failings of Pappe and to a lesser extent Morris, is the near total silence on military plans, meetings, and strategies of all the various Muslim players.

    Please elaborate as to what relevance does this have to the 1948 ethnic cleansing?

    Also what Morris has to say:

    In an article titled “Israel revisited”, published by the Washington Post Foreign Service on 11 March, 2007, Morris argues remorsefully that “had the war ended more definitely and logically demographically, every one would have been better for it. Not only Israel and the Palestinians, but all of the Middle East.”

    It is not difficult to translate Morris’s ghoulish words into simple language. In plain English, he says that in 1948, Israel should have expelled and/or massacred the entire Palestinian people between the River Jordan and the Mediterranean. In other words, he wishes Israel had “completed the job” employing whatever means necessary, including, conceivably, genocide and ethnic cleansing.”
    “In fact, Pappe no longer works as an historian. He quite openly confesses:

    And Morris has admitted that: he is more committed to the state of Israel that to his work as a historian

    He also says this:

    Ben Gurion should have expelled more Palestinians during the 1948 war to leave a stronger Jewish majority between the Mediterranean Sea and the Jordan River.

    how charming. No wonder you think so highly of him.

    Marilyn, I get the picture you are not an educated historian. if you were, you would not be seeking to understand this conflict through Pappe.

    It’s a mystery how someone who has openly expressed such islamophobia can pretend to have any objectivity with regard to he history of Israel. Perhaps you should give up trying to give advice to others and just be honest about your bias?

    And the outright lies he tells is Beyond Chutzpah. But of course he knows the ideologues and anti-Semites do not care about the truth and facts.

    That’s funny. When Carter gave his speech at Brandies University, he admitted to a poorly phrased passage and not only apologized, but stated that he had ordered it to be reprinted. Allan Dershowitzs, who followed him on stage to rebut Carter’s arguments stated that following this acknowledgment from Carter, he was largely in agreement with Carter’s presentation.

    The fact is that most of Carter’s book was in accord with mainstream Israeli news publications and reports from B’Tselem. I take it you regard Haaretz and B’Tselem as discredited too?

    What I want to know is WHO is going to be brave enough to finally tell the “Palestinians” they do have any “right” to return to Israel and never have.

    What is the right of return for Israel other than law Israeli Jews passed after they carried out the ethnic cleansing? The law juts proves that a system of discrimination in Israel has been legitimised by the Israeli government. All your argument amounts to is the idea of winner takes all.

    What you have failed to answer repeatedly, is that given that 700,000 Arabs lived in Israel before 1948, whther they left of their own volition or not is irrelevant. Under international law, they should have been allowed to return once the war was over and they were not. Since the, the only argument Israel has ever made against their return is that is would change the status quo of Israel being the Jewish majority inside Israel.

    This has to be the single most blatant admission that the purging of Arabs in 1948 served an fulfilled an ideological purpose.
    Given that even the former Israeli foreign minister, Shlomo Ben Ami, admits that the ethnic cleasing of 1948 was pre-planned, all you have done in confirm the legitimacy of Pappe’s work.

    Well done.