Yesh Gvul
Courage To Refuse
Shministim
Pilots
Free The Five
New Profile
Refuser Solidarity Network


Name: Antony Loewenstein
Home: Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
Comment Rules
About Me:
See my complete profile



Google
Web antonyloewenstein.blogspot.com
Sweat-Shop Productions
Sweat-Shop Productions
Sweat-Shop Productions



Blogs

Sites




Previous Posts



Powered by Blogger

 


Friday, January 13, 2006

Getting full on Israel

Rupert Murdoch and Nicole Kidman, seen above, enjoy a tasty meal in New York. What's the occasion? Let the "official" News Ltd press release explain:

"News Corporation chairman and chief executive officer, Rupert Murdoch, has received a humanitarian award from the Simon Wiesenthal Centre.

"The Eastern Office of the Centre presents the award annually.

"Mr Murdoch, who attended with his wife, Wendy Deng, received the award at the organisation's annual dinner at The Waldorf-Astoria in New York on Wednesday.

"Australian Hollywood actor Nicole Kidman presented Mr Murdoch with the Humanitarian Laureate Award in recognition of his contributions to humanitarian causes. The award recognises his exceptional efforts on behalf of tolerance and diversity."

One has to read another Murdoch publication, Melbourne's Herald Sun, to discover the real reason behind the award:

"The award recognises Mr Murdoch's support for Israel. Mr Murdoch thanked 'his real friend and great sport' for agreeing to present the award."

Elites TV goes even further:

"The black-tie crowd was rapt as both the Israeli and U.S. national anthems were played, and speeches were made.

"As usual, our Open All Night team got into the spirit of the evening, focusing on the gleaming diamond ring on Nicole Kidman’s wedding-ring finger. Is it an engagement ring from country singer Keith Urban? Kidman tore into the chicken dinner with gusto, causing everyone to wonder if she’s pregnant."

Amazingly, the website actually features a rather unflattering picture of Kidman tearing into her dead bird.

But, let's not be churlish. Murdoch was thanked for his life-long support of the Zionist state, and by implication, its brutal occupation, checkpoints, Jewish-only roads etc. And let's not forget that supporting the Iraq war was the true mark of a
humanitarian. As he said in 2003:

"The greatest thing to come out of this for the world economy, if you could put it that way, would be $20 a barrel for oil. That's bigger than any tax cut in any country."

22 Comments:

Blogger Shabadoo said...

Ah, after Murdoch and News Ltd again? Why don't you go commit a little journalism again and lob a call into Janet Fife-Yeomans for comment? After all, there's no one around to fire you for sandbagging her quotes this time...

Friday, January 13, 2006 2:45:00 pm  
Blogger Polywise said...

ttzxShabadoo, your obsession with Ant is becoming really quite disturbing, not to mention, sad. What, are you glued to his blog all day, waiting with baited breath for him to post something just so you can respond?

Friday, January 13, 2006 2:50:00 pm  
Blogger neoleftychick said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

Friday, January 13, 2006 2:59:00 pm  
Blogger Wombat said...

Hey Shab,

You never answered my question abtou whther you considered yourself a Republican. What's the verdict?

Friday, January 13, 2006 3:00:00 pm  
Blogger Shabadoo said...

Hi Addamo:

Thanks, sorry, contrary to what some people think (see above) I do have a rich full life beyond my barrel-fishing around here. I'm not a Republican, in either the Australian or contemporary American senses of the word (though it's inevitable here); my politics are pretty classically liberal, and so my ancient sympathies are Aristotlian, and in more modern times I think JS Mill's "On Liberty" is a pretty good roadmap. Very round-about answer, but hope it helps. I'd call myself a libertarian, but there are just too many freaks in that department.

Polywise, I see only 'progressives' are allowed to play journalistic inside baseball...very telling. But don't flatter yourself, no one is stalking your man.

Friday, January 13, 2006 3:34:00 pm  
Blogger Wombat said...

Well Shab,

hansk for the reply.

Guess what? I consider myself a libertarian also. I'm stil puzzled why you got so offended at my Repug comment?

Friday, January 13, 2006 3:39:00 pm  
Blogger Shabadoo said...

Oh, it wasn't so much that I was offended, just that I thought it was beneath you...it's the sort of thoughtless crap that gets slung around over at Kos and the like. My point was that I tend to turn off from arguments when that sort of thing comes out.

Friday, January 13, 2006 4:51:00 pm  
Blogger Wilbourne said...

So it's no longer Israel in Antony's own words. It's become the Zionist state. We already know he thinks Zionism is an immoral and unjustifiable concept. And as such, so is Israel - the Zionist state. About time you stopped beating around the bush and said what you truly believed, Israel has no right to exist.

My reasoning is correct is it not? If Zionism is wrong, then so too becomes the Zionist state as you called Israel.

Please outline your problem with the Simon Wiesenthal Centre, and why then it is an outrage that Murdoch attends a function of theres. Come on Antony, answer a question I pose to you for once, you just posted a few days ago about free and healthy debate.

Friday, January 13, 2006 7:54:00 pm  
Blogger Antony Loewenstein said...

I don't believe in a Jewish, Zionist state. It's pretty simple really, said it numerous times before. I support the right of Jews to live there, along with Palestinians. A one-state solution is the ideal, but a two-state more likely in the near future.
As for the Wiesenthal Centre, no better or worse than most Zionist groups, defending every Israeli crime like they own the place.
Read Finkelstein's Holocaust Industry for much more on this.

Friday, January 13, 2006 8:51:00 pm  
Blogger Wilbourne said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

Friday, January 13, 2006 9:13:00 pm  
Blogger Wilbourne said...

I've read all Finkelstein has to offer, I doubt he affected me as with you.

I have some unrelated questions if you would indulge me. Answer at your discretion of course.

Is say, Peretz, a Zionist in your eyes?

If there is a state of Palestine on the majority of the West Bank, with equal territorial exchange for the large settlements close to the green line, would you cease to be so belligerent towards Israel?

Is the Islamic Republic of Iran justified in mandating by law their Islamic identity?

Why do you think there is no concerted effort by people such as those in the International Solidarity Movement to form a international solidarity movement in defence of Sudanese animists and Christians that have been oppressed for decades at the hands of the Sudanese government and also wish for a state of their own?

Do you think a concerted campaign of attacks on civilian targets in the West (terrorism, if you will), used to highlight the oppression of their people would be justified as the Sudanese non-Muslims have no other means to fight their oppressors?

Why is it that when George Bush comes to Australia there are massive protests, but when the Chinese President Hu Jintao arrives there are no protests in support of the long oppressed Tibetans? Why does Bob Brown shout down George Bush, but gush all over Hu Jintao?

What is your postion on Hamas, and their charter, leading the PA after the upcoming elections? What of their 'resistance' against civilian targets?

Thanks for your time.

Friday, January 13, 2006 9:16:00 pm  
Blogger Antony Loewenstein said...

Sorry dude, truly no time to answer all these.
My book covers much of it, and it's out in a few months.

Friday, January 13, 2006 10:25:00 pm  
Blogger Wilbourne said...

No problem, just curious.

Friday, January 13, 2006 11:23:00 pm  
Blogger Wombat said...

Wilbourne,

I don’t know if you’re interested in what I have to say, but if you would indulge me, I have some ideas about these qeusrions:

“If there is a state of Palestine on the majority of the West Bank, with equal territorial exchange for the large settlements close to the green line, would you cease to be so belligerent towards Israel?”

That’s what we in the blogosphere call a loaded question. Belligerence implies irrationality. What is so irrational about championing the cause of a displaced population?

If the land that belongs to the Palestinians is handed back to them and th3ey are left alone, then the case will be closed.

”Is the Islamic Republic of Iran justified in mandating by law their Islamic identity?”

I don’t believe so, but let’s look at recent history. Iran used to be an open and progressive democracy until the US overthrew their democratically elected leaders and installed a dictator. Mossadegh was stupid enough to think that Iran could keep their oil revenues and use them to benefit the Iranian people. The Shah was in turn, overthrown and a massive distrust of the West was established. The US has only themselves to blame for radicalizing Iran.

”Why do you think there is no concerted effort by people such as those in the International Solidarity Movement to form a international solidarity movement in defence of Sudanese animists and Christians that have been oppressed for decades at the hands of the Sudanese government and also wish for a state of their own?”

Good question. Just a guess here - there is probably no moral justification for this other than the fact that there is no dispute of territory, and no outside interference contributing to the conflict. Sovereignty is a tricky issue.

”Do you think a concerted campaign of attacks on civilian targets in the West (terrorism, if you will), used to highlight the oppression of their people would be justified as the Sudanese non-Muslims have no other means to fight their oppressors?”

Attacking the West would only be of benefit if the US was complicit in assisting or enabling the Sudanese leadership in oppressing the non-Muslims. Do you have evidence that this is taking place? Bin Landen tells us there is a good reason why does not attack Sweden.

”Why is it that when George Bush comes to Australia there are massive protests, but when the Chinese President Hu Jintao arrives there are no protests in support of the long oppressed Tibetans? Why does Bob Brown shout down George Bush, but gush all over Hu Jintao?”

That’s an easy one. George Bush comes to Australia pretending to be the leader of the free world, champion of human rights and bringer of democracy. Many believe the US once stood for these values but has shelved them in favour of US hegemony and big money interests. The anger people have towards the US is that it knows better.

China has never pretended to be any of these things. China has a history of being oppressed and humiliated by external forces, which has instilled a distrust of the foreign states. The attitude most people share is that opening China up (practically and ideologically) is the only way to affect human rights in that country.
Finally, the spiritual leader of Tibet, has stated repeatedly that he is not opposed to Tibet becoming part of China, in fact that he believed it may in the best interest of Tibet to be integrated.

It’s not an excuse, but it does shed come perspective.

“What is your postion on Hamas, and their charter, leading the PA after the upcoming elections? What of their 'resistance' against civilian targets?”

This is a sensitive issue but potentially significant. I believe that by entering mainstream politics, Hamas will be forced to become more moderate in order to succeed and increase it’s appeal. Just recently, there was a report that Hamas had stated that they are changing their charter to recognize Israel.

Saturday, January 14, 2006 2:14:00 am  
Blogger Darp said...

Hmmmm...

I somehow can't imagine Uncle Rupert working the two way radio on an FDB recce mission to pin down a group of neo-Nazis who were planning to do over a Synagogue.

Where's MY bloody award handed to me by Nicole Kidman?

Saturday, January 14, 2006 2:31:00 am  
Blogger James Waterton said...

"picture of Kidman tearing into her dead bird."

What a philistine! Whereas the culturally well-adjusted blog administrator would only be seen eating live bird.

Saturday, January 14, 2006 5:20:00 am  
Blogger Clumsy Birds said...

Murdoch was thanked for his life-long support of the Zionist state, and by implication, its brutal occupation, checkpoints, Jewish-only roads etc.

Hmmm, try: And by implication, his support for the only gay rights parade in the Middle East, set in Jerusalem of all cities, inter alia.

That’s a pretty crappy picture of Nicole by the way. Really that desperate to point out the fact than an actress eats? No need to get all snotty, I'm sure whatever it was, was free-range.

Saturday, January 14, 2006 3:44:00 pm  
Blogger neoleftychick said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

Saturday, January 14, 2006 10:47:00 pm  
Blogger Edward Mariyani-Squire said...

Shabadoo said...

"my politics are pretty classically liberal, and so my ancient sympathies are Aristotlian, and in more modern times I think JS Mill's "On Liberty" is a pretty good roadmap."

Shabadoo, I don't understand the "and so" in the above statement. Putting "classical liberal" and John S. Mill together makes perfect sense, but throwing in Aristotle seems a bit weird.

Just wondering how The Big A fits in, that's all.

Regards.

Sunday, January 15, 2006 6:20:00 am  
Blogger Ibrahamav said...

Addamo_01 said...

If the land that belongs to the Palestinians is handed back to them and th3ey are left alone, then the case will be closed.
******************************
At least we now know that the irradication of Israel is to goal. What could possibly be irrational about that?

Monday, January 16, 2006 12:20:00 am  
Blogger Wombat said...

Ibrahamav said...

"At least we now know that the irradication of Israel is to goal."

I don't follow. We are talking about occupies territories aren't we?

Monday, January 16, 2006 3:21:00 am  
Blogger Ibrahamav said...

Not to the palestinians who consider all of Israel to be occupied territory. But you knew that.

Tuesday, January 17, 2006 3:40:00 pm  

Post a Comment

<< Home