Yesh Gvul
Courage To Refuse
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

Sweat-Shop Productions
Sweat-Shop Productions
Sweat-Shop Productions



Previous Posts

Powered by Blogger


Wednesday, January 11, 2006

Perspective received

Scott Burchill introduces some perspective to the legacy of Ariel Sharon:

"Current orthodoxy paints Sharon as a "warrior statesman" who courageously returned the Gaza Strip to the Palestinians and was preparing to make further "painful and generous concessions" on the West Bank before being cut down by a stroke. Dubbed "a man of peace" by President George W. Bush, it is said Sharon moved from the hard Right to the political centre, creating a new political party that, after winning elections scheduled for March, would oversee a peace settlement that delivered a Palestinian state.

"None of this is even remotely true."

The current fawning over Sharon is about as accurate as the demonising of Arafat as the inspiration for Bin Laden.


Blogger orang said...

It's been announced by the doctors that they've seen an arm move.

Some Haj pilgrims from Morocco having taken a detour to visit the bedside swear he smiled and winked at them.

Time lapse photography has been inconclusive.

Wednesday, January 11, 2006 9:43:00 pm  
Blogger boredinHK said...

Re Arafat - there is an interesting note about Arafat and his promotion of total anarchy as a political tool on Alert and Alarmed ( Edward may be able to provide a link ) . I would like to but having suggested that Professor Evans block anonymous contributions I appear to have been zapped and can't get access.

Wednesday, January 11, 2006 10:19:00 pm  
Blogger neoleftychick said...

What a hoot! First we had Chomsky, now this Burchill chucklehead. Who next? Mr. Ed? Or maybe another treat from Evan Jones off his meds!

Wednesday, January 11, 2006 10:22:00 pm  
Blogger Wombat said...

Yeah Neo,

Darlings like you risk going into factual overload.

Thursday, January 12, 2006 12:55:00 am  
Blogger neoleftychick said...

Someone should tell Burchill that while some unidentified source blames Sharon "indirectly" for Shabra and Shatila, in the real world we lay the blame on, like, you know, those who actually DID the killing. That would ah, ah, ah....Syrian-baked/armed/financed, er, er LEBANESE!

Hullo? Earth to Scott? Give us a tingle next time to resurface from your latest anti-semitic dive!

The car-wreck of Loewenstein's european bourgeois Jew-wreck continues apace. None of us can resist gawking.


Thursday, January 12, 2006 1:40:00 am  
Blogger Wombat said...

neoleftychick said...

"in the real world we lay the blame on, like, you know, those who actually DID the killing."

That's like saying you can't blame Iran for the terrorists they sponsor, blame the terrorirts and the terrorists alone.

Beam me up lefty.

Thursday, January 12, 2006 3:48:00 am  
Blogger orang said...

Neo is an apologist for state terror.

Is he dead yet?

Thursday, January 12, 2006 6:39:00 am  
Blogger leftvegdrunk said...

Neoleftychick, you could use the same logic (those who did the killing, rather than those who ordered it) to exonerate Pinochet, Saddam, Milosevic... Is that what you are suggesting? If not, why is Sharon different?

Thursday, January 12, 2006 6:51:00 am  
Blogger neoleftychick said...


Help me out here. After years of attacks from "Palestinians" and Lebanese armed forces, including 3 full scale invasions and decades of terrorism, Israel retaliates.

It only does so after the attmepted assassination of its Ambassador in London. It does so while a civil war, started by Palestinians, is in progress.

One side of the civil war, the Maronite Philangists, was funded, backed, trained, and ARMED by er, er, er.....SYRIA!

In August, 1982, following the assassination of the newly popularly elected Prime Minister, Bachir Gamayel, the Philangists slaughtered 2,000 Palestinians in a revenge campaign for the assassination, which had been carried out by the now Syrian-backed PLO.

So WHO is to blame?

1. Yasser Arafat for getting the Pals kicked out of Jordan (how on earth the Muslim world continues to live in denial by not vaporising Jordan, a Palestinian state, for evicting Palestinians, says a hell of a lot about Muslim "brotherhood").

2. Yasser Arafat for years of non-stop murders of Israelis.

3. Yasser Arafat for being a major player in starting the Lebanese Civil War in the first place.

4. Yasser Arafat for his involvement in Gamayel's assassination;

5. Syria for the role it played in backing the Philangists at the start of the Civil War.

6. Syria for its role in Gamayel's assassination.

7. The Philangists who were the military arm of the Maronites. Remember them? The ones whose Prime Minister got bumped off above? They slaughtered the Pals. You seem to think that Sharon is responsible because as a foreign military leader he did not step in to stop miltary from his enemy killing other members of his enemy? You are nuts.

So now you have it. Those responsible are Yasser Arafat and the PLO and the Syrian-backed Philangists.

What the hell is WRONG with you people??? Why are you all so ignorant? I have only been studying these issues for a little over a year. I am athiest white girl who has never even been to the middle east, yet I seem to know more than all of you combined.

God help the poor Towelheads if this is the quality of its western support base!

Thursday, January 12, 2006 11:39:00 am  
Blogger Wombat said...


Yo uhave gone off on a tamgent theer, but the fact remaisn that if you unleash a pack of pitbulls in a childrens nursery, you have something to answer for.

Thursday, January 12, 2006 11:56:00 am  
Blogger neoleftychick said...


I find it interesting that you judge a reasoned, fact and date based logical argument that shows a command of all the relevant actors and their relations with each other to be a "tangent."

On the other hand, you laud Scott Burchill, who shows no understanding of the events and no training in, or facility for, historiographic reasoning.

I am wondering if your prejudice reflects simple misogyny, lack of education, or just the usual bigotry. Perhaps a combination of the three.

On pitbulls you might be right, but we are talking about the Soviet-puppet Syrian government, a UN and Soviet funded PLO, a man, Yasser Arafat, who was recognised by the entire Arab world as a legitimate Arab leader, and a well-organised and trained military group whose candidate was elected PM. Are you suggesting that these actors should be considered as nothing more than dogs?

I know many would agree with you.

Thursday, January 12, 2006 12:41:00 pm  
Blogger Antony Loewenstein said...

Burchill is a respected academic.
And some people admit to studying the Middle East for one year.
Mmmm, hard to know who to respect, isn't it?

Thursday, January 12, 2006 12:50:00 pm  
Blogger neoleftychick said...


Burchill is a "respected academic!!!???" Huh? What does that SAY? How does that "opinion" of YOURS relate to anything?

I have shown very decisively and methodically reasons why he should not be respected. Can you counter with reasons why we SHOULD respect him? Is he a friend of yours? perhaps you would like to forward him my critique?

Yes, I have been studying these issues for a little over a year. That is why I am so gbsmacked at the appalling ignorance shown by everybody.

Thursday, January 12, 2006 1:02:00 pm  
Blogger orang said...

You know you do have a very large blind spot in your morality sensor.

The truth is Sharon should rightly be tried as a war criminal - If Milosovic, Hussein and Pinochet are such then so is he.

I won't even bother to argue regarding your "historiographic reasoning" to the lead up to the Sabah/Chatila massacre. But you, you poor "athiest white girl" are defending Israel and Sharon on this because prior to this Arafat and Syria were bad...Oooh you are completely absolved Mr B. of Beirut.

When are you going to start your own blog so we'll know where to go for such wisdom. Do you need help there?
(By the way broaden some of your historical "research". Be brave, Arafat bad, Golda good is not all there is)

Thursday, January 12, 2006 1:10:00 pm  
Blogger neoleftychick said...


Another blowhard who needs to take a Critical Reasoning 101 course. I provide dates, facts, and relationships. You just say "no, it was Sharon."

You see, what my study has shown me is that the whole Arab side in this debate is one of the most elaborate con-jobs and conspiracies the world has ever seen.

It is clear that the vast majority of westerners are just lazy zombies who easily lap up the lies and excruciatingly bad and unethical "scholasrhip" of the Chomskys, Burchills, Saids of this world.

If you wish to show how my analysis is wrong, go ahead.

But please note, that unlike the rest of you 2 digit IQers, I do not need to rely on 2nd rate academics to bolster my arguments as my brain is more than capable of arranging the evidence itself.

Thursday, January 12, 2006 1:16:00 pm  
Blogger orang said...

By the way, to help your historical writings, it's spelt; P-h-a-l-a-n-g-i-s-t.

Go to Wikipedia, do you dispute any of this you scholar you?

"...The next day, on September 15, the Israeli army reoccupied West Beirut, killing 88 people and wounding 254. This Israeli action breached its agreement with the United States not to occupy West Beirut ([4]); the US had also given written guarantees that it would ensure the protection of the Muslims of West Beirut. Israel's occupation also violated its peace agreements with Muslim forces in Beirut and with Syria.

Menachem Begin justified the occupation as "necessary to prevent acts of revenge by the Christians against the Palestinians” and to "maintain order and stability after Gemayel’s assassination". However, several days later, Ariel Sharon told the Knesset, Israel’s parliament: “Our entry into West Beirut was in order to make war against the infrastructure left by the terrorists”.

The Israeli army then disarmed, as far as they were able, non-pro-Israeli militias and civilians in West Beirut, while leaving the Christian Phalangist militias in East Beirut fully armed.


Ariel Sharon then reportedly invited Lebanese Phalangist militia units to enter the Sabra and Shatila refugee camps to clean out the PLO fighters. Under the Israeli plan, Israeli soldiers would control the perimeters of the refugee camps and provide logistical support while the Phalangists would enter the camps, find the PLO fighters and hand them over to Israeli forces.

However, ultimately no persons were handed over to Israeli forces, there was no fighting and no weapons were reported to be found in the camps.

Sharon's instructions to the Phalangists emphasized that the Israeli military was in command of all the forces in the area.

The Israeli military had completely surrounded and sealed off the camps and set up observation posts on the roofs of nearby tall buildings on September 15. The next day Israel announced that it controlled all key points in Beirut. The Israeli military met throughout the day with top Phalangist leaders to arrange the details of the operation. For the next two nights, from nightfall until late into the night the Israeli military fired illuminating flares above the camps.

On the evening of September 16, 1982 the Phalangist militia, under the command of Elie Hobeika, entered the camps. For the next 36 to 48 hours, the Phalangists massacred the inhabitants of the refugee camps, while the Israeli military guarded the exits and continued to provide flares by night."

So far, who would have guessed that Sharon would be dubbed "The Man of Peace".

Thursday, January 12, 2006 1:39:00 pm  
Blogger neoleftychick said...

Thank you, thank you, THANK YOU! Finally we are getting somewhere. Let's use your own words.

"For the next 36 to 48 hours, the Phalangists massacred the inhabitants of the refugee camps, while the Israeli military guarded the exits and continued to provide flares by night."

As I said above, the murders were at the hands of fellow-Arabs, the Phalangists. Now, perhaps you should attend to all the incidents leading up to this and you will agree with me that the 3 baddies were:

1. Yasser Arafat and the PLO. How many "Palestinians" have been killed by Arafat and his goons over the years? The poor, poor things;

2. Syria;

3. The Lebanese themselves.

Thursday, January 12, 2006 1:46:00 pm  
Blogger Wombat said...


You seem awfully proud of yourself. While you are thorough, it’s easy to formulate an argument by ignoring the inconvenient half of it.

neoleftychick said...
"One side of the civil war, the Maronite Philangists, was funded, backed, trained, and ARMED by er, er, er.....SYRIA! "

Partially true.Israel resumes were arming the Maronite Christians. Israel has a well documented history of doing deals with the devil. Even to this day, they are still getting caught making money selling US military technology to it’s enemies.

neoleftychick said...
"Yasser Arafat for years of non-stop murders of Israelis."

What about Ben Guiron and his successors? What about Israeli chief-of-staff Rafael Eitan, who had his hands in the Sabra and Chatila massacre? The murder has been perpetrated in both directions.

neoleftychick said...
"Yasser Arafat for being a major player in starting the Lebanese Civil War in the first place.

How can you make such a stupid clima when the war involved so many players – the Maronite Christians, Shi'i Muslims, the Druze, PLO, the Israeli as well as the Syrian army?

Israeli troops invade southern Lebanon. International pressure made Israeli withdraw from occupied territory.

neoleftychick said...
"Yasser Arafat for his involvement in Gamayel's assassination"

Elie Hobeika, the leader of the militia that massacred carried out the massacre in the Sabra and Shatila, died a day after saying he was ready to testify in a case brought by Palestinians, accusing Ariel Sharon. Sharon denied sanctioning the massacres, but has since all but admitted to it, and was demonized in Israel for it.

How often have we heard Israeli denial ? Shimon Peres denied any role in the blast which ripped through a Beirut suburb as Hobeika was leaving home, killing him, two bodyguards and another person and injuring three more.

neoleftychick said...
"Syria for the role it played in backing the Philangists at the start of the Civil War."

Again, Israel was arming them.

Like they say, there are two sides to every story. In the case of the Lebanese Civil War, even more than two.

The bottom line is that denying Sharon’s guilt it pretty futile given that his own countrymen consider him a war criminal.

Thursday, January 12, 2006 2:07:00 pm  
Blogger neoleftychick said...


When terrorist-apologists such as yourself set themselves up as law-maker, judge, trial, and jury to declare somebody a "war criminal" when no legal body, legitimate or otherwise has ever done so, it is time to reach for one's revolver.

Sorry, but the Lebs had invaded Israel countless times and Arafat/PLO's crimes are all listed above. I have provided you with the facts.

The final fact is that Sharon did nothing as his Lebanese enemies slaughtered his Palestinian enemies.

Life is tough and war is tougher. For the PLO we can only say "as you sow, so you reap" and "if you live by the sword, you die by the sword."

For you to place Ariel Sharon's "responsibility" to protect his enemy (the Palestinians) from his other enemy (the Lebanese) above the responsibility of the Lebanese butchers who actually carried out the killings is so scary.

But it sure does explain a lot of the wacky denial that the pro-terrorist camp wallows in.

Thursday, January 12, 2006 2:15:00 pm  
Blogger neoleftychick said...


Interesting how immediately following Shatila it was Arafat and the PLO who had to flee to exile in Tunisia. Bit odd for a "cleanskin" don't you think? ;))

Oh, and a bit odd of the supposedly anti-Arab US to assist him, don't you think? ;)

Thursday, January 12, 2006 2:20:00 pm  
Blogger Wombat said...


You do have an appreciation for drama don't you? I make a remark that you consider inflamatory, and you start spoutign colourful terms like "terrorist-apologists" are talking about Russian Roulette.

Are you going for some sort of record for the number of ad hominems you can stuff into a sentence or something?

The "war is a dirty game" excuse is becomming so worn out, it needs a serious face lift. Yes there were two enemies involved in the massacre, but when you are shipping arms to one of them, you can kiss innocenece goodbye. Just like they did in the Iran/Iraq war, Israel can't help meddling by backing a leeser enemy against are greater one.

Gamblings debts don't debts have a habbit of comming back to haunt you.

As for Lebannon, if Israel had not been driven out the second (or was it the third) time by Hezbollah, they'd probably be building settlements there too.

Thursday, January 12, 2006 2:30:00 pm  
Blogger neoleftychick said...


Actually, like every war, the Israelis were driven out by the US. But I doubt they have ever had serious designs on Lebanon. Syria and the West Bank for sure, but not lebanon. Why would they? It's a dump.

So the Towlies should thank the US everyday that Israel was stoppped from very justifiably expanding its territory. Who knows, it still might! i STRONGLY support Israel totally annexing the entire West bank as part of the state of Israel.

And "terrorist-supporter" is very apt. You cannot help but blame Israel for everything, rather than the REAL culprits in this whole sorry saga. Muslim Arab males.

Denial is clearly not just a river in Egypt. ;)

Thursday, January 12, 2006 2:44:00 pm  
Blogger orang said...

neoleftychick said...

"Thank you, thank you, THANK YOU! Finally we are getting somewhere. Let's use your own words.

"For the next 36 to 48 hours, the Phalangists massacred the inhabitants of the refugee camps, while the Israeli military guarded the exits and continued to provide flares by night.""

You are f*kin insane aren't you...??

"Mr orang you said yourself you held back the crowds and kept everybody out of the area while shining a light onto the scene so your two friends repeatedly, for 48 hours kicked the shit out of neolefty. "

Thank you your honour, can I go now? Since I obviously had nothing to do with it.

As I said before you have a blind spot in your morality sensor.

Thursday, January 12, 2006 3:02:00 pm  
Blogger Wombat said...

Very Cute Neo,

You're fond of cliche's aren't you?

Israel too should also be thanking the US, for without the blank cheques and military aid they receive from the, their situation would be somewhat different. One things for sure, the USS Liberty would probably still be afloat and most of the 35 men killed in the attack would probably still be alive.

One cannot help countering your one sided views about the Israeli Palestinian conflict. Such bias invites refutation and challnges. So no, I don't blame Israel for everything, only for what they are responsible for.

As evidence of your extremist views, you maintain that Israel should take all of the West bank, when even Israel would not dare to make such a claim (at least not officially).

If I were to be honest however, I can't see how Palesitine could work by being given the West Bank and Gaza and it's enclaves. No country could pratically exist with this patch work of borders. Maybe the best solution is for Jordan and Egypt to clear some space for a Paelistinian state after all.

As you have pointed out, what I think matters not.

Thursday, January 12, 2006 3:05:00 pm  
Blogger neoleftychick said...


Far less likely would the judge say "your 2 friends are innocent, it is ornag who is gulity. Oh FFS, give us a break. This is Romper Room. Back to Chomsky you go.


I have concluded that it is cruel and tedious to continue stringing the Pals along. My prediction? There will never, ever be another Palestinian state. But there will be another war.

Let us hope this time it is sorted for good.

Thursday, January 12, 2006 3:21:00 pm  
Blogger orang said...

It will all be one state with Jews, Non-Jews, Honourary Jews and, to quote Mr Menahim Begin "Beasts walking on two legs" "

"[The Palestinians are] beasts walking on two legs." Menahim Begin, speech to the Knesset, quoted in Amnon Kapeliouk, "Begin and the Beasts". New Statesman, 25 June 1982."

Our resident historian will think this is funneeee!!

(Oh God, let my people go....why do they hate us....)

Thursday, January 12, 2006 3:27:00 pm  
Blogger neoleftychick said...


The Pals will be persuaded with cash to move in with their ethnic relations - Jordan and Syria. If they refuse, a furture Israeli leadership will push them out. With no Ruskies around, the world will agree.

Thursday, January 12, 2006 3:28:00 pm  
Blogger orang said...

My Dear, who is actually teaching you this nonsense?

"With no Ruskies around, the world will agree." ??? When was the last time Russia did anything to influence the world? 1962?

".......If they refuse, a furture Israeli leadership will push them out." - I don't think so but you never know.

I like this one, have you come across it in your studies?

" We live in a thunderously failed reality. ... A state lacking justice cannot survive. ... Even if the Arabs lower their heads and swallow their shame and anger for ever, it won't work. A structure built on human callousness will inevitably collapse in on itself. Note this moment well: Zionism's superstructure is already collapsing like a cheap Jerusalem wedding hall."
(Avraham Burg, 15 September 2003) Jerusalem wedding hall.. I like that one.

Oooh look at this. Maybe that's where they learned about Bantustans and walls. What's you're scholarly take on this?

"There is no terrible regime - Columbia, Guatemala, Uruguay, Argentina and Chile during the time of the colonels, Burma, Taiwan, Zaire, Liberia, Congo, Sierra Leone - there is not one that does not have a major military connection to Israel. Israeli arms dealers are there [acting as] mercenaries - the guy behind Noriega was Michael Harari, an Israeli, who got out of Panama. Israeli mercenaries in Sierra Leone go around the UN boycotts of what are called blood diamonds, same in Angola. Israel was very involved in South Africa, of course, during the apartheid regime."
(Jeff Halper, 20 September 2003)

Thursday, January 12, 2006 4:45:00 pm  
Blogger leftvegdrunk said...

Neoleftychick, just a quick response to your lengthy reply on Sharon's accountability for war crimes. Here's a recap that speaks for itself.

N: " the real world we lay the blame on, like, you know, those who actually DID the killing..."

L: " could use the same logic to exonerate Pinochet, Saddam, Milosevic... Is that what you are suggesting?"

N: Obfuscation and avoidance, then "...Those responsible are Yasser Arafat and the PLO and the Syrian-backed Philangists."

As an aside, your studies may lead you to Middle East observors such as Tom Porteous. In this month's Prospect Magazine, Porteous looks closely at the political situation in Iran, placing it within its historical context. He also makes some more general remarks about the region as a whole. Such as this:

"[T]he tendency of western politicians and media to focus on ideology in the middle east at the expense of political analysis results in a banal and incomplete picture of what is going on. The ideologies may be real enough, but they are also nurtured and manipulated as political tools by competing elites and states as a means of attaining and holding power. It was always so, and the US and Britain should know this, for they are as much responsible for nurturing and manipulating ideologies in the middle east as anyone else in the past half-century."

I recommend the article very highly.

If indeed you are a student of the Middle East then you will no doubt appreciate the importance of political economy. Please, do us all a favour and demonstrate this method of analysis rather than spewing out nonsense and racial slurs.

Thursday, January 12, 2006 5:40:00 pm  
Blogger Ian Westmore said...

neoleftychick said...

Someone should tell Burchill that while some unidentified source blames Sharon "indirectly" for Shabra and Shatila, in the real world we lay the blame on, like, you know, those who actually DID the killing.

AFAIK, Hitler never even said so much as "boo" to a single Jew, let alone physically hurt one, so by your criteria, he should have been allowed to go free had he survived WW2. Interesting!

However, Sharon did directly get his hands bloody at the Qibya massacre in 1953.

Thursday, January 12, 2006 6:02:00 pm  
Blogger neoleftychick said...

ian westmore

When you provide evidence that Hitler was RESPONDING to a mass campaign by 100s of millions of towelheads to obliterate he and his mere 5% of the total area and population THEN you can get away with posting such bullshit.

Until then, fucking well grow up you anti-semitic moron.

Thursday, January 12, 2006 6:22:00 pm  
Blogger orang said...

hhhhaaaaa, what a cracker. a true true psycho!

No it's alright folks, nothing to see here. A little too much know.,,,'s OK. She'll be alright..

Thursday, January 12, 2006 6:34:00 pm  
Blogger orang said...


Good link - Prospect Magazine and good article.

Imagine, we could probably engage Iran and work out an equitable solution. But that's too complicated. Let's just bomb them. They are just rag heads after all. (wait a minute , are Iranians rag heads-no that's the airabs)

Thursday, January 12, 2006 6:46:00 pm  
Blogger Ian Westmore said...

neoleftychick said...
Until then, fucking well grow up you anti-semitic moron.

Ah, yes, the apoplectic resort to the anti-semite charge in a vain attempt to confuse and befuddle in the hope the inability to answer the charge that Sharon was directly involved in murdering mostly women and children. How unusual!

No doubt you'll go equally rabid when I point out that the Knesset's own inquiry into the Lebanon massacres found Sharon "personally responsibility" Those darn anti-semites are everywhere, aren't they?

Thursday, January 12, 2006 7:13:00 pm  
Blogger Wombat said...

Good point Mr Westmore.

Now hear Lefty argue that "personally responsibility" does not mean guilty.

Friday, January 13, 2006 12:50:00 am  
Blogger Wombat said...

On a more positive note, it seems my prediction was right abotu Hamas being forced to become more moderate as a onsequence of it;s election success:

"Hamas drops call for destruction of Israel from manifesto",2763,1684472,00.html?gusrc=rss

Babysteps for sure, but babysteps in the right direction nonetheless.

Friday, January 13, 2006 1:48:00 am  
Blogger neoleftychick said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

Friday, January 13, 2006 11:16:00 am  
Blogger Wombat said...

And thanks to Ben Guiron's advice, no one trusts the Israeli's either.

Friday, January 13, 2006 11:31:00 am  
Blogger neoleftychick said...


Ah, it is not Israel that requires the rest of the world to give it the right to exist.

Friday, January 13, 2006 11:48:00 am  
Blogger Wombat said...

Well that's questionable. If the US were to tunrn off the tap and close their cheque book, Israel would become vulnerabel overnight.

Of course that won't happen. But don't lose sight that Israel had a helping hand getting to where it is.

Friday, January 13, 2006 2:16:00 pm  

Post a Comment

<< Home