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


Monday, January 09, 2006

We're better than you

Yet another example of Israeli racial discrimination dressed up as demographic concerns:

"A conference on finding ways to achieve a permanent Jewish majority in Acre is to be held on Sunday in the northern Jewish-Arab city. The convention, the first of its kind, was initiated by the New Forum for Strengthening the Jewish community in Acre, lead by council member Muli Cohen, a member of Mayor Shimon Lankri's faction in the city council."

Imagine the outcry if an Australian city hosted a conference demanding the right to maintain the mythical (and pretty dull) Anglo-Saxon culture. Actually, it's probably closer than we think.


Blogger Human said...

snv.slnsnbsn fej23iraknn.
sdnnvndsfjnrejnksdfnoinon lsknnwns wu30jgn.

Monday, January 09, 2006 2:10:00 pm  
Blogger Wombat said...

I can just picture Neolefty there as MC of such a conference, whipping up the crowd into a fenzy like some Amway come KKK annual meeting.

Monday, January 09, 2006 2:12:00 pm  
Blogger Ibrahamav said...

You can see it because you are a racist.

Monday, January 09, 2006 2:55:00 pm  
Blogger Ibrahamav said...

Pardon me, probably a racist. But definately full of addamo.

Monday, January 09, 2006 2:56:00 pm  
Blogger Shabadoo said...

How is this any different then Labor branch-stacking their electorates with ethnic voters?

Your contempt for this country drips off the screen, Anty...I think you need some help, or a long vacation.

Monday, January 09, 2006 3:27:00 pm  
Blogger Wombat said...


You don't see a slight disparity is the stakes between Labor branch-stacking and an ethnic cleansing?

Surely you're not using the moral equivalence argument?

Monday, January 09, 2006 3:41:00 pm  
Blogger orang said...

Shabadoo said...
"How is this any different then Labor branch-stacking their electorates with ethnic voters?...... "

On the face of it you have a point, however I don't believe the Labour branch has the power or the inclination to ban their opposition from bringing their spouses into the electorate. -Israeli Arabs married to Palestinians cannot bring their spouses into Israel. Israeli Jews can bring their Russian Christain brides - but that's different.

Monday, January 09, 2006 4:17:00 pm  
Blogger James Waterton said...

Pardon? The Anglo-Saxon culture is "pretty dull"? Pull your head out of your arse, Loewenstein. It's time you developed some perspective.

Monday, January 09, 2006 5:03:00 pm  
Blogger Human said...

dfsbs sdn sdklnfown l nsan
sdnbqiwbg sdngqpoh dssi25

Monday, January 09, 2006 5:07:00 pm  
Blogger James Waterton said...

Human's making more sense than usual.

Monday, January 09, 2006 5:34:00 pm  
Blogger orang said...

?? human, are you there?

Stay where you are. Do not move. Take deep breaths....

Monday, January 09, 2006 6:54:00 pm  
Blogger neoleftychick said...


I can assure you that if Australians were continually attacked by primitive Towelheads, Australians would vaporise every single last one of them, THEN proudly declare Australia a "No Towelhead Zone."

The sad thing for the poor Israelis is that the Soviets and the US have always opposed Israel's interests and prevented Israel from defending itself.

If Israel had ignored everbody and just finished the job properly until the Towlies surrendered and signed a proper peace treaty, we wouldn't have had to go through all this.

Let us hope that the next Israeli elections see the victory of an extreme right leader who takes no more nonsense.

I say declare war on the West Bank and push ALL the Towlies out.

It would help the rest of the world immensely, don't you agree?

Monday, January 09, 2006 6:59:00 pm  
Blogger orang said...

you again show your superior insight. Brilliant. Set off the 200+ nukes on the West Bank and get it over and done with - what do you say? All this footseying around - fuck it. Let's do it once and for all!

Monday, January 09, 2006 7:08:00 pm  
Blogger Clumsy Birds said...

Pardon? The Anglo-Saxon culture is "pretty dull"? Pull your head out of your arse, Loewenstein. It's time you developed some perspective.

Kudos to that.

Also, how is it mythical? Last time I checked I’m an Anglo-Saxon Australian

Monday, January 09, 2006 10:14:00 pm  
Blogger James Waterton said...

Good point. How can it be mythical, yet pretty dull? Antony, stop writing in cliches. It doesn't befit a journalist.

Monday, January 09, 2006 11:15:00 pm  
Blogger Ibrahamav said...

I don't recall seeing a plea for ethnic cleansing in Acre. Must be someone full of addamo to suggest anything like that.

Must have been a racist.

Tuesday, January 10, 2006 12:17:00 am  
Blogger Wombat said...

There is no "plea for ethnic cleansing in Acre" becasue the please is for enthnic cleanings throughout all of Israel.

Israeli leaders aren't even ashamed to admit it and Ibraham thinks it's a grand idea.

the best way to get rid of racism is to nationalise it right Ibby?

Tuesday, January 10, 2006 1:15:00 am  
Blogger Ibrahamav said...

Best way to get rid of racism is to get rid of the addamo slinging racists like 01.

To deliberately state that the Acre program is a plea for ethnic cleansing is the same addamo regarding the heinious attempt by 01 to morally equate the deliberate murder of 4 young sisters, at point blank range, with the collateral death of Arab human shields used by hamas terrorists.

Makes you want to puke.

Tuesday, January 10, 2006 3:23:00 am  
Blogger Wombat said...

I see. A 56 year old woman in her own home is a human shield. Forcing men to jump into a river and drown is accidental death of human shields?

And here is another exmpale of human shields getting in the way. I guess US servicemen must love those human whoelds that carry $10,000 on their persons.

Interesting perspective Ibraham. I now think I understand you.

Tuesday, January 10, 2006 3:32:00 am  
Blogger Wombat said...

here is hte link of the human shied that had $10,000 on him.

Tuesday, January 10, 2006 3:33:00 am  
Blogger James Waterton said...

Addamo - I wouldn't be waving that around like it's the gospel truth, if I were you.

Tuesday, January 10, 2006 3:36:00 am  
Blogger Wombat said...

Why James?

Because the source is suspect or lacking crebility, or because you have evidence to suggest the story is false?

Admitedly I wouldn't stake my life on the source, seeing as it's linked to a conspiracy web site, but what are the chancs of this story making it to the the MSM either way? I wouldn't normally link to such a site except fo the fact that those I'm debating are linking to right wing nuts sites like

Take the story of the 56 year old Iraqi woman shot in her own home for example.

As the story begins with this observation:

"Not a single member of the so-called mainstream media have bothered to report the murder of an Iraqi woman in her home."

And as the reprot concludes ,"The absence of reporting, by U.S. and UK news outlets, does not make the truth go away. The killing of Iraqis continues unabated and unreported. Though if one American dies, CNN runs an hour-long special."

Tuesday, January 10, 2006 4:32:00 am  
Blogger Ibrahamav said...

There 01 goes again, comparing addamo to apples. Try to stay in the same conflict.

Do we know if the story of the 56 year old in Iraq is legit? We do know the story about the pregnant mother and her 4 daughters murdered a point blank range by palestinians. we do know the accidental collaterla death storys concerning human shields being used by palestinians.

We do know that 01 is full of addamo.

Tuesday, January 10, 2006 4:44:00 am  
Blogger Wombat said...

What can't you find the story of the 56 Iraqi woman of Faux news or David Horoqitz's web site Ibretard?

Imagine my surprise. Must be that the story never happened. Then again it could be that reporteres fro mteh MSM are being intimidated by teh US and rpevented from reporting such stories.

Go back to sleep you reptile.

Tuesday, January 10, 2006 5:20:00 am  
Blogger Ibrahamav said...

Funny how our addamo slinger didn't address the actual issue. Just slinging more addamo.

Tuesday, January 10, 2006 6:09:00 am  
Blogger Wombat said...

So says the human stain who runs away every time he is questioned posed and never provides any sources to back his claims.

Tuesday, January 10, 2006 7:19:00 am  
Blogger Ibrahamav said...

I'm right here, I have never run. I have not been legitimately asked to provide any sources for anything.

There was an attempt at jew baiting that was ignored, and, of course, the slung addamo was aptly dodged.

Tuesday, January 10, 2006 7:26:00 am  
Blogger Wombat said...

I provided a link. If you don't accept it, so be it.

As fo running, you are legendary for having dogdged and weaved for days avoiding questions, arguing isntead that a quesetion is not a question or that the quesrion was never asked etc etc.

You were asked to provide a passage that proved Chmsky was an anti-semite and after 22 days of toing and froing, all you could cough up were the number of hits from a Google search.

When it comes to sources, you get the award for lamest effort of the 2005.

Tuesday, January 10, 2006 7:48:00 am  
Blogger Ibrahamav said...

Again, prove this statement:

Addamo_01 said...
Most of us have addressed how the soldiers themselves are just exploited by the US government as cannon fodder. Most are forced into the military due to economic hardship.

Don't bother with the exploitation part, prove that "Most are forced into the military due to economic hardship."

If you can. Or you can run and hide. Or at least sit quietly in eddie's rectum.

Tuesday, January 10, 2006 8:35:00 am  
Blogger Wombat said...

So I have to do as you tell me right Heir Ibraham?

And if I answer your question, will you provide me with the passages of Chomsky's writings that prove he is an anti-Semite?

Tuesday, January 10, 2006 8:56:00 am  
Blogger James Waterton said...

Well, the scenario is possible. However, many things are possible. It's an issue of plausibility. There may be a grain - or even grains - of truth to the story, but it seems quite ropey to me.

Just take a look at the site, for starters. It's an ideologically biased and somewhat wacky website so common sense would tell you that the story told is best taken with a pinch of salt.

Also, the story itself is so fantastic and is exactly the way some anti-war elements would like to portray GIs. Sorry, it screams 'fraud' to me.

Tuesday, January 10, 2006 12:52:00 pm  
Blogger Wombat said...

What is fantastic James? The story of the woman shot in her own house?

As for the link, there are more and I will go looking if you are interested.

I don't have the link at my disposal, but I presume you saw the footage of Birtish Contractors shooting random targets out the rear windows of their cars. No idea how many people were killed, but these guys obviously thought they would face no retribution for their acts - after all the did film the act.

Most importantly it reveals the mindset that pervades at least a portion of the occupying forces. Frustration? Hatred of the locals? Resentment for serving 3 consecutive tours thanks to stop loss. Who knows?

If someone were to tell you that US personnel were torturing people to death without the Abu Graib evidence, you would no doubt have thought that fantastic too. If someone were to tell you that there are a second set of photos/tapes etc that are described as far worse than the first lot, what would you say? The Pentagon is fighting tooth and nail to prevent this material being released to the public, because they are regarded are extremely damaging.

Here is an interview with a former US army interrogator from Iraq, talking about some of the interrogation methods they used:

He discusses how Navy Seals would use hypothermia on suspects, monitoring their body temperature by anal thermometers to make sure they didn't die. How anesthetized do you think you need to be to shoot a woman for spitting at you?

Here is the story of three US soldiers who forced a man to jump off a bridge into the Tigris River and drown. I believe they got 6 months or less:

And even worse, here is the admission that they were told to covered up the event:

During the assault on Fallujah, soldiers were ordered to shoot anything that moved:

Is it that unlikely that some of these men took the order out of context?

Now I know these links don’t smack of being rock solid, but can you can see my position? You are suggesting that fringe web sites are open to fraudulent claims (fair comment) yet there is the equivalent likelihood that these stories aren't making it to the MSM because they are being covered up by the military.

Tuesday, January 10, 2006 1:30:00 pm  
Blogger Ibrahamav said...

Chomsky said:

You find occasional instances of anti-Semitism but they are marginal. There’s plenty of racism, but it’s directed against Blacks, Latinos, Arabs are targets of enormous racism, and those problems are real. Anti-Semitism is no longer a problem, fortunately. It’s raised, but it’s raised because privileged people want to make sure they have total control, not just 98% control. That’s why anti-Semitism is becoming an issue. Not because of the threat of anti-Semitism; they want to make sure there’s no critical look at the policies the US (and they themselves) support in the Middle East.

Chomsky’s remark is shabby and repellent. It marks the first case I have come across in his writings on the Jews that crosses the line from bombast to bigotry. The plain interpretation of his remark is that the Jews have 98% control of the US and want total domination. Typically, however, Chomsky leaves himself enough wiggle room to be able to claim that no such impure thoughts crossed his mind. He insinuates his message – by talking of “privileged people” instead of Jews – rather than states it unambiguously, but he has already declared, a couple of sentences earlier:
By now Jews in the US are the most privileged and influential part of the population.

It’s an antisemitic remark...

Wednesday, January 11, 2006 2:45:00 am  
Blogger Wombat said...

I appreciate you at least providing this answer.

Chomsky qualifies from the outset that he considers the reduction of anti-Semitism a good thing. Whether he is correct about anti-Semitism still being a problem, or otherwise, is irrelevant.

The comment (about the 98% control) is referring to elites, and expressing the view that this group hides behind the anti-Semitic charge, to mask their activities. Most elite businessmen always want more than what they have. They do not represent or speak for the Jewish population. As far as the US is concerned, I think it's fair to say that Jewish people by and large, are fairly well protected in the US.

Chomsky should have qualified this statement by pointing out examples of who he is referring to, but without reading the whole text, it is difficult to know if he does or not.

I know a wealthy Jewish businessman in Sydney, who is extremely successful and equally ruthless. He and his family experienced a bomb scare once and when interviewed by a local paper, he suggested the motivation was anti-Semitism. This was met with ridicule by those who knew him given that it was no secret any number of the former business assocociates he had burned could have done it.

Like Chomsky alludes suggests, he used anti-Semitism to mask his sins.

People like Abe Foxman, clearly is a person who’s personal ambitions are served by making sure that anti-Semitism gets a lot of media coverage.

Wednesday, January 11, 2006 8:35:00 am  
Blogger Ibrahamav said...

The elite was already identified by Chomsky as being Jews.

He didn't qualify his statement because he is an antisemite. He may not be a blood sucking, baby killing, grandmother raping antisemite, but he hates Jews none the less. For the same reason AL does.

Wednesday, January 11, 2006 9:18:00 am  
Blogger Ibrahamav said...

"I know a wealthy Jewish businessman in Sydney" Anecdotal information that proves absolutely nothing.

Wednesday, January 11, 2006 9:19:00 am  
Blogger Wombat said...

The statements themselves are not anti-Semitic, unless there is more incriminating comments that you haven't quoted.

I would be curious to know who he is referring to when he says "they want to make sure there’s no critical look at the policies the US (and they themselves) support in the Middle East." It appears he is be referring to Israel lobbyists who he regards as being too powerful.

Sorry but there is no indication whatsoever tha he hates Jewish people or that AL does.

Wednesday, January 11, 2006 3:18:00 pm  
Blogger neoleftychick said...

Chomsky is a tired old intellectual fraud. His Linguistics is baloney and his talents as an historiographer rate alongside AL's talents as a journalist.

Thursday, January 12, 2006 1:56:00 am  
Blogger Wombat said...

Whatever you thnk of Chomsky, he ends up being being vindicated more often than his critics, which is what drives them batshit.

But the issue here is whether Chomsky is an anti-Semite. What's your opinion on that?

Thursday, January 12, 2006 12:58:00 pm  
Blogger neoleftychick said...


Vindicated? You are joking, right? He has changed his position so many times on the Arab-Isreali issue and is constantly lying about what he argued in the past.

He is all over the shop on the Arab-Israeli issues. I challenge you to paraphrase succinctly his position.

You will not be able to, because he is nothing more than a cheap sophist.

Thursday, January 12, 2006 1:09:00 pm  

Post a Comment

<< Home