<< FIRST THEY CAME FOR THE DAEWOOS ~ MAIN ~ INVESTIGATION UNDERWAY >>
AUTHOR “DIDN’T ASK FOR THIS”
The Sydney Morning Herald’s Ben Cubby deals gently with Antony Loewenstein, the dissenter who dared to ask why:
His book, My Israel Question, is a probing analysis of Israel’s direction and an attempt to uncover Australia’s Zionist lobby. Loewenstein’s timing is also, unfortunately, exquisite. The book, delayed for several months, is being launched this week as war flares along Israel’s borders.
Antony Loewenstein: war profiteer! Incidentally, it would have been nice of Ben to tell us why the book was delayed.
Now after two years of research and soul-searching, Loewenstein awaits reaction to the book’s publication, relaxed and comfortable in his Sydney home, with his partner and his pet dog, Chomsky.
Must be hella expensive importing Chomsky’s favourite chew bones ... from Cambodian graves. What breed is Chomsky, by the way? Moral relativist spaniel? Freedom-hating puke hound? Whiny bitch?
“It’s still extremely frustrating,” Loewenstein says. “I don’t want to be defined as the guy who criticises Israel; I didn’t ask for this.”
Some tips to anyone who doesn’t want to be defined as “the guy who criticises Israel”: don’t continually criticise Israel. Don’t appear on television, radio, and in the SMH criticising Israel. Don’t obsessively criticise Israel on your website. Don’t write a book, titled My Israel Question, criticising Israel.
In his mid-20s, Loewenstein visited the Auschwitz death camp. “Seeing the results of blind hatred and unchallenged devotion slowly led me to be more questioning on a range of matters, including my heritage and the state of Israel,” Loewenstein writes.
Antony’s visit to Auschwitz led to him question ... Jews. Interesting.
In 2003, he landed a journalism traineeship with the Herald’s website, but left after two years to become a freelance writer.
He left? Cubby should talk to his fellow SMH staffers.
Jeremy Jones, a spokesman for the Australia/Israel & Jewish Affairs Council, whom Loewenstein makes passing reference to in My Israel Question, says factual errors about the role and function of Jewish organisations in Australia detract from the book’s value.
“It’s a vanity publication, sloppy and very poorly researched. I’ve read the book and I found it very disappointing. It’s not the sort of thing somebody who doesn’t know the history should read; they might make the mistake of taking it seriously.”
Loewenstein says claiming his scholarship is sloppy is stock-in-trade for people who wish to denigrate his work. “They always say that.”
And they generally back it up.
Aspects of the criticism may be deserved. Much of Loewenstein’s writing to date has comprised polemics and commentary. It is not difficult to discern a certain sameness, a slightly harping tone ...
A certain sameness, a slightly harping tone ...
Loewenstein passionately believes television and newspapers have become terrified of criticising Israel, after hounding by Zionist lobbyists. When asked if he knew of any examples of reporters being guided by editorial directives from his time at the Herald, he said he did not know of one. When pressed, he said he would “rather not go into it”.
So much for “speaking truth to power”.
Happily for Loewenstein, My Israel Question is a serious and interesting work that will stand up to the coming barbs.
He really should thank whoever at Melbourne University Press re-wrote it.
Far from being the work of a “young rebel” - a term he says was used to describe him when he was growing up inside the Jewish community - most neutrals will view it as relatively moderate.
Loewenstein has been called “far left”, most recently by Ted Lapkin, the policy director of the Australia/Israel & JewishAffairs Council, in a debate on the ABC’s Lateline program. A genuine far-left analysis of modern Israel would have been more scathing than Loewenstein’s modest calls for a two-state solution and a re-examination of US financial and military support.
Now we may see why Loewenstein’s book was so long delayed; the brave dissenter’s views have been watered down. His “modest calls” in print are rather less so at Antony’s site, where he writes that “the defeat of America and its allies in Iraq is vital”, “advocat[es] Coalition defeat”, declares himself to be “an anti-Zionist Australian Jew” and “a Jew who doesn’t believe in the concept of a Jewish state.” His feelings towards Jews who don’t share his opinions? “Reception to such ideas within the Jewish community is usually vitriolic, bigoted, racist and downright pathetic. Australian Jews, generally speaking, are incapable of hearing the true reality of their beloved homeland and its barbaric actions.” And bring on militant Islam: “Sooner or later, the US and its Western allies will have to learn to deal with groups like the Muslim Brotherhood and Hamas. True democracy means accepting the will of the people, without interference or obstruction. The West should be worried.”
Loewenstein seems pleased by the prospect of these groups causing alarm in the West. But the real danger, according to him, comes from Israel:
The uncontrolled policies of the Israeli government should now be seen as a danger to enlightened citizens and governments across the globe.
Back to moderate Antony in his SMH interview:
“I just want to encourage people to think about these questions a bit,” he says. “We need to get beyond the idea that everything we do in the West is noble and right.”
A few days after that interview, back at his widely-unread blog, Loewenstein sharpened that idea:
Western “values” deserve to be challenged and overthrown.
UPDATE. Loewenstein continues his moderate act.
It seems to me that Loewenstein must have visited Auschwitz and asked himself, “Why am I a Jew?” His attitude since then has to been to be a “rebel” in the Jewish community in the manner of teenagers who say and do obnoxious things in order to piss off their elders.
Maybe we should congratulate the Jewish community for producing “rebels” like this, instead of like those of another community who put on bomb belts and kill as many people as possible while suiciding.
Loewenstein says claiming his scholarship is sloppy is stock-in-trade for people who wish to denigrate his work. “They always say that.”
Has Jesse Macbeth given the book two thumbs up?
Posted by andycanuck on 2006 07 31 at 12:36 PM • permalinkGood grief.
Mel Gibson has a long way to go to reach Ant’s level of “revolting piece of work”.
Posted by Spiny Norman on 2006 07 31 at 01:13 PM • permalinkTrue democracy means accepting the will of the people, without interference or obstruction.
Which, of course, is why true democracy is a horribly abusive system and no government opperates that way. Ever read the Federalist Papers, Loewenstein, or Plato’s Republic? Ha, who am I kidding, the mental midgit has probably never even heard of them.
>What breed is Chomsky, by the way?
He’s a mixed breed. Half semi-apostate commie loon, half whiny bitch.
Posted by Dave Surls on 2006 07 31 at 01:33 PM • permalinkMy first reaction was pity for the poor dog…
Posted by Spiny Norman on 2006 07 31 at 01:34 PM • permalink...those of whom he speaks so highly would slay him in a second.
Oh no, not Ant. He’s fed the crocodile, see?
Posted by Spiny Norman on 2006 07 31 at 01:52 PM • permalinkChimaomao? A red heeler? Bullshit hound? Asshole apso? Snotweiler? Any breed of terrorier?
Posted by andycanuck on 2006 07 31 at 02:09 PM • permalinkWell, when you believe the mob is on your side, of course you would believe in mob rule.
Meanwhile, those who believe “Western “values” deserve to be challenged and overthrown” deserve to be cast out from any remotely Western country to live henceforth in only non-Western countries.
Posted by JorgXMcKie on 2006 07 31 at 05:35 PM • permalinkIt seems to me to be rude to pick on a dumb animal like that. And I can’t say that I liked the abused the dog either.
Posted by William Sjostrom on 2006 07 31 at 06:13 PM • permalinkWe will just have to take Ant’s concluding assertion at face value, because it has that ring of truth about it:
“It’s said that only Israelis have the right to criticise Israel’s policies, not those in the Diaspora, though we never say that about other societies.”
This strange phenomena explains why the criticisms of those in the Australian diaspora (Greer, Hughes, Pilger) about Australia are so universally admired.
Posted by Margos Maid on 2006 07 31 at 06:19 PM • permalinkWhat gets he is they wrote a controversial book and then complain about the contraversy. If you do not want someone to disagree with you, strongly, then do not write books.
A few years back I wrote a letter refuting a sports writer who was writing about the 1999 Women’s World Cup. He then sent we an e-mail telling me I was an ignorant idiot and that I should never dare to disagree with him. I wrote him back (copying his editor) suggesting that if he could not handle public criticism, he should look for a new line of work.
Full credit to Ant for magnificently embracing the two golden tenets of the left within the one small allocated space:
1. It’s all about me
2. Only criticise safe targetsPosted by Margos Maid on 2006 07 31 at 07:06 PM • permalinkWhat really pisses me off about Loewenstein is that he continually lies. He makes a back-arse fool out of himself on national TV due to his lack of knowledge of basic middle eastern geography—and then he has the audacity to accuse Ted Lapkin in his latest post of needing a “necessary history lesson in the finer points of Jewish terrorism”.
The post in question relates to a Crikey piece by Arena editor Guy Rundell who spews this insult:
” He [Lapkin] got his arse whipped so badly on Lateline that even The Australian was embarrassed for him. Now it appears he is ignorant of the basics of the region’s history – or stupidly willing to lie about easily checkable facts. Maybe he should return to active duty in the IDF, as they appear to be pretty poor shots too.”
The source for the “historical fact” in question were the Jabotinsky files”, which are both in Hebrew and code. Neither Rundell nor Loewenstein speak Hebrew. Lapkin is not only fluent in Hebrew but is a former Israeli Defence Force Intelligence Captain. Me thinks the Leftoid pranksters, Loewenstein and Rundell are lying frauds.We already know that Loewenstein thinks Lebanon is in between Tel Aviv and Haifa.
I looked at Arena once. It is an embarrassment. If it has my tax money supporting it, I’ll puke.
And anybody who reads Loewenstein’s blog knows he is now very dishonestly moderating his public persona.
It won’t work Antony, I’ve already sent a stack of posts from your blog to the editor of The Australian (you know the one where your mate Orang called the editor a whore with semen dripping off his keyboard). Just so they know what you are really like.
It won’t take the mainstream media long to see that Loewenstein is a person who damns Mel Gibson’s anti-Semitic outburst in The Sunday Telegraph but he publishes the worst type of anti-Semetic outbursts on his own blog.
Time’s up Loewenstein—everyone is catching on to your lying arse (except your best friends—the fundamental Islamists and the neo-Nazis, oh and Guy Rundell).
“I don’t want to be defined as the guy who criticises Israel; I didn’t ask for this.”
what else ya got, Flavius?
Posted by richard mcenroe on 2006 07 31 at 08:28 PM • permalink“What really pisses me off about Loewenstein is that he continually lies.”
If you’re going to get angry every time some ultra-leftist loon starts lying…you’ll go through life being perpetually angry.
Posted by Dave Surls on 2006 07 31 at 09:00 PM • permalinkPerhaps Loewenstein suffers from Stockholm Syndrome.
Patty Hearst also suffered from it after her kidnapping. I think it demonstrates why some Jews can’t handle the burden of continual discrimination and join the ranks of the persecutors, believing this will give them immunity to anti Semetism.
What causes Stockholm Syndrome? Captives begin to identify with their captors initially as a defensive mechanism, out of fear of violence. Small acts of kindness by the captor are magnified, since finding perspective in a hostage situation is by definition impossible. Rescue attempts are also seen as a threat, since it’s likely the captive would be injured during such attempts.
It’s important to note that these symptoms occur under tremendous emotional and often physical duress. The behavior is considered a common survival strategy for victims of interpersonal abuse, and has been observed in battered spouses, abused children, prisoners of war, and concentration camp survivors.
Western “values” deserve to be challenged and overthrown.
One has to wonder why Ant thought it necessary to put quotes around the word ‘values’. The implication is that our values are somehow unreal or fraudulent.
Perhaps he did it because a bare “Western values deserve to be challenged and overthrown” sounds a little too much like a call to actual action, and not just a pose of fashionable dissent. If Ant pretends that our values don’t really exist, then he doesn’t have to actually do anything.
Other than whine, of course.
Posted by blandwagon on 2006 07 31 at 09:52 PM • permalinkThanks for the compilation of the quotes of the real AL Tim. I will borrow them if I may. I was trolling through his site collecting to send to local ABC radio (Adelaide), you have saved me the pain. Why, because they had on “this young man who after doing an article for the SMH on line which surprised him by where it took him, and led in particular to him to become embroiled in a painful exercise of questioning.” Well that’s what they said of him.
Can anyone tell me whether AL has had an opinion piece in the SMH “online” or in fact it was merely his piece in Margo’s diary, and the article so beloved by the Adelaide Institute that they reproduced it at their site?
I thought I might help the ABC out before they embarressed themselves and asked him the question that AL gave them to ask the Ambassador.
“Whether he has any problem being the representative of a JEWISH state that has become an oppressor of another people.”
Interestingly he brought up his Jewish only roads, but now with a “sense” of. His latest is the marriage laws that, as he put it, don’t allow Jews and Arabs to marry in Israel proper. He seems to be conflating the issue of right of Palestinians who marry Israelis to move to Israel (which is a problem for them for obvious reasons) and the fact that there are no civil marriages allowed in Israel and only Jews can have religious ones. This stinks, but what AL of course didn’t mention, no doubt because he had no idea, is that it is a matter that has and is a major argument in Israeli society, the Israel Supreme Court and the Knesset, and has reached the point where the Chief Judge of the Supreme Court speaks of the law as denying peoples human rights.
He did of course claim that he did support the right of Israel to exist and for Israelis to live in peace.
And which should be upsetting to his familiars, said that the Holocaust was a profound, (wow real bad) event and that it killed 5 or 6 million Jews. Had to qualify it a bit I suppose as a succour to his familiars.
“Western “values” deserve to be challenged and overthrown.”
Now he’s channeling Jesse Jackson: “hey, hey, ho ho, Western civ has got to go”. When asked what they intend to replace it with, the answer is always some half baked adolescent form of socialism. where everything should be “free” (and it is, to somebody!).
Posted by Vanguard of the Commentariat on 2006 07 31 at 11:18 PM • permalinkProb’ly one of those ghastly rat-like things with bulging eyes that quiver and quake all the time. Bred for the pot. Best place for ‘em.
Dear Olrence,
Owing to circumstances beyond my control, I am obliged to decline your invitation for dinner next Sunday.
Yours always.Posted by SwinishCapitalist on 2006 08 01 at 03:18 AM • permalink#1 Jim,
A golden deciever is a woman who appears attractive from behind, but has a face like a welders bench.
This is a very amusing thread.Posted by Daniel San on 2006 08 01 at 03:22 AM • permalink#46 He did of course claim that he did support the right of Israel to exist and for Israelis to live in peace.
Ros, AL is hopelessly inconsistent, saying anything to try to protect himself from his own outpourings. His real belief is that Israel, as we know it, should never have happeneed, and should now be dismantled to save the world.
He is as credible as a Holocaust denier.
By the way, he might say one day it was a pity the alternative Zionist Home - Uganda -was not taken up instead. Even the Chinese were expelled from there!
You see what I mean by his use of ‘Israel’?My my, don’t we have a lot at stake in tearing down Mr Loewenstein? He’s a traitor to the jews! So says the bloghead. So moderate.
Posted by Miranda Divide on 2006 08 01 at 09:22 PM • permalink# Thankyou for gracing us with your commonsense Miranda
People seem to get so narky when real moderates like Loewie suggest that Israel should open its highways to suicide bombers.
Posted by Margos Maid on 2006 08 01 at 09:29 PM • permalinkWell Miranda, AL’s views are sort of like a black man having good things to say about the Ku Klux Klan. Except of course that the Klan never wanted to kill all the blacks, just to “keep them in their place” dontcherknow. Such people are ripe for mocking.
Posted by Michael Lonie on 2006 08 02 at 12:36 AM • permalinkTraitor to the jews second, Miranda.
Obnoxious prat first.Posted by SwinishCapitalist on 2006 08 02 at 01:08 AM • permalink#65 Dan Lewis
Congrats on getting this letter published in Crikey today. Onya mate.
“Daniel Lewis writes:
Antony Loewenstein insists he is stifled, censored and oppressed. In one month he has had an article in Crikey, a half-page op-ed and book review in The Australian, appearances on Lateline and ABC radio (to name but a few) and a fawning review from Fairfax, notwithstanding numerous factual errors in his book which he refuses to acknowledge. Other publicity seeking first-time authors could only dream of being so “silenced”.
When caught out and quoted for things that might have been wrong (eg Ted Lapkin noting in his Preface, Loewenstein placed Lebanon in between Tel Aviv and Haifa), Loewenstein denies it, simply convinced the criticism is a dirty Zionist tactic, before continuing to repeat such untruths later.
For one who feels his views are squashed however, Loewenstein has no problem at all censoring civil comments on his blog (such as mine) with which he disagrees or to which he cannot respond.
His (now published) canard about “Jewish only roads” in Israel is but one example of many. In other words, he stifles dissent while simultaneously moaning that he is the victim of censorship, a point contradicted every single time he says it in public.”
Page 1 of 1 pages
Members:
Login | Register
| Member List
Golden Deceiver.