Logic:

No Jewish "dissident" is being silenced (see almost any edition of the Jewish News), though I am sure that there are some who would like this to happen.

I signed the dreaded Loewenstein petition because of the tone of the debate, in which those Jews who publicly state, for instance, that the Lebanon war was badly conducted are described as "traitors", "closet antisemites", "self-haters" and worse. People such as Phillip Adams are "antisemites" too, as are those who a few years ago stated that the campaign against Hanan Ashrawi receiving the Sydney Peace Prize was vicious, unbalanced and unwarranted.

I do not see eye to eye with Loewenstein on a number of matters, but to see him described, as in one well-known Jewish chat group, as "traitorous scum" and "a Jewish Quisling" is well over the top.

More light, less heat!

Youngsteve

"More light, less heat!"

I could not do anything but agree with that statement. But as one who has the Jewish News bookmarked but almost never reads it and who is on the edge of what we might call a community I do understand the problems that others see with the general publicity surrounding the petition.

In an environment where there is a lot of hate publicity against Israel such a group does cast aspersions on Jewish people in general by tarring them all with the brush of conspiring with the persecutors of Palestine, and none of that is true. Lowenstein does look to me as someone who is grandstanding.

Many extreme remarks to which you refer come from holocaust survivors and their families (of which I am not one) and understandingly they are very sensitive to any criticism of Israel. Nevertheless there are a large number of Jewish people outside of this loop including multi-generation Australians who still consider Israel receiving totally unfair press coverage and wonder what this "alternative" group are up to.

The way you talk about a country like Iran, sounds superior, or worse still, very elitist.

Maybe a few lessons in post-WW 1 and 2 Middle East history might enlighten you.

Like all you ultra-right wingers, you seem to believe that the only good future for the Middle East is still the now very worn-out neo-colonial one.

George W's missile diplomacy and its shock and awe failure, should surely be a lesson after what has happened with Iraq. So much we pray that it be relegated to the dustbin like 18th and 19th century Promised Land philosophy.

Or maybe like Socrates we should make our prayers not religous but the one that says Out with the Gods and in with the Good.

In the bush we call it commonsense, while the social scientists whom you so much deter, simply call it insight, only gained by taking lessons fom history.

Maybe then you might change your mind about Iran, a country even since its Persian days, has never attacked another ME country unless attacked herself when Iraq backed by Americana could not even do her in.

In fact, even many Westerners clapped their hands when Iran finally won, similar to when we gave a cheer when they captured the Yankee embassy when the fake Shah was given the boot.

bushbred

Are you referring to me? If so I am no right winger, more left of centre, and an ALP member. Still you can't always be right.

I see nothing elitist about distrusting a religious based government who treats woman and Jews as second grade citizens denying them the same rights as male Muslims, or which has stoning for adultery on its books. This has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with colonialism.

I accept that Iran as Persia had a peaceful existence but it was not always a theocracy. The situation now can be quite different. Certainly a leader who stages an international conference to deny the holocaust is short of a shingle or two. I am sure the women of Iran who found their rights diminished somewhat do not appreciate the current regime.

Also the expressions of disdain for modern Western liberalism from Islamic theocracies and dictators should give all of us reason to worry. And so should you.

The Promised Land philosophy as you put it started earlier than the 18th century. The Romans did not force all Jews out of Judea, and many remained and their descendants are still there. Also nearly a million Jews were edged out of Muslim lands, as well as Christians Druze Zoroastrians and other non Muslim groups. The golden age of the Islamic world never ever gave equality to non Muslims.

The claim that Israel is just a land for European Jews is totally false. It has given refuge to Jews Christians and Druze leaving Muslim controlled lands. This fact is always ignored by the left because it spoils their argument. There are many on these posts who wish I would go away because I keep on bringing up a fundamental truth.

Logic: Another fact which the Left (with honorable exceptions) finds embarrassing is the wide circulation and acceptance in the Arab/Moslem world of "The Protocols of the Elders of Zion", a nineteenth-century antisemitic concoction, which first came out in Tsarist Russia and was used as an excuse for bloody pogroms. It was later used as a school textbook in Nazi Germany. The Hamas Covenant quotes it as a reliable source on what the Jews get up to. Check it on your search engine!

Yes I am well aware of The Protocols of the Elders of Zion. In fact one particularly aggressive writer to OLO actually referred to it as a proof of his anti Israeli arguments.

You should take a look at the anti-semitic websites some coming from Egypt. In our country the owners of the sites would be charged with offenses. And the interviews on Al Jazeera of women proud that their sons and daughters have committed Jihad (ie murder). One woman even was encouraging her younger son into following his older sibling into Paradise. Quite sickening.

The sooner the left wakes up to the reality of Islamic fundamentalism and realises it is so far from their values the better. You'd think the Bali and other bombings would be a wake up call. Nor can I understand why the decent Muslims (by far the majority) don't distance themselves more openly from these fanatics.