My posts of of January 14 (Where's This All Going?) and January 27 (A Matter of Motive) both deal with the agenda behind the decision by NSW Premier Baruch (Jerusalem Prize) O'Farrell to mount an inquiry into Section 20D of the NSW Anti-Discrimination Act.
The second of these two posts featured Herald journalist Sean Nicholls' highly pertinent analysis of O'Farrell's motives, occasioned, as he put it, by the man's "seeming unwillingness to explain himself."
The Premier has wasted no time in responding to Nicholls:
"The Premier, Barry O'Farrell, has nominated the Muslim riot in central Sydney last year as one reason why an inquiry is needed into whether the state's racial vilification laws need strengthening... On Sunday, Mr O'Farrell said he was concerned there was no attempt to prosecute those who held up 'offensive' signs during violent protests sparked by an anti-Islamic film in September. 'That blackened the city; that blackened my state. That's why there is an upper house inquiry... [the] effectiveness of this legislation,' he said." (Failure to prosecute rioters means laws need closer look - O'Farrell, Sean Nicholls, Sydney Morning Herald, 28/1/13)
Well that's it then? Mystery solved. Well, no.
Either Baruch's memory is fading fast or he's being, as they say, economical with the truth.
You see, Sydney's so-called Muslim riot* occurred on September 15 last year. Baruch, however, first announced his inquiry months before at an "Israel Independence Day cocktail event" in May. (See my 9/9/12 post From Flower to Flower.)
I'm hoping Sean Nicholls will follow this one up.
[*See my 23/9/12 post NSW Police Riot, September 15 2012.]