by Mike Carlton, 28/3/19
Man: Hi. Do youse sell books?
Shop: We do indeed Sir, as you can possibly discern by the rows upon rows of books lining our walls from floor to ceiling, slim volumes, weighty tomes, each shelf groaning with the wisdom of the ages, the soaring delights of the English canon, works of literature to be savoured and devoured, books of whimsy and humour and...
Man: Yeah nah. Well I wanna buy one please.
Shop: Of course. And did Sir have any particular book in mind?
Man: Yeah. A blue one, not real thick...
Shop: A blue one, not real thick? Well that certainly narrows it down. Did you have in mind a novel... or poetry, perhaps?
Man: Ummm...
Shop: ... Biography, history, philosophy... quantum mechanics, nuclear medicine... feminism?
Man: Any of them blue and not too thick?
Shop: One or two, I dare say Sir, one or two...
Man:I wanna buy the book what Pauline Hanson read. Wot she was talking about on TV.
Shop: Oh. The book that Pauline Hanson read... book that Pauline Hanson read, let me guess. Was it Das Kapital, perhaps, Karl Marx. Very popular over the years, that one...
Man: Is it blue?
Shop: Sorry, sorry, my mistake. That only comes in red. We've got a blue Mein Kampf. Not real thick...
Man: Does it have pictures?
Shop: Not that I can recall, no. There's a picture of the author on the cover, though.
Man: Yeah, nah, orright. I'll 'ave it.
Shop: I think you'll enjoy it. You can always look up some of the big words...
Man: Wot? Do you think I'm stupid?
Shop: Not at all, Sir. Just a bit thick...
Showing posts with label Mike Carlton. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Mike Carlton. Show all posts
Sunday, March 31, 2019
Sunday, February 3, 2019
Mike Carlton's 'On Air' 5
In conclusion...
"It was Fairfax that cracked. Ignominiously, Darren Goodsir, a decent man and a good journalist, was trapped between the devil and the deep blue sea. From the boardroom and the executive suite, his lords and masters were howling for my head on a platter. So was the lobby. They had to be placated, he told me, yet he wanted to keep me writing for the paper. I could see his dilemma, an added distraction he did not need. As the Herald slowly imploded, with more and more of its best and brightest journalists 'taking redundancy' - that cloying euphemism - he had to battle to shore up newsroom morale and to keep the show on the road. Nor was his own job safe: notoriously, Herald editors had the career prospects of a subaltern on the Somme.
"For my part, I was angry that few at the paper seemed at all interested in the filth heaped upon me. Still less was I accorded the courtesy of a face-to-face meeting where I could put my case... Our negotiations were by phone and email. Goodsir wanted to suspend me for a cooling-off period of about three weeks until the end of the month, and he pushed me again to apologise to the aggrieved. I reluctantly agreed, with the proviso that I would not grovel to anyone who had called me Hitler's cocksucker and the like. I thought the deal was done...
"[A]t around ten pm, the phone rang again. It was Sean Aylmer, Fairfax's editorial director, and therefore Goodsir's boss... [H]is voice was cold. 'We've decided to suspend you indefinitely,' he said... The arrogance, the impertinence of this apparatchik calling late at night to relay this decision was bad enough. But Fairfax had broken its word to me. A rank and cowardly betrayal. Weak-kneed, the company had buckled to the pressure from the lobby and the bullying from the Murdoch press. How they would cheer in Holt Street when they heard they had won. I was not going to cop it anymore. 'You needn't bother suspending me. You can get fucked, Aylmer. I've just quit.' I slammed the phone down in his ear." (pp 513-15)
"It was Fairfax that cracked. Ignominiously, Darren Goodsir, a decent man and a good journalist, was trapped between the devil and the deep blue sea. From the boardroom and the executive suite, his lords and masters were howling for my head on a platter. So was the lobby. They had to be placated, he told me, yet he wanted to keep me writing for the paper. I could see his dilemma, an added distraction he did not need. As the Herald slowly imploded, with more and more of its best and brightest journalists 'taking redundancy' - that cloying euphemism - he had to battle to shore up newsroom morale and to keep the show on the road. Nor was his own job safe: notoriously, Herald editors had the career prospects of a subaltern on the Somme.
"For my part, I was angry that few at the paper seemed at all interested in the filth heaped upon me. Still less was I accorded the courtesy of a face-to-face meeting where I could put my case... Our negotiations were by phone and email. Goodsir wanted to suspend me for a cooling-off period of about three weeks until the end of the month, and he pushed me again to apologise to the aggrieved. I reluctantly agreed, with the proviso that I would not grovel to anyone who had called me Hitler's cocksucker and the like. I thought the deal was done...
"[A]t around ten pm, the phone rang again. It was Sean Aylmer, Fairfax's editorial director, and therefore Goodsir's boss... [H]is voice was cold. 'We've decided to suspend you indefinitely,' he said... The arrogance, the impertinence of this apparatchik calling late at night to relay this decision was bad enough. But Fairfax had broken its word to me. A rank and cowardly betrayal. Weak-kneed, the company had buckled to the pressure from the lobby and the bullying from the Murdoch press. How they would cheer in Holt Street when they heard they had won. I was not going to cop it anymore. 'You needn't bother suspending me. You can get fucked, Aylmer. I've just quit.' I slammed the phone down in his ear." (pp 513-15)
Saturday, February 2, 2019
Mike Carlton's 'On Air' 4
Great globs of bias and invention in the Murdoch gutter tradition...
"The Herald was getting twitchy. There was a snowstorm of letters to the editor from Jewish readers protesting furiously about the column, the headline and the Le Lievre cartoon. The cartoon drew the initial fire; a lot of people assumed I had drawn it, and written the headline as well. There were angry demands for me to be sacked. Dutifully, the editor published some of the more rational letters in the paper. Other people cancelled subscriptions. A number of Jewish-owned businesses withdrew their advertising... On the grapevine, I heard that directors on the Fairfax board were having their arms twisted and their ears bent, not least by the AIJAC. Many were receptive.
"On Monday, 4 August the editor-in-chief of the Herald, Darren Goodsir, publicly apologised for the cartoon. He also phoned to ask me to apologise to anyone I had offended. Reluctantly, I said I would consider it. The time bomb was ticking.
"Unsurprisingly, it exploded in the Murdoch press, led by the Australian and the Daily Telegraph. I had been on their notorious 'shit list' for years. The Australian had managed to get hold of the tweets and a lot of the emails I had sent to my attackers. The tweets were available for all to see, but the emails were not and obviously had been forwarded to the paper in a bunch. By whom? Your guess is as good as mine. The next day they were splashed in a long front-page story. It was heaven on a stick for the Murdochracy. There were two big birds to kill with one stone: the hated Fairfax press in general, and me in particular. Away they went. 'Fairfax Media is under pressure to sack columnist Mike Carlton, who has been ordered to apologise for using anti-Semitic and abusive language towards readers,' it began. On and on it went, a poisonous cocktail of a few facts heavily larded with great globs of bias and invention in the Murdoch gutter tradition. With malicious dishonesty, the paper mentioned not once the torrent of Jewish hatred which had prompted my response. There was not a syllable of the Nazi smear, the 'Hitler's bitch' stuff. The impression given - deliberately - was that I had exploded with rage at polite, reasoned criticism.
"I believe the Telegraph was even more vile in its attack on me. I never bothered to read what it ran - not then, not since - but I was told it splashed all over the shop as well. Somebody showed me the artwork they had confected. Against the background of a bombed and burning village, my head had been wrapped in a keffiyeh, the chequered Arab scarf, then photo-shopped onto the stooped and evidently fleeing body of a man in burned and tattered clothing. Carlton's a terrorist, geddit?" (pp 511-12)
To be continued...
"The Herald was getting twitchy. There was a snowstorm of letters to the editor from Jewish readers protesting furiously about the column, the headline and the Le Lievre cartoon. The cartoon drew the initial fire; a lot of people assumed I had drawn it, and written the headline as well. There were angry demands for me to be sacked. Dutifully, the editor published some of the more rational letters in the paper. Other people cancelled subscriptions. A number of Jewish-owned businesses withdrew their advertising... On the grapevine, I heard that directors on the Fairfax board were having their arms twisted and their ears bent, not least by the AIJAC. Many were receptive.
"On Monday, 4 August the editor-in-chief of the Herald, Darren Goodsir, publicly apologised for the cartoon. He also phoned to ask me to apologise to anyone I had offended. Reluctantly, I said I would consider it. The time bomb was ticking.
"Unsurprisingly, it exploded in the Murdoch press, led by the Australian and the Daily Telegraph. I had been on their notorious 'shit list' for years. The Australian had managed to get hold of the tweets and a lot of the emails I had sent to my attackers. The tweets were available for all to see, but the emails were not and obviously had been forwarded to the paper in a bunch. By whom? Your guess is as good as mine. The next day they were splashed in a long front-page story. It was heaven on a stick for the Murdochracy. There were two big birds to kill with one stone: the hated Fairfax press in general, and me in particular. Away they went. 'Fairfax Media is under pressure to sack columnist Mike Carlton, who has been ordered to apologise for using anti-Semitic and abusive language towards readers,' it began. On and on it went, a poisonous cocktail of a few facts heavily larded with great globs of bias and invention in the Murdoch gutter tradition. With malicious dishonesty, the paper mentioned not once the torrent of Jewish hatred which had prompted my response. There was not a syllable of the Nazi smear, the 'Hitler's bitch' stuff. The impression given - deliberately - was that I had exploded with rage at polite, reasoned criticism.
"I believe the Telegraph was even more vile in its attack on me. I never bothered to read what it ran - not then, not since - but I was told it splashed all over the shop as well. Somebody showed me the artwork they had confected. Against the background of a bombed and burning village, my head had been wrapped in a keffiyeh, the chequered Arab scarf, then photo-shopped onto the stooped and evidently fleeing body of a man in burned and tattered clothing. Carlton's a terrorist, geddit?" (pp 511-12)
To be continued...
Friday, February 1, 2019
Mike Carlton's 'On Air' 3
Juicy carrots for politicians of all sides and pliant journalists...
"The lobbying is slick and sophisticated, sometimes subtle and unseen, at other times loud and combative. Huge effort goes into influencing Australian political and public opinion, and media coverage of Israel and the Middle East. Cabinet ministers and editors invariably take the phone calls. The AIJAC is always ready with a free, well-written article to push the current line on the opinion pages.* Generous financial donations are slung to the major political parties. In his entertaining Dairy of a Foreign Minister, Bob Carr complains at length of the lobby's attempts to browbeat the Gillard government into backing the belligerent Likud hard line in Israel, a situation he thought scandalous and depressing.
"The respected Australian journalist John Lyons has explained, in detail, how the AIJAC operates and agitates above and below the wire to advance the policies of the Netanyahu government. Lyons, now a senior ABC editorial executive, is a former editor of the Sydney Morning Herald and for six years was the Australian's Middle East correspondent. In his memoir, Balcony Over Jerusalem, he writes: 'The longer I was in Israel, the more I realised that key figures in the Australian Jewish community sat on the far right of the Israeli political spectrum. In Israel I was able to have meaningful discussions with key army or intelligence figures about the Palestinian issue. But with many of Australia's Jewish leaders this was just not possible. It was almost as if they felt that, given they were not living in Israel, they needed to take a harder line than many people living there.'
"Lyons details the AIJAC's relentless public and private attempts to discredit him for his reporting, and the work of other Australian correspondents in the Middle East. When all else fails, the lobby hurls the 'anti-Semitic' tag into the ring. You criticise Israel or Netanyahu or the Likud party: therefore you must hate Jews. You are an anti-Semite. This is a giant leap, as daft as suggesting that to criticise Tony Abbott, say, or to question our defense policies is to hate Australians. But it is a charge almost impossible to rebut, with a dizzying catch-22 dangling from it. We say you are anti-Semitic, you say you are not. But if you disagree with us you must be anti-Semitic. Even to suggest that there is an Israel lobby is anti-Semitic.
"That's the stick for journalists unwilling to regurgitate the hasbara or propaganda pumped out by the Netanyahu government and the Israeli military. There are also juicy carrots for politicians of all sides and pliant journalists willing to be schmoozed. Money is no object. The AIJAC and another group, the NSW Jewish Board of Deputies, run regular 'study tours' to Israel, funded by generous Jewish donors. Selected politicians and hacks are flown business class, put up in five-star hotels, and wined and dined in the best Tel Aviv restaurants while being escorted around showpiece hospitals, kibbutzes and settlements. Lyons writes: 'No editors, journalists or others should take these trips: they grotesquely distort the reality and are dangerous in the sense that they allow people with a very small amount of knowledge to pollute Australian public opinion.'
"He is right. They offered me one of these junkets many years ago; I declined it for exactly those reasons. But it is a heroic figure indeed who stands between an Australian journalist and a gravy train. As I write, another eight hacks have returned from one. They were the editor of the Sydney Morning Herald, the editor-in-chief of Huffington Post Australia, the editor of the Weekend Australian's Inquirer section, the news director of the Daily Telegraph, reporters from Channel 7 and Sky Television, and producers from SBS Television and radio 2GB. Their minder was Vic Alhadeff, from the NSW Jewish Board of Deputies.
"Alhadeff evidently weaved his magic. At a welcome home reception at Sydney's Australian Jewish Museum in October 2017, the eight brimmed with gratitude. Israel 'captured my heart and my mind', wrote Anna Caldwell of the Telegraph. There were 'so many signs of hope... every day we saw Israelis and Palestinians working side by side - they all wanted peace'. All this discovered in a week. Everyone agreed it had been wonderful. Fancy that. These travelling troupes are sometimes allowed to see Gaza, but only from a distant hill.
"Here, then, were the wheels and levers of a powerful media machine aimed right at me. Murdoch's newspapers lined up alongside." (pp 509-11)
[*For example, Ryvchin popped up on the opinion page of The Australian only yesterday: Amnesty lost its way over Israel]
To be continued...
"The lobbying is slick and sophisticated, sometimes subtle and unseen, at other times loud and combative. Huge effort goes into influencing Australian political and public opinion, and media coverage of Israel and the Middle East. Cabinet ministers and editors invariably take the phone calls. The AIJAC is always ready with a free, well-written article to push the current line on the opinion pages.* Generous financial donations are slung to the major political parties. In his entertaining Dairy of a Foreign Minister, Bob Carr complains at length of the lobby's attempts to browbeat the Gillard government into backing the belligerent Likud hard line in Israel, a situation he thought scandalous and depressing.
"The respected Australian journalist John Lyons has explained, in detail, how the AIJAC operates and agitates above and below the wire to advance the policies of the Netanyahu government. Lyons, now a senior ABC editorial executive, is a former editor of the Sydney Morning Herald and for six years was the Australian's Middle East correspondent. In his memoir, Balcony Over Jerusalem, he writes: 'The longer I was in Israel, the more I realised that key figures in the Australian Jewish community sat on the far right of the Israeli political spectrum. In Israel I was able to have meaningful discussions with key army or intelligence figures about the Palestinian issue. But with many of Australia's Jewish leaders this was just not possible. It was almost as if they felt that, given they were not living in Israel, they needed to take a harder line than many people living there.'
"Lyons details the AIJAC's relentless public and private attempts to discredit him for his reporting, and the work of other Australian correspondents in the Middle East. When all else fails, the lobby hurls the 'anti-Semitic' tag into the ring. You criticise Israel or Netanyahu or the Likud party: therefore you must hate Jews. You are an anti-Semite. This is a giant leap, as daft as suggesting that to criticise Tony Abbott, say, or to question our defense policies is to hate Australians. But it is a charge almost impossible to rebut, with a dizzying catch-22 dangling from it. We say you are anti-Semitic, you say you are not. But if you disagree with us you must be anti-Semitic. Even to suggest that there is an Israel lobby is anti-Semitic.
"That's the stick for journalists unwilling to regurgitate the hasbara or propaganda pumped out by the Netanyahu government and the Israeli military. There are also juicy carrots for politicians of all sides and pliant journalists willing to be schmoozed. Money is no object. The AIJAC and another group, the NSW Jewish Board of Deputies, run regular 'study tours' to Israel, funded by generous Jewish donors. Selected politicians and hacks are flown business class, put up in five-star hotels, and wined and dined in the best Tel Aviv restaurants while being escorted around showpiece hospitals, kibbutzes and settlements. Lyons writes: 'No editors, journalists or others should take these trips: they grotesquely distort the reality and are dangerous in the sense that they allow people with a very small amount of knowledge to pollute Australian public opinion.'
"He is right. They offered me one of these junkets many years ago; I declined it for exactly those reasons. But it is a heroic figure indeed who stands between an Australian journalist and a gravy train. As I write, another eight hacks have returned from one. They were the editor of the Sydney Morning Herald, the editor-in-chief of Huffington Post Australia, the editor of the Weekend Australian's Inquirer section, the news director of the Daily Telegraph, reporters from Channel 7 and Sky Television, and producers from SBS Television and radio 2GB. Their minder was Vic Alhadeff, from the NSW Jewish Board of Deputies.
"Alhadeff evidently weaved his magic. At a welcome home reception at Sydney's Australian Jewish Museum in October 2017, the eight brimmed with gratitude. Israel 'captured my heart and my mind', wrote Anna Caldwell of the Telegraph. There were 'so many signs of hope... every day we saw Israelis and Palestinians working side by side - they all wanted peace'. All this discovered in a week. Everyone agreed it had been wonderful. Fancy that. These travelling troupes are sometimes allowed to see Gaza, but only from a distant hill.
"Here, then, were the wheels and levers of a powerful media machine aimed right at me. Murdoch's newspapers lined up alongside." (pp 509-11)
[*For example, Ryvchin popped up on the opinion page of The Australian only yesterday: Amnesty lost its way over Israel]
To be continued...
Thursday, January 31, 2019
Mike Carlton's 'On Air' 2
A tsunami of hatred, bigotry, racism, insult and abuse...
"I had expected a torrent of abusive emails. The Israel lobby in Australia is well organised, hyperactive and loudly vocal. It wields weight and power beyond its size. Anyone working in the media is aware that any criticism of Israel - the slightest hint of it - stirs much of the Jewish community to the wrath of God. But even prepared for that, I had no idea what was about to descend. For more than a week I was engulfed by a tsunami of hatred, bigotry, racism, insult and abuse beyond anything I have ever experienced.
"It began with emails... The trickle that began early that Saturday morning became a flood over the weekend and beyond. 'Heil Hitler, you ignorant, Jew-hating, anti-Semitic slime,' was one of the first. I was attacked as 'a Hitler lover', 'a Nazi', 'a Palestinian cocksucker', 'a Muslim lover', 'an anti-Semitic motherfucker', 'Palestinian scum' and 'Holocaust denier'. On it rolled, a stream of filth. I lost count of the times I was called a Nazi. 'People like you started World War II,' said one woman. 'You would have gassed my grandmother in Auschwitz,' said another. A nutter named Ziggy, apparently thinking I might be spawn of the SS or similar, helpfully wrote in German: 'Die Nazi-Obst fallt nicht weit vom Stemm.' The Nazi fruit does not fall far from the tree.
"Twitter chimed in. One Alex Ryvchin, the Public Affairs Director of the Executive Council of Australian Jewry and a leading figure of the Israel lobby, berated me with a slew of ever more creative insults. A travel agent from Sydney's Rose Bay announced I was in cahoots with the corrupt New South Wales politician Eddie Obeid. 'Carlton's business is bankrolled by the Obeids,' she tweeted. Others displayed blatant racism. 'We are the Chosen People. Get over it,' was a jaw-dropper. One man wrote: 'Jews make things. Can't remember the last Palestinian invention.' A woman - apparently professional and well educated - thought my supposed religion might somehow be relevant. 'Catholic, much?' she snapped. I did not know whether to laugh or cry at that one.
"It became obvious that a lot of the attack was coordinated. Some lines were repeated over and over again. 'We gave them Gaza; they gave us rockets,' was a common one. 'Israel takes every care to avoid unnecessary casualties, but Hamas is using children and civilians as human shields,' was another. There were scores of these tweets and emails with identical wording." (pp 506-07)
To be continued...
"I had expected a torrent of abusive emails. The Israel lobby in Australia is well organised, hyperactive and loudly vocal. It wields weight and power beyond its size. Anyone working in the media is aware that any criticism of Israel - the slightest hint of it - stirs much of the Jewish community to the wrath of God. But even prepared for that, I had no idea what was about to descend. For more than a week I was engulfed by a tsunami of hatred, bigotry, racism, insult and abuse beyond anything I have ever experienced.
"It began with emails... The trickle that began early that Saturday morning became a flood over the weekend and beyond. 'Heil Hitler, you ignorant, Jew-hating, anti-Semitic slime,' was one of the first. I was attacked as 'a Hitler lover', 'a Nazi', 'a Palestinian cocksucker', 'a Muslim lover', 'an anti-Semitic motherfucker', 'Palestinian scum' and 'Holocaust denier'. On it rolled, a stream of filth. I lost count of the times I was called a Nazi. 'People like you started World War II,' said one woman. 'You would have gassed my grandmother in Auschwitz,' said another. A nutter named Ziggy, apparently thinking I might be spawn of the SS or similar, helpfully wrote in German: 'Die Nazi-Obst fallt nicht weit vom Stemm.' The Nazi fruit does not fall far from the tree.
"Twitter chimed in. One Alex Ryvchin, the Public Affairs Director of the Executive Council of Australian Jewry and a leading figure of the Israel lobby, berated me with a slew of ever more creative insults. A travel agent from Sydney's Rose Bay announced I was in cahoots with the corrupt New South Wales politician Eddie Obeid. 'Carlton's business is bankrolled by the Obeids,' she tweeted. Others displayed blatant racism. 'We are the Chosen People. Get over it,' was a jaw-dropper. One man wrote: 'Jews make things. Can't remember the last Palestinian invention.' A woman - apparently professional and well educated - thought my supposed religion might somehow be relevant. 'Catholic, much?' she snapped. I did not know whether to laugh or cry at that one.
"It became obvious that a lot of the attack was coordinated. Some lines were repeated over and over again. 'We gave them Gaza; they gave us rockets,' was a common one. 'Israel takes every care to avoid unnecessary casualties, but Hamas is using children and civilians as human shields,' was another. There were scores of these tweets and emails with identical wording." (pp 506-07)
To be continued...
Wednesday, January 30, 2019
Mike Carlton's 'On Air' 1
In earlier posts on the subject of Australian political memoirs that tackle the bullying ways of the Israel lobby, I dealt with those of former foreign minister Bob Carr and former prime minister Kevin Rudd, as well as journalist John Lyons' contribution to the genre, if I may call it that. It is now time to focus on the last of the four, journalist Mike Carlton's On Air (2018).
Those of you with long memories will perhaps recall that Carlton first came under attack in 2010 following his criticisms of Israel's Mavi Marmara massacre, prompting him to describe the lobby, in his Sydney Morning Herald column, as "a ferocious beast." (See my 12/6/10 post A Ferocious Beast.)
Then, in 2014, in the hardest-hitting opinion piece in the Australian corporate media on Israel's murderous Operation Protective Edge*, in which he accused the apartheid state of waging "a war of terror on the entire Gaza population," Carlton again came under attack from the aforementioned ferocious beast. (See my 27/7/14 post Carlton & Le Lievre Get Gaza.)
It is this lobby-orchestrated backlash that he deals with in some detail in his memoir.
He begins with the circumstances which led up to Operation Protective Edge and an account of its brutal 50-day course, and describes precisely what it was that led him to write his offending column, Israel's rank and rotten fruit is being called fascism:
"The ABC's Matt Brown reported for 7.30 on the killing of the four boys on the beach, interviewing the bereaved father and an eleven-year-old boy who had been injured by shrapnel but escaped. I watched his 7.30 story shaken to the marrow, choking back tears, achingly conscious of our own little boy peacefully asleep in his bedroom." (pp 504-05)
"With the column," he adds, "was a cartoon by the artist Glen Le Lievre, depicting a Jewish man seated in an armchair marked with a Star of David and operating a TV-style remote control to blow up a Gazan township. It was a pungent spin-off from news photographs - seen worlwide - of Israeli families relaxing with drinks and snacks on a border hillside as they watched Gaza being bombed in the near distance below. The column, its headline and the cartoon touched off a firestorm." (pp 505-06)
[*Sadly, typically, I'm not aware of any other.]
To be continued...
Those of you with long memories will perhaps recall that Carlton first came under attack in 2010 following his criticisms of Israel's Mavi Marmara massacre, prompting him to describe the lobby, in his Sydney Morning Herald column, as "a ferocious beast." (See my 12/6/10 post A Ferocious Beast.)
Then, in 2014, in the hardest-hitting opinion piece in the Australian corporate media on Israel's murderous Operation Protective Edge*, in which he accused the apartheid state of waging "a war of terror on the entire Gaza population," Carlton again came under attack from the aforementioned ferocious beast. (See my 27/7/14 post Carlton & Le Lievre Get Gaza.)
It is this lobby-orchestrated backlash that he deals with in some detail in his memoir.
He begins with the circumstances which led up to Operation Protective Edge and an account of its brutal 50-day course, and describes precisely what it was that led him to write his offending column, Israel's rank and rotten fruit is being called fascism:
"The ABC's Matt Brown reported for 7.30 on the killing of the four boys on the beach, interviewing the bereaved father and an eleven-year-old boy who had been injured by shrapnel but escaped. I watched his 7.30 story shaken to the marrow, choking back tears, achingly conscious of our own little boy peacefully asleep in his bedroom." (pp 504-05)
"With the column," he adds, "was a cartoon by the artist Glen Le Lievre, depicting a Jewish man seated in an armchair marked with a Star of David and operating a TV-style remote control to blow up a Gazan township. It was a pungent spin-off from news photographs - seen worlwide - of Israeli families relaxing with drinks and snacks on a border hillside as they watched Gaza being bombed in the near distance below. The column, its headline and the cartoon touched off a firestorm." (pp 505-06)
[*Sadly, typically, I'm not aware of any other.]
To be continued...
Saturday, April 29, 2017
Anatomy of a Murdoch Mugging
Editing a Murdoch Newspaper for Dummies. A Helpful Guide by Mike Carlton (29/4 tweet)
Day 1. Select this week's hate figure. Direct pliant hack to write 1,000 word front page savageing of hate figure disguised as news story.
Day 2. Have Abbott, Abetz, Bernardi, Christensen, Hanson join denunciation. Run editorial cartoon and swingeing 800 word leader attacking hate figure.
Day 3. Page one follow-up, reporting that hate figure has caused nationwide outrage, is under pressure to resign, apologise, remove FB page etc. Sool Kenny, Albrechtsen, etc to put in the boot.
Day 4. Widen attack on hate figure to also blame the ABC, Green-Left inner city latte sippers, Islamic extremism, Feminism, the CFMEU, Bill Shorten, identity politics, virtue signalling. Recall heroic sacrifice of tragic NewsCorpse martyr the late Bill Leak on altar of political correctness. Second editorial cartoon.
Day 5. Front page report of Peter Dutton's bashing of hate figure on Bolt and Hadley shows. Third editorial cartoon. Graham Richardson explains why hate figure is truly hateful. Greg Sheridan demands hate figure be deported.
Day 6. Paul Kelly's 8,000 word Inquirer essay explaining hate figure is the tragic but inevitable symbol of the ideologically driven retreat from the pure Catholicism of the Council of Trent, the collapse of the post-war anti-Communist consensus, the selfishness of the Millennial generation, the abandonment of Judeo-Christian morality by self-absorbed LGBTI activists, and the failure of Labor's Bill Shorten to stand up to ALP radical Left in Victoria.
Day 7. Select new hate figure. Repeat above.
Day 1. Select this week's hate figure. Direct pliant hack to write 1,000 word front page savageing of hate figure disguised as news story.
Day 2. Have Abbott, Abetz, Bernardi, Christensen, Hanson join denunciation. Run editorial cartoon and swingeing 800 word leader attacking hate figure.
Day 3. Page one follow-up, reporting that hate figure has caused nationwide outrage, is under pressure to resign, apologise, remove FB page etc. Sool Kenny, Albrechtsen, etc to put in the boot.
Day 4. Widen attack on hate figure to also blame the ABC, Green-Left inner city latte sippers, Islamic extremism, Feminism, the CFMEU, Bill Shorten, identity politics, virtue signalling. Recall heroic sacrifice of tragic NewsCorpse martyr the late Bill Leak on altar of political correctness. Second editorial cartoon.
Day 5. Front page report of Peter Dutton's bashing of hate figure on Bolt and Hadley shows. Third editorial cartoon. Graham Richardson explains why hate figure is truly hateful. Greg Sheridan demands hate figure be deported.
Day 6. Paul Kelly's 8,000 word Inquirer essay explaining hate figure is the tragic but inevitable symbol of the ideologically driven retreat from the pure Catholicism of the Council of Trent, the collapse of the post-war anti-Communist consensus, the selfishness of the Millennial generation, the abandonment of Judeo-Christian morality by self-absorbed LGBTI activists, and the failure of Labor's Bill Shorten to stand up to ALP radical Left in Victoria.
Day 7. Select new hate figure. Repeat above.
Friday, August 19, 2016
Done Under 18C for Daring to Criticise Israel
With support for the retention of Section 18C of the Racial Discrimination Act sometimes being used as a measure of one's stand against racism, it is well to keep in mind its potential for misuse.
Former Sydney Morning Herald columnist Mike Carlton put his finger on the problem in a recent tweet:
"RW nutters now howling for the repeal of 18C once wanted me to be done under it for daring to criticise Israel. Fucking hypocrites." (17/8/16)
He is referring, of course, to a complaint lodged under 18C against his passionate denunciation of Israel's 2014 genocidal attack on Gaza in the Herald.
Guardian journalist Amanda Meade pointed out at the time that "it is possible that the complaint will be thrown out because it is understood that the complainant - said to be Wayne Karlen, a constant critic of the paper on Twitter - is not Jewish. According to the act: 'Only an 'aggrieved person' may lodge a complaint. In the case of the racial hatred provisions, an aggrieved person is someone from the group targeted by the behaviour who is offended, insulted, humiliated or intimidated because of his or her race'." (Mike Carlton's column and SMH cartoon: racist complaint lodged, 14/8/14)
This implies that if the complaint had been lodged by a Jewish Zionist as opposed to a non-Jewish Zionist, Carlton may well have become embroiled in a protracted legal battle fought on the false Zionist premise that criticism of Israel is a form of anti-Semitism.
The outcome could conceivably have come down to whether or not the presiding judge accepted this claptrap. Therein lies the problem with 18C for critics of Israel.
See also my 17/8/14 post Using Section 18C to Silence Critics of Israel.
Former Sydney Morning Herald columnist Mike Carlton put his finger on the problem in a recent tweet:
"RW nutters now howling for the repeal of 18C once wanted me to be done under it for daring to criticise Israel. Fucking hypocrites." (17/8/16)
He is referring, of course, to a complaint lodged under 18C against his passionate denunciation of Israel's 2014 genocidal attack on Gaza in the Herald.
Guardian journalist Amanda Meade pointed out at the time that "it is possible that the complaint will be thrown out because it is understood that the complainant - said to be Wayne Karlen, a constant critic of the paper on Twitter - is not Jewish. According to the act: 'Only an 'aggrieved person' may lodge a complaint. In the case of the racial hatred provisions, an aggrieved person is someone from the group targeted by the behaviour who is offended, insulted, humiliated or intimidated because of his or her race'." (Mike Carlton's column and SMH cartoon: racist complaint lodged, 14/8/14)
This implies that if the complaint had been lodged by a Jewish Zionist as opposed to a non-Jewish Zionist, Carlton may well have become embroiled in a protracted legal battle fought on the false Zionist premise that criticism of Israel is a form of anti-Semitism.
The outcome could conceivably have come down to whether or not the presiding judge accepted this claptrap. Therein lies the problem with 18C for critics of Israel.
See also my 17/8/14 post Using Section 18C to Silence Critics of Israel.
Thursday, February 25, 2016
It's Time for Paul Sheehan to Go
On Monday the Sydney Morning Herald published a highly dubious piece on its opinion pages by its highly dubious columnist Paul Sheehan: The horrifying untold story of Louise. It was the story of an alleged 2002 rape/ bashing, by alleged Arabs (behind Sydney's St Mary's Cathedral of all places), of an alleged nurse known only as 'Louise'. Louise's 'experience', as related by Sheehan, was so horrific that it was reminiscent of a wartime enemy atrocity story.
Red flags, bells, and whistles abounded, unheard by Sheehan. Among them (in order of appearance):
1) Louise, having just completed back-to-back shifts at St. Vincent's Hospital, was too tired to drive home, and so decided to park her car in a secluded lane behind SMC, as you would, and sleep in it - without, unbelievably, locking the doors. Sheehan didn't ask about this elementary precaution.
2) The gang who dragged her from her car spoke "Arabic." Sheehan didn't ask how Louise knew it was Arabic.
3) One of the gang allegedly sodomised Louise whilst simultaneously cutting her throat with a knife. Sheehan didn't question either the Herculean strength or the - ahem - multi-tasking needed to accomplish this incredible feat.
4) Of the next lurid detail I will say only that while I've heard of synchronised swimming, I've never heard of synchronised, pinpoint urination.
5) "It was August 2002." I see. How convenient that the alleged atrocity should fit neatly within the 2001-06 timeframe of Sheehan's book 'Girls Like You.'
6) Sheehan writes that: "After I gave a speech at a gathering at NSW Parliament, I was approached by someone who told me that hers [Louise's] was a story that had never been told, given that I had written Girls Like You..." Sheehan doesn't tell us what this gathering was about or who had convened it, although it should be pointed out that Fred Nile's Christian Democrats call for a moratorium on Muslim immigration. Details of this meeting have been ommitted. Why?
7)
Louise: A couple of homeless guys had seen it... One of them told me later, 'I'll never forget what happened when the MERCS got you. We thought you were dead.'
Sheehan: MERCs?
Louise: It had been going on for years and was so frequent it had a name: MERCs. Middle Eastern raping c__...
So frequent were these MERC atrocities, apparently, that until Louise had told him about them, Sheehan, who had written an entire book on the subject of rape by men of 'Middle Eastern appearance', knew nothing of them. Right...
Today, we get this apology from Sheehan:
"At 6pm on Monday I had a heart-sinking conversation with Louise... In my third conversation with her that afternoon, as I was saying she needed to talk to the police... she told me I was 'oppressing' her. Then she said: 'I don't want to continue this conversation,' and hung up. She has remained incommunicado ever since. This led quickly to 3 realisations. First, I was countenancing the near certainty that in the areas of her story where I had given her the benefit of the doubt, I had been wrong to do so. Second, I had not considered the possibility that her story had been carefully constructed on a foundation of embellishments, false memories and fabrications. Third, I owed an apology to the NSW Police... After publication I learnt that a woman had made very similar claims of rape during two rallies last year organised by Reclaim Australia... In the story recounted to me by Louise, she made insulting references to rapes committed by Middle Eastern men. I had wrongly amplified this insult by including her words in the column. Had I known on Sunday what I knew by Wednesday, the column would not have been written..." (The story of Louise: police have no case to answer, but I do)
Sheehan certainly does have a case to answer: for years of Islamophobic, Arabophobic and Zionist columns carefully constructed on a foundation of embellishments and fabrications. Simply scan my Sheehan posts and you'll see why he fell for Louise's story - it fitted so well with his prejudices. The opinion editor and those higher up the Fairfax food chain also have a case to answer: for enabling him all these years.
Frankly, it's time for Sheehan to go, time for the Herald to publicly apologise for his nastiness over the years, and time for its management to get down on its knees, and beg Mike Carlton to come back in Sheehan's place.
Red flags, bells, and whistles abounded, unheard by Sheehan. Among them (in order of appearance):
1) Louise, having just completed back-to-back shifts at St. Vincent's Hospital, was too tired to drive home, and so decided to park her car in a secluded lane behind SMC, as you would, and sleep in it - without, unbelievably, locking the doors. Sheehan didn't ask about this elementary precaution.
2) The gang who dragged her from her car spoke "Arabic." Sheehan didn't ask how Louise knew it was Arabic.
3) One of the gang allegedly sodomised Louise whilst simultaneously cutting her throat with a knife. Sheehan didn't question either the Herculean strength or the - ahem - multi-tasking needed to accomplish this incredible feat.
4) Of the next lurid detail I will say only that while I've heard of synchronised swimming, I've never heard of synchronised, pinpoint urination.
5) "It was August 2002." I see. How convenient that the alleged atrocity should fit neatly within the 2001-06 timeframe of Sheehan's book 'Girls Like You.'
6) Sheehan writes that: "After I gave a speech at a gathering at NSW Parliament, I was approached by someone who told me that hers [Louise's] was a story that had never been told, given that I had written Girls Like You..." Sheehan doesn't tell us what this gathering was about or who had convened it, although it should be pointed out that Fred Nile's Christian Democrats call for a moratorium on Muslim immigration. Details of this meeting have been ommitted. Why?
7)
Louise: A couple of homeless guys had seen it... One of them told me later, 'I'll never forget what happened when the MERCS got you. We thought you were dead.'
Sheehan: MERCs?
Louise: It had been going on for years and was so frequent it had a name: MERCs. Middle Eastern raping c__...
So frequent were these MERC atrocities, apparently, that until Louise had told him about them, Sheehan, who had written an entire book on the subject of rape by men of 'Middle Eastern appearance', knew nothing of them. Right...
Today, we get this apology from Sheehan:
"At 6pm on Monday I had a heart-sinking conversation with Louise... In my third conversation with her that afternoon, as I was saying she needed to talk to the police... she told me I was 'oppressing' her. Then she said: 'I don't want to continue this conversation,' and hung up. She has remained incommunicado ever since. This led quickly to 3 realisations. First, I was countenancing the near certainty that in the areas of her story where I had given her the benefit of the doubt, I had been wrong to do so. Second, I had not considered the possibility that her story had been carefully constructed on a foundation of embellishments, false memories and fabrications. Third, I owed an apology to the NSW Police... After publication I learnt that a woman had made very similar claims of rape during two rallies last year organised by Reclaim Australia... In the story recounted to me by Louise, she made insulting references to rapes committed by Middle Eastern men. I had wrongly amplified this insult by including her words in the column. Had I known on Sunday what I knew by Wednesday, the column would not have been written..." (The story of Louise: police have no case to answer, but I do)
Sheehan certainly does have a case to answer: for years of Islamophobic, Arabophobic and Zionist columns carefully constructed on a foundation of embellishments and fabrications. Simply scan my Sheehan posts and you'll see why he fell for Louise's story - it fitted so well with his prejudices. The opinion editor and those higher up the Fairfax food chain also have a case to answer: for enabling him all these years.
Frankly, it's time for Sheehan to go, time for the Herald to publicly apologise for his nastiness over the years, and time for its management to get down on its knees, and beg Mike Carlton to come back in Sheehan's place.
Wednesday, January 6, 2016
Why is Ruth Pollard Leaving Fairfax?
Sadly, it looks as though Fairfax Media's Middle East correspondent Ruth Pollard is bowing out. I haven't always been kind to her as some of my earlier posts on her reporting attest but I have to say that the quality of her reporting has only improved with time. Suffice it to say that when the AIJAC crowd start yapping about her 'negativity' towards Israel and her lack of 'balance'* you know she's doing something right.
In fact, one tweet I've read has even suggested that Fairfax will be closing its Jerusalem bureau - which could only mean that Fairfax papers from now on will carry only craportage on the Middle East from the likes of the New York Times and Washington Post. This, of course, would constitute yet another huge milestone in Fairfax's decline into irrelevance.
Given earlier ructions over the reporting of Ed O'Loughlin, Fairfax's ME correspondent until 2008, and the Sydney Morning Herald's treatment of its star columnist Mike Carlton following pressure from Israel lobbyists, one cannot help but wonder about the real reasons for Pollard's leaving her post.
I sincerely hope that Ruth finds the time to write a memoir of some kind, one which frankly tackles the subject of Israel lobby pressure on Fairfax Media in general, and the craven crew at the helm of the Herald in particular, and details what must have been for her an incredibly steep learning-curve in occupied Palestine.
[* The truth about the Gaza war (hint: it's not what Ruth Pollard tells you, aijac.org.au, 5/9/15]
In fact, one tweet I've read has even suggested that Fairfax will be closing its Jerusalem bureau - which could only mean that Fairfax papers from now on will carry only craportage on the Middle East from the likes of the New York Times and Washington Post. This, of course, would constitute yet another huge milestone in Fairfax's decline into irrelevance.
Given earlier ructions over the reporting of Ed O'Loughlin, Fairfax's ME correspondent until 2008, and the Sydney Morning Herald's treatment of its star columnist Mike Carlton following pressure from Israel lobbyists, one cannot help but wonder about the real reasons for Pollard's leaving her post.
I sincerely hope that Ruth finds the time to write a memoir of some kind, one which frankly tackles the subject of Israel lobby pressure on Fairfax Media in general, and the craven crew at the helm of the Herald in particular, and details what must have been for her an incredibly steep learning-curve in occupied Palestine.
[* The truth about the Gaza war (hint: it's not what Ruth Pollard tells you, aijac.org.au, 5/9/15]
Monday, August 24, 2015
Tweet of the Day
"Imagine Abbott will announce we're bombing Syria in good time for the Canning khaki bye-election."* - Mike Carlton
*19/9
*19/9
Tuesday, January 20, 2015
Je Suis Le Lievre & Carlton
Remember Glen Le Lievre's powerful cartoon in last year's Sydney MorningHerald, drawn as Israel was 'mowing the grass' in the Gaza Ghetto, and many Israelis - with kippahs (some incorporating the Star of David) and without - were enjoying the spectacle from a nearby hill (some sitting in lounge chairs)?
Remember the knee-jerk allegations of anti-Semitism which followed it?
Remember the equally powerful essay by columnist Mike Carlton which shared the page with it?
Remember how the Herald got the wobbles when the usual suspects began hurling the usual accusations of anti-Semitism at him?
Remember how Carlton ended up resigning from the paper rather than kiss the ring?
Remember the dark threats in Murdoch's Australian about "the organised [Jewish] community getting legal advice and looking closely at its options"?
Well, here's the final (?) chapter in the saga - Press Council Adjudication 1634 of January 15, the subject of which, I note, is exclusively Le Lievre's cartoon. What rubbish it is:
"The Press Council has considered whether its Standards of Practice were breached by a cartoon in the Sydney Morning Herald on 26 July 2014. It was associated with an opinion piece on the conflict in Gaza and depicted an elderly man with a large nose, wearing the distinctively Jewish head covering called a kippah or yarmulke, and sitting in an armchair emblazoned with the Star of David. He was pointing a TV remote control device at an exploding cityscape, implied to be Gaza. Implied to be Gaza!
"The Council asked the publication to comment on whether the cartoon had placed gratuitous emphasis on race or religion. It also asked the publication whether the cartoon could reasonably have expected to cause offence and showed insufficient concern for balancing the sensibilities of some readers with the broader public interest.
"In response, the publication agreed that the cartoon had placed gratuitous emphasis on the Jewishness of its subject and in so doing had inappropriately emphasised religious persuasion rather than Israeli nationality, thereby causing offence. It pointed out that a 650-word apology had been published about a week later."
So the cartoon was thought too Jewish and insufficiently Israeli. The kippah is Jewish, but worn by countless Israelis, including, when it suits him, Netanyahu. The Star of David is Jewish, but is emblazoned on every Israeli flag and death-dealing fighter jet, not to mention on many Israeli kippahs.
If Le Lievre inappropriately emphasised religious persuasion that is because Israel itself, through its appropriation of Jewish religious symbols for its own political ends, inappropriately emphasises religious persuasion.
"The publication also pointed out that the newspaper's Editor in Chief and News Director had subsequently participated in seminars facilitated by the Jewish Board of Deputies to raise awareness about the imagery that could be construed as anti-Semitic. It said further seminars were planned and would be expanded to include the newspaper's senior editorial staff.
"The publication also said that a requirement for extra layers of approval had been introduced for all cartoons prior to publication."
So much for the Herald's slogan "Independent. Always."
"Conclusions: The Council emphasises that cartoons are subject to its Standards of Practice. The application of those standards however, takes account of the fact that readers can reasonably be expected to recognise that cartoons commonly use exaggeration and caricature to a considerable degree and therefore should be interpreted by them with this in mind.
"In this instance, the cartoon's linkage between the Jewish faith and the Israeli rocket attacks on Gaza was reasonably likely to cause great offence to many readers. A linkage with Israeli nationality might have been justifiable in the public interest, despite being likely to cause offence. But the same cannot be said of the implied linkage with the Jewish faith that arose from inclusion of the kippah and the Star of David. Accordingly, the Council's Standards of Practice were breached on the ground of causing greater offence to readers' sensibilities than was justifiable in the public interest.
"The Council welcomes the prominent, extensive and closely-reasoned apology by the publication and its subsequent action to reduce the risk of repetition. The Council commends this approach to other publications."
For the genesis of this complaint to the Press Council see my 7/12/14 post The Whinge Goes On.
As for Mike Carlton, our Human Rights Commissioner Tim Wilson referred in yesterday's Australian to Carlton "facing a complaint under 18C because of his disgraceful anti-Semitic language." (Charlie Hebdo v 18C: no contest)
Mike's tweeted response (18/1): "I used no 'disgraceful anti-Semitic language' and was not pinged by 18C. Tim Wilson is a posturing fuckwit."
Remember the knee-jerk allegations of anti-Semitism which followed it?
Remember the equally powerful essay by columnist Mike Carlton which shared the page with it?
Remember how the Herald got the wobbles when the usual suspects began hurling the usual accusations of anti-Semitism at him?
Remember how Carlton ended up resigning from the paper rather than kiss the ring?
Remember the dark threats in Murdoch's Australian about "the organised [Jewish] community getting legal advice and looking closely at its options"?
Well, here's the final (?) chapter in the saga - Press Council Adjudication 1634 of January 15, the subject of which, I note, is exclusively Le Lievre's cartoon. What rubbish it is:
"The Press Council has considered whether its Standards of Practice were breached by a cartoon in the Sydney Morning Herald on 26 July 2014. It was associated with an opinion piece on the conflict in Gaza and depicted an elderly man with a large nose, wearing the distinctively Jewish head covering called a kippah or yarmulke, and sitting in an armchair emblazoned with the Star of David. He was pointing a TV remote control device at an exploding cityscape, implied to be Gaza. Implied to be Gaza!
"The Council asked the publication to comment on whether the cartoon had placed gratuitous emphasis on race or religion. It also asked the publication whether the cartoon could reasonably have expected to cause offence and showed insufficient concern for balancing the sensibilities of some readers with the broader public interest.
"In response, the publication agreed that the cartoon had placed gratuitous emphasis on the Jewishness of its subject and in so doing had inappropriately emphasised religious persuasion rather than Israeli nationality, thereby causing offence. It pointed out that a 650-word apology had been published about a week later."
So the cartoon was thought too Jewish and insufficiently Israeli. The kippah is Jewish, but worn by countless Israelis, including, when it suits him, Netanyahu. The Star of David is Jewish, but is emblazoned on every Israeli flag and death-dealing fighter jet, not to mention on many Israeli kippahs.
If Le Lievre inappropriately emphasised religious persuasion that is because Israel itself, through its appropriation of Jewish religious symbols for its own political ends, inappropriately emphasises religious persuasion.
"The publication also pointed out that the newspaper's Editor in Chief and News Director had subsequently participated in seminars facilitated by the Jewish Board of Deputies to raise awareness about the imagery that could be construed as anti-Semitic. It said further seminars were planned and would be expanded to include the newspaper's senior editorial staff.
"The publication also said that a requirement for extra layers of approval had been introduced for all cartoons prior to publication."
So much for the Herald's slogan "Independent. Always."
"Conclusions: The Council emphasises that cartoons are subject to its Standards of Practice. The application of those standards however, takes account of the fact that readers can reasonably be expected to recognise that cartoons commonly use exaggeration and caricature to a considerable degree and therefore should be interpreted by them with this in mind.
"In this instance, the cartoon's linkage between the Jewish faith and the Israeli rocket attacks on Gaza was reasonably likely to cause great offence to many readers. A linkage with Israeli nationality might have been justifiable in the public interest, despite being likely to cause offence. But the same cannot be said of the implied linkage with the Jewish faith that arose from inclusion of the kippah and the Star of David. Accordingly, the Council's Standards of Practice were breached on the ground of causing greater offence to readers' sensibilities than was justifiable in the public interest.
"The Council welcomes the prominent, extensive and closely-reasoned apology by the publication and its subsequent action to reduce the risk of repetition. The Council commends this approach to other publications."
For the genesis of this complaint to the Press Council see my 7/12/14 post The Whinge Goes On.
As for Mike Carlton, our Human Rights Commissioner Tim Wilson referred in yesterday's Australian to Carlton "facing a complaint under 18C because of his disgraceful anti-Semitic language." (Charlie Hebdo v 18C: no contest)
Mike's tweeted response (18/1): "I used no 'disgraceful anti-Semitic language' and was not pinged by 18C. Tim Wilson is a posturing fuckwit."
Tuesday, January 6, 2015
Herald: Propaganda In, Truth Out
At the Sydney Morning Herald (dubbed hilariously: 'Independent. Always.'), the door to the letters page is always open to brazen Zionist propaganda:
"The past 6 Israeli prime ministers, including the incumbent, declared themselves in favour of two states for two peoples. A Palestinian state will happen when the Palestinian leadership makes the same declaration." Vic Alhadeff CEO NSW Jewish Board of Deputies (3/1/15)
In the face of the facts, however, it is slammed shut - as the following letter, written by UNSW academic Peter Slezak in response to Alhadeff's, but refused publication, shows:
"Vic Alhadeff (Jan 3-4) makes two statements that he must know to be false. First, he says that past Israeli prime ministers 'including the incumbent, declared themselves in favour of two states.' However, The Times of Israel (13/7/14) reported that in early July 'The prime minister ruled out full Palestinian sovereignty... This was not a new, dramatic change of stance by the prime minister. It was a new, dramatic exposition of his long-held stance.' As Alhadeff must know, Netanyahu's Likud Party has never accepted a Palestinian State. Its electoral partner, Yisrael Beitenu, likewise categorically rejects an independent Palestinian State. The Likud Charter includes the following explicit statements: (a) 'The Jordan River will be the permanent eastern border of the State of Israel.' (b) 'Jerusalem is the eternal, united capital of the State of Israel and only of Israel.' (c) 'The Government of Israel flatly rejects the establishment of a Palestinian Arab state west of the Jordan river.'
"Second, Alhadeff says 'a Palestinian state will happen when the Palestinian leadership declares itself in favour of two states for two peoples. As Alhadeff must also know, in 1988 on behalf of the PLO Arafat made exactly such a declaration: 'We accept two states, the Palestine state and the Jewish state of Israel' reported in the New York Times December 8.
"Alhadeff's misrepresentations reveal a great deal about obstacles facing a just solution to the Israel/Palestine conflict."
Publishing Israel lobbyist Alhadeff's transparent propaganda is one thing. Refusing to publish Slezak's devastating rebuttal is quite another. Yet another example of the Israel lobby's hold over the Herald, so dramatically illustrated last year by the events surrounding the departure of columnist Mike Carlton from its staff.
PS (7/1/15): Peter Slezak's letter has belatedly appeared in the SMH. There's a story here somewhere.
"The past 6 Israeli prime ministers, including the incumbent, declared themselves in favour of two states for two peoples. A Palestinian state will happen when the Palestinian leadership makes the same declaration." Vic Alhadeff CEO NSW Jewish Board of Deputies (3/1/15)
In the face of the facts, however, it is slammed shut - as the following letter, written by UNSW academic Peter Slezak in response to Alhadeff's, but refused publication, shows:
"Vic Alhadeff (Jan 3-4) makes two statements that he must know to be false. First, he says that past Israeli prime ministers 'including the incumbent, declared themselves in favour of two states.' However, The Times of Israel (13/7/14) reported that in early July 'The prime minister ruled out full Palestinian sovereignty... This was not a new, dramatic change of stance by the prime minister. It was a new, dramatic exposition of his long-held stance.' As Alhadeff must know, Netanyahu's Likud Party has never accepted a Palestinian State. Its electoral partner, Yisrael Beitenu, likewise categorically rejects an independent Palestinian State. The Likud Charter includes the following explicit statements: (a) 'The Jordan River will be the permanent eastern border of the State of Israel.' (b) 'Jerusalem is the eternal, united capital of the State of Israel and only of Israel.' (c) 'The Government of Israel flatly rejects the establishment of a Palestinian Arab state west of the Jordan river.'
"Second, Alhadeff says 'a Palestinian state will happen when the Palestinian leadership declares itself in favour of two states for two peoples. As Alhadeff must also know, in 1988 on behalf of the PLO Arafat made exactly such a declaration: 'We accept two states, the Palestine state and the Jewish state of Israel' reported in the New York Times December 8.
"Alhadeff's misrepresentations reveal a great deal about obstacles facing a just solution to the Israel/Palestine conflict."
Publishing Israel lobbyist Alhadeff's transparent propaganda is one thing. Refusing to publish Slezak's devastating rebuttal is quite another. Yet another example of the Israel lobby's hold over the Herald, so dramatically illustrated last year by the events surrounding the departure of columnist Mike Carlton from its staff.
PS (7/1/15): Peter Slezak's letter has belatedly appeared in the SMH. There's a story here somewhere.
Friday, November 7, 2014
The Whinge Goes On
"The Sydney Morning Herald could be forced to defend its decision to run an anti-Semitic cartoon..." (Fairfax faces press council showdown over anti-Semitic cartoon, Nicola Berkovic, The Australian, 5/11/14)
Notice how you can't even complete a sentence in Murdoch's Australian without encountering a problem? In this case, it's the anti-Semitism smear. This ferociously Zionist rag has merely to assert anti-Semitism for it to be so.
"... and an accompanying article by former columnist Mike Carlton at the Australian Press Council. A Sydney engineer, Wayne Karlen, 60, and two Jewish readers have lodged a complaint with the press council about the publication of the cartoon and column, arguing they are 'racist', 'severely biased', 'inflammatory' and 'highly offensive'."
Nothing new here, of course. These are the usual Zionist whinge-words trotted out on those rare occasions when someone in the ms media, sufficiently moved by the plight of the Palestinian people at Israeli hands, manages to find the words (or, in the case of cartoonists, the images) to adequately convey the brutality of Israel's war crimes. The cartoonist in question is, of course, Glen Le Lievre. (Just click on the Carlton and/or Le Lievre labels below for a backgrounder.)
"Mr Karlen, who is not Jewish..."
Presumably, this makes him an objective observer.
"... said his late father had fought the Nazis in World War II and he found the publication distressing. 'It was important for me at the outset to complain because I identified with anti-Semitism and Nazi propaganda because my father served in the Royal Canadian Airforce,' he said. 'That was a terrible time and terrible history and to see that replicated in a relatively respectable newspaper... I just thought it was wrong'. The cartoon... showed a Jew with a hooked nose casually destroying Gaza. The image... also included a Star of David."
So Karlen "IDENTIFIED WITH anti-Semitism and Nazi propaganda"? Work that one out if you can.
What's striking, however, isn't the man's pathetic incoherence, but how someone with an alleged concern for what the Nazis did to European Jewry can so completely ignore, unlike Carlton and Le Lievre, bless them, what the Israelis got up to in the course of their latest Massacre Protective Edge (8/7-26/8) in Gaza, namely, to cite the findings of the Russell Tribunal's Emergency Session on same, war crimes, crimes against humanity, crimes of murder, extermination and persecution, and incitement to genocide.
Thankfully the Herald has so far resisted yet another surrender to Karlen and friends:
"Mr Karlen said the trio decided to lodge the press council complaint after failed attempts by the Human Rights Commission to broker a settlement with Fairfax."
I for one, however, won't be holding my breath.
Notice how you can't even complete a sentence in Murdoch's Australian without encountering a problem? In this case, it's the anti-Semitism smear. This ferociously Zionist rag has merely to assert anti-Semitism for it to be so.
"... and an accompanying article by former columnist Mike Carlton at the Australian Press Council. A Sydney engineer, Wayne Karlen, 60, and two Jewish readers have lodged a complaint with the press council about the publication of the cartoon and column, arguing they are 'racist', 'severely biased', 'inflammatory' and 'highly offensive'."
Nothing new here, of course. These are the usual Zionist whinge-words trotted out on those rare occasions when someone in the ms media, sufficiently moved by the plight of the Palestinian people at Israeli hands, manages to find the words (or, in the case of cartoonists, the images) to adequately convey the brutality of Israel's war crimes. The cartoonist in question is, of course, Glen Le Lievre. (Just click on the Carlton and/or Le Lievre labels below for a backgrounder.)
"Mr Karlen, who is not Jewish..."
Presumably, this makes him an objective observer.
"... said his late father had fought the Nazis in World War II and he found the publication distressing. 'It was important for me at the outset to complain because I identified with anti-Semitism and Nazi propaganda because my father served in the Royal Canadian Airforce,' he said. 'That was a terrible time and terrible history and to see that replicated in a relatively respectable newspaper... I just thought it was wrong'. The cartoon... showed a Jew with a hooked nose casually destroying Gaza. The image... also included a Star of David."
So Karlen "IDENTIFIED WITH anti-Semitism and Nazi propaganda"? Work that one out if you can.
What's striking, however, isn't the man's pathetic incoherence, but how someone with an alleged concern for what the Nazis did to European Jewry can so completely ignore, unlike Carlton and Le Lievre, bless them, what the Israelis got up to in the course of their latest Massacre Protective Edge (8/7-26/8) in Gaza, namely, to cite the findings of the Russell Tribunal's Emergency Session on same, war crimes, crimes against humanity, crimes of murder, extermination and persecution, and incitement to genocide.
Thankfully the Herald has so far resisted yet another surrender to Karlen and friends:
"Mr Karlen said the trio decided to lodge the press council complaint after failed attempts by the Human Rights Commission to broker a settlement with Fairfax."
I for one, however, won't be holding my breath.
Wednesday, September 10, 2014
AUJS Plays the Anti-Semitism Card
An important essay on the latest Zionist campaign to silence pro-Palestine activism on Australian university campuses from the Socialist Alternative paper Red Flag (26/8/14):
"Australian supporters of Israel have reacted to the growing hostility to the Gaza war with a hysterical campaign of slander and suppression against anyone who dares to criticise Israel.
"On 26 July the Sydney Morning Herald published a courageous opinion piece by Mike Carlton in which he wrote: 'The onslaught is indiscriminate and unrelenting, with but one possible conclusion: Israel is not fighting the terrorists of Hamas. In defiance of the laws of war and the norms of civilised behaviour, it is waging its own war of terror on the entire Gaza population of about 1.7m people. Call it genocide, call it ethnic cleansing: the aim is to kill Arabs.'
"Carlton predicted a 'customary torrent of abusive emails calling me a Nazi, an anti-Semite, a Holocaust denier, an ignoramus' for uttering such self-evident truths. They arrived on cue. The Australian Jewish News ran an editorial calling for a boycott of Fairfax papers. Intense pressure was placed on Sydney Morning Herald management. And within a week, Carlton was suspended, after which he responded in the only honourable way and resigned.
"While SMH management tried to claim Carlton was sacked because he responded with choice words to a few of the hundreds of emails defaming him as a Nazi, there is little doubt that if this were about any other issue, he would still have his job.
"Two weeks later, a billboard in Melbourne that read 'Apartheid: wrong in South Africa, wrong in Palestine' was pulled by publicity company Oohmedia! following a flood of criticism. Oohmedia! declined to reveal to Red Flag who the 'interested third parties' were that forced its change of heart, but the Zionist Federation of Australia, on its Facebook page, was open in claiming that its campaign made the difference.
"On the same day, the NSW Supreme Court banned Palestine Solidarity Activists from protesting outside the Israeli Film Festival in Sydney.
"This followed on from a campaign by Zionist hackers to shut down pro-Palestinian websites in Australia, including the Red Flag website, which was the victim of a DDoS attack that put it offline for several days.
"But the most extensive aspect of the campaign to suppress pro-Palestinian voices has been that waged on university campuses by the Australasian Union of Jewish Students (AUJS), in some cases in alliance with university administrations and right wing student union officials.
"AUJS describes itself as the peak body representing Jewish youth. Its spokespeople are frequently quoted in the press as authorities on anti-Semitism. But AUJS is not an apolitical organisation. Its website proudly proclaims that it exists to 'promote a positive image of Israel on campus.'
"AUJS accuses its enemies on campus of conflating Zionism with Jewishness, and with turning criticism of Israel into hostility to Jews. In fact, conflating Judaism and Zionism is precisely the political goal of AUJS. Slandering supporters of Palestine as anti-Semitic is its primary method for 'combating anti-Zionism' and fulfilling the project, outlined in the AUJS constitution, of 'actively advancing the interests of Israel.'
"The Australian Jewish News is an unabashed mouthpiece of AUJS propaganda. On 15 August it published a highly defamatory article repeating AUJS accusations against Socialist Alternative, without even bothering to get a response to the entirely unsubstantiated claims. Even Murdoch's mouthpiece, The Australian, usually goes through the form of journalistic norms before printing its hatchet jobs.
"AJN's article claimed: 'There are fears for the safety of Jewish students at universities across Australia, following a spate of verbal attacks and harassment, which resulted in at least one student being too scared to go to classes and AUJS suspending activities at one institution. Members of the Socialist Alternative are believed to be behind much of the anti-Israel and anti-Semitic vitriol aimed at Jewish students, who have been accused of supporting 'genocide' and 'ethnic cleansing' in Israel.'
"Socialist Alternative unequivocally rejects the accusations of anti-Semitism and that our student activists have targeted Jewish students. It is a vile slander based on bare-faced lies. It has become clear to us that AUJS has adopted a conscious strategy of encouraging its members on campuses across the country to make unfounded accusations of anti-Semitism and 'targeting Jewish students' as a means to sabotage Palestine solidarity activism.
"AUJS members have filed a flood of complaints describing pro-Palestine events as 'anti-Semitic', while lobbying university vice-chancellors to ban pro-Palestine activism on campus.
"They have managed to get the vice-chancellors of Monash and La Trobe universities to send emails to all students that implicitly attacked pro-Palestine activists. At Monash, individual Palestinian solidarity activists are facing 'misconduct hearings' that threaten their right to study at the university. At the University of Western Australia, the Socialist Alternative club is fighting deregistration following false claims orchestrated by student Zionists.
"These latest attacks follow a string of other incidents. AUJS spokesperson Matthew Lesh claimed on 3AW Radio in Melbourne that Jewish students were physically ejected from a Socialist Alternative meeting at Monash University because they were Jewish. This is completely false. Not only were Jews welcome and encouraged to attend, but the talk itself was given by a Jewish member of Socialist Alternative.
"A small group of organised Zionists attempted to disrupt the meeting. They gave up after being told the meeting was for supporters of Palestine and they were not welcome. There is nothing unusual in this. Socialist Alternative has in many previous instances barred right-wingers who have attempted to disrupt our meetings. Even if you don't agree with this policy, it has nothing whatsoever to do with anti-Semitism.
"If AUJS were honest, it would admit that its campaign is not driven by concerns about anti-Semitic attacks on Jewish students, but concern that the tide of opinion is turning against Israel's war on Palestinians.
"Socialist students have played an important part in this process. At Monash University, Socialist Alternative moved a motion in the student council condemning Israeli war crimes and occupation. Similar motions, including endorsements of the BDS campaign, were taken up and adopted at the Victorian College of the Arts, University of Sydney, Flinders University and Curtin University. A similar motion moved at La Trobe University was voted down in a heated council meeting.
"As Israel's crimes against humanity in Palestine are exposed to the world, support for the Palestinian cause will continue to grow. But if the last month is any indicator, this will also lead to ever more fanatical and dishonest campaigns by pro-Israel groups as they try desperately to defend the indefensible. It is crucial that these campaigns are resisted."
For a snapshot of the situation on US campuses, see 'Civility' is the Israel lobby's new weapon against free speech on US campuses, Ali Abunimah, electronicintifada.net, 7/9/14.
"Australian supporters of Israel have reacted to the growing hostility to the Gaza war with a hysterical campaign of slander and suppression against anyone who dares to criticise Israel.
"On 26 July the Sydney Morning Herald published a courageous opinion piece by Mike Carlton in which he wrote: 'The onslaught is indiscriminate and unrelenting, with but one possible conclusion: Israel is not fighting the terrorists of Hamas. In defiance of the laws of war and the norms of civilised behaviour, it is waging its own war of terror on the entire Gaza population of about 1.7m people. Call it genocide, call it ethnic cleansing: the aim is to kill Arabs.'
"Carlton predicted a 'customary torrent of abusive emails calling me a Nazi, an anti-Semite, a Holocaust denier, an ignoramus' for uttering such self-evident truths. They arrived on cue. The Australian Jewish News ran an editorial calling for a boycott of Fairfax papers. Intense pressure was placed on Sydney Morning Herald management. And within a week, Carlton was suspended, after which he responded in the only honourable way and resigned.
"While SMH management tried to claim Carlton was sacked because he responded with choice words to a few of the hundreds of emails defaming him as a Nazi, there is little doubt that if this were about any other issue, he would still have his job.
"Two weeks later, a billboard in Melbourne that read 'Apartheid: wrong in South Africa, wrong in Palestine' was pulled by publicity company Oohmedia! following a flood of criticism. Oohmedia! declined to reveal to Red Flag who the 'interested third parties' were that forced its change of heart, but the Zionist Federation of Australia, on its Facebook page, was open in claiming that its campaign made the difference.
"On the same day, the NSW Supreme Court banned Palestine Solidarity Activists from protesting outside the Israeli Film Festival in Sydney.
"This followed on from a campaign by Zionist hackers to shut down pro-Palestinian websites in Australia, including the Red Flag website, which was the victim of a DDoS attack that put it offline for several days.
"But the most extensive aspect of the campaign to suppress pro-Palestinian voices has been that waged on university campuses by the Australasian Union of Jewish Students (AUJS), in some cases in alliance with university administrations and right wing student union officials.
"AUJS describes itself as the peak body representing Jewish youth. Its spokespeople are frequently quoted in the press as authorities on anti-Semitism. But AUJS is not an apolitical organisation. Its website proudly proclaims that it exists to 'promote a positive image of Israel on campus.'
"AUJS accuses its enemies on campus of conflating Zionism with Jewishness, and with turning criticism of Israel into hostility to Jews. In fact, conflating Judaism and Zionism is precisely the political goal of AUJS. Slandering supporters of Palestine as anti-Semitic is its primary method for 'combating anti-Zionism' and fulfilling the project, outlined in the AUJS constitution, of 'actively advancing the interests of Israel.'
"The Australian Jewish News is an unabashed mouthpiece of AUJS propaganda. On 15 August it published a highly defamatory article repeating AUJS accusations against Socialist Alternative, without even bothering to get a response to the entirely unsubstantiated claims. Even Murdoch's mouthpiece, The Australian, usually goes through the form of journalistic norms before printing its hatchet jobs.
"AJN's article claimed: 'There are fears for the safety of Jewish students at universities across Australia, following a spate of verbal attacks and harassment, which resulted in at least one student being too scared to go to classes and AUJS suspending activities at one institution. Members of the Socialist Alternative are believed to be behind much of the anti-Israel and anti-Semitic vitriol aimed at Jewish students, who have been accused of supporting 'genocide' and 'ethnic cleansing' in Israel.'
"Socialist Alternative unequivocally rejects the accusations of anti-Semitism and that our student activists have targeted Jewish students. It is a vile slander based on bare-faced lies. It has become clear to us that AUJS has adopted a conscious strategy of encouraging its members on campuses across the country to make unfounded accusations of anti-Semitism and 'targeting Jewish students' as a means to sabotage Palestine solidarity activism.
"AUJS members have filed a flood of complaints describing pro-Palestine events as 'anti-Semitic', while lobbying university vice-chancellors to ban pro-Palestine activism on campus.
"They have managed to get the vice-chancellors of Monash and La Trobe universities to send emails to all students that implicitly attacked pro-Palestine activists. At Monash, individual Palestinian solidarity activists are facing 'misconduct hearings' that threaten their right to study at the university. At the University of Western Australia, the Socialist Alternative club is fighting deregistration following false claims orchestrated by student Zionists.
"These latest attacks follow a string of other incidents. AUJS spokesperson Matthew Lesh claimed on 3AW Radio in Melbourne that Jewish students were physically ejected from a Socialist Alternative meeting at Monash University because they were Jewish. This is completely false. Not only were Jews welcome and encouraged to attend, but the talk itself was given by a Jewish member of Socialist Alternative.
"A small group of organised Zionists attempted to disrupt the meeting. They gave up after being told the meeting was for supporters of Palestine and they were not welcome. There is nothing unusual in this. Socialist Alternative has in many previous instances barred right-wingers who have attempted to disrupt our meetings. Even if you don't agree with this policy, it has nothing whatsoever to do with anti-Semitism.
"If AUJS were honest, it would admit that its campaign is not driven by concerns about anti-Semitic attacks on Jewish students, but concern that the tide of opinion is turning against Israel's war on Palestinians.
"Socialist students have played an important part in this process. At Monash University, Socialist Alternative moved a motion in the student council condemning Israeli war crimes and occupation. Similar motions, including endorsements of the BDS campaign, were taken up and adopted at the Victorian College of the Arts, University of Sydney, Flinders University and Curtin University. A similar motion moved at La Trobe University was voted down in a heated council meeting.
"As Israel's crimes against humanity in Palestine are exposed to the world, support for the Palestinian cause will continue to grow. But if the last month is any indicator, this will also lead to ever more fanatical and dishonest campaigns by pro-Israel groups as they try desperately to defend the indefensible. It is crucial that these campaigns are resisted."
For a snapshot of the situation on US campuses, see 'Civility' is the Israel lobby's new weapon against free speech on US campuses, Ali Abunimah, electronicintifada.net, 7/9/14.
Sunday, August 31, 2014
Mike Carlton on the Likud Lobby
"In today's piece for Crikey on the end of the seven-week Gaza conflict, which he describes as 'Israel's Vietnam', Carlton also had some words for his critics, writing: 'None of this is even vaguely understood by the powerful and sophisticated Likud lobby in Australia. The faintest criticism of Israel is always met with concerted howls of 'anti-Semitism!' It is a facile label flung about by the comfortable kaffeeklatsch of Sydney and Melbourne, well-upholstered burghers who have never actually experienced a flicker of anti-Semitism in their gilded lives, let alone the Gestapo knock at midnight or even a rocket landing down the street. In doing so, they demean the memory of those who truly knew what it meant: the dead of Auschwitz'." (Mike Carlton pens first column for Crikey since quitting Fairfax, Mumbrella, 28/8/14)
Sunday, August 17, 2014
Using Section 18C to Silence Critics of Israel
The very public campaign waged against the Abbott government's proposal to drop Section 18C of the Racial Discrimination Act was largely orchestrated and spearheaded by the Executive Council of Australian Jewry (ECAJ), one of the prongs of Australia's Israel lobby, allegedly because 18C was needed as a defence against an imminent outbreak of Fredrick Toben-style Holocaust denialists. (See my posts George Brandis Launches Zionist Festival of Hypocrisy (30/3/14) and Why I Can't Get Too Excited Over Section 18C (1/5/14))
The pressure and the hype duly worked its magic and the government backed down. Of course, Abbott couldn't possibly admit to be heavied by the lobby, so some other excuse had to be found. And found it was:
"The Prime Minister said he had made a 'leadership call' to abandon the changes, because they had become a 'complication' in the Government's relationship with the Muslim community. 'When it comes to counter-terrorism, everyone needs to be part of Team Australia,' Mr Abbott said." (Government backtracks on Racial Discrimination Act 18C changes; pushes ahead with tough security laws, Emma Griffiths, abc.net.au, 6/8/14)
Muslims again! The cynicism is breathtaking. As Herald columnist Waleed Aly put it:
"The announcement wasn't altogether surprising, but the context for it was. Suddenly section 18C would be left as a figleaf for Muslims; a kind of transfer fee for their recruitment to 'Team Australia'. Consider how that looks if you believe - as presumably the government still does - this section is an egregious attack on free speech. Apparently we must live under its yoke to appease Muslims in the hope they'll help us fight terrorism. We're being held to ransom again. Muslims are the Grinch who stole freedom. The truth, of course, is that Muslims are largely peripheral to both issues... [W]hilst I have met Muslims who were unimpressed by the government's plans for the Racial Discrimination Act, it seems an unusual red line for them to draw given that Muslims aren't even protected by it. The law doesn't regard Muslims as a racial group. So, whatever it is section 18C prevents you from saying about Aborigines or Asians or Jews, you can go right ahead and say it against Muslims." (Abbott's 18C puzzle linking terror and free speech raises interesting political questions, 8/8/14)
What Ali doesn't allude to, of course, is ECAJ's crucial role in the campaign to retain 18C, or the bizarre fact that, as far as the RDA is concerned, Jews are deemed a racial group. Nor does he allude to the real reason our Israel lobbyists fought so hard to retain Section 18C: its utility as a weapon against those who buck the party line on Israel.
For example:
"The controversial 18C provisions of the Racial Discrimination Act will be used in a complaint against The Sydney Morning Herald over its anti-Semitic cartoon and the accompanying article by former columnist, Mike Carlton. A Sydney-based engineer, Wayne Karlen, 60, has lodged a complaint with the Australian Human Rights Commission arguing the publication of the cartoon and the column caused offence to Australian Jews. Mr Karlen also referenced the subsequent abuse of readers by Carlton, stating in the complaint that The SMH has committed an unlawful act within the meaning of the RDA. 'This cartoon racially vilifies Jews and the similarity to Nazi propaganda compounds the distress to those of us that had relatives fight and die in WWII,' he said. 'The absence of a strong formal censure for publishing this racist and offensive material conveys an appearance of official acceptance of same.' Mr Karlen, who is not Jewish, said he decided to lodge the complaint on Tuesday after the ABC's Media Watch defended the cartoon and Carlton the night before. 'The suggestion by the public broadcaster and others that this cartoon is acceptable must be refuted in the strongest terms and those responsible for its dissemination must be held responsible,' he said. 'The publication of this cartoon has caused offence to and racially vilifies Jews and was done to portray Jews as murderers of men, women and children for entertainment. The publication of this cartoon has caused intimidation and contributed to the Jewish community becoming afraid for their safety living in Australia and has offended their friends and supporters.' In addition to Mr Karlen, The Australian understands at least one member of the Jewish community has also lodged a complaint with the commission under section 18C, although Jewish organisations have stated they will not be taking similar action in light of the Herald's apology. Mr Karlen suggests the Herald should be publicly censured and receice [sic] a 'significant fine' that could be donated to an accredited Jewish charity... The Herald's editorial position supported the retention of 18C..." (18C used to sue Carlton for racial vilification, Sharri Markson, The Australian, 14/8/14)
The pressure and the hype duly worked its magic and the government backed down. Of course, Abbott couldn't possibly admit to be heavied by the lobby, so some other excuse had to be found. And found it was:
"The Prime Minister said he had made a 'leadership call' to abandon the changes, because they had become a 'complication' in the Government's relationship with the Muslim community. 'When it comes to counter-terrorism, everyone needs to be part of Team Australia,' Mr Abbott said." (Government backtracks on Racial Discrimination Act 18C changes; pushes ahead with tough security laws, Emma Griffiths, abc.net.au, 6/8/14)
Muslims again! The cynicism is breathtaking. As Herald columnist Waleed Aly put it:
"The announcement wasn't altogether surprising, but the context for it was. Suddenly section 18C would be left as a figleaf for Muslims; a kind of transfer fee for their recruitment to 'Team Australia'. Consider how that looks if you believe - as presumably the government still does - this section is an egregious attack on free speech. Apparently we must live under its yoke to appease Muslims in the hope they'll help us fight terrorism. We're being held to ransom again. Muslims are the Grinch who stole freedom. The truth, of course, is that Muslims are largely peripheral to both issues... [W]hilst I have met Muslims who were unimpressed by the government's plans for the Racial Discrimination Act, it seems an unusual red line for them to draw given that Muslims aren't even protected by it. The law doesn't regard Muslims as a racial group. So, whatever it is section 18C prevents you from saying about Aborigines or Asians or Jews, you can go right ahead and say it against Muslims." (Abbott's 18C puzzle linking terror and free speech raises interesting political questions, 8/8/14)
What Ali doesn't allude to, of course, is ECAJ's crucial role in the campaign to retain 18C, or the bizarre fact that, as far as the RDA is concerned, Jews are deemed a racial group. Nor does he allude to the real reason our Israel lobbyists fought so hard to retain Section 18C: its utility as a weapon against those who buck the party line on Israel.
For example:
"The controversial 18C provisions of the Racial Discrimination Act will be used in a complaint against The Sydney Morning Herald over its anti-Semitic cartoon and the accompanying article by former columnist, Mike Carlton. A Sydney-based engineer, Wayne Karlen, 60, has lodged a complaint with the Australian Human Rights Commission arguing the publication of the cartoon and the column caused offence to Australian Jews. Mr Karlen also referenced the subsequent abuse of readers by Carlton, stating in the complaint that The SMH has committed an unlawful act within the meaning of the RDA. 'This cartoon racially vilifies Jews and the similarity to Nazi propaganda compounds the distress to those of us that had relatives fight and die in WWII,' he said. 'The absence of a strong formal censure for publishing this racist and offensive material conveys an appearance of official acceptance of same.' Mr Karlen, who is not Jewish, said he decided to lodge the complaint on Tuesday after the ABC's Media Watch defended the cartoon and Carlton the night before. 'The suggestion by the public broadcaster and others that this cartoon is acceptable must be refuted in the strongest terms and those responsible for its dissemination must be held responsible,' he said. 'The publication of this cartoon has caused offence to and racially vilifies Jews and was done to portray Jews as murderers of men, women and children for entertainment. The publication of this cartoon has caused intimidation and contributed to the Jewish community becoming afraid for their safety living in Australia and has offended their friends and supporters.' In addition to Mr Karlen, The Australian understands at least one member of the Jewish community has also lodged a complaint with the commission under section 18C, although Jewish organisations have stated they will not be taking similar action in light of the Herald's apology. Mr Karlen suggests the Herald should be publicly censured and receice [sic] a 'significant fine' that could be donated to an accredited Jewish charity... The Herald's editorial position supported the retention of 18C..." (18C used to sue Carlton for racial vilification, Sharri Markson, The Australian, 14/8/14)
Thursday, August 14, 2014
Independent? Always? Really?
Is the following promo yet more evidence of the Sydney Morning Herald's cowardice in the wake of the Carlton/Le Lievre affair? Is it the price the Herald believes it has to pay to appease certain subscribers/advertisers? Is the hosting of unvarnished Israel lobby propaganda about to become as regular a feature of the paper as it is of The Australian?
Found at the bottom of the Herald's opinion page yesterday:
"Like lambs to the slaughter: It's time to get to the root of the problem in Gaza. That problem is not the occupation. The problem is Hamas, an Islamist terror organisation which keeps using Gaza's civilians as sacrificial lambs. Read Mark Leibler's article on-line at smh.com.au/content"
Found at the bottom of the Herald's opinion page yesterday:
"Like lambs to the slaughter: It's time to get to the root of the problem in Gaza. That problem is not the occupation. The problem is Hamas, an Islamist terror organisation which keeps using Gaza's civilians as sacrificial lambs. Read Mark Leibler's article on-line at smh.com.au/content"
Tuesday, August 12, 2014
The Smearing of Glen Le Lievre
I wasn't even aware of The Australian's media editor, Sharri Markson, until last week's media mugging of Fairfax columnist Mike Carlton. It was her journalistic high-fiving with colleague Darren Davidson over the matter that first brought her to my attention. (See my 8/8/14 post, The Australian: The Herald Buckles to the Bullies.)
Having recovered (one assumes) from this excess of schadenfreude, she's now taken it upon herself to hammer home the false allegation that the Glen Le Lievre cartoon which accompanied Carlton's July 26 piece on Gaza is anti-Semitic. It seems that we can now expect to see this smear repeated over and over again in the Murdoch press in the hope that, for the credulous and the uncritical, it will become received wisdom:
"In an exclusive interview, [former Fairfax chief executive] Mr McCarthy said it is 'obvious' recent events including publication of an anti-Semitic cartoon, columnist Mike Carlton's abuse of readers and the quality of editorial management, were a direct result of the loss of experience on the Fairfax board." (Fairfax board to blame: ex-CEO, Sharri Markson, 11/8/14)
"Former Fairfax directors agreed with ex-chief executive Brian McCarthy that a lack of leadership by Mr Corbett... was ultimately to blame for events of the past two weeks, where readers were abused by columnist Mike Carlton and were offended by the publication of an anti-Semitic cartoon, similar to imagery from 1930s Germany." (Corbett not competent, says Singleton, Sharri Markson, 11/8/14)
"It took 10 days for The SMH editor-in-chief Darren Goodsir to apologise for the publication of an anti-Semitic cartoon showing a Jewish man with a hooked-nose sitting on a chair with the Star of David, casually pressing a remote control to blow up Gaza." (ibid)
Sadly, those who should know better but, it seems, wouldn't know confected Zionist outrage if it hit them in the face, are retailing the smear:
"Right for SMH to apologise for Gaza cartoon. As a Jew it disturbed me. But those who claim SMH editors are anti-Semitic are wrong." (Jonathan Swan tweet, 3/8/14)
"As to the cartoon that ran with one of those columns, he had no more to do with that than I have to do with whatever cartoon Reg runs with this column. And the Herald was right to apologise for the offence and trauma that image caused." (Peter FitzSimons, The Fitz Files, The Sun-Herald, 10/8/14)
"Now we agree that that cartoon went too far..." (Paul Barry, Media Watch, 11/8/14)
"SMH cartoon racist and to be profoundly regretted; Calton not. If Carlton's a-Semitic, then I must be too, bec'se I opposed Gaza." (Thomas Keneally tweet, 12/8/14)
Mike Carlton really needs to come out in support of Le Lievre. His August 3 tweet "Chairs," which juxtaposed a photograph of the Sderot Cinema mob* watching the 'fireworks' in Gaza with a shot of a Palestinian youth sitting on a lounge chair surrounded by his ruined home is insufficient in light of the above.
As for Le Lievre's reaction to the smear, check out his July 27 tweets.
PS (6: 20pm):
"My last word. Pls don't desert the fine journalists @smh. That's exactly what the toxic sludge at News Corpse wants you to do. Thanks guys." Mike Carlton tweet today.
"Don't forget the fabulous cartoonist @MikeCarlton01@smh." Tony, Retweeted by Mike Carlton.
Having recovered (one assumes) from this excess of schadenfreude, she's now taken it upon herself to hammer home the false allegation that the Glen Le Lievre cartoon which accompanied Carlton's July 26 piece on Gaza is anti-Semitic. It seems that we can now expect to see this smear repeated over and over again in the Murdoch press in the hope that, for the credulous and the uncritical, it will become received wisdom:
"In an exclusive interview, [former Fairfax chief executive] Mr McCarthy said it is 'obvious' recent events including publication of an anti-Semitic cartoon, columnist Mike Carlton's abuse of readers and the quality of editorial management, were a direct result of the loss of experience on the Fairfax board." (Fairfax board to blame: ex-CEO, Sharri Markson, 11/8/14)
"Former Fairfax directors agreed with ex-chief executive Brian McCarthy that a lack of leadership by Mr Corbett... was ultimately to blame for events of the past two weeks, where readers were abused by columnist Mike Carlton and were offended by the publication of an anti-Semitic cartoon, similar to imagery from 1930s Germany." (Corbett not competent, says Singleton, Sharri Markson, 11/8/14)
"It took 10 days for The SMH editor-in-chief Darren Goodsir to apologise for the publication of an anti-Semitic cartoon showing a Jewish man with a hooked-nose sitting on a chair with the Star of David, casually pressing a remote control to blow up Gaza." (ibid)
Sadly, those who should know better but, it seems, wouldn't know confected Zionist outrage if it hit them in the face, are retailing the smear:
"Right for SMH to apologise for Gaza cartoon. As a Jew it disturbed me. But those who claim SMH editors are anti-Semitic are wrong." (Jonathan Swan tweet, 3/8/14)
"As to the cartoon that ran with one of those columns, he had no more to do with that than I have to do with whatever cartoon Reg runs with this column. And the Herald was right to apologise for the offence and trauma that image caused." (Peter FitzSimons, The Fitz Files, The Sun-Herald, 10/8/14)
"Now we agree that that cartoon went too far..." (Paul Barry, Media Watch, 11/8/14)
"SMH cartoon racist and to be profoundly regretted; Calton not. If Carlton's a-Semitic, then I must be too, bec'se I opposed Gaza." (Thomas Keneally tweet, 12/8/14)
Mike Carlton really needs to come out in support of Le Lievre. His August 3 tweet "Chairs," which juxtaposed a photograph of the Sderot Cinema mob* watching the 'fireworks' in Gaza with a shot of a Palestinian youth sitting on a lounge chair surrounded by his ruined home is insufficient in light of the above.
As for Le Lievre's reaction to the smear, check out his July 27 tweets.
PS (6: 20pm):
"My last word. Pls don't desert the fine journalists @smh. That's exactly what the toxic sludge at News Corpse wants you to do. Thanks guys." Mike Carlton tweet today.
"Don't forget the fabulous cartoonist @MikeCarlton01@smh." Tony, Retweeted by Mike Carlton.
Sunday, August 10, 2014
A Muslim Boycott of the Herald?
I have some issues with the following Guardian Australia report. Not, I hasten to add, with the report per se, but rather with some of the positions taken by the organisations cited in it:
"Australian Islamic groups have condemned the Sydney Morning Herald for threatening the suspension of columnist Mike Carlton and accused Fairfax of losing its independence. In a letter to the Fairfax chief executive, Greg Hywood, and editor-in-chief, Darren Goodsir, the Australian National Imams Council of NSW and Muslim Legal Network NSW, among others, said they would boycott the SMH unless the outspoken columnist was reinstated... The letter to Fairfax said the Muslim groups would consider notifying community organisations and spokespersons to cease cooperating with Fairfax journalists for media interviews." (Islamic groups threaten SMH boycott over Mike Carlton's departure, Amanda Meade, 9/8/14)
Fair enough. I'm all for Muslim (or any other) community organisations condemning and boycotting the weak-kneed Herald over Mike Carlton's resignation. But why, I'd like to know, has the rabidly pro-Zionist and thoroughly Islamophobic Murdoch press never, as far as I'm aware, elicited a similar response by these organisations?
"'As representatives of the Muslim community we have always regarded Fairfax to be one of the more balanced media organisations in the country...', it said." (ibid)
Are they serious? While the Herald isn't quite the echo-chamber for Zionist propaganda and Islamophobia that the Murdoch press is, it can hardly be held up as a real counterweight to it. While the reports of its Middle East correspondent Ruth Pollard are generally sound (as are those of The Australian's ME correspondent John Lyons), when it comes to the Palestine/Israel conflict, its opinion pieces are invariably pro-Israel, its editorials are as weak as the proverbial piss (none so far on the latest genocidal pounding of Gaza BTW), and its ME-related cartoons by Moir woefully clueless. Then there's its ubiquitous and reliably Arabo- Islamophobic columnist, Paul Sheehan, who has never, to my knowledge, drawn a complaint from our Muslim bodies.
"The Muslim community groups also condemned the [Glen Le Lievre] cartoon that accompanied Carlton's column. 'It was indeed a racist cartoon that implicated the Jewish people in the actions of the Israeli state by using Jewish symbolism and stereotype,' the letter said." (ibid)
What rubbish! If the cartoon is anti-Semitic for using Jewish symbolism, so too is the Israeli state. I mean, haven't the authors of this letter ever seen an Israeli flag? And what is this expression "the Jewish people" doing in their letter? This is stock standard Zionist dogma FFS! If these organisations really want to finger a racist cartoon why aren't they gunning for the one by The Australian's cartoonist Bill Leak, showing a Hamas 'terrorist' telling his son "There! Now you go out to play and win the PR war for daddy"?
Truly, these organisations really need to get their act together before putting pen to paper.
"Australian Islamic groups have condemned the Sydney Morning Herald for threatening the suspension of columnist Mike Carlton and accused Fairfax of losing its independence. In a letter to the Fairfax chief executive, Greg Hywood, and editor-in-chief, Darren Goodsir, the Australian National Imams Council of NSW and Muslim Legal Network NSW, among others, said they would boycott the SMH unless the outspoken columnist was reinstated... The letter to Fairfax said the Muslim groups would consider notifying community organisations and spokespersons to cease cooperating with Fairfax journalists for media interviews." (Islamic groups threaten SMH boycott over Mike Carlton's departure, Amanda Meade, 9/8/14)
Fair enough. I'm all for Muslim (or any other) community organisations condemning and boycotting the weak-kneed Herald over Mike Carlton's resignation. But why, I'd like to know, has the rabidly pro-Zionist and thoroughly Islamophobic Murdoch press never, as far as I'm aware, elicited a similar response by these organisations?
"'As representatives of the Muslim community we have always regarded Fairfax to be one of the more balanced media organisations in the country...', it said." (ibid)
Are they serious? While the Herald isn't quite the echo-chamber for Zionist propaganda and Islamophobia that the Murdoch press is, it can hardly be held up as a real counterweight to it. While the reports of its Middle East correspondent Ruth Pollard are generally sound (as are those of The Australian's ME correspondent John Lyons), when it comes to the Palestine/Israel conflict, its opinion pieces are invariably pro-Israel, its editorials are as weak as the proverbial piss (none so far on the latest genocidal pounding of Gaza BTW), and its ME-related cartoons by Moir woefully clueless. Then there's its ubiquitous and reliably Arabo- Islamophobic columnist, Paul Sheehan, who has never, to my knowledge, drawn a complaint from our Muslim bodies.
"The Muslim community groups also condemned the [Glen Le Lievre] cartoon that accompanied Carlton's column. 'It was indeed a racist cartoon that implicated the Jewish people in the actions of the Israeli state by using Jewish symbolism and stereotype,' the letter said." (ibid)
What rubbish! If the cartoon is anti-Semitic for using Jewish symbolism, so too is the Israeli state. I mean, haven't the authors of this letter ever seen an Israeli flag? And what is this expression "the Jewish people" doing in their letter? This is stock standard Zionist dogma FFS! If these organisations really want to finger a racist cartoon why aren't they gunning for the one by The Australian's cartoonist Bill Leak, showing a Hamas 'terrorist' telling his son "There! Now you go out to play and win the PR war for daddy"?
Truly, these organisations really need to get their act together before putting pen to paper.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)