Fairfax's Shame

"[Paul] Sheehan was reportedly one of the highest-earning journalists on the [Sydney Morning Herald]." (Paul Sheehan given redundancy package by Fairfax - but won't say if he was pushed, Amanda Meade, theguardian.com, 18/5/16)

Problem Solved

"Controversial Fairfax columnist Paul Sheehan will be one of the more high-profile casualties of the publisher's latest redundancy round, Diary can reveal. Sheehan disgraced The Sydney Morning Herald with an unsubstantiated story about an alleged gang rape in March. He was stood down indefinitely by SMH editor-in-chief Darren Goodsir who said at the time a review of the incident had found 'unacceptable breaches of fundamental journalistic practice.' Perhaps the writing was on the wall for Sheehan, although the redundancy program was still in its 'voluntary' stage as of last week. That could change, given Fairfax editorial director Sean Aylmer told staff on Friday the program had not yielded enough 'suitable' job cuts." (Sheehan facing the axe, The Diary, Media, The Australian, 9/5/16)

So what's next for Paul? Surely not the dreaded scrapheap?

Wait a minute... I've got an idea! Now that ex-Australian Mark Regev has become Israel's ambassador to the UK, Netanyahu will be looking for a new foreign media spokesman. Sheehan should slot in nicely. After all, he's got it all down pat. For example:

"Women [in Gaza], living under sharia law, are used primarily as breeding stock." (See my 13/1/09 post Oriana Fallaci Meets Israeli PR at the SMH.)

"Most of the constrictive actions Israel has taken in the Palestinian territories - the walls, roadblocks, security restrictions - has been in reaction to an intransigent Palestinian political culture." (See my 21/11/14 post Paul Sheehan: Toeing the Likud Line.)

Paul Sheehan: Going, Going...

... but still not bloody gone!

Only "stood aside until further notice"? (Paul Sheehan suspended by Sydney Morning Herald over false rape story, Amanda Meade, theguardian.com, 4/3/16)

That's all? Just a suspension? What a joke! Principal Goodsir is so half-arsed.

Look, the bugger will be off school for a week or so having the time of his life. Then before you can say good riddance, he'll be back in class again annoying the bejesus out of his teachers as usual.

Either that or he'll give Fairfax High the finger and pop up at Murdoch. For the life of me I could never understand why he didn't go to that bloody hole in the first place.

The Herald 'Apologises'

Blink and you'd have missed it. The Sydney Morning Herald 'apologises' for its Islamophobe-in-residence, Paul Sheehan, without mentioning his name:

"In last Monday's paper, the Herald reported the details of an alleged sexual assault under the headline 'The horrifying untold story of Louise.' A subsequent column printed in last Thursday's edition, 'The story of Louise: why the police have no case to answer, but I do,' acknowledged key elements of the original story were unable to be substantiated. The original story, which has been corrected, included aspersions against the Middle Eastern community and raised untested allegations of inaction against the NSW Police. The Herald sincerely regrets the hurt and distress this report caused to these groups, and unreservedly apologises." (Apology, 29/2/16)*

And then, adding insult to 'apology', the Herald publishes the following letter of appreciation to Sheehan/concern for 'Louise' in the same edition:

"I very much appreciate Paul Sheehan's honesty and admission to his mistake but am a little perplexed. Does this mean 'Louise' was never raped or beaten up and spent two months in hospital? I would very much appreciate an explanation. It appears in the second article that Louise is a troubled soul. However, if any of her comments are true they need to be considered. I am also concerned that the police advised her that they were unable to assist as she reported the incident four months after and therefore it was too late; this does not ring true. I do hope that you can get to the bottom of this unpleasant situation." Linda Ward, Tweed Heads South

[*Compare the above paragraph with the Herald's elaborate, multi-paragraph grovel to the Israel lobby for the supposed offence of its cartoonist Glen Le Lievre in depicting Israel's enjoyment of Gaza's agony under Israeli attack in 2014. (See my 4/8/14 post Sustained Israel lobby barrage cripples SMH.)] 

Journalists in Glass Houses

"A tissue of lies: Paul Sheehan & 'Louise': The most perfunctory of checks would have shown Paul Sheehan's allegations were almost certainly untrue. But he couldn't help himself"

So runs the headline for Richard Cooke's 25/2 post on The Monthly's Greasy Pole blog.

According to Richard's twitter account, he writes for "The Monthly, The Saturday Paper, The Guardian, The Chaser & The Check Out."

Although I saw nothing in his piece that I'd disagree with (and even learnt a few things about loopy Louise), I nonetheless found myself wondering whether he was really the best qualified to write it, given the old adage that people who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones.

I mean, I can overlook a young scribbler's working for Morry Schwartz's 'Don't talk about the Occupation' publications. Jobs are hard to find after all.

But that crap he once wrote for the Sydney Morning Herald in 2005 about Gaza and Hamas, where he referred to occupied Gaza as a "troubled territory," and the Islamic resistance movement, Hamas, as a "terrorist organization," (Hamas vs The Lions Club, 13/9/05), was a classic example of a smartarse journalist tackling a serious subject that he knew absolutely SFA about.

However, it's an episode from 2006, in which Richard managed to display what seems to me something of a malicious streak (as well as confirming his truly abysmal ignorance of the Palestine problem), that reminded me of the old injunction about glass houses and stones. Did he, I wonder, even for a moment, recall his own particular fall from journalistic grace at this time as he wrote about Sheehan's?:

"Asked why he sent a cartoon by Michael Leunig to a Holocaust cartoon competition launched by an Iranian newspaper, freelance journalist Richard Cooke pauses. He is an articulate person, and the pause is an awkward break in an otherwise fluid conversation. 'I'm not sure a can give you a good answer to that,' he said yesterday. He was, however, able to explain how the cartoon, which was rejected by former Age editor, Michael Gawenda, in 2002, found its way onto the Hamshahri website. The newspaper contest - to find a cartoon on the Holocaust - came after a Danish newspaper published caricatures of the prophet Muhammad, angering Muslims around the world.

"Cooke, 26, who contributes to the satirical website The Chaser and has been a contributor to various Fairfax publications said he read about the Holocaust competition on the web and remembered the Leunig cartoon. He then found himself wondering 'what would happen if these two things were brought together.' The Leunig cartoon stirred 'multiple feelings, some of them conflicting' within him, he said. The first frame, Auschwitz 1945, shows a man with the Star of David on his back walking towards an arched entrance bearing the words 'Work Brings Freedom.' The second frame, Israel 2002, shows a man with the Star of David and a rifle. He also walks towards an arched entrance, this one bearing the words 'War Brings Peace.' Cooke says he is personally unsympathetic to the sentiments in the cartoon. Of Leunig he says: 'I don't think he is an anti-Semite but I think that work could be interpreted by some people... in a way that he hadn't intended it to be taken.'

"Cooke did not send the cartoon itself to the Hamshahri competition, but he sent the link to Media Watch and an accompanying note purporting to be from Leunig. The consequences of writing a note in the cartoonist's name was not something he thought about because 'it never occurred to me that it would be quoted.' But Cooke was seriously mistaken. He saw the cartoon - the first entry in the competition - and the faked note posted on the site about 1am on Tuesday. At 2am he rang the Fairfax switchboard in Sydney wanting to pass on the anonymous message that the words on the irancartoons.com website did not belong to Leunig but he could not raise anyone. At News Ltd he found only a security guard at the Daily Telegraph. Later on Tuesday morning, when he checked Google, he found 150-related stories on the Leunig story.

"Cooke knew that because he had left the telephone number of The Chaser on the email - 'not the smartest move' - the hoax would be traced to him. 'If I had gotten a second opinion I probably wouldn't have done something so stupid.' He spent much of Tuesday watching more stories on the hoax being posted on the web. 'My feelings at this point were confused,' he says. 'A lot of them were nervous feelings.'

"On Tuesday evening, Cooke received a telephone call from Julian Morrow, executive producer of the television satire, The Chaser, who asked what he knew about the hoax. Morrow said he knew nothing of it until he received a call from The Age that night. Morrow advised Cooke to apologise to the cartoonist, something Cooke said he had wanted to do when the controversy began to erupt. Cooke does not remember exactly what he said to Leunig, but he recalls 'that he mainly seemed to be relieved that it wasn't a neo-con pressure group who had posted the cartoon, just a dipshit from The Chaser.' He also admits he has played pranks before... Morrow said when he found out on Tuesday night that a person connected to The Chaser website had perpetrated the hoax, he was particularly unhappy that Leunig had been misrepresented. He was pleased that Cooke's apology had been accepted by the cartoonist." (Satirist wishes he got a second opinion before starting Leunig hoax, Katherine Kizilos, The Age, 16/2/06)

What a goose...

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.

Paul Sheehan Biopsied

Eeeuw! I've just biopsied Paul Sheehan's latest growth, Hard decisions at the heart of the crisis (SMH, 7/15), and, frankly, the expression 'seething mass' doesn't begin to do it justice.

Just take a gander at these little wrigglers:

"... the atavistic bloodletting carried out in the schism between Sunni and Shia Muslims..."

Yeah? Funny how they're not slugging it out in Mecca on the hajj then.

"Where once Australians used to travel overland to Europe via Pakistan, Afghanistan, Iran, Iraq, Syria and Lebanon, that is now too dangerous."

The bugger's repeating himself here. For all the dirt on Sheehan's atavistic yearning for the Kombi van and the 60s/70s Hippy Trail, see my 15/1/15 post From Hippie Hordes to Mohammedan Hordes.

"Syria is finished."

All self harm, of course. Nothing to do with Western intervention.(See my 26/5/15 post Frankenstein Monster Mark III.)

"Iraq is now three states..."

Self harm again. Nothing to do with Western intervention. (ditto)

"... the Muslim world is exporting its instability to Europe via a mass exodus of people."

Spontaneous instability, of course. Nothing whatever to do with Western interventions. (ditto)

"What can or should Australia do? There is nothing we can do about the ancient Sunni-Shia schism, but we can protect those who have become collateral damage: Christians."

A Christians-only refugee policy? What's next? A Christian Australia policy? Christian State in the South Pacific (CSSP)?

Excuse me while I wash my hands.

Ah, that's better!

Of all the many indicators of the Sydney Morning Herald's precipitous decline as a reliable news source, the retention on staff of the odious Paul Sheehan (while heavying and discarding Mike Carlton under pressure from the Israel lobby) has to be the most telling.

The following letter in yesterday's edition was a neat riposte to Sheehan:

"I write in response to Paul Sheehan's opinion piece (Hard decisions at the heart of the crisis, Sept 7).

"It is hurtful to suggest that providing asylum is 'to import the Sunni-Shia schism via a large influx of Muslims'. The relationship between Sunni and Shia Muslims in Australia is overwhelmingly one of peace and harmony. If anything, the only wave of religiously motivated conflict in Australia that has lead to criminal behaviour, violent outbreaks and social disharmony has been attacks on Australian Muslims.

"Australian Muslims don't think it is critical to ascertain the religion of the perpetrators but focus on trying to increase community harmony. Mosques have been shot at and firebombed, and women in Islamic scarves have been physically assaulted in public. I think it is safe to assume that they are not Sunni or Shia. With regard to refugees, I would like to remind Sheehan that until the current conflict, Syria was a harmonious, multi-faith society.

"After all, Syria became home to the refugees who fled the armies of Ibrahim Pasha in 1839; Circassian refugees in 1860; Armenian refugees in 1915; Palestinian refugees in 1948 and again in 1967; refugees from Kuwait in 1990; from Lebanon in 1996; from Iraq in 2003, and Syria again became home to refugees from Lebanon in 2006.

"Syria never closed its borders to those seeking safety. Until recent times, the same will be recorded in the history books for Australia. At a time of unprecedented suffering in Syria, with millions of people displaced, to debate on whether we should ask a drowning man what their religion is before we save them is a sad indictment on our humanity." Ahmed Kilani, Lugarno

A Strange Choice of Book Reviewer

Let's say your the literary editor of the Sydney Morning Herald's Saturday arts supplement, Spectrum. 

Let's assume you're well-informed and genuinely interested in debate.

Let's say you've decided (for reasons best known to yourself) that, of all the latest books on Palestine/Israel that need reviewing, it just has to be Philip Mendes and Nick Dyrenfurth's Boycotting Israel is Wrong.

Who are you going to commission to do the job?

Jake Lynch, Stuart Rees, Peter Slezak, Antony Loewenstein, Nick Reimer, Marcelo Svirsky? All conversant in the politics of Palestine/Israel, and all supporters of the pro-Palestine boycott, divestment and sanctions (BDS) campaign.

OK, you're not Spectrum's literary editor. Susan Wyndham is, and she's commissioned Dennis Altman, professorial fellow in the Institute for Human Security & Social Change at LaTrobe University to review Mendes & Dyrenfurth (Shaky support for two states, 20/6/15)

Problem is, according to freelance journalist Michael Brull, a close observer of these things, Altman is dismissive of the call to boycott Israel. (But what about Zionism?, Michael Brull, Overland, Autumn 2010)

Now I've been unable to access the Altman article Brull refers to on Overland's website. It seems to have been withdrawn for some reason. But, assuming that Brull is correct, and Altman takes a dim view of BDS, or worse, why then commission him of all people to review an anti-BDS book?

Certainly, anyone who begins his review this way has got to be a bit of a worry:

"Anyone who writes about the Israeli/Palestinian conflict is asking for trouble; even that statement will itself draw criticism. Few issues bring out such deeply polarised views, leaving little room for genuine empathy with the range of positions involved on the ground."

OMG... genuine empathy for the range of positions involved? Yes, yes, Mr Netanyahu, I do empathise with your position, I really do... you're absolutely right about... and... and... but...

Ditto for this:

"I largely agree with the comment they [Mendes & Dyrenfurth] cite from David Remnick... that: 'Israel exists; the Palestinian people exist... Within these territorial confines two nationally distinct groups, who are divided by language, culture and history cannot live... wholly together'."

Well, weren't South Africa's Whites and Blacks ONCE so divided?  Now where do they live if not wholly together?

And this:

"Thus Boycotting Israel gives us a great deal of detail about some of the excesses of the BDS movement, including the attacks on the Max Brenner chocolate shops..."

Attacks? You're kidding me? What attacks?

But more than that, Altman avoids the real reason why Zionist propagandists such as Mendes and Dyrenfurth have gone to the trouble of writing a book smearing the BDS campaign.

It's because one of the three aims of the BDS campaign is the right of return to their homes and lands, in Israel (im)proper, of the Palestinian refugees of 1948.

Mendes & Dyrenfurth have referred to this fundamental tenet of international law sneeringly as "a so-called Right of Return." (The BDS campaign's flaws and failings, M&D, Australian Jewish News, 5/5/15) And Dyrenfurth recently said on the ABC's Radio National that "The most problematic aim of the PACBI (Palestinian Campaign for the Academic & Cultural Boycott of Israel) statement relates to the right of return for Palestinian refugees from the 1948 war... if there was a mass return of Palestinian refugees to Israel proper... that would mean the end of Israel..." (Is boycotting Israel ethical or anti-Semitic?, Religion & Ethics Report, 17/6/15)

What he meant was the end of Israel as a Jewish supremacist state, that is one which allows people like Mendes & Dyrenfurth, simply by virtue of their having Jewish mothers,* to swan in or out of Israel (im)proper as they please, while denying the same right to its original, indigenous non-Jewish inhabitants, ethnically cleansed in 1948. IOW, to discriminate in favour of Jews but against non-Jewish Palestinians.

[*Through Israel's Law of Return]

From Hippie Hordes to Mohammedan Hordes

Despite a Muslim recently saving Paul Sheehan's bacon (see my 7/10/14 post Paul Sheehan's Narrow Escape), the Fairfax calumnist's momentarily softened heart has once again hardened against the fanatical Mohammedan hordes and their false religion:

"A de facto world war is under way and it has everything to do with Islam. It is not thousands of lone wolves. It is not un-Islamic conduct. It involves thousands of Muslims acting on what they believe is their religious duty to subjugate non-believers, as outlined in the Koran. And the problem is growing, not increasing." (Crimes have everything to do with Islamic faith, 12/1/15)

Charlie Hebdo? Not really. More like memories of a footloose youth. Memories of a time when hair was king, and hippie chicks beckoned and called; when Journey to the East and Dharma Bums were required reading; when a joint was something you inhaled, not complained about; when one could ride the Kombi along the hippie trail all the way to London. Above all, a time when the natives knew their place and obligingly parted way for the hippie hordes:

"Young Australians used to travel overland from Singapore to London. That route has become a hell-hole. Pakistan is dangerous. Afghanistan is a no-go area. Iran is an oppressive theocracy. Iraq is disintegrating. Syria is a disaster area. Lebanon is dangerous. In Turkey, for the first time, Australians travelling to Gallipoli will be going under a security alert. All these Muslim countries used to be safe to travel in."

So what happened? Islam... obviously.

Paul Sheehan: Toeing the Likud Line

Twice-rambammed (2006 & 2008) Sydney Morning Herald calumnist Paul Sheehan just couldn't help himself.

With the leader of Jewish State in the Levant (JSIL) having recently laid down the latest Likud party line, namely, that ISIL and Hamas "are branches of the same poisonous tree," all his Fairfax acolyte down under had to do was toe it:

"Although this attack appears to have nothing to do with Islamic State, it was the latest in a series of attacks on Jews by Palestinians in Jerusalem in recent weeks, the same blood fever that has led hundreds of young men... to travel from throughout the Muslim diaspora to join the butchery of Islamic State..." (Jews bare [sic] the brunt for naive hatred of Israel, 19/11/14)

And omit, of course, any mention whatever of the "blood fever" that has JSIL fanatics butchering occupied Palestinians, or "intransigents" as Sheehan styles them:

"The core basis of hostility to Israel is a lack of acknowledgment that most of the constrictive actions Israel has taken in the Palestinian territories - the walls, roadblocks, security restrictions - has been in reaction to an intransigent Palestinian political culture, a template set in place 45 years ago by the corruption and rejectionism of the first Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat..."

OK, I knew your eyes would be rolling at this nonsense. But guess what? So did Sheehan:

"Israel's arguments are routinely greeted with eye-rolling cynicism, as if the Israelis are the bullies of the Middle East..."

As if... FFS!

Paul Sheehan's Narrow Escape

The Sydney Morning Herald columnist who wrote that "Women, living under sharia law, are used primarily as breeding stock;"* who spoke of the "shackles of Arab Islam;" who said he could point to "hundreds of pages of examples of bastardry by Muslims living in this country;" who gave us "a sample of more than 100 verses in the Koran that call Muslims to violence against the Unbelievers;" and who championed the visit to these shore of arch-Islamophobe Geert Wilders - I am of course referring to none other than Paul Sheehan - seems to have gone soft of late:

"I think of my car blowing a tyre on a desert highway in Dubai, and the furnace-like conditions when I opened the door, and the shimmering, unsettling heat of the landscape. As I was trying and failing, to get the very tight bolts off the wheel, a passing driver pulled over and got the tyre off for me. It was hard work in oppressive conditions. He was a plumber from Pakistan. A Muslim. A stranger who stopped to help a stranger." (Personal experience of Muslims paints different picture to grim news stories bombarding us, 2/10/14)

Jeez, Paul, what with those 100+ Quranic verses buzzing around in his head, calling him to do violence to Unbelievers like you, its a wonder he didn't beat you to death with the wheel wrench.

[*See my posts: Oriana Fallaci Meets Israeli PR at the SMH (13/1/09), Sheehan: Liberate Egypt from... Islam (18/2/11), It's Not Just Alan Jones 1 (3/10/12), Islamophobia Goes Mainstream (11/6/13).]

Will the Real Jihadis Please Stand Up?

If you've been reading Zionist propaganda emissions on the 'events' in Gaza, whether in the press or on the Internet, you'll know that the Islamic resistance movement there, Hamas, is not only an existential (aren't they all?) threat to Jewish Israelis but to the Palestinians of Gaza as well, uniquely responsible for every Palestinian death and maiming.

Invariably, at some point, the propagandist will invoke the dreaded Hamas Charter (apparently a document so toxic, it's up there (or should that be down there?) with those other anti-Semitic frights, Mein Kampf and the Protocols of the Elders of Zion).

One such recent (7/8/14) emission, by the Herald's Paul Sheehan, for example, Jihad now built into the fabric of Arab world, introduces the Hamas Charter with the following drumroll:

"Why would Hamas, having taken control of Gaza's 1.8 million population with its host of social needs commit so much of its resources to building strategic tunnels into Israel and stockpiling weapons? [You're not, of course, supposed to answer with the bleeding obvious: because the Gaza Strip is under siege by a genocidal, apartheid entity bent on wiping Palestine (and Palestinians) off the map.] The answer is clear. The covenant of Hamas is unambiguous. It lays out its goals, and its actions have been entirely consistent with those goals:... 'In the face of the Jews' usurpation, it is compulsory that the banner of jihad be raised... There is no solution for the Palestinian problem except by jihad...'"

Jeeeeeehad!

You know how it goes with the odious, Islamophobic Sheehan. Seizing on the good old 'J' word - "the common denominator... is the call to jihad" - he blithely goes on to conflate Hamas with the jihadi cutthroats of ISIL, thus absolving Israel (or nearly so) of blame for its murderous rampage in Gaza.

Meanwhile, back in the real world, let's open the 1988 Hamas Charter to see what's really driving the jihad - or struggle - of Hamas against Israel:

"[Palestinian] society... opposes a vicious Nazi enemy in its behaviour, which does not differentiate between men or women, elder or youth... Our enemy uses the method of collective punishment, robbing the people of their land and property, and chasing them in their migration and places of gathering. They purposely break (bodily) bones, fire (live ammunition directly) at women, children, elders (sometimes) with a reason or without a reason, create concentration camps to place thousands (of people) in inhuman conditions, not to mention the demolition of homes, orphaning of children, and issuance of tyrannical laws on thousands of youth so they spend their best years in the obscurity of prisons. The Nazism of Jews has included women and children. Terror is for everyone, they frighten people in their livelihood, take their wealth, and threaten their honor. They, with their shocking actions, treat people worse than they treat the worst of war criminals. Deportation from one's land is a form of murder." (Journal of Palestine Studies, Summer 1993)

Considering that the Charter was issued in 1988, during the first intifada, it is quite remarkable how the Israeli genocidal behaviours listed are not only still on display today, but have taken on ever more extreme and destructive forms. The above passage (and what we are witnessing in Gaza today on our television screens) surely begs the question: which is it that most closely resembles the rampaging Islamic State maddies of Syria and Iraq, Hamas... or the Jewish caliphate of Israel?

I Read the News Today, Oh Boy...

Quality false symmetry:

"The Israelis and Palestinians are killing each other, dreadful enough as more than 1700 people have been killed to date." (How to rein in the dogs of war, Peter Hartcher, Sydney Morning Herald, 5/8/14)

Recycled Zionist talking points with a dash of Islamophobia:

"Hamas wanted strategic blows. It wants jihad." (The Hamas trap: hidden labyrinth was wired for war, Paul Sheehan, Sydney Morning Herald, 4/8/14)

What I really mean is that Sheehan confirms my prejudices, while Carlton challenges them:

"Paul Sheehan appears to have a better grip on the reality of the matter than Mike Carlton..." (Letter of Philip Cohen, Brighton-le-Sands, SMH, 5/8/14)

Views that madden to crime:

"Well said, Herald, it takes courage and understanding to admit a mistake that caused distress to some readers ('We apologise: publishing cartoon in original form was wrong', August 4)." (Letter of Denis Suttling, Newport Beach, SMH, 5/8/14)

Working wonders with the passive voice:

"Palestinians kill three innocent Israeli youths in the West Bank. In response, an innocent Palestinian teenager is killed." (Letter of George Fishman, The Australian, 4/8/14)

Onward Christianist Soldier

Sydney Morning Hasbara calumnist, Paul Sheehan, attended the Q Society's recent SION shindig in Melbourne*, and met there "a patriotic, articulate Australian intelligence officer, now serving in the Army reserve."

So taken with said PAAIO was Sheehan that he's made him the subject of his latest calumn, Army clueless over religion, claims one of its own (17/3/14):

"Major Bernie Gaynor jnr has served 3 tours of duty to Iraq but he is going to be thrown out of the army this week..."

Not one! Not two! But three! (Any wonder Iraq's still in a heap?)

And just what has Gaynor, who describes himself on his blog as a "conservative Catholic," learned from his time there?

"[The ADF] has spent the last decade at war with people who fight for their religious beliefs... As a Catholic, I understand why people are motivated by religious belief, rather than what would seem to be rational..."

OK...

So let me get this straight: The Bushies invaded Iraq in 2003, guns blazing, and blow me down if the Iraqis didn't start shooting back!

A truly astonishing state of affairs! I mean, if the Bushies had invaded, say, Thailand instead, the locals would've retaliated with flower power, not fire power. Why? Because they're Buddhists, of course! But no, not your Iraqis. They shot back. There could only be one possible explanation for this! Islam! What else?

But there's more to Gaynor than his deathless insight into what makes Iraq tick. There's his mathematics. Move over, Isaac Newton:

"The [Australian Muslim community's] participation rate in the ADF is low. There were 88 Muslims in uniform in mid-2013. That means that, while there is one Australian in uniform in every 400, there is only one Muslim in uniform for about 6000 Muslims in this country."

But there's more. Maths, that is:

"This is not because the Islamic community is peaceful. I think there are now 9 Australian Muslims who have died in Syria. On a per capita basis, that is equivalent to the ADF losing over 400 soldiers in Afghanistan. So while the Islamic community is 15 times less likely to contribute to our nation's defence, it is 10 times more likely to see its sons die on the battlefield... for a cause that hates Western life, history and culture."

WTF!

Seriously now, could you make this bloke up? No way, not in a million.

Now I was going to present my annual Bore of the Year award to Sheehan but, as it happens, the bugger's dug up one even more penetratingly boring than himself!

What to do? Seeing it's just a once-in-a-year award, maybe I should just split it between them.

[*See my 10/3/14 post Then There Were Two.]

FYI: For the bizarre story of another feral soldier who strutted his stuff in Iraq, shot his mouth off big time in 2003, got slapped down for it by Bob Carr, entered federal parliament on a Labor ticket in 2007, embarked upon a glorious parliamentary career as a sidekick of Labor's Zionist enforcer, Michael Danby, and lost his seat at the 2013 election, see my posts Mike Kelly's Mission Impossible (19/1/13) & Nipping at the Heels (11/3/09).

J'Accuse

One of the most appalling Arabophobic/Islamophobic/Ziophilic so-called opinion pieces ever to appear in the Australian press (and that includes the Murdoch press!), has resulted in the letters editor of the offending paper, the Sydney Morning Herald, printing just one (1) critical letter in response, and that from a person of Arab background. I have little doubt too that that was severely edited. (There was another, one-sentence letter, of little substance.)

The Arabophobic etc I refer to is of course that by Herald calumnist (no spelling mistake here) Paul Sheehan, the subject of Monday's post.

The key question here is this: Were there any other critical responses?

If so, why did the letters editor, given the opinion editor's appalling lapse in allowing Sheehan's poison onto the opinion pages in the first place, not at least have the decency to print a number of critical responses?

If not, what does the absence of any critical response to Sheehan's toxic emission from Herald readers, apart from Mr Kazak, tell us about the readership of the paper? That they found nothing of any offence in it or its equally appalling graphic? That, God forbid, they even agreed with it? In which case, one can only ask: where the hell is this society of ours heading?

Here is Ali Kazak's lone letter:

"Paul Sheehan still thinks Muslims are under his bed ('Arab spring yields to Muslim winter' January 6). He does not mention the fact the deplorable sectarian conflict we are witnessing in Iraq is the result of the war against Iraq launched by America and its allies, including Australia, nor did he mention the explosives and car bombs are also blowing up mosques and killing Muslims, so what is the surprise about the blowing up of churches and synagogues as well? No one is immune from sectarianism.

"Sheehan's admiration for Israel is making him blind to the facts of the Middle East and to Israel's Jewish extremism, gross violations of human rights and war crimes."

Paul Sheehan Dishes It Up

Here's celebrity chef Paul Sheehan's true-and-tried recipe for old-fashioned Arabophobic/ Islamophobic stew.*

It's so easy, anyone can do it! All you need do is chuck a teaspoon each of the following fresh ingredients into a large pot of bile water, stir vigorously, and bring to the boil:

Car-torchings - France, Muslim
Armed takeover of city - Iraq, Muslim
Attacks on churches - Iraq, Muslim
Car bomb - Lebanon, Muslim
Sunni Muslim fundies vs Shia Muslim fundies, Syria
Taliban resurgence - Afghanistan, Muslim
Violence - Egypt, Muslim
Armed militias - Libya, Muslim
Rebels - Central African Republic, Muslim
Hotel bombing - Somalia, Muslim
Nukes - Iran, Muslim
Missiles - Hezbollah, Muslim

Then add lashings of Israeli propaganda:

"'We have entered a new era of chaos, the Arab Spring has given way to the Muslim winter,' Israel's Economy Minister Naftali Bennett said during a recent visit to Sydney. 'The Arab world has never been more unstable. The Muslim winter is here to stay.' The facts support him. Israel is surrounded by repression, dysfunction, stagnation, medievalism and open war among Muslim populations."

And the latest in HOT Israeli chilis ('Actually, these HOT Israeli varieties have a decidedly aphrodisiac effect on me': Paul)

"Putting to one side [Bennett's] ardent Zionism, there are simply no politicians in Australia with a resume like his: former commando in the Israeli Defence Forces; still a major in the reserves; a law degree from Hebrew University; self-made multi-millionaire after founding two cyber security companies; the former chief of staff to Benjamin Netanyahu; the founder of The Jewish Home party that won 12 seats at the last election. He is aged just 41."

Bulk up the brew with bucketfuls of Israeli hysteria and hype, courtesy of The Jerusalem Post:

"'[I]nexplicably... we see... the surreal spectacle of the relentless advance of a grotesque two-state juggernaut of failed formulae and disproven dogma, undeterred by the death and destruction left strewn in its wake, edging ever-closer towards its inevitable destination of catastrophe and chaos...'" aka the 'peace process'.

"'Israel could soon be facing the daunting prospect of a vast radicalised Islamist expanse stretching from Iran westward, pressing on its eastern frontier. Whether that frontier is the Jordan Valley or the indefensible 'Auschwitz' pre-1967 lines is a matter of life or death for Israel and Israelis'."

Chuck in - why not? - a bomb explosion in Prague and a death sentence in Gaza - no, not the Israeli variety - it's all grist to the (propaganda) mill.

Blend the above until it smells just right - say, like a Palestinian refugee camp in the Gaza Strip after an Israeli phosphorus bomb or two have just been dropped on it, or maybe a Cronulla Beach pogrom.  

Finally, top with the following gormless question and apropos-of-absolutely-nothing statement: "What does all this mean? The peace process is a facade."

Serve across two (2) Herald opinion pages and top with humongous Michael Mucci** graphic of a swarthy, frowning face wrapped in Palestinian keffiyeh and an arm brandishing a Kalashnikov submachine gun mysteriously emerging from a cloud.

Enjoy, bogans!

[*Arab spring yields to Muslim winter, Sydney Morning Herald, 6/1/14; ** One of Michael's listed "passions," you'll be pleased to know, is "The promotion of Human Rights through the visual arts," michaelmucci.com]

Still Waiting for Kristallnacht

At long last Sydney Morning Herald ranter Gerard Henderson has found his way home... to Murdoch's Australian.*

That leaves the appalling Paul Sheehan, now alone and palely loitering on the Herald's opinion pages. Is he too about to receive the tap? After all, as he's just candidly admitted, he's about as popular with Herald readers as a fart in a crowded lift:

"If you don't like what I write there is no more fertile place to read criticisms than The Sydney Morning Herald. Each year the paper publishes, by my estimate, about 6,000 criticisms of me on its letters page or online comments section. A further 1,000 criticisms, at least, are submitted but not published. I know people who skip my column and go straight to the comments because they like red meat in the mornings." (Time for real steel, not tinkering, 23/12/13)

Frankly, it's time he was put out to pasture... most appropriately on the same blasted heath where Sheridan and now Henderson graze.

And just to remind you how bad Sheehan really is (and while we're at it, just how corrupting is the practice of rambamming), take a look at this snippet from The Australian Jewish News of March 30, 2007:

"The resurgence of Nazism will likely lead to another Kristallnacht, Sydney Morning Herald columnist Paul Sheehan told a Jewish audience last week. Sheehan, who travelled to Israel on a journalists' mission organised by the NSW Jewish Board of Deputies late last year, told last Tuesday's Board of Deputies plenum that there is 'no question we will see another Kristallnacht because the Nazis are rising around the world'." (Second Kristallnacht ahead, warns Fairfax columnist)

[*Just in case you're naive enough to think that, in dropping Henderson, the Herald is making way for some fresh new talent, think again. It's apparently replacing him with former Howard government minister Peter (Grim Reaper) Reith.]

The Selective Outrage of Paul Sheehan

Brown MUSLIM men... very, very bad:

"Western women appear to be a magnet for leering and Egypt is known to have a wider problem of sexual assaults." (Sexual repression a thorn in side of Egypt democracy, Paul Sheehan, Sydney Morning Herald, 4/7/13)

White CHRISTIAN men... no worries, mate:

"A person could visit Angkor, one of the world's greatest cultural destinations, and for less than $US100 purchase some or all of the following smorgasbord of experiences in a single day... One bar girl to provide a 'happy ending' ($US25)." (Fortress of solitude, Paul Sheehan, The Age, 20/11/10)*

[*See my 7/5/11 post Killer Letter.]

Antidotes to Internet Islamophobia

As you will have seen in yesterday's post on Islamophobia, at least one of our ms Muslim-bashing pundits, the Sydney Morning Herald's Paul Sheehan, gets all he needs to know on the subject of Muslims and their religion from Islamophobic websites.

Little wonder then that his tiresome rants are full of pseudo-scholarship and Islamophobic bile.

Those seeking informed and scholarly correctives to such rubbish might find themselves wondering where to go. I've found two books in particular most useful.

One is M.A.S. Abdel Haleem's 2004 translation of the Qur'an, which is excellent for contextualising Quranic quotes (that is, if their textual co-ordinates are given). (See my 27/4/13 post Facts & Context: There's No Getting Around Them.)

The other - although Islam is not its principal subject - is Philip Jenkins's fascinating study, Laying Down the Sword: Why We Can't Ignore the Bible's Violent Verses (2011).

Jenkins is the author of The Lost History of Christianity and Distinguished Professor of History at Baylor University's Institute for Studies of Religion.

Here's a sample:

"In terms of its bloodthirsty and intolerant passages, the Bible raises considerably more issues than does the Qur'an. Some Bible passages justify genocide and multigenerational race war; the Qur'an has nothing comparable. While many Qur'anic texts undoubtedly call for warfare or bloodshed, these are hedged around with more restrictions than their biblical equivalents, with more opportunities for the defeated to make peace and survive. Furthermore, any of the defenses that can be offered for biblical violence - for instance, that these passages are unrepresentative of the overall message of the text - apply equally to the Qur'an.

"When noticing the scarcity of impossible or unpalatable texts in the Qur'an, I stress that I am talking about that scripture alone, rather than the later works that explained or elucidated it. By this I mean the Hadith (the reputed sayings of Muhammad) and the later body of commentaries (known as the Tafsir). These later works matter immensely for understanding the overall pattern of the religion, but they must be used carefully as means of approaching the original scripture.

"Not just in Islam, commentaries and later interpretations distort readers' ideas about what exactly the original text contains. When Americans hear the phrase 'the separation of church and state', many assume that it occurs in the US Constitution, which it does not. It actually comes from a letter by Thomas Jefferson, and the words may or may not accurately reflect the guiding principles of the Constitution itself. Similarly, Muslims often take ideas from the commentaries and read them back into the Qur'an itself. To take one grotesque example, many ordinary believers think that a passage in the Qur'an describes Jews being transformed into apes and pigs; as I will show below, that reading is false. This understanding stems from one tradition in the Tafsir, which has entered folklore.

"If we do take those other sources, the Hadith and the Tafsir, into account as ways of understanding the Qur'an, then in fairness we should have to look at the entire contents of the Church Fathers for interpreting the Christian Bible, and the Talmud for the Hebrew Bible. If we did that, then alongside all the spiritual and cultural splendors of those works we could certainly find some obnoxious and unpalatable materials, some of which attack other faiths. But if instead we compare like with like, scripture with scripture, rather than how passages have been used by later generations of believers, then the Qur'an is in no sense a bloodier or more warlike text than the Bible - either the Hebrew Bible or the larger text beloved by Christians. Indeed, that Islamic text has far fewer passages demanding to be confronted or accommodated.

"In that sense, the Qur'an does not pose as many ethical difficulties as the Bible. This claim does not represent a kind of apology for Islam, a defense of its religious claims. In fact, one might even argue the opposite. As I will suggest, the disturbing features of the Bible reflect a much greater antiquity than that of the Qur'an, revealing complex dialogues with many cultures over time - interactions that ultimately created the essential foundation for the universalism of the Qur'an and of early Islam. In terms of its spiritual authority, the fact that the Qur'an is so straightforward - so lacking in extreme violence, in fact - is at once its strength and its weakness." (pp 73-75)

Islamophobia Goes Mainstream

While Australian politicians flock to sign an Israeli government-sponsored declaration committing them to fight criticism of Israel under the pretext that they are fighting anti-Semitism, a marginal form of racism at best in this country, Islamophobia is thriving in the mainstream media. The following instances have occurred within the past two weeks:

Paul Sheehan, Sydney Morning Herald columnist, 27/5

"Here is a sample of the more than 100 verses in the Koran that call Muslims to violence against the Unbelievers [Sheehan lists a handful of unnumbered, contextless quotes]... Most Muslims are peaceful, like most non-Muslims, but the Koran groans under the weight of its own contradictions, with entreaties to kindness co-existing with exhortations to merciless war." (Twisting Islam to justify pure evil)

In attempting to directly link the Qur'an with acts of violence today, Sheehan cites the anti-Islam hate site thereligionofpeace.com, which interestingly links, through a reference to rampaging, murderous 'Muslims' vs 'Jews' working on their "159th Nobel Prize," to Zionist propaganda site, unitedwithisrael.com. (For the full story on thereligionofpeace.com, I refer you to the 10/7/12 post TheReligionOfPeace.com: Working to Streamline the American Empire's 'War on Terror, at loonwatch.com.)

No doubt too busy trawling Islamophobic websites to do his homework, Sheehan's ignorance of the Qur'an was made abundantly clear by the following letter from Yusuf Mansuri of Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, which I quote in part:

"Paul Sheehan plays a double game (Twisting Islam to justify cruelty, May 27). He starts, rightfully, calling the murderers responsible for the vile and hateful crime committed in Woolwich last week psychopaths and thugs.* But he then jumps to how the Koran is hateful and full of contradictions. He cherry-picks verses to provide evidence. As a responsible journalist, he should be aware that a verse is part of a chapter; and the chapter provides the context. For example, 'And slay them wherever ye find them...', from the Koran, chapter 9, verse 5, is not about killing unbelievers wherever you find them, as Sheehan would have readers think. If he were to read a few verses before and after he would understand the verse is quoted during a battle and is about the breaking of a peace treaty with the Muslims by the polytheists of Makkah. The verse immediately after says: 'And if any one of the polytheists seeks your protection, then grant him protection (amnesty) so that he may hear the words of Allah. Then deliver him to his place of safety. That is because they are a people who do not know.' Every verse he has quoted is misleading and is out of context. The only other people who quote these verses out of context are the extremists." (28/5/13)** 

Q&A - 27/5

CHARLES NORTHCOTE: Panel, good evening. In light of recent events in the UK, namely the horrific terrorist murder of the British soldier Lee Rigby, we have terrorism coming from within. Let me quote the words of Ayatollah Khomeini. 'Islam makes it incumbent upon all males to prepare themselves for the conquest of countries so that the writ of Islam, Sharia, is obeyed by every country in the world. Those who know nothing about Islam pretend it counsels against war. Those are witless. Islam says kill all unbelievers just as they would kill you.' How do you propose to make a stand against such radical behaviour and belief systems?

[According to wikiquote.org, this quote, from Amir Taheri's Holy Terror: Inside the World of Islamic Terrorism, is disputed. For Taheri's record as a fabricator, click on the tag below.]

FRED NILE: Well, I'm very concerned about Islam and I have spoken on this before and what is being quoted is correct, it is in the Quran So we have to say the Islamic...

TONY JONES: I don't think it was a quote from the Quran. That was a quote from Ayatollah Khomeini.  

FRED NILE: Yes, but he's quoting the Quran. There are verses in the Quran that say cut off the hands of your enemies, their legs, crucify them and so on...

Suddenly, Nile's an expert on the Qur'an! No one in the audience asked him to substantiate his assertions, chapter and verse. And no one raised the fact that he heads a party which calls for a moratorium on Muslim migration. (See my 7/10/11 post Witches Brew 5.)

Q&A - 3/6

KAIA THORPE: Thank you for the opportunity to ask Senator Cory Bernardi my question. I have a problem with a school textbook, entitled [sic] Learning From One Another: Bringing Muslim Perspectives into Australian Schools 2011. Why is Islam part of the syllabus for our primary and secondary school children? Muslims comprise only 2.25% of our population. Buddhists are more at 2.5%, while Christians at 64% are the majority, yet Christianity is not part of the school curriculum. Why are we giving Islam preferential treatment? Why are we promoting to our children a cruel culture which has nothing but contempt for our democracy?

To begin with, the aforementioned is not a textbook, it's a teaching resource. And heaven forbid that our kids should learn about something the old biddy who asked the question knows nothing about!

As for Bernardi's response, the bloke who'd earlier in the show been telling us, apropos racists mouthing off on buses, that "If you hear racist words or slogans being... directed at individuals, you've got to stand up and say, 'That's wrong. Don't do it. It offends me'," started on about "the Judeo-Christian tradition that informs our values," and began dog-whistling that "if we don't have people in public life that are prepared to stand up for those values, then they will be replaced by other values that are not as consistent with our democratic ideals."

No one, of course, raised the issue of Bernardi's Islamophobia, or his promotion of Dutch Islamophobe Geert Wilders.

Greg Sheridan, foreign editor of Murdoch's Australian, 8/6

"This boatpeople phenomenon is essentially determined Muslim immigration. It is important to confront the sensitivities of this situation head on. The overwhelming majority of Muslims in Australia are law-abiding and productive citizens. They should not be made to feel unwelcome or uncomfortable because of the necessary debate about this huge, unregulated Islamic inflow. But to dodge the debate because of that sensitivity is a recipe for continued, disastrous policy failure." (Policy failure creating a monstrous problem)

The first sentence says it all really.

[*See my 29/5/13 post In the Name of Afghanistan;** See also my 27/4/13 post Facts & Context: There's Just No Getting Around Them.]