THE NEW AMERICAN CENTURY is a compelling factual history of neoconservatism and its influence on US Foreign Policy in the Middle East during the first decade of the twenty-first century. Click on image above for details.

Sunday, June 02, 2013


Going almost unnoticed in the Australian media was the news that all 105 members of Australia’s opposition parliamentarians became signatories to the ‘London Declaration on Combating Anti-Semitism’ during budget week last month.

The Declaration could possibly become the foundation for new laws that might restrict criticism of Israel in Australia as part of the Coalitions proposed revamping of Australia’s Racial Discrimination Act – the same act which, under Section 18C, Andrew Bolt was successfully prosecuted when he racially vilified a number of indigenous Australians.

The Declaration, based on the European Union’s EUMC ‘Working Definition of anti-Semitism’, consists of some 34 recommendations that it says governments should enact to combat anti-Semitism.

The problem with the Declaration is that embedded in it are recommendations that suggest that not only should vilification of Jews as a race, ‘individually’ or ‘collectively’, become illegal but criticism of Israel as a state, presumably because it calls itself a ‘Jewish State’ and is, therefore, collectively Jewish, should also be considered as anti-Semitism and so should be made illegal. For example, the ‘Working Definition of anti-Semitism’ says that “claiming the State of Israel is a racist endeavour” is “denying the Jewish people their right to self-determination” and such criticism should be labelled as ‘anti-Semitic’. The Declaration ignores entirely the fact that Israel is not a ‘Jewish state’ as some 22% of its population are Arab.

The ‘Working Definition’ also suggests that “Drawing comparisons of contemporary Israeli policy to that of the Nazis” is also ‘anti-Semitic’. So too, according to the ‘Working Definition’, is “accusing Jewish citizens of being more loyal to Israel… than to the interests of their own nations”.

While there are many appropriate recommendations that go toward combating anti-Semitism within the documents, those mentioned above, and others, are wholly inappropriate and should not be included in either the ‘Declaration’ or ‘Working Definitions’ and completely excluded from any future legislation in Australia or anywhere else on the planet.


Anonymous said...

The EU has renounced long ago to any definition of antisemitism. That infamous "working definition" never made it, and trying to give to it any kind of official EU imprimatur is dishonest at best.

Damian Lataan said...

Indeed, it has been discredited, but shouldn't someone have pointed that out to the opposition?

Malcolm McIntyre said...

It's not just the Opposition MPs who have been lining up though, is it?

Bending the knee to Israel Firstism, otherwise known as Jewish supremacism, is revealed as bipartisan policy.

A more interesting question - because in this case the answer is not clear - is: are funding threats/inducements sufficient to have induced this convergence of political minds, or are Aussie leaders and MPs who make the obligatory trips to Israel subjected to some sort of brainwashing?

On another subject, your May 23 post 'Has the West's war against Islam radicalised Western Muslims?', have you considered that this is an objective rather than an unintended consequence of the Great War on Terror?

In Australia, we have seen governments of both persuasions allow the Saudis open slather to spread the repulsive Wahhabi doctrine while nominally opposing Islamic fundamentalism.

It is clear that the US and the rest of the West, along with Israel, see the Muslim Brotherhood as an organisation they can do business with. The Middle East's Christians, Sufis and secular citizens become collateral damage, of course, but hey you can't make an omelette without breaking eggs can you.

Damian Lataan said...

First, it is true that some Labor members have also signed up to this nonsense but, if Labor were returned to government, they would be a lot less likely to implement any part of it. Since they are, it seems, unlikely to be returned to power, however, the conservatives are far more likely to enact these laws.

Second, you've pre-empted my next post which I'll put up after the weekend. In it I posit that the war in Syria, rather than having evolved to become a full-on sectarian war after starting out as sectarian, was actually contrived and manipulated by Israel and their Western allies into becoming a full-on war between Israel's enemies. It was deliberately allowed to progress to this point. After more than two years of fighting I can't see how it could have gone any other way, but I also can't see how no one could have not seen it coming.

The West and their allies are sitting back and enjoying watching their enemies bathe in each others blood. They're all making the appropriate noises about how ghastly it all is but no one seems to being actually doing anything to stop it.

Kelt said...

Judaism requires of 'jews' that they impose the 7 laws of Noach upon the heads of those not 'jewish'.

Some of us think jews as frauds. That they are not "Chosen' deceptively claim to represent a monopoly conduit to 'god'.

It is repugnant to suggest that having an inability to recognise the divinity of the 'jews' and thus a desire not participate in their religion as a 'noachide' represents anti-Semitism or jew 'hatred'.

The failure exists not with us, but with them..

Their lies were ineffectual in having us believe them as immutable Truth.