Australia's Labor Green Loons and that terrible "Jewish Lobby"

Jewish lobby is not the most worrying problem

Andrew Bolt 
Herald Sun
April 13,2014

FORMER foreign minister Bob Carr is not wrong: there is a Jewish lobby. But it’s not the lobby that worries me.

Carr last week outraged Jews by attacking Melbourne’s “Israel lobby” for its “very unhealthy” influence on prime minister Julia Gillard.

Carr accused it of trying “to block the Foreign Minister of Australia through their influence with the Prime Minister’s office from even making the most routine criticism of Israeli settlement policy”.

BLOG WITH ANDREW BOLT

True, there is a Jewish lobby, just as there are other ethnic and religious lobbies. True also, it’s more organised than most, and richer.

But also true is that many supporters of Israel — like Gillard, like me — reach their opinions on the arguments, not as quo for Jewish quids.

We see a democracy threatened by terrorism, an open society challenged by closed ones.

Carr also leaves out a critical fact, making the Jewish lobby seem unique and even sinister.

See, he actually defeated the “Israel lobby” in 2012 by warning Labor MPs of a more powerful lobby — the Muslim one.

Steve Price and Andrew Bolt discuss the appalling Mr Carr and further on the Un Holy Alliance between his Labor Party and Islam,aka. Labor/Green Loon's VOTE People

As The Australian then reported: “Mr Carr is believed to have spent an hour with Ms Gillard … explaining the electoral problems in Sydney” if she did not become less pro-Israeli.

The Sydney Morning Herald noted: “Many MPs in western Sydney, who are already fearful of losing their seats, are coming under pressure from constituents with a Middle East background.”

Frontbencher Tony Burke also insisted Gillard back the Palestinian cause — and here’s why: Burke’s Sydney seat of Watson now has an astonishing 20 per cent of Muslim voters. In fact, of the 20 seats with the most Muslim voters, Labor held all but one.

And so Carr rolled Gillard and overturned her support for Israel.

This is not the first time Labor placated the Muslim lobby. It notoriously reversed a decision to deport extremist preacher Sheik Taj El-Din Hilali.

Just last September, the Mufti of Australia wrote to Labor members to warn union boss Paul Howe had a “bias” towards Israel, and if he was not blocked from becoming a senator, Labor would lose the Muslim votes that helped “successfully retain the majority of ALP seats in Western Sydney”.

Did Carr denounce that “unhealthy” influence? No.

It seems there’s only one kind of “unhealthy”ethnic influence now for modern Labor.


The Labor / Green Loon's Muslim "Un Holy Alliance"

If any one wants to know how a grub like Hilalie could ever get into Australia and then be granted citizenship and then rejoice in the murder of 18 Australians and some 2,900 men women and children from all over the world at the World Trade Center it's easy, just arrive when the country is been run by the Australian Socialist Labor Party that needs votes to stay in power regardless of the economic social or security cost's

MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AFFAIRS

Interview with Alan Jones, 2UE

ALAN JONES: This boat people issue doesn't go away. The Prime Minister yesterday, in launching his policy, made the simple point that the Government will decide who comes into Australia and on what terms. It's as simple as that, and it is simple. How many times have I made the point that if you're going to determine who comes into your home and on what terms, surely we as a nation have that entitlement in relation to our national home.

But now we have the spectacle after last week and an Indonesian fishing boat sinking and 350 so-called asylum seekers dying, we've got the spectacle of three Indonesian warships searching for a fishing boat ! allegedly hijacked by Iraqi asylum seekers and believed to be heading to Australia.

Now, the search was under way since last Thursday, the day after it was reportedly seized by 170 asylum seekers. But now it has been found drifting off the Indonesian island of Sumbawa and the boat people have been taken by smaller boats to the village of Sangyang which is an hour's sail away. It's said that the boat was hijacked by a group of Iraqi refugees who want to go to Australia. So the debate goes on.

As one editorial wrote at the weekend, "When Australians awoke last week to the image of three little girls staring from almost every newspaper front page, many felt a surge of sorrow and a huge pang of guilt. Suddenly, protecting our borders from asylum seekers seemed flint-hearted. What nation could be so stony as to turn away the sweet innocence? Surely not the land of a fair go."

But it went on. "A mourning Muslim community was quick to blame the Government. After ! all, it was argued the girls would never have been on board that leaking rust bucket had it not been for our law designed to ensure those who seek refugee status really are refugees."

It said, "The Muslim community, so deeply touched by tragedy, could easily be forgiven for reacting in anger." And then it said, "The truth is somewhat different." It said, "It should be remembered that those who choose Australia as a destination do so not because they've suddenly become imbued with Aussie fervour, it's because the people-smuggling industry sees us as an easy target. The softer we get, the more they will come."

And it's on again. We woke yesterday to headlines which cried, "Mutiny on the Ocean - Vessels Head for Australia." And then of course in the middle of all this last week, we've got Sheik Taj el-Din Al Hilaly, the alleged spiritual leader of Australia's 300,000 Muslims, accusing John Howard and government policy of having "opened the gates to death" to the asy! lum seekers who drowned off Indonesia.

And that has led to a flood of comments, emails and faxes from you to me about the Sheik, such that it's time we spoke to the Immigration Minister about what this bloke is saying, who he is and how long he can go on saying it. And Philip Ruddock is on the line.

Minister, good morning.

PHILIP RUDDOCK: Morning, Alan.

ALAN JONES: What about this mutiny on the ocean? What is the update, and what do you know on that?

PHILIP RUDDOCK: Well, no more than the reports. I mean, obviously while we're in touch with the Indonesian authorities, they don't brief us on all of these developments. But I'm pleased that we haven't seen a further loss of life because I think the events of last week were tragic and one wouldn't want to see those sorts of things happening again.

And as far as I'm concerned, if we were to relax our approach and encourage more people to think that they should come this way, we would only ! be exposing more children to a possible death in the same way that these children have died.

ALAN JONES: There is talk today that two Indonesian police officers have been arrested over the fishing boat that sank on October 19 with only 44 of its passengers surviving. Can you confirm that?

PHILIP RUDDOCK: I can't, but it's a matter for the Indonesian authorities to, of course, progress. They've been obviously very concerned about many of the claims that have been made - I would be - and they've sought to deal with it.

And our view all along was that it was a matter for the Indonesians to handle. It's within their boundaries, they're a sovereign nation and they've got responsibility in relation to any complaints that are made about their law enforcement officers.

ALAN JONES: There's talk of 3,000 more boat people expected to head for Australia in the next few weeks and the Indonesian Government saying there are 4,000 illegal immigrants waiting to sail! to Australia. Is that consistent with your intelligence?

PHILIP RUDDOCK: Not quite. I mean, the sorts of numbers that we've known to be in the hands of smugglers - that is, we've identified particular smugglers who might be planning to bring boats to Australia - don't suggest the numbers are immediately as high as that. But the reports of up to 4,000 in Indonesia and possibly another 4,000 in Malaysia are very real.

ALAN JONES: Is there a need to re-examine the quotas on refugees who are found to be genuine? We allow in about 12,000 a year.

PHILIP RUDDOCK: Well, I mean, Mr Beazley's not arguing that we should and the reason he's not is that there is a very heavy cost. And it's one of the draw factors, of course. I mean, for us it's $30 million per thousand on the forward estimates. So I mean, you can decide that you're going to spend that money on additional refugees being resettled in Australia, but I look at what's happening at the moment in Pakistan, f! or instance, and I think to myself, well, what would $30 million do in terms of looking after millions of people who are in dire straits.

And I think that certainly the approach being taken by the international community at this stage is that an evacuation of modest numbers of people from Pakistan is not going to deal with the very much larger crisis that Pakistan faces. And I think it has to be seen in that context.

And there's no amount of people that we could take that would limit, I think, the groups of people with money to travel and still vulnerable to the blandishments of smugglers.

ALAN JONES: Okay. Well, down to the thing that has concerned my listeners - and I have been inundated and I suppose you have as well. But they're asking me how much longer that Australians have to cop the kind of stuff that this Sheik Taj el-Din Al Hilaly went on with last week arguing that you and the Prime Minister and government policy had "opened the gates of death! ."

PHILIP RUDDOCK: Well look, I wasn't very impressed with the comments, as you can imagine, and I'd seen the Sheik several hours before he made them and didn't make them to my face.

I said - look, one of the things in your introduction I'd just pick up. I think it's unfair to say that all Muslims take the view that the government policy in this area is wrong. Many Muslims I know very strongly support the approach that we take because they believe we're a…

ALAN JONES: But this bloke calls himself the spiritual leader.

PHILIP RUDDOCK: Yeah well, he does that but his position is not as sound as that and he's been - essentially, I think there are very significant splits within the Islamic community.

ALAN JONES: Well, Alan Ramsey who's been around Canberra longer than you have - and that's saying something…

PHILIP RUDDOCK: I saw Alan…

ALAN JONES: Well, he wrote at the weekend - and I just want to take you through some of this beca! use my listeners want some answers - that 11 years ago, as Opposition spokesman on immigration, you pursued questions never answered as to why the Hawke Labor Government granted this bloke, Al Hilaly, permanent residency in 1990, that eight years earlier, he said, the Sheik had arrived in Sydney from Egypt under the Australian Federation of Islamic Councils on a three-month visa and his family never left.

Now there were several convictions, intellectual convictions against this bloke and many want to know how he still remains in the light of saying the things he said.

PHILIP RUDDOCK: Well, I mean, Alan Ramsey's story went through it and I think there were some other stories at the same time, that related what happened. I mean, this…

ALAN JONES: He was accused of inciting racial hatred.

PHILIP RUDDOCK: Yes, and Chris Herford, who was the former Minister, determined that in character terms he should not remain in Australia.

ALAN JONES: That's r! ight.

PHILIP RUDDOCK: And he issued a deportation order.

ALAN JONES: That's in 1986.

PHILIP RUDDOCK: And that was overturned because there were representations made by essentially the Lebanese Muslim Association in Sydney to the Members of Parliament - I think Leo McLeay was one and Paul Keating was another.

ALAN JONES: Alan Ramsey said that Hilaly had been supported by strong New South Wales and federal ALP lobbying and survived.

PHILIP RUDDOCK: Well, as I understand it, there was very strong lobbying, and I spoke to Robert Ray at the time. He made the decisions that he would be able to continue to remain here on a temporary basis. They were renewed, as I understand it, for a number of years, and Ray I think was a bit nervous that there may be a change in an election. It didn't happen. There was a Labor Government was returned and Hilaly was given permanent residency.

And once he was granted permanent residency, provided he remained i! n Australia, he was eligible for citizenship.

ALAN JONES: Let's go back a bit, just go back a bit, because…

PHILIP RUDDOCK: …while Gerry Hand was Minister…

ALAN JONES: Let's go back a bit though before we get to Gerry Hand because you're going fairly quickly but my listeners would want us to go a bit more slowly.

In October 1998, you demanded his visa be withdrawn after, as Ramsey rightly reports, a series of virulent anti-Semitic comments were attributed to a speech he made at the University of Sydney. I should repeat that Ramsey at the weekend said the comments were published in a Jewish newspaper and contained a reference to Jews as the underlying cause of all wars and that Jews who "used sex and abominable acts of buggery to control the world."

And this bloke, in spite of overtures that such a person shouldn't be kept in this country, has been kept here.

PHILIP RUDDOCK: And the reason he's been kept here is that the decisions the L! abor Government took at that time gave him permanent residency and then citizenship, and once you achieve citizenship, it cannot be revoked. And you know, when we came into office…

ALAN JONES: So the deportation order of Herford was revoked by Herford's successor?

PHILIP RUDDOCK: That's right.

ALAN JONES: To placate an ethnic community in the run-up to the July '87 election?

PHILIP RUDDOCK: There were very significant pressures put on at that time, and former Prime Minister Keating, I believe, was the person who pushed for the Minister at that time to take those decisions.

ALAN JONES: Ramsey wrote on Saturday that privately the Sheik had travelled to Canberra for a meeting with McLeay and Keating and when Robert Ray learnt of it - the Minister - he deferred the Sheik's application for a year on the grounds of collusion. And Ramsey said that Keating wouldn't speak to Robert Ray for months.

PHILIP RUDDOCK: Well, I know none of that. But ! I know that Ray was not keen to make the decision, but I know the decision was made and I know when I came Minister in 1996 it was a fait accompli.

I mean, citizenship is something that cannot be revoked unless it was initially obtained by fraud, and there is no suggestion here the information that you are speaking of was not known to the Government at the time.

ALAN JONES: Right. But Ramsey does say in September 1990, when Hand then approved Hilaly's permanent residence, you, Philip Ruddock, sought under Freedom of Information "all briefings and advisings" in the "grant of resident status to Hilaly and his family." And you were quoted as saying the Minister must be able to justify the decision, and yet you've never had those questions answered.

PHILIP RUDDOCK: No. I mean, you might - the question I would expect from you is why I haven't asked for those papers now and what would I do with it. And essentially I've come to the view that if I can't do anythin! g about the decision, it's going to be pretty silly of me just seeking to look at the papers.

I mean, I know of the concerns. There were security concerns and they were mentioned in that article as well as the vilification of a segment of our community. And I make the point every time I speak in front of Hilaly about the importance of our culturally diverse society and what that means. And I make the point very strongly that, you know, when you've settled in Australia, while we acknowledge that people have different cultural backgrounds, we have an expectation that they'll observe our laws.

And one of the things that disappoints me in relation to immigration laws is that some people seem to think - and Hilaly is arguing this - are entitled to ignore our laws if they relate to immigration. And I don't think you have a society that believes in the rule of law where you say, well, there are some laws that I'll obey and some that I won't.

ALAN JONES: But when ! a bloke says that the Prime Minister of a country has opened the gates to death because asylum seekers have drowned, isn't this an incitement to mobilise his people against those who support the Government?

PHILIP RUDDOCK: Look, I mean it is very clear that remarks of that sort, if they were being made - and the sort of remarks that he's made elsewhere - would be matters that we would take into account under the character provisions if we were dealing with a migration application de nevo. They are matters…

ALAN JONES: He's already a permanent citizen.

PHILIP RUDDOCK: He's a permanent resident and citizen.

ALAN JONES: And citizen. But in January last year, is it right that he was sentenced to a year in jail with hard labour after being convicted of smuggling antiquities from Egypt to Australia?

PHILIP RUDDOCK: I believe there was a conviction which he has appealed and that appeal is still being dealt with.

ALAN JONES: And the Sheik's so! n and four other people were also jailed.

PHILIP RUDDOCK: I don't know about that, but I do know that those proceedings were taking place in Egypt and he was the subject of a conviction and that matter has been appealed and that appeal is still being dealt with.

ALAN JONES: It's not fair to the Muslim community, surely, to be represented in the public place by people who speak like this, is it?

PHILIP RUDDOCK: Well, I think the Islamic community have been very concerned about this matter themselves and he's been at times relieved of some of his responsibilities. And as I understand it, he is no longer the Mufti - which was the terms used - for the Supreme Spiritual Leader in Australia. He is just one of a number of imams.

ALAN JONES: Good on you. Thank you for your time because many of my listeners wrote and asked me to ask you those questions. I've done that and you've answered them. I thank you for that.

PHILIP RUDDOCK: Thanks, Alan.
ALAN JONES: Philip Ruddock, the Immigration Minister. There you are, we're inundated with letters and faxes and emails here about all of that. I hope that clarifies it for you. He is an Australian citizen.

29 October 2001

Australia's Anti-Semitic Labor Party

The Anti-Semitic Labor Party

The Age
October 25, 2004

Former ALP minister Barry Cohen used to be proud of his party because it fought prejudice. Not any longer.

It's a sepia-toned family portrait taken in the late 1930s of Mendel and Mindel Kozerwoder and their children Itzek, Charna, Malka, Mania, Yidel, Moishe and baby Faigele. There's nothing unusual about it but it is very precious to me, for they are all members of my family who, with one exception, perished in the crematoriums of Chelmno and Auschwitz.

Sydney's Occupied Territories remind Labor Green Loon Government who is in charge

Gillard backs down forced to support "The Savage" over Israel in UN Vote to save own job

Sydney's Occupied Territories residents urged to wear Keffiyeh to show support for Terrorism

Clasped in the hands of my great-uncle is a photograph of my grandparents, Moishe and Zelda Kozerwoder. Itzek, the only survivor, gave me the photograph after I returned from a visit to Poland, during which I went to the villages of Pajcczno and Dzialoszyn, from which my grandparents departed in the late 1890s. Their travels took them to England, South Africa (where my father was born) and finally to Australia, just after the outbreak of World War I.

The photo is the only image I have of the many members of my family who were murdered by the Nazis. When I look at it my emotions range from gut-wrenching pain to seething rage. It has ensured that I belong to that school of Jewish resolve whose motto is "never again".

There is nothing special about what happened to me and my family. Many Jewish families suffered the same fate. I became aware of the Holocaust in 1944 as the Allied armies swept across Europe and liberated the death camps. I was only nine years old but I can still recall the pain I felt as I watched the newsreels of the emaciated survivors and the mountains of corpses.

Soon afterwards I was sent to boarding school to prepare for my bar mitzvah. There was a noticeable shortage of synagogues in the country town of Griffith, NSW, where I was born and where my father was the local dentist.

My introduction to anti-Semitism commenced on my first day at school. The school sergeant refereed three fights between myself and classmates who called me "a dirty f---ing Jew". I was lucky. Bloody noses and black eyes were nothing compared to what happened to those members of my family who did not have the prescience to depart Europe as my grandparents had done.

It didn't, however, make it easier to ignore the taunts and the occasional vicious remark that came at the most unexpected moments and from the most unexpected quarters. Like most Jews in a predominantly Christian society, I developed a defence mechanism to cope. Humour was one weapon. Knowing the history and roots of anti-Semitism was another. So, too, was the pride in seeing the survivors of the Holocaust recreating a Jewish nation for the first time in 2000 years.

The survivors of the camps, a million Jews expelled from Arab countries and idealists from all over the Diaspora overcame the combined Arab military forces to ensure that not only did Jews have a haven, but one that was free and democratic. Israel has remained that way, in stark contrast to its Arab neighbours.

Australia is probably the least anti-Semitic country in the world, but what happened to my family made a deep impression on me. I became obsessive about discrimination; be it fighting for civil rights in the US, or against apartheid or the appalling treatment of our indigenous people.

I was, however, an armchair critic mouthing off endlessly about what the government should do.

Then a friend hit a sensitive nerve. "What are you doing about it?" he asked. It wasn't difficult to decide. I knew the enemy was on the political right: Nazis, fascists, conservatives, whether from the extreme right that led to the Holocaust or the social exclusion practised by the genteel middle class.

In 1964 I joined the ALP. Not that the Labor Party of the early 1960s was a beacon of light, for there were many ALP members still steeped in the White Australia philosophy and indifferent to the suffering of Aborigines. But those who spoke up about such injustices were almost all from the ALP.

By the time I arrived in Canberra in 1969 as the MP for Robertson I felt at home in the company of those led by Gough Whitlam, who forced the Labor Party to change.

However, I can still recall the wry amusement my opposition to apartheid caused colleagues.

I was accused of being obsessive on the question of racism and to that charge I plead guilty. I became deeply involved in the fight for Aboriginal rights and to this day one of the proudest moments of my life was to be one of a small group of "yesterday's heroes, looking frail and aged", who were brought on stage at the Reconciliation Conference in Melbourne in 1997 to be honoured for our work in the 1967 referendum.

I have often been asked if my being Jewish was ever an issue during my 20 years in Federal Parliament. Not to the best of my knowledge. I cannot recall a single anti-Semitic remark from either side of the House. That did not mean that everyone agreed with my views on Israel. Nor did I expect them to. However, while my views remain the same, the Labor Party's these days are very different.

The Labor Party has always had Palestinian supporters but they used to have little influence on the party's policy. They were more than counter-balanced by the influence of then ACTU president Bob Hawke. In the immediate aftermath of the Yom Kippur War and before my first visit to Israel I attended a meeting he addressed in Sydney. I have not heard a more passionate, nor better informed, defence of Israel or more scathing indictment of its opponents.

Convinced that MPs could understand Israel's problems better if they went there, I organised a series of delegations. By the time I retired in 1990 more than half the ALP caucus had visited Israel.

But gradually, Labor's Left and more extremist elements, such as the Greens and Democrats, became increasingly shrill in their denunciation of Israel. I found out what Israel was up against when representing Australia at Inter-Parliamentary Union conferences from 1973 until 1981. Created to foster peace and democracy, the union was dominated by communist dictatorships, Third World "democracies" and the 22 Arab countries. Every IPU conference devoted a major part of its sessions to denouncing Israel.

It was a mirror image of the UN, whose obsession with Israel was aptly illustrated by Israeli ambassador Abba Eban when he said: "If a resolution was put before the UN that the earth was flat and that Israel caused it, 145 would vote for it, five against with 45 abstentions."

That trend has infected the ALP. The handful of pro-Palestinian supporters has grown steadily as the party has become dominated by the education mafia; former public servants and party union apparatchiks.

Plenty will say: "Why shouldn't the Labor Party support the Palestinians?" No reason, providing the case they put is not based on the lies spouted by the Palestinian propaganda machine.

Nowhere is Israel subjected to more criticism than in Israel. Demonstrations in excess of 100,000 are regularly held in Rabin Square. Supporters of the Peace Now movement have protested in support of Palestinians. In contrast, when Jews have been massacred by terrorists there have been wild celebrations in the Arab streets.

How can any social democrat ignore such barbarism? There are Labor MPs who are vigorous supporters of Israel but their numbers are diminishing and they are being drowned out by the more vociferous members of Labor's hard Left.

When Australian Jews respond to the grotesque exaggeration about Israel, we are accused of being part of the "Jewish lobby". Israel's opponents in Australia now include those who support the Palestinians not for ideological reasons but because of the increased number of Arab voters in their electorates.

This trend reached a crescendo in the aftermath of September 11. For me September 11 was the clearest demarcation ever between good and evil. Yet many Australians could not contain their glee that at last "the Yanks had got their just deserts".

I have never been able to fathom the vicious anti-Americanism that permeates so much of Western society. Despite all their faults, Americans have been the one constant bastion against totalitarianism of the right and left. Does anyone doubt that fascism and communism would have been defeated without the US? From the left's point of view, the triumph over communism has been America's greatest crime.

The disintegration of the Soviet Union and the revelation that matters were far worse than even the Americans had claimed, forced the left to face up to the fact that for decades their defence of tyrants such as Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, Castro et al was inexcusable. There were no apologies, however. Being on the left means never having to say you're sorry or admit you're wrong. This goes a long way to explaining their attacks on George Bush, Tony Blair and John Howard, while ignoring the monstrous crimes of the Assads, Saddams, Gaddafis and other Arab despots. The war on terrorism and the war on Iraq have given the left a new lease on life.

But this time it has a new twist, a distinctly anti-Semitic one. It surfaced immediately after September 11 and was summed up in comments by Sydney Morning Herald columnist Alan Ramsey, who suggested that the cause of September 11 was America's Middle East policies and their failure to rein in the Israelis. This has been repeated ad nauseam by one left/liberal commentator after another.

Israeli scientist Haim Harari nailed this nonsense in a speech earlier this year: "The millions who died in the Iraq-Iran war had nothing to do with Israel. The mass murder happening right now in Sudan, where the Arab Muslim regime is massacring its black Christian citizens, has nothing to do with Israel. The frequent reports from Algeria about the murders of hundreds of civilians in one village or another by other Algerians have nothing to do with Israel. Saddam did not invade Kuwait, endanger Saudi Arabia and butcher his own people because of Israel . . . The Taliban control of Afghanistan and the civil war there had nothing to do with Israel. I could go on and on."

Anyone who believes that "reining in the Israelis" will bring peace and prosperity to the Middle East should change their medication. The ranting and raving, common among the extreme right, has been taken up with gusto by the left. When it started to infect the social democratic wing of the Labor Party I became extremely worried.

There will be those in the ALP who will say "our policies support Israel's right to exist, so what are you complaining about?" That's not good enough. Not for me.

I'm sick of the calumny heaped on Israel - most of which is a pack of lies. I'm sick of Labor leaders making all the right noises to Jewish audiences while an increasing number of backbenchers launch diatribes at Israel. When the likes of Labor MP Tanya Plibersek rise in the House of Representatives and call Ariel Sharon "a war criminal" and Israel a "rogue state", or Opposition whip Janice Crosio makes the absurd claim that Israeli forces had destroyed Bethlehem, Nablus and the Jenin refugee camp, I want to hear more than stony silence from those in the Labor Party who say they support Israel. Some do. Most don't.

How long is it since any Labor leader gave the sort of passionate and accurate defence of Israel we used to hear from Hawke or Kim Beazley?

I don't want even-handedness when it ought to be obvious to all but the blind that there is no moral equivalence between a country that seeks to defend its citizens from thousands of terrorist attacks, and the terrorists themselves. I want to hear Labor MPs stand up and be counted. I want to see an end to well-known Labor identities marching behind banners equating Israel with Nazism.

Silence on these issues isn't good enough for me. If people want to criticise Israel, fine - plenty of Israelis do. But let it be reasoned criticism, and if they want even-handedness let them also berate the Arab world for its denial of basic human rights for any of its citizens.

Let's hear the Labor feminists take the Arab nations to task for their abominable treatment of women. Let's hear those Labor supporters, who are so loud in their denunciation of homophobia, demand an end to the barbaric treatment of gays. Let's also hear civil rights activists bemoan the lack of basic freedoms available to most of the 300 million Arabs in the 22 Arab countries.


There will be some who will argue that I am exaggerating; that the evidence is sparse; that this typical Jewish paranoia. Not at all. It came from the horses' mouths, and the head horses at that. Before the Iraq war one of the most senior NSW right-wing MPs told me: "I understand and support Israel's position, but in my group, I'm the only one."

Soon after I told a Labor legend: "Anti-Semitism is now rampant in the Labor Party." I expected a vigorous denial. His response confirmed my worst fear: "I know," he said.

For better or worse my character and life were shaped by the anti-Semitism I experienced as a boy and a young man. I was proud to belong to a party that fought all forms of prejudice. Not any longer.

The Australian Labor Party can choose any path it likes. So can I.

Barry Cohen was arts minister in the Hawke government. A longer version of this article (which Barry Cohen asked not be published until after the federal election) appears in the Australian Jewish News.