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.

1 / 85 Kerr St. Fitzroy Tony Abbott

Proof: PM told firm what she won't tell parliament

HEDLEY THOMAS, NATIONAL CHIEF CORRESPONDENT
The Australian 
November 29, 2012 12:09PM

JULIA Gillard admitted during a secret internal probe to writing to a government department to help overcome its objections to the creation of an association for her then boyfriend and client, union official Bruce Wilson.

The revelation, contained in a document released today after 17 years, comes after days of stonewalling by the Prime Minister, including in parliament, on the question of whether she had personally vouched for the Australian Workers Union Workplace Reform Association.

The document, a record of interview between Ms Gillard and her law firm, Slater & Gordon, in September 1995, reveals the association was initially regarded as ineligible because of its "trade union" status.

Ms Gillard overcame the obstacle by writing to the Commissioner for Corporate Affairs in Western Australia in 1992 and arguing that the decision to bar it should be reversed.

Ms Gillard also wrote the association's rules, which emphasised worker safety but made no mention of its true purpose of funding the elections of union officials.

The document reveals she "cut and pasted" some of the rules from her earlier personal work incorporating the controversial Socialist Forum, which she helped found at Melbourne University in the 1980s.

Ms Gillard has admitted providing legal advice to help Mr Wilson and his union colleague Ralph Blewitt set up the association, which was later used by the two men to defraud hundreds of thousands of dollars.

The Prime Minister later described the association as a "slush fund" for the re-election of union officials, but she has repeatedly denied any wrongdoing, saying she had no knowledge of the workings of the association.

But Opposition Leader Tony Abbott claimed Ms Gillard may have broken the law in arguing the case for the association to be incorporated.

“Plainly on the basis of the documentary evidence of the unredacted (Slater & Gordon exit interview) transcript, she gave false information to the West Australian authorities,” Mr Abbott told the Nine Network this morning.

“For a senior lawyer to make false claims to an important statutory body like this is a very, very serious matter... it's in breach of the law I would think and it's certainly very, very unethical.”

Manager of opposition business Christopher Pyne today called on the Prime Minister to resign.

“I think her position is entirely untenable and if the Prime Minister had any respect for the parliament, for the Australian public or for the Labor caucus she would resign as Prime Minister today and allow the Labor party to select a new leader and to move to put this sordid mess behind us.”

But Workplace Relations Minister Bill Shorten said there was “no smoking gun” in the fresh revelations.

“Let's be really straight, what do you think it is that the Prime Minister has done wrong? What law has she broken?” Mr Shorten told Sky News.

“People just want to make this great fuss about a 20-year vendetta against the Prime Minister.”

In parliament this week, Ms Gillard has refused to answer repeated questioning from Deputy Opposition Leader Julie Bishop on whether she wrote to the West Australian authority to vouch for "the bona fides of the AWU Workplace Reform Association".

On Monday, she told parliament: "The claim that the Deputy Leader of the Opposition has now made is a claim that appeared in The Age . . . The correspondence she refers to has never been produced, so the claim has been made but no correspondence has ever been produced."

Yesterday she told parliament she had "dealt with these matters fully".

"I have dealt fully with my role in providing legal advice on the incorporation of this association. I have provided detailed answers on this. They were provided in press conferences; they have been provided in this parliament," she said.

Later she added: "Once again, we are in a situation where the Deputy Leader of the Opposition is asserting things she has got no sources for, except she read them somewhere."

Last night, a spokesman for the Prime Minister said she had "no recollection of receiving or sending the claimed correspondence in this matter".

The evidence that she did write to the West Australian body is contained in a section of transcript from the September 11, 1995, tape-recorded interview with Ms Gillard during an internal probe led by Slater & Gordon's then senior partner Peter Gordon.

Some of the transcript was provided to The Australian in August.

The latest section of transcript is being released now by the firm's former equity partner, Nick Styant-Browne, after Mr Wilson's interview on the ABC's 7.30 meant his legal confidentiality as a former client of the firm was waived.

In his 7.30 interview, Mr Wilson explained some of Ms Gillard's role and legal advice in making "the necessary changes" for the association to be approved.

In the section of transcript from the 1995 Slater & Gordon interview that was released, Mr Gordon asked Ms Gillard about those changes: "Do you recall whether, when it was necessary to argue the case with the, with the relevant Western Australian authority, whether you consulted anyone else in the firm as to what would or would not get, become acceptable or appropriate?"

Ms Gillard: "I once again don't recall talking to anybody else in the firm about it."

Mr Gordon: "Beyond that, and it seems from the file, that after that letter it was successfully accepted as an incorporated association and duly was created and presumably accounts were set up."

Ms Gillard told Mr Gordon she had nothing to do with the association's accounts, and that she attended only to its incorporation.

Mr Gordon referred to Ms Gillard's letter to the government authority and he stated that, "it appears from the file to be the letter arguing that it ought to be not construed as a trade union - did you have anything personally to do with that incorporated association afterwards?"

Ms Gillard: "No, I did not."

It was unlawful under the Associations Incorporation Act for an association to be named in a way "likely to mislead the public as to the object or purpose".

After the association was incorporated, about $100,000 from its accounts went towards the purchase of a $230,000 Melbourne terrace house in 1993 for Mr Wilson to live in. Ms Gillard went to the auction and witnessed a power of attorney document for Mr Wilson to buy the property in Mr Blewitt's name, while Slater & Gordon managed the conveyancing and organised the mortgage.

The association issued invoices in its official-sounding name and received money for work that did not exist.

Neither Ms Gillard nor the firm of Slater & Gordon told their client, the AWU, about the existence of the association carrying the union's name, resulting in further fraud and the draining of accounts amid police investigations into separate fraud allegations involving Mr Wilson.

Ms Gillard had not opened a file at the firm for her legal work for Mr Wilson on the association. Her legal partners were unaware of its existence until August 1995, when Mr Wilson's separate Victorian slush fund was exposed and police were called in by the AWU's national leaders to launch a fraud investigation. Ms Gillard's conduct at the time and the firm's internal review of her actions led to a breakdown in trust and relationships, resulting in her leaving.

Elsewhere in the newly released section of transcript, Mr Gordon was concerned that other partners at the firm might have been involved in the matter and the legal work that Ms Gillard had performed.

He asked Ms Gillard: "And last Monday I think you gave to (fellow legal partner) Paul Mulvaney a follow-up which demonstrates that Slater & Gordon had drafted model rules for, for that, had submitted those rules to the relevant Western Australian government authority; that there'd been a letter from the authority suggesting that it might be a trade union and therefore ineligible for incorporation under that legislation; and that we had prepared a response submitted on Wilson's instructions to that authority suggesting that in fact it wasn't a trade union and arguing the case for its incorporation. My recollection is that all of that happened in or about mid-1992. Is that right?"

Ms Gillard: "I wouldn't want to be held to the dates without looking at the file, but whatever the dates the file shows are the right dates, so . . ."

Mr Gordon: "Yes. And to the extent that work was done on that file in relation to that, it was done by you?"

Ms Gillard: "That's right."

Mr Gordon: "And did you get advice from anyone else in the firm in relation to any of those matters?"

Ms Gillard: "No, I didn't."

Mr Gordon: "Did (the firm's recognised lawyer on incorporations) Tony Lang have anything to do with the model rules or the drafting of them?"

Ms Gillard: "No, I obtained, I had just in my own personal precedent file a set of rules for Socialist Forum, which is an incorporated association in which I'm personally involved. And I've just kept them hanging around as something I cut and paste from for drafting purposes."

Ms Gillard assured him Slater & Gordon had nothing to do with setting up bank accounts for the association and that nobody at the firm, including herself, had anything to do with the association beyond advising on its incorporation. Mr Gordon asked Ms Gillard: "Can I ask you then - following the last thing that we did to setting up the incorporation, which appears from the file to be the letter arguing that it ought to be not construed as a trade union - did you have anything personally to do with that incorporated association afterwards?"

Ms Gillard: "No I did not."

Mr Gordon: "Right, to the best of your knowledge did anyone at Slater & Gordon?"

Ms Gillard: "To my knowledge, no one at Slater & Gordon had anything to do with it post that time."

The Australian asked Ms Gillard's office yesterday whether she had anything to add to her previous statements about her role. A spokesman replied last night that Ms Gillard "has no recollection of receiving or sending the claimed correspondence in this matter".

"The Prime Minister sighted, witnessed, dictated and signed thousands of documents in the course of her legal career," he said. "Any correspondence in this matter would have been received or sent in her capacity as a lawyer acting on instructions. As the Prime Minister has noted, the application to incorporate the (association) was lodged by its office bearer, Mr Ralph Blewitt. The decision to incorporate the association was made by the WA Commissioner of Corporate Affairs."

Ms Gillard said on Monday, when asked why the AWU was not informed about her role in the incorporation of the association: "Did I need to separately advise the AWU this was occurring?

"Of course I didn't. The people I was dealing with were elected officials of the AWU."

Asked why she did not disclose the existence of the association to the AWU three years later, amid a police probe into Mr Wilson's other slush fund, she said: "I did not have in front of me any evidence of criminality or wrongdoing but there was a lot of rumour about what was happening in the Victorian branch of the AWU at that time. In those circumstances, I came to a personal decision about ending my relationship with Mr Wilson and I did so."

Additional reporting: Lanai Vasek

1/85 Kerr St. Fitzroy: Sensational new evidence released by Slater and Gordon Lawyer

Fresh claims Julia Gillard argued for union body

The Daily Telegraph
November 29, 2012 12:00AM

THE Prime Minister will enter parliament for the last day this year under intense pressure to explain new allegations she was heavily involved in the creation of a union body later 
used as a "slush fund".

The Australian reports today that documents, released after 17 years, show Ms Gillard argued the case for the incorporation of the Australian Workers Union Workplace Reform 
Association.

Ms Gillard told her employers at the law firm Slater & Gordon in 1995 that the association was a "slush fund" to be used for the re-election of union officials.

However, it eventually became the vehicle through which major union fraud was committed, with $100,000 from it being used to buy a Melbourne home which Ms Gillard's 
boyfriend, union official Bruce Wilson, lived in.

Ms Gillard has always vehemently denied any knowledge of the fraud.

She has admitted having only been involved in providing legal advice to Mr Wilson and their friend, union bagman Ralph Blewitt, as to the incorporation of the association.

The newly released documents, a record of interview about the association between Ms Gillard and Slater & Gordon then-senior partner Peter Gordon in September 1995, show Ms 

Gillard alone prepared the response when the authority suggested it was ineligible for incorporation due to its "trade union status".

The documents show that Ms Gillard in 1992 wrote to the Commissioner for Corporate Affairs in Western Australia, where the association was being incorporated, arguing for the 
decision to be reversed.

This week Ms Gillard refused to answer repeated questioning in parliament from Deputy Opposition Leader Julie Bishop as to whether she wrote to the authority to vouch for "the 
bona fides of the AWU Workplace Reform Association".

On Monday, Ms Gillard told parliament: "The claim that the Deputy Leader of the Opposition has now made is a claim that appeared in The Age ... The correspondence he refers 
to has never been produced, so the claim has been made but no correspondence has ever been produced."

The documents relied upon by The Australian were released by Slater & Gordon's former equity partner Nick Styant-Browne, after Mr Wilson's interview on the ABC's 7.30 on 
Tuesday night.

However, Mr Styant-Browne released them on the basis that Mr Wilson's interview meant that he had waived his legal confidentiality as a former client of the firm.

The documents also show Ms Gillard wrote the association's rules.

While they emphasised worker safety, her document did not outline that the association was to be used for the re-election of officials.

It was also revealed the rules Ms Gillard used were "cut and pasted" from rules she had earlier used when incorporating the Socialist Forum which she had helped found at 
Melbourne Univeristy in the 1980s.

Last night, Ms Gillard's spokesman told The Australian the PM had "no recollection of receiving or sending the claimed correspondence in this matter".

State of Socialist Governance in Australia: Corrupt to the Core

Racist Bigot and Misandrist Green Loon Christine Milne blames it all on" older white men"

1/85 Kerr St.Fitzroy: Former Julia Gillard Lover defends her over AWU SCAM involvement

1 / 85 Kerr Street Fitzroy : Dear Prime Minister. You are a liar.

1 / 85 Kerr Street Fitzroy : The Prime Minister tells lies,she always has.....

What Julia Gillard said on August 23 2012

Australian Politics: Madame Gillard returns from Thailand gabfest to AWU SCAM allegations

Ralph Blewitt Ben Fordham discuss Julia Gillard and the AWU SCAM

Alan Jones Michael Smith on Julia Gillard and the ex AWU Official Boyfriend

Australian Politics: Madame Gillard returns from Thailand gabfest to AWU SCAM allegations

Australia: Muslim Insurgents and Colonilaists demand Australia support Muslim Terrorists

PRO-Palestine broadcaster ABC ...Rats in the Silo aka. "their ABC " destroys Australia’s Middle East legacy

Australia Day Race Riot HUCKSTER and Unions ACT Secretary, brands Tony Abbott ".. a raving Zionist"

• Wayne Hem, former AWU employee recalls the $5,000 from Bruce to Julia
• Senator The Honourable George Brandis SC - the shadow Attorney General
• I know that there are a few people who want me to disclose details of my personal phone calls
• From the source re One Nation
• Urgent dispatch from Right Wing Misogynist Conspiracy Central
• Julia, people aren't stupid, this bloke lobbed a blog comment - he can work it out. Why don't you do something for the people who lost the money?
• Kerr Street Fitzroy Sale in 1996
• My own thoughts on Bruce Wilson's admissions on ABC 7.30 last night
• Doing our bit for recycling.
• Paper for comment please - The Boulder Mystery

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

No peace for Labor in the Middle West

Gemma Jones and Janet Fife-Yeomans 
The Daily Telegraph
 November 29, 2012 12:00AM

FORGET the war-torn Middle East, Labor MPs are trying to keep the peace in their own electorates first.

The most vocal minister to speak out against Prime Minister Julia Gillard's plan to vote against giving Palestine an upgraded status at the United Nations was Tony Burke, whose southwestern Sydney electorate is made up predominantly of Islamic voters and those of Lebanese heritage.

Mr Burke was among 10 cabinet ministers who spoke out against the Prime Minister's position, with Ms Gillard only deciding at the last moment that Australia should abstain after it became clear caucus would revolt.

One Labor MP yesterday said applause broke out in the party room when Ms Gillard revealed her backdown, while MPs who had supported a no vote were furious.

A pleased Mr Burke yesterday said: "I was always supportive of the two-state solution and I have argued for that in every forum. I'm fully supportive of the position taken by the Prime Minister."

MPs yesterday said they were concerned about Ms Gillard's judgment after she appeared blindsided in cabinet by the ferocious opposition of her ministers, with Mr Burke and Communications Minister Stephen Conroy engaging in a lively debate.

One said Mr Burke was concerned about the impact on his electorate, which is home to Lakemba Mosque.

Mr Conroy, who some MPs believe is too close to the PM in her fractured caucus, and Employment Minister Bill Shorten backed the PM's original position.

Banks MP Darryl Melham was one of the key agitators but he has held his views since the mid 1970s and was not acting because he feared the large number of people of Lebanese descent in his electorate would turn on him.

Transport Minister Anthony Albanese, who holds the seat of Grayndler, said yesterday it was a matter of principle, not protecting himself from an electoral backlash.

"This is a matter of principle. Labor's position has consistently been for a two-state solution," he said.

A spokesman for Climate Change Minister Greg Combet, who was also vocal against the proposed vote against the resolution, said he supported the abstention outcome.

Australian Palestinian organisations were mixed about the reasons the MPs may have had to force the Prime Minister to backdown.

Katherine Kelly of Australians for Justice and Peace in Palestine said it was not a question just for Muslims.

"We have many people within AJAP who are not Muslims. You do not have to be Muslim to recognise there should be justice for Palestine," she said.

She said sitting on the fence was not a good stand for the government to take.

"Abstaining is not a 'no decision'. It is a decision to sit on the fence," she said.

Mr Conroy declined to comment on a matter involving cabinet discussions.

Foreign Minister Bob Carr told the chamber the decision was balanced: "The vast bulk of Australians want a two-state solution. On countless occasions the previous coalition government opted to abstain. It's a valid option."

Nationals Senator Barnaby Joyce responded by listing all the Australian prime ministers since 1948 who had supported the policy of secure borders for an Israeli state.

He asked Senator Carr if he categorically supported secure borders for Israel.

"We wouldn't contemplate any other policy," Senator Carr said.

"This motion doesn't confer statehood on the Palestinian territories, it gives non-state status ... somewhat higher than what it enjoys at the present time," he said.

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

Sword hangs over ALP MPs in Sydney's west


Evelyn Yamine 
The Daily Telegraph
November 29, 2012 12:00AM

SAMAR Hamze believes the Palestine-Israel conflict affects people in Australia - and could affect votes.

The 22-year-old believes people in the electorate of Watson, in Sydney's southwest, would have turned on federal member Tony Burke, who holds the seat, if he had not spoken up against Prime Minister Julia Gillard's plan to vote against Palestine's bid for upgraded status in the UN.

Ultimately that would have cost him and Ms Gillard votes.

Ms Hamze works at her family's fruit market on Haldon St in Lakemba

"In this area people stick up for our brothers and sisters in Palestine and want to help them in any way to stop the conflict," Ms Hamze said.

"If our Prime Minister got in the way of that it would definitely affect votes. She would have been making things worse, not better.

"If she actually had an idea what could make things better, more calm and peaceful, then she should go for it, but otherwise not get involved. In the end, all we want is peace."

Coalition for Justice and Peace in Palestine convenor Jennifer Killen said their membership reflected the ethnic and religious diversity of the wider Australian community, including students, church groups, professionals academics and unionists.


"Australians have an innate sense of justice, and this makes Palestine a big issue in Australia," Ms Killen said.

"Our sympathy is always with the underdog. Polling shows about two-thirds of Australians support full UN membership for Palestine."

 Why does Sydney now have "Occupied Territories" and who facilitated their establishment?

Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs
Interview with Alan Jones, 2UE October 29 2001   

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"

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

Thank you Australian Labor Party and their Financiers and Fund Raisers the Australian Council of Trade Unions and GetUp

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

Bankstown Torch November 21 2012 Page 5.