Powered by

Dhimmitude	Diplomacy	Iran	History unfolding	Historic statements
Media imbalance	UN doings	Philosophy & Morality	Hamas / Gaza	US Politics
Terrorism	Australian Issues	Neo Anti Sem	Spengler	Videos

To get maximum benefit from the ICJS website Register now. Select the topics which interest you.

Criticism of Israel and Antisemitism: Fraser Goes too far

The recent assassination of Hamas militant Mahmoud al-Mabhouh in Dubai has created a huge international reaction, not only for the killing—although al-Mabhouh was himself a killer—but also for the multiple identity heists which it seems the hit team perpetrated. Australian passports were used, among others, and Prime Minister Kevin Rudd has asked the Israeli Ambassador for an explanation.

No response is yet forthcoming, but according to former Australian Prime Minister Malcolm Fraser, if and when they do own up, the one thing the Israelis should not be allowed to get away with is blaming it on the Holocaust.

Mr Fraser’s surprising remarks were reported in the Australian as follows:

Mr Fraser said the Jewish state could no longer use the Holocaust as an excuse to justify state-sanctioned murder, and criticism of its policies should not be dismissed as anti-Semitism.

"That happened 65-66 years ago and it cannot be used any longer to prevent proper discussion of Israel's policies when those policies are counter-productive to world peace," he said. "To suggest that those who are critical are anti-Semitic – I reject that utterly."

These remarks raise the question of whether Mr Fraser would recognize antisemitism if he walked right up to it and it hit him on the head.

The problem, pointed out by Barry Rubin, is that:

"Despite decades of documentation and explanation about antisemitism, a large proportion of the Western intelligentsia doesn’t understand it. … In other words, they don't know antisemitism when they see it—or even practice it."

There have been some antisemitic howlers by Western politicians in recent years under the guise of criticism of Israel. A recent example was the recommendation by British politician Baroness Tonge that Israeli aid teams in Haiti be investigated for harvesting bodily organs. This recycled an ancient blood libel, but substituted organs for blood, and Israelis for Jews.

Of course Mr Fraser was quite correct when he pointed out that criticizing Israel is not the same thing as antisemitism. To dismiss any and all criticism of Israel as antisemitism would be utter nonsense.

One might well ask what is the difference between legitimate criticism and racial incitement.

Let us, for example, consider Mr Fraser’s claim that Israel uses the Holocaust as an "excuse to justify state-sanctioned murder"? Could this be an example of what Rubin described as "they don’t know antisemitism when they … practice it"? Or does it fall within the bounds of legitimate criticism?
How could one tell the difference?

Let us put Mr Fraser’s statement through the lens of the Victorian Racial and Religious Tolerance Act (RRTA).

In terms of the RRTA, the question to be asked is whether Mr Fraser’s statements have incited "hatred against, serious contempt for, or revulsion or severe ridicule of" a "class of persons" (here Jewish leaders of the state of Israel), on the ground of their "race"?

Undoubtedly the answer to this question must be “Yes”.

For anyone to use the Holocaust as an excuse for murder would be contemptible, but it must be regarded as especially contemptible if Jews were to use this excuse, as they themselves suffered from "state-sanctioned murder" in the Holocaust on a cataclysmic scale. How cruel and hypocritical that would be! It is precisely the Jewishness of the state of Israel and its leaders, in the context of the reference to the Jewish Holocaust and "state-sanctioned murder", which would intensify the contempt.

My Fraser’s accusation appears to incites contempt against Israel's leaders. It appears to invoke a traditional antisemitic stereotype of the cruel hypocritical Jew.

But would Mr Fraser have a defence under the RRTA? To determine this we can ask whether he made his contribution as part of a discussion "in the public interest", and in doing so, was he making a "a fair and accurate report of any event or matter of public interest"? Did he act "reasonably"?

Yes, it is in the public interest to discuss this incident. And yes, it is in the public interest to discuss antisemitism, criticism of Israel, and the difference between the two. But no, Mr Fraser did not give a "fair and accurate report", and he did not act reasonably when he made this particular comment.

The Israelis have not and will not claim the Holocaust as an excuse for killing al-Mabhouh. They have not even acknowledged responsibility, but if they did, the reason given would surely be al-Mabhouh's self-confessed past actions as a kidnapper and killer of Israeli soldiers, and his role as chief arms procurer for the 'Izz ad-Din al-Qassam Brigades, which is the military wing of Hamas.

The Hamas Brigades have repeatedly been classified by the Australian Attorney General as a 'terrorist organization', which, the Australian Government reports, is dedicated to the 'destruction of the state of Israel'. Other nations who have declared the Hamas Brigades to be terrorists are: Canada, Japan, the United States, and the European Union. Al-Mabhouh's job was providing weapons for terrorists.

Mr Fraser went too far. He might have just stopped with the statement that criticism of Israel "should not be dismissed as anti-Semitism." Instead he strayed into antisemitism himself, with the libel that Jewish Israeli leaders "use the Holocaust as an excuse to justify state-sanctioned murder."

That was unconscionable, and under Victorian law, possibly illegal.

Mark Durie is a human rights activist, Anglican vicar and author of The Third Choice.

# reads: 744

Printable version

follow ICJSr on Twitter

News

cb: :Daily News Alert from Israel - COP/JCPA
Prepared for the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations by the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs

ca: : 1268141233: :Trafigura, Vitol Stopping Iran Gasoline Sales as U.S. Sanctions Loom
(Reuters) Simon Webb and Luke Pachymuthu - Oil trading firms Trafigura, based in Amsterdam, and Vitol, based in Switzerland, are stopping gasoline sales to Iran, industry sources said on Monday, joining BP, Glencore and Reliance Industries which have halted sales under threat of U.S. sanctions. Analysts say Iran would always find traders to sell it fuel, but the smaller list of suppliers means Tehran would have to pay higher prices. "Political pressure from the United States and its European allies is starting to make an impact and deter fuel trading with Iran," said IHS Global Insight Middle East energy analyst Samuel Ciszuk.
1268141271: :Congress Hot to Trot on Iran Sanctions
(Foreign Policy) Josh Rogin - As the Obama administration pursues new multilateral Iran sanctions at the UN, Congress is getting ready to move forward with its own sanctions bill, which the administration is still not happy with. A senior Senate aide close to the process said the House and Senate will soon move to conference on resolving the two versions of the Iran sanctions legislation, one led by Rep. Howard Berman (D-CA), and the other sponsored by Sen. Chris Dodd (D-CT). The State Department had been negotiating with key senators over Dodd's bill, seeking an exemption for any countries they determine to be "cooperating" with the U.S. on the sanctions regime. Several congressional aides said Friday that their bosses were getting impatient with the ever-slipping deadline for UN action and that a large exemption that includes Russia and China would not fly on Capitol Hill. The administration had pledged to wrap up at the UN in February during the French rotating presidency, then that slipped to March, and now lawmakers are being told April.
1268141307: :Experts Skeptical of Indirect Peace Talks
(Washington Post) Janine Zacharia - U.S. special envoy George Mitchell announced Monday that Israel and the Palestinians had agreed to indirect talks, though he acknowledged that the structure and scope of the talks had not yet been agreed upon. "It's hardly a cause for celebration that after 17 years of direct official talks we are regressing to proximity talks," said Yossi Alpher, former director of the Jaffee Center for Strategic Studies at Tel Aviv University. "Israelis and Palestinians aren't ready for direct talks; their positions are too far apart," said Aaron David Miller, a former Middle East negotiator now at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars. Daniel Kurtzer, a former U.S. mediator and ambassador to Israel and Egypt, said it's "not understandable why we would now have them sit in separate rooms and move between them."
1268141344: :For Iran, Enriching Uranium Only Gets Easier
(New York Times) William J. Broad - Uranium enrichment is a tricky process that accelerates as it moves ahead. "The higher the concentration, the easier it gets," said Houston G. Wood III, a professor of mechanical and aerospace engineering at the University of Virginia who specializes in nuclear enrichment. On Feb. 7, Iran announced it would begin enriching its stockpiled uranium to 20% from 4%, which nuclear experts said was actually a fairly easy step - not at all as demanding and time-consuming as raising the level to 4% from 0.7%.
1268141381: :Turkey Should Pause Before a Mirror
(Guardian-UK) Stephen Kinzer - A committee of the U.S. Congress voted last week to brand as genocide the 1915 slaughter of Armenians by Ottoman Turks. Turkey suffers from a creeping image deterioration in Washington. Some feel that Turkey has become too close to Iran, and resent the vigor of Turkey's opposition to sanctions on the Iranian regime - especially important since Turkey holds a rotating seat on the UN Security Council. These doubts might not have become as powerful if Israel, Turkey's old friend, had come to its rescue with lobbying help on Capitol Hill, as it has in the past. But Turkish leaders have sharpened their criticism of Israel lately, and the Israelis, seeking to show that they too have cards to play in this game, did not rush to help Turkey this time.
1268141451: :Dozens of Arab Students in U.S. Visa Fraud
(AP) Gillian Flaccus - Eamonn Higgins, 46, was charged Monday with operating a ring of illegal test-takers who helped dozens of Middle Eastern nationals obtain U.S. student visas by passing various proficiency and college-placement exams for them, federal authorities said. Over a seven-year period, Higgins collected tens of thousands of dollars from foreign students from Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Lebanon, Kuwait, Turkey and Qatar before he or his accomplices took their exams at ten southern California community colleges and universities using doctored IDs. Higgins may have worked with hundreds of foreign students, although authorities have only been able to definitively identify 119.
1268141487: :U.S.: Annapolis Understandings Are Non-Binding
(Ha'aretz) Barak Ravid, Akiva Eldar and Avi Issacharoff - In a Jerusalem meeting with Quartet envoys on Friday, U.S. special envoy for the Middle East George Mitchell's deputy, David Hale, said the negotiations after Annapolis and the understandings reached by Tzipi Livni and Ahmed Qureia, as well as Ehud Olmert and Mahmoud Abbas, would not be binding. The talks will be based on agreements signed by Israel and the Palestinian Authority, including the Roadmap. Abbas never responded to Olmert's offer, but the Palestinians insisted that the negotiations resume from where they stopped during Olmert's term as prime minister. The U.S. apparently accepted Israel's position, which was to ignore everything that was not signed as part of an agreement. The talks will also be based on the Obama administration's two statements from the past year: President Obama's speech to the UN, which described the goal of a secure, Jewish state in Israel alongside a viable, independent Palestine; and Secretary of State Clinton's statement regarding a Palestinian state based on the 1967 borders with territory exchanges, combined with Israel's desire for a secure Jewish state that includes "recent developments," meaning the settlement blocs.
1268141515: :State Department: New West Bank Homes Don't Violate Freeze
(Ha'aretz) The U.S. said on Monday that Israel's approval of 112 new homes in Beitar Illit, adjacent to the "green line" in the West Bank, did not violate a limited Israeli settlement freeze. "On the one hand, it does not violate the moratorium that the Israelis previously announced. On the other hand, this is the kind of thing that both sides have to be cautious about as we move ahead with these parallel talks," said U.S. State Department spokesman P.J. Crowley. Under heavy U.S. pressure, Israel agreed in November to restrict building in the West Bank. The government said at the time that exceptions could be allowed.
1268141557: :Exception to Freeze Approved for Infrastructure, Safety Reasons
(Jerusalem Post) Tovah Lazaroff - Beitar Illit is the third-largest Jewish city in the West Bank, with a population of 36,000. Israel has assumed that it will retain Beitar Illit in any final status-agreement with the Palestinians. On Monday, the Defense Ministry explained that initial approval for the 112 apartment units had been granted by former Prime Minister Ehud Olmert as part of a larger project of close to 300 units. Contractors had received all the permits necessary for the units and had laid the foundations for all but 112 units when the moratorium was announced. A source explained that it was impossible to lay infrastructure for the larger project without construction of these 112 units. In addition, the site, as it is now, posed a safety hazard to people in the area.
1268141614: :Rachel Corrie Damage Suit Trial Begins
(Jerusalem Post) Dan Izenberg - The hearing of witnesses in the civil suit filed by the family of Rachel Corrie - a member of the pro-Palestinian International Solidarity Movement (ISM) who was killed trying to block an IDF bulldozer in 2003 - is due to begin in Haifa District Court on March 10. The IDF Southern Command investigated the incident and closed the file without taking measures against any of the soldiers involved. The state maintained that Corrie had been 100% responsible for the accident and that she had deliberately placed herself in danger.
1268141656: :Fayyad's Intifada
(Ynet News) Alex Fishman - Israel had issued VIP cards to about 300 Palestinian elected officials and heads of security arms which enable them to quickly pass through IDF roadblocks in the West Bank. However, Israel recently removed 100 names from the VIP list - all of them members of the Fatah's central committee who took part in the protests in Bil'in. Palestinian officials are also shunning economic ties with Israel, as seen in the discussion on eliminating Palestinian workers at industrial zones in the settlements. On the whole, the Abbas-Fayyad duo is attempting to erase the last remnants of the Oslo Accords as they press the Americans to prevent Israel from engaging in "hot pursuits" within the West Bank. All these moves, which are part of what is known as "Salam Fayyad's White Intifada," are directed at defeating Hamas in the upcoming local elections in the West Bank on July 17. Hamas has already announced that it will not take part in the elections. Indirect negotiations are slated to be launched this week between Israel and the Palestinians. However, before the local elections in the West Bank, nothing will come out of these contacts. The Palestinians enter these talks with the aim of discussing the core issues, so that they can showcase them ahead of the elections. Israel views these talks merely as a stage en route to direct talks which will be launched - according to Mitchell's plan - in four months. Meanwhile, the Americans want to end these talks with at least a declaration on final-status borders. What we have here are three parallel lines that do not meet. The PA cannot show up at the elections with a record of concessions on the national front. It has a clear interest in creating a crisis in order to prompt a warm public embrace and reach the elections with an image of strength.
1268141694: :Are Iran's Oil Reserves Its Trump Card?
(New York Times) Jad Mouawad - Iran holds the world's second-biggest oil and gas reserves and supplies about 4.5% of the world's oil production. Iran may be counting on China to shield it against international sanctions that could really hurt, but some analysts believe that would be expecting too much. "The Iranians are overconfident in the Chinese reliance on them," said Jon Alterman of the Center for Strategic and International Studies. Meanwhile, Erica S. Downs of the Brookings Institution says it is unclear how much money the Chinese have spent so far in Iran's energy sector. "The Iranians aren't getting all they were hoping for from China," she said. The global recession isn't helping. Iran needs oil prices to stay above $90 a barrel to balance its budget, according to PFC Energy, a consulting firm. Also, unlike a few years ago when the world's oil system could barely keep up with growing demand, there now is ample spare capacity, much of it in Saudi Arabia. Cliff Kupchan, a former State Department official and now a director at the New York consulting firm Eurasia Group, said this meant that Iran no longer held a "trump card" when it comes to oil.
1268141759: :Facing Iran: Lessons Learned Since Iraq's 1991 Missile Attack on Israel
(Institute for Contemporary Affairs-Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs) Moshe Arens - The Iranians learned a great deal from the destruction of Iraq's Osirak reactor by the Israel Air Force in 1981. The Osirak reactor was the key element in the Iraqi nuclear program: a single target which, when it was destroyed, set that program back very substantially. The Iranians saw this and they dispersed their nuclear program. Much of it is deep underground. There is no single target which, if destroyed, would substantially set back the Iranian nuclear program. When I came to Washington as Israel's ambassador in 1982, the atmosphere was one of hostility and there was talk of imposing sanctions against Israel as a reaction to its unilateral action against the Osirak reactor. Yet after a few years the view in Washington changed completely. It is difficult to envision the Americans undertaking Operation Desert Storm in the Gulf in 1991 if the Iraqi nuclear program had continued beyond 1981 and had not been so seriously set back by the Israeli action. Some say that while the missiles Israel faces are relatively cheap weapons, we are launching a very expensive missile interceptor against it, which does not seem very wise at first sight. However, the damage that might be caused by the incoming missile may far exceed the cost of the missile interceptor. Israel's missile interceptor system poses a dilemma to anybody who decides to launch missiles against Israel, especially a missile that has a nuclear warhead. The dilemma is that the missile may very well be intercepted and thus expose the launching of a nuclear missile, even if it didn't reach its target, which could bring about the response that could be expected for committing this deed. At the start of the Gulf War, the Americans said they expected that within 48 hours the U.S. Air Force would eliminate the missile launch capability of the Iraqis. If they did not succeed, Israel would be free to take whatever action it considered appropriate. Although there was intensive aerial activity directed at hitting the Scud launchers, not a single Scud launcher was hit or immobilized during the Gulf War. Furthermore, the U.S.-made Patriot missiles in Israel did not succeed in intercepting a single Scud missile. Prof. Moshe Arens was Israel's defense minister during the 1991 war with Iraq.

Tell us what you think

Yes, I"m sure Ymr is right. Israel itself did not invoke the Holocaust to justify Cast Lead. This also makes Mr Fraser"s comments even more unreasonable.

Posted by Mark Durie on 2010-03-07 22:23:06 GMT

Actually not quite. The causus belli for Cast Lead and it justifications did not follow Felicity friend"s grandmother. Everyone I heard spoke about the need to stop Hamas rockets and morters.

Posted by Ymr on 2010-03-07 12:44:52 GMT

Felicity makes a good point: Israel"s supporters have invoked the Holocaust in the past, e.g. during the action in Gaza. This was unwise. Better to justify the fight in terms of the need to defend oneself, and the genuineness of the threat.

Posted by Mark Durie on 2010-03-07 12:35:04 GMT

Mr.Fraser"s comments are inexcusable and irrelevant to a discerning audience. However, the leftists and jew haters would think it is the holy grail. In my opinion, he is a silly old fart and should go and look after his sheep.

Posted by rloader of Qld on 2010-03-07 07:35:27 GMT

Which Australians are you referring to, Fraser supporters or Durie supporters? And what is the point you say they have?

Posted by Felicity on 2010-03-07 05:35:02 GMT

The has beens and talking heads found a golden opportunity to show their true face, because the Dubai job points to an Israeli blunder, which in my opinion has more to do with the loss of Dubai as forward intel post and a good location to meet agents than anything else. Perhaps in Israel, some have a better idea, but the damage to Israel\"s reputation is severe. The botched up job in Norway and Amman are mentioned in every opportunity. If the Israeli\"s rubbed him out in damascus no one would wince, but Dubai is another matter. It gives many critics of Israel, closet anti-semites an opportunity to come out knowing they cannot be blamed for any malice as they merely ask appropriate questions about violation of their own identity. It also shows a bit of lack of concern to the well being and discomfort of many Jews overseas who want to defend Israel, but not under such awkward circumstances. From Los Angeles, the entire affair looks differently, simply because the economy and the buyer\"s remorse on this shabby presidency is consuming the attention of the nervous public. Australians, ruled by Socialists with a big chip on their shoulders, as suppliers of commodities to the Global Economy, can afford to indulge in squabbles which puts them back in the middle of world affairs. Their existence is not in question as that of Israel, which makes the discussion somewhat uneven, nevertheless, they have a point.

Posted on 2010-03-07 03:12:37 GMT

I totally agree with Mark Durie. However, during the war in Gaza, the sentiment that the tragedy of the holocaust justified the defence of Israel (which automatically means killing the enemy, as with all wars) was frequently expressed. I recall one such comment in this forum, that the writer"s grandmother was "butchered by the Nazis", therfore Israel was justified in defending itself. There were more comments in this vein published in the daily press. So it is little wonder that this theme is quoted by somebody unsympathetic to Israel"s right to defend itself. As has been recently pointed out, wouldn"t the events of September 11 justify the "state sanctioned" assassination of Osama Bin Laden in the eyes of the US and its supporters, even if it took even longer to find him? All killing is killing. Either nothing can justify it, or anything can justify it. Politicians should make up their minds which idea they support.

Posted by Felicity on 2010-03-07 01:16:56 GMT

Thank you Mr Durie. What a relief to have a sane reflection on Mr Fraser"s appalling comments. To suggest that Israel uses the Holocaust as an excuse indicates that he clearly does not understand the situation and should retire gracefully as he is no longer serving a useful purpose with such facile comment.

Posted by paule on 2010-03-07 00:21:09 GMT

Quite right: Fraser"s comments are unadulterated anti-semitism because he demonises Jews and applies a double-standard. The previous commentators are also right: Fraser is an irrelevant, ineffectual has-been whose pompous aspirations to project himself as "elder statesman" is both incredible and pathetic.

Posted by sandy on 2010-03-06 23:21:04 GMT

Mr Frazer has been exposed for lying in relation to the Whitlam Government dismissal. He is regarded by most Liberals as the most ineffective Prime Minister. He came to power with the greatest liberal majority in history, and despite 2 terms achieved very little apart from eliminating Death Duties. He was a great failure He helped install Mugabe as Zimbabwe dictator, still in power after so many years.Few people take any notice of him these days, he is barely worth criticizing him

Posted by Harry Segal on 2010-03-06 22:56:36 GMT

Fraser\"s brain is animated by 2 related obessions. * Guilt over how he become PM * Winning esteem by latching on to popular causes (aka fads). The joke is that some Jewish organisations think that silly old fogey will lend authority to their organisation.

Posted by ymr on 2010-03-06 22:54:47 GMT

Links

Criticism of Israel and Antisemitism: Fraser Goes too far

Twitter Updates

News

Tell us what you think