Subject: Mahathir & the “Jewish vote”
Mahathir & the "Jewish vote"
Malcolm Turnbull led the push to make Australia a republic; now he's
trying to get into Federal Parliament as a member of the Liberal Party.
His wife has become Lord Mayor of Sydney, and is playing to the Jewish
lobby to help Malcolm win preselection.
Only a few months ago, the Jewish lobby threatened the Australian Labor
Party with loss of electoral funding. Now, ALP leader Simon Crean is on
the bandwagon.
(1) Sydney Lord Mayor to boycott peace prize
(2) Ashrawi hits back: boycott ridiculous
(3) Labor leader Simon Crean says Howard should have condemned Mahathir
more strongly ... "There is no place for anti-semitism"
(4) Israel Shamir on some tricky issues
(5) [shamireaders] In Support Of Malaysian PM's Comments On Jews, by
Elias Davidsson
(6) & (7) Communism and Christianity
(8) & (9) ADL defamation suit against New Republic
(1) Sydney Lord Mayor to boycott peace prize
Sydney Lord Mayor to boycott peace prize
ABC Radio - The World Today - Wednesday, 22 October , 2003 12:24:46
Reporter: Jo Mazzocchi
http://www.abc.net.au/worldtoday/content/2003/s972644.htm
ELIZABETH JACKSON: Doctor Hanan Ashrawi is a prominent Palestinian
activist who's met with the US Secretary of State, Colin Powell, and
National Security Adviser, Condoleezza Rice as well as the British
Foreign Minister, Jack Straw. But she won't be meeting with Sydney's
Lord Mayor, Lucy Turnbull, when she comes to Australia next month, to
receive the Sydney University Peace prize.
The annual prize, that's previously been awarded to world figures such
as Mary Robinson, the former Head of the United Nations Commission on
Human Rights, and Archbishop Desmond Tutu, is now being boycotted by the
Sydney City Council, the event's main sponsor.
And the reason for the boycott? Well, Lord Mayor Lucy Turnbull says Dr
Ashrawi is an unsuitable recipient for the prestigious award because she
doesn't speak the language of peace.
But that's not a view shared by the Premier of New South Wales, Bob
Carr. He says he intends to go ahead regardless of the snub and present
the prize next month to the high profile Palestinian advocate.
And the group who awarded the prize in the first place, the Sydney Peace
Foundation, claim the Lord Mayor's decision has more to do with Lucy
Turnbull's husband, Malcolm's campaign to win the State seat of
Wentworth - a seat that has a very large Jewish population.
Jo Mazzocchi reports.
JO MAZZOCCHI: According to the Institute of International Studies at the
University of Berkley, Dr Hanan Ashrawi has been a central player in the
push for a Palestinian homeland and a tireless campaigner for human
rights.
A Palestinian academic and human rights campaigner, she's served as the
official spokeswoman for the Palestinian Delegation to the Middle East
Peace Process and is a Director of the Palestinian Initiative for the
Promotion of Global Dialogue and Democracy.
But her critics claim she's not an agent for peace and Sydney's Lord
Mayor, Lucy Turnbull, says she's decided the City Council, the major
sponsor for this year's peace prize, should boycott the event.
Lucy Turnbull explains why.
LUCY TURNBULL: Um, I think Jo, I think it's very important to give peace
prizes to people who act to pursue peace and who talk the language of
peace. And my enquiries have led me to have some concerns about her
track record.
For example, in 1996, she was one of a small minority of the, on the
Palestinian National Council who voted against removing the clauses in
the Palestinian Charter asking for the destruction of Israel.
JO MAZZOCCHI: The Lord Mayor says she's convinced the Palestinian
activist is dismissive of the Road Map for Peace within the Middle East,
but the group who awarded her the prize in the first place, the Sydney
Peace Foundation, disagrees. It's awarded her this year's annual peace
prize, the only international prize of its kind awarded in Australia.
The Director of that Foundation is Professor Stuart Rees.
STUART REES: If you actually look at Hanan Ashrawi's detailed analysis
of the Road Map to Peace, of her statements on two-State solutions to
that awful conflict, you'll see that, um, of course she makes caveats
but she's committed to a two, to a two-State solution and she's
committed to the essential goals of the Road Map to Peace.
JO MAZZOCCHI: Professor Rees claims Lucy Turnbull's decision is linked
to her husband's push for the State seat of Wentworth, a seat that
boasts a large Jewish population.
STUART REES: Well, uh, you'd have to say that in the chemistry of
current politics, um, around here, to make that link doesn't seem all
that extravagant.
JO MAZZOCCHI: But that's a view rejected by the Lord Mayor.
LUCY TURNBULL: I find that deeply offensive and I find it extraordinary
that somebody who's in charge of the Peace Foundation plays the woman
and not the issue that I'm raising here, and that issue is the
appropriateness of Dr Ashwari as a peace prize recipient, bearing in
mind that I respect the Peace Foundation's right to choose whoever they
like.
JO MAZZOCCHI: New South Wales Premier, Bob Carr, although not involved
in the decision making process, says he still intends to present the
award to Dr Ashrawi next month, when she arrives in Sydney.
This is what he told ABC Local Radio.
BOB CARR: I'm not going to withdraw from this. I'm not going to withdraw
from this for a very simple reason: the security of Israel will only be,
only be achieved by a peace settlement with the Palestinians and we've
got to seize every opportunity to engage with both sides and urge peace
on both sides.
JO MAZZOCCHI: The Sydney Peace Foundation has also attacked members of
the Jewish community for placing enormous pressure on the Lord Mayor to
boycott the event.
That's a claim rejected by both Lucy Turnbull and Stephen Rothman, the
President of the New South Wales Jewish Board of Deputies, who says
there's been no concerted lobbying campaign.
STEPHEN ROTHMAN: My understanding is there's no concerted effort by the
Jewish community as such, um, on the Sydney City Council. Um.
JO MAZZOCCHI: Has there been any kind of lobbying, though?
STEPHEN ROTHMAN: By, by members of the Jewish community and non-Jewish
Australians, there is a groundswell of view that this is the wrong
person to give a peace prize to.
It's a number of people, um, some of whom are Jewish not most of whom
are Jewish, and have done so because they are political affiliates or
friends of the people in power in the Sydney City Council.
The fact is that the Jewish-ness of the people opposed to this prize is
really almost irrelevant. The fact is.
JO MAZZOCCHI: But doesn't it go to the heart of the issue, though?
STEPHEN ROTHMAN: No, no it doesn't. It's not whether this person is
Palestinian or whether the opposition is Jewish, um, the fact of the
matter is that this is a person who on standards applicable in Australia
is not a person who is renowned for engaging in constructive discussion
and action for peace. She's a person, in fact, who's renowned for
exactly the opposite.
ELIZABETH JACKSON: Stephen Rothman, the President of the New South Wales
Jewish Board of Deputies, speaking to Jo Mazzocchi.
(2) Ashrawi hits back: boycott ridiculous
By Ed O'Loughlin in Gaza, Sean Nicholls and Anne Davies
Sydney Morning Herald, October 23, 2003
http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/10/22/1066631507555.html
The Palestinian woman at the centre of the political storm over the
Sydney Peace Prize, Hanan Ashrawi, has described as "ridiculous"
claims
that she opposed the Oslo peace process and the recent Middle East
"road
map" effort.
Sydney's Lord Mayor, Lucy Turnbull - who announced the city council
would boycott the award - yesterday repeated her belief that Dr Ashrawi
was an unsuitable recipient because she had "not shown a sufficient
commitment to the peace process".
The basis for this claim was a 1996 meeting of the Palestinian National
Council when Dr Ashrawi voted "against removing the clauses in the
Palestinian charter that called for the destruction of Israel", Cr
Turnbull said.
Dr Ashrawi had also "dismissed at a very early stage the
performance-based road map for a negotiated settlement to the Middle
East conflict," Cr Turnbull said.
But Dr Ashrawi told the Herald: "Obviously she's been misled
deliberately or she's taken information based on incomplete or dishonest
sources. I knew there would be mobilised voices trying to malign
Palestinians, particularly ones like me who have been outspoken for
peace."
Dr Ashrawi said that far from rejecting peace, she had served as a
negotiator in the run-up to the Madrid and Oslo agreements, which led to
the Palestinians accepting the two-state solution and Israel's right to
exist.
She said she still supported the road map as published, although she
deplored efforts to alter it and the failure to implement it.
Dr Ashrawi said she was looking forward to her visit to Australia next
month.
It also emerged yesterday that the City of Sydney publicly supported the
right of the Sydney Peace Foundation committee to award its peace prize
to Dr Ashrawi just weeks before Cr Turnbull declared the council would
boycott the event because of the choice.
In a September 26 article about the award in the Australian Jewish News
a council spokesman said it "respects the right of the foundation to
make its choices in selecting a winner".
Yesterday the Deputy Opposition Leader, Barry O'Farrell, called on the
Premier, Bob Carr, to reconsider presenting the prize to Dr Ashrawi,
claiming some Labor backbenchers had expressed qualms to him.
Mr Carr, however, said he was not considering withdrawing.
George Newhouse, a member of the Jewish Labor Forum, said he was "in
two
minds" about Cr Turnbull's actions, but agreed with her that Dr Ashrawi
was not a worthy recipient.
"The message is going to be delivered by the Premier that the
Palestinians will never achieve anything by terror and violence," he
said. "If that message gets through then there's some value in him
speaking to Ashrawi."
The deputy lord mayor, Dixie Coulton, yesterday claimed Cr Turnbull was
"overstepping her role as Lord Mayor".
Cr Coulton, who is a political opponent of Cr Turnbull, said: "She did
not ... [have] the right to involve the city in this debate."
City councillors were not informed of the Lord Mayor's decision until
two days after Cr Turnbull sent a letter to the director of the Sydney
Peace Foundation, Stuart Rees.
Professor Rees said he had been told Cr Turnbull's husband, Malcolm, was
concerned the row was being used to derail his campaign to win Liberal
preselection for the federal seat of Wentworth, which has a large Jewish
vote.
Mr O'Farrell, however, said it was "despicable of Dr Reece to reduce
the
Lord Mayor's motives down to what was happening in the seat of
Wentworth".
(3) Labor leader Simon Crean says Howard should have condemned Mahathir
more strongly ... "There is no place for anti-semitism"
The Australian, 22 Oct 2003
Mahathir reiterates Jewish comments
From correspondents in Bangkok, Thailand October 21, 2003
http://www.news.com.au/common/story_page/
0,4057,7625958%255E2,00.html
DESPITE a barrage of international criticism over his allegedly
anti-Semitic remarks, unrepentant Malaysian Prime Minister Mahathir
Mohamad maintains that Jews are arrogant and control the world.
Among an array of world leaders, US President George W. Bush personally
condemned Mahathir's statements and pulled him aside at the Asia-Pacific
Economic Cooperation meeting to say the remarks were "wrong and
divisive," a White House spokesman said.
But Mahathir, who retires at month's end after 22 years as the leader of
mainly Muslim Malaysia, said the global reaction "shows that (Jews) do
control the world," today's Bangkok Post quoted him as saying.
"Israel is a small country. There are not many Jews in the world. But
they are so arrogant that they defy the whole world.
"Even if the United Nations say no, they go ahead. Why? Because they
have the backing of all these people," said Mr Mahathir.
Mr Mahathir triggered an uproar last week at a summit of Islamic
countries by stating that "Jews rule the world by proxy. They get
others
to fight and die for them."
The issue trailed him to the APEC summit, which closes today, where
leaders ranging from Australia to the United States continued to
criticise Asia's senior statesman.
Shortly before Mr Bush and Mr Mahathir sat down together in the same
room with 19 other APEC leaders yesterday, US National Security Adviser
Condoleeza Rice said the American President "thinks those remarks were
reprehensible. I do not think they are emblematic of the Muslim world."
Later White House press secretary Scott McClellan quoted Mr Bush as
telling the Malaysian leader face to face that: "It stands squarely
against what I believe in."
After Mahathir's latest comments, Australian Prime Minister John Howard
said: "any attempt to divide this world according to religious
affiliation is the last thing we want."
"We want Jews and Christians and Muslims of goodwill cooperating."
The thrust of Mr Mahathir's address, made at the Organisation of the
Islamic Conference in Kuala Lumpur, was that the world's 1.3 billion
Muslims had been outflanked by "a few million Jews" and needed to
give
up violence and think hard about greater unity and improved education to
defend their interests peacefully.
Mr Mahathir said in the Bangkok Post interview that his remarks had been
taken out of context, noting that in his speech he had urged Israelis
and Arabs to stop killing one another.
"In my speech I condemned all violence, even the suicide bombings and I
told the Muslims it's about time we stopped all these things and paused
to think and do something that is much more productive," he said.
"That was the whole tone of my speech, but they picked up one sentence
where I said that the Jews control the world."
However, Opposition leader Simon Crean belives Prime Minister John
Howard should have taken a stronger stand against anti-semitic comments
by the Malaysian prime minister.
Mr Crean said Mr Howard should have condemned Mahathir Mohamad
"quickly,
strongly, and decisively".
"I think that the prime minister should have taken a much stronger
stand
in statements against Dr Mahathir," Mr Crean told reporters in
Melbourne.
"There is no place for anti-semitism.
"Australia abhors it, and so should other countries."
Mr Crean said that Australia, as a tolerant society, should be at the
forefront of criticising anti-semitism.
"I firmly believe that no international leader should make anti-semitic
comments," he said.
"I think people that do make them publicly should be criticised and
condemned for having made them, to demonstrate that that is the
collective view, or that it is the view of others."
The Associated Press
(4) Israel Shamir on some tricky issues
Date: Mon, 20 Oct 2003 12:26:30 +0200 From: "Israel Shamir"
<shamir@home.se>
: What is your position on these tricky issues:
: Gay Marriage
It has no meaning! Marriage is the sacral union of feminine and
masculine. But if gays wish to draw a contract re their material
obligations, they may.
: Divorce Settlement (one of the most difficult questions: in the west,
: divorce is a battleground shattering lives, in part becasuse of the
"sex : war" and "winner take all" approach)
Let them split 50-50, unless the marriage was very short and barren.
: The Green movement
Wonderful guys!
: Employment: has the replacement of people with machines - in farm, :
factory & office - gone too far?
Oh yes! The first job to go should be the job of the boss.
: Tibet and Burma - the Dalai Lama & Su Shi movements.
In Tibet, while approving of cultural autonomy and religious freedom, I
fully support the People's Republic of China and reject all attempts of
Judeo-American Empire to undermine and break it to pieces like they did
in the USSR. In Burma, I am suspicious of the forces supported by the
US, whatever slogans they brandish.
(5) [shamireaders] In Support Of Malaysian PM's Comments On Jews, by
Elias Davidsson
Date: Mon, 20 Oct 2003 14:58:08 +0200 From: "Israel Shamir"
<shamir@home.se>
The daring speech of the Malaysian PM, Dr Mahathir brought many
responses, but the best and most lucid is that by our good friend, a
native of Jerusalem, Elias Davidsson. He wrote:
In Support Of Malaysian PM's Comments On Jews.
As a Jew myself (but opposed to Zionism) I need no encouragement from
Malaysian PM Mahathir Mohamad to observe what should be obvious to the
blatant eye: Namely that Jews effectively rule US foreign policy and
thus determine to a great extent the conduct of most countries. If an
empirical observation is defined as "antisemitism", then this
would
apply also to any other empirical observation, whatever its nature. When
I say "the sun shines today", it would also amount to
"antisemitism" and
you will find people dispute whether the existence of an undetermined
number of clouds, sometimes hiding the sun, invalidate the proposition.
So it is with the proposition that Jews control the world. Surely they
do not control every single action; surely it does not mean that every
Jew participates in the "control". But for all practical purposes
the
proposition holds. The very fact that a mere statement of this type
causes outrage in the chancelleries of the most powerful nations (while
the death of half a million children in Iraq between 1990 and 2001 has
not), the fact that dozens of nations could change by 180 degrees their
opinion of what Zionism is (in 1975 they adopted a UNGA resolution that
Zionism is a form of racism whereas after the demise of the Soviet Union
they simply, and without any arguments rescinded that resolution), the
fact that to obtain US credits one country after the other takes up
diplomatic relations with the State of Israel and shows great
"sympathy"
to the Jewish victims of the Holocaust, the fact that in order to be
voted into the Congress, an American must demonstrate his or her
allegiance to the State of Israel, all of these and many more facts
demonstrate that the Jews indeed have the power referred to my Malaysian
PM.
This observation has nothing to do neither with the exotic Protocols of
the Elders of Zion nor with esoteric interpretations of the Talmud. It
is based on publicly available evidence and has little to do with
conspiracy theories. Why Jews wield such power is again another
question. Perhaps because Jews emphasize so much education, perhaps
because Jews feel solidarity with each other and care much more for
their "nation" than many others.
Mahathir has neither asked to discriminate against Jews, let alone to
kill Jews. It is shameful to equate him to the Hitlerites. He urges
Muslims to fight Jews by adopting modern methods, technology and educate
themselves, in other words to surpass Jews in excellence. What's wrong
with that? By this he is doing service to the Muslims (over 1 Billion
people) and to humanity. Jews must know their place and content
themselves with influence derived from their small number. Jews must
learn some humility...
Elias Davidsson
edavid@simnet.is
(6) Communism and Christianity
Date: Mon, 20 Oct 2003 07:14:10 -0700 (PDT) From: Joachim Martillo
<thimbronparnassos@yahoo.com>
The complete disconnect at the beginning of the 20th century between the
Jewish (really Ashkenazi) and non-Jewish (really non-Ashkenazi)
perceptions of the Communist party is quite interesting. In the naughts
of the 20th, Lenin apparently considered himself mostly in competition
with the Bund for members.
But was the dejudaization of the Soviet Communist party a completely
predictable outcome or was it an accidental side effect of the
Nazi-Soviet Pact?
(7) Communism and Christianity
Date: Thu, 23 Oct 2003 11:13:58 +0200 From: "Israel Shamir"
<shamir@home.se>
Dear Joachim, you asked a difficult question. Probably what happened is
normal Russification of power, like the Norman power in England of
Plantagenets was Anglisized, or Manju power in China was Han-ified.
Molotov-Ribbentrop treaty would not be possible if this process would
not be completed previously. But the changes in Germany 1936 influenced
and speedied up the process in Russia and Italy (for Italy read Esau's
Tears by Lindemann). Shamir
(8) ADL defamation suit against New Republic
Date: Mon, 20 Oct 2003 22:29:29 +0500 From: "Eric Walberg"
<eric@albatros.uz>
For anyone interested, this is the section of the article by New
Republic Senior Editor Gregg Easterbrook which so offended the ADL:
Set aside what it says about Hollywood that today even Disney thinks
what the public needs is ever-more-graphic depictions of killing the
innocent as cool amusement. Disney's CEO, Michael Eisner, is Jewish; the
chief of Miramax, Harvey Weinstein, is Jewish. Yes, there are plenty of
Christian and other Hollywood executives who worship money above all
else, promoting for profit the adulation of violence. Does that make it
right for Jewish executives to worship money above all else, by
promoting for profit the adulation of violence? Recent European history
alone ought to cause Jewish executives to experience second thoughts
about glorifying the killing of the helpless as a fun lifestyle choice.
But history is hardly the only concern. Films made in Hollywood are now
shown all over the world, to audiences that may not understand the
dialogue or even look at the subtitles, but can't possibly miss the
message--now Disney's message--that hearing the screams of the innocent
is a really fun way to express yourself.
And this is most of his (grovelling, boot-licking) mea culpa which the
ADL finds inadequate:
Looking back I did a terrible job through poor wording. It was terrible
that I implied that the Jewishness of studio executives has anything
whatsoever to do with awful movies like Kill Bill. Nothing about Eisner
or Weinstein causes any movie to be bad or awful; they're just
supervisors. For all I know neither of them even focused on the
adoration-of-violence aspect until the reviews came out. My attempt to
connect my perfectly justified horror at an ugly and corrupting movie to
the religious faith and ethnic identity of certain executives was
hopelessly clumsy.
Where I failed most is in the two sentences about adoration of money. I
noted that many Christian executives adore money above all else, and in
the 20-minute reality of blog composition, that seemed to me, writing
it, fairness and fair spreading of blame. But accusing a Christian of
adoring money above all else does not engage any history of ugly
stereotypes. Accuse a Jewish person of this and you invoke a thousand
years of stereotypes about that which Jews have specific historical
reasons to fear. What I wrote here was simply wrong, and for being
wrong, I apologize.
Every reporter who has called me today has asked me my faith. Since I
say this is relevant for others, it's relevant for me. I'm a Christian.
I worship in one of the handful of joint Christian-Jewish congregations
in the United States. This website describes the Bradley Hills
Presbyterian (USA) side of the church. This website describes Bethesda
Jewish, a Klal Yisrael ("All Israel") congregation that shares the
same
worship spaces and finances. Two years ago I wrote in The New Republic
of the Bradley Hills-Bethesda Jewish joint congregation, "One of the
shortcomings of Christianity is that most adherents downplay the faith's
interweaving with Judaism." I and my family sought out a place where
Christians and Jews express their faith cooperatively, which seems to me
a good idea. Bad idea: writing poorly about this, and being
misunderstood. Again, I'm sorry. ***
Ironically, this ADL suit backfired in the sense that it motivated at
least me to actually read the article and scan the New Republic, which I
see is an essentially pro-Zionist rag, tho' not in the ADL league.
Elsewhere, NR hack Lawrence F. Kaplan rates Lieberman as the best of the
dems (Category: Political Courage; Grade: A) but then takes a swipe at
Lieberman, making him look like a crypto-Nazi, referring to his essay,
"The Theological Iron Curtain," in the current issue of The
National
Interest. The article attacks Bush from the right -- mostly for
neglecting the war (sic or rather SICK). You can find that at
http://www.tnr.com/primary/ though
I wouldn't read it on a full stomach.
(9) ADL defamation suit against New Republic
Date: Mon, 20 Oct 2003 22:29:13 -0700 From: Jeff Blankfort
<jab@tucradio.org>
Actually, I can't think of any major film executives who are not Jewish.
Hollywood was founded by Jews when most other businesses were closed to
them--others went into furniture--and were neither religious or
particularly concerned with pushing any Jewish agenda. If fact, the last
thing they wanted to portray was any issues of specific concern to Jews,
such as anti-semitism. They are responsible, however, for putting on the
screen most of the racist stereotypes that have persisted since that
day. Their successors are worse, and not nearly as funny, and they know
exactly what they are paying for and what brings them profits. It ain't
the prophets.
I am surprised that his column actually was published because the New
Republic is as bad as the ADL and its publisher Marty Peretz is
certainly in the class of the ADL's Abe Foxman, and I suspect he might
not be there for long. He regularly sends letters out describing the New
Republic as being pro-Israel.
Jeff B
--
Peter Myers, 21 Blair St, Watson ACT 2602, Australia
http://users.cyberone.com.au/myers
ph +61 2 62475187
to unsubscribe, reply with "unsubscribe" in the subject line
