Letters, June 17, 2011

Boycotters should learn lesson of Marrickville

ON Q&A last week, Paul McGeough and Lee Rhiannon sought to promote Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) by issuing a carefully sourced letter from Desmond Tutu.

McGeough spoke supportively of BDS protesters rallying outside a Trader Joes store to promote their cause.

Christopher Pyne promptly observed that boycotting Jewish products or stores and not gentile ones was anti-Semitic. The audience applauded with gusto.

Australians are not stupid.

The Nazis tried: ”Kauft nicht bei Juden”.  The hard left are trying: “Do not buy from Israelis.”  It is a little like saying there are some Jews (Not Israelis) we can abide. That is racist. It is hateful, and is being routinely exposed as such.

For those genuine people who are not racist but are initially attracted to the promotion of BDS, the best antidote is conversation and dialogue.

Local councils should be promoting dialogue and community harmony. When they don’t, their community will tell them.

That is the lesson of Marrickville. After all effective dialogue is the antithesis of a boycott.

However, for the die-hard hater, one can only expect a dialogue of the deaf.

The Marrickville experiment has demonstrated that Australians and not just Australian Jews understand that building community harmony is right, and boycotting harmony is wrong.

Comedian shows BDS is no laughing matter

WHEN comedian Sandy Gutman, aka Austen Tayshus, was announced as a guest panellist on ABC’s Q&A along with Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) supporting Greens senator-elect Lee Rhiannon and Fairfax journalist Paul McGeough, I thought it was a strange mix and that Sandy would be overwhelmed by these two anti-Israel activists along with what seemed to be a predominantly left-wing pro-Palestinian audience .

Predictably, when the ABC selected a Palestinian law student to ask a controversial question on the BDS, to his credit Sandy was well prepared, knew his stuff and went on the attack.

Before Israel-basher Rhiannon could finish her anti-Israel dialogue, Sandy came out with the question we would all have loved to ask her, McGeough and all the other Israel critics – why are you so obsessed with Israel?

Sandy went on to put these ratbag Israel-bashers in their place. He has shown in his own way that our Jewish community leaders’ tactics of remaining calm, polite and politially correct while debating with Israel detractors has got them nowhere, and only the Palestinian narrative is getting across to Australians.

At least Sandy got his point across – how hypocritical these left-wing anti-Zionists are – and made their arguments look weak and ineffective.

It was a pleasure to hear the other two guest panellists from Labor and Liberal both agree about the evilness of the racist Israel boycott movement. Kol Hakavod Sandy.

Our leaders should be more like Gutman

LIKE a lightning boxer Sandy Gutman (aka Austen Tayshus) had anti-Israel Lee Rhiannon and Paul McGeough on the canvas within seconds on the ABC TVprogram Q&A.

The show’s compere Tony Jones, desperately trying to limit Gutman’s intellectual punches, could not stop the rout. Gutman opened the door for other guests Christopher Pyne and Nicola Roxon to finish the job. People are unaccustomed to such muscular Jewish comedians.

They prefer their Jewish wit to ooze with self deprecation and neurosis. But Austen Tayshus is no Woody Allen or Jerry Seinfeld obsessed with foibles, his blowtorch mind is motivated by pride in the Jewish religion and people. Of Israel detractors, Gutman says, “when they saw me they were shaking like a leaf”.

These days, perhaps more Jews should take a leaf out of his book.

Fears for Israel over McGeough’s new role

THE Age and The SMH has announced the appointment of Paul McGeough as their new chief correspondent for foreign affairs (The Saturday Age 11/06).

McGeough, who as the Fairfax correspondent on the Turkish flotilla bound for Gaza, described the actions of Israeli soldiers as, “They hunted like hyenas”.

A sure way of portraying Israelis, and indeed Jews, as repulsive, low-life creatures; reminiscent of how we were portrayed as vermin by the Nazis.

And with McGeough at the helm, we can be sure to get more of the same.

The Anti-Defamation Commission must receive more funding to combat such hateful incitement, and if necessary, bring court actions against those in the media who vilify us.

Double standards from the NIF

LIKE so many others, I am very concerned with the past performance and political agenda of the New Israel Fund (NIF). Its platform clearly supports BDS where the settlements are concerned.

What does that mean? NIF is comfortable with the notion of punishing people, and destroying their livelihood, in the hope that, if they’re hurting enough, it will force the Israeli Government to change. Now Israel is a democracy, and in democracies you don’t bend people to your will. That’s totalitarianism.

You present convincing arguments, and if you fail to convince, you accept it, or try harder. Boycotts against democracies are nothing short of terrorism without the violence, a form of collective punishment designed to hurt individuals who are simply trying to feed their families.

But the NIF believes the settlers don’t belong. The Etzion Bloc, which supports 18 communities, was purchased in 1930 by Shmuel Yosef Holtzman.

Why exactly can’t Jews build and live on land that they own? They say that it’s about “peace”.

If, hypothetically, New York City residents decided they didn’t want African-Americans living there, if they began terrorising the African- American population to the point where communities had to be protected by the authorities, if they said there would be no peace until the African-Americans were gone, would Naomi Chazan and the NIF be supporting boycotts of their businesses until they went?

I didn’t use Jews in the example for the very real fear that many would say, “yes, for the sake of peace, Jews must go.”

Moetzah misguided on same-sex marriage

THE notion of marriage under Jewish law is seemingly misunderstood by many, including the Progressive Moetzah.

Since it is essentially a private contractual agreement between a man and a woman, in essence it does not necessarily require the presence of a rabbi or any other religious official. The presence of a religious or civil official is, however, required under most Western civil laws, including Australia.

Since the Jewish Law “explicitly prohibits homosexuality”, as stated by Rabbi Yossi Feldman (AJN 10/06), how much more so the notion of officiating a union between two men and presenting it as a “Jewish wedding” is absolutely bizarre!

Nonetheless, it is extremely important to note that it is the homosexual acts that are forbidden (under Jewish law) and not the sexual orientation. Judaism’s restrictions focus on the person’s actions rather than a person’s desires. That is, a man’s desire to have sex with another man is not a sin in itself.

Knowing the above, it is also important to note that observant (Orthodox) Judaism teaches that behaviour towards all individuals, and in particular towards Jews who care about Judaism, must be with respect, compassion, sympathy and understanding, irrespective of age, colour, gender and/or sexual orientation.