MICHAEL KROGER - ANOTHER ZIONIST WHO LIVES IN AUSTRALIA

Michael Kroger, the latest zionist to come out of the closet, is now taking the Greens candidate for the Batman by-election to task because of her support for BDS.

The candidate, Alex Bhathal, has now stated that she doesn't support all of the BDS items, particularly two of them.

There are probably more zionists in 2018 in Australia than there are in Israel, but unlike those in Israel where most are probably Jewish, the vast majority of those in Australia are Christian.

The question is, why??

The answer must assuredly be that they are trying to get the Jewish zionists to move to Israel, thus saving them the problem of their ongoing anti-semitism.

After all, there are only somewhere between 100,000 and 120,000 Jews in Australia, and once Isael has kicked out most of the African refugees there and also the Palestinian Israeli citizens who still live in the so-called officially recognised  "borders" of Israel, there will be more than enough extra places for Australian Jewish zionists.

After all, apart from the Christian zionists like Michael Kroger, there are the fanatical Jewish zionists like the federal member for Israel Michael Danby - who still calls Australia home.

Does Michael Kroger know that there are many Jews in Australia who do not toe the zionist/Israel line and who support BDS?

Many of them also don't fear the political consequences of complete boycotts of Israel as some of the Greens seem to do. The Greens still have a great deal of growing up to do, and they should have trips to South Africa and learn what BDS achieved there in the apartheid years.

Of course Israel apartheid is easier to enforce because of the numbers involved, but with the ongoing genocide of the Palestinians, the Israelis hope to one day have the numbers.

ZIONISTS CENSOR AUSTRALIAN SCHOOL CURRICULA?

New test for VCE literature sparks censorship concerns

Date

May 26, 2016 The Age

Timna Jacks

Education Reporter 

 

Cast of the play, Tales of A City by the Sea, when it premiered in 2014. Photo: The Age

• VCE play accused of being 'anti-Israel propaganda'

Books, plays and films studied for VCE will soon be screened to ensure they don't offend religious and cultural groups.

Education Minister James Merlino has ordered the Victorian Curriculum Assessment Authority (VCAA) to review its text selection process for VCE English, literature, drama and theatre studies.

A spokesman for Mr Merlino said the Minister requested to "extend" the guidelines to "ensure that the views and sensitivities of cultural and religious groups are considered".

This comes after two Jewish groups slammed the inclusion of a play on the VCE drama list, Tales of a City by the Sea, which depicted life during war in Gaza, and was written by Palestinian playwright Samah Sabawi.

Mr Merlino demanded the review after the B'nai B'rith Anti-Defamation Commission and the Jewish Community Council of Victoria complained that the play promoted an anti-Israel agenda and could isolate Jewish students.

Some of Australia's most well-known authors, including some who have books on the list, have slammed the minister's intervention.

Christos Tsiolkas has criticised the review. Photo: Simon Schluter 

Author Christos Tsiolkas said excluding texts that would offend certain groups put "most literature out of bounds".

He said his teachers showed him provocative literature, including works by Henry Miller, Philip Roth, Fyodor Dostoyevsky and Tennessee Williams. These inspired him to become a writer and feel more comfortable as a gay male.

"What scares me about the current age is that teachers may not take these kinds of risks with their students anymore because of this general fear that you can't be seen to treat young people as curious or intellectually able," he said.

"The last thing you'd want is a curriculum that will bore students."

Anna Funder's former publisher was sued by a group of ex-Stasi, who found her book Stasiland offensive. Photo: Trevor Collens

Writer Anna Funder, whose non-fiction book Stasiland is on the VCE English booklist, said while she was not across the details of the review, testing literature to ensure it was not offensive was ludicrous.

"A lot of Shakespeare is offensive, Shylock is offensive, The Taming of the Shrew is offensive … life is offensive and literature represents life.

"Any government that tries to make a piece of literature palatable to everyone kills the thing."
However, a spokesman for the Ethnic Community Council of Victoria welcomed the review.

"We welcome any government initiatives that look at embracing the cultural sensitivities of the many ethnic groups that are represented in Victoria."

Dr Dvir Abramovich, who is the chair of B'nai B'rith Anti-Defamation Commission, said students should not be exposed to "pedagogical materials" that could "create tension and disharmony between their friends at school".

"The VCAA selection process must reflect community standards by ensuring that students are provided with plays that promote understanding of complex issues and which furnish its learners with appropriate context and balance."

But president of the Australia Palestine Advocacy Network, Bishop George Browning, said he was concerned that the minister was "bowing to vexatious complaints".

"It is vital that the review does not lead to censorship of Palestinian voices within arts and education, even if this is difficult for some people to hear."

President of the Australian Association for the Teaching of English Monika Wagner said challenging texts encouraged students to think critically.

"It [the review] does tend to suggest that there would be a single homogenised heteronormative, culturally normative type of text that is considered acceptable. I don't know what that text would be but that's what I would be afraid of."

This is not the first time the VCE authority has been asked to reconsider texts perceived to be controversial.
In 2012, Nobel-prize winning author Gabriel Garcia Marquez's Love in the Time of Cholera was reviewed by the VCAA after an Age columnist complained it was offensive because it "says repeatedly that screwing a child for art's sake is excusable".

 

HOMOPHOBIA, XENOPHOBIA, HUMAN RIGHTS ABUSES, APARTHEID - AUSTRALIA'S POLITICIANS AND THE PEOPLE WHO ELECT THEM

Gay refugees on Nauru 'prisoners' in their home as Australia prepares to celebrate Mardi Gras

March 5, 2016 

Nicole Hasham

Environment and immigration correspondent

EXCLUSIVE

Injuries the men say they have suffered on the island nation. Photo: Supplied
 
Two gay refugees who fell in love at the Nauru detention camp say they are virtually prisoners in their home: holed up in fear for their lives after being bashed and verbally abused in a nation where homosexuality is illegal
.
As Sydney prepares for Saturday night's Mardi Gras parade - an event that showcases Australia as a global model of acceptance of gay and lesbian people - the federal government is refusing to rescue the two young Iranian men it sent to a country where they could be jailed for their sexual orientation, according to lawyers.
Immigration Minister Peter Dutton has so far refused to help the refugees, who say they have been repeatedly beaten, had rocks thrown at them and been called "human rubbish". His department says refugees at Nauru can accept resettlement in Cambodia.

A digitally altered photo of two gay Iranian refugees, Nima and Ashkan, who say they are being persecuted at Nauru, where homosexuality is illegal. Photo: supplied
 
The Human Rights Law Centre and international LGBT rights group All Out have begun a petition calling on Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull to urgently intervene and bring the men to Australia. The refugees, known by the pseudonyms Nima and Ashkan, live in the Nauruan community. They say they spend their lives confined in a tiny unit with the doors locked and window shades drawn - leaving just once a week to buy food, escorted by a case manager.

"We would love to live in a country where we can love each other without any barriers … and Australia is such a country," Nima told Fairfax Media through an interpreter, speaking on the phone from Nauru.
"Most of the time we just lie on the bed because we can't do anything … we are mentally suffering. We can't do anything else."

Further injuries the men have endured. Photo: Supplied
 
The men, both in their 20s, fled Iran separately after suffering persecution and headed to Australia. They met after being transferred to the Nauru detention camp and their relationship began about two years ago.

They claim to have suffered harassment from other detainees while inside the centre. After being found to be refugees and moved into the Nauruan community, they say the attacks escalated.

In one alleged assault one evening in July last year, the men were walking home carrying their shopping when their path was blocked by three local men.

The refugees allege the men asked if they were partners, which they confirmed, before the men said "f*ck you" and beat them with sticks, forcing them to the ground.

The refugees said they sustained bruising and were taken to hospital. Ashkan allegedly suffered concussion and was kept overnight

In an attack the following month, Nima was allegedly punched in the head by two men on motorbikes, who yelled "you f***ing gays".

A spokesman for the Department of Immigration and Border Protection said it was "aware of an incident involving the individuals" and law enforcement in Nauru was the responsibility of the island's government.
The spokesman said concerns about the treatment of gay people are considered prior to a detainee's transfer to that country.

"It is not Australian government policy for illegal maritime arrivals to settle in Australia. Refugees in Nauru may apply to Cambodia for permanent settlement," he said.

Very few refugees have taken up the Cambodia resettlement option. Critics say that nation has been accused of human rights abuses, has high poverty levels and no refugee resettlement experience.

The Nauruan government had not provided comment at the time of writing.

HRLC's director of advocacy and litigation, Anna Brown, said under Nauruan law Ashkan and Nima risk being jailed for up to 14 years.

"This situation and similar ones on Manus [Island] are just so wrong ... the Australian government knowingly and deliberately allows gay men to be warehoused on tiny islands where they face assaults, prejudice and extremely harsh criminal penalties," she said.

The HRLC says former human rights commissioner Tim Wilson was notified of the case and raised it with the government. Mr Wilson, who recently resigned the post to launch a bid for Parliament with the Liberal Party, would not comment.

A spokesman for Connect Settlement Services, which assists refugees at Nauru, said it was aware of assault allegations "made by clients in June and July last year and we have provided assistance to those clients".

 

AUSTRALIAN CHRISTIAN ZIONISTS RUN THE FEDERAL PARLIAMENT

History shows that the establishment of zionist Israel was initiated and pushed by christians in the British parliament in the middle of the 19th century because they saw it as a way to rid Britain of the hated Jewish community.

Anti-semitism was - and still is - an issue in the communities which are of religious persuasions other than Jewish.

So it is no surprise that the latest incarnation of zionists running (ruining?) the current federal government are predominantly christian zionists who would be very pleased to see Israel supported under every circumstance and ignore the indigenous population of Palestine as if it doesn't, didn't and will never exist!

Supporting the well-being of the theocratic zionist state helps to ensure the continuation of the state that has as one of its founding laws the "law of return" which allows entry to Israel of Jews from any country around the world.

This means that if Australian zionist governments support Israel it may help to get as many Jews in Australia to go and settle in Israel.

There are somewhere between 100,000 and 120,000 Jews in Australia and they are not all zionists, so it really is a tall ask to think they will be able to get rid of all of us, but they are certainly trying (in more ways than one!) to achieve the impossible.

The current federal government no longer recognises the fact that Israel runs an apartheid state and is persecuting the original inhabitants of Palestine whose land they continue to colonise more and more. In the eyes of Australian zionist politicians "their Israel, right or wrong" have a god-given right to the unholy land!

All one can say is "OI VEY!!!"

PALESTINE - TIME AUSTRALIAN POLITICIANS LEARNT SOME HISTORY!

Palestine - the great taboo in Australian politics.

Is there a parliamentarian in the federal parliament - and probably in most state and territory parliaments - who is not a zionist?

Even the Greens, who, at some stages in their short careers in Australian parliaments have been "supporters" of the Palestinians, are these days hedging their bets, shamefully!

Now we have a current federal parliament government minister showing his ignorance about the Israeli occupation of East Jerusalem!

It is a fact that Israel occupies the whole of Palestine, which is controlled by the Israelis as a giant concentration camp, aided and abetted by their US and other allies around the world, who are too afraid of losing Jewish support money in their own countries to think of changing their allegiances.

Israeli apartheid is worse than South African apartheid, and the only way a chink has managed to appear in Israel's armoury is by way of the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement which, after years of getting nowhere, has at last started making inroads into the Israeli government consciousness.

Since Israel became an occupying state in 1948 it has continued to make the lives of Palestinians worse and worse in each successive year, and the stage has now been reached where there is no possibility of a viable separate Palestinian state ever being possible.

Where are the politicians - both here and around the world - with the guts and courage to stand up to their governments and to the Jewish/Israel lobbies within their communities, and demand that Palestinians be recognised as equal citizens of a combined Israel-Palestine territory?

Oh - of course! the answer came in a flash of lightning!

The Israel-Palestine affair continues to cause the Western World and their allies to keep fighting wars in support of Israel, and the armament manufacturers would be devastated if there was peace in the Middle East.

So, to make sure that never happens, everybody must go on supporting Israel and condemning the Palestinians to life in their concentration camp.

ZIONISTS IN AUSTRALIA, JEWISH AND NON-JEWISH! OI VEY!

Where does one start with the outrage because of actions, comments and statements from politicians who know nothing about certain topics but open their mouths and put as many feet into them as they can cram!

Julie Bishop comes to mind! Her ignorance is appalling, and she shoots from the hip about Israel, BDS, zionism and Edward Snowden. If anybody behaves as a traitor to the country she is supposed to serve, Bishop again comes to mind.

Two very interesting letters in The Age newspaper on 20 January 2014 show how some people are intelligent and are able to think for themselves (the first letter), while others don't know what they are talking about and swallow any stories which are thrown in their direction (the second letter).

The writer of the second letter uses names incorrectly and outside the context in which the zionists use them, and also states "....what we have in Judaea (sic) and Samaria....." and her address is given as Chirnside Park, which is presumably in Melbourne, Victoria, Australia, and not in "Chaifo" or however the Hebraists spell it, in Northern Israel. Why on earth is she living in Australia when "her" country has open doors for zionist settlers, particularly in the occupied West Bank Palestinian lands?

As for "scholarly support", she does not quote who the scholars are, and what their legal sources are. There is nothing legal about an illegal occupation, despite what she is trying to parrot, and the fact that The Age newspaper prints such rubbish says something about the quality of the media in Australia.

In conflict

George Browning's response to Julie Bishop's comment that settlements in the West Bank do not breach any international law is not surprising (''Bishop's troubling stance on legality of Israeli settlements'', Forum, 18/1). What is surprising is the fact that Australia is on the UN Security Council and that her comments would appear to be in conflict with the Fourth Article of the Geneva Convention. Many countries that are in breach of UN regulations, such as Iran and North Korea, tend to have penalties imposed on them for breaches. Rules for some not for others, but then democratic principles are subject to evolutionary forces.

Rob Park, Surrey Hills

Wisdom in approach

There is much scholarly support for the proposition that the Israeli settlements are indeed legal. What we have in Judaea and Samaria is not the ''usual'' example of, say, one nation occupying another. Julie Bishop has responded wisely, by stating the matter should not be ''prejudged'' at this stage.
Vera Hardiman, Chirnside Park

There is nothing wise about what Julie Bishop says on the topic of Israel - she was bought out by the zionists long ago, and, like the rest of her colleagues, sings to their tune.

 

INDEPENDENT AUSTRALIA BLOG JOINS MAINSTREAM MEDIA

When Independent Australia started out, it was refreshingly different. Investigative journalism seemed back on the agenda, and exposures relating to the HSU, Kathy Jackson, Ashby, Slipper and all the goings-on seemed to promise more of the same.

Latest postings indicate a subtle injection of anti-semitism from people quoting the Protocols of the Elders of Zion, and I am disgusted such postings were allowed by the moderators of the site.

As someone who is Jewish and has lived through some of the worst excesses of apartheid South Africa and to see that Israel has refined and extended the meaning and significance of apartheid in maintaining one of the world's biggest concentration camps is to abhor that which is done in the name of being a "Jewish State" and the only "democracy" in the middle east.

Israel is a country which has received unwavering support from most - if not all - of Australia's prime ministers and governments since at least 1980, and this zionism shows no signs of abating, both Gillard and Abbott showing how much they love that country. Considering how small is the Jewish vote in Australia, one has to wonder whether this "unqualified " support has more to do with financial issues than political ones, but it is repulsive nevertheless.

And then "independent" media online get themselves bogged down with rants about Jews and zionists controlling the world - the "Protocols" world conspiracy to control the USA, the banks, the world's finances, and many other things besides, leaves one despairing of where our freedoms lie.

Lie may be the operative work here, because so many lies are told about Jewish and zionist world control without proper analyses of the policies and politics of what is actually happening in all the countries involved and the numbers of Jews involved in all of these "conspiracies" and no one comes up with the understanding that there are more christian zionists than there are Jewish ones.

It really is disgusting and it goes on and on!

WHAT DO ZIONISTS AND CATHOLIC BISHOPS HAVE IN COMMON?

It is a well-known fact that when human rights activists attack Israel and its ongoing apartheid treatment of the Palestinians, the two standard responses are "anti-semitic" and "look at countries such as........." "why don't you attack them?" "Why don't you look at their appalling behaviour to gays and lesbian?" This last statement because the attacks on Israel - "The Only Democracy in The Middle East" by a gay person are to show how one-sided and lacking in understanding these homosexuals are!!! Israel doesn't behave like that to its GLTH communities.

Now look at the outcry from the Catholic church hierarchy over the calls for a royal commission into the ongoing child sex abuses committed by priests and others in the system over at least the last 50 years - and no doubt the previous 500 years as well!!

"Why is the Catholic church singled out when there are others guilty of committing these crimes in other religions and in the wider community in general?

The similarity hits one when one makes analyses of the current and ongoing situations in the Vatican and Jerusalem - the world is grossly unfair and prejudiced when singling us out - we are not like we have been painted and others are much worse and commit crimes against humanity of which we are not guilty !!

It has been interesting to hear how quickly the so-called democracies have rushed to defend Israel - "Israel is fully entitled to defend itself against aggression from the Palestians" - and from all sides of political spectra - and the same when a royal commission was announced into aspects of child sexual abuse - it will be wide ranging and the Prime Minister assured cardinal George Pell - he who is a man perpetually dressed in women's clothing - that the catholic church has not been singled out and other organisations will be scrutinised by the royal commission as well. Weasel words spoken by a weasel politician - well aren't most of them anyway?

VICTORIAN STATE MP USES TEENAGER TO DO HIS ANTI-BDS WORK FOR HIM

The zionists are very adept at running dirty tricks campaigns and they will do anything to smear people who are non-zionists or anti-zionists. Yet these xenophobic bigots continue to live in Australia and seem unwilling to move to their "mother country" Israel.

The fact is that the Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions movement is gaining ground - slowly, but surely - and this is proving too much for zionists around the world to comprehend.

Interesting to use a teenager who doesn't actually know about the issues in which he is being used as a go-between in the nastiest possible way.

Has this politician no shame? - and why is he living in Melbourne? His place is surely in the West Bank illegal apartheid Jewish settlements selling Max Brenner chocolates to the religious fanatics from the Bronx.

Oh what a tangled web we weave........

From the age newspaper 12 September 2012

MP hit for 'lack of judgment' on teenager

September 12, 2012

Adam Cooper

Martin Foley. Photo: Teagan Glenane

A STATE Labor MP has sought legal advice over what he claims is an attempt by a political opponent to drive a wedge between him and sections of Melbourne's Jewish community.

Martin Foley, the member for Albert Park, was criticised by Liberal opponents in Parliament yesterday over claims he threatened a teenage school student who emailed him over a contentious protest movement.

Mr Foley said he had received an email from James Mathias, 17, last month accusing him of backing the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement, a pro-Palestinian organisation that promotes the boycotts of Israeli-owned companies such as the Max Brenner chocolate shop chain.

Mr Foley said the teen had claimed he had read of the issue in Hansard, although the parliamentary record was yet to be published online. He said he checked with the teen's school the following day and was told James was working as an intern for Liberal MP David Southwick.

Mr Foley got in contact with the teen via email and telephone, demanded an apology, and told him he was being used as a political pawn. Mr Foley denied threatening or bullying him. He said he had received an apology from James the following day and had no problem with the teen.

But Mr Foley said the issue had prompted a wave of trolling against him, and that he was obliged to defend himself. He said he had consulted Jewish leaders to stress that he was not anti-Semitic.

Mr Southwick, the Member for Caulfield, yesterday told Parliament Mr Foley had shown an ''appalling lack of judgment'' in his treatment of the teenager.

Other Liberals also took up the attack in Parliament, with Cindy McLeish claiming Mr Foley had threatened union retribution against the teen, while Clem Newton-Brown said Mr Foley was ''unhinged'' and called for him to be provided professional help.

Mr Foley, a former secretary of the Australian Services Union, was not in Parliament to hear the barbs, as he had been ejected from the house over an earlier matter. But he said the attack was a diversion from the bipartisan policy the two parties had earlier shown in opposing the BDS movement.

''This is simply a diversion by the Member for Caulfield, having been caught red-handed for running a dirt unit out of his office and trying to use young Liberals to play wedge politics,'' he said.

''It's Mr Southwick who needs to account for his actions, not me.''
Mr Foley said he had sought legal advice on whether the distribution of Hansard before it was published online constituted a form of publishing in his defence against the Liberals' claims.

PALESTINE - FOR AND AGAINST

The following articles published in The Age newspaper over the week ranging from 5 to 11 November 2011 provide some diverting and diverging views on the Palestine bid for statehood - or at least standing as a nation at the United Nations:

ALP senator laments Gillard's Palestine stand

By Daniel Flitton

November 5, 2011

A PROMINENT Labor senator has expressed dismay at Julia Gillard's decision to overrule Kevin Rudd on a key United Nations vote on Palestine.

NSW Labor Senator Doug Cameron said Australia had missed a chance to help win peace in the Middle East.

The government is yet to declare how it will vote on the contentious plan for Palestine to join the world body, although Britain, France and Colombia told the UN overnight they will abstain on a vote.

The Age revealed yesterday Mr Rudd had also urged Australia to abstain from a separate resolution on Palestine becoming a member of the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation, only for Ms Gillard to ignore the advice and side with Israel, the US and 11 other countries in opposing the proposal.
Senator Cameron said yesterday he supported Mr Rudd's position and that recognition would have helped their cause and not harmed Israel. ''It would have meant we could take a very small step towards fixing the problems in the Middle East, which is so important in the overall fight against terrorism,'' he said.

Asked on ABC radio if he was disappointed Ms Gillard had overruled Mr Rudd, Senator Cameron responded: ''Yes, I am.''

Mr Rudd told reporters in Brisbane, when asked if he was satisfied with the UNESCO vote: ''I support the government's policy.'' The New York Times reported the Palestinian bid for UN membership - which Washington had threatened to veto - had moved closer to outright rejection in the Security Council.

Britain, Colombia and France told a private meeting of the council's membership committee they would abstain, raising doubts Palestinians could muster the nine votes needed on the 15-member body before the US would likely wield a veto. Should Palestinians push ahead to seek observer status in the General Assembly - similar to the Vatican - Australia would then be force to take a position.

A spokeswoman for Mr Rudd yesterday issued a statement in response to questions from The Age that has not changed since September.

''If a Palestinian resolution is introduced to the General Assembly - and that is not yet certain - the government will consider it carefully. The government will not make a decision until it has seen a draft resolution,'' it read.

Obama's gaffe exposes uneasy relationship with Israel

November 10, 2011

By Simon Mann in Washington


A CANDID moment between French and US Presidents has laid bare the testy relationship between Benjamin Netanyahu and Israel's allies, and underscored the lingering discord between the White House and the Israeli Prime Minister.

In an exchange at last week's G20 meeting in Cannes, Nicolas Sarkozy allegedly branded Mr Netanyahu a ''liar'', inviting agreement from Barack Obama.

According to French journalists, who overheard the exchange, Mr Obama obliged, responding: ''You're sick of him, but I have to work with him every day.''

The loose remarks reflect mounting international frustration with the stalled Middle East peace process, as well as a barely concealed animosity between Mr Obama and Mr Netanyahu.

The gaffe gave Mr Obama's Republican opponents ammunition and prompted the pro-Israel Anti-Defamation League to express concern over the extent to which the ''private views'' might inform US and French policy towards Israel.

''We hope that the Obama administration will do everything it can to reassure Israel that the relationship remains on a sure footing and to reinvigorate the trust between President Obama and Prime Minister Netanyahu, which clearly is not what it should be,'' said the league's national director, Abraham Foxman.

Republican presidential wannabe Michele Bachmann demanded that Mr Obama apologise to Mr Netanyahu, linking the incident to the administration's lax efforts to protect Israel from the nuclear ambitions of Iran and to other ''tragic errors'' of the President's foreign policy.

The uneasy relationship between the two leaders was most on show in May when Mr Netanyahu lectured Mr Obama before reporters in the Oval Office, after the President had raised the prospect of a return to Israel's pre-1967 borders as a means of advancing the peace process. Mr Netanyahu flatly rejected the idea and appeared to patronise Mr Obama by offering a history lesson.

In an earlier meeting between them, Mr Obama had reportedly sat down to dinner, making the Israeli leader wait in another room at the White House.

Despite the embarrassment, a former US ambassador to Israel, Martin Indyk, did not believe the blunder would damage US-Israel relations, particularly over the issue at hand - Iran's nuclear ambitions.

''The subject is too serious to be affected by personalities. They agree on the nature of the threat and they also agree on the way to deal with it. That is by ratcheting up sanctions.''

Public backs Palestine bid

November 11, 2011

AUSTRALIANS broadly back an independent Palestinian state joining the United Nations but mostly confess to ignorance about the Middle East conflict, a poll has found.

The findings come as it appears the question of Palestinian membership at the UN will fail in the Security Council. The US has indicated it would veto any such resolution and Palestinian negotiators are now likely to take their quest to the General Assembly, where the Gillard government will be required to take a position.

The Roy Morgan poll, commissioned by advocacy group Australians for Palestine, found Australians had roughly equal sympathy for Israelis and Palestinians. But 62 per cent of those surveyed said Palestine should be accepted as a UN member after being told ''Israel and the USA are opposed to it'', although the question neglected to mention other countries also opposed.

The figure dropped to 52 per cent of people saying Australia should vote in favour of the Palestinian bid.

Voting against Palestine may cost Australia a seat on the Security Council

By Richard Woolcott

November 11, 2011

Our national interest requires a rethink on the Middle East.

The importance of Australia's candidature for election next October as a non-permanent member of the United Nations Security Council for a two-year term (2013-14) should be better understood and supported by our politicians and the Australian public.

Unfortunately, our prospects have been undermined by our recent vote against Palestine's admission to the United Nations Education Scientific and Cultural Organisation.

The Security Council is the principal organ of the UN with the power to impose sanctions and the responsibility for initiating peacekeeping operations. Like the G20's role in dealing with international economic and financial issues, the council deals with the maintenance of international peace and security. It is the world's pre-eminent crisis management forum.

Membership of the council is important to us. It will enhance our international standing as a responsible middle power. As I know from my experience in representing Australia on the council, membership offers an opportunity to make a difference, to influence situations in the direction of peace and to contribute to reforms.

The election, by secret ballot, will be contested. There are three candidates for two seats. When then prime minister Kevin Rudd announced our candidacy in March 2008, Finland and Luxembourg had already been in the field for well over a year.
Should we fail in our bid, the addition of two more western European voices, in addition to Britain and France, both permanent members of the council, would unbalance it, as happened in 1996 when we were defeated by Sweden and Portugal.

I have recently returned from two weeks in New York. Since my time at the UN, the global situation has changed enormously. Unprecedented economic growth, especially in China and India, and the increase in membership to 193 have driven change. The UN now reflects a different and much more complex, multipolar and interconnected world.
Australia has a proud record in the United Nations. We have played a major role in peacekeeping and peace-building since 1947. We have provided some 60,000 servicemen and police to more than 50 multi-lateral operations, including our major contribution to the UN Transitional Authority that brought peace and elections to Cambodia. We are in the top 10 contributors to the World Food Program, the World Health Organisation, UNICEF, the UN Development Program and the Human Rights Commission.

Prime Minister Julia Gillard has described the Security Council's work as ''vital''. She worked to secure the support of the Pacific Islands Forum in Wellington in September and again at the recent Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting in Perth. She will have more opportunities to seek support for our election at the APEC and East Asian Summit talks later this month.

In these circumstances, I find it both surprising and a decisive setback to our election prospects that the Prime Minister decided Australia should vote against the admission of Palestine to UNESCO.

The applications committee is to report to the Security Council today on Palestine's bid for statehood. If it is decided to vote in the council, the US is committed to a veto. Ultimately, however, the issue will presumably go to the General Assembly in the attempt to upgrade Palestinian representation. A positive approach to this issue is actually in the US and Israel's long-term interests.

Putting it bluntly, I consider that if we again vote against Palestinian ''statehood'' when it comes to the General Assembly, we are most unlikely to be elected to the council. At worst we should abstain.

I have never argued that we should change policies to secure a vote. What I have argued is that policies should be changed if they are ineffective or overdue for change, which is the case on a number of our votes on Middle East issues. We will do considerable damage to the more even-handed and reasonable policies we have been moving towards in the Middle East if we continue to vote against Palestinian statehood. This is also illogical because we support a two-state solution.

Middle Eastern diplomats outside Israel have depicted the present situation as like two people arguing over a pizza, but before the argument is resolved one side (Israel through the acceleration of its settlements program) has started to eat the pizza.

I do not think the security of Israel, which we rightly support strongly, is at issue. Israel's security needs to be underpinned by a negotiated two-state solution. Statehood itself can only result from a negotiated settlement, as all sides know.
This is a historic moment although it will not create a state, as the Palestinians themselves know. It does, however, reinforce their moral position and progress towards the accepted two-state solution.

We can and should win a seat on the Security Council. But I fear we will be defeated again, as we were in 1996, if we continue to vote against upgrading Palestinian representation, especially when it comes before the General Assembly. This will be a matter for regret and it will not be in our national interest.

Richard Woolcott, former head of the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, was Australia's ambassador to the UN (1982-88) and represented Australia last time it was elected to the Security Council in 1985-86.

DENNIS ALTMAN WANTS TO HEDGE HIS BETS ON THE ISRAEL-PALESTINE CONFLICT - BUT HE'S WRONG!

The item below is an article by Dennis Altman in The Age newspaper on 19 September 2011. In the article Altman seems to express the view that Israel ought to support the Palestinian bid for statehood at the United Nations as it would be in Israel's interests because of its oft-declared support of a two-state solution.

Surely if Altman had studied the situation ingreater depth he would have come to realise a long time ago that Israel's agenda is not, will not be and has never been in the past, to permit a Palestinian state in its midst.

Israel's intention, from the earliest zionist activist days, has been to occupy the whole of Palestine and turn it into a Jewish state, for Jews only. Kick the Palestinians out by fair means or foul - usually foul, and bit by bit occupy the whole of Palestine so that a separate state is an actual impossibility.

This is already the situation on the ground with so many settlers in the Occupied Territories and the "Berlin apartheid Wall" stealing large portions of an already-shrunk West Bank of Palestinian territory.

Australia will support whatever the United States does in the UN and the UN Security Council. They will both oppose Palestinian statehood.

While the bid for a state of Palestine is fraught with difficulties and problems, it would permit a bargaining position for the Palestinians and force Hamas and Abbas to find a modus vivendi in order to consolidate negotiating positions with Israel.

Ultimately, because it will have no other choice, Israel and Palestine will have to live together, and the ultimate answer for the land of Palestine is for it to become one democratic Israeli-Palestinian state which both sides of the problem refuse to contemplate at the moment.

As fro the other issue in Altman's article, Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) worked with the apartheid South African regime, when many international multi-national organisations pulled the plug on their South African operations.

The BDS support is growing internationally daily, and although at this stage the USA still supports Israel unreservedly, some of its long-term At=rab allies are beginning to raise questions.

Whether they will prevail or not in the longer term, Israel has already damaged itself irreparably and the friends it has had will not be there in the indefinite future.

Now read Dennis Altman''s article:

Israel's opposition to recognising Palestine is a puzzle
Dennis Altman
September 19, 2011

The move to recognise Palestinian statehood is led by President Mahmoud Abbas.

The passionate support for Israel in Australia is also hard to explain.

FOR elements of both left and right in Australia, the Palestinian-Israeli dispute has become an issue of the first order, quite unrelated to any realistic assessment of its importance to Australia.

Some members of the Greens and the ALP support boycotts of Israeli products, which has created confrontations in Melbourne and Sydney. The mainstream of both major parties remains deeply committed to Israel, and any criticism of its government is denounced rather than discussed.

Even the suggestion that Australia might abstain from rather than oppose this week's General Assembly vote on recognising Palestinian statehood will bring abuse on the government.

Israel, backed by the United States, insists that admitting a Palestinian state to the United Nations would be a blow to the peace process. ''The road to peace,'' said US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, ''runs through Jerusalem and Ramallah, not New York.''

It is understandable that the Israeli government does not want to legitimise the General Assembly as a mediator in the conflict. The assembly vote would recognise the pre-1967 borders of Israel, thus eliminating large areas of Israeli settlement over the past 30 years.

Yet the Israeli government's adamant opposition to recognition of a Palestinian state is puzzling. If Israel is committed, as it says, to a two-state solution, would recognition not help in cementing support for the concept? Indeed, as increasing numbers of Palestinians and some Israelis come to argue that a two-state solution is no longer feasible, and as demographic changes threaten the ''Jewishness'' of Israel under its current borders, it is in Israel's long-term interests to build support for the two-state model.

The move to recognise Palestinian statehood is led by the more moderate faction under President Mahmoud Abbas, with whom Israel has consistently claimed it can negotiate. Indeed, some senior Hamas figures have spoken against it: one claimed it would mean ''the Palestinian resistance won't be allowed to fire one single gunshot at the Israeli occupation''. Is this not for Israel a desirable outcome?

Since the 1967 war, Israel has consistently placed short-term tactical victories ahead of longer-term strategic thinking. It has relied on military force and American backing to maintain a status quo. But one consequence of the so-called Arab Spring is that Israel's de facto Arab allies, particularly Egypt, can no longer be relied on to back this status quo.

It is significant that Turkey is moving quickly from being a de facto ally of Israel to a leading proponent of the Palestinian cause. This does not mean that Turkey seeks the abolition of the state of Israel. It is a signal that the most powerful country in the region - and a democracy, despite the claim that Israel is the only such state in the Middle East - recognises that a paradigm shift is required.

This is rarely acknowledged in Australia, where debate, while sometimes intense, rarely goes beyond entrenched set pieces on both sides. The pro-Palestinian lobby is small, and too often engages in acts that are counterproductive. The pro-Israeli lobby is far larger and influential, and has powerful emotional support on both sides of politics. Kevin Rudd once claimed that support for Israel was in his DNA, and Julia Gillard and Tony Abbott seem determined to go one better.

Just why there is such passionate support for Israel is difficult to explain. Neither national interest nor the small Jewish population explain it. I suspect it is born of the formative experiences of political leaders, now in their 40s and 50s; note that Gillard was a student leader when the national movement was destroyed by ferocious debates on Palestine.

Most of our political leaders identify with Israel as part of the mythical ''free world'' that Abbott says President Barack Obama leads, forgetting that this term was a product of the Cold War. They have ended up supporting an American position that is almost certainly more hardline than Obama himself would espouse were he not facing a difficult election in which the pro-Israeli lobby is enormously important.

Twenty years ago negotiating with the PLO was also denounced as against Israel's interests, until it became official government policy. In the same way UN recognition of the reality of a Palestinian state might break a deadlock. Those who are really concerned for the survival of Israel need recognise that a peaceful settlement is not necessarily achieved through support for every Israeli administration.

Dennis Altman is director of the Institute for Human Security at La Trobe University.

FAIRFAX NEWSPAPERS - REACTIONARY, RIGHT WING, NO CONTRARY OPINIONS ALLOWED??

Imagine the shock and horror when opening The Age's opinion pages on Monday 5 September 2011 to discover that Amanda Vanstone and John Howard were setting the tone of political discussions on the Australian Labor Party's leadership issues and its asylum seeker policies!

Why on earth would anyone other than a dyed-in-the-wool, rusted on reactionary bigot be interested in anything these two has-beens have to say about the politics of 2011??

Just imagine The Age having supporters of the Palestinians and supporters of the Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions (BDS) campaigns writing opinion pieces to be shared with readers - if there are any left after 5 September - and showing that The Age's editor-in-chief and his reporters and journalists were open to views other than those of the zionists who seem to hold disproportionate sway over Fairfax!!

It really is time that the journalists who draw their pay from Fairfax put some pressure on their bosses to make them publish views other than those of the most reactionary members of our societies.

Vanstone and Howard have other avenues to make their repugnant and repellant views public, and the newspapers we read are not those who should give them room for those views. Howard and his government, which included Vanstone, had more than 11 years to push their particularly repulsive barrows, and voices opposing their views were made to grow dimmer in that time due to a very compliant media!

Fortunately there are many alternatives in 2011 where one can make one's voice heard and where one can also obtain information which the media deny us with their own self-censorship, but it is still wrong that Fairfax should give column space to these people who have access to all those media on radio, television and print whose views are the same as theirs.

THE AGE NEWSPAPER - MOUTHPIECE FOR AUSTRALIAN ZIONISTS!

It was known before Israel became a state in 1948 and it has been known ever since - Israel was NEVER going to permit a Palestinian state next to it.

Everything that the state of Israel has done since 1948, despite its mealy-mouthed statements about a two-state solution, this was never going to happen and now, in 2011, the reality on the ground is that a two-state solution is impossible.

It is amazing that people as diverse in their zionist politics as Colin Rubenstein (The Age 22 August 2011)and Larry Stillman and Harold Zwier(The Age 15 August 2011) still talk as if the creation of a Palestinian state (or not) was a feasible option.

The only possible solution to the Israel-made intractable solution to the Palestine situation is for there to be ultimately one secular state of Israel/Palestine in which the two populations will live as one people as is slowly happening in the racially divided South Africa of the apartheid years and beyond.

Israel has allowed itself to become a theocracy - it was never a true democracy in any sense because the religious groups always have held sway in the Knesset, no matter which side of politics was the major party - the religious parties were always needed in coalition to achieve government.

Now in 2011, despite the huffing and puffing by Abbas and the Palestinians for a Palestinian state, should such an entity come into existence, an independent Palestine would be that in name only, still entirely controlled by Israel. The Palestinian people would still be denied the human rights supposedly guaranteed by the United Nations Declaration of Human Rights soon after that "august" body was established.

Until the United States of America ceases to support unreservedly, the existence of the state of Israel, and to support it with billions of dollars of aid every year, the middle east wars will continue and the peace which so many in the world desire will not occur.

Meanwhile back in Australia the zionists hold sway because the zionist Age supports Israel and never queries the rights of the Palestinian people who are demonised endlessly and never given the same rights of responses in the paper that the zionist are given.

More shame to a once great newspaper that it should travel down the road of lies and prevarication which is so prevalent in the Australian zionist communities.

THIS LETTER IN THE AGE ON 24 AUGUST 2011 SAYS IT ALL!! - AND AT LEAST THE LETTER-WRITER GOT IT INTO THE PAPER - EVEN THOUGH IT IS AT THE TAIL END OF THE LETTERS!

We've had views on Palestinian statehood from the Jewish left and now the Jewish right. Is it asking too much for The Age to publish a Palestinian perspective, or doesn't it count?

Shane McCartin, North Fitzroy

BAILLIEU TURNS VICTORIA INTO ZIONIST POLICE STATE!

This article was sent to us by email and was published in the Electronic Intifada
Home
The Electronic Intifada


الانتفاضة الإلكترونية
Search form
Search
You are here
Activism News
Australia’s repression of BDS movement coordinated with Israel
Kim Bullimore
The Electronic Intifada
Melbourne
9 August 2011

Australian solidarity activists are facing intense police repression.
(
Erik Anderson
/
Flickr
)

In the largest show of support for the Palestinian-initiated boycott, divestment and sanctions (BDS) campaign so far in Australia, more than 350 persons marched on 29 July in solidarity with the Palestinian struggle — and in opposition to an attempt by Victorian Police to criminalize Palestine solidarity activism in Melbourne.

A month earlier, on 1 July, a similar, peaceful BDS action involving 120 persons was brutally attacked by the Victorian Police. Nineteen individuals were arrested.

Charged with “trespassing” and “besetting,” those arrested are now facing fines of up to AUD $30,000 (approximately US $32,300). The 1 July action, organized by the Coalition Against Israeli Apartheid, had sought to highlight the complicity of two Israeli companies, Jericho and Max Brenner Chocolate, with Israel’s occupation and apartheid policies. The action was the fourth protest against both companies since December 2010.

Jericho, located in Melbourne Central Shopping Centre and other shopping centers around the city, produces cosmetics made from minerals exploited from the Dead Sea. While Jericho and other Israeli companies — such as Ahava, also a target of BDS campaigns — profit from the Dead Sea, Palestinians are regularly denied access by Israel’s military checkpoints, exclusion zones and Israeli-only roads.

Max Brenner Chocolate, the other Israeli company subject to BDS protests in Melbourne, is owned by the Strauss Group — one of Israel’s largest food and beverage companies. On its website, the Strauss Group emphasizes its support for the Israeli military, providing care packages, sports and recreational equipment, books and games for soldiers.

Strauss boasts support for the Golani and Givati Brigades, which were heavily involved in Israel’s military assault on the Gaza Strip in the Winter of 2008-09, which resulted in the killing of approximately 1,400 Palestinians, the majority civilians, including approximately 350 children. While Strauss has removed information about their support for the Golani and Givati brigades from their English language website, information about the company’s support for both brigades remains on their Hebrew language site.

BDS repression coordinated with Israeli government

Trade union and community representatives spoke at the rally on 29 July before the crowd marched through the city. In spite of repeated threats of mass arrests by Victoria Police — and the deployment of police horses in one of the shopping centers — the protest marched into both the Melbourne Central and Queen Victoria centers, staging peaceful sit-ins in front of the Max Brenner stores located within.

Two day earlier, on 27 July, the Victorian police confirmed during a bail variation hearing at the Magistrates’ Court of Victoria (local District Court) for some of the activists arrested on 1 July that a decision had been made to arrest the protesters before the demonstration. This decision was made after discussions with Zionist organizations, the Victorian government, shopping center managements and state and national management of Max Brenner.

In April, the Australian Jewish News (AJN) reported that the Jewish Community Council of Victoria (JCCV) had made representations to the Victorian police. According to the AJN, JCCV president John Searle had “called on the police to stamp down harder on aggressive protesters” (“Police questioned as protests turn violent,” 15 April 2011). Similar calls for a government and police crackdown on BDS protests against Max Brenner in Sydney were made in June by former AJN journalist Walt Secord, who is now a member of the NSW State Parliament (“Police called to action on BDS,” 24 June 2011).

On July 29, the same day as the BDS action against Max Brenner in Melbourne the Australian Jewish News carried a “debate” piece between Vic Alhadeff, the CEO of the NSW Jewish Board of Deputies, and Ted Lapkin, a former staffer with the key pro-Israeli lobby group in Australia, the Australia/Israel and Jewish Affairs Council. The piece reveals that the various calls for police and government crackdown on BDS activism was part of a “nationally coordinated strategy” developed with and backed by the Israeli Foreign Ministry (“BDS: To protest or not to protest?”).

Arguing against any Zionist-organized BDS “counter” protest, Alhadeff writes: “It is important for the community to be aware that our response to BDS forms part of [a] coordinated national strategy. Furthermore, this strategy is endorsed by counterparts abroad and Israel’s Foreign Ministry.”

Alhadeff outlined this coordinated national strategy in response to BDS, stating that it “included, but is not limited to, engagement with civil society and politicians, patronage of boycotted outlets, cooperation with police, shop owners and center managers and exposure of the motives behind the BDS movement.” According to Alhadeff, Zionist policy in response to BDS should be one which seeks to “speak softly” but to also carry “a suggestion of a big stick.”

Activism leadership targeted

During cross-examination by Robert Stary, the lawyer representing the activists, Michael Beattie, an operational support inspector with the the Victorian Police, conceded that both Melbourne Central and Queen Victoria shopping centers were “public places” and that neither center prior to 1 July had sought any civil injunctions to prevent entry to the public places inside.

The cross-examination by Stary also revealed that the main reason that police had decided to criminalize the actions against the Israeli companies was because they had been well-organized, coordinated and effective.

Victorian Police acknowledged that the demonstrations had been peaceful, that solidarity activists hadn’t damaged property and there was no record of police or any member of the public being injured.

According to the testimony given by Inspector Beattie, the police had specifically sought to target the leadership of the protests, in particular those activists the police perceived as “operating a command and control function,” in order to diminish the possibility of well-coordinated demonstrations — and to ensure “no protesters go to property and disrupt targeted business or additional businesses.”

According to Inspector Beattie, “the protesters had their own way” for too long and a “decision [was] made to draw a line in the sand and make arrests.” Another police officer, Senior Sargent Andrew Falconer, also gave testimony at the court hearing and acknowledged that police infiltrators had been sent to pro-Palestine solidarity meetings in order to monitor the activity of BDS activists.

In a statement issued after their arrests, the nineteen activists noted that “the attack on the peaceful BDS action in Melbourne highlights increasing attempts to criminalize BDS and Palestine solidarity activism internationally. Currently in the US, France and Greece, hundreds of pro-Palestine activists are facing criminal charges for nonviolently standing up for Palestinian human rights” (“Support the Boycott Israel 19 Defence Campaign”).

James Crafti, one of the activists arrested, told The Electronic Intifada that “the attempt by Israel and governments around the world to criminalize pro-Palestinian and BDS activism ignores the fact that the real criminal activity is being carried out by the Israeli state.”

“Since its founding in 1948, Israel has sought to ethnically cleanse the indigenous Palestinian people through war, occupation and apartheid practices. Israel regularly engages in collective punishment, arbitrary arrests, extra-judicial assassinations and the demolition of Palestinian homes and civil infrastructure, all of which are illegal under international law,” he added.

Crafti noted that while the Victorian and Australian governments sought to criminalize support for Palestine self-determination, they refused to hold Israel accountable for its human rights abuses, war crimes and apartheid policies.

All of the arrested activists who spoke to The Electronic Intifada said the police attack on the protest also highlighted the increasing repression of civil liberties and freedom of speech by the Victorian (conservative) Baillieu government.

One Palestine solidarity activist, Sue Bolton, who has been charged with “besetting” (obstructing or hindering the right to enter, use or leave a premise), asserted that the police reaction to the action on 1 July was “over the top.”

“There were massive numbers of police, well over a hundred, not counting those behind the scenes in the loading docks,” she said.

According to Bolton, the Queen Victoria Centre loading docks had been cleared of delivery trucks, allowing the police to set up a processing unit and bring in prison transport trucks to be used as holding cells for those arrested.

Bolton described how police had sought to “kettle” the demonstration by corralling protesters and physically pushing them into a smaller and smaller area. According to Bolton, this resulted in a number of protesters being injured and crushed when the police had surrounded and violently pushed protesters from all sides.

Similar tactics have been used by police forces in Canada, the United Kingdom, Germany, France, Finland and Denmark. The use of kettling by police in the UK against student protesters in November 2010 has led to legal challenges and the calling for a ban on the use of the tactic in the British High Court and the European Court of Human Rights.

Damian Ridgwell, another Palestine solidarity protester arrested on 1 July, told The Electronic Intifada that he had been standing away from the peaceful picket, speaking on a megaphone when three policemen grabbed him.

“I was dragged behind police lines,” Ridgwell said. “Once they grabbed me and started dragging me, I went limp and dropped to the ground … As I was being carried through the corridors of the loading dock, I lost consciousness because one of the police had me in a choke hold. I am not sure how long I was out, probably a few minutes. I woke up on the loading dock floor and heard the police saying I was ‘out.’”

Ridgwell, who was charged with trespassing, said “while it is outrageous we were arrested for peacefully demonstrating, our arrests have to be seen in the context of the Australia government’s support for Israel and its continued theft of Palestinian land … it’s important we don’t let the police intimidate protests like this. It is important to keep going with the protests and to keep supporting BDS.”

Australian government’s support of Israeli apartheid

Successive Australian governments, including the current Gillard government, have long supported Israel’s colonial and apartheid policies.

Current Australian Prime Minister Julia Gillard signaled her uncritical support for Israel when she was still deputy Prime Minster of Australia. During the early days of Israel’s bombing of Gaza in the winter of 2008-09, she blamed Palestinians for Israel’s all-out assault, saying that Hamas must “renounce violence” and that Israel had the “right to defend itself.”

During a visit to Israel In 2009, Gillard was thanked by Israeli government minister Isaac Herzog for standing “almost alone on the world stage in support of Israel’s right to defend itself” (“Israel to Gillard: thanks for standing by us,” The Age, 24 June 2009).

The arrested activists noted that in June, the Baillieu government had established a new 42-member riot squad — and the attack on the 1 July protest was the first time it had been used in any significant way.

According to James Crafti, “the Victorian government thinks it can easily get away with attacking a pro-Palestine action because they think they can label us anti-Semitic.” Crafti, who is Jewish, said that the police and those opposed to the BDS actions, however, “underestimate the sympathy towards both Palestine and the [Palestine solidarity] movement in the broader community.”

“The amount of force used by the police and the response of the political elite to our protests, particularly the fact that the Australian Foreign Minister [and former Australian Prime Minister] Kevin Rudd felt the need to go a few days after our protest to Max Brenner as a public relations stunt is a sign of the pro-Israeli forces’ desperation,” he added.

The eleven activists succeeded in changing the original bail conditions preventing them from entering either shopping center (which also host medical clinics and a major train station) until the end of their case, to a lesser restriction of being prohibited from being within fifty meters of Max Brenner in both centers. However, Stary said he was still “anxious about the criminalization of dissent.”

“The police should not be used to protect the interests of an international commercial company,” he said.

Building on the success of 29 July, Melbourne activists will continue to campaign in support of Palestinian rights and oppose the criminalization of Palestine solidarity activism. The next Melbourne BDS action is scheduled for 9 September, the same week those arrested will plead not guilty to the charges against them. The defense campaign in support of the arrested activists has gained wide attention, with well-known public figures such as filmmaker John Pilger, author Norman Finkelstein and radical thinker Noam Chomsky supporting the campaign.

In a media release issued immediately following the success of the 29 July BDS action, Melbourne activists said the Victorian Police “thought that by attacking the BDS demonstration they would put an end to our movement. They were wrong … [we will] not be silenced” (“BDS returns to Max Brenner in spite of police intimidation,” 5 August 2011).

Kim Bullimore has lived and worked in the West Bank of the Occupied Palestinian Territories. She is a member of the Melbourne Coalition Against Israeli Apartheid and a co-organizer of the first national Australian BDS conference, which took place in Melbourne in October 2010. Kim writes regularly on the Palestine-Israel conflict for the Australian newspaper, Direct Action. She has a blog at livefromoccupiedpalestine.blogspot.com.