RELIGION IS NOT RACE AND RACE IS NOT RELIGION - THE BOTTOM LINE IS NATIONALISM

What is going on in this country is race hatred propogated by governments, reactionary groups, people who are unable to accept for all sorts of reasons, that all of us are part of one system - we are all part of the human race, that is the species we are, neither fish, nor flesh, nor fowl. Of course flesh can be human, but all anlimats have flesh and we humans have flesh.

The trouble is, we also have brains which register thoughts and actions and these can propagate hate - hate of people who are different from us, who don't look like us, who don't speak like us, who don't worship the same deity or don't worship any deity - and are therefore DIFFERENT!!

But as Shakespeare said so many years ago: "..........and what's his reason? I am a Jew. Hath not a Jew eyes? hath not a Jew hands, organs, dimensions, senses,affections,passions? fed with the same food, hurt with the same weapons, subject to the same diseases, healed by the same means, warmed and cooled by the same winter and summer, as a Christian is? If you prick us, do we not bleed? if you tickle us do we not laugh? if you poison us, do we not die? and if you wrong us, shall we not revenge? If we are like you in the rest, we will resemble you in that. If a Jew wrong a Christian, what is his humility? Revenge. If a Christian wrong a Jew, what should his sufference be by Christian example? Why, revenge. The villainy you teach me I will execute, and it shall go hard but I will better the instruction."

This may have been written by Shakespeare a few hundred years ago, but it is still apposite.

However, religion is not race, and what we have been taught by governments and those who like to practice extremism all use the precept of religion and race interchangeably.

The bottom line is that there is only one race, and that is the human race, and those whom it suita denigrate those who look different, who speak differently, whose homes have different practices which suit their requrementw and whose whole way of life is different in certain respects from the "common" perception.

Racism is, in effect nationalism and those who practise it do so because they are unable to handle difference and they have been taught that certain people's practices are abhorrent to the mass of the population and need to be stopped.

Pause for a moment, and look around the world and see how ugly are these actions and activities and end up murderously and viciously and end up to the detriment of so many.

The systems of goverment around the world under which we live preach hate to enable those government systems to operate successfully for those who have gained positions of power, and of course the majority of people in the world suffer.

This racism in nationalism, not racism, not religion.

THE GREATEST LIES ANY AUSTRALIAN GOVERNMENT HAS EVER TOLD!

If you think that Australians - most of us who are not in the "millionaire" class - are being lied to about the budget and what previous governments have done to ruin the income of the government to be able to fund everything that governments are usually responsible for - think again!

It is not so much that we are being lied to so much as we are not being told the truth about anything. This and previous governments since 1992 have always had enough money for all the organisations and everything else that governments are supposed to be responsible for to run the country.

However, everything is now being sold off and privatised so that the rich get richer and the poor get poorer and the gap widens. Obviously we don't need local workers any more - everything can be outsourced to countries where wages are a fraction of Australia's, taxes are not levied in the same way, and/or corruption flourishes - and who says there is no corruption in Australia?

But think about two organisations which, on their own, would fill the government's coffers over and over and over again until they would be overflowing.

What are these two organisations?

Well the most obvious one is religion. Religions have tax exemption and are probably worth more than all government assets put together.

The other obvious one is the concentration camps in foreign countries, set up by the Australian government and run by private companies who run them for huge profits and the more people incarcerated, the richer these companies get.

But the government has to pay for these concentration camps in foreign countries by paying those governments money for occupying some of their territory and incarcerating our legitimate asylum seekers who should be inside Australia and being part of Australian life.

Closing the concentration camps and bringing all asylum seekers into Australia would save the government billions, if not trillions of dollars making Australia even richer than it already is.

Taxing religions as all other organisations are taxed - properties and other holdings - and Australia would become twice as rich as if it only closed the concentration camps.

Paul Keating started the rot in 1992 and every government since has compounded it.

Australia is rotten to the core and corrupt into the bargain - in fact it is no bargain!

And all the so-called justification for levying new taxes on those who can least afford it is corruption of the worst sort. Australia is not only emulating the Tea Party, it is becoming the Tea Party!

TAX RELIGION! TAX RELIGION! TAX RELIGION!

Joe Hockey wants to alter the age pension. He wants to increase pension age from 65 to 70.

Many people, because of the nature of the work they have done ovcr their lifetimes are unable to work till they drop!

Joe Hockey, like others before him, refuses to tax religions.

The main reason of course is that so many of the likes of Hockey belong to religions which have never had to pay tax and are, of course, inordinately wealthy.

If religions were to be taxed, governments would lose their votes - or would they?

Considering what some of the largest religions of this country have done to some of their younger parishioners - and got away with - and not had to pay for their misdeeds - it is a disgrace that governments have not imposed taxes on them.

Instead, governments of all persuasions deem it easier to scapegoat the poorest and most vulnerable members of the community and lower their incomes, one way or another, to increase their budgets.

Do they increase taxes to the already fabulously wealthy? Of course not!

It is time voters showed governments that they mean business when they tell them to tax the wealthy - and religions - but too many of the voting public seem to be fearful and intimidated by those in power.

...........and what is desperately needed is for taxes on alcoholic drinks to be magnified, durgs to be legalised and taxed, and governments to wake up to themselves and start actually governing!

PELL AND HART DO MORE FOR ATHEISM IN AUSTRALIA THAN DAWKINS, HITCHENS AND OTHERS COMBINED!

George Pell and Denis Hart appeared at the Victorian Parliamentary Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse. Their behaviour was appalling, their demeanour and utterances even worse, and their patronising, condescending - and ultimately evasive responses showed that they cared nothing about the victims and everything about the reputation of their religious organisations.

Presumably they will also put in appearances at the Royal Commission into Child Sexual Abuse, and, as they did in Victoria, they will blame others fairly and squarely for the responsibility of their organisations for the appalling and illegal behaviour which was the culture - and presumably still is - of the people they are supposed to serve and protect and teach about humanity and respect.

What a tragic joke!

Chrissie and Antony Foster and their families have suffered more than most people suffer in a lifetime of the horrors inflicted on them and their families by the organisations in which they put so much faith - if that is an appropriate word under the circumstances.

Here is Chrissie's latest article on the issues which appeared in The Age newspaper on 6 June 2013:

Why these two men are still part of the problem

June 6, 2013
By Chrissie Foster

High-ranking clerics must answer for the smokescreen they created in protecting criminal priests.

Cardinal George Pell. Photo: Joe Armao

On the last two Mondays in May, we heard the Archbishop of Melbourne, Denis Hart, and Cardinal George Pell, Archbishop of Sydney, give testimony to the Victorian parliamentary inquiry into child sexual abuse in religious organisations. They spoke on the sexual abuse of hundreds of "innocent people" – known to the rest of us as children – committed by priests and brothers in Victoria.

Discussion, debate and analysis have followed their evidence. I must add to this argument. I bear personal witness to experiences with both Archbishop Hart and Cardinal Pell which contradict their limited vision of events. Space limits the attack I would like to launch, so I will refer to just two instances, one relating to the cardinal and one the archbishop.

I first locked horns with the hierarchy of the Catholic Church in 1996, and the protection of children has meant I have not stopped challenging them since. In March 1996 I discovered that my eldest daughter Emma had been sexually assaulted by our parish priest, Father Kevin O'Donnell, who at that time was in prison after pleading guilty to sexually assaulting children from 1946 to 1977. Emma's disclosures and, later, those of our second daughter, Katie, took his offending to his retirement in 1992 – amounting to 50 years of raping, sodomising and sexually assaulting, most likely, hundreds of children.

Archbishop Denis Hart. Photo: Joe Armao

In Cardinal Pell's written submission to the parliamentary inquiry, he stated: "Although he [Father O'Donnell] brought shame upon the priesthood and the church, he was buried with other priests in Melbourne. Had he been laicised before he died, this would not have occurred." Seemingly the cardinal is lamenting that a career child rapist was not laicised before he died so, sadly, a criminal priest is "buried with other priests". This sounds a noble and reasonable lament for a pious and forthright cardinal.

Yet on February 18, 1997, I and 44 other distressed parents met with then Archbishop George Pell in Oakleigh. At this meeting we asked the archbishop that the then living and imprisoned Father O'Donnell be laicised. Pell smiled condescendingly and said "we can't do that" – just as the canon lawyer had said and done to our same request only months earlier.

This time we were talking to the boss, so we persisted. We told Archbishop Pell that his own canon law said it was possible. The archbishop replied that canon law was hard to understand, hard to interpret. We produced a copy of the 1152-page book of canon law and read aloud law number 1395.2 – it clearly stated a priest could be laicised for the sexual abuse of a minor. Taken aback, with the evidence of the book and its clear language, the archbishop back-pedalled, saying he would have to get back to us about it. He never did. Later in the meeting, we again asked that O'Donnell be laicised; again it was denied.

So despite his 2013 public show of disappointment that Father O'Donnell was not laicised before he died, it was in fact George Pell, as Archbishop of Melbourne who, 16 years earlier, refused to laicise O'Donnell. Pell as archbishop had from July 1996 until O'Donnell's death in March 1997 to laicise the imprisoned criminal "before he died". But even when asked to laicise O'Donnell he refused, claiming ignorance of laicisation protocols when in fact he had served, for nine years at that time, on the body that oversaw the laicisation of priests in Rome – the Congregation for the Doctrine of Faith. We did not discover this fact until 12 years later, in 2009.

While Archbishop Pell denied our request in 1997, he now appears to lament the fact that Father O'Donnell was not laicised before he died – as though he had nothing to do with it. Cardinal Pell should face the truth: that in 1997 he was happy for O'Donnell to be "buried with other priests in Melbourne"; he ensured it happened. Yet Cardinal Pell now presents to Australia a misleading impression of regret that O'Donnell is buried with other priests, when he played a major role in bringing that reality about. Cardinal Pell's failure to act meant one of Australia's worst child rapists kept his privileged title of Father and was buried honourably with other priests. In Archbishop Hart's oral evidence to the parliamentary inquiry, he stated that when victims decided not to accept the church offer of compensation, it had "walked with them" through the court system to "more generous payouts". Later, he stated that "no victim had made it to court". So how could the church have possibly walked with victims through the court system when it has never happened? You can't have it both ways.

In addition to this, we personally sued Archbishop Hart in our attempt to reach court, him being the current leader of the Melbourne Archdiocese. Hart never contacted us. He did however send us a message. Instead of acting out his words of apparent compassion in "walking with victims", he set his lawyers on us for years, engaging, directing and paying them to strenuously defend the church to the point of claiming Father O'Donnell's innocence – even after their independent commissioner, Peter O'Callaghan, had found sexual abuse had taken place with both Emma and Katie. Astoundingly, their attack negated Archbishop Pell's earlier written apology to Emma.

Also Archbishop Hart, if you and the church hierarchy are happy to "walk with victims" to achieve "higher payouts" as you say, why not simply remove the cap you hold in place to control and minimise payouts? Your heart, like that of others in the hierarchy, is bent on preserving church wealth instead of restoring broken lives. None of your actions, in any way, resemble your claim of "walking with victims". It is time for honesty, Cardinal Pell and Archbishop Hart, not smokescreen words for personal cover-ups. Your words are manifestly misleading to all who hear them, and therefore you remain part of the problem, not part of the solution.

Chrissie Foster is the co-author of Hell on the Way to Heaven.

AUSTRALIAN BROADCASTING CORPORATION TURNS 80 AND STILL BEHAVES LIKE AN 8-YEAR-OLD!

Mark Scott was appointed to head the ABC by the Howard government. Scott came from Fairfax media and brought his right-wing reactionary views with him to the new job.

As with SBS the ABC has been sliding backwards for the last 10 to 15 years and has now reached almost rock-bottom with its political judgement so extremely on the right that Genghis Khan and others look positively liberal by comparison.

Apart from the dumbing-down politics of this once great organisation, other actions on a day-to-day basis show that the ABC ignores listener complaints learns nothing from past mistakes and continues to perpetuate them.

Take the introduction to the television news at 7pm every night when we have the introduction saying "ABC News - ABC News - ABC News" to ensure that those of us who are moronic enough not to understand what is about to take place that we are about to get to see a news bulletin! Really!

As if that isn't bad enough, some other programme promos tell us this is "ABC1 - ABC1 - ABC1" telling us that we really are too dumb to know if we only hear it once we won't know that the TV station is actually ABC1 - surprise, surprise!

One of the reasons people like me have taken to blogging is because over the years we have written to organisations such as the ABC complaining about things like the above, only to be totally ignored.

One of the other major sins about which people have been complaining for years - at least those whose letters actually get published - is the endless promos for various new programmes - such that by the time we get to see them we often feel that they represent an anti-climax - will they live up to the hype? Sometimes yes, mostly no!

Another major sin - and this too is on the list of complaints - endlessly - is the one about music-over accompanying speech for many programmes. The music drowns out the speech so one doesn't know what has been promoted. Many broadcasters who are well-spoken and articulate are drowned out totally - Marion Arnold is one whose announcements usually suffer, together with most others too.

One of the other major problems, apart from the right-wing bias so obvious in news and current affairs programmes is the creeping in of religious music on Classic FM and support for zionism and totally ignoring of Palestinians.

Unfortunately for many of us there is no alternative, but these days when it all becomes unbearable we turn to CDs and DVDs and thank goodness for them!

ANTI-DISCRIMINATION LEGISLATION IS DISCRIMINATORY AND ENTRENCHES APARTHEID IN AUSTRALIA EVEN FURTHER!

In their scramble to put five different pieces of anti-discrimination legislation into one basic anti-discrimination law, the Australian Federal Government is further entrenching discrimination and apartheid.

Apartheid has been one of the basic modus vivendi of Australian politics since 1788, but it gets further entrenched with every government in every state and territory since that date.

In a country as rich and prosperous as Australia there is no excuse whatever for the Indigenous population to suffer the indignities, poverty, ill-health, lack of education and all the other diseases from which the poorest people in the world suffer.

Many people and groups have made submissions to the government's proposed changes to the legislation, but one of the groups which was given assurances by the prime minister from the outset was one of the religious lobby groups who were assured that the discriminations which they have perpetrated against certain groups in the communities would be allowed to continue as before and no legislation would be introduced to change those exemptions.

Oh, the hypocrisy coming from an atheist prime minister - and an unmarried one - to organisations which discriminate in employment against atheists and unmarried people, whether male or female!

All of these discriminatory practices might have some modicum of acceptability if these religious organisations paid taxes as most other organisations and indviduals are forced to do by legislation in order for public infrastructures to be financed.

But the horror of it all is that not only are there thses tax exemptions but many of the project carried out by the religious organisations receive government support funding.

The perfidy is endless and the government should be sxposed by the main stream media for its behaviour. But the main stream media is in thrall to its ownership and "friendship" with the conservative politicians - roughly about 95% of them,and so remains silent on the apartheid "anti-discrimination" proposals.

In South Africa, during the worst years of the apartheid government, every time they introduced more and more repressive legislation it was given titles such as "The equal Education" law and one knew straight away that the government was making laws which became worse and worse as "separate development" developed the country between 1948 and 1994.

Now the same process is well under way in Australia and the gay, lesbian, transgender and HIV communities can expect the worst outcomes from legislation which further enshrines inequality.

GILLARD IS A HOMPHOBIC HYPOCRITICAL BIGOT AND YOU SHOULD NOT VOTE FOR HER!

The following article appeared in The Age on 17 January 2013, and the letters following the article are relevant to this and an earlier post. You have to ask yourself how low can this government get? Isn't it at rock-bottom yet? It must be pretty close by now!

Religious groups free to discriminate against pregnant women

By Jane Lee and Clay Lucas

The draft bill makes clearer which groups religious organisations can discriminate against lawfully.

Religious organisations, including those funded by the state government, retain their legal right to discriminate against pregnant women under a new human rights bill. The draft of the Human Rights and Anti-Discrimination Bill consolidates five existing federal discrimination laws after a decades-long campaign by lawyers and human rights advocates. The draft bill makes clearer which groups religious organisations can discriminate against lawfully.

Under the draft bill, faith-based groups, including schools and hospitals, can still refuse to hire people because of a wide range of attributes that would be unlawful for any other organisation, including women who are pregnant or potentially pregnant.

When the Sex Discrimination Act - which came into force in 1984 - was drafted, a number of religious bodies argued they should be allowed to discriminate against pregnant or ''potentially pregnant'' women to avoid having to employ unwed mothers.

The Human Rights Law Centre's director of advocacy and strategic litigation, Anna Brown, said that while the bill introduced important new protections from discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity, and removed the ability of religious bodies to discriminate on the basis of age, sex and breastfeeding, it was a ''missed opportunity'' to narrow the broad exemptions available to religious groups.

Weet-Bix manufacturer Sanitarium is a religious organisation owned and operated by the Seventh-Day Adventist church, which means it could discriminate against people with these attributes.

An online advertisement for a manufacturing team leader position with the company says: ''If you share our passion for what we do, our products and you can align with our Christian-based principles this is a great opportunity for you.''

Sanitarium spokeswoman Julie Praestiin said the company's workplace culture was ''grounded on Christian-based values of care, courage, humility, integrity and passion which are generally shared by the Australian community''.

She said Sanitarium complied with employment laws. ''We are an equal opportunity employer and have a diverse workforce which encompasses a variety of cultures and worldviews. Religious belief is not a condition of employment.''

Hugh de Kretser, executive officer of the Federation of Community Legal Centres, said that Sanitarium, which is understood to have a turnover of $300 million a year – although the church is not required to lodge Sanitarium's financial reports – should not be allowed to discriminate.

''That a large organisation with a turnover of $300 million a year is given a green light by the law to discriminate highlights the problems with these exemptions,'' he said.

''It's about balancing freedom of religion from freedom from discrimination, and getting it right as to where we draw the line. And examples like this show that the exemptions need to be wound back.''

President of the Australian Human Rights Commission, Professor Gillian Triggs, said that the government had aimed to consolidate laws rather than ''embark on full-scale reform''.

Professor Triggs acknowledged that there were some tensions between how the bill protected different human rights. ''In a secular society such as Australia . . . one does not want to give any sort of particular priority to one freedom above the right of people to non-discriminatory employment.'' She said it was important ''that we don't throw the baby out with the bathwater'' as the bill was the first step towards creating a coherent federal human rights system.

Jane.Lee@fairfaxmedia.com.au ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Letters in The Age:

A betrayal of human rights

January 17, 2013

THE Gillard government had the opportunity to create a law that prevented discrimination against workers and volunteers on the basis of certain ''attributes'' including sexuality and single parenthood. Instead it chose to exclude faith-based organisations (The Age, 16/1) from this even though they receive billions of dollars of taxpayers' money, via funding agreements with governments, to provide essential education, health and community services. Frequently they are the sole local service provider.

Imagine how it feels to know you are denigrated to such an extent that, no matter how experienced and competent you are at work, you can be sacked with no redress because your very being ''injures the religious sensitivities of adherents of that religion''. What do taxpayer-funded, universal services have to do with religious sensitivities? This is a human rights issue that should involve the whole community. I am still haunted by the car stickers proclaiming ''Kill a Queer for Christ'' that I saw in the United States. Bad things happen when good people do nothing.

Lyn McKenzie, Fitzroy

Illustration: Jack Chadwick.

Enshrining bigotry

IN 1981, a friend was sacked from his teaching job at a Catholic school in Geelong after he let slip to a colleague that he was living with his girlfriend. That such action was legal in the 1980s was lamentable. Fast forward to 2013 and the legality of that bigotry is about to be enshrined in the Human Rights and Anti-Discrimination Bill. Haven't we come a long way?

Richard Aspland, Rosanna

Well, fair's fair

SO RELIGIOUS groups can refuse to hire law-abiding people they deem to be sinners. Presumably they will not get too upset if I refuse to hire someone because they are religious. Do unto others…

Andy Stewart, Coburg

Shameful legislation

FAR from being the courageous leader she markets herself as, Julia Gillard lacks a spine. She also betrays the real values of Labor and sells out a fairer Australia for base political interests. It is bad enough that she is happy to entrench discrimination against those who face discrimination in their daily lives. Worse is that Penny Wong, an openly gay person, says she is seeking ''to balance the existing law and the practice of religious exemptions with the principle of non-discrimination''. There is no balance when discrimination is legislated. Labor's move to the extreme right of politics is complete. Shame on Gillard and Wong.

Douglas Potter, Surrey Hills

But the Bible said …

RELIGIOUS groups discriminate against gays because the Bible tells them it is OK to hate them. Shamefully, the government agrees. I am looking forward to religious groups sacking menstruating women and those who eat shellfish, trim their beards and wear clothes of mixed material. However, owning and beating slaves is OK.

Ian Smith, Whittlesea

...and another thing

SHAME on Gillard for giving in to bullying by the so-called Australian Christian Lobby. No government should condone discrimination.

Robert Humphreys, Coburg

Discrimination

TO THOSE faith-based organisations that don't want me as an employee: do you still want my taxes?

Michael Dalton, Yarraville

CHURCHES can discriminate against those who are ''different''. That's a lovely Christian attitude. What utter hypocrisy.

Keith Beman, Woodend

GIVEN the revelations of clergy abuse, the last thing churches should be allowed to do is ''vet the sexual practices of potential employees''.

Benjamin Doherty, West Melbourne

GILLARD is our most disappointing atheist prime minister. She could have promoted tolerance and rationality, but she caved in to superstitious bigotry.

Terry Kelly, Carlton North

........and to add insult to injury, WE have to continue to pay our taxes and those who discriminate DON'T pay any at all!!! (RED_JOS COMMENT)

BOB CARR UNDERLINES THE GILLARD GOVERNMENT'S HUMAN RIGHTS HYPOCRISY!

Bob Carr, Australia's foreign minister, was quoted on ABC radio on Wednesday 15 January 2013 as saying that he welcomes a re-opening of a North Korean embassy in Canberra because it would allow Australia to draw attention to human rights abuses in North Korea.

This is the same Bob Carr who was premier of New South Wales for about 10 years during which he found it difficult to equalise age of consent for sexual relations between heteros and homos.

This is the same Bob Carr who is now part of the Gillard Australian Labor Party (sic)government which has just granted exemptions for religious bodies from equal human rights for the Gay Lesbian, Transgender, HIV (GLTH) members of the community on the grounds that they can choose who meets their religious requirements in the running of their organisations such as aged care, schools and other religious institutions!

And before finishing with Bob Carr let us consider his and his government's deepest hypocrisy in relation to nuclear countries such as North Korea and those not EVER mentioned as nuclear powers such as Israel, because we - read US bumboys or arselickers - consider ourselves as being one of Israel's closest allies. (Let them occupy the whole of the west bank and Gaza and there will be no further problem in Israel and Palestine because Palestine will no longer exist!)

HOMOPHOBIA AND HYPOCRISY

It is difficult to know where to begin with this whole ghastly story of "O What a Tangled Web We Weave..........." because we should all have learnt by now that governments of all permutations and combinations lie to us all the time and cover up those issues which they don't want us ever to find out about - Julian Assange comes to mind.

But back to the present dilemma. Gillard and her government are stacked with homophobes, from Gillard herself to Roxon, Swan, Plibersek, Combet, Ferguson, Danby, Wong - yes you read correctly - she is a Christian lesbian (a contradiction in terms - tautology?) and others too numerous to mention. The hypocrisy starts with issues like gay marriage, gays employed in religious institutions, gays in positions of authority in various capacities, and religious institutions which pay no taxes but claim exemption on the grounds of reverse discrimination.

This article by David Marr appeared in The Age on Monday 14 January 2013 and explains much better than I can what is meant by hypocrisy in this government, led by an atheist and kowtowing to the religious right and all its adherents in order to ensure their support at the next election and for as long as possible into the future.

This was followed by letters in The Age on the next two days:

Visible endorsement

The exemptions proposed under federal discrimination law (Comment, 14/1) are not in plain English. The section should be retitled ''Support for bigotry'' and should be explicitly opt in. Then we can clearly see which religions endorse bigotry.

Further, it's deeply hypocritical for those who give money or attend services to say, ''Oh, I don't support XYZ actions of my religion but still call myself a member.'' If you continue to belong, you visibly endorse the actions of the leadership and are answerable for what is done in your name.

Janine Truter, The Basin

……. AND ANOTHER THING

Will Tony Abbott oppose the discriminatory anti-discrimination bill? Me thinks not.

Alan Williams, Port Melbourne

AND

In thrall to church

IT BEGGARS belief that in a secular society, the church and, in particular, the Catholic Church, can hold such sway over the lives of ordinary Australians (''Labor's anti-discrimination legislation is a bigots' charter'', Comment, 14/1). Publicly funded institutions should not be able to discriminate against those who do not subscribe to a particular religious point of view.

But it is not only employees who are discriminated against; public Catholic maternity hospitals don't give their patients a three-month scan, presumably for fear they may choose to terminate if the scan throws up something untoward with the foetus.

Australia was formed as a secular state so why does our government collude with the churches?

Megan Peniston-Bird, Hawthorn

So out of touch

RELIGION is creeping insidiously into Australian politics and it will eventually backfire on those promoting it. It's bad enough that Labor cosies up to the Australian Christian Lobby, which only represents itself and not most Christians, let alone the wider community. This coupled with Labor continuing the Howard government's ideological blunder of placing fundamentalist chaplains in state schools reeks of special privilege to one sector of society.

Many socially progressive issues are being ignored by parliamentarians reliant on the faith-gene instead of rational and compassionate thinking. The Human Rights and Anti-Discrimination Bill is a disgraceful display of kowtowing to religious leaders who are out of touch with the electorate.

David Nicholls, president, Atheist Foundation of Australia, Maitland, SA

…….AND ANOTHER THING

It’s not OK to discriminate in regard to colour, age or sex, that is unless you are an organisation that believes in a book written many hundreds of years ago.

Geoff Lane, Gisborne

This article by Jonathan Swan was in The Age newspaper on 16 January 2013 and provides the news of the Gillard government's ongoing pandering to the religious right bigots who have her ear and provide so many of the votes.

When finally one day governments in Australia have the guts to tax religions we might be on the way to equality - and pigs will fly!!

GLTH people may work for us and we will gladly take their taxes, but EQUALITY??? Not in our lifetimes!

PELL SIMPLY REFUSES TO ACKNOWLEDGE THE PICTURES - BOTH BIG AND SMALL!

This article appeared in The Age newspaper on Saturday 17 November 2012. Chrissie Foster and her family have waited a long time for this to happen. Now that it has been announced by the federal government, let us hope that the terms of the royal commission will not be full of weasel words that allow the Catholic church an out to escape the blame and responsibility of all these decades of obfuscation and hiding behind their "traditions" such as confessionals and the like. Pell defrocked? Now that would be something to behold!

So much heartbreak, so much pain, it's about time

November 17, 2012
By Chrissie Foster

Happy bedtime: Chrissie Foster with Aimee, Emma and Katie before their world was shattered.
I COULD never stand to live in a world without justice and truth: at last there will be a platform for both. Prime Minister Julia Gillard's announcement of a royal commission on child sexual abuse has brought to an end the cries from victims and victim supporters. Of course, there have been many tears this week. More will be shed. But the royal commission is a cause for celebration.
For my family, the struggle to achieve this breakthrough began 16 years ago, on March 26, 1996. This was the day my daughter Emma, after almost a year of starving her 13-year-old body to an emaciated 41 kilograms, numerous self-harming horrors and attempts to take her own life, disclosed that our parish priest had sexually assaulted her. Not once, but on many occasions over her primary school years.
Fifteen months later more horror and heartbreak surfaced through a half-finished suicide note from our second daughter, Katie. She had hidden the note in a shoebox. It was written in her very neatest handwriting. Katie had been another victim of our parish priest.
There was no cure for my much-loved daughters. The pain never leaves. After years of subsequent torment, Emma took her own life at the age of 26. Katie, while drunk after binge drinking, was hit by a car in 1999 (she was 15) and still receives 24-hour care as a result of her injuries.
There are many of these stories. Ours is not rare. The Prime Minister's announcement was a godsend, proof that our many voices have been heard and believed, at long last. It feels like justice. The burning truth has ignited a light and we must shine it on the Catholic Church because of its cover-up. The Catholic hierarchy fiercely lobbied against a royal commission. But a royal commission had to be called. The claim from the hierarchy and biased commentators - that the Catholic Church is no different to other organisations in relation to child sex crimes and cover-ups - is nonsense. On the first day of the Victorian parliamentary inquiry I sat and listened to the evidence of Victoria Police and three professors.
All stated they would speak only about the Catholic Church. They based their submissions on records and research. Facts. Catholic Church sex offenders committed six times more sexual assaults on children than all the other religions combined. At least one in 20 Melbourne priests was a child sex offender, but the real figure was probably one in 15. There was a systemic obstruction of police inquiries over five decades.
Officers in two police forces - Victoria and New South Wales - have made allegations of extensive church interference with investigations. The royal commission should look closely at this. It should examine the influence of the religious leaders on police and governments.
Why did state governments allow the church's flawed and destructive Melbourne Response and Towards Healing schemes to exist unchallenged for more than 15 years? At his media conference on Tuesday, Cardinal George Pell, ignoring the Victorian inquiry's expert evidence, chose to blame the ''press'' for a ''smear'' campaign against the Catholic Church. But the media is not the problem. Along with brave victims willing to go to police despite their trauma, the ''press'' has helped find a solution. If journalists had not written and broadcast stories of crimes and cover-ups, the likes of Father Gerald Ridsdale and countless other convicted criminal priests would still be celebrating Mass in Australia's Catholic parishes.
One thing is certain: the priesthood never lifted a finger to protect children from ongoing sexual assaults and rapes. Rather, the church paid for the paedophiles' legal defences. Not one priest or brother did it help jail.
Cardinal Pell said the confessional seal was ''inviolable''. I say the lives and bodies of our children are inviolable. Why should a foreign state law - the Vatican's Canon Law - override our Australian laws in protecting our children?
To understand why the confessional seal must be broken to protect children, we need only look at evidence given to a Queensland court in 2004. Father Michael McArdle, after pleading guilty to and being convicted of child sexual assault offences, swore an affidavit. In it he stated he had confessed to sexually assaulting children 1500 times to 30 different priests over a 25-year period.
Every one of those ''good'' priests, as if of one mind and voice, said to the criminal: ''Go home and pray.'' Is that what they are taught to say to each other when told of such crimes? Not one of the 30 priests urged him to get help or go to police. Nor did they report his crimes. The victims were abandoned to become hurting adults, their lives shattered. Distraught. Suicidal.
This is a rare insight into the secret world of paedophile priest confession. We must learn from it. The church system was designed to protect the priest and church from scandal. It was not established to consider the futures of Australia's children. We must not be distracted by the confusion and side issues thrown our way by the church hierarchy.
If mandatory reporting had been enforced at McArdle's first confession, then the next 25 years of pain and suffering for children would never have occurred. The guilt of which he was unburdened though confession only served him to reoffend within the same week. Cardinal Pell said he welcomed the royal commission. Why then did he deny its need just the previous day and the 20 years before?
Recently he spoke of a ''cancer'' in the church. He is part of that cancer. Perhaps it is time for Cardinal Pell to step down and hand over to another cleric who possesses some empathy and compassion for children.
As for the royal commission, the government must strive to write the best terms of reference that encompass the essential need to expose child sexual assault and its cover-up in organisations.
Justice and accountability are needed for past crimes against children. Though it will not help my daughters, this will ensure change and safety for all future children. Only with this reality will victims become survivors.
Chrissie Foster is the co-author of "Hell On The Way To Heaven".

THE AUSTRALIAN BOOK OF ATHEISM - COMMENTS AND THOUGHTS

"The Australian Book of Atheism", edited by Warren Bonett - also a contributor - was published by Scribe in 2010.

The essays cover a wide spectrum of thoughts and comments about what atheism is in Australia and what its impact is on our societies which are god-driven.

For instance, there is a contribution by Dr Philip Nitschke on atheism and euthanasia, and we all know that the outcome of the Northern Territory's introduction of a euthanasia bill was overturned by the federal parliament with god-lovers such as Kevin Andrews driving the debate and ensuring that euthanasia was not to be allowed for Australians demanding it as their right!

The contents are divided into sections illuminating the different perspectives on what should be a very simple topic:

OVERVIEW
PERSONAL
EDUCATION
SOCIAL AND CULTURAL
POLITICS
PHILOSOPHY
RELIGION AND THE BRAIN

The essays are thoughtful and educational and show a wide range of responses to the god-driven world around us. At over 400 pages, most of which are very readable - and entertaining - one is left pondering why, with so many of us atheists, so many of the non-atheists require the support of some mythical, invisible, incomprehensibly cruel and murderous "male" construct, who unleashes wars and famines and cruelty by some few on the many who have no defences and who are left dead and dying by those who also claim to have their god on their side!

I have one serious criticism of the book - there is no index!

For a volume with so much in it, and with information provided by so many with so many references to others, an index is a vital part of such a volume.

I also have one comment which, to my way of thinking, is a serious omission.

At a time when homosexuality has become much more accepted by the heterosexual world and there is ongoing discussion about equal rights for all humans, gay and straight, there is no chapter on homosexuality and religion and atheism.

Many gay, lesbian, transgender and HIV (GLTH) members of the community were brought up in families where religion was the be-all and end-all of their lives - and god said homosexuality was evil because it was written in the bible, and we were all going to rot in hell if we didn't change our ways and our lifestyles. Many were brought up in Catholic households where hell ruled, and many were brought up in other religions where religion was not as rabid but where poofters were the bottom of the food chain!

Why is there no essay about why so many of those GLTH people who were brought up in religious households are now amongst the most avid of atheists, and why is there no assessment of this development in our atheist history?

Other than these comments, the book is a must for those trying to get to grips with what religion has done to them and why they should drop it immediately and develop into happy, productive and normal members of our society.

GILLARD, SWAN, DROP GOD AND CONCENTRATE!

In 2011 in Australia the prime minister and the treasurer are telling the population that the May 2011 budget is going to be a tough one!

Gillard and the federal opposition's Tony Abbott are calling for those unfortunate people who receive benefits because of unemployment, disability, old age and various other reasons, to look to their laurels and are being told "we are going to be tough on you because you must get jobs and lose your benefits.

Now, as ever in Australian society, it is those who are most disadvantaged and struggling to put a roof over their heads and food in their stomachs who are told to suffer more.

Those who are rich will be looked after and will be able to get richer at the expense of the poor who will get poorer. By these means the budget will be able to keep Australia afloat.

However, the major organisations which would make Australia prosperous for years to come by being taxed,continue to be tax exempt because they have rich and powerful lobbies. These are the religious institutions in Australia who continue to be treated as gods and royalty because our atheist prime minister has suddenly found god in her middle years - she has had a "Damascus" moment.

In 1994 a group in the USA was pushing for that country's government to consider taxing religious organisations who had been tax-exempt in that country.

Guess what??!! Here we are 17 years later and what has changed?

But the world is changing. There is turmoil in the middle east and the rich countries are literally shitting themselves because it has all come as a surprise and they don't know how to handle it all. Added to which the USA is so bankrupt because of its wars, its bankers and its support for Israel that they too are looking for cuts to budgets to make the poor get poorer and the rich get richer.

The item below therefore makes very interesting reading!

2 February 2009

I came across this 1994 press release while researching further atheist sites relating to gay, lesbian, transgender and HIV/AIDS communities (GLTH), and as I am trying to list as many atheist organisations as possible, this is next on the list!:
PRESS RELEASE AMERICAN GAY AND LESBIAN ATHEISTS, INC.
P O Box 66711 Houston,

PRESS RELEASE PRESS RELEASE *****************************************************************

AMERICAN GAY AND LESBIAN ATHEISTS, INC.

P O Box 66711
Houston, TX 77266-6711
Dial-A-Gay-Atheist: 713-880-4242

AGLA CALLS UPON IRS TO MONITOR CHURCHES FOR POLITICAL INVOLVEMENT

For Immediate Release
Saturday, October 29, 1994
Contact: Don Sanders, National Director

Houston, TX -- As the political season reaches "high gear," the national office of American Gay and Lesbian Atheist is busily watching the degree to which churches and religious organizations in the Houston area are involving themselves in partisan politics. American Gay Atheists, Inc. is a non-profit, 501(c)(3) educational foundation which does not violate the tenets of the IRS codes which prohibit direct involvement in partisan politics by non-profit groups.

American Gay and Lesbian Atheists (AGLA) has been instrumental in having the Dallas office of the Internal Revenue Service maintain an open file (File 4940 Dal) on Houston area churches and religious groups which involve themselves in the political process, such as endorsing candidates for public office. During the 1993 elections, AGLA documented numerous cases of direct political involvement by Houston churches, particularly in the races of Sheila Jackson Lee, who was backed heavily by numerous Black ministerial alliances. In some cases, the political involvement of churches was so blatant that some churches placed campaign signs on their properties.

"Such political involvement by churches is harmful to basic freedoms and civil rights of many, particularly gays and lesbians," says Don Sanders, national director. "The strongest opposition to equality of rights for gays and lesbians comes from the churches and the Christian scriptures. Many ministers bastardize the non-profit status accorded them under the rules of the Internal Revenue Service by directly instructing their congregations for whom to vote and how to vote on key issues, such as abortion rights, women's rights, and rights for gays and lesbians." Sanders points out that efforts to stop churches from influencing politics have proven ineffective. "However," Sanders says, "if the politically-meddling churches suddenly were threatened with loss of their privileged tax status accorded them under the directives of the Internal Revenue Service, much direct partisan political involvement on the part of churches would cease."

During this political season, AGLA is carefully monitoring the antics of the so-called Religious Right and the support of their candidates by churches. "If the churches will not abide by the law which prohibits them from endorsing candidates, instructing their congregants for whom to vote, or funding political campaigns, we hope that our efforts to encourage the IRS to look into these matters by giving them documentation on this obvious abuse and illegal activity will help prove to the churches, once and for all, they should get out of the political game, or lose their tax exemption," says Sanders.

For further comments or questions, contact Don Sanders.

American Gay and Lesbian Atheists promotes Thomas Jefferson's constitutional premise of separation between state and church, and works to protect and promote the civil and human rights of persons who are Atheists and gay.

*********************************************************************** * * *

American Atheists website:

http://www.atheists.org

* * PO Box 140195 FTP: ftp://ftp.atheists.org * * Austin, TX 78714-0195 * * Voice: (512) 458-1244 Dial-THE-ATHEIST: * * FAX: (512) 467-9525 (512) 458-5731 * * * * Atheist Viewpoint TV: avtv@atheists.org * * Info on American Atheists: info@atheists.org, * * & American Atheist Press include your name and mailing address * * AANEWS -Free subscription: aanews-request@listserv.atheists.org * * and put "info aanews" in message body *
* * *

This text may be freely downloaded, reprinted, and/other * * otherwise redistributed, provided appropriate point of * * origin credit is given to American Atheists.
* * * *********************************************************************** E-Mail Fredric L. Rice / The Skeptic Tank

AUSTRALIAN FEDERAL AND STATE GOVERNMENTS JOIN THEOCRACIES SUCH AS IRAN, THE VATICAN, ISRAEL, SAUDI ARABIA - & OTHER SIMILAR COUNTRIES

Some of the goings-on in federal and state parliaments in Australia over the last several years, and increasingly rapidly recently, indicate that Australia is on the verge of becoming a theocracy in the worst traditions of those types of states.

Indications are that more and more of its citizens will be affected by the change from a secular state to a theocratic one and the scene is getting uglier every day.

The items from newspaper and radio reports are becoming more alarming for those who do not have strong ties to religions of any sort.

Racism and homophobia are on the increase and statements from theologians, supported by politicians of all persuasions do not a pretty picture make!

"HELL ON THE WAY TO HEAVEN" - BY CHRISSIE FOSTER

AN INDICTMENT OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH, RELIGION AND POLITICS

I am 84 years old and have been an atheist for practically all of my adult life. I was brought up by my Jewish family to be a good practising Jewish man, to believe in god and to be a good heterosexual husband and father.

Being young, naive, trusting and obedient, as an adolescent and a young adult I did as I was told by my mother who was doing her best to be both parents to me as my father died when I was three and I had a stepfather with whom I was not very close. My father had been a religious young Jew and an ardent zionist, but he died at the age of 31 in 1930 and it is difficult to know what his responses would have been to the excesses of the Jewish state he believed in becoming Israel and a terrorist police state.

My disillusionment with religion began when I was fairly young and has only intensified over the years when I have watched the excesses of all religions behaving contrary to what they all preach, and the death and destruction this has brought to the life and death of so many around the world.

When I came out as a gay man at the age of 61 I started discovering so many in the gay, lesbian, transgender and HIV/AIDS communities who had turned against their religions because they had been abused by religious people, by families, by employers, by those around them - and us - on a daily basis of homophobia and hate based often on the teachings of their religions.

During the five year period that I was a carer of people living with, and dying of AIDS I found many who had been thrown out of their homes by families because they were gay and because their families professed religion - mostly Catholics and Jews in my experience.

Many of these people had had nowhere to turn, and no one to turn to, and fortunately so many in the gay and lesbian communities had formed organisations to care for desperate people at their wits' and life's ends.

Although in my sixties and seventies, I learnt a great deal from the sufferings of these people and it had a profound and traumatic effect on me and my life for many years.

It is only in recent years that it has eased off somewhat, and I have become more peaceful in my later years due mainly to my partner of 18 years and my many caring and understanding friends.

Through one of these friends we were introduced into the life of Katie Foster who was being cared for on this particular day and brought Katie to our house - in a wheelchair - all the way from Oakleigh - quite an expedition to get to Preston from there on public transport. This would have been about 2007 or 2008 and from then on we continued to hear about the Foster family and what had happened to them to turn their lives upside down so that they were on a roller-coaster ride because of the Catholic church in their lives.

Our friend knew the Fosters through her own family who also lived in Oakleigh and had known them for years with their children attending the same Catholic church and schools.

When Chrissie Foster wrote the book with a journalist, Paul Kennedy, we received some of the early copies after it went on sale because our friend brought some to our house and gave us one. She then bought copies for people she knew and so did we.

At that stage we didn't know we were going to meet the Fosters, but our friend turned 60 and had a "mingling" for family and friends - she didn't want to call it a birthday party and amongst the friends were the Fosters.

My partner was nearly finished reading the book at that stage, and I was in the middle of a fairly long and comprehensive book of research called "The Invention of the Jewish People" - another book on religion and politics and the collision of it all due to the state of Israel and the lies and wars it has waged - in the name of the Jews - over the years since Israel was created in 1948.

I have just finished reading Chrissie's book after finishing the other one, and I found it devastating in its impact. What the Fosters have gone through and how they have suffered and come out fighting at the end of it is unbelievable in itself, but to meet them and talk to them and then be invited to their home to meet them and see Katie once again, this time in the loving and caring environment of her home made a lasting impression on us and it was one that will stay with me for a long time.

For a family to have suffered as they did due to the abuse of their two older daughters at the hands of their Catholic priest at the school the girls attended due to Chrissie's religious beliefs and her faith in her religion and to read and hear how it was all shattered as were their lives is to know what religion is capable of in all our lives.

Those responsible for this devastation in the lives of the Fosters and countless hundreds and thousands around the world are the Catholic church and its hierarchy from the fascist pope downwards, all other religions and the countries which house them and give them privileges which no other citizens are allowed - tax exemptions so that they can steal people's lives and incomes as they get richer and richer shows a collusion beyond comprehension.

Countries like Australia which give the Catholic church so much power and refuse to tax any part of it is in itself a criminal act, and the challenges which the Fosters faced in attacking the institutions which house us is as daunting as it is bravery of the first degree.

The Fosters may have won some compensation in their legal challenges to the Catholic church hierarchy, but it robbed them of their most precious possessions, the lives of two of their daughters.

There is hope that their youngest daughter, who escaped the sexual assaults perpetrated on her two older sisters will, in time, be able to live a comparatively normal life and achieve some measure of happiness.

The oldest daughter committed suicide and the middle daughter harmed herself and has ended up in a physically and mentally impaired state, but we actually saw a change for the better in her from when she visited us at our house some 3 years ago, and so there is some hope that as the years pass, she may regain some of her lost abilities, but for the parents, Chrissie and Anthony, their lives have been shattered forever, and one can only hope that also, over time, there may be some healing and some peace restored to all of them.

DENNIS HART, GEORGE PELL, CATHOLIC CHURCH MEN WHO HAVE NO AUTHORITY TO TELL PEOPLE HOW TO VOTE!

An archbishop and a cardinal who belong to an organisation which exists in Australia on a tax-free basis have the temerity to tell people how they should vote, despite the fact that they have no authority to do so because they pay no taxes to the governments who are elected and who control the finances of the country through the taxes raised by their laws and regulations.

Hart and Pell should stick to their cover-ups of priests behaving badly and not try and stick their nasty little beaks into areas which do not concern them.

Just because a certain political party supports abortion, euthanasia, gay rights and other social reforms to achieve equality for the citizens of Australia does not give non-tax payers such as religious organisations any rights whatever!

This letter, from The Age newspaper of 2 November 2010 says it all:

Charitable status

AS ARCHBISHOP Hart joins Cardinal Pell in political attacks on the Greens, I am wondering where the Australian Tax Office is in all this.

In granting tax-exempt status to charities, the Tax Office insists they not engage in political activities.

Recently the Tax Office has spent considerable public money pursuing Aid Watch, claiming it is engaging in political activity and thus is not a charity.

So why has there been no action taken against the partisan politicking of Hart and Pell, officials of that charitable institution the Catholic Church?

Thos Puckett, Ashgrove, Qld

FASCISTS AND ZIONISTS FIND COMMON GROUND

This is an article in the current edition of Socialist Alternative - September 2010:

Fascists and Zionists find common ground .
By Jade Eckhaus
07 September 2010



Today in Britain if you decided to attend a fascist rally you might see something slightly unexpected in the crowd: the Israeli flag. Israeli flags are becoming more and more common as Zionists join forces with the fascists to mobilise against anti-fascist groups and pro-Palestine supporters throughout Europe.

In England the English Defence League (EDL), known for its vitriolic and violent anti-Muslim racism, has gone so far as to set up a “Jewish Division” and now it is not an uncommon sight to see Zionists and fascists together yelling “We hate Muslims” and “Muslim bombers off our streets” at pro-Palestinians forces.

But is it not just small groups of Israel supporters around the world who agree with the revolting anti-Muslim racism of Europe’s far right and fascist groups: the state of Israel welcomes fascists with open arms – as long as they hate the Muslims as much as Israel does.

This is why people like the Dutch politician Geert Wilders from the far-right Freedom Party – who argues that the Quran should be banned and calls for an immediate end to Muslim immigration to Holland – was invited by the Israeli government to speak at a conference in Israel. He argued that “The jihad against Israel is the jihad against the West.” Perhaps what he really meant to say is the genocide of the Palestinians that Israel is carrying out is one that fascist parties around the world would like to emulate.

It is hardly surprising that fascists and far-right lunatics of all colours and stripes have started looking to the state of Israel as a beacon of hope. Israel is a state built on the genocide and dispossession of the majority Palestinian population. Israel’s entire project demands the continued demonisation of Arab and Muslim people.

Former Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Shamir best articulated that project when he said in 1988 that Palestinians resisting occupation should “be crushed like grasshoppers…heads smashed against the boulders and walls.” It is that project that today sees Israel planning to deport hundreds of children for the “crime” of being non-Jewish immigrants.

That project means that the Israeli government is yet to condemn former chief rabbi Ovadia Yosef for arguing that “God should strike [the Palestinians] with a plague.” And that project saw the Israeli soldier Eden Abergil send shockwaves across the globe when she posted photos of wounded, bound and gagged Palestinians on her Facebook page with other soldiers in the foreground displaying their weapons and laughing.

These actions are not just individual events but rather an illustration of the nature of the state of Israel, a state where Palestinians are legally second class citizens, where soldiers are surprised that the world might object to photos of Palestinians being brutalised being put on Facebook.

Fascists look to Israel because Israel is the leading light in the project of building a racially pure state. Israel’s racist Law of Return means that I, as a Jewish person, have the right to go to Israel at any time and receive Israeli citizenship, while the descendants of Palestinians driven off their land in 1948 have no right to return to their homes.

And let’s not forget the 30 laws that directly discriminate against non-Jewish Israeli citizens, the segregated education system which means that for schools in majority Palestinian communities the government spends $US190 per Palestinian student, compared to $US1,100 per Jewish student; or that because of the lack of funding for Palestinian communities in Israel the Palestinian death rate is 1.5 times higher than the Jewish death rate.

The revolting racism espoused by Jewish members of the EDL finds its roots in the racism of Israel’s leading statespeople. Take Roberta Moore, one of the leading members of the EDL’s “Jewish Division”, who maintained in an interview with Ha’aretz, one of Israel’s leading newspapers, that the EDL are not racist – they are just “anti-Islam, as everyone should be”. Moore went on to identify with Golda Meir, whom she considers one “of the best Prime Ministers Israel ever had”. Golda Meir famously brushed aside objections to her repulsive anti-Palestinian policies by saying “There is no such thing as a Palestinian people… They [don’t] exist.”

When pictures of a fascist holding an Israeli flag at a rally flooded the internet last year, an Israeli Embassy spokesperson said: “It is appalling to see the flag of Israel abused by thugs who stir up violence and tension between communities.” It is appalling that thugs stir up violence and tension between communities – but hardly surprising that they use the flag of the state that murders Muslims with impunity to do so.

While my family fought against and were murdered by the fascists in Nazi Germany, the state of Israel now welcomes them. This is yet another illustration of the fact that the state of Israel is in no way the beneficiary of the real Jewish tradition but rather the creators of a new tradition of racism and genocide.

At the bottom of the article in the online edition, readers are asked to make comment. However, apparently there is no one available from Socialist Alternative to process the feedback which they have asked people to make. This is yet another example of groups like Socialist Alternative not being able to get their acts together - what a waste of time when one has made a comment only to be told it won't be posted!

ZIONISTS AND ISRAEL INVOLVEMENT WITH THE MELBOURNE INTERNATIONAL FILM FESTIVAL

The story of the involvement of Israel and zionism with the running of the Melbourne International Film Festival is just too interesting to forget about and keeping the issue alive in the public mind is an absolute necessity.

Many thanks to those who publicised the issues: Antony Loewenstein, Crikey, the ABC and others.

Antony Loewenstein
How the Melbourne Film Festival embraces apartheid Israel
Published on 31 July 2010 in Israel.


Back in 2009, film-maker Ken Loach withdrew his film Looking for Eric from the Melbourne International Film Festival after it was revealed that the Israeli government offered financial support for the event.
This year there was supposedly no controversy despite the festival again taking funds from the Israeli government (the director, Richard Moore, is a Zionist whose son has served in the IDF).
(Tuesday, July 20, 2010
Yes, Dear
Melbourne lobby group Australians for Palestine has just posted the following appeal on its website:

"Last year Australians for Palestine (AFP) initiated a cultural boycott in Melbourne protesting Israel's partnership with the Melbourne International Film Festival (MIFF). The protests continued over the 12 days of the festival to much heated debate in the media over the rights and wrongs of boycotting cultural events. English film maker Ken Loach withdrew his film Looking for Eric, which then sparked an exchange of letters with MIFF's Executive Director Richard Moore who refused to reconsider Israel's sponsorship. This year's festival will be held from 22 July - 8 August and Israel is again a cultural partner. The protest is not directed at any film or filmaker but against the cultural partnership that MIFF has with the state of Israel. We are simply asking you to let MIFF know that you do not approve of normalising relations with an apartheid state that is currently oppressing some 5.5 million Palestinians in Gaza, the occupied West Bank, and East Jerusalem and in Israel itself."

So what's Mr Moore's problem? How much bad news from Israel can one absorb before the penny drops?

The Australian Jewish News of July 16 sheds some light on a dark corner. Some excerpts from A chat with Richard Moore:

"This time last year, the MIFF was embroiled in controversy when director Ken Loach withdrew his film because of Israel's support of the festival. Has there been any backlash this year?

"I was very happy to declare this festival a Loach-free zone. I decided not even to bother going to see his film at Cannes this year, because we objected so strongly to what he did last year. I gather it wasn't a terrific film, it didn't get very good reviews. The Australians for Palestine have started up their annual campaign against MIFF but we were undeterred by their protest last year and we approached the Israeli Embassy again this year and they were more than happy to support us. But so far this year, we've had no controversy like that.

"That must be a relief.

"Well yes, I guess so, although from a publicity point of view, it's a terrible result. We're trying, as much as possible, to deeply offend some people...

"You're not Jewish, so where does your affinity with Israel come from?

"My wife is Jewish, I lived in Israel for two-and-a-half years, I speak Hebrew and I've got two Jewish sons, so that goes some way to explaining my affinity with Israel."

I see, so marrying a Jew, and a stint in Israel, renders one immune to independent thought. )
And then something changed a few weeks ago, an issue that has thus far received no mainstream media coverage. Australian, Jewish academic Ned Curthoys has written an exclusive report for this site:

About a fortnight ago, some friends of the Palestinian people alerted the production company Human Film that the 2010 Melbourne International Film Festival lists the state of Israel as a cultural partner and therefore official sponsor of the festival. Their award-winning Iraqi film Son of Babylon was due to screen on Wednesday the 28th of July and Friday the 30th of July.
On behalf of Human Film, the Director Mohamed Al-Daradji, the Producer Isabelle Stead and the Producer Atia Al-Daradji wrote on Sunday the 25th of July to the Executive Director of MIFF, Richard Moore, stressing that Son of Babylon is a Palestinian co-production and that as they, as filmmakers, are ‘wholeheartedly against the Israeli governments’ actions against the Palestinian people and as such cannot screen our film at Melbourne IFF whilst there is Israeli government support involved’.
The signatories stressed that they are not against the Israeli people or Israeli filmmakers but ‘against the Israeli government actions against Palestine’ and that they refused to have any association with the state of Israel until it respected the human rights of the Palestinian people. They repeated their request to withdraw the film.
[MIFF head] Richard Moore responded by agreeing to disagree on the political aspect of the matter and, complaining of the logistical impossibility of withdrawing the film on the eve of screening, informed the signatories that the Monday screening would be shown but that he is prepared to countenance financial compensation for the Wednesday the 28th screening.
Isabelle Stead, the main producer of SON OF BABYLON, writing on behalf of Human Film, responded that she really hoped that he, Richard Moore, had respected their wishes and withdrawn the film from the festival, entirely. This isn’t about politics, she wrote, this is about humanity.
She made the point that it had only just been brought to their attention that MIF festival was supported by the state of Israel, and that upon receiving this information, they acted as promptly as they could. Isabelle was surprised that Melbourne IFF had not informed filmmakers whom have a Palestinian element/connection to their film that the state of Israel are involved in funding the festival. She pointed out that the festival was informed in enough time to stop the screening – as in 2009 when Ken Loach withdrew his film on the eve of its screening. MIFF should not underestimate Human Film’s resolve to ensure that their film is not associated with the state of Israel as long as it continues its illegal crimes against humanity.
Richard Moore refused to acknowledge that he had any obligation to inform a Palestinian co-production about Israeli sponsorship, instead claiming that revocation of permission to withdraw the film and to take action against the festival if it does not withdraw the film was a ‘divisive act’ that contravenes the film company’s ethos of breaking down cultural barriers.
Isabelle Stead repeated her willingness to reimburse the festival and repeated her point that the festival must hold some responsibility in not informing a Palestinian co-production that it was being supported by the state of Israel. She reminded Moore that in the 1980s Mr Rod Webb, The Sydney Film Festival Director, refused to accepted any sponsorship or screen films from apartheid South Africa. When Israel is no longer an apartheid state, she wrote, we will of course be proud to screen our films in conjunction with them. In the interim she would be happy to help Richard Moore find alternative sponsorship that is independent of Israel’s support for Melbourne IFF in the future.
She welcomed Moore’s allusion to their mission statement and pointed out it was still in full force and effect, since they were ‘acting from a humanitarian stance’. She asked that Richard Moore respect their wishes not to screen Son of Babylon and wanted to be informed if the film had been screened at the festival.
Richard Moore then revealed his hand by declaring, against the common wisdom of Jimmy Carter and Desmond Tutu, that the comparison of Israel with an apartheid state was ‘odious’. He now claimed that Human Film had not taken the issue of compensation seriously, and, to rub salt into the wound, smugly talked of how much the patrons had enjoyed the screening and that he hoped the film scored well in audience awards.
Isabelle Stead now accused Richard Moore of petulance, and was clearly upset that he had disregarded the multiple requests of Human Film not to have any screenings of their film at the festival. Isabelle wrote that she had spoken to the producer of Looking for Eric – who informed her that they were not requested to pay the festival any monies for pulling the film in 2009. She reiterated that she had made a fair offer to reimburse the festival for the shipment costs along with any monies paid to their sales company to screen the film. She reiterated that any permissions granted to Melbourne IFF to screen SON OF BABYLON had been revoked.
Isabelle. in a later correspondence, suggested that she was disgusted with the behaviour of the festival towards Human Film, and very saddened that Moore couldn’t see past the politics to the real heart of the issue. Human Film would now prefer to offer the proceeds of the admissions for the screening of Son of Babylon to a charity of their choice.
The second screening of Son of Babylon on Wednesday went ahead without any signal that this was against the express wishes of Human Film. One can safely draw the conclusion that just as MIFF and Richard Moore failed in their ethical obligation to inform international film makers of Israeli sponsorship of the festival, they have also engaged in a conspiracy of silence to prevent you knowing about the principled ethical objections of Human Film to screen Son of Babylon.
The public can make up their own mind but audiences of the MIFF 2010 and the wider public have a right to know about the way in which Richard Moore himself is deliberately politicizing the festival.

---------------------------------------------------------

Yesterday Crikey published the full email correspondence between MIFF and the film-makers.

LEAKED: Filmmakers demand Son of Babylon to be withdrawn from the 2010 MIFF program
July 30, 2010 – 12:59 pm, by Luke Buckmaster

This morning the makers of the acclaimed feature Son of Babylon alerted Crikey to the news that they sent numerous requests to the Melbourne International Film Festival asking for the film be removed from the festival program.
The filmmakers strongly object to MIFF’s links with the State of Israel, which is one of the festival’s sponsors. Last year British director Ken Loach withdrew his film Looking for Eric from the program for the same reason.
Son of Babylon explores the aftermath of Saddam Hussein’s downfall in Iraq. It is the second festival-selected film to attract controversy this year, following the OFLC’S decision earlier this month to ban director Bruce LaBruce’s LA Zombie.
Unfortunately for the filmmakers, Son of Babylon screenings have already come and gone. MIFF organisers claim they were not given sufficient notice to cancel the screenings.

Cinetology has not just the scoop but the entire email exchange between the makers of Son of Babylon and MIFF Executive Director Richard Moore, pasted below. Note that Cinetology has not edited the correspondence in any way.

Dear Richard,
When we grant a festival permission to screen a film that took us years to make along with danger, blood, sweat and tears - we do so with trust. I would have thought a festival would morally recognise the need to tell a Palestinian co-production that it was funded by the state of Israel?
Your tone and “reasonable” manner is petulant, along with your actions in disregarding our requests not to have any screenings of our film at your festival.
I have spoken to the producer of Looking for Eric – who informed me that they were not requested to pay you any monies to the festival for pulling the film. I have made a fair offer to reimburse you for the shipment costs along with any monies you paid to our sales company to screen the film. A more than fair offer.
Also please send to me a copy of the agreement you have in place with our agent.
I will again reiterate that any permissions granted to Melbourne IFF to screen SON OF BABYLON have been revoked.
Sincerely,
Isabelle Stead
Iraq’s Missing Persons Petition – please sign: http://www.thepetitionsite.com/1/iraqs-missing-campaign
http://www.facebook.com/pages/Son-of-Babylon-bn-bbl/165219640829
http://www.causes.com/iraqsmissing
Isabelle Stead
Human Film
Isabelle@humanfilm.co.uk
ADP House, 35 Hanover Square, Leeds, LS3 1BQ, UK, t: +44 (0) 113 243 8880 M+ 44 (0) 7835 378454
Human Film Inc. provides the information contained in this email message “as is” and makes no representations or warranties of any kind regarding its accuracy or reliability. Human Film Inc. disclaims all liability of any kind whatsoever arising out of your use of, or inability to use, this email message and the information contained on it.
This is a privileged and confidential communication. If you are not an intended recipient, you should: (1) reply to sender; (2) destroy this communication entirely, including deletion of all associated text files from all individual and network storage devices; and (3) refrain from copying or disseminating this communication by any means whatsoever.
On 28 July 2010 09:25, Richard Moore wrote:
Dear Isabelle
Re the question of festival sponsorship ; it is entirely a matter for our independent arts organisation to seek sponsorship wherever we see fit and we are under no legal obligation to declare our sources of funding for external groups to approve or disprove . Similarly we don’t ask filmmakers to declare their sources of funding.
For the record I find your comparison between Israel and an apartheid state odious ; we shall have to agree to disagree on this issue.
I have tried to deal with you in a reasonable manner by proposing a fair financial offer to compensate our festival for financial loss . In my view you have chosen not to treat this offer seriously.
Clearly, this situation is an unfortunate one and has been compounded by the time factor . As explained in prior correspondence, the fact that you contacted us only on the date of the first screening exacerbated this situation.
I confirm that we have screened the film : it was enjoyed by many patrons and I sincerely hope it scores well in our audience awards.
regards
Richard Moore
Richard Moore
Executive Director
Melbourne International Film Festival
22 July – 8 August, 2010
http://www.melbournefilmfestival.com.au/
Direct: 61 3 8660 4804
Fax: 61 3 9654 2561
Postal Address: GPO Box 4982, Melbourne VIC 3001 Australia
Street Address: Level 5, 225 Bourke Street Melbourne VIC 3000
Become a Member and/or join our e-newsletter Widescreen here:
http://www.melbournefilmfestival.com.au/join
Please consider the environment before you print this e-mail
Dear Richard,
I am happy of course to reimburse you for any money you paid to screen the film to our Sales company – along with shipment cost – but please also recognise the festival must hold some responsibility in not informing a Palestinian co-production that it was being supported by the state of Israel.
In the 1980’s Mr Rod Webb The Sydney Film Festival Director, refused to accepted any sponsorship or screen films from apartheid South Africa, when Israel is no longer an apartheid state, we will of course be proud to screen our films in conjunction. In the interim I would be happy to help you find alternative sponsorship that is independent of Israel’s support for Melbourne IFF in the future.
Thank you also for relaying back to me our mission statement which I am please and proud to say is still in full force and effect, to reiterate my last email – we are acting from a humanitarian stance.
I apologise if you felt threatened by my last email this was not my intent, nevertheless as said at present we have revoked your rights to screen our film and hope that you respect and have respected our wishes. Please can you inform me if the film has already screened at your festival?
Furthermore I am happy to work out an alternative for Melbourne audiences to view the film, independent of the Melbourne IFF.
Sincerely,
Isabelle Stead
Iraq’s Missing Persons Petition – please sign: http://www.thepetitionsite.com/1/iraqs-missing-campaign
http://www.facebook.com/pages/Son-of-Babylon-bn-bbl/165219640829
http://www.causes.com/iraqsmissing
Isabelle Stead
Human Film
Isabelle@humanfilm.co.uk
ADP House, 35 Hanover Square, Leeds, LS3 1BQ, UK, t: +44 (0) 113 243 8880 M+ 44 (0) 7835 378454
Human Film Inc. provides the information contained in this email message “as is” and makes no representations or warranties of any kind regarding its accuracy or reliability. Human Film Inc. disclaims all liability of any kind whatsoever arising out of your use of, or inability to use, this email message and the information contained on it.
This is a privileged and confidential communication. If you are not an intended recipient, you should: (1) reply to sender; (2) destroy this communication entirely, including deletion of all associated text files from all individual and network storage devices; and (3) refrain from copying or disseminating this communication by any means whatsoever.
On 27 July 2010 05:58, Richard Moore wrote:
Dear Isabelle
As I outlined in my previous email I look forward to seeing your written offer of financial compensation . I do not agree that you have provided us with enough time to cancel the screening. I have entered into correspondence with you promptly about this in order to find a solution.
Its unfortunate that you now resort to threats to “take appropriate action against the festival “. Indeed , it seems extraordinary to me that an organisation that claims to “break down cultural barriers through film “.. to “ further understanding” and that also states that it does “ not apply any language,cultural,political,religious or any other barriers to our film making practice “ would engage in such a divisive act.
For your information the second screening of SON OF BABYLON is sold out. We estimate the costs of withdrawing the film at
Admissions $3,300
Hire of venue $400
Replacement film hire $500
Staffing $250
Total $4,450
These hard costs do not include the distress and potential upset caused to our patrons and the cost of communicating with everyone who has purchased a ticket.
I expect to hear confirmation of your agreement to compensate the festival on these costs before I will reconsider the matter of the second screening of the film.
Regards
Richard Moore
Richard Moore
Executive Director
Melbourne International Film Festival
22 July – 8 August, 2010
http://www.melbournefilmfestival.com.au/
Direct: 61 3 8660 4804
Fax: 61 3 9654 2561
Postal Address: GPO Box 4982, Melbourne VIC 3001 Australia
Street Address: Level 5, 225 Bourke Street Melbourne VIC 3000
Become a Member and/or join our e-newsletter Widescreen here:
http://www.melbournefilmfestival.com.au/join
Please consider the environment before you print this e-mail
Dear Richard,
Thank you for replying to our email. Please be aware Mohamed is currently in Sarajevo promoting the film and our Iraq’s Missing People Campaign.
I am the main producer for SON OF BABYLON, on behalf of the director, myself and our team I really hope that you have respected our wishes and withdrawn the film from your festival, entirely. This isn’t about politics this is about humanity.
To request a withdrawal of our film to a festival is our last wish and we are sorry for any inconvenience this causes to you, your colleagues, your festival and your audiences especially at such short notice. Please know it was only just brought to our attention that your festival was supported by the state of Israel, upon receiving this information, we acted as promptly as we could.
We have only just last week, taken over the festivals from Roissy Films our sales company and will of course ensure in the future that we check in advance a festival’s sponsors, before accepting an invitation. Nevertheless I am surprised that Melbourne IFF do not inform filmmakers whom have a Palestinian element/connection to their film that the state of Israel are involved in funding the festival?
The festival was informed in enough time to stop the screening – as I understand you were able to do this in 2009 when Ken Loach withdrew his film on the eve of it’s screening. Therefore if you have knowingly disregarded our wishes and screened the film, we will of course be left with little alternative than to take appropriate action against the festival. We would of course, be very reluctant to do this, but you should not underestimate our resolve to ensure that our film is not associated with the state of Israel as long as it continues it’s illegal crimes against humanity.
Sincerely,
Isabelle Stead
Human Film & Iraq Al-Rafidain
Iraq’s Missing Persons Petition – please sign: http://www.thepetitionsite.com/1/iraqs-missing-campaign
http://www.facebook.com/pages/Son-of-Babylon-bn-bbl/165219640829
http://www.causes.com/iraqsmissing
Isabelle Stead
Human Film
Isabelle@humanfilm.co.uk
ADP House, 35 Hanover Square, Leeds, LS3 1BQ, UK, t: +44 (0) 113 243 8880 M+ 44 (0) 7835 378454
Human Film Inc. provides the information contained in this email message “as is” and makes no representations or warranties of any kind regarding its accuracy or reliability. Human Film Inc. disclaims all liability of any kind whatsoever arising out of your use of, or inability to use, this email message and the information contained on it.
This is a privileged and confidential communication. If you are not an intended recipient, you should: (1) reply to sender; (2) destroy this communication entirely, including deletion of all associated text files from all individual and network storage devices; and (3) refrain from copying or disseminating this communication by any means whatsoever.

On 26 July 2010 17:02, Mohamed Al-Daradji mohamed@humanfilm.co.uk http://mohamed@humanfilm.co.uk wrote:
Answer her by no money will pay to them and we drowthe film out
———- Forwarded message ———-
From: Richard Moore moore@melbournefilmfestival.com.au http://moore@melbournefilmfestival.com.au
Date: 26 July 2010 06:54
Subject: SON OF BABYLON
To: mohamed@humanfilm.co.uk
Cc: Michelle Carey carey@melbournefilmfestival.com.au http://carey@melbournefilmfestival.com.au, Jess Langley langley@melbournefilmfestival.com.au >, Petrina Dorrington dorrington@melbournefilmfestival.com.au >
Dear Mohamed
Michelle Carey our head of programming has forwarded me your email which
arrived many weeks after the festival program has been announced and 3
months after you supplied us with all the technical information about your
film. This document we regard as official confirmation of your acceptance of
our conditions for the festival.
You sent the email on the day of the first screening of the film. I wouldn’t
suggest that your timing intended to cause our festival disruption; however,
I should point out that we have sold tickets to this session and we have an
eager public willing to view it.
You have your political opinions, which clearly I don’t share – lets put
that to one side. To request a withdrawal of the film on the day of the
screening is simply not acceptable and shows a lack of respect for our
organisation . We have worked hard to bring your film here and your
selection meant that other films could not be included in the program. We
are not able to replace the film at short notice and we will screen it
today.
I am prepared to consider other options for the second screening but I will
also need to consider the financial ramifications to our organisation of
having to bring in another film and the inevitable confusion and disruption
this will cause our patrons. Perhaps you will be prepared to offer us some
financial compensation for withdrawing your film.
I look forward to hearing from you in the near future.
Regards
Richard Moore
Richard Moore
Executive Director
Melbourne International Film Festival
22 July – 8 August, 2010
http://www.melbournefilmfestival.com.au/
Direct: 61 3 8660 4804
Fax: 61 3 9654 2561
Postal Address: GPO Box 4982, Melbourne VIC 3001 Australia
Street Address: Level 5, 225 Bourke Street Melbourne VIC 3000
Become a Member and/or join our e-newsletter Widescreen here:
http://www.melbournefilmfestival.com.au/join
Please consider the environment before you print this e-mail
From: Mohamed Al-Daradji mohamed@humanfilm.co.uk >
Sender: mohamedaldaradji@googlemail.com
Date: Sun, 25 Jul 2010 18:09:19 +0100
To: Michelle Carey carey@melbournefilmfestival.com.au >
Cc: Isabelle Isabelle@humanfilm.co.uk >; atia
aldraji atia_alrafdeniraq@yahoo.com >
Subject: RE: We would like to withdrew our film Son of Babylon from
Melbourne IFF 2010
Dear Michelle,
It has just been brought to our attention that the Melbourne IFF is
supported by the state of Israel.
SON OF BABYLON is a Palestinian co-production. We the filmmakers are whole
heartily against the Israeli government’s actions against the Palestinian
people and as such cannot screen our film at Melbourne IFF whilst there is
Israeli government support involved.
As human beings we feel duty bound not to support Israel’s aggressive
actions against the people of Palestine, who have been refused basic human
and political rights within an apartheid system, who are subjects to ongoing
military violence by the Israeli state, and let’s not forget the appalling
siege of Gaza which has deprived a besieged population of their basic human
needs such as clean water, food and medicine.
Rest assured we are not against the Israeli people or Israeli filmmakers, we
are against the Israeli government actions against Palestine..
It is therefore from a humanitarian stance that we refuse to have any
association with the state of Israel until they respect the human rights of
the Palestinian people.So we would liek to withdrew Our film Son of
Babylon.
We will be more than happy to work with you in the future if there no
Israeli government support to your festival.
I am looking forward to hear from you.
Faithfully,
Mohamed Al-Daradji – Director
Isabelle Stead – Producer
Atia Al-Daradji – Producer

---------------------------------------------------------

ABC - THE DRUM UNLEASHED

Robust Community Debate

3 June 2010

Occupied with free speech

Jacinda Woodhead

The Melbourne International Film Festival is receiving Liberty Victoria's free speech award, the Voltaire award, for its "refusal to buckle in the face of intense pressure from a foreign government and a left-wing filmmaker last year".

The "foreign government" was China, which urged MIFF not to screen a documentary on Rebiya Kadeer, a Uighur Independence leader who was also a guest of the festival. The award seems valid here: MIFF allowed for a minority voice to be heard, and didn't kowtow to governmental bullying.

On the other hand, the "left-wing filmmaker" was Ken Loach, whose series of written exchanges questioned MIFF's decision to accept funding from "cultural partner", the state of Israel. Loach wrote:

As you are no doubt aware, many Palestinians, including artists and academics, have called for a boycott of events supported by Israel. There are many reasons for this; the illegal occupation of Palestinian land, destruction of homes and livelihoods, the massacres in Gaza, all are part of the continuing oppression of the Palestinian people.
We hope you can reconsider accepting Israel as a sponsor.

The letters saw a showdown between Loach and festival Executive Director, Richard Moore. Loach eventually withdrew his film, Looking for Eric, from the festival, quoting Israeli poet, Aharon Shabtai:

I do not believe that a state that maintains an occupation, committing on a daily basis crimes against civilians, deserves to be invited to any kind of cultural event.

Despite Moore – the self-proclaimed winner of last year's fracas – crowing that he would not be pressured as "part of an orchestrated campaign", it is bizarre that Liberty Victoria would deem MIFF's position on Ken Loach worthy of an award.

Moore and the festival have consistently misrepresented Loach's withdrawal. As with the Edinburgh Festival, where he successfully made the same appeal, Loach stated: "This is not a boycott of Israeli films or filmmakers but of the Israeli state." Thus, it was always a matter of accepting funding from a country that continuously and flagrantly disregards United Nations regulations and human rights appeals.

As with his opinion piece in The Guardian, 'Censorship has no place in film', Moore continues to frame the issue as one of censorship, claiming:

Politics will always walk hand in hand with film, and with film festivals, but at the core of every festival, from Melbourne to Montreal, is the independence and integrity of the programme.

When Richard Moore and Liberty Victoria recognise the festival's independence, what are they claiming it is independent of – influence from, or relationship to, the outside world? Why shouldn't international law and crimes against humanity be of interest to an Australian film festival? Cultural events, by Moore's own admission, are also political.

There is a history of censorship with Moore and MIFF, as there is with all festivals – whatever the Melbourne International Film Festival chooses to show or omit from the festival's selection helps to decide film in Australia for the next couple of years. It's an incredibly influential position, and a glaring example of censorship through inclusion and exclusion.

Since Moore assumed the mantle of Executive Director, MIFF has gone out of its way to strengthen cultural ties with Israel. In 2007, MIFF showcased the thriving industry of contemporary Israeli cinema. In 2008, perhaps due to some concern about bringing Israeli cinema to the fore, MIFF had a Border Patrol section that theoretically "look[ed], in different forms and style, at the so-called 'Israeli/Palestinian question', from different perspectives".

One of the two Palestinian films to screen in this section was Salt of the Sea. This brilliant film screened once at MIFF, near midnight on a cold wet week night. Filmmaker Annemarie Jacir has described the near physical impossibility of making the film, not least because she couldn't get permission from Israel to shoot in any of the locations. The entire film, which tells the story of a Palestinian-American who tries to return to her grandmother's house, was shot illegally in Israel.

Richard Moore states: "To be frank, there isn't a lot of Palestinian cinema around". But the reason the Palestinian film industry is so small is because Palestinians are living under occupation, in circumstances in which it is almost impossible to finance and resource a film project, let alone get permits to film, particularly if the film is at all critical of the occupying power, Israel.

The argument seems then to not be a question of which films Moore is choosing to bring to the festival, nor about the specific politics of these films, but about the films that can never be made. As Ken Loach suggested, until we have a free Palestine, we can never have industries without censorship. To pretend otherwise is to tacitly approve and support a boycott on Palestine; one where Palestinians can't go to universities or hospitals or visit their families, let alone make cinema, which is a real testament to the brutality of the occupation under which they live.

Israeli journalist Gideon Levy recently wrote:

Doctors, professors, artists, jurists, intellectuals, economists, engineers - none of them are permitted to enter Gaza. This is a complete boycott that bears the tag 'Made in Israel'. Those who speak about immoral and ineffective boycotts do so without batting an eye when it comes to Gaza.

MIFF is right not to bow to pressure from countries like China, who have a questionable human rights record. Equally, they shouldn't bow to the bullying tactics of the state of Israel. Because when you accept Israel as a "cultural partner", then you collaborate in a social, political and cultural denial of an entire people.

This year, Moore is emphasising his autonomy once more by declaring the 2010 festival 'a Ken Loach-free zone': "I won't be going to see his film and if it plays in Melbourne, it won't be in MIFF."

This claim seems more than a tad disingenuous. Moore has, after all, confirmed that this year's festival will again accept Israeli government funding, so nothing about MIFF's understanding of their relationship to the world beyond the festival doors has changed. Most likely, the real reason Loach's film about the war in Iraq won't be showing this year is because he will ask the question: is MIFF still taking money from Israel?

This was never an issue of censorship, or not showing Israeli films. It was always about how Richard Moore and Australian cultural festivals are politicising their programs by accepting money from Israel, thereby supporting the actions of a brutal and oppressive government.

Loach again:

The boycott of apartheid South Africa suffered similar criticisms to the ones you now make. But who would now say it was wrong? ... You either support the boycott or break it.

Jacinda Woodhead is a Melbourne writer and the online editor for Overland literary journal, where she blogs about politics and literature.