By Jeffrey Loewenstein LL.B - Jeffrey was a member of the Victorian Bar and a one-time Chairman of the Anti-Defamation Commission and member of the Jewish Community Council of Victoria
Jillian Segal’s new report – dubbed ASECA Priorities – screams of a desperate and dangerous attempt to quash any criticism of Israel by undoing the tethers of Australian democracy.
The net outcome of Segal’s hard-right recommendations – none of which is supported by any evidence – should be the federal government’s rescinding of her appointment. If Segal has her way, nearly every facet of life in Australia would, in effect, be subject to vetting by a cohort of pro-Israel supporters who wish for us to be muzzled as Israel carries out the worst crimes imaginable.
The unelected Segal wants to reshape the arts, vet our public broadcasters, oversee the use of venues, stages, art spaces, what festivals should and should not be doing, revise our visa programs, sit atop digital governance and online regulation and tell universities how to conduct themselves. The gall of the overreach is extraordinary – and yet mainstream media freely aired Segal’s report and arguments with barely a care for its implications on Australian democracy.
In essence, Segal would have it – although she denies it – that criticism of Israel, in whatever context it arises, be regarded as antisemitic. Whether it is generally known or understood what Zionism means or represents would be a moot point.
But who is this unelected Segal? She is South African-born, a former president of the Executive Council of Australian Jewry (still an office-bearer in that pro-Israel lobby group), a former president of the Australia Israel Chamber of Commerce and a board member of the Weizmann Institute of Science in Israel (a significant research centre that aids in the development of Israeli military technology).
We also know that Segal’s husband has donated generously to rabid, extreme anti-immigrant group Advance Australia.
But in this report, Segal has invented something called “modern progressive antisemitism” that is taking “the hostility of Islamic extremism and far-left antisemitism, together with traditional antisemitic tropes”.
Its contents are antithetical to the values of Australians – be they Christian, Muslim, Jewish, advocacy and human rights and civil-libertarian groups – in denying the unfettered right to protest in whatever lawful way about Israel’s actions, even if they were at the same time promoting social cohesion.
One starting point and seeming foundation, in part, for Segal’s report is that “many in the Jewish community remain concerned that coverage they perceive as one-directional may contribute to a negative – and even hostile – view by audiences of those who support Israel, or have sympathy for it”.
Recently at a Senate hearing, Segal said she (emphasis added) held concerns about “the tone (and) frequency of reporting about Gaza on the ABC”. So, is there to be a limit on the number of reports?
Add to that, Segal says that the widely criticised IHRA definition of antisemitism should be adopted across the board, with extensive powers given with regard to people seeking to visit Australia – based on whether they are antisemitic (read, anti-Israel) – and dealing with people in Australia who espouse “antisemitic” views by cancelling any visa they might hold.
There can be little doubt that what Segal espouses is to shut down any criticism of Israel in Australia, and she appears determined to override Australia’s democratic norms to achieve it. In the eyes of the pro-Israel lobby, criticising Israel is tantamount to, and a manifestation of, antisemitism, which is palpable nonsense.
The focus should not be Segal’s outlandish ideas of what constitutes antisemitism, but a thorough interrogation of the positions of “mainstream” Jewish organisations who, to date, have not expressed any criticism of Israel’s actions in Gaza, let alone genuine sympathy or concern for the plight of the innocent women and children in Gaza.
What Segal and the pro-Israel lobby have failed to reckon with is that their blind support for Israel is wholly out of step with Australian public opinion (79 per cent understandably view Israel negatively), and their antics to most – from the Royal Commission whingefest by pro-Israel supporters and now this latest report – look unhinged.
It should also not be overlooked that Segal and the pro-Israel lobby’s hostility extends to – and is perhaps most vicious toward – the growing number of conscientious Australian Jews fully in tune with their sense of morality and moving further away from Israel, Zionism and the distortions of Jewish faith and tradition that they represent.
There is an element of sideswiping antisemitism that does not fit Segal’s and the lobby’s characterisation of what qualifies as antisemitic. A type of antisemitism wholly ignored by a pliant mainstream media that runs front-page spreads at the beck and call of Segal. The obvious point they have skipped is that targeting ‘modern progressive Australia’ is also targeting active Jewish voices standing against Zionism and genocide.
On a political level, Segal’s outlandish recommendations make it clear, if not urgent, that her appointment be revoked – if protecting “social cohesion” and our basic freedoms is still something of interest to the Labor Party.
Israeli is not a religion.
Jewish is not a nationality.
Anti-Zionism is not anti-semitism.
And most importantly, all people with an ounce of morality despise the genocidal state of Israel.
“NAZIs made me afraid to be a Jew. Zionists made me ashamed to be a Jew.” Dr. Shahak, Holocaust survivor
IRONY: When Zionists who survived a genocide use it as an excuse to commit genocide.
Also: these Zionist terrorists are setting up the Jews to be hated by the whole world for another 2000 years! (Historically they were initially hated as Christians said the Jews killed Jesus).
Segal is the envoy for Genocide. Sacking her is too lenient. She is advocating on behalf of the most vicious, sadistic terrorist organisation on earth, the israeli government. This is a war crime.