Byron Echo responds to claims in the Australian Jewish Association advertisement: an "extreme organisation" which "promotes one-sided warped and dangerous views"

 

The Byron Shire Echo

24 January 2024, p.2

Click on image to enlarge

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

The Byron Shire Echo

Volume 38 #33 • January 24, 2024

We’ve had complaints

The Australian Jewish Association (AJA) sure did stir up a lot of complaints to The Echo, given their inflammatory and inaccurate statements in their page 5 advertisement last week.

There is no evidence that Hamas is responsible for all Gazan deaths, for example, and the rest of their claims around the Middle East peace process are contested – at best.

But that’s free speech.

It’s easy to say you support it, but harder as a publisher to actually follow through with it.

So who are the AJA (www.jewishassociation.org.au)?

Despite claiming they do not affiliate with any political party, their members are linked to far-right-wing think tank IPA, and the Liberal Party.

AJA tweet Jan 17

On January 17, the AJA tweeted

their Echo ad with the statement:

‘Byron Bay is known as a hot spot

for left-leaning activist types. The

local paper, The Byron Shire Echo,

is widely read and often contains

anti-Israel content. AJA decided to

take out a half page ad and share

some facts. The ad was generously

facilitated by Michael Burd. What

do you think of the AJA ad?’

Well here’s what we think:

The AJA is an organisation that should not be taken seriously, because it only promotes one-sided warped and dangerous views.

It is simply untrue to imply that Israel is an innocent bystander/victim in the unfolding clusterfuck.

Their ad appeared designed to divide rather than inform.

Unlike most mainstream media, The Echo is independent and contains a range of views from its readers and contributors.

Saying The Echo ‘often contains anti-Israel content’ is like saying that those who criticise Israel are antiSemite, or are ‘self-loathing Jews’.

As a society, aren’t we past such stupid school-yard bullying?

The AJA appears more aligned with war-mongering types, like Israeli PM, Bibi Netanyahu, than with those seeking genuine peace.

Netanyahu has forged a hardright coalition to remain in power, yet faces much criticism from within Israel over his attempts to curb the powers of the judiciary, for example. Netanyahu also faces court on charges of corruption, and it appears he needs this war to stay in power. There is no two-state solution with Netanyahu.

As for Australian mainstream media (especially Newscorp), they appear ‘state captured’ – that is, they take paid junkets to Israel and subsequently write favourably about Israel’s policies.

By contrast, Israel’s own media is often critical of its government, and there appears more freedom to report without fear or favour in Israel than here in Australia.

ABC journalist, Antoinette Lattouf, was recently sacked after posting a Human Rights Watch video describing Israel’s starvation of Gaza civilians. It’s alleged that the national broadcaster took action after complaints from ‘Jewish lobbyists’.

The Echo is not aligned with either side of the Israel and Palestine conflict.

It’s all too easy to shoot the messenger.

Instead, genuine attempts at peace are required by ‘leaders’ if this intractable ongoing disaster has any hope of resolution.

The Australian Jewish Association (AJA), like any extreme organisation on both sides of this conflict, are not helping that cause.

Hans Lovejoy, editor

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Letter to the Editor, 24 January 2024, p.12:

I live in Byron Bay and always look forward to reading The Echo. I was beyond shocked and horrified at seeing the Zionist propaganda advertisement on page 5 by the Australian Jewish Association (AJA). I certainly didn’t expect this in a Northern Rivers local newspaper.

As a non-practising Jewish woman who is completely appalled at what is happening in Gaza, due to the actions of Israeli leaders and IDF, I’m so disappointed with your choice to accept this advertisement.

Gaza has been under control by Israel for a very long time. They control all access into and out of Gaza with multiple checkpoints for children, women and men. The IDF shoots children throwing stones at them.

I don’t condone the actions of Hamas on 7 October, 2023. Killing civilians is not okay. However, the claims of beheading, rape and burning babies are not verified. Israel’s response was, and is, reprehensible and repugnant. Indiscriminate bombing of civilians and infrastructure is against humanitarian laws. Israel are committing war crimes and genocide against a race of people displaced in 1948 and harassed since then.

Entire families have been wiped out. Journalists, UN aid workers and medical staff are being killed by the IDF. No one is safe in Gaza.

The occupied (by Israel) West Bank is also an unsafe place for Palestinians to live, work and play. Settlers use violence to displace Palestinians from their homes and agricultural land.

To condone Israel is to condone genocide.

Linda Teese

Byron Bay

NOTE

The Byron Shire Echo is a free weekly independent tabloid newspaper that is published in the Byron Shire, New South Wales, Australia....

The Echo is totally owned by people who live in Byron Shire.

It is published by Echo Publications Pty Ltd, an Australian proprietary company, limited by shares, registered in 1990.

Australian Prime Minister & Liberal MP for Cook, Scott Morrison, goes into battle against the "Evil One" just in time for the forthcoming federal election campaign

Scott John Morrison has a Facebook account Scott Morrison (ScoMo), two Twitter accounts, @ScottMorrisonMP (created on 22 April 2009 when he was an Opposition backbencher, blue ticked, 606.9k followers) and The PMO (created March 2017 in anticipation perhaps, blue ticked, 20.5k followers) and an Instagram account, scottmorrisonmp (285k followers).

The first social media account is not accessible to me because I am not a Facebook member, the second is not accessible to me because years prior to becoming Australian prime minister Scott Morrison chose to block any access by me to his personal Twitter account (an act I still find baffling), the third has not been actively tweeting since 2019 and the fourth is not fully accessible to be because I am not an Instagram member. 

Like the vast majority of social media accounts held by the Australian population, Morrison's own Twitter accounts are classified as engaging in ordinary tweet activity by Bot Sentinel. Just like GetUp! and @GreenpeaceAP.

Scott Morrison uses all four social media accounts as vehicles for his constant self-promotion and relentless electioneering.

However, he is apparently dissatisfied with social media. He believes it is being used by "the Evil One".

This is Prime Minster Morrison during an ACC (Pentecostal) Convention on the Gold Coast, Queensland in April 2021:

At 14:10mins he begins to 'preach' against social media and suggests it is being "used by the Evil One" as a weapon.

I'm not sure exactly what he was referring to at that point. However, I note that at last count Scott Morrison has 215 nicknames and descriptive political terms applied to him by the general public on Twitter and I seem to recall at least one account parodying him.

Seven months later on Monday 28 November 2021 this was Scott Morrison in in a joint media release with Attorney-General Michaelia Cash:

Combatting online trolls and strengthening defamation laws

In a world-leading move, the Morrison Government will introduce new court powers to force global social media giants to unmask anonymous online trolls and better protect Australians online.

The reforms will be some of the strongest powers in the world when it comes to tackling damaging comments from anonymous online trolls and holding global social media giants to account.

The reforms will ensure social media companies are considered publishers and can be held liable for defamatory comments posted on their platforms. They can avoid this liability if they provide information that ensures a victim can identify and commence defamation proceedings against the troll.

Prime Minister Scott Morrison said the rules that exist in the real world should exist online too.

“Social media can too often be a cowards’ palace, where the anonymous can bully, harass and ruin lives without consequence,” the Prime Minister said.

“We would not accept these faceless attacks in a school, at home, in the office, or on the street. And we must not stand for it online, on our devices and in our homes.

“We cannot allow social media platforms to provide a shield for anonymous trolls to destroy reputations and lives. We cannot allow social media platforms to take no responsibility for the content on their platforms. They cannot enable it, disseminate it, and wash their hands of it. This has to stop.

“These will be some of the strongest powers to tackle online trolls in the world.

“Anonymous trolls are on notice, you will be named and held to account for what you say. Big tech companies are on notice, remove the shield of anonymity or be held to account for what you publish.

“In a free society with free speech, you can't be a coward and attack people and expect not to be held accountable for it.”

The reforms will give victims of defamatory online comments two ways to unmask trolls and resolve disputes.

First, global social media platforms will be required to establish a quick, simple and standardised complaints system that ensures defamatory remarks can be removed and trolls identified with their consent. This recognises that Australians often just want harmful comments removed.

Second, a new Federal Court order will be established that requires social media giants to disclose identifying details of trolls to victims, without consent, which will then enable a defamation case to be lodged.

Importantly, the reforms will also ensure everyday Australians and Australian organisations with a social media page are not legally considered publishers and cannot be held liable for any defamatory comments posted on their page, providing them with certainty.

Attorney-General Michaelia Cash said this was in response to the Voller High Court case, which made clear that Australians who maintain social media pages can be ‘publishers’ of defamatory comments made by others on social media—even if the page owner does not know about the comments.

“Since the High Court’s decision in the Voller case, it is clear that ordinary Australians are at risk of being held legally responsible for defamatory material posted by anonymous online trolls,” the Attorney-General said.

“This is not fair and it is not right. Australians expect to be held accountable for their own actions, but shouldn’t be made to pay for the actions of others that they cannot control.

“The reforms will make clear that, in defamation law, Australians who operate or maintain a social media page are not ‘publishers’ of comments made by others.”

The Attorney General said the package of reforms would complement the defamation reforms currently being progressed in partnership with states and territories, and sit alongside the Government’s commitment to improving online safety.

“Social media providers should bear their fair share of responsibility for defamatory material published on their platforms,” the Attorney-General said. ‘This reflects the current law.’

“However, if defamatory comments are made in Australia, and social media providers help victims contact the individuals responsible, it is appropriate they have access to a defence.”

These new powers build on the Morrison Government’s other world-leading reforms, from establishing the eSafety Commissioner, to legislating the new Online Safety Act, to drafting new online privacy laws and securing support for global action to be discussed at the G20 in Indonesia in 2022.

An exposure draft of the legislation will be released in the coming week. This will provide all Australians, the industry, states, territories and stakeholders to have their say on these important new laws.

[Ends]

On Wednesday 1 December 2021 - the second to last sitting day of the parliamentary year - Morrison released the exposure draft of "Social Media (Anti Trolling) Bill 2021" which can be found here.

Having decided to release this draft the Morrison Government needed to collect its political guns and ammunition to be used in defence of the over reach contained within the bill's 28 pages.

So it was serendipitous to say the least that at 9:42 am on the same day the Government announced in the House of Representatives its intention to establish a Select Committee on Social Media and Online Safety to inquire into the range of online harms that may be faced by Australians on social media and other online platforms, including harmful content or harmful conduct. This inquiry to be held during the parliamentary recess and its report due at the start of the 2022 parliamentary year. 

A year during which the Australian Parliament will sit for only 10 days until August 2022 when a full calendar is expected to recommence.

Despite Prime Minister Morrison's recent assurances concerning free speech in Australia - there is no blanket protection of speech in this country. In fact there are severe constraints made worse in the last 7 years by the Abbott-Turnbull-Morrison Government

 

Australian LNP MP for Warwick George Christensen
exercising the peculiar form of free speech fully endorsed by 
his prime minister, Scott Morrison 
IMAGE: @maxiedexter

The Age, 21 January 2021:

When Prime Minister Scott Morrison was invited to condemn far-right conspiracy theories promoted by government members such as George Christensen, he refused. He defended another Liberal backbencher, Craig Kelly, who undermined the government's health message by spreading false information about COVID-19. "There's such a thing as freedom of speech in this country and that will continue," Morrison said.

In fact, there are severe constraints on free speech in Australia, more so than in North America or Western Europe. The Coalition government's 2018 security laws make it an offence to leak, receive or report a wide range of "information, of any kind, whether true or false and whether in a material form or not, and includes (a) an opinion and (b) a report of a conversation". Another clause makes it a serious crime to say anything that harms "Australia's foreign relations, including political, military, and economic relations". Even if ministers should sometimes be circumspect, other people should be free to criticise any country without resorting to disinformation.

Jail sentences for some offences can be 15 or more years, even when little genuine harm results. There is no recognition that leaked information has never killed anyone in Australia. In contrast, secret intelligence generated by Australia and its allies has led to innocent people, including children, being killed in Afghanistan and elsewhere.

Parliamentarians have endorsed the serious erosion of core liberties. The rot set in when they abjectly acquiesced in the Australian Federal Police's raid on Parliament House in 2016, with police accessing IT systems and seizing thousands of non-classified documents to search for the source of leaks to a Labor opposition frontbencher. The leaks revealed problems with rising costs and delays in the National Broadband Network - information that should have been public.

In an earlier era, ASIO and the AFP would never tap phones in Parliament House, let alone raid it. The Parliament should have found the AFP in contempt. Instead, politicians squibbed it.

Last July, the AFP recommended charging ABC journalist Dan Oaks, co-author of the 2017 series "The Afghan Files", which exposed alleged war crimes committed by Australian special forces in Afghanistan. In October, the prosecutor declined to proceed. The law should clearly state the AFP should not pursue a journalist acting in the public interest.

Undeterred, the government is pushing for more powers that undermine free speech and civil liberties. Its International Production Orders bill would give ASIO and the AFP the right to order communications providers in "like-minded" countries to produce any electronic data they request and remove encryption. One downside is that the FBI and a wide range of US security bodies would have reciprocal rights to access private data held by Australian people and corporations. A big stumbling block is that the US law, called the CLOUD Act, prohibits other countries accessing data if they have weaker privacy and civil liberties protections than the US. Australia falls into that category.

Last month, Home Affairs Minister Peter Dutton introduced a bill creating extraordinary powers to affect a wide range of people, not just paedophiles as the government claims. The bill covers all crimes with a jail sentence of three or more years. This includes whistleblowers and journalists and innocent people expressing an opinion that falls foul of foreign influence laws.

If passed, Dutton's bill will give the AFP and Australia's Criminal Intelligence Commission the ability to covertly take over a person's online account to gather evidence of a crime. These proposed new powers should be severely curtailed.

BACKGROUND

InnovationAus, 7 December 2020:

The federal government last week introduced legislation handing new powers to the Australian Federal Police (AFP) and Australian Criminal Intelligence Commission (ACIC) to hack into the computers and networks of those suspected of conducting criminal activity online, specifically targeting the dark web.

The bill introduced three new warrants, allowing authorities to “disrupt” data of the suspected offenders, to access their devices and networks to identify who they actually are, and to take over their accounts covertly.

The laws were introduced without any consultation and with little fanfare from the government, and were quickly met with widespread concerns, and comparisons with the highly controversial anti-encryption powers, which were passed in a rush in the last days of Parliament in 2018.

The Law Council of Australia said the “extraordinary” powers needed to be subject to proper review and oversight and must be referred to the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security (PJCIS).

A Home Affairs spokesperson confirmed the bill would be referred to the PJCIS and would be debated in Parliament after a report is tabled.

“It is important for the PJCIS to consider this critical and complex piece of legislation, the spokesperson told InnovationAus.

The new powers point to authorities wanting to conduct “poisoned water hole” operations, where police or other agencies take over an illegal platform or service on the dark web and continue to operate it in order to obtain the identities of its users.

The network activity warrants in the new bill would allow the AFP to access the device and networks of groups or individuals suspected of taking part in criminal activity online, but whose identities they do not know.

They serve to “target criminal networks about which very little is known”. These warrants would be issued by an eligible judge or member of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal.

Information obtained under one of these warrants could be the subject of derivative use, the explanatory memorandum said, which means it could be cited in an affidavit on application for another investigatory power, such as the issuing of another warrant.

These warrants could be used in combination with the new account take over warrants, which would allow the AFP and ACIC to take over the online accounts of individuals suspected of taking part in criminal activity, covertly and without consent, and would be approved by a magistrate.

The legislation unveiled last week by the government also included “minor amendments” to the Controlled Operations Act, scrapping a requirement that the illicit goods used by authorities as part of an “online controlled operation” be under their control at its conclusion.

This means that if an undercover AFP officer is posing as a drug dealer, any drugs used in the operation must still be in their control at the end of the operation.

“This is intended to address how easy data is to copy and disseminate, and the limited guarantee that all illegal content will be able to be under the control of the AFP and ACIC at the conclusion of an online control operation,” the explanatory memorandum said.

According to Deakin University senior lecturer in criminology Dr Monique Mann, these changes point to the government looking towards “poisoned water hole” operations, where authorities take control of a criminal platform or marketplace and then continue to operate it in order to gather information on its users.

“The amendments to those laws, combined with the computer network operations powers and capabilities, indicates to me that they want poisoned water hole operations,” Dr Mann told InnovationAus.

“Effectively this is giving law enforcement the ability to conduct extraterritorial government hacking of websites around the world, that they don’t know where they are, which is beyond the legal authority of Australian law enforcement,” she said.

“They will potentially be running poisoned water holes and hacking companies where they’re not sure where they are located. That has significant extraterritorial implications for due process for suspects.

“Because they’re going for an expansion of hacking and account takeovers, it shows they’re going to hack into them, take them over and continue to run them as controlled operations. This suite of powers combined in this way is for poisoned water holes, it’s pretty clear.”.....

Australian Parliament, Parliamentary Business, 3 December 2020:

Surveillance Legislation Amendment (Identify and Disrupt) Bill 2020. 

Referred to Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security on 8 December 2020.

Note:

Under the amendments found in the aforementioned bill, essentially a member of the Australian Federal Police can telephone an eligible judge and verbally request a Data Disruption Warrant based on the vague requirement of "reasonable grounds". 

Likewise a Network Activity Warrant can be granted by a judge or AAT member which is "unsworn" and an Account Takeover Warrant can be granted by a magistrate over the phone - again based on "reasonable grounds".

Nowhere in this bill is a request for such a warrant restricted to activities on so-called 'dark web' sites as is implied by Minister for Home Affairs Peter Dutton, nor does the type/level of Commonwealth or State "serious offence" on which the bill relies to trigger federal government hacking of an individual's digital devices, web sites or social media/chatroom accounts appear to exclude communications by/with journalists, whistleblowers or political/environmental activists acting in good faith.

Australia 2019: freedom of speech and the citizen's right to know

In 2019 it is not hard to hear and read evidence of politicians and industry leaders publicly telling blatant lies or deliberately misleading in an effort to deceive the general public and voters in particular.

Often this evidence of lying comes straight from the horse's mouth so to speak - via live radio or to camera interviews. 

Other times the veil of secrecy is lifted by mainstream and social media.

It has become so increasingly common over these last twenty years that it seems that the majority of those who are elected to govern on our behalf at federal, state and local government level now see deception and deceit as being the pattern card of a successful politician.

Indeed, even certain industry and ideological lobby groups are apparently contaminated by this warped pattern card.

The ability for media or private individuals to fact check all the fake news currently in the public domain falters before its sheer volume.

Checking veracity is complicated by the fact that News Corp (through its online/print newspapers & televised news outlets such as Sky News and Fox News) as well as social media giant Facebook Inc (which has a company policy of allowing politicians to lie repeatedly and unchecked on its digital platform) derive considerable income from disseminating demonstrably false information supplied by vested interests.

Thus in Australia, along with the U.K. and U.S.A., we are now beginning to drown in all that fakery and lying - our democratic processes are threatening to become highly dysfunctional.

Whilst freedom of speech is implied in the Australian Constitution it is not clearly spelt out - leaving a great deal of wriggle room for governments of the day to bully both the media and the private citizen whenever they have the temerity speak out against deceit or corruption.

This bullying, which often begins as an abuse of parliamentary privilege, appears to be an attempt to protect those perpetrating ongoing deceit and whatever is the political malfeasance or financial fraud cover-up of the day.

When 'doxing' an individual, phone calls from ministerial aides, emails expressing displeasure or legal letters threatening defamation do not work, these days the next step is for governments to use the federal police to raid media or union offices and the homes of journalists/whistleblowers in a further effort to intimidate.

A growing pile of legislation now exists at federal and state level which establishes a 'right' for government to bully, intimidate, coerce and ultimately silence those journalists, whistleblowers and ordinary citizens who do speak up.

Rather belatedly mainstream media is beginning to express its concerns about the path government is now treading.....

The Singleton Argus, 28 October 2019, excerpt from Voice of Real Australia: 

Meanwhile, elsewhere in Scotty Morrison's Chamber of Secrets, everyone's been donning invisibility cloaks in the all-seeing-no-talking halls of the magical-mystery castle of Hogwash:

Home Affairs is being investigated for its failure to process Freedom of Information requests within the legally required time limits.

Australia's cyber security agency has confirmed it pressured organisers of a major conference to drop two speakers, one a noted whistleblower.

And a report into a computer hack at Parliament House might not be released, even in redacted form.

A week after the unprecedented all-media #righttoknow campaign was launched with the front pages of the nation's daily newspapers symbolically censored with a redacted government document, Coalition MPs and Senators have for the most part lined up behind the Prime Minister and his "no one is above the law" rhetoric, while Labor has used the press freedom push to bash the government (despite its earlier support for some of the laws in question).

Thankfully, there have been some independent voices speaking up, and sensibly, from the cross-bench. And, yes, that includes Senator Jacquie Lambie.

The front pages of ACM's 14 daily newspapers featured an example of a "redacted" government document to highlight to increasing restrictions being placed by government and goverment agencies on the release of information the public has a right to know.

Here's what some of Australian Community Media's leading journalists and columnists have had to say on the issue over the past week:

Newcastle Herald journalist Joanne McCarthy:

"I've spent more than 13 years challenging powerful Australians, including churchmen, who thought they were above the law. Too many politicians, for too long, stayed mute.

"I know hundreds of quiet Australians - women abused and abandoned by our health system, and people sexually abused and betrayed by churches and other institutions. Many were betrayed again when they sought help from powerful churchmen who counted prime ministers as friends.

"The quiet Australians I know were the silenced Australians. Until they spoke to the media and found their voices."

Read Joanne's opinion here.

Canberra Times commentator Jack Waterford:

"The problem is bigger than excessive secrecy and inadequate accountability in matters loosely connected with national security.

"Once we have agreed to restrict our liberties by increasing the powers of those in the national security state, the slippage begins.

"Soon cops and others will have access to bugging, tapping, interception and coercive powers - extending all the way down to parking fines."

Read Jack's full analysis here.

The Border Mail columnist Zoe Wundenberg:

"If you see something, say something. Or so we are told by our government in the fight against terror on our home soil. Dob in your neighbour. Report your colleague. Be the eyes and ears of the government.

"Unless, of course, you aim your telescope at Parliament House."

Read Zoe's comments here.

Australian Community Media is part of Australia's Right To Know, the coalition of 20 media organisations and industry groups leading the #righttoknow campaign. Read more here.

James Joyce

Executive Editor, Australian Community Media

Tweets of the Week

Unity message to the government from Australia's papers #mediawatch #rightoknow pic.twitter.com/wuE9ZyGjQx

— Media Watch (@ABCmediawatch) October 20, 2019

Scott Morrison’s arrogant dodging of questions is spreading through his Department - nobody is prepared to reveal the truth on the PM’s attempt to get a White House invitation for Brian Houston. #righttoknow #estimates pic.twitter.com/uBAIRG5ZZR

— Senator Penny Wong (@SenatorWong) October 21, 2019

Cartoons of the Week

@cathywilcox1

@davpope

Parents with LGBTIQ children call on Australian Prime Minister Scott Morrison "to do as he promised which was to govern for all of the people which surely must include the LGBTIQ people"

Media Release

10th June, 2019

Religious Freedom is not an issue - Religious Privilege is a huge concern

After Marriage Equality was achieved, the right wing of the Government decided Christian rights were at risk. A Religious Review was held due to concerns about the rights of Christians.

Mr Ruddock, a conservative and Att. General who was the architect of rewording the “marriage act” to read as “man and woman” to exclude same sex couples, was the Chairperson.

Eventually, after much delay the Review showed there was very little concern for Christians.

However, the government’s paranoia about LGBTIQ people is a great concern to LGBTIQ people and their loved ones.  

Because:

Welfare groups, aged care and hospitals are predominantly run by Religious bodies

Teachers working at Christian schools may be retrenched and students expelled

Businesses owned by Christian individuals or organisations 

May all be given the right to refuse service or care, just because their clients, customers or staff involved are LGBTIQ. 

Additionally, there is the concern of the promotion of hate speech. Christians may not believe their words are harmful, or may not care but the impact of what is said or written can be devastating for the LGBTIQ person and their loved ones. Again any freedom, including freedom of speech should never be used as a tool for abuse. 

The ratio of Christians suffering poor mental health or suicide from hate speech is minimal. However, the negative impact of hate speech, homophobia and transphobia against LGBTIQ people is extremely high.

So, as National Spokesperson for parents with LGBTIQ children, I am calling on Mr Morrison and his team to do as he promised which was to govern for all of the people which surely must include the LGBTIQ people. They pay taxes, contribute to society and vote.

           

Parents and Friends of Lesbians and Gays+ also made a January 2018 submission to Religious Freedoms Review.