[Update : Radio National‘s ‘The World Today’ has published the online transcript of the interview with march organiser Christine Hawkins which Liam kindly mentioned previously: ‘Women protest Sheikh’s comments with bikini march’ (Monday, November 27, 2006, 12:46:00, Reporter: Sabra Lane). A claim is made that the website for the march — in reality, a hastily cobbled-together wiki — was ‘hacked’ by White supremacists. As far as I’m aware, this is false, as the history of the page demonstrates. Further, the ‘White supremacists’ referred to in the report are Perth-based Ben Weerheym and various members of Scumfront, a number of whom have expressed support for both ‘chicks in bikinis’ and ‘Muslims out’.]
Murdoch’s Daily Terror — by way of Luke McIlveen — has today ‘revealed’ the fact that the fascist Australia First Party — under the leadership of Lebanese-Australian Dr. Jamahl Saleam — has finally ‘revealed’ its candidate for the upcoming NSW state election in March, 2007: aged care worker John Moffat. The article comes just under two weeks away from the first anniversary of the notorious outburst of racial violence that occurred last year in Cronulla, and for which local racists and fascists are organising a commemorative ‘Great Australian Bikini March’ on Saturday, December 9 in Brunswick, Melbourne. It also appears just a month after the AFP experienced its first electoral success in some years with the election of Bruce Preece to the Prospect City Council in Adelaide. Moffat himself previously stood for the AFP in March 2003, and received 814 votes for his trouble.
NSW Premier Morris Iemma has warned the ‘racist’ and ‘extremist’ AFP to pull their chicken-heads in prior to their intended celebration of the ‘White Uprising’, intimating that the NSW police may not look all that favourably on the presence of fascist groups intent on stirring up racism in the local community. Speaking to the press shortly after the events in December, local Melbourne fascist, and former leader of the now defunct Patriotic Youth League Luke Connors (young_soldier on the White supremacist website Scumfront) stated that “about 15 League members handed out literature to the Cronulla crowd, as well as buying drinks for some participants”. Meathead also claimed that his group ‘predicted further racial violence, naming the Melbourne suburbs of Heidelberg, Preston, Reservoir and Springvale as potential “hot spots”‘.
And Brunswick?
Total scum.
My blog has received two racist and religiously intolerant comments against Islam and Middle Easterns.
At least one of them is from Darrin Hodges, who as you probably already know, is the Secretary of the Sutherland Shire Branch of the Australia First Party.
Creepy.
If I could be bothered to grace his blog with my interest and time, I’m sure I could expect to see an entry on the pathetic excuse for a protest re that Aussie bikini apparel against Islam (?) in Brunswick.
If anywhere in Melbourne is going to be a ‘hotspot’ for ‘further racial violence’ it’ll be thanks to the efforts of people like that dickhead.
“Bikini-clad fascists in Cronulla. And Brunswick?”
I can assure everybody that I will not be appearing in Cronulla – or anywhere else for that matter – in a bikini.
Dazza,
Are you serious about AFP winning office or not? Word on the street is that bikini-wearing will soon replace baby-kissing as the politician’s favoured tactic.
Dreck,
Yeah, Dazza’s been hanging about the place like a bad smell for well over a year now.
Oh yeah… and “further racial violence” gets them all hot ‘n’ bothered — which is precisely why they seek to encourage its expression.
They love it.
Daft buggers.
// article in morland leader:
http://www.morelandleader.com.au/article/2006/11/27/7575_cov_news.html
you can post a comment/letter to the editor on the same page //
edited hi-lites:
Ms Hawkins said the march was designed to “show our opposition and go home” and was not politically motivated.
“Our fathers and forefathers fought to have the freedom we enjoy now,” Ms Hawkins said. “We do not want conflict with the Islamic community. Australians know how to be tolerant, but we will not tolerate the intolerable.” {easily the most fabulous sentence i’ve read for a while}
“I am a veteran bikini wearer and I want my children and grandchildren to be able to do the same,” she said.
That’s “morEland leader”.
(Thanks sparx!)
Andy,
As an activist whose main goal is to rid Australia of discrimination: WHY THE F’ ARE YOU OPPOSING THIS RALLY!
The reasons behind this rally is to: give a voice to those who have been harassed by racist gangs – victims usually being White; to show these bigots that we, as Australian’s, won’t back-down from these supremacists!
…and why can’t White Australian’s protest for their rights to cultural praxis without being hounded by Leftwing groups calling them: ‘RACISTS!’?
– Regards,
Michael H. Reyfield
Dear Michael,
My main goal as an activist is to be active; my main goal as an anarchist is to bring about radical social change — to take part in the creation of a global, classless, non-hierarchical society.
An-archy.
I oppose this rally because I think it’s a fascist provocation which does little to end sexism in Australian society, but sadly quite a lot to encourage the further demonisation and political and social marginalisation of Muslims.
The reasons you give for the rally are specious. First, you refer to the political function of the rally as being concerned with “giv[ing] a voice to those who have been harassed by racist gangs”. Huh? The usually White Christine Hawkins has been harassed by racists gangs? If so, she’s yet to make any public allegation of said crime. Then again, if your account is correct, I suggest she refer the matter to the police. (As for victims of gang activity ‘usually being White’, I dunno. All things being equal, and the Australian population being majority White, you may be right… but not ‘cos you’re White, mmmkay?)
Secondly, you claim that the march has something to do with showing ‘bigots’ that “Mick Reyfield” — as an Australian, presumably in a bikini, or possibly some other form of beachwear — won’t ‘back down’ from the ‘supremacist’ members of ‘racist gangs’. Which begs the question: Why do you believe that the racist gangs who’ve been harrassing Christine Hawkins live at 19 Michael Street, Brunswick?
Finally, you appear to believe that marching to a mosque in Brunswick on the first anniversary of the racist mob attacks in a city 1,000 miles away — while wearing a bikini — has ‘something’ to do with protesting at an alleged threat to the rights of White Australians; specifically, to engage in various forms of ‘cultural praxis’… such as marching to a mosque in Brunswick on the anniversary of a racist mob attack in a city 1,000 miles away — while wearing a bikini.
Presumably.
Weird mob, these ‘White Australians’. But if you’re one of them, I pray that the Australian Government is tolerant.
Sincerely,
@ndy.
Its great to see your reply didnt resort to: F’off Neo-Nazi!
I oppose this rally because I think it’s a fascist provocation which does little to end sexism in Australian society, but sadly quite a lot to encourage the further demonisation and political and social marginalisation of Muslims…
I can see that…
I would rather see this rally taken to a different venue — preferably at a beach; scheduled on a different day. Having this event held at a mosque, on ‘Cronulla Day’, you do get the feeling it is aimed at those who have never committed a crime.
Then again, if your account is correct, I suggest she refer the matter to the police.
Then that statement goes back to the incident at Cronulla. Where locals made multiple reports to the police, however, the law authorities lacked any initiative to have these thugs thrown in prison.
Secondly, you claim that the march has something to do with showing ‘bigots’ that “Mick Reyfield” — as an Australian, presumably in a bikini, or possibly some other form of beachwear — won’t ‘back down’ from the ’supremacist’ members of ‘racist gangs’. Which begs the question: Why do you believe that the racist gangs who’ve been harrassing Christine Hawkins live at 19 Michael Street, Brunswick?
…???
Weird mob, these ‘White Australians’. But if you’re one of them, I pray that the Australian Government is tolerant.
Well…
The Government lacks too much tolerance – especially when it comes to ‘White’ offenders. I can prove this, because it was this Government of ours that brought in the Politically Correct system that we have today. It seems every time a Muslim, or any other minority, has a ‘hiccup’ over some systematic dogma, the rules have to be changed — and forced upon us to keep the minority groups pleased…
I don’t mind migrants, so long as they keep their beliefs to themselves.
Thanks for the reply,
M Reyfield.
Michael,
If the rally were to take place somewhere else — like, say, a beach (which is where I believe bikinis are usually worn) — and at another time, then yeah, I’d care less. But Hawkins’ ‘grandmother act’ is just that: an act. And it’s quite obvious that, as far as her mob is concerned, *it’s being Muslim that’s a crime*. Further, this is, of course, to completely leave to one side the question ‘How is this rally going to empower women to fight sexism?’ — if that’s even vaguely what the organisers and participants in the rally/march imagine they’re trying to accomplish. Which I seriously doubt. But if so, there’s a number of other, far more obvious courses of action they may take, one of which is to pay attention to the voices of local Muslim women who’ve condemned sexist sentiment, in both the local Muslim communities and among the Australian public generally.
As regards ‘Cronulla’, one worthwhile source, I think, is Liz Jackson’s report on *4 Corners* from earlier this yr; there are many others. But before launching into a discussion in regards to the history of local crime in Cronulla, and the apparent failure of policing of said crime in the area, I would like to know the basis of yr opinion before commenting further.
======
LIZ JACKSON: On Sunday, 4 December [2005], police were called down to the beach following an ugly assault. The incident led the news in Sydney on Channel 7 and 10. Here’s Channel 9.
NEWSREADER: A major police hunt is underway for a cowardly group of up to 20 men who attacked two surf lifesavers at Cronulla. Both young men had to be treated in hospital for severe cuts and bruising.
REPORTER: For many, this was not just a brutal crime but an act of sacrilege. Young volunteer surf lifesavers bashed while giving up their weekend to help others.
ALAN JONES: How the thing was broken up, I don’t know.
LIZ JACKSON: Sydney Radio 2GB, on Monday morning.
ALAN JONES: Bill, hello?
BILL: Alan, I just saw something on the news on Channel 9 of the horrendous bashing, or if you like…
ALAN: Appalling!
BILL: …gang attack on the beach at Cronulla yesterday. I mean, what type of grubs do we have in this…?
ALAN: What kind of grubs? Well, I’ll tell you what kind of grubs this lot were. This lot were Middle Eastern grubs. And you’re not allowed to say it. But I’m saying it.
LIZ JACKSON: The surfies at Cronulla were talking about it, too. The bare facts are these. Three volunteer lifesavers were leaving the beach, having finished their patrol. They were not in uniform. There was a verbal altercation with a group of what the locals call Lebs, with provocative insults from both sides. The lifesavers were bashed. But these are the rumours that were spreading around…
SCOTT: They were playing soccer, I think. And they kicked the ball at some girls and started harassing the girls. And the lifeguards asked them to stop. Standard thing – happens all the time down here. And, you know, they didn’t like it and a fight broke out.
MARK: Well, I heard that a lifeguard saved, like, a Muslim lady. And because they touched her, the Muslim men bashed them. But I don’t know if that’s true. But that’s what I heard.
MICK: There was two lifeguards on duty. They just got picked on and just, apparently, bashed, you know.
[snip]
LIZ JACKSON: By the end of the day, 26 people had been treated for injuries. Two of them were ambulance officers, assaulted as they took the wounded to hospital. 16 people were arrested, more than half of them were locals.
======
“…This paucity of hard data is a feature of the debate on ethnicity and crime. Neither the Australian Institute of Criminology nor the NSW Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research collects such information. Reasons range from the failure of police to provide adequate figures, to the fear held by many researchers that ethnic-based statistics would raise more questions than they answer, and would be wide open to misrepresentation.
Department of Corrective Services records show that Lebanese-born migrants are over-represented in the state’s prisons. They make up 1.4 per cent of the prison population but only 0.8 per cent of the general population of the state, according to the 2001 census. Migrants born in Vietnam, Fiji and New Zealand are even more likely to end up in prison. Migrants born in Greece and Italy are less likely to end up in prison than their Australian-born peers.
But again, these figures say little because the department records only the birthplace, not the ethnic background of prisoners…”
[Source : http://www.smh.com.au/news/national/crime-amp-prejudice/2006/08/04/1154198328970.html?page=fullpage#contentSwap2%5D
======
“The Government lacks too much tolerance – especially when it comes to ’White’ offenders. I can prove this, because it was this Government of ours that brought in the Politically Correct system that we have today. It seems every time a Muslim, or any other minority, has a ’hiccup’ over some systematic dogma, the rules have to be changed — and forced upon us to keep the minority groups pleased…”
OK, lemme see if I understand you correctly:
1) The HoWARd Federal Government is responsible for introducing ‘political correctness’ as a feature of the Australian political system;
2) This has resulted in the HoWARd Federal Government persecuting white Australians and;
3) pandering to the whims of ‘minority groups’ such as Muslims, whose religious dogma has demanded significant changes be made to the Australian legal and political system?
Absolute bollocks.
1) ‘Political correctness’, besides being meaningless (‘correct’ according to whose ‘politics’?), is a load of garbage. And while the HoWARd Federal Government may well be considered a waste dump, it’s certainly not responsible for foisting on the Australian public anything like it outside, perhaps, of fear and loathing of refugees, Muslims, trade unionists, gays, lesbians, Aborigines, leftists… the list goes on. In any case, the origins of the term go back to 1793 (apparently), but in more recent years merely describes a device used in a cultural war over political values, one used quite cleverly — but with lessening purchase, in my opinion — by right-wing reactionaries, largely in order to ‘politely’ tell their critics to ‘shut the fuck up’.
[On origins, see : http://www.linguistlist.org/issues/7/7-879.html%5D
Questions: What do you mean by ‘the Politicially Correct sytem that we have today’? What are the characteristics of this system? Why do you believe that the HoWARd Government is reponsible for its introduction? If this ‘system’ is indeed ‘new’, what preceded it?
2) Question: How does the HoWARd Government persecute white Australians?
3) What are the ‘minority groups’ that you refer to? What are their whims? How have their dogmas — religious and/or cultural — manifested themselves in our political institutions… and what precisely are these ‘dogmas’ anyway?
In my opinion, the only ‘minority group’ that exercises any REAL power is the ruling class. It’s a tiny minority of the population, consists largely of old, white, stupid, corrupt men, and can go and get fucked for all I care.
(Is that sentiment ‘politically correct’?)
Cheers and beers,
@ndy.
Bugger.
That link again:
http://www.linguistlist.org/issues/7/7-879.html
just a question. have any of the planned protesters against the protesters tried to contact them, to sit down and figure out where they’re coming from? (I’m doing so) they might just be some fairly ordinary people — certainly some of their concerns can’t be easily dismissed, even if their tactics are questionable. they may have genuinely made a mistake in putting it on the anniversary of cronulla, and so have now cancelled. i don’t think it’s helpful to label them fascists, unless they self-identify that way, or you’ve totally and open-mindedly sussed them out first. if you think of yourself as an anarchist and therefore a good guy and them as fascist and therefore bad, you’re going to obscure your own faults and any genuine concerns they might have. all you’ll get out of it is a street fight, a chance to vent. i hope we can aim a little higher.
hi adam,
i have not contacted either christine hawkins or chris gemmell-smith, but i believe some others have.
that’s in melbourne. as for sydney, i don’t know.
as to from where they’re “coming from”: the outer-eastern suburb of endeavour hills. politically speaking, and based on hawkins’ own pronouncements, i would suggest that her politics are those of an ignorant, suburban, bigot.
q. which of their (her) concerns are “legitimate”? is sexual violence a problem? yes, of course. and? the whole furore surrounding the sheikh from sydney’s remarks, as i’ve pointed out previously, have little to do with fighting sexism, and everything to do with promoting anti-muslim bigotry: they’re all a bunch of violent misogynists.
in other words, it smacks of a double standard. (what, christian ministers haven’t made similar remarks? non-muslims don’t rape? the christian churches in australia DON’T have a history of denying, down-playing, excusing and covering-up — consciously and deliberately — the sexual abuse of children by their clergy?)
then, of course, there’s the (sensible and sober) reaction: let’s all wear bikinis and march on a mosque on the anniversary of the cronulla riot!
yeah.
right.
hawkins’ may be a reactionary — rather than a conscious advocate of ‘fascism’ — and merely silly — if not grossly stupid — but i refuse to believe that anyone could be THAT stupid and THAT ignorant not to understand the significance of the date she voluntarily arranged to have her little march on.
sorry.
the reasons for the cancellation? um, how about walking into a shit-storm? the denial of council permission? public liability insurance? police advice?
i freely admit to having faults, but being a sucker isn’t one of them.
cheers,
andy.
“to take part in the creation of a global, classless, non-hierarchical society.”
So you’re in favour of globalisation then ?
“a classess non-hierarchical society”
what’s that then?, is that like where everybody gets to be the cleaner and everybody knows exactly which part of the floor they’re to polish?
Dazza,
I support the globalisation of resistance, not capital:
And yeah, yr description of the implications of this global struggle is about as accurate as yr understanding of politics generally is: congratulations.
So you were against globalisation before you were for it?
And how stupid are those G20 protestors?, they did more to advance the cause of the transnationalists then anybody, all people talk about is the G20 riot, there has been little discussion about the actual conference itself. They also managed to provide a handy pretext for the government to put up even harder civil disorder legislation, which they will need, as civil disorder will become more common as globalisation bites deeper.
well done morons, congratulations. How does it feel to be the tools of the transnationalists?
Christ Dazza. I mean you CAN read, right? Quit poking yr nose in the Protocols, and read something genuinely informative for once…
BEDEVERE: So, how do we tell whether she is made of wood?
VILLAGER #1: Build a bridge out of her.
BEDEVERE: Ah, but can you not also make bridges out of stone?
VILLAGER #1: Oh, yeah.
RANDOM: Oh, yeah. True. Uh…
BEDEVERE: Does wood sink in water?
VILLAGER #1: No. No.
VILLAGER #2: No, it floats! It floats!
VILLAGER #1: Throw her into the pond!
CROWD: The pond! Throw her into the pond!
BEDEVERE: What also floats in water?
VILLAGER #1: Bread!
VILLAGER #2: Apples!
VILLAGER #3: Uh, very small rocks!
VILLAGER #1: Cider!
VILLAGER #2: Uh, gra– gravy!
VILLAGER #1: Cherries!
VILLAGER #2: Mud!
VILLAGER #3: Uh, churches! Churches!
VILLAGER #2: Lead! Lead!
ARTHUR: A duck!
CROWD: Oooh.
BEDEVERE: Exactly. So, logically…
VILLAGER #1: If… she… weighs… the same as a duck… she’s made of wood.
BEDEVERE: And therefore?
VILLAGER #2: A witch!
VILLAGER #1: A witch!
CROWD: A witch! A witch!
corrections:
http://www.smh.com.au/news/national/crime-amp-prejudice/2006/08/04/1154198328970.html?page=fullpage#contentSwap2
(‘then’ = ‘than’, dazza.)
on g20: http://slackbastard.anarchobase.com/?p=472
on civil disorder legislation (nsw): http://slackbastard.anarchobase.com/?p=495
The Hazzard report (or at least the executive summary) is a crock. That three part rant by the Marxist toilet bowl scrapings at WSWS is just leftist hysteria. While the media did play a part (and I had a lengthy discussion with somebody close to Al-Hilali about that issue) it was not the cause or the catalyst of the so-called riot.
It was not 5000 ‘evil white people’ on a rampage: I was there; I saw Asians, Pacific Islanders, Maori and other [ethnicities] in the crowd. I didn’t see them being chased up and down the beach. It was an issue of culture. The so-called riot was a symptom of the diseased ideology of multi-culturalism and the Iemma government’s unwillingness or inability to apply law and order.
I also had an interesting chat with somebody from the SMH who apparently reads your site. I hope it doesn’t inspire the SMH to recklessly promote anarchy. Heaven forbid that it might cause another ‘Reclaim the Streets bongo parade’.
Dazza,
The WSWS series of articles is not a “rant”, nor is it “hysterical”. Instead, it’s a careful analysis of the Police Report. The series says absolutely nothing about ‘evil white people’, but, rather, quite a lot about the political climate created by the media — gay multi-millionaire shock-jock Alan Jones ‘led the charge’ — and the inadequate police response; this despite the fact that police i.n.t.e.l.l.i.g.e.n.c.e. was able to confirm that a ‘major incident’ was almost certain to take place…
======
Extract, Part 1:
“Jones repeatedly read out an alleged text message sent out by local “youngsters” in the Cronulla area encouraging others to go to the beach on the following Sunday, “to support Leb and Wog bashing day”.
On another occasion, Jones called for, “A rally, a street march, call it what you will. A community show of force.”
It did not take long to prove that these considerable efforts were not in vain.
Referring directly to the role of the shock-jocks, the Hazzard report states, “comment made by the broader community relating to the incidents was at times racist, exaggerated, inaccurate and advocated vigilante behaviour.”
But in the aftermath of the riots—unprecedented in Australian history—no official investigation was launched into their causes. Media attention continued to focus exclusively on how many Middle Eastern youth had or had not been rounded up, and the need for a massive police presence throughout the summer on Sydney’s beaches.
The only explanation for Scully’s behaviour was that he, too, was trying to protect the culprits. Adam Walters drew the conclusion in an article on ninemsn.com.au that Scully’s actions were, indeed, aimed at suppressing the police report in order to protect Jones. Apparently, on September 19, when Hazzard initially briefed the police minister on the report, Scully questioned him as to whether the role of the media fell under its terms of reference.
According to Walters, Hazzard’s notes of the meeting reveal that the police minister’s only concerns “related to the criticism of Alan Jones and other influential media commentators”. It appears that the primary motivation of the state Labor government was to avoid, at all costs, a falling out with the highly influential Jones so close to the March 2007 state election.”
Extract, Part 2:
“According to Assistant Police Commissioner Hazzard’s report: “The blame for the ethnic tension that was evident, could not exclusively be attributed to either the Middle Eastern or Caucasian Australians.”
In other words, the Cronulla riots were not caused by ethnic tension between “Anglo” Australians and those of Middle Eastern background or appearance per se. Another factor was required for the riots to erupt.
The “shock-jocks” provided the immediate catalyst. By creating the initial media storm, they consciously set larger events into motion. As Alan Jones himself exclaimed on radio 2GB on December 8, 2005: “I’m the person that’s led this charge here. Nobody wanted to know about North Cronulla; now it’s gathered to this.”
The Hazzard report finds that the outright lies broadcast about the original fight at Cronulla beach on December 4, “led to a significant amount of publicity on radio, television and in the print media”. It placed “issues of racial tension, ethnic gangs and related matters” in the centre of media discussion. The media swarmed to Cronulla before the riots, “in anticipation of public disorder”…
Extract, Part 3:
“An examination of Assistant Police Commissioner Hazzard’s report raises a number of questions about the police response to the race riots—both on the day, and in the broader political arena.
First, the report’s terms of reference “did not require that the cause of the Cronulla riots be established”. Instead, “it was widely accepted that the riot was caused by racial conflict”. This incredible assertion is directly contradicted by the report itself, which finds that the factors responsible were more complex than simply “racial conflict”.
Second, the police preparations in the days before the December 11 Cronulla rally pose questions that the report does not seriously address.
The police were well aware of the scale and nature of the attacks being planned. They closely monitored what was being said in the media, and intercepted text messages similar to those cited earlier. Their intelligence, according to the report, “clearly indicated that a major rally would take place at Cronulla Beach on Sunday 11th December, 2005.” It “also suggested that the rally would be violent”.
A risk assessment conducted by the police classified “racially motivated violence” as “Almost Certain”. It also classified the likelihood of “large scale affray and riot” as “Likely” with the consequences of that being “Major”.
A “Major” rating indicates: “Multiple casualties (police and/or community); Major property damage; Major embarrassment or harm to Government and/or NSW Police; Large financial loss; Road closures with implemented traffic management plan, medium to heavy traffic.”
According to the report, police policy calls for “the placement of a MIRT (Major Incident Response Team) to manage a major public order incident,” when required.
Despite the dire warnings, the “Major Incident Management System” was not implemented. Police planning remained at a lower level, and it was unclear who was in command during the initial rally and attacks.”
======
Finally, that person from the SMH should be congratulated on their good taste.
Bongo crazy,
@ndy.