Andrew Fraser “sorry” for racist remarks…

…the fucking liar.

‘Academic sorry for racist remarks’
Alyssa Braithwaite
August 30, 2006

A SYDNEY academic who created a racial furore by claiming African refugees were linked to high crime rates has apologised for his comments.

Macquarie University Associate Professor Andrew Fraser sparked the racial controversy in June last year when his letter making the remarks was published in local newspaper, the Parramatta Sun.

The university subsequently suspended him from teaching after he made further comments about Sudanese refugees and non-white immigration.

Safi Hareer from the Sudanese Darfurian Union sought a public apology from… Fraser in a complaint to the Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission (HREOC), saying the academic’s letter had breached the Racial Discrimination Act.

[Fraser] received a letter from HREOC president John von Doussa in April saying his comments were unlawful, and rejecting the professor’s submission that the letter held academic merit.

Mr von Doussa invited [Fraser] to a HREOC conciliation with Mr Hareer, urging him to apologise for the letter.

At the time [Fraser] said an apology “was out of the question”.

But Mr Hareer’s lawyer, George Newhouse, said [Fraser] had apologised to his client and the matter had been settled.

A public apology will also be published in the Parramatta Sun newspaper today.

“After mediation, [Fraser] agreed to apologise to Mr Hareer and to the Sudanese community in Australia,” Mr Newhouse said.

Mr Newhouse said [Fraser] had acknowledged that he had hurt fellow Australians.

“Andrew Fraser has apologised for his hurtful statements and Safi Hareer has accepted his apology,” he said.

“(Mr Hareer) was really pleased that two people with different views could sit down and discuss and resolve their differences in a human way, man to man.

“All credit to [Fraser] for apologising, and I’m glad it was done without going to court because really, no-one wants to do that.”

[Fraser] could not be contacted last night.

Not unexpectedly, news of Fraser’s ‘apology’ has been greeted on Scumfront, Fraser’s strongest supporter, with some dismay — and this appraisal by James Newman, the bonehead who videoed the Cronulla riots, added a Skrewdriver soundtrack, then uploaded it to the site:

As [Fraser] said at the [Sydney Forum]… He apologized for hurting any thin-skinned people who may have been offended [by his remarks,] but still believes that importing [sic] large numbers of blacks to Australia is a sure fire way [to] increase… crime and other social problems. [This] they can[‘]t deny because it is the truth[.] That[‘]s why they never took him to court because they knew they would lose. [Fraser] said they could do what they liked with the apology[,] but there is no way he would [pay] to have it printed in the media.

This is nothing but spin from that dog Newhouse.

As usual, the bonehead in question gets it arse-backwards: if Fraser “apologized”, it was likely because he estimated that, if it went to court, he would lose. Still, the bonehead’s account is useful if for no other reason than it demonstrates the (in)sincerity of Fraser’s “apology”.

Further, the fact is Fraser has been very active since June 2005, the date of publication of his racist letter to the Parramatta Sun, reportedly a result of Fraser’s “…seeing a photograph of a Sudanese child” in the paper. “Associate Professor Fraser wrote to the newspaper saying ‘an expanding black population is a sure-fire recipe for increases in crime, violence and a wide range of other social problems’.”

Indeed, according to the Canadian-born Fraser in an interview with Ray Martin on ACA (July 17, 2005), the ‘typical’ Australian is and should be “the sun-bronzed, blonde, blue-eyed Aussie. That is what brought me down here. That is what, I would say, brought many people down here, the belief that what was really attractive about Australia, was that it was populated by [sun-bronzed, blonde, blue-eyed] Australians”.

Soon afterwards, Fraser’s membership of and status as ‘legal adviser’ to the (now largely defunct) Patriotic Youth League (PYL) were exposed (‘Top academic accused of neo-Nazi links’, The Australian, July 20, 2005); his lying protestations to the contrary undermined by Melbourne resident Luke Connors of the PYL. One measure of Connors’ character may be found in the same email in which Fraser’s status was revealed: “Mr Connors said he had conducted an online poll asking PYL members to identify the most troublesome minority in their area: ‘abos, curry munchers, wogs or chinks?'”.

Following his refusal to have his contract bought out by the University (Fraser was due to retire in June this year) and then being suspended from teaching duties, Fraser had his essay ‘Rethinking the White Australia Policy’ — Fraser’s Big Idea is a return to a White Australia — rejected by Deakin University for inclusion in the Deakin Law Review.

Denounced as a racist and a shoddy academic, as a show of support for Fraser, the fascist Australia First Party (of which the PYL was its nominal youth wing) organised a rally on October 8th, 2005 outside Kirribilli House. Led by the neo-Nazi criminal Dr. James Saleam, AFP could only manage to attract a handful of protesters: the bulk of Fraser’s support was generated by racists and fascists on sites such as Scumfront. Still, one good turn deserves another, and in February 2006, Fraser travelled to Virginia in the United States to address the White supremacist 2006 American Renaissance Conference.

After having been informed in April 2006 by HREOC that, in their opinion, his original letter was illegal, Fraser declared that he was unwilling to ‘apologise’. According to Greg Roberts (‘No apology for linking Africans to crime’, The Australian, April 4, 2006):

In a landmark ruling that raises fresh questions about the limits to which academics can engage in public debate, HREOC chairman John von Doussa has found Professor Fraser’s comments were unlawful because they amounted to a “sweeping generalisation” that was not backed by research…

But Professor Fraser told The Australian he would not apologise to anyone.

“Even those who disagree with me should be appalled at this attack on the freedom of academic debate”,” he said.

“This gives the lie to all those politicians who’ve claimed that racial hatred legislation would not curb freedom of expression in Australia”.

After having denied the offer of a free ticket to one of Rain Pryor’s performances at the Melbourne Comedy Festival, Fraser accepted the opportunity to cite the convicted neo-Nazi criminal Ben Weerheym in his essay ‘Rethinking the White Australia Policy’.

Finally, last weekend Fraser addressed the fascist Sydney Forum, an address which may, in turn, have been a way of saying ‘thanks’ to AFP following their ‘action’ in support of Fraser at the Sydney office of George Newhouse on July 26.

And now he’s sorry?

About @ndy

I live in Melbourne, Australia. I like anarchy. I don't like nazis. I enjoy eating pizza and drinking beer. I barrack for the greatest football team on Earth: Collingwood Magpies. The 2024 premiership's a cakewalk for the good old Collingwood.
This entry was posted in Anti-fascism. Bookmark the permalink.

29 Responses to Andrew Fraser “sorry” for racist remarks…

  1. HAH!

    The good Professor spoke of this saga. They did not want to take it to court because they knew THEY WOULD LOSE!

    It was bluffing and intimidation at its finest.

    [L]et’s wait and see if this apology appears in the paper.

    Good to see you all protesting at the [F]orum guys!

    [N]ice one, red scum.

  2. @ndy says:

    Dearest Ben,

    You’re begging the question.

    (Look it up in the dictionary or ask an adult for further explanation.)

    IF Fraser was absolutely certain he would win any resultant legal battle, WHY then did he issue a phony apology?

    Well? Boofhead?

    Btw, I live in Melbourne. That’s about 1,000kms from Sydney.

    (Look it up in the atlas or ask an adult for further explanation.)

    And I’m not a red.

    (Look it up in the encyclopedia or ask an adult for further explanation.)



    PS. How was David Bradbury’s presentation? Better than the Syrian Ambassador’s? Funnier than Sandy Thorne’s?

  3. Chow_mein_muncher says:

    Australia wasn’t owned by white people in the first place. THIS IS ABORIGINAL LAND. WHITE PEOPLE TOOK IT FROM THEM, TOOK THEIR KIDS, STOLE THEIR LAND, KILLED THEM. They took advantage of Aboriginal people. Why do you think they didn’t take over Papua New Guinea and New Zealand – because they were too well organised. British people took advantage of Aboriginal people because they weren’t organised. AUSTRALIA IS THE COUNTRY OF OPPORTUNITY, AND MIXED PEOPLE. EVERYONE HAS COME FROM EVERYWHERE. AUSTRALIA ONLY HAS HISTORY OF THE PAST 200 YEARS.

  4. Asher says:

    For the record, the Brits did come here, murder plenty of Maori and steal their land. They just signed a piece of paper about halfway through.

  5. Asher says:

    Here being Aotearoa / New Zealand…

  6. @ndy says:

    The nation-state of ‘Australia’ was largely the product of inter-imperialist rivalry (Britain vs. France) for dominion in the Asia-Pacific region, and the perceived need to provide a sewage outlet for the shit of Empire (terms used, quite literally, by a range of bourgeois quacks in the late eighteenth century). Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples, on the other hand, were ‘organised’ in 1788, and still are, only in terms of a radically different understanding of the relationship between themselves, each other, and ‘the land’: organisation, per se, has little to do with invasion and conquest, the success of which is dependent on a range of other factors. The British Empire was, in turn, the projection of a certain order of things, established through an internal consolidation of power and the incorporation of a range of different peoples over a period of centuries…

  7. Ash:

    For the record, the Brits did come here, murder plenty of Maori and steal their land. They just signed a piece of paper about halfway through.

    …and the Israelis did go to Palestine and contributed to the deaths of quite a few innocent children, if you didn’t know.

  8. @ndy says:

    On the ball as usual I see Mick. Keep it up.

  9. That racist [edit] should be arrested and deported to the Simpson Desert. All enemies of the people should be deported to the Simpson Desert.

  10. On the ball as usual I see Mick. Keep it up.

    It’s not my fault that you defend their actions.

  11. @ndy says:

    Try that again Mick, only this time in English (sorry, I don’t speak Gibberish).

  12. Mick Rey says:

    Try that again Mick, only this time in English (sorry, I don’t speak Gibberish).

    I know you are… I said you are, so what am I?

  13. ha Andy, you anarchists will never attack me because by the time you anarchs have a vote on weather or not to go into battle. I will have crushed you anarchs.

  14. Pingback: Whoa, it’s a Devine bullshit tsunami « Fuck Politeness

  15. Zshavii says:

    Australia And New [Z]ealand wasn’t [sic] even named by the [B]ritish in the first place[:] the proper names came from the Dutch, Portuguese, Spanish, Italians, Germans, [and] many more Latin and mainland European countries [sic] [.] at that if [sic] it wasn’t for them the typical white [A]ussie would have nothing even the culture it has today and the technologies it [sic] has[.] [T]hey should face the fact there [sic] the slow learners[.] [I]f you wanna get typical [sic] about it the non typical [sic] whites have the brains not the typical white [B]ritish convict stock.

  16. @ndy says:

    You make a very strong case Zshavii.

  17. "Franklin" says:

    [Tony. Go away.]

  18. Zshavii says:

    thank you andy i could keep going on andy but i just put it plain and simple i think these slow learners will get it through to there head.

  19. Victor says:

    Why is it that only white people can be racist?

  20. @ndy says:

    I don’t know. I don’t agree. Why do you think only white people can be racist? I always thought it was a human foible, not a white one.

  21. Pingback: Racist rampage? | slackbastard

  22. Brain Dead Aussie Beer Swiller says:

    I love that Jewish Academic who spoke in Sweden that stated openly that “Jews” were leading the multi-cultural push and that the “anti-semitism” would pass due to their “leading role” in creating it – Barbara Spectre.

    I watched a David Duke video (PLEASE DONT KILL ME! IT WAS AN ACCIDENT!) and he produced an excellent piece on it. In fact all his video’s are spot on – shame about his mothers bed sheets – How Zionists Divide And Conquer –

    Then there is this telling quote from

    Liebman was personally so convinced of the incompatibility of the values of integration and group survival, and of the inevitable “victory” of the former over the latter, that he concluded he and his family had no Jewish future in the United States, and relocated with them to Israel. For Goldstein, the solution is multiculturalism. The only thing that will save Jews from extinction as a group in America, he avers, is “the ultimate dissolution of the dominant culture of which Jews have long strived to be a part”.

    “The Price of Whiteness: Jews, Race, and American Identity”, by Eric L. Goldstein, Princeton University Press, 2006, 307pp.

    Lets repeat that…

    For Goldstein, the solution is multiculturalism. ‘The only thing that will save Jews from extinction as a group in America, he avers, is ‘the ultimate dissolution of the dominant culture of which Jews have long strived to be a part’.

    And NOW it all makes sense 🙂

    Jews are destroying their “power competitor” – Predominately fair skinned Christian America and Europe.

    I wonder what Jews will be like as the dominant power on the planet? Well, i’ve read their holy books. It does’nt look good, and I watched Gaza.

    Me thinks this is all going to end very badly for someone and I don’t mean Christian America and Europe.

  23. captain obvious says:

    Well then, can anyone tell me why 78% of incarcerated males in the US are black?

    Yet blacks make up less than 20% of the population.

    Please…I would like to be enlightened here?

    How about what this guy mentioned about black on white crime.

    You realise that black on white crime is 50 to 1. That’s right! For very 51 crimes 50 are caused by black on white, and one is caused by white on black.

    So out of a million crimes reported in the year of 2008 in the USA. 830 THOUSAND crimes were black on white. Robbery, rape, assault, buglary [sic].

    I am not even talking about drug related. Just…black on white, or white on black crime. Something you can do to another person.


    Sorry I had to enlarge that statement. I just really wanted to make that point.

    So please. Enlighten me.

    I am ever so anxious to hear the rationalization of this.

  24. Pingback: When White nationalists attack! New Right @ Gaza solidarity rally, Sydney, November 24 | slackbastard

  25. Pingback: When White nationalists attack! New Right @ Gaza solidarity rally, Sydney, November 24 « you said it…

  26. B says:

    Why are most imprisoned males black?

    Probably for reasons surprisingly similar to why Andrew Fraser was legally oppressed for being himself. In other words, his own institution agreed with his prescription for inclusion/exclusion: keep potential offenders out.

    His ironic (universal) complaint: I am not the offender. I need to be heard.

  27. ihatenexus2013 says:

    My neighbor was ambushed by a gang of Sudanese on his way home from shopping in October 2011. They bashed him pretty bad. He went home, got into his nephew’s car and went looking for the Sudanese. Trust me. You really do not want a pair of muscular South Pacific Islanders going after you in the middle of the night. If they found the Sudanese, it would have been a blood bath. God help the Sudanese if my neighbor ever catches up with them.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.