ECAJ – mikeybear

STOP THE HATE NOW!

There is an extreme homophobia that exists in the Australian Jewish Community. STOP THE HATE NOW.

From: Michael Barnett
Date: 6 March 2016 at 23:23
Subject: Extreme homophobia in the Jewish community in Australia
To: Robert Goot <president@ecaj.org.au>
Cc: ….

Dear Robert,

I wish to remind the ECAJ that there is an extreme homophobia that exists in the Australian Jewish Community.

It’s name is Paul Winter and it’s name is Robert Weil. These are the names of it’s public face. There are many more names that do not dare show their face.

These people are vile humans and they claim their superior perspective.

I am sick of reading their filth and hatred toward people like me. Every time I read one of their posts I feel like vomiting.

Tonight Paul Winter has just spewed this bile:

Paul Winter says:

March 6, 2016 10:10 pm at 10:10 pm

Comparing the Nazi persecution of homosexuals to that of their persecution of Jews is false and hysterical. Homosexuals, communists and various other groups were discriminated against and were even killed. But the Nazis selected only two groups for extermination: the Jews and the Gypsies. The extermination of the Gypsies was nowhere near as thorough or as sadistic as the extermination program that Jews were subjected to.

Nobody wishes to persecute people because of their sexuality. Nobody in their right mind would want a regime to drive a person to suicide as that genius Alan Turing was. But nobody in their right mind either would acquiesce to same sex marriage or for same sex couples to raise children. That is not being homophobic, but simply recognising that we do not need to change the marriage laws in Australia where homosexuals have equal rights and that no man can be a mother nor a woman a father, role models children need to develop in a healthy way.

Complaining about a persecution that does not exist – unlike in mohammedan realms where homosexuals are publicly hanged or thrown off tall buildings – is merely a ploy to gain social goals that the LGBTIQ cohort does not need or deserve. We do not need to change to make Trotskyites deriding society as heteronormative feel comfortable. We do not need rainbow or colour me purple days at schools where students fling their difference in the face of their heterosexual peers, who then, like true cry-bullies, complain about objectors denying them a safe space. Mutual acceptance and all round respect is called for.

I have been reading Paul Winter and Robert Weil’s filth in the pages of the Australian Jewish News and on J-Wire for years and IT IS ENOUGH.

You are the head of the ECAJ and I am wondering what the fuck your responsibility is if it’s not to feed your ego and that of the other jellyfish that cannot muster up the courage to denounce extreme homophobia in the Jewish community.

Now you may guess I am angry. Yes, I am fucking outraged. I have been a victim of this shit for decades.

But let me go back to 1999. That was the year that Rabbi Emeritus Ronald Lubofsky ripped me a new arsehole in the JCCV Plenum.

Let me tell you about Rabbi Emeritus Ronald Lubofsky AM. In the 1970s this “man” used to teach bar mitzvah students at St Kilda Synagogue. With two of his students he used to masturbate in front of them during their lessons. These were 12 or 13 year old boys. There may well have been more. He took that secret to his grave. Is he a hero of the Jewish community, this man who left me distressed in 1999 because he abused the trust I gave him and destroyed me in the most inhumane manner possible at the JCCV Plenum.

I am sick of the filth that people like Lubofsky, Weil and Winter dish up on gay people. SICK OF THE SHIT.

Now you can delete this email, you can take legal action against me, or you can fucking show some spine.

I am over wankers like you doing sweet FA. FUCK THE LOT OF YOU.

Speak out on those orthodox rabbis in the ORA, RCNSW and RCV who hate homosexuality and who want to deny Australians civil marriage. Speak out on arsewipes like Winter, Weil and “Lubofsky the paedophile”. Speak out on the bigotry, the intolerance, the hatred, the homophobia and the transphobia in the Jewish community.

STOP THE HATE NOW.

Michael Barnett.

The ECAJ should look at it’s policy on Social Inclusion

Conveniently, the ECAJ have overlooked their policy on Social Inclusion when it comes to lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex people.

I’ve written recently on how the Executive Council of Australian Jewry believes anti-discrimination legislation should not protect people on the grounds of gender identity and sexual orientation. I’ve also written on how the ECAJ believe our society should be “inclusive” (that’s the ECAJ’s version of “inclusive”, which means everyone except gays and lesbians).

In The Age today the topic of the Anti-Discrimination Bill in relation to discrimination against lesbians and gays was raised, and the following reported:

Jews ”don’t have a position on this”, Executive Council of Australian Jewry executive director Peter Wertheim said.

Perhaps the ECAJ has forgotten the extreme discrimination that the Jewish people have suffered in recent and distant times? Maybe the words “Six Million” might ring a bell? Or “Pogroms”? Or “Spanish Inquisition”? Or “Pharaoh” and “Egypt”? In the history of the Jewish people there has been no shortage of persecution. Yet the ECAJ claim they don’t have a position on discrimination against lesbians and gays.

Hop on over to their web site and have a look at their Platform, in particular Section 1.1 on Social Inclusion:

1.1 NOTES that it is the vision of the ECAJ to create and support a community in which all Australians, including all Jewish Australians:
(a) feel valued and their cultural differences are respected;
(b) have a fair opportunity to meet their material and other needs; and
(c) are equally empowered as citizens to participate in and contribute to all facets of life in the wider community;

Given that the ECAJ want a society in which all Australians feel valued, have a fair opportunity, and are equally empowered to participate in and contribute to all facets of life, they actually do “have a position on this”.

The correct and only response from the ECAJ should be “We condemn all forms of discrimination, especially that perpetrated against persecuted minorities, and support an Australia where all people are treated equally.”

It’s not asking too much, is it?

Clarifying the authority of the ECAJ

Contrary to its claims, the Executive Council of Australian Jewry does not represent the entire Australian Jewish Community.

Senate Legal and Constitutional Affairs Committee
PO Box 6100
Parliament House
Canberra ACT 2600
Australia
legcon.sen@aph.gov.au

January 11 2013

Dear Committee Secretary,

I wish to clarify some potentially misleading information presented in submission #242 by the Executive Council of Australian Jewry (ECAJ) on the Exposure Draft of Human Rights and Anti-Discrimination Bill 2012.

The ECAJ describes itself as “the officially elected representative organisation of the Australian Jewish Community and speaks on its behalf.”

If you review the ECAJ web-site (www.ecaj.org.au) you will see on the front page it lists its constituents and affiliates. These are the organisations and communities it represents. To help you understand this better, let me give you an example.

One of the constituents of the ECAJ is the Jewish Community Council of Victoria. The JCCV represents approximately 60 member organisations in the Victorian Jewish community. There are many organisations it does not represent, including a number of schools, synagogues and other organisations. The JCCV claims to be the voice of the Victorian Jewish community, yet it has no authority to be the speak on behalf of the organisations it does not actually represent. Similarly, the ECAJ has no authority to claim to represent those organisations, communities or citizens who are not affiliated with its constituents.

It is also important to understand that the ECAJ does not represent in any way the best interests of gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgender and intersex people in the Jewish community. The ECAJ, and its constituents have no formal GLBTI representation, and have never engaged in any formal consultation with the GLBTI community to understand and cater for the specific needs of this highly disadvantaged, marginalised and victimised minority section of its community.

In fact it is clear from the ECAJ submission to your committee that they believe GLBTI people should not have any protection under anti-discrimination legislation. The ECAJ also give tacit approval that same-sex couples should be denied the right to equality under the Marriage Act, which is further evidence that the ECAJ do not represent the interests of GLBTI people.

To this end you will have a better understanding that not only do the ECAJ not represent the entire Australian Jewish community, but they do not and cannot speak on its behalf. Further, I can state with absolute authority that the ECAJ do not speak on behalf of gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgender and intersex people in the Jewish community.

Finally, I would like to make it clear that it is imperative that anti-discrimination legislation afford full protection to people on the grounds of gender identity, gender expression, biological sex characteristics and sexual orientation.

I will be glad to assist in clarifying any of this information.

Sincerely,

Michael Barnett
Convenor
Aleph Melbourne
www.aleph.org.au
0417-595-541

ECAJ calls for inclusive society (that excludes gays getting married)

Is it asking too much for the Executive Council of Australian Jewry to state that all Australian should have equal rights before the law?

ECAJ logo Despite my ongoing calls for the Executive Council of Australian Jewry to decry the efforts of the Orthodox Rabbinate’s opposition to civil legislative reform to allow same-sex couples to marry in Australia, they remain steadfastly silent. I have put a case forward that it is in their best interests to support marriage equality in Australia, especially given they already have issued a statement for respect of GLBT people.

The Executive Director of the ECAJ, Peter Wertheim expresses an interest in the harmony of society in Australia, as reported in the Australian Jewish News :

Executive Council of Australian Jewry executive director Peter Wertheim said there was nothing Dr Mohamed could learn from Gaza and its Hamas rulers that could possibly have any legitimate application in Australia.

“His visit and his comments undermine Australia’s efforts to build a peaceful, inclusive and democratic multicultural society,” he said.

I put it to Peter Wertheim that whilst the ECAJ remains silent on marriage equality it shows that the organisation is not genuine about its desire for a wholly inclusive society in Australia, and demonstrates that the ECAJ’s agenda is pro-Zionist and not pro-humanity.

The credibility of the ECAJ, being a body that represents the interests of Australians, is perilously fraught at present. Yet a simple statement claiming that it believes all Australians should have equal rights before the law could easily rectify that.

Is that too much of an ask Peter?

The dichotomy of the Jewish leadership when it comes to Hitler and homophobia

The Jewish community is intolerant of hate perpetrated against it but not by it. Why this dichotomy of attitude?

A guaranteed way to find out if the Executive Council of Australian Jewry and the Anti-Defamation Commission are still in business is to report a rogue Hitler reference to them and measure how many milliseconds it takes for them to issue a media release and demand an apology by the perpetrator. Take for example this recent example involving Macquarie Bank.

Yet these very organisations have moral constipation when rabbis from their community, such as Chaim Ingram or Shimon Cowen, to name two of the more obnoxious, say that gays should consider taking their lives for being homosexual, or make claims that we can be cured of our homosexuality, as if it’s an illness.

Imagine for one minute if a Muslim or Christian cleric were to say that Jews should consider taking their lives for their religious beliefs or because their way of life was considered an illness. It has been proven by their past actions that the ECAJ and the ADC, along with other organisations such as the New South Wales Jewish Board of Deputies, the Jewish Community Council of Victoria and every other Jewish organisation in the country would be screaming livid. Yet stunned silence when it comes to these anti-gay statements by Jewish “leaders”.

I hold in complete contempt every single person and organisation complicit in the silence that is being perpetrated when these vile rabbis are not howled down. Why are people so scared to speak out against these perpetrators of hate? What illness has affected this community when they are more outraged at statements of hate and intolerance against them than those from their midst?

From zero to front page in two weeks

The Jewish community is a funny animal. Two weeks ago, on February 10, I brought to the attention of senior community leadership news of a story that was going to break that would put a spotlight on the Jewish community. After some resistance, a statement was issued by the Executive Council of Australian Jewry distancing the Jewish community from the distasteful views of a certain ‘respected’ rabbi.

The following week saw the story get the front-cover on both the Melbourne commuter newspaper mX and gay community newspaper Star Observer. Sydney’s Gay News Network also comprehensively covered the story as it unfolded. GLBT community radio JOY 94.9FM and veteran journalist and broadcaster Doug Pollard was also swift on covering and helping to break the story both on air and online. Even bloggers Mike Stuchbery and Torrents of Scorn took a stance on the issue. The take-up and interest by these outlets was impressive.

This week’s edition of the Australian Jewish News sees a highly reactive cover-story response to the news that I brought to the attention of the Jewish community two weeks ago. I am of the firm belief that if I had not responded to a tip-off from Doug Pollard on this story and set into place a chain of events, including bringing the developing stories to the attention of the Jewish News, that the paper would not have given this story the high-profile status that it has received this week. Kudos to the AJN for the coverage of an important issue nevertheless.

The actual issue at play here is a deeply odious statement by Rabbi Dr Shimon Cowen that challenges the ethics of an anti-bullying program that affirms homosexuality. So offensive is the stance of this academic that both the ECAJ, the Monash University Faculty of Education staff and the Monash University media office have distanced themselves from his views.

Adding an extra dimension to this story, Monash University has been found to have an adjunct/honorary association with Rabbi Dr Shimon Cowen, ongoing to 2015. Monash University have advised that the academic is not an employee of the university and that they believe the association with him is meritorious.

I have petitioned the university to hold Rabbi Dr Shimon Cowen to account for his homophobic views, such that he compares homosexuality to incest and bestiality, and put it to the university that they would not be so welcoming of an academic who’s speciality was Holocaust denial.

The issue of homophobia and bullying is firmly on the radar of the Australian Jewish community now. It will be interesting to see the response from the community to an issue that makes so much of it deeply uncomfortable. It will also be interesting to see how Monash University handles the uncomfortable situation they find themselves in.

Rabbi Dr Shimon Cowen – turning harmony into division

In just one week Rabbi Dr Shimon Cowen’s steadfast desire to promote his bigoted, antiquated and intolerant views on homosexuality have successfully managed to cause the leadership of the Australian Jewish community and Monash University to distance themselves from him.

[SOURCE]

Rabbi Dr Shimon Cowen had a goal of bringing harmony to this world:

Rabbi Dr Shimon Cowen received a PhD in social philosophy from Monash University, Melbourne and rabbinic ordination in the Kollel Menachem Lubavitch, Melbourne, of which he was Programme Director, and from the Chief Rabbi of Haifa, Rabbi S.Y. Cohen. He also founded the Institute for Judaism and Civilization in 1998, helping to bring together the two worlds of religious tradition and secular society in discussion and, ultimately, harmony.

He completely missed the mark in achieving harmony. In fact he’s succeeded in creating more social division and unrest than he probably ever have imagined he was capable of.

In just one week Cowen’s intolerant and bigoted views on homosexuality have led him to be shunned by the leadership of the Australian Jewish community and have caused Monash University, his Alma Mater, to distance themselves from him.

Time to rethink your strategy Rabbi?

History making statement issued by Australia’s Jewish peak body against ‘respected’ Orthodox Rabbi

The Executive Council of Australian Jewry has distanced itself from the toxic message of the homophobic Orthodox Rabbi, Dr Shimon Cowen. Whilst the it has issued statement is welcome, the message it conveys is far from sufficient.

Last Friday, February 10 2012, news came to me by way of Queer community journalist Doug Pollard that Rabbi Dr Shimon Cowen had published a paper via the virulently anti-gay Australian Family Association, slamming homosexuality and along with it the Safe Schools Coalition Victoria. The SSCV web site describes itself as “Dedicated to supporting gender and sexual diversity in schools.”

Doug Pollard has a personal interest in the welfare of SSCV as he was instrumental in helping the program get off the ground. I have a personal interest in fighting homophobic intolerance in the Jewish community. So without delay I wrote to the Executive Council of Australian Jewry (ECAJ) and asked they intercede in this unpleasant matter, as they had made a commitment to countering hatred against GLBT people. Together with Doug Pollard and also Rob Mitchell of the RJM Trust we had a dialogue with the ECAJ, explaining our concerns and reasons why a prompt response from the ECAJ would be beneficial.

On Monday, February 13 2012 Peter Wertheim, Executive Director of the ECAJ, issued a statement indicating the rabbi’s views were not representative of those of Australian Jewish community and in doing so, distanced themselves from his toxic viewpoints. To the best of my knowledge this single acts sets a precedent for the Australian Jewish community (and perhaps even globally), as there has never been an organisation representing, in part, the Orthodox Jewish community that has spoken out publicly against an Orthodox Jewish rabbi.

I have to praise Peter Wertheim and the ECAJ for their professionalism, sensitivity and swift action in handling the concern presented to them. They have told the community that it is unacceptable to vilify homosexuals and attack organisations and programs that have been established to prevent young people from bullies, especially bullies of the likes of Rabbi Cowen and his cohorts.

In saying that though, there is ample room for improvement in the position taken by the ECAJ. Their cautiously worded statement lacked the necessary gravitas to tell the Orthodox Rabbinate that they must never again speak ill of homosexuality, that they must never refer to it as an illness, that they must never offer ‘reparative therapy’ as a ‘cure’ for homosexuality and that they must actually accept that homosexuality is a normal and healthy expression of human sexuality.

I have presented the ECAJ with a statement each from the Australian Psychological Society and the Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Psychiatrists. These statements are absolutely unambiguous in their message and leave no room for uncertainty as to what these two professional bodies believe is the best approach to the issue of reparative therapy. Yet the ECAJ has refused to publicly acknowledge these two statements. Why? It surprises me that an organisation that has access to a plethora of psychologists and psychiatrists in the Jewish community didn’t source one of each to help them understand and convey these plain language statements.

The presence of Professor Kim Rubenstein on the ECAJ executive adds the necessary relevant academic and scientific qualifications to the repertoire of the ECAJ, as she is the convenor of the Gender Institute at the Australian National University, and is well-connected on these matters. With her talents at hand, and access to a wealth of resources through the ANU, the ECAJ currently has no reason for saying “but it’s outside our area of expertise”.

I need to remind myself that the Jewish community, at its official level, is excellent at fighting hate from beyond its borders. However it is far from having perfected that art when the hate emanates from within. What is rewarding though is seeing that it is trying hard to get there.

20120213_safe_schools

A statement from the ECAJ on International Holocaust Remembrance Day 2012

A statement by Peter Wertheim, Executive Director of the Executive Council of Australian Jewry, on International Holocaust Remembrance Day 2012:

“January 27 is the date, in 1945, when the largest Nazi death camp, Auschwitz-Birkenau, was liberated by Soviet troops. It is a devastatingly appropriate day for all of us to remember and reflect upon the genocide that resulted in the annihilation of 6 million European Jews, 2 millions Gypsies (Roma and Sinti), 15.000 gays and millions of others at the hands of Nazi tyranny.

Auschwitz was not merely the final destination of many of these murdered men women and children. In a very real and terrible way it continues to symbolise the final destination – the ultimate consequence – of hatred of the other that is allowed to go unchallenged. The spectre of Auschwitz will continue to haunt the whole of humanity until it learns to free itself from the scourges of racism and other forms of hatred.

International Holocaust Remembrance Day is an opportunity for all of us to look inwards into our own hearts and minds and to resolve to confront our own prejudices. For this is where racism and other forms of hatred begin. No ideology of hatred can take root without the active participation or passive acquiescence of ordinary people.

We must never be afraid to speak out against hatred that is directed against ourselves, especially when it may be contentious or unpopular to do so. Yet we must also be sensitive enough to recognise hatred that is being directed against others and to speak out in their defence too, even when it may be contentious or unpopular to do so.

The struggle against racism and other forms of bigotry is not easy. Yet it has never been more necessary for all of us to be a part of it. As the number of survivors diminishes with time, the need for us to pass on this message to our children only grows more urgent”

A response from SBS to the ECAJ’s complaint about “The Promise”

The ECAJ have complained to SBS about discrimination and stereotyping. Consider this reply from SBS to the ECAJ, challenging issues of discrimination and harmful behaviour in the Jewish community.

Consider this conversation* between Sally Begbie, SBS Ombudsman and Peter Wertheim, ECAJ Executive Director regarding the ECAJ complaint about the screening of “The Promise”, a situation that has even made the mainstream media.

SALLY BEGBIE: Hi Peter. It’s Sally Begbie from SBS calling. It’s about the letter we’ve received from you regarding The Promise.

PETER WERTHEIM: Hi Sally. Thanks for calling. How may I help you?

SALLY: I’ve read the complaint, all 31 pages. It took me a while to get through the document. Very thorough and comprehensively researched I’ll have to admit.

PETER: Indeed.

SALLY: It’s about stereotyping, and discrimination of Jewish people. Those are the main concerns?

PETER: Yes, that’s correct. Stereotyping, discrimination, negative attitudes of Jews.

SALLY: I see. Yes. That’s a concern we take seriously at SBS.

PETER: That’s good to hear.

SALLY: And no doubt, it’s something your organisation takes just as seriously, stereotyping and discrimination.

PETER: Absolutely. We pride ourselves on our efforts to prevent and reverse such attitudes. If you take a moment to review our web site you’ll see we give those issues priority amongst the many issues we care about.

SALLY: That’s excellent to hear. In reviewing the complaint that we’ve received I have been doing some research into issues and attitudes amongst the community you represent, to gain a more complete understanding of the situation. I’ve had some interesting findings.

PETER: Oh, yes?

SALLY: Well, it seems that there appears to be an area of concern into discrimination that the ECAJ has remained silent on, that some in your community are demanding a more vocal response.

PETER: Please explain.

SALLY: In particular, it seems that the ECAJ values equality and egalitarianism, yet has no comment to make on the issue of marriage equality. That would seem to me to be a strange position to take, considering your organisation does not stand for discrimination in any way whatsoever.

PETER: That’s a difficult area Sally.

SALLY: Discrimination? It really doesn’t seem that difficult to me.

PETER: No, not discrimination. Marriage. It’s a complex issue for some in the Jewish community.

SALLY: But your organisation does not stand for discrimination.

PETER: Correct.

SALLY: And yet you’re prepared to remain tolerant of some discrimination?

PETER: No, we don’t stand for discrimination of any type.

SALLY: So you’re supportive of efforts to remove discrimination facing Jews in same-sex relationships?

PETER: It’s not so simple Sally.

SALLY: It is to me. Discrimination is discrimination.

PETER: Of course, but not all discrimination is the same.

SALLY: However you look at it, it’s still discrimination. There’s another issue that has come to my attention. If I may.

PETER: Certainly.

SALLY: I’ve read that some in your community are concerned about attitudes that are upheld amongst certain religious leaders and members of the community whereby homosexuality is considered a condition that can be overcome with reparative therapy. The concerned parties seem to be calling on your organisation to speak out against these attitudes, claiming they’re proven to be harmful to members of the community who are being asked to overcome their orientation. They’ve provided you with evidence from leading professional bodies claiming these are harmful and ineffective therapies.

PETER: I’ve heard these concerns.

SALLY: Do you take them seriously? The claims that they are harmful to members of the Jewish community who are being forced to undertake them?

PETER: Absolutely. The ECAJ does not for one minute want a single member of the Jewish community to undergo an iota of suffering or come to any harm. We would extend that concern to the wider community as well.

SALLY: And you would then want to ensure that your community had a clear and unambiguous understanding that it is inappropriate to refer people to practitioners of these untoward therapies?

PETER: It would be our desire to ensure no member of our community came to any harm.

SALLY: So what I am hearing is that your organisation takes the issues of discrimination and harm seriously and wants to ensure the ongoing and increasing welfare of the members of your community, the Jewish people of Australia.

PETER: Effectively. Yes.

SALLY: Then it would seem to me, Peter, that it would be to your organisation’s advantage to show the rest of us that it does take these issues seriously and take a stand on them. You are asking SBS to take a stand against discrimination and stereotyping affecting the Jewish people, but what I see is that there are members of your community who are lacking the necessary protection from your organisation and who are at the mercy of harmful attitudes that have not been reined in.

PETER: Of course, we want a positive outcome for all parties.

SALLY: That’s good to hear. So do we. I appreciate your time today. We’ll be in touch.

This is one of many possible conversations that could potentially occur. I am not aware of it actually having occurred, yet.