‘Concerns about Howard's penchant for exploiting and exacerbating racial divisions for political purposes are so widespread in Australia that it the issue was the topic of a well-reviewed book by one of the nation's most prominent academics -- Race: John Howard and the Remaking of Australian Politics, by Andrew Markus, a former head of the School of Historical Studies at Australia's Monash University, where he currently directs the Australian Centre for the Study of Jewish Civilisation. The premise of Markus' book is that racial issues have become disturbingly prominent in Australian public life during the Howard years.

Now, with his over-the-top attempt to associate Obama with terrorism, Howard has turned his attention to public life in the United States. Of course, John Howard will deny that Obama's race was a factor in his decision to loudly and aggressively attack just one of more than a dozen Democrats who are actively campaigning or considering a presidential run - most of whom are war critics.

But, as Sylvia Hale suggested with regard to the prime minister: "Examine his record and his message becomes clear."’

Is Obama's Race A Factor In Howard's Attack?

meanwhile ….. over at Crikey …..

Charles Richardson writes:

‘It's not very long ago since many institutions, even in countries like Britain and the US, had an official or unofficial system of quotas to restrict the number of Jews - in schools, universities, businesses and, of course, in immigration.

Just this morning, newly released letters allow us to read how 1940s Jewish refugees, including Anne Frank's family, were unable "to break through the [US] State Department's tightening restrictions".

So it was morally shocking to read this morning of a visiting Israeli professor, Raphael Israeli, calling for numerical limitation of Muslim immigrants.

As quoted in the Australian Jewish News, he said: "You have to adopt some kind of preventative policy. In order not to get there, limit the immigration and therefore you keep [Muslims] a marginal minority, which will be a nuisance, but cannot pose a threat to the demographic and security aspects of a country."

In The Sydney Morning Herald, professor Israeli said this was a "misunderstanding" of his views. But obviously not a serious one.

He was just as explicit to the Herald, saying "Greeks or Italians or Jews don't use violence", and that "in France, which has the highest proportion of Muslims in Europe at about 10%, it was already too late."

There's nothing new about this sort of diatribe, but this is an unusually explicit version. As usual, there's no evidence for any of it. "[M]ilitant Muslims were changing [France]'s political, economic and cultural fabric". Really? Where? How?

Certainly, France and other European countries have racial problems: African and Middle Eastern immigrants who've been ghettoised in desolate suburbs with no jobs and poor public services.

But none of that is remotely connected to religion. Nor is it of any obvious relevance to Australia, which lacks France's historical and geographic ties to the region.

Prejudice has never required evidence. But it's disturbing to find such prejudice being dispensed not by a street-corner agitator, but by an academic sponsored by the Australia/Israel & Jewish Affairs Council, who has "just begun a six-week stint as a scholar-in-residence at the Shalom Institute in Sydney".’