“Palestinians are angry at their treatment by the State of Israel, not because their oppressors are Jewish, but because they live under a cruel and barbaric siege, their anger comes from people being killed, maimed and oppressed … We cannot censor the political views of Palestinians because they are unpopular” – Nasser Mashni, APAN president.

The Australia Palestine Advocacy Network said it was “disturbed” by the lack of transparency. “Universities that have adopted the definition have not consulted with community groups or stakeholders,” said its president, Nasser Mashni. “Some universities have engaged with us on this issue, but others have either refused to acknowledge our correspondence, or misled us.”

Excerpts from APAN’s inaugural Palestine Solidarity Conference featuring Randa Abdel-Fattah, Micaela Sahhar, Kim Bullimore, Senator Lidia Thorpe, Noura Mansour, Rand Khatib, and Tasnim Mahmoud Sammak.

“Discussions centred on how to raise public awareness about Palestinian human rights and oppression, rather than be derailed by endless discussions on differences between internal Palestinian political forces or what a final Palestine/Israel state will look like,” writes Michael Bull.

“Far from a necessary instrument in the fight against antisemitism, the IHRA definition is a hammer to crush Palestine advocacy, and has been the subject of intense debate internationally for several years,” writes Nick Riemer.

“Touring Israel and Palestine in 2014 as a guest of the Australian Jewish Affairs Council, and then again two years later with the Australia Palestine Advocacy Network, the question I kept asking people was, how does this end, ever? Nobody even pretended to put forward a workable solution,” writes Mark Kenny.

“The IHRA has faced global backlash among Palestinian and Arab scholars who argue its definition of antisemitism, which includes “targeting the state of Israel”, could be used to shut down legitimate criticism of Israel and stifle freedom of expression, citing the banning of events supporting Palestinian rights on campuses after the definition was adopted by universities in the United Kingdom,” writes Caitlin Cassidy.

“Here in Australia, the profile that APAN has been able to build has given a much greater sense of awareness amongst the Australian public and the leadership of Australia given greater awareness of the plight of Palestinians” – George Browning.

“At a time when UN experts and the world’s leading human rights organisations are openly labelling Israel’s policies against Palestinians as the crime of apartheid, we would hope our government would be taking greater action in supporting the Palestinian people in their demand for justice” – Nasser Mashni, APAN president.

“StandWithUs, founded in 2001, states that its goals are to “stand up for Israel” and fight antisemitism. But Rothstein has attracted criticism in the past for urging supporters of Israel to back its government’s policies,” writes Daniel Hurst.

“The Editorial muses that Labor will next proceed to the recognition of “a non-existent Palestinian state”. One would only hope so. That is the resolution of recent ALP conventions. Labor rank and file expect it of the Government. Such recognition by Australia would bring Australia into line with the majority of UN member states,” writes Paul Heywood-Smith.

“The Albanese government has enabled Australia to re-join the majority international position which insists the status of Jerusalem can only be resolved in a final peace agreement between the two parties. Taking this step has been urgent, for in recent years the Israeli government has insisted the whole of Jerusalem to be its ʹeternal and undivided capital’,” writes George Browning.

“At Labor’s 2018 national conference, the party passed a motion calling on the next Labor government to recognise Palestine as a state. At its national conference last year Labor incorporated the resolution into its official platform, saying the party “expects this issue will be an important priority for the next Labor government,” writes Matthew Knott.

“Palestinian groups have publicly supported the reversal but made it clear it doesn’t mean anything for Palestinians who have been displaced from or persecuted in their homeland since Israel invaded and declared independence in 1948,” writes Aleksandra Bliszczyk.

“Nasser Mashni, vice president of the Australia Palestine Advocacy Network, said Australia’s Palestinian population had consistently been made an “other” and excluded from public debate, portrayed as “one organic mob of bearded, screaming Islamo-fascists,” writes Finn McHugh.

“The center-left Labor Party government agreed that the Australian Embassy would remain in Tel Aviv, as it has been. The Cabinet also reaffirmed that Jerusalem’s status must be resolved in peace negotiations between Israel and the Palestinians, Foreign Minister Penny Wong said” – The Associated Press.

“The center-left Labor Party government agreed to again recognize Tel Aviv as the capital. The Cabinet also reaffirmed that Jerusalem’s status must be resolved in peace negotiations between Israel and the Palestinians, Foreign Minister Penny Wong said,” writes Rod Mcguirk.

“We wouldn’t accept Russia’s annexation of Kyiv for example, why should we accept that Israel can just annex Jerusalem” – APAN President Nasser Mashni.

“The rally condemned Israel’s latest attack on Gaza and its killing of at least 46 people, including 16 children. It also highlighted the continuing oppression of Palestinians, who have endured more than 70 years of brutal occupation by the apartheid Israeli regime,” writes Isaac Nellist.

“Every individual, every nation has the right to defend itself from aggression. But no individual or nation has the right to so subjugate another, to so diminish their humanity that they are forced to live in a world where normal freedoms and decencies have long since been taken away,” writes George Browning.