I’ve always been reluctant to comment on Palestinian-Israeli matters because of the intractable nature of the problem as evidenced by modern-day conflicts, especially from the six-day war (1967) to the present.
But the egregious toll of the October 7, 2023 attack and the resultant suffering and death from IDF bombardments of the Palestinians neighbourhoods requires us to be outspoken in defence of basic human rights, especially with regard to the killing and maiming of children.
I would have thought that its entirely reasonable to raise our concerns about the crisis through whatever medium we can. That’s the nature of democracy. Yet when well-meaning persons wish to express their concerns at a local government level there has been either scathing or vitriolic responses where some would seek to gag debate or proclaim it is misuse of Byron Council time and resources.
I think neither is appropriate. The vitriol aggravates division in a community. And the exhortations for Council to concentrate on ‘fixing the roads’ rather than allowing discussion on the crisis in Palestine is disdainful. It is disdainful because the motion passed on June 27 did not require much time or resource allocation by Council.
I note that there has been widespread condemnation of the situation in Palestine at universities, by unions and by many other Australian councils. Besides, such interactions between citizens, through local government channels to the national government is to be applauded isn’t it?
Similarly when a person exercises a right to speak in favour (or against) a motion and there is a ‘pile on’ of derogatory comment trying to shut down debate, often hyped up in social media echo chambers, it’s not healthy. For me, I’d prefer to have the light shine in.
This is not about trying to understand or evaluate the competing arguments over Gaza, the West Bank, or Jerusalem itself. So entrenched are the historical flash points in Palestine and Israel that any chance of, e.g. ‘a two-state solution’ (the Australian government’s position) has all but disappeared. But we need to have a solution, and soon, to the present shocking injury toll, especially to innocent children. As Ruth Bader Ginsberg once wrote (and always practised): ‘reacting in anger or annoyance (does) not advance one’s ability to persuade’.
For four decades The Echo has printed the stories some people loved, some people hated, and some pretended not to read. If you want us to keep telling the truth, the real truth, not the sugar-coated version. We’ll need your support to keep the presses rolling. 
