The 1947 Academy Award winning film may be somewhat dated, but remains thought-provoking on the subject of antisemitism, how and why it can flourish and what both Jews and non-Jews can do about it.

Gregory Peck plays a character who pretends to be Jewish so as to gain an insight into how a Jewish person is treated compared with non-Jews, shortly after the defeat of Nazi Germany. The "gentleman’s agreement" refers to the unwritten acceptance of antisemitic practices, such as the "understanding" by various property owners that they will not accept Jewish tenants.

While the "gentleman’s agreement" in the film was, unambiguously, morally reprehensible, there can be unwritten understandings which may be motivated by better principles that may have unintended consequences.

Responsible and decent members of the journalism profession are sensitive to the potential for reports about one or other ethnic or religious group to be exploited and misused by the bigoted and intolerant. In the light of the many credible reports of harassment of members of a number of different groups following the orchestration and perpetration of recent horrific terrorist crimes by self-described followers of Islam, it is reasonable to expect that discretion will be used in coverage of matters relating to Australia’s Islamic and Arab communities.

On September 14, I co-signed with a senior representative of the National Council of Churches in Australia and the Australian Federation of Islamic Councils, a call "on members of our three faith communities to respond to the terrible events by strengthening the ties of faith and mutual respect that bind us together". We stressed together that "our compassion for the victims and our horror at the inhumane deeds must not become an excuse for hatred or bigotry or be exploited by those who seek to divide us on the basis of religion or ethnic origin".

But is concern at racism reasonable justification for an almost blanket failure to report anti-Jewish incitement, as well as rationalisation of terrorism, by individuals associated with the Islamic or Arab communities?

Is it not relevant and of definite public interest for members of the Australian community to become aware of individuals from within the Islamic community who have promoted obscene anti-Jewish propaganda, justified suicide terrorism and/or depicted the US as "evil", in the period both before and after September 11?

Last year, one of Australia’s best known racists was given a platform at a public rally against Israel, in Sydney’s Martin Place, to spout his anti-Jewish obscenities — and to this day not one of the organisers or co-speakers has had the decency or integrity to even identify this as unacceptable.

On the Internet, one can view the fanatic anti-Jewish rhetoric, sometimes but not always couched in religious terms, sometimes but not always premised on alleged sins of the State of Israel, on Australian Islamic sites.

Leaflets and magazines containing vicious anti-Western and anti-Jewish propaganda give testimony to the existence within Australia of individuals who might not themselves be terrorists but who certainly would not take issue with the rationalisations used by terrorist murderers.

In the interests of the highest principle of promoting communal mutual respect, the track records of particular individuals have basically been ignored.

Of all candidates to represent Muslim Australians in calls for mutual respect and breaking down of stereotypes, the choice of Imam Hilaly of the Lakemba Mosque is the one least likely to have credibility.

It was Imam Hilaly who, at a publicly advertised meeting at Sydney University on September 18, 1988, managed to include in a speech on "Tolerance in the Islamic Religion" comments such as "the Jews’ struggle with the human race is as old as history itself", "the methods used by Judaism to control the world … include secret movements as well as the destructive doctrines and groups, such as Communism, Libertinism, Freemasons, Baha’ism, the Rotary Clubs, the Lions Clubs, Jehovah’s Witness, and the new Christian sects", and "the Jews try to control the world through sex, then sexual perversion, then the promotion of espionage, traitory [sic] and economic hoarding".

Despite numerous requests, calls, demands and friendly supplications, Imam Hilaly has never apologised for, nor rescinded, these comments, or other insulting references to Australian women and other groups.

Alan Ramsey in the Sydney Morning Herald and Rachel Morris in the Daily Telegraph have both written articles recently which made reference to the lack of credibility he brings to the cause of community harmony, yet he was the Islamic religious leader who joined senior Christian, Buddhist and Jewish leaders at the NSW Government launch of an affirmation on "Harmony and Understanding in Troubled Times", on November 15.

I personally know a number of prominent Australian Muslims who are motivated by Islam to work towards understanding, mutual respect and a better Australia and it is difficult to conceive how it is in their interests, let alone those of anyone else, to have Imam Hilaly’s participation take away from the credibility of a drive for communal harmony.

Any "gentleman’s agreement" which inhibits public understanding of the sources of "hatred and bigotry" is unlikely to have the effect of promoting harmony.

While I understand that this can be the result of good intentions, I urge those who may be doing so to reassess this policy.