Man denies trying to provoke staff in ‘undercover’ Daily Telegraph stunt

A Dispute Over Alleged Antisemitism at Cairo Takeaway

A heated altercation at a Sydney restaurant has sparked a public debate over antisemitism, provocation, and discrimination. The incident took place at Cairo Takeaway in Enmore, where a Jewish man claims he was unfairly targeted by staff members during a visit. The restaurant, however, has presented a conflicting account of the events, leading to a bitter back-and-forth that has drawn in political figures and media outlets. The situation has also raised questions about the ethics of undercover operations and the handling of sensitive social issues.

The Incident and Its Aftermath

The Jewish man, who has not been named, claims he visited Cairo Takeaway and had an uneventful interaction with staff until he attempted to leave. According to his account, he thanked a female staff member, who responded in a curt tone, saying, “Hmmm… pleasure.” The man then asked if everything was okay, but the staff member did not reply. He later complimented her on the drink, which he described as delicious, and she explained that it contained hibiscus flower. The situation escalated when a Telegraph employee approached the staff member, asking why she seemed uncomfortable with the man’s presence. The man alleges that the staff member became aggressive, accused him of trying to provoke an antisemitic outburst, and called him an idiot. He also claims that two staffers followed him and Telegraph reporters up the street, continuing to berate him until they were able to leave.

The restaurant, however, has rejected the man’s version of events as “wholly incorrect” and “scandalously false.” The establishment has since taken to social media to share its side of the story, sparking widespread public reaction. Home Affairs Minister Tony Burke weighed in on the matter, expressing outrage if the restaurant’s account were true. “Deliberately provoking people in some pathetic game to try and get a reaction is irresponsible and runs counter to the national interest,” he said.

The Role of the Daily Telegraph

The incident has also drawn scrutiny due to the involvement of the Daily Telegraph, which appears to have orchestrated the visit as part of an undercover operation. An internal document from the newspaper, titled “topic plan,” details a plan to have the Jewish man “see what it’s like being Jewish in Sydney” by secretly filming his interactions in various neighborhoods, including Newtown, Blacktown, and Bankstown. The document describes the operation as an effort to expose antisemitism, noting that the man would wear video glasses to capture reactions to his presence. Editor Ben English later admitted that the approach could have been better handled but denied any intent to provoke an incident or falsely accuse the restaurant’s staff of antisemitism.

Legal Threats and Apology Demands

The Jewish man’s lawyer, Rebekah Giles, has demanded that Cairo Takeaway delete its social media posts about the incident, issue a public apology, and retract its claims. The lawyer has accused the restaurant of defaming her client and threatened to take legal action if these demands are not met. The man himself has expressed offense at the staffer’s suggestion that he was bringing overseas conflicts to Australia, insisting that he participated in the Telegraph’s operation to highlight the rise of antisemitism in Australia.

A Broader National Conversation

The incident has sparked a wider debate about antisemitism in Australia and the responsibilities of individuals and institutions in addressing it. While the Jewish man and his legal team argue that the operation was a legitimate effort to expose discrimination, critics have questioned the ethics of such undercover tactics. The involvement of political figures like Tony Burke and the media’s role in amplifying the story have further complicated the issue, highlighting the need for careful handling of sensitive social matters.

Conclusion

The altercation at Cairo Takeaway has become a flashpoint in a larger conversation about antisemitism, media ethics, and the challenges of addressing discrimination in public spaces. With conflicting accounts and legal threats hanging in the balance, the situation underscores the complexities of navigating such issues in a polarized society. As the debate continues, it remains to be seen how the various parties involved will resolve their differences and whether the incident will lead to greater awareness and understanding of the challenges faced by Jewish Australians.