Israel

[SkStu]

have they gone too far yet? Im wondering what exactly they will need to do before the international community will take a stand against them.

The IDF stormed a ship bound for Gaza which contained aid and supplies for the blockaded Gaza Strip, killing 9 and injuring dozens.

Their defence? If they let one ship in they will have to let them all in.

Does this excuse justify their actions? The ship had been searched and cleared by the Turkish government.

The latest sickening action in a long, long line of sickening actions from Israel. I just hope the necessary world powers will do te right thing this time.

CONTENT REMOVED: http://foot.ie/faq.php?faq=rules#faq_attribution

[thischarmingman]

Watching coverage on BBC World and Al Jazeera throughout the day and the difference is startling; Al Jazeera far more willing to ask the tough questions of the Israeli representatives they had on and using far stronger language to describe the events. The fairly limp wristed comments from the White House were disappointing if not unexpected.

It would be nice to see this as the tipping point but unfortunately it'll be old news in a few days, and the Israelis know it, which only makes the whole thing more frustrating, depressing and infuriating. That said, the fact there's so many nationalities involved on board the boats makes it a unique situation and means there might be a chance for real action.

It must be hell for those who know that a family member of friend was on board one of the ships and be faced with the news blackout Israel have engineered regarding the dead and the injured.

[SkStu]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/world/middle_east/10195838.stm

http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/2010/may/31/henning-mankell-israel-flotilla-gaza

here are the links to the articles i posted earlier.

I agree TCM - was very disappointed in Washingtons response - something along the lines of "regret the loss of life". The bare minimum in other words. Huge implications here for Israel though. Turkey was their one ally in that region and they have stormed a Turkish boat and killed 9 people who were there. It will be interesting to see how there policy of deliberate ambiguity will work over the next few days muddling the facts to such an extent that, as you say, it will be forgotten far more quickly than it should.

What will it take for America and Britain to take a stand against their actions? They've gotten away with everything to date. As you say, frustrating, depressing and infuriating.

pretty interesting website regarding military strength and firepower.

http://www.globalfirepower.com/

[ArdeeBhoy]

Sadly can't see the US doing too much unless the Turkish state (who hardly have an unblemished record) decide to take or threaten direct action v.Israel.
Whilst not having much time for either regime, one can only hope it doesn't as the potential escalation in the Middle East tinderbox doesn't bear thinking about.
On a more parochial note, given there was substantial Irish input into one of the boats in that flotilla, one can only hope the likes of Martin propose immediate sanctions v.Israel, both economic and cultural. It's harsh on the average Israeli but they do keep voting for various showers of paranoid c*nts.

And to think people on here were whinging about anti-Israeli publicity when we played them in those qualifiers. They have got off very lightly in the meantime....
And yes, am well aware of various Muslim fundamentalists! But don't feel that's an issue here.

[John83]

...It's harsh on the average Israeli but they do keep voting for various showers of paranoid c*nts...
Not to condone anything they´ve done, but it´s not paranoia if everyone´s really out to get you.

[Eminence Grise]

I was interested to hear the Israelis claim that they were acting within their rights to board vessels in international waters. I always thought that the right of free passage was guaranteed by states, but when I had a look at the UN website (http://www.un.org/Depts/los/convention_agreements/texts/unclos/part2.htm) it appears there are legitimate grounds for withdrawing the right.

Article 19 [abridged]
Meaning of innocent passage
1. Passage is innocent so long as it is not prejudicial to the peace, good order or security of the coastal State…. [Israel can take its pick of problems here]

2. Passage of a foreign ship shall be considered to be prejudicial to the peace, good order or security of the coastal State if in the territorial sea [my emphasis] it engages in any of the following activities:
(a) any threat or use of force against the sovereignty, territorial integrity or political independence of the coastal State…. [Israel can make a case for sovereignty and territorial integrity being threatened]

(b) any exercise or practice with weapons of any kind; [the IDF claimed its troops opened fire only when threatened by knives and sticks and when crew attempted to seize troops’ weapons]

(d) any act of propaganda aimed at affecting the defence or security of the coastal State; [aside from delivering humanitarian aid, the flotilla was intended to publicise conditions in Gaza; by inference this could result in pro-Hamas sentiment, thereby damaging Israeli security]

(f) the launching, landing or taking on board of any military device; [I imagine it’s quite easy to attribute a military purpose even to humanitarian aid]

A little further on, another article allows a country to take action outside its territorial waters:

Article25 [abridged]
Rights of protection of the coastal State
2. In the case of ships proceeding to internal waters or a call at a port facility outside internal waters, the coastal State also has the right to take the necessary steps to prevent any breach of the conditions to which admission of those ships to internal waters or such a call is subject.


So, if my reading of this is right (and it’s just a layman’s glance over part of the convention, done late at night) Israel has done its homework, and has acted in a legally justifiable way to prevent a threat to its sovereignty.

However…

Moral justification for armed troops to rappel from military helicopters, open fire on civilians, prevent badly-needed humanitarian aid from reaching a subjugated people, engage in propaganda and censorship, and show flagrant disregard for international comity is another matter entirely.

Coming so soon after the Mossad use of forged Irish and Australian passports, and the ongoing disproportionate use of military power against Hamas (whose terrorist activities are also to be condemned ) and Palestinians in general, it is disappointing to see the international community so meek in its response, Turkey and Arab/Muslim states excepted. The US response was typically mealy-mouthed; Cowen stumbled and mumbled his way to asking for an independent international enquiry (repeating the EU line – a safe call); alright, Michéal Martin summoned the Israeli ambassador to account for the incident, but he did the same when the passport scandal broke.

As long as international condemnation of heavy-handed and illegal actions remains lily-livered and ineffectual, why would Israel even consider changing how it conducts itself? No matter that it is becoming an international pariah with a disregard for international law that makes North Korea look like a paragon of virtue, Israel will continue to do just what it has always done.

[ArdeeBhoy]

Except they're not. Or they probably wouldn't be if they'd shown a bit more humility, amongst other traits.

[SkStu]

Not to condone anything they´ve done, but it´s not paranoia if everyone´s really out to get you.

and if everyone is really out to get you then there is usually a pretty compelling reason.

[Macy]

It will be interesting to see how there policy of deliberate ambiguity will work over the next few days muddling the facts to such an extent that, as you say, it will be forgotten far more quickly than it should.
The Assistant/ deputy Ambassador was on the Last Word last night and said there were hand grenades thrown and they had pistols - fair play to Savage, who got her to withdraw it, but I'm sure that stuck in someones head (which was the intention). Hook/ Newstalk opened with basically a propaganda piece for the Israeli's, down to the "only democracy in the middle east" crap - the whole reason for the blockade is because they won't accept the democratic decision of the people of Gaza. I think Crowley is back out there for RTE judging from Morning Ireland, so they'll be back "on message"...

[pineapple stu]

Not to condone anything they´ve done, but it´s not paranoia if everyone´s really out to get you.
Israel are out to get everyone first though. That's the problem, and now it's the circle. Israel justify their actions because people get píssed off at them for land grabs and what have you, but they conveniently ignore that last part.

[Mr A]

It's hard to work out what the hell either side were thinking.

Surely the Israelis should have known that there might be resistance and should have acted much more carefully to account for that.

And surely anyone on those ships would have known that attempting to lynch Israeli commandos was only going to end one way. But then maybe that was the point?

The result is a disaster for everyone except Hamas.

[Macy]

And surely anyone on those ships would have known that attempting to lynch Israeli commandos was only going to end one way. But then maybe that was the point?
Do you really believe that IDF commandos coughed up a couple of pistols to people armed with, albeit sophisticated :rolleyes: , knives and metal bars? I just don't buy it! Not the brightest to put up resistance, but I don't see how they put up enough that would end in that slaughter.

[Spudulika]

I was given a hint of this early this morning from a friend who'd told me that going back to the ME would be dangerous as Israel had gone mental again. Only listening to Morning Ireland did I grasp it, and then on PK he had the Deputy Ambassador woman and her counterpart from the Turkish Embassy. If I were a swing voter I'd have gone to the Turkish side as he was a true diplomat. The Israelis have violated maritime law, and the lies that are circulating now will grow legs as the republican and conservative media in the UK and US will spin it mercilessly. Own goal for Israel and what sympathy they had in moderate circles is evaporating quickly. On the OK show she came across as a total creamer and she tried to say they had guns, before quickly saying - taken from the commandos. It will be interesting to see the autopsies on the bodies - and how many suffered single bullet wounds!

[thischarmingman]

And surely anyone on those ships would have known that attempting to lynch Israeli commandos was only going to end one way.

I know in the interests of fairness we should mention the official Israeli line but in my view they've forfeited their right to be taken at face value with their numerous lies in the past. If the evidence proves otherwise, fair enough, but until them I'm going to go right ahead and presume the innocence of everyone on the flotilla. Even if that were the truth, it's still a pretty disproportionate response.


muddling the facts to such an extent that, as you say, it will be forgotten far more quickly than it should.

What will it take for America and Britain to take a stand against their actions? They've gotten away with everything to date. As you say, frustrating, depressing and infuriating.


That's just it- the standard Israeli tactic- muddy the waters sufficently so that by the time the truth comes out it doesn't much matter because some of the mud has stuck. See, for example, Sabra and Shatila, Lebanon. It would be great if some world leader would take a stance. Robert Fisk writes in his column today (http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/commentators/fisk/robert-fisk-western-leaders-are-too-cowardly--to-help-save-lives-1987989.html):


You only have to read the gutless White House statement – that the Obama administration was "working to understand the circumstances surrounding the tragedy". Not a single word of condemnation. And that's it. Nine dead. Just another statistic to add to the Middle East's toll.

But it's not.

In 1948, our politicians – the Americans and the British – staged an airlift into Berlin. A starving population (our enemies only three years before) were surrounded by a brutal army, the Russians, who had erected a fence around the city. The Berlin airlift was one of the great moments in the Cold War. Our soldiers and our airmen risked and gave their lives for these starving Germans.

Incredible, isn't it? In those days, our politicians took decisions; our leaders took decisions to save lives. Messrs Attlee and Truman knew that Berlin was important in moral and human as well as political terms.

Depressing stuff.

[John83]

Israel are out to get everyone first though. That's the problem, and now it's the circle. Israel justify their actions because people get píssed off at them for land grabs and what have you, but they conveniently ignore that last part.
The creation of their state was greeted with a declaration of war from five neighbouring countries. That´s a curious definition of "first" you have there.

Again, and I shouldn´t have to point this out only this is so polarised a debate, this doesn´t mean I think Israel is justified in much of anything they do. I´m just pedantically objecting to the notion that Israel are the big evil and everyone else is blameless.

[Macy]

The creation of their state was greeted with a declaration of war from five neighbouring countries. That´s a curious definition of "first" you have there.

I thought it was them jumping the gun and declaring independance that sparked the war? But isn't that the root of the problem anyway - it was "created".

[dahamsta]

So was Pakistan, so was Northern Ireland. Hmmm, I think I'm detecting a pattern...

[ArdeeBhoy]

Yeah, The word 'Brits' springs to mind!!!
;)

[Macy]

Stupid religious nutjobs comes to my mind (all of them on all sides).

[culloty82]

Like John, I'd be wary of passing comment on this due to the emotions on both sides, but in '48 the UN had a partition plan just like the arrangement that will be enforced when the Palestinians get independence, the Jews agreed, the Arabs wouldn't, with the result that the neighbouring countries invaded, so for once the British aren't to blame, even though they carved out Palestine first day. Israel can blamed for this incident, building the "security wall" that annexes half the West Bank and the settlement, but they do have some fair grievances, like that Hamas want to wipe their country off the map and that most of the neighbouring states and Iran continue to refuse to recognise them, so there's fault on both sides that only a two-state situation can solve.

[Docboy]

I wouldn't believe a word coming from the Israeli side given their history for subterfuge in similar situations. Are they seriously expecting us to believe that a ragtag bunch of do-gooders (not rubbishing the work being done) would take on the most heavily armed military in the world?

Never ceases to amaze me how little empathy they have for other people's suffering given what their race was put through.

[Spudulika]

If we roll it back, and this is something mentioned by Arab Muslim and Jewish scholars who were in Palestine pre-war, the pogroms of Stalin and co, the extermination led by Hitler, the moral cowardice of the cheeating handballing French, the active hatred of the Italians, the Croatian, Serbian and other Yugoslav bloodthirstiness, and the general elimination of the "jewish problem" that was not helped by the spineless Irish to any great degree, was completed when tens of thousands of europeans were shunted out of the continent and thrown into the mix in a foreign land. The argument, by these scholars has been - large parts of Germany had been cleared - what wasn't it repopulated with displaced jews from around europe and ringfenced (for want of a better word)? I'm not for a moment excusing the horrible attitudes of the "only democracy in town" which is nonsense anyway, as tracts of jews and arabs are prevented from having a voice. However it's about time that something major was done, and Israel was told to cop itself on - it is a distablising state, it has meddled and messed in affairs of nations around it and needs a good boot.

[MariborKev]

However it's about time that something major was done, and Israel was told to cop itself on - it is a distablising state, it has meddled and messed in affairs of nations around it and needs a good boot.

And the chances of that happening?

Once again, it rolls out that "If you are anti Israeli then you are an anti semite" ******.

Israel should be
-Forced to re-open all the checkpoints to Gaza to allow reconstruction material etc in
-Made to stop building new checkpoints(their own High Court has ruled it illegal in some cases FFS)

[ArdeeBhoy]

Like John, I'd be wary of passing comment on this due to the emotions on both sides, but in '48 the UN had a partition plan just like the arrangement that will be enforced when the Palestinians get independence, the Jews agreed, the Arabs wouldn't, with the result that the neighbouring countries invaded, so for once the British aren't to blame, even though they carved out Palestine first day. Israel can blamed for this incident, building the "security wall" that annexes half the West Bank and the settlement, but they do have some fair grievances, like that Hamas want to wipe their country off the map and that most of the neighbouring states and Iran continue to refuse to recognise them, so there's fault on both sides that only a two-state situation can solve.

You might like to read up on the history of Jewish independence and certain activities of Israeli governments since, especially in the last 40 years, which have helped perpetuate the main issues based on their aggression which combined with every Muslim fundamentalist and successive US foreign policy has helped widen this conflict across much of the globe......

[Rasputin]

The creation of their state was greeted with a declaration of war from five neighbouring countries. That´s a curious definition of "first" you have there.
The creation of the state?
Are you for real?
You do mean the Nakba right?
Where Palestinians were ethnically cleansed from their lands by either the Terrorist "Stern gang" or by official military forces.
Hows that for a "first"?
http://www.thebabelproject.org.nz/babel_files/palestine.jpg (http://www.thebabelproject.org.nz/babel_files/palestine.jpg)


Like John, I'd be wary of passing comment on this due to the emotions on both sides, but in '48 the UN had a partition plan just like the arrangement that will be enforced when the Palestinians get independence, the Jews agreed, the Arabs wouldn't,
Look at my map above.
I know if me and my family were ethncially cleansed from my home and forced into a refugee camp I wouldnt accept it.

with the result that the neighbouring countries invaded, so for once the British aren't to blame, even though they carved out Palestine first day.Britain capitulated to the likes of the Stern Gang because they couldnt contain the violence.
They also had a hard on for Zionist rehtorric that apparently the Jewish religion warranted its own state as was outlined in the cast iron legal document that is called the Torah.

Israel can blamed for this incident, building the "security wall" that annexes half the West Bank and the settlement,Thats good of you.
The internationally illegal 436 mile 8 meter high perimeter wall that not only snatchs even more land off the Palestinians while they continue to expand their internationally illegal settlements in the west bank.

but they do have some fair grievances, like that Hamas want to wipe their country off the map and that most of the neighbouring states and Iran continue to refuse to recognise them,But these are merely reactions to the contexts they found themselves in.
Iranians or Palestinians were not queing up to blow themselves up in Jewish markets before the UN and Britain and America thought it would be ncie to have a puppet state in the middle east.
These extremist views were only formented after the injustices of ethnically cleansed Palestinians and the subjegation of a people.
This is not even mentioning the fact that Israel helped set up Hamas to undermine the largely secular PLO.

so there's fault on both sides that only a two-state situation can solve.Indeed theres fault on both sides but fault lies in far greater proportion on one side than on the other.

[OneRedArmy]

The creation of the state?
Are you for real?
You do mean the Nakba right?
Where Palestinians were ethnically cleansed from their lands by either the Terrorist "Stern gang" or by official military forces.
Hows that for a "first"?
http://www.thebabelproject.org.nz/babel_files/palestine.jpg (http://www.thebabelproject.org.nz/babel_files/palestine.jpg)


Look at my map above.
I know if me and my family were ethncially cleansed from my home and forced into a refugee camp I wouldnt accept it.
Britain capitulated to the likes of the Stern Gang because they couldnt contain the violence.
They also had a hard on for Zionist rehtorric that apparently the Jewish religion warranted its own state as was outlined in the cast iron legal document that is called the Torah.
Thats good of you.
The internationally illegal 436 mile 8 meter high perimeter wall that not only snatchs even more land off the Palestinians while they continue to expand their internationally illegal settlements in the west bank.
But these are merely reactions to the contexts they found themselves in.
Iranians or Palestinians were not queing up to blow themselves up in Jewish markets before the UN and Britain and America thought it would be ncie to have a puppet state in the middle east.
These extremist views were only formented after the injustices of ethnically cleansed Palestinians and the subjegation of a people.
This is not even mentioning the fact that Israel helped set up Hamas to undermine the largely secular PLO.
Indeed theres fault on both sides but fault lies in far greater proportion on one side than on the other.How do you propose solving the problem?

And when I mean the problem, I mean the whole problem (basically as you've outlined). Would Israel rolling back to either the 67 or 74 boundaries keep the wider Middle Eastern world onside? If you accept that a certain percentage of the region see nothing short of total Jewish annilihation as acceptable, then there is no solution.

I'm not being smart or anything, but the problems are so intractable its almost impossible to see a way out.

[Spudulika]

I don't know if anyone has been to a refugee camp, I have, in Jordan, and Jordan is one of the most accepting places for Palestinians, and has left itself open to chaos as a result. The population is close to 50-50 Palestinian-Jordanian and while there is peace there, before long some of the loonies will grab power and then we're in an all out war. I can understand where the Palestinians are coming from, and I object to Israel being called the only democracy in the ME, according to Bush and Co Iraq is now a democracy, yet the biggest and baddest dictatorship goes untouched - Saudi Arabia. No amount of UN rhetoric will solve the problem, only a concerted international effort that will bring in line the radicals on all sides.

The Jewish lobby is too great in the UK and USA to do anything decent, and the EU is no better. They're happy to leave a strip of desert in a constant state of fear as it buys into their little game. I don't see an all-out attack on Israel by it's neighbours doing much, or vice versa. There is no solution. We're stuck with this until a modern day Saladin comes in, crushes the Israeli state, and allows all faiths to worship to their invisible friend.

[Rasputin]

How do you propose solving the problem?
The only viable solution is a return to 1967 borders.
To role back the Zionist policies of ethnically cleansing Palestinian lands its not that difficult and not that different to how their allys in apartheid South Africa were crushed.
And that is of course economic sanctions that crush the state and the cutting of America's bank rolling of the Zionist regime.
But for that to occur there must be political will among the EU and America to actually curtail the injustices of Israel.
But that simply wont happen because in the wider socio-economic political context Israel is a key ally of America and the EU in a very valuable region.

And when I mean the problem, I mean the whole problem (basically as you've outlined). Would Israel rolling back to either the 67 or 74 boundaries keep the wider Middle Eastern world onside?
The wider Middle-Eastern world is onside with Israel, if by the wider Middle-Eastern world you mean the ruling regimes of the respective countrys.
Very few openly oppose Israel, in fact the vast majority of these ruling regimes are allys of Israel.
The only two Middle-Eastern countrys that I can think of that currently oppose Israels policies are Iran and Syria but it must be mentioned that Syria's rehtorric has mellowed signifcantly in the past few years as it comes into line with Americas political line, hence you no longer here the same calls to bomb Syria into oblivion that you did a few years ago.
The likes of Turkey for example has open military training in conjunction with the IDF or even when Israel started its illegal invasion of the Lebanon the reason for Hizbollah's popularity was that it did not bend its knee to Israel as the ruling elite in the Lebanon did.
This whole myth that Israel is under siege by a sea of raving Arabs is nonsense, the over whelming majority of ruling regimes in the Middle East are politically affiliated to Israel in one way or another.

If you accept that a certain percentage of the region see nothing short of total Jewish annilihation as acceptable, then there is no solution.
Of course there is raving anti-semites in the Middle East but to say that with this factor there can be no solution is wrong IMO.
Its like saying that Europeans cannot have diplomatic relations when there are a certain percentage of Europeans who are lunatic Anti-Semites.

I'm not being smart or anything, but the problems are so intractable its almost impossible to see a way out.
I dont agree.
Its fairly basic really.
The world powers helped facilitate a land grab off a people and planted foreigners that were politically affiliated with the super powers in that territory.
These planters continue to ethnically cleanse the native population in accordance with the Koenig Memorandum.
The planters actions against the native population could be curtailed by the super powers if they choose so and the political will is so.
The reactionary fanatcism that it has created in the a section of the native population is just that, a reaction to the context.
If the cause for the fanatcism is removed it shall eventually fizzle out and die.
Give the Palestinians a land free from Israeli occupation or Israeli interferance and let them move forward but it all depends on the likes of America and the EU.

[Neish]

Never ceases to amaze me how little empathy they have for other people's suffering given what their race was put through.

Thsi is one of the things that annoys me to most abot the actions of the Israelie state, theyhave always satated how they were a victimised people. yet they turn round and do the exact same to others

[Spudulika]

http://www.rte.ie/news/2010/0607/thomash.html

One of the best known and respected op-ed writers, and longest serving in the White House press corps, gets shafted for calling it as it is. It seems that making a truthful statement doesn't work in relatino to Israel. Never going to change.

[OneRedArmy]

http://www.rte.ie/news/2010/0607/thomash.html

One of the best known and respected op-ed writers, and longest serving in the White House press corps, gets shafted for calling it as it is. It seems that making a truthful statement doesn't work in relatino to Israel. Never going to change.I agree with everything she said, apart from telling the Jews to go back to Poland and Germany. I think that was a bit much to be honest.

That said, the whole anti-semitism thing has in the US been successfully (from their perspective) broadened by the Zionist movement into any critical statement of the Israeli state is decried as anti-semitic, which is quite patently ridiculous. Many Israeli jews disagree with the actions of successive Israeli governments.......are they anti-semitic?

[Spudulika]

ORA, it's a symptom of an overbearing set of governments who are determined to remove choice or dissent from the public. Same thing with any special interest group - travellers, africans, muslims, jews. We have to be very careful with all we say - offend mohammed and you're under a fatwa, question african governments and you're racist, question Israeli actions and you're anti-semite, point out to Irish travellers that they are not a distinct ethnic group but just Irish and Pavee Point are down your throat. In the same way as debate on immigration is stifled in Ireland, all issues that will hold the government up to a moral/active light, are buried by media outrage. And then it's left for Joe to pick up the slack on Livewhine.

[Rasputin]

ORA, it's a symptom of an overbearing set of governments who are determined to remove choice or dissent from the public. Same thing with any special interest group - travellers, africans, muslims, jews. We have to be very careful with all we say - offend mohammed and you're under a fatwa, question african governments and you're racist, question Israeli actions and you're anti-semite, point out to Irish travellers that they are not a distinct ethnic group but just Irish and Pavee Point are down your throat. In the same way as debate on immigration is stifled in Ireland, all issues that will hold the government up to a moral/active light, are buried by media outrage. And then it's left for Joe to pick up the slack on Livewhine.
Really gobsmacked you can compare the Zionist lobby to Pavee Point.

[SkStu]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/10311653.stm

Israel reject UN proposal for international inquiry and instead propose to set up their own investigation. Somehow heralded by the US as "an inportant step forward", it would appear, from his comments, that Netanyahu has already determined what the result of the inquiry will be.

It is being rightly ridiculed. What a pathetic sham and to be frank, the USA needs to grow a pair.




Three-man panel
Headed by ex-Supreme Court judge Yaakov Tirkel
Other members: Amos Horev, a retired military officer; and Shabtai Rosen, a professor of international law
Two foreign observers: David Trimble and Ken Watkin
Will consider how nine Turkish activists died after their ship was boarded by Israeli commandos
Will also adjudge whether Israel's naval blockade of Gaza is allowed under international law

[Spudulika]

Really gobsmacked you can compare the Zionist lobby to Pavee Point.

When the headers back in the 1890's when the British Israelites were over ripping up the Hill of Tara to find the Ark of the Covenant, one of their claims was that the Irish gypsy/traveller was actually a pureblood jew who had wandered from the "homeland" to the westernmost shores of Europe. They provided acres of evidence of this from fairs, rites, festivals etc. So it's not too great a leap :-) Both sides makes claims that have little basis, and both claim racism when you question their standpoints.

Very good reaction piece to the diplomat expulsion - I particularly love the line:

One Israeli official responded to Martin’s comment by saying, “If and when Ireland will come to face a cruel enemy dedicated to its total obliteration by all means, only then will there be any moral authority to the preaching coming out of Dublin.”
em, yes, someone needs to open an ould history book!
http://www.jpost.com/International/Article.aspx?id=178570

[Docboy]

That's what you're dealing with folks: "you wouldn't understand". The thing is that most of us have fairly good understanding if the sense that by acting they way Isreal are they are only ensuring that the threat against their state will continue long into the next generation. Amazing how these hardliners can never see the error of their ways.

[Spudulika]

That's what you're dealing with folks: "you wouldn't understand". The thing is that most of us have fairly good understanding if the sense that by acting they way Isreal are they are only ensuring that the threat against their state will continue long into the next generation. Amazing how these hardliners can never see the error of their ways.

http://www.independent.ie/opinion/columnists/kevin-myers/kevin-myers-there-is-little-freedom-of-speech-on-subject-of-israel-2220558.html

Sometimes it can be hard to take alot of what KM takes fully seriously as he is a polemicist and has his tongue firmly in cheek. However this is pretty straightforward and blunt - and he's been hammered for it already. He specifically states that there is no correlation between anti-zionist and anti-semite, yet I heard on the radio yesterday afternoon some num calling him a racist and anti-semite. This was from the jewish side, and just a couple of months ago he was attacked (verbally) by the Irish Islamic something or other for being anti-Islamic. Before that he was anti-Catholic, and even when he slagged off some vicars for being two-faced, anti-Protestant. Apparently you can't call into question people's behaviour or actions without offending some sort of interest group. And only yesterday I read (and now cannot find) about Irish travellers being made an ethnic group! Holy cow, I mean, come on! Surely the first ethnic group are Dubs, followed by Dulchies, followed by Culchies, and then the ethnic subgroups - Corkonians, Wicklowites etc. Just gets worse and worse!

[dahamsta]

Sometimes? Always. He's not a racist, or an anti-semite, he's quite simply a self-promoting troll.

[Spudulika]

Sometimes? Always. He's not a racist, or an anti-semite, he's quite simply a self-promoting troll.

Like I said he's a polemicist - in person he is a much different proposition to his columns and occasional tv jaunts. Of course he's self-promoting, same as almost any columnist or journalist, though he does have the ability to own up to mistakes. It's always a fine line between wanting to deck him and shake his hand!

[dahamsta]

I'd never shake Myers' hand. He's scum, simple as.

[Rasputin]

When the headers back in the 1890's when the British Israelites were over ripping up the Hill of Tara to find the Ark of the Covenant, one of their claims was that the Irish gypsy/traveller was actually a pureblood jew who had wandered from the "homeland" to the westernmost shores of Europe. They provided acres of evidence of this from fairs, rites, festivals etc. So it's not too great a leap :-)
Thats actually fascinating, never even heard of that before.
You wouldnt have any links on that?

Both sides makes claims that have little basis, and both claim racism when you question their standpoints.Totally different contexts, I think bringing the traveller question into the Israel/Palestine discussion only contributes to muddying the water even further.


Amazing how these hardliners can never see the error of their ways.
Thats taking the Israelis at face value when they claim their actions are in self defence etc.
But what we must look at is the full context of the Israel/Palestine question since the 1920's/1930's.
What is happening is a systematic campaign of ethnic cleansing.
These plans were drafted in plan "Dalet" and have continued to this day.
For anyone under any doubt read Ilan Pappe's great work, "The Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine".
And before someone chimes in with the crys of Anti-Semitism and all that nonsense, Ilan Pappe is actually Jewish and a quite principled critic of Israeli policy.

[Spudulika]

Thats actually fascinating, never even heard of that before.
You wouldnt have any links on that?
Totally different contexts, I think bringing the traveller question into the Israel/Palestine discussion only contributes to muddying the water even further.

Fair point on muddying the waters, I was drawing parallels on the matters of freedom of speech - when freedom of speech comes with caveats attached - ie Thou shalt not slag off Mohammed, Thou shalt not question Israeli government policy - they're the only democracy in town don't you know, Thou shalt not question why Irish Travellers can be termed a separate ethnic group etc.

The best I can do, on short notice, in relation to the Hill of Tara is this weak effort from Wikipedia. With an addition that in the majority of ancient sites Irish travellers had a tradition of staging fairs (the locals too), hence the rather spurious link the British Israelites made between Travellers and Wandering Jews - this all goes back to the age of romance when whole nonense and lie about Celts in Ireland came into vogue. It was no leap of the imagination that it again came into vogue in the early 1990's and "I Keltoi" when the EEC/EC then EU were trying to push a lovely hippy version of European unity - Napoleon, Hitler or the Romans wouldn't make a good template - so better to use the first, and this is true, "proto-Europeans" as the original EU. Anyway, the theory about the Ark of the Covenant, the lost tribe of Israel etc all came to a crashing end when, by local history, the Irish travellers borrowed some items from the tourists and failed to return them.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hill_of_Tara#Ancient_monuments - point at the bottom of this section

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Israelism

[peadar1987]

I think a two state solution is the only fair model. The 1947 boundaries, with Jerusalem a special, secular, UN-controlled zone. Any military action to change the borders, from either side, will result in military force being used to restore the borders.