web analytics

FINALLY FACING MY WATERLOO

By Patrick Van Roy On May 11th, 2019

guest post by Paul McMahon

The Eurovision Song Contest, that annual fest of over the top campiness and bad taste, has long been something of a tradition in the McMahon household. For more than two decades we have gathered each year as a family in a week in May in front of the TV armed with ice cream, chocolate, bags of sweets, (and maybe a can or two of beer for Daddy), and marvelled and laughed at the big hair, the shoulder pads, the glitz and grease paint, the exaggerated kitschiness and of course fascinated at the reflective micro politics of Eurovision voting.

But not this year .

This year, as it was in 1979 and 1999, the Eurovision Song Contest will be held in Israel. Wait! I hear you shout, how can Eurovision be held in Israel when Israel itself is in the Levant region of Western Asia? A good question I reply, my only explanation is that many of Israel’s inhabitants are actually European or are descended from European immigration to Israel in the wake of WWII.

There has been a fairly active but ultimately unsuccessful campaign  in Ireland, supported by many in the Irish arts sector including a former Eurovision winner,  to get Ireland to boycott the contest.

Which has led my children, two here with us, one in Budapest and one in Amman yet still regularly in contact with each other and with us, to collectively come to the decision that generally, but particularly in the wake of Netanyahu’s electoral promise of even more expansionism and annexation of land, that they can’t in all good conscience take part in the tradition this year either in reality or on Skype. And you know what? They are absolutely correct and I’m bloody well proud of them for it.

Now I know that there’s some debate around boycotts but for me they’re the ultimate in personal freedom and choice. Don’t like or agree with something? Withdraw your personal support for it.  Don’t agree with boycotts? Easy, don’t boycott. Simples. Incidentally, in a wonderfully poetic touch the Irish, with their instinctive opposition to injustice and their natural affinity with the underdog. The nation who invented the concept of the boycott, have organised an alternative to Eurovision in Dublin’s National Stadium on the same night. Some of Ireland’s famous musicians will take to the stage with all proceeds being donated to  the Middle East Children’s Alliance.

So there you have it, I feel the death knell is sounding for a casa McMahon family tradition as once the chain is broken I fear it ever will be repaired. I do however hope that when my children become parents themselves then the tradition can be reborn with three generations instead of two. The disrupting of this family tradition has brought some marvellous memories throughout the years flooding back full of love, smiles, laughter and warmth tinged with the sadness that as young men must become middle aged so must children in turn become adults along with the accompanying loss of childhood innocence,  insulation and wonder as life inevitably moves forward.

In the misquoted lyrics of the 1974 Eurovision winner:

My my. I tried to hold it back but it was stronger

318 Responses to “FINALLY FACING MY WATERLOO”

  1. Great post Paul. Nice balance of political polemic, family warmth and ‘guilty pleasure’ entertainment choice.

    I bet you will still watch at least some of Eurovision though. It’s impossible not to at least peak at some of the long night of tacky cheap eurotrash 🇪🇺😉

  2. Thank you Colm. As always many thanks to you too Pat.

    I have to admit that the (deliberately) kitsch, tackiness and bad taste is difficult to resist. This should have won it in 2013:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_AfrOZersNk

  3. Colbert does Eurovision

    https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=CTP17rWuUMo

  4. anytime, sorry didn’t get it up yesterday but festivities came first.

  5. anytime, sorry didn’t get it up yesterday…

    We don’t really need to know about your sex life Patrick 🙂

  6. //Now I know that there’s some debate around boycotts //

    A boycott would send the right signal. But unfortunately in this case a boycott would affect most precisely the people in Israel who tend to reject the country’s ethno-racist ethos.
    The illegal settlers, Bibi and his right-wing friends are the kind of spoilt children who tend to dig in deeper when they encounter criticism from outside.

    It’s a difficult one to call. The best would be for all countries to go and make a point of showing their distaste for Israeli Lebensraum and related policies.

  7. In all honesty I think boycotting Eurovision this year because it is being held in Israel is pointless as well as being completely ineffective. It also is the wrong target whatever you think of Israeli policies. Eurovision is only being held in Israel because their contestant won last year. It is not an Israeli construct. It belongs to no country. It is purely a location this year. Boycott Israeli products or business/commerce entities all you want, but if you like watching Eurovision , watch it and enjoy it, wherever it happens to be this year. Its a harmless piece of frivolous fun and should remain thatw ay.

  8. // Eurovision is only being held in Israel because their contestant won last year. It is not an Israeli construct.//

    The Olympics aren’t a Soviet product, yet the Moscow Olympics were boycotted by the west after the SU invaded Afghanistan.

  9. I rarely watch it anymore. Ireland as the “Brazil” of the Eurovision should automatically get into the final over all the new makey-uppy eastern countries.

    And wasnt Australia in it last year?

    Johnny Logan must be turning in his grave.

  10. I think there is an enormous difference between the worlds biggest sports contest which is awarded to countries following international competition and which acts as a showcase for a country’s comprehensive organisational abilities and prowess and a one night only light hearted singing show.

    The Olympics is a hugely prestigious political prize. Eurovision is not. Boycotting Eurovision will effect the policies of the Israeli govt not one micromillimetre. An Olympic boycott is an appropriately serious action. Choosing politically not to watch largely dreadful singers screeching badly written songs trying to outcamp each other brings political seriousness where it just isn’t welcome 🙂

  11. //prowess and a one night only light hearted singing show. An Olympic boycott is an appropriately serious action. //

    Your objection to a Eurovision boycott seems to be that it won’t hurt enough. OK.

    And as for prowess…. boy, did you not see Netta (pictured above) doing her thing on stage last year and singing of her “Toy”?

  12. Well if you want to talk about prowess.. I’m your man 🙂

  13. “Johnny Logan must be turning in his grave.”

    I’m pretty sure Johnny Logan is still alive.

  14. He might be breathing but I don’t think his career is !

  15. ….. which I think is the point MourneReg was making !

  16. Israel has been in the Eurovision for decades, so they have every right to hold the contest. I understand the case for a boycott, but where would it end? If France wins, should it be boycotted next year because of the brutality of its police against the Gillet Jaunes? Should Italy be boycotted because it has a right-wing racist as deputy prime minister? Should Hungary be boycotted because of Orban’s racism and corruption?

  17. Or Belgium because it is such a boring country 😉

  18. No Colm, Belgium is two boring countries pretending to be one boring country. The Flemings and Waloons speak different languages, vote for different political parties and live in different areas. Brussels is the only part of the country where they are mixed.

  19. Well yes, I suppose there had to be something interesting about Belgium Peter 🙂

  20. When France, Italy and Hungary create a de facto apartheid structure then yes they should be boycotted. Until then the comparison with Israel is silly. If boycotts were an acceptable tactic against Apartheid South Africa, why are they not acceptable against Hafrada Israel?

  21. In all honesty I have nothing against Belgium apart from the fact that at Christmas their capital city forces us to eat their sprouts… uugh, enough to almost turn me into a Brexiteer 🙂

  22. Seamus

    My point is Eurovision is too precious and wonderful to be damaged by Boycotts, no matter what the cause 😉

  23. //When France, Italy and Hungary create a de facto apartheid structure//

    or invade a neighbouring country, colonise it and treat its people like second-class citizens in their own homeland.

  24. Until then the comparison with Israel is silly.

    I wasn’t comparing them. I did say that I understand the case for a boycott of Israel, but there could also be cases for boycotting other countries, for different reasons.

  25. And if other people want to do that then they are welcome to do so. Ultimately, at its heart, a boycott is a form of non-violent protest. It is the sort of thing that should be encouraged, not discouraged.

  26. He looked dead last time he was on the telly.

    Anyway, what is the British obsession with describing Belgium as “boring”? Ethnic tension, some of the bloodiest battlefields in history, beautiful towns/cities, great chocolate and probably the best beer in the world.

  27. Good points MR 🙂

  28. Ethnic tension, some of the bloodiest battlefields in history, beautiful towns/cities, great chocolate and probably the best beer in the world.

    Yes but they still seem to do all that in such a boring way 😉

  29. “The history of Belgium extends before the founding of the modern state of that name in 1830. Belgium’s history is therefore intertwined with those of its neighbours: the Netherlands, Germany, France and Luxembourg. For most of its history, what is now Belgium was either a part of a larger territory, such as the Carolingian Empire, or divided into a number of smaller states, prominent among them being the Duchy of Brabant, the County of Flanders, the Prince-Bishopric of Liège and County of Luxembourg. Due to its strategic location and the many armies fighting on its soil, since the Thirty Years’ War (1618–1648), Belgium has often been called the “battlefield of Europe” or the “cockpit of Europe”.[1] It is also remarkable as a European nation which contains, and is divided by, a language boundary between Latin-derived French and Germanic Dutch…

    Politically the country was once polarized on matters of religion and, in recent decades, it has faced new divisions over differences of language and unequal economic development. This ongoing antagonism has caused far-reaching reforms since the 1970s, changing the formerly unitary Belgian state into a federal state, and repeated governmental crises. It is now divided into three regions: Flanders (Dutch-speaking) in the north, Wallonia (French-speaking) in the south, and bilingual Brussels in the middle. There is also a German-speaking population along the border with Germany that was granted to Prussia in the Congress of Vienna in 1815 but added to Belgium following the 1919 Treaty of Versailles following World War I. German is the third official language of Belgium. ”

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Belgium

  30. Are you trying to put us to sleep Peter 😉

  31. This song would have won Eurovision in 1825:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0I6Uc54HwDs

  32. there’s only one song for this post…. where’s david

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sj_9CiNkkn4

  33. Peter here’s a headline just for you…… damn murdering environmentalist

    Cleaner New York waterways are causing surge in beached whales

    Cleaner waterways in New York City have attracted more sea life, including seals, dolphins, whales, and sharks in bigger numbers than seen in a century.

    Sadly, many don’t survive the trip — there are also more mammals washing ashore or getting stranded.

    Cases of beached whales have surged statewide, from 22 in 2009-2013 to 41

    https://nypost.com/2019/05/11/cleaner-new-york-waterways-are-causing-surge-in-beached-whales/

  34. Boycotts can work but ultimately it’s a form of personal protest. For example, I try not to buy Israeli produce. It may not have a huge effect on the Israeli economy but my conscience is clear.

    And probably the best beer in the world

    As a beer lover I could never see the attraction Reg.

  35. There is such a thing as a reverse boycott

    I will grab a small box of Jaffa oranges whenever I see them for sale

  36. I wonder are there any Iranian oranges in the supermarket. Must check.

  37. Well done Phantom.

    I have personally boycotted meat for 35 years.

  38. Do the people who boycott Israeli products boycott products from other countries? I think I know the answer but I’m curious if they would cop to the answer.

  39. There is such a thing as a reverse boycott

    Absolutely there is which, as in a boycott, is your personal choice.

    Which countries are you referring to Mahons? Like Israeli produce I try not to buy Chinese however it’s not always possible.

  40. I refer to none. My question was for those who boycott Israeli products what other countries do they boycott.

  41. Mahons, on May 12th, 2019 at 10:55 PM Said:

    I refer to none. My question was for those who boycott Israeli products what other countries do they boycott.

    Those who ask this have misunderstood a very basic fact about BDS: it’s a tactic, not a value. Boycott is used selectively where it might highlight injustice / change behavior.

    What better question is: what peaceful methods are the Palestinians permitted to use in order to resist the occupation? Strongly worded letters to Netanyahu?

  42. Palestinians are free to use all peaceful methods, though of courservice they are forbidden from doing so against their own leadership. Oh, all tactics are values.

  43. The Israeli Muslims have increased in population

    What about the Jews and Christians of Arabia? How are they doing?

  44. they are the subjects of genocide

  45. What about the Jews and Christians of Arabia? How are they doing?

    What about them? If you’re suggesting that Israel shouldn’t be boycotted because Christians are being persecuted in other countries I can’t see the correlation.

  46. Good post Paul. Thanks.

  47. Cheers Dave. Much appreciated.

  48. //The Israeli Muslims have increased in population //

    So what? The blacks in apartheid South Africa and Catholics in sectarian NI up to 1972 also increased disproportionately in population.

    Apart from the fact that you’re starting from a low base, as Israeli Muslims showed a very sharp decline when the state of Israel was founded and about 1 million of them (half the population) were ethnic cleansed, 500 of their villages sacked and their economy and way of life wiped out, the argument also suggests that the prosperity of a people can be measured according to the number of children they have. Common sense, however, suggests the opposite. Otherwise Niger and Liberia would be topping all those Happiest People on Earth polls.

  49. If you recycle only one type of bottle and not all bottles are you truly concerned about the environment?

  50. That’s what I thought you were trying to get at with your prevous comment Mahons. A fundamentally flawed analogy.

    The legitimacy of boycot A isn’t dependent on boycot B. For example, I may disagree with the Turkish occupation of Northern Cyprus but it’s not analogous with Isreal as the Turks aren’t constantly seeking to expand their land mass, (as per Netanyahu’s electoral promises), or occasionally carpet bombing Greek Cypriot villages.

  51. Noel

    The Arab and Iranian Muslims are generally worse than genocidal to their religious minorities.

    They tend to extermination of Jews, Christians and Bahais time and again.

    But let’s not boycott Iran, Egypt, or Saudi Arabia let’s single out the one small Jewish state for boycotts and condemnation

  52. You don’t boycott countries with better records than Israel or countries with worse records. That is what I was getting at.

  53. I’ve said previously Mahons, I try not to buy Israeli of Chinese produce although in the case of China it’s more difficult because of the ubiquitousness of their products.

    But let’s not boycott Iran, Egypt, or Saudi Arabia let’s single out the one small Jewish state for boycotts and condemnation

    AFAIK I don’t use any produce, with maybe the exception of oil from SA, from any of those countries listed although I don’t think that someone who concisouly supports brutal expansionism by purposefully buying Israeli produce is in a position to complain?

  54. My concern with the boycott of Israel is that it’s origins predated the existence of the State of Israel. And that many of its advocates are opposed to not merely Israel’s transgressions but it’s existence. At the same time many of its adherents not only fail to take measures against the enemit’s of Israel they don’t even acknowledge the transgressions of those enemies.

  55. //But let’s not boycott Iran, Egypt, or Saudi Arabia….//

    There used to be boycotts of South Africa and Rhodesia. Trump is trying to boycott Iran and also trying to force the world to join in the boycott.

    The fact is that the weapon used depends on the situation and the target.
    Israel (like old SA, Rh etc) is simply within the western sphere.

    The country was set up by Europeans, primarily as a place for Europeans to live and as an assumed remedy for a primarily European disaster. Being part of the family, it is within the range of our influence.

    It’s biggest benefactor is the US and its biggest customer is the EU. It also gets massive political and material support from the west in many forms, especially military. It is in short our baby, we are in many ways infinitely more responsible for Israel than we could ever be for Iran.

    I don’t believe you’re genuinely unable to see these obvious facts, preferring to sniff around for early signs of anti-semitism among Lefties etc.

    Israel claims to have a political and moral standard equal to the west. But it massively discriminates against people based on their religion, it started a war of conquest and then drove out some of the native population and puts the most absurd pressure on the rest:
    building housing estates where they may not live, roads that they may not use, wells that they may not draw water from and then shoots youths dead when they riot in protest.
    It welcomes as fellow citizen any Ivan Ivanovich with a distant Jewish relative, or sometimes not even that, yet people who were born and brought up there and who lived and owned property there were driven out, their property stolen and are not allowed return. All because they are the wrong religion.

    The old Stormont regime in NI was a model of tolerance and pluralism compared to Israel’s treatment of the Palestinians. But you constantly condemn the one while supporting the other.
    Only in America, as the man said.

  56. “The Israeli Muslims have increased in population”

    In 1945 Jews made up 31% of what was Mandatory Palestine (what is today Israel, Gaza and the West Bank). Today they make up 54% of the same. In 1945 Palestinian Muslims made up 60% of Mandatory Palestine. Today they make up 44%. In 1945 Palestinian Christians made up 8% of Mandatory Palestine. Today they make up 2%.

  57. I’m unaware of the origins of the Boycott predating the existence of the state of Israel however it’s largely a moot point as I’m only naswerable for my personal actions. In terms of the existence of the state, I think it was an injustice foisted on those who lived there but see it as a fait accompli, existing before I existed.

    That doesn’t mean that I have to agree with its second class treatment of some of its citizens, its overkill, its brutality and its expansionism.

    There used to be boycotts of South Africa and Rhodesia.

    Indeed there did Noel. The legend ‘Armoured Cars & Tanks & Dunnes’ in the campaign to stop Dunnes Stores stocking SA produce was a personal favourite.

  58. Right on cue:

    https://english.palinfo.com/news/2019/5/12/settlers-start-to-establish-new-outpost-east-of-nablus

  59. I’m not suprised your unaware of its origins. I’m also not suprised you begrudgingly accept it’s existence (or do you).
    As I’ve indicated the boycott is a weapon, applied selectively by many of Israel’s opponents who standard seems less that Israel stop some practice or retreat to some border, but rather that it no longer exist.

  60. Selective morality is no morality at all.

  61. I’m not suprised your unaware of its origins. I’m also not suprised you begrudgingly accept it’s existence (or do you).

    You’ve got the opportunity to teach me then although I’m at a bit of a loss in understanding how you can boycott a state or its produce when the state doesn’t exist? I accept the exisentance of Israel as a reality, begrudgingly or otherwise, that doesn’t mean that I have to like the fact. Do you doubt the sincerity of this? One of the things I have always been when commenting here is honest. I wear my politics on my sleeve and if yo ask me my position on a subject I will give it to you and then explain why I hold such a position.

    This honesty has led me to get a fair bit of flack here.

    Selective morality is no morality at all.

    Selective morality? Where did you get that one from? I’m unaware of any selective morality that I practice but if yo wish to provide me with examples I’ll happily look into them, (although I don’t think you will).

  62. I’m unaware of any selective morality that I practice

    That’s correct.

  63. But if you wish to provide me with examples I’ll happily look into them

    Go for it then. Or perhaps you’re unaware of it too?

  64. boycotts are the yuppies idea of protest. They mean nothing except to show that the person engaging in them is a sheep and nothing more. The israel one is the sleaziest because it’s two fold or actually two faced. You boycott Israel and say it’s for the pallies or some political stance or another when the truth is it just means you hate jews.

    An inbred almost natural state of mankind for all of recorded history this hate against the jew.

    As long as the US exists Israel will exist.

    and we enjoy the fact that it annoys the rest of the world 😉

  65. You boycott Israel and say it’s for the pallies or some political stance or another when the truth is it just means you hate jews.

    The Zionist equivalent of Islamophobia.

    I’m a born and bred working class man Pat. How would you suggest I protest?

  66. Arab boycotts of Jewish businesses there started in the 1920s, and the Arab League advocated boycotting Israel before it was formally established. It is an economic weapon not for justice but for eradication.

  67. I disagree Patrick. Boycotts can be legitimate forms of expression and protest. I also don’t see all who advocate boycotts of Israel as anti-semites.

  68. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazi_boycott_of_Jewish_businesses

    https://encyclopedia.ushmm.org/content/en/article/the-boycott-of-jewish-businesses

    Nothing new under the sun on this one, boys

  69. Surely a boycott Is just a decision not to purchase a goods/service for a reason of your own choice. People can’t be made to buy something they don’t wish too.

  70. Arab boycotts of Jewish businesses there started in the 1920s

    So it was against Jewish businesses as opposed to the state of Israel founded some twenty years later? Okay then?

    It is an economic weapon not for justice but for eradication.

    So, if you disagree with something and withdraw your financial support for it you’re actually advocating extermination rather than peaceful protest? Strange way to go about genocide.

  71. See the earlier version of BDS in Germany

  72. Oh no! Phantom said the Nazis boycotted Jewish bussinesses. Whatever could he be trying to imply?

  73. BDS 1.0 isn’t the same as BDS 2.0 but both are disgusting.

  74. Paul – the origins of the boycott go back to when it was against Jews on the yest established Jewish state and transitioned to Israel once it was established.

  75. Oh no! Phantom said the Nazis were BDS1. Whatever could he be trying to imply?

    Poor and ridiculous in equal measure.

  76. So if you were opposed to Apartheid South Africa and boycotted them because of it – you are pretty much a Nazi?

  77. BDS 2.0 has a smiley face, but it’s bad too.

  78. Paul – the origins of the boycott go back to when it was against Jews on the yest established Jewish state and transitioned to Israel once it was established

    Anything I can find says the AL boycott started in 1945 against the suggested formation of the state of Israel.

  79. Phantom. I try not to buy Israeli goods. Am I a bad person?

    (BTW, there is only one BDS campaign. Nice try with the historical attempted slr though)

  80. The BDS campaign is specifically aimed at Israel. The Nazi boycott was specifically aimed at Jews. Are you suggesting that the BDS campaign advocate boycotting Jewish goods in their entirety, and not just Israeli goods?

  81. Paul – at what point would you cease participating in a boycott of Israel? If your answer is the same as some Arab organizations – when it no longer exists – how persuasive do you think the movement is?

  82. I’ve given my opinions here before if you want I can repeat them but a good start would be when it’s completely desists from settlement expansion as a show of good faith.

  83. BDS 1.0 wanted all Jews to be dead.

    BDS 2.0 wants them to be scattered and stateless.

    There’s not a lot to choose from, bro.

  84. BDS1 didn’t exist. It was Nazi genocide based on racial superiority.

    A cheap attempted slur at a legitimateform form of peaceful protest.

    …..bro.

  85. “BDS 2.0 wants them to be scattered and stateless.”

    Actually BDS wants:

    “Ending its occupation and colonization of all Arab lands and dismantling the Wall”

    “Recognizing the fundamental rights of the Arab-Palestinian citizens of Israel to full equality”

    “Respecting, protecting and promoting the rights of Palestinian refugees to return to their homes and properties as stipulated in UN Resolution 194”.

    So:

    1. The withdrawal and ending of military occupation by Israel of the West Bank, East Jerusalem, Gaza and the Syrian Golan Heights.

    2. The removal of any laws or barriers to full citizenship that the Arab citizens of Israel currently face.

    3. The right of Palestinians who were ethnically cleansed from the Holy Land to return to their homes.

    What is unreasonable about that?

  86. It requires all that without any commitment or concessionsfrom Arab States and/or Palestinians?

  87. What concessions would you suggest an oppressed people can give?

  88. From Phantom’s link

    the Nazi racist criteria codified in the Nuremberg Laws of 1935 and subsequent ordinances identified Jews according to the religion practiced by an individual’s grandparents.

    Whereas the Israeli classification:

    The rights of a Jew under this Law and the rights of an (immigrant) under the Nationality Law, (5712–1952), as well as the rights of an (immigrant) under any other enactment, are also vested in a child and a grandchild of a Jew, the spouse of a Jew, the spouse of a child of a Jew and the spouse of a grandchild of a Jew

    So, speaking of Nazi parallels…….

  89. Oh stop murderous incursions, terrorist acts, accept some territorial concessions, scheduling as to potential returns etc. Be a good start.

  90. I thought you asked me my opinions as to what would make me cease participating in a boycott of Israel Mahons?

  91. “Oh stop murderous incursions, terrorist acts, accept some territorial concessions, scheduling as to potential returns etc. Be a good start.”

    Maybe if Israel didn’t illegally occupy their country then they wouldn’t engage in murderous incursions or terrorists acts.

    And why should they accept territorial concessions?

  92. I did Paul. You answered. I was clarifying if your answer required them to do so unilaterally. Personally I think they should unilaterally end the building of settlements.

  93. Seamus – let me answer your last question first, because they have to.
    If you don’t have a ceasefire you won’t get peace.

  94. “Seamus – let me answer your last question first, because they have to”

    If a mugger steals your wallet you have to give it to them to stop them stabbing you. They are still the one morally in the wrong. Israel is the mugger.

  95. For me to end the boycott the first stop in a process would be the immediate halting of settlement expansion in the occupied territories. I personally don’t see how Palestinians could bilaterally reciprocate.

    Personally I think they should unilaterally end the building of settlements.

    A welcome and fair comment.

  96. //Personally I think they should unilaterally end the building of settlements.//

    The whole point of the settlements has been to colonise Palestine and divide any likely Palestinian state so much that it could never function. Any “territorial concessions” the Palestinians could make wouldn’t alter this fundamental policy.

    The Palestinians have in fact been deprived of their land and asked/forced to make territorial concessions from the very start. The original partition of Palestine gave the Arabs much less and the Israelis much more territory that their numbers warranted. Later Israel got even more territory, until in the 67 war it seized what was left of Palestine.
    It has been a clear demonstration of might-is-right from the start. The Israelis had the money and the military power and the backing of the west and they used all three in pursuit of their mad Blut-und-Boden dream.

    But those dreams tend to turn out badly. Even if one were to ignore completely the plight of the Palestinians and have only Israelis interests at heart, this insane ethnic expansion will one way or the other have very serious consequences for Israel one way or the other. That has been true in almost other similar ventures in recent history, and is all the more true today when technology remembers and the world will not look away. A society based on racial supremacy is sick and will ultimately destroy itself. This is already recognised by best people in Israel today.

    The Israeli right may feel cock-a-hoop with the US and all its military technology behind them and the Palestinians on their knees. But that situation won’t last forever.

  97. Seamus – your analogy is absurd.

  98. The plight of the Palestinians includes other Palestinians. And other Arab nations.

  99. “Seamus – your analogy is absurd.”

    How is it absurd? The Israelis murder Palestinians in their droves. And your response is that the Palestinians should given in and give Israel what it wants (which is the ethnic cleansing and annexation of the Reichskommissariat Judea und Samaria) just to get Israel to stop murdering the Palestinians in their droves.

  100. Israel doesn’t murder Palestinians in their droves.
    My response is not what you claim it is. My response is that the Palestine will have to make concessions to their claims if they want peace. It is how a negotiated settlement works.

  101. “Israel doesn’t murder Palestinians in their droves.”

    Israel murdered at least 290 Palestinians in 2018 alone, of whom at least 56 were children. What do you call that?

    “My response is not what you claim it is. My response is that the Palestine will have to make concessions to their claims if they want peace. It is how a negotiated settlement works.”

    The concession is an end to armed resistance.

  102. The concession was an end to terrorist attacks and a cease fire.

  103. Israel has come up many times over the years.

    It’s critics here have never expressed the slightest sympathy for any Israeli/Jewish cause, including the Jewish desire for a national homeland.

    Apparently, just about every people has a right to a state of their own –except one.

    Why is that?

  104. That is Palestine’s concession. Israel stops illegally occupying and ethnically cleansing Palestinian lands, and Palestine stops resisting that occupation.

  105. They have a right to a homeland, Phantom. That right does not come at the expense of Palestinians though. Israel should withdraw to the 1967 borders. That is an acceptable compromise.

  106. Killed and murdered are two different things.

  107. “Killed and murdered are two different things.”

    True. So those 56 children were asking for it?

  108. Israel doesn’t murder Palestinians in their droves

    It killed 1,492 civilians in Gaza in 2014?

    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/mar/27/israel-kills-more-palestinians-2014-than-any-other-year-since-1967

    Apparently, just about every people has a right to a state of their own –except one

    More sophistry. The fact that they killed, dispossessed and then brutalised a people in their quest for a homeland is the issue in question. Why was their homeland nor established in somewhere like Alaska?

  109. I’ve never made such a claim Seamus. I can tell you they didn’t ask to have Palestinian military embedded in their schools, hospitals and residences.

  110. And when Israel used live rounds to disperse crowds in Gaza? What would you call that?

  111. Paul – Again in combat people are killed especially urban combat. Alaska doesn’t have the same historical tie to the Jewish people that Israel has.

  112. Lead poisoning (sarcasm light on).

  113. I don’t think Israel should use live rounds if they are merely dispersing a crowd. I think such a practice is properly condemned.

  114. We are talking about a illegal occupier murdering children. Maybe not the time to be sarcastic just because you can’t formulate an adequate response.

  115. “I don’t think Israel should use live rounds if they are merely dispersing a crowd. I think such a practice is properly condemned.”

    And would you call it murder?

  116. No, you are talking about it as if it were true. As if the facts supported your claims of murder.

  117. “No, you are talking about it as if it were true. As if the facts supported your claims of murder.”

    Are you saying Israel didn’t use live rounds to disperse crowds?

  118. It depends on the facts, firing live rounds into an otherwise peaceful March might very well be murder. Would you call any terrorist act against Israelis murder?

  119. You’ve labeled every Palestinian death murder. The facts don’t support that.

  120. “You’ve labeled every Palestinian death murder. The facts don’t support that.”

    To quote you “I’ve never made such a claim”.

    “It depends on the facts, firing live rounds into an otherwise peaceful March might very well be murder.”

    And a march that showed no risk to life to anyone, peaceful or otherwise? A march where people were for example throwing stones? Would that be murder?

    “Would you call any terrorist act against Israelis murder?”

    Some of them? Sure. Others no. It would depend on the situation.

  121. The land of Israel Is the historic home of the Jewish people

    You guys really don’t know that?

  122. “The land of Israel Is the historic home of the Jewish people”

    Bully for them. The land of Palestine is the historic home of the Palestinian people. And it is Palestine that is being illegally occupied, not Israel.

  123. Seamus you said Israel murdered 290 Palestinians. Are you stepping back from that claim. Cause I quoted your claim correctly.

    As for stone throwing I believe that live rounds are justifiable in response. I think live rounds to disperse rioters is a valid response, and certainly not murder.

  124. “As for stone throwing I believe that live rounds are justifiable in response. I think live rounds to disperse rioters is a valid response, and certainly not murder.”

    So much for proportional response.

    Considering that shooting children with stones is now justified no wonder you think Israel never murdered people.

    “Seamus you said Israel murdered 290 Palestinians.”

    At which point you said I “labeled every Palestinian death murder”. Considering that the Israelis have killed thousands over the course of the conflict then those two statements don’t line up.

    In the same way that technically you didn’t say that all children killed by the Israelis were asking for it – you certainly implied it. And then followed it up with your disgusting disregard for human life.

  125. Thrown stones are meant to cause bodily damage.

    You guys really don’t know that?

    Would you like it if somebody throw stones at you?

  126. I never wrote Israel “never murdered anyone” you have been arguing with an imaginary person. I wrote your claim that they murdered 290 people is not accurate.
    I never implied any child was asking to be killed.
    You Clas are not factually supported which is a nice way of saying they are false.

  127. “Thrown stones are meant to cause bodily damage.”

    So I take it any child in New York city with a stone in their hand should be summarily executed?

  128. “I never wrote Israel “never murdered anyone” you have been arguing with an imaginary person.”

    Ok. Do you accept that Israel have murdered people in the last year?

  129. Again Seamus you are setting forth arguments that have never been advanced by me. Try addressing the arguments I have made. I have never said a child anywhere should be shot for holding a stone. Stop making sit up.

  130. “I have never said a child anywhere should be shot for holding a stone. Stop making sit up.”

    You said “As for stone throwing I believe that live rounds are justifiable in response”. So which is it?

  131. Seamus

    Come off it

  132. People who bring their children to riots are not model parents.
    I will happily address any particular case as to whether Israeli actions constituted murder. We both know you don’t have 290 to offer.

  133. “Come off it”

    Answer the question. Should children in New York City who throw stones be executed? And if they shouldn’t be in New York City why should they be in Gaza?

  134. Mahons,

    Simply yes or no answer. Do you accept that Israel have murdered people in the last year?

  135. Holding a stone, perhaps at a worksite, is not the same as throwing one at someone’s head

    Holding a stone at a demonstration is a very bad idea

  136. Seamus – you are pretending riotING with stones is the same as holding a stone. You are approaching a level of intellectual dishonesty that is usually reserved for ATW’s right wing contingent.

  137. “Holding a stone, perhaps at a worksite, is not the same as throwing one at someone’s head”

    And considering that the Israeli snipers are in a different country altogether from the people, often times children, holding and throwing stones, then it is a bit of a nonsense to say they are throwing one at anyone’s head.

    None of the soldiers who murdered Palestinians on those days were in any risk of being hit by the stones, never mind harmed.

    “Holding a stone at a demonstration is a very bad idea”

    Do the NYPD fire live rounds at crowds of people if some of them are holding stones?

  138. I held a knife last night

    That doesn’t mean that I stabbed someone with it

  139. On what occasion in the last year? You said there were 290 examples. If you can name one I will happily agree or disagree but not in the abstract.

  140. “Seamus – you are pretending riotING with stones is the same as holding a stone. You are approaching a level of intellectual dishonesty that is usually reserved for ATW’s right wing contingent.”

    And you are pretending that murdering children is somehow a legitimate act.

  141. “If you can name one I will happily agree or disagree but not in the abstract.”

    When they fired live rounds to break up the demonstrations in Gaza last year.

  142. Why didn’t the IDF shoot these people?

    https://www.foxnews.com/world/israeli-police-23-officers-hurt-by-stone-throwing-settlers

  143. What were your friends doing at the “ demonstration “

    Please be precise

  144. Seamus – now you are simply lying in desperation. I’ve never said murdering children is a legitimate act.
    As for the NYPD they rarely use deadly force but are correctly authorized to do so in the event of a riot.

  145. They weren’t my friends. However, the independent investigation found:

    https://www.un.org/unispal/document/un-independent-commission-of-inquiry-on-protests-in-gaza-presents-its-findings-press-release/

    – Four Israeli soldiers were injured at the demonstrations;
    – 189 Palestinians were killed;
    – 35 were children – 1 of whom was a 2 year old toddler shot in the head (probably rioting, right lads?);
    – 3 were medical staff;
    – 2 were journalists;

    With the exception of one incident in North Gaza on 14 May that may have amounted to “direct participation in hostilities” and one incident in Central Gaza on 12 October that may have constituted an “imminent threat to life or serious injury” to the Israeli security forces, the commission found reasonable grounds to believe that, in all other cases, the use of live ammunition by Israeli security forces against demonstrators was unlawful.

    189 people killed. 2 were justified. So for the slow counters in the room that is 187 murders.

  146. The Gaza demonstrators were rioters. The use of deadly force against rioters was justified. As for the settlers the authorities would have been justified in using force.
    Now why not wave the white flag and admit you have no factual basis to claim 290 murders.

  147. ” I’ve never said murdering children is a legitimate act.”

    You are right you didn’t. It is why you are pretending that the murders of children aren’t murders.

  148. “Now why not wave the white flag and admit you have no factual basis to claim 290 murders.”

    I just found 187 in one look through Mahons. Give me time.

  149. “As for the settlers the authorities would have been justified in using force.”

    Yet didn’t use it. Why do you think they didn’t? What was different between the group they shoot in cold blood and the people they didn’t shoot?

  150. *Apologies. 181. The total dead was 183, of which 2 were justified.

  151. That isn’t remotely a finding of murder.

  152. “That isn’t remotely a finding of murder.”

    And for people who will bend over backwards to excuse the mass slaughter by the Israeli state – nothing ever will be enough for a finding of murder.

  153. You didn’t find murders, you found UN pablum.

  154. I’m merely holding you to the facts.

  155. “You didn’t find murders, you found UN pablum.”

    Independent investigators – rather than the IDF’s Widgery.

  156. “I’m merely holding you to the facts.”

    No. You are trying to obfuscate in an effort to excuse mass slaughter. And when you were presented with facts you play the man not the ball.

    Lethal force can only be acceptable when there is a real threat to life or a real threat of serious injury. All other applications of lethal force are unjustified.

  157. Lethal force can be used against rioters in virtually every democracy.

  158. “Lethal force can be used against rioters in virtually every democracy.”

    When there is a real threat to life or a real threat of serious injury.

  159. No criticism against your rock throwers

  160. When there is a real threat to life or a real threat of serious injury.

    So “ minor “ injuries to soldiers and cops should be tolerated

    All righty then

  161. Molotov cocktails, incendiary devices etc.

  162. “No criticism against your rock throwers”

    Their behaviour pales into insignificance compared to the actions of the IDF.

    And I guess you now believe that Bloody Sunday was justified? Because a few of them were throwing stones as well.

  163. “So “ minor “ injuries to soldiers and cops should be tolerated”

    No it shouldn’t be. And it should be punished by the relevant authorities (of which Israel is not in this case as it is a completely different country). And maybe if occupying forces didn’t occupy then there wouldn’t be stone throwing against the occupying forces.

    However, do you believe that minor injury justifies a death sentence?

  164. You guess wrong, arguing again with your imaginary adversary. I don’t recall people being offered a bounty to be killed or injured as Hamas had offered.

  165. “You guess wrong, arguing again with your imaginary adversary”

    Surely Bloody Sunday must be justified? Some of them threw stones – which in your weird world justifies mass slaughter. What is different (other than skin colour) between the IDF shooting rioters (including children) and the British Army shooting rioters (including children)?

  166. Again, try to read without sniffing glue first. I haven’t justified Bloody Sunday. I have made no racial or ethnic justification for any action. You continue to just make things up. Did you relocate to Aberdeen?

  167. What is different (other than skin colour) between the IDF shooting rioters (including children) and the British Army shooting rioters (including children)?

  168. Seamus

    You are normally an astute debater

    This isn’t your best night.

  169. Bloody Sunday was a civil protest that had fringe elements of violence. Gaza involved a violent protest that had fringe elements of civility. What they had in common is that terrorists used each to justify their actions.

  170. good analysis Mahons

  171. Paul – Again in combat people are killed especially urban combat.

    Combat? Were the Israeli air force in combat with the Palestinian Airforce? The IDF with the Palestinian Army?

    What’s the difference between craven multiple murder as the result of a car bomb in Omagh town centre and multiple, multiple murder killings as a result of the Israeli Air Force carpet bombing a village?

    How is a dispicable no warning bomb in Warrington killing two children different from four kids playing football on a Gaza beach being blown to smithereens by a weapon of war?, (apart from the high probability that the Gaza beach strike was a deliberate strike).

    I’d suggest that the impartial objective observer would see all comparisons as the same at best wanton reckless destruction and at worst cynical indifference to innocent lives.

    The most striking feature of this thread is how those five minutes ago were deriding the non violent tactic of boycott as one of eradication and comparing it to Nazism are now doing semantic somersaults in order to avoid calling the multiple murder killing of civillians by astonishingly violent, massive overkill murder.

    If a boycott is a tactic of eradication where does that put the murder killing of almost 1,500 civillians?

  172. Which village was carpet bombed by the Israeli Air Force with the intent to simply kill civilians? I will happily review any incident you point me to.

  173. The 4 kids on the Gaza beach is a much stronger case for condemnation. It would seem to involve a reckless disregard without an imminent threat. That occasion is certainly one in which a negligent homicide charge could have been considrred.

  174. I also think the Israeli soldier who shot a wounded prisoner at point blank range was guilty of manslaughter and was unjustly paroled.

  175. The intent in Omagh wasn’t to kill civilians either?

    It was still mass murder though?

  176. Which Village did the Israelis carpet bomb with the murderous intent to kill civilians?

  177. Omagh was pure terrorism and more analogous to Hamas and prior IRA atrocities.

    Now back to the question you skipped, what village bombing incident do you refer go?

  178. //It’s critics here have never expressed the slightest sympathy for any Israeli/Jewish cause, including the Jewish desire for a national homeland.//

    Bla bla bla bullshit. As usual when he’s in a mess, Phantom comes out with falsehoods.

    And what in the name of Methuselah is “the Jewish cause”??

    Some strange remarks here. Or maybe not. Let’s face it, we all know that the Israeli lobby in the US holds the public debate on Israel in America firmly by the balls.

    (I saw this once again just a few weeks ago when the US embassy moved to Jerusalem. Bill Maher was having a little chat on CNN with 3 other journalists, who were supposed to be opposing him. Maher declared that nobody can criticise Israel using the territory it gained in a defensive war after it was attacked (in 1967). A US channel is probably the only kind in the world (or outside Israel) where none of the others even contradicted such a blatant – and very fundamental – lie. These 4 American “journalists” naturally believed what Israeli propaganda wants them to believe. Instead of just keeping quiet about the fact that Israel attacked its neighbours then, they actually declare the opposite.

    And we saw that here too. When I first came to ATW, every US contributor bar none believed Israel was attacked in the Six Day War. It took me about a year and 6 posts to convince Phantom that the opposite was the case. Since then he has at least keep quiet about the matter, and switched instead to pathetic attemps to portray the other side as closet anti-semites.)

    Now we have two Irish-Americans who regularly condemn British actions in using lethal force in riots actually support another army “using lethal force” (a nice way of saying shooting people dead) against rioters in Palestine. Apparently as long as the people doing the shooting are Jews and the people doing the dying are Arabs it’s all swell.

    But maybe shooting Palestinians is all part of “the Jewish cause”, which one must support. Phantom?

    What’s more, the Israelis are pursuing the Jewish cause in Palestine and killing the locals there; the British army at least had the excuse that they were operating in what was legally their own country and facing an insurgency.

    BTW, Paul, did you see the soldier’s remarks yesterday on “using lethal force” in Ballymurphy in 1971. Strangely frank and very welcome. It sort of puts a few things right from an authoritative source.

  179. //It’s critics here have never expressed the slightest sympathy for any Israeli/Jewish cause, including the Jewish desire for a national homeland.//
    Bla bla bla bullshit. As usual when he’s in a mess, Phantom comes out with falsehoods.
    And what in the name of Methuselah is “the Jewish cause”??

    Oh, I misunderstood. So Paul, Noel and Seamus support the existence of the Jewish nation of Israel after all. Who knew?

    While Jews and Israelis will often have harsh criticisms to make of Israeli governments, there is huge support among them for the existence of the one, only, small, Jewish state. It’s not a Jewish cause, it’s the Jewish cause.

  180. “So Paul, Noel and Seamus support the existence of the Jewish nation of Israel after all. Who knew?”

    I have often stated that I support the existence of a Jewish nation state. I even stated it on this thread.

    As I said “They have a right to a homeland, Phantom. That right does not come at the expense of Palestinians though. Israel should withdraw to the 1967 borders”.

    “Bloody Sunday was a civil protest that had fringe elements of violence. Gaza involved a violent protest that had fringe elements of civility. What they had in common is that terrorists used each to justify their actions.”

    Both were civil protests against the actions of their occupiers. Both had people, often children, throwing stones. Those throwing stones posed no threats to their occupiers, which is why neither resulted in any injuries. Both resulted in the occupying army executing protestors. There is no difference (other than skin colour). And considering you claim, rather unconvincingly, that you aren’t a racist, maybe you can come up with the real reason you oppose the wanton slaughter of protestors in Derry but support the wanton slaughter of protestors in Gaza.

    “Which village was carpet bombed by the Israeli Air Force with the intent to simply kill civilians?”

    This isn’t in Palestine but gives you an idea:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qana_massacre

  181. //So Paul, Noel and Seamus support the existence of the Jewish nation of Israel after all. Who knew?//

    Phantom, since I have been on ATW I have repeatedly said I support the existence of Israel, have said it’s a great country, and the one in the ME I’d feel most at home in and that it was necesary after the Holocaust.

    That’s not to say that the idea of setting up a country on a religious-ethnic basis is not insane. It is – whether Israel or Saudi Arabia or anywhere else. But the Holocaust was, and hopefully will remain, a unique event calling for unique response.
    So the new state was set up in Palestine. I rather suspect Phantom’s unflinching support for the Jewish Cause would be very different if it was set up in the US.
    After initial, pre-war, hopes of co-existence and a need to treat the local Arabs well, the new country quickly started banishing them and introducing the most vicious sectarian laws that would make an old Unionist blush – all aimed at getting more Palestinian land for free.

    Phantom, your hypocrisy has been shown up clearly. I presume you are now just telling lies about us out of embarrassment and hoping to change the topic to anti-semitism. Ah yes, that final resort in the pro-occupation argument.

  182. I’ve never based my view of the legitimacy of the use of lethal force based upon the race or ethnicity of those using it or those on the receiving end.
    That standard of analysis is more often used by those complaining about Israel as Arabs are killed in far greater numbers by other Arabs, but such occasions do not apparently trigger their outrage.

  183. Gaza wasn’t a civil protest Seamus.

  184. “Gaza wasn’t a civil protest Seamus.”

    Yes it was. It was a protest about the ongoing injustices faced by the Palestinians at the hands of the Israelis. It was targeted for disproportionate violence by the IDF.

    “That standard of analysis is more often used by those complaining about Israel as Arabs are killed in far greater numbers by other Arabs, but such occasions do not apparently trigger their outrage.”

    Name one situation where Arabs are being killed by other Arabs that I don’t complain about?

  185. Seamus

    What you say is confused. You say here that you want Israel to withdraw to ( indefensible ) borders. And that the Jewish right should not come at the expense of Palestinian rights. But a return to 1967 borders will come at the expense of Arabs who’ve lived in Haifa or Jerusalem.

    Noel

    You use the words lie/liar more often than others do, when there is no need of it.

    I don’t think that you guys support the existence of Israel, certainly not as a going, Jewish concern. You reluctantly accept it in the short term

    I think that Seamus’ proposal is a truce, an intermediate stage on the road to destruction.

  186. SEames – I believe it was Paul’s claim about the carpet bombing of villages, no doubt he is busy searching for such an incident and will be back with multiple examples.
    As for that incident in Lebanon I think the Amnesty report seems balanced and indicates that the IDF made a horrendous error even though the Hezbollah rocket appears to have been a deliberate provocation.

  187. Seamus – no it wasn’t, unless you think civil means rioting and use of stones, molotov cocktails etc.

  188. “But a return to 1967 borders will come at the expense of Arabs who’ve lived in Haifa or Jerusalem.”

    Which is why it is a compromise.

    Firstly Jerusalem will be partitioned in a return to 1967 borders, and East Jerusalem recognised as the capital of the Palestinian state.

    And secondly, absolutely both states should have a right to exist, and the other shouldn’t be able to prevent the other from existing. And yes reducing Israel to its pre 1949 borders, or the UN partition plan, would cause untold misery and so shouldn’t be pursued. I have a certain amount of sympathy for those Arabs who lived in Haifa, and other parts of what is now Israel, but in the interests of peace those claims should be dropped and those people living outside of the former mandate who previously lived in what is today Israel should be settled in Palestine and justly compensated for the loss of land, property and the hardships they have suffered.

    “I think that Seamus’ proposal is a truce, an intermediate stage on the road to destruction.”

    Honest question Phantom. We have known each other, through this forum, for over a decade. Do you honestly believe that I want the destruction of the Jewish people or the Jewish state – and the mass wanton slaughter that would accompany it?

  189. To accept with great moral misgivings the existence of a state is not the same as to support it’s existence

  190. “Seamus – no it wasn’t, unless you think civil means rioting and use of stones, molotov cocktails etc.”

    In which case Bloody Sunday wasn’t a civil protest as it also had rioting.

    “As for that incident in Lebanon I think the Amnesty report seems balanced and indicates that the IDF made a horrendous error even though the Hezbollah rocket appears to have been a deliberate provocation.”

    They seem to make a lot of horrendous errors. In the recent conflict in Gaza, in 2014, nearly 2/3rds of those killed were civilians. That’s over nearly 1,000 horrendous errors.

    I also note, that considering that you support Amnesty’s reporting of the events, why do you question their reporting of the events in Gaza in 2018?

    https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2018/05/israelopt-use-of-excessive-force-in-gaza-an-abhorrent-violation-of-international-law/

  191. Seamus – I did not single you out particularly regarding Arab on Arab violence. The International community regularly condemns Israel without the same standard applied to Arab states.

  192. Seamus

    I don’t think that you want that horror, but I think that what you propose makes it far more possible at some point

    And I think that many of Israel’s enemies do want it destroyed, not shrunk. I would think that the big majority of Arab enemies want that, as would many BDS trendies in Europe

  193. “To accept with great moral misgivings the existence of a state is not the same as to support it’s existence”

    No it isn’t. All people’s have a right to self determination. And I include the Israeli’s in that. They have a right to national self determination. So do the Palestinians. The key way to achieve peace is to find a way that both the Israel’s right to national self determination and the Palestine’s right national self determination are respected. While I am of course sympathetic to the people who were ethnically cleansed out of what is today Israel I also feel that allowing an unrestricted right of return to those areas of Palestinians threatens the existence of Israel, and as such threatens the Israeli’s right to national self determination. As such I wouldn’t support it.

  194. It would be an interesting question for discussion in itself why Americans generally support Israel in its conflict with the Palestinians and why the Irish (whether lefties, liberals or conservatives) generally support the Palestinians.
    It’s also nice to see in that respect the sides arranged so neatly on this thread.
    (The situation in the UK and in Europe is more mixed with – very generally – the lines drawn according to politics.)

    I mentioned above the pro-Israeli lobby in the US as one reason, but of course there is more to it than that, and I can think of at least two other factors. Similarly in Ireland there are several causes, and they all seem to be very fundamental ones.

  195. “I did not single you out particularly regarding Arab on Arab violence. The International community regularly condemns Israel without the same standard applied to Arab states.”

    We aren’t talking about the international community. We are talking about you and me. You said the standard of my (maybe Paul and Noel’s as well) analysis was “more often used by those complaining about Israel as Arabs are killed in far greater numbers by other Arabs, but such occasions do not apparently trigger their outrage”. Now considering that I regularly do comment when Arabs are killed by any Arabs (in fact I am one of the most vocal opponents on this site of both the Saudi Arabian genocide in Yemen and the ongoing actions and even existence of the Assad regime) then you are attempting to target me with guilt by association or you are attempting to obfuscate the issue. What other people do, or think, is not relevant. What do I think, what do you think – that is what we are discussing.

    “I don’t think that you want that horror, but I think that what you propose makes it far more possible at some point”

    I disagree. Firstly the western international community would stand with Israel. The occupation is what is hurting Israel’s standing in the western international community (with even the occasional crack appearing in the US). Remove that and Israel becomes a beacon of light in a continent of darkness.

  196. By the Irish above I mean Irish people identifying with Ireland.

  197. “It would be an interesting question for discussion in itself why Americans generally support Israel in its conflict with the Palestinians and why the Irish (whether lefties, liberals or conservatives) generally support the Palestinians.”

    I think most Irish people see our own past, and our own conflicts, in a lot of international conflicts as well. And so when it is big bad neighbouring country vs small oppressed country we tend to take the side of the small oppressed country (and also can’t understand why anyone else wouldn’t). It is why most Irish people are pro-Palestinian. It is why most Irish people are pro-Catalan, and pro-Basque. It is also why historically Irish people tended to be quite supportive of the Zionists (seeing the conflict as Zionist vs British) and being sympathetic to the idea of an oppressed people forming their own country.

  198. Seamus – Um no. I know what I’m discussing. My use of English was quite clear.

  199. “Seamus – Um no. I know what I’m discussing. My use of English was quite clear.”

    It was quite clear. It was an attempt to attack me not based on my own actions but on the actions of other people of whom I actually disagree with. It was as pathetic as it was stupid.

  200. Seamus – your persecution complex is in overdrive. I’m comfortable attacking you unfounded claims directly (see above).
    You on the other hand have attributed beliefs and arguments to me that I have not made.

  201. You attacked me by suggesting that I condemn Israel for killing Arabs but do not condemn other Arabs for killing Arabs. When that was pointed out for the falsehood that it was you are now trying to pretend you targeted someone else with that condemnation and not me.

  202. //I think most Irish people see our own past, and our own conflicts, in a lot of international conflicts as well. And so when it is big bad neighbouring country vs small oppressed country we tend to take the side of the small oppressed country (and also can’t understand why anyone else wouldn’t). It is why most Irish people are pro-Palestinian//

    Correct.
    There are also the parallels of war and oppression and dispossession on religious grounds, violent evictions with immediate destructions of people’s homes, banishments and generally people reduced to second-class status because of their ethnicity/religion.

    Of course, as in Ireland in the 16th and 17th Centuries, religion, and phoney claims of the need to protect flanks etc, was just a pretext for justifying expansion and the robbery of land. It was and is all about loot and the spoils of war, and fear of losing what has previously been stolen.

    It just goes to show how little bunk history actually is. It forms what is felt as a natural political instinct.

  203. //Firstly the western international community would stand with Israel. The occupation is what is hurting Israel’s standing in the western international community (with even the occasional crack appearing in the US). Remove that and Israel becomes a beacon of light in a continent of darkness.//

    My opinion exactly, and one that I’ve expressed here many times, all of which Phantom insists on hiding from.

  204. Seamus – read it again, slowly. You’ll see you are not only wrong on the issue under discussion, but on comprehending what I wrote.

  205. Ok, if I read it incorrectly what was your point?

  206. Sorry if I haven’t answered you as quickly as you’d like Mahons. I have a life outside ATW which include family and professional commitments.

    Which village was carpet bombed by the Israeli Air Force with the intent to simply kill civilians? I will happily review any incident you point me to […]

    Which Village did the Israelis carpet bomb with the murderous intent to kill civilians?

    I never stated that the Israelis ‘carpet bombed with the murderous intent to kill civilians’ I drew an analogy between the multiple murder as the result of a car bomb in Omagh town centre and multiple, multiple murder killings as a result of the Israeli Air Force carpet bombing villages

    I never once suggested ‘murderous intent to kill’ and actually drew the analogy with Omagh and the bombing of Gaza in 2014 as while innocent victims weren’t the objective at Omagh that was the result and both acts of bombing were ‘at best wanton reckless destruction and at worst cynical indifference to innocent lives’

    I believe it was Paul’s claim about the carpet bombing of villages, no doubt he is busy searching for such an incident and will be back with multiple examples

    I don’t need to search as if you type ‘IDF bombing Gaza 2014’ in various correlations you’ll have any amount of examples you need but the one that sticks in my memory is the numerous bombing of Shujayea with consecutive multiple casualties and deaths.

    Details upon request.

    Omagh was pure terrorism and more analogous to Hamas and prior IRA atrocities

    Please explain the difference between atrocities like Omagh and atrocities of repeated arial bombing that left almost 1,500 civillians dead. Be as specific and detailed as you like.

    So Paul, Noel and Seamus support the existence of the Jewish nation of Israel after all. Who knew?

    I absolutely don’t support the State of Israel in its present form not do I agree with the injustices perpetrated on the Palestinian inhabitants in State’s formation and its wake. Why would I?

    I think most Irish people see our own past, and our own conflicts, in a lot of international conflicts as well.

    Yep, from above:

    …..in a wonderfully poetic touch the Irish, with their instinctive opposition to injustice and their natural affinity with the underdog. The nation who invented the concept of the boycott

    BTW, Paul, did you see the soldier’s remarks yesterday on “using lethal force” in Ballymurphy in 1971. Strangely frank and very welcome. It sort of puts a few things right from an authoritative source.

    I did Noel. He’s the second soldier to claim such things, the difference being that this claim actually came from a former Para and the previous one from an off duty soldier from another regiment there at the time who was married to a local Murph woman. My cousin is married to one of Danny Teggart’s girls and her son told me when soldier F was indifferently giving his evidence a few weeks ago he had to take her out of the inquiry she was so upset. Here’s another related nugget that came from a former Para a few days ago:

    https://www.irishnews.com/news/northernirelandnews/2019/05/11/news/british-soldiers-used-shot-catholic-man-s-skull-as-ashtray-1617500/

  207. No country has a right to invade another for selfish reasons.

    Above all, no country has a right to invade and deprive that country’s people of use of the land or its resources, destroy their homes or attempt to create a political hold on the country by colonising it and settling its own people there.

    The people of any country invaded by an oppressive enemy have a right to resist in every way allowed by the rules of war, including attacking and killing the invading soldiers.
    This also includes throwing stones.

    I’d say the same, but even louder, if it were Irish soldiers doing the invading or oppressing. But I like to think that no Irish army would every do anything of the sort.

  208. Paul – first the joke about you not answering was a joke. I was sure you’d be back.

    If you want to withdraw “intent” than your murder claims deflate.

    Your memory of Shujayea include HaMas attacks from there and the efforts to get the citizens to leave?

  209. Omagh was terrorism at its most basic. It is easily distinguishable from a military action. You are comparing apples and oranges.

  210. Noel – that is kind of like saying I’d like to think Helen Keller wouldn’t dive over the speed limit.

  211. I think Irish empathy for Palestinians stems from a few things. There is a natural sympathy for the suffering and refugees (Irish priest, Concern and other organizations astoundingly show up in all sorts of destitute places performing great works). There is a solidarity with those effected by partition.

  212. Mahons, you forget Rockall. There we were justified, but our characteristic reticence and peacefulness won out.

  213. And there is a propaganda drive to equate terrorists with freedom fighters in some of the louder circles. And there is a conformity of thought that hasn’t entirely escaped the Irish nature on certain topics. I don’t think anti-semitism plays a role.

  214. Very many Jews sided with the Irish in their struggles with the Brits, most certainly in the times of the recent Troubles.

    The Irish rewarded them by siding with the Arabs.

  215. Funny Noel.

  216. //equate terrorists with freedom fighters in some of the louder circles//

    I doubt if that’s a strong tendency. Most people are aware that actions count more than labels. Attacking Israeli soliders in Palestine is the act of a freedom fighter; exploding bombs in Israel is the act of a terrorist.

    //The Irish rewarded them by siding with the Arabs.//

    zzzzzzz

    Phantom, the Irish don’t side with “the Arabs”. They side with the victims of vicious oppression, land robbery and general ill-treatment at the hands of an invading force, the same way as you would anywhere else if the pepertrators weren’t Jews and the victims weren’t Muslims.

    As I said, the best people in Israel are also of the same view. Let’s hope they get their way pretty soon. If they don’t, as they well realise, their country is doomed.

  217. American support for Israel also stems from several factors, some good some bad. A larger Jewish population, a feeling of protecting a historically persecuted people, an appreciation for a democracy and ally. Then there are some crackpot evangelicals, slimy politicians and pure Arab haters. As a supporter of Israel myself I do think those whose support is total have emboldened many wrongful practices and unjust results.

  218. You need only to go look at the Walls in Derry or the tedious struggle pamphlets and speechs by SF on the topic to see the tendancy.

  219. BTW, my son Alex, whom you two met in NY, was in Israel last month, all paid by his father of course. He really loved the place.

    Now, let’s call it a day with some music, and perhaps some advice to the Israelis to confine their territorial greed to places where other people don’t already live.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r6yb5n2JEtA

  220. Yes, they sided with the Arabs in the Arab-Israeli conflict. That’s what I said! 🙂

  221. Good man Alex.

    I’d like to go back to Israel some day.

  222. Good man Alex.

    I’d like to go back to Israel some day.

  223. I’d say the Irish have a mixed historical record on the issue of land grabbing, vicious oppression and Ill treatment by an invading force when the victims aren’t Irish. This isn’t unique in the World sadly.

  224. Wow. How old is he now?

  225. The Arabs also have a mixed record on those things, if I am not mistaken.

  226. So do we.

  227. //American support for Israel also stems from …..a feeling of protecting a historically persecuted people, an appreciation for a democracy//

    Oh please!

    I’d say the ancestral experience of the frontier and taking over a new country is an important parallel, especially when both were done with an ancient religious book in hand and a feeling of moral superiority to the natives.

    I’ve met many Americans of all political stripes who seen the I/P conflict as a clash of civilisations; Israel as an outpost of the west that has to be supported for that reason alone.

    It’s interesting that US support for Israel became strongest when Israel started the occupation. Before that, US govts could be very critical of Israel’s conduct. This is also the same time that strong support for Israel among Europeans began to ebb. But maybe that’s a coincidence. At any rate, it used to be a Leftie trend to go to Israel and join a Kibbuz for a while (that’s your anti-semitism among European leftie students again, Phantom), and I know many Irish people who went when they were young. But that mood disappeared after Palestine was invaded and the oppression began.

    Generally the influence of the Bible on the American psyche is much stronger than anywhere else I know. And there’s a kind of Old Testament nostalgia among a lot of Americans.
    There are the mad evangelicals who support Israel (but probably dislike Jews), but the experience of the Bible can be found everywhere in American culture, music and writing, even among non-believers.

    I like meeting people who like what Israel is doing and dislike Arabs. They are honest and don’t try to pretend the Pallies are the bad guys. The admit Israel’s actions are unfair and the oppression is cruel. But they like it because it’s us vs them.

  228. If you want to withdraw “intent” than your murder claims deflate

    Omagh was terrorism at its most basic. It is easily distinguishable from a military action. You are comparing apples and oranges.

    Good, now we’re getting to the nub of things.

    The objective of the Omagh bombing was to car bomb Omagh town centre, (in 1998 the real IRA had previously car bombed Moira and Portadown and massive car bombs had been defused in Lisburn and Banbridge. Warnings had been given for all) Likewise with Omagh a warning had been given saying there was a carbomb placed in ‘High Street’ (there is no High Street in Omagh), and the RUC mistakeningly believing that Omagh court house was the target evacuated the public towards Market Street where the bomb was.

    The intention was not to kill civilians but to bomb buildings. The Real IRA intend to bomb buildings in Co Tyrone and unintentionally murder kill innocent civillians and the IDF bomb redidential areas in Gaza and unintentionally murder kill innocent civillians. One is mass murder while the other is ‘civillians being killed in combat?’ Please explain to me the difference. As I said, both are ‘at best wanton reckless destruction and at worst cynical indifference to innocent lives’

    And before people jump to conclusions. This isn’t a defence of the Omagh bombing, it’s fact.

    Your memory of Shujayea include HaMas attacks from there and the efforts to get the citizens to leave?

    Yes it does, it also includes the astonishingly violent, massive overkill I speak of above and the fact that collective punishment is banned under International Law.

    Perhaps the ‘efforts to get the citizens to leave’ were inadequate like the Omagh bomb warning and that’s why so many civillians were murdered killed?

    To repeat myself, it’s incredible that those who were only last night criticising a non violent boycott as a tactic are today excusing, defending or at the very least diminishing the use of weapons of war astonishingly violent force against a civillian population.

  229. Alex is 18, he’s left home to study. He travels a lot and I believe the US trip really started him off on that. He travelled to China, alone, and various other places and seemingly can’t get enough of the world. He chose to go to Israel on a whim “because nobody ever goes there”.
    He isn’t really interested in politics.

  230. “Very many Jews sided with the Irish in their struggles with the Brits, most certainly in the times of the recent Troubles.

    The Irish rewarded them by siding with the Arabs.”

    This isn’t a quid pro quo thing. It is we back those who deserve to be backed and oppose those who deserve to be opposed. If you are the aggressor, the invader, the ethnic cleanser, the occupier – then chances are the Irish will oppose you. And chances are the Irish will support your victims.

    And if you want Irish support then the key is don’t be the aggressor, the invader, the ethnic cleanser, or the occupier.

  231. Cool. And time flies.

  232. I’ll note you attribute only base motives for US support for Israel and only laudible motives for Irish support for Palestinians.

  233. Mahons, that American “feeling of protecting a historically persecuted people” certainly didn’t help the historically persecuted Vietnamese, nor does the “appreciation for a democracy” sound credible in view of the American support for practically every tyranical dictatorship in Latin America.

    To be fair to the Americans, most of them probably know little about what is really happening in Palestine, or probably even where Palestine is. The US media is totally partisan and even seems to nurture this ignorance (see my example of Bill Maher, and indeed ATW, above).
    The Americans are generally a fair-minded people and I have know doubt that far more of them would be as hostile to Israel’s actions there as I am if they were better informed.

    But what’s your reading of it? it can’t be a coincidence that the only three Irish Americans we have are all very supportive of Israel in this conflict, while the entire Irish (qualified as above) contingent strongly supports the Palestinians’ right to Palestine.

  234. We were trying to protect the Vietnamese from Communism. No informed person would suggest that the overall record of the US in promoting democracy isn’t the leading nation to have done so. I certainly don’t find Irish people better informed on the Middle East than my fellow Americans.

  235. Or we were trying to protect ourselves from a real communist threat.

    But this came after we chose to back the French colonialists in a part of the world that we knew very little about.

  236. Still doesn’t excuse the support of ethnic cleansing, second class citizenship, land grab and incredibly over proportionate violence by European immigrants on indigenous inhabitants in 1948 and thereafter.

  237. “We were trying to protect the Vietnamese from Communism.”

    I don’t think that’s true. It wasn’t altruistically attempted to help the Vietnamese avoid communism that led to American action in Vietnam. It was part of the wider Cold War conflict. Vietnam wasn’t a pet project to help the Vietnamese people. It was a battlefield of the Cold War.

    “No informed person would suggest that the overall record of the US in promoting democracy isn’t the leading nation to have done so.”

    I’m not saying this to have a go at America. But ultimately America’s foreign policy has always focused on what is in the best interests of America (as most countries foreign policy will be about what is in their best interests). So America would take a pro-American dictatorship ahead of an anti-American democracy (and put together coups of such in Egypt, Syria, Guatemala, the Congo, Brazil, Greece, most famously Chile, and attempted to do the same in Nicaragua).

  238. One of the problems of leading the free world as opposed to benefitting from that leadership on the sidelines is that you sometimehave to do deals with devils (see Stalin, Marcos) in order to advance a more global good. And sometimes horrendous errors in judgment are made (See Vietnam, Iraq).

  239. I would argue that in many of the situations it didn’t advance a more global good. Overthrowing a collectivist democracy that was not allied to the Soviet Union didn’t advance the global good.

    Overthrowing democracies in Iran, Egypt, Syria, and Iraq all led, in many situations, to the dictatorships that those countries see today (causing massive problems for the region).

  240. What global good did Ferdinand Marcos serve?

  241. It was a battlefield of the Cold War.

    I’d agree with that.

    What global good did Ferdinand Marcos serve?

    He wasn’t a Stalin, Pol Pot or a North Korean Communist Monarchist.

    During the sixties, there was some optimism about the Philippines, which was relatively well off as compared with China, etc at the time. That hope has completely faded. Over time, the Philippines will become a vassal state to China. But we didn’t know that they’d accomplish so little in fifty years, then.

  242. Marcos kept Phillipines from becoming Communist and the Asia that is free (Japan, Taiwan, South Korea) was kept that way in no small part due to our ability to use bases there.

  243. Not that the Germans or Russians would allow you to comment freely, but without us you would be writing now in one of their languages. You are welcome.

  244. “He wasn’t a Stalin, Pol Pot or a North Korean Communist Monarchist.”

    “Marcos kept Phillipines from becoming Communist”

    He wasn’t a communist. However support for communists grew under Marcos. He didn’t peg back the communists. He caused them, due to the corruption of his regime. In the absence of his dictatorship the communist insurgency in the Philippines would never have reached the sort of level it did. The Philippines, the world, even the United States, would have been better off without the likes of Ferdinand Marcos.

  245. “Not that the Germans or Russians would allow you to comment freely, but without us you would be writing now in one of their languages. You are welcome.”

    Do you want to know why people hate America so much? Comments like that.

  246. Very many of the Asian countries have advanced quickly from ruin or near ruin – Japan, Korea, Singapore, China, Malaysia, Vietnam…but not the Philippines.

    Strong hard-working and education revering Confucian culture hard to keep down – it is the opposite of a miracle that Mao in China and the Communist monarchy in NK kept/keep those people in poverty.

  247. Seamus – as long as the right people hate us we are content. See we know if there is one thing that Irish left wing political dilitants can’t abide it is mentioning their impotence. Now tell us again how Lord of the Dance keeps the Free World free.

  248. Not that the Germans or Russians would allow you to comment freely, but without us you would be writing now in one of their languages. You are welcome

    Yep, true enough. you can say whatever you like but just be careful about what you do or the US might open up a can of regime change on your ass.

    Mahons is on the wind up trying to out Troll Pat.

    BTW, thanks for the Taliban, Al Qeda and ISIS. We’re welcome

    God Bless US Exceptionalism.

  249. //but without us you would be writing now in one of their languages. You are welcome.//

    Mahons, that’s total nonsense. The Germans had been stopped in the West before the US even thought of joining the war. If the Nazis weren’t able to overrun Britain when they were fighting it alone, they were certainly in no position to conquer it after they’d invaded the Soviet Union. America played no role in protecting Ireland from Hitler, apart from supplying Britain as the war went on, but even that was very little and too late to affect the outcome in the west.

    I doubt if the Soviets ever had ambitions of conquering Erin. Sure they had enough cold and damp places already. Overall Ireland was protected more by its position in the world rather than by any external friend.

  250. “Seamus – as long as the right people hate us we are content. See we know if there is one thing that Irish left wing political dilitants can’t abide it is mentioning their impotence. Now tell us again how Lord of the Dance keeps the Free World free.”

    They are probably as effective in keeping the Free World free as a shyster like yourself is. I’d also argue that increasingly the United States, and Donald Trump in particular, are not the leaders of the free world.

  251. The Taliban, ISIS and AL Qeda. More Irish joined them than fought them.

  252. Noel – you have a rich fantasy life.

  253. “The Taliban, ISIS and AL Qeda. More Irish joined them than fought them.”

    All created by the United States or their key allies.

  254. The Taliban, ISIS and AL Qeda. More Irish joined them than fought them

    Well I don’t know if that’s actually true but even if it is, so what? Why should the Irish, (or any European citizen for that matter), give their lives for a US created monster?

    See we know if there is one thing that Irish left wing political dilitants can’t abide it is mentioning their impotence.

    Impotence in what, World domination? Who do you think Ireland is, the US?

  255. The Taliban, ISIS and AL Queda all arose out of radical Islam which has existed as long as Islam itself. Don’t tell me I have to explain Israel and Islam to you.

  256. Don’t tell me I have to explain Israel and Islam to you.

    Yes, of course. We’ll say nothing about the US funding, training and supporting the Afghan warlords who were the Mujahadeen. Who then morphed into the Taliban whose Taliban fighters in Iraq morphed into Al Qeda who then moved over the border into Syria when the civil war, (thanks CIA backed Arab Spring), to become ISIS.

    Shhhhhhhhhh.

    Own it.

  257. We certainly supported them against the Russian invasion of Afghanistan.

  258. Yes you did. And then left them to their own devices and become the Taliban when the Russkies skedaddled.

    Etc, etc.

    Oh yes you did.

  259. Please, from a people whose greatest foreign policy expert is Daniel O’Donnell.

  260. Don’t mention it. you’re welcome.

  261. Mahons is correct in that radical Islam is as old as Islam itself. The founder of radical Islam is the perfert Muhammad
    Himself

    You can’t blame the CIA or Dick Cheney for that I’m afraid

  262. For the record Seamus doesn’t care if his countrymen fought for the ISIS, the Taliban of AL Q. All of whom have murdered more Muslims than Israel. We’ve come full circle on HIS empathy for Muslims.

  263. “For the record Seamus doesn’t care if his countrymen fought for the ISIS, the Taliban of AL Q. All of whom have murdered more Muslims than Israel. We’ve come full circle on HIS empathy for Muslims.”

    Where the fuck did I even come close to saying any of that dickhead?

  264. Seamus – Temper temper. You can make all sorts of false claims about me and do i resort to such language? For the record it was Paul who wrote “so what?”.

  265. “You can make all sorts of false claims about me and do i resort to such language?”

    I’ve made no sort of false claims about you. Show me one.

    “For the record it was Paul who wrote “so what?”.”

    Does that mean you have withdrawn your slur?

  266. I have corrected my observation that the person was Paul not yourself.

    You’ve made numerous false claims on this thread alone, reread them and repent.

  267. “I have corrected my observation that the person was Paul not yourself.”

    Have you withdrawn your slur about me? Simple yes or no.

    “You’ve made numerous false claims on this thread alone, reread them and repent.”

    Such as?

  268. I have already indicated it was Paul not you. If the isn’t simple enough too bad.

    You made several false claims about my positions (which I already pointed at as they were made). Unlike you I quite timely corrected my error, and I didn’t act the pouty princess about it. Ironic how quickly ardent Republicans turn aristocratic on you when you call them out on their baloney.


  269. I have already indicated it was Paul not you. If the isn’t simple enough too bad.”

    If I make an error and falsely accuse someone of something I would normally have the common decency to apologise. You seem to lack that.

    “You made several false claims about my positions (which I already pointed at as they were made).”

    Such as?

  270. No, this thread demonstrates you would not.

  271. “No, this thread demonstrates you would not.”

    You keep saying that. Yet you can’t come up with one single example.

  272. The examples are above. They are generally followed by my saying that is false, that you are arguing with an imaginary adversary etc. We both know where you wrote falsehoods. I don’t feel the need to point it out afain, you’ll just lie again.

  273. “The examples are above. They are generally followed by my saying that is false, that you are arguing with an imaginary adversary etc. We both know where you wrote falsehoods. I don’t feel the need to point it out afain, you’ll just lie again.”

    If there are so many examples why don’t you come up with one single example? The reason is because there are none.

  274. See. Now tell us again about how your boycott is working.

  275. Mahons is correct in that radical Islam is as old as Islam itself. The founder of radical Islam is the perfert Muhammad himself.

    Okay then, the US armed, trained and financed radical Islam in the form of Afghan warlords and and formed them into the fighting force that was the Mujahadeen then left them with their military infrastructure intact in a country absolutely awash with then state of the art weaponry to morph into the Taliban whose Taliban fighters in Iraq morphed into Al Qeda who then moved over the border into Syria when the civil war started, to become ISIS.

    Feel better now?

    For the record Seamus (Paul) doesn’t care if his countrymen fought for the ISIS, the Taliban of AL Q. All of whom have murdered more Muslims than Israel.

    Except of course Paul’s comment was in relation to your risible claim that ‘more Irish joined them than fought them’:

    UK ministry of defence (MOD) figures showed more than 230 Irish citizens joined British defence units between 2013 and 2015.

    https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/big-surge-in-recruits-here-as-british-army-targets-ireland-35340247.html

    It’s a safe assumption that quite a few of those Irish citizens would have went to Afghanistan and Iraq? Indeed, two of my own cousins were in Iraq with different branches of the US military. By contrast, some 30 Irish passport holders are thought to have went to fight for ISIS:

    https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/news/islamic-terror-suspects-will-be-allowed-home-varadkar-37855110.html

    And, as I said above, ‘Why should the Irish, (or any European citizen for that matter), give their lives for a US created monster?’

    So, there you have it, sterling attempt at trying to put words into my mouth though.

    And, ‘just for the record’ also. Those who advocate / excuse / diminish weapons of war astonishingly violent collective punishment against a civillian populace aren’t really in a position to lecture about the morality of killing.

  276. I’d say the number of Irish people who killed Arabs is a fraction of one percent of the number of Americans who did the same.

  277. Agreed Noel, and it applies to all sides

  278. Sort of in the middle here. I don’t get the US slavish support for Israel. And, whilst I fully understand the Irish outrage at the plantation of the Palestinian territories, I don’t get the general Irish obsession with Palestine/Israel. What the Chinese are doing in Tibet and now with the Uighurs is much worse and more permanent.

  279. //What the Chinese are doing in Tibet and now with the Uighurs is much worse and more permanent.//

    MR, what do you reckon how many people in Ireland or the US, or anywhere else, could tell you who the Uighurs are?

  280. In hindsight the Carter/ Reagan arming of the Mujahadeen was a catastrophic move, for the region and for the US. I’ve said this before.

    US unquestioning and brain dead support for Israel in all matters including settlement building is wrong, and ultimately harmful to both the US and Israel.

    The Uighur and Tibetan nations are being culturally obliterated,yes. But who knows where those places are anyway? Such a hassle, all these countries, all these names! Who can learn them all.Boo Israel!

  281. I try not to buy Israeli produce because I disagree with the disposession of Palestinians during the fiundation of the state reg and think that at the very least reparations should be paid to these people or their descended families for any property or land confiscated.

    I don’t think that’s obsessive.

    What the Chinese are doing in Tibet and now with the Uighurs is much worse and more permanent.

    I don’t know if it’s worse or indeed more permanent but it’s still an injustice hence as I say above:

    I try not to buy Israeli of Chinese produce although in the case of China it’s more difficult because of the ubiquitousness of their products.

  282. Yes, poor Israel can’t get on with its ethnic cleansing and killings without all this foreign criticism, and look at what China’s doing to the Uighurs……

    🙂

  283. Just to clarify – my “obsession” comment relates to us as a nation. I mean Dublin City Council wanted to (and possibly did) fly the Palestinian flag at one stage. Solidarity is one thing but that’s a bit mad.

    Are we projecting our own neuroses on to a completely different scenario?

  284. But who knows where those places are anyway? Such a hassle, all these countries, all these names! Who can learn them all.Boo Israel!

    In one comment Phantom’s just summed up the stereotypical infamous American public ignorance of world geography and its slavish devotion to Israel.

    I still find it incredible that it’s possible to denigrate a non violent protest like a boycott yet justify horrifically violent collective punishment of a populace.

  285. Paul

    That was a mocking comment. The average west European BDS pinky in the air latte sipping trendy from hell is every bit as ignorant of Tibet and Xinjiang as the average Trumper drone.

    Some of us have tried to keep up on the Uyghur issue and have posted on it on these pages

  286. “The average west European BDS pinky in the air latte sipping trendy from hell is every bit as ignorant of Tibet and Xinjiang as the average Trumper drone.”

    I think that is broadly true but I would also go one further and suggest what happens in western liberal democracies is felt more keenly by people in western liberal democracies. So when a western liberal democracy does something awful it is felt more by people here than when crackpot dictatorship does the same thing (or something even more awful).

    Or when something awful happens in a western liberal democracy it is felt more than if it happens in a different place. On the 12th November 2015 two suicide bombers killed 43 people in Beirut. And nobody really seemed to notice. The day after three suicide bombers killed 90 people in Paris and it resulted in one of the biggest acts of international public mourning ever seen.

    And it is that culturally Paris is closer to us than Beirut is.

    So the focus on Israel is not antisemitism or trying to do Israel down. It is that it is a western liberal democracy and so its actions are felt more keenly in western liberal democracies.

  287. Phantom – they are great advocates of diversity, but not diversity of opinion. Oh and please don’t argue that they are anything but 100% right, cause you’ll upset them.

  288. Indeed it was Phantom. Very much in the vein of Mahons’ comments last night and your comment quoted in fact.

    (Clue, the use of the adjective ‘stereotypical’)

    The average west European BDS pinky in the air latte sipping trendy from hell is every bit as ignorant of Tibet and Xinjiang as the average Trumper drone.

    Seriously doubt the accusation as much as I doubt the description.

    Some of us have tried to keep up on the Uyghur issue and have posted on it on these pages

    Bully for you. See my comments re ‘stereotypical infamous American public ignorance’ above and consider yourself one of the exceptions to the rule.

  289. “Seriously doubt the accusation as much as I doubt the description.”

    Ignoring the latte sipping trendy bit I would say that most Irish people are more aware, and have stronger feelings, on the Israel/Palestine conflict than they would on the Chinese/Tibet conflict or the Chinese/Uyghur conflict. I would also say they probably they are more aware, and have stronger feelings, on the Spain/Catalan issue and the Spain/Basque conflict than they would on the Chinese/Tibet conflict or the Chinese/Uyghur conflict.

    Strange no one seems to suggest that we are anti-Spanish.

  290. Phantom – they are great advocates of diversity, but not diversity of opinion.

    You’re absolutely entitled to your opinion Mahons. I’m also absolutely entitled to disagree and to argue against it,

  291. //It is that it is a western liberal democracy and so its actions are felt more keenly in western liberal democracies.//

    Exactly, just as I said above.

    Also, the West didn’t set up China, didn’t make it a place for westerns to go and lord it over the natives. China isn’t a response to a European disaster, and the West doesn’t supply it with all the latest military technology to ethnic cleanse the Uighurs or any other population it feels uncomfortable with and rob their land.

    Israel is not only within our cultural sphere, but is our creation and thus a fair target for our criticism.

  292. Mahons has decided to stop arguing and start flinging insults. He has morphed into a full troll on this thread.

  293. I would agree with your 1.26 Seamus. It’s the ‘average Trumper drone’ comparitive I disagree with.

  294. On the Uyghur matter, it is interesting that while up to 1 million Muslims are in concentration camps right now, the west and the Muslim countries have largely been silent on it

    China has huge economic and military advantage in west Asia, more than any other country, the US included. There is no possibility of a successful Uyghur or Tibetan revolt.

    In the case of the Uyghurs, the Chinese were terrified at some muslim terrorist atrocities in China in the nineties and later. This prompted a crackdown on the innocent and the guilty that has been merciless.

  295. Do you but Chinese produce Phantom?

  296. *Buy.

  297. I think that you mean Chinese products and not produce ( agriculture )

    Yes I do buy Chinese products. It would be very hard not to buy Chinese products these days.

    I would have dozens of Chinese made products in my house, and I imagine that all here would say the same. China is deeply integrated into the world manufacturing system.

  298. I think the Uyghur issue is complicated by the simple fact that we can’t do anything about it. A major civil response in pretty much any country isn’t going to have any impact on China. The UN can’t do anything about it due to China’s veto power on the Security Council. Internationally a lot of countries feel they can’t do anything about it and so don’t want to risk their relationship with China by trying.

    I think the contrast isn’t so much with Israel but with Myanmar, and the ethnic cleansing of the Rohingya. Obviously neither Myanmar, or their allies, had veto power in the Security Council. This has allowed the UN to be much more forceful in at least their investigation of the Rohingyan crisis. There have also been major civil responses in many western countries (largely focused on Aung San Suu Kyi). And a lot of countries didn’t have much of a relationship with Myanmar so they didn’t really feel like there were losing anything by having a go at them.

  299. China

    If the UN is blocked, then action could be taken outside of the UN. There is no will to do it in most every country because they’re afraid to cross China on a matter than China sees as critical to Chinese security.

    Even very Muslim Pakistan, which has a land border with Xinjiang/China, keeps its mouth shut, because they want to stay on the right side of China, want to get that Belt and Road / New Silk Road development money.

  300. No, I’m pretty sure I mean produce as a collective noun to refer to goods and crops etc but let’s not get into a semantic argument. I think it’s a bit of a cop out to criticise regimes or countries and call for action against them when you’re not prepared to act on principle yourself. But that would be me going on about boycotts again.

    If the UN is blocked, then action could be taken outside of the UN

    What actions would you suggest for Israel which have been condemned by the UN in some 45 resolutions?

  301. Do you boycott Spanish products in solidarity with the Basques?

  302. I try to buy local Basque products when possible although it’s impossible not to buy Spanish products here in the Basque Country. I should also add that I’m unaware of any Basques that boycott Spanish products.

  303. I don’t generally support boycotts or sanctions.

    And I oppose attempts to force others to boycott against their will or to force others to sanction against their wishes.

    No cop out at all, only Euclidean clarity.

  304. Please explain how forcing others to boycott against their will or forcing others to sanction against their wishes works?

    What actions would you suggest for Israel which have been condemned by the UN in some 45 resolutions?

  305. Paul

    You’re a smart guy, you don’t need to pretend not to be.

    We’ve discussed ” secondary boycott ” before, we’ve discussed boycotting those who don’t boycott before. I oppose this type of action.

    I despise the Cuban and Iranian regimes but I think that it should be legal to visit those places and trade with them.

  306. Phantom, the only way a boycott or sanctions can be enforced is if it’s made an offence by governments for their citizens or other countries to break them. Forcing others to boycott or sanction or a personal level is impossible.

    Should I ask the Israel / UN action question a third time or will you just continue to ignore it?

  307. Paul

    This has been explained to you. Please pay attention this time.

    If a labor union or a wildcat group of workers at a supermarket chain refuses to handle Israeli goods lets say, that is forcing the supermarket to boycott. This practice is illegal in the US and correctly so. I don’t think that the practice is illegal in all countries.

    I also oppose boycotts of those who don’t boycott.

    You should do what you think is best, but not tell others what to do, not bring economic pressures on those who don’t see it your way.

  308. Some American politicians want to make some boycotts ( of Israel mainly ) illegal.

    I think that this is wrong and probably illegal.

    You should be able to boycott any business or country that you wish to.

    Just don’t try to force me to join you in your boycott.

  309. If a labor union or a wildcat group of workers at a supermarket chain refuses to handle Israeli goods lets say

    The last time I’m aware of such an occurrance happening was in the US in the wake of the deaths of the hunger strikers dying more than 35 years ago. But as you say, it’s illegal now in the US.

    I’ll just let the UN / Israel action question rest then as you seem to be comfortable calling for UN or ‘outside’ action for some persecution but not for others.

  310. One silly discussion at a time, Paul.

  311. Obscure ‘smart’ remark about Poughkeepsie or something.

    I was wondering when it would make its appearance.

  312. Boycotts are useful only if a mass phenomenon and hurt the target. Isolated private boycotting is IMO a waste of time.
    In the case of Israel, nothing short of the EU closing its doors to Israeli imports could effect a change, and probably not even that.
    We shall have to wait for Israel, like so many other ethnic cleaners, to choke on its own greed, I’m afraid

    Meanwhile, I shall be voting for the Irish lass in Tel Aviv on Thursday. We have three landlines and four mobiles in the house here, so I’ll be able to vote early and often.

  313. Fair enough Noel. As I said three days ago:

    Paul McMahon, on May 12th, 2019 at 3:46 PM Said:

    Boycotts can work but ultimately it’s a form of personal protest. For example, I try not to buy Israeli produce. It may not have a huge effect on the Israeli economy but my conscience is clear.

  314. About 2 or 3 years ago, the EU ruled that all products imported from Israeli settlements in Palestine and E. Jerusalem were to be labelled as such and were a.f.a.i.k. then not covered by the free trade deals between the EU and Israel (which also apply to Palestine).
    This was a good idea; I think most people would prefer not to buy stuff made in the settlements, even though that would of course also hurt Palestinians working for the Israelis there. But the ruling was left up to the individual states to implement, and as far as I know only France has actually gone ahead with the labelling.

    Better than a private boycott IMO would be to lobby your local or national govt or food supplier to follow the labelling directive, or not to stock such products in the first place.

  315. If I may quote Sweet Dickinson Willie from Do The Right Thing, “What you oughta do is boycott that goddamn barber that fucked up your head!”

  316. I’ve seen products for sale here that said ” Made in the West Bank ” or something like that.

  317. Noel,

    Sort of – the EU has separate free trade agreements with Israel and with the Palestinian territories. If I recall, Israeli settlement goods were claiming Israeli origin to avail of the EU-Israel FTA but the ECJ ruled they couldn’t as they didn’t actually originate in Israel.

  318. This year, as it was in 1979 and 1999, the Eurovision Song Contest will be held in Israel.

    Why not? If Israelis in Greece can provide aid to Ghanaian refugees from the war in Syria, then anything goes.

    https://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-5473381,00.html

    Greek refugee aid centers are mainly operated by Israelis; in Lesbos there is an Israeli school for Syrian, Iranian, Iraqi and Afghan refugees

    In Lesbos, the Israeli aid workers set up the School of Peace, which had four classes in different languages: Arabic, Dari (a dialect of the Persian language common in Afghanistan), Kurdish and French, for the benefit of refugees from Ghana.