IRISH HYPOCRISY...
Saturday, December 27, 2008 at 10:09PM For some reason, Ireland never misses the opportunity to bash Israel. And so it is that I note that Foreign Affairs Minister Micheál Martin has condemned Israel’s devastating air strikes against Gaza which have killed as many as 140 people.
Mr Martin urged Israel to immediately halt its attacks and allow humanitarian agencies access to the Hamas-controlled Palestinian territory. “I condemn in the strongest terms Israel’s action in launching air strikes in Gaza against Hamas targets which have resulted in widespread civilian fatalities,” he said.
Hey Michael - why were you MUTE when Hamas were rocketing Israel on a daily basis. After lashing out at Israel, little Martin adds that Israel does have the right to live in peace (How gracious of him) but each day, when the Hamas rockets fell from the skies, Martin was mute - and dumb.
View Printer Friendly Version
Reader Comments (51)
Has he commented on previous Israeli strikes? Or has he stayed silent on any Palestinian actions that have killed 150 people?
There is a question of scale.
I am being a bit pedantic here fo course. There are plenty of folk who will condemn this but didnt care about the regular bombardment the Israelis were experiencing.
As well as that - if I was a Palestinian I woulbe furious with Hamas - they're hardly a walking arguement in favour of the Israelis withdrawing from other occupied territory..
Israel has the right to defend itself. Hamas continued to fire occasional rockets during the "ceasefire".
But this Israeli incursion will end and Hamas will re-group. There is no military solution to Israel-Palestine. It will have to be political, and it could still be decades away.
The people of Gaza have a right to defend themselves.
It was Israel that broke the ceasefire arranged between them.
Israel's policy of isolating and weakening Hamas has clearly failed. As Peter says, this attack will do for Hamas what the Lebanon invastion in 2006 did for Hezbollah.
Israel strike comes from weakness not strength. Peter is correct above.
David, I must have missed the Irish airstrikes that killed a couple of hundred civilians. Or perhaps your headling should actually read "Irish minister displays a lack of balance". Doesn't quite have the same punch though...
As someone not from Ireland or the UK (I'm from Australia), I would like to know why the Irish have an almost perverse fascination with the middle east conflict considering the events there have no impact on their lives or on their nation? Why do they side with the arabs who culturally and religiously have nothing in common with them? Why do they also completely ignore other conflicts around the globe that are much more violent and cause the loss of many more lives, such as the muslim genocide of other muslims in Darfur? Why have they jumped on the palestinian bandwagon and ignored for example Bangladeshi muslim elite forces torturing and massacring innocent civilians in Bangladesh? I am intrigued because every Irish tourist I have met here (I work in a bar and meet alot of them) has always spoken of this conflict as if it is their own.
Thanks and Regards,
Ben
Ben
Probably because less than twenty years ago the Irish Government was happy to allow its territory to harbour Hamas's equivalent, who would then launch attacks on British sovereign soil.
Thanks for the reply Andrew
So they automatically support terrorists worldwide because they never really gave up terrorism themselves. Thanks for the clarification.
>>Thanks for the clarification.<<
And if you accept "clarification" by someone like Andrew McCann(!) on how the Irish think, I think it’s quite clear to all what answers you really wanted to hear, Ben.
So spare us the phoney curiosity about the Irish in future please.
It is a bit strange Ben, given the historic connection between those who set up the Irish state and the Israeli state. One of the main gunrunners to the Hagannah was an Irish Jew caled Robert Briscoe, who also smuggled weapons to the IRA. The IRA were viewed very positively by those fighting for Israeli independence - Yitzhak Shamir used to call himself "Michael Collins" as a code name, I believe.
The real reason is that a lot of people in Europe (and America) feels some connection to the middle east - in the Christian tradition you grow up with stories about Palestine, bethlehem, Jerusalem etc. We recognise the places from the Bible.
Also Israel likes to style itself a western democracy and indeed enters Eurovision song contest- further increasing our interest.
They also recognise a militarily powerful colonial power beating the sh1t out of people in their own country - then "planting" colonists of a different ethnicity on occupied territory. It bears some similarities to a lot of periods of Irish history, you see.
(The last paragraph isnt meant to support the chumps's Hamas rocket firing from un-occupied territory, by the way)
Good summary, Andy. And about as accurate as you can get.
"So spare us the phoney curiosity about the Irish in future please".
Why is his opinion and response any less valid than yours?
Cheers for the answer Andy.
Ben
Andrew's comments on Irish affairs are to be taken with a grain of salt as
a) he isn't Irish ( the lesser reason ) and
b) he is openly hostile to the Irish state and to the Irish people, despite occasional faux-respectful comments.
Not that long ago, in a moment of "whimsy" he expressed a wish that the nationalist population of the north be carpet-bombed.
You'll get a more useful and informed comment about Irish political opinion by canvassing the Tonga Bloggers Association.
The reason people are not happy about this is that it is totally disproportionate. How many Israelis are diying not many at the moment.At the same time people have a right not to live in fear. What we need to do in Gaza is to take it back from absolute chaos and insanity . We do not do it by going wild. The people who are interested in getting this right need to keep prodding and unsettling hamas not creating hysteria. Its one for the long haul. What Ireland is against is whipping a situation up into hysteria
Paul, what do you consider to be a 'proportionate' response to launching of rockets by 'palestinians'? As far as I am aware, a proportionate response to attack is the minimum which will prevent such attacks from re-occurring.
Ben
Thanks for your gracious reply.
The issue of why Israel/palestine gets so much coverage when the death toll is lower than Sudan / Congo etc is often mooted.
I would put it down to the reasons above, as well as pointing out that people are fickle. South Africa got "too much" coverage in the 80s compared to the oppression, in , say Tibet or Guatemala, - its just the way things are.
Noel - thanks for your kind words.
Allan
Unfortunataely given the pig-headedness of Hamas that could mean wiping out every man, women and child in Gaza. In no other political situation on earth would that be viewed as proportionate.
Again, in no other political situation on earth would a 200:1 death toll be viewed as anything other than a disproprtionate response.
Having said that of course - Hamas had fair warning and bear ultimate responsibility.
"The reason people are not happy about this is that it is totally disproportionate. How many Israelis are diying not many at the moment."
500 million arabs who want 5 million jews dead. There's a proportion for you Paul.
Hamas doesn't want to inflict proportionate casualties. It explicitly wants ever single Jew in Israel dead. Numeric proportions go out of the window when you are faced with neighbours who want to exterminate every single one of you and are trying their best within their fortunately limited means to achieve it.
And Noel, to say that Israel broke the ceasefire is nothing more than a complete lie. The ceasefire was a joke - not one day went by when Hamas didn't send a rocket attack into Israel. But what else do we expect from you?
These strikes have taken place against military installations - all fair and above board according to international law. All this BS about 'disproportionate responses' is absolute nonsense - if your enemy uses a blunt club on you and you are holding a machine gun you are not obliged to try and club him with it instead of shooting. That phrase has only come into being as a stick to beat the Jews with - I'm sure you'd all prefer it if they'd lay down and take a beating but this time around they *are* firing back.
Am Yisrael Chai.
Any evidence for that line about "not one day went by when Hamas didnt send a rocket attack into Israel"?
I read the Israeli pres on a daily basis and certainly didnt see that.
The Israeli government arent even claiming that. The ISraelis and Palis both fired rockets at each other during that time period, and a number of Israeli attacks were not preceeded by any Palestinian action.
While you're at it you may want to include some evidence on Hamas wanting to kill every Jew etc. I'm not actually defendign them, or particualrly doubtful, just you repeatr it enough times so I presume You would have some strong evidence.
And the fact is, in any other situation then these actions would be widely decried as disproportionate. If the IRA had fired a number of mortars without inflicitng casualties and the response of the British Army was to kill over 200 people - you can be sure the world would have united (US included) in criticsing the "disproportionate response".
However, just because it is disproportionate doesnt mean it is completely unjustified. I take your club/machine gun analogy - it is valid. Just because Hamas are using the worst tactics since the Al-Mahdi mob in Sudan doesnt mean Israel has to.
When someone says that they want to kill you, believe them.
Hamas wants to destroy the Jewish state. The Israelis believe them.
Phantom
As I said I wasnt particularly doubtful on that. I certainly didnt want to give the impression I was defending those imbeciles. I just wondered if it was one of those things that gets repeated or if they had issued some statement saying "we want to kill all the jews" or words to that effect.
Of course they have made a habit of killing innocent Jews. However the UVF made a habit of killing innocent Catholics - but I dont think anyone thinks they wanted to kill ALL Northern Irish Catholics.
Saying you dont accept Israel's right to exist (as stupid and pointless as that is) is not the same as saying you want to kill everyone in it.
As bad as the UVF was - and they were unforgivable, inhuman in some of the things they did -- they never targeted children. Which Hamas has of course done, and which they remain unrepentent about.
Its terror at a much higher level of depravity, which points directly at the extermination core beliefs that Hamas holds dear.
"UVF was - and they were unforgivable, inhuman in some of the things they did -- they never targeted children"
No, they just threw bottles of piss over the Catholic School children at Holycross.
I'd hardly compare that depraved and profoundly unmanly activity on the part of UVF or whoever - to driving a bomb laden car into a school bus - which Hamas did and which they're still congratulating themselves over.
"I'd hardly compare that depraved and profoundly unmanly activity on the part of UVF or whoever - to driving a bomb laden car into a school bus - which Hamas did and which they're still congratulating themselves over."
I didn't compare anything. You said the UVF never targated children, I merely qualified your inaccuracy.
The real reason for Irish interest in the Israeli/Palestinian problem is the same as that of most countries interest. It has been the most widely reported, focused and commented on and internationally politically involved inter-state conflict since the Second World War. It is the single most potent crucible of world power poltiics and while other conflicts involve much greater casualties and suffering none have ever had the attention of this one.
>>And Noel, to say that Israel broke the ceasefire is nothing more than a complete lie.<<
Only to someone with well blinkered eyes like you have.
The ceasefire was being maintained by both sides until Israel broke it with an attack on Gaza that killed 8 (I think) Hamas members on the night of 4 November. Since then Hamas has considered the ceasefire broken and has been firing rockets at Israel regularly.
I can understand that you had to keep your eyes shut that night to the sight of someone like Obama being elected, but the story was also carried in the papers next day. And then there are the weeklies..
Chris
The segue was killing by the UVF, beginning at Andy's 6;44, the context which is understandable by anyone reading the back and forth responses which follow.
The unmanly, vulgar and scatalogical acts by the UVF and whoever was with them were not killing or close to it
I'll forgive your misreading of the context if you forgive my technical error.
>>acts by the UVF and whoever was with them were not killing or close to it<<
For the record, the UVF also deliberately killed several children in NI, Phantom.
I recall an occasion I remember hearing on the news when they (or the UFF) deliberately killed children queing at an Ice cream van in the nationalist part of Derry city.
Noel
This I did not know. Can you please provide details of these incidents.
And I know about the Shankill Butchers, so let's not pin the deeds of them on the others. They're all horrible, but they're not all the same.
The Hamas murders I refer to were of six and seven year olds riding on a school bus. And they committed other attacks on schoolage kids, but that one does stick in the mind.
>>Noel
This I did not know. Can you please provide details of these incidents.<<
Phantom, there were many:
Gerald McAuley (15) was one of the first people killed in the troubles. Shot by UVF gunmen when helping people evacuate their homes that had been torched by loyalist gangs.
Marie McGurk (14) and James Cromie (13) were killed when the UVF left a bomb in the pub where they worked.
Rory Gormley (14) Michael Turner (16) and Martha Campbell (13) were shot dead from passing cars when walking or playing on the streets in Belfast (3 separate incidents)
Most tragic of all was David McClenaghan (15). He was a mentally retarded boy. One evening a UVF gang broke into the house of his mother, a widow and mother of 3 kids, took the woman and boy up to a bedroom, raped the mother and shot dead the boy.
These are all from just the first 3 years of the Troubles.
( I almost don't want to say this because it can and perhaps will be misconstrued as being in the slightest sympathy with the sectarian murder gangs )
I will qualify my 7pm to state " young children ".
I'd not think of teenagers as "children", especially those who are independent enough to work outside the home.
Hamas targeted six and seven year olds. And were proud of it.
Hey Noel,
Try this letter from the supposedly 'impeccable' Human Rights Watch.
http://www.hrw.org/en/news/2008/11/20/letter-hamas-stop-rocket-attacks?
"We recognize that until last week Hamas took efforts to halt rocket attacks by other groups as part of the June 19 ceasefire. However, throughout the ceasefire period other armed groups have continued to intermittently fire rockets from Gaza."
Other armed groups. *snigger*
"In the most recent incident, on October 23, a Palestinian man stabbed to death Avraham Ozer, an 86-year-old year Israeli pensioner in Gilo, an Israeli settlement south of Jerusalem.
Sami Abu Zuhri, a Hamas spokesman in Gaza, characterized this attack in an email statement to local media as an “operation” that “proves the Palestinian people are committed to the resistance with all its forms...."
The Palestine Now Network quoted Salah al-Bardaweel, the spokesman for the Hamas parliamentary bloc, as referring to such attacks as “heroic operations.” "
What Israel did on 4th November was collapse a tunnel which had been dug into Israeli territory in direct violation of the ceasefire. And if you are trying to claim by your ridiculous doctrine of proportion that the loss of eight Hamas 'soldiers' justifies firing literally dozens of rockets deliberately at purely civilian targets then you really are showing yourself as an utter hypocrite.
>>especially those who are independent enough to work outside the home.<<
They were working at home. It was their father's pub.
Phantom
You are clutching at straws there. There isn't a great deal of moral difference between targetting a 14 year old and a 7 year old purely becasue of their racial or religious belonging. Both are the actions of cowardly scum.
OK
It was an attack on an adult place of business where young people happened to be. Not the same as attacking a [ readily identifiable ] schoolbus, or god help us, a school building, which Hamas has I believe also done.
Colm
Killing any innocent is indefensible. But attacking six and seven year olds in a school bus is a new low in the long and disgusting history of terrorism.
I have no respect for any the loyalist gangs, but they never did this thing that Hamas did. I was unsure for a minute there, but now I think its pretty clear that we were talking about different things.
Isn't this all rather pointless ? - comparing the respective viciousness of Irish/British and middle Eastern terrorists.
I think its rather important to discuss the differences. I've never accepted the " they're all the same " line of reasoning.
Hezbollah is not Al Queda and the UDA is not the IRA and Abu Sayeff is not the Tamil Tigers.
Most or all may belong in hell, but its important to think it through and to recognize the various depravities.
Like in the purely criminal gangs-
The Italian mafia would typically never touch the wife or a young child of a rival mobster who was terminated
The Colombian drug gangs will rape and kill the wife, and kill all the children, including a baby in the crib.
Its simple to say "they're all criminal killers". These different pathologies tell us something.
>>And if you are trying to claim by your ridiculous doctrine of proportion that the loss of eight Hamas 'soldiers' justifies firing literally dozens of rockets deliberately at purely civilian targets t<<
What are you talking about my "doctrine of proportion" (???!!!)? I never used the term (and never would). I think "proportion" is a favourite word of yours. I also never said the killing of the 8 Hamas members justified the rockets. I merely said that Israel broke a ceasefire that Hamas had been maintaining until then. Contrary to what you and others here suggested.
For what it's worth. I don't think anything justifies firing rockets into Israel, or at civilian targets anywhere.
The fact is, however, that Israel's policy since Hamas came to power has been to isolate, weaken and destroy it as a political force if possible. That policy inevitably led to incidents like that on 4 Nov, which in turn destroyed any prospect of the ceasefire continuing.
Apart from that, my opinion is that this is all a side-show and, notwithstanding the tragic loss of life, of little political consequence. The decisions will be made in Washington by the new administration there, and any hope of peace will have to entail Israeli disengagement from all the occupied territories in return for a guarantee of its security.
The prospect of merely peace and security, but no territorial gain, is one Israel is not yet ready to accept. Hopefully the Obama govt. will be able to change that.
alaninaberdeen
israel needs to realise that their in it for the long hall. they need to tire them out run them down demoralise them marginalise them devide them foster fear within their ranks but do not kill them in their masses
Noel - Give up all occupied territories to kleptocratic terrorists to guarantee peace? I have a bridge in Brooklyn to sell you.
Certainly negotiations can include removal of settlements, and an eventual return of certain land (and it must be substantial), but what the Arabs have not won by force of arms and terrorism need not be returned to them on vague promises of unrequited peace.
And no American Administration will or should suggest suicide as an option to Israel.
Phantom
Why didn't you expand on my reasons of 'open hostility' to the Irish State? Was it because you might have had to mentioned their former illegal claim on UK territory? Their bolt holes for IRA gunmen? Their repeated refusal to extradite IRA terrorists to the UK? Their repeated past refusal to accept international law?
When the Tongan State experiences territorial irredentism from a neighbouring country then your analogy might make some sense.
'then "planting" colonists of a different ethnicity'...
Despite overlooking the very inconvenienct fact that people from Scotland has been settling in Ulster centuries before the Plantation took place.
'...on occupied territory.'
To date no Irish nationalist apologist has given me an accurate legal definition of how Northern Ireland is 'occupied territory'. I think you'll be no different.
>>Certainly negotiations can include removal of settlements, and an eventual return of certain land (and it must be substantial), but what the Arabs have not won by force of arms and terrorism need not be returned to them<<
They there is going to be more war. And "the Arabs" are going to continue to be justified in waging it, as the inhabitants of land occupied by a foreign power always are.
Andrew
I know of no " Irish nationalist apologist " here. There's nothing to apologize for.
This particular political ground has been gone over many times and I choose not to fight any of it again today.
My only point above was that you were not really qualified to answer Ben's question, that you were so close emotionally to the issue that you couldn't speak objectively, or seek to do so.
Had you said something along the lines of:
The Irish see (false?) parallels to their own struggle for independence
Some of the university set are influenced by pan - European hostility to Israel and may not be thinking as independently as they might
Coverage by RTE and BBC is so one sided in presenting the Palestinian side of things that they have influenced public opinion greatly
The IRA had tacit alliances with "liberation movements" worldwide and this may have influenced "progressive" opinion in Ireland
But you said none of these things.
Lots of Irish people, including those here, don't particularly care for any Irish govt, including that of twenty years ago. That argument holds no water whatever.
Those who believe that Palestianian violence is justified seem to think that Israel should rely on their counsel for peace. Sort of like asking a homeowner to listening to a person cheering an arsonist for the best way to put out a fire.
'There's nothing to apologize for.'
There's plenty to apologise for!!!!!! How about holding an illegal territorial claim for the best part of 62 years?
'This particular political ground has been gone over many times and I choose not to fight any of it again today.'
Yet you were the one who brought it up.
Here is a Tonga based blog chosen at random.Perhaps the conversation can be picked up there.
Good old selective indignation! Including a list of terror acts from Noel, were told from the first three years committed by Loyalist paramilitaries. Didnt the IRA , who reveled in their discription as the most ruthless terrorist group in Western Europe commit such acts then? Once troops fom the mainland became involved in Ulster, it was only natural that the Westminster Government would want a greater say! I dont recall Gerry or Bernadette refusing British Army medical support in their hour of need, in fact without it Bernadette would be dead.She bought the Army medic who saved her life a glass bowl. Most people accuse her and Paisley of doing a lot of the stirring that led to the troubles. She unlike Paisley has remained true to her convictions! Ulsters safe! Eileens in the Lords!