Taoiseach is anti-semitic

[Purple]

Your posts are replete with whataboutery, attempts to conflate Judaism with Zionism and the two favourite hasbara trick questions
Do you think that Israel has a right to exist and Do you think that Israel has a right to defend itself or is it herself?

Can you try that again in a more coherent way please?
My question was simple; do you think Israel has the right to exist? If you do then you are a Zionist.

I've seen nothing from you that you wouldn't find in western MSM.

Do you mean mainstream media? It’s just the media my dear fellow. The rest, social media, is not media at all. It is the digital equivalent of a bunch of people on barstools.

Have you read any books on the conflict and if so which?

Yes, dozens over the last 30+ years. I’ve also read about the region in pre-Christian times, more than 20 books on the Crusades, many books on Islam and the influence of the cultures they conquered on the evolution of their religion.

 

[jimmij]

Can you try that again in a more coherent way please?

You specialise in whataboutery. As in what about the Uighurs? What about the Sudanese? Do you understand now?
You also try to conflate Judaism with Zionism to such a degree that using the word zionist is enough for you to call someone a bigot, me for example. OK?
In other words you play the anti-semitism card, repeatedly.
Finally there are your disingenuous questions such as asking people if they believe that Israel has a right to exist.
Those are just standard zionist trick questions. If you don't understand why, google it.

Can you try that again in a more coherent way please?
My question was simple; do you think Israel has the right to exist? If you do then you are a Zionist.

You also said that if you don't then you are advocating for genocide. Another zionist propaganda point.

Do you mean mainstream media? It’s just the media my dear fellow. The rest, social media, is not media at all. It is the digital equivalent of a bunch of people on barstools.

The best journalists rarely or never appear on mainstream media.
They don't toe the line.
MSM is largely a mouthpiece for corporate and government interests, they don't have real journalists just ones who sit in hotels a safe distance from the action. They do put on helmets and flak jackets for the camera and occasionally go on a carefully curated trip with the military.
They know what to say and what to not say.
If you can't see that from the coverage of Gaza even in Public Service organisations such as the BBC then you never will. The way the stories are presented, what is highlighted and what's buried. The way Israeli victims' lives and losses are given the full Princess Diana treatment while Palestinian ones mostly remain faceless and anonymous, not real people, not like us. The way Israeli statements are reported without qualification while Palestinian ones are all given with a health warning.
Every piece on the conflict has to to carry a mandatory reference to what's always termed a massacre, 16 months ago.
By comparison when an Israeli bomb kills, the deaths are commonly referred to in the passive tense, those people just died, somehow.
The failure to correct the record even when Israeli lies are exposed such as the one about the rapes on October 7th for which ZERO evidence has emerged. Yet as as little as a day or two ago you were repeating it here.
Similarly with your claim about the extent of Hamas's tunnel network. Something you doubtless picked up somewhere and found agreeably congruent with your prejudices.

Whenever Israel do something particularly bad which you can't defend you pull your punches.
It's not israel, it's this particular Israeli government.

Yes, dozens over the last 30+ years. I’ve also read about the region in pre-Christian times, more than 20 books on the Crusades, many books on Islam and the influence of the cultures they conquered on the evolution of their religion.

That's terrific. I'm interested in the books that have informed your views on Palestine since the late 19th century or later and which you feel entitle you to tell others that they are ignorant by comparison.

 

[Purple]

You specialise in whataboutery. As in what about the Uighurs? What about the Sudanese? Do you understand now?

You care about one conflict in the world but not others. Why? If your concern for this conflict is based on a humanitarian interest in the suffering of the people of Gaza or in the broader injustices perpetrated against the Palestinian Arabs in the West Bank and Gaza then why don't you care about bigger and bloodier conflicts where there is far greater injustice and oppression. Have you a family link to the area or are you motivated by a specific dislike of Israel? If it's the latter I suggest some self examination. Do you understand now?

You also try to conflate Judaism with Zionism to such a degree that using the word zionist is enough for you to call someone a bigot, me for example. OK?

I'm not conflating the two. Zionism is the belief that there should be a Jewish homeland in the Middle East. Judaism is a religion and, in some cases, an ethnicity. Two very different things. Using the term Zionist in a pejorative way to describe the Jewish people who live in Israel is bigoted so if you do it then you're a bigot.

In other words you play the anti-semitism card, repeatedly.

If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck...

Finally there are your disingenuous questions such as asking people if they believe that Israel has a right to exist.
Those are just standard zionist trick questions. If you don't understand why, google it.

I'll ask you again, it's not a trick, just a yes or no question; do you think Israel has the right to exist.

You also said that if you don't then you are advocating for genocide. Another zionist propaganda point.

The State of Israel exists. If you want to see it wiped out what would you call it other than advocating Genocide?

The best journalists rarely or never appear on mainstream media.
They don't toe the line.
MSM is largely a mouthpiece for corporate and government interests, they don't have real journalists just ones who sit in hotels a safe distance from the action. They do put on helmets and flak jackets for the camera and occasionally go on a carefully curated trip with the military.
They know what to say and what to not say.
If you can't see that from the coverage of Gaza even in Public Service organisations such as the BBC then you never will. The way the stories are presented, what is highlighted and what's buried. The way Israeli victims' lives and losses are given the full Princess Diana treatment while Palestinian ones mostly remain faceless and anonymous, not real people, not like us. The way Israeli statements are reported without qualification while Palestinian ones are all given with a health warning.
Every piece on the conflict has to to carry a mandatory reference to what's always termed a massacre, 16 months ago.
By comparison when an Israeli bomb kills, the deaths are commonly referred to in the passive tense, those people just died, somehow.
The failure to correct the record even when Israeli lies are exposed such as the one about the rapes on October 7th for which ZERO evidence has emerged. Yet as as little as a day or two ago you were repeating it here.
Similarly with your claim about the extent of Hamas's tunnel network. Something you doubtless picked up somewhere and found agreeably congruent with your prejudices.

Whenever Israel do something particularly bad which you can't defend you pull your punches.
It's not israel, it's this particular Israeli government.

Okay, you're a conspiracy theorist. Now I understand.
I'm done with you.

That's terrific. I'm interested in the books that have informed your views on Palestine since the late 19th century or later and which you feel entitle you to tell others that they are ignorant by comparison.

Be careful some of them were written by journalists such as Robert Fisk, Ari Shavit and Ian Black, some even written by politicians such as Conor Cruse O'Brien. You probably think they are all part of the conspiracy...

 

[jimmij]

You care about one conflict in the world but not others. Why? If your concern for this conflict is based on a humanitarian interest in the suffering of the people of Gaza or in the broader injustices perpetrated against the Palestinian Arabs in the West Bank and Gaza then why don't you care about bigger and bloodier conflicts where there is far greater injustice and oppression. Have you a family link to the area or are you motivated by a specific dislike of Israel? If it's the latter I suggest some self examination. Do you understand now?

This reminds me of the trope where every accusation is actually a confession.
You're the one who's obsessed with Israel. Your only interest in the Uighurs or the Sudanese is to use them as a tool to accuse others of being anti-semitic.
Whataboutery is a fraudulent form of debate but when you're defending the indefensible, needs must I suppose.

I'm not conflating the two. Zionism is the belief that there should be a Jewish homeland in the Middle East. Judaism is a religion and, in some cases, an ethnicity. Two very different things. Using the term Zionist in a pejorative way to describe the Jewish people who live in Israel is bigoted so if you do it then you're a bigot.

It's like talking to the wall. That's WHY I use the term zionist. It's so as to NOT conflate Jews with Zionism the way you do.

If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck...

Everything's a duck to you then

I'll ask you again, it's not a trick, just a yes or no question; do you think Israel has the right to exist.

Does the Soviet Union have a right to exist?
There is no such concept in international law as a state's 'right to exist'.
Human Beings have a right to exist, not states.
The settler colonial project that led to the planting of a Jewish State in a land overwhelmingly populated by non-Jews was wrong and should never have happened.
Its British sponsors thought it would give them a loyal little Jewish-Ulster in the Levant to help guard their Suez passage to India (which they'd earlier embezzled from Egypt as was their wont).

The State of Israel exists. If you want to see it wiped out what would you call it other than advocating Genocide?

Was the Soviet Union "wiped out" too, was there a genocide?

Okay, you're a conspiracy theorist. Now I understand.
I'm done with you.

You can take a horse to water but you cannot make him drink. Adios pardner.

Be careful some of them were written by journalists such as Robert Fisk, Ari Shavit and Ian Black, some even written by politicians such as Conor Cruse O'Brien. You probably think they are all part of the conspiracy...

I can see now where you're coming from. Ari Shavit. LOL.
Without the Lydda massacre there could never have been night clubs in Israel to match New York.
No Lydda, no great nightlife distills his justification for the Nabka.
Ari certainly liked clubbing...

 

[Purple]

Can understand Harris as he has little experience but surprised Martin has not been more diplomatic. But chasing popular votes of course. Good Prime Time last night on how we have lost that one thing we had been good at over the decades, keeping good relations with everyone. Eaten bread is soon forgotten.

And he'll be the next Minister for Foreign Affairs. I like Harris but he's utterly unsuited to that position.

 

[Duke of Marmalade]

No Lydda, no great nightlife distills his justification for the Nabka.
Ari certainly liked clubbing...

This had me looking up Nabka on Wikipedia, a medium that I still trust, pretty accurate on NI where I have first hand experience.
I have to say that it was an eye opener. They pull no punches that the Palestinians have been subject to huge injustice, not just from Israel but from Arab countries themselves. Israel on the other hand is portrayed as the aggressor manipulating international organisations first to gain rights to land in Palestine but then to flout the conditions. Very similar to the Ulster plantation of the 17th century and just as barbaric with numerous massacres. 400 years later Ulster is getting near living with its past, I fear that Israel/Palestine have a long way to go, not helped by the barbarism of Hamas and, I suppose I have to concede, a disproportionate response from Israel.

 

[jimmij]

This had me looking up Nabka on Wikipedia, a medium that I still trust, pretty accurate on NI where I have first hand experience.
I have to say that it was an eye opener. They pull no punches that the Palestinians have been subject to huge injustice, not just from Israel but from Arab countries themselves. Israel on the other hand is portrayed as the aggressor manipulating international organisations first to gain rights to land in Palestine but then to flout the conditions. Very similar to the Ulster plantation of the 17th century and just as barbaric with numerous massacres. 400 years later Ulster is getting near living with its past, I fear that Israel/Palestine have a long way to go, not helped by the barbarism of Hamas and, I suppose I have to concede, a disproportionate response from Israel.

Hi Duke.
I'm glad that my post got you to look up the Nabka.
I had my eye-opening moment about Palestine during one of Israel's previous "mowing the lawn" exercises in Gaza.
It's a very deep rabbit-hole, it's taken me to finding out a lot more about America and the way the world works.

Major-General Smedley Darlington Butler (July 30, 1881 – June 21, 1940) was a United States Marine Corps officer and writer. During his 34-year military career, he fought in the Philippine–American War, the Boxer Rebellion, the Mexican Revolution, World War I, and the Banana Wars. At the time of his death, Butler was the most decorated Marine in U.S. military history. By the end of his career, Butler had received sixteen medals, including five for heroism; he is the only Marine to be awarded the Marine Corps Brevet Medal as well as two Medals of Honor, all for separate actions.
...
In 1933, Butler became involved in a controversy known as the Business Plot, when he told a United States congressional committee that a group of wealthy American industrialists were planning a coup d'état to overthrow President Franklin D. Roosevelt. Butler also claimed that the plotters of the alleged coup intended on using Butler, at the head of a group of veterans, to place the federal government under arrest. The individuals alleged to be involved in the coup all denied the existence of such a plot and the media ridiculed Butler's allegations, but a final report following an investigation by a special House of Representatives committee confirmed at least some of his testimony.

- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smedley_Butler

Today there's no need for a coup d'etat in the USA.
The democracy problem has been 'solved'.
Money owns Congress and the Presidency via the power of their political donations as well as the money they lavish on retired politicians and top military men.
There's often an overlap between the aims of different interest groups, most obviously AIPAC and the Military-Industrial Complex. America's continual warmongering feed the Arms industry, most of the money voted to support places like Ukraine ends up back in America buying arms.
And it's all so blatant, see, for example, Congress giving Netenyahu over fifty standing ovations during his speech a few months back.

Britain's empire made Britain money. There was a tiny British administration in charge in somewhere like India. Underneath them was a larger Indian elite who were in charge of really running the country. Those people did well and so were loyal. Underneath them huge numbers of people toiled for very little.
India supplied England with cheap commodities. India was also in turn Britain's captive market for its industrial goods.
British exporters didn't have to compete with Germany or whoever else there.

When Britain had an empire you could see it on the map, same with Spain. America replaced Spain and Britain (and France and the Dutch).
You don't see their empire on the map. It works in a slightly different way.

In 1935 Smedley Butler wrote :

I spent 33 years and four months in active military service and during that period I spent most of my time as a high class muscle man for Big Business, for Wall Street and the bankers. In short, I was a racketeer; a gangster for capitalism. I helped make Mexico and especially Tampico safe for American oil interests in 1914. I helped make Haiti and Cuba a decent place for the National City Bank boys to collect revenues in. I helped in the raping of half a dozen Central American republics for the benefit of Wall Street. I helped purify Nicaragua for the International Banking House of Brown Brothers in 1902–1912. I brought light to the Dominican Republic for the American sugar interests in 1916. I helped make Honduras right for the American fruit companies in 1903. In China in 1927 I helped see to it that Standard Oil went on its way unmolested. Looking back on it, I might have given Al Capone a few hints. The best he could do was to operate his racket in three districts. I operated on three continents.

The toppling of governments and replacing them with compliant regimes for the benefit of multinationals has only accelerated since then.
When you read stories from mainstream media about 'democratic' movements trying to overthrow 'dictators' in places like Venezuela, you need to read between the lines.
Mainstream media cannot be trusted to not propagandise, even places like the BBC but especially newspapers like the New York Times and the Washington Post.

 

[Duke of Marmalade]

@jimmij Your World view is quite prevalent especially here in Ireland. I don’t share it.

 

[jimmij]

@jimmij Your World view is quite prevalent especially here in Ireland.

Is it? I mustn't be meeting the right people then.

I don’t share it.

That's grand, obviously.
My own worldview has changed hugely in recent years.
For most of my adult life I was a news junkie (print and broadcast).
At one time I used to think it would be terrible if newspapers disappeared.
I still have a sub to the Irish Independent but I just quickly scan through it once a day so I don't miss stuff that might affect my life, such as forthcoming changes in legislation.

 

[jimmij]

Khalida Jarrar, a Palestinian politician, was one of the Palestinians released as part of the ceasefire.
This was after her fifth period of detention, this time since December 2023.

In early August,without informing her family, and still requiring medication, she was incarcerated in a windowless cell measuring 2.5 x 1.5 meters at Neve Tirza and was kept in solitary confinement. According to Gideon Levy, it was furnished with a bed of concrete with a thin mattress, and a mainly unflushed toilet. She reportedly lay on the floor to breathe through a crack beneath her cell door in an attempt to get fresh air. She asked her lawyer to help secure conditions that would allow her to breathe, as she was suffocating.

In her six years of imprisonment, she has been refused leave to attend her father's funeral (2015), that of her mother (2018), of her daughter Suha (2021) who died aged 31. On Suha's death from cardiac arrest in July 2021, Jarrar was denied a temporary release from her imprisonment on humanitarian grounds in order to attend her daughter's funeral. Her son Wadia died in 2024, aged 29, also of a heart attack while she was again under administrative detention.

Khalida Jarrar - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Edit: Video of her on he release https://www.youtube.com/shorts/b5enLgPZktA

 

[Duke of Marmalade]

Our esteemed President raises the Gaza situation at a Holocaust memorial event. The most charitable interpretation is that he is suffering from old age Biden syndrome. There are genocides going on to-day in Africa but Micky shows his racist streak by regarding those folk as savages and not comparable to the atrocities of white nations like Nazi Germany or Israel.

 

[Purple]

There are genocides going on to-day in Africa but Micky shows his racist streak by regarding those folk as savages and not comparable to the atrocities of white nations like Nazi Germany or Israel.

And China where 5-10% of the approximately 2 million Uyghurs detained in concentration camps die each year and force sterilisation, implanted contraception and abortion have seem the birth rate fall by 25%. I wonder what Mickey D would say if it was the Jews doing that?

Then there's Burma where of the 1.3 million Rohingya who were there in 2015 about 900,000 have fled the country, 100,000 are in concentration camps and around 40,000 have been killed. I didn't hear Mickey D opine about that at the Holocaust memorial event. I suppose there were no Jews involved there either and neither side was backed by the evil Americans.

I'm not sure if he mentioned Darfur either, or Yemen or any of the other more serious conflicts which killed and displaced more people. I was too busy being ashamed of our head of State. No Jews involved I suppose so fair enough. He's not anti-Semitic though, god no, perish the thought.

 

[Purple]

Micky D chose the Young Scientist exhibition to make yet another highly political and inappropriate speech. His naive and childish insular view of the world was yet again on show when he started spouting about NATO.

The response from the Chief Foreign Affairs correspondent of The Wall Street Journal was excellent, accurate and succinct. He said "Ireland, whose safety is de-facto guaranteed by Nato, and which not only rides for free but also grandstands lecturing others who, unlike her, don’t have the luxury of being an island off an island off the safe side of Europe and today face an existential threat”.

The Defence editor of the Economist, a left of centre liberal publication, said that people who agreed with him were “detached from reality” and “what's funny is a lot of Irish people seemingly unaware that the president's ramblings are completely at odds with the policy of the Irish government.”

Listening to him really is like listening to a 15 year old socialist. It was funny when he was Minister for Galway but now it's embarrassing and damaging to our country's vital interests.

 

[jimmij]

The most stupid thing that Sweden and Finland did recently was to join NATO.
Russia was not a threat to Finland but now the USA will be adding to its vast array of overseas bases by plonking some in Finland and thereby Finland will become a de-facto threat to Russia.

https://news.usni.org/2023/12/21/new-pact-gives-u-s-military-access-to-15-bases-in-finland

 

[Purple]

The most stupid thing that Sweden and Finland did recently was to join NATO.
Russia was not a threat to Finland but now the USA will be adding to its vast array of overseas bases by plonking some in Finland and thereby Finland will become a de-facto threat to Russia.

Have you any awareness of the history between the two countries?
Are you aware of the sabotage of Finish cables by Russia?

The threat of Russian invasion is a defining characteristic of the Finish identity. It informs their economic, defence and social policies.

Edit: Corrected to change Norway to Finland.

 

[jimmij]

I assume you're referring to Finland and not Norway in your posts

Are you aware of the sabotage of Norwegian cables by Russia?

I'm aware of reports of cables connecting various NATO countries being damaged and insinuations that it's Russia that's behind it.
I wouldn't be surprised either if it was true.
They were also supposed to have blown up their own gas pipeline to Germany.
But then what was this from Biden: https://youtu.be/xWUuhNd37WI?si=r1yB34kz597QNxy7&t=20
Since the US showed no concern about damaging its German ally's economy nothing would surprise me, not even the CIA being behind all of these.

The threat of Russian invasion is a defining characteristic of the Norwegian identity. It informs their economic, defence and social policies.

That's why they were neutral.

 

[Purple]

I assume you're referring to Finland and not Norway in your posts

Yes, my typo/mistake.

 

[Purple]

'm aware of reports of cables connecting various NATO countries being damaged and insinuations that it's Russia that's behind it.

Accusations rather than insinuations.

I wouldn't be surprised either if it was true.

Why?

 

[jimmij]

Why?

For asking that, I can only assume that you're unaware of NATO's involvement in the current war in Ukraine.

 

[Purple]

For asking that, I can only assume that you're unaware of NATO's involvement in the current war in Ukraine.

I am aware that NATO countries are helping democratic Ukraine defend itself from the illegal invasion by the totalitarian dictatorship Russia.

If Russia regards that as an offensive action would you agree that it makes it more likely that Russia is involved in asymmetric attacks on NATO countries? That's why I asked you why you would be surprised if such accusations were true.