Dublin “Die-in” in support of Lebanon and Palestine

by Jan Palach - Palestine Israel Solidarity Campaign Thu Jul 27, 2006 12:06

"So, with eight pro-Palestinian activists in Ireland for every Israeli apologist"

Can't I just be pro-people???

Not looking forward to Saturday in all honesty...

by WTF Thu Jul 27, 2006 12:31

unmasked Israel to those who had failed to grasp that this is exactly what they’ve been doing in Palestine for decades.

WTF -, Since when have Israel been bombing Jordan aka Palestine? I know that Israel withdrew troops from some area acquired after the arabs invaded and were defeated in 67 and then proceeded to get rained on with rockets from palestinians in that area as soon as they withdrew--shows how much they can guarantee security in the areas they are given control of --much like southern lebanon really--under the control of a militia that has been accumulating offensive weapons for 6 years--12,000 rockets or thereabouts --why accumulate OFFENSIVE weaponry and not defensive ehhh...think about that for a little bit, this peacefull militia lovingly funded by Iran and Syria

Those Die-In photos reminded me of what a suicide bomber can do, must be due for a few of them soon in a few shopping centres

by Ali H. Thu Jul 27, 2006 14:31

The root cause of the middle east arms race including Iran's nuclear weapons drive is

1. Israel's 250 nukes, biological and chemical weapons
2. US/Israeli policy against Syria and Iran

Iran is obviously trying to acquire nukes not to drive Jews into the sea but to prevent the US/Israelis from toppling their regieme. It is Iran who is under real threat not Israel and hence the diversionary tactics in Lebanon. This buys them time to get nukes so they can prevent themselves from being invaded i the same way the North Koreans did.

The fact Hezbollah have 10,000 missles is inconsequential compared to the size of Israels arsenal and in any case they were not firing 100s of them at Israel until Israel decided to flatten the whole of Lebanon.

If Israel wants peace it can obtain it by negotiation with its neighbours without pre-conditions.

Attempting to solve Israels "security" "problem" by military means has been seen not to work over almost 60 years.

This latest piece of military adventurism will fail and the Hydra will raise it's head again in 5-10 years time when the weapons technology available to them will be even more fearsome.

The Israelis must be exceptionally stubborn and/or stupid not to have realised this by now.

by hmmz Thu Jul 27, 2006 14:57

perhaps you need some reminding of quotes in history:

Last week, in an address to the delightfully named "World Without Zionism" conference in Tehran, Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad called for Israel to be "wiped off the map." On one level it was refreshing to see that Iran's new president, unlike many Western politicians, does not view elevation to high political office as mutually incompatible with expressing deeply held convictions. But even more unusual than a politician speaking honestly was the international community's rush to condemn a Muslim leader's call for the destruction of the Jewish state.

Of course the responses from individual world leaders--such as Kofi Annan, who expressed "dismay," and Tony Blair, who proclaimed his "real sense of revulsion" at Ahmadinejad's "completely unacceptable" words--are to be welcomed. So too is the response of the 25-member European Union, whose leaders, meeting at the time in London, issued an immediate condemnation noting that "calls for violence, and for the destruction of any state, are manifestly inconsistent with any claim to be a mature and responsible member of the international community."

All this does beg a question, however: Why single out Iran for such exceptional opprobrium at this particular moment? Annan portrayed the comments as contrary to the spirit of the international body he leads, saying that "under the United Nations Charter, all members have undertaken to refrain from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state." Blair, meanwhile, argued that Ahmadinejad's statement was unprecedented. "I have never come across a situation of the president of a country saying they want to wipe out--not that they have got a problem with or an issue with, but want to wipe out--another country," Blair explained.

Both men could use a history lesson. The U.N. Charter was introduced in 1945, and since that time Arab and Muslim leaders have expressed the desire to obliterate the Jewish state with impressive regularity. No sooner was the State of Israel proclaimed on May 14, 1948 than it was invaded by neighboring Arab states, with Arab League Secretary-General Abdel Rahman Azzam proclaiming that "this will be a war of extermination and a momentous massacre which will be spoken of like the Mongolian massacres and the Crusades."

Such rhetoric has been used by a long line of Arab leaders. During the 1950s and '60s it was Egyptian president Gamal Abdel Nasser, the self-styled champion of pan-Arabism, who led the call for Israel's destruction. "During the crusaders' occupation, the Arabs waited seventy years before a suitable opportunity arose and they drove away the crusaders," he proclaimed in late May 1967. "Recently we felt that we are strong enough, that if we were to enter a battle with Israel, with God's help, we could triumph ... our main objective will be the destruction of Israel."

Nasser's goal was ultimately frustrated when Israel routed its Arab adversaries in the shortest war in modern history. But the baton passed to a new generation of aspiring pan-Arab champions, notably Syrian president Hafez Assad and Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein. For his part, Iran's Ayatollah Khomeini emphasized the need to destroy the Jewish state well before coming to power in 1979; and during his reign the destruction of Israel evolved into one of the most fundamental tenets of his revolutionary creed. Since Khomeini's death in June 1989, Iran's approach toward Israel has remained uncompromising, with both conservatives and leading reformers in total agreement on the issue. After meeting Hamas leader Sheikh Ahmad Yasin in 1998, Khomeini's successor, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, vowed that Iran would not recognize Israel "even for one hour" and would "continue to struggle against this cancerous growth." In 2000, he explained that the only "remedy" for Israel was "to destroy the root and cause of the crisis," and in a statement reported by Reuters later in the year he called Israel a "cancerous tumor" which "should be removed from the region." The next year, former Iranian president Ali Akbar Hashemi-Rafsanjani, widely regarded as a pragmatist, noted that Israel was more vulnerable to nuclear attack than Muslim countries "because the use of even one nuclear bomb inside Israel will destroy everything." Then he added, "It is not irrational to contemplate such an eventuality." For his part, former president Mohammed Khatami, often held up as Iran's leading moderate, has described Israel as "a parasite in the heart of the Muslim world" and argued that "all of Palestine must be liberated."

And let's not forget the PLO. Since its establishment in 1964, the organization's publicly stated objective has been the destruction of Israel. In June 1974, the group introduced a new phased strategy whereby it would use whatever land Israel surrendered as a springboard for further territorial gains, until the "complete liberation of Palestine"--in other words the destruction of Israel--"could be achieved." Yet in November 1974, Yasir Arafat became the first non-head-of-state to address the U.N. General Assembly; and in 1975, the year Israel suffered the ultimate indignity of the Zionism-is-racism resolution, the PLO established another precedent when it was invited to sessions of the U.N. Security Council on the same basis as member states. In 1980, just weeks after Fatah, the PLO's dominant constituent group, had reiterated its objective of liquidating Israel, the European Community issued the Venice Declaration that called for the PLO's "association" with the political process.

Given this history, it is hardly surprising that despite their official commitment to peace with Israel within the framework of the Oslo process, Arafat and his PLO successors have never truly abandoned their commitment to Israel's destruction. Instead they have embarked on an intricate game of Jekyll-and-Hyde politics, constantly reassuring Israeli and Western audiences of their peaceful intentions while at the same time denigrating the peace accords to their Palestinian constituents as a temporary measure to be abandoned at the first available opportunity. Neither this duplicity nor the war of terror launched in September 2000 seems to have much discredited the PLO as a peace partner in the eyes of the international community.

by Ali H. Thu Jul 27, 2006 18:59

Your facts are way past their sell-by date ... the PLO are history my friend.

Even the PLO/CIA stooge president Abbas has zero credibility with the vast majority of Palestinians now.

Even less sop now that he was unable to bring about any movement towards a ceasefire despite window-dressing visits from Condi "Matzo Balls" Rice.

The reality is that Israel is only interested in unilateralism since their withdrawl from Lebanon in 2000 leaving a mess behind them.

The fact is that a unilateral approach will not work and bombing the shit out of Hamas and Hezbollah will only postpone the date of the next attacks on Israel.

In this environment it suits Israel to saw that all Muslims want to drive them into the sea. It suits them to say there is no partner for peace.

The reality is that Israel is not interested in being a partner for peace and never has been as a matter of policy.

Laying waste to Gaza and Lebanon over a few hostages who could have been negotiated for, is the action of a bankrupt state racing headlong towards its own destruction.

The alternative would have been to negotiate a prisoner exchange and use this as a stepping stone to engage meaningfully with the Palestinians whose fate is at the root of all the problems in the middle east.

by FedUp Fri Jul 28, 2006 12:20

On the subject of Arabs wanting to destroy Israel - Hamas recently implicitly recognised Israel by calling for a two-state solution to the Israel-Palestine problem in the so-called "Prisoners Statement", offering negotiation. But the US and Israel chose to ignore this and Israel kidnapped members of the Palestinian Authority and continued it's attacks on Gaza.

Also - why to we hear so much about the missiles supplied to Hezbollah by Iran and Syria, but no mention of the weapons of mass destruction supplied by the US to Israel. Even as Ms Rice was expressing her sympathy for the plight of the Lebanese innocents being slaughtered by Israel, the US was rushing more weapons to Israel so the slaughter can continue.

Why are US opposing a cease-fire? And why have they blocked a UN resolution condemning the killing of the 4 UN observers? And why do the US claim to support democracy on the one hand but refuse to accept the will of the Palestinian people in electing Hamas?

The whole thing stinks!

by Revolt Video Fri Jul 28, 2006 12:34 revoltvideo at hushmail dot com

Taken from Indymedia sites around the world

Link:

http://www.indymedia.ie/article/77526

by wtf Fri Jul 28, 2006 13:11

The Legacy of a Terrorist:

He was born in Egypt, as Yasser Abdul-Ra'ouf Qudwa Al-Husseini. In attempts to legitimize himself as a true Palestinian, Yasser claimed he was born in Jerusalem. In fact, Ian Pacepa, a former Romanian intelligence official, has revealed that the KGB had trained him at its Balashikha special-ops school east of Moscow and in the mid-1960s decided to groom him as the future PLO leader. The KGB first destroyed Arafat's official birth records in Cairo Egypt, and then replaced them with fictitious documents stating that he had been born in Jerusalem and viola! Yasser was now a Palestinian by birth. The KGB then went to work on Arafat's four-page tract called "Falastinuna" (Our Palestine), and transformed it into a 48-page monthly magazine for the Palestinian terrorist organization al-Fatah. Arafat had headed al-Fatah since 1957. The KGB distributed the magazine around the Arab world and in West Germany, where many Palestinian students were seeking an education. Arafat was an undercover operative for the KGB and received much support from other KGB puppets such as Egyptian ruler Gamal Abdel Nasser (who proposed Yasser to be the Chairman of the PLO in 1967). In 1969, it was the KGB who prompted Arafat to declare war on American "imperial-Zionism" during the first summit of the Black Terrorist International, a neo-Fascist pro-Palestine organization financed by the KGB and Libya's Moammar Gadhafi. Yasser claimed to be the one to come up with the "imperial-Zionism" strategy to attack the US, but this was actually a favorite tool of Russian intelligence to feed ethnic hatred. The KGB regarded anti-Semitism and anti-imperialism as a valuable instrument in furthering anti-Americanism. Arafat also tried to claim that through his mother, he was related to the "Grand Mufti," Haj Amin al-Husseini. Haj Amin was anti-British and anti-Jewish. He engineered riots against the Jewish people and actually met with Hitler in November of 1941. Palestinian historian Said Aburish, has disputed any relation between al-Husseini and Arafat.

In 1957, Yasser helped in the founding of Fatah, an organization dedicated to the establishment of an independent Palestinian state in place of Israel and Jordan (i.e., historic Palestine).

Fatah began carrying out terrorist attacks on Israeli targets. They received much of their support from Syria. On March 18, 1968, Fatah attacked a school bus full of children, killing two and wounding 28. Israel dropped leaflets in the Jordanian city of Karameh (where Fatah has established its base) three days later, urging civilians to evacuate as they prepared to retaliate. Once the attack ensued, Arafat fled. He continued terrorist activities that lead to over 1,500 dead and wounded by the end of the year. Arafat had set up a "state within a state" in Jordan and on September 12, 1970, Arafat's Palestinian terrorists hijacked 3 planes, landed them in Jordan, and blew them up. King Hussein responded by declaring martial law and civil war ensued. Arafat fled to Syria and then to Lebanon. Once in Lebanon, Arafat began to undermine the central government of that country. In September of 1972, an arm of Fatah, known as Black September (named after the 1970 hijacking stunt), murdered 11 Israeli athletes at the Munich Olympic Games. Arafat's PLO helped destabilize Lebanon and contributed to the civil war, during which Arafat and the PLO were responsible for the persecution and murder of thousands of Lebanese citizens. While in Lebanon, the PLO kept lobbing attacks on Israel. In June 1982, Israel finally answered with a full-scale assault that resulted in the Lebanon War. The United States was able to broker a cease-fire deal and Arafat and was sent to Tunisia, which became his base of operations for the next decade. On October 7, 1985, terrorists hijacked the the cruise ship, Achille Lauro. Arafat was the mastermind behind this tragedy where the Palestinian terrorists shot a wheelchair-bound Jewish passenger named Leon Klinghoffer and dumped his body overboard. After all this fighting and all this violence, Arafat had one more chance. His claim has always been that he is fighting for the Palestinian People. His every action was supposed to be about giving Palestinians their own state. In July of 2000, he was given an offer for just that.

Israeli Prime Minister, Ehud Barak, asked Clinton to call a meeting so that Israel could show its determination in reaching peace. Barak offered a plan beyond what anyone could have imagined. The offer:

Israeli redeployment from 95% of the West Bank and 100% of the Gaza Strip The creation of a Palestinian state in the areas of Israeli withdrawal The removal of isolated settlements and transfer of the land to Palestinian control Other Israeli land exchanged for West Bank settlements remaining under Israeli control Palestinian control over East Jerusalem, including most of the Old City "Religious Sovereignty" over the Temple Mount, replacing Israeli sovereignty in effect since 1967 All Arafat had to do was declare an end to conflict and agree to make no future claims on Israel. The Palestinian negotiating team was very interested in the offer, but Arafat didn't take it. The talks collapsed. They did not collapse due to discussions, but rather due to lack of discussions. Arafat made no counter offers. He made no additional requests. No discussion at all. He just walked away! His whole life had been built on violence against Israel. His entire career was dedicated to total destruction of Israel. He couldn't bring himself to stop the fighting. The Palestinians were finally going to have their own land, but he just walked away!

Let the media outlets, heads of state, and talking heads glorify him as a man who committed his life to the cause of the Palestinian People. I know better, and quite honestly, they do too. His love was not for the people he claimed to be fighting for. His love was for the fight against the people he hated. When the chance was at his fingertips, his hate of Israel was far greater than his love for the Palestinians. To me, he will forever be the blood thirsty terrorist that had peace in his hand, and threw it away. He will be the man that returned to the Palestinians, and instead of bringing them peace and a state of their own, he called them to offer up their lives and the lives of their children. His hate was so bitter, he preferred to see them kill themselves and their young, than to give them their dream. As you watch the news coverage of his death, you may find yourself shaking your head in disbelief, and a voice in your head saying, "He walked away."

by dunk Fri Jul 28, 2006 14:20 fuspey at yahoo dot co dot uk

theres the imc-org feature on this issue
War in the Middle East While the World is Watching
http://www.indymedia.org/en/2006/07/843022.shtml

and also democracy now's constant top coverage http://www.democracynow.org/index.shtml

with 2 features from big names:
Robert Fisk in Beirut: Israeli Assault on Lebanon Inflicting "Mass Punishment on a Whole People"
http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=06/07/19/134...id=25

Noam Chomsky: U.S.-Backed Israeli Policies Pursuing "End of Palestine"; Hezbollah Capture of Israeli Soldiers "Very Irresponsible Act" That Could Lead To "Extreme Disaster"
http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=06/07/14/146258

+ imc-radio audio:

and daily updates from Palestine Today, a service of the International Middle East Media Centre
http://www.imemc.org
latest
http://radio.indymedia.org/news/2006/07/10703.php
and
audio Jul. 27, 2006
http://radio.indymedia.org/uploads/palestine_today_0727...y.mp3

Weekly Summary of israeli War Crimes
http://radio.indymedia.org/news/2006/07/10701.php
latest audio Jul. 27, 2006 ;'
http://radio.indymedia.org/uploads/iwc26jul.mp3

Collective punishment - trademark of Israel

by Paddy Savage - Consistent Life Ethic(inc. animals) Fri Jul 28, 2006 19:56 achorusline19 at hotmail dot com

its obvious this assault from Israel is just a front for the U.S invasion of Iran which they will call intervention,In my view the U.S is the whore of babylon riding on the beast(the woman Israel) its all in revelation.but i wonder how all the lefties feel about the daily hanging of homosexuals and women and also stoning by mad fundamentalist mobs in Islamic countries such as Syria and Iran,and yes im aware capital punishment is prevalent in the U.S also,so what do we do,the international community?? do we allow the armed forces of both the zionazis and islamofacists to wipe out the entire civilian population and infrastructure of both countries? I really think people should sit and think about what this war is really about?? Im under no illusion!!! NO KILLING PERIOD(That includes the unborn and animals).

Love and Light, Homo Paddy

by removefiannafail - www.soldiersofdestiny.org Sat Jul 29, 2006 12:29

Adolf Hitler may be alive and well, in an underground bunker somewhere in Tel Aviv.

by MichaelY - iawm - per cap Sat Jul 29, 2006 14:27

The Backgound and the Grand Plan

It’s been 15 days since Israel invaded Lebanon. It’s been two full weeks since Israel put into action a military plan it had been preparing for 18 months – on a pretext that one of its military convoys on the Israeli-Lebanese border (some say inside Lebanese territory) was attacked by Hezbollah fighters.
The initial PR/media/US and British backed blitzkrieg that this was an “inevitable defensive response by Israel” responding to fundamentalist provocations “aided and abetted by Syria and Iran” held sway for a few days. Even here in Indymedia we have had arguments comparing the Lebanese and Gaza situations to Loyalists firing missiles into Dundalk, or even Drogheda and Dublin…or Canadians firing Scuds into Chicago etc. The message they tried to drum into us was that Israel was right to invade, was correct in bombing Lebanese cities, and as a result, we, the civilised West would benefit from this aggression. Exactly as we were supposed to have benefited from the invasion/and then occupation of Afghanistan and Iraq. And that the price of a few hundred dead in Lebanon, as well as the destruction of that country’s infrastructure was “a price worth paying”!! Hard not to remind ourselves of some similar commentary of Madeleine Albright for whom the death of hundreds of thousands of Iraqi children in the 1990s because of the sanctions was similarly “ a price worth paying”! An initial question worth posing here is who exactly is paying this inflated price….both in terms of lives lost, including that of many many children, but also in terms of the military expenditure exacting that price. Who is exactly paying for the bombs and the uranium depleted missiles raining on the Lebanese?
The plan was to go in, with shock and awe tactics, frighten the life out of the Shiite population supporting the Hezbollah fighters, divide the Lebanese along religious lines, defeat the resistance in a few days and come out as shining crusading knights for democracy and the rest. Create the conditions what Bush and that incomparable Rice called and continue to refer to as “the new Middle East”! To be more specific, in his Press Conference with Blair, yesterday Friday, Bush explained it as: “Our aim is to turn this intense conflict into a moment of opportunity and a chance for broader change in the region”! We are quite a distance away here from a defensive move by Israel provoked by belligerence.
The plan also involved the slamming of Hezbollah by a number of US allies in the Arab world, such as the Saudi and Jordanian Royals…for supposedly recklessly provoking the war. And it also encompassed the sideways attack on Syria and Iran by the EU, and particularly the Blair Government while dissenting voices were either silenced or sidelined. That was the plan…..hatched by Israeli and US intelligence over the last three – four years, ever since in fact the Israelis were defeated and chased out of Lebanon by Hezbollah in 2000.

The Reality

With hundreds of Lebanese dead, and the numbers rising every day and night as Israel continues its bombardment, but most crucially with Hezbollah holding out steadfastly against the much vaunted Israeli military, opinions and the tide in the Arab world, and further afield internationally, are beginning to shift..
The Saudi Royals issued yesterday, Friday, a dire warning that the 2002 Peace Plan – offering Israel full recognition by all Arab States in exchange of it returning to the pre-1967 borders – could perish. “If the peace option is rejected by Israel…”, the Saudi statement continued, “…only the war option remains.”
The Jordanian King Abdallah, from his corner, said Jordan was sending medical personnel and drugs to help the “….the victims of Israeli aggression”.
An outpouring of newspaper columns, cartoons and blogs, as well as public poetry readings in many Arab countries, have showered praise on Hezbollah, while attacking the US for trumpeting this “new Middle East” concept…that catchphrase much used by Shimon Peres who was the principal negotiator of the 1993 Oslo Accords. As the Fawaz al-Trabalsi, a columnist in the Lebanese daily As-Safir said on Thursday, “…the only new thing in the Middle East at the moment is the ability of one courageous group of people to challenge Israel militarily”!
It is also worth noting that Al Jazeera broadcast a tape on Friday from Zawahiri, the second-in-command of Al Qaeda, supporting Hezbollah and arguing that their fight in Iraq against US forces paralleled what Hezbollah was doing. This is a very noteworthy instance of Sunni/Shiite convergence….much more important than Bush’s rantings about a new Middle East.

And what now?

Bush and Blair, during their Press Conference, talked of (another?) plan involving a United Nations Security Council resolution. This resolution would address the root cause of the problem, which according to them, is Hezbollah militancy. The plan included sending Rice back to the region and she’s flying in as these lines are written.
It also has as an objective the dispatching of a multinational force to control the border. They all, of course, understand that the plan could work only if Hezbollah was prepared to allow it to work.
Bush and Blair are hoping that the cloak of a Security Council resolution will force Iran and Syria to tread carefully in their support of Hezbollah while pushing the latter from operating as a politico-military organisation, because to do so would bring the wrath of the United Nations on it.
It is perhaps useful to conclude that these ‘plans’ go right against the grain of popular feeling in the region. An editorial, for example, by Egyptian Ibrahim Issa, who faces a gaol sentence for his previous criticism of President Mubarak, compared current Arab leaders to the medieval princes who let away the Crusaders chip away at Muslim lands until they controlled them all. And poet Ahmed Fouad Negm, said yesterday in an interview: “I asked a street sweeper what he thought of the situation and he said: Uncle Ahmed Nasrallah, the leader of Hezbollah, has awakened the dead man inside me! May God make him triumphant”!

by Mise Sun Jul 30, 2006 02:10

Israel’s Government has thrown its weight behind efforts by supporters to counter what it believes to be negative bias and a tide of pro-Arab propaganda. The Foreign Ministry has ordered trainee diplomats to track websites and chatrooms so that networks of US and European groups with hundreds of thousands of Jewish activists can place supportive messages.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/newspaper/0,,174-2289232,0....html

Just as suspected all those anti-arab ignorant zionist scumbags posting on here and elsewhere are all shills paid for by the Israeli foreign ministry .

by redjade Sun Jul 30, 2006 12:57

Last night ex-pioneer and I went to a vigil/protest organised by the Lebanese Embassy in the centre of Budapest. It was a somber event of hundreds of Lebanese other Arabs and about half of the crowd was Hungarian - I think many of the Lebanese community are beyond anger at this point. What else could one be?

Then to wake this morning to the scenes of the results of an American 'Bunker Buster' and the UN offices attacked by angry crowds.

Makes me wonder if the calm and somber crowds last night are the feeling same today?

Again - this difference between CNN Int'l and BBC World is stark. CNN says Condi canceled a meeting Lebanon - BBC says the Lebanese PM told her not to come. CNN dismisses it all as 'he said - she said'

I'll be closing this week's 'Notes on the Long War'
NotLW.002: Israel and other 'Mistakes'
http://indymedia.ie/article/77427
and starting another today

Budapest Vigil at Vörösmarty ter {redjade photo}

by Felix Quigley Sun Jul 30, 2006 16:19 felixquigley6 at yahoo dot es

Michael Youlton above seems to equate the Hezbollah with a progressive movement, but they are a fascist movement, full of Jew hatred.

Their leader makes it quite plain that he is out for the total destruction of the state of Israel.

Moreover the Hezbollah are surely the creation of Iran with Syria helping. We have seen pictures of Hezbollah giving the fascist salute which is not surprising since the founder of the Palestinian movement was a Nazi War Criminal, the notorios Hajj Amin el Husseini.

Youlton is obviously part of this Irish neoLeft which is doing such damage in Ireland, really stirring up hatred of Israel at every opportunity.

So there is a reference in the initial piece to Israel targetting civilians. But Hezbollah, and Hamas, always operate their attacks on Israel using civilians as cover.

The lying machine of the neoLeft is quite polished by this stage. Truth never actually will get in the way. Even if good individuals argue the point and prove the truth it does not work. Such good people actually misjudge the by now Fascist neoLeft. The pursuit of truth and science is not on their agenda, the neoLeft are truly disciples of dogma. Prove one point, they very quickly move the ground onto something else. They never travel alone either, but like rats they travel in a pack. If some poor individual takes them on, and is seen to be winning, you soon see an eating frenzy as the poor individual finds himself facing about 10 neoLeft Fascists, all firing off their lies, punctuated by loudmouth insults, in rapid succession. I have seen this on Indymedia Ireland over the past few days.

Good people should remember though that this is necessarily the nature of a revolutionary period, a period with obvious dangers as I have described above, (which can indeed by very frustrating to have to helplessly watch), but also a period of great opportunity.

Actually it is well to also remember the contrary nature of the Irish psyche. The more these neoLeft Fascisti shout on the streets about the horrors of the Israelis the more Irish people, the best of them, will become quissical. We are like that. We cannot help it! We will say why do those strange people have to shout so hard! About such a tiny country! Are those bearded wonders in Iran all that great either! What was that rumour about gays being hanged! Etc etc!

Not just in Ireland either, everywhere. The hatred for Islamofascism that these neoLefts are covering for is intense and deep.

Take the working class in every country, and especially in Iran and in Muslim countries. Certainly the advanced workers when they think of the Islamists know that what awaits them in the future from those bastards is chains and more chains.

In many ways, as always, and as was the case with Hitler and the Nazis, Jew Hatred (Hatred of Israel) is the cement that holds the whole rickety thing together.

Workers, advanced national movements and advanced youth know that complex problems in the world today require complex solutions. Not all of these want to delve into the answers at this point. They have other things on their mind, such as trying to enjoy their lives, the short span they have been alotted.

Yet these clever youth and workers look out and they see these ageing Mullahs, bearded weirdos like Bibn Laden, and those crazed testosterone filled, wild-eyed killers of the Hezbollah, and what can they think? That that future is a crazy future and I will do my damnedest to avoid it is likely to be their response.

And so the neoLeft Fascists in the streets of Ireland, centred around the Palestine Solidarity Group and Indymedia, have to shout all that much harder.

Do you see my point? It is a shrill shriek of desparation from these neoLeft Fascisti!

These Irish neoLeft may try to hide from Irish youth the terrible pictures of the two gay youth standing on a gallows in Teheran with hooded men (did I say men, sorry a mistake on my part) putting a noose around the necks, the necks of these two beautiful human beings. Yes they work to hide that image.

But what about the essence of the Mullahs belief? How to hide that?

This was put best of all by an Iranian website in exile.

“The cabal of fanatical mullahs ruling Iran has lost its patience, not only with the unbelievers, but also with the Mahdi as well. They aim to force his arrival. The mullahs believe they have the means to make it impossible for the Mahdi to tarry any longer by causing unprecedented death and destruction—conditions deemed essential for his coming. The world must hit the very bottom, before the Savior of the world comes to the rescue, so they firmly believe.”
(Iran Press News, Thursday 27 July, 2006)

What it amounts to is this. They, the Iranian religious fascists, actively seek Amagheddon. The old traditional Judeo Christian idea of the Second Coming has been changed fundamentally. They are not waiting for an event, they are actually creating the event.

These bastards have decided to create such killing mayhem and havoc on earth, such extreme suffering of human beings, such murder, such incineration of peoples, that their (in their eyes) lazy old Mahdi will have to get up off his arse and make his appearance here to straighten everything out for us.

And in plain words, because it is a most vulgar and base notion, that is what the Mullahs drive for the Nuclear bomb in Iran is ALL about.

The neat truth of it all is that it is the basest of notions, really the thought processes of ignorant baboons of men. And that is what the Fascisti neoLeft of Ireland is supporting.

(I must apologise most sincerely to baboons. The baboons, and all animal species, do have a wonderful culture and they have lived in harmony with earth for millions of years, doing harm to nobody and nothing)

by M Sun Jul 30, 2006 17:31

http://www.unison.ie/irish_independent/stories.php3?ca=...14435

Anti-war brigade misses the mark

HUNDREDS are dead in Lebanon but it's good to see that the Irish have not been found wanting in the face of adversity. RTE anchors (with a silent w) are engaged in a fierce battle to sound the most indignant on air; various people have been issuing more statements than all the members of the Irish Bankers Federation put together; and protestors in Dublin have lain down in the road outside the Israeli embassy and pretended to be dead. While covered liberally in Heinz tomato ketchup.

As you do.

The mind boggles. Real people have died brutally, but the only way our "anti-war" rabble can think of to show their opposition is to lie down on the road, make like a burger for five minutes - and then celebrate another crushing blow against imperialism.

As if that wasn't bad enough, they added to the offensiveness of the whole farce by calling it a 'Die-In', which is presumably a bit like a lie-in (something the student supporters of the Ireland Palestine Solidarity Campaign know all about) - only without the pillow.

What are these people on? Do they honestly think that all across Lebanon people are saying to one another: "Do you know what we need right now, lads? We need a bunch of middle class publicity junkies in a small offshore European capital to pretend to be blown up. That'll really bring home to those pesky Israelis what they're doing."

There was a similarly distasteful episode during the Bosnian war, when feminists organised a so-called "sex strike" to highlight the issue of the rape of women during the conflict. As if not letting your boyfriend get his leg over for a couple of weeks would suddenly bring the whole edifice of the international war machine crashing down.

What are these boneheads going to do next - hop about on one leg for an afternoon to show solidarity with victims in the Third World who've lost limbs to landmines?

Eilis O'Hanlon

by MichaelY - iawm Sun Jul 30, 2006 19:17

I am not going to spend too much energy to respond to FQ's rant...the name-calling and the epithets and the fact that I am, supposedly, part of a neo-left fascist(i?) bloc supportive of or sympathetic to the Islamic fundamentalists are tactics employed to smear, scare, create confusion and, if it comes to it, set people up.The Sunday Independent calls us scum, FQ equates us with Nazi Youth....FF Senators demand we are prosecuted for 'inciting violence' and I hear a White House DC-based think-tank is preparing new legislation against people "like us"!! At the same time, our numbers grow, our support among ordinary people in the street increases...and our opponents voice gets shriller and shriller.....all this tells its own story.
To return to my piece above, I presented some facts, important points of what I believe is happening in Lebanon (and Gaza) over the last period. None, not one of those facts, has been put into question. I did not editorialise - did not draw conclusions. This is my view of the process as documented from a variety of sources and personal contacts.

To summarise and to clarify:
My position is that the Israeli invasion of Lebanon, with all the killing and destruction it implies, is part and parcel of a plan, worked diligently over the last few years, by a number of intelligence sevices, is to rework and turn around the political relations in the Middle East. Part and parcel of this plan is to weaken and/or destroy Syria and Iran, the two Islamic States which constitute, at the moment, for a variety of reasons, a serious threat to the Empire's hegemony in the region. Part of that plan is the physical annihilation of movements such as Hamas, such as Hezbollah, such as the Taliban, such as Al-Qaeda....and of States such as Saddam's Iraq....irrespective of the human cost.
Israel, and soon Turkey, are part of that plan - while the Saudi and Jordanian Royals will play ball with a nod and a wink.
That's where I stand....nowhere in there is there an assertion, or belief, that any of those States, or movements, are progressive, or 'Left' or 'revolutionary'....unless the recognition that both Hamas and Hezbollah are elected representatives of a section of their people in their respective areas is translated as 'support'. Should our support for democracy be only for those elected representatives with whom we agree??
I have no idea who FQ is - his Spanish email tells me nothing....but Mise's message above may situate him/her in a specific camp. However, he/she is correct only to the extent that the Left and the anti-war movement in Ireland, and elsewhere is squarely against the politics his/her message articulates.
To shift the basis of argument somewhat, could it be that FQ is exhibiting the very behaviour he/she attributes to myself? Projection is, after all, one of the most widely used tactics and forms of psychological defence.

by iosaf Sun Jul 30, 2006 19:43

& I'm not really sure I've identified the reasons yet - I tried to point a week ago that this war means different things to different sections of the word simply based on whose Telly they watch or more facetiously what they think of Omar Sharrif. http://indymedia.ie/article/77517

4 years ago, the world was in relative peace, certainly the relationships between arabic and european states was close to normal. Democracies were very slowly emerging. Solidarity in the "Islamic world" was at its height - everyone was aware of the wedge that could be driven between shia and sunni - but no-one dared to think it would benefit the west to provoke a sectarian split which would finally effect 6 states.

Then we got the "war on terror". As a sideshow we also got the "emergent revolution people power gigs" - The Ukraine, Georgie all went through the sort of crap which really only ever happened once - the night the Berlin Wall came down. By the declaration of the "cedar revolution" it was obvious that this sort of meddling or imposition of liberal democracy from without a nation-state (something never before attempted - before meddling set up cryptofascist dictatorships, military juntas, or just funded opposition groups in exile) provoked together with the war on Iraq a mass popularisation of radical groups and their positions which within Islam are sectarian. Only 3 months into the Iraqi war I came to the conclusion that the "coalition of the willing" didn't want in any sense "democracy to emerge" because they moved first to stop organisation of workers and the agricultural sector in any "left way". Better a mad mullah sunni or shia than an iraqi red... 3 years ago Hezbollah which then still had its telly station and its internet sites could only get a few thousand people on the street. 1 year ago Bush calls for democracy - and 300,000 people walked under HZB banners in Beirut. "Emergent democracy US/UK style" means creating the conditions necessary for fueling and provoking terrorist insurgencies. It seems to be part of the "recipe".

I agree with much if not most of what the IPSC say, but there is another element on the geo-political level which differentiates the kingdom of Jordan and its role from the Saudi, or for that matter which sees Morocco and Turkey occupy a similar role in EU/NATO diplomacy.
I don't readily lump them together at all, Irish commercial media is cravenly pro-USA the Irish in general seem to be that way but we can't judge all of the EU on the basis of a tiny state-

I'm trying my best to formulate a concise explanation of another so far overlooked dimension - International trade and oil - which is why I wanted readers to ponder Venezuela's entry allbeit as observer to the League of Arab states. But sadly none of my explanations can counter the commercial media of Ireland the abuse shed recenty on Irish pacifists and solidarity groups with Palestinian or Lebanese civilians.
= Keep protesting - anyway you can !!!!!!!!!

by anon Sun Jul 30, 2006 20:59

I thought 911 reminded us the world wasn't peaceful.

by pfft Mon Jul 31, 2006 11:35

blitzkrieg

the term Blitzkrieg is incorrect as some1 else pointed out.
Do you support Hizbollah, as your comments just blatently (as per usual) are anti USA and anti israel claptrap

Do you think a country which has rockets flying into it by a Militia which was supposed to be disarmed 6 years ago by the United Nations and by the lebanon host country itself has the right to defend its citizens from random attacks by that Militia?

do you agree with the aims of hizbollah which is the extermination of the jewish people and state?(1982)

Do you agree with the aims of the PLO which is the total destruction of the Jewish state?(1957)

Do you agree with with the aims of hamas which (again surprisingly) is the total destruction of the Jewish state?

do you disagree with the UN statement which agrees that Israel has the right to defend itself as the UN itself has failed miserably in its mission to disarm the last militia in lebanon?

Do you agree with the UN statement(Kofi Annan) which acknowleges that Hizbollah are an organisation which use the lebanese people as human shields and do you condone such actions?

As a person supporting **antiwar** , your comments on this site as far as i can see are just anti USA and anti Israel and Anti UK . Does your organisation support these views?
If so why are you calling yourselves an ***antiwar** movement?

I represent no organisation, just my own views and i find it amusing that somebody with an antiwar movement can post such ridiculous remarks not even remotely relevant to peace.

by Felix Quigley Mon Jul 31, 2006 15:05

Michael Y

Uncle Nasrallah is a fascist. That is the main problem with your analysis.

The Hezbollah movement is really a creature of Iran, it is hard to get away from that.

The President of Iran has made repeated attacks that Israel should be destroyed, Jews moved to Europe etc. As has Nasrallah.

The Hezbollah have been photographed giving the Nazi salute.

I think they are an anti-Semitic Fascist movement in league with the Fascist Iranian regime.

They are against America in the sense that they, Iran, want a form of Islamic fascism.

But they have shown that they will unite with the US elite as they did in supporting Islamist Izetbegovic in Bosnia against the Serbs.

Why is all of the Irish Left lining up behind such characters, especially with the fascist attitude to gays and women. It is incredible.

Just by calling my points a rant does not make them so.

My colleague above has put some very good questions but few answers have come. Your mind seems to travel along the lines of dogma and not relate to specifics.

by Fuckoff Quickly Tue Aug 01, 2006 20:22

Iran does not presecute Jews and there is a large community present in Iran. They are not singled out for any particular treatment different from other ethnic and religious groups in Iran. In fact despite numbering only 25000 they have their own political representation as do the Zoroastrians and others. Hardly the actions of a Nazi regieme especially given they've had 27 years since the Iranian revolution to get around to genocide.

During the same 27 years the Zionazis have killed tens of thousands of Muslims, conducted thousands of state-sanctioned murders, propped up facist puppet regiemes (SLA), deprived the Palestinians of any rights and devastated the Lebanon twice to name but a few of their crimes.

Now go back to whatever hole you crawled out of and get your facts right next time Zionazi propagandist.

by Mustafa Tue Aug 01, 2006 20:56

"
During the same 27 years the Zionazis have killed tens of thousands of Muslims, conducted thousands of state-sanctioned murders, propped up facist puppet regiemes (SLA), deprived the Palestinians of any rights and devastated the Lebanon twice to name but a few of their crimes."

It only took Jordan less than three weeks to kill more moslems than all of those killed during 60 years of war against Israel. (Black September)
Not to be bested, Assad killed more moslems in two weeks than Jordan ever dreamed of. (Hama)

by disgusted ex provo Tue Aug 01, 2006 21:41

Just read an interesting article

http://www.phoblacht.net/MH2507065g.html

by MichaelY - iawm Tue Aug 01, 2006 22:50

The above is an extremely interesting link - especially for those young SF members who are loyal to their organisation but also support the anti-war movement.

For comparison purposes also please consult the following article about Iraq and Afghanistan:
http://www.indymedia.ie/article/77627

by disgusted ex provo Tue Aug 01, 2006 23:21

And to think that we once proudly flew the Palestinian flag alongside the Tricolour in our estates.

Now $inn Feign has desires on sitting in Government under Paisley they feel that they must Squeaky boot behind the Right wing fanatics who rule the world.

By the way before the $inn Feigners jump to their keyboards I have spelt their name as I read into it!

by Mustafa Tue Aug 01, 2006 23:59

"And to think that we once proudly flew the Palestinian flag alongside the Tricolour in our estates."

Now all you're left with is the Swastika next to your Tricolour...but hey, you can still be proud.

by Pete Brickette Wed Aug 02, 2006 18:27

Mustafa must have been smoking something illegal if He saw the Swastika being flown anywhere alongside the Tricolour in Ireland. Now being displayed alongside Loyalist flags would not be surprising as they are affiliated with British Right wing Nazi parties.

The most amazing aspect of all is the fact that they fly the Israel flag and have the Star of David on their Ulster flag while being aligned to these Nazi Thugs.

But then again they have the Red hand of the Gaelic O'Neill clann on their Ulster flag; the lost tribe of Israel indeed.

by YHWH Wed Aug 02, 2006 18:43

ISRAEL ADMITS NO HEZBOLLAH ROCKETS FIRED FROM NEAR DESTROYED BUILDING IN QANA:

It now appears that the military had no information on rockets launched from the site of the building, or the presence of Hezbollah men at the time.
The Israel Defense Forces had said after the deadly air-strike that many rockets had been launched from Qana. However, it changed its version on Monday.

The site was included in an IAF plan to strike at several buildings in proximity to a previous launching site. Similar strikes were carried out in the past. However, there were no rocket launches from Qana on the day of the strike.http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/745185.html

Israel's Latest Massacre in Qana: Racist Jewish Fundamentalism a Factor:

Israel's biggest-selling paper, Yedioth Ahronoth, advocated raising the threshold of Israel's response to Katyusha rockets: "In other words: a village from which rockets are fired at Israel will simply be destroyed by fire."[3] It is worth noting that all available evidence points to the fact that no Katyusha was fired by the Lebanese resistance from Qana before the bombing.
http://electronicintifada.net/v2/article5338.shtml

How many more neo-con- jew/isreali/zionist apoligists are going to spew their bulshit euphemisms this way .You are fucking murderers! and there is no excuse for that no matter what your chorus. Israel fires its own rockets on itselfand where it cant find rockets to kill its own citizens it makes up bullshit stories.Look at he fucking evidence , Israel with american and british sponsors is taking over the middle East to conclude its Eretz Israel model of an imperial power. It will do this at any cost of innocent lives because given its track record of mass genocide and brutality and as the Yesha Rabbinical Council announced in response to an IDF attack in Kfar Qanna that "according to Jewish law, during a time of battle and war, there is no such term as 'innocents' of the enemy." "All of the discussions on Christian morality are weakening the spirit of the army and the nation and are costing us in the blood of our soldiers," the statement said. (Efrat Weiss)
There you fucking have it, if your not jewish you're cannon fodder and there's no excuse or rights for you to exist. So people have no choice but either to succumb or die trying.

btw : Semitic people are arabs so dont harp you're anti-seminalite card.Fuckwits. Soon the six pointed Star will overtake the swastica in terms of genocide, ignorance and unconditional hatred if not so allready.

by Finnegan - RFI - Resist Fascist Islam Thu Aug 03, 2006 12:34

1. The Hizbollah hate the west and christians - ie. - YOU.
Israel is on your side.

2. The Hizbollah are crap shots - all their fancy Iranian rockets and they can't hit anyone. Israel can shoot straight.

3. The Hizbollah DELIBERATELY target civilians. The Israelis don't. Hence leaflets warning of raids BEFORE they are launched. Hizbollah? No warnings. No military targetting.

4. The Hizbollah are Taliban-style Islamic Fascists who want to kick the only non muslim country in the middle east into the sea. Israel is the only democracy in the middle east and want nothing more than to be left alone.

These are facts.
Irish democracy has always been protected by the same forces that protect Israel.
The only difference is that large sections of the Irish populace live in a dreamworld where they think they are 'bigger' than they actually are. We are tadpoles living in an ocean of sharks. Your stupid support of muslim fascists only makes you look like the idiots you are.

by MichaelY - iawm Thu Aug 03, 2006 13:44

(Non-news bulletin board style chat removed -ed)

Irish democracy, both in the 26 Counties over the last 100 years (Remember the Tans?), and in the 6 Counties more recently, has indeed been protected and boosted by the same forces that arm and bolster Israel.

Our only problem, as you correctly point out, is that as a peasant people that we are, and close to the earth, our brains don't function at the same wavelengths as those of our 'protectors'. Like yours for example. We missed the Industrial Revolution you see....and Cromwell came here not as a liberator but an invader and a coloniser God Bless him!

We say democracy and we believe that democratically elected political organisations, be it Hamas,
Hezbollah or Sinn Fein closer at home should be respected. Damn!

We read opinion polls that say the megamajority of the English, Welsh and Scots, as well as the American people oppose the foreign policy of their respective governments - fools that we are, we are taken in! The world screams that Israel should stop its war crimes and we're taken in. We are simple people you see.

We read Bush saying he's invading Iran because of Saddam's mushroom clouds and we believe him. too How stupid of us.

by Felix Quigley Thu Aug 03, 2006 14:08

What Michael above leaves out is the issue of anti-Semitism inside Islamist organizations like Hezbollah, Hamas and indeed Fatah. He leaves out the obvious anti-semitic content of Ahmadinejad and the Iranian Mullahs. It is quite an obvious phenomenon but why do the Irish neoLeft play it down.

I think because they were won over on an emotional basis to support for Palestinianism going back to the 60s. But the PLO was set up by the Arab Higher Committee and by the Arab bourgeoisie in order to destroy Israel, set up in 1964 before there was the 1967 War, and before any "Occupation".

You can see this in the comments from advocates of Palestinianism here. There is no in-depth analysis and instead resort to very violent sounding, at times, name calling.

You Michael earlier on were suggesting that I was a "Zionist" plant, apparantly the idea that an Irish person could take the support of Israel seriously seemed incomprehensible to you.

This is a real fascism that is involved in Hezbollah, Hamas Fatah and the Iranian Mullahs. Israel is facing this every day and to me the United States elite is much more interested in its oil interests than in supporting Israel against the Fascists. It seemed obvious to me, if you listen to their words, that Bush and Rice were holding Israel back from bringing the war to Hezbollah.

Await a UN Resolution which at the last minute the US elite will support and which will have a Interventionist Army installed in Lebanon, and behind it Hezbollah will take over Lebanon totally, making life just impossible for Christian Druze and other minorities to live there. Israel will be encircled even more by the very dangerous Islamofascism and its growing number of states.

The Irish neoLeft shouts very hard, covering themselves in Tomato Sauce and other anti-Israel stunts but you cannot make the Mullahs out to be anything but Fascist. When all is said and done the image of the two young gays on the Scaffold in Teheran will endure.

by pfft Thu Aug 03, 2006 14:08

MichaelY

As you represent the antiwar movement i shall ask again:

blitzkrieg

the term Blitzkrieg is incorrect as some1 else pointed out.
Do you support Hizbollah, as your comments just blatently (as per usual) are anti USA and anti israel claptrap

Do you think a country which has rockets flying into it by a Militia which was supposed to be disarmed 6 years ago by the United Nations and by the lebanon host country itself has the right to defend its citizens from random attacks by that Militia?

do you agree with the aims of hizbollah which is the extermination of the jewish people and state?(1982)

Do you agree with the aims of the PLO which is the total destruction of the Jewish state?(1957)

Do you agree with with the aims of hamas which (again surprisingly) is the total destruction of the Jewish state?

do you disagree with the UN statement which agrees that Israel has the right to defend itself as the UN itself has failed miserably in its mission to disarm the last militia in lebanon?

Do you agree with the UN statement(Kofi Annan) which acknowleges that Hizbollah are an organisation which use the lebanese people as human shields and do you condone such actions?

As a person supporting **antiwar** , your comments on this site as far as i can see are just anti USA and anti Israel and Anti UK . Does your organisation support these views?
If so why are you calling yourselves an ***antiwar** movement?

I represent no organisation, just my own views and i find it amusing that somebody with an antiwar movement can post such ridiculous remarks not even remotely relevant to peace

by MichaelY - iawm Thu Aug 03, 2006 14:46

Dear friends,

I see your messages go in tandem. A number of short responses.
1. I don't represent the anti war movement in Ireland. nor do I represent the IAWM - which is a separate organisation inside it. My views are my views alone.
2. I don't find it strange at all that an Irish person would hold political views supporting Israel, Bush, Blair or whatever head-the-ball takes his/her fancy. My comment about you FQ,arise from the fact that I know that the Israeli Foreign Affairs Dpt has at the moment created a task force of a couple of thousand students, supporters that is, who are tracking every portal, every chatroom, every political blog and are posting pro-Israeli and anti-Arab, anti-Muslim, anti-Hamas, anti-Hezbollah, anti-Syrian and anti-Iranian commentaries. Having said that, I am not suggesting that you, personally are part of that cabal. I have been polite and measured in my responses - and you seem to have got the message because your comments have mellowed considerably.
3. To the heart of the matter: both Hamas and Hezbollah are elected politico-military organisations, supported actively by the Palestinians and the Shiite population in Lebanon. They are part of their respective governments...these are facts. Also they constitute a serious threat to the Empire's plans for the region, the "new Middle East" Bush and Rice are talking about. To that extent, and to that extent alone, they deserve and receive political support from left wing people the world over. If bringing democracy to that part of the world is supposed to be a part of the Crusaders plan - then that democratic process deserves support.
4. Neither I nor the Left in general are blind or ignorant of the serious political problems that permeate those organisations or Syria and the Islamic Republic of Iran. But then again, here was Bush in Miami yesterday making speeches telling his followers that he has "plans for Cuba" so that the "totalitarian regime there can be detroyed"....how does that differ from the utterings of the Ahmed-whats his name in Iran re:Israel? And does that make the Republican Party or the US Government fascist? So, careful with your epithets and political definitions - being a political opponent of Israeli aggression does not qualify one as an anti-Semite.
5. Israel is continuing its aggression....now they're talking about advancing way in until the River - from where they had to withdraw in 2000 because of international derision and military defeat. You tell me what should the position of an anti-war activist be in Ireland?
6. As for pfft - it must be obvious to you sunshine that I won't engage...I didn't and I won't. Find somebody else to answer your questions. Read some books or go and see a film or two. Better still read the material coming from the anti-war movement in Israel and the Womens Colaiiton Against the War.

by Caravaggio Thu Aug 03, 2006 14:56

I know all you guys hate the Sunday Independent but that piece by Eilis O'Hanlon summed up my feelings perfectly. Aside from the wider issue of the rights and wrongs of the current conflict why, oh why do marchers always have to indulge in such cringe-worthy and patronising theatrics. Drum banging, makeup, playing dead. It's plain embarassing. It also does nothing to serve your cause. Why not march in silence and quiet solemnity.That would, at least have some dignity. I think it's because the majority of marchers are out there to inflate their own egos and not for any greater good. Prove me wrong...

by Ariel Sharon - Aipac Sat Aug 05, 2006 02:00

Guide to acceptable politically correct attitudes and interpretation techniques
for news media coverage of the above conflict.

Rule 1. In the Near East it is always the Arabs who attack first and it is ALWAYS Israel that defends itself. The term to be used is ‘retaliation’ and the purpose ‘fighting for Israel’s existence.’

Rule 2. Arabs for whatever reason regardless of nationality or provocation are not allowed to kill or otherwise harm Israelis. This is to be described as ‘terrorism.’

Rule 3. Israel has the right to indiscriminately slaughter provided the victims are Arabs, preferably civilians as they cannot shoot back. These can include casualties being transported to Israeli bombed hospitals; pregnant women, children, infants, the unborn. This is called ‘self defence’ or more usually ‘collateral damage.’

Rule 4. When Israel in a bloodlust kills many innocent civilians the Western nations will call for ‘restraint’ and this will be described as ‘the reaction of the international community.’

Rule 5. Under no circumstances neither Palestinians nor Lebanese must capture Israeli military personnel even when they are illegally on the territory of neighbouring countries.

Rule 6. Israel has the inalienable right to capture as many Palestinians as they so wish and regardless of their status. (Palestinians around 10,000 to date of which many hundreds are children. The Lebanese thousands of civilians including children). All these prisoners must be denied human rights, access to lawyers, and indefinite terms of imprisonment to include mental and physical torture. These will all be held under the blanket term ‘terrorists’.

Rule 7. When you say ‘Hezbollah’ there is a statutory requirement to add ‘supported by Syria (or Iran)’.

Rule 8. When you say ‘Israel’ you must NEVER add ‘supported by the USA, Britain, or any other European country.’ Nothing must be said that suggests that Israel has more arms including nuclear weapons than the rest of the Arab world in total or that it is in open defiance of scores of U.N resolutions despite American vetoes.

Rule 9. If mentioning ‘Israel’ you must never mention the terms ‘Israeli Occupied Territories’, ‘UN resolutions’, ‘Geneva Conventions’, ‘Human Rights’. This could unnecessarily distress television watchers, radio listeners and newspaper readers in the West.

Rule 10 Israelis speak better English than the Arabs do. This is why they are always allowed to comment without interruption or censure, and to always have the unchallengeable last word. This allows the Israeli and their apologists to properly explain Rules No.1 and No.9. This falls under the heading ‘neutral journalism.’

Rule 11 If you cannot comply with these rules or if you feel that the Arabs have drawn the short straw it is crystal clear that you are a dangerous anti-Semite and will be publicly exposed and ridiculed as such. You will be required to debase yourself and publicly recant.

by PaddyK Sat Aug 05, 2006 02:20

Eilis O hanlon, along with her fellow mumblers in the Sunday Independent, called for a war against Iraq, then shut up like a little girl when she saw what happened.
Why dont you shut up too ?

by Caravaggio Sat Aug 05, 2006 17:29

Is that what passes for a grown-up discussion? I don't like your point so shut up. That's a Biill O'Reilly tactic isn't it? If you're going to respond to a point do so but at least try to think of a cogent arguement. Also - I don't really understand your title. What's an inflation hole?

by Bentoit Sat Aug 05, 2006 17:54

"Arabs have drawn the short straw "

Arabs took the short straw, burned it and then blamed Israel.
Today there will be a march in support of Arab short strawism.

by PaddyK Sat Aug 05, 2006 20:53

An inflation hole is a hole that you put your lips up to and blow air up. You were trying to blow hot air up an inflaiton hole in your stupid post. "Why Stupid ?" i here you snivel, Stupid Firstly cos its plain stupid. Secondly, cos Eilis O hanlon is a moral coward that wrote a number of pieces urging warfare by America in Iraq. Her and her colleagues in the Sunday Independent , Irelands largest red herring, took the piss out of the peace movement , those who marched in support of peace, ordinary people who knew it would turn sick.
They abused their journalistic positoin to insult people who could not answer back. Since it turned sick, a long time back, most of that sour bunch of armchair demagogs have had the sense to shut up." Sense ? " i here you ask. Yes , I answer, cos they have not the stomach to look at the death that they cheerled, and explain their position now. So rather than apologise to the ordinary families they abused from their safehouse and express horror at what turned out they would probably stutter their way through some third rate parrallel explanation of all the things we dont understand about the world and look even more lame . So they have the sense to shut up. Moral and intellectual cowardice with a little common sense thrown in.

Do you have any sense to go along with that stupid post you made ?

by Felix Quigley Mon Aug 07, 2006 16:13

Michael Y

You write above

"Neither I nor the Left in general are blind or ignorant of the serious political problems that permeate those organisations or Syria and the Islamic Republic of Iran. But then again, here was Bush in Miami yesterday making speeches telling his followers that he has "plans for Cuba" so that the "totalitarian regime there can be detroyed"....how does that differ from the utterings of the Ahmed-whats his name in Iran re:Israel?"

You are amazing Michael. What has Cuba got to do with Israel? You even drag that into your attack on Israel. Your hatred for Israel is quite amazing to me. Where did it come from. Surely Israel is not responsible for the fact that Castro is a dictatorial slimebag and that Bush is exactly the oil and profit pursuer that he is. Neither are any friend of Israel.

You raise the issue of anti-Semitism in your piece above.

In fact the biggest issue that Israel faces all the time is world anti-Semitism.

There is only one way that Israel can survive against the onslaught of this world anti-Semitism and that is to explain things carefully to the American ordinary people.

The problem with Hezbollah was not in them as soldiers (thjey are a negative deathcult in reality full of hatred for Jews) but in their arms. How could a buildup of this nature take place.

I mean we are talking about 10,000 rockets, with rocket launchers, fortifications, training in the open, practice firing, all this happening under the noses of the United Nations

This placed in the spotlight a number of forces. Iran is the obvious one, as is Syria, because they supplied the death cult with the rockets. But in my opinion not the main issue because that is what we expect Iran and Syria to do.

No I wanted the Israeli Government and the IDF to place the spotlight onto those countries and organizations who watched this happen, knew it was happening and who did nothing. Who were they?

They certainly include the Sharon Government of which Olmert was a part. They must have had intelligence this was happening but they did not warn the Israeli public, the opposite, they gave away Gaza to the same enemy just last year. At a meeting Olmert banged the table and swore that Hezbollah would never fire a rocket at Israel. Olmert should tell that now to the families of the soldiers killed yesterday.

But still, in my opinion, the Israeli leaders are still not the main culprits. Who then are they?

To answer that you have to go back to the last war with Lebanon, when the IDF led by Sharon, had pursued the PLO to their bolthole in Beirut, and who were totally routed. In stepped the USA and the EU, and the PLO were flown on US planes out of Beirut and to safety in Tunis. Some years later the second part of this betrayal by the US and EU of Israel happened when these PLO terrorists were brought back into the heart of Israel, the historical Yesha, and handed power in their own specially created for them state, from which they were able to kill Jews once again.

In the meantime the Hezbollah were able to be built up by Iran and Syria because of the friendly relationship maintained, despite what they tell us, between the US and those two Jew killing states.

Move forward to 2000, Israel was promised that if it withdrew from the South Lebanon zone then Israel would not be attacked.

Who did the promising? As far as I can gather the promising was done by the US and the EU, more specifically by the US Government and the French Government.

This determined my approach to this war.

War is not different to politics. War is an extension of politics.

I felt that Israel had to find a way to make it clear to the world, in the best way that it can, and despite a hostile media it is still possible to do this, that it believed that 1. Hezbollah was heavily armed by the Iranian and Syrian regimes and 2. The US and EU had broken their promises of 2000 in allowing this to happen.

The world had to know the situation. The main item was that 10,000 deadly rockets were pointed at Israeli civilian areas. That these rockets, as was being proven, were filled with ball bearings to spread out and murder many civilians.

The nature of Hezbollah should have been more developed at this point. All Jewish websites should have been placing at the top of their sites that picture of Hezbollah giving the straight-arm Nazi salute. A picture worth 10 million supporters for Israel in the West!

Jews should have got creative. Feminist movements, for example, should have learned about the practice of honour-killing among the Palestinians and Lebanese.

Along with that picture of the death cult giving the fascist salute mentioned above there should have stood another picture on all Jewish sites worthy of the name. That is of the two young gay lads who were shown having the rope placed around their necks by hooded men (sorry did I say “men”!) in Teheran.a short time ago.

Apart from it being the moral thing to do, if the world is made up of 10 per cent of homosexual inclination, as some claim, then the Israeli state should be aware of that and use that in battle against the fascists.

But my main point that I made very early on, concerning laying the conditions for this war to be fought, was this:

With as much fanfare as possible Israel should have issued a summons to those countries which gave those promises to Israel in 2000, that Israel would be safe if they withdrew from South Lebanon.

With such great fanfare, a build-up in the Press, even if some of it was hostile such as is even some Israeli Press, because who cares, it is still publicity, I suggested this move by the Israeli state.

When countries are displeased, they call in the Ambassadors. This always draws attention.

Now how much attention would this have got?!!

Ms Livni calls in to see her, because she is mightily displeased, the Ambassador to Israel of the United States. Ms Livni asks Mr US of A Ambassador for an explanation. You promised in 2000 as we vacated South Lebanon to fulfil YOUR wishes, she accuses, what happened? Exactly what did happen? How did those rockets arrive in South Lebanon?! Ah you say, Mr Ambassador, that they come via Syria from Iran. But Mr American Ambassador, is it not true that your State Department has a standing order never to criticise Syria which has been in place for years. YOU ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR OUR PLIGHT.

Mr American Ambassador. Stop keeping your finger stuck up your Ambassadorial ass. Print our displeasure in your Media, the NYT will do for a start.

Next on the line is Blair’s Ambassador. Same questions. Same accusations. Do not accept any bullshit from these anti-Semitic social democrats, a la Bevin.

After that the French. Now that would be funny to watch. The “shitty little country” asking for some explanations of broken promises from those French anti-Semites.

My the way, Mr Ambassadors, Ms Livni will add at the end, I have met you here in Jerusalem because this is the Capital of our proud country. If in the future you want to see me to complain about brutality to the poor Palestinians, as you so often do, I will meet you only if you move your embassies to Jerusalem. Got it! Good! Now run along and do not EVER break your promises to Israel again.

Oh, I almost forgot to add the most important “detail” about these meetings. From now on, since Israel sees itself as an open and a progressive country, there is no hidden diplomacy. I, Ms Livni, am paid by the Israeli people and I represent the Israeli people. Everything will be published in full in all the Media we can reach.

The result of these meetings. Only this! The noble Ambassadors would be told the following:

1. Israel holds you responsible for the plight which Israel now faces with a death cult armed to the teeth with 10,000 rockets pointing at our citizens

2. Israel faces a total paralysis of its economy in the area around Haifa and that is the heart of our economy.

3. We are forced to attack Hezbollah with all we have got. It is your responsibility, having caused this problem, to facilitate our attack.

4. You will do this be ensuring safe transfer of all civilians out of this rocket zone because we are going to attack this zone and it will be your responsibility if any innocent civilian is hurt.

5. Those who remain will be combatants. No quarter will be given. OUR AIM WILL BE TO MAXIMISE THE NUMBER OF ENEMY KILLED IN THIS BATTLE AND TO MINIMISE THE NUMBER OF ISRAELI SOLDIERS KILLED.

I have no military experience. But the military tactics would follow from this political approach. I feel what is decisive in war is what is in your head. War is an extension of politics.

From my meagre knowledge of war, though, I think the above would have set the scene for correct methods of warfare.

Especially it would have placed Rice and Bush on the defensive. Their own people, the wonderful American people, would have understood that Israel was forced to act because of the broken promises of their own Government.

It would have followed, I think, that anything that moved in or out of that zone, from the given date of evacuation, had to be taken out by the Israeli air power. That was the rule laid down when the American and French Government broke their promise to Israel in 2000.

The bombs which Israel ordered and I presume does pay America for in 2005, why the hell were they not in place in 2005!!!

by blaise Tue Aug 08, 2006 02:35

The Cuba policy of the United States does, in fact, doe have something in common with the Israel policy of the yankees. both are demonic They (the United States and Israel) see the world through their own eyes and they would like to enforce their view on the world. It is not working Mr. Felix, not in Iraq, Afghanistan, or Lebanon. Israel is leading the United States deeper into the abyss with its terror filled campaigns against the Palestinians and now the Lebanese. Fidel Castro is one of the greatest leaders of his generation and obviously you know very little about what he has achieved (which could have been a lot more had the greedy yanks not embargoed the island to death). You really want those Miami scum to go back and confiscate land which they pilfered in the first place? He (Castro) took the shoeless poor and gave them shoes, education, medical care - in short, hope - something they did not have when Batista and they greedy americanos were lapping it up in their nightclubs while the country went to rack and ruin. I don't know who you are but you are not man enough to shine el presidente Fidel's shoes and as for your backing of those murderous bunch of Israeli terrorists, you should be ashamed of yourself and do a little cultured reading on the situation to how it has evolved over the years and how your beloved Israeli governments have always shafted the Arabs. You are creating more hatred with you unheroic bombing of Lebanon - and some day - they will make you pay for it. Don't you think your Jewish brothers would walk away from a land deal with no water or air rightss? Please. We are not all stupid like you. Next thing you are going to tell us is that CNN is a news agency, that their imbedded journalists roving around with the Israeli tanks are actually journalists. Thank God the majority of Irish people are not stupid and can see through this American Israeli charade.

by Caravaggio Tue Aug 08, 2006 15:16

Okay - despite your fuzzy thinking, poor writing style and agressive tone I will respond (and not ask you to shut up - that would be infra dig). I don't care what Eilis O'Hanlon wrote about the war in Iraq. She along with all Sindo staff are more than welcome to support any war they want. If you don't like it buy another paper. This was not at all the subject of her piece posted here.

I posted because someone had copied and pasted Ms. O'Hanlon's piece which directy related to the main piece on this thread. No-one had posted a follow up and as Ms. O'Hanlon's piece strongly reflected my opinion on the nature of many political marches I posted a piece in agreement.

I stand by what I wrote. I find the whole concept of a 'Die-In' incredibly crass, patroinising and ultimately self defeating in that if marchers truly want as much support as possible (something I sometimes doubt) they would abandon these childish antics that serve to do little more that alianate many potential co-marchers. A lot of people (myself included) are turned off by this nonsense and are disinclined to march as a result.

Your response was vague at best and willfully ignorant at worst. You say my piece was stupid:
A) Because it just was and
B) Because Eilis O'Hanlon insulted peace marchers and supported the war.

Those aren't points at all relating to what I wrote. If you respond - please stick to the topic at hand and avoid meandering rants. They just serve to show up your intellectual shortcomings and especially poor grasp of English.

by PaddyK Tue Aug 08, 2006 17:34

Why Carravaggio's original piece was stupid:

CARRAVAGGIOS ORIGINAL PIECE
---------------------------
"I know all you guys hate the Sunday Independent but that piece by Eilis O'Hanlon summed up my feelings perfectly. Aside from the wider issue of the rights and wrongs of the current conflict why, oh why do marchers always have to indulge in such cringe-worthy and patronising theatrics. Drum banging, makeup, playing dead. It's plain embarassing. It also does nothing to serve your cause. Why not march in silence and quiet solemnity.That would, at least have some dignity. I think it's because the majority of marchers are out there to inflate their own egos and not for any greater good. Prove me wrong..."
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Ok, you cant possibly know what "all you guys think” you are generalising, I know I think the Sunday Independent is crap and I’ve highlighted a couple of particularly sordid episodes in the recent weeks were Ireland's leading rag nailed it's swastika to the mast. But I see precious little evidence to suggest that everybody here agrees. So that's a stupid point.

If Eilis O Hanlon and those cronies are your heroes then good luck to you. However, in light of the things they've written and subsequently failed to follow up with further analysis of the disintegration of Iraq, something which other people had the common sense to envisage and march against only to be insulted by those lackies, I have about as much respect for their opinions as I would for some really stupid person.

Aside from the wider issue of right and wrong? That IS the issue. What is happening in Lebanon and Palestine is WRONG it is RIGHT to highlight that in any way possible. By sidestepping the RIGHT and WRONG of the issue you are immediately outside the sphere of relevance. Now, That’s stupid ! Plus you forgot your question mark.

Your next two sentences don't count as sentences. Perhaps you should have joined them to the preceding sentence with "of". Besides that stupid oversight, why the hell would you get embarrassed about what other people do? That is just stupid. Perhaps you are worried about what the precious Israelis will think of the people with the ketchup on. That would be stupid considering the whole point of the protest is to highlight to them and others what they seem to be too racist to see. Piles of dead Arabs. So to worry about what racists think ? Well, that's completely stupid and actually it does something to serve their cause it gets people talking, see?

They don’t walk in Silence and solemnity because they want to do a die in. It would be stupid to organise a die in then march in silence and solemnity. Why don’t you march in Silence and solemnity, that would not be stupid, for a change.

Who are you to decide who has dignity and who has not? Death be not proud, and the people lying in a jumble on the ground are no less or more dignified that a pile of body parts, the likes of which are piling up at a very undignified rate in Lebanon and Palestine while we sit here and talk about your stupid post.

First of all you say that marchers should be dignified and sombre, than you say marchers are egomaniacs but they embarrassed themselves, and you apparently, by lying on the ground pretending to be dead. They are not allowed bang drums, put on make-up or chant. (Geez, memo to self, don’t let Carravaggio organise St. Paddy’s weekend.) The whole concept of what you think you are transmitting is stupid.

Prove you wrong? Don’t be stupid it's your opinion, it can’t be proven wrong but it certainly can be proven stupid.

But take heart , my good man, Felix Quigley's stupid post is far more stupider than your stupid post.

by Caravaggio Tue Aug 08, 2006 19:17

Good man - you almost managed to touch on some relevant points. I'll address them:

• Fair enough - not everyone posting here can hate the Sunday Indo but would it be a fair generalisation (not all generalistions are wrong) to say that most marchers at least hate the Sindo and that on Indymedia it is an icon of 'The Mainstream Media', usually in a negative way?

• Eilis O Hanlon is not a hero of mine and I don't really know her cronies. I don't read the Sindo.

• 'Aside from the wider issue of right and wrong? That IS the issue.' Surely there's room for other areas of debate. In this instance I was addressing Ms. O'Hanlon's piece. Is that not okay? Do I have to write about my opinions on the current conflict? I don't really want to.

• But I do get embarrassed for you. I don't know why. You know when you're watching some god awful RTE attempt at a sitcom or newsreader doing some cabaret or something and you actually get embarrassed for them. Anyway - that's what I (and lot's of people) feel when we see you covered in ketchup and playing dead. As for the Israeli's (and I honestly don't give a fig what they think) - if they see photos etc. of the march they don't see 'Piles of dead Arabs'; they see piles of alive Irish people. With tomato sauce on them. Lying in the street. For a bit. And then getting up...

• 'They don’t walk in Silence and solemnity because they want to do a die in'. Yes - that's what I'm challenging: the idea of a 'die-in'. It's really, really naff. That's the main point in fact. A 'die-in' is a terribly naff idea. I suggest the quiet dignity approach because it would probably make more people march.

• There can be dignity in death but you guys aren't dead.

• There's a difference between Paddy's Day and an anti-war march. One is a drunken celebration of Irishness. The other's supposed to be serious.

I'm absolutely serious here: I honestly think that there would be more marchers (and therefore more impact) if the marches were more egalitarian and had wider appeal to middle classes. I think that the organisers of these marches would do well to leave their egos and their greasepaint at home and simply march to make a point. And please - no repeats of the 'Die-in'. It does your cause no good.

by chekov Tue Aug 08, 2006 19:37

Caravaggio, you are missing the point.

I'm absolutely serious here: I honestly think that there would be more marchers (and therefore more impact) if the marches were more egalitarian and had wider appeal to middle classes. I think that the organisers of these marches would do well to leave their egos and their greasepaint at home and simply march to make a point. And please - no repeats of the 'Die-in'. It does your cause no good.

Such things are really just photo-ops. They marginally increase the chance that the demonstration will get media coverage (photo editors like striking pictures) as well as providing a little bit of variety for those who like dressing up and so on.

Most marches are fairly dull affairs and there is no noticeable surge of middle class people. Nobody ever marches for any other reason than to make a point - if some want to add a bit of variety to it, who are you to begrudge that?

And, Ms O Hanlon will always find something to sneer about with any march or protest. If everybody walked with their heads down in utter silence, she'd sneer at them for exactly the opposite point. "Lefties are so boring and turgid, why don't they add a bit of colour to it.....]"

Your point about egos is gratuitously insulting and fairly ignorant. Nobody marches because it's fun or ego-inflating. It isn't.

by PaddyK Tue Aug 08, 2006 21:01

Carravaggio, you seem like a decent enough skin. Let me clarify to you, I was not at the die-in, but I support it. I support any non-violent action that brings this issue back to the surface of Irish society as often as possible. If the activists had organised a troupe of trained seals to juggle fake cluster bombs whilst they stood around singing "Rock of Israel" in Grim Reaper outfits, that would have been fantastic. And no doubt as Chekov has said, The bitter old farts in the Sindo would have abused their journalistic privelege to insult such noble efforts.
Grabbing five minutes of attention from the pressing issues of today i.e. Jordans new tits, Big Brothers new freak, etc.. is a thankless task as you yourself have proved by insinuating that those noble demonstrators had lost their dignity whilst inflating their egos.

I marched in my local town before the bombardment of Iraq. I brought my family , we enjoyed it. It was not sombre or silent, we clapped our hands , shouted, I felt uplifted, not undignified. I felt a tiny sense of wellbeing, no ego-inflation at all. Please dont be embarrassed for me. Be embarrassed for clapped out journalists who drag the Irish media down into the dirt. Now, let there be no more mention of stupidity, go forth and somberly and silenlty change the world.

by PaddyK Wed Aug 09, 2006 03:35

The israeli smokescreen attack on Lebanon is having the desired effect as disgraceful abuses multiply in Palestine without any attention. The International media is so busy covering up Israeli war crimes in Lebanon that it forgot about the Palestinians.

----"The food and security situation is catastrophic," he told the Swiss news agency.--

http://www.swissinfo.org/eng/front/detail/Concern_raise...89000

-----"Israel's armed forces attack the Strip with up to 300 shells a day using aircraft and warships. Incursions by tanks and bulldozers terrorise the population."-----

No parades, no make up , no drums, no art in Jerusalem should be supported. Isolated Jerusalem.

Parades and Demos are for the free world only.

http://electronicintifada.net/v2/article5360.shtml

by Felix Quigley Thu Aug 10, 2006 14:17

PaddyK

You obviously are full of hatred for Israel. I am not sure where you have got this hatred from. Is it from your reading of history I wonder?

But then how do you see Hezbollah?

For me this is an army that is created for the sole purpose of killing Jews. It is linked surely to Ahmadinejad and his statements are full of ending Israel for good.

Nasrallah has on many occasions asked Arabs to murder Jews? Is this Hezbollah not anti-Semitic?

How do you see it?

by Felix Quigley Thu Aug 10, 2006 14:24

To the person who wrote above about Cuba. Israel is NOT responsible for Cuba! Why are you so full of hatred for Israel?

I want to question whether the US Government as opposed to the American people is really the friend of Israel.

First of all in 2000 the United States encourages Israel to withdraw from Lebanon telling them that South Lebanon would not be used as a launching pad for attacks.

What happened? As the US Government entered into a pally relationship with Iran from 2000 to 2005 the stooges of Iran, in the shape of the jew Killing Hezbollah, prepared for war with 16,000 advanced rockets pointing at Israel, and also with Hezbollah Jew killers travelling to Iran for special training.

So a large responsibility for the present plight of Jews in Israel rests with the very powerful American Government.

Then the US enters with the arch-enemies of Israel, the French Government of Chirac, to produce a deadly UN Resolution.

The very latest turn of the knife in the back of Israel by this corrupt American regime took place just yesterday. The following is an extract from a White House Spokesman. It is only a couple of paragraphs but in it you can see very clearly that this White House reads the situation as an absolutely equivalence between the Hezbollah and Israel. This was as Israeli forces enter into Lebanon to fight against this anti-Semitic and Jihadist Hezbollah scum.

Read these lines carefully and act is my advice to Jews.

“CRAWFORD, United States (AFP) - The United States said that the timing of a United Nations resolution on the Lebanon crisis was unclear and warned against any “escalations” in violence, as Israel widened its war against Hezbollah.

“We want an end to violence and we do not want escalations,” White House spokesman Tony Snow said as the Lebanese Shiite militia warned of more attacks on Israel’s port city of Haifa. “It’s a message to all parties.”
US warns Israel, Hezbollah against ‘escalation’ (AFP)
Wed Aug 9th 2006 at 7:30 pm ET
by Olivier Knox

(http://www.political-news.org/breaking/27366/us-warns-i....html)

As far as I can judge it is ALL branches of the American Government which sees an equivalence between the Hezbollah and Israel!

The spokeman for the State Department of the American Government, to complete the picture, had this to say at a press conference, again as Israeli troops prepare to fight Islamofascism and to lay down their lives, not just for Israel but for all who are threatened by Islamofascism, (such as gays 10 per cent of the population and women making up as we know another 50 per cent of the total population of the world)

“I’m not in a habit of commenting on their military operations,” said State Department spokesman Sean McCormack.

“We have, in the past, very strongly counseled both in public and private that the Israeli government needs to take the utmost care to avoid any loss of innocent life. These are very difficult situations.”

McCormack also expressed concern over the humanitarian situation in Lebanon, urging the Israelis “to do everything that they possible can” to help people in southern Lebanon as well as cities like Tyre “that are essentially cut off from the outside world.”

(Ibid)

McCormack starts you will notice with a lie…they comment on Israeli military options all the time, as if they own Israel.

This is all part of the campaign by Bush and Blair to separate out the Hezbollah, and to say that Lebanon is a democracy. But this democracy, so called, allowed and actually aided Hezbollah to attack Israel. That guff by Bush and Blair is the biggest lie of all.

Time for Israel to break with these and to make its appeal to the ordinary people of the world, who DO want to fight Islamofascism!

by de Gaul Mon Aug 14, 2006 14:43

Saw a reference to an article in the 'Blanket' above. It's interesting to note that the editor of the Blanket, Anthony McIntyre, gets a very favourable mention in - and writes for - the British Movement. Don't believe me? Check out their site "www.henryjacksonsociety.org" and then click on the 'Northern Ireland' tab. The only question is, is McIntire a fool or a rogue?