Showing posts with label Politics. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Politics. Show all posts

Wednesday, 19 February 2014

The strange absence of Bible stories from the gay marriage debate



The referendum on same-sex marriage to be held next year seems destined to be acrimonious and highly contested.

Already the 'Pantigate' episode has prompted threats of legal action, compensation payments and claims of attempts to silence opinions on both sides of the debate.

The central issue in the affair revolves around the role being played by homophobia in the debate.

Some have claimed that opposition to same-sex marriage is by definition homophobic, a view that has provoked much outrage in opponents of the measure.

Rather than making blanket statements which leave no room for further debate, a more revealing approach would be to examine whether there are any arguments against same-sex marriage that are not based on homophobia.

Another feature of the debate so far is the total absence of any reference to religious doctrine by devout Catholics who oppose same-sex marriage.

Instead their opposition is based on the “won't someone please think of the children” principle.

Apparently marriage is all about the kids and as gay couples can't conceive children together they have no right to get married.

Where this convenient definition of marriage comes from is another question, personally I would define marriage as a public declaration of love and commitment between a couple. Whether that couple go on to have children is beside the point.

Opponents of same-sex marriage also claim that gay couples are not as good at parenting as a male-female couples. Research showing otherwise is duly dismissed.

One thing we can be clear on however is that the Catholic Church, most Christian denominations (and many other religions) are unambiguously homophobic.

The official line of the Catholic Church on the subject is: “Basing itself on Sacred Scripture, which presents homosexual acts as acts of grave depravity, tradition has always declared that 'homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered.' ”

The 'Sacred Scripture' includes the Old Testament tale of Sodom and Gomorrah. This story begins with the visit of two magical creatures known as 'angels' to a man called Lot in the city of Sodom. The men of the city (all of them, apparently) took a shining to these two visitors and declared that they wanted to have sex with them. Being a righteous man Lot was absolutely horrified by this idea, so he offered his two daughters to the mob so they could “do what you like with them”, i.e. to gang rape them.

(This is not the only questionable sexual episode involving Lot and his daughters, for details on incest between them see Genesis19: 30-38).

Anyway, the men of Sodom declined the offer, but the two angels were able to stop them from entering the house by casting some sort of spell that blinded them. They then advised Lot to leave the city with his family and to never to look back. Then someone called 'The Lord' destroyed the city and all its people with burning sulphur from the sky. Lot escaped but his wife was not so fortunate, she looked back at the city and was instantly turned into salt.

It seems from the story that 'The Lord' is a remarkable individual. He can conjure sulphur and turn the constituent parts of the human body into sodium chloride. Plus he has a 'The' in his name.

This tale forms the basis of the Catholic Church's opposition to homosexuality, today, as well as the 'religious convictions' and 'genuinely held beliefs' we have heard so much of. This includes the complaints that people are being oppressed because they can't discriminate against gay people due to these beliefs.

The Bible condemns homosexuality, but if anyone actually read the book you would quickly notice the large number of behaviours that are also forbidden, including eating shellfish, wearing clothes made of two fabrics, getting a tattoo or working on the Sabbath.

One rule which may be relevant depending on how heated the referendum debate gets is that under no circumstances can a woman grab the genitals of a man who is fighting her husband. If she does her hand is to be chopped off.

The Bible also contains a wide range of immoral behaviours that are condoned or encouraged by God (which, by the way, includes Jesus), including murder, genocide, rape and slavery.

Why Christian churches cherry-pick the Bible's condemnation of homosexual people and ignore numerous other condemnations in the Sacred Scriptures, like the one about the testicle-grabbing wives, is a question I would love to hear answered.

None of this would matter but for the impact Christian teachings have had on the laws of this country, including teachings based on an anti-gay fairytale written 2,500 years ago.

It also leaves me wondering why supporters of the Catholic Church who are against same-sex marriage do not cite their church's views on homosexuality ('grave depravity', 'intrinsically disordered', etc) when opposing the reform, instead of relying entirely on dubious secular arguments.

One possibility is that they don't share these views, i.e. their opposition to same-sex marriage is totally unrelated to the religious opposition to same-sex marriage their church has.

Hopefully we will have an answer to this puzzle before the referendum takes place next year.

Thursday, 15 August 2013

Aon Ghéilleadh! – Gaeilge úsáidte ag an Protestant Coalition


Tá Gaeilge úsáidte ag an Protestant Coalition ar leathanach Facebook an pháirtí dílseachta conspóidí.

Cén fáth a deirim go bhfuil siad conspóideach? Sa chéad dul síos seo páirtí atá tar éis tacaíocht a léiriú d'ionsaithe ar an PSNI, nó an PSNIRA mar a ghlaonn siad orthu go minic. 

Is é Jim Dowson, iarbhall den pháirtí faisisteach, an BNP, duine de na bunaitheoirí. Bhunaigh sé páirtí fíordheis eile, Britain First, chomh maith, agus tá ceangal láidir idir an dá ghrúpa.

Mar aon le sin tá rabhaidh déanta go minic ag an PC go bhfuil baol ann go rachaidh dílseoirí i mbun 'cogaíochta' má leantar le cúrsaí mar atá ó thuaidh. 

Creideann siad chomh maith go bhfuil Facebook i mbun comhcheilg frith-Phrotastúnach agus frith-Dhílseachta toisc go bhfuil ceanncheathrú an chomhlachta lonnaithe i mBaile Átha Cliath.

Mar sin, is páirtí antoisceach lán le gealta é an Chomhghuallaíocht Phrotastúnach. Ach más féidir le páirtí mar seo an Ghaeilge a úsáid is léir nach baol í an teanga don fhéiniúlacht Aontachtach.


Chuir an páirtí físéan faoi Léigear Dhoire ar an leathanach Dé hAoine (9ú Lúnasa) ach ní raibh gach duine sásta go raibh sé i nGaeilge (tuigtear gur cuireadh clár faisnéise faoin léigear i mBéarla ar an leathanach níos déanaí).

“I prefer the English translation rather than this Leprechaun language…NO SURRENDER,” a dúirt John MacLaughlin.

Dúirt an Chomhghuallaíocht áfach go bhfuil Gaeilge ag Protastúnaigh in Albain.

“tens of thousands of Scottish Protestants speak the Gaelic!!” arsa an páirtí.

Níor ghlac an tUasal MacLaughlin leis an dearcadh seo.

“Maybe so but we are in Northern Ireland and the majority speak the English language. Far too many times we see the likes of bbc and the media use this leprechaun language on the t.v. and in the papers. Everybody to their own but I shall not be using it as 99% of my friends wouldn’t understand me,” ar seisean.

Scríobh an Protestant Coalition ‘aon ghéilleadh’ ar an snáithe níos deanaí, an t-aistriúchán ar ‘no surrender’ atá ag Google Translate.

Leiríonn suirbhé ar antuairisceoir.com nach gcuireann sé seo isteach ar phobal na Gaeilge. De réir na dtorthaí is déanaí tá 1% (duine amháin go dtí seo) den tuairim gur le náisiúntóirí amháin an teanga agus tá 3% (beirt) idir dá chomhairle. Creideann 96% (68 vóta) go bhfuil an ceart ag gach duine an Ghaeilge a úsáid.




 

Friday, 5 April 2013

Anti-Semitic material on Irish ‘Freeman’ website




Just over a week ago I’d never heard of the ‘Freeman’ movement. I now wish I could say the same, as it is disappointing to discover that there are people in Ireland who believe in such rubbish.

‘Freemen’ are essentially a cult-like group that claims citizens do not have to obey civil law. It sprang from the US Sovereign Citizens movement which believes in similar nonsense. 

It is interesting to note how ‘freemen’ in different countries adapt different pseudo-legal arguments to prove the same point (that  they don't have to comply with civil law), for example much emphasis is placed on the Magna Carta in the UK while in Ireland the collective tribe-based Brehon Law is put forward as being superior in some way to our current legal system.

More detailed explanations of the ludicrous claims of the Freeman movement can be read here and here.

Another interesting aspect of the movement is the widespread belief in conspiracy theories. One of the most common ones is the claim that a tiny secretive cabal of politicians and bankers are seeking to enslave humanity in an oppressive global ‘New World Order’.  This is apparently being done by a whole host of real and imagined organisations like the Illuminati, the Freemasons, the Bilderberg group, the Rothschild family etc.

Having had some knowledge of the Sovereign Citizens I was aware that there is an anti-Semitic variant of the NWO theory which claims that Jewish people are controlling this alleged attempt at world domination.

So I decided to search the websites of the leading Freeman group in Ireland, Tír na Saor, and its internet radio station, to see if any of their users subscribed to this particular theory.

Here is what I found:

*The notorious Nazi propaganda film, ‘The Eternal Jew’, made by Joseph Goebbels in 1940 prior to the commencement of the Holocaust.

*Other vile anti-Semitic videos with delightful titles such as ‘A Devil in Disguise’ and ‘Synagogue of Satan – Beginners Guide to the Jewish Question’.

*Claims that the US Federal Reserve (Central Bank) is a ‘private counterfeiting organization run by Jewish bankers’.
 
*A post on the site commemorating anti-Jewish postage stamps issued in 1941 by the pro-Nazi puppet government in Serbia depicting “a strong and victorious Serbia crushing an evil Masonic-Communist-Jewish plot for world domination." The post also contains an article by US Neo-Nazi William Pierce on the NATO-Serbian conflict in 1998 which he describes as an attempt “to use White Americans to kill White Europeans in order to advance the Jews' schemes.”

*Comments claiming that 'Jewish People' killed the Russian Royal family in 1918 “because they warned the world of the enslavement of the world from the Jews.”

*Praise  for Russian President Vladimir Putin for opposing ‘oligarchs’ Mikhail Khodorkovsky and Boris Berezovsky who are ‘both Jews just by chance.’

*An article uploaded on the Tír na Saor internet radio website written by recently deceased ultra-conservative Catholic writer Deirdre Manifold claiming that Jewish bankers orchestrated the Bolshevik Revolution in Russia,

and

*A video of an anti-Semitic speech by US Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan.

By the way, I have also found two anti-Semitic comments on the website forum of the new political party Direct Democracy Ireland, which has extensive links to the Freeman movement.

Comments on the party's online forum state that ‘Zionist Jewish bankers’ control central banks around the world while another claims that ‘rothschild zionists are out to murder the lot of us and future generations.’

I have also found evidence that an activist with Direct Democracy Ireland has posted anti-Semitic material on the internet.

All in all it’s a pretty shocking state of affairs that DDI and Tír na Saor would allow such offensive, hate-filled bigotry on their websites.

Neither organisation has responded to emails I sent them with questions about this disgusting anti-Semitic material.

Monday, 12 November 2012

Sorry, I’ll never be mature enough to honour British war criminals





Apropos of James McClean, here is the BBC reporting last month on the ‘controversy’ surrounding the visit by Japanese politicians to the Yasukuni Shrine in Toyko to honour Japan’s war dead.
 
The Yasukuni Shrine is the Japanese equivalent of the British Poppy, both “honour” their countries’ war dead, but as much as both may try to ignore the facts, these war dead include people who committed crimes against humanity.

There are some differences between here and there however.

*China and Korea actually protest anytime a Japanese politician visits the shrine.
*Korea was part of the Japanese Empire for 35 whole years.
*AFAIK people in the Korean media don’t ask if Koreans are ‘mature’ enough to honour Japan’s war dead or Koreans who fought in the Japanese Army.
 
If anyone wants to honour Irish people who fought in WWI wear an anti-war white poppy, otherwise you’re honouring British war criminals, something I’ll never be mature enough to do I’m sorry to say.

Thursday, 15 March 2012

Fracking-linked University studies environmental impact of fracking


Fracking is either a path to secure, cheap energy for the future or a nightmarish abomination that poisons water supplies with methane as well as toxic and possibly radioactive waste. It can also cause earthquakes.

A number of videos at the end of the article set out the two sides of the argument.

Clare County Council has already banned fracking while Leitrim and Fermanagh have been identified as other areas in Ireland where the controversial practice could be done. Locals and environmentalists have expressed concern about the possibility.

In response, the Environmental Protection Agency has commissioned the University of Aberdeen to study fracking. Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources Pat Rabbitte told the Dáil on 7 March that the EPA “is funding preliminary background research into the environmental aspects of shale gas extraction and the regulatory approaches of other countries, with a view to helping to establish best environmental practice.”

I'm waiting for an answer from the EPA as to why the University of Aberdeen was chosen, but here are some interesting facts about the institution.

The University describes Aberdeen as “the heart of the European oil and gas industry”.

Among the areas the University's Geology section assists in is “the development of unconventional hydrocarbon resources.”

Its 'research partners' include such names as Shell, Exxon Mobil, BP, Chevron, Statoil, Total, BHP Billiton and Halliburton.

Halliburton is one of the pioneers of fracking in the US, and gave its name to the so-called 'Halliburton loophole' – a 2005 exemption from the Safe Drinking Water Act given by the US Congress to fracking developments at the behest of then Vice President, Dick Cheney, former CEO of...Halliburton.

The University of Aberdeen is also a member of the Scottish Oil Club - “The national forum for the presentation and discussion of views on the economic, industrial, technological and political aspects of petroleum and other energy resources.”

The Club organised a seminar last November entitled "Shale Gas Projects and Investments" given by John Logel from Talisman Energy.

Among Talisman's claims to fame is a children's colouring book featuring a character called Talisman Terry “your friendly Fracosaurus”.

“I am here to teach you about a clean energy source called Natural Gas,” Talisman Terry says. You can see some of the pages in this image and watch a report on it below.



This delightful book was eventually withdrawn following a lampooning on the Colbert Report, which also claimed that Talisman was found to have violated Pennsylvania environmental regulations 145 times in 2010.

In light of the facts outlined here it will be interesting to see the results of the University's study.

www.twitter.com/colmobroin


Talisman Terry


Pro-fracking




Anti-fracking




Fracking Debate


Wednesday, 15 February 2012

Bánú na Gaeilge ó stair na hÉireann


Tá an-suim agam i stair na hÉireann, ach rud amháin a thug mé faoi dheara go minic ná an laghad tagairtí don Ghaeilge a bhíonn i leabhair staire. De gnáth is fo-nóta atá sa teanga, déantar tagairtí anseo is ansiúd dó ach sin é.

An sampla is measa den nós seo a tháinig mé ar riamh ná an leabhar meánscoile – Focus on the Past 2. Foilsíodh an leabhar seo in 1990 - níl a fhios agam an bhfuil sé fós in úsáid, ach tá súil agam nach bhfuil. Clúdaíonn an leabhar Teastas Sóisearaigh stair na hÉireann agus na hEorpa ó 1450-1850. Leagtar béim ar stair shóisialta agus eacnamaíochta mar aon le stair pholaitiúil.

Déanann an leabhar a mhúineann stair do pháistí na Poblachta éagóir uafásach ar an nGaeilge. Tá níos mó ráite ann faoin Réabhlóid Tionsclaíoch ná an Ghaeilge. Tá dhá thagairt don teanga - mír an-bheag ag an deireadh faoi thionchar an Ghorta ar an teanga agus píosa faoin difríocht idir an cultúr Gaelach agus an cultúr Sasanach ag deireadh na meánaoiseanna.

Seo an píosa faoin nGorta:

“The Irish speaking areas of the south and west suffered most from death and emigration, both during and after the Famine. The numbers of Irish speakers fell drastically as a result. These areas continued to experience high levels of emigration in the following decades.”

Ní hamháin nach bhfuil mórán ann faoin nGaeilge (nó faoi mheath na Gaeilge – ceann de na hathraithe sóisialta is mó is stair na hÉireann) tugann sé eolas míchruinn faoi bheocht na teanga freisin.

Breathnaigh ar na léarscáileanna thíos, na cinn a dhéanann 'cur síos' ar staid na Gaeilge in 1851 agus 1891.


Ar thaobh na léarscáileanna deirtear “Between 1851 and 1891, the areas where nearly everyone spoke Irish had been much reduced in size” agus sa mhír é fhéin deirtear “Areas where most people spoke Irish.”

Dóibh siúd le cur amach acu ar bheocht na teanga sa lá atá inniu ann, is léir cé chomh míchruinn is atá an cur síos seo.

Cén áit as ar tháinig na maíomhanna in Focus on the Past? Is ó Dhaonáireamh 1851 agus 1891 a thagann siad. Seo léarscáil a léiríonn na háiteanna sa tír ina raibh Gaeilge ag ar a laghad 25% den phobal de réir Daonáirimh 1851.



An bhféachann sibh cén áit a bhfuair Focus on the Past an fhaisnéis - ceantracha ina bhfuil Gaeilge ag 80% den phobal amháin atá curtha sa leabhar – sin an ciall le “Areas where most people spoke Irish” de réir dealraimh. Déantar neamhaird ar na ceantracha eile ina raibh Gaeilge ag formhór an phobail. Baintear úsáid as an gcleas céanna le daonáireamh 1891.

N'fheadar cén fáth gur cuireadh an t-eolas míchruinn seo os comhar páistí méanscoile, ach is náireach an scéal é gur tharla a leithéad.

Tá sé deacair teacht ar shonraí faoin leabhar, ach de réir na bileoga seo ón bhfoilsitheoir, Gill & Macmillan, bhí an chéad eagrán de Focus on the Past á mhúineadh go 50% de pháistí na Poblachta.

"Study the map showing the decline in the number of Irish speakers in the years after the Famine," a deir an leabhar.

Cén teachtaireacht a thugann na léaráidí míchruinn seo do pháistí a dhéanann staidéar orthu? An teachtaireacht a fhaighim uathu ná gur beag baint a bhí ag an nGaeilge le formhór na tíre le fada fada an lá. Má chreideann páistí nach raibh Gaeilge á labhairt ina gceantar leis na cianta, tá baol ann go gceapfaidh siad nach bhfuil ceangal acu féin leis an teanga, agus níos lú seans go mbeidh fonn orthu í a fhoghlaim (rud a tharlaíonn i mBaile Átha Cliath).

Mar a dúirt an fear – an té a bhfuil smacht aige ar an am atá caite, beidh smacht aige ar an am atá le teacht.

Anois cuir an éagóir i gcomhthéacs measúnaithe eile ar bheocht na Gaeilge, mar shampla an ceann seo ó 1800.



Níl a fhios agam cén faisnéis a úsáideadh don léarscáil seo, ach is dócha go gcuireann an easpa eolais atá againn faoi bheocht na Gaeilge roimh an nGorta leis an bpointe faoi bhánú na teanga ó stair na hÉireann.

Thursday, 26 January 2012

198 corporate convictions – and one person goes to jail


A recent look at the annual reports of the Office of the Director of Corporate Enforecement shows that it secured 198 convictions since it was set up in 2001.

Most of the convictions led to disqualifications and fines (mainly between €500-€1,500), while only eight included prison sentences. Of those, seven were suspended or overturned on appeal.

The one person who did go to prison, Kenneth Shanny from Dunshaughlin in Co Meath, was convicted of auditing offences under the 1990 Companies Act. He was sentenced to three years in prison, with the last year suspended, and is currently appealing the sentence.

So in ten years one person has been jailed by the body set up to tackle corporate crime in Ireland.

The Office is also investigating the goings-on in Anglo Irish Bank, an investigation that is in its third year. Due to the workload involved in the Anglo case the number of convictions the ODCE has secured dropped dramatically from 38 and 46 duine in 2005 and 2006 to just two in both 2009 and 2010.

Figures released by the Minister for Justice Alan Shatter in November also showed that ten prison sentences have been handed down for breaches of the Competition Act since 2001, but that all of them were suspended.

Meanwhile almost 7,000 people were jailed in in the first eleven months of 2011 for not paying fines (134 a week) up from 2,000 in 2008.

Thursday, 5 January 2012

€860 million worth of fish was taken from Ireland's seas in 2011


The Minister for Agriculture Simon Coveney told the Dáil before Christmas that 937,924 tonnes of fish would be taken from Ireland's waters in 2011, worth a total of €1.04 billion.

However, Irish fishers were only allowed to take 17% of this, meaning that €863 million was be fished by foreign trawlers. Only a quarter of the fish taken from Ireland's seas are landed in the country, meaning that the potential to create processing jobs is also being lost.

How did it all come to this?

Lorcán Ó Cinnéide from the Irish Fish Producers Organization (IFPO) explained thus; The EU doesn't view Ireland's territorial waters as 'Irish', they are seen more as a commonage to be divided up between all the nations of the EU. Indeed when Ireland joined the EEC its waters only extended 12 miles from shore. This was increased to 200 miles in the late seventies so foreign trawlers were already fishing in what become Ireland's waters.

The quotas for each EU nation's fishing fleets were set according to the historic size of the fleets. People in Ireland didn't recognise the potential of the fishing industry (and to be honest aren't all that mad about eating fish) and hadn't developed it by the time we joined the EEC.

Ireland had a small fleet when it joined whereas France, the UK and Spain had much larger ones – so we got a tiny quota and they get large ones. In fact, according to Lorcán, France gets about 32% of the fish from Ireland's waters, almost twice what Irish fishers get. To increase Ireland's quota France, Spain, the UK etc would have to reduce theirs and the IFPO don't believe there is much chance of that happening, so short of us leaving the EU there doesn't seem to be much we can do.

Ireland may not have recognised the potential of fishing in the past, but times have changed and it seems a bit unfair that the current quotas should be set in stone forever more. Certainly the next time France raises the issue of Ireland's “unfair” corporate tax rate we should mention the fishing quotas.

www.twitter.com/colmobroin

Thursday, 15 December 2011

Dublin City Council didn't want stronger fire regulations


Dublin City Council is currently embroiled in a dispute with builder Tom McFeely over the enforcement of fire safety regulations in the Priory Hall apartments. The apartments are virtual death traps due to the fact that they were not built according to fire safety regulations.

The council moved its tenants out of Priory Hall in 2009 and got a High Court order in October to remove private residents. The High Court ordered the council to pay for the residents' emergency accommodation but DCC is trying to overturn the ruling.

The lack of building regulation is causing major problems for the council, but it turns out that they and other local authorities didn't want stronger rules during the Celtic Tiger years.

Local authorities give buildings fire certificates based on architectural plans, not on inspections carried out following completion. The Competition Authority proposed a full inspection regime for construction projects as part of a consultation document on the architectural sector in 2003, but this was rejected by Dublin City Council and other local authorities.

The City and County Managers' Association wrote to the Authority saying that they did not have the resources to implement such a regime. They acknowledged that the cost could be covered by charging construction companies a fee, but rejected this option as it would increase the cost of building projects.

“We feel that monitored self-certification by suitably qualified persons should continue,” the Association said.

The Department of Environment recommends that 12-15% of completed buildings are inspected by fire brigade officers, but there is no way at present to verify that the remaining buildings were built according to plans.

Construction industry insiders say that plans are not always implemented as outlined to fire brigade officers due to pressure to cut costs.

The Chartered Institute of Building also wrote to the Competition Authority in 2004 saying there was an urgent need to introduce an inspection regime. The group condemned the self-certification system claiming that developers were discouraging building professionals from monitoring construction projects.

“It has become normal practice on large and medium-sized housing developments (and in some cases small developments) to refuse to allow work-in-progress inspections by client's professional representatives.”

“Self-certification by architects, building surveyors and appropriately qualified engineers etc should only be considered in conjunction with a combination of an increase in Local Authority inspections and resources, where necessary, in addition to the introduction of an approval system...in the interests of public health and safety.”

The recommendation to introduce a full inspection regime was not included in the final report on architects published by the Competition Authority in 2006, the year Priory Hall was built.

John Kidd from the Irish Fire and Emergency Services Association told me that Priory Hall is the “tip of the iceberg.” The trade union estimates that fire regulations were not complied with in 10% of Celtic Tiger-era buildings.

“It's only a matter of time before we have a major fire tragedy. Fixing the problems now could end up costing the council more than it would have to enforce a proper inspection regime during the boom, and lives would not have been put at risk either.”

Amen to that.

By the way Dublin City Council has not said why they didn't move private tenants out of Priory Hall when they moved their own tenants in 2009 due to fire safety concerns. It's unclear who would have been liable if a fire had occured there in the meantime.

www.twitter.com/colmobroin

Wednesday, 30 November 2011

An bhfuil gach sceimhlitheoir ar mire, nó Breivik amháin?


Caithfidh mé a rá go bhfuil an-amhras orm faoin measúnú go bhfuil Anders Behring Breivik ar mire. Dar le saineolaithe, bhí Breivik síocóiseach nuair a dhúnmharaigh sé 77 duine san Iorua i mí Iúil.

daoine san Iorua in amhras faoin maíomh seo chomh maith.

Má tá Breivik ar mire, caithfidh go bhfuil gach sceimhlitheoir nó saighdiúr a dhúnmharaigh daoine ar son cúis éigin as a meabhair chomh maith.

Bí cinnte de go raibh cúis shoiléir ag Breivik, is cuma más cúis lofa gan bhunús a bhí ann. Creideann sé gur bagairt iad Moslaimigh don Iarthar agus go bhfuil comhcheilg ar bun ag an eite chlé leo chun smacht a fháil ar an Eoraip. Sin an fáth gur ionsaigh sé daoine óga ó Pháirtí an Lucht Oibre san Iorua.

Má léann tú forógra Breivik feicfidh tú go gcuireann sé a chás i láthair le struchtúr - ní rámhaille atá ann. Níl sé níos áiféisí ná seasamh Al Qaeda go bhfuil an tIarthar ag iarraidh Ioslaim a scrios, nó seasamh Ronald Reagan go raibh bochtáin Ghuatamala, na Salvadóire nó Nicearagua ina mbagairt do na Stáit Aontaithe.

Bhí loigic lofa ag Breivik – níl an dara rogha againn na daoine seo a mharú toisc go bhfuil siad ar tí 'muidne' a scrios. Bíonn an 'loighic' chéanna ag sceimhlitheoirí mórthimpeall na cruinne. Sin an fáth go maraíonn Al Qaeda sibhialaigh de gach reiligiúin agus cúlra agus an fáth gur thacaigh SAM leis an sléacht bharbartha a mharaigh 200,000 duine i Meiriceá Láir sna 70í agus 80í.

Bheadh sé an-éasca dúinn beag is fiú a dhéanamh de Breivik mar 'ghealt'. Tá go leor daoine leis an tuairim chéanna faoi Ioslam agus an eite chlé is atá ag Breivik. Buíochas le Dia nach bhfuil níos mó acu sásta foiréigean a úsáid mar a rinne seisean.

Mura théitear i ngleic le hIoslamafóibe áfach athróidh sé sin amach anseo.

Monday, 31 October 2011

Internet crusaders target all Muslims, not just extremists


The brutal murders of 77 people in Norway in July by Anders Behring Breivik has drawn attention to so-called 'anti-jihad' writers and bloggers.

So far the focus has been on whether the writings of people such as Robert Spencer (above) and Pamela Geller 'inspired' Breivik's terrorist attack. It is virtually impossible to say if this is true, so they should be presumed innocent.

What is undeniable is that dire warnings about 'Islamisation' have become more frequent in Europe and America in recent years. Controversial Dutch politician Geert Wilders and US Republicans Sarah Palin and Newt Gingrich have now be joined by the first Irish politician to attempt to garner votes on the subject, co-opted Fine Gael councillor Joe O'Callaghan, who recently called for burkas to be banned.

Spencer and Geller are not marginal internet cranks however, they have appeared on Fox News, CNN and NBC in America. Spencer has advised the FBI on Islam and his best-selling books have been recommended for its agents by the FBI.

At first glance it would appear that their websites, Jihadwatch.org and Atlas Shrugs are committed to highlighting crimes and oppression by extremist Islamists. They claim to be defending human rights, religious tolerance, freedom of speech and equality for women from Islamic supremacists.

Articles posted on Jihadwatch.org in recent months detail the scandalously short sentences handed down to Islamists for the brutal lynching of three members of the Ahmadiyya Muslim minority in Indonesia, despicable honour murders against Muslim women by their families, repression under Sharia law and the persecution faced by people around the globe who leave Islam.

All very commendable, so far.

The more you look into the sites, however, the clearer it becomes that the 'anti-jihad' writers are not just targeting extremist and violent Islamists, but all Muslims.

Their argument, essentially, is that Osama Bin Laden is the true face of Islam (1) and that the root cause of extremist violence is the religion itself (2). Spencer, the intellectual heavyweight of the movement who regularly quotes from Islamic texts, derides the concept of 'moderate Islam,'(3) and claims that “there is no political Islam, no 'Islamism', no 'Islamists' -- there are only Islam and Muslims.” (4)

According to this school of thought, Muslims who say they don't agree with a violent campaign for world domination either don't understand their own religion or are lying and waiting until Muslims are in a strong enough position to reveal their inner fundamentalist.

The documentary Islam: What the West needs to know, which features many of the most influential anti-jihad writers, makes this point clear. A short TV ad is shown of ordinary Muslim Americans describing their backgrounds and finishes with the statement that “Muslims are part of the fabric of this great country and are working to build a better America.” The contributors to the documentary warn ominously however that the Koran allows Muslims to deceive non-believers in the service of Islam.

This is possibly the most reprehensible claim made by the anti-Muslim writers. If you accepted what they say it would mean that you can't trust your friends, relatives, neighbours or work colleagues if they happen to be Muslim. In fact, all Muslims are suspect according to this poisonous allegation.

Jihad Watch would be better called Muslim Watch as its modus operandi is to collate as much evidence as possible to prove that the Koran obliges Muslims to use violence to conquer the world - and ignores all evidence to the contrary. This is the trademark tactic of internet hate sites, similar to 'Gombeen Nation' which incites hatred against Irish speakers or the 'Jewish Crime Thread' found on neo-Nazi website Stormfront, which seeks evidence to reinforce pre-existing antisemitism.

Jihad Watch mixes real, harrowing examples of violence and oppression by Islamic extremists with transparent and ludicrous attempts to convince readers that Muslims as a whole are a threat to the rest of humanity. All conflicts between Muslims and others are interpreted as part of the global jihad. Resistance by Uighur Muslims to oppression by the Chinese government is therefore part of the 1,400 year struggle by Islam to dominate the world (5).

Spencer even refers to Kosovo Prime Minister Hashim Thaci as a 'jihadist' (6) while Geller has described Kosovo as a “radical Islamic state in the heart of Europe” (7) and included Somali piracy as another front in the conflict. It is noteworthy that in the case of Kosovo, the anti-jihadi writers are targeting Europe's indigenous Muslims, people who have been living on the continent for thousands of years, not recent migrants.

The anti-jihadi narrative is that Islam and Muslims are the problem, so they must be opposed in all contexts. Spencer and Geller don't just confine their activities to the internet or TV, they organised the protests against the planned mosque and community centre close to Ground Zero in New York, claiming it was a 'victory mosque' to celebrate the murder of 3,000 people by Al Qaeda on 9/11. They have also targeted recently appointed New Jersey judge Sohail Mohammad (8), America's first Muslim Congressman - Keith Ellison (9), and David Ramadan (10), a Republican Party member who is running for the Virginia House of Delegates. Ramadan is labelled an 'Islamic supremacist' by Geller simply because he doesn't oppose the 'Ground Zero mosque'.

Comments by readers of Jihad Watch leave us in no doubt about the core issue. 'Quranimals', 'subhuman barbarians', 'parasites', 'savages', 'bearded apes in pajamas', 'people infected with the musloid faith', 'vermin', these are just some of the dehumanising descriptions of Muslims that Spencer allows on his site. He himself has called Pakistan a “den of vipers.” (11).

One commenter has called for anti-jihadis to form groups modelled on Irgun and the Stern gang (12), Zionist terrorist groups that were active in Palestine during the British Mandate period, and states that Anders Breivik “chose his targets well” but that anti-jihadi activists should not follow his example “at this time, anyway.” (13). “It's only a matter of time before there's a Pan-European parasite-cleanse,” another commenter predicts (14).

An indication of the grasp on reality that fans of the site have is the claim that “Ireland is becoming just as dhimmified as the rest of Europe. The last time I was there, I barely recognised Dublin. Jilbabs, niqabs, and saffron beards everywhere.” (15).

Anyone who doesn't buy into this world-view is unilaterally dismissed as a 'dhimmi', a term that refers to subjugated Christians and Jews who live under Islamic rule. The media are said to be part of a Leftist-Islamist conspiracy because they don't explicitly explain to the public that the Koran orders Muslims to commit violence against infidels.

If the anti-jihadi activists confined themselves to highlighting human rights abuses by Islamic extremists and governments the charge of Islamophobia would not be true. They go way beyond this legitimate activity however, and demonize all Muslims and all Muslim communities.

The one defence that anti-Muslim writers have to the charge that they are mimicking Nazi Jew-baiting is to say that Jews were not launching terrorist attacks against Germany in the 1930s (16). This is true of course, but just like the Islamophobes, the Nazis were able to mix facts, canards and prejudice to portray Jewish people as a threat to Germany.

It may be extremely difficult for us to comprehend how the Nazis were able to generate such a frenzy of hate against Jewish people, but examining how Muslims are being dehumanized today shows how simple it might have been for them to spread their doctrine of genocide.

All they had to do was highlight the disproportionate number of Jewish people in business, law, medicine, entertainment and the media and to use this as evidence that Jews were conspiring to dominate society. The Nazis also promoted the 'Jewish Bolshevik' conspiracy, claiming that Jews were an imminent threat to Germany through their supposed control of the Soviet Union.

Add in the latent religious antisemitism in Europe and soon you had a large group of people convinced that there was an intractable Jewish 'problem' that had to be 'solved' somehow. Jews could then be barred from certain professions, have their property seized and their citizenship stripped. The Nazis contemplated deporting Jews from Europe but then decided to murder them all as deportation was not 'practical'.

All of the above solutions to the Muslim 'problem' have been backed directly or indirectly by various anti-jihad activists. That's right, all solutions, including the final one. John Joseph Jay, a co-founder of the Spencer/Geller organisation American Freedom Defense Initiative (17) and a board member of its campaign group, Stop the Islamization of America (SIOA) (18), has recommended “old fashion war with wholesale slaughter including indiscriminate death of innocents and babes. down to the last muslim, if necessary.” (19).

Robert Spencer says that Muslims should not be allowed to emigrate to Western countries (20) but claims he does not support the deportation of European or American Muslims. He is however an enthusiastic supporter of people who do, like Geert Wilders, the far-right Dutch politician who has said it may be necessary to deport millions of European Muslims (21).

Wilders mixes standard anti-immigrant rhetoric with attacks on the deviant minority du jour - Muslims, based on alleged concerns for human rights. He blames crime among Muslim communities on their religious background and ignores the link between petty criminality, poverty and inequality found in all societies.

He has blithely spoken of deporting millions of Muslim from Europe. To highlight what this would actually involve, let us imagine that his plan was implemented in the UK. Wilders has said that Muslims who won't integrate should be stripped of their citizenship and deported. According to research 40% of British Muslims support Sharia law (22). In a city like Bradford this would mean deporting 30,000 of the 75,000 Muslims living there (23). But what if these English people don't want to leave their country for ever, what if some members of a family support Sharia but others don't? What if no country was willing to accept deportees? How much money would it cost to deport and compensate over a million people in total from Britain? Eventually other 'solutions' would be sought for this 'problem'.

This may sound like a far-fetched scenario, but once you start demonizing and dehumanizing an entire community you've begun to lay the tracks to Auschwitz.

The anti-Islam activists don't just fantasise about futuristic doomsday scenarios involving the ethnic cleansing of Muslims however, they include people linked with actual ethnic cleansing and killing of Muslims in Europe.

One of the contributors to Islam: What the West needs to know, is a man called Serge Trifkovic, a former spokesperson for the Bosnian Serb forces (24) that waged a bloody campaign of ethnic cleansing against Muslims and Catholics in Bosnia.

As Muslims were involved in the conflict, the anti-Islamic writers conclude that it was part of the global conflict between Islam and Judeo-Christian civilisation (the targeting by Orthodox Serbs of Catholic Croats is conveniently ignored).

Trifkovic was a spokesman for the Bosnian Serb government during their onslaught which killed at least 30,000 Muslim civilians (25) (26). This campaign of ethnic cleansing, which involved murdering, torturing and raping civilians, was designed to drive Muslims from their native areas and leave them too terrified to ever return.

He has supported indicted war criminals Radovan Karadzic and Ratko Mladic and denied genocide and planned ethnic cleansing took place in Bosnia (27) (28)(29). He spoke for the defence at the trial of convicted war criminal Milomir Stakic (30), whose fiefdom included the notorious Omarska concentration camp.

Trifkovic, whose writings on Islam have been praised by Spencer (31), was also an advisor to former Bosnian Serb President, Biljana Plavsic (32), who pleaded guilty to war crimes against Muslims (33). Plavsic was considered to be 'extreme' by yet another indicted war criminal, Vojislav Seselj. As hard as this may be to believe, Seselj claimed at his trial that Radovan Karadzic also considered her to be extreme (34).

You may never see an outright justification of the monstrous crimes committed against Bosnia's Muslim community by Robert Spencer, Pamella Geller or other writers, but what you will see are attempts to downplay or deny these crimes and repeated efforts to contextualise the Bosnian war as being part of a conflict between peace-loving Christianity and violent Islam (35).

The anti-Muslim writers are as thorough in ignoring extremism in other religions as they are in scouring the earth for evidence that Islam is violent. This may seem like a minor point, but without it demonization becomes much harder. To dehumanize a group of people it must be shown that they are different from 'us', that they are an 'other'. We are peaceful, they are violent; we are enlightened, they are backward; we treat women equally, they oppress women; we are honest, they lie.

If the anti-Muslim writers acknowledged that Christians, Jews, Hindus, Buddhists and others are not without sin, it would show that 'we' are not that different from 'them' after all, thus making it harder to turn Muslims into social outcasts.

As the quotes at this post show, the anti-jihadi message bears a remarkable similarity to the antisemitism of Nazi propagandist Julius Streicher, the editor of Der Stuermer. It includes the quoting of religious texts to prove the nefarious and conspiratorial nature of Muslims/Jews, the claim that the Left are allied with Muslims/Jews while governments stand idly by, the slur that Muslims/Jews are deceitful and the contention that criticising Muslims/Jews is not incitement to violence against Muslims/Jews.

Spencer et al would no doubt feign outrage at being compared to Nazis like Julius Streicher, and others may think it unfair or exaggerated. However, given the fact that he portrays the entire Muslim community as a threat, calls for legal discrimination against Muslims, supports advocates of future ethnic cleansing of Europe's Muslims, has collaborated with people linked to real life ethnic cleansing of European Muslims and makes every effort to downplay an act of genocide in Srebrenica (36) – the worst massacre in Europe since the Nazis, the comparision is entirely appropriate.

Demonizing and dehumanizing a community has consequences. In Streicher's case it had personal consequences for him, as he was tried and executed for crimes against humanity at the Nuremberg Tribunal despite the fact he had no part in the planning or implementation of the Holocaust. His anti-Jewish writings and speeches were enough to convict him.

Reacting to claims his writings inspired Anders Breivik, Spencer said that this was like blaming the Beatles for the Tate/La Bianca murders because Charles Manson said he was inspired to commit them by their song Helter Skelter (37). This comparison would only be apt however, if Helter Skelter contained lyrics which said Sharon Tate, Leno La Bianca and their friends were involved in an evil conspiracy to take over the US, that the media was helping them and that the US government, police and FBI knew of the plan to enslave the American people but refused to prevent it.

If indeed the Beatles had made such a claim would they be to blame for the Manson Family's violence? It's hard to know, but they would certainly be shunned by society for using such highly irresponsible rhetoric.

If Spencer, Geller and other anti-jihad writers want to show they are not hate-mongering crypto-fascists they must in future restrict their efforts to highlighting religious persecution and intolerance in all faiths, desist from publishing noxious anti-Muslim comments on their websites, end campaigns to restrict the religious and civil freedoms of Muslims and efforts to downplay horrific war crimes committed against Muslims. Above all they must stop targeting 20% of the world's population because they are followers of Islam.

Otherwise there will be no doubt that they are inciting hatred against Muslim people.

(For further information on Islamophobic activists see www.loonwatch.com and www.islamophobia-watch.com).

Notes

(1) http://usminc.org/pigtislam.html. The Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam (and the Crusades), 2005.
(2) http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/atlas_shrugs/2009/11/will-muslims-serve-on-the-911-muslim-terrorist-jury.html
(3) http://www.jihadwatch.org/2006/01/what-is-a-moderate-muslim.html
(4) http://www.jihadwatch.org/2011/09/islam-versus-islamism----a-distinction-without-a-difference-1.html
(5) http://www.jihadwatch.org/2005/04/china-crushing-muslim-uighurs.html
(6) http://www.jihadwatch.org/2010/12/more-on-kosovo-jihadists-organ-trafficking.html
(7) http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/atlas_shrugs/2008/02/give-em-a-state.html
(8) http://www.jihadwatch.org/2011/08/nj-governor-christie-says-critics-of-hamas-linked-judge-are-ignorant-and-this-sharia-law-business-is.html
(9) http://www.jihadwatch.org/2006/09/spencer-keith-ellison-cair-and-hamas.html
(10) http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/atlas_shrugs/2011/04/ramadan-watch-defeat-islamic-supremacist-david-ramadan-in-virginia.html
(11) http://www.jihadwatch.org/2011/08/shocker-terrorists-who-attack-kill-civilians-in-western-china-were-trained-in-pakistan.html
(12) http://www.jihadwatch.org/2011/07/the-malaysian-response-to-the-norwegian-massacre.html
(13) http://www.jihadwatch.org/2011/07/lebanon-roadside-bomb-targets-un-peacekeeping-convoy.html
(14) http://www.jihadwatch.org/2011/07/us-special-ops-commander-warns-of-al-qaedas-next-generation.html
(15) http://www.jihadwatch.org/2011/05/ireland-muslim-arrested-for-threatening-obama.html
(16) http://www.jihadwatch.org/2011/08/the-atlantics-jeffrey-goldberg-equates-resistance-to-islamization-with-nazism.html
(17) http://powerbase.info/images/6/66/AFDIarticles.pdf
(18) http://www.jihadwatch.org/2010/08/hamas-linked-cair-dhimmi-leftist-bloggers-lie-again.html
(19) http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/atlas_shrugs/2008/11/mumbai-muslims.html?cid=140889682#comment-6a00d8341c60bf53ef010536253cce970b
(20) http://www.jihadwatch.org/2007/08/australian-pol-to-oppose-islamic-immigration.html
(21) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NCxKjcwrBo4
(22) http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1510866/Poll-reveals-40pc-of-Muslims-want-sharia-law-in-UK.html
(23) http://www.neighbourhood.statistics.gov.uk/dissemination/LeadTableView.do;jsessionid=36FMTG4HYGnjMGnTfDhMLpLswGyDpSy59nV1RZncQ8161K2rlWkp!193229230!1313274023452?a=7&b=276807&c=bradford&d=13&e=16&g=379385&i=1001x1003x1004&o=35&m=0&r=1&s=1313274023452&enc=1&dsFamilyId=95&nsjs=true&nsck=true&nssvg=false&nswid=1280
(24) http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/1423835.stm
(25) http://www.icty.org/sid/10591
(26) http://www.icty.org/x/cases/stakic/trans/en/030319IT.htm
(27) http://www.chroniclesmagazine.org/2008/07/22/karadzics-arrest-bosnian-myths-rehashed/
(28) http://truthfrequencynews.com/?p=4363
(29) http://www.srpska-mreza.com/WarCrime/ST-Hague.html
(30) http://www.icty.org/x/cases/stakic/acjug/en/sta-aj060322e.pdf
(31) http://www.jihadwatch.org/2006/05/trifkovic-jihads-fellow-travelers.html
(32) http://archive.frontpagemag.com/readArticle.aspx?ARTID=20283
(33) http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/2293037.stm
(34) http://www.icty.org/x/cases/slobodan_milosevic/trans/en/050830IT.htm
(35) http://www.jihadwatch.org/2011/03/setting-the-record-straight-on-bosnia.html
(36) http://www.jihadwatch.org/2011/06/un-officials-and-the-muslim-regime-in-sarajevo-orchestrated-the-srebrenica-massacre.html
(37) http://www.jihadwatch.org/2011/07/anders-breivik-stole-the-counterjihad-movement-from-freedom-fighters----were-stealing-it-back.html

Jihad Watch support for restrictions on rights.
http://www.jihadwatch.org/2005/07/fitzgerald-bomb-mecca.html
http://www.jihadwatch.org/2007/08/fitzgerald-needed-a-muslims-only-airline.html

Jihad Watch comments:
'Quranimals/Bearded apes in pajamas' - http://www.jihadwatch.org/2011/07/uk-there-are-25-areas-around-the-country-which-the-government-has-earmarked-as-areas-where-violent-e.html
'Subhuman barbarians/Savages' - http://www.jihadwatch.org/2011/06/taliban-raid-on-kabuls-hotel-inter-continental-ends-after-six-hours-nato-helicopter-support.html
'Parasites' - http://www.jihadwatch.org/2011/04/we-urge-all-muslims-to-stay-away-from-the-royal-weddingbecause-of-the-likelihood-of-an-attack-by-the.html
'People infected with the musloid faith' - http://www.jihadwatch.org/2011/07/shocker-anti-semitism-marrs-malaysian-football-match-with-british-club.html
'Vermin' - http://www.jihadwatch.org/2011/04/israeli-foreign-minister-there-was-quiet-and-hamas-took-advantage-of-the-quiet-in-order-to-smuggle-m.html

www.twitter.com/colmobroin

Islamophobia and Antisemitism: Same message, different minority.



Below are quotes which highlight the disturbing similarities between Islamophobic and Antisemitic messages.

Ten statements by 'anti-jihad' writer Robert Spencer and Nazi propagandist Julius Streicher are compared.

Julius Streicher was the editor of Der Stuermer, a Nazi paper that spread vicious Antisemitic propaganda from 1923-1945. As Nazi Party leader in Nuremburg he organized the destruction of synagogues in the city.

He was not directly involved in the Holocaust but was convicted of crimes against humanity after WWII. He was found guilty of inciting hatred against Jews in Der Stuermer and was executed in 1946.

Robert Spencer is a prominent critic of Islam who runs the Jihadwatch.org website. He is the author of several best selling books on Islam and he has spoken on Fox News, CNN, NBC and other news channels.

He has organized protests against the construction of mosques in New York. He has advised the FBI on Islam and his books were recommended by the FBI for its agents.

The following is a comparison of their views on Muslims and Jews respectively.

1 Muslims/Jews have a religious duty to conquer the world.
“Islam understands its earthly mission to extend the law of Allah over the world by force.”

Robert Spencer.

“Do you not know that the God of the Old Testament orders the Jews to consume and enslave the peoples of the earth?”

Julius Streicher.

2 The Left enables Muslims/Jews.
“The principal organs of the Left...has consistently been warm and welcoming toward Islamic supremacism.”

Robert Spencer.

“The communists pave the way for him (the Jew).”

Julius Streicher.

3 Governments do nothing to stop Muslims/Jews.
“FDI* acts against the treason being committed by national, state, and local government officials...in their capitulation to the global jihad and Islamic supremacism.”

(Freedom Defense Initiative, Robert Spencer/Pamela Geller organisation).

“The government allows the Jew to do as he pleases. The people expect action to be taken.”

Julius Streicher.

4 Muslims/Jews cannot be trusted.
“When one is under pressure, one may lie in order to protect the religion, this is taught in the Qur'an.”

Robert Spencer.

“We may lie and cheat Gentiles. In the Talmud it says: It is permitted for Jews to cheat Gentiles.”

From The Toadstool, children's book published by Julius Streicher.

5 Recognizing the true nature of Muslims/Jews can be difficult.
“There is no reliable way for American authorities to distinguish jihadists and potential jihadists from peaceful Muslims.”

Robert Spencer.

"Just as it is often hard to tell a toadstool from an edible mushroom, so too it is often very hard to recognize the Jew as a swindler and criminal."

From The Toadstool, children's book published by Julius Streicher.

6 The evidence against Muslims/Jews is in their holy books.
“What exactly is ‘hate speech’ about quoting Qur’an verses and then showing Muslim preachers using those verses to exhort people to commit acts of violence, as well as violent acts committed by Muslims inspired by those verses and others?”

Robert Spencer.

“In Der Stuermer no editorial appeared, written by me or written by anyone of my main co-workers, in which I did not include quotations from the ancient history of the Jews, from the Old Testament, or from Jewish historical works of recent times.”

Julius Streicher.

7 Islamic/Jewish texts encourage violence against non-believers.
“'And slay them wherever ye find them, and drive them out of the places whence they drove you out, for persecution is worse than slaughter...' -- 2:191.”

Koranic verse quoted by Robert Spencer on Jihadwatch.org.

“'And when the Lord your God has delivered them over to you and you have defeated them, then you must destroy them totally: men and women and children, even the animals.' (Deuteronomy 7:2.).”

Biblical verse quoted by Julius Streicher in Der Stuermer.

8 Christianity is peaceful while Islam/Judaism is violent.
“There is no Muslim version of 'love your enemies, pray for those who persecute you' or 'if anyone strikes you on the right cheek turn to him the other also'.”

Robert Spencer.

“The Jew is not being taught, like we are, such texts as, 'Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself,' or 'If you are smitten on the left cheek, offer then your right one.'"

Julius Streicher.

9 Muslims/Jews are uniquely violent.
"(Islam) is the only major world religion with a developed doctrine and tradition of warfare against unbelievers."

Robert Spencer.

"No other people in the world has such prophecies. No other people would dare to say that it was chosen to murder and destroy the other peoples and steal their possessions."

Julius Streicher.

10 Criticising Muslims/Jews is not incitement to violence against Muslims/Jews.
“There is nothing in anything that I have ever written that could be reasonably construed as an incitement to violence against anyone.”

Robert Spencer.

“Allow me to add that it is my conviction that the contents of Der Stuermer as such were not (incitement). During the whole 20 years, I never wrote in this connection, 'Burn Jewish houses down; beat them to death.' Never once did such an incitement appear in Der Stuermer.”

Julius Streicher.

Notes:

Robert Spencer quotes;

(1) http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-871902797772997781
http://www.ourbeacon.com/cgi-bin/bbs60x/webbbs_config.pl/md/read/id/314123119154008
(2) http://www.jihadwatch.org/2011/07/anders-breivik-and-the-echo-chamber.html
(3) http://freedomdefense.typepad.com/about.html
(4) http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-871902797772997781
(5) http://www.jihadwatch.org/2007/08/australian-pol-to-oppose-islamic-immigration.html
(6) http://www.jihadwatch.org/2011/07/daniel-greenfield-in-defense-of-robert-spencer.html
(7) http://www.jihadwatch.org/2011/08/wapo-do-critics-actually-read-the-koran-uh-yeah.html
(8) http://books.google.ie/books?id=eanFm7hiM1cC&pg=PA27
(9) http://www.jihadwatch.org/2006/01/what-is-a-moderate-muslim.html
(10) http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/console/p00hz34g

Sources for Julius Streicher quotes;
http://propagander.tripod.com/js2.html
http://www.calvin.edu/academic/cas/gpa/story5.htm
http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Holocaust/Streicher.html
http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Holocaust/Giftpilz.html
http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Holocaust/secretplan.html

Internet Crusaders target all Muslims, not just extremists.

www.twitter.com/colmobroin

Friday, 21 October 2011

Téarma Uachtarántachta amháin, ar feadh seacht mbliana


Ó thosaigh an feachtas Uachtarántachta táthar ag caint ar leasú a dhéanamh ar théarma na hoifige. Faoi láthair maireann an téarma seacht mbliana agus tá cead ag an Uachtarán dhá théarma a chaitheamh san Áras.

Ceann de na moltaí ná go leanfadh an téarma ar feadh cúig bhliana ionas nach mbeadh Uachtarán sa phost ar feadh 14 bliain dá gceapfaí iad faoi dhó.

Sílim gur cheart an post a leasú – ba cheart an téarma a fhágáil ag seacht mbliana, ach srian téarma amháin a chur ar gach Uachtarán.

Ceannaire Stáit gan chumhacht atá san Uachtarán agus tá sé nó sí ceaptha bheith 'os cionn' na polaitíochta. Ní bhíonn aon bhaint acu le riaradh na tíre agus is annamh a dhéantar cáineadh orthu.

An t-aon am a tharla sé sin, in 1976, d'éirigh Cearbhall Ó Dálaigh as an bpost “to protect the dignity and independence of the presidency as an institution”.

Bhí roinnt conspóide ann in 2004 nuair a ceapadh Máire Nic Giolla Íosa don dara théarma gan toghchán. Abraimis go raibh toghchán ann - bheadh uirthi teacht anuas ón ardán neamh-pholaitiúil ómósach go gáitéar na polaitíochta arís.

Tá sé feicthe againn le cúpla mí anuas cé chomh salach agus gaingeadach is atá toghchán na hUachtarántachta, agus ní bheadh sé ceart ná cóir go mbeadh ar an Uachtarán bheith páirteach ina leithéad d'fheachtasaíocht mhíchuibhiúil.

Dá mbeadh an bua ag Nic Giolla Íosa in 2004 fillfeadh sí ar Áras in athuair, ach is cinnte nach mbeadh an meas céanna ag an bpobal uirthi dá mbeadh sí ag argóint leis na hiarrthóirí eile.

Mar sin molaim fad an téarma a fhágáil ag seacht mbliana, ach srian téarma amháin a chur leis an Uachtarántachta.

Monday, 17 October 2011

Do Unionist politicians understand what British means?


There was a furore in the Northern Ireland Assembly last week when SDLP MLA Dominic Bradley was censured following a spat involving the Irish language.

Bradley was in the process of asking a question in Irish (which he was going to translate to English), when he was interrupted by David McNarry of the UUP (you can read the transcript here).

McNarry is an extremist when it comes to Irish, having tried to ban the language in the Assembly a number of years ago.

Bradley objected to being barracked by McNarry, but instead of being allowed to carry on he was asked to sit down by the Deputy Speaker, Roy Beggs. He refused and was later sent a letter by the main Speaker, Willie Hay, saying he would be denied speaking rights for an unspecified period.

The sorry episode is another example of hostility to the Irish language among Unionist politicians. It shows that they oppose the language even when spoken by peaceful constitutional nationalists like the SDLP.

All bases are covered in Stormont when it comes to the language. If it's a few words of Irish at the start of a speech it's tokenism, if it's half in Irish and half in English it wastes time and if simultaneous translation was proposed that would be waste of money. The message is clear - no Irish speakers about the place.

Antipathy to the Irish language has been a feature of British politicians in Ireland since the Middle Ages, so this is not something new.

Various reasons are given by today's Unionist parties for their hostility to Irish, one of which is that it is a threat to Northern Ireland's Britishness, an argument that has been made by people in the DUP, UUP and TUV.

These parties' entire world view is defined by being British. They are British in the same way that Americans are American or Danes are Danish, yet many of them don't seem to understand what 'British' actually means.

British, by definition, incorporates cultures and characteristics that are indigenous to or have developed in the United Kingdom. We are told that it is an inclusive, 'umbrella' term which covers English, Scottish, Welsh and Northern Irish identities. It allows people to be English and British, Scottish and British, Welsh and British etc.

The Unionist parties say that Northern Ireland is British, which is why they often have images of the six counties covered in the Union Jack, so that means that cultures indigenous to Northern Ireland are also British (this also holds for the rest of Ireland for people who use the term 'British Isles').

Scots and Welsh people complain that many in England use the word 'British' when what they really mean is English. It seems that many Unionist politicians in the North think the same too.

If they believe Northern Ireland is British, they have to accept that the Irish is a British language in the same way as Unionists in Scotland and Wales say their indigenous languages are. In fact, compared to the respect shown to Scottish Gaelic and Welsh in Britain, Unionist opposition to the Irish language is downright anti-British.

Of course, the above definition of Britishness is the de jure one. The de facto definition has been different - culturally and politically, Great Britain can often seem like Greater England.

In terms of language, one thing is clear, the Union has been a complete and utter disaster. Manx, Cornish, Channel Island French and Irish (in the parts of Ireland that remained in the UK) have been wiped out as community languages, Scottish Gaelic is at death's door, Scots has been ridiculed and marginalised while even Welsh is under severe pressure from English in its heartland.

The de facto definition of Britishness promoted in Britain and Ireland until recent decades was Englishness, essentially. Things have changed in Scotland and Wales, and some people in Northern Ireland like the UUP's Basil McCrea have too , but it's about time other Unionist politicians realised that English and British are not the same thing.

www.twitter.com/colmobroin

Thursday, 6 October 2011

Dublin-Monaghan was Ireland's 9/11


Last month people in America and around the world commemorated the ten year anniversary of the 9/11 terrorist attacks. On that day 3,000 civilians were murdered by Al Qaeda.

In response to this massacre the US government launched a massive worldwide campaign to destroy Osama Bin Laden's group. It invaded Afghanistan and removed the Taliban from power because they were sheltering Al Qaeda.

It got a resolution in the United Nations which called on all countries “to work together urgently to bring to justice the perpetrators, organizers and sponsors of those terrorist attacks and stressed that those responsible for aiding, supporting or harbouring them would be held accountable.”

George Bush said that anyone helping terrorists were terrorists. The US built the Guantanamo Bay prison camp and kidnapped and tortured people it suspected of being involved in the 9/11 attack.

It eventually caught up with Osama Bin Laden in May of this year and killed him.



Now imagine that the US had taken a different approach to the greatest single act of murder against its citizens. Imagine that the investigation had been wound down after two months. Imagine that leads were not followed up and that US authorities ignored strong evidence that a foreign government had helped the terrorists to carry out their bloody attack.

Imagine that survivors who were campaigning for justice were placed under surveillance by the FBI. Imagine that police and Department of Justice files on the case went missing. Imagine that for years there was no official commemoration of the event and that the families had to campaign for a monument to the victims.

Imagine that the Taliban refused to share information they had on the attack but the US continued to have friendly relations with them. Imagine that Al Qaeda carried out more terrorist attacks on America while the Taliban continued to give them shelter.

It's hard to imagine such a scenario, but one just like it happened, and continues to to happen, in Ireland.

The Dublin-Monaghan bombings were Ireland's 9/11. It was the single biggest crime in the history of the State. 33 people were killed, including one pregnant woman, when bombs went off in Dublin and Monaghan town in 1974.

The UVF were suspected at the time of being behind the atrocity, and they finally admitted responsibility in 1993. Evidence suggests that the loyalist paramilitary group did not act alone, and that the British government's security forces, MI5, the British Army and the RUC, may have helped them to carry out the terrorist attack.

As you might guess from the paragraph above, the Garda investigation into the attack was stopped after two months and leads indicating UVF involvement weren't followed up. The families of the victims were outraged and began a campaign to find the truth. Garda Special Branch officers surveilled the families at protests and commemorative events. Garda and Department of Justice files on the case have disappeared, presumed destroyed.

The families eventually forced the government to holding an inquiry into the attacks. It concluded that the allegation that British forces were involved in the attack was “neither fanciful nor absurd” but that as the British government refused to cooperate with the inquiry, it could not give a definitive answer. A parliamentary report ohttp://www.blogger.com/img/blank.gifn inquiries into other loyalist attacks in the Republic accused the British government of engaging in 'international terrorism'.

Earlier this year newly-elected Taoiseach Enda Kenny asked David Cameron to hand over files the British government it has on the bombing. He refused. This is how things stand at the present – the Irish government half-heartedly asks the British government for the files, they say no and we say ok, no worries.

Given the way the Irish and British states have dealt with the attacks since 1974, it's hard not to suspect that both governments are happy to allow the situation to remain as it is.

All the while the British government was, at best, refusing to reveal all its knew about loyalist attacks in the Republic, at worst, actually involved in them, the Irish government was helping the British government to stop the IRA from attacking the UK.

If you're not from Ireland you may be totally baffled as to the reasons the Irish government has basically covered up Ireland's 9/11. If you're Irish you may have an idea, but it'll most likely be one that is almost never openly discussed in Ireland.

It's got to do with the implications of possible British involvement in the attack. If it so happened that the British government organised the bombing, it would mean that they had launched a terrorist attack on their nearest neighbour and had committed an act of war. This would have massive international repercussions.

More importantly for Irish governments, it would cause massive outrage in Ireland.

The main priority of the Irish establishment since the beginning of the Troubles has been to maintain 'stability' south of the border. This means keeping support for the IRA in the Republic as low as possible. If it were known that Britain bombed Ireland, support for the IRA could grow. Looking the other way with regards to the Dublin-Monaghan bombing was done in the name of protecting the State.

Unfortunately the 'State' in this case does not include the citizens of the State, and more specifically the 33 citizens killed on 17 May 1974. They, their families and the truth have been sacrificed in the name of the 'State'.

Since 1974 Fianna Fáil, Fine Gael, Labour, the Progressive Democrats, the Green Party and Democratic Left have been in power and have been involved in this scandal. Remember this the next time you hear people from these parties pontificating about law and order or morality.