BS: Hart questions Irish Americans

Subject: BS: Hart questions Irish Americans
From: maire-aine
Date: 23 Feb 03 - 01:13 PM

I just don't understand how Gary Hart can keep self-destructing like this..Article from Irish Echo

Subject: RE: BS: Hart questions Irish Americans
From: GUEST,sorefingers
Date: 23 Feb 03 - 01:28 PM

He like a bunch of other so called Americans ough to look at their own families, who should check before they start throwing shit around...

Mr Hart's family is very likely descended from emigrants from ...da dahhhhh Westmeath Co Ireland...

Subject: RE: BS: Hart questions Irish Americans
From: GUEST
Date: 23 Feb 03 - 01:41 PM

Here are links to the transcript of his speech cited in the Irish Echo article:

http://www.garyhartnews.com/hart/writings/speeches/sf_02_10_2003.php

The quote the Irish Echo uses is the second to the last paragraph of the speech. There is no mention of any particular ethnic group.

Subject: RE: BS: Hart questions Irish Americans
From: Michael S
Date: 23 Feb 03 - 01:46 PM

My very immediate reaction is that I don't find the quoted language terribly disturbing. However, when asked for specifics, the article suggests he engaged in some distressing group stereotyping.

However, those specifics are not in quotation marks. Did he say, "Those Irish and Cuban Americans do this." Or did he say, "I've seen this in the political dialogue of some Irish-Americans and some Cuban Americans, to cite two examples."

The former is worse than the latter. The former should be explained and, perhaps, an apology is due. Criticism of the latter could be the type of foolishness that forbids a politician from being candid and sophisticated.

I've admired Hart. I hope he didn't simply stereotype egregiously. They can step in it, can't they?

Peace,
Michael

Subject: RE: BS: Hart questions Irish Americans
From: GUEST
Date: 23 Feb 03 - 01:55 PM

Here is a link to the only other news organization I could find online who mentioned this speech.

New York Sun article on speech

Considering that both articles cite ABC News as the source of the Irish and Cuban remarks, without using quotation marks, as Michael S points out, I'm still looking for the actual story that the remarks were supposed made in at the ABC News website.

Subject: RE: BS: Hart questions Irish Americans
From: GUEST
Date: 23 Feb 03 - 02:30 PM

According to this article in the National Review (a far right American weekly news and opinion magazine), it was Jews that Hart targeted in his remarks at Stanford Law School:

http://www.nationalreview.com/comment/comment-geraghty021403.asp

Subject: RE: BS: Hart questions Irish Americans
From: michaelr
Date: 23 Feb 03 - 02:30 PM

That's a pretty intelligent, well-thought-out speech. I, too, would guess the sentence in question refers to Zionists in America. Of course, to say so openly would have caused Hart a shit storm of "anti-semitism" accusations. So he did a clumsy little dance when asked about it directly... oh well.

That doesn't change the fact that he has some right-on ideas about American policy and its role in the post-Cold War world.

Cheers,
Michael

Subject: RE: BS: Hart questions Irish Americans
From: Michael S
Date: 23 Feb 03 - 02:35 PM

Michaelr (known in my house as the other Michael), said this:

>That doesn't change the fact that he has some right-on ideas about American policy and its role in the post-Cold War world.

I agree wholeheartedly. Gary Hart hasn't a chance in a million of winning the Demo nomination, but he's one of the brighter, brighter bulbs out there, and I hope his ideas get heard in America's quadrennial silly season.

Peace,
Michael

Subject: RE: BS: Hart questions Irish Americans
From: GUEST
Date: 23 Feb 03 - 02:52 PM

I consider the source of the supposedly anti-Irish/Cuban remarks. The Irish Echo and New York Sun aren't exactly known for being paragons of journalistic integrity.

Subject: RE: BS: Hart questions Irish Americans
From: The Pooka
Date: 23 Feb 03 - 03:01 PM

maire-aine - Well, the Donna Rice syndrome won't do it any more (hell, today that might *gain* Gary some votes -- better taste than Clinton's, etc.:), so maybe he *had* to find a new way to self-destruct. In the coming Democratic primaries, perceived political incorrectness could be a very effective instrument of electoral suicide. Maybe he should dare the media to follow him around and see if they can find any evidence of ethnic prejudice. Hoo boy.

But yeah, much depends on what he actually said to ABC. I, too, like him & hope he didn't stereotype too egregiously. (Naturally, he should Be Like Me: stereotype *just enough*.) I can't believe he really thinks Irish-Americans have divided loyalties. Surely he must know we are always among the first patriots to stand up and be counted for the good old Red White and Green. *BLUE BLUE* yeh yeh that's it, Orange White & Blue...

Subject: RE: BS: Hart questions Irish Americans
From: GUEST
Date: 23 Feb 03 - 03:07 PM

I believe michaelr's interpretation is dead on, and is corroborated by which journals picked this up 1) a fairly conservative New York based Irish American paper, and 2) a new (started publishing in 2002) right wing New York based paper with very strong ties to the pro-Israel lobby, and 3) one of the most conservative weekly magazines in the country.

Pretty much of a no-brainer. The story, which wasn't even a story, was picked up by right wing papers with strong ties to the pro-Israel lobby, and a fairly conservative Irish American paper always looking for conspiratorial evidence of anti-Irish bias in the US that doesn't exist.

Subject: RE: BS: Hart questions Irish Americans
From: Ebbie
Date: 23 Feb 03 - 04:16 PM

A good speech. Can you imagine Dubya giving such a one? He not only wouldn't know how to pronounce the words, he wouldn't have a clue as to what it's about.


I don't know which group(s) Hart was thinking of when he implied that some Americans sometimes are torn between their loyalty to the 'old' country versus to the country they have adopted. I've worked as a tutor with a lot of immigrants who went on to become US citizens and they tend to be more vehemently 'patriotic' than we native borns, but I would imagine there is sometimes a conflict.

Subject: RE: BS: Hart questions Irish Americans
From: CarolC
Date: 23 Feb 03 - 04:41 PM

It's a very good speach. And there is noting at all incorrect about this statement by Hart:

"We must not let our role in the world be dictated by ideologues with their special biases and agendas, by militarists who long for the clarity of Cold War confrontation, by think-tank theorists who grind their academic axes, or by Americans who too often find it hard to distinguish their loyalties to their original homelands from their loyalties to America and its national interests"

The last sentence can easily be applied to quite a few groups and nationalities of origin in the US, including those mentioned, as well as many others. He is talking about any group of people whose vision and/or agenda is more narrow than what is good for the country as a whole. He forgot to include industries with economic agendas in that paragraph, but that's about all, as far as I can see.

I like his world view. I would consider voting for him, if he demonstrated that he was more than just talk with regard to his vision. I'm guessing that there are some people who already know how much potential this man has to bring about change for good. That's why they're gunning for him so early in the game.

Subject: RE: BS: Hart questions Irish Americans
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 23 Feb 03 - 05:03 PM

I'd rather assume that, in the unlikely events of some kind of war between the USA and Ireland, one hell of a lot of Irish Americans wouldn't have much difficulty in deciding which side they were on, and it wouldn't be ...

As well it's not going to happen.

Subject: RE: BS: Hart questions Irish Americans
From: The Pooka
Date: 23 Feb 03 - 05:45 PM

McGrath LOL! good point there. / And yes, as well for Bertie & his Fianna Fail Axis of Evil that Dublin's not gonna Mess with Texas, for you're quite right about us Yankmicks: the Some who would then Come from a Land Beyond the Wave, would kick his Irish arse.

Gary Hart is all right. It IS a good speech, I agree.

Subject: RE: BS: Hart questions Irish Americans
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 24 Feb 03 - 09:03 AM

Interesting. I left the end of that penultimate sentence open to see which way people might jump. I'd suspect there'd be a fair number going the other way than The Pooka...

But maybe the Irish in America are a bit different from the rest of the Diaspora.

Subject: RE: BS: Hart questions Irish Americans
From: GUEST
Date: 24 Feb 03 - 09:19 AM

"But maybe the Irish in America are a bit different from the rest of the Diaspora."

Maybe it is your perception of the Diaspora that needs adjusting? I don't think most Irish Americans would give up life in the US or Canada to move to Ireland. And the premise of the US and Ireland being at war is just silly, so why work so hard to force a fit with the speech?

No, Hart was talking about the pro-Israel lobby. He was just using enough veiling with PC code to get away with it.

BTW, I have now reread all "The Note" archive at the ABC News website where this item is said by the above sources, to be taken from, and the quote isn't there. However, there is no entry in the archive yet for the week the speeches were made. I'll try to remember to keep checking back until it appears.

Subject: RE: BS: Hart questions Irish Americans
From: GUEST,The Dreaded Guest
Date: 24 Feb 03 - 10:39 AM

Hart is the spokesman for the CFR. He is a stone-cold traitor to the interests of the U.S. He is for U.N. control of your lives and an 80-90% world population reduction, but you won't see HIM volunteering for euthenasia. Less than a month ago he said Dallas, Cleveland and Denver would be hit with smallpox. The Governor of Colorado just received the power to dig mass graves. If you believe or put any trust in ANYTHING Gary Hart says, do the U.S. a favor and go to the head of his population-reduction line. Maybe if enough of you volunteer to die, he'll call off the smallpox release.

Subject: RE: BS: Hart questions Irish Americans
From: CarolC
Date: 24 Feb 03 - 10:42 AM

Guest, there are too many groups who fit that description for it to be just about Jews. Take the Elian Gonzales debacle a few years ago. What a pain in the arse that situation was. And take the fact that I, as a citizen of the country that brags about being the "most freedom loving nation in the world", am forbidden from buying Cuban cigars or traveling to Cuba.

I can tell by the stance that the US has tended to take with regard to India and Pakistan, that the pro-India lobby must be putting a lot pressure on the US government, and giving them big headaches in the process, since both India and Pakistan have nuclear weapons.

And certainly, the pro-Zionist lobby is doing no less to secure preferential treatment for themselves than the Cuba lobby and the India lobby. All of these interests are more narrow than what is good for this country.

Making it just about Jews is small minded and wrong-headed.

Subject: RE: BS: Hart questions Irish Americans
From: GUEST
Date: 24 Feb 03 - 10:46 AM

Look at the amount of US foreign aid given to Israel, as compared to the other nations you list, CarolC. That should tell you exactly who Hart meant if he actually made the comment being attributed to him, which none of the above journals has actually directly quoted. To think he would have made this statement and not meant the pro-Israel lobby in the US, defies logic.

I haven't used the word Zionist, BTW. I have used the term "pro-Israel". The term Zionist is too emotionally charged to be useful in this context, and it isn't really relevant anyway.

Subject: RE: BS: Hart questions Irish Americans
From: CarolC
Date: 24 Feb 03 - 10:57 AM

I don't agree with you about the word Zionist. Many, many Jews are not Zionists. But it is the Zionist agenda of the Israeli government that causes problems.

As for whom Hart was talking about with that quote, it would be a waste of his breath for him to only be talking about Jews, or even Zionists, for that matter. Yes, Israel and the pro-Zionist lobby are a very big problem for any US government that might want to use a balanced approach in the middle east. But dispite appearances, the middle east is a very small part of the world. The headaches faced by politicians who have to deal with lobbies seeking preferential treatment for their countries of origin are huge, and to only address one lobby, however persistant, powerful, and influential it may be, is to not really address the problem.

Subject: RE: BS: Hart questions Irish Americans
From: GUEST
Date: 24 Feb 03 - 11:08 AM

CarolC, you might want to have a look at these sites regarding US aid to Israel:


http://www.csmonitor.com/2002/1209/p16s01-wmgn.html

http://www.wrmea.com/Washington-Report_org/www/backissues/0496/9604007.htm

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/2627561.stm

Subject: RE: BS: Hart questions Irish Americans
From: CarolC
Date: 24 Feb 03 - 11:23 AM

I'm very aware of what the US is giving to Israel in the form of financial and military aid. As well as what it has been doing for Israel at the UN with its vetoes. And what President Clinton did when he helped the Israeli government spread the Big Lie about what happened at Camp David. But I cringe just as much when I see what kinds of policies we implement in other parts of the world when one group of people uses the US government to help them leverage power over other groups or other countries. I cringe with discomfort and embarassment over our treatment of Cuba. I cringe with horror over our approach towards India and Pakistan.

I still hold that he was talking about any group who would try to use the US government to put forward an agenda that serves an interest that is narrower than what is good for the country as a whole. It's the practice that he is addressing as being something we need to stop, regardless of who is doing it. I am very sure he didn't mean 'Jews shouldn't do this, but it's ok for everyone else to do it'.

Subject: RE: BS: Hart questions Irish Americans
From: GUEST,Forum Lurker
Date: 24 Feb 03 - 11:27 AM

CarolC, I think you misunderstand what Zionism actually means. A "Zionist agenda" would be an agenda which works toward establishing a Jewish homeland in Israel. As this has already occurred, there is no Zionism. The task is now to make that homeland safe and peaceful.

Subject: RE: BS: Hart questions Irish Americans
From: GUEST
Date: 24 Feb 03 - 11:33 AM

CarolC, the problem isn't that Hart, apparently when questioned about to which country/ethnicity he was referring in his speech, said Irish and Cuban Americans. The problem is, he apparently didn't include Israel, the largest recipient of US foreign aid, and the most powerful ethnic lobby in the US, on the list.

Subject: RE: BS: Hart questions Irish Americans
From: CarolC
Date: 24 Feb 03 - 11:55 AM

A "Zionist agenda" would be an agenda which works toward establishing a Jewish homeland in Israel.

It really is an agenda that works toward establishing a Jewish homeland in Eretz Israel. There's a big difference there.

CarolC, the problem isn't that Hart, apparently when questioned about to which country/ethnicity he was referring in his speech, said Irish and Cuban Americans.

My understanding, from what has been said earlier in this thread, is that we don't know for sure that he did say "Irish and Cuban Americans". Based on what I read in his speach, I tend to doubt that he is as stupid as people want to make him out to be.

Subject: RE: BS: Hart questions Irish Americans
From: GUEST
Date: 24 Feb 03 - 11:57 AM

Who do you think is trying to make Hart look stupid here? I see people saying they think the speech was a good one, and that he is a smart guy, so I'm puzzled by your response.

Subject: RE: BS: Hart questions Irish Americans
From: CarolC
Date: 24 Feb 03 - 11:59 AM

It looks to me like a lot of people are trying to make him look stupid. He must be pretty dangerous to the status quo to be recieving this much attention for something we don't even know whether or not he actually said.

Subject: RE: BS: Hart questions Irish Americans
From: GUEST
Date: 24 Feb 03 - 12:05 PM

The point I have made in this thread is that his supposed remarks to ABC News' online "The Notes" hasn't surfaced, so we haven't even been able to verify that he actually said what is being attributed to him by Irish Echo, New York Sun, and National Review. As I also said, considering that I've only been able to come across any mention of his remarks in three pretty small medida sources, I wouldn't say any attention is being paid to the remarks at all in the mainstream and right wing media.

But having said that, Hart is still a Democrat with some foreign policy influence. As Dreaded Guest points out, he sits on the Council on Foreign Relations, and the speech was made to foreign relations audiences on the West Coast. Which is why I think he was referring to the pro-Israel lobby. There is a lot of pressure right now from centrist and moderate foreign policy think tanks, for the US to drastically cut it's funding to Israel.

Subject: RE: BS: Hart questions Irish Americans
From: CarolC
Date: 24 Feb 03 - 12:08 PM

I'm glad to hear that, GUEST. But I still don't think he was referring only to what you call the pro-Israel lobby. I guess we'll have to agree to disagree on that, since neither of us is in a position to prove that the other is wrong.

Subject: RE: BS: Hart questions Irish Americans
From: GUEST
Date: 24 Feb 03 - 01:03 PM

Okey dokey, CarolC.

Subject: RE: BS: Hart questions Irish Americans
From: GUEST
Date: 24 Feb 03 - 02:31 PM

I sort of see Hart's point. For many years some Irish Americans funded various terrorists groups in Ireland.They did seem to have some difficulty as to where loyalties ought to be. I think that this is not unusual for immigrants, understandably so. However, there are many groups who maintain loyalties not to countries but to specific political agendas. This can cause problems. I do not think his remarks were far off the mark. There must be a time when one accepts that being an American requires more than residency..it requires responsibility .

Subject: RE: BS: Hart questions Irish Americans
From: The Pooka
Date: 24 Feb 03 - 08:23 PM

Kevin McG, I don't yet see a whole lot of Yankee Doodle Diasporans jumping in here the other way, to stand back-to-back with Father Ahern at Vinegar Hill as the US Marines advance to the fatal conclave. (Terraced thousands died, shaking scythes at cruise missiles...)

But I must admit, I did miss the point of your subtly open-ended question. Having been away from the 'Cat for a while, I must have forgotten how clever you are (seriously). If I'm not more careful, this foreshadows my conviction on felonious forgettery charges, whereupon the penultimate sentence may be meted out. In any case, yes, the Irish-Americans *are* different. We have proportionately more Plastic Paddies than any other diaspora venue. Apart from Tipperary of course. Trust me on this. I oughta know. :)

More to come. (Fair warning!)

Subject: RE: BS: Hart questions Irish Americans
From: Forum Lurker
Date: 24 Feb 03 - 09:41 PM

CarolC, as I'm sure you've noticed, there IS a Jewish homeland in Eretz Yisrael. Zionism has fulfilled itself. There is no Zionist agenda today, anymore than there is a movement to free the American colonies from the control of England. Also, a person can be completely loyal to several countries, agendas, etc. Unless they come into conflict, one can in fact be pro-American, pro-Israel, and pro-Irish independence, all at the same time. Most agendas are not mutually exclusive.

Subject: RE: BS: Hart questions Irish Americans
From: The Pooka
Date: 24 Feb 03 - 09:57 PM

Dammit, Lurker, here I've been mentally composing a lengthy treatise on the matter, and now you've gone & summed me up (sussed me out??) in one crisp penultimate sentence: "One can in fact be pro-American, pro-Israel, and pro-Irish independence, all at the same time." Phooey.
C'est Moi.

WELL, I'll probably post it anyway....

Subject: RE: BS: Hart questions Irish Americans
From: Forum Lurker
Date: 24 Feb 03 - 10:31 PM

Humble apologies. I, too, know the anguish of frustrated verbosity.

Subject: RE: BS: Hart questions Irish Americans
From: CarolC
Date: 24 Feb 03 - 10:47 PM

My understanding of the term "Eretz Israel" is that it includes all of biblical Israel. Meaning that it includes the Palestinian Occupied Territories. Yes, Israel is in posession of those territories. From what I've read of the writings of Zionists throughout the history of Zionism, the intention is make all of what was biblical Israel (including the Palestinian Occupied Territories) a part of the Jewish State. I don't see that happening without a lot of bloodshed, and without putting Americans and Jews all over the world in a lot of danger.

Subject: RE: BS: Hart questions Irish Americans
From: Forum Lurker
Date: 24 Feb 03 - 10:54 PM

The intent of Zionism was to establish the homeland. Expanding its borders is a matter of Israeli foreign policy. While some of the early Zionists hoped to reach the borders of pre-Roman Israel, and while some of Israel's modern politicians may hope to do so, Zionism has fulfilled its purpose of creating the state of Israel, and thus does not exist. Eretz Yisrael means "the land of Israel." Any connotations of specific borders are just that: connotations which are not actually present in the phrase.

Subject: RE: BS: Hart questions Irish Americans
From: The Pooka
Date: 24 Feb 03 - 11:21 PM

Ohhh, Forum Lurker. You may know the Anguish; but I haven't yet made the acquaintance of the Frustration. Just hang on a minute. :)

Subject: RE: BS: Hart questions Irish Americans
From: The Pooka
Date: 24 Feb 03 - 11:22 PM

Setting aside Hart's as-yet-uncorroborated interview indictment of Cuban- and Irish-Americans, the relevant (if penultimate) sentence from his thoughtful speech, as previously noted, states (emphasis added):

"Americans who too often find it hard to distinguish their loyalties to **their original homelands** from their loyalties to America and its national interests..."

Now, a (hyper?)technical point regarding the Jews. I don't want to seem anti-semantic here, but I think Israel is "their original homeland" only in a very different sense -- deeper perhaps, but also vastly more remote & removed in time, generations, and interim locales -- than is Ireland mine, or Cuba (or indeed Spain) yours, or Japan the next fellow's, etc. I suspect that for American Jews Israel is less the country of origin than, theoretically and sometimes really, a country of destination, or destiny: "Next year in Jerusalem." If so, and *if* Hart *did* have the Jews in mind, then at least his phrase might have been more artfully drawn.

CarolC correctly notes that not all Jews are Zionists. Probably to eschew stating the obvious, she declines to add that many Gentiles ARE Zionists, in the post-1948 sense that they support the permanent existence of Israel as an explicitly Jewish state. I'm pleased to say that I am among these latter.

I also favor Palestinian human rights & eventual statehood --*nationhood* -- and I refuse to believe that this is forever irreconciliable with Zion. / But if I'm wrong - if the 2 turn should out to be indeed mutually exclusive & one must therefore Choose - then, unlike my goyish republican brotherhood (GRB) of Sinn Fein across the water, I shall (however sadly) choose Israel.

But I also support SF's declared *political* goal (their economics, Oy!) of a peacefully & democratically united 32-county Ireland. And yes, that being the "original homeland" of my ancestors (OKOK, 50% of them; which easily attains the Quota under *my* single-transferable-vote scheme :) -- well, there you have *my* personal 'divided loyalty'. And yes, I want my government to quietly facilitate that cause, all the while publicly maintaining that of course it's strictly an internal UK matter. :)

And since we're vetting the supposed Gary Hart exemplifications here, I'll also toss in --- *really* endangering my Mudcat standing (if any) now -- that I do not care for Papa Fidel at all, at all. Ohhh he's a wily charmer and all that, sure. Nice beard, man. But he's also a brutal tyrant who has screwed his country & his people. (Yeahyeah I know, Fulgencio Battista. Wasn't he worse? Y'know what? Bad as he was: No.) So, I guess I stand with the disloyal Cuban-Americans, too.

Look. We ALL have "divided loyalties", i.e., multiple tribal affiliations which will sometimes conflict. There it is. Which does not *necessarily* mean that we are unpatriotic. Indeed, most of us are not that, at all. / I meant it when I told McGrath, above, that of course I'd fight for the USA (USA! USA!) in his thought-experimental war between Washington & Dublin. (Granted, that's easy to say in so ridiculous an hypothesis.)

But y'know what else? I think one can credibly OBJECT, *in principle*, to divided **national** loyalties -- ONLY if one *believes* in the validity of the principle of UNDIVIDED national loyalty. Loyalty, presumably, to the Nation wherein one presently dwells.

E.g.: our Guest The Dreaded Guest moderately & judiciously declares that Gary Hart is, among other things, "...a stone-cold traitor to the interests of the U.S." Well. Without rising to that particular bait at the moment, I suggest this: I am allowed to have a serious *"loyalty"* problem with my fellow-citizens' sympathies for other nations -- ANY other nations, whether I like 'em or not -- ONLY if I *believe that it is possible* for there to be *such a thing* as "a stone-cold traitor to the interests of the U.S."

IOW, we can holler about divided or uncertain national loyalty -- provided we believe in the concept of national loyality.

I confess: I do believe in it. No, not in an unlimited no-matter-what, my-country-right-or-wrong sense -- but, to a very considerable degree still. Big presumption, albeit rebuttable, in favor of mine own tribe. And No, not only with regard to What America Could Become; but also as to What We Are Now.

Do you?

(CarolC: feel free to substitute Canada. Or Newfoundland. Especially Newfoundland. :)

-Pooka

Subject: RE: BS: Hart questions Irish Americans
From: GUEST,WillyMcBoyne
Date: 25 Feb 03 - 02:00 AM

It is rarely noted in America that the millions of Ulster people (that is the protestant people of northern Ireland) who emigrated to the USA absorbed themselves into the country, unlike the Irish (catholics) whose loyalty is forever with their 'mother' country. Hence these revolting St Paddy Day parades. Nazi rallies under another name. Hey, they both celebrate ethnic purity, don't they?

As for Israel, any country that is founded on the ramblings of a sick and stupid book like the Old Testament is a country that is going to have problems. A state for the jews is a state that is racist by definition. A state should be for its citizens, regardless of race.

The Cubans of the USA are disgusting. The USA drove Castro into the arms of communisim. He wasn't even a commie when he came to power. Millions of people live in South America with no health system or government policies to look after them, but they do have death squads to murder and torture troublemakers.The trouble with Cuba is the american embargo, not its brave leader.

Subject: RE: BS: Hart questions Irish Americans
From: Cluin
Date: 25 Feb 03 - 02:39 AM

Give us a kiss!?

Subject: RE: BS: Hart questions Irish Americans
From: CarolC
Date: 25 Feb 03 - 10:30 AM

I must admit, Pooka, that the idea of a person who isn't Jewish being a Zionist had not occurred to me.

As to your tribal loyalties, I will have to admit, also, that the only tribe to which I am completely loyal is the Human Race. That being the case, I don't stand by silently while any one group of people seeks domination over another group or commits ethnic cleansing of another group, if I am in a position to speak up. That especially goes for groups who do these things with my tax dollars, thus making me actively complicit.

As for national loyalty, mine isn't particularly strong, except that I believe in doing whatever is to the highest good of all concerned. That means everyone. And I do believe there is such a thing. But too many people are too focused on the small picture to see that reality.

Forum Lurker, I long ago realized that the best way for me to learn about subjects like the middle east, and in this case, Israel and Zionism, is to read and listen to arguments or debates between people who are in the same group but who hold different opinions on some things. So I've seen your argument, and I know that it is not universally held by either Israelis, Jews, or Zionists. Nevertheless, I'll bow to your use of the word for the purpose of this thread, since you're the one with whom I'm communicating.

Subject: RE: BS: Hart questions Irish Americans
From: The Pooka
Date: 25 Feb 03 - 12:17 PM

CarolC, well & truly said.

One notes in passing that Jews, Zionist and not, are among the groups who have had a bit of experience at being dominated and "ethnically cleansed". The modern-day success of the Zionist enterprise is of course a direct result of that. (Yes, and ironies therein abound today, I grant you.)

Anyway, since your study methods admirably include "...listen[ing] to arguments or debates between people who are in the same group but who hold different opinions...", surely you have learned a whole lot from the Jews! :) Others too of course (like we Irish, who fight among ourselves for want of other worthy opponents:); but Oy! you want 5 opinions, ask 3 Jews.

Why, they'd probably even disagree over the merits of Guest Battling McBoyne & his special interpretations of the Torah. Good points too there, King Willy. I'm sure the Orange Order would agree that "A state should be for its citizens, regardless of race." Must remember to boycott (you should pardon the expression) all those Nazi rallies on the 17th. Let's hear it for nice inclusive democratic diversity parades, like on the Twelfh. :)

Cheers & Peace

Subject: RE: BS: Hart questions Irish Americans
From: CarolC
Date: 25 Feb 03 - 12:33 PM

surely you have learned a whole lot from the Jews!

Most definitely. Going all the way back to my childhood. One of the most important lessons I learned from the Jewish experience of the 20th century is that we should never allow ourselves to become complicit.

Subject: RE: BS: Hart questions Irish Americans
From: GUEST,Forum Lurker
Date: 25 Feb 03 - 01:55 PM

Thank you, CarolC. I personally have never seen Zionism used in a context other than either the original founding of Israel or anti-Semitic ravings, but then I've never had anyone argue the Palestinian case as eloquently or rationally as you have, either.

McBoyne-the state of Israel was founded to keep ethnic, religious, or culturally Jewish people safe from oppression. The inclusion of Judaic principles was almost incidental to this task. I don't even want to try to address your misconceptions on the Irish.

Subject: RE: BS: Hart questions Irish Americans
From: Frankham
Date: 25 Feb 03 - 02:39 PM

Most of Hart's speech is not offensive to me. But here's the part where I think he shoots himself in the foot.

"Americans who too often find it hard to distinguish their loyalties to their original homelands from their loyalties to America and its national interests"

IN my view, there would be no America if there weren't some loyalty to one's original homeland. America is made up of all kinds of nationalties, opinions, races, creeds etc. We are not monolithic Christian or anything else. Why shouldn't Americans have ties to their original homelands? Even political ties? Why do they need to distinguish anything?

OTOH now when someone sends money to the IRA or Jihad, is this in the best interest of America? That may be the real question he is asking?
When does that political interest become dangerous to America?

The question needed to be fleshed out because he may not be referring to the culture of other lands, but the political or religious stuff that brings airplanes into towers.

When does the work of Mossad or the CIA or Islamic Jihad become a threat not only to America but the rest of the world? I think that on reflection, this may be a fair question.

Frank Hamilton

Subject: RE: BS: Hart questions Irish Americans
From: CarolC
Date: 25 Feb 03 - 02:53 PM

Thank you, Forum Lurker, for your kind words.

Subject: RE: BS: Hart questions Irish Americans
From: GUEST,WillyMcBoyne
Date: 26 Feb 03 - 02:39 AM

Lurker. I can understand the desire of the Jewish people to have a safe haven from persicution, but the fact is that the land they chose already had people living there, i.e. the Palestinians. I wonder if jews would have so much sympathy if they had chosen Ireland to settle instead of Palestine. By the way, no-one has told me the difference between a Nazi rally and a St Paddy day's parade. Someone here mocked the 12th. Why? Are they so different?

Subject: RE: BS: Hart questions Irish Americans
From: Forum Lurker
Date: 26 Feb 03 - 08:55 AM

A Saint Patrick's Day parade celebrates the rich, millenia-old cultural heritage of the Irish Catholics. It is a cultural and religious holiday, which is also used as an excuse by persons of all heritages to get drunk on cheap green beer. There isn't a single racist step in the whole parade.