BS: I was wrong about the latest Gaza truce

Subject: RE: BS: I was wrong about the latest Gaza truce
From: pdq
Date: 28 Jan 09 - 11:56 AM

"... Israel continues its defensive operations in order to stop Iran-backed Hamas from firing thousands of rockets, missiles and mortars on Israeli civilians."

Yep, the country financing and motivating the violence in Gaza (and also Lebanon) is our old bud Iran. Please recall that Iran was our best ally in the Middle East until Jimmy "Peanut Head" Carter pulled the plug on the Iranian Monarchy and allowed the Islamists to start their reign of terror. 30 years of Hell. Thank you, Jimmy Carter (who helps support the saying ("the good die young").

Subject: RE: BS: I was wrong about the latest Gaza truce
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 28 Jan 09 - 12:29 PM

Jimmy "Peanut Head" Carter pulled the plug on the Iranian Monarchy and allowed the Islamists to start their reign of terror.

You seriously think the USA could have crushed an extremely popular revolution and reinstated the Shah who was detested by the oiverwhelming mass of Iranians?

It would have been a bigger operation than the Vietnam War and probably with even less hope of success. Reagan's ally Saddam Hussein, with massive military forces right next door to Iran, wasn't able to do the job, even using poison gas.

Like many popular revolutions, Iran's went seriously wrong in all kinds of ways, but its mass support at the time, and later, is beyond doubt.

Subject: RE: BS: I was wrong about the latest Gaza truce
From: pdq
Date: 28 Jan 09 - 12:45 PM

McWrath's post is so confused and rediculous that it is not even possible to respond to it.

Iraq was our blood enemy beginning in 1967 when we helped Israel fight the Arab World. The US did an amazing job of maintaining neutrality in the Iran-Iraq war. We did supply arial photographs to Iraq of Iranian incursinons but only after the Iranian government changed policy from "defensive" to "offensive". We never did supply Iraq with weapons although about 1 1/2 % of Saddam's were US-made, their sale to Iraq was mostly through illegal arms dealers.

Subject: RE: BS: I was wrong about the latest Gaza truce
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 28 Jan 09 - 01:52 PM

...it is not even possible to respond to it.

Evidently.

Subject: RE: BS: I was wrong about the latest Gaza truce
From: Nickhere
Date: 28 Jan 09 - 03:00 PM

Teribus, the Officials have not actually disarmed at all. They have been on a kind of ceasefire since the 1970s and it's assumed they are no longer active. Yet it was Provo weapons that were decommissioned.

Also, regarding numbers, the various republican militant groups - Provisional, Official, INLA, etc., were responsible for around 1,950 of the 3,500 or so deaths during the Troubles. Loyalist militants were responsible for about 800 with the remainder divided between the RUC (Northern Police Force) and the British Army. The Irish army and police contributed neglible numbers.

The Real IRA (a splinter group from the Provos which didn't agree with the 1998 agreement) claimed responsibility for the Omagh bomb. Thankfully the British didn't regard this bombing as "a bombing by an Irish terrorist group" and decide to bomb the southern half of the country into a car park (thanks guys, BTW).

Subject: RE: BS: I was wrong about the latest Gaza truce
From: Nickhere
Date: 28 Jan 09 - 03:17 PM

Another aside, there was something of a feud between the Provos and Real IRA in the late 90s over the divergence in directions

Subject: RE: BS: I was wrong about the latest Gaza truce
From: Nickhere
Date: 28 Jan 09 - 03:20 PM

I really like this one "The US did an amazing job of maintaining neutrality in the Iran-Iraq war"

One of the most effective ways of doing that was to sell weapons to both sides.. maybe they'd even wipe each other out. Irangate......

Subject: RE: BS: I was wrong about the latest Gaza truce
From: CarolC
Date: 28 Jan 09 - 04:34 PM

The term "Palestinian" is just the name people use for the indigenous people of the area at this time. And it is completely irrelevant to the question of the culture and identity of those people. In the US, we call the indigenous people of the land that is now the US, "Indians", but that term is irrelevant to who they are and were, and to their culture and identity.

The indigenous people of the area we now call Israel and the Palestinian occupied areas have their own identity and culture that goes back thousands of years, and is irrelevant to and independent of any names we would apply to them.

Subject: RE: BS: I was wrong about the latest Gaza truce
From: CarolC
Date: 28 Jan 09 - 04:38 PM

I notice none of the people who are blaming Hamas were living in Gaza under the blockade. In one of the interviews of Jimmy Carter, he mentioned the fact that most Gazans were subsisting on one meal a day under the blockade. If the blockade isn't an act of war, and also terrorism, I don't know what is.

Subject: RE: BS: I was wrong about the latest Gaza truce
From: CarolC
Date: 29 Jan 09 - 02:10 AM

Looks like it wasn't Hamas who broke the ceasefire after all...


Timeline of Cease-fire Breaches & Important Events

Sunday, Jan 18 - After a 22-day assault on Gaza in which over 1,300 Palestinians were killed and approximately 9 Israelis were killed, Israel and Hamas each declared a ceasefire. Within several hours, the first breach took place, when Israel killed a Palestinian civilian:

The UN reports: "One Palestinian farmer was killed on the morning of 18 January in Khuza'a east of Khan Yunis following the Israeli-declared cease-fire." [3]

Monday, Jan 19 - Once again the ceasefire was breached when Israel killed another Palestinian civilian. Palestinian militants did respond, but caused no damage or injuries:

The UN reports: "On 19 January, a Palestinian farmer was killed by Israeli gunfire east of Jabalia. The same day, Palestinian militants fired a number of mortars towards Israel and also shot at Israeli troops still inside the Gaza Strip. No injuries or damage were reported." [4]

Wednesday, Jan 21 - Israeli naval boats fired at the Gaza coastline, causing some damage.

IMEMC reports: "On Wednesday, the boats fired shells at the coast line, causing damage but no injuries." [5]

Thursday, Jan 22 - A Palestinian child was wounded by gunfire from Israeli troops, between 4 and 7 Palestinian civilians (fishermen) were injured when they were fired upon by Israel's navy, and a home was set fire by shells from the Israeli navy:

The UN reports: "Four Palestinians were injured on 22 January by a shell fired from an Israeli gunboat off the Gaza coast. The same day, a house was set on fire by a shell fired from an Israeli gunboat. No injuries were reported. Also on 22 January, IDF troops shot and injured a child east of Gaza City near the border." [6]

IMEMC reports: "On Thursday of last week, Israeli Navy forces opened fire at Palestinian fishermen just off the shore of Gaza City, injuring seven civilians." [7]

Saturday, Jan 24 - Israeli tanks fired on the border town of Al Faraheen, causing damage to homes and farms. Also, Aid agencies call on Israel to finally open all crossings into Gaza:

IMEMC reports: "On Saturday, the Israeli army opened fire at residents homes and farmlands located in Al Faraheen village located in the southern part of the Gaza strip. Local residents said that Israeli tanks stationed at the borders opened fire at their homes and farms; damage was reported but no injuries." [8]

Maan News reports: "A coalition of international aid agencies urged the Israeli government on Saturday to open the Gaza Strip's border to allow vital goods into the territory… The agencies, including Oxfam, Save the Children, and the Palestinian NGO Network (PNGO) held a news conference on Saturday at the intensive care unit of Gaza's Ash-Shifa Hospital to point up an ongoing humanitarian crisis stemming from Israel's blockade." [9]

Sunday, Jan 25 - Israeli F-16s flew over Gaza, causing schools, government offices, and banks to close and causing Egypt to rapidly evacuate all of its personnel from the Rafah crossing in fear that an attack was imminent.

Haaretz reports: "On Sunday Israeli F-16s flew over Gaza, terrifying people who thought Israel was launching a new offensive. A number of banks, government offices and schools were closed, occupants running to their homes as the Israeli warplanes flew overhead." [10]

Maan News reports: "Egypt suddenly and rapidly evacuated its personnel from=0 Athe Rafah border crossing with Gaza on Sunday fearing a possible Israeli airstrike on the Palestinian side of the crossing, Egyptian security sources said." [11]

Violence on January 27th

What appears to have happened today is that a remote device was detonated near or under an Israeli patrol near the Kissufim crossing between Gaza and Israel. It is not clear on which side of the border the attack took place. One soldier was killed and three were injured.

(The New York Times is reporting this as "the first serious confrontations between Hamas and Israel since each declared a tentative cease-fire 10 days ago."[12] However, there is no indication that Hamas was responsible for the bomb and seems, despite all the Israeli violations, to be pushing for a cease-fire.)

http://palestinethinktank.com/2009/01/28/israel-violated-cease-fire-7-times-no-media-reports/

Subject: RE: BS: I was wrong about the latest Gaza truce
From: Teribus
Date: 29 Jan 09 - 03:43 AM

If Hamas and the Palestinian people want the border crossings open CarolC why are they attacking border crossings and planting IED's at them?

Subject: RE: BS: I was wrong about the latest Gaza truce
From: CarolC
Date: 29 Jan 09 - 03:53 AM

Maybe they're trying to blast them open. I wouldn't blame them if they were.

Subject: RE: BS: I was wrong about the latest Gaza truce
From: Teribus
Date: 29 Jan 09 - 04:53 AM

If they plant them just in order to blast the crossings open why don't they just do that? Why do they have to wait for people to pass where they have planted the explosives? Or is killing people, particularly Israeli citizens just as important as blowing open the crossings?

Subject: RE: BS: I was wrong about the latest Gaza truce
From: theleveller
Date: 29 Jan 09 - 05:30 AM

For 'Israeli citizens' read 'invading army'.

Subject: RE: BS: I was wrong about the latest Gaza truce
From: CarolC
Date: 29 Jan 09 - 06:51 AM

In answer to the question of why they have targeted crossings...

The raid comes after Hamas-affiliated militants threatened to storm Gaza's borders with both Israel and Egypt in protest against a continuing international blockade imposed on the territory since the Islamists seized control of it last summer.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/middle_east/article3714388.ece

If people want to show outrage about targeting civilians, they should note that the Israeli military was targeting civilians (including children) in its several breaches of the ceasefire this past week. I expect that the people who have shown such outrage about Palestinians targeting civilians will also show an equal amount of outrage about what Israel has been doing this past week.

Subject: RE: BS: I was wrong about the latest Gaza truce
From: Teribus
Date: 29 Jan 09 - 08:31 AM

Oh CarolC, I think that is has been pushed way past the point of people showing or voicing outrage at the targeting and killing of "innocent civilians" its been done so long in that part of the world it now has absolutely no impact or meaning.

The leveller has put it very succinctly for one who views the conflict from the "Palestinian" side:

"For 'Israeli citizens' read 'invading army'."

OK that defines the rules of engagement and leveller it then works both ways. I am awfully surprised that the Israeli Government and the IDF haven't seized on the dictum of proportional response advocated on this Forum by Little Hawk, which if I remember correctly consisted of incoming fire into Israel from the Gaza Strip, response by Israeli forces should be counter battery fire on the original point of fire by long range artillery. He seemed to think that that would have sufficient deterrent effect - Oddly enough I don't, because Hamas's response to this would be to ensure that their original points of fire were located inside schools, hospitals and mosques, and they would ensure that those attacks were mounted when all of those locations were full of "innocent civilians" and the "butchers bill" would be enormous. Wouldn't matter a toss to Hamas and the likes of Islamic Jihad or whoever, they've never given a damn or cared about the "Palestinians" for as long as their arses have pointed downwards.

But as theleveller says if everybody on either side of the divide is considered a combatant, that makes things much simpler and the sooner the blast complete and utter hell out of one another the better, at least then the problem will be resolved one way or the other.

By the bye Hamas still sitting on all those millions of Euros?? Iran's "Rockets-'R'- Us" Store mustn't be open yet then.

Subject: RE: BS: I was wrong about the latest Gaza truce
From: CarolC
Date: 29 Jan 09 - 09:23 AM

https://usacbi.wordpress.com/

Subject: RE: BS: I was wrong about the latest Gaza truce
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 30 Jan 09 - 07:46 AM

In a way it is true that the slaughter of civilians, children included, is a side issue to the main question of this situation; though the comparing of a poorly-armed force firing rockets to a country whose military capability stretches to nuclear weapons seems more than a little disproportionate to me, and tit-for-tat arguments are far more at home in the schoolyard than in the adult world.
The main question surely is, should any country have the right to invade, and occupy a country and ghettoise, terrorise, humiliate and oppress the people of that country - especially when this behaviour is based on a two thousand year old myth.
I was born in the first half of 40s when the Holocaust was at its height. Images of these events formed my views on racism when I was growing up; these views were strengthened later with documentaries such as Shoah and books by authors like Primo Levi and Martin Gilbert.
When I lived in Manchester, a good proportion of my friends were working class Jews, nearly all of whom were disgusted at the militaristic and imperialistic behaviour of Israel following the Six-Day War. The few I am still in touch with continue to be appalled at their behaviour; an ex-girlfriend, daughter of a Holocaust survivor summed it up recently by saying "They are crouching behind the dead of Auschwitz to justify their actions".
All racism and State terrorism is appalling, but it is particularly distressing when the persecuted become the persecutors - for me, there is little to choose between the behaviour of the Israelis in Gaza and the Nazis at Lidice - only the protagonists have changed.
We have found out to our cost here in Ireland over the last three decades that, no matter what your point of view on nationalism, while one country persists on occupying another, the outcome is inevitably vicious and bloody.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: I was wrong about the latest Gaza truce
From: Teribus
Date: 30 Jan 09 - 11:24 AM

Guardian covered this today:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/jan/30/hamas-reprisal-attacks

Not only can the Palestinian Arabs not share a country with the Jews - they can't even manage to share it with one another, which sort of kills stone-dead the following aspirations:

- One State Solution
- Two State Solution

Maybe there should be a Three State Solution proposed with:

- Israel
- West Bank
- Gaza

If things continue as they are then Israel and West Bank will eventually iron out all their points of difference and rub along quite peacefully and a sort of mutual prosperity will evolve. Gaza on the other hand under the guiding hand of Hamas will remain the basket case it has been since 2005 and be reduced to a sort of live firing range and weapons testing ground, which would be no great change it's what Hamas have used it for from Day One.

"tit-for-tat arguments are far more at home in the schoolyard than in the adult world." - Jim Carroll

"The main question surely is, should any country have the right to invade, and occupy a country and ghettoise, terrorise, humiliate and oppress the people of that country - especially when this behaviour is based on a two thousand year old myth." - Jim Carroll

I would certainly like to hear from the Government of any nation on this earth who would stand by mute and inactive for seven years and submit to a barrage of over 8000 rockets and mortar bombs fired deliberately at centres of civilian opulation under their protection. Quite right Jim these tit-for-tat arguements go way beyond those of the school playground.

I do not know what two thousand year old myth Jim is referring to as for the first part of that quote from his post I note that he confers the status of nation upon Gaza. This is good because it does put things into a clearer perspective. When one country attacks another then the country that has been attacked has every right to protect itself and if that requires invasion, occupation and forcibly disarming your enemy and degrading their ability to further wage war then that is exactly what you do.

This I though was worth a good chuckle:

"We have found out to our cost here in Ireland over the last three decades that, no matter what your point of view on nationalism, while one country persists on occupying another, the outcome is inevitably vicious and bloody."

What country persisted in occupying what country Jim?? Northern Ireland is and always has been part of the United Kingdom. The people of Northern Ireland voted it that way, because they did not want to be part of an independent Ireland. The only reason the people of Northern Ireland experienced an outcome that was "vicious and bloody" was because a crowd of complete and utter eejits took it upon themselves to try and impose their will on the people of Northern Ireland by force. They certainly had no mandate to unify Ireland in the manner they chose by the population of either Northern Ireland or Eire, that was abundantly clear to the PIRA in the all Ireland Referendum held at the same time as the one for the GFA where 94% voted to renounce Eire's Constitutional claim to Northern Ireland and declared that violence has no part in politics in Ireland.

Subject: RE: BS: I was wrong about the latest Gaza truce
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 30 Jan 09 - 12:30 PM

Perhaps you'd like to tell me when the 'people of Ireland'got the opportunity to vote on the partition of Ireland?
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: I was wrong about the latest Gaza truce
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 30 Jan 09 - 02:21 PM

Northern Ireland is and always has been part of the United Kingdom.

It certainly has not. There was no United Kingdom of any sort prior to James I and VI. There was no United Kingdom of Great Britain prior to the Act of (Scottish) Union in 1707. There was no United Kingdom that included any part of Ireland prior to the Act of (Irish) Union in 1800. The present "United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland" has only existed since the Government of Ireland (Partition) Act in 1920.

Subject: RE: BS: I was wrong about the latest Gaza truce
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 30 Jan 09 - 02:33 PM

Teribus,
I've been musing over your spectacular ignorance of Irish history. I have no particular wish to see you make a fool of yourself again, as you did with your support for the Royal racists, so to put the record straight:
The whole of Ireland was a full colony of Britain (it's oldest) up to 1922. Following an incredible own goal by Britain with the extremely brutal mishandling of the Easter Week uprising, which turned the actions of a few revolutionaries into a nationwide opposition to British rule, a treaty was signed creating The Irish Free State. At first it was proposed that 9 counties remain under colonial rule, but realising that this would leave the Protestant Settlers (that's what they were) in a minority, the proposal was changed to 6 counties.
This led to a vicious civil war in Ireland, not over whether she should have remained a British colony, but rather, whether the six counties should have been signed away in the first place.
Britain, because of its partitioning of Ireland, bears full responsibility for all the violence that has taken place here.
The parallels between what happened in Ireland in 1922 and Israel in 1948 are inescapable.
Jim Carroll
PS Your real name isdn't David Irving by any chance?

Subject: RE: BS: I was wrong about the latest Gaza truce
From: pdq
Date: 30 Jan 09 - 03:04 PM

On Mudcat, one could start a thread on wildflowers or birdwatching and someone would twist it into a discussion about what the English have done in Ireland.

Subject: RE: BS: I was wrong about the latest Gaza truce
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 30 Jan 09 - 03:18 PM

You mean you have no idea what we did to the birds and flowers here?
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: I was wrong about the latest Gaza truce
From: Teribus
Date: 30 Jan 09 - 03:35 PM

Talking of ignorance of Irish History. I said the following and I will stand by it with the exception of three days in 1922:

"Northern Ireland is and always has been part of the United Kingdom." - Teribus

"For three days from midnight on 6 December 1922 Northern Ireland stopped being part of the United Kingdom and became part of the newly created Irish Free State. This remarkable constitutional episode arose because of the Anglo-Irish Treaty and the legislation introduced to give that Treaty legal effect.

The Treaty was given effect in the United Kingdom through the Irish Free State Constitution Act 1922. That Act established a new Dominion for the whole island of Ireland but also allowed Northern Ireland to opt out. Under Article 12 of the Treaty, Northern Ireland could exercise its opt out by presenting an address to the King requesting not to be part of the Irish Free State. Once the Treaty was ratified, the Houses of Parliament of Northern Ireland had one month to exercise this opt out during which month the Irish Free State Government could not legislate for Northern Ireland, holding the Free State's effective jurisdiction in abeyance for a month.

On 7 December 1922 (the day after the establishment of the Irish Free State) the Parliament demonstrated its lack of hesitation by resolving to make the following address to the King so as to opt out of the Irish Free State:

" "MOST GRACIOUS SOVEREIGN, We, your Majesty's most dutiful and loyal subjects, the Senators and Commons of Northern Ireland in Parliament assembled, having learnt of the passing of the Irish Free State Constitution Act, 1922, being the Act of Parliament for the ratification of the Articles of Agreement for a Treaty between Great Britain and Ireland, do, by this humble Address, pray your Majesty that the powers of the Parliament and Government of the Irish Free State shall no longer extend to Northern Ireland." "

On 13 December 1922 Prime Minister Craig addressed the Parliament informing them that the King had responded to the Parliament's address as follows:

" "I have received the Address presented to me by both Houses of the Parliament of Northern Ireland in pursuance of Article 12 of the Articles of Agreement set forth in the Schedule to the Irish Free State (Agreement) Act, 1922, and of Section 5 of the Irish Free State Constitution Act, 1922, and I have caused my Ministers and the Irish Free State Government to be so informed."

As an exercise in pedantry MGOH I think I said that Northern Ireland has always been part of the United Kingdon, therefore your masterpiece above on when the United Kingdom came into being was a bit pointless and corrected me on nothing. Now had I said that Northern Ireland has always been a part of Great Britain you might of had a point, as it stands it is just so much pointless waffle.

On the same subject some incoming for you. In all the dates and times you mentioned there was no such entity politically as Northern Ireland. Northern Ireland only ever came into being when it was established as a distinct region of the United Kingdom on 3 May 1921 under the terms of the Government of Ireland Act 1920.

Jim if you are going to quote me then quote me correctly, I did not say that 'people of Ireland' voted for partition, what I stated put in its corrrect context was:

"Northern Ireland is and always has been part of the United Kingdom. The people of Northern Ireland voted it that way, because they did not want to be part of an independent Ireland."

I take it that you now see the distinction "people of Northern Ireland" as opposed to "people of Ireland".

And just to put the record straight Jim-Lad the people of Northern Ireland have since that date solidly voted to remain within the United Kingdom and damn near every poll taken on the subject of leaving the UK and joining the South has resulted in a resounding confirmation in the status of Union with the UK.

You were as wrong about this as you were on some very weird perceptions you had with regard to the Royal Family, their rights, incomes and taxes.

Subject: RE: BS: I was wrong about the latest Gaza truce
From: Teribus
Date: 30 Jan 09 - 03:43 PM

Oh forgot this piece of complete and utter Bullshit from you Jim:

"This led to a vicious civil war in Ireland, not over whether she should have remained a British colony, but rather, whether the six counties should have been signed away in the first place.
Britain, because of its partitioning of Ireland, bears full responsibility for all the violence that has taken place here."

First bit rather like Hamas and Fatah isn't it. De Valera put Collins in an impossible position then shat all over him - My opinion Eamon De valera wasn't fit to lick Collin's boots. Britain did not partition Ireland as can be seen from my post above what came into being was a UNITED Ireland, but the six counties making up Northern Ireland had an opt out clause whiich THEY chose to exercise - THEY CHOSE Jim, got that!! Nothing whatsoever to do with Britain, the people of Northern Ireland through their legal and duly appointed representatives made the decision.

Subject: RE: BS: I was wrong about the latest Gaza truce
From: Stringsinger
Date: 30 Jan 09 - 05:12 PM

Schlomo Zand

Check this out. Zand has opened a can of worms.

Subject: RE: BS: I was wrong about the latest Gaza truce
From: Stringsinger
Date: 30 Jan 09 - 05:13 PM

Zand suggests that Palestinians and Jews are historically related.

Subject: RE: BS: I was wrong about the latest Gaza truce
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 30 Jan 09 - 05:14 PM

"Always" does not mean "continually since 1920".

Subject: RE: BS: I was wrong about the latest Gaza truce
From: Teribus
Date: 30 Jan 09 - 05:38 PM

Pointless pedantic waffle on your part Kevin and hopelessly incorrect.

Northern Ireland first came into being when it was established as a distinct region of the United Kingdom on 3 May 1921 under the terms of the Government of Ireland Act 1920. Apart from the three days as part of the The Free Irish State in 1922, in the time it took the elected Government of the North to exercise their right to opt out of the Irish Free State, Northern Ireland has always been part of the United Kingdom.

And "always" Kevin, as far as Northern Ireland is concerned, started when it decided to be part of the United Kingdom on 13th December 1922. If anybody referred to you in the absolute meaning of the word "always", that "always" could only ever start from your date of birth.

Subject: RE: BS: I was wrong about the latest Gaza truce
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 30 Jan 09 - 06:23 PM

`When I use a word,' Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, `it means just what I choose it to mean -- neither more nor less.'

Subject: RE: BS: I was wrong about the latest Gaza truce
From: Teribus
Date: 30 Jan 09 - 07:08 PM

I take it then that he read the Guardian too

Subject: RE: BS: I was wrong about the latest Gaza truce
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 31 Jan 09 - 03:50 AM

There has never been a vote on the question of whether to remain as part of Britain,
Ireland was a colony until 1922, then it was partitioned and six counties were retained as part of Britain - that's what the 'troubles' were about.
Catholics, who made up one third of the country, had no say in its running.
"Sir James Craig, later Lord Craigavon, was prime minister from 1921 until his death in 1940. J. M. Andrews, his successor, had been in cabinet since 1921 and Lord Brookeborough was prime minister from 1943 to 1963.
Craig had unambiguously declared that the Northern Ireland government would be 'a Protestant parliament for a Protestant people' and partition had indeed guaranteed a large in-built Protestant majority. Catholics made up about one third of the population, but with the removal of proportional representation, the Unionist Party soon came to dominate both local and central government. Where necessary, as in Derry, blatant gerrymandering was employed to ensure that there would always be a unionist-controlled council, despite the city's Catholic nationalist majority."
Every drop of blood shed from 1922 is down to British rule.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: I was wrong about the latest Gaza truce
From: Teribus
Date: 31 Jan 09 - 04:53 AM

"Every drop of blood shed from 1922 is down to British rule." - Jim Carroll.

No Jim every drop of blood shed from 1922 is down to Irish stupidity on both sides of the divide and an "absolutist", no compromise mentality in both camps that adopted the creed, "My way or no way".

At the last gasp it took thirty years to bang heads together, when (as was noted by the Official IRA in 1970) by just letting things take their course the same outcome could have been achieved without the resutant loss of life in six months to a year.

Subject: RE: BS: I was wrong about the latest Gaza truce
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 31 Jan 09 - 03:09 PM

"is down to Irish stupidity on both sides of the divide"
Make up your mind - you were busy telling us that the 'Northern' (sic) Irish were British, and have voted to be such.
Are you then saying that it is down to Irish and British stupidity?
"At the last gasp it took thirty years to bang heads together,"
Your attitude smacks of the Imperial arrogance which caused that bloodshed in the first place. - I understand that a visit from the queen is being contemplated at present and that one of the items on her agenda will be a speech apologising for British misrule.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: I was wrong about the latest Gaza truce
From: Teribus
Date: 31 Jan 09 - 05:57 PM

No Jim just Irish stupidity.

Best put by a Dutch friend of mine one night in the mid 70's down in Kinsale when he was verbally assaulted by a self proclaimed "quartermaster-sergeant" in the IRA who castigated my dutch friend about how useless the dutch were and how Hitler had gone through them in a week.

My Dutch friend's answer was classic. He looked this prat straight in the eye and said, "When God allocated the different races their countries he gave the Irish Ireland, a struggling country divided by sectarian strife. He gave the Dutch the Netherlands. Now if by some quirk of fate God had given the Dutch Ireland it would now be an independent, unified country, hard working, prosperous and enjoying one of the best standards of living in Europe if not the world. If by that same quirk of fate God had given the Irish the Netherlands it would have disappeared beneath the waves about five hundred years ago."

You are as bad as Mugabe - you were handed everything on a bloody plate and still f**ked it up. Northern Ireland and Eire have had self-government and independence respectively for more than 80 years - and still it Britains fault - Grow up, you wanted it, you got it, if you screwed it up you have no-one to blame but yourselves - live with it.

Subject: RE: BS: I was wrong about the latest Gaza truce
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 01 Feb 09 - 04:01 AM

"You are as bad as Mugabe "
Teribus,
It is hard not to notice that when confronted with facts you resort to invective - a common tactic with intellectual bullies (minus the vital ingredient, of course).
Your fascinating anecdote proves - what? - that you have a friend, nothing more (surprising enough in itself, I suppose).
So far we have exchanged opinions on Royal racism, genocide in Palestine and similar behaviour by Britain in Ireland (sorry to all innocent bystanders for that; it was my intention to use Ireland as an example of the outcome of Imperialist occupation, not to hi-jack this thread).
Whenever you find yourself in a corner, you wave your arms and shout. You have emerged as a racist (albeit closet), a supporter of countries who invade and occupy others, and an apologist for genocide and mass murder of civilians, one third of whom were children.
Please go away, count to ten slowly, and come back when you have something intelligent to say.
Best wishes,
Jim Carroll
"you were handed everything..."
Oh, and by the way, if you had read my posts properly you would have been aware that I'm not Irish, but a Brit.

Subject: RE: BS: I was wrong about the latest Gaza truce
From: Teribus
Date: 01 Feb 09 - 05:57 AM

Aw Jim!! How predictable, attack the poster and ignore the points raised.

From your side of this discussion it would actually have been rather nice to have been presented with facts, instead what you came up with were tired old myths, half-truths and lies. Want a list of them Jim??

Example 1:
"We have found out to our cost here in Ireland over the last three decades that, no matter what your point of view on nationalism, while one country persists on occupying another, the outcome is inevitably vicious and bloody."

What country persisted in occupying what country Jim?? The question is as yet unanswered by Jim the "Brit" - Jim don't you find being referred to as a "Brit" offensive? Aren't you outraged?? Terribly racist you know just as bad as referring to somebody from Pakistan a "Paki".

Northern Ireland is and always has been part of the United Kingdom. So tell me Jim over the last three decades what country persisted in occupying what country? - How can a country "occupy" itself??

Example 2:
"The whole of Ireland was a full colony of Britain (it's oldest) up to 1922."

Really Jim?? Not according to our mutual friend Kevin who signs himself as MGOH. Can you dredge though your fantasy book of history and explain to everybody how Ireland could achieve the status of integral part of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland (1801 Act of Union) and still be a "colony" at one in the same time??

"Britain, because of its partitioning of Ireland, bears full responsibility for all the violence that has taken place here."

But as we have seen and as is recorded and documented as historical fact, the British did not partion Ireland did they?? That was the choice of the people of Northern Ireland. Or perhaps you feel as though Britain should have ignored the wishes and desires of that section of people? If they had done so the "civil war" that the South exerienced in 1922 would have looked like a pub brawl compared to the one that would have been fought had the South tried to force the North into a united independent Ireland in 1922. The prospect of this happening was fully realised by all parties in the negotiations that led to the creation of the Irish Free State and that is why the opt out was included in the treaty and ALL parties agreed to it.

Example 3:
"There has never been a vote on the question of whether to remain as part of Britain,
Ireland was a colony until 1922, then it was partitioned and six counties were retained as part of Britain - that's what the 'troubles' were about."

Every time the people of Northern Ireland go to the Polling Station there is a vote on whether or not Northern Ireland remains part of Britain.

We've dealt with the "colony" crap up above, and chapter and verse has been provided to show quite clearly that Northern Ireland came into being because that is what the majority of people living there wanted at the time and all polls taken on the subject indicate that they still prefer the status quo.

Oh and Brit Jim the "Troubles" much as you would like to think of them as having to do with the "struggle" for the unification of Ireland they had more to do with the Northern Irish Human Rights Movement which the bulk of the population in the UK totally supported. The Official IRA recognised that and stayed clear, the eejits of the Provisional IRA jumped in to pour petrol on the fire and set about murdering those they were purportedly "protecting". As to blood being on anybodies hands then the PIRA and the other paramilitaries must shoulder responsibility for the major portion of it.

"Every drop of blood shed from 1922 is down to British rule." Utter nonsense, one set of clowns decided to impose their views and visions on the general population by force of arms, they were countered by another set of clowns with the opposite point of view. All the Governments of both the UK and Ireland ever tried to do was end the carnage. I've asked this before Jim maybe you can give me an answer - name one member of any paramilitary group involved in the "Troubles" who sacrificed his or her life to save the life of an innocent by-stander in Northern Ireland - There are numerous examples of precisely that among members of the armed forces, security forces and emergency services.

Example 4:
"I understand that a visit from the queen is being contemplated at present and that one of the items on her agenda will be a speech apologising for British misrule."

Now I wonder if that did actually occur would it work?? Would that be it? Would a line be drawn under it?? Somehow doubt it, don't you?

As a "Brit" Jim, where does this total ignorance of our constitutional monarchy, its powers and restraints come from??

One minor point Jim-Lad - As a Constitutional Monarch the Queen cannot make such a speech as you refer to, the Prime Minister can, the Queen cannot, she's not allowed to.

So there are instances of British misrule are there Jim - Hardly surprising that, quite human, I know it must be hard living in a world where no-one is as perfect as yourself. Can you give us any examples of Governments that have never made mistakes Jim?? I'd be very interested in reviewing that list.

Subject: RE: BS: I was wrong about the latest Gaza truce
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 01 Feb 09 - 03:59 PM

Terribus,
First let me thank you for your last posting – it couldn't have come at a better time to illustrate the childish nastiness you appear to adopt to those who deem to disagree with you – please feel free to continue doing so.

"What country persisted in occupying what country Jim?? "
Whatever way you partition it or govern, Ireland – all 32 counties of it - is a single country with its own language and culture. It has been held as a colony of Britain by repressive laws and force of arms for many centuries . When it was partitioned six counties remained part of Britain and continued to be held so by force of arms and manipulated laws. The bloodshed that occurred, both before and after that partitioning was due to that continuing occupation.

"Jim don't you find being referred to as a "Brit" offensive? The question is as yet unanswered by Jim the "Brit" – "
No it hasn't – it was never asked, apparently you've only just found out where I'm from and are now, in your unpleasantly childish way, trying to make something of it.
No, I have no objection whatever to being called 'Jim The Brit' – what a strange question.
Nobody is going to use it as a reason for pouring petrol through my letter-box, or terrorising my children at school, or daubing obscene and insulting graffiti on my walls, or sneering at my religion and customs, or trying to make me a third class citizen.
Nor will it cause me to worry about going out at night for fear of me or mine being beaten or murdered by racist thugs.
Nor will it be used by walking beer-bellies in order to insult me in the name of humour.
Nor is it going to be used to arrest me imprison me without charge, dress me in an orange boiler suit and put me in a cage where I will be beaten and humiliated.
Nor will it be the cause of my being shipped off to a country where I will be tortured – whoops sorry, 'specially rendered'.
Why on earth should I object – feel free.
In the forty-odd years of our association with Ireland, both as a regular visitor and as a resident, I have never once been insulted, persecuted or been made feel unwelcome because of my national origins. We have received nothing but friendship and hospitality from the Irish people – I wonder how many people emigrating to the UK, especially those of a different colour, can say that!

"Britain, because of its partitioning of Ireland, bears full responsibility for all the violence that has taken place here. - That was the choice of the people of Northern Ireland...."
No it wasn't – the people of ( the incorrectly called) Northern Ireland, the people of the republic, nor, for that matter, the people of England have never been consulted on the matter. In order for them to have been, a referendum would have to have been held – no such has ever taken place

"Every time the people of Northern Ireland go to the Polling Station there is a vote on whether or not Northern Ireland remains part of Britain".
No they don't; as I have just said, no referendum, no consultation- that's how parliamentary democracy works.

".. that is what the majority of people living there wanted at the time...."
Oh, there was a referendum then – sorry, must have missed it!
It is the duty of any government to act on behalf of the whole population – not just those who voted for them.

"So there are instances of British misrule are there Jim."
Of course there are – including a mismanaged famine that slaughtered and forced emigration and abject poverty on many millions (try Mrs Woodham-Smith's 'The Great Hunger'), the violent repression of the whole country by armed thugs, many of them dredged from English jails, massacres of civilians, manipulation of laws to disenfranchise and persecute the native population, the forcible seizure of homes, land and property and rapine and open murder.
I don't know where you get your 'facts', but I suggest you try fellow Brit, Robert Kee's, 'The Green Flag' history of Ireland, or his 'Ireland – a history – written to accompany if excellent BBC series.

By the way – who are the 'we' you keep referring to – I've never been asked to vote of the Irish question – have you?
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: I was wrong about the latest Gaza truce
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 01 Feb 09 - 04:04 PM

Oh, nearly forgot - this appeared in the Irish Times as part of a petition for justice in Gaza - says everything taht needs to be said on the subject 9AS as does your arrogantly chosen name by the way Terribus - did you know that not only does it mean war-cry, but is also used by some Travellers to describe an uncontrollable, dangerously violent and unpleasant drunk - well done:
"Israel's bombardment of Gaza killed over 1,300 Palestinians, a third of them children. Thousands have been wounded. Many victims had been taking refuge in clearly marked UN facilities.
This assault came in the wake of years of economic blockade by Israel. This blockade, which is Illegal under international Humanitarian Law, has destroyed the Gazan economy and condemned its population to poverty. According to a World Bank report last September, "98% of Gaza's industrial operations are now inactive".
The most recent attack on Gaza is only the latest phase in Israel's oppression of the Palestinian people and appropriation of their land.
Israel has never declared its borders. Instead, it has continuously expanded at the expense of the Palestinians. in 1948, it took over 78% of Palestine, an area much larger than that suggested for a Jewish state by the UN General Assembly in 1947. Contrary to International Law, Israel expelled over 750,000 Palestinians from their homes. These refugees and their descendants, who now number millions, are still dispersed throughout the region. They have the right, under International Law, to return to their homes. This right has been underlined by the UN General Assembly many times, starting with Resolution 194 in 1948.
In 1967, Israel occupied the remaining 22% of Palestine: the West Bank and Gaza. Contrary to Article 49 of the Fourth Geneva Convention, Israel has built, and continues to build, settlements in these occupied territories. Today, nearly 500,000 Israeli settlers live in the illegal settlements in the West Bank (including East Jerusalem), and the number grows daily as Israel expands its settler programme.
Israel has resisted pressure from the international community to abide by the human rights provisions of International Law. It has refused to comply with UN Security Council demands to cease building settlements and remove those it has built (Resolutions 446, 452 and 465) and to reverse its illegal annexation of East Jerusalem (252, 267, 271, 298, 476 and 478). Since September 2000, over 5,000 Palestinians, almost 1,000 of them minors, have been killed by the Israeli military.
11,000 Palestinians, including hundreds of minors, languish in Israel jails. Hundreds are detained without
trial. In addition, Israel is breaking International Law by imprisoning them outside the occupied territories, thereby making it almost impossible for their families to visit them. Every year, hundreds of Palestinian homes are demolished. The Palestinian population of the West Bank and Gaza lives imprisoned by walls, barriers and checkpoints that prevent or impede access to shops, schools, workplaces, hospitals and places of worship. They are subjected to restrictions of every kind and to daily ritual humiliation at the hands of occupation soldiers and checkpoint guards.
Invasion, occupation and plantation of their land is the reality that Palestinians have faced for decades and still face on a daily basis, as their country is reduced remorselessly. Unless, and until this Israeli aggression is halted, and the democratic rights of the Palestinian people are vindicated, there will be no justice or peace in the Middle East. Israel's 40-year occupation of the West Bank and Gaza must be ended.
The occupation can end if political and economic pressure is placed on Israel by the international community. Recognizing this, the Palestinian people continually call on the international community to intervene.

WE, THE SIGNATORIES, CALL FOR THE FOLLOWING:
The Irish Government to cease its purchase of Israeli military products and services and call publicly for an arms embargo against Israel.
The Irish Government to demand publicly that Israel reverse its settlement construction, illegal occupation and annexation of land in accordance with UN Security Council resolutions and to use its influence in international fora to bring this about.
The Irish Government to demand publicly that the Euro-Med Agreement under which Israel has privileged access to the EU market be suspended until Israel complies with International Law.
The Irish Government to veto any proposed upgrade in EU relations with Israel.
The Irish people to boycott all Israeli goods and services until Israel abides by International Law."
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: I was wrong about the latest Gaza truce
From: Teribus
Date: 01 Feb 09 - 07:26 PM

Pssst Tosser Jim this is what the Arabs rejected in 1947:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:UN_Partition_Plan_For_Palestine_1947.png

This is what they SAY they are fighting for now:

http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/History/6daywar.html

OK now any rational sane logical thinking people out there - which was the better deal for the "Palestinian Arabs"?? Please remember that had they accepted this deal ther would have been no displaced Arabs and ther would have been no "right of return" question.

History records that they rejected the 1947 proposal - So having lost the war that they chose to fight, just what exactly are we supposed to do?? Give them another shot at it?? You have got to be joking. But seriously they did try to refight the war and lost it again three times. OK when do you stop, the former main supporters have vanished from the scene, you now have Iran and Syria. Current attrition figres run at for ever Israeli killed 130 Palestinian Arabs get killed. I am very please to heard that the Israeli PM has announced that in future any attack upon the civilian population of Southern Israel from the Gaza Strip will be met by "disproportionate force" the days of "tit-for-tat" are over - Good that is exactly what the situation demands. Personally I'd like to see that translated into counter battery fire at at least brigade strength for at least one hour in response to any rocket or mortar fired from Gaza. I could not care a toss about where that mortar or rocket was fired from, or what casualties resulted from the retaliatory fire was - that is entirely up to Hamas, their choice. And it is all a matter of choice.

What defines the boundaries of the United States of America?? Or any other nation for that matter?? Mutual agreement? Or conquest and treaty dictated by fortune of arms?? If it's good enough for our ancestors it's bloody well good enough for the Arabs of Palestine and their declared foes the citizens of Israel. The former, the Arabs of Palestine, attempted to destroy the Israelis by force of arms and lost, plain and simple - live with it and continue your lives - if you lose at the poker table you can expect no refund because you chose unwisely - lesson number 1, life is hellishly more cruel and unforgiving than poker, that is reality.

Subject: RE: BS: I was wrong about the latest Gaza truce
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 02 Feb 09 - 03:57 AM

Teribus
"Pssst Tosser Jim"
I am happy to discuss Ireland, Gaza - any subject with anybody on this forum, but I find you one of the most arrogant, ill mannered and childish individuals I have ever come across.
I suggest you go and get some help for your 'little social problem', then maybe you will be in a position to learn something about the world around you
Good luck with the search,
Jim Carroll