Irish ‘Peace’ Activists and Gaza
Posted on Wednesday, June 09, 2010 at 11:47 AM
Larger Text
Print
E-mail
55 Comments
RSS 
Recent Posts
- Pro-Life campaigners need to get a grip - Irish women still have no choice over abortion
- Abortion reform Irish style - Women still have no rights over their own bodies, continue to travel to the UK for procedure
- We’re total abortion hypocrites - proposals for new legislation were laughable
- Catch 22 for Irish abortion law - navigating Ireland’s rigid, Catholic influence legal framework and Savita Halappanavar’s case
- The late Baroness Margaret Thatcher had her good points
Archives
The hype and hysteria last week surrounding the final days of the journey of the Rachel Corrie, the "Irish" aid ship for Gaza, was extraordinary.
After what had happened a few days earlier to the Turkish aid ship, a confrontation in which nine of those on board had died, there was alarm at all levels about the possibility of a repeat performance by the Israeli special forces.
Thankfully, the journey of the Rachel Corrie ended without anyone getting hurt, and it's worthwhile now looking back at exactly what went on.
First of all, although the aid it was carrying came from Ireland, the ship is owned by a Malaysian group. So it's not Irish.
Apart from ownership, the continual reference in the international media last week to the "Irish aid ship" gave the impression that the ship had the support of everyone in Ireland, that the aid on board had been paid for by some kind of national collection in Ireland, or even that the ship had the approval of the Irish government.
None of this is correct, although it is true that there is a great deal of sympathy in Ireland for the plight of the Palestinians.
It's also true that there is a counterbalancing dislike here for Hamas, perhaps because we know something about terror campaigns. As one commentator here put it last weekend, Hamas is worse than the IRA, and what they have done to Gaza is a "democratic" nightmare.
So the implication in the repeated media references to "the Irish aid ship" last week (like on CBS News) was seriously misleading.
Equally wrong is any assumption that the people on board "the Irish aid ship" were representative of Ireland or the Irish people. They may have been well meaning, but they don't represent anyone but themselves and the action groups they belong to.
With some exceptions, like Mairead Corrigan Maguire, who won a Nobel Prize in 1976 as one of the Peace People, and Irish American Denis Halliday, former UN assistant secretary general, the 15 to 20 Irish on the Rachel Corrie, the Turkish ship and smaller boats in the flotilla, were the kind of young activists who make a career out of this sort of thing.
The same faces reappear, whether it's on the protest at U.S. troops landing at Shannon, or the Shell to Sea campaign to keep the gas refinery miles offshore, or other anti-U.S. or anti-capitalist causes beloved of the liberal left.
One of the Irish on the flotilla, for example, Fiachra O Luain from Donegal, is a more or less full-time political activist who was involved in the protest over the U.S. military using Shannon Airport. Another of the Irish, Fintan Lane, is a left wing academic who has been active and vocal on a number of issues here.
The names of two of the Irish involved in the flotilla sounded a little different, Isam Bin Ali and Al Mahdi al Harati. In fact both are Libyans who have become naturalized Irish citizens.
Now is it just me, or does anyone else think that people who are given citizenship here should be spending their time working hard to contribute to the Irish state instead of taking it on themselves to go on a lengthy voyage to make a political point supposedly on behalf of the Irish people?
That, of course, was the whole purpose of this flotilla. It wasn't really about delivering aid.
It was about creating a confrontation, grabbing international media attention and putting pressure on the Israelis to end the blockade of Gaza. It was about scoring a political point.
The extremely violent behavior of the "peace activists" on the Turkish ship who attacked the Israeli commandos was mainly to blame for the subsequent fighting which left nine of them dead.
After what had happened a few days earlier to the Turkish aid ship, a confrontation in which nine of those on board had died, there was alarm at all levels about the possibility of a repeat performance by the Israeli special forces.
Thankfully, the journey of the Rachel Corrie ended without anyone getting hurt, and it's worthwhile now looking back at exactly what went on.
First of all, although the aid it was carrying came from Ireland, the ship is owned by a Malaysian group. So it's not Irish.
Apart from ownership, the continual reference in the international media last week to the "Irish aid ship" gave the impression that the ship had the support of everyone in Ireland, that the aid on board had been paid for by some kind of national collection in Ireland, or even that the ship had the approval of the Irish government.
None of this is correct, although it is true that there is a great deal of sympathy in Ireland for the plight of the Palestinians.
It's also true that there is a counterbalancing dislike here for Hamas, perhaps because we know something about terror campaigns. As one commentator here put it last weekend, Hamas is worse than the IRA, and what they have done to Gaza is a "democratic" nightmare.
So the implication in the repeated media references to "the Irish aid ship" last week (like on CBS News) was seriously misleading.
Equally wrong is any assumption that the people on board "the Irish aid ship" were representative of Ireland or the Irish people. They may have been well meaning, but they don't represent anyone but themselves and the action groups they belong to.
With some exceptions, like Mairead Corrigan Maguire, who won a Nobel Prize in 1976 as one of the Peace People, and Irish American Denis Halliday, former UN assistant secretary general, the 15 to 20 Irish on the Rachel Corrie, the Turkish ship and smaller boats in the flotilla, were the kind of young activists who make a career out of this sort of thing.
The same faces reappear, whether it's on the protest at U.S. troops landing at Shannon, or the Shell to Sea campaign to keep the gas refinery miles offshore, or other anti-U.S. or anti-capitalist causes beloved of the liberal left.
One of the Irish on the flotilla, for example, Fiachra O Luain from Donegal, is a more or less full-time political activist who was involved in the protest over the U.S. military using Shannon Airport. Another of the Irish, Fintan Lane, is a left wing academic who has been active and vocal on a number of issues here.
The names of two of the Irish involved in the flotilla sounded a little different, Isam Bin Ali and Al Mahdi al Harati. In fact both are Libyans who have become naturalized Irish citizens.
Now is it just me, or does anyone else think that people who are given citizenship here should be spending their time working hard to contribute to the Irish state instead of taking it on themselves to go on a lengthy voyage to make a political point supposedly on behalf of the Irish people?
That, of course, was the whole purpose of this flotilla. It wasn't really about delivering aid.
It was about creating a confrontation, grabbing international media attention and putting pressure on the Israelis to end the blockade of Gaza. It was about scoring a political point.
The extremely violent behavior of the "peace activists" on the Turkish ship who attacked the Israeli commandos was mainly to blame for the subsequent fighting which left nine of them dead.
It's quite clear now that the commandos were not expecting violence on this scale (previous ships had been boarded without much trouble) and so they were taken by surprise.
Everyone knew that the Israelis had not allowed any ship to break the blockade, and the presumption by the Israelis was that this crew, like others, would submit to being boarded and would allow their aid to go to Gaza via Israel.
When the Israeli commandos were attacked after the boarding -- and the film and still pictures from the ship clearly show this happening -- they were unprepared for dealing with activists who were swinging metal bars and other weapons.
Outnumbered and under severe pressure, some of the commandos over-reacted and started shooting at close range. When soldiers -- any soldiers -- are attacked with that level of ferocity that is how they react.
The outcry which followed focused all attention on the Rachel Corrie, and the Irish government voiced its concern about what might happen and worked out a compromise deal with the Israeli government.
Under this deal the Rachel Corrie would dock at the Israeli port of Ashdod, close to Gaza, and land its supplies. The aid would be inspected under the supervision of UN and Irish Aid officials.
The entire cargo, including an estimated 550 tons of cement, would then be taken by road into Gaza, with two people from the Rachel Corrie monitoring it all the way.
By any standard this was a fair compromise and probably took the Irish government some time to negotiate. But it was rejected out of hand by those on board the Rachel Corrie.
Halliday was quite open about the reason. "While humanitarian assistance is one of the two targets of our mission, the second is to break the siege, the stranglehold of Israel over Gaza, and by voluntarily avoiding Gaza and going to Israel that would not be done," he said.
So getting the aid in was less important than provoking a confrontation that would attract international media attention. Probably at that point, the Rachel Corrie lost the sympathy of most Irish people. It was boarded, there was no resistance, and it was brought to Ashdod.
Although there was a protest meeting in Dublin last weekend, less than 1,000 people turned up.
Everyone knew that the Israelis had not allowed any ship to break the blockade, and the presumption by the Israelis was that this crew, like others, would submit to being boarded and would allow their aid to go to Gaza via Israel.
When the Israeli commandos were attacked after the boarding -- and the film and still pictures from the ship clearly show this happening -- they were unprepared for dealing with activists who were swinging metal bars and other weapons.
Outnumbered and under severe pressure, some of the commandos over-reacted and started shooting at close range. When soldiers -- any soldiers -- are attacked with that level of ferocity that is how they react.
The outcry which followed focused all attention on the Rachel Corrie, and the Irish government voiced its concern about what might happen and worked out a compromise deal with the Israeli government.
Under this deal the Rachel Corrie would dock at the Israeli port of Ashdod, close to Gaza, and land its supplies. The aid would be inspected under the supervision of UN and Irish Aid officials.
The entire cargo, including an estimated 550 tons of cement, would then be taken by road into Gaza, with two people from the Rachel Corrie monitoring it all the way.
By any standard this was a fair compromise and probably took the Irish government some time to negotiate. But it was rejected out of hand by those on board the Rachel Corrie.
Halliday was quite open about the reason. "While humanitarian assistance is one of the two targets of our mission, the second is to break the siege, the stranglehold of Israel over Gaza, and by voluntarily avoiding Gaza and going to Israel that would not be done," he said.
So getting the aid in was less important than provoking a confrontation that would attract international media attention. Probably at that point, the Rachel Corrie lost the sympathy of most Irish people. It was boarded, there was no resistance, and it was brought to Ashdod.
Although there was a protest meeting in Dublin last weekend, less than 1,000 people turned up.
And when the five Irish who were on the Rachel Corrie arrived back in Dublin on Monday, only a handful of people were there to meet them, although this did not stop the media referring to their "heroes' welcome".
Overall, the feeling here is that the Israelis are their own worst enemy. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu should write a book called How to Lose Friends and Alienate People.
But as one Israeli supporter here wrote in a letter to a newspaper, everyone else can make mistakes and take chances, but Israel has only to be wrong once and it is in deep trouble. It is surrounded by hostile states, almost at permanent war with Syria and only a short rocket flight from Iran which is completing its nuclear program and wants to wipe Israel off the face of the earth.
It only has to be wrong once. It won't get a second chance.
Hamas is not interested in a negotiated settlement and co-existence. That's why it keeps up its rocket attacks into Israel from Gaza.
It may have been elected, but it has its own ideas about democracy. It has murdered most of the Fatah leaders who were its rivals, it imposes its fundamentalist views on the people and it deals savagely with any opposition. Its only interest is the destruction of Israel.
Faced with this, the Israelis in return want to destroy Hamas. Their method is the collective punishment of the Palestinian people for electing Hamas, aimed at turning them against the Hamas leaders.
Hence the very restrictive blockade of Gaza, which has now been there for three years. It's harsh, it's cruel and it makes the lives of ordinary Palestinians very primitive.
It even seems ridiculous. Cement and metal pipes, for example, are on the aid banned list.
But as the Israelis point out, cement can be used for making bunkers as well as rebuilding schools, and metal piping is used to make the rockets that still fly into Israel from Gaza.
It's a mess. You can't blame the Israelis for wanting security and a respite from the rockets. And you can't but be sorry for the ordinary Palestinians who suffer so much. Whether "peace activists" like those who attacked the Israeli commandos boarding the Turkish ship have anything to contribute is far from certain. Irish or not.
Overall, the feeling here is that the Israelis are their own worst enemy. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu should write a book called How to Lose Friends and Alienate People.
But as one Israeli supporter here wrote in a letter to a newspaper, everyone else can make mistakes and take chances, but Israel has only to be wrong once and it is in deep trouble. It is surrounded by hostile states, almost at permanent war with Syria and only a short rocket flight from Iran which is completing its nuclear program and wants to wipe Israel off the face of the earth.
It only has to be wrong once. It won't get a second chance.
Hamas is not interested in a negotiated settlement and co-existence. That's why it keeps up its rocket attacks into Israel from Gaza.
It may have been elected, but it has its own ideas about democracy. It has murdered most of the Fatah leaders who were its rivals, it imposes its fundamentalist views on the people and it deals savagely with any opposition. Its only interest is the destruction of Israel.
Faced with this, the Israelis in return want to destroy Hamas. Their method is the collective punishment of the Palestinian people for electing Hamas, aimed at turning them against the Hamas leaders.
Hence the very restrictive blockade of Gaza, which has now been there for three years. It's harsh, it's cruel and it makes the lives of ordinary Palestinians very primitive.
It even seems ridiculous. Cement and metal pipes, for example, are on the aid banned list.
But as the Israelis point out, cement can be used for making bunkers as well as rebuilding schools, and metal piping is used to make the rockets that still fly into Israel from Gaza.
It's a mess. You can't blame the Israelis for wanting security and a respite from the rockets. And you can't but be sorry for the ordinary Palestinians who suffer so much. Whether "peace activists" like those who attacked the Israeli commandos boarding the Turkish ship have anything to contribute is far from certain. Irish or not.
55 Comments
15 - 55 | See all comments
GeorgeDillon | Jun 23, 2010, 08:26 AM EDT
John Spain's column should be removed. His support for violence and terror is unacceptable, and he should not be given a forum for his extremism.
Report abuse
WoundedKnee | Jun 21, 2010, 04:14 PM EDT
What an idiot this columnist is. Would he like to tell us how peanut butter is a weapon? How about pepper and salt? I have published the list of banned substances (banned by Israel that is, not by any sane people) elsewhere on this site. How come this guy Spain doesn't justify what's on this list. Or is he just a bigot and a warmonger?
Report abuse
shuvonn | Jun 18, 2010, 07:18 AM EDT
Nice to see Israel has lifted the ban on SOME imports as per an agreement currently being crafted with Tony Blair, and after calls from several EU ministers, I hope they keep their word on this one.
One could question as to whether that decision is to avoid the REAL inquiry that the U.N. is demanding into the death of the Turkish citizens on the Mavi Marmara, the one Israel proposes at the moment will not include testimony from the IDF members who took place in the *incident* in international waters, and there have been rumors medals have been awarded to those IDF members.
Report abuse
irishwxman | Jun 17, 2010, 05:31 PM EDT
ouch. You got me there. I will just go sit in the corner now and pout.
Report abuse
shuvonn | Jun 17, 2010, 03:37 PM EDT
You can insult all you like, it appears that is your only weapon against anyone who disagrees, it negates anything you post.
Report abuse
irishwxman | Jun 17, 2010, 10:51 AM EDT
Oh and FYI...just because you still seem to be clueless about government...The United States is, indeed, a republic, not a democracy. Accurately defined, a democracy is a form of government in which the people decide policy matters directly--through town hall meetings or by voting on ballot initiatives and referendums. A republic, on the other hand, is a system in which the people choose representatives who, in turn, make policy decisions on their behalf. The Framers of the Constitution were altogether fearful of pure democracy. Everything they read and studied taught them that pure democracies "have ever been spectacles of turbulence and contention; have ever been found incompatible with personal security or the rights of property; and have in general been as short in their lives as they have been violent in their deaths"
Report abuse
irishwxman | Jun 17, 2010, 10:48 AM EDT
LOL!!! The childishness ensues. I'm just waiting for you to blast me with the ole, "I'm rubber your glue..." argument. So what's the name of the Obama worship church you go to? Is there like statues and shrines and stuff? Do you guys do living sacrifices in his honor? Chant and speak in tongues? I will wait patiently for your reply because I know Hannah Montana is coming on and you don't want to miss it before your nap.
Report abuse
shuvonn | Jun 16, 2010, 04:17 PM EDT
You do SO like to split hairs. It is YOU being petty, Obama REPRESENTS the US, HE is a symbol of the country BECAUSE the MAJORITY of it's people voted him in and if they had NOT he would NOT be the president. Just like the FLAG is a symbol of a country, what is so hard for YOU to understand ?
IF Obama represents the people of the US, HE represents the US...
Ireland is a constitutional republic and a parliamentary democracy. And the U.S. is constitutional republic and representative democracy. FYI: A republic is a form of government where the head of state is not a monarch...
It's a pity you cannot make a point without being petty and childish.....GROW UP BOY!!
Report abuse
irishwxman | Jun 16, 2010, 11:49 AM EDT
What is so hard for YOU to grasp? We are NOT a democracy!! We are a Republic. Just like Ireland. Where did you...excuse me, let me rephrase, Where DO you go to school? If they taught you that America is a democracy that instructor needs to be fired. And I know Netanyahu is the PM, I was making a point. Had I known you were going to be delicately searching for any discrepancies I would have been more specific. So not only are you childish, you are petty. What else can we tack on? Obama does not represent America, he represents the PEOPLE of America. He is not a king. So lessons learned today...America is a REPUBLIC, and the president represents the people, not the country. that is what a REPUBLIC is!
Report abuse
shuvonn | Jun 16, 2010, 10:26 AM EDT
The president represents the country, Cameron represented Great Britain in the BRITISH PARLIAMENT, while on British SOIL, NOT abroad when he apologized for Bloody Sunday yesterday. Why is that so hard a concept for you to grasp? And YOUR form of democracy is name calling just because the one you didn't want got in? That's not exactly an example of maturity.
FYI: Netanyahu is NOT the president of Israel Shimon Peres IS the president. Netanyahu is the Prime Minister. Maybe it is YOU who needs to read a book, if you do not even know that fact, my bad that I typed that incorrectly in my previous post, and you didn't even cop that one....
Report abuse
irishwxman | Jun 15, 2010, 12:08 PM EDT
the fact of the matter is simple. The people on the flotilla had no intention of providing aid to anyone. they were only trying to provoke Israel. you bought into their propaganda hook line and sinker. You accuse me of calling you names? Well here is one for you: SUCKER!
Report abuse
irishwxman | Jun 15, 2010, 12:05 PM EDT
"The president of a country REPRESENTS the country"
WRONG! thanks for playing. He represents the U.S. when he visits other countries, but when he is here he doesn't represent jack squat. He is some loon that other loons elected, and now most of them are slapping their hands on their heads and saying, "WHAT HAVE I DONE??" And if you said you didn't think Netanyahu is a good prez, then that is your prerogative. It doesn't mean you think Israel sucks because you dislike Netanyahu. That is just asinine. God I can't wait for summer to end so you have to go back to school. Shouldn't you be outside playing or something? Maybe read a book and learn before you open your trap? I read your posts and am utterly speechless at the absurdity of that thing. It's almost as if you just type for the sake of typing and don't really understand what you are typing.
Report abuse
shuvonn | Jun 14, 2010, 06:44 PM EDT
The president of a country REPRESENTS the country, he/she is the internationally recognized representative of that country.
Whose picture do they burn ? WHOSE flag do they burn when being critical of AMERICA?
Would you accept me saying that I did not care of Shimon Peres? But HE is only a figurehead like the Irish president, so how bout I say I think Netanyahu is not a good president? Would I be anti-Israeli then to you? This seems to be a hard concept for you to grasp.
Let me CLARIFY for you. YOU ARE ANTI-AMERICAN because YOU are critical of the person whom the MAJORITY voted in to represent and RUN the country. And that Man runs the country as opposed to being ONLY a figurehead like in Israel or Ireland. THAT IS as IF you said horrible things about the MAJORITY who voted him in ergo AMERICA, Obama REPRESENTS America to the world, YOU yanks didn't take too kindly when the DIXIE CHICKS did that but that was because it was BUSH and not a democrat. YOUR REPUBLICAN BIAS IS SHOWING.
Again with the names, how childish you are. Get this man a LABEL MAKER he desperately needs one.
The IDF committed PIRACY in International waters, and robbed 3.5 million of property and cash from approximately 40 differently nationalities, their video cameras, their cell phones, memory sticks and credit cards and there were the hypocrite looking for proof less than 24 hours and now you call the theft weak? SO it looks like YOU think that its okay to search your kills and take the credit cards and use them, what FINE, UPSTANDING people the US has serving it now...
Report abuse
irishwxman | Jun 14, 2010, 03:53 PM EDT
You are not turning the argument on me you buffoon. Look at your logic; had you insulted Benjamin Netanyahu, then I could say you are anti Netanyahu, not anti Israel. But what you have done incessantly is attack the entire country of Israel, which in part makes you anti Israel. Now had I gone and said horrible things about America, then you could rightfully call me anti American. But because I LOVE America, and care what happens to this country, I have utter disgust for the president of America who looks to destroy it from the inside out. That does not make me anti America. If anything it proves that I am very PRO America. Your arguments make no sense at all! You are comparing apples to cantaloupes. And if stolen credit cards is all the ammo you have against the Israelis, that is just weak.
Report abuse
Report abuse