Belfast Israeli supporter says he was threatened with arrest by the PSNI.

Radio Caller:

I responded to the call on BBC television by a very nice young lady who said there would be a peaceful candlelit procession from clonard Monastery to the city hall in support of the citizens of Gaza. Now I went along. I’m a supporter of the Israeli standpoint, I went along expecting it to be completely non political, non sectarian situation. When I arrived there at the city hall, I arrived quite early. I noticed several Palestinian flags on Display. Now because I had been at anorher event I had an Israeli flag in my car. Now I went back and got that flag.
I waited until the procession came along and the flags were still being displayed . Now I was there primarly in support of what this organisation was putting forward, that the citizens of Gaza are being victimized. Now they’re being victimized by Hamas, and when the Palestinian flags were produced I produced my Israeli flag. Now I was dragged by the PSNI to the side and the flag was taken off me and I was threatened with arrest.

(More from the caller in the audio/vid.)

  • Rabelais

    RS and Jimmy,
    Why do you bother? UMH occupies a discursive universe quite separate from our own. It is irrational and anti-intellectual. Its constituents take pride in its contrariness. And all opposition to their ridiculous, threadbare ideas rather perversely seems confirm them in their own peculiar faith.

  • Jimmy Sands

    So this isn’t Jesus’ world? Whose is it?

    And what is the relevance to catholicism of the parable of the sower?

  • Ulsters my homeland

    Rabelais, explain what is anti-intellectual about a Pope agreeing with the creation of a state which doesn’t yet excist? knowing full well violence will be used?

  • Rabelais

    Rabelais, explain what is anti-intellectual about a Pope agreeing with the creation of a state which doesn’t yet excist? knowing full well violence will be used?

    Posted by Ulsters my homeland on Jan 08, 2009 @ 10:58 PM

    Why would I try to explain anything to you UMH? There is no intellectual, political or moral ground that you and I share that would make any such communication possible.

  • Ulsters my homeland

    well that’s that, you’re in a world of you own. All the best on that.

  • Rabelais

    No UMH, I’m not in a world of my own and neither or you. We’re just in separate worlds. Incredible. we couldn’t even agree on that.

  • Ulsters my homeland

    Rabelais, tell us why “There is no intellectual, political or moral ground that you and I share that would make any such communication possible.”

    Hello?

  • Prionsa Eoghan

    UMH

    The Catholic church missed oot oan an almighty heid nipper when they let you go boyo. I bet you could rant for Ireland. C’mon your obsession with the church is unhealthily obsessive, let it go man. Move onto the Baptists or something ;¬)

  • Rabelais

    Look back over the thread at your exchange with Republican Stones and Jimmy Sands. Is not just that any sort of agreement between you and them (and me) is unlikely. Its the fact that there isn’t even any chance of agreeing any common terms of reference.

  • Jimmy Sands

    You are opposed to the existence of the Catholic Church in this world but state that it does not exist in Jesus’ world. Surely it must follow that this is not Jesus’ world? Alternatively if this is Jesus’ world, and therefore the Catholic Church does not exist, you are protesting against a figment of your imagination. Which is it?

  • Greagoir O Frainclin

    “Unionists who are normally pius”, Greagoir?”

    Here’s that ‘o’ for you Rory!

  • Damo Mackerel

    Republican stones are you suggesting that the Israeli Flag is a symbol equated to a swastika flag?

  • Pól

    Damo, I suggest you ask that question to a Gazan…

  • RepublicanStones

    ‘Republican stones are you suggesting that the Israeli Flag is a symbol equated to a swastika flag?’

    No Damo and nor is the confederate flag, which you seem to have forgot I mentioned as well.
    I was merely alluding to the stupidity of waltzing into the middle of a group of people and their supporters waving a flag which represents their oppression. And as the Israeli state from its very foundations has oppressed the Palestinian people, do you think it is a good idea to saunter in with an Israeli flag?

  • grow_a_brain

    Im sorry, the caller is a complete and utter gobshite. ” Israel respects the pre 67 borders”

    You really cant make ignorance like this up.

    Shulamit Aloni,former Education Minister of Israel, on the Apartheid of the Israeli state:http://www.counterpunch.org/aloni01082007.html

    you have to love this excerpt:

    By now they have requisitioned further lands for the purpose of constructing “Jewish only” roads. Wonderful roads, wide roads, well-paved roads, brightly lit at night–all that on stolen land. When a Palestinian drives on such a road, his vehicle is confiscated and he is sent on his way.

    On one occasion I witnessed such an encounter between a driver and a soldier who was taking down the details before confiscating the vehicle and sending its owner away. “Why?” I asked the soldier. “It’s an order–this is a Jews-only road”, he replied. I inquired as to where was the sign indicating this fact and instructing [other] drivers not to use it. His answer was nothing short of amazing. “It is his responsibility to know it, and besides, what do you want us to do, put up a sign here and let some antisemitic reporter or journalist take a photo so he that can show the world that Apartheid exists here?”

    An orthodox Jew on Zionism: http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=dxdsH9_HYKM&feature=related

  • James

    http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=i08L09V0_sg&feature=channel_page

    Hamas reserves extra special love for the catholics in this one!

  • Ulsters my homeland

    grow_a_brain

    It’s interesting to know how Zionism came about. It’s name was first called FUTURISM and was created by a Jesuit named Francisco Ribera (1537-1591). He wrote a book entitled ‘[i]In Sacrum Beati Ioannis Apostoli, & Evangelistiae Apocalypsin Commentarij'[/i], in response to the historicist teachings of the Reformers, who quite openly called the Pope the Anti-Christ. His book shifted the blame from the Papacy to some individual in the future and Jews were mentioned quite frequently.

    The main thrust of his book stated that:

    – the Antichrist was one man and not a dynasty.
    – He would sit in a rebuilt temple in Jerusalem.
    – He would call himself God.
    – He would be received by the Jews.

    This became the teaching of the Roman Catholic church and it sounds very much like Zionism to me.

  • Globetrotter

    Reader,

    “It was a factual correction to a claim you made in your own post. You should actually thank Mark for his assistance in making your next post better informed and more accurate.”

    I didn’t make any claims, just gave anectodal evidence having been there recently.

    Hardly any Israelis have been killed, while loads of Palestinian men, women and children have died.

    Is that factual enough?

  • Ulsters my homeland

    The Jesuits are a nasty bunch. In order to continue the deception that the Papacy is not the Anti-Christ, a Jesuit from Chile Emmanuel Lacunza (1731-18010, wrote a book supporting Francisco Ribera’s FUTURIST ideas that a Temple in Jerusalem was to be rebuilt.

    Emmanuel Lacunza added a fictitious author name to his book, the name he used was a Jewish one, Rabbi Juan Josafat BenEzra. How deceiving is that? Obviously a book with such FUTURIST ZIONIST ideas would need to be accepted by Jews and Protestants.

  • Jimmy Sands

    “The Jesuits are a nasty bunch.”

    So they’re not simply misguided, these catholics are deliberately anti-Jesus?

  • Ulsters my homeland
  • darth rumsfeld

    my tuppence worth on “proportionality”.
    In the last year Hamas have fired approximately 5000 rockets into Israel, with relatively minor success. Doubtless this is a matter of regret to them, as I’m sure the aim of the rockets is not to irritate but to injure and kill. So what if “only 11 Israelis have died? What’s the correct number that can be killed before action has to be taken. If 11 citizens of belfast were killed by a terrorist group people would be demanding action- and rightly so- but it would have to be measured, and effective. That’s really the only area where israel deserves the world’s scrutiny. I’m not sufficiently expert on the security calculations to judge, nor is any one else posting here

    Now we understand that Hamas is never going to engage in a conventional war, and we understand that Israel is unwilling to invade -except as a last resort. Can any state permit 5000 attacks on its territory go unanswered? What democratically elected government would not face the wrath of its people for failing to respond?

    Everyone- especially Hamas- knows that bombing is not surgical. Everyone also knows that Hamas are using their own people as human shields to mount attacks. Terrorists/guerrillas/francs tireurs ( delete to taste) always do.

    None of this excuses Israel if it had been manufacturing an excuse to utilise the window of the fag end of the Bush presidency. But frankly, the likelihood is that all parties in this tragedy were going to push Obama as hard as they can in the first few weeks of his presidency anyway,so something like this was always going to happen when Hamas ended its ceasefire.

    No one side has all the moral high ground here. Both are working the percentages for all they are worth, and innocent lives are being lost. The slavish anti-Israel anti-US kneejerkers on this thread need to factor thses unpalatable truths into their calculations

  • darth rumsfeld

    “I was merely alluding to the stupidity of waltzing into the middle of a group of people and their supporters waving a flag which represents their oppression. And as the Israeli state from its very foundations has oppressed the Palestinian people, do you think it is a good idea to saunter in with an Israeli flag?”

    You have a point.
    Or at least you would have, if you also mentioned the offended Celtic jersey wearing tricolour waving spides who turn up at orange parades throughout the north- or indeed any loyalists who turn up at republican events if such a thing happened. And then there’s the rabble who came out in Belfast a few weeks ago to protest against the homecoming of the troops from Afghanistan.

    Soooo- we should never protest if particiapnts in a demonstration might take offence.
    What a mature approach. And so at odds with the juvenile mindset of someone who bravely drives up the Shankill with a camcorder on his knee and then posts his video on youtube with derogatory comments, don’t you think?

  • Jimmy Sands

    UMH,

    “On August 15, 1534, Ignatius Loyola founded a secret Catholic order called the Society of Jesus, also known as the Jesuits. Historically, we might compare this order to Darth Vader’s Evil Empire in the classic Star Wars films.”

    There’s certainly no denying the calibre of scholarship on display here. He appears to take the view that they are working for Satan, so presumably that is your view. Am I right?

  • pfhl

    What is certain, that nothing happens without the Vatican’s say-so, even if your a Zionist Jew.

    Posted by Ulsters my homeland on Jan 08, 2009 @ 08:38 PM

    Do all states also ask the pope for advice when allowing divorce, gay marraige, abortion, contraception and euthanasia? Or do they only seek advice on the creation of states? Not sure what you mean with nothing happens without the vatican’s say-so. Did they create the world wars as well? How about the atomic bomb, what was their input?

  • Seimi

    pfhl,
    Didn’t they create the Holy Hand Grenade of Hantioch (I think)?

    Ye gotta watch us schemin’ Papists! 🙂

  • runciter

    In the last year Hamas have fired approximately 5000 rockets into Israel

    Hamas was recognised by the Israeli government for having adhered to the most recent six month ceasefire.

    It cannot be held accountable for attacks on Israel by other groups in that period.

    Israel deliberately broke that ceasefire in November. Why would they do this?

    So what if “only 11 Israelis have died?

    In that same time-frame Israel killed over 1200 Palestinians.

    Who is the aggressor? Who is acting defensively?

  • Jimmy Sands

    “my tuppence worth on “proportionality”. ”

    Proportionality is probably the wrong word. AS I’ve said before “only 11 Israelis dead” is a poor argument, and you are right to point out that it’s hardly for want of effort. However, the better question is whether or not the response effectively addresses the problem or whether it is merely retribution for its own sake.

  • runciter

    the better question is whether or not the response effectively addresses the problem or whether it is merely retribution for its own sake

    It is not a “response”, nor is it “retribution”.

    Israel, not Hamas, deliberately broke the most recent ceasefire.

    How is breaking a successful ceasefire a ‘responsive’ or defensive action?

    The most likely explanation for the current attack is that it serves the goals of Israeli expansionism.

  • runciter

    “only 11 Israelis dead” is a poor argument

    The argument is not “only 11 Israelis dead”.

    The argument is that the level of Palestinian aggression is miniscule compared to the level of Israeli aggression.

    Painting such a situation as a two-sided ‘conflict’ is a serious misrepresentation. That such misrepresentation is popular in the media does not make it any more reasonable.

  • Reader

    Globetrotter: Hardly any Israelis have been killed, while loads of Palestinian men, women and children have died. Is that factual enough?
    I assume that you think you are making your point by your choice of words instead, then. But see that “Hardly any”: does that really mean “Not enough”, “Just enough”, or “Too many”?
    And, do you think Israel would be right to demand an end to rocket attacks as a condition of a peace deal?

  • Jimmy Sands

    Runciter,

    “The argument is that the level of Palestinian aggression is miniscule compared to the level of Israeli aggression. ”

    Argument for what? If anything that would seem to me a very cogent reason for the Palestinians to stop.

    I did not say it was a defensive action, quite the opposite in fact. You object to the term retribution. Would then do you believe the motive to be?

  • Ulsters my homeland

    http://www.historicist.com/articles2/jesuitfuturism.htm

    Jimmy Sands

    “[i]There’s certainly no denying the calibre of scholarship on display here. He appears to take the view that they are working for Satan, so presumably that is your view. Am I right?”[/i]

    just to remind you of the authors position on that, he says:

    “In other words, can a sincere Christian be used by both Jesus Christ and the devil? At first we might say, “Never!” but consider this. In Matthew 16, Jesus told Peter that God was blessing him as he shared his faith in Christ (16:15-17), and then, just a few minutes later, Peter yielded to temptation and Satan spoke through him (16:21-23)! This proves that a Christian can be used by both God and Lucifer, and all within a short space of time. I call this the Peter Principle.”

  • Jimmy Sands

    So it would be fair to say they’re working for him part time?

    Are they doing it deliberately or do they just not recognise him when he tells them to do things?

  • James

    hi jimmy, what do you mean by the comments: “Are they doing it deliberately or do they just not recognise him when he tells them to do things”

    can you explain what you mean?

  • Jimmy Sands

    James,

    I think we’ve established that Jesuits do the work of the devil. I’m trying to find out whether they are deliberately helping him or are simply being fooled.

  • James

    “I think we’ve established that Jesuits do the work of the devil.”…….Jimmy Sands

    “I’m trying to find out whether they are deliberately helping him or are simply being fooled.”…….Jimmy Sands

    …………………………….

    do you know what Jimmy, you consentrate on your ideas, but please leave the rest of us out of it. We don’t want your Catholicism, Roman or not.

  • Jimmy Sands

    I don’t understand. I was simply asking a question. If you don’t know the answer then fine. No need to be rude. But I forgive you.

  • Mr Angry

    [i]”What is certain, that nothing happens without the Vatican’s say-so, even if your a Zionist Jew.”[/i]

    Posted by Ulsters my homeland on Jan 08, 2009 @ 08:38 PM

    Celtic 2 – Dundee 1

    The Vatican “at work” today…..probably.

  • look at my wee red shoes aren’t they lovely Doroth

    Football’s too butch for the Vatican. Playing chase in the Vatican is more interesting.

    Bishops 4 – choir boys 0

  • jrd

    Why are these protesters flying Palestinian flags? Surely if you going to express your support for the Gazans, should you not fly the Gazan/Hamas flag not the Palestinian flag (a Fatah/PA banner).You wont see too many Palestinian flags flying in Gaza, not since 2006. Since the people of Gaza rejected Fatah, Hamas has killed or silenced Fatah and their supporters in Gaza.

  • Ric Flair

    Pogroms WOOO! never happened WOOO! in Belfast WOOO! Ever WOOO!

  • runciter

    I did not say it was a defensive action, quite the opposite in fact. You object to the term retribution. Would then do you believe the motive to be?

    Expansionism.

    Not only is the expanionist tendency in Israel well documented, (http://www.scribd.com/doc/2019273/Mearsheimer-Walt-The-Israel-Lobby-and-U-S-Foreign-Policy-2007) but the ‘facts on the ground’ speak for themselves.

    http://whatreallyhappened.com/IMAGES/Israel_stealing_palestine.jpg

  • RepublicanStones

    Glad you like my work darth.

    Regarding the flags, the central point you gloriously miss (which you’re good at) is they represent states which, actually, through state policy subjugated the various groups of people mentioned. So your comparison with tricolour waving hoops fans is null and void. Unless you have evidence the Irish state actually ethnically cleansed/oppressed/swore at/wedgeied unionists or orangemen?

  • Conchuir O Fearain

    This debate is another example of why the six counties cannot work as a state, due to bickering over issues, which have very little to do with us. It always comes down to Catholic/Protestant, Republican/Unionist. Both sides make valid points, but we all have enough troubles of our own to be worrying about an issue, which is half way across the world. By all means protest your case, but try and keep things relative, it is a war, just has we had our war. We shold not be taking sides, but putting pressure on both side to come to a resoloution.

  • darth rumsfeld

    “Glad you like my work darth”

    love it mate
    Never ceases to reassure me that I’m not deluding myself whenever I know I’ve won the argument.

    “So your comparison with tricolour waving hoops fans is null and void”

    Well no actually. The point was about the right of people to protest against those whose opinions offend them. By your logic ( if I may over charitably dignify it as such) people should not be allowed to protest unless those against whom they are protesting pass a test ( set by you presumably) of super duper nastiness. In my innocence, I thought the classic test of a free society was to allow free expression.

    And since most of the people at the rally weren’t actually from Palestine the anger they obviously feel against Israel has nothing to do with their direct experience of suffering.

    Now look what you’ve gone and done.
    You’ve let me wipe the floor with your prejudice dressed up as argument by adopting the liberal position. me- a liberal???!!!

    Conchuir shames you by his maturity. It’s not our conflict. Nor is the Basque dispute. If you wanna rant about it too feel free, and if someone is excercised enough to counter demonstrate let them – just as long as they don’t stop me getting to the shops..

    Only my modesty and recognition that even a primary school pupil would see the nonsense you post for what it is save me from smugness

  • Conchuir O Fearain

    To be fair darth, im lower 6th @ a grammer school.

  • darth rumsfeld

    I doubt it Conchuir, otherwise your teachers would smack your wrists for mis-spelling “Grammar”

    Jimmy Sands
    You are quite correct. “Proportionality” is a mistaken basis for argument. Effectiveness is probably the depressingly accurate test, and on that basis I am not convinced that Israel is any nearer its aim. I also accept that Israel has questions to answer about the use of white phosphorous , amongst other factors.

    Runciter allows his prejudice to blind his common sense. Israeli expansionism? It’s clear to anyone that Israel is seeking to contain an external threat. They’ve used many strategies over the years, and sometimes frankly with less success than the collateral damage merits. I think this may well be such a case, since rockets will probably always be a threat. It just won’t work to punish the Palestinians for electing Hamas in my opinion, no matter how Hamas are clearly unfit for power

  • Conchuir O Fearain

    Aah, well spotted, apologies for my terrible mis-spelling. But seriously, I am.lol

  • RepublicanStones

    ‘Never ceases to reassure me that I’m not deluding myself whenever I know I’ve won the argument.’

    your modesty is humbling darth.

    ‘By your logic ( if I may over charitably dignify it as such) people should not be allowed to protest unless those against whom they are protesting pass a test ( set by you presumably) of super duper nastiness.’

    Allowed? Where did i state that. it seems you can’t read the posts. I questioned the wiseness of doing such a thing, not the legitimacy or legality of it. Do try and keep up dear boy, here i’ll quote myself for you….

    “I was merely alluding to the stupidity of waltzing into the middle of a group of people and their supporters waving a flag which represents their oppression.”

    ‘You’ve let me wipe the floor with your prejudice dressed up as argument by adopting the liberal position. me- a liberal???!!!’

    Again your modesty is humbling.

    ‘It’s not our conflict. Nor is the Basque dispute. If you wanna rant about it too feel free, and if someone is excercised enough to counter demonstrate let them – just as long as they don’t stop me getting to the shops..’

    Its not, but this is a thread pertaining to it, incase you haven’t noiced. And again I was questioning the sanity of this man, not his legal rights.

    ‘Only my modesty and recognition that even a primary school pupil would see the nonsense you post for what it is save me from smugness’

    Unfortunately it hasn’t stopped you from being precisely that coupled with being inaccurate. Oops.