Report from the Galway Campaign Boycotting Israeli Goods

by TD - IPSC Mon Oct 01, 2007 18:25

5

by TD Mon Oct 01, 2007 18:31

3

The text on the T-shirt reads, "Caterkiller" : a fact that the spirit of the murdered Rachel Corrie, from her unquiet grave, would not find fault with?

by Mary Kelly Tue Oct 02, 2007 00:10

thanks for caring

by Biker Tue Oct 02, 2007 12:23

Spotted Israeli chives in Londis this morning - used to grow them myself one time so there's no excuse for imports - especially from Israel.

by polly Sat Oct 06, 2007 10:18

> I have long been a supporter of boycotting
> Israeli goods.I always check fruit and veg but i
> didnt realise that we imported garden furniture
> and other items also. I will make sure to check
> everything im buying in the future. I dont want to
> support a government who are murderers.
> KEEP UP THE GOOD WORK.

by Malachy Mon Oct 15, 2007 16:43

Is it just me, or why is it whenever I see the Malaysian women in their head shawls I'm reminded of the Carmelite nuns back in the eightines when they were taken out of doors to vote as they should on the abortion referendum?

by Galwegian Tue Oct 16, 2007 17:07

As usual attempts are made to make things on this website appear they are part of the protest. The parade of of as you call them young ones were taking part in the Oyster Festival parade and had nothing to do with you.

Quite honestly I am sick and tired looking at this carry on every Saturday its past its sell by date.

by Mickey Tue Oct 16, 2007 17:40

Fair Play Tommy you are a true galwegian legend. Don't be put off by Galway's answer to Victor Meldrew. I look for you everytime I go down Shop Street and I think your pictures are great. Your sence of justice is immence and you bring it to the people of Galway. You add colour to this great city while contribiting to it's vibrancy. Your strenght of character is unmatched by many who would try to lead us.

Every week you are there telling the truth with out looking for fame or fortune.

Thank you good man

by Sceptic Tue Oct 16, 2007 21:24

You are not necessary right about the chives - because they can be grown in this part of the world does not mean its not economic to import them from Israel instead. Its all to do with comparative advantage which is a very potent force in economics and trade theory and not a pedantic point.

by PaddyK Tue Oct 16, 2007 22:27

Tell us Sceptic,

What is the Comparative Advantage (C.A) that Israel has over Ireland in the production of chives?

And while you're working late, what is the C.A. Israel has in the production of Spuds over Ireland?

by Dave Wed Oct 17, 2007 09:04

I presume there's a boycott on Palestinian produce as well, what with their terrorism?

What's good for the goose is good for the gander and all that.

by PaddyK Wed Oct 17, 2007 12:34

Their is a complete embargo on Palestinian produce, at source, if that makes you feel happier?

They cant get anything out of the place what with Israeli state terror tactics. Hundreds of road blocks in Palestine, sealed borders, no ports, no abiltiy to export whatsoever, Dave.

In fact they are having great difficulty getting stuff in just to stay alive. So you really dont have to worry. in fact whatever Israeli produce ever becomes surplus due to an increasingly succesful boycott can be foisted onto the imprisoned Palestinians, as always.

So it's a win, win situation for you and your mates, Dave.

There's your balance, nothing going in and nothing coming out of Palestine, it's called a siege.

by Dave Wed Oct 17, 2007 12:41

I just don't seee the need to differentiate between terrorist tactics regardless of the terrorists.

Israel's record speaks for itself but you don't seem to acknowledge Palestinian terrorism. It's the morbidly obese elephant in the corner.

by PaddyK Wed Oct 17, 2007 13:13

You are entitled to your own idiosyncrasies in how you interpret the world.

But this thread is about Boycotting goods to bring about a change in official policy. If you are so concerned about the official activities of the Palestinian entity and you can actually find something to Boycott, then go ahead and knock yourself out.

You similtaneoulsy seem to acknowledge the atrocious nature of the Israeli regime and this thread is informing you that there is a huge amount of Israeli produce finding it's way onto our shelves.
And you should probably boycott it as best you can as a small means of contribution to ceasing Official state terror.

So that's that straightened out , you dont need to cloud the issue anymore with the mirror of parity trick.

ok Dave?

by pat c Wed Oct 17, 2007 13:43

"Israel's record speaks for itself but you don't seem to acknowledge Palestinian terrorism. It's the morbidly obese elephant in the corner."

No. The Palestinians are the mouse in the corner. The IDF are the War Elephant armed with attack copters, jets and tanks.

There is the violence of the oppressor and there is the responsive violence of the oppressed. I dont support attacks on civilian targets but I do support the Palestinians and Hezbollah in their defensive war against Israels Military might and against the Armed Colonist militias in the West Bank.

by eastern eye Thu Oct 18, 2007 10:56

What was so "responsive violence of the oppressed" in Hezbolla's attack last year, when they attacked an IDF patrol WITHIN Israel's borders and missiled thousands of Katyushas towards all the northern part of Israel, tragetting hospitals?
"Responsive violence" in return for WHAT?

by PaddyK Thu Oct 18, 2007 13:26

"Responsive violence" in return for WHAT?

The capture of the Israeli soldiers was a military tactic employed to gain a bargaining chip that might secure the release of Lebanese prisoners detained in israel. It was also an act of solidarity with the Palestinians of Gaza who were being hammerd day and night with indiscriminate shelling from the Israeli military on civilians. The violence being unleashed against Gaza was a response to Palestinian requests for a release of a couple hundred child and women prisoners out of a total of 12000 in exchange for an Israeli soldier they had captured. Israel was refusing to exchange any prisoners for their captured men so they were bombing the hell out of both Gaza and Lebanon by the middle of July 2006 killing hundreds of civilians many of them children and families.
It was in response to this uncontrolled barrage of bombs on civil society and infrastructure that the Hezballah declared war against Israel and started firing rockets.

As you diddle away aimlessly with your keyboard wherever you are, people are still getting blown up by Israeli weapons in Southern Lebanon as they try to make a life in amongst the million illegal and deadly cluster bombs intentionally strewn across the region at the end last Summer's battle. None of the victims are "terrorists" just children , farmers and UN Workers. Will Hezbollah take responsive military actions to this ongoing war crime? I dont know, do you?

by eastern eye Tue Oct 30, 2007 16:33

Hizballa started missiling all the northern part of Israel as a deception *while* capturing the two soldiers, *before* the Israeli reaction, showing Israel they have the power to bomb the entire Galilee.
*This* is the cause of the war. Not the soldiers. For the soldiers alone, Israel wouldn't go to war. Military tactic is nice, usually states reacts as a result of military activities against them.
Solidarity is nice as well, question is, if a political party holding all the Northern part of Spain kidnapped French soldiers and bomb all the southern part of France, in order to show solidarity with Belgium - would you see it as a legitimate act?

by PaddyK Tue Oct 30, 2007 21:27

++ “The [Hezbollah] rocket fire began in the early morning hours of Thursday [July 13], after Israel Air Force jets struck targets across Lebanon following cross-border attacks by Hezbollah.” (Ha’aretz, July 13, 2006)++

++According to Haaretz, Ehud Olmert said it was decided at least four months before that any kidnap of Israeli troops on its border would trigger war. (BBC News, Thursday, 8 March 2007)++

++Preparations for Israel's war in Lebanon last summer were drawn up at least four months before two Israeli soldiers were kidnapped by Hizbullah in July, Ehud Olmert, the prime minister, has admitted. (Guardian Friday March 9, 2007)++

THE WINOGRAD COMMISSION V NEW YORK TIMES by Howard Friel
++ The Commission then criticized the Israeli government for not knowing or anticipating that Hezbollah would respond to Israel’s military reprisals with missiles fired on northern Israel: “A meticulous examination of these characteristics would have revealed the following: the ability to achieve military gains having significant political-international weight was limited; an Israeli military strike would inevitably lead to missiles fired at the Israeli civilian north.....” ++

Interesting read actually : http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2007/05/03/938/

-------------

Eye Eye,

The Bombardment was a preplanned military event designed well in advance of the capture of the Israeli soldiers in the Hezbollah action of July 12. Trying to make it appear as though it was a case of Israel fighting for it's survival after being savagely and unsuspectingly attacked is absurd.
Israel occupies Lebanese territory, Israel continues even now to violate Lebanese airspace daily as they did prior to the 2006 atrocities and as they continued to do immediately after the 2006 bombardment. Hezbollah may have made a foolhardy strategic error in capturing the Israeli soldiers but all the indicators say that this attack against Lebanon was coming sooner or later. it is part of the Neo Con Plan for a new Middle East configuration.

A week into the bombardment George Bush said that he suspected Syria was trying to reassert its influence in Lebanon. Speaking in Washington, he said: "It's in our interest for Syria to stay out of Lebanon and for this government in Lebanon to succeed and survive. The root cause of the problem is Hizbullah and that problem needs to be addressed."

You ask the following question : "if a political party holding all the Northern part of Spain kidnapped French soldiers and bomb all the southern part of France, in order to show solidarity with Belgium - would you see it as a legitimate act? "

Well, that depends on how extreme the atrocities France was perpetrating against Belgium. Better to think of it this way. Would AIPAC and the Neo Con Cabal in the US be legitimate in it's actions to ship out massive amounts of explosives for the express purposes of flattening Lebanon and it's infrastructure.

Howard Friedman, President of AIPAC : " My fellow American, Look what you've done "!

http://www.counterpunch.org/walsh08162006.html

Christian America is allowed to promote the slaughter of Lebanese civilians half way around the world even though they are not threatened in any way by Lebanon, in solidarity with the Israelis. But the Muslim Arabs of Lebanon threatened and occupied and constantly harassed and historically haunted by the Israelis are not allowed to show solidarity with their Arab brothers a couple of hundred miles away struggling against the very same oppressor under very similar circumstances?

Legitimacy you ask? I don’t know about that, but I can certainly see the logic.

by Frank Adam - private citizen Tue Nov 13, 2007 18:05 Prestwich, Manchester

Arab states and jihadis go for Israel because of its proximity and because the West has so far felt it can not risk oil to reproach Arabs for the Arab attack on Israel since 1947 in defiance of the UN peace plan. If Israel fell into the sea tomorrow there would still be no peace in the area as Syria and Egypt let alone Jordan grab the bits for themselves as in 1948 to 1967.

If the jhadis who are promoting their clerical fascist religious wars can get away with pulling the wool over your eyes about their imperialist aims by blaming Israel for Palestine rights the Arabs no more believe in than any Trotskyist believes in states, then their next target - in their words - is the USA and the West in general including Ireland which they see as weak & materialist as the USSR. After all, you are reporting from a shopping spree.

When you have to clear up after bombs in buses (Israel), trains (Madrid & London), and skyscrapers (New York), or will it be the blowing out of your stained glass and crucifixes? Do not whinge you were not warned. These people are brimming with contempt that the West is prosperous, free and relatively relaxed over religion and women, and not Moslem - just bloody kaffirs to sell into slavery like African blacks.

Ireland so far has had an easy twentieth century behind the US Navy and brought up to speed on €U funds. As the oil goes and maniacs who think wearing veils feeds you, bring you medieval violence by modern methods; somehow none of you will be as self controlled about jihadi demands and violence as Israel has to be to preserve your petrol. Come the end of oill and the Arabs return to the desert as they will have nothing to sell,
"Which explains the hump on the camel,
And the Sphinx's inscrutable smile."

by Simon de Montford Tue Jul 22, 2008 17:07

Israel has the largest stockpile of nuclear arms in the Middle East region yet claims - with US help - to be threatened as a state! European countries are terrified to launch any sort of boycott on Israel and the US will continue to veto UN resolutions: thus permitting Israel to ignore UN resolutions already passed and to continue its unlawful and inhumane campaign against the Palestinians. So some people in Galway genuinely concerned about human rights and international affairs have come together to try to highlight the impotence of governments. They should be supported.

by Sceptic Wed Jul 23, 2008 12:46

“Israel has the largest stockpile of nuclear arms in the Middle East region yet claims - with US help - to be threatened as a state!”
Israel has been threatened by Iran. The point about a threat to Israel is that it has no strategic depth – a handful of nukes aimed at it and all life and property in both Israel and Palestine would be destroyed. Thus the stakes are for Israel could not be higher – they are existential.

“European countries are terrified to launch any sort of boycott on Israel and
European countries have no reason to be terrified – they would impose a boycott if they wished. They don’t want to.

“the US will continue to veto UN resolutions thus permitting Israel to ignore UN resolutions already passed and to continue its unlawful and inhumane campaign against the Palestinians.”
The two things are not so causally related. The blame for the lack of action on 242 (which was not opposed by the US) lies with all the parties – not just Israel. It depends on prior agreements with the parties concerned. Land for peace depends on Israel having interlocutors to negotiate with.

by Fred Johnston Thu Jul 24, 2008 12:21

Once again the old boring argument about Israel not having interlocutors . . . this is dragged out constantly to mask the fact that Israel does not WANT interlocutors who can provide undilutable solutions; Israel wants some sort of agreement that will oversee the demise of Hamas, as does the US. As for Iran posing a nuclear threat - the US signed with India, did they not, a deal by which that country can develop nuclear power. No one blinked. The US wish to establish and secure unassailable base-power in the Middle East and if that means keeping Israel happy they will do it, whatever fate befalls the Palestinians.

by Sceptic Sat Jul 26, 2008 11:48

For a variety of reasons Israel could not simply withdraw from the west bank as it did from Gaza unless there is a PA which can guarantee that the area will not become a launching pad for rocket attacks as happened in Gaza. As for Hamas dealings with it have not been ruled out for ever but there are certain basics of behaviour it should adhere to like recognition of prior agreement and the State of Israel.

The Indian example is invalid as regards Iran. India is not in the region and is not threatening its neighbours. The US agreement is for a civil nuclear programme not a military one – there is no US objection to an Iranian civil programme. India is a stable democratic and predictable state. Iranian policy under its present rulers is more of a cause than a state as such. Also the Indian weapons programme has been a reality for decades – it did not get outside assistance to become a nuclear power.

by Fred Johnston Sat Jul 26, 2008 12:30

Sceptical you may well be, and who would blame you, in some circumstances; but it remains irrefutable that the US and Israel are not interested in reaching agreement with Iran on a nuclear programme of any kind and that they are equally unfazed about reaching one which satisfies the wholly just demands of the Palestinians. Right-of-return is not on the table, though it should be; the ill-treatment, meanwhile, of Palestinians at checkpoints remains a commonplace. Israeli settlements continue to be built on the wink and nod from the US - tell me how the intransigence of the Israelis vis-a-vis this last is helping things? George W. Bush is trying to find ways to justify some sort of finger-pointing at Iran; remember the Gulf of Tonkin?

by Fred Johnston Sat Jul 26, 2008 13:44

As for Europe and others not doing a thing to halt Israeli violations of human rights and even borders . . . writing in 'Barricata,' French journalist Pierre Stamboul, member of the l'UJFP (Union of French Jews for Peace) recounts how, when the jail in Jericho, ostensibly under the reponsibility of both the UK and the US, was stormed in 2006 by Israeli forces and police and guards killed, the prisoners were deported to Israel - naturally, the observers, ie, the US and UK chappies, stood back and did nothing, neither did they even offer protest. The Israeli army regularly enters the Bethlehem camp of Dheisheh, where the cultural centre has been constantly destroyed and rebuilt. (One French prisoner is held at present by the Israelis, a young man named Sala Hammouri.) As Stamboul points out, "La grande majorité des Palestiniens n'a connu que l'occupation." It would appear also that stopping Palestinians at roadblocks and making life difficult for them is often a source of amusement for some young Israeli soldiers. Now while this sort of relational disparity continues, and it will so long as the US (and now Obama, dutifully) continues to prop up an increasingly militaristic regime in Israel under the pretence of protecting it, nothing is possible in the Middle East.