Israeli cricketers were forced to play behind closed doors in Glasgow yesterday. It's a further success in the Scottish actions to show that Israel is not just another respectable member of the family of nations.
A delegation including former Glasgow Lord Provost Alex Mosson met with the Norwegian team before the match in an attempt to have them refuse to play. They had a choice between joining a fine tradition of sporting boycotters, or to be like Gooch and Gatting who toured racist South Africa. They sadly chose the latter.
Pro-Israelis have tried to paint the events of this week as Scotland bowing to Muslim pressure. The truth is that they are groping for things to say after being comprehensively rejected by Scots up and down the country.
Nor is the issue of boycotting Israel something unique that we are asking for. In 1980, the US boycotted in the Moscow Olympics in protest at the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan. In 2006, Israel has launched a war of aggression on Lebanon.
UPDATE 06/08/06: For anyone interested in the result, Norway did the decent thing if they were going to take to the field, and stuffed Israel.
Today's match was against France. Again, a delegation went in to meet the team before the match. This time, the manager informed us that he had been told by the French government that he had to take part.









I'm against sporting boycotts as, almost always, the sports people concerned having nothing to do with the politics. The World Cup, for example, would never take place if every nation was to exercise whatever grievance it had this week.
Haranguing Israeli cricketers just smacks of a load of hairy-lipped feminists and male hectoring bores who need a good stiff...drink.
Posted by: Ted | 07 August 2006 at 12:36 PM
Your statement about the Israelis being rejected by Scots up and down the country is wrong. There has never been anti-semitim in Scotland and Scotland is more pro-jewish than other parts of the UK. The majority of people in the UK are not protesting against the bombs. Indeed anger is reserved for the 7th Century styled Islamic fascists (Hezbolla) who are waging a war against a sovereign democratic nation (Israel) in order to destroy it. Israel needs weapons and needs to defeat Hezbolla in order to survive. Israel and the West face their gretaest existential threat from Islam.
Posted by: naveen | 07 August 2006 at 01:08 PM
lmao you're taking the piss aren't you?
Posted by: naveen is a tube | 07 August 2006 at 02:02 PM
a "sovereign democratic nation" which has stolen land from nations surrounding it since it's inception. a "sovereign democratic nation" which refuses to state what it's borders actually are. a "sovereign democratic nation" whose chosen capital is still not accepted as valid due to that nation's lack of willingness to confirm it's own borders. psht.
the Hamas govt stated that they will not recognise Israel until Israel confirms it's own borders. an acceptable proposition as how can you recognise a country or state which is in a constant state of flux regarding the area it covers.
as for Scotland and the Scottish people being pro-Israeli, I believe that the Scottish people are more likely to be pro-peace. and that is one thing the Isreali govt and it's allies can never truly claim to be.
one final comment to naveen, the islamic fascists you comment upon, would they have an equal conterpart in the Israeli political/military structure? Or is the Israeli control, interment and murder of hundreds of people (many women and children included) based upon religion and race an entirely different situation seperated from the usual idea of fascism and the one levelled at Hezbolla?
General comment: the thing that scares me most about Israel and the successive Israeli govts is that they seem to be unable to learn from their own history. They cry victim whilst handing out the same treatment their own people felt 100, 70, 60 years ago.
Posted by: jings | 07 August 2006 at 03:03 PM
Well as usual,
with these US-Israeli racist fundamentalist fanatics there seems to be substance to their assertions -
Scots New Labour MPs are being inundated with letters of concern regarding the use of Scottish airports to transport US bombs to Israel for use against defenceless Lebanese and Palestinian communities -
And also letters about the performance of their glorious leader, the completely raving mad and serial liar PM Tony Blair -
- over his shameless association with another raving lunatic war criminal, the US Prez George Bush Junior
- and the UK government's veto of an EU propasal for a ceasefire over Israel's ethnic cleansing of southern Lebanon and its attacks on the rest of the country
Source of my informations is last week's Friday edition of the UK Channel 4 News -
- if I get any more news I'll pass it on.
By the way naveen,
would you care to give us the source of your assertions - I can't see any - I am sure you wouildn't be making all that up now would you ?
I've always found so-called 'pro-Israel supporters' to be so honest and trustworthy as well.
Posted by: joe90 | 07 August 2006 at 08:14 PM
Israel is a sovereign democratic state which has given up most of the land it occupied. It is threatened by Islamic states who don't want it just to return to its original borders, they want to wipe it off the face of the earth. Hamas and Hezbollah have made this explicit and the Palestinians knew what they were doing when they elected them. Hezbollah faied to adhere to the last UN resoultion which called for its disarmamament. Israel has complied 95% but Hezbollah and Lebanon not at all. Israel has no choice but to destroy Hezbollah.
If the Lebanese Government had forced Hezbollah to comply with the UN resolution, they would not be in this position.If you want the source read the UN Resultions.
Posted by: naveen | 07 August 2006 at 11:00 PM
So much talk of UN resolutions these days! Shall we talk about the UN resolutions that Israel has ignored (allow the Palestinians that were run out of their homes to return, etc...)?
Palestinians elected Hamas because they were tired of the corrupt Fatah party.
"Israel and the West face their greatest existential threat from Islam." This tired line again? How exactly Islam threatening the West? Are Muslims invading and occupying Western countries?
Posted by: Perla Zhemchuzhina | 08 August 2006 at 05:00 AM
"Israel is a sovereign democratic state which has given up most of the land it occupied."
If they gave up all the land it has illegally occupied and issued an apology for the horrors it has wraught upon the native people, then assisted with rebuilding the infrastructures of Gaza and Lebanon (atoning for their sins, basically), then maybe the surrounding Arab nations would treat it with a little more respect and perhaps even trust.
Stretching it a little, but optimism abounds.
Posted by: jings | 08 August 2006 at 09:43 AM
Are Muslims invading and occupying Western countries?
<islamophobe>
Yes, it's called IMMIGRATION.
</islamophobe>
Posted by: George Carty | 08 August 2006 at 10:43 AM
The immigration of non Moslems into Western countries is a disaster and wholly undesirable. There should be open public debate on this.
Posted by: NAVEEN | 08 August 2006 at 04:01 PM
The immigration of non Moslems into Western countries is a disaster and wholly undesirable.
Is that a typo, or are you really criticizing non-Muslim immigration as well as Muslim immigration?
If so, thanks for admitting to being a volkisch-nationalist. OK, we now know where you're coming from. Strange, I always thought of this kind of nationalism as totally un-British. The English, Scottish, Welsh and Ulstermen are hardly pure races after all...
Posted by: George Carty | 08 August 2006 at 04:51 PM
The native British are more or less pure races and all are Western European Christians who essentially share the same culture. Likewise the Germans and French and other Europeans. It is all non western immigration whic is the problems and especially Moslem immigration as these people cannot integrate into Western society and indeed the beliefs of Islam and the West are incompatible.
Posted by: naveen | 08 August 2006 at 08:39 PM
As I thought naveen,
you are just making it up -
Exactly when has 'Israel' been threatened with physical destruction ?
The last time I looked western 'democracy' wasn't about creating a homogenised monoculture where everyone thinks the same, votes the same, follows the same orders - I thout it was about freedom of expression and human cultural diversity.
I think what some of these neo-Darwinists here are thinking of is totalitarian social systems such as nazism, fascism, and Stalinism. Under these regimes, sure, you have to fit in and integrate, or else, unlike free-wheeling democracy.
It is always important not to get democracy confused with wash-up, corrupt racist states like, say, the current Israel regime obsessed, as it is, with its ethnic-racial purity.
Posted by: joe90 | 08 August 2006 at 09:39 PM
Western democracies are based on JudeoChristian values which gave rise to the particularist culture to be found in Western countries. This permits freedom of expression and human rights. These freedoms are being eroded by the presence of non WEstern people who want to restrict criticism of their religions and cultures. The most troublsome minority are the Moslems who want to outlaw discussion and criticism of their religion by claiming "Islamophobia" and restricting freedom of speech. The most vital part of freeedom of speech is the criticism of relevant topics. The Moslem presence in the WEst destroys the freedom of speech. Look at the example of the Danish cartoons.
Western freedoms and Western society is being eroded by the presence of aliens who are largely unassimilable.
Posted by: naveen | 09 August 2006 at 11:33 AM
Western democracy is based on democracy -
- and Christianity has more in common, theologically, with Islam than it does with Judaism - it should really be called Christeo-Islamism..ism
Hitler said the same stuff about the Jews regarding values being eroded by outsiders etc etc - that's just traditional western xenophobia, and has nothing whatsoever to do with free expression
And the only people eroding anyone's freedoms around about here are George Bush and Tony Blair -
- in order to attack the rest of the world, George Bush had first to attack his own people and his own constitution, which he swore on oath to protect - it didn't stop him passing the Patriot Act, the most unpatriotic act in American history.
And you are confusing freedom of expression with freedom to insult others - freedom is an act, not a simple expression - if you use your freedom to commit a crime such as being the mafia boss and telling one of your goons to shoot someone, then its a crime just like any other criminal act.
And deliberately insulting someone else's faith is an act of the deepest barbarity and has nothing to do with freedom - but has everything to do with the traditional western freedoms of racism and fascism.
Posted by: joe90 | 09 August 2006 at 04:00 PM
I would describe the Islamist extremists who marched under banners such as "Behead those who insult Islam" as "verbal terrorists". Like real terrorists who use guns and bombs, they sought to play two extremes against the middle.
Ariel Sharon toured the Temple Mount with a heavily armed bodyguard. The aim was to provoke a response from Palestinian militants, which would propel Sharon to power on an "anti-terrorist" ticket.
Hamas suicide bombers killed Israeli civilians. The aim was to provoke Israel into killing Palestinian civilians in revenge, thus driving ordinary Palestinians into Hamas's arms.
Al-Qaeda kamikazes destroyed the World Trade Center. The aim was to provoke America into invading the Middle East, which would help al-Qaeda both by destroying the two-bit secular dictatorships which are al-Qaeda's "near enemy" and by uniting the Muslim Ummah behind a cause (namely anti-Americanism).
The takfiris of al-Ghurabaa marched in London allegedly to protest the Danish cartoons, but carrying murderous anti-Western placards. The aim was to incite Islamophobia in Britons (and other Europeans) which would increase the siege mentality of Europe's Muslims, and thus drive them into the arms of al-Ghurabaa and other extremist groups.
To understand any sort of terrorism, you have to understand how terrorists think. Read http://www.dailykos.com/story/2004/11/10/01247/557>Terrorist Strategy 101.
Posted by: George Carty | 09 August 2006 at 04:13 PM
Christianity developed out of Judeism and Jesus was a Jew. The first churches in Jerusalem and Antioch were Jewish converts. Judeism and Christianity thus have a common core of the Old Testament and the Law of Moses. Judeism misses the new Testament. Islam has nothing to do with either. It is a cult which has grown out of the worship of one man, Mohamed, the dead prophet.It is a barbaric, tribal and primative cult.
To criticise it is not an insult but entirely relevant. Indeed the days of politically correct silence are over. Today the Home Secretary announced that Islam posed the greatest threat to the West since the Nazis. With that in the open, it is time now to deal with that threat in an effective manner before the jihad starts in earnest. The solution is the expulsion of Moslems from Europe. Now that Carty has explained to us how terrorists operate, we can avoid the situation developing and eliminate the threat.ie the return of Moslems to their ancestral lands.
Islamophobia does not drive Moslems into the hands of extremists. That is where they chose to be because their religion is an extremist totalitarian fascist cult. Moslems will wage jihad however they are treated.
Posted by: navven | 09 August 2006 at 08:40 PM
To pretend you're 'criticising' when your just parading your racism around in public, isn't too difficult to spot.
Exactly what makes you an expert on other people's faiths and beliefs and how to improve them?
How perfect are you naveen ?
I don't need to read about terrorism when I have people far worse than terrorist running my government - they're called war criminals, but known to all and sundry as the militant extremist fundamentalist New Lanour Party who run the British government.
Their ideological fanatical leader is called Tony Blair, the Butcher of Baghdad - and for our sins the British taxpayer get subsidise his mass-murders abroad using billions of taxpayers pounds that could be better spent on luxury items at home such as public health, education, schools etc
And your grasp of theological talking points is woeful naveen. I am talking theology not history - and Jesus was the Messiah and The Son of God if you ask certain other people - personally myself, I like to see Him as one of a long line of brilliant people who belong to Palestine and its beautiful land.
Posted by: joe90 | 09 August 2006 at 11:42 PM
Jesus was a Jew who belonged to Israel and your lack of education and linguistic ability is striking.Palestine did not exist during the life of Jesus. It was Israel the home of the Jews.
If you believe that Tony Blair is a war criminal you are free to leave the country. Because you are ignorant your self, and in all likelihood know little of your own religion (probably Islam), you assume other are similar. Anyone who has read the Koran can deduce that it is an extremist totalitarian cult which belongs in the tribal environments of the desert.It does not belong in Europe.
Posted by: naveen | 10 August 2006 at 11:29 AM
naveen,
it was a special provence of Rome matey - and they gave a few names in their time - and who were these Italian foreigners to say what name ancient Palestine should be given?
I notice you don't pursue the theological similarities and differences between the three great religions - no surprise there
Ever hear of the Philistines ie Palestine
How about Tony Blair leaving the country naveen ?
Better still, how about putting him in jail for his crimes ?
Talk about deserts and totalitarian cults naveen - that's where you seem to feel most comfortable - why doesn't that surprise me coming from an ignorant non-entity like you?
Posted by: joe90 | 10 August 2006 at 02:52 PM
"If you believe that Tony Blair is a war criminal you are free to leave the country."
Naveen, to use your own logic, if you don't agree with this blog, can you please just bog off?
Posted by: Osama | 10 August 2006 at 07:55 PM
Osama,
It is a free country and anyone can post a blog.Sorry but it is not the Islamic banana republic of Pakiland where you come from. But just remember not to abuse the freedoms and don't expect the country to change to suit you. Part of living in Europe is hearing messages that you don't like. If you don't like it, well go back to where you came from.
Posted by: naveen | 12 August 2006 at 12:16 AM
Osama,
It is a free country and anyone can post a blog.Sorry but it is not the Islamic banana republic of Pakiland
It's probably just me as usual but,
isn't the reference to 'bananas' a throwback (pun intended) to the good old days of yore, before a different threat threatened our happy shores -
- a time when everyone was happy with their lot and Pathe Newsreels weren't ashamed of telling the rest of the nation of the latest advance and progress of civilisation among the savage natives of north England, Wales , Ireland and Scotland!
Oh ,
how 'Great Britian' was a happy land then, full of innocent morons smiling at clapped-out old cameras - will we ever be able to re-create this lost racially-pure neverland utopia, filled with gormless naveens and their ilk?
Will we ever be able to send them back in their bananas boat back to Pakistan, where they don't grow bananas?
Will naveen ever be able to peel a banana knowing full well, that the banana was the thin end of the wedge once, and that they led to the downfall of paradise in these isles, as people who are all dead now, or aren't but are totally alive but totally la-la, used to know it?
Posted by: joe90 | 12 August 2006 at 12:51 AM