Aengus Ó Snodaigh (of Sinn Fein) & his Goebbels/ Nazi/ Israeli outburst

LordSutch

Irish Times Article/ 14th/ January/ 2009.

THE ISRAELI ambassador to Ireland, Dr Zion Evrony, and Fine Gael TD Alan Shatter have reacted angrily to Sinn Féin deputy Aengus Ó Snodaigh’s comparison of their methods to that of Nazi propaganda minister Joseph Goebbels. Dr Evrony yesterday appeared at an emergency meeting of the Oireachtas foreign affairs committee to discuss the conflict in Gaza. The ambassador and the Palestinian Delegate General to Ireland, Dr Hikmat Ajjuri, gave presentations about the conflict and took questions from TDs and Senators.
Mr Ó Snodaigh claimed Dr Evrony and Mr Shatter, a member of the committee who criticised the Palestinian representative’s presentation, had exposed the committee to “propaganda, twisted logic and half truths”.

Ó Snodaigh said: “I think Goebbels would have been proud of it.”

At the end of the meeting, Dr Evrony said he had heard many false accusations and examples of rewriting of history. “What overshadows this discussion is this despicable analogy the deputy from Sinn Féin made,” he said. The ambassador said Mr Ó Snodaigh’s comments were “outrageous” and asked him to apologise.

Mr Ó Snodaigh said: “You won’t get an apology from me anyway.”

Dr Evrony said “some deputies here” would always believe everything Israel did was wrong and everything Palestine did was right. “They have their stereotypes. Don’t confuse them with the facts,” he said. “When you are deep in prejudice and stereotypes you are bound to fall into traps like this.”

The ambassador said Ireland was lucky in its neighbours – the Atlantic Ocean and the Irish Sea. “Guess what? We live in a different neighbourhood,” he said. He said Ireland had never had to fight an outside enemy or use force. His spokesman later said it was important to clarify Dr Evrony meant “since independence”. Mr Shatter, who had earlier remarked that he was the only Jewish member of the Oireachtas, described Mr Ó Snodaigh’s remarks as an “extraordinary contribution”. Speaking afterwards, Mr Shatter said he was “appalled” by what he described as “the analogy he [Mr Ó Snodaigh] made between myself and Dr Goebbels”.

“It’s particularly appalling to suggest that a member of this House conducts himself in such a manner that resembles the conduct of the chief propagandist of Hitler’s Nazi Party, and quite extraordinary that such remarks should be made by a Sinn Féin member about the only Jewish member of this parliament. “His reference about both myself and the ambassador gives a very interesting insight into the mindset of the deputy.” Mr Shatter had earlier described the presentation of Dr Ajjuri as “economical with the truth”. Dr Ajjuri, who sat beside Dr Evrony at the committee meeting, said Gaza had become a “virtual prison, cut off from the world completely, with massive economic consequences amounting to a humanitarian disaster”.

This article appears in the print edition of the Irish Times

This Thread is NOT about your leanings one way or the other (Pro Hamas) or (Pro Israeli), but rather "Should representitives from Sinn Fein expect to get away with pontificating to & comparing others to Goebbels & the Nazi's" ? and Should Ó Snodaigh be throwing (metaphorical) stones at anyone, given Sinn Feins refusal to condemn many of the atrocities carried out by the IRA during the 35 years of the 'Troubles' in Northern Ireland . . .

rcecil

Comparing Fine Gael's censorship of all things republican for many years, there is definitely a comparison to be made. The Irish Times and it's British loving writers could stand a bit of critique as well. 300 dead Irish civilians, not to mention the bombings of Dublin and Monaghan leave all of us in a bit of muck.

gurramok

The self proclaimed true republican Michael McDowell got away with it, so why not?

meditraitor

Didnt see much wrong there, apart from Mr Shatter calling Dr Ajjuri (palestinian representative) a liar.
I hope he apologises for that, how can an elected official get away with such carry-on

andrewh5

He should be suspended for it. The suspension should remain until he has apologised. Disgusting!

marcsignal

andrewh5 wrote: »

He should be suspended for it. The suspension should remain until he has apologised. Disgusting!

Emmm, that's a bit strong, I'm sure Dr Ajjuri would be happy enough if he got a simple apology from Alan Shatter

Het-Field

Everybody is entitled to his or her own view. No matter how extreme or irrational it is. In this case O Snodaigh's contribution is both extreme and irrational.

The likes of O Snodaigh are the ones who wrap themselves in a Sinn Fein cloak when trying to defend the callous deaths of Gerry McCabe and such people. They have colluded with the IRA during their most vicious campaigns, and they have blood on their hands They have no moral authority when they continue to speak out of both side of their mouth. Of course supporting those in Gaza is tantamount to their views on Ireland.

This outburst is another example of how rotten an organisation Sinn Fein are.

Het-Field

gurramok wrote: »

The self proclaimed true republican Michael McDowell got away with it, so why not?

If I remember rightly, McDowell recoiled.

José Alaninho

Mr O'Snodaigh's comments are not as outrageous as is being made out. I for one find it very ironic that Israel has turned Gaza into a veritable mirror-image of the Warsaw ghetto during the 2nd World War, and is currently engaged in war crimes no different to those carried out by the Nazis during the Holocaust, namely the systematic slaughter of a civilian population in order to demonstrate its military superiority to any would-be enemies.

More power and fair play to Aengus for telling it like it is, in light of blatant attempts by Israeli apologists to play this butchery off as precision strikes against specifically military targets.

meditraitor

Het-Field wrote: »

how rotten an organisation Sinn Fein are.

+1

Although the propaganda analogy wasnt to far of the mark when you look at the way Isreal has always acted to cover up her attrocities over the years.

Nodin

Mr Shatter had earlier described the presentation of Dr Ajjuri as “economical with the truth”. Dr Ajjuri, who sat beside Dr Evrony at the committee meeting, said Gaza had become a “virtual prison, cut off from the world completely, with massive economic consequences amounting to a humanitarian disaster”.

Long before the current invasion, there were many reports from a number of NGO's and the UN saying much the same thing. Unless Shatter was referring to another section of the Dr's address, I'd say he was gravely mistaken.

Nodin

José Alaninho wrote: »

Mr O'Snodaigh's comments are not as outrageous as is being made out. I for one find it very ironic that Israel has turned Gaza into a veritable mirror-image of the Warsaw ghetto during the 2nd World War,

Upon witnessing footage of an old woman in the ruins of her house, a cabinet minister under Sharon made much the same observation - he said it reminded him of his mother (or grandmother) and how she'd suffered. Lost his job for his trouble.

andrewh5

Het-Field wrote: »

Everybody is entitled to his or her own view. No matter how extreme or irrational it is. In this case O Snodaigh's contribution is both extreme and irrational.

The likes of O Snodaigh are the ones who wrap themselves in a Sinn Fein cloak when trying to defend the callous deaths of Gerry McCabe and such people. They have colluded with the IRA during their most vicious campaigns, and they have blood on their hands They have no moral authority when they continue to speak out of both side of their mouth. Of course supporting those in Gaza is tantamount to their views on Ireland.

This outburst is another example of how rotten an organisation Sinn Fein are.

+2

Irlbo

I'll try and put my republican and pro-Palastine leanings aside on this one,and just to clarify Im not pro-Sinn Fein,but I actually do agree with him,he is the only TD in Leinster house not sitting there like sheep,nodding their head like sheep in agreement with everything thats presented to them,from anybody,he knows his stuff and has sympathies and isnt afraid to stand up to advocates of warmonglers who are commiting war crimes on a very poor downtrodden race of people

marcsignal

didn't senator David Norris recently make comparisons to the Gaza situation being akin to the Warsaw Ghetto ?

Don't hear anyone calling for his head, his suspension, or an apology.

BroomBurner

Irlbo wrote: »

I'll try and put my republican and pro-Palastine leanings aside on this one,and just to clarify Im not pro-Sinn Fein,but I actually do agree with him,he is the only TD in Leinster house not sitting there like sheep,nodding their head like sheep in agreement with everything thats presented to them,from anybody,he knows his stuff and has sympathies and isnt afraid to stand up to advocates of warmonglers who are commiting war crimes on a very poor downtrodden race of people

As someone who can't stomach Sinn Féin, there is a sense on this thread that people are choosing his organisation to jump on instead of thinking about what it was he actually said, and whether or not there was merit in it.

Mr.Micro

I am no fan of SF or Mr. O Snodaigh, if nothing else it will give the Israeli Ambassador food for thought and make him realize that everybody is not going to agree with Israel's ruthless disproportionate policy in Gaza.

marcsignal

BroomBurner wrote: »

As someone who can't stomach Sinn Féin, there is a sense on this thread that people are choosing his organisation to jump on instead of thinking about what it was he actually said, and whether or not there was merit in it.

Mr.Micro wrote: »

I am no fan of SF or Mr. O Snodaigh, if nothing else it will give the Israeli Ambassador food for thought and make him realize that everybody is not going to agree with Israel's ruthless disproportionate policy in Gaza.

well said gentlemen.

I've never been a supporter of Sinn Fein, and never will be, but i find it amusing that there should be so much hysteria when there are nazi analogies made over Israels actions. The Israelies are happy enough to drag in the nazi holocaust on other occasions, when it serves to bludgen their critics into silence.

Het-Field

BroomBurner wrote: »

As someone who can't stomach Sinn Féin, there is a sense on this thread that people are choosing his organisation to jump on instead of thinking about what it was he actually said, and whether or not there was merit in it.

I thought it was the point of the thread i.e if Sinn Fein could take a moral high ground on this situation. Remember, they are an organisation which were capable of some pig headed strategy, or at very least guilty of endorsing such strategy.

I feel that Mr O Snodaigh is convinced that he is the only pro-gaza advocate around. He is forgetting that most of Ireland, including myself would consider Israel's actions as disproportionate, but not necessairly unjustified. I would like to know if he blindly supports the Hamas offensive, and whether the actions of these extremists is acceptable. Unequivocable support for Hamas, or Hezbollah (when discussing Lebanon) is equally reprehensible. It is not as though they dont have innocent blood on their hands.

BroomBurner

Het-Field wrote: »

I thought it was the point of the thread i.e if Sinn Fein could take a moral high ground on this situation. Remember, they are an organisation which were capable of some pig headed strategy, or at very least guilty of endorsing such strategy.

I feel that Mr O Snodaigh is convinced that he is the only pro-gaza advocate around. He is forgetting that most of Ireland, including myself would consider Israel's actions as disproportionate, but not necessairly unjustified. I would like to know if he blindly supports the Hamas offensive, and whether the actions of these extremists is acceptable. Unequivocable support for Hamas, or Hezbollah (when discussing Lebanon) is equally reprehensible. It is not as though they dont have innocent blood on their hands.

I think for your first point, the thread title should have been "Given his past, does O'Snodaigh have a right to say...". Personally, I took the point of the thread to be about discussing what he said, irrespective of who said it.

Unfortunately, i can't comment on your second point.

Though I would like to add that I don't think people that are against the disproportionate acts of Isreal are strictly pro-Hamas. In fact, I would make a wild guess at there being a lot of Palestinians that aren't pro-Hamas either, just like there are Isreali's who are disgusted with their own governments actions.

marcsignal

BroomBurner wrote: »

Though I would like to add that I don't think people that are against the disproportionate acts of Isreal are strictly pro-Hamas. In fact, I would make a wild guess at there being a lot of Palestinians that aren't pro-Hamas either, just like there are Isreali's who are disgusted with their own governments actions.

good point, and i'd like to add that there are a fast growing number of jewish acedemics and intellectuals worldwide who are appaled by israels actions.

I was also pleasantly surprised to see a letter to the Irish Times from Irish/Jewish intellectual and political sociologist Dr. Ronit Lentin condemning Israels actions. I wonder will Alan Shatter attack her ? or will the Israeli ambassator revoke her Israeli citizenship ??

gurramok

Its just the killing of 300 kids by Israel has me upset about their war effort, it does sound Nazi type as well as Rwanda type criticism so i will not shut up as it does not make me a pro-Hamas supporter.

The Saint

While I believe Ó Snodaigh is entitled to make whatever analogies he likes I often cringe when people start making analogies with the Nazi's with regard to this conflict. They are not the same. Using terms like Nazi, holocaust, genocide etc. make a person look like they do not have a realistic grasp of the situation and engage in hyperbole to put their point across. I think that this detracts from a perfectly legitimate arguement and allows the other side to deflect the arguement to the comments made rather than the actual situation. This then defelcts energy from discussing the actual situation and issues which are bad enough. I feel that these arguements are petty and show an unwillingness or inability to engage with the facts as they are.

I would say this about the Israeli side also. There is no one trying to commit another holocaust against the Jews, there is no one trying to commit genocide against the Jews, there is no one trying to drive the Jews into the sea. Using Nazi analogies against the Palestinians is laughable. Invoking this is also petty and cheap and bears no relation to the reality.

Anyway, no one should invoke the Nazi's and the holocaust to make arguements for their side. It's a cheap tactic used to deflect from the realities and changes the focus of attention from these realities into squabbles like this about who said what.

Irlbo

Ireland is a country that shares a alot of solidarity with Palastine,both being forcibly occupied by a foreign entity ala Britain(the 6 counties still being occupied) in our case,as Im aware aswell,wasnt that Britain that placed the jews in Palastine who settled there and announced it their homeland despite palastinians living there peacefully for hundreds of years???,everybody should be allowed speak their mind,this is a democracy we're suppose to live in,Mr O'Snodaigh is a TD and its good to hear a TD air these views,and it unuasual this happens,as most of the norm,FF and FG do their usual and keel their mouths zipped,probably wouldnt know were Palastine was on a map

marcsignal

The Saint wrote: »

While I believe Ó Snodaigh is entitled to make whatever analogies he likes I often cringe when people start making analogies with the Nazi's with regard to this conflict. They are not the same. Using terms like Nazi, holocaust, genocide etc. make a person look like they do not have a realistic grasp of the situation and engage in hyperbole to put their point across. I think that this detracts from a perfectly legitimate arguement and allows the other side to deflect the arguement to the comments made rather than the actual situation. This then defelcts energy from discussing the actual situation and issues which are bad enough. I feel that these arguements are petty and show an unwillingness or inability to engage with the facts as they are.

I would say this about the Israeli side also. There is no one trying to commit another holocaust against the Jews, there is no one trying to commit genocide against the Jews, there is no one trying to drive the Jews into the sea. Using Nazi analogies against the Palestinians is laughable. Invoking this is also petty and cheap and bears no relation to the reality.

Anyway, no one should invoke the Nazi's and the holocaust to make arguements for their side. It's a cheap tactic used to deflect from the realities and changes the focus of attention from these realities into squabbles like this about who said what.

+1

I couldn't agree more with everything you have posted here. However it's not a new tactic regarding this issue. The Israelis have been using it for some time now to justify their actions. Jewish Professor Norman Finkelstien speaks about the very matter HERE @ 7:44 in this youtube recording of a talk he gave in an American university.

Danuogma

I am no fan of Sinn Fein but fair play to O'Snodaigh for having the balls to tell it like it is. The predictable "shock horror" monopoly on victimhood routine that some people employ is getting tedious.

LordSutch

Joseph Gobbels ~ courtesy of Wikipedia

The view of most historians is that the decision to proceed with the extermination of the Jews was taken at some point in late 1941, and Goebbels’ comments make it clear that he knew in general terms, if not in detail, what was planned. The decision in principle to deport the German and Austrian Jews to unspecified destinations "in the east" was made in September. Goebbels immediately pressed for the Berlin Jews to be deported first. During 1942, Goebbels continued to press for the "final solution to the Jewish question" to be carried forward as quickly as possible now that Germany had occupied a huge swathe of Soviet territory into which all the Jews of German-controlled Europe could be deported. There they could be worked into extinction in accordance with the plan agreed on at the Wannsee Conference convened by Heydrich in January. It was a constant annoyance to Goebbels that, at a time when Germany was fighting for its life on the eastern front, there were still 40,000 Jews in Berlin.[66] They should be "carted off to Russia," he wrote in his diary. "It would be best to kill them altogether." Once again, there is no doubt that Goebbels knew what would happen to the Jews who were to be "carted off." The Jews are now being deported to the east.
A fairly barbaric procedure, not to be described in any greater detail, is being used here, and not much more remains of the Jews themselves. In general, it can probably be established that 60 percent of them must be liquidated, while only 40 percent can be put to work […] A judgement is being carried out on the Jews which is barbaric, but fully deserved.

This makes for shocking reading, but can modern day comparrisons be made?

marcsignal

Camelot wrote: »

Joseph Gobbels ~ courtesy of Wikipedia

The view of most historians is that the decision to proceed with the extermination of the Jews was taken at some point in late 1941, and Goebbels’ comments make it clear that he knew in general terms, if not in detail, what was planned. The decision in principle to deport the German and Austrian Jews to unspecified destinations "in the east" was made in September. Goebbels immediately pressed for the Berlin Jews to be deported first. During 1942, Goebbels continued to press for the "final solution to the Jewish question" to be carried forward as quickly as possible now that Germany had occupied a huge swathe of Soviet territory into which all the Jews of German-controlled Europe could be deported. There they could be worked into extinction in accordance with the plan agreed on at the Wannsee Conference convened by Heydrich in January. It was a constant annoyance to Goebbels that, at a time when Germany was fighting for its life on the eastern front, there were still 40,000 Jews in Berlin.[66] They should be "carted off to Russia," he wrote in his diary. "It would be best to kill them altogether." Once again, there is no doubt that Goebbels knew what would happen to the Jews who were to be "carted off." The Jews are now being deported to the east.
A fairly barbaric procedure, not to be described in any greater detail, is being used here, and not much more remains of the Jews themselves. In general, it can probably be established that 60 percent of them must be liquidated, while only 40 percent can be put to work […] A judgement is being carried out on the Jews which is barbaric, but fully deserved.

This makes for shocking reading, but can modern day comparrisons be made?

It's also interesting to also note that Dr. Goebbels had a hand in the Haavara Agreement when the Nazis briefly shared the goals of Zionism in pre war effort to remove Jews from Europe.
In 1935 the steamer 'Tel Aviv' made its maiden voyage from Nazi Germany to Haifa with Hebrew letters on its bow and a Nazi flag fluttering from its mast. The Captain of the Zionist-owned ship was a member of the Nazi Party. A passenger described the spectacle as a 'metaphysical absurdity.'

LordSutch

But should he be compared to Alan Shatter or the Israeli foreign minister to Ireland?

marcsignal

Camelot wrote: »

But should he be compared to Alan Shatter or the Israeli foreign minister to Ireland?

Well actually I don't think Aengus Ó Snodaigh is very well versed in the Nazi movement of ww2, the individuals involved, and what their actual roles were within that movement. I think his reference to Goebbels was just an attempt to suggest that the Israeli ambassador was indulging in Propaganda, and there the comparison ends.

If you want my own personal opinion, Joachim von Ribbentrop the Nazi foreign minister would probably be a better comparison for the Israeli Ambassador, considering they have vaguely similar roles, and would appear to share a startling degree of Ribbentrops notorious arrogance. Alan Shatter would probably be better compared to any other non-German Nazi Sympathiser of the time, because of his support for Israel.

Just my own opinion/evaluation.

KyussBishop

Mr.Micro wrote: »

I am no fan of SF or Mr. O Snodaigh, if nothing else it will give the Israeli Ambassador food for thought and make him realize that everybody is not going to agree with Israel's ruthless disproportionate policy in Gaza.

I'm sure he doesn't care, as judging by his articles (Zion's, the Israeli ambassador) in the Irish Times, he is only here to spout out completely one-sided propaganda.

He needs to be expelled immediately (primarily in protest at the events in Gaza, secondarily for his role as propagandist), and the Irish Times deserves a lot of criticism for giving voice to him at all.


As for the actual comparison with Goebbels: he is an apologist for and defender of actions which amount to near-indiscriminate murder, so I consider it a fair comparison.