David Norris' presidential bid scupperd by Israel

My name is URL

Anyone else following this on the news right now? Apparently the Israeli Embassy have released letters dating back to the early 90's from David Norris asking for leniency to be shown towards his ex-partner Ezra Nawi, who was being charged with statutory rape of a Palestinian boy at the time.

It's likely to completely ruin his bid to be president.

The reasons for Israel releasing these letters only now is blatantly obvious in my eyes. What's your thoughts?

So why does Israel not want Norris to be president exactly?

My name is URL

King Mob wrote: »

So why does Israel not want Norris to be president exactly?

Really..? Can you not take a stab in the dark at why they don't want him to be president? His former partner, and still close friend is a major dissenting voice in Israel.

Why do you think they'd release these letters just now? I guarantee you that it's not because they're concerned about us electing a president that would be bad for Ireland.

uriah

If the Department of Justice released letters he wrote to the Irish Government asking for leniency for someone being charged with rape of an underage child, would our first instinct be to accuse them of attempting to scupper his campaign?

Do we believe such information about possible presidential candidates is relevant and ought to be released?

Or do we believe it is none of our business?

My name is URL

My name is URL wrote: »

Really..? Can you not take a stab in the dark at why they don't want him to be president? His former partner, and still close friend is a major dissenting voice in Israel.

And can you explain how Norris would be a major problem for them considering the president here doesn't have that much power?
Surely they'd be working to destroy the actual power in our country?

My name is URL wrote: »

Why do you think they'd release these letters just now? I guarantee you that it's not because they're concerned about us electing a president that would be bad for Ireland.

Well you haven't even shown that it was the Israeli government in the first place.

But then I forgot the rule around here, since it was a thing involving Israelis/Jews I should just assume it is a conspiracy....

Emiko

uriah wrote: »

If the Department of Justice released letters he wrote to the Irish Government asking for leniency for someone being charged with rape of an underage child, would our first instinct be to accuse them of attempting to scupper his campaign?

Do we believe such information about possible presidential candidates is relevant and ought to be released?

Or do we believe it is none of our business?

Statutory rape is not rape. It means the person had sex with someone underage.

uriah

Emiko wrote: »

Statutory rape is not rape. It means the person had sex with someone underage.

Then why is it called 'rape'

Yitzhak Rabin

King Mob wrote: »

And can you explain how Norris would be a major problem for them considering the president here doesn't have that much power?
Surely they'd be working to destroy the actual power in our country?


Well you haven't even shown that it was the Israeli government in the first place.

But then I forgot the rule around here, since it was a thing involving Israelis/Jews I should just assume it is a conspiracy....

Y'know, sometimes the conspiracy makes more sense mob...

Anyway, its true, so what does it matter who released the letters. A senator tried to use his position as a senator to interfere in a trial of his partner accused of child rape. Not someone I want representing our country.

Wolfe Tone

How young was the boy?

My name is URL

King Mob wrote: »

Well you haven't even shown that it was the Israeli government in the first place.

But then I forgot the rule around here, since it was a thing involving Israelis/Jews I should just assume it is a conspiracy....

Switch on the radio.. it's been mentioned on various news bulletins that the Israeli embassy are the ones that leaked the letters to Norris' campaign team.

King Mob wrote: »

And can you explain how Norris would be a major problem for them considering the president here doesn't have that much power?
Surely they'd be working to destroy the actual power in our country?

A measure of how petty they are. They don't care if he'd be a problem or not.. they care that he has ties with an outspoken critic of their fair land.

Emiko

uriah wrote: »

Then why is it called 'rape'

It's a technical term.

Statutory rape is not rape.

They are two different crimes.

Wolfe Tone wrote: »

How young was the boy?

15

My name is URL

yekahS wrote: »

Y'know, sometimes the conspiracy makes more sense mob...

Anyway, its true, so what does it matter who released the letters. A senator tried to use his position as a senator to interfere in a trial of his partner accused of child rape. Not someone I want representing our country.

Accused being the operative word, yekahS. He had not been found guilty at the time when Norris wrote the letters (and I agree that he shouldn't have done that in the first place).. he asked for clemency to be shown, and for the evidence to be carefully examined. It's hardly the worst thing an elected official could do.

His hopes to be president are over. That's fine, and not surprising given this new information. But the motives of Israel releasing the documents now can still be questioned. To me it just shows them for the slimy scumbags that they are. Taking the moral high-ground over something like this despite their own history of interfering in the affairs of other countries.

My name is URL

My name is URL wrote: »

Switch on the radio.. it's been mentioned on various news bulletins that the Israeli embassy are the ones that leaked the letters to Norris' campaign team.

So no nothing to actually suggest that it was orders from the global conspiracy?
How do you know that it wasn't someone on Norris's team requesting the information?
How do you know that it wasn't someone acting on their own?

My name is URL wrote: »

A measure of how petty they are. They don't care if he'd be a problem or not.. they care that he has ties with an outspoken critic of their fair land.

So what should the evil conspirators have done?
Withheld the information? Should they have covered up the incident?
I bet that not releasing the letter would also be construed as a conspiracy...

yekahS wrote: »

Y'know, sometimes the conspiracy makes more sense mob...

Yea and this isn't one of them.
It just seems to be another case of Israel = evil conspiracy.
I guarantee that if the source was Spain or France this topic wouldn't be here.

yekahS wrote: »

Anyway, its true, so what does it matter who released the letters. A senator tried to use his position as a senator to interfere in a trial of his partner accused of child rape. Not someone I want representing our country.

Well clearly you've just fallen for the Evil Jewish Conspiracy's trap.

My name is URL

King Mob wrote: »

So no nothing to actually suggest that it was orders from the global conspiracy?
How do you know that it wasn't someone on Norris's team requesting the information?
How do you know that it wasn't someone acting on their own?


So what should the evil conspirators have done?
Withheld the information? Should they have covered up the incident?
I bet that not releasing the letter would also be construed as a conspiracy...


Yea and this isn't one of them.
It just seems to be another case of Israel = evil conspiracy.
I guarantee that if the source was Spain or France this topic wouldn't be here.


Well clearly you've just fallen for the Evil Jewish Conspiracy's trap.

:rolleyes:

My name is URL

My name is URL wrote: »

:rolleyes:

A concise rebuttal that counters my point and truly shows that your claim isn't just based on bigotry and assumptions.
:rolleyes:

Emiko

King Mob wrote: »

A concise rebuttal that counters my point and truly shows that your claim isn't just based on bigotry and assumptions.
:rolleyes:

Why do you think Israel released the letters?

My name is URL

King Mob wrote: »

A concise rebuttal that counters my point and truly shows that your claim isn't just based on bigotry and assumptions.
:rolleyes:

No, it was a rebuttal fitting your reply. Have you turned on the radio yet? Are you not hearing the story being reported? =/ How is it based on assumption?

As for bigotry, well you're always quick to claim that opinions are based on bigotry. I suppose that by having a negative view of Israel, based on documented history and form, that I am a rabid anti-semite. Well, if that's what makes an anti-semite then so be it.. I am happy to call myself an anti-semite if that is the case.

brimal

My name is URL wrote: »

But the motives of Israel releasing the documents now can still be questioned. To me it just shows them for the slimy scumbags that they are.

There is a thread on the Politics forum about this. You should see the difference in language and maturity.

Not one 'Israel are xyz' post. Everyone is having a reasonable debate on the issue without any hate-filled bias.

This forum still a breeding ground for anti-Israel & anti-Jew agendas.

uriah

Emiko wrote: »

It's a technical term.

Statutory rape is not rape.

So, techinally, it is rape?

Emiko

Emiko wrote: »

Why do you think Israel released the letters?

That's the thing, there's nothing to show "Israel" did.
All that is known is that it is leaked from the embassy.
Url et al are making the assumption that this was on orders from the Israeli government because Israel = conspiracy.
However as I pointed out in the previous post there are many other explanations that don't rely on Israelis being pure evil and always out to get everyone.
For example it could have been a single employee who leaked the letter on his/her own volition.
Or it could have been a member of Norris's own team who asked a contact or such to hand him the letter.
But then these explanations don't play to the Israel is evil agenda here so they are ignored with a :rolleyes:.

Now my question is, what you guys think they should have done with the letter? Refuse to release information? Cover it up and deny it was ever sent?

My name is URL

brimal wrote: »

There is a thread on the Politics forum about this. You should see the difference in language and maturity.

Not one 'Israel are xyz' post. Everyone is having a reasonable debate on the issue without any hate-filled bias.

This forum still a breeding ground for anti-Israel & anti-Jew agendas.

Israel is a breeding ground for anti-Israel agendas. Their history in foreign relations and affairs speaks for itself. I care not for the religion of those involved. And fwiw, when I say that they are slimy scumbags, I am only referring to those involved in making the calls.

Emiko

uriah wrote: »

So, techinally, it is rape?

Now you're being deliberately obtuse.

Go look it up instead of acting the dick.

My name is URL

My name is URL wrote: »

No, it was a rebuttal fitting your reply. Have you turned on the radio yet? Are you not hearing the story being reported? =/ How is it based on assumption?

You are assuming that the Israeli government ordered the letter to be leaked.
How do you know this?
How do you discount the other possible explanations I suggested?

My name is URL wrote: »

As for bigotry, well you're always quick to claim that opinions are based on bigotry. I suppose that by having a negative view of Israel, based on documented history and form, that I am a rabid anti-semite. Well, if that's what makes an anti-semite then so be it.. I am happy to call myself an anti-semite if that is the case.

Well you see there's a difference between criticising Israel and their policies and assuming that people/organisations are involved in conspiracies because of their nationality/heritage.
You don't understand that difference.

Wolfe Tone

I'm just delighted that this came out now before the election.

Emiko

King Mob wrote: »

That's the thing, there's nothing to show "Israel" did.
All that is known is that it is leaked from the embassy.
Url et al are making the assumption that this was on orders from the Israeli government because Israel = conspiracy.

Now my question is, what you guys think they should have done with the letter? Refuse to release information? Cover it up and deny it was ever sent?

The weekend will tell a story, but like URL I'd be suspicious of their motives.

I'd suspect they've done it to get at Nawi, as opposed to any interest in who will be Ireland's next president.

Emiko

Emiko wrote: »

The weekend will tell a story, but like URL I'd be suspicious of their motives.

And being suspicious of a people without anything to support that suspicion is bigotry.

Emiko wrote: »

I'd suspect they've done it to get at Nawi, as opposed to any interest in who will be Ireland's next president.

But again, you're assuming it was "they" in the first place.

Emiko

King Mob wrote: »

And being suspicious of a people without anything to support that suspicion is bigotry.

Being suspicious of a government's actions is necessarily bigotry?

I don't see how.

But again, you're assuming it was "they" in the first place.

For now. Like i said, the weekend will tell a story.

My name is URL

King Mob wrote: »

You are assuming that the Israeli government ordered the letter to be leaked.
How do you know this?
How do you discount the other possible explanations I suggested?

Fair enough, I am assuming that they took it upon themselves to release the letters. Time will tell.

Well you see there's a difference between criticising Israel and their policies and assuming that people/organisations are involved in conspiracies because of their nationality/heritage.
You don't understand that difference.

I do understand the difference. I wasn't unfairly basing my opinion on nationality or heritage. The facts which are available atm suggest that the letters were handed over by the Israeli embassy, for whatever reason. And that the man at the centre of this whole thing just happens to be an extremely vocal critic of Israel, as is Norris to a far lesser extent. Those are facts, not opinions based on anything.

GerardKeating

Emiko wrote: »

It's a technical term.

Statutory rape is not rape.

They are two different crimes.



15

Rape is Sex without consent, a 15 cannot consent, so it IS rape.

Of course he might actually be innocent of the allegation.

Emiko

Emiko wrote: »

Being suspicious of a government's actions is necessarily bigotry?

I don't see how.

Because you are only assuming that it is government action because it is Israel.

My name is URL

My name is URL wrote: »

Fair enough, I am assuming that they took it upon themselves to release the letters. Time will tell.

I do understand the difference. I wasn't unfairly basing my opinion on nationality or heritage. The facts which are available atm suggest that the letters were handed over by the Israeli embassy, for whatever reason. And that the man at the centre of this whole thing just happens to be an extremely vocal critic of Israel, as is Norris to a far lesser extent. Those are facts, not opinions based on anything.

But you are assuming that the Israeli government did release the letter for the express purpose of either getting to the activist or influencing our government.
The only thing you have to support this is your own bias.
You are assuming it's a conspiracy.
This is not the same as fair criticism of a government.

digme

I'm delighted , this is great news !!!!!!!!!

54kroc

Should we not be thanking the Israeli Embassy for bringing this to light?

goat2

uriah wrote: »

If the Department of Justice released letters he wrote to the Irish Government asking for leniency for someone being charged with rape of an underage child, would our first instinct be to accuse them of attempting to scupper his campaign?

Do we believe such information about possible presidential candidates is relevant and ought to be released?

Or do we believe it is none of our business?

it most certainly is our buisness, who ever we elect will be representing us on the world stage,

My name is URL

cork45 wrote: »

Should we not be thanking the Israeli Embassy for bringing this to light?

They could have brought it to light 20 odd years ago, when it was even more relevant than it is now.

54kroc

My name is URL wrote: »

They could have brought it to light 20 odd years ago, when it was even more relevant than it is now.

Well they didn't, but they have now and I'd just like to say thanks to Israel.

Wolfe Tone

Sure isnt Michael D just as "anti Israel"

Jeboa Safari

My name is URL wrote: »

Accused being the operative word, yekahS. He had not been found guilty at the time when Norris wrote the letters (and I agree that he shouldn't have done that in the first place).. he asked for clemency to be shown, and for the evidence to be carefully examined. It's hardly the worst thing an elected official could do.

His hopes to be president are over. That's fine, and not surprising given this new information. But the motives of Israel releasing the documents now can still be questioned. To me it just shows them for the slimy scumbags that they are. Taking the moral high-ground over something like this despite their own history of interfering in the affairs of other countries.

Fair play to whoever released it, its better us knowing now. And it would look like it was Norris who tried to use his capacity as Senator to influence a court decision in another country, supporting someone convicted of statutory rape.

Jeboa Safari

Jeboa Safari wrote: »

Fair play to whoever released it, its better us knowing now. And it would look like it was Norris who tried to use his capacity as Senator to influence a court decision in another country, supporting someone convicted of statutory rape.

But this seems to be jumping to assumptions in the same way.
Has the letter actually been released to the public?
Have you read it?
How is he using his position to influence anything? If he did, how was it an inappropriate use of his position?
Had the guy actually been convicted at the point the letter was written?
What does the letter actually ask?
Does it actually try to defend statutory rape as some seem to be implying?

My name is URL

http://www.rte.ie/news/2011/0730/norrisd.html

That gives the jist of what was said.

My name is URL

My name is URL wrote: »

http://www.rte.ie/news/2011/0730/norrisd.html

That gives the jist of what was said.

Don't see what's wrong with any of that, he's just making an emotional plea (and IMO a futile one, as the guy had already been convicted.)
The only thing I can see that might be wrong is him using seanad letterheads, which may have implied a level of authority he was no allowed to use in a personal matter.
Hardly the worst abuse of power I've ever heard of.

My name is URL

King Mob wrote: »

Don't see what's wrong with any of that, he's just making an emotional plea (and IMO a futile one, as the guy had already been convicted.)
The only thing I can see that might be wrong is him using seanad letterheads, which may have implied a level of authority he was no allowed to use in a personal matter.
Hardly the worst abuse of power I've ever heard of.

I agree, but think there may be more to it. I can't see his entire senior campaign team stepping down over what appears in that article. There's no hint about who 'leaked' the letters either. I presume that it would be very difficult to acquire that kind of stuff from the Israeli authorities.

He was definitely foolish to use official stationary nonetheless.

My name is URL

My name is URL wrote: »

I agree, but think there may be more to it. I can't see his entire senior campaign team stepping down over what appears in that article. There's no hint about who 'leaked' the letters either. I presume that it would be very difficult to acquire that kind of stuff from the Israeli authorities.

He was definitely foolish to use official stationary nonetheless.

It could be that the election team do see it as a killing blow to the campaign, not because of the actual letter but the overreaction seen in the popular press.
Or it could be that he perhaps had denied to them that he had written such a letter. and they are all offended that he would so blatantly lie about it.

But why exactly do you presume that such a letter would be hard to get from the authorities?
I'd imagine that if an Irish senator wanted to send such a letter to Israel he'd do it through the embassy who might keep a copy on file. Or maybe it was sent directly to the court who then sent a copy to the embassy as it was a communication from a foreign official.
I'm sure if you knew where exactly to look and what exactly to look for you'd be able to get something like that.

Yitzhak Rabin

Mob, were you not critical me that hill fella who sent a dvd to a jury in england. Why so defensive of a senator abusing his position to try and influence a sentence in a child rape case?

yekahS

yekahS wrote: »

Mob, were you not critical me that hill fella who sent a dvd to a jury in england. Why so defensive of a senator abusing his position to try and influence a sentence in a child rape case?

Well one I wasn't very critical of Hill, I just made fun of his fake name which he ripped off of Dune.
Second I was mostly just pointing out stuff like "sending tapes to the jury could be considered jury tampering." I am not trying to say that the guy who was convicted of child rape was right or justified or that child rape is not a crime.
Thirdly they are different circumstances as Hill sent tapes to a jury and judge in an on going trial which was suggesting that the people on trial were not guilty, while Norris sent a letter to the court asking for leniency after the trial had found the guy guilty.

So could you explain how exactly was he abusing his position other than perhaps inappropriate use of stationary?

N8

King Mob wrote: »

So could you explain how exactly was he abusing his position other than perhaps inappropriate use of stationary?

inappropriate defense of statutory homosexual paedophilic and predatory rape of a minor by a member of a national body not democratically placed there who was in fact a partner of said paedo rapist ...

perhaps I missed something here ....

Emiko wrote: »

Statutory rape is not rape. It means the person had sex with someone underage.

fair point - why not contact Norris and offer your under age child for his israeili bud to shag up the butt and endure the forced oral sex?

Wolfe Tone wrote: »

I'm just delighted that this came out now before the election.

I would guess his backers are thinking the exact same thing this evening ....


Ok now it’s a conspiracy theory to expose a dirty old man whose ex partner was a child raping homosexual paedophile predator who used his charity to groom vulnerable children and that this same presidential candidate exposes a thought it is ok for older men to train younger children toward homosexuality – not a bother – this is the man to represent our country – a liberal wanting our children exposed to child rape – why not resurrect Brendan Smith and have him as our President?

Surely it couldn’t be a conspiracy to expose Norris? It couldn’t be exposing the truth about a pretender who has paedophilic leanings finding a short route to the top? Surely not?

I have found it is not bigotry to rather not have children raped or abused??
Ah sure because it’s a homosexual exposing the benefits of paedophilia rather than the Vatican sure why not?

Ah sure lets continue to have our children raped and tortured under another the guise of another regime – liberalism.

N8

N8 wrote: »

inappropriate defense of statutory homosexual paedophilic and predatory rape of a minor by a member of a national body not democratically placed there who was in fact a partner of said paedo rapist ...

perhaps I missed something here ....

Yes, you did miss something.
What Norris actually said in his letter.
He at no point "defended" any sort of rape.

N8

King Mob wrote: »

Yes, you did miss something.
What Norris actually said in his letter.
He at no point "defended" any sort of rape.

Kings Mob play with words as you like - 'clemency for child rapist who is an ol' ride of mine – it’s ok Israeli friends I am an Irish senator' – sure it’s not a defence or that ... from a chap who openly stated it’s ok for older men to groom children?

Kings Mob do you want the ex partner of a homosexual predatory paedo rapist as the head of state of any country?

Is it a conspiracy this has become known or an expose of the real person behind the facade of liberalism?

N8

N8 wrote: »

Kings Mob play with words as you like - 'clemency for child rapist who is an ol' ride of mine – it’s ok Israeli friends I am an Irish senator' – sure it’s not a defence or that ... from a chap who openly stated it’s ok for older men to groom children?

Kings Mob do you want the ex partner of a homosexual predatory paedo rapist as the head of state of any country?

Is it a conspiracy this has become known or an expose of the real person behind the facade of liberalism?

Ok wow. You don't seem to actually be able to read what people say...
You're claiming he said things he didn't and total and dishonestly misrepresenting the things he did.

I could restate the facts and show you exactly were you're wrong and telling lies, but your clearly not interested in the truth.

N8

its ok King Mob you are the absolute truth - I bow down and immediately forget everything I heard today on the radio stations and return to voting for those presidential hopefuls proposed by the smallest minority who would have their friends rape my children and those of my friends family and neighbour - I apologise Kings Mob I will of course bow down to you who knowest everything :rolleyes:

N8

N8 wrote: »

its ok King Mob you are the absolute truth - I bow down and immediately forget everything I heard today on the radio stations and return to voting for those presidential hopefuls proposed by the smallest minority who would have their friends rape my children and those of my friends family and neighbour - I apologise Kings Mob I will of course bow down to you who knowest everything :rolleyes:

N8, here's a little project for you.
Actually go and find the full quotes that you think show that he supports child rape.
See if they actually match what you claim he said.

But I would imagine you'd be more comfortable spreading lies rather than actually examine something.