nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

markhumphrys.com

meditraitor

MarkHumphrys.com
Irish. Atheist. Liberal-right. Anti-jihad. Pro-American. Pro-Israel.

http://markhumphrys.com/irish.left.israel.html

Ive seen this site for a while now and everytime I am using the search for anything about the Irish Left it is on the front page.... now obviously there is no such person as MarkHumphrys and this is a troll site but who put this together.....

Would I be right in thinking that there are financial ways to keep your site on the first page of related queries?

Or maybe I am wrong, is there such an ignoramous around somewere trolling?

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

Frank Grimes

humphrys wrote: »

Yes I see the wonderful secular liberal democracy in Gaza. Gay rights, sexual freedom, religious freedom for all.

http://markhumphrys.com/gaza.html#taliban.hell

This has nothing to do with what I asked you - do you realise that not all Palestinians are Muslims and/or religious?

RayM

humphrys wrote: »

The Irish President, Michael D. Higgins, is the most anti-American head of state in the west. He has a long track record that the media entirely ignored:
http://markhumphrys.com/michael.d.america.html

I notice in your main article about President Higgins that you believe...

...Michael D. Higgins will make Ireland hated in America. Ireland will be linked again and again in world news headlines with anti-American, anti-Israeli and anti-business statements. Michael D. will endlessly attack the Celtic Tiger, and this message will be heard abroad. American companies will hear it. What is wrong with Irish people? Do they want to be poor?

At the end of his presidency, if (or, more accurately, when) it turns out that he hasn't actually made Ireland "hated" in America and that American companies (who are here, not because of our love of all things American, but because they don't like paying tax) haven't been scared away by him, will you be prepared to admit that your assertion was utterly wrong and very silly indeed?

Also, given the quite rabid nature of your anti-Obama rhetoric, do you ever worry that the type of reactionary blow-hards who equate opposition to a country's president or foreign policy with outright hatred of that country... might perceive you as being anti-American?

jonniebgood1

humphrys wrote: »

So Hamas are not racist, mass-murdering Islamist religious fascists?
Which part of that description is inaccurate as applied to Hamas?
Do you know anything about what Hamas is and what it believes?

Why do you feel the need to divert to Hamas. That is the same as a person in the 1970's saying all Irishmen were IRA. Total rubbish as Hamas are seperate to what we are discussing. Your reference to them reflects an inability to discuss in a rational manner the treatment of ordinary (non-Hamas) civilians.

humphrys wrote: »

The reason why the Arab Muslim world hates Israel is mainly because they are Jews versus Muslims. If they were Muslims, doing exactly the same things, no one in the Arab world would care. Where were the Muslim tears for the south Sudanese?

Again this is fabrication or some kind of world view created to suit a viewpoint. Israel as a state was set up following the atrocities committed against Jewish people in WWII. Many of its proponents are shaming the memory of these unfortunate victims by their modern day behaviours. They act like their former Nazi overlords denying civil rights to ordinary people who are unconnected to Hamas. A very serious part of this problem is people who refuse to recognise this, a category which you seem to fall within. You should reflect on that as you spout nonsense such as you openly expressed view of palestinians as "racist, mass-murdering Islamist religious fascists". Now you need to explain Mr Humphrys at what age a defenseless child becomes a racist, mass-murdering Islamist religious fascist. And if they becoe this monster what type of ruling regime of a country gives way to a situation where this happens?
Thats a question to be answered by the way.

humphrys

Nodin wrote: »

Not all Palestinians live in Gaza.

You don't seem to care about human rights in Gaza now that Hamas rules it.

I suspect you wouldn't be that interested in human rights under Fatah in the West Bank either.

But you should understand that the brutal, thuggish, oppressive nature of the societies Hamas and Fatah want to set up is the main reason I wish for their defeat.

If the Palestinians wanted to set up a secular liberal democracy, I would be sympathetic to their cause. But they don't, so I amn't.

humphrys

Frank Grimes wrote: »

This has nothing to do with what I asked you - do you realise that not all Palestinians are Muslims and/or religious?

The setting up of a brutal sharia state in Gaza has nothing to do with the issue? It's the very core of the issue. It's the reason why no secular liberal westerner should support the Palestinian cause.

You do realise that people carry Hamas flags through Dublin on anti-Israel demos?

You do realise that the Irish Anti-War Movement openly supports Hamas?

humphrys

RayM wrote: »

At the end of his presidency, if (or, more accurately, when) it turns out that he hasn't actually made Ireland "hated" in America and that American companies (who are here, not because of our love of all things American, but because they don't like paying tax) haven't been scared away by him, will you be prepared to admit that your assertion was utterly wrong and very silly indeed?

If Michael D. shuts up with his opinions on America and Israel for 7 years, I will have been wrong. It would be a major departure from his previous life though. I do note that he has said little on world affairs so far. But that may change if we get a Republican US President and if Israel bombs Iran.

As for the Celtic Tiger, he has already been banging on about how bad that was:
http://markhumphrys.com/michael.d.higgins.html#celtic.tiger
Not what I want American companies to hear, but maybe you think it's great.

RayM wrote: »

Also, given the quite rabid nature of your anti-Obama rhetoric, do you ever worry that the type of reactionary blow-hards who equate opposition to a country's president or foreign policy with outright hatred of that country... might perceive you as being anti-American?

People who support American power and leadership of the free world, who want an aggressive America defending western interests in the world, tend to dislike Obama. Pro-Americans in Britain, Israel and other countries around the world would agree with me on this. Plenty of Brits and Israelis can't stand Obama either.

People who think that America needs its wings clipped, and needs to be more apologetic, and the UN or EU or international law should take a lead, tend to like Obama.

It's obvious that I dislike Obama because he isn't pro-American enough for me.

Obama's rhetoric is awful, and encourages the enemy:
http://markhumphrys.com/obama.war.html#cairo.speech

But I do admit that he's not all bad. He's killing the enemy without trial, instead of putting them in Guantanamo. He's not all bad:
http://markhumphrys.com/obama.html#defence

humphrys

jonniebgood1 wrote: »

Why do you feel the need to divert to Hamas. That is the same as a person in the 1970's saying all Irishmen were IRA.

Divert? Hamas were elected by the people of Gaza. They are the de facto government. They represent the people of Gaza. The IRA back in the day never represented most Irish people.

I haven't even started on the PLO / Fatah yet, but I thought we could agree on Hamas. Now you say Hamas setting up a brutal sharia state is irrelevant to the conflict? Are we talking about imaginary Palestinians here, or about the real ones, who support Hamas and Fatah?

jonniebgood1 wrote: »

Again this is fabrication or some kind of world view created to suit a viewpoint. Israel as a state was set up following the atrocities committed against Jewish people in WWII. Many of its proponents are shaming the memory of these unfortunate victims by their modern day behaviours. They act like their former Nazi overlords denying civil rights to ordinary people who are unconnected to Hamas.

To declare that Israelis are like the Nazis marks you as not serious.
The Nazis killed 90 percent of all Jews in Poland.
Where is the genocide of the Palestinians? Where are the gas chambers?
To compare a low-level conflict to industrial genocide suggests you know little about either. Maybe you should read a bit about the Holocaust.

David Norris is the same as you:
Norris uses "Nazi" language about Israel
http://markhumphrys.com/david.norris.html#nazi

jonniebgood1 wrote: »

A very serious part of this problem is people who refuse to recognise this, a category which you seem to fall within. You should reflect on that as you spout nonsense such as you openly expressed view of palestinians as "racist, mass-murdering Islamist religious fascists". Now you need to explain Mr Humphrys at what age a defenseless child becomes a racist, mass-murdering Islamist religious fascist. And if they becoe this monster what type of ruling regime of a country gives way to a situation where this happens?
Thats a question to be answered by the way.

Israel has no problem with innocent children. It does have a problem with the parties and groups representing adult Palestinians - Hamas and Fatah.

If the Palestinians ever support a party that is secular, liberal, non-violent and not a bunch of brutal Jew-killing terrorists, I will take a look at their cause again. Until then, I wish Israel good luck and think we all should support it.

If these imaginary Palestinians who believe in western values exist, I think they should get organised. Where is their party?

Frank Grimes

Frank Grimes wrote: »

humphrys: You do realise that not all Palestinians are Muslims, or even religious?

humphrys wrote: »

Yes I see the wonderful secular liberal democracy in Gaza. Gay rights, sexual freedom, religious freedom for all.

http://markhumphrys.com/gaza.html#taliban.hell

Frank Grimes wrote: »

This has nothing to do with what I asked you - do you realise that not all Palestinians are Muslims and/or religious?

humphrys wrote: »

The setting up of a brutal sharia state in Gaza has nothing to do with the issue? It's the very core of the issue. It's the reason why no secular liberal westerner should support the Palestinian cause.

You do realise that people carry Hamas flags through Dublin on anti-Israel demos?

You do realise that the Irish Anti-War Movement openly supports Hamas?

I get it, you don't like Hamas. You still haven't addressed my question though.

jonniebgood1

humphrys wrote: »

To declare that Israelis are like the Nazis marks you as not serious.

Except I did not 'declare' this. You are making up stuff now- please do not make up stuff that I 'declare'. I said "They act like their former Nazi overlords denying civil rights to ordinary people who are unconnected to Hamas." I made no Holocaust comparison- you made that up.

humphrys wrote: »

If the Palestinians ever support a party that is secular, liberal, non-violent and not a bunch of brutal Jew-killing terrorists, I will take a look at their cause again. Until then, I wish Israel good luck and think we all should support it.

Who is morally in the right. Whats the casualty rate for example?

Israeli Casualties: Adults and Minors
September 2000 to May 5, 2002
Civilian Injuries: 2,707
Civilian Deaths: 319

...
Palestinian Casualties: Adults and Minors in the West Bank and Gaza Strip
September 2000 to May 6, 2002
Injuries: 19,189
Deaths: 1,538

http://journalism.berkeley.edu/projects/arccrisis/ispal-casualty.html

humphrys wrote: »

Israel has no problem with innocent children.

Palestinian Fatalities of Minors Under Age 18
October 2001 to May 5, 2002
Palestinian Minors Killed by Israeli Security Forces in Occupied Territories
210 (ages 4 months to 17)
22 percent of total civilian fatalities (956)Palestinian Minors Killed by Israeli Citizens in Occupied Territories
1 (age 2 months) (by gunfire)
6 percent of total civilian fatalities (17)

Palestinian Minors Killed by Israeli Security Forces in Israel
1 (age 14) (by Israeli police force)
5 percent of total civilian fatalities (22)

Deaths of Palestinian Minors Caused by Delay in Obtaining Medical Treatment Due to Israeli Restriction of Movement
8 (stillborn to age 11)
35 percent of total civilian fatalities (23)

Nodin

humphrys wrote: »

You don't seem (........) so I amn't.

Amazing how you constantly seek to deflect the issue in order to allow another muslim bashing rant.

Peoples have the right to self determination. You paint yourself as a "liberal" but in fact support colonialism.

You didn't answer the question - So being colonised by Israel makes no odds to the people in those areas at all?

humphrys wrote: »

who want an aggressive America defending western interests in the world,.

What are "western interests"?

humphrys

jonniebgood1 wrote: »

Palestinian Fatalities of Minors Under Age 18
October 2001 to May 5, 2002
Palestinian Minors Killed by Israeli Security Forces in Occupied Territories

A breakdown of these stats is on my site:
http://markhumphrys.com/israel.conflict.crimes.html#israel.tries

From this we see that 95 percent of all Palestinian deaths are male. Why is this?

We can see (see graphs on my site) that the Palestinians kill a broad section of society, including old people and people minding their own business in coffee shops and on buses.

While in contrast (see graphs on my site) the Israelis kill young men engaged in violent attacks and riots, and stupid kids standing around watching. Women and old people are not at risk. People who avoid riot zones are not at risk. At around age 12 (see the graphs), Palestinian boys (but note, not girls) start watching riots, helping, spotting, running back and forth, throwing stones and carrying toy guns, and, inevitably, getting shot. One of the reasons their parents let them do this (indeed encourage them to do this) is because of the culture of Islamic child martyrdom in Palestinian mosques, schools and kids TV.

humphrys

Nodin wrote: »

Amazing how you constantly seek to deflect the issue in order to allow another muslim bashing rant.

You're the one who wants to discuss the Israel conflict without discussing Islam. You're trying to rule out discussion of the major cause of the conflict in favour of your imaginary causes.

I see no reason why I should play your game.

Nodin wrote: »

Peoples have the right to self determination. You paint yourself as a "liberal" but in fact support colonialism.

So Hamas self-rule in Gaza is a victory for "liberal" values is it?

The setting up the brutal Hamas sharia state in Gaza is something "liberals" should applaud is it?

jonniebgood1

humphrys wrote: »

A breakdown of these stats is on my site:
http://markhumphrys.com/israel.conflict.crimes.html#israel.tries

From this we see that 95 percent of all Palestinian deaths are male. Why is this?

We can see (see graphs on my site) that the Palestinians kill a broad section of society, including old people and people minding their own business in coffee shops and on buses.

While in contrast (see graphs on my site) the Israelis kill young men engaged in violent attacks and riots, and stupid kids standing around watching. Women and old people are not at risk. People who avoid riot zones are not at risk. At around age 12 (see the graphs), Palestinian boys (but note, not girls) start watching riots, helping, spotting, running back and forth, throwing stones and carrying toy guns, and, inevitably, getting shot. One of the reasons their parents let them do this (indeed encourage them to do this) is because of the culture of Islamic child martyrdom in Palestinian mosques, schools and kids TV.

Can you explain why there are 319 civilian deaths on one side and 1,538 on the other?

oceanclub

To say his site is wildly partisan is an understatement. He rightly condemns Islam as homophobic. But then in the same site, praises Orson Scott Card, a notorious homophobe, for his "great politics" and condemns MDH for rightly pointing out Mark Steyns' homophobia.

It's not to say Humpheys isn't right in some circumstances, but the site is just so wildly one-sided and over the top it's hard to take seriously. He condemns RBB but he comes off as a right-wing version of him, not seeing _any_ good in even the mildest of opponents.

P.

KyussBishop

Ya it's just feeding attention at this stage; he seems determined not to answer, nevermind even acknowledge questions relating to Israel, so there's not really a chance of any worthwhile or honest discussion.

oceanclub

http://markhumphrys.com/ni.nationalists.html

I personally would trade our independence from Britain just to get the Public Record Office back

Bizarrely, Mark would sell out our self-determination for a single building(*), yet defends the right of other countries to use much more violence for _their_ self-determination. Does he put such limits, for example, on the self-determination of Israel?

P.

(*) I too lament the loss of these records.

humphrys

jonniebgood1 wrote: »

Can you explain why there are 319 civilian deaths on one side and 1,538 on the other?

I just explained that. You aren't listening.

Absolute numbers killed in fighting is a poor way to decide which side to support. Otherwise we would all support Germany in WW2 (7 million dead) rather than Britain.

A better way is to ask what kind of society the combatants want to set up. The left never asks this question about the Palestinians. You seem uninterested in this question too.

humphrys

oceanclub wrote: »

But then in the same site, praises Orson Scott Card, a notorious homophobe, for his "great politics" and condemns MDH for rightly pointing out Mark Steyns' homophobia.

Can you give me an example of Orson Scott Card's homophobia. I musn't have read those columns.

Can you also give me an example of Mark Steyn's homophobia. The column MDH refers to is not remotely homophobic.

Please supply actual quotes. Thanks.

humphrys

KyussBishop wrote: »

Ya it's just feeding attention at this stage; he seems determined not to answer, nevermind even acknowledge questions relating to Israel, so there's not really a chance of any worthwhile or honest discussion.

Oh really? What question do you have that I have not addressed?

There's a lot of people hostile to Israel here. It's hard to deal with them all. I have some free time today so this is fun, but it may not last.

I've provided a lot of links and facts and graphs. I haven't got a lot of links and facts in reply.

http://markhumphrys.com/israel.html

oceanclub

You must know very little about OSC if you don't know he wishes to keep anti-gay laws in place:
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orson_Scott_Card#section_4

humphrys

oceanclub wrote: »

Bizarrely, Mark would sell out our self-determination for a single building(*),

For you, self-determination is supreme.
For me, human rights and civil liberties are supreme.
Human rights and civil liberties were not noticeably better in post-1922 Ireland than they were in pre-1919 Ireland.

For most of the 20th century, in fact, it seemed that we had less civil liberties in Ireland because we left the UK, not more.

So by these standards, destroying our history in the Public Record Office was too high a price to pay for independence.

oceanclub wrote: »

yet defends the right of other countries to use much more violence for _their_ self-determination. Does he put such limits, for example, on the self-determination of Israel?

Israeli self-determination is not a trivial improvement like Ireland's was. If their enemies succeed in ending the Israeli state, all Israeli Jews will be dead.

oceanclub

humphrys wrote: »

For you, self-determination is supreme.
For me, human rights and civil liberties are supreme.
Quote]

Where did I ever say that? Thinking that independence is arguably worth more than a building does not mean i think its "supreme" Are you capable of discussion without creating a parody straw man of your opponents?

P.

humphrys

oceanclub wrote: »

You must know very little about OSC if you don't know he wishes to keep anti-gay laws in place:
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orson_Scott_Card#section_4

Thanks. There is some bad stuff there. He goes a bit beyond just being against gay marriage.

I knew he was a Mormon but I didn't know about this. I guess I never read those columns! Thanks for that.

Do you have any proof Mark Steyn is a homophobe?

humphrys

[QUOTE=oceanclub;79858027

Where did I ever say that? Thinking that independence is arguably worth more than a building does not mean i think its "supreme" Are you capable of discussion without creating a parody straw man of your opponents?

P.[/QUOTE]

OK. So do you think the destruction of our history in the Public Record Office was a price worth paying for the modest changes brought about by Irish independence? If some wizard offered you a deal - the PRO back, but Ireland within the UK, would you accept?

KyussBishop

humphrys wrote: »

Oh really? What question do you have that I have not addressed?

There's a lot of people hostile to Israel here. It's hard to deal with them all. I have some free time today so this is fun, but it may not last.

I've provided a lot of links and facts and graphs. I haven't got a lot of links and facts in reply.

http://markhumphrys.com/israel.html

'Fun' indeed

You are quick to point out perceived hypocrisy on other peoples opinion of Israel, but you do not state your own opinion of Israel anywhere; you seem to do everything you can to avoid discussing that, and instead always try to refocus on the perceived hypocrisy of others views.

So, some basic questions as a starting point:
Do you think Israel's slow annexation of the west bank is justified?
Do you think Israel's blockade of Gaza is justified?

Nodin

humphrys wrote: »

You're the one who wants to discuss the Israel conflict without discussing Islam. You're trying to rule out discussion of the major cause of the conflict in favour of your imaginary causes.

I see no reason why I should play your game.

I'm afraid it's you who has claimed that Islam is the root of the trouble, without either explanation or proof. I don't accept that claim.

What are "western interests"?

humphrys wrote: »

So Hamas self-rule in Gaza is a victory for "liberal" values is it?

The setting up the brutal Hamas sharia state in Gaza is something "liberals" should applaud is it?

Why is it everytime I mention colonialism you scream Gaza/Hamas?

The facts are that the colonial enterprise in the occupied territories predates the foundation of Hamas, Hezbollah or Islamic jihad.

Nodin

humphrys wrote: »

Thanks. There is some bad stuff there. He goes a bit beyond just being against gay marriage.

I knew he was a Mormon but I didn't know about this. I guess I never read those columns! Thanks for that.

Good to see you do quality "research" that the Irish media are afraid to.

humphrys

Nodin wrote: »

Good to see you do quality "research" that the Irish media are afraid to.

Are you still struggling to find that Mark Steyn material?

Nodin

humphrys wrote: »

Are you still struggling to find that Mark Steyn material?

Somebody else is discussing that particular wing nut with you, not I.

What are "western interests"?

Why is it everytime I mention colonialism you scream Gaza/Hamas?

humphrys

KyussBishop wrote: »

Do you think Israel's slow annexation of the west bank is justified?

Israel was repeatedly attacked by Jordan and Egypt, who openly declared that they wanted a genocide of the Jews. (Look up their words if you don't believe me.) Luckily, they failed.

When you lose an aggressive war, you should expect to lose territory (e.g. that has happened to Germany). That seems reasonable to me. Israel took Egyptian and Jordanian territory as a buffer zone against future attack.

It did not seem a bad decision for a long time, even for the Palestinians in those zones, who were not oppressed but rather saw their wealth vastly increase.

Israeli occupation made the "oppressed" Palestinians 3 times richer.
There was also a massive rise in Palestinian life expectancy from 54 to 73 under Israeli "occupation".
http://markhumphrys.com/israel.future.html#gdp

The problem was the peace process. Attempting to make peace with that lunatic terrorist Arafat led to massive increase, not decrease, in killings:
http://markhumphrys.com/israel.future.html#recent.past
And Arafat's intifada caused a total collapse in the Palestinian economy.
(See GDP graph above.)

If Israel could find its way back to where it was before the peace process, the West Bank might be ok.
What's your solution? Ethnically cleanse 1/2 million Jews I suppose?

KyussBishop wrote: »

Do you think Israel's blockade of Gaza is justified?

Well how would you stop the rocket fire?

Israel ethnically cleansed 8,000 Jews from Gaza. It destroyed their homes and communities to appease the Palestinians. That was a major gesture. And what did they get in return? Endless rocket fire and attacks. Don't you think the Palestinians should have made some gesture in return, instead of escalating the violence?