Should Israel be banned from Rugby

Israel is carrying out ethnic cleansing and colonization in Palestine, has committed gross violations of human rights against the native population, including state terrorism, mass murder, destruction of vital infrastructure, and mass incarceration, has built a giant wall within Palestinian territory, creating an Apartheid state, and is imposing enforced third world poverty through its control of resources within Palestine and blockading of humanitarian aid. Surely, if South Africa was prevented from attending the first two World Cups because of the Apartheid system, and Fiji was barred from including military personnel in its team for the 2011 tournament, Israel should not be free to compete in international rugby under these circumstances.

Rowanbi wrote:Israel is carrying out ethnic cleansing and colonization in Palestine, has committed gross violations of human rights against the native population, including state terrorism, mass murder, destruction of vital infrastructure, and mass incarceration, has built a giant wall within Palestinian territory, creating an Apartheid state, and is imposing enforced third world poverty through its control of resources within Palestine and blockading of humanitarian aid. Surely, if South Africa was prevented from attending the first two World Cups because of the Apartheid system, and Fiji was barred from including military personnel in its team for the 2011 tournament, Israel should not be free to compete in international rugby under these circumstances.

Damn right. They called me a gypsy.

Sport should be divorced from politics at all times.

And anyway, how can we possibly deny the Israeli rugby team - who have valiantly defeated Latvia, Denmark, Andorra, Serbia, and Luxembourg - their moment in the sun?

But there have been extreme cases - Apartheid South Africa, for one. Apartheid Israel is an extreme case.

You just don't like Israel which is what this is all about, were Iraq banned from sport after the Kurdish genocide or how about Yugoslavia during the Balkan conflicts, there are countless more examples and as far as i'm concerned Israel are not the issue.

Well, that's like asking why wasn't Indonesia banned in the 80s alongside South Africa, given they were carrying out genocide of the Timorese. I'm not sure of the answer to that, but I can tell you that the West by and large backed Indonesia during that period, just as it backed Saddam when he was gassing Kurds (& Iranians). War crimes are quite another matter, and that's a real pandoras box, for the reason just mentioned. But Israel, in addition to all its war crimes and violations of human rights, has become as much an Apartheid state as South Africa was under white rule - and that's why this is about Israel.

Yes us naughty westerners have a lot to answer for....

Yes I remember distinctly Thatcher and Reagan congratulating Hussein on what a great idea Halabja was !!..

I still blame George W for putting the Twin Towers in the way of a couple of fun loving terrorists who only wanted to see what it was like to fly a commercial airplane..

To be honest you reap what you sow, you poke a bear enough (Israel) and it will react.

Hammersmith harrier wrote:You just don't like Israel which is what this is all about, were Iraq banned from sport after the Kurdish genocide or how about Yugoslavia during the Balkan conflicts, there are countless more examples and as far as i'm concerned Israel are not the issue.

Weren't Yugo banned from the 92 Euros??

One of the best bets in history was the bloke that bet on Denmark to win when they hadn't even qualified. He'd calculated that Yugo would be banned, knew the Danes would be their replacement, and then just had to hope they went all the way......

Concurrently there was one of the stupidest/most arrogant decisions made as one of the Laudrups refused to compete and went on holiday instead as he said Denmark would just get embarrassed. Gutted.

Interesting comment made on another forum:

I agree with the general appallingness of the Israeli regime, however it's not precisely the same as South Africa. In SA, rugby and the Springboks in particular were a major symbol and tool of oppression. Playing international rugby was an expression of the legitimacy of the system. Not allowing them to play was a big deal. Israeli rugby (as far as I know) is of absolutely no importance to their regime at all. I also doubt that they prohibit Palestinians from playing against or with Jewish Israelis. I also doubt that if a visiting opponent included a Muslim Arab, they would need to "legitimise" that player by declaring him an "honorary Jew."

If a rugby, or general sporting, boycott of Israel would have any effect then I would be all for it. Unfortunately I doubt that either government or general population give a whole lot of Frak about rugby or sport in general. A software and arms boycott on the other hand...

Have to agree with that.

Meanwhile, this link provides an interesting perspective on the merits of boycotting Israel: https://electronicintifada.net/content/boycotting-israel-free-speech-right/16056

There was talk about banning Zimbabwe national rugby team because of their racist Government, yet when the Zimbabwe RFU answered their case they showed their team photo which showed a mixed group of black and white people all playing rugby together.

No one is going to pretend that Israel are in the moral right on their land grabbing, basically their doing to the Arabs what Hitler did to them. However when Muslims fly aeroplanes into buildings your going to find sympathy pretty hard to come by.

You can never put the Israeli problem into words, but you can see a diagram which shows everything:

Agree with all that, but the Muslims who flew planes into buildings were mostly Saudis, some had ties to American politicians, such as the Bush family, and intelligence services. Saudi Arabia was never punished for this. But their ideological enemies in the Middle East were bombed to Smithereens, notably Iraq, where the equivalent of a genocide has basically taken place - much to the Saudis' delight.

Incidentally yeterday marked the sixty-eight anniversary of the Deir Yassin massacre committed by the Ergun and Stern Zionist terrorist organizations in 1948, killing up to 360 Palestinians in cold blood.

"They took us out one after the other; shot an old man and when one of his daughters cried, she was shot too. Then they called my brother Muhammad, and shot him in front [of] us, and when my mother yelled, bending over him - carrying my little sister Hudra in her hands, still breastfeeding her - they shot her too." (Pappe, The Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine)

Normal laws don't apply to Israel. Should they be banned? no! Keep politics out of sport please. The South Africans should not have been banned either.

Your first point is correct. Laws that apply to every other country on earth do not apply to Israel. I don't agree with your next point, however. As a youth I myself opposed the boycotts of SA, but I have come to recognize just how effective they were. Would that work with Israel? If it were only rugby, obviously not. But if it were part of a wider ban, including all sports and other contacts, then yes, rugby ought to do its bit. Hopefully that day will come sooner rather than later.

Rowanbi wrote:Your first point is correct. Laws that apply to every other country on earth do not apply to Israel. I don't agree with your next point, however. As a youth I myself opposed the boycotts of SA, but I have come to recognize just how effective they were. Would that work with Israel? If it were only rugby, obviously not. But if it were part of a wider ban, including all sports and other contacts, then yes, rugby ought to do its bit. Hopefully that day will come sooner rather than later.

You'll notice all US presidential candidates go to Israel before the elections. They're basically going to seek approval. Donal Trump went but he angered them by saying he won't take their side re the conflict over there. Hence the media backlash.

You'll notice all US presidential candidates go to Israel before the elections.

That's because the Israel lobby is backed by 40 million Christian fundamentalists who want to see Israel re-created to be just like Biblical times.

Trump isn't a real politician and is only there so that the warmonger, pathological liar and shameless sycophant Hillary Clinton will seem like the lesser of two evils when it comes to the actual election. Bernie's a lame duck on foreign policy, on the fence when it comes to Israel - though he did make them angry by stating they killed 10,000 civilians the summer before last when it was actually only about 2000 civilians. Get it right Bernie! Genocidal maniacs have feelings too, you know...

Rowanbi wrote:You'll notice all US presidential candidates go to Israel before the elections.

That's because the Israel lobby is backed by 40 million Christian fundamentalists who want to see Israel re-created to be just like Biblical times.

Brainwashed by the media which is controlled by Jews (before anyone gets upset, they boast about it themselves).

I'm no fan of Hollwood or the corporate media, but I think the lobbiests are mostly brainwashed by their church leaders and school teachers. The Israel lobby, or Zionist lobby as it's sometimes called, is overwhelmingly white Christian America. The Jews themselves have little to do with it, apparently, and tend to be a lot more savvy besides. I actually have a great deal of respect for them. In fact, you'd be surprised how many are against Zionism themselves. They've had massive rallies against Israeli policies in the past but these received scant attention from the media. Also, the demographics are changing. More and more Mizrahi Jews are flooding in from the Middle East and Africa these days, which may be alienating them from American Jews, who are primarily Ashkenazis and Sephardics from Europe and Turkey.

Rowanbi wrote:You'll notice all US presidential candidates go to Israel before the elections.

That's because the Israel lobby is backed by 40 million Christian fundamentalists who want to see Israel re-created to be just like Biblical times.

Trump isn't a real politician and is only there so that the warmonger, pathological liar and shameless sycophant Hillary Clinton will seem like the lesser of two evils when it comes to the actual election. Bernie's a lame duck on foreign policy, on the fence when it comes to Israel - though he did make them angry by stating they killed 10,000 civilians the summer before last when it was actually only about 2000 civilians. Get it right Bernie! Genocidal maniacs have feelings too, you know...

When Captain America throws his mighty shield
All those that choose to oppose his shield must yield
If it comes to a fight and the dueller's duke
Then the red and white and the blue will come thru
When Captain America throws his mighty shield

I'm a big fan of Israel...You can talk to Israel..

Not easy to talk to people that detonate bombs on buses full of school children..

Cant see the sense in penalising Israel if the Palestinians are stupid.

When can we start talking about lizard people??

Yes, Apartheid South Africa had its apologists too. Blame the resistance, blame the retaliation, and ignore the fact that ethnic cleansing, periodic massacres and mass incarceration of minors without due legal process are the cause.

You quite clearly dislike Israel so that clouds your opinion on it, as far as i'm concerned they're entitled to defend themselves, pretty bloody stupid to provoke a country more powerful than yourself.

aucklandlaurie wrote:Cant see the sense in penalising Israel if the Palestinians are stupid.

Hardly one way traffic and you cant punish/ban a country you dont recognize

This whole thread is about the wider debate, it's the very foundation of why the OP thinks they should be banned.

Debate the rugby, by all means.

You can't debate the rugby without debating the conflict.

Only thing dangerous on here is the OP......

Seems to be an interesting little undercurrent pervading his opinions..

Though one does wonder why in election year with 5.3 million Jews in the USA and many in the top 1% bracket ....Any candidate would be silly enough to cosy up with Israel..

As I said, Apartheid South Africa had its apologists too.

But the Apartheid in Israel is actually much worse. The white regime in South Africa needed its non-white majority for labor, and therefore, while abusing them and carrying out untold atrocities, it did not a attempt to wipe them off the face of the map. Israel on the other hand does not need its native Palestinian population for labor purposes, and from the very outset as being trying to wipe them off the face of the map. That's a valid definition for ethnic cleansing. The Zionists who arrived from Europe were unquestionably more European than Middle Eastern in terms of their ethnicity, and were mostly in fact from Eastern Europe. After the inevitable skirmishes which take place whenever foreign invaders attempt to take over a foreign land, the Zionists turned to terrorism, periodic massacres, strategical r***, mass incarceration without due legal process, and sundry other blatant human rights violations to achieve their aims. Gaining increasing support from the US, which has now reached several billions of dollars per year, they have easily defeated the impoverished native population and forced them to live in a walled-in ghetto - or outdoor prison - under enforced 3rd Worldish conditions without freedom of movement or clean drinking water. Meanwhile, the colonization process continues with Zionist settlers advancing onto more and more Palestinian territory and living in affluence on the other side of a giant wall.

Pr4wn wrote:This thread is getting dangerously off-topic.

Please stay away from the wider Israel-Paestine debate.

Oh, in that case I'll withdraw from the discussion at this point. As somebody else mentioned, we can't really debate the merits of boycotting Israel without  discussing the wider issue itself.

So, that's it from me on this topic, chaps

Rowanbi wrote:As I said, Apartheid South Africa had its apologists too.

But the Apartheid in Israel is actually much worse. The white regime in South Africa needed its non-white majority for labor, and therefore, while abusing them and carrying out untold atrocities, it did not a attempt to wipe them off the face of the map. Israel on the other hand does not need its native Palestinian population for labor purposes, and from the very outset as being trying to wipe them off the face of the map. That's a valid definition for ethnic cleansing. The Zionists who arrived from Europe were unquestionably more European than Middle Eastern in terms of their ethnicity, and were mostly in fact from Eastern Europe. After the inevitable skirmishes which take place whenever foreign invaders attempt to take over a foreign land, the Zionists turned to terrorism, periodic massacres, strategical r***, mass incarceration without due legal process, and sundry other blatant human rights violations to achieve their aims. Gaining increasing support from the US, which has now reached several billions of dollars per year, they have easily defeated the impoverished native population and forced them to live in a walled-in ghetto - or outdoor prison - under enforced 3rd Worldish conditions without freedom of movement or clean drinking water. Meanwhile, the colonization process continues with Zionist settlers advancing onto more and more Palestinian territory and living in affluence on the other side of a giant wall.

Defending yourself from a next door neighbour that lobs missiles over the border is a long way from engaging in apartheid.

Depends if you stole your house off your neighbour and then gradually stole more of his land every day whilst blocking the supermarket from delivering food and then dousing his home in internationally banned chemicals.....

TopHat24/7 wrote:Depends if you stole your house off your neighbour and then gradually stole more of his land every day whilst blocking the supermarket from delivering food and then dousing his home in internationally banned chemicals.....

Don't forget bombing his kid's room in retaliation for him throwing some stones at your garage

Not sure how long this thread will last. This is a political issue that has about 3500 years of history to it. It is not worth debating something when debaters have no idea about the history and are just pushing a short term political and perhaps not so political agenda.

In the absence of knowledge of that history it is fair to do a present day comparative analysis, comparing Israel with other states, to see if the treatment is consistent with elsewhere.

Yes, because the issues of today can not be debated or understood without an encyclopedic knowledge of something that happened when Jesus was/wasn't around....

TopHat24/7 wrote:Yes, because the issues of today can not be debated or understood without an encyclopedic knowledge of something that happened when Jesus was/wasn't around....

Very informative response.  What happened on the Indian subcontinent post WWII and compare that with what happened in the Maghreb + Middle East from Morocco to Persia.

That's important to the creation of a country out of thin air due to Western guilt, stealing land of another country in the process, which has caused untold heartache death and misery ever since?

I'm all ears......

TopHat24/7 wrote:That's important to the creation of a country out of thin air due to Western guilt, stealing land of another country in the process, which has caused untold heartache death and misery ever since?

I'm all ears......

What happened to the Jews living in the Mahgreb and greater Middle East and Compare that to what happened between Muslims and the Hindus in the Indian subcontinent. Anyway I stop here. No point in continuing. Good luck. I suggest you start one of those petitions.

Locking this now. Everyone was warned that this was going off-topic and it's just gone further.