Israeli cricketers forced to play matches at military base in Scotland

Pro-palestinian thugs and Socialist Worker bums trying to physically disrupt Israeli cricket in Scotland.

Demonstration against Israeli Cricket Team

How are the Israeli cricket team racist, you thick fucking pig shitted biggots? I cannot believe this. It's like shouting at somebody to stop shouting, or saying "Can you please stop swearing, you fucking cunt".

Quoting a commentor from Pickled Politics

Steven J — on 8th August, 2006 at 3:44 pm

Good news regarding a subject you touched on before. Despite the thuggish tactics of Osama Saeed and other bigoted hooligans and thugs, the Israeli cricket team have been able to play matches at an RAF base in Scotland with a cricket pitch. It is a shame that it came to this, and that thugs and hooligans of the Musliam Association of Britain threatened violence and disrupted the tour, but it is still a victory against their chauvinism, and in the face of such bully boy bigotry, a victory for Scotland and British society over the communalist bigots.

Hear, hear!

THE Israel cricket team's visit to Scotland took another bizarre twist yesterday when they were forced to make a four-hour trip from Glasgow to RAF Lossiemouth air base to play their last two fixtures under armed guard.

Israel's opening match in the European Cricket Championships, proposed to be held entirely in Glasgow, had to be cancelled after organisers could not find a venue secure enough to satisfy police, with anti-war groups threatening to demonstrate against Israel's military action in Lebanon.

About 100 protestors attended each of Israel's matches on Saturday and Sunday at New Anniesland, but Glasgow Academicals refused to sanction the use of the ground on week days because the pavilion houses a nursery school, and further protests - combined with a 500-strong police presence - would have disturbed the children.

That left the European Cricket Council scrambling for an alternative until the idea of approaching the armed services was mooted by the organisation's tournament referee, Lt Col David Jukes.

ECC head Richard Holdsworth contacted Lossiemouth and after consultation with the Foreign Office, the base agreed that the cricketers could use its club pitch, which normally stages matches in the North of Scotland League. Israel will play against Guernsey today and either France or Gibraltar in their final match tomorrow. "We have been looking at absolutely every possible option to try and fulfil every fixture in this tournament," said Holdsworth. "A member of our staff, Lt Col David Jukes, suggested we look at the various military bases in Scotland and we found that Lossiemouth had a pitch. They were extremely helpful and Israel's matches will take place there.
God bless the RAF!

9 Responses to “Israeli cricketers forced to play matches at military base in Scotland”

  1. # Anonymous Old Peculier

    "Racist" is just a reflex reaction by Muslims and lefties. Ironic really, when anti-Semitism, which is a genuine form of racism, goes unrecognised by either Muslims or lefties and encouraged by both.  

  2. # Anonymous Osama Saeed

    Racist? Who said anything about that? Erm hello there's a war going on?

    And today's match has been cancelled.  

  3. # Anonymous alison

    Osama - Are the cricketers the new front line then?  

  4. # Blogger jonz

    Well, apparently, it was not cancelled due to the actions of Osama et al

    A spokesman for the organisers, the European Cricket Council, insisted the move was not due to any threatened demonstration.

    It is understood that Israel's opponents Greece had suffered travel problems and were unable to make it.


  5. # Anonymous Osama Saeed

    Alison, think global, act local.

    Jonz, yeah "travel problems". They make it all the way from Greece, but then can't find a coach or some cars to drive them from Glasgow to Lossiemouth.

    Yesterday, we were told it was cancelled due to a "technical fault" - in a game of cricket.  

  6. # Anonymous alison

    Well good on them for trying to cover your pathetic little hatefest then. Though knowing this countrys transport fortes it could well be true. I can make it to Paris quicker than I can North South London some days Osama.

    What 'local' as in this is a local anti semitism/racism/general jew bashing event for local people?  

  7. # Blogger Rottweiler Puppy

    Alison said: "Osama - Are the cricketers the new front line then?"

    Don't be daft, Alison. Defenceless women and children are the Global Jihad's front line -- They only dare take on cricketers when the British cops are out in force to keep them safe from any harm.  

  8. # Anonymous Clematis Fraudster

    "think global, act local"

    What, Osama? Bully a group of amateur cricketers because they happen to be Israelis?

    How brave and principled. I salute you and your fellow activists. What next" A blockade of a bagel factory?

    Still, I am sure you would do the same if the Saudi Arabian, Sudanese or Iranian football teams were playing in the UK, wouldn't you? You have to make a stand against these brutal regimes, don't you?  

  9. # Blogger mister

    . . . anti-Juditism is hostility traceable to the Jews' unique sense of themselves: the sense which arose, and to a large extent still arises from that of being chosen. Aside from the unity of God, chosen-ness is the Jews' fundamental claim: they are those who have the covenant. Chosen-ness is also fundamental to their extraordinary survival as a people with an unbroken, coherent culture: without it, such a survival is inexplicable.

    An isolated culture can survive by transmitting its ways to the next generation with relatively little effort; but in proximity, cultures compete, and survival requires significant effort, which, in turn, can be motivated only by a correspondingly significant sense of self; a culture that does not think much of itself will not make much of an effort to propagate itself.

    Ordinarily, most peoples make a substantial effort to survive, but nonetheless eventually fade away. Without geographic roots, this occurs after a few generations. Even when rooted, peoples conquer or are conquered, and their cultures combine and assimilate. We see that virtually every society is a patchwork of smaller peoples in various stages of integration and dissolution. Thus a normal sense of self eventually leads to loss of self; only the Jews' extraordinary sense of self could inspire the extraordinary efforts that have saved them from that fate.

    . . . Whereas Anti-Semitism exerts an external pressure of rejection on individual Jews that tends to drive them together, thereby increasing group identity and adhesion, anti-Juditism acts from within as well as without, and corrodes that which binds them together. One can destroy people, but the other can destroy the people.
    Intrigued? You know what to do.

    I understand the impulse to universalism and the discomfort with particularism (given some of its uglier manifestations). But universalism can produce the same kind of ugliness when it tries to destroy the particularism of family and religion in favor of an ideal - Stalinism and Pol Pot-ism come to mind here, as well as Wahabism - just ask the Bosnian Muslims. And particularism does not inexorably lead to aggression against those who are different. In fact, kindness to and acceptance of strangers is one of the most emphasized commandments in Jewish law.

    The George Soros' and Tony Judts of the world are uncomfortable with any preference for one group over another, for any reason. At the same time they decry "globalization": bland global commercialism and the disappearance of languages and customs and local control. But to keep a culture going (especially in the midst of strong pressure to give it up) you have to have a critical mass of people who consistently and repeatedly prefer it to another. If the anti-globos were logical, they would be gathering around the Jewish community asking us how we do it, instead of calling us "racist" when we do what they admire and promote for other ethnic groups.

    This post on patriotism examines many of the same ideas. (It does not link them to any kind of ethnic identification; however, others have explored the similarities between the Jewish and American "experiments.") It is no accident that those Jews who are the most uncomfortable with religious particularism tend to be equally uncomfortable with national particularism. After all, Judaism is a nationality (with religious elements). In a later essay, Armed Liberal quotes from John Schaar:
    To be a patriot is to have a patrimony; or, perhaps more accurately, the patriot is one who is grateful for a legacy and recognizes that the legacy makes him a debtor. There is a whole way of being in the world, captured best by the word reverence, which defines life by its debts; one is what one owes, what one acknowledges as a rightful debt or obligation. The patriot moves within that mentality.
    I think this is a good description of the kind of Jew who values the Jewish "experiment," as Remler quotes Maurice Samuel:
    What, then, is the Jewish people? It is a continuous association of individuals, now some thirty five hundred or four thousand years old, working out an experiment in the relationship to God.
    This description encapsulates nearly everything important: the past continuity, the continuous working out, the experimental nature of the enterprise, and the relationship to God, the last being (pace atheists) no more than the traditional name for the central mystery of existence - Why is there anything rather than nothing at all? The Jewish people are an experiment that seeks the best way to focus human attention on that most important question, and the best way to have it inform the conduct of life.
    One could say the same about Americans, Tibetans, Bosnians, Bretons, Navajos, or any other self-identified group (and most fo us do have multiple group identities which overlap each other). Then one can ask the question: does my group identity demand that I disrespect others without a compelling reason, or does it include a tradition of goodwill to strangers, and what conditions have to obtain for that tradition to be put aside? At that point - when one has made that distinction - one can condemn aggression based on a group identity.  

Post a Comment

Links to this post

Create a Link

Looks odd? Use Firefox!

Email drunkenblogging AT