Our president

[AnSionnachGlic]

I am so proud to hear our president Michael D Higgins, not afraid to speak out against Israel's comments about Ireland. A voice of reason among a fractured world....President Michael D Higgins accuses Israel of ‘deep slander’ over anti-Semitic claims

www.irishtimes.com/politics/2024/12/17/president-michael-d-higgins-accuses-israel-of-deep-slander-over-anti-semitic-claims/

I agree, I was impressed by what he said. Netanyahu is a bully, good to see Michael D and the govt standing up to him. The Israeli government are attempting to gaslight the whole world, but we all see through the lies. I hope we keep calling them out.

Maith an fear. The cheek of them. There are a lot of very fine decent Jewish people who agree with Michael D. Including holocaust survivors.

Love him but he seems so frail lately 😢

Yes it is a complete slander and the stuff they are saying about the Irish people and government is shocking but yet they get away with it. They now refer to Simon Harris as Ireland's antisemitic Prime Minister, they are a disgrace. Thankfully he is responding with dignity and grace

Same. 😔

I know...as they say " The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing ". Thankfully our president is calling them out on it but I'm afraid it will have little effect, but it's a start. And he does look frail..I don't think he has been too strong since his last stay in hospital.

There's a thread on Mumsnet about the anti Semitic Irish educational system.

Ireland has been a flame as it has practically stood alone against Israel's tyranny. There's bound to be pushback and accusations of antisemitism, it goes with the territory.

I've only dipped in and out of that thread, it's awful. I can't believe some of the things that are being left undeleted.

I 100% agree with what he said.

I 100% believe he should not have said it. He really does not seem to understand the role of president. That speech, and several previous ones, was well outside the remit of the role of Uachtarán.

Once his term is up, then he can say what he wants. Until then, he should respect the role of Uachtarán and limit his speeches to topics that fall within his remit.

Sorry but I disagree @OchonAgusOchonOh . People said that about Robinson when she drew attention to the diaspora - our guilty secret. This is not a party political issue. Michael D is talking about basic human rights - universal rights. If we don't believe in them we should remove our signature from the UN Declaration .

You can disagree all you like @Abhannmor . I believe he is stepping outside his remit as president, you don't 🤷‍♀️. The joys of free speech.

No, it's not a party political issue. It is a political issue though.

And no, Robinson's speech on cherishing the diaspora was not the same.

I'd feel better about an tUachtarán, and the government, if they treated all human rights abusers equally.

The world is, unfortunately, not short of murderous genocidal régimes and innocent men women and children suffering war, oppression, displacement, destruction and famine.

To take one example: Iran. As well as persecuting and sometimes assassinating women who dare to stand up to the Modesty Police, thousands of people have been executed or 'disappeared', including for standing up for basic human rights.

What was the response of an tUachtarán? In the formal letter of welcome to the new Iranian president, he celebrated the new Irish embassy in Teheran because it would ' 'help make the dialogue and cooperation between our two countries even easier'.
And an Ceann Comhairle, speaking at an event in the Iranian embassy, spoke of ' the cordial and historic relations of Iran and Ireland.'

So the opposition to tyranny and commitment to being, as an Taoiseach said
'pro-peace, pro-human rights and pro-International law' seems to get turned on and off like a tap - on for Israel, off for Iran, or Yemen, or Syria, or Myanmar/Burma...

Higgins has actually made a few speech's on Syria, Myanmar and Yemen. His 2017/2018 Christmas speech has a lot about Myanmar. Also generally about the arms trade.

His speech this year mentioned a few countries. It's very unfair to say he's focused on Israel. Most of his speeches are about humanitarianism and human rights.

Yes I'm quite proud of the stance our president and government have taken. The people out there that are so stupid to think a criticism of the policies of a specific government is a criticism of a race really are not worth thinking about.

I'd be prouder of our president and government if they gave equal attention, in 2024 and 2025, not in 2017 0r 2018, to the suffering of all the people in conflicts that they seem not to care much about - there are about 59 armed conflicts going on around the world currently, and hundreds of thousands of men women and children suffering, starving and dying in all 59 of them.

For some reason a displaced child being pulled today from the rubble of a destroyed building in the Yemen or South Sudan or Syria just doesn't seem to matter enough to inspire passionate speeches about them by our president and government.

Either we as a nation stand for human rights for all, all over the world, and condemn human rights abuses equally wherever they are happening and whoever the perpetrators are, or we don't. Currently our representatives don't, and I think that's shameful.

100% agree.

If he wanted to speak out on political issues he should not have taken on this role. He either doesn't understand the remit or thinks he is above it. It has got increasingly bad to the point I think of him as our Biden - he should have finished up after a term (which is what he said was his intention at the outset).

For some reason a displaced child being pulled today from the rubble of a destroyed building in the Yemen or South Sudan or Syria just doesn't seem to matter enough to inspire passionate speeches about them by our president and government.

Umm and what country has been bombing Syria and Yemen recently? The only country bombing them by the way. Yemen has had a truce since 2022.

There have been many statements made on Syria recently. And Ireland has actually been vocal on South Sudan speaking about gender based violence and using starvation as a weapon on war. We would have minimal impact here though. It is continuously active on Myanmar. It just doesn't get the same media pick up . Ukraine the same - all of Europe is in agreement on this.

We could definitely do more. But we definitely just don't speak out on one thing.

None of them appear to be terribly bothered by the plight of women in Afghanistan. Women there have been relegated to a status lower than domestic animals.

Women in Iran are also in a terrible situation. Their status is well below second class.

Actually when Ireland was on the UN Security Council it was active on Afghanistan - it blocked an exception that allowed taliban leaders to travel to meet foreign officials. We have continuously spoken out about the taliban but obviously have basically no influence here. They are already not an internationally recognised government.

I haven't heard Micheal D mention them. Or Iran, which is an internationally recognised government

It's honestly laughable to say that Michael D has said nothing about Afghanistan. He's been highlighting the issues with the Taliban for as long as I can remember; he got ejected from the Dail for it at one point. He was demanding the withdrawal of Irish personnel there during the war as well, I remember that controversy.

He has spent his entire career speaking out about human rights both here and abroad. It's categorically not true that he has only spoken out for Gaza. You'd be hard pushed to find a speech from him, that doesn't mention the words human rights, women's rights or climate change.

I'm talking about the current situation in Afghanistan. He spoke out against them in the past but nothing in recent times that I've heard.

Have you not? Clearly that is proof at the grand old age of 80, after a career of speaking out about human rights around the world, he'd just become a racist instead.

I've only heard him speak once, within the last few years. at an event that my organisation at a time was invited to, and he was speaking about Afghanistan and women's access to education.

So I can only surmise that you are wrong.