Jul 302011

The presidential election campaign seems to be coming off the rails for David Norris, but nobody has yet said exactly why, though there are hints that he may have written an inapproriate letter to Israeli authorities in 1992, requesting clemency for a former lover, Ezra Nawi, convicted of sex with an under-age youth.   Various members of his election team seem to have quit, either by text or on Twitter, but there’s almost no hard information. The article states that Nawi, an outspoken Jewish critic of Israeli policy in Gaza and the West Bank, was convicted of sex with a minor in 1992, but information on this conviction seems to be scant.  Norris broke up with Nawi due to his persistent infedilities.

I have been unable to find any details of this conviction on line, apart from a post on politics.ie by our old friend, TheSystemWorks, who was banned from this site for attempting to derail criticism of Israeli policy regarding Palestine.  This individual had a clear policy of promoting Israeli government policy, not just on this site, but on many others, and used many dishonest and disruptive tactics while he was allowed to take part in discussions here.  As I said, he is no longer tolerated, due to his disrespect for those who disagreed with his government’s actions.

This isn’t to say that reports of the conviction are invented, but the timing is certainly suspicious, to say the least.   I can’t find anything about the trial, but maybe some vigilant reader might be able to provide more details.

There is no suggestion that Norris had anything to do with Nawi’s actions, apart from seeking clemency in sentencing, but the campaign team seems to be disintegrating around him.

Maybe more information will emerge as time goes on but if this information has been leaked by the Israeli embassy, we’re looking at a clear interference in Irish affairs by an external agancy.





Our little friend, thesystemworks, posting as @mendingtheworld,  tweeted as follows:

The Israeli embassy had no interest in this until I broke the story to them. Screw you.

No change there, then.


More factoids emerge as the day wears on.  Some stories indicate that Norris wrote to the Israeli authorities on Oireachtas notepaper in 1992, requesting lenient treatment for Ezra Nawi, although it’s not yet clear if he wrote in respect of the sex offence or one of the political charges he faced for his opposition to Israel’s treatment of Palestinians.  If so, Norris wouldn’t be the only Irish politician to lobby the Israeli government on its policy, but it raises another question.

Why did the Israeli authorities keep such a letter quiet until right now, nineteen years later, as Norris enters the last lap of his quest to secure a nomination?  It’s hard to escape the conclusion that they chose the moment to cause maximum damage.

It’s also hard to escape the conclusion that Israel used the letter tactically to influence an election in this State.




Text of Norris letters


While the letter to the high court is in parts cringe-inducing, it is not on Oireachtas stationery as charged.

  126 Responses to “David Norris Presidential Campaign in Disarray”

Comments (125) Pingbacks (1)

    If true, I don’t see why it should result in people within his campaign team resigning.
    He’s not responsible for a former partner’s actions and he didn’t do anything illegal.
    Here’s an interesting article on Erza. Who was recently “jailed by Israel for his human rights advocacy”


    If it’s true that Nawi raped a child and Norris knew about it and continued the relationship, then that quiet simply is that, regardless of Israeli involvment. I have a horrible feeling that his campaign staff only resigned because Norris pleaded for clemency using offical Seanad paper. Am I the only one who feels this way?


    I don’t believe that continuing the relationship indicated anything other than loyalty. It happens all the time after one partner has committed some appalling crime and in my opinion is a personal decision between two people.

    It comes down to exactly what Norris did when he contacted the Israeli authorities. If he wrote as a private citizen then he has done no more than anyone might do on behalf of a loved-one, even if that person has committed a crime. On the other hand, if he tried to use his position as a senator to influence a court of law in another state, then it seems to me that at the very least, he was guilty of monumental stupidity. If he did abuse his elected status this way then I don’t think he can credibly remain a senator.

    However, there is a big, big question to ask. The Israeli authorities have known about this letter for 19 years and only now decided to release it.



    Abusing a defenseless child is different. If I found out that my girlfriend molested a child I’d “well” before throwing her headfirst into a fucking skip. There is a myriad number of reasons why
    Mossad/Israel would give the go ahead for that, chiefly among them is Ireland’s general opposition to Israeli “policy” in the region. Nawi is too marginalised and unimportant a figure for them to get too worked up about.


    Nawi was convicted, not Norris. And Norris’s letter is said to have been about the sentence, not the verdict.

    This leak looks politically motivated, and calculated, for whatever reason, to assist Israeli policy at this moment.


    Fully aware Nawi was convicted and not Norris. Fully aware that Nawi is a Paedophile or at least has Paeodophillic tendencies and Norris isn’t and dosen’t. As i said with the information Norris had that should have been game over. I’m struggling to believe this.


    The strange thing is that he wouldn’t be a paedophile in Spain, Denmark, Austria, France, Germany, Greece, Portugal, Hungary, Iceland, Italy, Poland or the Czech Republic.

    It appears to be a relative concept. Creepy but not absolute.


    Ya i know that it was statutory which is meaningfully mitigating but forgive me for being uneasy about it. The child is Palistinian the poorest of the poor the most vunerable of the vunerable. that be mitigating too but not in a good way.


    I’m trying to think my way through this because it has wide relevance. The first thing we have to accept is that the word “paedophile” doesn’t seem to have a universal, commonly accepted meaning, even within the EU, which comes as a bit of a surprise to me.


    It’s all comes down to vulnerability. Wheather you are a Predator or a Paedophile depends on a whole range of factors, you’re still a fucking cunt.


    That’s fine, but cuntishness is not a measurable quantity, and I would like to find some ground everyone might agree on.


    Paedophile, 14 and under. I Think that people of good conscience everywhere can happily agree on that definition. There ya go i’ve solved it.


    How about in Spain?


    Thats simpily wrong. As i said the truth at the core of this issue is vulnerability.Two teens rutting and being targeted by a predator is a different thing. Anyway I dont care what the Spanish think, my recalling of the history of this might be a bit sketchy but didn’t they out of confusion, stupidity and cowardice leave us in the lurch back in the day. Somewhere in the Cobh area i’n told.


    And that’s relevant in what way exactly?


    Well the reports I read said it was a 15 year old,not 14. And statutory meaning that it was consensual but tehnically illegal. There are 15 year olds precicious enough to get into that kind of shenanigans with open eyes, so really the conviction (insofar as we know about it) means nothing in relation to this man’s sexual label.

    I very much doubt that this is a case of Israel trying to interfere in our sovereign processes; you can be sure that this letter has been known about for some time now by someone here, who has only now called in a favour and asked for it to be released. It was anounced earlier on (can;t rcall by whom) that the battle to secure the candidacies would be fought using dirty tricks, and quite a deal was made of this at the time – so I would bet that they were already diggin up the bodies even last year….My bet would be FF, who are desperate to get any kind of control back

    I really hope Norris can survive this one….


    It’s not relevant at all, was trying and obviously not succeding to be funny.


    Now, I was searching the net in different languages (those I speak at least) and didn’t find anything about a conviction of Nawi as a child molester. Not a hint. Not even on gays’ websites. Ok, so it’s a long time ago, www-wise. And probably it’s an old chestnut for everyone except those with vested interests.

    What I found is that Nawi was a human rights activist, one who most certainly is “a thorn in the flesh” of the Israeli establishment. And by now, after years of watching, I wouldn’t put anything beyond said establishment.

    So Nawi apparantly had sexual relations with someone considerably younger. Bad form in any case but not necessarily a crime, as Bock explained in another thread. Didn’t topple Signore Berlusconi yet, didn’t it? But then the young ones in his case were only girls, and probably “sluts” in the public opinion. Macho, macho… as long as girls are involved.

    Don’t get me wrong, I have no time whatsoever for rapists and child molesters. Or animal torturers. I’m not even interested if they had a terrible childhood or problems with their mammy. They are scum, as simple as.

    Nawi is gay and that gives leverage for all sorts of mud-slinging, especially in countries with a fundamentalist faith and a claim to the moral highground. As Israel. As Ireland, too, in some way or other. As Norris well might know.

    That this letter turned up 19 years later is actually an indication that it is used for political reasons, in my opinion at least. He was a senator for quite a long time and it was never am issue.
    Like in the US, when political candidates were accused that they inhaled a joint when at a party as a, say, 19 year old. Which is only interesting when someone is in the way of someone else.

    As far as I understand, Norris didn’t claim the innocence of his then lover. He just asked for clemency in his letter. What’s wrong with that? Since I consider him as an intelligent person with some integrity I think he wouldn’t have done that if he thought that his lover actually raped a child. But then, what do I know?

    Anyway. What hypocrites are Norris’ team if they jump ship right now? What agenda lies behind all that so-called scandal?
    I think that’s the real question.


    Bock,I see you are a politically correct liberal graduate from the Frankfurt school.Norris is so tainted and and so unsuitable.I’m amazed anyone could defend him.I recall Norris defended the irish speaking “poet” from Donegal who abused children in Nepal.What the hell is wrong with people? Wrong is wrong.This guy is a pervert.


    Four meaningless labels in four lines. Nice going Bob. Impressive analysis out of you.

    I thought “liberal” was an insult only in America but obviously the disease has spread.


    Bock, Liberal is not an insult,it is a label that fits you well.How you can defend Norris and his ilk is beyond me.



    Next you’ll be saying “Outraged mother of seven”.


    Bock,you disappoint me.You have no argument to make at all.Do you even know what I mean when I say you’re a graduate of the Frankfurt School?You’re a lightweight politically correct person.Just like 95% of the people here.


    Bob, I don’t give a rat’s arse what you think of me. I’m happy to be a lightweight. Now off you go and patronise someone more serious with your Daily Mail clichés.


    Goodnight Bock.Checkmate!!


    What’s up with Bob, Bock? Have you been yanking his chain someplace else?


    Poor old Bock has no arguments to make.He’s a lightweight.He even threw in the Daily Mail as an insult.What an intellectual!!


    Bob, if you have an argument to make, let’s hear it.


    Bob, do you even know what the Frankfurt School is? I doubt it.

    I am from that School, with a dregree by the way.
    So go on, discuss! I’d love to pull your intellectual balls off!
    I’m sure your knowledge ends at the Murdoch-interpretation.


    Bob, do you have something to say about the Norris story?


    Carrig..Berlusconis girlfriends were all of legal age, he commited no crime.Anyhow Nawi and the Israelis at least have something in common,,,both are screwing the Palestinians.


    William: I didn’t say it is a crime to screw someone younger. See: http://bocktherobber.com/2011/07/schrodingers-pervert
    Berlusconi is 74 years of age. If he grabs an 18 year old it is still kind of a pervert act. Nobody can tell me that a 17 year old girl fancys seriously a 74 year old man, unless he is powerful, rich and good-looking. The latter at least Berlusconi is not. The first two might be a kind of attraction or of being overwhelmed or so. Still dodgy. And still using power to get what you want. It’s complicated, I know.

    Your “witty remark” is, by the way, not witty at all. The Israelis are screwing the Palestinians alright, but what gives you the idea that Nawi screws Palestinians?
    Is that some Irish sense of sexual deprived humour?

    Sorry, I’m not in the mood right now to think jokes about serious things like that are funny. I’m just dealing in real life with hypocrisy, incomptence and ignorance in my lovely county clare. I apologise if I come across a bit, well, cross.


    Why would Israel be said to have an agenda for leaking/releasing the letter now as opposed to hanging onto it and releasing it either much later when Norris was an actual candidate or ” even better” when he’d been elected President ? Unless the agenda is to damage Norris and not Ireland ?


    Why Israel would have an agenda?

    Because Israel might not be interested to have a president in the western world, as small as Ireland might be, who is opposed to their politics?
    A senator doesn’t hurt, but a president does.
    And destroying a candidate before he is famous, sort of, is less spectacular than exposing an elected president. The media might notice and Israel could be put into a bad light in the world wide media.

    Dont’ ever underestimate cunning and deviousness.


    Shur didn’t that knob above – ‘the system works’ write,”the Israeli embassy had no interest in this until I broke the story to them. Screw you.”
    Maybe the little twirp has a pal in Israel who had it released.

    Following the link ‘Text of Norris letters’ above. I wouldn’t be suprised if Norris didn’t write those.


    The whole thing smells dodgy. Now seems the minor in question might have been 17, not 15, the issue being that homosexual activity at the time was illegal in Israel until the age of 18. (Heterosexual activity was legal at 16).

    The SystemWorks individual (http://thesystemworks.wordpress.com/) is right wing and openly opposed to David Norris’ candidacy, and I tend to agree with Carrig that Israel would not like to see Norris holding the presidency.


    Mick, if you have a source for that, could you link to it please? I’d like to clear this up one way or the other. I found confirmation that the age of consent for gays was 18. Now where’s the authorative source for the age of the youth?


    John Waters, who normally engerders in me the visceral response to vomit blood was excellent on Dunphy’s show on newstalk this morning.


    Surely the real problem here is, not that he supported his friend and tried to influence the sentencing process in another state but that he used his position as a senator using Seanad paper thereby bringing the Houses of the Oireachtas into it. Was this abuse of power or just bad political judgement? Either way his goose may be cooked !


    The letter is on unheaded paper.


    Are you sure of that Bock|? Because all the reports seem to be indicating that it was…


    He used the letterhead writing to Nawi’s lawyer and in a general character testimonial to whom it may concern. Not to the court.


    Compare and Contrast: Norris 2011/1997 letter, and Kathleen Lynch “Good Stock” 2008 letter. While your at it, compare to Gay Mitchell’s 1997/2003 Florida death row letter.

    The more I think about this, the more I come to the conclusion that Norris is being done in by guilt by association. His campaign is faltering not because of what he did, but because of what someone he knew did or is. Today’s Sun headline said it all about how Irish presidential campaign are run.

    It’s also worth mentioning the Lenihen Snr presidential campaign way back in 1990. Again, the leading candidate was removed before the race began by conveniently timed ghosts from their past. Politics and policy in this country is locked up tighter than a drum.


    The letter to the courts was not on headed paper but in the letter, he makes reference to the fact that he is a senator, that he was ‘widely mentioned as a possible presidential candidate’ and also that he was ‘ a person of some consequence whose views are not arrived at lightly or for no good reason’. So he obviously thought long and hard about writing this letter and decided that his personal feelings towards Nawi were strongly than any politicial considerations.


    ” Don’t ever underestimate cunning and deviousness ”
    Damn Jews, eh ?


    Louise, does the letter which is some 17 years old actually refer to Norris as ‘widely mentioned as a possible presidential candidate’?

    I presume you’ve read the letter.


    @ John

    I’m just listening to the Dunphy podcast, and I agree with you on both points …. Waters is spot-on in this case.

    Appallingly bad judgement on Norris’s part ….. not Presidential in the slightest.


    Guys, if you want to discuss the Dunphy podcast, could you please do it wherever the Dunphy webcast is posted? Thanks.


    “A senator doesn’t hurt, but a president does.”

    I disagree.
    The Irish presidency is a neutered office – permission must be granted for a the holder to take a piss.


    Pg. 4 No.8. You presumed right.
    Linked to above btw.


    In answer to the question posed in comment 45, yes, the letter does and yes, I’ve read it all (a few times actually). Download and read page 4, the paragraph that begins ‘Secondly I am a serious and respected person both within my own community and to some extent at least internationally.’


    Thanks Louise, read that.

    The actual line where he refers to the presidential election states that he is seen as a candidate in the forthcoming presidential elections. The letter is dated August 29 1997. He may well have been mooted as a candidate in 1997, I don’t remember. I think he was trying to give some backgroung to his credentials and that he was writing from an informed position.

    I don’t have any problem with anything contained in the letter. He was not seeking to have the conviction overturned but did ask for clemency. Under Israeli law judges may choose from a variety of sentencing depending on the severity and circumstances of the crime. He also used his considerable experience in similar cases to underline what he considered to be flaws in the case. Israeli law is in part based on Common Law and case law from Ireland and Britain may be taken as precedence.. He at no time condoned the offence.

    This man is being hounded out of the presidential race by the self appointed moral guardians. The same moral guardians who have been deafeningly silent in the calls for criminal proceedings be taken against John MaGee and Seán Brady. What double standards.


    Came across the Sindo by accident yesterday, free read in Supermac’s. It carried the clemency letter in full which I read in full. I found the tone of the letter to be arogant condescending and impertinent. I wasn’t going to vote for him anyway. If he does get on the ballot, which I now doubt, I cannot see middle Ireland rallying behind him.


    The letter is awful


    Is the blogger mentioned in this article ‘the systems works”, I wonder?

    He now feels a “bit betrayed”. What a fucking weasel.
    Is he in trouble with this friends in Israel or the Israeli embassy since his twitter post?
    Trying to do some back-pedding now it seems.

    It says in the article, “but blogger John Connolly (22), based in London, said he had not been in contact with the Israeli authorities before publishing details of Ezra Nawi’s conviction.”

    Yet he had wrote in a twitter post, “The Israeli embassy had no interest in this until I broke the story to them. Screw you”.

    So he was bullshitting about being in touch with the Israeli embassy then? Or maybe not.
    Either way that 22 year old has a lot of growing up to do.


    The very same vindictive little fantasist we all came to dislike so much a couple of years back.


    Speaking of letters. Gay Mitchell wrote, in his official capacity, to the Governor of Florida asking him to commute a death sentence on a convicted murderer to a life sentence. This isn’t receiveing any media attention. As Red Mist says above middle ireland probably won;t vote for Norris, will they vote for Mitchell? Bear in mind that neither sought to have the convictions overthrown, they merely appealed for clemency. Is Norris’ “crime” that he intervened for a former partner? Is it ok to intervene in the sentencing of a convicted murderer but not in the sentencing of a sex offender? Or does the fact that Paul Hill mudered two women at an abortion clinic make it ok?


    Just had a read there of his latest post on Norris and the comments.
    He’s an all mighty fucking prick I have to say.
    “Right now I am working on getting more information from Israeli sources on Nawi’s activities and his relationship with Norris. This matter isn’t over by a long shot.
    I have my theories on the other skeletons but will have to keep quiet until I know more (to avoid a lawsuit and all)” And he’s only delighted with himself that his story has gone national.

    The independent article indicates he’s willing to betray his source, if he even has one.
    And he’s clearly been trying to persuade people of his relationship with contacts within Israel and the Israeli embassy.

    Why would anyone want anything to do with that kind of a weasel. He’s only an embarrasment.


    So “thesystemworks” is in reality a little 22 year old Irish prick called John Connolly….jesus I dont know whether to laugh or cry hahahaha


    Nice work FME. Jesus, what a fucking freak. So it seems Norris wasn’t involved in a relationship with Nawi at the time or after the rape. Fine. How and ever that seems a moot point considering what we now know. the letter was sickening.


    Just one more comment on that 22 year old horrible cretin.
    The little gurrier needs a bit of sense knocked into him.
    What an underhanded, vindictive piece of work.
    Reading the letter Norris wrote, I have no doubt his intentions were good.
    I don’t think he did anything unethical.
    Unlike that horrible urchin with a blog.
    That’s all I have to say on that muppet.


    This is how the guy describes himself on his blog ….

    “I want to make a contribution, though it may be a small one, to defending liberty and truth. I will be offensive in doing so. For you see, I have two major loves: free markets and Zionism. Yep, I’m the kind of guy most folks today are indoctrinated to hate. I believe environmentalists are scamming us, as is the human rights industry and of course the socialists, as always. Oh, and Palestinians are not a bunch of perfect victims. So I’m here to rant, partly as a form of therapy, I suppose.

    Of course, I will also treat any surfer kind enough to stop by to lighter fare: a dose of humour, everyday life observations, and of course, more ranting. Lots of ranting. Nothing beats a good rant.

    By the way, I’m a 22-year old recent law graduate living in London. I spent most of my life in the land of milk and silage – that is, rural Ireland – and also the cities of Dublin and Cork. Yet I believe Jerusalem is closest to my heart. I’m a nerd, though not a geek, and I’m passionate about travel, learning and a good argument.”

    John Connolly sounds like one of those dangerous guys you’d like to strangle before they have the capacity to cause a lot of harm.


    John @ 58 in what way is the letter sickening?


    I wouldn’t be so quick to condemn John. You’re only allowing yourself to be manipulated by a little twirp with ulterior motives and they’re certainly not based on Norris and his merits.


    I’m not being manipulated. The two matters are seperate as are the two people. I believe what Norris did was wrong and disingenous for a whole number of reasons and he should pull out of the race. I, also believe Norris at his core to be a good man. I’m pro Palestinian and anti Israeli policy in the region without being anti Israeli or anti Semitic whatever the fuck that means. I obviously realise that John Connolly is a pathetic window licker with an agenda.


    Norris is not a bad man but he displayed a terrible lack of judgement in that letter. I don’t care if John Connolly has an agenda. We had a right to know about that letter and no matter how vicious Connolly’s motives might be, the facts remain.

    I think that Norris allowed himself to be blinded by his feelings for Nawi and was too emotional about the issue.

    Re the relationship with Nawi, there appears to be many doubts as to when it actually ended. Some commentators are saying that it ended only as recently as 2001. Is it relevant? I don’t know.


    I would love to see a transcript of the trial, or even a summary, instead of all the secondhand facts being thrown out.




    What is?


    RE: Comment No. 63 -John.
    I don’t think his letter was disingenous at all. In fact I think it was sincere.
    People are so quick to condemn without even knowing the facts of the case against Nawi.
    And I don’t know about you but I certainly wouldn’t allow myself to be lead to believe anything about anyone, when they clearly have an agenda as you say.

    I agree, I think Norris a good man. I also think there’s been a malicious campaign against him to ruin his chances of a nomination. I think he should get his nomination and let the people decide.


    If the relationship continued that ,in my opinion, is very relevant.


    Excuse me John, but who made you judge and juror of the relevancy or otherwise of anyone’s personal relationships? Do you even know the facts of the case against Nawi?


    That’s below the belt but i’ll answer it. Not aware of all the facts and neither is anyone else but i’ve been following this closely. You’re right nobody has made me judge and jurior on what is a moral question so i’ll make this as simple as possible. If I found out that my girlfriend or anyone i know including a member of my family was convicted of statuory rape or of molesting a child I would have nothing more to do with them. Cannot believe what i’m reading espically on this site.


    I’ll be addressing that issue shortly, but let me just interject that this matter is so riddled with spooks and chancers, I want to see authoritative, definitve sources for everything. So far I have been unable to find a contemporary report of the case. What sources are we relying on?


    Let the people decide.

    Norris may have failings. so what, don`t we all!

    He sould be given the chance to go forward as a candidate for president. As to his letter, well personally I don`t find anything wrong in it. It seemed to be a heartfelt appeal to the court on behalf of a very dear friend. Would wish that I had friends like that. Maybe I have.

    The letter was used as a way to hightlight his sexual orientation, hinting on the criminal aspect. Once the exact contents became known, well, seems like a damp squib to me. Of course there will be others that will see what they want to see in that letter.

    As an aside, i see where you are going Bock, looking to see what the court case was like, how it was conducted and if David Norris`s letter had any effect on the court and what was the ultimate sentence. I can only say that it must be written somewhere, records are kept, maybe the Israeli Court records can help. Just airing my thoughts here Bock. I have no faith in anything the Israeli Courts do.


    Not only that. I’d prefer not to be relying on the Sunday Independent for hard facts. After all, we have already discovered that there were two different ages of consent in Israel at the time. I just want to see the precise evidence that was put forward because, unlike most cases, this one is full of people with political agendas.


    Good point. I think it is fairly clear that Nawi was convicted, wheather Norris continued the relationship or not we dont know, thats why I used the conditional. By the way I’ve been following this site for 2 years without commenting that spooks and chancers bit probably wasn’t fired in my direction I know but just in case I’m not.


    No matter what the age of consent, I personally think there is something a little questionable about a sexual relationship between a mature adult and a teenager, of any sex. There is an imbalance in the maturity that makes the relationship slightly exploitative. And I think that David Norris has a different view to me on that matter, if recent events are anything to go by.


    RE: Comment 71.
    To be frank with you John I thought my comment was restrained if anything, considering how distasteful I find your speculation on Norris’s continuation of his relationship with Nawi.
    First off, you are speculating on the possibility of the relationship continuing after Nawi’s conviction. You don’t know if it did and in what capacity, but are willing to condemn in advance.
    Also, if the relationship did continue, you shouldn’t be putting your own moral compass on matters especially when you don’t know the facts.
    I’d have suspicions of the legitimacy of any convictions of Nawi by the Israelis.
    He was also “jailed by Israel for his human rights advocacy” recently.


    John @ 71 agree with you there mate, especially your last sentence.


    John, Darina Allens husband was convicted of posessing child pornography. Do you boycott Ballymaloe products? The Irish Examiner? (to which DA is a contributor)

    Norris has not been convicted of anything, if he is guilty of anything it is loyalty.

    I think the problem here is not that he wrote seeking clemency but rather that he sought clemency for a sex offerder. No one seems bothered by Mitchells intervention for a convicted murderer.

    Middle Ireland is outraged.


    I’m getting tired of this, one more go and then I’m getting drunk. If you look at my posts at the very top right through I have used the word ”IF”. Let me see If I understand your last post. If Nawi wasn’t framed by the Israeli’s and if Norris continued in a relationship of any kind with him and if Norris pleaded for clemency using offical government paper I have every fucking right not to impose my moral compas on anyone but to express my moral disgust.


    But Norris didn’t appeal for clemency using official government paper.


    That’s splitting hairs. He wrote the letter to Nawi’s lawyer on headed paper and he referred to himself as a senator and a person of some consquence in the letter to the judges. He spent quite a lot of time outlining his credentials, achievements and influence. He most certainly did not write the letter as David Norris, ordinary man.


    I’m not following you there John.
    Look to keep it simple. Stop speculating. That’s all.
    And another thing, a relationship of some kind obviously continued after the conviction.

    If any moral disgust is warranted here, I think it should be towards that cretin John Connolly.


    @ No 8. I’m about as far from middle Ireland as is possible.


    Speculation, considering some of the evidence already in the public domain, in this instance, is actually OK.


    @ 84, Good for you John

    @ 82, Louise, it is not splitting hairs, it is a fact. He wrote a “To whom it may concern” on official paper, he wrote the clemency letter on plain paper. You yourself read the letter several times.

    A letter from DN the ordinary guy wouldn’t have seen the light of day. A letter from DN the senator stands a better chance of being read by the judge,

    No one, not even DN condoned the offence or questioned the legitimacy of the court yet there is outrage that he wrote at all. Ireland can be an intollerant conservative shithole at times. Unless you’re a priest.


    island bank @73
    you “have no faith in anything the Israeli courts do” Given that they found a Jewish citizen guilty of the statutory rape of a Palestinian , what exactly would they have had to have done in this case to satisfy your standards ?


    @ 86 – It still makes it clear in the letter that the person writing it is a senator. I don’t see why headed paper would make a difference in this case.

    David Norris did actually criticise some of the conclusions reached at the trial and also criticised the manner in which Nawi was arrested. Maybe he was right, but I stand by my belief that it was not appropriate for him to do so in his official capacity as senator. This is not intolerance or conservatism; this is merely stating that I think he wouldn’t be suitable as president (still support his right to be nominated though).
    Criticising David Norris does not make one an apologist for priests who abuse children.


    Just before I go John Connolly is an irrelevance.


    I agree. That’s why he was kicked off this site.


    Louise I’d imagine the reason for Norris introducing himself as a senator and friend of Newi was to try and have some credibility with the judge. Had he written as DN the bloke in the pub I doubt that his letter would have even been read. However had he written on Oireachtas headed paper it may have been construed as interference by a foreign government official. I honestly don’t see why it should affect his presidential campaign. Mitchell seems unaffected by his letter writing.


    One part of this dilemma is very clear, JC aka TSW must have invested an enormous amount of his vindictive manipulative and nasty mind set on derailing Sen. Norris’s Presidential bid.

    I would be of the opinion that Sen Norris would make a very fine President, He would have my vote but for me as a potential voter what really bothers me now is……………………

    1. D.N.’s letter of appeal for a non custodial sentence based on the ” Strongest arguement of Ad Misericordiam ” seems to demonstrate a lack of clarity and an overly emotive message lacking the objectivity while attempting to blend a legal argument citing precedents yet delivering a strong emotive plea suggesting the potential of ” suicide ” and an ” elderly mother ” .

    2. D.N. suggested in that letter that he offer himself as a ” Guarantor ” that Nawi would never again commit such an offence.
    That suggests to me an extreme overeach of either naivite or sheer panic neither of those traits would i find reassuring in a person assuming a burden of responsibility for others.

    3. There seems to be little doubt surrounding the facts that Nawi, who would have been about 40 at the time, had some kind of sexual liason with a teenager now what we don’t know is who seduced who or what information was given at the time if Nawi knew what age the ” teenager ” was at the time, However, IF it was decided by the Israeli Courts at that time that the offense commited was that of ” Statutory Rape ” then i would be of the opinion that Senator Norris was extremly beyond his remit to suggest to any Court the non application of a non custodial sentence, If Senator Norris believed he would hold any sway or deliver any impact in the delivery of sentence then for me as a David Norris supporter i am very dissapointed at his choice to put aside the greater objectivity required for a public representative.

    4. We have debated here over several threads the demise of the greater growth of Irish Society through the foul processes of ” cute hoorism ” I feel sad today to see all of this fall on Senator Norris but i fear he brought it on himself to a large degree, I believe he was 100 % sincere in what he wrote but unfortunatly was blinded that it was another form of the dreaded ” cute hoorism ” which i would never have applied to D.N. previously, But how do we define ” Cute Hoorism ” if its not by using the appointed position to provide gains for those we hold close ( for whatever reason ) and to attemt to circumnavigate the normal procedures those people would, without political influence have to travel.


    Spent a bit of time on his site, the guy is disturbed.


    John, I had to edit your comment. You can’t suggest things like that.


    Ya, badly judged on my part.


    Lapsedmethodist. Regarding your comment – 87.

    “you “have no faith in anything the Israeli courts do” Given that they found a Jewish citizen guilty of the statutory rape of a Palestinian , what exactly would they have had to have done in this case to satisfy your standards ?”

    I doubt Nawi’s religion matters a jot to the Israelis when he’s a supportor of the Palestinians.
    He’s actually an Arab jew born to Iraqi immigrants according to what I’ve read.



    The spam filtering system is having an off day and intercepting all comments. We don’t control it and we can’t fix it, so please be patient. If your comment doesn’t show up immediately, it’s nothing to get bothered about. Eventually, things will sort themselves out, your Dudeness. Please don’t keep reposting the same thing.


    FME @ 98
    What in the name of all that’s holy is an ” Arab Jew ” ? And if the Israeli courts , which include a judiciary drawn from all Israels ethnic and religious groups, can find their President guilty of rape, what else then can they do to put islandbanks febrile mind at ease ?


    There aren’t many ethnicities that are also religions. Maybe that’s how the confusion arises.

    WIkipedia has this to say about Arab Jews.

    Another interesting article on the subject is here.


    I think what this discussion needs and only in this one instance mind, is, George Galloway. Just a thought.


    I’m not having him crawling around the floor in a cat suit.


    Si Senor, nobody wants that no matter who’s floor it is. Just thought he could liven this discussion with only the pure hatred that people have for the RESPECT man.


    Yes Bock, I know what they are.. but not in the context of whether or not Norris should have a shot at the Pres job. Or indeed what having had Iraqi parents – the Jews of Iraq died out when the last 50 were hung in 1969 – would cause the Israeli judiciary to decide one way or another.


    I only say this in view of your comment : “What in the name of all that’s holy is an ” Arab Jew? ”


    @ 105 Those words you’ve used and i’ve tried hundreds of combinations make absolutely no sense.


    I can find no reference to the last 50 Jews being hanged in 1969. There is a reference to 14 Iraqis, nine of whom were Jews, and also a reference to this being the thing that forced Baghdad’s remaining Jews to leave, followed in the next ten years by most of the other Iraqi Jews.

    I’d greatly appreciate if people didn’t make shit up for the sake of argument. It pisses me off and distorts the logical space I try to maintain here.


    Bock, I am amazed at attitudes defending Norris on this site. I wonder if we were dealing with Fr Nawi convicted of unlawful sex with a minor and Bishop Norris writing to influence an Irish court in sentencing Fr. Nawi would attitudes be so forgiving.


    If a bishop wrote to an Irish court he might be thought to have some influence. As it happens, Norris didn’t write directly to the court, which in any case was outside the jurisdiction. He sent the letter to Nawi’s Israeli lawyer and left it up to him as to whether the letter should be submitted during the sentencing phase of the trial when mitigation pleas were being made. The lawyer chose to use Norris’s letter as part of his argument. I think the letter was foolish and pompous, but it’s being spun as something very different.


    Firstly I think its important to state that I have always been and will continue to be a supported of the Palestinian peoples right to self determination in their own land.
    I also believe that Israel has a right to exist and are morally and legally entitled to live within the boundaries of the land of Israel established in 1948.

    1. thesystemworks – A wanker of the highest order. I have had several run ins with him on this blog over the last while. He is a major ghoul.

    2. Nawi – A man in his forties having sex with a 15 year old boy is wrong, plain and simple. You can go on all day about the ages of consent in different parts of Europe etc. But the reality is that this middle aged man had sex with a 15 year old boy.

    3. I have and will continue to fight and criticize organisations who hide and support Paedophiles. The Catholic Church being the most significant of these. But I am sure they are not the only ones.

    4. David Norris is an individual for whom I had great respect, for his political views and his challenge to the political establishment in Ireland to tell the people the truth and move this country towards the day when we can eventually call ourselves a true Republic.
    He therefore cannot and should not be defended or excused for his “mistake” or “his lack of judgement” in dealing with this very serious issue of a middle aged man having sex with a 15 year old boy. A boy we should consider, having the maturity of most 15 year old boys heading towards the back end of puberty. I am outraged at the way the catholic church continues to hide and support paedophiles within it ranks. If I am to be consistent in this regard, I must also condemn Norris for using his position and privilege as a Senator in the Irish Republic to request clemency for a convicted child rapist.


    And what would you think of a presidential candidate who used the his position and privilege to request clemency for a convicted murderer?

    By Fintan O’Toole

    “In 2002, when it emerged that the then junior minister Bobby Molloy had intervened in a much more serious way on behalf of a child rapist, Patrick Naughton, the then taoiseach, Bertie Ahern, defended him on the basis that “that’s what politicians do. A Teachta Dála is a public representative and you make representations.” There is nothing to suggest that Ahern was wrong about this. In relation to child rape alone, we know of three specific cases of TDs making pleas on their behalf. In 2007, it emerged that Fianna Fáil TD Tony Killeen had twice written to the minister for justice seeking early release for a heinous double rapist, Joseph Nugent. Fine Gael’s Pat Breen went so far as to put down a parliamentary question about when Nugent would be released. The Cork Labour TD Kathleen Lynch wrote a letter to a judge in 2008 to tell him that a convicted rapist of two children came from “a good family”.
    What happened when these interventions came to public attention? Molloy eventually resigned – but that was because his office had gone even further and tried to contact the judge directly. The other three subsequently gained political promotion: Killeen to the cabinet as minister for defence; Breen to the chairmanship of the Oireachtas committee on foreign affairs; and Lynch to a junior ministry with responsibility for disability and older people. It is absolutely clear that the existing standard in Ireland is that making representations on behalf of a child rapist does not debar you from public office.
    So, is Norris’s offence worse than these others? Hardly. It relates to a crime that, while utterly inexcusable, is less violent and brutal than the others. And, on a human level, it is considerably less cynical. Killeen, Lynch and Breen made their interventions purely as part of the demented system of clientelism. They did it to get votes. Norris did it out of a misguided sense of loyalty to someone who had been the love of his life”


    And what would you think of a presidential candidate who used the his position and privilege to request clemency for a convicted murderer?

    I would fell exactly the same way, whether the person trying to sway a Judges decision is a left winger, a right winger, a capitalist, or a communist, doesn’t matter.
    We should be consistent in condemning all acts by individual politicians who use their political position to try and sway a Judges decision. It is especially disgusting, and a gross misuse of political position, when it comes to looking for clemency for child rapists or murderers.


    LJS, given the almost total lack of reporting on the clemency letter sent by Gay Mitchell for a convicted murderer and the letters sent by Kileen and Lynch for rapists does this not smack of double standards. I know two wrongs don’t make a right but they either all resign or none resign.

    The forensic investigating of the Norris affair and the complete dieinterest in the Mitchell letter shows that the catholic right still control this sometime cess pit of a country. The same catholic right that harboured child rapists for years and indeed supplied them with a ready supply of victims.


    Just to point out it was statutory rape and not rape that Nawi was convicted of.
    I know this is a bit of a taboo subject but I was calling a friend of mine a doozy old man earlier, for well being a bit doozy about something. Anyways he was telling me he’s more of a dirty old man, that he was at a wedding over the weekend and there was a tall mature enough looking gorgeous girl there that he said he was ogling half the night. Turned out she was 14. He couldn’t believe it and neither could others he said.

    I wonder would people be less eager to condemn if it was an older man convicted of statutory rape with an underage girl, than between a man and an underage boy.


    @lapsedmethodist, re comment 105: I know a Jew of Iraqi heritage, living in Limerick too, he must have survived the 1969 hangings.

    My opinion on the David Norris affair is broadly in line with those expressed by Long John Silver in comment 111.

    Just wondering, does anyone have a link to the story of Gay Mitchell writing a letter of clemency for a double-murderer in Florida?


    I am 100% in agreement with LJS post 111. It does not matter “who shot who in the what now” as one of my legal eagle friends would say, it is simple, Adult + 15 yr old boy or girl up the arse= wrong and cannot be condoned or dealt with in the way David Norris did. Simply wrong.

    His letter as printed by the Sindo was cringe inducing, (person of consequence) oh please! His withdrew from the Presidential Race with an equally self serving pompous speech at his own front door. He should consider his position and resign from the Seanad. I hear some liberals on the 9 O’Clock news saying that what happened was in the past, isn’t that the Catholic Church defence for child abuse apologia and discretion on child abuse? Enough already, lets not support the supporters or apologists for or of David Norris or Nawi.


    Did he write directly to the Israeli high court? I was under the impression that he sent a letter to Nawi’s lawyer to submit or not as he saw fit when pleading mitigation. As I understand it, this was perfectly legal under Israeli law.


    Ok fair enough I know where you stand. I for one will not be associated even in the remotest way with a child abuser. Maybe its just me, I am opposed to this sort of thing and cannot countenance supporting any person who would.

    The rest is technical apologia. Look what the other candidate did?? Attacks on the person who broke the story, a story which turned out to have more than a grain of truth to it. Ad hominum as you would say yourself Bock. But didn’t he, (Norris) do a lot of good during his campaign on this that and the other, all very true but this does not excuse what he did. Whether he wrote to the court or not is immaterial, it was presented to that very same court and he could only have written the letter with that intention in mind.

    His resignation from the campaign was self serving and pompous. He said the disgraceful actions of Nawi had now “spred to him” as if he had nothing to do with it. Finishing with Beckett instead of Joyce was just showing off about how he was the cleverest boy in the class and to underline in his mind at least that he will be the greatest President that Ireland never had! Delusional, he should resign from the Seanad and Trinity for that matter.


    I don’t want to say too much right now, except that I would very much like to see a link to the source material here. SInce some of the court transcripts were made available to that individual, I can only presume the rest of them exist somewhere as well. I’m not happy to rely on Haaretz and the Sunday Independent as authoritative sources, because I have a feeling something extremely relevant remains to emerge.


    Re 114. I agree completely with you. They should be pressured into resigning. Although I am almost certain that Tony Kileen is no longer actively involved in Politics. Mitchell should certainly be brought to task for his actions.


    I hate clicking on the troll’s blog and I’d have no interest in his fanatic Zionism but he’s on about his source again.
    So now he’s saying his source, “is adamant the convictions in question were for Nawi’s political activities in Judea and Samaria, not statutory rape, and I believe the person on that.”

    There seems to be a lot of back-peddling by sneaky little weasels going on here.

    So the source contributed nothing to what was written on the troll’s blog apparently, but tipped him off to the conviction yet believed it to be a politically motivated spurious conviction all the same.

    Trolly says about his source, “my friend is from the West of Ireland, where he or she indeed canvassed for Higgins”
    This all stinks. Who’s behind the smear campaign against Norris?

    And where are the official court proceedings of Nawi’s convictions?
    Nawi has been jailed several times by the Israelis.

    Seems to be a lot of condemnation coming from some people when they don’t have the facts.
    And anecdotal comments above such as ” Given that they found a Jewish citizen guilty of the statutory rape of a Palestinian , what exactly would they have had to have done in this case to satisfy your standards”.

    It doesn’t satisy any standards that Nawi happens to be Jewish. He’s a Palestinian activist.
    He’s a plumber who has said he is an advocate for non violent campaigning and protest, yet he’s been convicted numerous times under suspicious circumstances. (e.g. his last conviction)


    Interesting discussion on the circumstances of the case here. Despite widespread efforts, nobody has yet been able to unearth a first-hand account of the trial. Very strange.


    This letter, being a very fixed part of the court case, is the only document in the public domain. Why?

    Who was the source of this letter?

    Why is the actual court case details so difficult to obtain?

    Was this letter released by people working for David Norris or some other source?

    How did this letter get into the public domain and not the full details of the court case also?

    Who would have such a source/resources for such an event?


    Bock, i have been told by a reseacher for one of the company`s that do polls, that David Norris is about to re-enter the presidential campaign next week, That is all i have for now. I really hope it is true.

Leave a Reply