What needs to be known about my findings on Norris and Nawi

Due to the vile anti-Semitic bile coming out of many of David Norris’s defenders (and some people who are just deranged), I am compelled to make certain matters more clear on my original story on David Norris and Ezra Nawi, and the process that went into publicizing it. It should be known that the only contact I had with any Israelis, in posting the original piece on Monday, was getting some friends to help with the translation of Hebrew material. That is all. The Israeli Embassy obviously got wind of the story eventually (I posted it on their Facebook wall, after all) but many Irish journalists and personalities knew about this from me before they did. When the story broken here gained momentum, it was only a matter of time before evidence of Norris’s assistance to Nawi came out. Norris openly admitted years ago to helping Nawi and his Arab lover when they were in legal difficulties abroad (even in relation to matters like work permits). Unless he used self-destructing paper or smoke signals for secrecy, once the story went national the gritty details could never have been kept secret. I never had those papers, and never claimed to have them.

My views on many issues are very different from those held by David Norris, and not just on Israel. They are in fact very different from all those in the Irish Presidential race. That is why I am not supporting any candidate. I happen to think the battle of ideas is far more exciting than the fight for bums on seats in some parliament, and currently have no membership in any political party (though I have in the past). I would have thought my heterodox views would have been irrelevant given the important nature of the story. If I came by information like this on any person running for office, I would publish it in whatever way I could.

This is despite the motives of the person who inspired me to do the research in the first place. Here is something I have been emphatic about from the beginning: My friend is a trade unionist. That is what I meant by saying ‘labour movement’ when I spoke to the media. It does not necessarily mean Labour Party. However, recently it hit home that the person is fond of Michael D. Higgins and canvassed for him many elections ago. That has unnerved me a bit.

Nevertheless, I have absolutely no regrets about what has occurred. I am in fact quite glad about it, when I think David Norris could very well have been President before the relationship with Ezra Nawi became widely known. Can you imagine what the political and news climate would be like in Ireland and abroad if the information were to get out when David Norris could have been Ireland’s Head of State?

Some people have made an issue out of nothing on hearing I am going to Israeli sources for more information on Nawi and his relationship with Norris. Yes, indeed I am. It doesn’t mean Israeli sources were behind the original piece I wrote, like many are insinuating. I have been caught upon something big, and much like in the case of the Dude (a.k.a. Jeffrey Lebowski) it has been mostly unintentional. I want to converse directly with people on the ground, particularly the Jewish community of Judah and Shomron who have fought with Nawi for many years. This is for my own interest, but no doubt if I should publish what I learn it will be of interest to many readers.


About Cranky Notions
Reactionary. That fella from the Norris scandal.

52 Responses to What needs to be known about my findings on Norris and Nawi

  1. Pingback: Curiouser And Curiouser – David Norris, John Connolly, Labour And Israel « An Sionnach Fionn

  2. roxymuzak says:

    Norris step down and stop disgracing the country in the eyes of the world – step down as Senator also.

  3. Cassy says:

    It appears academic now, but people have been asking about the content of an earlier letter (dated 27-05-97 from Norris to Nawi’s lawyer, Reuben Bar Chaim) referred to in the letter you published. Senator Norris wrote that he was ‘a direct personal witness of some of the peripheral events’ and says he gave details of his ‘direct knowledge of events surrounding the case’ in that earlier letter. We do not know if it was written on Ireland’s Senate notepaper. Perhaps you could find and publish that letter.

  4. J.C.S says:

    It’s a pity the News of the World is gone, you would have fitted in there very well.

  5. honestmum says:

    Who needs the “New of the World” when we have scum like you? You and your pro-israeli pals have done nothing to make those undecided think better of your kind.

    David Norris is a decent man who has had a past (most of us had) and is not a peodophile. The guilty man was not with David Norris at the time and the circumstances around the “Rape” were possible also political.

    You have not fooled us.

    • Erm… I haven’t said Norris was pedophile, honestmum (ironic username given your comment).

      In fact, the statutory rape incident occurred in 1992. David Norris said in the Helen Lucy Burke interview that he broke up with Nawi around the year 2000. So Norris continued a romantic relationship with this man who had sex with a minor.

      • James says:

        What about all the people in Parishes around this country and women and men married to abusers who turned a blind eye and still suported the abusers who actually actually violated young children against their will. I am not defending David Norris ex partner he should have used better judgement, however, aparently the 15 year old involved said he was older than he was and wanted to have sexual intercourse with this man. I still dont agree that he was right he should have used better judgement.

        What about all the underage people in our nightclubs here at weekends there are plenty of invalid age id cards going around these people are pretending to be 18 and above. These people are engaging in sexual activity some only 15 it goes on every weekend in most countries that have a night club culture. I dont agree with it but there are 15 and 16 years olds out there who are actively seeking sex. Its a harsh reality of the culture and world we live in.

  6. Shanghai Mary says:

    Wow, what a story! Well done for getting the story out there. Norris, from his withdrawal announcement today, seems to now acknowledge what an indulgent mistake it was to support Ezra Nawi in his statutory rape case.

    Also, if a right-wing politician had pleaded clemency for a wayward friend, the left would scream blue murder, but it seems the perpetrator becomes the victim of a conspiracy when it’s the other way round – think Julian Assange.

    The left loves diversity, but just not diversity of thought (or dissent)

    John, you’re a tonic in these intellectually mediocre times,


    Shanghai Mary

    P.S. it must be a terrible thought crime to be pro-Israel in the Irish Republic, the way people are singling out your Zionism. You would have thought child abuse would have been the topic of the day.

    • L.R. Weizel says:

      Shanghai Mary, there is more than just left and right. It’s true that the left may tend to be intolerant of the typical “conservative” views you see in the media, but that’s because they’re largely bullshit and rely on such smear tactics rather than taking on people like Norris head on with the issues.

      This is the issue with the right – they will always dig up or just plain lie about what’s going on(like how american conservatives are pretending Anders Behring Brevik was a gay rights activist – no joke) as they know looking homophobic, racist etc. pulls the rug out from underneath them. The Left who are by and large slightly more honest have an uphill battle here. Please note for example that Norris actually had no objection to these being published. Would a right wing politician have had the same attitude?

      • Weizel: I deleted your other comment as you referred to Shanghai Mary as an eejit. I don’t tolerate that kind of thing here.

      • J.C.S. says:

        But you’ve just let everyone know what he thinks! Not much difference between that and letting the comment stand.

        For example……..

        A motorist is stopped by a Guard for some petty offence. When the Guard explains the offence the driver replies “if I called you a eejit for stopping me for that would you arrest me?”. To which the Guard replies “I certainly would”. The motorist then says “but you couldn’t arrest me for thinking you’re and eejit, could you?”. The Guard replies that he couldn’t arrest him for just thinking it. So, the motorist says “Well Guard I think you’re an eejit”.


        BTW Unless Mary is being tongue-in-cheek then maybe she doesn’t know the meaning of “Shanghaied” in which case I concur with Weizel’s thinking.

    • Shanghai Mary,

      How great it is to have one of my original fans commenting! Your kind words mean so much to me.

      People do seem to want to shoot the messenger. I can actually imagine that If most Irish bloggers and journalists had come by the information I did, they would have done nothing because they are so fond of Norris.

      • Ruairi says:

        Are you serious? You are aware that you’re talking of the same media which dug up a 9 year old article to insinuate that Norris has paedophilic tendencies. Norris was right to drop out of the race as it was a huge error in judgement but its ridiculous that your now trying to smear the other left-wing candidate in this race because your source ” is fond of Michael D. Higgins and canvassed for him many elections ago”.

        In the same way that you believe the liberal media wouldn’t have released this because it was Norris, I don’t think you would mention such a dubious link if it was Gay Mitchell or Sean Gallagher and not Michael D Higgins.

      • As far as I am aware (and I may be wrong about this) the Magill article was largely forgotten soon after being published, but circulated again on the internet as David Norris began campaigning.

  7. Henry Barth says:

    Sex with a minor? The age of consent is 13 in Spain; 14 in Germany. It varies all over Europe. But in Israel:

    “According to the Israeli Penal Code of 1977 the age of consent in Israel is 16 for any form of sexual relations. A special case arises when a person between ages 14–16 had sexual relations with an older partner; in this case the older partner would be exempt of criminal liability if three conditions are met: The age difference between the partners was less than three years, the younger partner gave consent and the act was done out of “regular friendly relations” and without the abuse of power.”


    • henrywood says:

      The age difference between the partners was about thirty years. Just imagine a 45 years old priest having sexual relations with a 15 years old choirboy. Would you still start your comment on such a case with: “Sex with a minor?”

  8. JV says:

    Nice work. I can’t wait to see your rigorous exposes on each of the other Presidential candidates since you don’t support any of them and have offered to expose such information about any of the other candidates if possible. You’ve got media attention so far, so why don’t you look into their backgrounds too? Would only be fair, I think.

    I think people looking to credit you for derailing his campaign, disrupting the democratic process and/or changing the course of Irish history (since his victory seemed likely), are only fuelling your ego and ignoring the role the media had to play in this. As you said, the information was out there so maybe they would have picked up on it eventually anyway. What he did was wrong, but I disagree that it would have been worse if this had broken while he was Head of State. You never know, he may have had a better chance to explain himself without the heat of a campaign, to acknowledge that his emotional involvement in the case was not appropriate or that the letters written to Israeli judges did not use Seanad notepaper. I also disagree with your assertion that the media was looking to protect Norris by not finding this story earlier. Surely this entire episode has demonstrated that elements in the media were jumping on any controversy they could find?

    No, by the way, I am not a conspiracy theorist. I hate conspiracy theorists and am therefore glad you addressed the claims that you’re some kind of puppet for the State of Israel, which are ridiculous. First of all, you’re clearly intelligent and thus well capable of breaking this story yourself. And secondly, I don’t see why the State of Israel would bother interfering in the election of the President of Ireland when it’s not that important a role for their diplomatic relations with the international community anyway.

    Having said that, it does worry me that you’re clearly a very opinionated person, and to me, it would appear that your interest in this story was not being a good citizen by pointing out the hypocrisy of a supposed champion of human rights seeking to be President of Ireland at a time when the horrors of institutional child abuse are coming to light. It would appear to me, that your sole interest in this story, was its connection to Israel, with whom you clearly have a deep emotional attachment. I doubt you can convince me otherwise, but I’d look forward to standing corrected.

    There is one thing I want to call you up on though. When you said:

    “Here is something I have been emphatic about from the beginning: My friend is a trade unionist. That is what I meant by saying ‘labour movement’ when I spoke to the media. It does not necessarily mean Labour Party. However, recently it hit home that the person is fond of Michael D. Higgins and canvassed for him many elections ago. That has unnerved me a bit.”

    Allow me now to be sceptical of you. Your blog seems to suggest that you come from a right-wing libertarian standpoint. You also come across as being a very intelligent person. Perhaps since Michael D. Higgins is a left-wing candidate & many of Norris’ votes would now transfer over to him, he does stand to benefit from his withdrawal. But maybe Norris’ supporters would not feel comfortable at all voting for him, if it came to light there was a link, however tenuous, between his campaign and this story breaking. One political campaign seeking to derail the frontrunner, is certainly a lot more plausible than a foreign country disrupting the elections of another that is of little diplomatic consequence to them and all out of spite for the individual’s political views. But it is still straying into conspiracy theory territory.

    So what about this? I’m saying it neither to mock nor flatter you, I really do believe you’re intelligent. In fact I believe you’re intelligent enough to bluff convincingly. Although you claim not to be particularly fond of any of the Presidential candidates, it is conceivable given your political position, that you’d prefer it if the Labour Party candidate didn’t win either. You have been getting quite emotional reactions from Norris supporters and they’re probably emotional enough then, to not vote for Higgins, if they suspected he or even one of his supporters was behind this sabotage.

    So I’m asking you straight up, if you dropped that bit in about having a trade union member friend who ‘unnervingly’ canvassed for Higgins, just to decrease the likelihood of him receiving Norris votes? For one thing, I’m sceptical that you have a friend who’s in a trade union; I couldn’t see you two getting along, but then again politics are often irrelevant in a friendship. Is it impossible that you are the one who found this story yourself and have now made this detail up in an attempt to strike at another campaign? Is it beyond you to manipulate emotionally-vulnerable people? I think you’re that clever. Call it.

  9. roxymuzak says:

    Well done on your exclusive. Norris did the right thing yesterday. We would have done without his all-about-me histrionics, though. I found his letter to the Jerusalem High Court bewildering, especially the part where he stated that he was a great friend of Israel. Yeah, right. With friends like him who needs Hamas.

  10. Ronan says:

    You make me sick to my stomach. Its smear campaigns like this that tarnish the Irish media.

  11. Mary Byrne says:

    excellent post and I concur with the notion of a rampant ego here. On would wonder though how a situation of statutory rape that went unreported in Israel, the person according to the Times served 3 months and it was deemed consensual. How then does such a story make it to the public domain in the manner it has and are we still in the realm of meeting in car parks, secret envelopes from trade unionists or fantasy land? I also look forward to the so called balanced approach i.e. reporting on other candidates in the same manner given the attempt here to feign a non biased approach.

    • There were no meetings in car parks or exchanges of envelopes, for your information.

      • AlanSmithee says:

        Forget it Mary. “John Connolly” here has already decided to “retire” now that he got what he wanted (Norris’ resignation from the presidential race) and the rest of the other candidates can be harbouring paedophile priests and crooked businessmen and he won’t give an iota of fucks as long as they all leave poor ickle Israel alone.

        He’s just the new Pamela Geller or Andrew Brietbart. Serial conspiracy loons who blow up the smallest details into massive scandals because their own narrow worldview can’t take it.

      • Oh, I’m not in retirement yet, Mr. Smithee.

        Honestly, though, is throwing around the names of unpopular conservative pundits the best you can do?

  12. henrywood says:

    To try and get a better understanding of just what has gone down I’ve been reading through a lot of the news stories on this affair and there is one sentence in Mr. Norris’s withdrawal statement, repeated in almost every news story, and it kind of baffles me –

    In a statement Norris said: “I deeply regret the most recent of all the controversies concerning my former partner of 25 years ago, Ezra Nawi. The fallout from his disgraceful behavior has now spread to me and is in danger of contaminating others close to me both in my political and personal life. It is essential that I act decisively now to halt this process.”

    To repeat: “The fallout from his disgraceful behavior has now spread to me […] ”

    So, just *when* did Mr. Norris decide that Ezra Nawi’s behaviour *was* disgraceful. It seems he did not think it all that disgraceful at the time of the event when one considers Mr. Norris’s pleadings and mitigations to the courts:

    “I feel that I know him very well and am in a position to give him a character reference attesting to his intelligence reliability and integrity. In fact I cannot speak highly enough of him.”

    If Mr. Norris had replied to any requests for character references about Mr. Nawi with the answer, “I think his behaviour has been disgraceful”, perhaps he would still be in the race?

  13. Mary Byrne says:

    Yes hindsight is a wonderful thing and I think if you read the letter it also is tinged with emotion regarding the mental health of the accused. The decision to make representation was rash and an emotional one in my opinion, which according to a cartoon in the Times, makes a person a very good candidate to represent Ireland. I refer of course to the numerous representations on behalf of criminals including murderers, by those in influential positions. That point alone highlights the hypocrisy of the situation, and I firmly believe that we should expect the same standards across the board. It will be interesting to see if the individual here shares these sentiments with reference to seeking high standards across the board, not taking the side of any particular candidate or group, and will work as efficiently to ensure the safety and well being of the Irish nation-which is no doubt, his lofty aim and all that he requires from this situation.

  14. henrywood says:

    Sorry, but that sounds to me like having your cake and eating it too. If Mr. Norris has now decided that what he wrote to the courts for Mr. Nawi was wrong and that Mr. Nawi’s behaviour was all the time “disgraceful”, then it shows a great lack of integrity on Mr. Norris’s part. If however, Mr. Norris believes in what he wrote all those years ago then he seems like a fair weather friend to now discard Mr. Nawi by the wayside.

    In fact, he sounds like a typical politician: it may be quite alright for weekend sailors to follow every change in the breeze which they think will favour the course they steer, but that is not how the Captain of a Ship of State should act.

  15. Mary Byrne says:

    What type of response would you have expected/wanted from him?

  16. Pingback: Irish Zionist blogger falls Norris campaign — amazing story | DanielOCarroll.com

  17. Guest says:

    Looks like he may throw his hat back in the ring, at last giving the Irish electorate the chance to prove that they are not serious about the sexual abuse of minors, unless of course as a stick to beat those nasty types that genuflect at the throne of St Peter.

    • JV says:

      You are outraged by one man’s (albeit inappropriate) representation for a former partner who had consensual sex with a minor by the laws of a specific country….. Yet countless thousands of cases of child-rape, having justice deliberately obstructed by a hierarchy of unaccountable bigots, is not a legitimate criticism of Our Lord’s Benevolent Holy Church, according to you?

      I am so happy… that I am not like you.

    • Fianna Fáil must be condemned for their antics here. FF are throwing the Norris spanner into the works just to make things complicated more complicated for FG and Labour, and to engage in their usual populist showboating. For shame. Hopefully an FF endorsement will do Norris no good. Still, its difficult to see most of them backing Norris with the likes of Osama bin Andrews out of office.

  18. Guest says:

    I’m happy your not either……how can you have consensual sex with a minor?

  19. Guest says:

    Looks like that ref FF, the sooner they get this election over with the better. How about giving Noddy two-pensions another run on condition that she doesn’t do another runner to the UN before her term is up?

  20. roxymuzak says:

    Just curious, and again great stuff on your exclusive. That’s what it’s all about. Meantime, why didn’t you find an agent and flog it to all the Irish nationals (at the same time) as an exclusive. You would have made a nice few doubloons. It’s my understanding that you just put it up on this site and they all basically robbed it. Leaving aside that imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, you could have made a five figure sum, all in, for a yarn like that.

    My advice is not to give away hot information for nothing.

    • Ha, Ha.

      I considered that approach alright. However, it would have been very difficult to do all that considering the information was mostly publicly available (albeit from Israeli sources).

      Still, perhaps the episode opens up a path for great riches or a regular chair on Tonight with Vincent Browne.

  21. roxymuzak says:

    The info was publicly available you say, but none availed of it until you let it out there, at which point people, shamefully. began to shoot the messenger. You’d imagine that you made it up. Anyway, as they used say in the RAF you only get flak when your over the target.

    If you have any more letters from Mr Norris get onto Max Clifford……. if a slapper from Donegal can get 50 grand for selling out Ricky Hatton……

    Meantime, let that be a lesson to you boys and girls.

    And remember boys and girls. If your in a band don’t ever buy drugs – sign a recording contract and get the R&R men to buy them for you.

  22. roxymuzak says:

    Any sign of those other six letters he wrote to Israel?

  23. roxymuzak says:

    I reckon they’ll come out if he gets the 20 votes…..

  24. roxymuzak says:

    Can you get your hands on said letters eitherway…….

    • Oh, I’m asking around, but no progress yet on my part. As I said in this post, I was following up the case from a different angle: Nawi’s bizarre, violent activities in his homeland. This has very personal relevance for me. However, given all the conspiracy theories about Israeli involvement in Norris’s downfall, I decided it was best not to pursue this when passions were so heated.

      What is certain, however, is that Ezra Nawi is a violent, Communist, drug dealing, sexual deviant sociopath with a conviction for improper use of a firearm. But that’s O.K., he can be get soft treatment from the Irish media because he’s a ‘human rights campaigner’.

      • Dan Filson says:

        “I was following up the case from a different angle: Nawi’s bizarre, violent activities in his homeland. This has very personal relevance for me.” Please explain your personal relevance angle, as this will help reassure those who sensed the hands of the Israeli agencies behind your Nawi/Norris obsesssion.

      • I’m talking as someone who has spent a lot of time in Israel, worked there and also happened to be a guest of settler families. I’ve never agreed with the settler movement’s aims, but I have also been shocked at the behaviour of the crooks in the Human Rights Industry, radical EU-funded NGOs undermining Israeli sovereignty, and UNRWA. Not to mention their network of friends in the media, academia and government abroad. It was particularly educational to see so-called ‘peace campaigners’ (communists, left-anarchists) destroy crops and harass people, even striking religious Jewish ladies with their children strapped to them. The Israeli authorities have their hands tied with these people: they have influential friends abroad, such as David Norris and Noam Chomsky, who will raise hell if they are touched.

        You may be interested in a post I wrote not long ago called The Palestine Industry.

  25. Noel says:

    Delighted to see that Norris has not only received the support necessary for nomination but – just one day after being nominated – is already leading the field!

    So it’s David against the goliath of ignorance once again. Way to go, Norris!

  26. .. says:

    Afraid he finished in the rear, so to speak, once again Noel. Alas

    • JV says:

      Good of you to clarify that for him, two weeks after it happened. I can understand the pathetic emotional kick some people could get out of gloating. I can even understand them making a joke that’s both homophobic and not funny. But two weeks later? Really? That’s cool. 😛

      I wouldn’t want anyone thinking it was solely because of this blogger that Norris didn’t win. Certainly not him; I don’t think you could deny he already has an ego, reading his blog. He never responded to my question if he only name-dropped Higgins to try & hurt his support among Norris voters. In hindsight, wasn’t a great question anyway. He has since criticised all the Presidential candidates and more than half of Norris votes transferred to Higgins anyway. I’m satisfied with his explanation of how he came across this story. And yes, it would have been worse if this had emerged while Norris was President.

      But the fact he got back into the Race at all demonstrated there was still public support for him. I think the Letters certainly hurt his campaign but he could have overcome them were it not for two other major factors:
      1) The media. I don’t mean in how they attacked him, but even just how they published polls like the Red C one that had Gallagher at 40%. That was published on a Sunday but conducted the previous Tuesday. In the meantime there had been two debates where Norris performed exceptionally well so it was out-of-date as far I was concerned. But it gave Gallagher that nationally-embarassing momentum and it fed a public perception that Norris was too low in support to bother considering. Polls feed into how people view the candidates.
      2) HIMSELF. I think he brought so much on himself in how he handled this. He could have overcome it. But while he performed well in some debates & interviews he did terribly in others. He shouldn’t have rambled & digressed so much. He shouldn’t have fed a public perception that he had iffy views about the age of consent. He should have put the Letters issue to rest sooner. He should have campaigned outside of Dublin more.

      Maybe he just wasn’t Presidential material. That’s certainly how he ended up presenting himself. He made a lot of mistakes himself. I just don’t want anyone thinking it’s solely because of this blog that he didn’t win. He could have overcome it but he didn’t. Getting back into the race at all demonstrated that he could have. So no-one be mad at John Connolly. You don’t want to be as petty as that refined wit who posted under a pseudonym of two dots. I’m sure John’s not too happy that President Higgins is pro-Palestinian anyway. =)

      But thank you John, all the same. I hope you enjoyed your 15 minutes of fame while it lasted. =)

  27. baconbiter says:

    David Norris is a raging anti-Semitic, which is evident in his hateful statements about Israel.

    Unfortunately, a large majority of the Irish not only defend his moronic diatribes, but wholeheartedly agree with his attacks on the Jewish State. Ireland is on a path, along with many other Socialist European Union countries, to demonise and vilify the Jews and their country for the sake of appeasing the Muslim countries.

    I stand 100% behind Israel and its constant quest to defend it citizens from the attacks of its Islamic foes.

  28. Pingback: Irish Zionist blogger falls Norris campaign -- amazing story | Danny Boy | IrishCentral

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: