A guest post by AKUS
The drumbeat against Israel has finally scored a grim victory in the heart of London with the decision by the landlord of the Ahava store, Shaftesbury PLC, not to renew the store’s lease when it expires. You may think that the description of Britain as the Fourth Reich is over the top, and I imagine there will be those who do, but how else do we describe a decision to move the Jews out of a commercial area in London – not because of what they do, or the problems they create – but because of the disturbance that those who hate them have created?
Let me make it quite clear – I do not distinguish between “Jews” and “Zionists”, or “Jewish” products and “Israeli” products, or products manufactured within the area west of the Green Line that some hooligans have decided shall be Israel’s Eastern border, and those manufactured in a tiny kibbutz in a god-forsaken corner of the Dead Sea where no Arab has lived in millennia. Nor, do I believe, do those demonstrators who scored this pyrrhic victory. They are fueled by the rising tide of anti-Semitism in Britain, which has become a country where significant numbers of people are proud to demonstrate under the banners of Hamas and Hezbollah, two organizations calling for the annihilation of the Jewish citizens of Israel.
Who does not remember picture like this from Hitler’s Germany?
The owner of a store next door expressed his opinion in terms were common currency among some in Germany at that time:
Colin George, manager of clothes shop The Loft, next door to Ahava, said: “I’m pleased Ahava is leaving. It’s brought the street down…Everyone would like them to leave. I wish they had left two years ago….Maybe they should be an online business instead.”
Mr. George hopes those troublesome Jews will just go somewhere else, somewhere out of sight (online), so that the right kind of people, the people Britons do not demonstrate against, can take over their stores. Consider this news item from the Nashua Telegraph, April 1, 1933, with its echo down the decades to April 1, 2011:
Notice how Colin George has shifted the blame for the disruption to his business from those demonstrators who actually disrupted his business to the store and company targeted. He may just be a frustrated small businessman, but blaming the Jewish victim for the actions of their persecutors – the inversion of blame – is a classic feature of institutionalized and internalized anti-Semitism. The demonstrators’ success lies not in the acquiescence of Ahava, but the acquiescence of the store owners next door.
There is a grim lesson here for England. Six years after that picture was taken and that column was written the world was at war. What started with the Jews did not end with the Jews. It never does. Not only were millions of Jews slaughtered in death camps – millions more non-Jews died after the leaders of the world watched and ignored the boycott, closing, and ransacking of Jewish businesses in Germany and Austria. The dead included millions of Germans who were so happy to see the Jews “leaving”, as Mr. George puts it.
Consider this excerpt from Mark Twain’s essay in Harper’s magazine over a century ago – “Concerning the Jews”:
To conclude. – If the statistics are right, the Jews constitute but one per cent. of the human race. It suggests a nebulous dim puff of star-dust lost in the blaze of the Milky Way. Properly the Jew ought hardly to be heard of; but he is heard of, has always been heard of. He is as prominent on the planet as any other people, and his commercial importance is extravagantly out of proportion to the smallness of his bulk. His contributions to the world’s list of great names in literature, science, art, music, finance, medicine, and abstruse learning are also away out of proportion to the weakness of his numbers.
He has made a marvellous fight in this world, in all the ages; and has done it with his hands tied behind him. He could be vain of himself, and be excused for it. The Egyptian, the Babylonian, and the Persian rose, filled the planet with sound and splendor, then faded to dream-stuff and passed away; the Greek and the Roman followed, and made a vast noise, and they are gone; other peoples have sprung up and held their torch high for a time, but it burned out, and they sit in twilight now, or have vanished.
The Jew saw them all, beat them all, and is now what he always was, exhibiting no decadence, no infirmities of age, no weakening of his parts, no slowing of his energies, no dulling of his alert and aggressive mind. All things are mortal but the Jew; all other forces pass, but he remains. What is the secret of his immortality?
Who could have believed that this miserable “triumph” in Seven Dials, this expulsion of a Jewish store orchestrated by this appalling alliance of Islamic extremists, ultra-left wing fanatics, and the naïve and misled, abetted by short-sighted local businesses, so redolent of Nazi triumphs in the 1930’s, now represents the best that Britain can achieve? If Twain were writing today, with one change he might be tempted to add Britain to the list of empires that “held their torch high for a time, but it burned out, and they sit in twilight now”. Twain would replace “Jew” with “Israeli”, but unless the British act now to overturn this decision would he doubt that we are seeing the twilight of a once great country?








69 comments
Comments feed for this article
April 2, 2011 at 12:20 pm
Thank God I'm An Infidel
peterthehungarian,
http://www.boycottscotland.com
It’s all about “comBPassion” for libyan oil contracts.
April 2, 2011 at 12:31 pm
Ariadne
Infidel, while you’re waiting for the Checkpoints Horror you might like to read of “Sanity”‘s epiphany at an Israeli airport.
http://cifwatch.com/2010/07/09/lessons-in-whitewashing
April 2, 2011 at 12:35 pm
Yohoho
@cba, may I make a suggestion?
If you were to answer Insanitary (and I don’t think you should -he’s best ignored) could you do so only if he answers TGIAI’s question above?
April 2, 2011 at 12:38 pm
Ariadne
HairShirt and Peter
Goldstone is still rather blaming Israel which refused to co-operate.
Former jurist Richard Goldstone said that if Israel had cooperated with his United Nations fact-finding commission into the events of Operation Cast Lead, the charges mounted against Israel in the Goldstone Report, including those of alleged war crimes and the intentional targeting of civilians, would have changed.
Now surely if Goldstone were a good judge he would have stepped down from his one-sided commission?
April 2, 2011 at 12:42 pm
Groovy Times
Sanity, it has been known for people to ‘just to hate Jews’, full stop. It can become a pathological, obsessive hatred, whereby the anti-Semite measures their own social, moral (and sometimes biological) worth by their hostility to the perceived criminality of the Jewish collective, and by diminishing or neutralising its pernicious influence, can herald a new era of common decency and progress for the rest of humanity.
Your campaign for international social justice, racial tolerance and human rights, seems to hinge solely on solving the inherent ‘criminality’ practised by Israel, and this you sarcastically assure us, has nothing to do with its Jewish nature. Personally, I don’t believe you. It is common currency with anti-Zionists to delude themselves that their left-wing credentials give them immunity from bigotry and prejudice. By the way, how are you getting on with ‘Trials of the Diaspora’?
April 2, 2011 at 12:51 pm
Ariadne
benorr
Covent Garden is an expensive and very pretentious enclave.
Really just a place for spending money.
If Ahava moves to Golders Green or somewhere in the vicinity there should be plenty of Jews to counter any jihadist morons who turn up.
April 2, 2011 at 12:58 pm
Sanity
I find Trials of the Diaspora a disappointing book. On the one hand it outlines some of the clear and horrific antisemitism that has taken place in the world, particularly in the first half of the book. But then it kind of sets itself too broad a scope in trying to ‘modernise’ the historical aspects of the book. And by defining its target so widely it loses itself as well as its explanatory power, in the end being unpersuasive in its analysis of modern forms of antisemitism. In my opinion.
But to be forgiving, Julius is not an academic, so perhaps is not trying to write something that is precise.
April 2, 2011 at 2:21 pm
Groovy Times
Sanity, you are a fast reader! But I take it you didn’t polish the book off in the last couple of days? Well, credit where it’s due, all respect to you. If I’m honest, my asking was a sarcastic swipe at what I perceived to be the dogmatic shallowness of the ignorant – in regard to the history of humiliation, persecution and murder of European (and English) Jewry and its shaping of modern Jewish identity, including the attraction that contemporary Jewish sovereignty offers as redemption from powerlessness. And I must say this pre-conception was based on your arrogant dismissal of this important context of Jewish identity as an example of my ‘racism’ against Europeans!
I’m not so surprised that the latter half of the book was least to your liking, as this focuses on modern manifestations of anti-Semitism and defines anti-Zionism in these terms. Do you see anything in that premise at all? I thought the book was an intellectual tour-de-force.
April 2, 2011 at 3:18 pm
Sanity
The problem is defining the scope too widely. To give a parallel: imagine I’m trying to decide whether a medicine is effective or not. How do I define effective? If I say that it’s about curing disease x, then I can evaluate and perhaps find that it’s not effective. But let’s say that I define success more broadly, eg, it makes the patient feel better, or makes them feel more at ease, or even tastes good. Then I can prove its effectiveness much more easily. I feel as though that is what’s been done in the Julius book.
So clearly there are *some* people who frame antisemitic attitudes by saying they are antizionist. But I think this is a tiny minority. There’s clearly something to it, but I think he makes it much more general than it can be, and thereby loses explanatory power.
I’m sure people will criticise me for citing Haaretz, but I think this is a much more nuanced position:
http://www.haaretz.com/weekend/magazine/when-the-walls-come-tumbling-down-1.353501
April 2, 2011 at 3:54 pm
Silverdog
The protestors and the British government that gave them license and space to protest should be sued for destroying the right of this business to conduct business, because their protest is based on lies that have now come to the fore:
Goldstone the belated penitent
http://www.jpost.com/DiplomacyAndPolitics/Article.aspx?ID=214866&R=R1
The protestors are a fraud. They damaged an innocent business, and they need to pay. Get all their names. File a civil action. Grind them into the poorhouse.
April 2, 2011 at 5:27 pm
Caroline Gurney
You can find the email addresses of the Directors of Shaftesbury here: http://www.shaftesbury.co.uk/about_directors.php. I think they need to know what people think of their actions.
April 2, 2011 at 6:25 pm
mostly harmless
Thank Caroline, I will be sending my letter of support for their actions.
April 2, 2011 at 8:35 pm
Serjew
“Secondly Israel’s human right records much better than the UK’s, we don’t bomb civilians in far away African and Asian locales in order to get lucrative oil contracts for BP like your country does.” peterthehungarian
And it´s even worse, as the UK uses this farse of “helping civilians” as a cover up. A real sanitary sewer.
April 2, 2011 at 11:11 pm
peterthehungarian
mostly harmful
Thank Caroline, I will be sending my letter of support for their actions.
You must be very very sad that you couldn’t participate in the Kristallnacht fun…
April 3, 2011 at 3:32 am
benorr
Peres is a great guy and has done miracles for Israel,there comes a time when even someone as great as Peres needs to call it quits.The Israeli government should buy Peres a gold plated rocking chair.
April 3, 2011 at 3:37 am
benorr
Stepping on mostly harmless is like stepping on dog shit,you don’t interact with dog shit,you just scrape it off and keep going.
Ignore the moron.
April 3, 2011 at 8:38 am
Andy Gill
I can’t work out whether Colin George is a bigot, or simply a spineless twat who hasn’t got the guts to stand up against neo-nazism.
Maybe he’s both.
April 3, 2011 at 6:11 pm
HairShirt
Ariadne, a propos
“..Former jurist Richard Goldstone said that if Israel had cooperated with his United Nations fact-finding commission into the events of Operation Cast Lead, the charges mounted against Israel in the Goldstone Report, including those of alleged war crimes and the intentional targeting of civilians, would have changed…”
Even a child can see that this is excuse-making. Goldstone thought that he could mea culpa himself out of any emotional discomfort but was, quite rightly, pounced upon for having been wrong all along.
Talking of wrong all along, a friend of mine, also a judge but one of the good guys, agreed with the Israeli lawyers that Goldstone’s evidence gathering was woefully biased, and this was shown even in preamble of the report, which said it set out to examine Israel’s war crimes, rather than to find out whether Israel had committed any, or whether indeed Hamas was complicit in the injury and deaths of its own people.
All of us know that evidence has to meet certain criteria, standards of proof. If Goldstone believed that Israel’s co-operation was vital to his discharging his duties at least capably, he should not have written that report without it. That he did so, that he conducted the enquiry at all with at least one panel member, Christine Chinkin, who had declared her anti-Israel bias beforehand by stating in an article in the UK Sunday Times that Israel committed war crimes, shows him to be at best disingenuous.
When interviewed about this by UNWatch, Goldstone said that he was sure that Chinkin would be able to have an open mind, and anyway there were other panel members (who could, presumably, counter any bias). For UNWatch’s comments see http://blog.unwatch.org/index.php/2009/07/13/goldstone-defends-christine-chinkin-from-bias-charge/
Of particular interest to me in the light of Goldstone’s alleged change of heart, is the exact way he answered the accusation. Chinkin should have been slung off the panel but wasn’t, not least because he had known her for many years, and in particular the weasely distinction between “judicial enquiry” and “fact finding mission”
This is the interaction style of a man who believes that he can fool his interviewer, who believes that he is of superior intellect and that his lies will be believed. Those facets of Goldstone’s personality, the ready employment of weasel words when he is in a tight spot, and his sublime arrogance when he dishes out what is bullsh*t but which he believes no-one will notice, should be borne in mind.
January 11, 2012 at 1:23 pm
Adam Hasan Jamal
I am merely a simple Muslim who follows Monotheism-the belief in one true Creator God. throughout history from the time of Adam the first Prophet, there has always been survivors from every nation ever conceived on this planet, most of the simple pious people have always suffered persecution.
They do not shout from the rooftops always crying out for sympathy, they forgive and forget and leave it to the Creator to exact retribution as is His wont. The pious ones have what they receive and do not complain. Amen