Amazon.com Widgets

Monday, February 1, 2010

Here's a sensitive little piece by Anthony Julius in the Times: The Outsiders. Julius was Deborah Lipstadt's lawyer, as well as Princess Diana's divorce attorney (or whatever they call it there in the UK). Always an interesting guy, here he discusses two of the faces Britain shows to its Jews (as well as giving us a few details of what Lady Di was really like for those into that). To long for a quote. Recommended.

5 Comments

This is a very interesting piece, especially to people who've been following issues in the UK including the portrayals of Israel in the media but also the rise of BNP which is closely linked to neonazi philosophy.

Alas the comment thread isn't very reassuring.

Antisemitism in Britain runs deep. It's difficult for many of us in America to truly grasp this since we admire so much about Britain and are so closely linked to the British, not least through our language.

Also I think it's important to note that antisemitism in Britain isn't recent, nor can it be blamed on the influx of Muslims and other immigrants.

In fact, it's probably the other way around - the more vocal anti-Israel, antisemitic groups found fertile ground there.

The British didn't even recognize Israel for nine months although revisionist historians in England claim The Empire stood by the Zionists - that is factually untrue to a very great degree.

Indeed, I read a recent piece in Open Democracy which seems to link various examples of Britain and genocide to this so-called support of the Yishuv and Israel in 1947-48 - as though this were a fact in the first place and as though the partition of the Mandate constituted "genocide" in the second.

Wierdly this was written partially to commemorate Holocaust Memorial Day:

http://www.opendemocracy.net/martin-shaw/britain-and-genocide

I don't understand how anybody can confuse the Shoah with the flight of the Arabs during a war started by the Arabs, which cost the Jews dearly and which they very well might have lost - indeed a real genocide was threatened and Britain, Shaw's apologia to the contrary, disarmed and blockaded the Yishuv whereas The Empire armed the Arabs and British officers led the Arab Legions into battle.

Indeed when Jerusalem was besieged and 100,000 people were being shelled and in danger of starvation the British wouldn't even help.

Sophia's right about the comments. By the way, some of the commenters charge Shaw with professional misconduct for mentioning his conversations with Diana. Despite the commenters' charges, nothing in Shaw's report of those conversations comes anywhere close to divulging privileged client information, unless Britain's rules for attorneys are vastly stricter than similar rules in the US.

Shaw? You mean Julius.

Sophia,

The British didn't even recognize Israel for nine months

In fact they fought against Israel where their officers lead the Jordanians, and their pilots flew for Egypt only to have some of their Spitfires shot down.

The British did a lot to try and abort the State from being born.

Yes Cynic, that's true, also I believe Britain armed the Arabs and the Yishuv/Israelis were pretty much on their own, having been forcibly disarmed by the British even though tens of thousands of Palestinian Jews fought for the Brits in WWII and many were killed including the leader of the Irgun.

Here's a thread about this on Harry's Place:

http://www.hurryupharry.org/2010/02/02/anthony-julius-on-english-antisemitism/#comment-443550

[an error occurred while processing this directive]

[an error occurred while processing this directive]

Search


Archives
[an error occurred while processing this directive] [an error occurred while processing this directive]