The following open letter was distributed to Martin Webster’s private email list. It is reprinted here by permission.
As you see, I am copying this to our friends Israel Shamir and Paul Eisen (of ‘Dir Yassein Remembered’) whose company I enjoyed at a pub meeting in London last Friday (12th August), plus some other people in the ‘bcc’ line.
I read all of your e-bulletins with great interest and listen intently to such of your speeches at meetings I am able to attend. Where you turn your mind to subjects about which you are qualified to discuss (i.e.: what’s going on in Israel; the oppression of the Palestinians by the Israelis; Jewish ethnocentrism and hypocrisy on the race issue, philosophical topics, etc.) then in my opinion you talk a great deal of sense and, as an “ex-Israeli” and “a proud self-hating Jew,” display courage.
But . . .
(There’s always a “but” . . .)
Because you are committed to a ‘One Nation’ solution to the Israel-Palestine conflict, and because this requires the full-hearted acceptance by Jews of what they want to practice in Israel (but what they want the gentile world to implement in the Diaspora): a multi-racial society, you feel called upon to defend the multi-racial concept in every place and on every occasion where events indicate that it is a far from perfect way of ordering human society and far from popular with those on whom it has been imposed by the power elites — most notably the Jews.
Thus you invite your subscribers to view a video which promulgates an explanation of last week’s riots in England which you summarize as follows:
“The statistics, sociology, police brutality, massive food price increases and economic catastrophes behind the recent and continuing riots in Britain.”
If I may use a good old-fashioned English expression: “What utter bollocks!”
Were food shops the principal targets of the rioting looters? Have our newspapers and TV screens been filled with pictures of people (80 per cent of whom were Afro-Caribbean blacks, 20 per cent of whom were white pseudo-anarchists and/or opportunist crook scum) making off with food?
No they were making off with large plasma-screen plasma TVs, mobile phones, and the like.
Once they had all the electrical goods they required for themselves or for re-selling via the Internet, they returned to ‘shopping’ for clothes — not practical clothing for England’s often wet and cold weather, but armfuls of track suits and expensive and equally impractical sports-trainer footwear.
Once they had their fill of ‘designer-label’ clothing, they turned their attention to bicycle shops, jewelers, and other luxury goods emporiums.
Plasma TVs & ‘designer’ sportswear at top of looters’ list — not food
When they did invade supermarkets — or, more often, family-run convenience stories and corner shops — did they emerge with bread, meat, tinned food and other items to stock their larders? No. It was the alcohol that they carried away. Food stocks were scattered and destroyed.
Shop-keepers who tried to protect their premises were beaten.
In Birmingham, three Asian men were run down and murdered by a car convoy Afro-Carrib looters who objected to shop-keepers trying to protect their livelihoods.
In London a Malaysian tourist was attacked, beaten, and had his jaw broken. Then other rioters pretended to assist, but only to help themselves to his possessions in his ruck-sack. So much for colored immigrant solidarity!
A lone elderly and white man in Ealing tried to put out a fire set by a gang of Black ‘hoodies.’ They kicked and/or stabbed him to death.
And if that kind of mayhem were not enough, furniture shops and other properties were set ablaze in Tottenham, Croydon, Hackney, and elsewhere in London leading to whole city blocks being turned into rubble and endangering the lives of innocent people, namely those living in flats above the shops and the fire-fighters who had to deal with the blazes. London has not seen visions of such fiery destruction since the Blitz during WW2.
So the fatuous attempt to draw on Marxian sociology-babble to try and explain away and excuse all this so as to salvage the concept of the multi-racial society is naïve and shoddy ‘thinking.’ Such tripe may go down well with the leftist student types who attend the Socialist Workers’ Party summer schools at which you used to give lectures in yesteryear, but as I think I have indicated above, such knee-jerk twaddle does not bear a moment’s adult contemplation.
But the twaddle is also an insult to the British working class who went through the Great Depression of the 1930s. The standard of living endured by poor out-of-work people in those days (still just about within living memory) was a quantum leap lower and more desperate than that experienced by those who went rioting and looting last week. Nobody is starving; nobody has to tramp from ‘spike’ (workhouse) to ‘spike’ for an overnight sleep.
Read Down and Out in Paris and London or The Road to Wigan Pier, or other of George Orwell’s chronicles of the desperate poverty of unemployed people in the 1930s. The wretched indigenous Britons of those days had a million more times the right to riot and loot than the mainly Black rabble who tried to put London and other of our cities to sack last week. But the poverty-stricken Brits of the 1930s they did not do so. They strived to remain decent and honest and respectful of their neighbors, in stark contrast to the current multi-racial society’s vile, murderous and selfish rioters.
So the explanations for last week’s rioting which you subscribe to and promote is not only a tissue of lies, it is a grave insult to our — or at least, my — immediate forbears who went through so much.
Gilad — you should be ashamed of yourself.
I conclude by inviting you to post these remarks on your blog and — if you can demonstrate your belief in free speech — post this URL for a video from New Zealand which gives an appraisal of the sloppy ‘thinking’ in which you have indulged yourself in defense of the multi-racial concept which, in England at any rate, has proved to be an utter failure and looks set to develop into a catastrophe.