Anti-Ahava activists – A case study

Michael

Michael

Despite police restrictions on the amount of protesters allowed at the bi-weekly saturday anti-Israel protests outside Ahava in Covent Garden, London chaos reigned as normal.

At a specially convened meeting where all sides, including the manager of Ahava and the owners of neighbouring shops, met with the police to discuss ways of minimising disruption to business it was resolved that anti-Israel and pro-Israel activists would be limited to 14 activists each and that noise would be kept to a minimum.

As expected the anti-Israel activists pleaded ignorance of the meeting and turned up in their usual numbers far exceeding the limit.

Their confidence was boosted by the recent decision at Hove Crown Court to let seven activists free, on the grounds of “lawful excuse” (they “believed” that Israel was guilty of war crimes in Gaza), even though they had confessed to causing £180,000 of damage to a factory that supplies Israel with military parts. The verdicts were returned after the judge had given an anti-Israel summing up before the jury deliberated.

So Covent Garden businesses will continue to lose money due to the disruption caused by the protests (apparently one shop has already gone under). With the precedent of “lawful excuse” excusing £180,000 worth of damage things could go from bad to worse for businesses on Monmouth Street.

Having covered the protests for the last six months one gets to know some of the anti-Israel protagonists so here is a quick case study of some of them:

The articulate businessman:

He is a member of the Palestine Solidarity Campaign and has his own business and a family. He feels that Israel/Palestine is the issue of our time. He protested against apartheid South Africa and now wishes to do the same for the Palestinians.

All well and good, even if you don’t believe that Israel is an apartheid state. But then he talks about 63 years of occupation which belies his care for the Palestinians. His main concern goes all the way back to 1947, well before he was born.

He doesn’t want Israel to exist as a Jewish state and so joins the boycott outside Ahava. But what is most discomforting is that an activist who has his own business and family will quite happily seek to put pressure on another business and its manager and staff who have their own families to feed and all because of his beliefs.

At the beginning of the video of him below you will see Michael who is a fixture at anti-Israel events. As you can see his repertoire consists of walking around thrusting a photograph of dead children in people’s faces.


The charismatic ringleader:

This activist in the footage below is present at every anti-Ahava protest and starts the singing off. No one else has the courage to start the anti-Israel music until she signals.

She repeatedly tells me that I must be infatuated with her due to the my camera being constantly on her. I am but not for the reasons that she gives. I am infatuated about understanding why someone is so devoted to ending the Jewish state judging by her song in this footage.



The enigma:

Below is Ben. I bumped into Ben in Golders Green recently and we had a very nice conversation. You could almost invite Ben for Shabbat dinner and break bread with him, that is until you see him screaming “From the River to the Sea, Palestine will be free” (see above video also).

The martyr:

This activist below seems to like to fling himself towards the Ahava shop. He did it again yesterday. With the Hove Seven in mind he might be feeling left out. He seems determined to get himself arrested for the cause.

The conspiracy theorist:

The tiny Jewish anti-Zionist contingent were completely absent from yesterday’s proceedings and this is one thing I do not understand. The absence of the yellow IJAN banner didn’t help the other anti-Israel activists who love to point to Jews who are on their side.

But surely, if this is the “issue of our time” they would be at every protest as opposed to absenting themselves when the sun shines. Shame on them.

18 responses to “Anti-Ahava activists – A case study

  1. JonathanHoffman

    Ben is indeed an enigma. No idea how he got sucked in. I offered to meet him to deprogramme him but he thinks I work for Mossad….

  2. ankhfnkhonsu

    People with no apparent life. This should be part of a psychological study for people who yearn to assert themselves in an existential world.

    It is pathetic. There are so many causes that are so black and white, morally and with enormous impact as compared to this bullshit, but unfortunately they do not fit the anti-Western, pro-islamist pattern.

  3. I feel sorry for the police having to deal with them.

  4. NONAZIBOYCOTTS

    The clip of “the articulate business man” telling Michael “blood-libelling-Jews-kill-children” Shanahan to piss off is very comical! Oops, bit of a hot blooded temper slipped out there amongst the eloquence.😉

    I wonder if they could do a double act? It looked like a spoof. Is “tally ho” Shanahan not aware of his hilarity? He is also totally obsessed with Hoffman. Probably some form of twisted admiration. I wonder if he has a secret shrine at home to Hoffman. (sorry Jonathan if that’s a disturbing thought!)

    The “articulate” business man was very very articulate in telling an Israeli he was speaking to that “he hopes that he comes back in a coffin from the IDF” So eloquent and articulate. Now isn’t that charming?
    I wonder if he learnt his eloquence of wishing Israelis dead in his first 3 years of his life in Pakistan?

    As for the man with the long eyebrows, I think it’s good that the enemy is so in awe of the achievements of the Mossad that they can only conclude that all Jews must work for them. We wish!
    Was it flattering Richard to be accused of working for one of the most formidable intelligence agencies in the world? It bloody well should be. Mind you I’m not sure there is anything Stalin man could say that would be flattering. Is it me or does he have a bit of a mad look in his eyes? Perhaps he is the dodgy uncle in his family? Do you think he is kind to animals and children? I’m struggling to imagine it but life is full of surprises. Maybe he is Santa Claus on a sabbatical over here in the summer from his usual role?

    Anyway what I’m trying to say in a roundabout way is that they are basically all a bunch of rent-a-cause extremist wankers who should all go and live in Gaza and dance the Jihad Jive to the rhythm of bullets.

    Now how’s that for eloquence and articulation?😉

  5. Richard, another good post, innovative, but simple in design, comic, but sensible too.

    Could you perhaps cover the decision of the Methodists to boycott Israel’s legal (by the holy law of our lord) settlements?

    I’d also like Jonathan (zf/edl) to comment on it too.

    Put simply, I was deeply, deeply sorry to hear this very saddening news, alongside the whole EDO case.

    What exactly is the Zionist community in this sceptred isle doing to combat the charlatans? Sheer, utter laziness seems to be the order of the day.

    Why isn’t Jonathan doing more to stop this seemingly irrevocable legitimacy crisis from continuing further? He should be there each day. At least Elton John does his bit for Israel.

    Thoroughly disillusioned with everything – that’s how I feel.

  6. JonathanHoffman

    http://cifwatch.com/2010/07/03/uk-judge-takes-delegitimisation-of-israel-to-new-depths/

    Tom – here is what I think of the EDO verdict.

    “Why isn’t Jonathan doing more to stop this seemingly irrevocable legitimacy crisis from continuing further? ”

    – I’m not sure what you mean, maybe contact me offline eg Facebook?

  7. Michael Plosker

    Sadly, it’s not the lunatics who stand outside Ahava who worry me, it’s the ordinary people walking by who agree with their warped view of Israel. There were a number of “you Jews” etc comments made on saturday, really quite upsetting.

  8. Jonathan Hoffman

    “maybe contact me offline eg Facebook”

    Actually don’t bother.

    I don’t indulge Jewbaiters.

  9. I was there, and there were no police restrictions on the number of protesters.

    My understanding of the meeting you refer to is that only one of the people who have protested against Ahava was allowed to go, and that that person made it quite clear that they could not represent anyone else, and could not make any agreements.

    It’s true that in some circumstances the police can use section 14 of the public order act to restrict the numbers at a protest, but they have never done outside Ahava, possibly because they would not have legal grounds to do so.

    • NONAZIBOYCOTTS

      Under section 16.5 of the public order act, people who congregate outside of Jewish businesses like flies to s**t, under the false pretences of caring about humanity come under the “Jew Hating Scum” act which generally means that they are wolves in sheep clothing. Mostly with this lot, the clothing is very worn and we can see the wolf underneath salivating at the prospect of hurting Jews. They are also prone, like wolves to travel in packs. You know, safety in numbers. Their outer sheep part though is that they have no brain and blindly follow. Baabaaa.

      I’m so glad David you were only passing by and not joining in with these vile bullies. Next time you walk past the bullies of Jewish businesses, you can do a moonie! (although that may come under section 14009 indecency act so maybe not?)

      Here’s to keeping the public order.
      Let’s drink to that.
      Le’chaim!
      Good stuff.
      Back to work.

  10. Actually, according to a report from someone in London ISM, the police did invoke Section 14 back in March, although to move the protest rather than restrict the numbers. Apologies for the poorly researched comment above.

    What grounds the police had to use S14 and whether or not they would have been approved by a court is not clear.

    The point remains that no conditions were imposed last Saturday.

  11. richardmillett

    David,
    It was due to be an informal agreement between both sides. That was the whole reason behind the police meeting that took place, which was obviously a waste of time.

  12. I have to say, Jonathan, that really hurt me. I’m a Zionist, and have been for a very long time. How dare you call me a Jewbaiter when I’ve done more in my time for Israel than you have. At a time when Israel has never been more internationally isolated, don’t you think it might be wiser to stick together, instead of slinging mud at your friends?

    Shame on you.

  13. Yvetta Bagel

    Richard, this looks wonderful – I shall enjoy (if that’s the right word) later, when I have time to savour it.
    I’m surprised the carol singer John Sullivan (remember him?) isn’t one of the anti-Ahava crowd – the “conspiracy theorist” reminded me a little of him, first glance.

    To Tom – there might be some comfort in the fact that the Methodists appear to be losing members at an accelerated rate:

    Britain’s Methodists in Meltdown
    http://www.daphneanson.blogspot.com/

  14. Yvetta Bagel

    The “articulate businessman” is likeable – but notice that tunnel-visioned exclusionary phrase, “the moral issue of our times” – what about Islamic atrocities and misogyny including that flogging in Pakistan reported this week of a mother and daughter in punishment not for their own deeds but for those of a male relative! – and notice the reference to Ilan Pappe and the eqivalencey of attacks on Barclays Bank and on Ahava.
    The “conspiracy theorist” – I can’t work out whether he was a protester as such or a collusionary passer-by.

  15. Yvetta Bagel

    Sorry for the spelling error! Typo!

  16. Yvetta he’s right – it is the moral issue of our times. Unfortunately he’s on the wrong side.

  17. Pingback: All you need is love (and eye cream) | Oy Va Goy! (Chas Newkey-Burden)