JK writes:
If Avigdor Lieberman and the purveyors of the mufti/Hitler-photo gambit in Israeli embassies want to be honest, they might add these photos of India’s Congress Party leader Subhas Chandra Bose visiting Germany. He was in Berlin at the same time as the mufti, and for the same reason: to rid his nation of British colonialism. Here are some nice shots.
Just for fun, they could throw in this photo of Bose–one of the heroes of the Congress Party, alongside Gandhi and Nehru–making a speech during WWII in Imperial Japan!
Bose
If Jeffrey Goldberg can understand the "enemy of my enemy is my friend" concept–it’s the basis of his logy analysis in the current "Ideas" issue of The Atlantic–why can’t Mr. Lieberman and Co. understand the historical context of British colonial subjects looking for help from Germany, however foolish and immoral it can appear to us at first blush?
A number of present-day political parties found inspiration of one sort or another in the Nazis, including India’s Hindu nationalist BJP party. The party that’s the present-day BJP sent missions to Germany thru the 1930s. Yet it’s the BJP that tightened relations with Israel in 2003, when Ariel Sharon visited Delhi.
Israeli embassies may also wish to slip in info about Pierre Gemayel, a personal guest of Hitler in 1936 who, inspired, then founded the Lebanese Phalange. But that might not be so good either…. Israel aligned itself with the Phalange during its invasion of Lebanon, and in 1982 inserted Pierre’s son, Bashir, as Israel’s hand-picked president!
I suppose the BJP and the Gemayels (not to mention Anwar Sadat who thought the Nazis were cool) are forgiven for their Nazi past because of alliances with Israel (and "anti-terror" rhetoric), while Palestinians as a population get demonized because they resist dispossession. So what’s Israel really concerned about–what happened in WWII, or maintaining domination over the land? We can see it’s the latter.
Personally I love our own Senator Lieberman. He waves the red, white, and blue, but makes sure his family marries no Goys, who are merely 98% of the USA population. Can’t get better than that!
Absolutely. If this is a legitimate game – which it isn’t really, but Liebermanwants to play it – then why not against India, and why not against Zionism?
link to marxists.de
Two things appealed to Subhash Chandra Bose.
1. The enemy of my enemy is my friend.
2. The use of similar symbols and concepts that appealed to Indian religious and political sensitivities (particularly the application of “deep” patriotism).
Bose was as much a Bengali nationalist as he was an Indian one, ironically.
The Bose support for the Axis military in WW2, put a GREAT BLOT on the prospects for Indian independance, an likely rationalized the extension of colonial rule for a few years, as much as he thought it reduced it.
Considering the fact that colonial rule did not extend “a few years” beyond WW2, but ended less than 2 years after the Japanese surrender: Not likely.
I can, on the other hand, almost guarantee, that without the Pacific War, maybe not India, but several other countries would not have won their independence for quite some time. This was of course not Japan’s intention – they wanted to take over, not liberate – but in the end the result of the war was the destruction of the colonial system in East Asia. And that was definitely *not* what the Allies were fighting for.
Coming back to the topic, though: This photo campaign is almost comically inane. So, the alleged spiritual ancestor of today’s Palestinian leadership worked with the Nazis? Hate to break it to you, Israel, but you know Germany? Those guys who you accept money and military hardware from, and who you depend on to give you greater access to European markets? And you know the German conservative party, who, inside Germany, are your most ardent, unquestioning supporters? Well, *their* spiritual ancestors didn’t work with the Nazis – they *were* the Nazis. And somehow, they have yet become your most trusted allies in Europe.
This whole idiotic PR stunt is just another admission on the Israeli government’s part that they do not make rational policies for today, but irrational policies based on vague emotional trappings of yesteryear.
Bose first made contact with Hitler in 1935.
He objected to gradualism, in favor of a more assertive revolutionary approach.
He regarded Vivekananda as his guru. (I was a follower of Vivekananda’s guru, Ramakrishna, in my teens. Obviously not F2F. I love the man, but reject elements of his teachings now.). My later teacher, PR Sarkar, was a third cousin of Bose, and admired him. How he reconciled support for nazism with spiritual humanism, I don’t get.
My wife told me of a scandal in England this week, in recently opened intelligence documents revealed that a former crown prince regarded Hitler as a great hero, and was persuaded to abdicate his right to the thrown on the basis of his marriage to a divorcee. Apparently, the crown prince thought of Hitler as admirable.
Witty,
If you don’t have a problem with supporting Zionism (ethnic Ashkenazi Nazism), why should you be surprised that other people might have supported or allied themselves with German Nazism.
We have to be clear on this point. You like all Zionist are an unabashed Jewish Nazi, and the Lieberman Mufti campaign makes it clear how important it is frankly, openly, and clearly to identify Zionism as ethnic Ashkenazi Nazism — no ifs, ans, or buts.
My later teacher, PR Sarkar, was a third cousin of Bose, and admired him. How he reconciled support for nazism with spiritual humanism, I don’t get.
I wasn’t aware that Bose or any member of his family supported ‘Nazism’ as such. Bose did beleive in dictatorship as he thought certain countries like Indian were ‘unready’ for demcracy. I wonder what part of Bose’s family you are referring to; my mother’s grandmother is the sister of Bose’s mother. I can assure you that most the family is not involved in ‘Nazism’. They don’t like Zionism much either.
The Bose support for the Axis military in WW2, put a GREAT BLOT on the prospects for Indian independance, an likely rationalized the extension of colonial rule for a few years, as much as he thought it reduced it.
This is completely wrong and idiotic; any Indian will laugh this off. Bose had become an outcast in the Congress party after he was effectively forced into resigning the Congress Presidency by the Gandhian wing. His popularity declined afterwards outside Bengal, even inside Bengal he couldn’t impose a mass leadership like the Muslim League and Fazal Haq’s Peasant Party.
Bose’s dalliance with Germany and Japan; didn’t matter a whit to Indian independence because the rest of the Congress was deeply opposed to Fascism under Gandhi and Nehru; their objections lied in the fact that Britain had declared war in the name of millions of Indians without any consultation or assurance of independence once war was over.
I suggest you actually learn something about Indian history before opening your mouth on it.
Vivekenanda is a great but flawed thinker; Ramkrishna is a greater mystic. Both would have been appalled that their names would anyway have been associated with Zionism or by Zionists.
I didn’t say that Bose “supported” naziism. He was a nationalist. As I stated earlier, my understanding of his views were based on “the enemy of my enemy is my friend”.
PR Sarkar was the founder of Ananda Marga. I was a follower, friends only now.
Bose’s actions scared the British. Similarly to how terrorist actions from Hamas were thought by the gullible to speed up the end of the occupation, they actually gave validity to the most reactionary. For example, I repeat that Hamas elected Netanyahu and Lieberman, in initiating rocket fire on Israeli civilians immediately after the formal cease-fire end in December.
After WW2, the British were down. There was nothing that could justify retaining a distant colonial presence. India’s independance accompanied Israel’s. They were BOTH part of the anti-colonial wave of independance movements following WW2.
Gandhi conspicuously refused to attack the British when they were under threat. Bose was not so charitable.
Some British distinguished between Bose and Gandhi. Some lumped them all together and at the lowest common denominator, terror.
My knowledge of Indian history is incomplete, not void.
And if he’s so interested in who supported what side in the war, maybe Lieberman could release some photos of those 10,000 or so Palestinians who actually enlisted to fight in it.
Except he won’t do that because they served in the British Eighth and Ninth Armies, not in the German Army, and that would really mess up the Palestinian nationalism as Nazism meme.
I think you are referring to the Arab legion which served the UK in various battles during WW2. I believe at its largest it numbered closer to 8K but it may have been as large as 10K. I am not sure how many of the soldiers were or could be considered Palestinian.
“Israeli embassies may also wish to slip in info about Pierre Gemayel, a personal guest of Hitler in 1936 who, inspired, then founded the Lebanese Phalange. But that might now be so good either…. Israel aligned itself with the Phalange during its invasion of Lebanon, and in 1982 inserted Pierre’s son, Bashir, as Israel’s hand-picked president!”
excellent, excellent, excellent freaking observation.
Richard,
Most educated Britons knew about King Ed and his Nazi sympathies – it’s not exactly a secret. He only abdicated as it was unconstitutional to marry a divorcee at the time. Had he not married her, in all likelihood, we would have stayed neutral in the war.
It’s funny how Zionists play down the Nazi-Zionist meetings that took place during the war.
And I’m not surprised the BJP have allied themselves with the Israeli government – Both stink of anti-Muslim bigotry
The expose in Great Britain this week described that it was because of his nazi overt espionage, not because of his marriage.
Siculo,
Only an idiot would equate Zionism with naziism.
I got that you are grasping for straws, whatever your real name is.
“How he reconciled support for nazism with spiritual humanism, I don’t get.”
Maybe in the same way Witty reconciles his support for zionism with spiritual humanism? I don’t get that either.
A recent thread on this blog articulated the strands that weave fascism and which of
them apply to Israel today and which do not. History never repeats itself exactly, but historians evoke the similarities for context and perspective. Most are not idiots. Most do not grasp at straws, but do hold onto bails of hay of fairly similar size.
In Re: Partition Still Casts Shadow On India-Pakistan Ties
Former Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Shamir took part in an attempt to form a Zionist German Nazi alliance as late as January 1941.
It is also worthwhile to point out that there really was a “Jewish Peril” in 1933 because Soviet ethnic Ashkenazim were already up to their eyeballs in mass murder, ethnic cleansing, and genocide: Jewish Peril 1933 versus 2009.
Insightful. I think I’ll believe your comments, on the basis of the integrity that you display.
Red leadership included lots of Jews, and they were popping up in top spots everywhere, e.g., in Hungary, in Bavaria. The big Weimar Era press was owned by five Jewish brothers. Hannah Arendt noted this trend and the fear it induced in Germans. In the key shopping district in Berlin 99% of the stores were Jewish owned, and the professions were disproportionately Jewish, etc. At the time German Jews were 1% of the population.
I understand Witty’s complete lack of integrity very well. I have been studying hypocritical Zionist behavior closely for approximately 15 years.
Even Zionists, who pretend to be moderate, want to reserve the right to make accusations of Nazism or Fascism to Jews so that Palestinians, Arabs, and Muslims can be demonized in the media as Nazis or Fascists while Palestinians, Arabs, Muslims, and anti-Zionists are accused of prejudice and anti-Semitism if they return the epithet.
Determining whether Zionism is a form of Nazism is a straightforward exercise.
One simply compares the primary literature of Zionism and German Nazism.
The ideologies are practically identical with the obvious ethnic substitutions. In many regards, Zionism is far more extreme.
While Zionists have not yet managed the wholesale slaughter associated with German Nazism, they are certainly getting there and the rule of comparison is the following:
1. Israeli Palestinians live under conditions like those of German Jews in 1935 or 1937.
2. Jerusalem Palestinians live under conditions like those of German Jews in the first half of 1939.
3. OT Palestinians live under conditions like those of Polish Jews before the start of Operation Barbarossa.
The ideological equivalence of Zionism and German Nazism was obvious in the 1930s. Klemperer wrote about it in his diaries. George Mosse even discussed it at Hebrew University.
Anti-Zionists and pro-Palestinians have to get over the reluctance to call Zionists Jewish Nazis because the identification is simply true, and the more Jews are willing to call Zionists Nazis, the more the US Israel Alliance can be undermined with the ultimate result of liberating Palestinians from Zionist oppression and of freeing the USA from Zionist subversion.
It is this simple. Jews who want to help Palestinians must openly declare Zionism to be Jewish Nazism — no ifs, ans and buts.
Richard Witty is one of the most vile and insidious sorts of Jewish Nazis because he works so hard at presenting a moderate face without ever renouncing one iota of Jewish Nazi ideology.
All decent human beings should hate and despise him for pure evil and unabashed lying.
Joachim Martillo – pseudo-intellectual extraordinaire, hero of the new racist doctrine by which whole ethnic groups are responsible for the actions of individuals. Slavery? Why, the Africans asked for it because they were dumb and weak. The Holocaust? Just punishment for the Jews “who were already up to their eyeballs in mass murder, ethnic cleansing, and genocide”. Genocide of the Native Americans? The primitive redskins got what they deserved.
So we agree that it’s racist to hold whole ethnic groups responsible for the actions of individuals? Like for instance, holding all Palestinians responsible for the actions of the Grand Mufti? And the Palestinians asked to be ethnically cleansed because they didn’t agree to allow foreign governments to divide their land and give more than half of it to European immigrants…
W.E.B. Dubois also visted Nazi Germany, and his reaction to it was not entirely negative.
Thank you!!! I’ve been waiting for someone to make this argument. Didn’t know Gemayel met Hitler. Now to read the lame excuses from the usual peanut gallery…
Andrew r:
Gemayel’s Phalange party was modeled entirely on the NSDAP (there were other ME parties that followed the Nazi fad, including the Syrian Socialist Nationalist Party, today more Socialist/Marxist inclined). They were Christian anti-Muslim (and anti-Palestinian) Fascists in the narrow (strict) sense of the word.
Who did the Phalange ally itself with in Lebanon? Think Sabra and Shatilah. Oh yeah, that was Israel and Ariel Sharon!
I knew that, I just didn’t know Gemayel met Hitler personally.
Oh, and even though I’m uneasy with the SSNP, there are certain members that deserve major respect.
Pingback: Israelis milking Hitler for all he is worth | America at War
RE: Lieberman uses Hitler against Palestinians. Why not against India?
SEE: “How Bush’s grandfather helped Hitler’s rise to power”, by Ben Aris in Berlin and Duncan Campbell in Washington, “The Guardian”, 09/25/04
(EXCERPT) George Bush’s grandfather, the late US senator Prescott Bush, was a director and shareholder of companies that profited from their involvement with the financial backers of Nazi Germany.
The Guardian has obtained confirmation from newly discovered files in the US National Archives that a firm of which Prescott Bush was a director was involved with the financial architects of Nazism.
His business dealings, which continued until his company’s assets were seized in 1942 under the Trading with the Enemy Act, has led more than 60 years later to a civil action for damages being brought in Germany against the Bush family by two former slave labourers at Auschwitz and to a hum of pre-election controversy….
ENTIRE ARTICLE – link to guardian.co.uk
@Dickerson3870
Yeah, good luck with that lawsuit. If what you posted is true, the company is gone, and the estate of Prescott Bush is presumably closed.
Citizen,
Israel has fascistic parties, and fascistic policies (most around Israel Beitanhu’s insistence on loyalty, as others have suggested here of Jewish and other Americans).
Zionism itself is not fascistic, its nationalistic.
If you want to take the philosophical next step and declare that all nationalism is fascistic, that would make an interesting discussion, but end up throwing Palestinian nationalism into the same league (which it is anyway already).
This school of apologia uses nationalism as if it’s a normative concept and everybody on the planet is entitled to their own brand of it. When did nationalism become a human right? You have the right to leave and return to your country, you have the right to resist aggression against your country; your country on the other hand, has no rights, and if it can only be maintained by violating the above, that calls its legitimacy into question. And this isn’t limited to Israel.
How did Hitler in 1941 explain to the mufti, that the Nazi system had initially embraced Zionism and the administrative structures it offered for their own ends? n all their strifes and fights the Nazi administration was in perfect harmony on that issue. Even urging German Zionists to attend the Zionist congress in Prague in 1933. They hoped that the Zionist would fight the boycott against Germany and they did. In the early years the Nazis could easily point their fingers at the British, didn’t they restrict immigration?
The sign on the cover imagine the publisher uses means
Auf nach Palestina – on to Palestine.
Never mind the accompanying illusions but initially the Zionists found much support from the Nazi administration.
Thanks, very interesting book you pointed us to!
The nazi movement explored different racist strategies to rid themselves of Jews.
They settled on the extermination strategy as cheapest with the least political cost, especially with the cast of strange bedfellows that they hoped to allign with in temporary and/or permanent alliances for their GRAND territorial objectives.
When the Mufti linked with Hitler (as a potential distracting flank to British forces in Egypt), they abandoned the Zionist “alliance”.
Where on earth are you getting evidence for the claim that extermination was cheap and had little political cost? That’s pure speculation and nothing more. It’s also very far from being true. Exterminations were so secret a project that there isn’t a single document or telegraph message that explicitly refers to extermination. It was a top secret project, which necessarily implies that it would have entailed a huge political cost were such a thing to become public knowledge.
The extermination policy that started in mid-1942 was never envisioned as cost-effective, but rather as a needed means to get rid of the 5th column in a nation fighting for its survival, especially after Kursk and Stalingrad. Witty, you are really ignorant. It occurred by default, and it cost the 3rd Reich a lot in terms of diversion
of men and materials when it was fighting the most powerful nations on earth.
A number of present-day political parties found inspiration of one sort or another in the Nazis, including India’s Hindu nationalist BJP party. The party that’s the present-day BJP sent missions to Germany thru the 1930s. Yet it’s the BJP that tightened relations with Israel in 2003, when Ariel Sharon visited Delhi.
To be honest it is only the Hindu Right wing parties who beleive in Hindutva that follow this line of thinking. They draw on their ideologue Sarvarkar’s thinking which was heavily influenced by 19th century European racial thinking on nationalism. Another head of the fascistic RSS which provides the leadership to the BJP, Hedgewar is notorious for praising German efforts to purify their “race spirit” by purging the Jews. The other more extreme on of the Shiv Sena, has its leader Bal Thakceray bestow fulsome praise on Hitler and his policies. Of course these parties now enthusiastically make a common cause in the so-called Hindu-Zionist alliance against the supposed ‘Islamic threat’.
The very recent alliance between Israel and India, results from common enemies largely, and some recent economic development coalitions.
When I visited Israel and India in 1986, they did not yet have diplomatic relations, and I had to travel through Cairo to get from Israel to India.
Also, when I arrived in India, I was questioned for an hour inquiring into what I was doing in India, relative to my Israeli visa in my passport. Ironically, the people that I was visiting in India, were more contreversial, and likely would have resulted in my expulsion if they knew.
The South African Ossewabrandwag supported the Nazis -> former member Vorster become prime minister of South Africa -> Israel supported South Africa under Vorster . . .
QED.
This is like shooting fish in barrel. Guilt by association is easy.
Here is my taxonomy of pre-State Zionist politics:
1. Congress Zionism (both political and cultural): voelkisch (proto-Nazi) theoretically racist Imperialist.
2. Labor Zionism (either fascist or comparable to the Strasser faction of Left Nazis).
3. Jabotinskian/Revisionist Zionist (comparable to mainstream or extreme Right Nazis, in many ways far more extreme and irrational).
BTW, in the above when I write Nazi, I mean German Nazi. Nazism refers to a class of ideologies that took hold throughout Central and Eastern Europea and that were associated with a number of ethnic groups including: Germans, Serbs, Croats, Rumanians, Poles, and ethnic Ashkenazim. Many of these groups also hosted distinct fascist movements as well.
Very true. And all thought they had good reason, their rationals are not taught in
US universities.
Didn’t the Irgun or Stern negotiate with the SS?
See below. Your message came in while I was writing my post.
Yes, they did so to save lives. The palestinian godfather negotiated with Hitler to kill Jews. Surely you see the difference.
Since no one else seems to have mentioned it, why not explore the insidious connections between the Nazis and the Zionists and perhaps reissue the medal that was coined to commemorate Adolph Eichmann’s trip to Palestine in the 30s which had a swastika on one side and a star of David on the other. Eichmann was the man with whom the Zionists successively negotiated the transfer of most of the German Jews to Palestine and particularly the young, healthy ones who the Nazis allowed to train as young pioneers.
There was nothing humanitarian about the Zionists. They were not interested in saving the old ones unless they had money which was then used to buy German goods which were shipped on Nazi flagged freighters to Palestine where they were resold by the newly arrived olim. (See Edward Black, The Transfer Agreement, Macmillan).
The Zionists rejected the old stereotype of the bookish, intellectual, businessman Jew in favor of building a “new Jew,” something that strangely resembled the Aryan image that the Nazis were projecting and they certainly seemed to have achieved that (and will be as successful in maintaining it as were those in the “1000 Year Reich.”)
The Nazis were so helpful to the Zionists in Palestine that the great Jewish writer, Leon Feutwanger wrote that one day “they will erect a statue to Hitler in Jerusalem.” Poor deluded Leon, too, managed to escape.
Then, of course, we have the case of former prime minister Yitzak Shamir, a member of Lehi AKA the Stern Gang that sent a message to Hitler expressing its understanding and support for the Nazi cause and offering to work with the Nazis against the British since their philosophies were similar. A copy of the document turned up in a safe in the Turkish embassy and not only has its authenticity never been denied, it has been published in the Israeli press.
As a result when the criminal terrorist Shamir replaced his fellow criminal terrorist Begin when the latter retired as prime minister in 1983, there were protests from Jewish holocaust survivors who asked how a man who tried to collaborate with Hitler could be allowed to rule Israel. As is well known in Israel, holocaust survivors have always been treated like shit, and so no one, except a few journalists now and then, paid attention to the story. Of course, to publish that in a US paper would have been verboten. Doing so got my late friend, Colin Edwards, a veteran radio journalist and longtime Welsh nationalist, thrown off the air at KALW in San Francisco when the Israeli Consul General and a local judge complained.
Besides Lenni Brenner’s “51 Documents” which seals the case for Zionist collaboration with the Nazis, I strongly recommend reading Ben Hecht’s “Perfidy,” which is an eloquent, irrefutable unmasking of the collaboration of the Zionist mainstream with the Nazis, written from the perspective of a member of the Irgun of which Hecht was its most important American supporter.
In “Perfidy,” Hecht reveals the lengths the mainstream Zionists went in order to sabotage the rescue of German and other European Jews who would have been sent to any place but Palestine. Building a Judenstaat was more important than saving Jewish lives. They were a truly execrable lot, those Zionists and, not surprisingly, they have created an even more execrable state.
Its been sickeningly mentioned a thousand times here.
Early in the nazi dominated 12 years, it was unclear to what extent Hitler was different than previous anti-semites. In an environment of persecution, officials and advocates working for the best interests of Jews, HAD TO deal with abusively anti-semitic officials, and the Zionists early assumed that Hitler’s anti-semitism was more of the same.
And, yes, at the time, some emphasized Zionism as an idealist solution, as more important in their minds than opposing the anti-semitism of Hitler (already a “norm” in most of Europe, just varying in extent).
Taking that strained FACT, and twisting it to imply any enthusiastic complicity with naziism is an ignorant and sick equation.
A very low level of intellectual analysis, someone that failed high school algebra, would conclude that Zionists “supported Hitler”.
There are two separate issues.
Are Zionists Nazis?
Were the Zionists enthusiastic in their collaboration with the German Nazis?
To answer the first question I relist my categories of pre-State Zionist politics (because I forgot one):
1. Congress Zionism (both political and cultural): voelkisch (proto-Nazi) theoretically racist Imperialist — in the USA Brandeis reformulated it as Refugeeism.
2. Labor Zionism (either fascist or comparable to the Strasser faction of Left German Nazis).
3. Jabotinskian/Revisionist Zionist (comparable to mainstream or extreme Right German Nazis, in many ways far more extreme and irrational).
4. Voelkisch occult nationalist Zionists, who were comparable to a minor current of the German Nazi movement.
Today American Refugeeist Zionism is a full-fledged form of Nazism with an important currents of voelkisch occult nationalist Nazism while J-Street and AFoPN as remnants of Labor Zionist fascism represent a minor insignificant internal opposition to Jabotinskian Zionist Nazism.
To answer the second question.
Some Zionists and non-Zionist German Jews were enthusiastic about Hitler. Others were not. There was an important current of pro-Jewish pro-Zionist Nazis, who actively and often enthusiastically collaborated with Zionists during the first five years of the German Nazi regime. Many Zionists saw collaboration in the liquidation of German Geldjuden as the means to create a functioning independent Zionist economy in Palestine. Other Zionists had developed attitudes, which were at least as hostile to the Diaspora as those of anti-Semitic German Nazis.
Overall back in the 30s and 40s the vast majority of Jews were almost certainly extremist Nazis or extremist Bolsheviks and a threat to the human race while today the vast majority of Jews are like Witty extremist Nazis and definitely a threat to the human race.
By way of contrast, the Mufti of Jerusalem was not a Nazi, only wanted Zionist invaders out of Palestine, and preferred to collaborate with the British.
[Note that the Mufti's teacher, Muhammad Rashid Rida, condemned pogroms against Russian Jews.]
The German Nazis were not particularly enthusiastic about him, for he was dispatched as quickly as possible to the Yugoslavian front, which in many regards was a worse assignment than the Soviet front.
As they say, politics makes strange bed fellows. Applying the Sotomayor impact litmus test, what do we get? I don’t think Witty’s high school algebra suffices to tell us.
@ Witty:
“After WW2, the British were down. There was nothing that could justify retaining a distant colonial presence. India’s independance accompanied Israel’s. They were BOTH part of the anti-colonial wave of independance movements following WW2.”
No. Israel’s formation and independence was VERY much a colonial enterprise. Exactly the contrary to India’s independence.
Not colonial at all, in that no European state would benifit.
This type of Zionist propaganda depends on the inadequacy of modern political science.
The Zionist Virtual Colonial Motherland (or Judonia) orchestrated the colonization of Palestine and benefited from it:
1. Virtual Colonial Motherland as Political Innovation
2. Herzl and Normalizing Jewish Power
3. Makdisi Overlooks US Journalistic Nazification
Its a strained analysis that describes a refugee people as colonial.
Thats like describing Palestinians in Syria as colonists of Syria.
According to the early Zionists themselves, they were not refugees, they were pioneers. They particularly recruited the young and strong and often discouraged those who might be seen as a burden from emigrating , or making aliyah. The very terms aliyah and olim denote that zionist emphasis on colonialism rather than refugeeism. Palestinians who were exiled or forced to flee to Syria were not intent on usurping the Syrians’ land and government to set up an exclusive Palestinian state, so your comparison is faulty.
Zionist Parable: Yosef Mokir Shabbat: Of course in real life, the Jew — let’s call him Witty Mokir Genevah — took a club, knocked off the old gentile’s hat, beat him senseless, stole the gem, and justified the crime as the will of God.
Richard,
What a ridiculous thing to say. Refugees to a host state don’t declare their own state. And the Zionist movement was itself a colonial movement, which you can tell from early Zionist writings.
Witty, hardly, and none too honest, I’d say. So the Nazi-Zio collaboration has been “sickeningly mentioned a thousand times here.”
Please give us ONE example of some of the details that I mentioned that have appeared at ANYtime in a mainstream or Jewish-American US publication.
Also, please don’t tell me your execrable Zionists didn’t know what was happening by 1939, including the odious Shamir who were still trying to sign up with Hitler.
Please don’t excuse your ignorance? Please…
Witty: “Its a strained analysis that describes a refugee people as colonial”
Huguenots were refugees. Where do you think Malans and Jouberts came from? I guess I’m less concerned with where folks came from than in the apartheid system they established. You say things like this again and again that are complete idiocy. Do you have any knowledge at all of other colonial/settler projects and what pushes were involved in prompting people to leave their original homes?