Where to begin with the outrageous ironies of invoking the Hollywood 10 against the Toronto Declaration against promoting Israel? Let us begin by noting that the Hollywood 10 got exactly what they had coming: the Communists made Hollywood into the most ruthless war propaganda machine in history.
A lot of readers will give me grief for that, I know, but consider how militantly Zionist those Popular Front Hollywood Jews were. Among the more memorable examples was Yip Harburg, who wrote "Somewhere Over The Rainbow", and later wrote a song for the Stalinoid presidential campaign of Henry Wallace about "fixing things in Palestine and Greece", that is, kicking the Arabs out of Palestine and standing in the way of the Marshall Plan.
In the past, this site has taken after Kirk Douglas for his shameless Zionist iterations. That's Kirk Douglas, who championed the arch-Stalinist Dalton Trumbo [pictured] in making a comeback by starring in Spartacus, the same Dalton Trumbo who around that same time directed the execrable Exodus. Indeed, one can reduce the entire longevity of the myth of progressive Israel to the bizarre and insular world of the Hollywood Popular Front. And in this light, the accommodation of militant Zionists by the Hollywood liberals at Huffington Post is just par for the course.
Finally, it is also worth noting in this context the Hollywood blacklist they don't talk about, of antiwar and anti-Communist voices before World War II. Among these were Lillian Gish for her support of the America First Committee; Walt Disney, of whom bizarre and baseless accusations of pro-Nazi sympathies linger to this very day simply because he would not use his cartoons to bash middle America like the pro-Soviet Warner Brothers; and last but certainly not least, Morrie Ryskind, the Marx Brothers collaborator who would become the highest paid screenwriter in Hollywood before being banished for his staunch anti-Communism, and going on to be a supporter of the anti-Zionist American Council for Judaism.
-
-
- Jack Ross in Brooklyn tonite– on Elmer Berger and the … 4
- Iran sanctions backlash– oil buyers ditch dollar 30
- O, Earth 3
- ‘Center for American Progress’ censors references to Israel from piece … 9
- Security expert formerly in Bush I administration says Holocaust rationalizes … 28
- Robert Reich pretends he’s stupid 9
- Factchecking Marty Peretz 2
- Israeli judges are the confessors in savage new doc’y on … 10
-
- Breaking: Israeli bulldozer, soldiers destroy entire Bedouin community near Anata … 760
- Publisher of the ‘Atlanta Jewish Times’ suggests Mossad should assassinate … 396
- Report: Israel to give US only 12-hour warning before attacking … 396
- Video: Settlers claim olive oil as ‘Israeli’ 282
- EU diplomats propose boycotts, divestment, and sanctions against Israeli colonialism 263
- In the last 24 hours an orgy of land theft … 219
- Arab-American high school student video targets US backing for killings … 218
- Why Christian Zionism is nothing short of outright heresy 167
-
- A regular commenter on this site seeks a more temperate … 506
- Publisher of the ‘Atlanta Jewish Times’ suggests Mossad should assassinate … 379
- New additions to the Mondoweiss comments policy 231
- Israel is at the heart of Jewish identity, Gorenberg says 136
- Report: Israel to give US only 12-hour warning before attacking … 134
- ‘Israel Firster’ gets at an inconvenient truth 120
- Video: Atlanta Jewish Times publisher’s tearful anti-apology 94
- Obama begins push for Jewish support in 2012 by touting … 91
-
Recent Comments
click link to see last 100 comments- Iran sanctions backlash– oil buyers ditch dollar (30)
- RoHa: If Iran gets lots of yuan, it will be able to easily buy lots of Chinese goods. What does China make?...
- Wolftone: Could someone explain how this shift away from the US dollar would affect China, which has, what, two...
- W.Jones: That’s a catchy, pretty song. I heard that during segregation in the US, African officials were...
- Video: Atlanta Jewish Times publisher’s tearful anti-apology (95)
- patm: EFFECTIVE APOLOGIES: A QUICK GUIDE TO THE KEY INGREDIENTS To fully clean up distressed feelings an apology...
- Allison Deger: Winnica-Adler is of course with remorse, but only extending to those he perceives as having hurt,...
- Security expert formerly in Bush I administration says Holocaust rationalizes Israel’s nuking Iran (28)
- Charon: It would most definitely be curtains for Israel. They would not be prepared for the aftermath. When people...
- DICKERSON3870: RE: “Notice how Ramberg…repeats the propagandistic claim that Iran has called for the...
- ‘Center for American Progress’ censors references to Israel from piece on Islamophobic film (9)
- Hostage: The Atlantic’s Jeffrey Goldberg has referred to Aish Hatorah as “Jewish extremists.” Now there’s a...
- Israeli judges are the confessors in savage new doc’y on legitimizing the occupation (10)
- eljay: >> You’re the judge, [y]es, but he stands before you, and he’s the enemy. Is this what a...
- The antiwar movement must rise again. Now (51)
- Dan Crowther: I agree with your point about Newt Gingrich for sure, and I do understand where you are coming from I...
- Iran sanctions backlash– oil buyers ditch dollar (30)
Our Writers
- Philip Weiss
- Annie Robbins
- Adam Horowitz
- Allison Deger
- Alex Kane
- Today in Palestine
- Kate
- Paul Mutter
Blogroll
That was fascinating. Thanks, Jack.
I agree! Thanks, Jack. The history that you recount is too often forgotten.
“And in this light, the accommodation of militant Zionists by the Hollywood liberals at Huffington Post is just par for the course.”
Exactly. Operating initially from their base in the cultural Marxist Left, the Zionists have slowly triangulated the entire country.
Look at us now. And its going to get worse before it gets better.
Well, Zionism has very little to do with actual socialism, or progressivism, nowadays. In fact the American left wing is pretty much under direct assault by hard core Zionists, who threw their lot in with neoconservatives. Which is ironic because most Jews are liberals, from what I understand, even those who are Zionist to some extent. It’s not too surprising — the Republican was originally a party that supported abolition when it was founded, and it’s only been in the last several decades that they’ve become reactionary and irrevocably corrupt. I don’t think Abraham Lincoln would recognize what’s become of the party he helped establish, considering where it is today.
And really, not only is the left under assault but American moderates are under attack as well. Just ask David Axelrod and Rahm Emmanuel, who are getting labeled as “traitors” nowadays.
Are the Jews that comprise 20% of the Democrats in the U.S. Senate Jewish Zionists or not? Don’t they routinely rubber stamp all aid and UN vetoes for Jewish Zionist Israel, and push for more? Did they decry the white phosphorous bombardment of Gaza by their fellow Jewish Zionists, or fold their arms and smugly grin? How about the outrageous Lebanon cluster bombs?
In addition to cultural Marxist elements in Hollywood, a main foot in the door, supporter and operational base for Jewish Colonialism (aka Zionism) — whether in America or Palestine — for decades has been the Democratic Party, which makes sense, because the overwhelming majority of American Jews came out of the Left and have stuck with left-liberalism since.
As we’ve discussed here in depth, the early Neocons were almost to a man former Trotskyites. And they broke with hordes of American Jews who were Stalinists, many of whom later became Trotskyites, too. And nearly all of them had Communist relatives or co-religionists who took their beliefs and world view to Palestine and became Zionist pioneers. The Neocons gained entrée to the highest levels of political power via Democrats like Scoop Jackson.
The Israel lobby and ethnocentric Jewish-American colonialism is a Democratic Party mess that more recently made its way into the corrupted Bushcon GOP.
I don’t think anyone who denies that Jewish colonialism and the Israel lobby are creatures of the Left can ever be taken seriously in the fight against Zionism. In fact, I would go so far as to say they are allies of Zionism — whether useful idiot or premeditated accomplices makes no difference.
Most “liberals” draw the anti-Zionist line at the Democratic Party’s door step, which is why anti-Zionism never goes anywhere, and never will until the door is kicked in.
Yeah. You deserve rage for that last post.
“Let us begin by noting that the Hollywood 10 got exactly what they had coming”
“Execreble Exodus”.
Praise the new generation gap. We erred in calling Johnson fascist when he had nurtured the most of Kennedy’s implied idealism in the Voting Rights Act, other civil rights legislation, Medicare.
Now, we need the new new left mocking the historical importance of the communist blacklists, and condemning any criticism of America First xenophobic sentiment and approach.
And, the utter revisionist view of Zionism, imagining that Jewish suffering didn’t occur, and that the America First crowd compelled Zionism to be a necessity by restricting post WW2 immigration of Jewish refugees.
Wisdom.
Well Richard I never thought I would be agreeing with you, but for the most part on this one you are spot on. It is not a matter of the “new left” embracing black lists, I never have and I never will. This post is quite inconceivable to me, will the next move be erecting a monument to McCarthy?
Not to mention the fact, that the “fight against communism” was the mantra to the complete assault of Latin America, and almost every incursion of empire – tearing down democratic activity in a great part of the globe by the “anti-communists.” Domestically the almost total undoing of any union movement so that the people are now complete dirt, totally atomized – unable to gain any ascendancy, and the current gap of income being so great it has surpassed the robber baron days.
Oh, I forgot to mention the arms race, and the building of a militaristic machine which swallows most of the budget, for the same process of empire. Of course Richard, I do not think you agree with or see the so-called “war on terror” as the new communism – or the excuse to continue this budget draining prospect for the few. Part of what you said above is enough said – I have a leafing of letters which reflect the despair of families drifting on ships who cannot believe that they are unable to set ashore because they are accused of being Bolsheviks. Of course, it was the fear of needing to have a more egalitarian society and the outcry of the few elites that fanned the flames of this groundless fear demonizing the victims and the needy. I am third generation, you can call me what you like, but I will never embrace these rabid anti-communism fairy tales as an excuse for the oppression that was unleashed.
Re: “…will the next move be erecting a monument to McCarthy?”
“McCarthyism” today is a term used more generally to describe demagogic, reckless, and unsubstantiated accusations, as well as public attacks on the character or patriotism of political opponents. Those who engage so of whatever political stripe
are unwittingly (or not) erecting a monument to McCarthy.
V…
Your socialist economic arguments are nearly wholly without merit. A few facts might do.
Like Communism, the socialism you espouse is economically unviable because it destroys incentive for enterprise and production. It penalizes entrepreneurship, and incentivises sloth, stagnation and economic cannibalism. This leads to massive deficits, massive debt and the erosion of the currency. The only reason the America dollar hasn’t collapsed is because we have the most powerful military in the world that continues to strong-arm and mercantilise poorer nations in order to pay for Washington’s socialist deficit spending, and prop up the dollar. Significant chunks of this deficit spending end up in the pockets of Wall Street crooks like Goldman Sachs via commissions for managing the sale of government debt to cover the deficits, and also via market bubbles inflated by the centralized Fed, Treasury and Wall Street (all disproportionately run by Wall Street crooks) who then cry “anti-Semtisim” when people complain about the arrangement.
America also pays for European socialism by providing the brunt of Europe’s defense with our military-industrial complex, which frees up money for European social welfare.
Western socialists and Zionists are essentially killing poor people around the globe to pay for the deficit spending and growing national debt that covers the cost of socialist sloth and Wall Street and Washington chicanery.
Back when the country was run on the economic vision set out by the Founders, and prior to this ugly Leviathan created by crypto-commie FDR and his Jewish brain trust, people were encouraged to use their God-given talents to invent, create, build, be dynamic and productive, not earn their “living” by foreign armed robbery, chicanery and the casino markets.
It’s this opium spoon fed to Americans by sleazy, morally and ethically bankrupt, highly centralized cultural Marxists, Zionists, Socialists and Wall Street crooks, in combination with the Leftist and Internationalist Capital Globalizationist agenda that discourages patriotism and neighborly cooperation in favor of some utopian “global view,” and encourages the off shoring of jobs (which again leads to higher profits for the greedy socialist elite) that has destroyed the economy and the country.
After WWII the remaining Jews or Europe didn’t need a place to flee to. They could have remained where they were (as many of them did). As for US restrictions on Jewish refugees after the war, there were many worthy refugees in those days. The US couldn’t take in all of them, just as today it can’t take in everyone who wants to come here. If the United States was so hostile to Jewish immigration, why are there very nearly as many Jews here as there are in Israel?
I still remember the Ross post where he trashed Woody Guthrie for writing “This Land is Your Land”, with his support of propagandistic communism and later Zionism.
Present reality changes. Revisionism of the past is a different story.
Maybe Ross was thinking of the lyrics Woody sometimes pulled out, and sometimes left in on that famous song of his? There easily available, if you are interested. BTW,
Woody’s song was copyrighted but he simulaneously included in the copyright notice
that he’d be happy if anyone stole his song and used it without his permission. Very anti-American in the sense of ignoring property rights–again, read his alternate lyrics.
Having written what I said above let me clarify one thing to the point of the post, this does not mean that I am comparing the said declaration on TIFF as a black list effort. Of course this mystifies the simple view that if you are for one you cannot be for the other and so on. In fact, it is confounding this current affair with the black lists that would give the impression that we are speaking of apples to apples, when I am not. In this current scenario we are not talking about black listing anyone, we are talking about sparing the Palestinian commiseration and destruction, and halting the self-destructive course of Israel. I hope i made this clear, and if not, I can elaborate.
the America First crowd compelled Zionism to be a necessity by restricting post WW2 immigration of Jewish refugees
Not true. It was the Zionists under Roosevelt who did this. Dont have the book I can cite from with me; I’m traveling. But this is hogwash. The Zionists wanted Jewish refugees to go to Palestine. There is lots of literature about this on the web, but probably on sites you would never read or would pre-judge. Both Canada and the USA were involved in this: these two countries were more than prepared to accept Jewish refugees — there weren’t that many, after all — but Zionists and Zionist Rabbis threatened the US and Canadian governments if they did.
BTW, Witty, before you go all postal on me about this, the book was written by a Jewish scholar who did exhaustive research at a time when no one thought to stop him. He used the FOIA to get presidential and FDR admin memos, and Jewish org docs.
MRW there might be some Zionists which added to the fray, but long before this in the early 20th century these issues were flying around in the USA. What never ceases to amaze me is the abject ignorance of most Americans of this era – I guess it is because it has ostensibly been erased from the history books or twisted. Indeed, it goes back further than even the first throes of the Red Scare. Do you think our grandparents changed their names because it was fashionable?
I suggest you go back to the drawing board on your considerations. It was not merely the Zionist contingency that brought about the apprehension, as valid as that scholarly work might be if it ignores what I said, it is not the complete picture.
Yeah, I know. It goes back to the 1924 immigration law and a lot of other things. Too late here for me to get smart about what I’m saying; however, I was blown away by the efforts started in the early 1930s to prevent Jews from emigrating here. Really ugly underhanded stuff initiated by the different, warring, factions of Zionism to gain control by being the ones who delivered the ‘mostest’ to Palestine. I mean, WWII hadn’t even started yet, nor the full import of Hitler. The Zionists were also behind restricting German immigration in the 1924 law; another topic for another time. All this info really shocked me. I spent months and months and months verifying that it was true: not because I had a dog in this fight, but I dont like being lied to and I have a congenital thingey about not being told the truth. I blamed my education for that.
What never ceases to amaze me is the abject ignorance of most Americans of this era As I mentioned above, I was shocked at how everything I was taught was wrong; and I’m not a dumb person, and I spent a fortune in time and money on my education. I feel as if the education I should have had began in 1999, when I was forced to expend hours, days, months, years, to re-educating myself by scouring the net, and rethinking everything. At this point in time, v, the thing that, now, oddly, really pisses me off the most, is the amount of propaganda in films from that period telling me history was otherwise.
Here’s a summary view on US Jewish refugee policy 1941-1952 by the holocaust museum: link to ushmm.org
The role of zionism in the holocaust:
link to jewsnotzionists.org
link to nsm88.org
“A study of JA policy during the Nazi era supports the position that, had Zionism not been preoccupied with building a Jewish state as its overriding goal, more Jews would have been rescued. The JA saved Jews only when it served its national goals. When the rescue efforts were against the national interests, like at the Evian Conference in 1938, they were sabotaged. According to documents quoted by the Israeli researcher S. B. Beit-Zwi in Post-Ugandan Zionism on Trial (Zahala, 1991) and partly addressed by Brenner in his first book, the JA leadership saw a great danger for the Zionist project if Jewish refugees were to go to any destination other than Palestine. In other circumstances, like the Transfer Agreement or the van Harten affair, the JA helped and protected the Nazis.”
link to redress.btinternet.co.uk
All of this leads inevitably to the question of how far the Zionists might have been involved in fomenting violence against Jews in the Arab states, to cause them to flee to the “safety” and exploitation of Israel after the 1948 war. Avi Schlaim says his father was always convinced the Mossad was behind the violence in Iraq that drove him out, but Schlaim could never find evidence to prove it.
I think it’s a brave post, Jack, and it reeks of insight sans the excess 20th C baggage we older folk lug around. Even though Dalton Trumbo is one of my screenwriting heroes, I am perfectly prepared to see him in his historical context. You remind me of it. I would suspect Trumbo knew which side his bread was buttered on; he saw the writing on the wall: he wasn’t going to work for a long long time.
And P.S., Jack: And in this light, the accommodation of militant Zionists by the Hollywood liberals at Huffington Post is just par for the course.
Ditto.
Another issue that is totally left out is the fight of a few against the growing power of the Guild in Hollywood. Some consider this a bit of an inside fight, but it was a fight nonetheless. The film industry and all of its parts was a burgeoning enterprise early on, and there were commercial interests as well as corporate considerations that fought against the rising cost of movie making. You might consider it a microcosm of the greater fight for rights and decent wages, which all enjoy now like all the work perks, collective contract negotiations, etc. Once again, it is the abject ignorance of the forces at war on these issues that cause to people to wrongly view an era, and is also part of the reason the people are currently flat on their asses when it comes to their employment today.
Its good that you are a free-thinking individual Jack.
But, if this is the content of an impending publication, you can expect a LOT of heat on it.
One definition of changes in intellectual history is the shifting of foundation references that hold up the “building” of actual events. It is either natural or historical revisionism, depending on the specific assumptions made, and what remains in the new foundations.
In my house, I have an original concrete foundation, and central foundation supports to hold up a heavier than originally designed roof, framing, insulation. Its not clear which “reality” is holding up the building. Both now, but if I jacked up the supports even a quarter of an inch, the central supports would be, and would shift the weight.
The original foundation though is stronger than the supports, and if I did raise them the quarter inch, the whole house would become unstable, and my walls would crack, even though the first 1/2 raised didn’t do that.
Intellectual proportion, maybe even resulting in “self-censorship”, er discretion.
Finally, it is also worth noting in this context the Hollywood blacklist they don’t talk about, of antiwar and anti-Communist voices before World War II.
I learned about the issue reading about the history of Pacifica radio. As a German it left me with mixed feelings, pretty much as the statements by Justin Raimondo on the issue. I understand the motivation of the objectors and the authoritarian treatment they received: prison. On the other hand I obviously prefer to not have been born into a Nazi empire and its vision. From that perspective it always felt important that the US joined the war.
I think it is wrong to simply couple anti-war and anti-Communism, that’s the cold war perspective. Admittedly it feels very American too me. As I think it’s wrong to construct fast continuities in these issues. But what do I know.
Hey, if we didn’t go to war with Nazi Germany through the back door via Japan’s
angst over our oil embargo (at the time Japan got 98% of its oil from us) and secret deals against Japan with England and Holland, which prompted the attack on Pearl
Harbor, you might well think today it was great to be a beneficiary of Hitler’s 3rd
Reich. It would’ve been harder for you to get any truth about your great nation than
it is for an average American today to get truth from its government-MSM complex.
Fools are born every minute and the ruling powers like to keep it that way–I mean,
did the average Weimar German ever see any of Grosz or Dix’s paintings regarding
WW1 and their culture?
“… the accommodation of militant Zionists by the Hollywood liberals at Huffington Post is just par for the course.
Finally, it is also worth noting in this context the Hollywood blacklist they don’t talk about, of antiwar and anti-Communist voices before World War II. Among these were Lillian Gish for her support of the America First Committee…”
Gish was not only blacklisted; they also tried to bribe her with lucrative film contracts to get her to shut up. Speaking of blacklisting American Firsters–Philip Roth would
disagree with this summary of the AFC:
link to fff.org
Growing up I heard all about McCarthyism, but nothing about the AFC.
The AFC was voluntarily disbanded asap after Japan
attacked Pearl Harbor. However, for Roosevelt,
that attack didn’t “come out of the blue.”
link to thornwalker.com
ARE YOU A COMMUNIST?
Sorry, you have to log in for the above one, this one you just have to give your DOB -
ARE YOU A COMMUNIST?
You know what is really mind boggling? Is that the USA so tied “patriotism” to capitalism that the mere inference that you had communist sentiments meant you were “un-American (and the incipient committees were launched under the same rubric).” The lite has so deftly tied a system which enriches the few (capitalism) with the country that it was a test of patriotism. This is why RFK used it during the Hoffa hearings (link above).
Now granted systemically Americans has a good deal for a number of years, but it had nothing to do with the “system,” but the demcratic uprising primarily fueled by union activity that was tagged as “communist.” The people who lead the masses of workers during the most effective period understood the adversarial between the corporate capitalist and the interests of the working class. However with time and change of leadership the unions became malleable to corporate management and called themselves “partners” with management. When the cycle of propaganda was completed (and it was relentless, vilifying unions and culminating in the Reagan era open warfare), most of the wages of the working people were frozen in the 1970′s. Than these asses decided to “lend” the money that was due to the people back to them, at rising interest creating a debt pit. So here we are today with the working class almost totally bereft and powerless, jobless and job-loss recoveries. They also spread this same system all over the world, which has created a global depression. Nice and “productive” with almost no one able to buy jack shit!
CAPITALISM HITS THE FAN
IF YOU DON’T KNOW WHAT TO DO
That is right, I am not done yet posting about this debacle, and the “righteous” anti-communist forces. Which in my view makes people who hold these “patriotic” views dupes and fools.
A major symptom of the truth in what you say here is the ever-growing income gap.
Another is our federal tax code, a recipe for giving bones to the poor and piling
meat on the very wealthy tables–all at the expense of the lower to middle working class.
link to original.antiwar.com
The Huffington Post: Israeli-Occupied Territory
by Justin Raimondo, January 03, 2009
Email This | Print This | Share This | Comment | Antiwar Forum
Pat Buchanan was widely vilified by the neocons and the politically correct left when he famously described the Congress of the United States as “Israeli-occupied territory.” Oh, what a conniption the liberals and the Commentary crowd had! That was during the countdown to the first Gulf War, when almost no one rose to object – and those who did, like Pat, were smeared for their trouble. Today, such an observation is hardly considered controversial: it is simply a known fact.
There is more discussion in the Knesset over the pros and cons of US intervention in the Middle East on Israel’s behalf than there is in on Capitol Hill. There’s a sense in which this sort of uniformity must be a little embarrassing for the Lobby, in that it underscores their fear that a real debate will suddenly break out. The regularity with which the American Congress endorses every fresh Israeli atrocity has a certain deadening metronomic quality about it – and, while we’re on the subject of monotony, the American media, too, plays an identical role as advocate and staunch defender of the Israeli case, as a matter of course. The “mainstream” televised and dead-tree-media has historically been a reliable “reporter” of the merits of the Israeli case. Now, the wannabe “alternative” online media is following suit, with an alacrity that is none too surprising.
When you own or run most of the messaging then you have control of the direction and perception
This is a most interesting book
link to ihr.org
An Empire Of Their Own: How The Jews Invented Hollywood
* by Neal Gabler. New York: Crown Publishers, Inc., 1988. Hardcover, 502 pp., illustrated, $24.95, ISBN 0-51746808 X.
Reviewed by Jack Wikoff
Much of An Empire of Their Own reads like a press agent release for the stereotypical Hollywood movie producer. Having originally subtitled his book How Zukor, Laemmle, Fox, Cohn and the Warner Brothers Invented Hollywood, author Neal Gabler provides valuable information about those Jews who came to dominate the film industry during the nineteen-twenties, thirties and forties.
Undoubtedly the subtitle was changed to How the Jews Invented Hollywood to promote more effectively the myth that Jews singlehandedly created the film industry. Reading An Empire of Their Own may cause one to be ultra-conscious of whether a film producer, director, actor or technician is Jewish or not. One reviewer has written that “if misread, the book could provide fuel for anti-Semitism.” This may or may not be true. What is certain is that the history of cinema is now old enough for us to see the extraordinary power this medium has had upon the political and moral values of the masses. Many Jews have persistently sought, and gained, this power throughout the twentieth century.
Citizen, do you believe your lies.
Tell me which country was going to give refuge to the Jews during WW2?
There was none.
My point is that to the extent any county did offer refuge–and some did–obviously you didn’t read the url sources’ content I gave to readers here–the Zionists worked against even those paltry offers (in the light of later history and without considering
the various nation’s denials reasons at the time, which had more motivation than simple anti-semitism, although that played a part too. To the Zionists nothing would do unless jewish refugees were sent to Palestine Mandate land. Golda Meir is an example. She took your view here and also my view. The devil is always in the details–nothing I said is a lie, and let’s allow the readers here to go to the urls I quoted from
and/or gave–argue with them and their sources–don’t simply call the messenger a liar. Your point is well taken; although not entirely true as I documented via the url references, and it’s not inconsistent with what I said or the information I referenced.
Kathleen, Pat Buchanon is the same nut that claims Hitler never wanted war in 39.
I just saw on Cspan where Andrew Roberts debated Pat make Pat look like a fool with his dumb Pro Hitler comments.
Why don’t you address Pat B’s evidence and reasoning in his book? Even if you merely go by the History Channel, it’s clear Hitler didn’t want to have a
war with England, at the least, nor did he really want war with the USA. In contrast,
he did want war with France, Poland, and the USSR. He wanted wars of his choosing but there were other actors on the stage. Pat B is not a fool.
Here’s some of Pat B’s questions related to his conclusion that Hitler did not want a second world war–ask yourself, are they dumb questions?:
link to buchanan.org
Chris Moore, the Arabs are the colonialists.
Besides Saudi Arabia and Egypt every other Arab country was stolen in the 7th Century by Mohammad and his Jihad army.
Modern genetic testing (haplotype mapping) show that the native people of Palestine and many of the European diaspora Jews are related. They do in fact share genetic markers that are rare or absent from the Saudi Arabians. What this means, Ed, is that the Palestinian Jews in the 8 th century converted to Islam. That is not colonialism. Face it man, those Palestinians you are so happy oppressing are your cousins.
I often wonder if the early Zionist leaders made their plans with an assumption that the Middle East would under European colonial control for the future? It certainly would have made their lives easier. The fact that the Zionists eventually wanted the British out of Palestine,( because the British stood in their way after a certain point) doesn’t mean that they necessarily wanted all the surronding countries to be free of European (and Zionism-supporting) European control.
Insightful post Jack. It should be expanded to a book, but Witty’s right, expect strong resistance. The Hollywood 10 (and Exodus, directed by Otto Preminger, not Trumbo who wrote the screenplay) are sacred cows.
A telling vid of the high-minded idealists who remain seated as Elia Kazan, one of the very few true artists Hollywood ever produced, is honored at the end of his life:
link to youtube.com
Goebbels would’ve appreciated Exodus.
link to eaazi.blogspot.com
Pingback: Hey! Heroic Hollywood 10 included anti-Zionist
I will have to try and look into that. I do wonder if the Zionists assumed that European (or later American) control over the Middle East would continue or even grow.
Zionism was very much of a post-Ottoman Empire thing, Palestine was back under the control of the British and French, this was the opportunity, the opening, if it could be obtained, and through the exigencies and chaos of two world wars, it was.
But I wonder if the Israelis ever thought they would be pretty much alone, among not among colonial dependencies or mandated territory, but with independent Arab neighbors?
“stolen in the 7th Century”
What’s next? Are you ZIonists going to ask us to give America back to the indians?
I always get a kick out of how Zionists scourge the whole world for anti-semitism, over and over they scream the whole world hates the Jews. And then they demand the entire world turn itself upside down to restore them an empire!
Which is it? Does the world hate us Jews, or is the world just panting to push everyone out of the way so we can have what we believe was once ours? I never could figure it out. I don’t know, maybe the world hates us enough that it wants us all to go to Israel, but it loves us enough (in the aggregate) that it will turn the Middle East topsy turvy just to bring things back to that magic pre “seventh-Century” days when Jews were the top guys around Palestine.
Or as the great Allan Sherman sings: “West of The Fountainblue, I am the law!”
Oh, come on, there always time for “My Son, the Folk Singer” Has anybody ever topped “Trampling through the warehouse where the drapes of Roth are stored”?
I note in passing that the execrable Exodus was actually directed by Otto Preminger.
Citizen, not one single country in WW2 wanted to give the Jews refuge.
Thats why Zionists knew Israel was their only hope.
You seem not to understand this.
I think this article will make you understand that even more.
link to jpost.com
Jun 5, 2009
Consider the experience of Sgt. Richard Paul, a reporter for Yank, an army magazine for soldiers. In October 1944 - six months before Obama’s great-uncle entered Ohrdruf Sgt. Paul submitted an article about the mass murder of the Jews in Auschwitz, the editors of Yank turned it down, saying it was “too Semitic.” They told him to rewrite it so that it “did not deal principally with Jews.”
The army’s other magazine, Stars and Stripes, was no different. It was not until April 1945 that Stars and Stripes finally published articles about Nazi atrocities and concentration camps, and even then, the articles did not mention Jews. The average GI reading Stars and Strips had no way of knowing that Jews were the main victims of the Nazis.
The line followed by Yank and Stars and Stripes was unfortunately consistent with the approach of the Roosevelt administration as a whole. Callingattention to the fact that the Jews were being singled out for persecution would have increased pressure on the US government to grant them refuge - something President Franklin Roosevelt did not want to do.
The chiefs of the US Office of War Information instructed their staff that coverage of the Nazi mass-murders would be “confused and misleading if it appears to be simply affecting the Jewish people.”
A meeting of the American, British, and Soviet foreign ministers in Moscow in October 1943 issued a statement threatening postwar punishment for Nazi war crimes against conquered populations. It mentioned “French, Dutch, Belgian or Norwegian hostages …Cretan peasants … the people of Poland” but not Jews.
In a similar spirit, General Eisenhower himself removed all references to Jews from a leaflet the Allies air-dropped over Europe in September 1944, threatening to punish anyone who collaborated in Nazi atrocities against civilians. Even President Roosevelt’s 1944 message commemorating the first anniversary of the Warsaw Ghetto revolt - a rebellion by Jewish fighters - did not mention the Jews.
Arthur Szyk, the famous artist and Holocaust rescue activist, remarked bitterly that Europe’s Jews were being “treat[ed] as a pornographical subject you cannot discuss it in polite society.”
On several recent occasions, President Obama expressed regrets about some past US policies and their impact abroad. Perhaps his visit to Buchenwald, and his memories of what happened to his great-uncle, will inspire the president to say a few words about the Roosevelt administration’s appalling policy toward Europe’s Jews during the Holocaust and about the lessons to be learned, in order to help stop genocide today.
“That’s why Zionists knew Israel was their only hope.”
Good point, Ed! Certainly Israel could have had an easier time of it if the areas around it (the Middle East “mandate” after the defeat of the Ottoman Empire) stayed under European control.
I wonder if the Israelis anticipated being an independent “Jewish” country in the midst of independent Arab (to be very general about it) countries? I would bet the early Zionist leaders thought that the Arabs would always be under the control of colonial masters, or at least moderators.
Just another way in which Zionists misread (and what tumultuous times, who could have imagined…) what the future course would be. I am going to have to look into this.
I am almost certain the Zionists pictured Israel as surrounded by compliant Middle Eastern satraps and dependencies. Who could make sure Israel was unchallenged and even sanction its expansion.
But things turned out different, and the Israelis could not adapt.