Wiesel scored $500,000 for speech to congregation of Hagee, a Holocaust revisionist

US Politics
on 51 Comments

During the J Street conference, I criticized Elie Wiesel for delivering a speech to the congregation of the homophobic, Holocaust revisionist Pastor John Hagee, whose conspiratorial prophecies were so extreme John McCain withdrew the preacher’s endorsement. Now, just over three months later, we know why Wiesel hailed Hagee as his "dear pastor."

For delivering a single speech to Hagee’s congregation, Wiesel received a check for $500,000 toward his foundation, according to Marita Styrsky, the wife of Christians United for Israel Eastern Regional Director Victor Styrsky (Christians United is Hagee’s lobbying arm). So Wiesel got his money and Hagee got a photo with a Nobel Prize-winning Holocaust survivor. Everybody went home happy.

Since praising Hagee, Wiesel has gone on to condemn the Goldstone Report as "a crime against the Jewish people." Wiesel’s remarkable statementprompted Richard Silverstein to ask, "What was the last event in world history you can recall being a “crime against the Jewish people?” The answer is pretty obvious.

51 Responses

  1. annie
    February 9, 2010, 11:26 pm

    and the hits just keep on comin’.

  2. Richard Parker
    February 9, 2010, 11:50 pm

    Wiesel has shown himself as a phony on his ‘Holocaust experiences’. He wasn’t ever there.

    An exceptional witness himself, Wiesel assures us of his having met other exceptional witnesses. Regarding Babi Yar, a place in Ukraine where the Germans executed Soviet citizens, among them Jews, Wiesel wrote: Later, I learn from a witness that, for month after month, the ground never stopped trembling; and that, from time to time, geysers of blood spurted from it.
    These words did not slip from their author in a moment of frenzy: first, he wrote them, then some unspecified number of times (but at least once) he had to reread them in the proofs; finally, his words were translated into various languages, as is everything this author writes.

    That Wiesel personally survived, was, of course, the result of a miracle. He says that:
    In Buchenwald they sent 10,000 persons to their deaths each day. I was always in the last hundred near the gate. They stopped. Why?

    link to ihr.org

    • wondering jew
      February 10, 2010, 12:01 am

      I think quoting from ihr on anything related to the Holocaust is highly questionable.

      • yonira
        February 10, 2010, 12:09 am

        I’d go beyond that and say just about everything on there is a load of bullshit. It’s standard reading for the die hards @ Mondolies.

      • Cliff
        February 10, 2010, 12:23 am

        Stupid website, RP.

        And yonira, shut up. You love these kinds of posts. It gives you an opportunity to bash the entire blog. You can’t debate most of the stuff here, so you wait til someone says something stupid (Rehmat) or cites a website of questionable or zero credibility (RP), and then use THAT to degrade everyone.

        yonira, have you seen the stuff said on Haaretz or YNet talkbacks? Or on YouTube videos? Pretty much ANYWHERE on the web?

        Phil does not screen people here. You know that.

        So why do you keep presenting comments you do not like, as representative of Phil Weiss and/or the majority view of the regular commentators here?

        Just admit – you rarely engage in debate. You come here, and talk about the debate (like how something sounds), or just whine. Whatever intelligent or compassionate thing you might say is drowned out by these inane declarations of yours.

        Where were you when we to deal w/ Baruch Rosen? Did you say anything to that guy in protest? There have been plenty of other vulgar and idiotic trolls here.

        You are not the first, and you won’t be the last. Take your shit-fit elsewhere.

      • ihsan
        February 10, 2010, 8:59 am

        Isn’t it obvious Yonira suffers from AD(possibly with a bit of H)D. Engaging in dialogue with him is what it must be like for Mahmoud Abbas engaging in dialogue with Israel.

      • Mooser
        February 10, 2010, 11:33 am

        Isn’t it obvious Yonira suffers from AD(possibly with a bit of H)D.”

        Not at all. He suffers from ziocaine addiction, which oftens leads to (in this case definitely) Munchausen Syndrome-by-proxy-syndrome by proxy.

        He is a good illustration of the consequences of ziocaine use. Parents, take warning and don’t let your kids get started on the stuff!

        Maybe we’ll just have to get some kind of zionon going. I know! We can combine anti-ziocaine therapy with good outdoor excersise and agricutural pursuits! You know, make a new Jew out of him!

      • Donald
        February 10, 2010, 12:11 am

        Yeah, I just googled ihr–apparently a bunch of Holocaust denialists. Utterly worthless.

      • Richard Parker
        February 10, 2010, 12:16 am

        If Robert Faurisson quotes from Elie Wiesel’s own writings, then it can’t be questionable in the least. Note that I did not quote from Faurrison’s own opinions.

      • Cliff
        February 10, 2010, 12:30 am

        Except, seeing as how Faurisson is a Holocaust denier, there are tons of Elie Wiesals out there.

        So EW is just a popular faker, to Faurisson.

        That’s the content, and intention behind ‘exposing’ him.

        That doesn’t mean Faurisson could be mistaken about specifically EW. If there is evidence, then present it I say.

        However, the context of HIS denouncement is shady. So whatever information Faurisson could have provided, loses it’s intellectual worth when you juxtapose it to the fact that he is a Holocaust denier.

        How is this any different from when Hagee supports Zionism, and we point out the hypocrisy?

        I bet, WJ doesn’t like Hagee’s support.

        Well, I don’t like Elie Wiesal. I agree w/ Fink – he’s the ‘Holocaust industry’s resident clown’. Dersh is a clown too.

        However, if Faurisson is the guy questioning Wiesal, I’d refuse to acknowledge his argument. That doesn’t mean the truth changes. What it does mean, is that I have moral issues with humoring this guys argument, given that he is that guy.

      • Cliff
        February 10, 2010, 12:33 am

        I also think it’s easier to dismiss Hagee, on the grounds that he’s a religious fanatic.

        You could make the case that Wiesal is a hack – WITHOUT, denying the Holocaust.

        However, accepting Hagee, means you accept a fundamentalism. You can’t accept the 2nd coming of Christ and ALSO believe in international law and human rights. Religious doctrine prevails.

      • MRW
        February 10, 2010, 11:26 am

        Cliff, have you read Faurrison? Do you read and speak French? I do, but I haven’t read his work.

        Then how do you know he is a denier, because a bunch of people said so?

        Look what just happened with the Goldstone report. Israel got the US Congress, of all things, as Haaretz reported

        The U.S. House of Representatives on Tuesday condemned a UN report that accuses Israeli forces and Palestinian militants of committing war crimes in Gaza early this year as irredeemably biased and unworthy of further consideration or legitimacy.

        With a 344-36 vote, the House passed a nonbinding resolution that urged President Barack Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton to oppose unequivocally any endorsement of the report. Twenty-two representatives voted present.

        Mob rule for this report,a dn virulent claims of anti-semitism hurled against this jurist.

        If not for the internet, there is no doubt in my mind the Goldstone Report would have been condemned as Holocaust denial, or some other such misery related to Israel.

        If I may so bold, your attitude should be ‘duly noted’ unless you’ve read the damn thing. This is not courting Holocaust denial. This is being reasonable. We Americans have rediscovered so much hidden history in the last 10 years — McNamara, CIA Northwoods, etc — that was actively sold to us as lies that it behooves us to be circumspect.

        As for Wiesel, I’ve known the family for three decades. Wiesel is a fraud. Enough said.

        And oh yeah, you wanna do some research? Check out who occupied Romania starting in January 1944: The Soviets (Allies) with US cash helping the Soviet behemoth. Sighet, where Wiesel was born, was in Romania, and in Hungary, and in Romania, back and forth. When Russia entered Romania in January 1944, and secured Bucharesti, it put Jewish Communists in control of the police. From my copy of Wiesel’s “All Rivers Run to the Sea” pgs 147-148, Schocken Books:

        The Red Army had given control of the police to some young Jewish Communists returning from Bucharest, the labor battalions, and the camps. Whom else could they have any confidence in? (one of them, Aczi Mendelowics, later become Amons Monor, chief of formidable Shin Beth Security Service in Israel. As a result, there was some settling of scores with the fascists.

        And where were their headquarters for this settling? Sighet city jail. in the same city/town where Wiesel claims that the Nazis swooped him up four months later. The Soviet terror machine was bearing down hard on the Nazis, driving them back out of Hungary and Czechoslovakia into Germany and out of Poland where the Soviet General freed Auschwitz in January 1945. You honestly think the Germans were worried about taking 15-year-olds and old men across a couple of countries to put them in camps in Poland? Against the Russian troops? Look at the maps in the links below. So where did all the Sighet Jews go? How about Palestine/Israel.

        First Jassy–Kishinev Offensive
        link to en.wikipedia.org

        Second Jassy–Kishinev Offensive (enlarge the map of the Eastern Front at right)
        link to en.wikipedia.org

      • Mooser
        February 10, 2010, 11:37 am

        “As for Wiesel, I’ve known the family for three decades. Wiesel is a fraud. Enough said.”

        Say What? Sorry, after a statement “I’ve known the family for three decades” that is not nearly enough said. But, hey, whatever.

      • Philip Weiss
        February 10, 2010, 11:22 am

        I agree with Wondering and condemn Parker for doing so. I might ban him on the sickmaking ground. I think despite his claim to be merely revising some Holocaust statistics, he’s a denier, and he’s not being honest about his belief, but it leaks thru. This has just been brought to my attention. I condemn the IHR and hate those f—ers. Let me get my head around the banning question; meantime I urge other commenters to condemn Parker and his pal Faurisson

  3. Richard Parker
    February 10, 2010, 12:40 am

    Faurisson has a notoriety as a ‘Holocaust Denier’. On deep consideration, I think he’s probably very right,in questioning the magnitude, but not the essence. (ie many Jews were killed, but in no way, 6 million).

  4. Richard Parker
    February 10, 2010, 12:49 am

    Cliff So whatever information Faurisson could have provided, loses it’s intellectual worth when you juxtapose it to the fact that he is a Holocaust denier

    Who has proved that he is a Holocaust denier? Has he ever said the ‘holocaust’ didn’t happen at all?

    • Donald
      February 10, 2010, 1:09 am

      He denies there was a genocide of the Jews, according to wikipedia. From what I’ve read there, it’s a common thing for Holocaust deniers to say they don’t deny the Holocaust, but then they have their own private meaning for the word, which for them is that some Jews were killed, but not nearly as many as is usually claimed. So yes, Faurisson is a holocaust denier.

      Raul Hilberg, who probably knew a bit more about this subject than you and all the drooling idiots at IHR, said about 5.1 million were killed. Is that the number you had in mind? (It doesn’t sound like it).

      • Donald
        February 10, 2010, 1:15 am

        I apologize for the drooling remark. In no way should I associate a physical condition with the sort of atrocity denying tendency of people who spend time trying to whitewash Nazi crimes.

    • Cliff
      February 10, 2010, 1:15 am

      I’ve only heard of Faurisson through Manufacturing Consent.

      I don’t know the specifics. The documentary didn’t really distinguish what kind of Holocaust revisionist/denier he was.

      Anyways, I think its a fact – in our society – that while you may say something true, it can be smeared by something you said before that was either untrue (and emphasized by your opponents, much to your detriment) or socially unacceptable.

      I think Holocaust denial is viewed as both.

      I don’t know much about Wiesal’s past. I have not investigated it.

      I also do not care whether he is or is not a Holocaust survivor. If he IS a survivor, it does not matter to me, because I’ve only ever judged him on his politics. I’ve judged him by those politics while taking into consideration the ‘universalist’ statements he has made.

      Basically, I think he’s sanctimonious.

      Now that aside. You cannot expect people who do not NEED another reason to dislike the guy, and to critique him justly – to humor an argument by a controversial and morally dubious ‘intellectual’.

      It’s tactically stupid.

      That’s the plain truth.

      Now, morally speaking – I’m not saying Faurisson is wrong by-definition. Anyone can speak some truth. But it’s difficult to overcome those social taboos, especially when it’s – as I said – tactically unnecessary.

      So yea, I don’t care much what he has to say.

      • MRW
        February 10, 2010, 10:22 am

        He’s a complete fraud, Cliff. This guy is telling the truth about him.
        link to henrymakow.com

        For 18 months when the Auschwitz Museum had an easily searchable database of all the names from the Russian Archives discoveries, you couldn’t find Elie Wiesel’s name, nor that of his sister Bea. The database was organized differently then. You didn’t really need to know a name exactly. You could search by letter in case the German official misspelled it, and you could see a copy of the original scanned document in German, and in most cases a translation. Now you must know the exact spelling, and access is restricted as a result.

        I haven’t checked, but someone told me Wiesel’s name is there now and that of his sister.

        The only names present originally where the names that Gruner writes about.

  5. Brewer
    February 10, 2010, 2:54 am

    I don’t know about Faurisson but I do know Wiesel is a Nakba denier:

    ” In a propaganda tour of recent history, he asserts that in 1948, “incited by their leaders, 600,000 Palestinians left the country convinced that, once Israel was vanquished, they would be able to return home.”

    This claim is a cheap lie and is known by Wiesel to be a lie. It is furthermore an utterly discredited lie, and one that Israeli officialdom no longer cares to repeat. Israeli and Jewish historians have exposed it time and again: Every Arab broadcasting station in the region, in 1947 as well as 1948, was monitored and recorded and transcribed by the BBC, and every Arab newspaper has been scoured, and not one instance of such “incitement,” in direct speech or reported speech, has ever come to light. The late historian and diplomat Erskine Childers issued an open challenge on the point as far back as the 1950s that was never taken up and never will be.”

    link to thenation.com

    • JSC
      February 10, 2010, 9:25 am

      Naomi Klein said something like “there is a Jewish debate about the Holocaust – never again to anyone, or never again to us” in a speech. The latter view has pretty much won.

      I honestly don’t care much about Holocaust deniers. Until Israel stops what it is doing, people will not care about the feelings of Jews unless they are browbeaten into doing so. This is not a good situation for anyone, especially Jews.

      • Donald
        February 10, 2010, 10:37 am

        Well, you can speak for yourself. You may not care about Holocaust deniers, but I don’t see any progress at all in replacing one form of hatred and dishonesty about human rights for another. Lying about the attempted extermination of Jews (with 5-6 million deaths) is despicable in itself and that is reason enough for anyone to be outraged, but then consider the fact that any linkage of this kind of hatred with the cause of Palestinian rights is harmful to Palestinians.

        This is simple common sense, but at a blog like this where most of us are interested in the I/P conflict (maybe to the point of obsession), it seems that some lose all sense of perspective. At any mainstream blog one could be an apologist for Israeli crimes and this would be accepted as a legitimate POV. Not here. Good for us. But at any mainstream blog anyone who denied the Holocaust would be jumped hard by practically everyone else. But not here. I can’t see this as an improvement–it just looks like a different version of the same underlying illness.

  6. VR
    February 10, 2010, 3:03 am

    I can’t think of a worse fate than being stuck in an elevator with Wiesel during a power outage. There is nothing more cynical than a Holocaust industry freak who shows that he does not give a damn by what he does, to cheapen the tragedy, by supporting inflicting like pain on other innocents. Building “monuments” on the bleached bones on other victims, and erecting colonial settlements in view of ethnically cleansed victims.

    I just have one question – did he get tears in his eyes when he got his check from that antisemitic bastard Hagee? Just asking because I refuse to subject myself to listening or watching this whining shyster.

  7. Avi
    February 10, 2010, 3:10 am

    Some threads seem to take on a life of their own.

    As for the Hagee $500,000 check, color me unsurprised.

    There is more than one casualty here. There’s Wiesel’s capitalizing on a tragedy, a fact that shows his utter disregard for common decency and the value of human life while the second casualty is justice and by extension, the people of Gaza.

    Here, a check for half a million dollars exchanged hands for personal gain, on both sides. In the case of the Israeli government and its defenders, political capital is the currency of choice. Careers can be made out of genocides and holocausts. Do the participants, the culprits who engage in such disgusting behavior ever look themselves in the mirror? Probably not.

    Wiesel should be banished from anything related to Judaism, be it institutions, universities, organizations, communities or businesses.

    • Mooser
      February 10, 2010, 11:44 am

      “There’s Wiesel’s capitalizing on a tragedy, a fact that shows his utter disregard for common decency and the value of human life while the second casualty is justice and by extension, the people of Gaza.”

      A Holocaust will do that to ya! Well, if you’re a regular person. If you are Jewish, on the other hand, a Holocaust is like a sort of finishing school, it just perfects all your liberal and compassionate instincts. Right?

      And no Zionist yet has been able to tell me why God allowed it? I mean, a pogrom or two, sure, we all got to take our lumps. But did we deserve that? (If I’m lucky, I won’t get an answer.)

  8. VR
    February 10, 2010, 3:14 am

    Elie is like the state of Israel, which is interested in how much they can get with the image of the Holocaust victims, but does not give a damn about the survivors in the flesh (the few left).


    • MRW
      February 10, 2010, 10:14 am

      Great link, VR. Everyone should read it. Bronfman took $8 BILLION off the Swiss in for these survivors and they got bupkis. Zero. Fucking Zip.

  9. Richard Parker
    February 10, 2010, 3:55 am

    DonaldRaul Hilberg was not a great writer. He spent most of his active career writing The Destruction of the European Jews (Yale University Press, 2003; originally published in 1961) which has become the classic text on the Holocaust.

    But consider this; when his book was first published (1961) there was no access to East German, Polish, or Russian archives. He was even denied access to Yad Vashem’s archives. Each of these states, for various of their own reasons, had different statistics for the number of Germans, Poles, Slavs and Jews massacred in the second World War (which lasted, for Europeans, from 1939-1945).

    He finished off his last edition by saying: “It has taken me some time to absorb what I should always have known, that in my whole approach to the study of the destruction of the Jews I was pitting myself against the main current of Jewish thought.”

  10. Richard Parker
    February 10, 2010, 4:11 am

    Now, having dispensed with two of the best-known recorders of the Holocaust (Elie Wiesel and Raul Hilberg), can anyone give me another one who gives facts of anyone else who discriminates between the vast number of Slavs, Poles, Russians, Gypsies, homosexuals, and others killed or starved by the Germans and comes out with the magic figure of ‘6 million’ ?

    • Citizen
      February 10, 2010, 9:25 am

      This short article at least approaches the problem:
      link to warofillusions.wordpress.com

    • Donald
      February 10, 2010, 9:31 am

      So some internet blowhard and Holocaust denier thinks he has just disposed of Raul Hilberg. Unfortunately, it’s precisely the existence of crackpot Holocaust deniers who flock to blogs on the I/P debate that makes it easy for Zionists to paint all their critics as raving anti-semites.

      • Richard Parker
        February 10, 2010, 3:10 pm

        I freely confess to ‘denying’ the holocaust, if only by doubting the unique experiences of Jews in a massive massacre of Poles, Slavs, Russians and others. But in no way am I a crackpot anti-semite, or internet blowhard. I’ve already said, on another thread, that I spend little time writing messages, but a lot in researching facts.

        I met, and stayed with Jeanne Monnier in Brussels many years ago (1967). Both she and her partner, Sylvia, were sent to Ravensbruck, and both were tortured. Sylvia could no longer walk; her feet were destroyed when she was interrogated by a German officer putting his desk on her feet as he asked questions.

      • Donald
        February 10, 2010, 3:45 pm

        Well, you seem to be doubting more than just the unique experiences–you seem to respect Robert Faurisson and IHR and think that the death toll was in no way 6 million and your vast research has enabled you to “dispense” with Raul Hilberg. It seems a little unlikely that you know more about that period of history than the world’s historians, but I guess we commenters at Mondoweiss are blessed to have someone here who knows more about that era than all of them put together.

    • Philip Weiss
      February 10, 2010, 11:25 am

      this is whack, to me. sorting out who is a Great writer from who isn’t on an historical matter, in an effort to discredit them. i wonder what real feeling about Jews underlies Parker’s interest in “magic”

      • Mooser
        February 10, 2010, 11:48 am

        Wouldn’t a comment written by Phil Weiss appear on a shaded background, along with the replies? Hasn’t that always been the case when Phil or Adam submit a comment? What has changed?

      • Cliff
        February 10, 2010, 11:59 am

        AFAIK, it’s only if you’re the article’s author. Blumenthal wrote the article though, not Phil.

      • Tuyzentfloot
        February 10, 2010, 3:57 pm

        Yeah, where’s our incentive!

  11. Richard Parker
    February 10, 2010, 4:31 am

    Tony Blair recently won a $1 million dollar prize from Israel, and he didn’t even need to make a speech: link to pulsemedia.org

  12. pabelmont
    February 10, 2010, 7:35 am

    Richard Parker alerts us to Tony Blair’s $1M prize. For peace, as it turns out.

    Last Sunday Tony Blair was presented with a cheque for $1 million, the Dan David prize, at a ceremony at Tel Aviv university. The prize was awarded for his “foresight”, “exceptional intelligence” and “steadfast determination” to end conflicts. It gets better as the BBC report explains his entry to the competition hails him as “one of the most outstanding statesmen of our era” praising his “morally courageous leadership” over Kosovo.

    Hmm, I forgot Kosovo. But I (and the article, continuing) remember Iraq and the war-of-choice (the Orwellian term for illegal war of aggression). GWB, TB really knew how to party, didn’t they? And both (to date anyhow) prosecution-free, President Obama (to name one potential prosecutor) looking to the future rather than to the past (unlike other prosecutors who recall that all crime happened in the past).

    • Richard Parker
      February 10, 2010, 3:26 pm

      Blair’s Dan David Peace Prize is just about as substantive (but worth more in $US dollar terms) as was Obama’s Nobel Peace Prize.

      Neither of them did anything at all to deserve their cash.

      Both of them are good-looking, good-talking people, who were hugely welcomed at the outset, but found they were outsmarted by the grim powers that be.

  13. JSC
    February 10, 2010, 9:26 am

    It seems Wiesel has proven himself to be the “resident clown” that Norman Finkelstein said he was.

  14. Cliff
    February 10, 2010, 10:06 am

    I apologize in advance for the slight derail.

    Wanted to hear your thoughts on this blog post:

    link to talknic.wordpress.com

    The author, goes through a lot of the misconceptions about the conflict. At some point she is challenged by Michael LeFavour (anyone remember him?). Very interesting debate.

    • VR
      February 10, 2010, 11:02 am

      Cliff, it always seems to be the same consummate dumb ass trolls (ML, YC, etc.). Which is proof positive that they NEVER learn, and this is because they are ideological idiots trying to make a point with a less than slender apparatus. It seems, at least in the USA there is no shortage of these dopes.

  15. Les
    February 10, 2010, 12:05 pm

    The holocaust has been a life long moneymaker for Wiesel. Does anyone know if $500,000 is a record for this excessively conventional speech maker? It is a formidable alliance, white racist Christians who support the mutual extermination of Israeli Jews and Arab Palestinians (including Christians) in lock step with American Jewish Zionists.

  16. marc b.
    February 10, 2010, 5:55 pm

    Wiesel. Holocaust survivor, and huckster. Finkelstein compiled an illustrative list of his fantastical claims. Wiesel is like Spalding Grey, but instead of using real life as his material he simply invents scenes seemingly taken from ‘The Painted Bird’, willfully unaware that it is a work of fiction.

    I feel sympathy for what he went through, but his abuse doesn’t excuse his fabrications or his racism, any more than years of physical abuse at the hands of a parent excuses the child who grows up to be a swindler.

  17. Les
    February 10, 2010, 7:58 pm

    It is no secret that some Jews collaborated as individuals with the Nazis save their own necks or to save family members and friends. I know of only one group of Jews that collaborated with the Nazis. The Zionist organizations that accepted money from the Nazis knew those funds came from confiscated Jewish property.

    • Brewer
      February 10, 2010, 10:18 pm

      There were plenty of direct collaborators.
      The most startling example is the NMO (Lehi) offer to the Germans:

      A concrete proposal of the alliance addressed to “Herr Hitler” followed in late December of 1940. It was facilitated by the fact that Syria and Lebanon were then still under the rule of the French Vichy regime. Consequently, there existed a Nazi diplomatic post in Beirut, while movement between Palestine and Lebanon was free. The proposal was unanimously approved by the entire LEHI command. A LEHI member, Naftali Lubenchik, was arrested for the actual delivery of the proposal to the German Consulate in Beirut. He did it disguised as a Maronite and with assistance from some Lebanese friends of LEHI. Lubenchik did meet a senior representative of the German Foreign Ministry in Beirut, Otto Werner von Hentig, who forwarded the proposal, along with his own memorandum, to Berlin. After the war, the documents were found in German archives. Hentig was alive until 1984, so various Israeli journalists and scholars had plenty of opportunities to interview him. The interviews have been published. The full text of the proposal was published in Israel in the original German and in a Hebrew translation, the latter in a collection of documents edited by Heller (In a Struggle for a State [Be’ma’avak Le’medina], Zalman Shazar Center, 1985, p. 308 ff). It has also been summarized and discussed in Hebrew-language sources too numerous to be listed. Following this publicity, LEHI veterans did finally acknowledge that they had indeed sought an alliance with the Nazis and in the end even published the proposal in their own major propaganda piece, In Purple: The Life of Yair — Abraham Stern, by Ada Amichal-Yevin (Hadar, 1986), which contains an extravagant apology of LEHI’s whole approach to the Nazis. As Heller acidly notes, however, there was a significant omission in the text as published there. To understand it, one has to know that, among its other falsehoods, the document was signed in the name of the parent organization from which LEHI had split, i.e., ETZEL. The omitted passage reads: “Given its world view, ETZEL bears the closest possible similarity to European totalitarian movements.”

      The principles of the alliance as proposed in LEHI’s document submitted to Hentig were to be LEHI’s unconditional acceptance of the Nazi “New Order” in Europe, together with “a state of the Jews to be established on nationalist and totalitarian foundations and tied to the German Reich.” The state was to be established “within its historic boundaries.” Yair considered it impolitic to explain to Hitler in full geographical detail exactly how those “boundaries” were envisaged. In the event the Nazis accepted the offer, “LEHI would join the war, fighting on the side of Germany, provided the latter would recognize the aims of the Israeli Liberation Movement.” The “state of the Jews” would commit itself to being “allied with the German Reich.” The alliance, as the document carefully explained, “would be our answer to a recent speech of the Chancellor of the German Reich, in which Mr. Hitler expressed his readiness to rely on any conceivable coalition and configuration of forces promoting isolation of Britain and thereby contributing to its ultimate defeat.” Heller adds that subsequent LEHI proposals forwarded to Hentig and listed by him in his own memorandum, “without hesitation suggested a cooperation [with the Nazis] in military, political and intelligence domains within Palestine, and after suitable organizational preparations, also outside Palestine.”
      Yitzhak Shamir, Then and Now: Israel Shahak.
      link to mepc.org

      Lennie Brenner deals with the less direct but tacit aspect of collaboration in his “Zionism in the age of the Dictators”. His evidence seems to suggest that many Zionists saw Nazi persecution as a positive – a goad with which to encourage emigration to Palestine. Ben Gurion seems to have bought into this:
      “If I could save all the children of Germany by bringing them to England and only half to Israel, I would choose the second.”

Leave a Reply