The only image of a Palestinian inside Yad Vashem depicts the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem sig heiling Nazi troops. (Photo: Max Blumenthal)
This week, a group of elderly Palestinian women were escorted to the Yad Vashem Holocaust Martyrs’ and Heroes’ Remembrance musuem to learn about the Jewish genocide in Europe. At the entrance of the museum, they were surrounded by a group of Jewish Israeli youth who recognized them as Arabs. “Sharmouta!” the young Israelis shouted at them again and again, using the Arabic slang term for whores, or sluts.
The Palestinians had been invited to attend a tour arranged by the Israeli Bereaved Families Forum, an organization founded by an Israeli whose son was killed in combat by Palestinians. They were joined by a group of Jewish Israeli women who, like them, had lost family members to violence related to the conflict. Presumably, both parties went on the tour in good faith, hoping to gain insight into the suffering of women on the other side of the conflict.
Unfortunately, the Palestinian members (who unlike the Israelis live under occupation and almost certainly had to obtain special permits just to go to Yad Vashem) learned an unusual lesson of the Holocaust: A society that places the Holocaust at the center of its historical narrative — that stops traffic for two minutes each year on the national holiday known as Yom Ha’Shoah — could also raise up a generation of little fascists goose-stepping into the future full of irrational hatred.
“In Palestinian culture, older women are most honored and they could not believe their ears,” said Sami Abu Awwad, a Palestinian coordinator of the tour. “We never talk like this to older women. The Palestinians, who were all grandmothers, were very shocked and offended.”
The report on this outburst of Jewish Israeli racism comes from the Israeli news website Walla! For some reason, I could not find reporting on it anywhere in English.
Perhaps the story was lost in the flood of reports about the anti-Arab racism that poured through the streets of Israel this week. Besides the publication of a series of rabbinical letters forbidding renting to Arabs and condemning relationships between Jews and Arabs, a school principal in Jaffa prohibited Palestinian-Israeli students from speaking Arabic to one another. In Bat Yam, a mostly Russian suburb just south of Jaffa, Jewish residents demonstrated against the presence their Arab neighbors. “Any Jewish woman who goes with an Arab should be killed; any Jew who sells his home to an Arab should be killed,” one protester reportedly shouted. And in Tel Aviv, locals rallied for the expulsion of foreign workers.
The Jerusalem Post reported:
On Saturday, three teenage girls born to African migrant parents were attacked and severely beaten by a mob of teenagers while walking to their homes in the Hatikva neighborhood.
That same night, someone tried to torch an apartment in Ashdod housing seven Sudanese citizens. The assailants set a blazing tire outside the front door of the apartment, and five of the seven residents were lightly hurt by smoke inhalation before they managed to break the burglar bars and flee through a window.
Meanwhile, in Jerusalem, a gang of Jewish youths was arrested after staging several random attacks on young Palestinian men with weapons including tear gas, which would be hard to acquire from anywhere except the army. Ynet reported:
The gang of teens was allegedly headed by a 14-year-old boy, and used a girl their age to seduce Arab youths.
The girl would then lead the young men to a meeting point in the city’s Independence Park, where they were allegedly brutally attacked by the teens with stones, glass bottles and tear gas. Police suspect the girl took part in three of the assaults.
Daniel Bar-Tal, a renowned Israeli political psychologist who has conducted some of the most comprehensive surveys of Israeli attitudes since Operation Cast Lead, found that the racist, authoritarian trends that are increasingly pronounced in Israeli society are products of a “psycho-social infrastructure” dedicated to promoting “a sense of victimization, a siege mentality, blind patriotism, belligerence, self-righteousness, dehumanization of the Palestinians and insensitivity to their suffering.”
This infrastructure is comprised of institutions like the Zionist education system, the Israeli Defense Forces, and even Yad Vashem, which explicitly links the Palestinian national struggle to Nazism.
Indeed, the only image of a Palestinian in all of Yad Vashem (at least that I am aware of) is of the Grand Mufti Hajj Amin Al-Husseini, who was forced by the British to flee to Germany, where he became a (not very successful) Nazi collaborator. In recent years, the Mufti has become a key fixture of Israeli propaganda efforts against the Palestinians. As such, a photo is featured prominently on a wall in Yad Vashem depicting him sig heiling a group of Nazi troops. However, there is no mention anywhere in Yad Vashem of the 9000 Palestinian Arabs the British recruited to fight the Nazis, or of the 233,000 North African volunteers who fought and died while battling the Nazis in the French Liberation Army (and whose heroic efforts were dramatized in the excellent film, “Days of Glory”).
According to Peter Novick, the author of “The Holocaust in American Life,” though the Mufti played no significant part in the Holocaust, he plays a “starring role” in Yad Vashem’s Encyclopedia of the Holocaust. “The article on the Mufti is more than twice as long as the articles on Goebbels and Goring, longer than the articles on Himmler and Heydrich combined, longer than the article on Eichmann — of all the biographical articles, it is exceeded in length, but only slightly, by the entry for Hitler.” [Novick, p. 158]
Not only has Yad Vashem attempted through propagandistic means to link the Palestinian struggle to Nazism, it has promoted an exclusivist view of the Holocaust. In April 2009, Yad Vashem fired a docent, Itamar Shapira, because he had discussed the massacre of Palestinians in Deir Yassin with a group of students from the settlement of Efrat. “All I was trying to say is that there were people who lived here before the Holocaust survivors arrived, that they suffered a terrible trauma too, and that we shouldn’t hide the facts,” Shapira told me a month after his firing. “Yad Vashem carefully selected what facts it wanted to present, but deliberately avoided things like Deir Yassin, even though its ruins were just a thousand meters from the museum.”
Iris Rosenberg, a Yad Vashem administrator who was involved in Shapira’s firing, said of the verbal assault against Palestinian women at the museum this week: “Despite the regrettable incident at the entrance to the museum, the team’s visit to the Holocaust History Museum was conducted in a dignified manner which was significant and important.”
Tamara Rabinovitch, the Israeli leader of the Bereaved Families tour, told Walla! that her Palestinian counterparts “were very excited by the visit. Some of them approached me and told me they heard details of the Holocaust but did not know how painful it was. In two weeks we plan to visit an abandoned Arab village so that the Palestinian narrative is represented.”
This post originally appeared on Max Blumenthal's website here.
Insightful video clip captures Israeli settler woman slyly baiting Palestinian woman, hissing, crooning at the caged woman face to face, “Sharmota, Sharmo000ta!”http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KUXSFsJV084
“Take your stinking paws off me, you damn dirty ape!”
(Famous line from Planet Of The Apes)
I wish I hadn’t watched that video. I spilt my coffee all over the floor, my hands were shaking so hard.
They are never going to be able to switch the hatred off. It’s why Israel can’t sign a 2 state agreement. They can’t put the genie back in the bottle.
You might be surprised. Palestinians have an astonishing ability to forgive. But that forgiveness becomes ever harder while kids are actively being shot, women actively harassed with soldier complicity, homes and business actively demolished.
Still, when the conflict comes to an end in a reasonably fair way, and when Israel stops its psychotic violence and harassment, I have full confidence that Palestinians can become partners in a peaceful democracy. As for the little fascists with the rocks and bottles…
Ironically, it’s easier for the oppressed to forgive. For the oppressor to ‘forgive’ properly requires him to come face to face with who he is, what he’s become, and what he’s done. And this is one of the hardest things for a deeply brainwashed human being with a great deal of blood on his hands to do.
Try to help them to do so.
It really can only happen if people don’t feel attacked. Maybe some experience a great catharsis during interrogation. I think it is a very very small minority.
More do so by sincerity, humility, and clear presentation of the truth. Most of those that act cruelly themselves, or have others act cruelly on their behalf, literally do not know of the pain and struggle that is occurring and that Palestinians are willing to forgive (hopefully).
“Most of those that act cruelly themselves, or have others act cruelly on their behalf, literally do not know of the pain and struggle that is occurring and that Palestinians are willing to forgive (hopefully).”
What is it about Israelis that you think they must be treated with kid gloves? It is not our role to help Israelis “not feel attacked; they needn’t feel that way because THEY ARE NOT THE ONES BEING ATTACKED. Why must we continually hold Israeli hands and gently lead them to the truth? Do you think that the woman really doesn’t understand that calling another woman a whore is painful? that settlers don’t understand Palestinian attachment to the land when they prevent them from reaching their fields or burn down their olive groves? When they evict them from their homes?
Frances..I had never shown this video to anyone (and I’ve done that MANY times) that hasn’t been left seething with rage! Not Zionists mind you, just the average, neutral person. This woman embodies the evil that are the settlers and their declared method for dealing with the Palestinians! Embitter their lives. Drive them insane so as to leave no choice but to leave.
Small success: My sister regularly buys Sabra hummus and Israeli fruit. I’ve been trying to get her to boycott their stuff for quite a while now but she literally NEVER watches the news and doesn’t care for politics so it’s an uphill battle. I sat her down and forced her to watch the video. She was quiet for a while and then she said “What else of theirs am I using?”. Baby steps, right?
Frances,
I’m totally with you on this one. [censored statement-- webmaster]
But then I understood something. Actually, provoking rage was her sole purpose. She was deliberately provoking everyone present (whom we don’t see in the video) to violence, so she could tell she was attacked. She was pretty safe, with the soldier at her back. If somebody would lose their temper, nothing would happen to her. Besides, she seems totally calm. She’s just shouting some text without too much heart.
And this seems to be their common tactics. I’ve noticed this pattern in many videos of encounters of the settlers, both with Palestinians and leftist activists.
Yad Vashem is built in the wrong place. A “Never again” museum built on a site that was ethnically cleansed . The contradictions of Zionism in one place.
I liked the idea behind the avenue of the righteous (goys) when I went there. I thought the Palestinians could have an avenue of the righteous Zionists in a museum of Zionism. It wouldn’t be very long.
An avenue of the self righteous would , however.
we need one of those avenues in washington and ny!
“Tamara Rabinovitch, the Israeli leader of the Bereaved Families tour, told Walla! that her Palestinian counterparts “were very excited by the visit. Some of them approached me and told me they heard details of the Holocaust but did not know how painful it was. In two weeks we plan to visit an abandoned Arab village so that the Palestinian narrative is represented.””
This is the most relevant point in the whole speech, some indication that there was interest in the suffering and aspirations of the other. You know “dialog”.
Why not promote Jews joining that club, the club of those that care about their neighbors (all of them), rather than only ridiculing Jews collectively for the idiocies of a few, a few too many certainly?
>> This is the most relevant point in the whole speech, some indication that there was interest in the suffering and aspirations of the other. You know “dialog”.
Actually, the quote below is even more relevant, some indication that there was interest in the suffering and aspirations of the other…and the Zio-supremacists turned away and chose to say “I’m not listening”. Seeing as how you are hypocrite “humanist”, it’s no surprise you chose to gloss over it.
>> In April 2009, Yad Vashem fired a docent, Itamar Shapira, because he had discussed the massacre of Palestinians in Deir Yassin with a group of students from the settlement of Efrat. “All I was trying to say is that there were people who lived here before the Holocaust survivors arrived, that they suffered a terrible trauma too, and that we shouldn’t hide the facts,” Shapira told me a month after his firing. “Yad Vashem carefully selected what facts it wanted to present, but deliberately avoided things like Deir Yassin, even though its ruins were just a thousand meters from the museum.”
You have the imagination that I don’t consider Palestinians’ experience as important?
>> You have the imagination that I don’t consider Palestinians’ experience as important?
I know for a fact that you consider the ethnic cleansing of Palestinians to be “currently not necessary”. That says a tremendous amount about what you think of their experience.
For the refugee half million utterly traumatized Jews stuck in Europe until illegal and then legal immigration to Israel, necessity was quite motivating, justly.
The statement, that expropriation is “currently not necessary” is agreement with Phil’s very very similar thesis.
Too much for you to digest?
Well, Dick, not really: “This is the most relevant point in the whole speech, some indication that there was interest in the suffering and aspirations of the other. You know “dialog”.”
Imagination is not even involved.
>> Too much for you to digest?
What, that you actually condone and justify past ethnic cleansing? Man, you are a hateful piece of work, a truly fraudulent “humanist”. You seriously need to reflect upon your callousness.
The present Eljay, the present.
The past is long gone. I was not alive in 1948.
In the present, I oppose settlement expansion. I support actual efforts to realize equal civil rights for Palestinians in Israel, and for viable Palestinian self-governance.
In 2010, in reality the only affect that I have on others is participation in local political discussion, some correspondence with my representatives and press, and dialog on blogs.
So, my purpose in commenting here is to propose what I think will lead to peace rather than pendulum swings. Peace being a collaborative effort to realize what is optimally healthy for the two communities.
NOT either/or. Not isolation, not suppression.
The very fact that you support Israel and find any and all actions by Israel means you find the Palestinians’ experience to be trivial.
“For the refugee half million utterly traumatized Jews stuck in Europe until illegal and then legal immigration to Israel, necessity was quite motivating, justly”
1. So the needs of Jews are more important than the needs of Arabs.
2. Immigration is one thing. Taking over the land is another. There was no necessity for that.
“So the needs of Jews are more important than the needs of Arabs. ”
This, sadly, seems to be the unspoken view of most Zionists and their supporters, which is, at heart, the racist view that one group of humans must cede their rights for the benefit of another group, which has no obligation to reciprocate.
” an abandoned Arab village ”
What a joke. Those villages weren’t abandoned. They were ethnically cleansed and their inhabitants sent into an exile by a Zionism that didn’t want them. They were not allowed back – not until now, at least.
The club of Zionists that care about their neighbours would fit into
a dancehall.
A dance hall?
Didn’t you mean a telephone booth?
Or a Volkswagen? ;-)
It’s just amazing witnessing the moral breakdown and disintegration of israeli society – the way it now proudly displays it’s racism before the world.
Just keeps getting worse – faster – and more in yer face – like by now it’s become the norm to be racist in the holy lands and the world expects that kinda shameful headline from over there.
“Things fall apart, the center cannot hold…”
We know the center cannot hold if the center is racist – we were there when Mandella was freed.
Where were israelis when Mandella was freed?
Ostriches or lemmings are they?
“Where were israelis when Mandela was freed?”
Peres was selling military technology to the racists. Under the table. Because Israel over the table is a beacon of progressiveness.
but under the table it needs money.
This included nuclear weapons proliferation, incidentally.
Max, thanks for superb/staggering report. When people complain about the delegitimization of Israel, maybe they should be attacking this conduct first, and saying, this delegitimizes the state…Phil
Yad Vashem is actually quite a shoddy museum. The whole idea of redemption in Israel and that Israel is justified by the Holocaust is very hollow.
I never though it was the right place to build that museum. Especially when to get to Yad Vashem from the East you have to go through the racial profiling of the checkpoints. It just doesn’t fit with the pictures of the Nazis inside.
They didn’t spend much money on Yad Vashem . The money still goes to the settlers and it shows.
I found Auschwitz to be far more moving. At Auschwitz you feel the loss. At Yad Vashem what I saw was the Palestinian village.
Yad Vashem gets shoved down the throat of every visiting dignitary. And the Israelis expect the Palestinians to pay homage. It’s beyond chutzpah.
Even the name is in Hebrew. It should be in Yiddish. The millions who were murdered didn’t speak Hebrew.
Nearby is another key Zionist site. Herzl cemetery where the Zionist nation masturbates over its war dead. Every one a sacrifice. We will remember them all. No you won’t.
Even the name is in Hebrew. It should be in Yiddish. The millions who were murdered didn’t speak Hebrew.
Many didn’t speak Yiddish either. The expression “yad vashem” (a monument and a memorial/name) is from Isaiah 56:5.
Do you have numbers on that, Shmuel. ? How many would have been non Yiddish speakers ?
Thanks for the reference.
How many would have been non Yiddish speakers ?
Apart from the obvious non-Yiddish-speakers (e.g. Greek or Italian Jews), Hungarian Jews – even the Orthodox – were mostly Hungarian-speakers, native-German Jews (as opposed to recent immigrants from the east) were mostly German-speakers, Dutch Jews spoke Dutch, Danish Jews Danish, etc. Even in Eastern Europe, many of the victims were assimilated to one degree or another and spoke little or no Yiddish.
3.5 million were Polish . Very few German Jews were murdered compared to those from further east. Hungarians were around 400,000. Italians would have been a couple of thousand. Greeks maybe 50,000 ?
Poles and Lithuanians mostly and how many of those would have been fully assimilated speaking just Polish/Lithuanian ? Yiddish was mortally wounded in the Shoah. Hebrew finished it off.
A real tragedy. Today’s Ashkenazis have no link to that chunk of their culture. And they really miss it. Modern Hebrew’s cult of the military is no substitute .
“Yiddish was mortally wounded in the Shoah. Hebrew finished it off.”
You obviously haven’t been to Williamburg recently. Yiddish is alive and well.
And Williamsburg is a gigantic huge metropolis.
No matter what Zionism has done with Hebrew, although I suspect reviving Hebrew as a spoken language wasn’t inevitably linked to colonizing Palestine, I’m still drawn to learning it. And it’s supposed to make Arabic easier. Even so, I’d still like to learn German/Yiddish. The grammar just scares me a bit.
אני רוצה מאוד ללמוד יידיש
Yiddish was mortally wounded in the Shoah. Hebrew finished it off.
I agree, although Israel was not the only place in which Yiddish was actively suppressed, or supplanted by other languages.
The fossilised kitchen Yiddish spoken in a few ultra-Orthodox enclaves cannot possibly be compared to the vast and prolific culture that was.
I can’t really speak for Yiddish, but German grammar really isn’t all that different from English grammar. I suppose there’s the gender-specific articles and a larger array of pronouns, but beyond that I found it pretty analogous to English grammar.
Of course, English grammar is arguably quite frightening.
andrew, learn Arabic. It is a far more important language in terms both of culture and of number of speakers. And it will make Hebrew a bit easier if you get round to it.
With Hebrew there’s a bit of self-interest. It has a finish what I started feel. When I get a handle on the Arabic alphabet, it’ll catch up fast and I’ll learn them concurrently. The similarities are awesome: Shalom Aleichem = Salaam Aleikum, numerals, pronouns…
“German grammar really isn’t all that different from English grammar”
It won’t be so bad once I get all these straight: das, den, dem, der, des, die… Seemingly das = this and des = of but not always. Also must get why adjectives sometimes end in -e vs. -es.
“Of course, English grammar is arguably quite frightening.”
Hebrew isn’t the first language I’ve tried to learn – outside conjugation – but it makes me appreciate how unwieldy English can be.
“products of a “psycho-social infrastructure” dedicated to promoting “a sense of victimization, a siege mentality, blind patriotism, belligerence, self-righteousness, dehumanization of the XXXXXX and insensitivity to their suffering.”
It sounds very like a European country that went through a similar trauma after World War 1 .
re WW I (and II): here’s a story for which Yad Vashem-style historiography has shown no interest:
link to zeevgalili.com
“re WW I (and II): here’s a story for which Yad Vashem-style historiography has shown no interest:”
What exactly is your point? That the Nazis were not as bad as people said?
There were a lot of Jews left in Germany in the 1940s. This was mostly because the Nazis had a harder time killing Jews close to home because they knew it would be harder to maintain their grip on power if they did so. So you have things like the Rosenstrasse episode as late as 1943.
The result was the same. The students were sent to concentration camps and killed.
Stop putting words in his mouth, you troll.
her mouth ;)
Ack. Sorry. :) It seems like I have a veritable instinct for getting people’s gender wrong whenever I blog.
I just read David Harris’s piece on HP and now understand why you thought this was my point (that the Nazis were not as bad). Well, I’m not David Harris, and it wouldn’t occur to me to defend oppressive and criminal regimes, be they Nazi or Zionist.
link to huffingtonpost.com
The exceptional story of the Polish rabbi shows how the Nazis accepted and even protected some (but by no means all) Jews who had performed some great service for the Reich (even if they did so for their own reasons, as in the case of the Rabbi who simply sought revenge for the Russian execution of his students), and this protection was possibly due to intervention or pressure by prominent members of the Wehrmacht leadership whom the Nazis could not afford to offend and refuse. It is telling that pro-German activities of the ‘good Jews’ never benefitted other Jews (the students deported after his death), whereas collective guilt was automatically assumed if a Jew assassinated a German official, as in the events that led to the Reichskristallnacht. A Jew was guilty until proven innocent. Same applies to Palestinians, who are all terrorists unless they come into Israel to fight wildfires or something. Then they are honored, but even then only after being humiliated over inaccurate identity cards nobody was worried about when they crossed the checkpoints, risking their own lives to fight the Carmel fires. Sick and twisted
“All I was trying to say is that there were people who lived here before the Holocaust survivors arrived, that they suffered a terrible trauma too, and that we shouldn’t hide the facts,” [Itamar] Shapira told me a month after his firing. “Yad Vashem carefully selected what facts it wanted to present, but deliberately avoided things like Deir Yassin, even though its ruins were just a thousand meters from the museum.”
I am shocked — SHOCKED — to learn that a holocaust museum’s historical narrative is anything other than strictly objective.
Yad Vashem’s American analogue, the United States Holocaust Museum in Washington DC, is taxpayer-funded to the tune of $50 million — a cool $12 million more than the Kennedy Center gets. The board of this public institution, appointed by the president, doesn’t look much like America — it’s entirely Jewish.
How could there possibly be a problem? ;-)
“The board of this public institution, appointed by the president, doesn’t look much like America — it’s entirely Jewish.”
A statement that is both untrue and bigoted.
Pierre Richard-Prosper is not Jewish. Orrin Hatch is not Jewish. Steven C. LaTourette is not Jewish. That’s off the top of my head.
Yad Vashem only tells you part of what you need to know about the Nazi persecution. It shows what the Nazis actually did to their victims. This is something we need to know. What we also need to know, and you won’t learn there (Correct me if I’m wrong) are the internal, self-created dilemmas the Nazis faced in formulating the Final Solution, of determining who was racially unfit. How they classified Mischling in the first and second degree, how the Nazis adopted racial theories that were applied also in the United States and other places that were Germany’s ostensible enemies – And how the Zionist movement itself embraced eugenics, albeit not sharing the same particulars.
link to holocaustresearchproject.org
Yad Vashem is part of building the Israeli national identity for both Israeli and diaspora Jews. The racist persecution was done to us and we are justified in making sure it doesn’t happen again. In all this we forget the insanity of racial classification, locating it somewhere else and pretending we aren’t doing it. We also forget we are the aggressors here and our actions can boomerang.
If you read the Israeli Law of Return, it has separate categories of who can make aliyah. I’m not technically Jewish according to that law and I can make aliyah. Israel has racial categories of people as the National-Socialist state had, among Jews and non-Jews, although these aren’t framed in scientific language. The Law of Return and the Absentee Property Law both define people racially by parentage. In the case of the latter, their absentee status is due to not being Jewish, making them inferior to those defined as Jewish and ‘child of a Jew’ in the Law of Return.
(That said, the story of Rabbi Kupferstock isn’t that relevant to this point, but the fact is Yad Vashem is using the history to tell Israelis this is what happens when Jews aren’t strong and trampling on other peoples’ rights.)
“but the fact is Yad Vashem is using the history to tell Israelis this is what happens when Jews aren’t strong and trampling on other peoples’ rights.”
That’s your opinion informed by your politics. It’s not accurate. And by the way, let’s just remember what Yad Vashem is. It is first an foremost a memorial. The museum is recent (about 5 or 6 years old), and most of what we have been discussing is the museum. There is little in the museum that can be classified as political. The museum is arranged in such a way that a visitor must see things in a certain order, and I believe it is basically chronological. And yes, there is a panel on the Mufti, consisting of the picture and a blurb, one out of several hundreds in the museum. As I said before, no one who has been to the museum would think that the Mufti is a focus of the museum. Much more is devoted to concentration camps, righteous gentiles, and so on.
and at the end of this memorial to European history, many images of deliverance in Israel and the promise of Zionism
also a room devoted to the error of assimilation in Europe, trusting the gentiles
My in-laws are a case in point.
You met my wife.
My mother-in-laws father was one of two doctors in a Hungarian town of 15,000. When the Hungarians prohibited Jews from professions, thereby making only one legal doctor in a town of 15,000, he broke the law and practiced medicine. He wasn’t allowed to call himself a doctor, or accept money for compensation, so he accepted chickens, cordwood, vegetables, brooms.
In 1944, when the Germans forced out the “incompetent” Hungarian fascists, and began herding the surviving Jews into slave labor (if young and able) or extermination camps, their family was turned in by one of his clients.
Later, after escaping from a slave labor camp, a Hungarian family did hide them for a few months until the Russians liberated Hungary.
From that, should they have learned not to trust the gentiles, or not to trust anyone, or to trust people only based on merit and/or verifiable reputation?
What do YOU think Yad Vashem suggests?
the challenge to americn jews is not to be trapped by a too-selfish reading of tragic history, for history does not repeat itself
what !!! a Max Blumenthal fan writing something that is untrue and bigoted!!!!! I’m shocked !!!
Look the settlers have more then their share of bigots as does Hamas and extremists on the other side. The difference is people who are truly interested in peace don’t make excuses for one side while demonizing the other. This demonization has became Max’s stock in trade.
the United States Holocaust Museum in Washington DC, is taxpayer-funded to the tune of $50 million
I didn’t know that. That means it is 1/3 of the entire federal Arts budget.
Source?
The US Treasury for the federal arts budget. Check their Web site.
I’ve not seen Yad Vashem. Phil, have you?
When my son visited, he told me that the most staggering display was the names. My wife’s family name is Meir. So, my son read through close to a dozen pages of Meir’s murdered, thinking that he would recognize the written down name of a great grandmother or someone.
He read something like 18 instances of the same name, killed in multiple locations.
The significance of the Mufti politically is largely an indication of the nazi political approach, more than a statement of his relative power and importance. (He was more powerful prior to WW2, but definitely did orchestrate persecution against those that migrated before the mid-30′s. He was an ACTIVE perpetrator, and ideologically. To include him in the museum is relevant.)
Specifically, the nazis grappled with whether to remove the Jews from Europe to migrate elsewhere, or just to kill them. At first, when they were considering just removing them, they sought out Zionists who did seek to populate Israel/Palestine and also to save European Jews from active persecution. But, it became apparent to the nazis that if they were to fight the British around the critical Suez Canal and other strategic Mediterranean areas, they would need the collaboration of the Arab world, and appealed to the mufti (already a sympathizer) to organize on their behalf. The statements by the mufti to Hitler, urging that he NOT facilitate emigration to Palestine, was a critical part of Hitler’s decision to abandon the effort for forced removal of Jews, in favor of annihilation. What else could he do?
You want to call that insignificant, or misleading, fine.
The world does need a nakba museum, and it would be wonderful if there was one in Israel, just to bear witness.
But, the either/or approach about Yad Vashem is cruelly insensitive, in reality.
Hopefully, the women that attended recognized that other Jews deeply respected their effort to get educated about Jews’ experience, and were able to remember what they were there for.
The presence of bigots in movements, gives cover to dismiss the movements. If I held that because I encounter bigots in the Palestinian solidarity movement, that Palestinian sovereignty was illegitimate, that the individual rights of Palestinians was trivial, then they would have one less sympathizer. (Even as I will not walk in a demonstration with the sign “Zionism is racism”.)
You were condemning the Goldstone Report long before you ever picked it up, and it’s pretty safe to assume you’ve never met a single Gazan in person, let alone visited the place.
Financier, heal thyself.
You won’t find many Meirs in Israel, Richard. Most people got a shiny new Zionist name. For the new world that now looks very like the old world. Very few Rivkas or Mendels in Israel. Which is a real pity. it is like what happened to architecture after the war when a lot of older stuff was demolished because it wasn’t modern. And now it looks dated and tacky.
“You won’t find many Meirs in Israel, Richard. . . ”
You will find plenty of Meirs in Israel, Richard, along with Rivkas and Mendels, in the haredi communities.
“Meir” was shortened from “Meyerson.” Incidentally.
I’m horrified, and ashamed, by the behaviour of those racist kids. The ongoing occupation breeds hatred and racism.
Zionism is racism is making a very strong comeback thanks to youtube.
i think it’ll get back to the UN eventually.
The Mufti had F-all to do with the Holocaust. It’s a Zionist spin that like many aspects of Zionist myth bears little relevance to reality.
Most people who were murdered in the Shoah died in Poland, Belarus and Ukraine at the hands of their neighbors and Soviet and German troops . By gunshot. Even if Palestine had been open how would they all have escaped? Answers on a postcard.
What did the Mufti do? Are you denying that he supported Nazi actions? Wow.
Again, relative to Yad Vashem, the mufti was more representative than actually important, of the change in the manner in which nazi Germany saw as options to get Jews out of their sight.
When transfer was a political option, they did not desire to waste the time and money on extermination, especially if the Jews themselves would pay for the transfer.
When the mufti declared his opposition to migration/forced removal of Jews to Israel/Palestine, the nazis sought other means to get Jews out of their sight, ultimately settling on extermination.
His impact on the policy of extermination was NOT insignificant, even if he himself did not weild much or dependable power.
Richard Witty
Are you really serious ?
Do you think Reinhard Heydrich and Hans Frank listened to anyone outside the Nazi party ? The Endlösung was part of a massive project to change the face of Europe and convert the Slavs of the East to a slave race and you are saying that a Palestinian religious leader was one of the main drivers of this. Are you taking your tablets? Not the Ziocaine.
Did the Mufti make a Powerpoint presentation at Wannsee? Did he decide to invade the Soviet Union as well, to hide his antisemitism ?
Why misinterpret my comments so?
I stated clearly that prior, Hitler and associates thought that it might be possible to just forcefully remove Jews from Europe, to solve the “Jewish problem”, then determined that political alliances required that he undertake a “final solution” rather than just shuffling chairs.
To many Jewish refugees, the harrassment by Palestinians and less local Arabs was both distinctly a “response” to Zionism, but also part of a continuum.
A continuum of “I wish you weren’t here.”
Hitler concluded, using the same language as anti-Zionists, that there were people already there and that he couldn’t just force the parasites onto a potential needed ally.
The repetition of the contempt is truth, and experienced by Jews that connect those dots. There are other stars in the sky to connect other constellations, that support anti-Zionism.
The stars though are NOT anti-Zionist, they are just stars. By “stars” I mean the propensity of people to construct patterns conforming to their prejudice, like a rohrshach test.
A healer/therapist also continues to see according to their prejudicial patterns in the rohrshach images, but because they have heard other interpretations that are viable, they don’t fetishize them.
Pro OR anti.
The statements by the mufti to Hitler, urging that he NOT facilitate emigration to Palestine, was a critical part of Hitler’s decision to abandon the effort for forced removal of Jews, in favor of annihilation. What else could he do?
That’s a rather amazing statement, Richard. What evidence do you have to back up the proclaimed huge influence of the Mufti on Nazi politics? You mean the “Aryans” allowed themselves to be influenced by a “Semite”an Untermensch? Rather then using him and ridiculing him as naive behind his back? He made them change their politics from removal to the Holocaust? A Semite did this? They allowed themselves to be led by him?
Could you give me your sources, beyond the usual suspects?
Could you give me your sources
good luck w/that.
LeaNder,
Thank you for calling RW on this ridiculous assertion.
link to en.wikipedia.org
The sequence of the German decisions relative to the “Jewish problem” were:
1. Force them to leave the areas that they lived. That was the period of the oft-sited communications between Zionists and Nazis.
2. Kill them
What made the shift? Did they really intend to exterminate from day one, or did they change their views?
I am saying that when they first considered just deporting the Jews, say to Palestine, they confronted the reality that Palestinians hated the Jews, did not want more of them, and then “realized” that the only real solution was extermination.
And, that the mufti’s assertions were critical in that recognition that forced removal was not an option.
You think that something else stimulated that change?
Witty might as well have eee and yonira ghostwriting his posts. For all we know, he does. He’s saying the EXACT SAME THING as the right wing extremists here.
“You think that something else stimulated that change?”
Anyone with even a passing knowledge of the history in this area can tell you: The invasion of Poland and later the invasion of the Soviet Union were that “something else.” Prior to Nov. 1, 1939, it was easy for the Nazis to indulge in the fantasy that the Jews of Europe could be resettled, even overseas, because they were dealing with a few hundred thousand people in Germany and Austria. The fantastical nature of the relocation plan was made clear, even to those who had supported it, when the military conquests in the East placed millions of Jews under the control of Germany.
It was a plan doomed to failure to begin with logistically and Hitler was never fully on board with it anyway (which is the ultimate reason why it was abandoned.)
So your notion that the Mufti’s expressed opposition to the relocation of Jews to Palestine stopped the relocation plan is historical nonsense, a bit of excuse-making for the likes of Adolph Hitler, and, to the extent it is advanced to further the claim of Palestinian responsibility for the Holocaust, a clear expression of anti-Arab bias akin to racism.
Indeed, the Mufti’s irrelevance is made most clear by virtue of the fact that the plan which was taken most seriously (to the extent any of them were) was the Madagascar plan, which would have shipped the Jews not to Palestine, but to Madagascar. If you’re saying that the Nazis conferred with the Mufti to get his views on sending Europe’s Jews to Madagascar, then you really don’t know what you’re talking about.
no Powerpoints, just promises from Hitler that he would be allowed to be in charge of the “final solution” in the ME after the war. Oh that and recruiting SS troops.
The SS gave up on the idea of recruiting Muslim troops in Yugoslavia and disbanded the few units that were formed. I don’t believe there was ever any serious proposal to form an Arab or Palestinian SS unit.
Phil,
Seafoid is right. (The Mufti was making an agreement, if I recall correctly, about getting his lands back in the event the Germans beat the Brits in the war; I can’t find the link.) This understanding was memorialized in the Alexandria Protocol of October 7, 1944, where they included a section called “Special Resolution Concerning Palestine.” This document is at Yale. It reads:
link to avalon.law.yale.edu
What did Husseini do? He was paraded around as a token by the Nazis and did effectively nothing at all once he was forced to leave Palestine. They used him to try to recruit Bosnia Muslims, who turned out to be such useless fighters that the SS disbanded them.
Someone really ought to do an objective biography of the guy.
the mufti was appointed by the british. i’m not sure he can be properly described as representing the palestinian people. this is what one palestinian professor had to say about palestinian links to nazis.
Because in the hierarchy of sources, a guy who posts comments on Daily Kos under the name “Palestinian Professor” must be credible.
The man whom the British described as “the only force able to unite the Palestine Arabs and ‘cool off the Zionists’” also represented the Arab Higher Committee during the 1948 War and led the riots in the thirties. He was not “a minor Arab.”
According to Edward Said:
“Hajj Amin al-Husayni represented the Palestinian Arab national consensus, had the backing of the Palestinian political parties that functioned in Palestine, and was recognized in some form by Arab governments as the voice of the Palestinian people.”
link to en.wikipedia.org
well, if he really said that i’m sure you’ll be able to source it somewhere besides wiki. nothing written about 1/p is reliable thru wiki as it’s a heavily influenced zionist zone.
just recently someone claimed palestinians admitted to “driving jews into the sea” w/quotemarks…according to benny morris. the only thing is they quoted morris and added their own quotemarks. i sourcd the lie, it was wikis editorial staff. besides, i am not wadding thru all that garbage. just find the wiki source, then we will talk about it.
annie,
In case you missed it below david samel clears up the “quote” which was cited by Dershowitz, but which was misquoted by him.
Here’s the snippet from David below:
I found this sentence to be quite significant. Did Said, of all people, acknowledge that Palestinians shared al-Husseini’s affinity for Nazism and even mass murder of Jews? This was most unexpected. . . I discovered that you used the same quote in The Case For Israel, with an endnote citing p. 248 of Blaming the Victims, a book edited by Hitchens and Said. . . When I turned to p. 248, I was somewhat shocked. The quote was clearly taken out of context, as the passage did not remotely suggest any Palestinian national consensus in favor of the Holocaust or mass murder of Jews. But even worse, it was an erroneous quotation. The actual quote is as follows:
“This committee [the Arab Higher Committee], chaired by Palestine’s national leader, Hajj Amin al-Husseini, represented the Palestinian Arab national consensus, had the backing of the Palestinian political parties that functioned in Palestine, and was recognized in some form by Arab governments as the voice of the Palestinian people.”
Thanks tree
Another example of why one must be cautious when consulting Wikipedia, especially on this matter, where erroneous quotes are reprinted.
The textual manipulations Dershowitz is capable of (taking out the comma, omitting a word here and there,etc.) are almost comical, and shows how easy it is to twist language around in order to completely change the meaning, with very little effort. It’s revelatory of his profound dishonesty, and it’s almost childlike in its simplicity.
Let’s do another, just for fun :
Which can be turned around by such illustrious scholars into :
et voilà ! Anyone can do it.
the Mufti was also elected President of the Supreme Muslim in 1922.
elected to the presidency of the National Palestinian Council in 1948.
ELECTED.
Phil, are you saying that the Mufti supported the Holocaust?
Phil, time and again you have shown that your understanding of the hisotry of Palestine is rather narrow in scope.
Do you read Israeli historians, at least? I’m honestly curious as to why such matters do not interest you. After all, anyone who’s interested in fighting for justice in Israel, in the name of Jews, should at the very least know the history inside out.
I get truly frustrated when I read the website owner write such things.
Avi, I met people of Arab decent, who seemed to admire Hitler. I was disgusted and shocked by these encounters. And when I studied Nazi film there were frequent rumors about the Nazi propaganda films–in spite of the apparently not too good control–being sold in the Middle East post WWII. This wasn’t my topic then, so it was a side impression, but I still remember it vividly.
Obviously it would be quite interesting to read Arabic studies about the impact of Zionism as part of the larger colonialism and a more detailed study of how well they understood what happened in Europe slightly later, or why the Zionist movement happened when it did. Are there cultural studies in this context? They would be important now.
The problem is the political use of these matters.
There was a news item a couple of years ago about Mein Kampf being a bestseller in India for business students; in fact, it was so in demand that it was sold at local news kiosks. ;-)
Yes, MRW, unfortunately, I met these kind of lunatics almost everywhere. There seem to be favorable undercurrents for the extreme right type Nazi lore in Japanese culture too, if I believe Japanese friends.
But then, sometimes one encounters familiar memes in unexpected contexts:
RW: I don’t hold the one-dimensional analysis of Israel as colonial settler-state that you do. I regard it as a body, that inevitably takes up space and needs room to live.
a “Volkskörper” (the body of a people) needs “Lebensraum”, inevitably.
Certainly.
Do you think that every community that needs to grow for population is nazi?
What about the Palestinian community that has increased its population significantly in the last 65 years? Does it need room to live?
Yes. Is it nazi for that?
The question is how communities resolve competing needs.
Suicide and willfully returning to near-nazi scale harrassment following WW2 was not an option for the hundreds of thousands of European Jewish refugees.
LeaNder,
Your anecdote is quite irrelevant given that it does not apply retroactively, unless you mean to imply that Arabs have an inherent pro-Nazi bias, thus explaining the Mufti’s alliance with Nazi Germany some 60 years ago.
I look forward to your clarification.
These articles may interest you MRW, Mein Kampf is a best seller throughout the Arab world also:
link to mfa.gov.il
link to windsofchange.net
Avi, what you said above is a complete lie, I look forward to your clarification. Quit trying to dupe the noobz.
Oh yes, let’s trust the ISRAELI FOREIGN MINISTRY to describe to us what the Eye-rabs are really like.
It was an article in yedioth ahronoth, do a fricking google search Chaos. You just make yourself look more and more stupid.
yonira,
Get yourself an education before you start throwing around empty accusations.
Thanks, Avi. Apparently, I’m not allowed to reply to yonira.
Gertrude Stein thought Hitler should receive the Nobel Peace Prize; she attempted to nominate him. Stein was in France through both wars.
LeaNder – much of the admiration for Hitler in Arab/Muslim countries (and also in India) is no doubt due to the fact that he took on the very colonial powers who had long subjected them to their imperial and national objectives – the British, French, Russians/Soviets, a well as the US. Germany was no colonial power until the very late 19th c, never in the ME, and German perceptions of the Orient differ significantly from the French, British or Anglo-American versions of Orientalism since the 18th c. Hitler did not breach (or more precisely: he didn’t get around to it) this much older tradition of good relations between Germany and the Arab-Islamic world, nor was he interested in recovering German colonies in Africa. Instead, his scheme of conquest and colonial rule focussed on Europe, and the ‘Lebensraum im Osten’ did not target the ‘Orient’/ME. Hitler’s main victims were white people, including European Jews, some of whom had already pursued the Zionist dream of reestablishing a Jewish state on Arab land under British protection. All things considered, the so-called Nazi-Arab alliance was no more genuine or based on mutual respect or common interest than the Hitler-Stalin pact, and it would not have lasted either. Note that analogies between Zionism and Nazism are at least as popular in Arab countries as ‘Mein Kampf’
yonira – for someone who keeps complaining about ad hominem attacks on this site, you surely aren’t practicing what you preach
Phil,
What we should remember here is that the Mufti was, as far as I can tell, a politician. As such, we can’t assume his actions and the relations he had were reflective of any kind of real inner convictions, but rather of political expedience and usefulness. He may have been a vile racist, or not, but the fact that he had relations with the Nazi party shouldn’t necessarily be shored out as some kind of proof of that.
Lest we forget, the US government had extensive relations and collaborations with ex-Nazis during the postwar period. For those in power, unfortunately such murderers and liars are definitely NOT “beyond the pale”, quite the contrary.
If you ever have the time to read up , or not,
Here :
link to my.firedoglake.com
and here :
link to buergerwelle.de
@seafoid The Soviets participated in the Shoah? Do you have a citation for that?
Did the Mufti influence the Shoah ? Would a welcome all Jews Mufti have changed the Shoah ? Or not.
Most of the Jews who went to the death camps went innocently. How many would have gone to Palestine ? It’s a complete non sequitur. Zionism was for extremists. Most Jews believed they would be taken care of. As anyone would.
Who knew outside of those doing the killing about what was going on? When did US Jews realise the Holocaust was on ? And by the way where were the Zionists of Palestine during the Warsaw ghetto uprising?
Where was America?
Bringing in the Palestinians as accomplices to the Shoah is appalling.
Yad Vashem is never going to show pictures of senior US politicians deciding to restrict Jewish immigration to the US during WW2, is it ? No, because it is all the fault of those dirty Arabs.
Why don’t we ask Prescott Bush. Or Charles Lindbergh.
Is there any doubt that if the Germans would have captured Palestine in WWII the Mufti would have been the figurehead responsible for the annihilation of the Palestine Jews? Instead of being thankful that his plans did not come to fruition, you are defending him.
So now it’s virtual, hypothetical deaths that justify the treatment of the Palestinians?
Again, where is your criticism of leading American figures who were at least as (if not more) involved with the Nazis? Prescott Bush gets a free pass, and I never see you wielding that “historic” photo of Charles Lindbergh.
This is racially motivated hate speech against Palestinians. It isn’t even really about who actually collaborated with the Nazis anymore. This is a disgusting, dirty commodification of the Holocaust, eee, and you should be ashamed.
why stop with leading American figures who were involved with the Nazis, Chaos4700?
How about the founding fathers of zionism — Herzl, Ruppin, Jabotinsky — who were involved with the Nazis and structured Israel’s Hebrew Culture on a German National Socialist template, with the assistance of Nazi leaders? link to tau.ac.il
Herzl was involved with the Nazis? Herzl died in 1904. Where do you come up with this crap?
Jabotinsky went to Poland in 1940 to try and convince Jews to leave because he saw the writing on the wall before they did. You’re speaking a load of crap.
inclusion of Herzl in that context — direct collaboration with NASDP –was in error; my apologies.
Your comments on Arthur Ruppin???
Jabotinsky travelled wherever he thought he could raise money and trouble. He was an opportunist and mercurial; his first public pronouncement on the virtues of zionism was these (from J Schechtman’s Biography of Jabotinsky):
Herzl’s confused identity is laid out here:
link to gilad.co.uk
“So now it’s virtual, hypothetical deaths that justify the treatment of the Palestinians?”
Why so surprised, Chaos? You have heard Zionists justify Israel as a refuge for Jews in case of future persecution. This just means that possible injustice to Jews outweighs actual injustice to Arabs.
As Saleema put it, “We matter and you don’t”.
Oh believe me, I’ve hit the painful sting of “We matter and you don’t” from Zionists whenever I bring up the context of my having Polish heritage, or being homosexual, and how that relates to the Holocaust. I just needed to put a lampshade on how this relates to ongoing atrocities. At least no one’s herding me behind concrete walls and barbed wire because of the factors of my birth — the same can’t be said for Palestinians.
We get it Chaos, you are the ultimate victim.
Yes, get your hate in while you can.
The Jews of Warsaw were exterminated alone. Nobody came to save them. Not the Zionists, not the Americans, not the British, not the Russians.
Blaming the Palestinians for this dark and shameful page of European history is appalling.
not quite “nobody,” seafoid: IRAN served as a refuge for Jews who were link to derekcrowe.com
Jagna Wright died last June. I corresponded with her in 2006, and purchased several DVDs of the film she was determined to produce.
In 2008, when I visited Iran, in response to my request our tour guide drove us past the cemetery where many of the Polish refugees who died in Iran were laid to rest. The cemetery is carefully maintained by the Islamic Republic of Iran. As survivors explain in the film, many of those who died soon after arriving in Iran, died because they were over-fed by British (who occupied Iran during WWII) personnel: the refugees were emaciated but were fed rich and fatty foods that their systems were too weak to handle. Many other refugees were taken into Iranian homes and nursed back to health. Bear in mind that the Iranian people had experienced several episodes of deliberate starvation at the hands of the British, and were acquainted with how to redeem a body — and a soul — shattered by forced starvation and hate.
“not the Americans, not the British, not the Russians. ”
I seem to recall that they were a bit busy at the time. Now what was it they were doing?
Figurehead.
Figureheads aren’t responsible. If the Nazis had annilated the Palestinian Jews, it would have been their plans carried out, their responsibility.
Remember what Benny Morris has said: Somebody had to be annihilated. He gives thanks for the annihilation of the Arabs. Why shouldn’t the Arabs have given thanks for the annihilation of the Jews?
Is there any doubt that if the Germans would have captured Palestine in WWII the Mufti would have been the figurehead responsible for the annihilation of the Palestine Jews?
woulda coulda huh. can you guys ratchet down this madness? palestinians are not responsible for the shoa, not then not now and no amount of wishful thinking will make it so. it is zionists responsible for ethnically cleansing palestine of the palestinian population, then and now.
you guys should be ashamed.
Annie,
If the Germans would have taken over Palestine in WWII, the Palestinians would have been responsible for part of the Holocaust.
If the Palestinians would have won the war in 1948 there would have been huge massacres of Jews.
Ignoring intentions and just looking at actual results is a fools game. The Palestinian intention of massacring Jews was thwarted. You will of course deny that this is what would have happened. Naturally, to you Palestinian society is perfect.
So they’re guilty until proven innocent? What makes you functionally different than the Nazis, eee? The Nazis believed the same lies about Jews as you believe about Palestinians.
“if” according to eee.
yawn.
Annie,
Yes, “yawn”. Thank goodness Jews control their own destiny in Israel and we don’t need to worry that you don’t care that the Jews of Palestine may have been murdered or will be murdered in the “one state solution”. Thank you for always proving how essential the state of Israel is.
i was yawning at your earlier silly assertion, but go ahead and feel free to pile on as many other assertions you want. you bore me eee, except on occasion you get so full of bloviated it becomes entertaining.
take a bow, it’s not everyone who can turn around a post about gruesome racist teenage behavior and recent racist trends in israeli society into a full on shoa blamefest against palestinians .
Annie,
You do not bore me. I find you very interesting as a proof why Israel can only rely on itself and not the good will of so called “liberal” people.
Oho! And now we see what this is really about: the categorical rejection of Western liberalism by a rightwing extremist. Yeah, buddy, the Nazis were all about “controlling our own destiny” too.
So you’re saying that the Germans would have taken over, but somehow Palestinians would have still been in charge, eh? Do tell, how does that work exactly? I’m sure present-day Palestinians would love to know….
“Who knew outside of those doing the killing about what was going on? ”
Apparently quite a few people. You can check the dates, but I believe the US knew as early as 1942. And closer to the scene, the Poles certainly knew, even if they did not want to know.
And if you go to the museum, you’ll find plenty on Western immigration restrictions, including, undoubtedly, something on the St. Louis, a symbolic example of the American attitude at the time.
No one is blaming the Palestinians here. Max is not telling the truth. He’s taking one panel out of hundreds and hundreds in a Holocaust museum and blowing it out of all proportion.
I really am sick and tired of hearing that museums like Yad Vashem exclude non-Jewish narratives. It is simply not true. Yad Vashem, like the US Holocaust Museum and many others, feature panels on Roma victims, homosexual victims, disabled victims, Jehovah’s Witnesses, Communists, and so on.
And like virtually all of these museums, a huge portion is devoted to Righteous Gentiles. One could get the false impression that Righteous Gentiles were actually the norm during the War, when the evidence sadly suggests otherwise.
Anyone who suggests that the museum focuses on the Mufti simply has not been there.
The truth of the matter is the no community has done as much as my own to promote the experiences of other communities during the Holocaust.
Oh, indeed? Have you read your friend eee’s comments?
All of this vacillation is making me sick.
Of course, no community has profited off of it as much as your own. Fancy that.
that implied jab at the poles for being anti semtic is old and stupid. who the hell do you think got the information out. most likely the same group that fed most of their info of what was happening in poland the home army
“that implied jab at the poles for being anti semtic is old and stupid. who the hell do you think got the information out. most likely the same group that fed most of their info of what was happening in poland the home army”
Well, a lot of survivors from Poland would disagree with you.
false and even if you include only jewish survivors it would still most likely be false. despite what your anti polonism forces you to view history the poles weren’t these super antisemitic jew killing jew haters. to the polish people they were citizens of poland and therefore deserving of help. if the jewish survivors agree with you( meraning they disagree with me) they would be wrong.
No one said the Poles were “super antisemitic jew killing jew haters.” But they weren’t philosemites either, and it is a sad fact of life that 90 percent of the Jews in Poland could not have died without significant local help.
Of course, there were righteous gentiles. They were unfortunately the exception rather than the rule.
I never said you said it I said you implied it. and the fact that you think the poles could have done more is crass and shows just how poorly the jewish community understands the history of world war 2. outside of we died the fact that you continue to blame the polish for the holocaust when they were next on the list behind the jews, literally had zero control over what happenedin their country, and has relative to their capabilities probably did more than anyother country or people to defeat the nazis is sick. your a sad and hateful person who is just looking to blame. yes most polish people were rather indifferent to the jews of poland( which was something the jewish community could have avioded had they you know interacted with the polish) to deem them complacent in the holocaust is a slander. they had to fight it because it was an attack on their very existence just as much as the jewish people
What the kids did should be condemned in the most harsh terms.
What we are seeing are the fruits of the second intifada. The trust between the Arab and Jewish community is non-existent and often it is translated to irrational hate. What we are seeing are not the results of education or serving in the IDF. It is the reaction to the suicide bombing campaign of the second intifada. This will take at least a generation to change. As for American Jews, the second intifada is a far away memory for most of them. Just as memories of 9/11 are more influential for NY Jews than Jews elsewhere.
Bullshit. The intifada happened because Israel has a fleet of armored bulldozers and wealthy, hungry dual-citizenship land barons.
And that’s why
IraqisIraniansPalestinians are supposed to suffer?Chaos, you don’t think the Palestinian transgressions had anything to do with Israeli animosity?
Do you still think there are WMDs in Iraq?
It is always someone else’s fault . You can’t educate kids to follow orders to drop white phosphorous on civilians of another religion and then turn around and moan that they are racist because of those they bomb.
It is always someone else’s fault .
It is always someone else’s fault .
It is always someone else’s fault .
It is always someone else’s fault .
It is always someone else’s fault .
It is always someone else’s fault .
It is always someone else’s fault .
It is always someone else’s fault .
It is always someone else’s fault .
It is always someone else’s fault .
It is always someone else’s fault .
It is always someone else’s fault .
And according to you, PG, that someone is usually the Jews.
PG,
“It is always someone else’s fault” is actually the Palestinian mantra. Nothing that has befallen them is ever their fault.
now you’re a mind reader h?
I insist on truth, facts, reality. if that’s threatening to you it sounds like a problem you need to resolve, not me.
struck a nerve did we?
That’s right, eee. Most of what has befallen them is the fault of Zionists.
It’s your fault.
This amazing post really is indication that Zionism has changed the Jewish character, one of its main purposes. There may be exceptions, but I have a difficult time imagining Jewish teenagers, orthodox or secular, acting like this anywhere in Europe or America–anytime in recent history.
The absolute power of Zionism in the Zionist space has done much damage to the people.
Gideon Levy :
“Ten times more significant is the question whether we happen to be living in the only country on earth where clerics determine the right to citizenship. No less important, how do we dare continue deceiving ourselves that this is a secular and democratic state?
The rabbis are Israel’s gatekeepers. What most of them believe became painfully evident recently when they published a ruling that prohibits renting apartments to Arabs and foreigners. One “moderate” rabbi did propose a “compromise”: renting apartments only to “good Arabs.” Another moderate rabbi said that “there is no wisdom” in the rabbis’ letter, but not a word about morality and justice. Most of them are frighteningly narrow-minded, obsessed with fear, and willing to whip up hatred toward foreigners they never met. What do they know about the world? Or about human rights?
Convinced and trying to convince others that the Jews are a chosen people, to which entry and even contact with those deemed inferior is forbidden, they live in their narrow pale of settlement, most of them boorish and ignorant of what happens outside”
‘renting apartments only to “good Arabs.” ‘
For hygene reasons, they would have to be mummified.
Scott,
To me, your observation above is the essence of antisemitism and why I give thanks for Israel every day.
1) To the extent that the character of Jewish teenagers was different from that of others their age in the diaspora, it was because they were a minority living sometimes in fear but always with some anxiety about their safety and future.
2) In Israel one should expect teenagers to act like other teenagers in any other place the rest of the world. Some are bad, some are good. Israeli teenagers are not better or worse than other teenagers in the world.
3) Israel is the one of the only places in the world these teens will be judged as humans and not as “Jews”, like you have the tendency to do.
So let me get this straight. Jews need to be weighed in as egalitarian a fashion as possible, but the entire Palestinian nation needs to carry the burden of condemnation for one crazy ex-Mufti?
Funny, eee. Here I was worried that I might be overindulging some deeply ingrained, sentimentalized, philosemitism (a trait shared by many commenters to this site) and here I am the essence of antisemite!
Scott,
The essence of antisemitism is to generalize about some mythological Jewish character and then decry its change under Zionism.
The only way Zionism changed Jewish society is by empowering it with sovereignty. For the first time in centuries Jews control their own destiny and are not at the mercy of what some pope, king or bunch of leftists think.
“Power corrupts Jews, and Zionist power has corrupted Jews absolutely.” For the first time in centuries, Jews have power over other peoples.
Which will it be, eee? Did the Zionist state corrupt these Jews, or did it merely expose a corruption that was present all along, under the surface?
“here I am the essence of antisemite!”
Don’t worry about it, Scott. Everyone else is, as well.
“For the first time in centuries Jews control their own destiny and are not at the mercy of what some pope, king or bunch of leftists think.”
The notion that Jews (or any other people) ‘control their own destiny’ just because they live in their own sovereign country strikes me as fundamentally idiotic. Who (still) believes this in the 21st century? And if, as seems to be the case in Israel, the alternative to living ‘at the mercy’ of others is to show no mercy for other people, what makes you think that Palestinians would not also strive to control their own destiny rather than be at the mercy of some Ottoman, British or Zionist rulers, or what a bunch of Likudists think? Your attitude boils down to this: Jews can only be empowered by refusing equal rights to other people. OR: Jews can only control their own destiny by controlling other people. That’s merely the flip side of the anti-semitic notion that Gentiles must control Jews or else be controlled by them – rather than the solution to anti-semitism, or the ‘Jewish problem’ , which the Jewish state was supposed to be. It’s more of the same, continuing a vicious cycle.
I would add that I can’t imagine white Mississippiian teenagers in the 1950′s acting that way around a group of elderly black women– though we have all have seen photos and videos of the racist rage of such people.
Are you claiming that diaspora Jewish teenagers don’t call non-Jewish grandmothers ‘whores’ because they are “a minority living sometimes in fear but always with some anxiety about their safety and future?” That’s crazy. A much simpler and more reasonable explanation is that diaspora Jewish teenagers are raised to display a much higher standard of public conduct. It’s cultural. There is a reason that Israel is losing the sympathy of increasing numbers of young American Jews.
I agree completely. I expect Israeli teenagers not to go around calling elderly women ‘whores’ … exactly the same standard of behavior I expect from teenagers everywhere else on the planet.
Their targets were gentiles and were singled out because they were gentiles. Are we supposed to ignore facts because you find them embarrassing?
Their misbehavior is fundamentally rooted in their (Israeli Zionist) notion of Jewish identity. It is silly to think that it is fundamentally antisemitic to point this out, and doing so does not necessarily constitute judging them as “Jews not humans”. I suspect your sensitivity is rooted in a desire to avoid examination of the very substantive differences between diaspora and Israeli political and social cultures.
Good reply, Colin.
Colin,
Like everywhere in the world, some teenagers are racists. Not because they are American, or German or Russian or Jewish, but because they are dumb and immature. Racism is always directed at the people who are different. So in Israel it is the Arabs, or Ethiopian Jews or Sephardi Jews or Ashkenazi Jews and so on who are targeted depending on the context.
Your claim that their misbehavior is rooted in their Israeli Zionist notion of Jewish identity is just vile and bigoted and of course antisemitic. A vast majority of Israeli Zionist Jews do not act in this way and your attempt to pin the teenagers’ actions on this is below contempt. These teenagers are racist just as there are a few racist teenagers in any sizable population. It has nothing to do with their identity or with the fact they are Jews.
Don’t you see that using anecdotes to generalize about a whole population is racist? And don’t you realize that this is what you are doing?
Then how is it not racist, eee, when you claim that “the Palestinians” would have been responsible for the shoah if Germany had won the war?
At 2:56 pm, eee chastises Colin:
>> Don’t you see that using anecdotes to generalize about a whole population is racist? And don’t you realize that this is what you are doing?
And at 3:03 pm he posts the following (in response to annie):
>> If the Palestinians would have won the war in 1948 there would have been huge massacres of Jews.
Clearly, there’s nothing Palestinians like better than to conduct “huge massacres of Jews”. What a joker.
eee, you really should have a long conversation with BenGurion Univ. professor Haggai Ram, who sees racism as endemic to Jewish Israeli identity. Perhaps he’s an antisemite? or perhaps this academic at Israel’s finest zionist university is sloppily relying on anecdotes in publishing his second book on the topic?
Yes, there are racists among any nation’s teenagers, or among any other population.
However, the racism and disgusting behavior of these particular teenagers stems from their colonial Zionist racial supremacism.
How so, exactly? I said, “Their misbehavior is fundamentally rooted in their (Israeli Zionist) notion of Jewish identity.” I clearly identified as the problem the Israeli Zionist Jewish identity embraced by these particular teenagers. I made no assertion, explicit or implicit, about larger Jewish identity.
It is no more antisemitic to point out that the racism of these Israelis stems from their version of Zionist Jewish identity than it would be anti-German to point out that the racism of Nazis stemmed from their version of German nationalist identity.
Not all German nationalists are racists and they certainly aren’t all Nazis, but one cannot understand Nazi racists and their actions without accounting for their version of German national identity. Nor can one understand Israeli racism against the indigenous people of Palestine without accounting for how Palestinians’ inconvenient existence conflicts with Israeli Zionist notions of self-identity. Discussing Jewish and Israeli identity is no more off the table than discussing German, or any other, identity when it is relevant to do so.
Exactly how have I done this? I am well aware that there are good Israelis who oppose their slide into fascism, but one has to be foolishly optimistic to dismiss the mounting evidence of pervasive Israeli racism as ‘anecdotal’. When half the population admit that they are racists, then the ‘few bad apples’ excuse rings hollow.
Israel’s top Reform rabbi: Israeli society falling into deep pit of racism
Report: 44% of Israeli Jews support rabbis’ edict forbidding rentals to Arabs in Safed
I think what gets your goat is that I am NOT generalizing about Jews, but that I pointed out that there is marked and increased divergence between the Jewish identities of young American Jews and young Israeli Jews. Young American Jews by and large don’t buy into Israeli racism and you the fear political consequences for Israel that will inevitably manifest when they come of age. Such fear is wise, but you should do someone constructive with it instead of wasting time trying to pass off these Israeli kids’ misbehavior as “something that could happen anywhere in the world” (yet simply DOESN’T) instead of a symptom of a much wider and deeper problem.
Like everywhere in the world, some teenagers are racists.
i guess you missed that israeli high school poll. over 1/2 of israeli jewish kids didn’t think palestinian israelis should be allowed to vote.
sheesh
Colin,
You certainly are generalizing based on “scientific” poles and scant anecdotal evidence. The Israeli-Jewish society is at war with the Palestinian society, suicide bombers, rockets, you name it. Under these circumstances the ability of most Israelis to recognize that most Palestinians are not to blame is quite exemplary. Let’s see how the US public acts after a few years of suicide bombings like in Israel. But of course, you want to single out Israelis as different from any other people; they are more racist because of their ideology. As for your allegations that these things do not happen anywhere else, have you seen the news from Russia lately regarding the thousands of arrests required to stop ethnic violence? Or what happened in Sri Lanka in suppressing the Tamils? Two wrongs do not make a right but your double standards make your antisemitism stand out.
Given the circumstances, Israeli behavior has been exemplary, but of course I don’t expect you to admit this. You will just continue your antisemitic line about Israeli ideology as a basis for racism.
Given the circumstances, Israeli behavior has been exemplary
lol
eee,
Your concerns are worthy of a reasoned response which I don’t have time to make right now. I’ll reply tomorrow.
The Israeli-Jewish society is at war with the Palestinian society, suicide bombers, rockets, you name it.
This is a perfect illustration of Colin’s point, that “(t)heir misbehavior is fundamentally rooted in their (Israeli Zionist) notion of Jewish identity.” You are simply stating their(the racist teenagers) notion of Jewish identity , which is that they are at war with the Palestinians. They think they can insult elderly Palestinian women because “Israeli-Jewish society” is at war with Palestinians and consider them as sub-human.
Under these circumstances the ability of most Israelis to recognize that most Palestinians are not to blame is quite exemplary.
Of course, you, eee can not be counted among those “most Israelis” since you’ve spent most of your posts here blaming the Palestinians for their own condition, for everything that Jewish Israelis have done to them, for what was done to Jews in Europe and to top it off have blamed them for a hypothetical Shoah in Palestine, that exists only in your fevered notion of Jewish identity.
How do you know that you are not typical of most Israelis? Since you’ve just managed to 1) prove that you constantly blame Palestinians, and now insist that you can not be a typical Israeli Jew since you do so , aren’t you a poor spokesperson here for Jewish Israelis? Frankly, if you were speaking for Americans, I’d tell you you have your head up your ass, and to stop speaking for me. Wouldn’t be wiser to give up the reins here to any one of the “most Israelis” who is not as bigoted as you?
Despite having grown up during WW2 and having taken the news of what the Nazis did to the Jews of Europe almost personally–it was years before I was able to have a civil conversation with a German–I never transferred those feelings into affection for Israel.
This was because my parents, neither of whom were, fortunately, zionists, were, however, involved in Jewish community activities, and as a consequence, we had a number of Israeli Jews visiting our home in the first five or six years following Israel’s establishment.
All had left Israel, as I recall, for the same reason, the unvarnished racism displayed by their fellow Israeli Jews towards the 150,000 Palestinian Arabs who had remained following the Nakba. The stories they told were how, whenever there was an attack on Israelis by Palestinian fedayeen who had been robbed of their land, Israeli Jews who lived near the Palestinians, took it out on them, committing what our Israeli visitors described as “pogroms.” These Israeli Jews had no desire to live in a racist country.
In the mid-60s traveling in Europe I had the same experience, meeting Israeli Jews who also had left for the same reasons and it was, in fact, years before I met an Israeli Jew who had anything positive to say about the country. At that time I had not yet been to the Middle East and wasn’t giving the Palestinian issue much thought but I found their comments worth noting.
In 1983, I spent two and a half months in Israel and interviewed Israeli soldiers who had opposed the Lebanese war, now, except for the massacres of Sabra and Shatila, largely forgotten by everyone in the West, including, inexplicably, the Palestinian solidarity movement, and I did take the time to visit Yad Vashem one morning, although I admit I did not pay much attention to what it had to say about the Mufti.
In the afternoon of the same day I made a trip to a Palestinian hospital in the hills of East Jerusalem, having been advised to do so by a young woman from the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP) in the West Bank.
There I found a half dozen Palestinian children who had been victims of a different luftwaffe, this one piloted over Lebanon by Israeli Jews in F-15s provided by the US Congress. The six children had a total of two legs and all were being fitted for prostheses.
When they were assembled together for a group photo, they were all smiling. It was all I could do to keep from crying. What I was seeing was a continuation of what I had seen at Yad Vashem,
Jeffrey, is there more? Or is the comma a mistake?
It should have been a period but I could have gone on about the same subject..
Wish you would have.
Just another reason to dislike Max.
It’s a Holocaust Museum. And I’ve been there. There is all of one panel discussing the Mufti. One. Out of hundreds and hundreds. To say that he is a major part of the museum is a big fat lie.
It is quite a moving experience, by the way, for those who have actually been there, and relatively little of it, at least from my memory, focuses on Israel. The only real Israeli part is the exit door at the end, which opens to a nice vista, which is, sorry to all of you, meant to suggest that despite the Holocaust, there is a Jewish future. And even that is controversial, as a the Yad Vashem guides freely told us.
This is typical of Max’s work, the use of a few bad apples to suggest that Israelis are “a generation of little fascists.”
How about we do this with the Palestinians, Max? Let’s generalize about those who support suicide bombings. By Max’s reasoning, Palestinians are all terrorists.
To suggest that
The only real Israeli part is the exit door at the end, which opens to a nice vista . . .
the “nice vista” is of Deir Yassim. So observes The Righteous Jew
{hophmi’s next words:}
“sorry to all of you . . .”
Yes, those are the words Righteous Jews believe need to be taken aboard, then spoken aloud, then acted upon, in order for . . .
{hophmi’s next words:}
“there to be
isa Jewish future”The “nice vista” was created over the bodies of murdered Palestinians. I find this highly symbolic.
The Mufti was clearly a Nazi sympathizer, but the difficulty for hasbarists has been how to lay blame on the entire Palestinian people for the Mufti’s actions. After all, the subtext is that since “the Palestinians” sided with the Nazis in WWII, their expulsion a few years later was well-deserved.
One of the leading proponents of this view is Alan Dershowitz. He has repeatedly argued that Palestinians can be blamed for the Mufti’s actions (which, though they were bad enough, he has shamelessly exaggerated to be much worse) because the Mufti was their national leader. Aside from the fallacy of holding an entire population responsible and even punishing them for their leader’s actions (how would we Americans fare under that standard?), Dersh’s reasoning was based not only an Edward Said quote taken wildly out of context but one that Dersh had deliberately changed in subtle but meaningful ways. Several years ago, I sent Dersh the following email:
Dersh answered: “Who are you. Identify yourself,” but offered no substantive answer. I did not respond. Of course, he has continued to spout this line since then, smearing the entire Palestinian people as Nazi sympathizers who cheered on the Holocaust and would have been enthusiastic participants if only they had gotten the chance.
Peter Novick’s statistics regarding the relative lengths of articles on the Mufti and Nazi leaders in the Yad Vashem Encyclopedia shows how thoroughly entrenched this line of reasoning is. The creation of a Jewish State on Palestinian land is quite often justified by the Holocaust, and the obvious answer that the Palestinians were not the perpetrators has generated this mendacious effort to smear them.
David Samel,
Scroll up to see the relevant quote I plucked from the 1944 Alexandria Protocol in which the chiefs and members of Arab delegations at the Preliminary Committee of the General Arab Conference specifically state their objection to what was happening to the Jews in Europe, but warn that the same injustice cannot be visited upon the Arabs of Palestine, no matter what their religion.
MRW – thanks for that quote, which I was unaware of – very interesting and unsurprising
“The enemy of my enemy is my ally.”
Of course Husseini was the ally of the Germans. The Germans were the enemy of the British. For Palestinians, WWII was a colonial war that was going to determine their own future, whether it would continue to be ruled by the Brits or by another power with whom they might establish better relations.
British rule was not in the Palestinian interest. They had promised Palestinian land for a Jewish homeland and opened the doors to an invasion of Jewish colonists. They brutally put down the Palestinian revolt against this immigration in the 1930s.
Nothing could be more natural than the Palestinians turning to the Germans as an ally. That’s just how realpolitick works.
Good point potsherd. If memory serves, at least some IRA members sided with the Nazis during the war, and joined the Irgun in Palestine, both out of animosity toward the British.
The beautiful novel “The English Patient” explores this territory as well.
It isn’t even particularly true that the Palestinians were the enemy of the British. They’d been promised an independent state and more often than not supported the British in WWII. Husseini may have called for anti-British activity in WWII, but Palestinian Arabs in Palestine generally didn’t respond to that call.
Jewish terrorist groups were busy planting bombs against the British in WWII, Yitzak Shamir’s group had some kind of alliance with the Italian fascists and tried to make one with the nazis. I bet that’s not in the holocaust museum. I wonder if the very anti-semitic Vichy regime, which did have a considerable part in the holocaust, gets as much space as Husseini.
Don’t forget, Husseini worked for or with the British for longer than he sided with the nazis. He received his first appointment as mufti from that Zionist Jew, Viscount Herbert Samuel. He sided with the nazis only after he was sent into exile and his political party outlawed by the British. The fundamental reason was that he objected to the Zionist takeover of Palestine.
And I’m not saying that Jews fleeing the nazis didn’t deserve refuge even in Palestine, but why pick on the Palestinians when the Zionists were bent on expulsion of Palestinians from Palestine and the takeover of their land by force?
The claim that the Palestinians would have slaughtered the Jews had they won the war is doubtful. The main reason they made any attacks on Jews was the fear that “the Jews” were bent on taking over their land. The Zionists had exactly that in mind.
David,
Hamas like the Mufti are Nazi ideology sympathizers. Just listen to their recent speeches. I would be happy to provide a link.
The point being is that if you plan to put your head in the sand and ignore this while naively talking about “equal rights”, we will get nowhere.
David,
No humane person blames all Palestinians for the actions of a large minority.
That is the importance of distinguishing between civilian and fighter.
When Palestine elects Hamas by a majority, the trust diminishes though.
Could you tell us again how you believe Operation Cast Lead was justified, Witty?
“When Palestine elects Hamas by a majority, the trust diminishes though.”
What about when the majority of Israelis elect governments which continue the land theft of Palestinian lands, support goose-steppers like Lieberman in the oppression of Palestinians, and commit atrocities and crimes against humanity, such as the war against the Gazans? Does this not only diminish, but destroy the trust that anyone should have in the Israeli people??
eee, the Nazis threw Jews into sealed chambers where they slaughtered them with poison and then burnt the bodies into ashes. Hamas in Gaza? Usually they offer me cigarettes, after having passed me through security screening twice now. The idea that they are eliminationist anti-Semites is non-sense.
I hope they weren’t those knoblesse things, nasty creations of imperialist oppressors, cigarettes, still the common currency of war.
Max,
Here is what they say themselves:
link to memritv.org
Want more?
I suppose I could explain to you the ideological context of this video as well as the confusions that result when the state killing your people identifies as the Jewish state, or more simply, point you to how Hamas treats the Jewish inhabitants of Gaza living at their mercy. I think the second option is more appealing, and the fact that I’m typing this pretty much explains it. good night.
No, this is what they say according to the paid liars at MEMRI.
eee, most Gazans have only had contact with Jews through the Israeli army for the past 62 years. Israel insists on making enemies with the whole Palestinian population. To expect Palestinian discourse to be free of antisemitism (And even that’s for the sake of argument, as I think antisemitism shouldn’t be decoupled from white supremacy) is to hold Palestinians to a standard of decency no society ever lived up to. Look at how Germans and Japanese were depicted in popular media during the world wars. Just because you can’t resist the temptation to depict Hamas as a wannabe-SS doesn’t mean they’re responsible for prolonging a conflict that began when its founders were young.
thanks andrew, helpful
Its helpful, but the question is of the future.
If hatred extends further, whether there is a stimulating cause or not, it is still cruel, and if it remains after a power change will likely result in pendulum swing cruelties.
The same standard applies to Israel. Even if there is a stimulating cause, it is still the ethical responsibility of Israel to restrain from targeting civilians, and intentionally minimizing civilian harms in all armed conflicts.
This is about the best you can do and it still accepts Israel’s right to attack and define who is a civilian.
>> The same standard applies to Israel. Even if there is a stimulating cause, it is still the ethical responsibility of Israel to restrain from targeting civilians, and intentionally minimizing civilian harms in all armed conflicts.
Should Israel fall short of its ethical responsibility:
- Blame the Palestinians and their supporters for failing to make “better wheels”.
- Wait 30 seconds, then proclaim Israel’s crime to be “in the past” and urge everyone to “look to the future”.
- Remind people that you don’t believe in justice.
Max,
Come on, the ideological context is exactly the problem.
As for the second option, there were also “show” Jews in Germany and even orchestras in the camps. You are useful to them. Look how you protect them, a regime that anywhere else you would find despicable.
I saw how Hamas treated Israeli children at their mercy, for example, waiting to enter a club. They showed them no mercy.
Andrew,
Till the first intifada tens of thousands of Gazans worked in Israel and had daily contact with Jews. In fact, ask many Gazans, what they want is to be able to work in Israel again. So the whole “seeing Jews through the army” story is just not true.
I see you have no problem making excuses for Hamas being racist while the Israeli public that has endured years of suicide bombings you and Phil hold to the highest standard. Why is that?
Andrew,
Hamas played a major role in derailing the Oslo process. In fact they brought Netanyahu to power in 96 with their suicide bombing campaign. They brought to its demise the Israeli peace camp with the second intifada. Furthermore, for anyone like you who believes that the solution is a one state with equal rights, how can a party that supports theocracy be part of the solution?
In order to write a post like this, you have to play dumb on many levels and ignore the history of the conflict. Any violent reaction to the Zionist invasion of Palestine is antisemitism; any response to the killing of Palestinian civilians that involves killing Israeli civilians indicates a genocidal intent not found in IDF terrorism because Israelis only defend themselves. The list of things Hamas don’t have in common with the NSDAP is much longer. For one thing, Hamas don’t systematically murder handicapped Palestinians. That would seriously merit a Nazi comparison. Also, Hamas aren’t planning an invasion of France and Russia.
I try not to make Israel-Nazi comparisons because the Second Reich, the cradle of Zionist thought, is a better point of departure. However, if you insist on reenacting WWII, the Israelis are the Germans. Hamas would be the communist partisans. Not nice guys. Not the reason there’s a conflict.
The Oslo process was Israel’s way of getting around any settlement that might have followed the Madrid peace conference convened by the GHW Bush administration in 1991 and making sure that Israel would be assured of retaining Palestinian land within the West Bank while guaranteeing the Palestinians nothing.
Oslo was succinctly summed up by Shlomo Gazit, a former head of Israeli intelligence and a negotiator for Israel in Oslo when he told a Jewish critic of the agreement in San Francisco who shouted out that it represented another “Munich,” referring to Chamberlin’s appeasement of Hitler in 1938, “I don’t like to make such comparisons but if it’s Munich, we’re the Germans and the Palestinians are the Czechs.”
What was that daily contact like? Also, going from Gaza to Israel doesn’t exactly guarantee you see the non-militant side of Israel to begin with.
I haven’t made any comments about the Israeli public and believe it or not, don’t hold them to a particularly high standard. The state of Israel is responsible for honoring internationally recognized human rights including the right to leave and return to your country. The “excuse” for Hamas racism is that it doesn’t justify persecuting Palestinians as a whole in that the aggrieved do not become the aggressor because they say scary things; Hamas’ antisemitism is not a reason for Israel to keep doing what it would’ve done anyway.
The peace camp was doomed from the start by trying to have peace in the framework of a colonial-settler state. They want a two-state solution to save their demographic nationalism and blame the colonized when it doesn’t happen. Oz, Grossman and Yehoshua and Meretz supported the 2006 and 2008-9 attacks. Have you even met one act of violence by an Israeli soldier that could not be defending Israel that you know is standard practice?
This is another strawman position you attribute to someone who doesn’t have it. It’s not for me to take a position on what the solution is. And asking what Hamas would do in a one-state solution is very academic. Right now Hamas has the power to do what Israel says it wants re: rocket fire and still get attacked, as we know from two years ago.
There’s no shortage of scenarios you can yank out to normalize the situation as it is now. Hamas could go away and it would be regime change in Egypt and Jordan tomorrow. Meanwhile, you support perpetual exile and imprisonment of civilians who haven’t done anything so you can construct an ideal metropolis free of strangers. If the situation for people there gets worse it’ll stem from enforcing this ideal, not from letting go of it.
And yet with all this contact that the Israeli Jews had with the Gazans prior to Cast Lead, and the contact that these Israeli Jews have with Palestinian citizens of Israel, those who control the Israeli government, not to mention everyday Jewish Israelis, evidence a near pathological inability to treat these Arabs as equals or, frankly, as fellow humans.
So what’s your excuse for that racism?
See, this is the point of all the Muftisprach from Zionists. First, they try to establish Husseini as a Nazi. Then, they compare other Palestinian nationists to Husseini. QED, they’re all Nazis and undeserving of “equal rights.”
And this is why the Zionists are full of shit. Nazis and other antisemites hated Jews, tried to exterminate Jews, for no reason. Their hate was irrational and baseless, founded on lies.
Palestinians may hate Jews. Husseini certainly did. He definitely wanted to drive them out of Palestine and would have certainly killed them to do this.
The difference is: he had a reason. His hate was rational and based on fact. Zionist Jews were invading Palestine for the purpose of driving native Palestinians off their lands, killing them to do this.
Palestinians had the right to defend themselves and their land. It was perfectly natural for them to want to do this. They were nothing like Nazis even if they made common cause with Nazis at the time.
or the infinitely more logical and reasonable explanation is the Nazis were at war with the british. occupied peoples through out history always sought out alliances and tried to cooperate with the enemies of their occupiers. the long history of the Irish siding with france. the french scots guard are just 2 examples in a fairly small area. hell the low countries didn’t join the allies until germany invaded them.
Many people, often in the name of balance and objectivity, fall in the trap of denouncing one action or another, one person or another.
Phil Weiss and you, David Samel, and myself included, make that mistake.
In this particular case, it’s important to point out that the Mufti did not “sympathize” with the Nazis, nor did he seek an alliance with Germany at the time due to ideological motives.
The fact of the matter is that before WWI, when the Allied Powers lay siege to the Ottoman Empire, Palestinians sided with the Allied Powers which included Britain.
Britain had promised the Palestinians and Arabs, in general, independence from the Ottoman Empire.
However, in the decades that followed Britain reneged on its promise and instead the Palestinians found themselves facing the Zionist takeover of their land.
It is within that environment that the Mufti found it convenient to side with Germany in WWII against Britain and other allied powers.
“It is within that environment that the Mufti found it convenient to side with Germany in WWII against Britain and other allied powers.”
I think you are reinventing truth for a political purpose in that assessment.
Don’t accuse Avi of reinventing the truth, Witty. That’s hypocritical as well as false.
No he’s not, RW. Avi has it right.
Chaos, the Mufti said it here:
Your link to MEMRI went down the memory hole, apparently.
I could easily prove you wrong, but there’s no point in my bothering to do so by citing a few well-known Israeli historians. You hear whatever you want to hear and forget everything that doesn’t mesh with your ideology.
What I wrote is known to anyone who bothered to open a history book on the subject, preferably a history book that’s not written by hacks like Michael Oren, Israel’s American-born ambassador.
But, go ahead, call me a liar. It means nothing coming from you.
As for you and your credibility, I think even you, deep inside, know what you are.
“In this particular case, it’s important to point out that the Mufti did not “sympathize” with the Nazis, nor did he seek an alliance with Germany at the time due to ideological motives.”
This conflicts with every source that I’ve read.
I’m sure that you are right that the mufti did seek to oppose Great Britain, and did seek to preserve Palestine for only his people.
But, it is also true that he strongly sympathized with the nazi movement and ideology.
“This conflicts with every source that I’ve read.”
Then I would suggest you check your sources.
“But, it is also true that he strongly sympathized with the nazi movement and ideology.”
It what sense? The Nazi movement and ideology was, primarily, a pro-German nationalist movement. One would be hard pressed to find a rational reason for a Palestinian nationalist to “strongly sympathize[]” with that movement, especially given the place where non-”Aryans” like the Mufti rank, in the Nazi movement and ideology.
The Mufti was an antisemite and a practitioner of realpolitik. That doesn’t make him a sympathizer with an ideology of Aryan world domination.
This conflicts with every source that I’ve read.
What sources have you read Witty?
I guess that principle of what naziism is makes it possible for Avi’s statement to be true.
If he was sympathetic with the persecution of Jews, in alliance with the fascistic group of Italy, Hungary, Japan, others, then he was in sympathy with the nazi movement.
Wierd.
Again, if you read my posts above, I stated that his voice was a component in the GERMAN decision to pursue the final solution rather than dispossession and to Palestine.
I assume that you all will never again refer to Zionist complicity with the naziis to emigrate Jews from Germany and areas it controlled to Palestine/Israel. And, I assume that you all will never again equate Israeli incidents/policy of forced removal with nazi.
When does ice become water (the change in emphasis of “Jewish problem” from dispossession to annihilation)? After it becomes apparent that in their realpolitik they cannot maintain the alliances that they sought strategically unless they forego dispossession as strategy.
If he was sympathetic with the persecution of Jews, in alliance with the fascistic group of Italy, Hungary, Japan, others, then he was in sympathy with the nazi movement…..Wierd.
richard, have you read
i’m reminded of an earlier discussion here last month. here’s avi trying to talk some sense into the conversation.
what do you read witty? what informs you? wiki?
The problem with your statement, though, is saying, “The Mufti was sympathetic with the persecution of Jews” is not the same as saying that “he strongly sympathized with the nazi movement and ideology” because they are not the same. Again, the Nazi movement and ideology were primarily one of Aryan/German supremacy. Persecution of the Jews was one elements of that, but it was not the entirety of the Nazi movement and ideology, nor was it the core of that movement and ideology. It was a large part of it, for sure, but the core of the movement was a pan-germanic, populist nationalism and supremacy.
And as a historic matter, the Mufti’s opinions were irrelevant to the German decision-making; it wasn’t even a component.
If Hitler had wanted to transfer the Jews to Palestine rather than murder them, the Mufti’s opposition wouldn’t have mattered at all. They would have been transferred, because that’s how it worked under the Fuehrerprinzip. The Jews were murdered and not transferred for one reason: because Hitler wanted to murder them and did not want to transfer them. Period. The Mufti had no affect or influence on this whatsoever and to suggest that he was a component is gibberish.
“When does ice become water (the change in emphasis of “Jewish problem” from dispossession to annihilation)”
Your assumption here was that there was such a change in policy from overseas relocation to annihilation. There wasn’t. While there was some investigation into relocation, it was never a serious option, either logistically or, especially, politically.
Yes, everyone has seen the ad. It’s a relic of the politics of that time, where calling a political opponent a fascist was a way of discrediting him. The signatories were all left-wingers.
In reality, Begin led a tiny group whose political program was unclear, and he was principally known as a leader of a militant group responsible for terrorist acts. Shamir’s group was even tinier. That, of course, has not stopped the propaganda campaign from casting the Irgun and Stern Gang as somehow representative of the majority of Jews in the Yishuv.
The important political organization of the time was led by Ben-Gurion, and he was certainly no fascist.
This nonsense about Zionists and Nazis is almost always brought up by crazy Westerners looking to score cheap political points. Most Palestinians and Arabs are smart enough not to bring it up because of the Mufti and the pro-Nazi stances of many Arab leaders during the war.
Begin led a tiny group whose political program was unclear, and he was principally known as a leader of a militant group responsible for terrorist acts. Shamir’s group was even tinier. That, of course, has not stopped the propaganda campaign from casting the Irgun and Stern Gang as somehow representative of the majority of Jews in the Yishuv.
please link to this ‘propaganda campaign’ because i have never heard or read anyone claim ‘Irgun and Stern Gang were representative of the majority of Jews in the Yishuv’ except perhaps by someone such as yourself, to then claim there was some alleged campaign ..possibly for the purpose of scoring “cheap political points” as you call them. i’ve certainly never heard it on this site. regardless of how ‘tiny’ that group might have been, begin did become prime minister, and shamir his foreign minister btw.
This nonsense about Zionists and Nazis is almost always brought up by crazy Westerners looking to score cheap political points.
well it was not me who brought anything. maybe you missed the comment i responded to.
I stated that his voice was a component in the GERMAN decision to pursue the final solution rather than dispossession and to Palestine.
I assume that you all will never again refer to Zionist complicity with the naziis to emigrate Jews from Germany and areas it controlled to Palestine/Israel.
the next time someone such as witty or yourself tries this nonsense of scoring cheap political points construing the mufti or by extension the palestinians were responsible for the holocaust i’ll remind you once again it isn’t a ‘left-wingers’ thing.
hophmi-speak:
facts = “nonsense”
Zionists are forever going on with mufti-this and mufti-that to demonize Palestinians as Nazis and imply that they were complicit in the genocide of the Jews.
But to point out the fact that Jewish Zionists were making exactly the same overtures to the Nazis at exactly the same time – oh, that’s “crazy nonsense.”
“what do you read witty? what informs you? wiki?”
That is a stupid response Annie.
I’ve read nearly every dissenting historian represented here as anti or critical of Zionism. Finkelstein, Pappe, Khalidi, Abunimeh, Shlaim, Segev, Morris, Kimmerling, others.
I have NEVER stated that Irgun was not a terrorist organization. Get clearer about what you are arguing about, please, so you don’t indulge in careless character assassination based on your own biases.
“And as a historic matter, the Mufti’s opinions were irrelevant to the German decision-making; it wasn’t even a component.”
“Your assumption here was that there was such a change in policy from overseas relocation to annihilation. There wasn’t. While there was some investigation into relocation, it was never a serious option, either logistically or, especially, politically.”
That is most likely self-talk.
Have you not read of the accusations that the nazis sought to negotiate with Zionists to move the Jews to Palestine? You think that Zionists initiated that, or that it was discussed from thin air?
There was much internal discussion of the resolution of the “Jewish problem”, and it was characterized by an emphasis on relocation, shifting to an emphasis of extermination. And between those two points, you have to cross a line.
But you’re only guessing becasue you don’t know eitehr way.
It was a mutually beneficial arrangement. The Zionists may well have initiated.
“That is most likely self-talk.”
Nope.
“Have you not read of the accusations that the nazis sought to negotiate with Zionists to move the Jews to Palestine?”
Sure. So? As a historical matter, there was relatively little support for a relocation option, logistically or politically, and none after ’41. And, most importantly, given the attempt to blame the Palestinians for the Holocaust through the person of the Mufti, Palestine wasn’t the main area of interest for the Germans, anyway, even considering the limited interest regarding relocation; Madagascar had more adherents, had the advantage of being an island, and was the colonial possession of France and not the UK.
“You think that Zionists initiated that, or that it was discussed from thin air?”
Why wouldn’t they? Even as late as January ’42 (and, realistically, later), the Zionists would be idiots not to see the realpolitik potential involved in their program in connection with the Nazi program.
“There was much internal discussion of the resolution of the ‘Jewish problem’, and it was characterized by an emphasis on relocation, shifting to an emphasis of extermination. And between those two points, you have to cross a line.”
But that’s simply not the way the Nazi state operated. There was no “line” to cross because there was never a central “policy” until Hitler decided on one. There was never an emphasis on relocation, but, rather, there were a number of possibilities that were examined to deal with the Jews of Europe.
Until Hitler decided on extermination, the were parallel and sometimes conflicting projects, theories and proposals as the constituent elements of the Nazi state and party jockeyed to seize power and leadership. Then, when Hitler decided, the parts fell in line to carry out Hitler’s wishes. That’s why the guest list at Wannsee looked as it did: so each of the constituent elements of the state and party understood where it fit into the plan decided up by Hitler.
logical valid but well lets see when the SS killed the people in the Heer complained and tried to get them punished and admonished and were appaled. when the Irgun and Stern gang killed the Yishuv at best just stood by and watched at worst helped. we have enough evidence to suggest they were sympathic to those actions and supported them.
It is within that environment that the Mufti found it convenient to side with Germany in WWII against Britain and other allied powers.
And fulfilling Hitler’s vision of Jew free society also
Zionist vision too, since we keep hearing how diaspora Jews are “not loyal” to the “Jewish nation.” Why didn’t you join your college friends on the fish-in-a-barrel shoot, incidentally?
A few months ago, I dealt briefly with the Mufti in my review of Paul Berman’s latest terrible book. I pointed out that Anwar Sadat had actually been imprisoned by the British in Egypt for his pro-Nazi activities, but we never heard about that from our hasbara friends after he signed the peace treaty with Israel. link to mondoweiss.net
Sadat changed his views.
Again, it’s no secret that Sadat was pro-Nazi.
It’s also no secret that he made peace with Israel thirty years later.
Those who are anti-peace on the right sometimes bring up Sadat’s Nazi past. I guess that’s true of those who are anti-peace on the left as well.
As far as I know Chaos, neither of my friends have any ‘kills’.
Not sure what that has to do with what i said though? Can you help me out on that?
From what I understand, Husseini did in fact sympathize with the Nazis and found German antisemitism appealing. It was realpolitick, but there was also an attraction. The one doesn’t exclude the other. A lot of people who swallowed their gorge and worked alongside Nazis for their own interests did not also sympathize (eg the Finns) but some did.
Let’s not place a false halo on Husseini’s head while filing off the horns that the Zionists have planted there.
thank you pots
David Samel, your rejoinder emphasizes that “Palestinians did not perpetrate holcaust,” which is true and important, of course.
But a broader fact that is almost always obscured is that by the time of World War II, the zionist colonization of Palestine had been underway for over 50 years. Entire Arab villages had already been destroyed by zionists. Arthur Rupppin had already “secretly” purchased huge swathes of Arab land.
facts are stubborn things, and The chronology cannot be changed by a visit to Yad Vashem.
“British rule was not in the Palestinian interest. They had promised Palestinian land for a Jewish homeland and opened the doors to an invasion of Jewish colonists. They brutally put down the Palestinian revolt against this immigration in the 1930s.
Nothing could be more natural than the Palestinians turning to the Germans as an ally.”
Was it also natural for the Mufti to broadcast “Kill the Jews wherever you find them” over the radio?
Was it also natural for the Mufti to broadcast “Kill the Jews wherever you find them” over the radio?
Would it have been natural for Sitting Bull to proclaim, “Kill the white-eyes wherever you find them?” You kill invaders. That’s how it works. Either you kill them, or they kill you.
The Jews won and they killed the Arabs. Husseini wanted it the other way around. Yes, that’s natural.
Was it also natural for the Mufti to broadcast “Kill the Jews wherever you find them” over the radio?
Cite? Was this during those “Arab broadcasts” urging the Palestinians to leave Palestine? The ones that were proven to be nonexistent?
i can cite it tree! it was the public prosecutor
Thank you, Max, for this complete report. To the many incidents you cite, may I add the story of the five Arabs who were expelled from an apartment in Tel Aviv after their landlady was threatenened with the torching of her building if she continued to rent out to Arabs.
Israel has always been a racist society, but it’s striking to see how mainstream the hate has gone, and how freely it is expressed these days.
“Was it also natural for the Mufti to broadcast “Kill the Jews wherever you find them” over the radio?”
Yes, everywhere we sent our belligerents to colonise, they wanted to kill us for it, it’s a demonstratable fact of conquest I’m afraid. From Australia to Africa and back to New Zealand the same result. I know ” We’ll fight them on the beaches” etc. sounds good, but it’s the same speech in a hundred different langauges and contexts, and it’s never going to be Zionistically Correct.
“We will push the Zionists into the sea or they will push us into the desert.”
“Never again?” you say, Phil?
Phil. Over 100 reactions. To me it looks always the same again here: the thread is spoiled by x-Zionists (well, x being liberal, or humanistic, and so more). Do you think I even read these posts and their subthreads? How worthless you allow RW (ah, an old friend of yours, that explains his great reasoning then), and eee, and hophmi, time and time again, and even giving compliments to “liberal zionist” [wtf is that eG] jon s.
Phil, if you really want to turn this into a we-jewish site, please then publish so. If not, then maintain it to be open.
I grew up with “Never Again”, Its current dichotemy of useage leads me to move to “Enough Already”. So enough already on the few Zionists that post here ; otherwise there’s nothing to throw rocks at, and the pit is boring and unproductive of good debate.
droog : prefix-pending (why not, what the heck, it’s so damn political and expedience based anyway) Zionist.
max, you’ve obviously written a great article here. it’s driving the zionists mad! we’re in mufti land again! the ziocaine is off the charts! the palestinians are responsible for the holocaust!
congratulations!
Of course the entire discussion has been diverted from the original point: the vile, racist behavior of Zionist teenagers.
exactly
How nice, I love your logic:
Since some Israeli teenagers are racist, Hamas is proven to be the leading defender of liberal democracy this side of the galaxy and Palestinian society is proven to be made solely of secular humanitarians that have never had a racist thought cross their mind and therefore all attempts to stand in the way of the one state solution are futile.
The act of the teenagers is awful. But what exactly do you want to show except that there are some stupid teenagers in Israel? It seems you are trying to show that since some teenagers in Israel are racist, Israel does not have a right to exist. Using this logic, I can prove that not one single country in the world has the right to exist.
A laundry list of the faults of the citizens of a country is nothing but that. Except that in the case of Israel, you try to use that as a case against Israel. Why is that?
Seriously, does the fact that a huge number of Americans believe Obama is Muslim or some other stupidity means that the US should cease to exist?
“A laundry list of the faults of the citizens of a country is nothing but that. Except that in the case of Israel, you try to use that as a case against Israel. Why is that?”
One reason is that Israel offers laundry lists of virtues as a case for Israel.
(Often lies, though.
link to youtube.com
)
You’re arguing with your self, eee. The existence of vile racist Zionist teenagers is evidence that Israel is a vile racist nation.
Whether it has any “right to exist” is another matter entirely, and indeed not one single other country in the world goes around declaring it has a “right to exist.”
Whereas the Zionist train of thought here today seems to run along the line that because the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem in the 1930s was anti-Jewish, so Jewish teenagers today have the right to use vile language to Palestinian grandmothers who have come to seek understanding and peace.
Sweetie, you’re leaving the realm of evaluative “should” and entering the realm of the predictive “will.” The amount of stupidity that drives American discourse and policy-making has exceeded minimum suicidal levels.
You make it sound as if these teenagers’ racism had popped up in a vacuum. Not so. In recent weeks, a long list of racist attacks and instances of incitement has shaken Israel, to the point that the Defense Minister is talking of a wave of racism sweeping the country. The incidents have included:
–A letter by 50 State-paid rabbis calling on Jews not to rent out to Arabs.
–A letter by their wives calling on Jewish girls not to date Arabs.
–An attack on a building in Safed where Arab students lived by Jewish demonstrators who shouted “Death to the Arabs” and hurled rocks and bottles at the building, shattering glass.
–An attack on five Arabs (one of them a Druze IDF veteran) in Tel Aviv, who were kicked out of the apartment they were renting after their landlady was threatened with the torching of her building.
–A ruling by the chief rabbi of Rosh Ha-Ayin that Arabs can’t be hired in stores that employ Jewish girls.
–A demonstration in Bat Yam protesting the presence of Arab residents in the town.
–A decision by Jewish teachers in Jaffa to ban the use of Arabic in their classes, including by Arab children talking to each other.
As you can see, it’s not just a matter of “a few stupid teenagers.” By denying what the Defense Minister of Israel himself admits, you’re being more Catholic than the Israeli pope.
I’ve been a little short on time lately and have only skimmed over this thread. I’ve got to say I’m disturbed that the Mufti of Jerusalem has become one of the main hasbara talking points in the last few months – it is seriously mufti Mufti MUFTI – all the friggin’ time lately.
This is especially disturbing since he was a marginal figure in Palestine, disliked by many and reviled by many more – and equally unpopular among Palestine’s neighbours. During 1947/48/49 his “army” never amounted to more than 3,000 out of a million Palestinians, such was his popularity (p76, Flapan, The Birth of Israel).
I suppose we can be glad that hasbara is reaching it’s predictable end. After zionists flat-out lied about Palestine for decades the New Historians learnt and told us the true history. Accusations of anti-semitism for political purposes has been so overused as to have become practically meaningless – despite the fate of Helen Thomas, Sanchez etc. it is when the lobby seems strongest it is most brittle. And now we have hasbara’s ‘final solution’: dissent is to be liquidated by attempting to brand Palestinians nazis and to make them ‘untouchables’. Well, it ain’t gonna work, and after this there is simply nowhere for hasbara to go is there?
- – - – - – - – - -
Happy New Year all! It’s only a few hours away in Australia. Can’t wait for 2011. Maybe next year in Jerusalem there will be freedom for all.
Sumud: Have the hasbarists been bringing up the Mufti on other sites more than usual lately? If so, is it your impression that this is accidental, or planned?
One unexpected benefit of the debate above: I have been studying the Holocaust for years, and I just now learn that one Richard Witty is an expert I had somehow overlooked, with a novel interpretation that places the Mufti right at the heart of the mass murder in Europe. Who knew?
I visited Yad Vashem a decade ago, and I did find the memorial moving. In their research department, I learned — or rather confirmed — that people who were almost certainly my relatives died in the death camps. (They and my grandfather had the same, somewhat unusual, last name, based on the town they came from in Lithuania.)
Then, toward the end, that notorious photo of the Mufti. The cheap political trick did not destroy my feelings about the memorial, but it certainly sullied them.
The photo of the Mufti in Yad Vashem is yet another sick example of how the Holocaust is used as a political tool. Shameful enough to even have such a place on land that was ethnically cleansed of most of the indigenous population (and still trying to), but right in the back yard of where Israel’s hideous crimes against humanity are carried out which is the norm in Israeli society. The behavior of these youths is not out of the ordinary either.
Even Lieberman started circulating these photos as a reason to build in East Jerusalem.
link to haaretz.com
I would be curious to know if Yad Vashem has any photos or information about Zionist collaboration with the Nazis, or how the Stern Gang offered to fight on the side of the Nazis against the British during WWII. Now that would be a revelation to the world and deserves attention!
The Palestinians paid for crimes that were committed a continent away that they had nothing to do with. They did not invade Europe, but rather it was their land that was invaded, yet Zionists must constantly find ways to demonize the Palestinians so as to justify in some way that they are the enemy while the Palestinians remain the dispossessed, the oppressed, their lives totally devastated,and deprived of even their most basic rights.
There may be photographs with the Mufti “Heiling” Nazi troops, but the reality is that Israel is the one who carries on the “Heil Hitler” mentality as Israel is a racist Jewish supremacy which is why people can and do behave the way they do.
Learn the lessons first before you have the audacity to think you can teach them to others.
“It would be curious to know if Yad Vashem has any photos or information about Zionist collaboration with the Nazis, or how the Stern Gang offered to fight on the side of the Nazis against the British during WWII.”
It would be curious to know if you’ve ever been to Yad Vashem. It’s clear that you haven’t.
Hopfmi asked me:
“It would be curious to know if you’ve ever been to Yad Vashem. It’s clear that you haven’t.”
That is one way of evading what I had originally asked, however, I am going to reply to his question.
No I have never been to Yad Vashem, nor have I ever been to Vad Yashem, not have I ever been to any Holocaust Musuem, nor do I intend to go. I do not go to such places that are used for political tools to justif and/or advance the crimes that Israel commits against the Palestinian people, nor do I go such places that are used as some sort of competition to show that no one in this world has suffered as much as Jews or that nothing can be compared to Jewish suffering.
Roma Gypsies also suffered the same fate as European Jews and were in concentration camps simultaneously with Jews, yet they do not have a state of their own and are still persecuted in Europe, and many people are even unaware of their Holocaust (known as The Devouring).n
Whatever the reason anyone wants to give to justify Zionist collaboration with the Nazis in order to bring Jews to Palestine, then the same justifications can be given to the Mufti for not wanting to bring Jews tlo Palestine. And in hindsight, he was absolutely right.
As opposed to a photo of the Mufti, better that this photo be placed in all Holocaust Museums wherever they are located to show how well the lessons are that Jews have learned
link to inminds.com
“No I have never been to Yad Vashem, nor have I ever been to Vad Yashem, not have I ever been to any Holocaust Musuem, nor do I intend to go. I do not go to such places that are used for political tools to justif and/or advance the crimes that Israel commits against the Palestinian people, nor do I go such places that are used as some sort of competition to show that no one in this world has suffered as much as Jews or that nothing can be compared to Jewish suffering.”
So you’re ignorant. Holocaust museums are not political tools. You’ve absolutely no credibility to speak about them if you’ve never been to one.
“Roma Gypsies also suffered the same fate as European Jews and were in concentration camps simultaneously with Jews, yet they do not have a state of their own and are still persecuted in Europe, and many people are even unaware of their Holocaust (known as The Devouring).”
Yes, and many Holocaust museums, including Yad Vashem and the US Holocaust Museum, have exhibits on the Roma.
“Whatever the reason anyone wants to give to justify Zionist collaboration with the Nazis in order to bring Jews to Palestine, then the same justifications can be given to the Mufti for not wanting to bring Jews tlo Palestine. And in hindsight, he was absolutely right.”
So you’ve have been happy with more dead Jews. That’s typical of a person who refuses to visit a Holocaust museum.
“So you’re ignorant. Holocaust museums are not political tools. You’ve absolutely no credibility to speak about them if you’ve never been to one.”
Without resorting to the same use of your language, this is an incredible statement, which essentially means that if anyone was not present during the Holocaust or referring to any time in history, then they have no credibility to speak about it
I don’t have to go to any Holocaust museum to be educated about what took place, but I think you need to do some serious research.
Beginning with the Roma Gypsies, they were not even a part of the U.S. Holocaust Museum until the 1990’s because Elie Wiesel objected to their inclusion, and it was not until he actually resigned from his position that one Gypsy was permitted to be on its 65-member staff. This is the same Elie Wiesel who said, after the Roma Gypsy expulsion from France just a few months ago that although it is a terrible thing, it should not be compared to the “Jewish case.” So there we have another example of the Holocaust being treated like it was a competition while Wiesel also remains silent on the crimes carried out against the Palestinians.
Most of these museums are supposed to serve as a memorial and educational tool just as the one in Washington which states that it inspires citizens and leaders worldwide to confront hatred, promote human dignity and prevent genocide. The only thing that it has inspired is to be indifferent to hatred and promote human suffering as long as the perpetrator happens to be Israel. I do not see any great lesson in that, except one of repugnant hypocrisy. There are all different ways to destroy a people, and that is why Genocide Laws were created. Israel is doing a phenomonal job on its own genocidal policies towards the Palestinians under the guise of their security and seeking “peace.”
Another point of interest is that in the Museum itself, and no doubt in all museums, is reference to the Nazi Nuremberg Laws of 1935 which shows the racist criteria of how Jews were defined and which robbed them of their rights and citizenship. That same racist criteria is used by Israel, (based on the Nazi Nuremberg Laws) to give whomever meets the racist criteria of who is Jewish the supreme rights and deprives others of their rights. That also applies to Jews who are not citizens of Israel but anywhere throughout the world who meet that obnoxious criteria. So basically, Israel carries out the same functions as did the Nazis as regards defining who Jews are, marriage laws, and even identity cards which clearly shows who is Jewish and who is not.
In all good conscience and ethics, how does anyone dare even make reference to those laws in those museums when they are virtually the same laws that are used in Israel to make it a Jewish supremacy and deprive others of their rights. You cannot support one and denounce the other when they are two sides of the same coin.
“So you’ve have been happy with more dead Jews. That’s typical of a person who refuses to visit a Holocaust museum.”
I think it was Ben Gurion who would have been happy with more dead Jews as well as others with their sickening Zionist ideology as long as most of them made their way to Palestine.
“Without resorting to the same use of your language, this is an incredible statement, which essentially means that if anyone was not present during the Holocaust or referring to any time in history, then they have no credibility to speak about it ”
Spare me. You’re talking about Holocaust museums you’ve never been to and apparently know little about. In no way did I remotely imply that someone needed to be present during the Holocaust to have credibility to speak about it. You know damn well I’m talking about the museums.
As far as Wiesel, you apparently cite one source (and this is obviously a pet issue for you, since you post about it everywhere). The fact of the matter is that there are exhibits in the USHMM on the Roma and Sinti. And he’s one guy, not the entire museum.
“The only thing that it has inspired is to be indifferent to hatred and promote human suffering as long as the perpetrator happens to be Israel.”
Really? That’s the only thing Holocaust museums inspire? Oh wait, you’ve never visited one, so you don’t really know jack.
“So basically, Israel carries out the same functions as did the Nazis as regards defining who Jews are, marriage laws, and even identity cards which clearly shows who is Jewish and who is not. ”
Except for the part about Nazis killing Jews and Israel serving as a homeland for them. I guess, for you, there is no difference between death and life. You forgot that part in your perverse and ridiculous comparison.
“You cannot support one and denounce the other when they are two sides of the same coin. ”
Unless, of course, the vast majority of the world does not see them as two sides of the same coin as you do.
Your reasoning is perverse, and your views of Holocaust museums lacks all credibility.
Instead of limiting his article to the incident of racism that took place near the entrance of Yad Vashem, Max Blumenthal saw fit to turn his article into an anti Yad Vashem piece. Part of MB’s rhetoric focused on the presence of a panel in Yad Vashem dealing with the mufti’s collaboration with the Nazis. If this thread left the topic of current day Israeli racism it was led there by MB.
A few comments on Max Blumenthal’s article: He refers to Yom Hashoah as a holiday. Holiday has connotations of happiness. Day of mourning or commemoration would be a more apt terminology.
He refers to the mufti’s getting kicked out by Britain and heading to Germany. The implication is that he was kicked out of Palestine and found his way immediately to Germany. The route was far more circuitous than that. He escaped from Palestine in 1937 and went to Lebanon. In 1939 his deteriorating relationship with the French who controlled Lebanon led him to withdraw to Iraq in 1939. When pro British forces regained control of Iraq in 1941 he fled to Persia (Iran). Later that same year when the Allies occupied Iran, he fled to Rome. From Rome he travelled of his free will to Germany so that he could collaborate with the Nazis (succesfully or not).
The mufti was a hate filled disgusting man and it is impossible to know what the politics of Palestine might have been if not for his person. There were other less belligerent voices in the Palestinian Arab community who saw the necessity of negotiating. The mufti would have none of it. He insisted that “when the sword talks, there is no need for words.” Any opinions on this thread accepting his attitude as the necessity of “the enemy of my enemy is my friend” reflect a realpolitik that would be dismissed as merciless, heartless and bloodthirsty in other contexts. There were many possible reactions to the British and the Zionists and the mufti felt that hatred was the surest path. Those who praise him and understand him are adhering to a path of hate.
Those who praise him and understand him are adhering to a path of hate.
Understanding, WJ, is adhering to the path of truth, not the path of hate. You do not have to sanctify Amin al-Husseini in order to understand him.
But the Zionist demonization of this figure is a huge milestone on the Zionist path of hate, and the place of that photo at Yad Vashem is part of it. But identifying a Palestinian, and thus “Palestinians” with the Nazis, Palestinians are given a share in the Nazi guilt for the Holocaust, which is then played to justify the ethnic cleansing of Palestine as reparation.
It is meant to refute the true Palestinian claim that they were innocent of the German crimes yet made to pay the price for them. It is a low, despicable ploy.
WJ, I think you should read Ghassan Kanafani’s book on the ’36 Revolt. It’s not very long and has a good deal of background on how the British created a segregationist economy favoring the Jews and how Palestinian society was fractured and torn apart by colonization and reactionary class warfare. Reading a detailed analysis by a Palestinian really hammers home the silliness of this Karsh-lite dichotomy between moderate negotiators and hate-filled reactionaries. Virtually no Palestinian was pro-Zionist however there were class considerations for the landowners and traditional leadership that caused them to sabotage the resistance of the city workers and peasants especially the Mufti by assassinating trade union leaders. And of course the British had a policy of executing local commanders and possessing a firearm was a crime.
The Mufti’s role is usually overstated. He did not begin the armed uprising – that was Qassam – and did not organize the general strike. He even called for an end to it in Oct. ’36 and appeased the High Commissioner with more moderate sermons. However, he was the representative of Palestine in the eyes of the British and most of the outside world. That’s more due to the colonial-regime and his family’s traditional influence than his personal merit.
It’s not likely the Nashashibis could have forced a lasting compromise that the dispossessed peasants would take seriously. One of them fought outright with the Brits and Zionists and was killed after the revolt.
link to newjerseysolidarity.org
True about Qassam.
I always found it ironic that Qassam was a sufi (dedicated to peace and reconciliation. I chanted the shema with sufis in Vermont and visited a sufi community in Haifa) and a Syrian (NOT a Palestinian).
Wow Richard, what’s the point of telling us he was NOT a Palestinian? You can’t be Syrian and Palestinian at the same time? The borders between Palestine, Syria and Lebanon were created by colonial occupiers and Qassam probably did not recognize these boundaries. Resisting colonization is no less justified if you are a Palestinian nationalist or a pan-Arab one. In fact, Qassam was in Palestine for 15 years before his fateful action and before moving there he took part in a revolt in Jabal Horan (in Syria). If he considered Palestine his homeland – and if other Palestinians concur – it’s not exactly your business.
He was as new an immigrant as Zionists at the time, that were then legally purchasing property.
He objected to their presence and their choosing to do their own labor.
I’ll pretend I didn’t read that. I can’t expect any less from you.
He objected to … their choosing to do their own labor.
Is that the new politically correct term for a covenant barring anyone but a Jew from ever owning or working on land that was bought by Zionists? Or their refusal to hire Arab workers in their businesses? I’ll have to remember that one the next time you wax poetic about real estate covenants against Jews in the past. Which usually comes right before you do a 180 and insist that we should not focus on the past. You always manage to excuse yourself from that stricture.
What’s amazing is that Richard is serving up the same rationale used by Ruppin and others for excluding Arabs from the settlements, i.e. so the Jews can do their own work. This would be something to throw back in his face, if it wasn’t like talking to a cinderblock.
Moreso, andrew, this is the same rightwing logic that is wielded against poor Hispanic immigrants in the US (many of whom are decidedly more native to this continent than either Witty or myself). It is also, not coincidentally… the same rationale for purging Poland of Poles, among other locales in Europe, by You Know Who.
I work a menial job and it pisses me off seeing Hispanic people having to do janitor work in hotels and malls because I know their lives are being taken away by this work. And what I find amazing about the hefty blame on illegal immigration is that working Americans are supposed to hate their rich but somehow they can’t put two-and-two together. We still have a racial hierarchy even if it’s technically not legislated (It is for Native Americans).
i agree andrew, there is still lots of racism in the US, however that is different than institutionalized racism which breeds more and more racism. i think we are becoming less racist not more. the same cannot be said for israel.
>> The mufti was a hate filled disgusting man and it is impossible to know what the politics of Palestine might have been if not for his person. … He insisted that “when the sword talks, there is no need for words.”
Sometimes sword talk, like ethnic cleansing, is necessary to create “a good in the world”. It is likely, however, that at some point he would have come to the conclusion that sword talk is “currently not necessary”. This is something any Zio-supremacist can appreciate.
“But the Zionist demonization of this figure is a huge milestone on the Zionist path of hate, and the place of that photo at Yad Vashem is part of it.”
“. . .It is a low, despicable ploy.”
It is not nearly as low as suggesting that the Zionist movement was allied with the Nazis and that the Zionists caused the war by not boycotting the Germans.
It is a matter of fact that at one point at least the Zionist movement and the Nazis discovered a common interest in moving the European Jews into Palestine. This can’t be denied.
It would be absurd to claim that the Zionists “caused the war,” but then I am not aware that anyone has actually made this claim.
From www.palestineremembered.com:
A month after the Nazi pogrom against Germany’s Jews, famously known as Kristallnacht, Ben-Gurion provided an interesting mathematical formula for saving German Jewish kids. He stated in December 1938:
“If I knew it was possible to save all [Jewish] children of Germany by their transfer to England and only half of them by transferring them to Eretz-Yisrael, I would choose the latter—-because we are faced not only with the accounting of these [Jewish] children but also with the historical accounting of the Jewish People.” (Righteous Victims, p. 162)
That’s at least tacit cooperation with the holocaust.
And would someone please answer my question as to the place the Vichy government has in Yad Vashem? Many French under Vichy really helped the holocaust, far more extensively than Husseini. Far more than the Syrians or Lebanese under Vichy. And it wasn’t as if the French Jews were trying to take over France, expel the non-Jewish French, and establish a Jewish state in France.
I’m sure you could find pro-nazi U.S. and British political leaders too, and in other parts of the world. From what I hear the U.S. was somewhat supportive of the nazi destruction of the communist and leftist parties in Germany during the early stage of the regime.
That’s at least tacit cooperation with the holocaust.
Well Lynn, you should really work on your time-line. This statement (which is a huge ‘talking’ point for the anti-Israel/anti-Semite crowd) has never been proven. Even if it were true, it was allegedly said in 1938. The full impact of Nazi Germany’s genocide of the Jews wasn’t known to Ben-Gurion until well after.
yonira.
This statement (which is a huge ‘talking’ point for the anti-Israel/anti-Semite crowd) has never been proven.
The quote that lyn provided, which does in fact come from Benny Morris’s Righteous Victims. page 162, cites as its sources Tom Segev ( in The Seventh Million) and Yoteim Weitz. In the Seventh Million Segev gives the cite for the quote: Ben-Gurion at the Mapai CC, 7 Dec. 1938, LPA, 23/38.
The quote itself is not at all under any dispute, except among idiot hasbara sites who dispute the truth constantly and with mad abandon. However, Ben-Gurion’s personal biographer, Shabtai Teveth. did try to put a positive spin on the statement, while acknowledging its existence.
According to Segev, Teveth wrote “All he wanted to say was that the only possible deliverance for the Jewish people was in Palestine”.
However, Segev goes on to say that “Ben Gurion commented that “the human conscience”might bring various countries to open their doors to Jewish refugees from Germany. He saw this as a threat and warned: “Zionism is in danger!”"
Zionism did little to rescue European Jews unless they were considered “good human material” (a Zionist term of the day) and headed towards Palestine. They offered no help to those who wanted to go elsewhere, and even sent some Jews back to where they came when they became sick or a burden on the Yishv.
I think it’s Yonira who needs to check the timeline.
Why are so many people under the impression that things started in 1939? Germany had alread instituted the Nuremberg Laws which stripped Jews of their citizenship in 1935. Along with that was the Law for the Protection of German Blood and German Honor which amongst other things set forth that marraiges between Jews and citizens of Germany or kindred blood were forbidden. (Once again, it always amazes me how one can have to much hatred for something that is truly despicable, yet follow on a similar path while trying to teach lessons to the world).
There was also the Kindertransport which first began by transporting childen to England at the end of 1938. So just using plain logic, do you actually think that the parents of these children would send them off to a foreign land if they felt there was something not ominous coming. The foundation was already set for other things to come.
As regards Ben Gurion and his quote, he did, in fact, state “If I knew that it was possible to save all the children of Germany by transporting them to England, but only half of them by transporting them to Palestine, I would choose the second…..He also commented in the wake of the Kristallnacht pogroms that “the human conscience” might bring various countries to open their doors to Jewish refugees from Germany. He saw this as a threat and warned “Zionism is in danger.”
(Ahh, how Ben Gurion must have been in his glory when the United States turned away 800 Jewish refugees in 1939 before the outbreak of the war who had tried to escape Germany and were sent back to Europe. )
This Ben Gurion quote comes from Tom Segev’s book “The Seventh Million” which I am looking at right now on page 28. Segev leaves a footnote here which states that later on , Ben Gurion’s biographer made a great effort to put that statement in another light (for the obvious reasons).
The context of Ben-Gurion’s statement is obvious; he’s making the assumption that things would not turn out well for Jews in Europe. It’s a downright dirty lie to suggest that he meant anything else.
So if he was making the assumption that things would not turn out well for Jews in Europe, why did he proopse their children be left there rather than being sent to England where they woudl be safer?
hophmi, do you ever notice that your comments have no basis in fact?
Ben-Gurion knew that Palestine was not capable of taking all the Jewish refugees from Europe. And yet he discouraged rescue efforts that did not involve Palestine as a final destination. And the Zionist Agencies utilized selective immigration there, rejecting those Jews it did not want. In other words, if the Jewish Agency or the screening groups thought you might end up being a burden to the Yishuv, or if you didn’t possess a skill they wanted, your application was denied. (Britain set the number of immigrants allowed, but the Zionists were given the choice of who to give the immigration certificates to.) And if you got injured in Palestine, and became a burden, you ran the risk of being sent home.
From Etan Bloom’s doctoral dissertation on Dr. Arthur Ruppin, Father of the Zionist Settlements:
link to tau.ac.il
Ben-Gurion and the early Zionists cared about their abstract social construct of “the Jewish people”. Did they care about the individual Jew if he or she was of no benefit to their new construct? Not so much, if at all. This is why Ben-Gurion’s statement is so vile. He knew that Zionism would not or could not help these people and yet he inveighed against help coming to them from other sources and against money being spent on rescue instead of nation building in Palestine.
If you want to be proud of this vile eugenics, hophmi, go right ahead. But don’t kid yourself that this was done to benefit individual Jews in need.
Tree said:
“And the Zionist Agencies utilized selective immigration there, rejecting those Jews it did not want. In other words, if the Jewish Agency or the screening groups thought you might end up being a burden to the Yishuv, or if you didn’t possess a skill they wanted, your application was denied.”
This was the Zionist method of who was sent to the left and who was sent to the right.
Earlier, hophmi tried to minimize the role of the Stern Gang’ role in the Zionist political scene but it should be pointed out that his and the Stern Gang’s attempt to collaborate with the Nazis against the British, revealed in a letter sent to Hitler but apparently unanswered, elicited protests from holocaust survivors in Israel when the assassin of Count Folke Bernadotte and Lord Moyne (your boy, Yezernitsky AKA Shamir) was named to succeed Begin when that old terrorist resigned as prime minister in 1983.
I a letter that the Jerusalem Post mentioned in the 27th paragraph of their story on Shamir becoming PM, the survivors declared that it was a sacrilege that this would be collaborator with Hitler was not to be the head of the Jewish state. Needless to say, their protest was ignored.
In fact, the shabby treatment of survivors of the Nazi concentration camps upon their arrival in Israel after the war is a story that is rarely told but Tom Segev did it in 1949:The First Israelis.
I found a mention in some world fact binder about the JPost reporting in ’89 about the Stern Gang’s overture. That was a really random find. I guess the Israeli body politic slept through that revelation like their leaders collaborating outright with John Vorster.
“Earlier, hophmi tried to minimize the role of the Stern Gang’ role in the Zionist political scene . . .”
Yes, I’d say they were minor. They never had more than a few hundred members.
Yes, I’d say they were minor. They never had more than a few hundred members.
And yet they often coordinated their attacks with the Haganah or got approval from the Haganah for many of them. Deir Yassin was one such attack which received prior approval from the Haganah, even though the village had a non-aggression pact with the Haganah to which it was adhering, according to the Israeli archives. British operations in late June 1946 confiscated large quantities of documents from the Jewish Agency reputed to have connected the Agency with the Irgun and Lehi(Stern Gang) and had stored them in the King David Hotel. This was the motive behind the bombing of the Hotel in July 1946.
minor? you mean the way several hundred efficient well armed trained militants (terrorists /militia whatever) let loose on the streets of new jersey amount to nothing? whoops! you didn’t say several hundred did you? you said ‘a few hundred’ …just like wiki, how quaint.
can you do better ? source!?! it isn’t a couple hundred, we know that. so give me numbers before you rhetorically reduce them please.
Yes, the Lehi and Etzel were minor organizations with little following in the Yishuv. In the first Knesset, Herut, the party of Begin got 14 out of 120 seats. These organizations were supported by about 10% of the population. Have you heard of the Altelena incident?
link to en.wikipedia.org
Clearly, there was no love between the Haganah and the Irgun.
The Haganah gave the Irgun permission to attack Deir Yassin, but to commit a massacre? Of course not.
Several hundred out of a population of hundreds of thousands. It’s common knowledge that the Stern Gang was a tiny group. You say the Stern Gang is “not a couple hundred.” You give a source.
Another of you claims that the Stern Gang acted with the support of the Haganah, based on “British documents” that are conveniently not available.
I’d like a source for that.
“The Haganah gave the Irgun permission to attack Deir Yassin, but to commit a massacre? Of course not.”
When you are talking about a peaceable civilian town, there is no difference. The Haganah knew or should have known they were signing off on a war crime and a crime against humanity.
Another of you claims that the Stern Gang acted with the support of the Haganah, based on “British documents” that are conveniently not available.
I guess that must be me that you mean. Lehi’s (Stern Gang] connection to the Haganah is not based on destroyed British documents, but rather based on the words of Israelis. It’s based on the words of Menachem Begin, and others, and the fact that the Haganah, the Irgun and Lehi had formed the United Resistance Movement in 1945 to coordinate their anti-British activities. (That the URM existed is not at all in dispute in Israel.) According to Begin the Haganah did not just support the King David Hotel bombing, it was the unit that ordered the Irgun to implement it.
According to the Etzel (Irgun) website:
Operation Agatha, as the British called it, took the Yishuv by surprise, and achieved most of its objectives. A considerable amount of intelligence information was collected, and thousands of Jews were arrested and jailed in a special internment camp which had been prepared at Rafiah. In Jerusalem, British troops entered the Jewish Agency buildings and, after ransacking the offices and in particular the archives, confiscated a large number of documents. This material was loaded onto three trucks and taken to the King David Hotel in Jerusalem, which housed the government secretariat and the military command. The documents included cables, which clearly demonstrated the role of the Jewish Agency in the leadership of the United Resistance. Also found was the text of the agreement between the Haganah and the Irgun and Lehi, and cables approving Irgun and Lehi operations against the British in the framework of the United Resistance.
link to etzel.org.il
Those confiscated reams of documents were being held in the south wing of the King David Hotel. The only stated reason for the blowing up of the Hotel, was to destroy those documents. If it is “convenient” that they no longer exist, it was only so to the Zionist paramilitary groups that destroyed them.
Afterwords, because of the number of innocent civilians killed, the Jewish Agency and the Haganah had to disavow any knowledge of it and officially disband the URM. However, coordination between the three continued, albeit on a more informal and more clandestine manner. None of this is seriously contested in Israeli history.
Clearly, there was no love between the Haganah and the Irgun. The Haganah gave the Irgun permission to attack Deir Yassin, but to commit a massacre? Of course not.
The Haganah gave the Irgun and Lehi specific objectives to meet in that attack (such as holding the village and not abandoning it after the attack), most of which they failed, but refraining from killing the villagers was not one of those objectives. And at one point, since the two smaller groups had botched the job, the Haganah was called in with small mortar fire, which ended the small localized resistance in the village. After the Haganah reinforcements left, the two groups continued with their massacre.
In case you are trying to imply that the Haganah was “above” massacres, I would remind you of the numerous massacres that were commited during Haganah missions, some of them well before April 1948.
This, from Ilan Pappe, recounts a Haganah mission on December 18, 1947, four months before Deir Yassin.
This is from Pappe’s “The Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine.” I do not have the book with me now, so I can not cite you the page at this moment. But if you wish I can post it after I return home in 2 days. And I can provide you with numerous other instances of Hagana massacres.
Not sure Hitler was every interested in moving European Jews to Palestine Pots.
link to worldfuturefund.org
Source: Documents on German Foreign Policy 1918-1945, Series D, Vol XIII, London, 1964, pp.881 ff.
If he were interested, he certainly wouldn’t have said so on that public occasion.
But the Zionists were definitely interested and Hitler was willing to make a limited deal with them.
He could hardly have made the same deal for support from both the Arab Legion and the Stern Gang. It isn’t likely that these two parties would have been willing to join forces against the British.
The point is that the Stern Gang was willing to make the offer to Hitler, not the other way around.
Potsherd, are you talking about the Naftali Lubenchik contact w/ Germany in 1941? That was an attempt to continue the “Transfer Agreement” which had been transferring Germany’s Jews (and their $$$) to Palestine.
The Stern Gang made an offer to Hitler to try and save German Jews, a little different than what the Mufti and Hitler had planned.
You’re twisting history again, yonira. The Transfer Agreement only concerned transferring German Jewish money to Palestine. It was agreed upon by Ben-Gurion and had nothing to do with the Stern Gang. It said nothing about transferring Jews. The Stern Gang letter had nothing to do with the Transfer Agreement, but was attempting to set up an alliance with Germany. It agreed with the dispossession of European Jews, but wanted them all moved to Palestine (regardless of what they may have wanted.) Here’s the contents of the letter:
The evacuation of the Jewish masses from Europe is a precondition for solving the Jewish question; but this can only be made possible and complete through the settlement of these masses in the home of the Jewish people, Palestine, and through the establishment of a Jewish state in its historical boundaries …
The NMO, which is well-acquainted with the goodwill of the German Reich government and its authorities towards Zionist activity inside Germany and towards Zionist emigration plans, is of the opinion that:
1. Common interests could exist between the establishment of a New Order in Europe in conformity with the German concept, and the true national aspirations of the Jewish people as they are embodied by the NMO.
2. Cooperation between the new Germany and a renewed volkish-national Hebrium would be possible and
3. The establishment of the historical Jewish state on a national and totalitarian basis, and bound by a treaty with the German Reich, would be in the interest of a maintained and strengthened future German position of power in the Near East.
Proceeding from these considerations, the NMO in Palestine, under the condition the above-mentioned national aspirations of the Israeli freedom movement are recognised on the side of the German Reich, offers to actively take part in the war on Germany’s side.
This offer by the NMO … would be connected to the military training and organising of Jewish manpower in Europe, under the leadership and command of the NMO. These military units would take part in the fight to conquer Palestine, should such a front be decided upon.
The indirect participation of the Israeli freedom movement in the New Order in Europe, already in the preparatory stage, would be linked with a positive-radical solution of the European Jewish problem in conformity with the above-mentioned national aspirations of the Jewish people. This would extraordinarily strengthen the moral basis of the New Order in the eyes of all humanity.
If you’d stop reading discredited hasbara cites and start reading some decent history books, you’d make a more useful addition to this discussion. As it is, you simply attack and spin as if you are rooting for your favorite TV wrestler.
It was a great deal more than that. The German Jews were a minor consideration. The major one was an alliance between Germany and a Zionist state in Palestine against the British occupation.
It should also be noted that at this time in history, the Zionist organization, through the Jewish Agency, which controlled who got immigration certificates into Palestine, had a screening process with regards to those Jews who wished to come to Palestine. Those who were sick or where considered to be non-productive members of society were turned down. This had been going on since 1918 and continued up until 1950 with the enactment of the Israeli Law of Return.
I must note that I misspoke in my reference to the Haavara (Transfer)Agreement having nothing to do with the transfer of German Jews. It was primarily about the transfer of money from the bank accounts of German Jews to the New Yishuv in Palestine in the form of German industrial equipment, with the Yishuv eventually returning a portion of that money to its rightful owner at some point after he arrived in Palestine. So, in that respect the agreement did concern emigration to Palestine. Its main value to the Zionist organizations was the influx of capital, as Germany was already in the process of encouraging its Jews to leave Germany, and Palestine was one of the places it already allowed and encouraged them to go prior to the agreement.
The rest of what I mentioned in my post at 5:42pm is correct.
Tree, a correction to your recounting of the Haavara Agreement. It did not transfer the money of German Jews to Palestine. Their money was used to buy German goods which were than shipped on Nazi flag ships to Palestine where the goods were offloaded and sold by the German Jews who had purchased them for what they could get. As I understand no one was allowed to take any large sums of money out Germany. In the end an estimated 150,000 of Germany’s Jews who were taken to the camps perished, the vast majority having found a way either to Palestine, the US or elsewhere.
You’re twisting history again, yonira. The Transfer Agreement only concerned transferring German Jewish money to Palestine.
Where do you guys come up with this crap?
link to en.wikipedia.org
I know, I know, all lies, Wikipedia is Zionist Occupied Territory, yada yada.
Tree, with all due respect, you didn’t misspeak. You told us something you believed to be true because you read it from some anti-Israel/anti-Jewish ‘scholar’ and took it as fact.
I know, I know, all lies, Wikipedia is Zionist Occupied Territory, yada yada.
so why not use another source then?
Yonira,
If you’d bother to read my post above, I already acknowledged before your post that I had misspoken about the Agreement. However, your insistence that the Stern Gang proposal was a continuation of the same agreement is totally wrong and yet you do not acknowledge this, nor do you acknowledge that the Ben-Gurion quote, that you insist is suspect, exists in the Israeli archives, is acknowledged by everyone (including Israelis and Ben-Gurion’s personally chosen biographer )except the silly hasbara sites you frequent. Why is it impossible for you to admit when you have wrong information?
Wikipedia is hit and miss on many things besides Israel/Palestine. If the information can be confirmed by external sources, then I consider it suitable for linkage, but if not then one must take everything written there with a grain of salt, and the knowledge that the information could be incomplete, slanted or just plain wrong. The Wikipedia entry on the Haavara Agreement is in various parts all three of these. Number one, not all German Jews that emigrated to Palestine, came under the Haavara Agreement, yet the Wikipedia entry lists 60,000 that did. However, the estimates of the total number of German Jewish emigrants cited by Israeli historians puts the number at 40,000 -50,000(approximately 10% of those who managed to escape Germany prior to WWII), so the number in Wikipedia is a falsity. Tom Segev puts the number that came under the Haavara Agreement at 20,000. Nearly twice as many German Jews came without the Agreement as came because of it. One of the principle reasons the Nazis agreed to the arrangement was because it helped to break the American Jewish-led boycott of German goods.
One significance of the agreement was that it allowed the German Jewish emigrant to remove more of his money from Germany than he would otherwise have been able to do, thus possibly encouraging him to emigrate to Palestine rather than to some other place, which was a primary interest of the Zionists. Only 3% of the German Jews chose to take advantage of the Agreement, however, but it did add to the coffers of the Jewish Agency, which was nearly bankrupt at the time. The Zionist governmental agencies got a cut of the German Jew’s money, as did the Nazis of course. This of course was its other significance to the Zionists, which was my point, poorly phrased in my original post.
Tom Segev, The Seventh Million, page 22.
The Wikipedia entry fails to mention that the emigres lost 35 percent of their money in the bargain, and implies that the full amount was returned to the emigres when this was not the case. This is a major omission on its part.
I also found this to be a highly slanted, and false, statement in the Wikipedia entry:
German support for Jewish emigration was detested by the Arab community, which had traditionally allied itself with Germany.
Its false on its face, as the Arabs sided with the British against the Turks and Germany in WWI, and makes no sense to say such a thing other than to slyly imply that the Arabs were all Nazi sympathizers.
I’d give Wikipedia a D on this entry. They’ve done better on occasion, but as I say, its hit and miss. Verify before believing everything you read there.
No, yonira, I read it from Israeli historical sources, using Israeli archival material. If you think the material is anti-Jewish, then the Israeli archives are anti-Jewish.
My point was that the agreement was more important to the Zionists of that time for the money it brought into their coffers ( and the pre-screened emigrants it lured to Palestine) than it was for rescuing German Jews. I suggest you read Tom Segev’s The Seventh Million or Yosef Grodzinsky’s In the Shadow of the Holocaust or Etan Bloom’s doctoral thesis on Arthur Ruppin. Or are all these Israeli historians “anti-Jewish” in your head? I’m not sure how Bloom or Grodzinsky self-identify but Segev considers himself a Zionist. If you’ve gone so far out on a limb to call fellow Zionists “anti-Jewish” maybe you should reconsider your prejudices and step back to rationality. Truth in this case happens to paint the early Zionists in a very bad light. There is nothing “anti-Jewish” about that, unless you believe in the fairytale that Jews are somehow different/better than the rest of humanity and every Jew is a saint.
yonira is uneducated and doesn’t even know what a reliable source would be
thanks, tree
link to en.wikipedia.org
“While Wikipedia policy requires articles to have a neutral point of view, it is not immune from attempts by outsiders (or insiders) with an agenda to place a spin on articles. [...]
In April 2008, the Boston-based Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting in America (CAMERA) organized a campaign to correct perceived Israel-related biases and inconsistencies in Wikipedia.[97][98]
[...]
In 2010, following a few incidents of bad press after the 2010 Gaza flotilla raid, a right-wing[100] Israeli organisation Yisrael Sheli said it intends to “revise” Wikipedia based on “national and ethnic interests.”[101] They offered a course entitled “Zionist Editing for Wikipedia.” They said the first seminar of 80 students was a success and they planned to offer more such courses.[102]
Following the announcement, the head of Palestinian Journalists Syndicate said there were plans to setup a counter group to ensure the Palestinian view is presented online as the “next regional war will be [a] media war.”[100]“
The accusation of Ben Gurion and of the Stern Gang is that they preferred Zionism to Jewish life.
That is a falsehood. They preferred Jewish life in Israel to persecuted life in Germany, Poland, Hungary, Rumania, Russia, and to prejudicially subordinate life in France, England even, US even.
Again, this is a letter sent by a teeny-tiny organization that was by definition out of the mainstream. It means historical bubcus today.
That is a falsehood. They preferred Jewish life in Israel to persecuted life in Germany, Poland, Hungary, Rumania, Russia, and to prejudicially subordinate life in France, England even, US even.
Only for the select few whom they considered “good human material”:
pg 210:
link to tau.ac.il
eee (and perhaps Yonira, Hophni and others as well),
I see you as someone who is sincere and concerned about Israel’s welfare, but I think you need to get out of the weeds of arguing about all the details, take a deep breath and have a look at the overall picture. You need to ask yourself two questions about your personal involvement in this issue:
1. Am I supporting moral conduct on the part of the past and present Israeli governments?
2. Is my defense and support of such conduct enhancing or harming Israel’s future?
There are a lot of Jews and non-Jews who care about Israel who have concluded that Israel’s conduct is demonstrably immoral and that the current course of the Israeli government is suicidal. It’s OK to get down in the dirt and argue about the presence or absence of “the” in UNR 242, but you first need to decide whether you are fighting for the right side and actually helping Israel. I don’t think you are.
I think there are a lot of sincere people on your side of the fence that are so focused on defending Israel from criticism that they never get around to looking at whether a good portion of the criticism is valid, and whether supporting and defending the indefensible may be doing great harm to Israel.
I think the reality of what Israeli and non-Israeli Jews need to face up to is that Zionism as practiced was controlled and led from the beginning by hard core zealots that were and remain determined to create a Jewish state in as much of mandate Palestine as possible with as few Arabs left over as possible, and who will go to almost any extreme to accomplish these goals. Begin, Sharon and Netanyahu are the most modern versions of this mold. These folks were/are racist to the core and supporting them can only lead to the destruction of Israel and the failure of a more progressive Zionist dream that I suspect you support and yearn for.
Eee, you cannot support these guys and support Israel. They are the problem; they are the threat to Israel; not the Syrians, Egyptians, Jordanians, Iranians or Turks; certainly not the Palestinians.
You talk about the Second Intifada as if it occurred in a vacuum. Switch places: if Israelis were in the Palestinians’ shoes; after 43 years of escalating occupation, oppression and degradation would you not be tempted to try or at least support violence and even terrorism as a means to get the invaders off your neck and out of your land?
You need to take some time off at this end of year to reflect on what you are trying to accomplish and whether supporting hard core Zionist racists and their policies is morally justifiable and helping Israel’s future. I think you will conclude it is neither moral nor helpful and that you will join the growing ranks of formerly strong, conservative Zionist supporters, like Jeffrey Goldberg who are rapidly concluding that Israel has become a ship of fools captained by zealous idiots with no idea of where they are going.
While you frequently encounter anger here at your repetitive party line-like responses, you are not among enemies. There are a lot of thoughtful, bright people in this group who have come full circle after a lot of research and soul searching. They have concluded, as I hope you will too, that Palestine must provide a homeland to both Arabs and Jews and that Israel and Israelis will not be safe and secure until their Arab brethren are treated as equals and given the very limited 22 percent portion of mandate Palestine they have been asking for since 2001.
Gil Maguire
Gil,
It is not everyone day someone addresses ‘us’ on here without a slew of ad-hominem attacks.
Thank you for the response. I can’t talk for the other Zionist trolls on Mondoweiss, but I honestly deplore the actions of the current Netanyahu government, deplore the occupation, and the ill treatment of the Palestinians.
That being said, I don’t think a one state solution will do anything to create some utopia in the ME, it will create more bloodshed. The youth on both side are brainwashed to hate each other, to think that they can live peacefully without some interim 2 state solution is laughable.
I defend Israel on Mondoweiss because I truly believe that there is more to it than just hating the Zionist regime. Israel has become the latest (and most convincing) patsy for hatred of Jews. I just responded to a post on here today which said that virtually all anti-semitism in the world today is because of Israel, that is just ridiculous.
yonira, I take strong exception to your remark:
You are speaking of me and Jerry Slater, and are speaking neither accurately nor truthfully. Your comment there was: “Jesus Christ man, and what was driving anti-Semitism before the creation of Israel? Are you saying if it weren’t for Israel it would just disappear? Do you guys realize how delusional you are?”, and my response was as follows:
To make matters worse, yonira, you now add to that dishonesty with an accusation of anti-Semitism, suggesting that Jerry and I were so motivated. At least from an integrity standpoint, you have nowhere to go but up.
yonira, neither Jerry Slater nor I said that all anti-Semitism was a reaction to Israel’s crimes, and neither of us believe that “if it weren’t for Israel it would just disappear.”
But you are aware, that that was exactly the position of many Zionists, that once there would be a Jewish state, antisemitism would disappear? Are you? I won’t bore you with quotations. That was also the reason, why they thought it not worthwhile to fight antisemitism, after all it would disappear once “the Jews” had a nation of their own.
Not too long ago, I read George R. Whyte’s book about the Dreyfus affair, I think his chronology shows that antisemitism can and must be fought not just be “the Jews”. And surely a pure Jewish enclave isn’t the solution.
Its true Yonira, Jerry and David only said “most”, not “all”.
By “most”, it is unclear if they meant 51% or 99.8%.
Perhaps they can clarify.
I expect they each have different estimates.
Sorry David but you seem to be rationalizing anti-Semitism as a valid response to anything that Israel does that others find objectionable. Since you brought up African Americans, your argument is equivalent to someone saying well there wouldn’t be so much racism if African Americans would just get off welfare. You need to understand that categorizing any group in such a fashion should never be excused and in doing so you only add to the problem.
Gil, you are misinterpreting. I was not rationalizing anti-Semitism and never said anti-Semitism was a “valid response” to anything. I was arguing that Israel’s misdeeds, purportedly committed on behalf of all Jews, incites anti-Semitism.
David, thanks for your reply,
Firstly, I don’t recall Israel claiming they were attacking Gaza (for example) in the name of all Jews, but I get your point.
Secondly, What is bigotry if it is not holding an entire group responsible for the actions of a few. Max Blumenthal, and by extension Philip Weiss, seem to be experts in this. Max’s new stock in trade is taking racists comments by a few people and claiming it represents all of Israel everyone that isn’t an anti-Zionist.
Thirdly how can you look at the comments on this thread and believe that the people commenting here trying to minimize the holocaust or making the Zionists partially responsible for it would somehow feel differently if not for Israels “misdeeds”. For most of them Israel primary misdeed is it’s existence.
Gil, Israel implicitly does everything in the name of all Jews, since it claims to be the state of all Jews. When the US acts, it does so in the name of all Americans. Individual Americans, or Jews, are free to dissent, of course, but should it surprise anyone when anti-American feeling sweeps the globe when our government does something terrible?
Your accusation against Max is unpersuasive. He has recorded some Israelis engaged in disgustingly racist behavior and he opines that this is not just an isolated problem but a more widespread and pervasive one. He never holds all Israelis responsible. I think he is right, but you can argue otherwise, and say that racism is not commonplace in Israel. Given recent well-publicized events in the Knesset, the clergy, and even among the citizenry, you don’t have much of a case.
Finally, you talk about those on this thread who try to “minimize the holocaust or making the Zionists partially responsible for it.” Who minimizes the event? Perhaps a tiny minority of those who comment here. As for Zionist collaboration with the Nazis, there certainly is evidence of it; the significance of it, and whether it had any effect on events, is disputed. The larger point is that there is a great effort to blame the Palestinian people for the actions of the Mufti during the war, and it is reasonable to raise Zionist collaboration in response. I might also add that John Vorster of South Africa, racist to the core, was imprisoned by the Brits after the war for his Nazi collaboration, but 30 years later, when PM of apartheid SA, was given a warm reception on a visit to Israel.
As for real anti-Semitism out there, my opinion is that if Israel kept within its borders, did not regularly attack its neighbors, and did not exercise harsh military rule over millions, it would incite little anti-Semtism. Then again, I do share the view that the very existence of the Jewish State is indeed problematical. You seem rather new at this site, but I can direct you to Entry No. 5 of the recently published series for my reasoning.
great comment, david,thank you
I’ve personally been educated by Max’s films.
But, in order for me to be educated rather than only offended, Ive had to wade through his snarky editorializing.
It hinders my, and likely others’, ability to hear his point.
Gil,
You seem to be under the illusion that this is an isolated incident. Have you not read reports of settlers attackign Palestinians while the IDF or Israeli police stand idly by?
Have you not seen the coverage of the demonstration by Zionist extremists through an Arab town, accompanied not only by Israeli police for protection, but undercover Israeli secret service agents who pounced on any Arabs who confronted the demonstration?
The Israeli government’s excuse was that the demonstration was “legal”, therefore the rights of the participants had to be protected.
And yet, those participating in peaceful demonstrations against settlements, or the wall are arrested.
If this is not proof of institutionalized extremism and racism, then what is Gil?
Meanwhile,
Who have you educated Witty? You’re not exactly a fast learner, and have demonstrated that you are impervious to information.
Sorry Shingo, But you are wrong. Just because an incident is not isolated doesn’t mean it is representative of the general population. And again anyone who makes it seem like it is is a bigot. Protecting demonstrators even those with with unpopular views is not institutionalized racism. I haven’t seen the video. Do I doubt that there is racism in Israel, absolutely not. Do I know there are racist politicians there of course. But first of all anecdotal evidence is not evidence of systematic or institutionalized racism.
You will find the same exact things in almost every country western and eastern alike. I think in this regard Israel is probably worse then some and better then most.
It’s certainly not as institutionalized as as it is in Gaza where men dressed up as cartoon characters on children’s shows talk about killing Jews to children. Have you seen that video Shingo?
strawman gil
Just because an incident is not isolated doesn’t mean it is representative of the general population. And again anyone who makes it seem like it is is a bigot.
shingo addressed institutionalized extremism and racism. just answer his question please.
If this is not proof of institutionalized extremism and racism, then what is Gil?
assuming you know what ‘institutionalized extremism and racism’ means. would you like examples of it, say in the education system? are you under the illusion the government of israel respects the rights of all the people it rules over equally? this is an apartheid government gil. millions of the people the goi rules over have no rights or citizenship or representation in their governing body.
isn’t witty supposed to be on a diet?
The evidence that Israel is deeply steeped in racism comes from the Israeli reactions to this single racist incident – the wave of defensive excuses it has provoked.
When Don Imus called a group of college students “nappy headed hos,” there was a great upwelling of condemnation of his remark, not a wave of excuses. It was clear to everyone that it was an inexcusable racist statement that should be condemned.
Not so in Israel, where the racists are defended, and that proves the point.
No Gil, observing a pattern of behavior, with little evidence to the contary is not bigotry.
Protecting demonstrators with with unpopular views is fine so long as it is applied consistently. When it benefits one group and discriminates against another, then it is indeed institutionalized racism.
You’re either ignorant on in denial. You can;t get more institutionalized than when racism is codified into the state’s laws.
Here’s just a few examples.
1. 93% of the land is held in trust by the Jewish National Fund for the use of Jews wherever they may be in the world. That means the Palestinians (20% of the population) are only entitled to use 3% of the land. No provision to accommodate natural growth.
2. ID papers are coded to differentiate Jews from Muslims
3. Intense airport security, where all items are removed from the cases of Arabs, not Jews.
4. Demolition of Arab homes
5. Refusal of permits to rebuild them
6. Prohibitions on Arab land purchases and the resulting overcrowding in Arab towns
7. Re architecting roads and bridges so that only Jews can travel on them
8. Gross neglect of infrastructure and services such a water, electricity, clinics and schools, especially in the Negev.
9. Exclusion of Arab workers from wealth generating sectors of the economy
10. Firing workers who speak Arab rather than Hebrew
11. Diverting or manipulating water supplies
12. Erasure of Arab presence and history by building parks and forests over Arab villages
13. Desecrating a Palestinian cemetery to build a Museum of tolerance
14. Removing former Arab place names from maps and roads.
15. Arab school curriculums are rewritten to remove Arab history and replace it with the Zionist history.
Now tell me which Western country has such laws and conventions?
I doubt whether the occupants of the Warsaw Ghetto read children’s books glorifying the bravery of their captors either Gil.
You’re either ignorant on in denial.
or being disingenuous.
Indeed in Israel it is different, Gil. There men don’t dress up as cartoon characters and talk about killing Jews to children. They dress up in Israeli army uniforms and actually kill children.
I would also add to the list that Israel’s Law of Return giving privileged rights to Jews is based on the Nazi Nuremberg Laws which had deprived Jews of their rights, all based on racist criteria defining who is a Jew. Would anyone dare to say that the Nuremberg Laws were not racist??
Also, there is no such thing as an “Israeli” nationality but a multitude of nationalities that make up the citizens of Israel and how Israel defines them. One of those nationalities is Jewish (yes Jewish is a nationality according to Israel). In other words, someone who meets the racist criteria of who Israel defines as Jewish and lives in Brooklyn has more rights than anyone who is already a citizen of Israel but who happens to be non-Jewish which refers mostly to the Arab population.
The ID cards by the way are coded to differentiate Jews from everyone else regardless of whether they are Muslims or not.
I did answer his question annie now answer mine . Is Israel more or less racist then most of the other govt’s in the Mid East or even the west ?
If this is not proof of institutionalized extremism and racism, then what is Gil?
racism is institutionalized in israel and no you have not answered his question. just a copy paste will do.
Is Israel more or less racist then most of the other govt’s in the Mid East or even the west ?
there’s more institutionalized racism in israel than any other country i am aware of on the planet at this time.
an after your copy paste i’ll respond to you again on this matter, maybe.
Jeffrey , so glad you responded I noticed below that Marleen had some questions regarding the Nuremberg laws and how Jews are claasified. I know you are something of an expert in this regard having heard you on a Pacifica broadcast explaining how Ruppert Murdock was really a Jew and how you had done research with showed he did indeed have Jewish blood. I already directed her to your web site JTR but perhaps you could give her a personal explanation.
That didn’t make the whole county racist though did it ?
“I would also add to the list that Israel’s Law of Return giving privileged rights to Jews is based on the Nazi Nuremberg Laws which had deprived Jews of their rights, all based on racist criteria defining who is a Jew. Would anyone dare to say that the Nuremberg Laws were not racist?? ”
Why do you think that might be? Could it have something to do making sure these Jews had a place to go post-Holocaust? Just possibly?
David,
As for real anti-Semitism out there, my opinion is that if Israel kept within its borders, did not regularly attack its neighbors, and did not exercise harsh military rule over millions, it would incite little anti-Semtism.
Forget inciting even “little anti-Semitism.” It would have none of that. It would have had the world’s love, which it has lost and is not getting back.
In every country in the world that has had war within its borders in the last 100 years (that leaves out Canada and the US) Israel is now a pariah. You hear it among the rich in Mexico, Malaysia, Australia, France, and Germany too. I’ve heard Latin Americans drip with disdain. Behind closed doors, Israel has no respect, and its leaders are ridiculed as low-rent commoners, gangsters, quasi-nouveau-riche with no class and insufficient international savoire-faire to run a first-world country, like dealing with your country-bumpkin cousin who thinks if he puts on a fancy suit and a pinky-ring, and announces his bank account — or his IQ — in a boasting voice, it makes him a gentleman.
You’re impervious to evidence it seems.
How about his?
Segregation of Jews and Arabs in 2010 Israel is almost absolute
link to haaretz.com
Israeli Education Ministry Approves New ‘whites-only’ Settlement School
link to imemc.org
link to m.smh.com.au
I’ll let Henry Siegman, formerly national director of the American Jewish Congress, answer that.
link to m.smh.com.au
MRW, i agree with what you’ve said except for the last part of this:
It would have had the world’s love, which it has lost and is not getting back.
time heals and people do forgive and forget. i would like nothing more than to love israel. someday, just keep all the possibilities open. visualize peace and forgiveness. really.
One Holocaust deserves another, is that it, hophmi?
The argument “tu quoque” is a fallacy, Gil.
Try again.
Annie,
It is not going to get the unadorned love that it had at one point. Will never happen. They squandered it; it was a unique situation that they blew.
Since it wants to be a nation, it is going to have to operate as a mature entity. Once that happens, it will garner respect, then attachments can grow as people (individually) see fit. But it will never have that blanket approval it was once capable of achieving.
Watching as the news of this event slowly leaks out in the Israeli press. Typical reaction: “It’s just a few kids, who cares? You’re just using this incident to bash Israel.”
I’m pretty sure that in the US, if a group of older black women were visiting a museum and a school group started in calling them, “Niggers,” the reaction would not be “It’s just a few kids, who cares?”
And I see GilGamesh here making the same lame argument.
Actually you won’t see GilGamesh making any more arguments here. It seems the policy here is to only allow ideas and arguments that Mr Weiss and or his moderators deem acceptable. token zionist are allowed but only if they don’t ask questions that are to difficult. I want to thank you all for only furthering my view that you are really only interested in propaganda and not in fostering and in fact afraid of any real discussion. I am thinking of doing my own feel the hate video on you tube with quotes form this site. So keep up the good work. you should be seeing yourself on youtube soon.
please remove me from any future lists unless you have the guts to admit why my posts were taken down.