Despite global disgust, Netanyahu doubles down on claim that Hitler got idea of Final Solution from a Palestinian

Israel/Palestine
and on 200 Comments

News sites around the world today are talking about Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s assertion in a speech yesterday that Hitler didn’t want to kill the Jews, just expel them, till he was convinced to exterminate them by the Palestinian leader, Haj Amin al-Husseini, the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem. The criticism is so universal, and angry, that the remarks look to be a landmark in Netanyahu’s cynicism; they draw back the curtain for the world on his refusal to sincerely address Palestinians aspirations for freedom today.

Yet, in the face of the criticism Netanyahu is doubling down on his contention that Palestinians incited the holocaust. Here is what he said today before leaving to Berlin:

My intention was not to absolve Hitler of his responsibility, but rather to show that the forefathers of the Palestinian nation, without a country and without the so-called ‘occupation’, without land and without settlements, even then aspired to systematic incitement to exterminate the Jews.

Meanwhile, Germany says it has no idea what Netanyahu is talking about.

Here is the speech to the World Zionist Organization, in which Netanyahu relates the ten biggest lies told about Israel. One lie is that Israel intends to destroy the Al-Aqsa mosque in Jerusalem. He says this lie has a long pedigree, going back to the mufti. The relevant portion begins at 2:55.

Here’s the passage:

My grandfather came to this land in 1920 and he landed in Jaffa, and very shortly after he landed he went to the immigration office in Jaffa. And a few months later it was burned down by marauders. These attackers, Arab attackers, murdered several Jews, including our celebrated writer Brenner.

And this attack and other attacks on the Jewish community in 1920, 1921, 1929, were instigated by a call of the Mufti of Jerusalem Haj Amin al-Husseini, who was later sought for war crimes in the Nuremberg trials because he had a central role in fomenting the final solution. He flew to Berlin. Hitler didn’t want to exterminate the Jews at the time, he wanted to expel the Jews. And Haj Amin al-Husseini went to Hitler and said, “If you expel them, they’ll all come here.” “So what should I do with them?” he asked. He said, “Burn them.” And he was sought in, during the Nuremberg trials for prosecution. He escaped it and later died of cancer, after the war, died of cancer in Cairo. But this is what Haj Amin al-Husseini said. He said, “The Jews seek to destroy… the al-Aqsa Mosque.”

The remarks are a huge embarrassment. Even Israeli leaders are characterizing them as “shameful,” according to the Times of Israel.

An overwhelming majority of Holocaust historians reject the notion that Husseini planted the idea of a “Final Solution” for Europe’s Jews in Hitler’s mind.

The Guardian says the speech has drawn a storm of criticism with many saying that Netanyahu is trivializing the Holocaust.

India Today says the speech has stirred up trouble for Netanyahu, and quotes Saeb Erekat:

It is a sad day in history when the leader of the Israeli government hates his neighbour so much that he is willing to absolve the most notorious war criminal in history, Adolf Hitler, of the murder of six million Jews,” Saeb Erekat, the Palestine Liberation Organisation’s secretary general, said.

“Mr Netanyahu should stop using this human tragedy to score points for his political end,” said Erekat, the chief Palestinian negotiator with the Israelis.

Ali Abunimah says that Netanyahu is practicing Holocaust denial and seeking to “whitewash Hitler.”

Scott Roth characterizes this as an ad hoc historical theory.

The philosophical underpinnings of Israel r intellectually & morally bankrupt. This is why we see these sort of ad hoc historical theories.

CJ Werleman cracks:

Netanyahu blames Palestinians – not Nazis – for Holocaust. Somewhere in Hell, Hitler high-fives the Devil.

Knesset member Ahmad Tibi had perhaps the best line in reference to Netanyahu’s race baiting before the last Israeli elections:

It was the mufti who rented the buses that took Arabs to the polls in droves

Max Blumenthal points out that Netanyahu has peddled this theory before, in 2009 speech. Netanyahu:

Eichmann’s deputy, Dieter Wisliceny, provided the following chilling testimony at Nuremberg: “The Mufti played a role in the decision to destroy the Jews of Europe. The importance of his role cannot be ignored. The Mufti repeatedly proposed to the authorities with whom he was in contact, first and foremost Hitler, Ribbentrop and Himmler, to destroy the European Jews. He saw in that an appropriate solution to the Palestinian question”. Wisliceny even provided hearsay evidence that the Mufti was directly involved in the Final Solution. “The Mufti was one of the initiators of the methodical destruction of the Jews of Europe and was a partner and consultant to Eichmann and Hitler on how to execute the plan. He was one of Eichmann’s best friends and constantly pushed him to speed up the destruction. With my own ears,” he said, “I heard him say that he visited the gas chambers of Auschwitz anonymously in the company of Eichmann”.

Ladies and Gentlemen,

As opposed to the things being said by Iran’s representatives and others, the Zionist leaders did not use the Holocaust to destroy the Palestinian national movement. On the contrary, the most senior Palestinian leader at the time, the Mufti Haj Amin al-Husseini preached and acted to implement the Holocaust in order to destroy the Zionist movement. It almost worked.

The Times of Israel quotes Tom Segev disputing Netanyahu’s history:

the notion that Hitler needed to be convinced to exterminate the Jews was “entirely absurd.” He stressed that “one can surely say that [Husseini] was a war criminal, but one cannot say Hitler needed his advice.”

Segev, born in Jerusalem to parents who escaped Nazi Germany in 1933, further stressed that by the time Husseini and Hitler met in 1941, the annihilation of the Jews had already begun. In fact, hundreds of thousands of Jews had been killed by the Nazis and their collaborators by the time of the meeting.

Here is another sign of how the speech is blowing up in Netanyahu’s face. From the Huffington Post’s Jessica Schulberg, on Israeli ambassador Ron Dermer’s claim:

Dermer says if US spent 1/10 the time worrying about Palestinian incitement as “Jews building apartments in Jerusalem” things would be diff

Israelis are trying to change the subject.

About Adam Horowitz

Adam Horowitz is Co-Editor of Mondoweiss.net.

Other posts by .


About Philip Weiss

Philip Weiss is Founder and Co-Editor of Mondoweiss.net.

Other posts by .


Posted In:

200 Responses

  1. Bandolero
    October 21, 2015, 11:19 am

    First German State TV news “ARD Tagesschau” published an article harshly critical with Netanyahus Holocaust comments.

    In short, the ARD first says the leader of Yad Vashem says Netanyahu is simply wrong, because the Holocaust started before Hitler met Amin al-Husseini. The British Guardian has this argument, too:

    Among those questioning Netanyahu’s interpretation of history was Prof Dan Michman, the head of the Institute of Holocaust Research at Bar-Ilan University and head of the International Institute for Holocaust Research at Yad Vashem. He said that while Hitler did indeed meet the mufti, this happened after the Final Solution began.

    Yad Vashem’s chief historian, Prof Dina Porat, told the Israeli news website Ynet that Netanyahu’s claims were incorrect: “You cannot say that it was the mufti who gave Hitler the idea to kill or burn Jews. It’s not true. Their meeting occurred after a series of events that point to this.”

    Further the ARD quotes the German government spokesman rejecting Netanyahus false claims. And then the ARD quotes the Israeli historian Moshe Zimmermann calling Netanyahu a Holocaust denier, who does so as a dirty trick to blame arabs for the Holocaust. Strong stuff, I never before heard German state TV criticizing an Israeli leader as a Holocaust denier.

    Vor seinem Abflug hat der israelische Ministerpräsident noch ein ganz anderes Diskussionsthema hinterlassen. Kurz zusammengefasst: Die Muslime seien schuld am Holocaust. Netanyahu sagte vor den 1700 Delegierten des Zionistischen Weltkongresses, der damalige Großmufti von Jerusalem habe Adolf Hitler erst zum Massenmord an den europäischen Juden gebracht.

    Zitat von Regierungssprecher Steffen Seibert

    “Ich kann für die Bundesregierung sagen, dass wir Deutsche insgesamt die Entstehungsgeschichte des mörderischen Rassenwahns der Nationalsozialisten, der in den Zivilisationsbruch der Shoah führte, sehr genau kennen. (…) Ich sehe keinen Grund, dass wir unser Geschichtsbild in irgendeiner Weise ändern. Wir wissen um die ureigene deutsche Verantwortung an diesen Menschheitsverbrechen.”

    Dafür bekommt er Widerspruch von der Leiterin der Holocaust-Gedenkstätte Jad Vaschem in Jerusalem. Netanyahus Äußerung sei schlicht falsch, ein Treffen Hitlers mit Großmufti Haj Amin al-Husseini habe viel später stattgefunden. Auch der israelische Historiker Moshe Zimmermann ist empört: “Damit reiht sich Netanyahu in eine lange Reihe von Holocaust-Leugnern ein. Er tut etwas Unerhörtes. Er schiebt die Verantwortung Nazi-Deutschlands für die Shoa, für die Vernichtung der Juden, dem Mufti und der arabischen Welt zu. Das ist ein mieser Trick, mit dem er die arabische Welt anschwärzt.”

    Source: http://www.tagesschau.de/ausland/israel-netanyahu-103.html

    Also the ARD quotes Isaac Herzog who said that Netanyahu as son of a historian must know history better, so the ARD implies intentional lying about the Holocaust on Netanyahu’s side.

    • Emory Riddle
      October 21, 2015, 11:25 am

      Now Bibi is in trouble.

      He is going against the narrative that, since the Holocaust was the worse crime against humanity ever committed in the history of the Planet, Hitler and his fellow Nazis are the worst and most evil people of all time.

      He is trying to shift that title to the Palestinians and, in doing so, is absolving Hitler of much of the guilt (Hell, extermination was not his idea, he was pushed into it by the Palestinians who, after all, held so much sway over the German Nazis).

      Some of the real crazies in Israel may go right along with him, but his ass is now in a sling with most Jews I would suspect. He has crossed his target audience.

    • pabelmont
      October 21, 2015, 12:12 pm

      Bibi (or any other politician, anywhere, anytime) intentionally lie? Oh no! And lie about the (oh so sacred) holocaust in Israel? Oh, my heart cries out to deny this accusation of holocaust revisionism. And especially as the Zios treat any sort of holocaust revisionism as holocaust denial (you know, if you say — but of course I don’t say — that it was not 6 million, but only 5.7 million) you are accused of anti-semitism.

      So Herzog is — in effect — accusing the Bibster of being an antisemite.

      • Emory Riddle
        October 21, 2015, 1:21 pm

        Yet when the 5 million “others” who died in the Holocaust are routinely left out of Holocaust memorials and discussions, there is never any accusations of Holocaust Denial or Revisionism.

        Funny business this Holocaust Denial.

      • kbro
        October 21, 2015, 1:49 pm

        NUTANDYAHU ‘S BLAMING THE PALESTINIANS FOR HITLER’S ATTEMPTED GENOCIDE CERTAINLY OPENS THE DOOR TO EXAMINING THE ROLE OF THE ZIONISTS IN COLLABORATING WITH HITLER :

        “there is detailed evidence that some Zionists collaborated with the Nazis, that Zionists sabotaged anti-Nazi boycotts, and that Zionists interfered with efforts to rescue victims of Nazi oppression.

        When facts first emerged in the 1950s about Zionist-Nazi collusion, it caused considerable scandal in Israel and led to the fall of the Israeli government of the time. A number of books are dedicated to this subject and it is discussed in numerous others, almost all by Jewish and/or Israeli authors. The topic inspired novels by well-known Israeli writers Amos Elon and Neil Gordon, was the subject of a 1987 British play, and was portrayed in a 1994 Israeli docudrama. It’s surprising that Steinberg and the Board of Rabbis make no indication of ever having heard anything about this.

        Popular American playwright and fervent Zionist Ben Hecht wrote the first book on the subject, “Perfidy,” relating the history of a Hungarian Zionist leader who arranged for his family and several hundred prominent Jews to escape while facilitating the movement of the rest of Hungarian Jews to Nazi concentration camps.

        Hannah Arendt, in her 1960 book “Eichmann in Jerusalem: A Report in the Banality of Evil,” writes: “To a Jew this role of the Jewish leaders in the destruction of their own people is undoubtedly the darkest chapter of the whole dark story.”

        In “The Transfer Agreement: The Dramatic Story of the Pact between the Third Reich and Jewish Palestine” (containing an afterword by ADL head Abe Foxman), pro-Israel writer Edwin Black reports that in 1933 Zionist leaders concluded a secret pact with the Third Reich that transferred 60,000 Jews and $100,000 to Palestine, Zionists promising in return that they would halt the worldwide boycott “that threatened to topple the Hitler regime in its first year.”

        Author-researcher Lenni Brenner wrote of Zionist-Nazi collusion in “Zionism in the Age of Dictators,” of which the London Times stated: “Brenner is able to cite numerous cases where Zionists collaborated with anti-Semitic regimes, including Hitler’s.”

        Brenner’s second book on the topic, “51 Documents, Zionist Collaboration with the Nazis,” includes a 1940 letter from underground Zionist terrorist leader Avraham Stern proposing that Jewish militias would fight on Germany’s side in exchange for Nazi help in creating an “historic Jewish state.”

        In “What Price Israel,” American Council for Judaism member Alfred Lilienthal describes FDR’s efforts to set up a program to rescue refugees, only to find Zionists sabotaging it. Roosevelt explained: “The Zionist movement knows that Palestine is, and will be for some time, a remittance society. They know that they can raise vast sums for Palestine by saying to donors, ‘There is no other place this poor Jew can go.’”

        When New York attorney Morris Ernst joined this refugee effort, he was shocked: “I was thrown out of parlors of friends of mine who very frankly said ‘Morris, this is treason. You are undermining the Zionist movement.’” Ernst wrote that he found a fanatical movement of men “little concerned about human blood if it is not their own.”

        In “The Seventh Million: The Israelis and the Holocaust,” Israeli historian Tom Segev quotes Zionist leader and future Israeli Prime Minister David Ben Gurion: “If I knew that it was possible to save all the Jewish children of Germany by transporting them to England, but only half of them by transporting them to Palestine, I would choose the second.”

        Segev writes that Ben-Gurion worried that ‘the human conscience’ might cause various countries to open their doors to Jewish refugees from Germany and saw this as a threat, warning: ‘Zionism is in danger.’”

        In the Bee’s report on the controversy, Sacramento’s Rabbi Alfi is further quoted as saying “there is no comparison” between the treatment of Jews in pre-war Germany and Palestinians. Yet, in 2002 the Israeli newspaper Ha’aretz reported that the Israeli military was specifically studying Nazi Warsaw Ghetto strategies for use in the Palestinian Occupied Territories.”
        FROM “DENYING NAZI-ZIONIST COLLUSION IN CounterPunch (official) http://www.counterpunch.org/2011/03/04/denying-nazi-zionist-collusion/

      • Maximus Decimus Meridius
        October 21, 2015, 3:35 pm

        Didn’t the odious Elie Wiesel say that the “other” victims of the holocaust didn’t deserve the same attention as Jewish victims because the latter “died differently”?

        When ethno-narcissism extends to stating that some lives are more valuable than others, it goes beyond chauvinism and descends into ugliness.

      • niass2
        October 21, 2015, 3:43 pm

        he would certainly hate me.

      • Citizen
        October 21, 2015, 5:16 pm

        Tweets today brought up Abbas’s college thesis which challenged the standard 6 million death number and argued that Hitler’s original idea did not include extermination, but transfer of Jews out of the Reich. Their point was Abbas, like the Mufti of old, had the same agenda, to get rid of the Jews from the Holy Land.

      • Maximus Decimus Meridius
        October 22, 2015, 7:21 am

        The ”Angry Arab”, Asad Abu Khalil, has long written about how Abbas’ thesis has been ignored by Zionists, because he (for the most part) is a servile puppet. Similar to Sadat, who was an active supporter of Nazi Germany, something which never bothered Israel in the least. Then there’s the Lebanese Phalanage, who were ‘inspired’ by the Nazis. And don’t even get me started on Israel’s new bestest buddies, the Saudis.

        In fact, most of Israel’s ”Arab friends” would be considered outright anti-semities if they did not toe the Zionist line.

    • Theo
      October 22, 2015, 9:30 am

      The german press, both newspapers and TV, is fully controlled, so they never ever dare to criticise Israel or its leaders. The treatment of the palestinians is not news here, or they just carefully sweep over it. The language they use would pass to a diplomat, who is carefull of what he says, not wanting to insult anyone. They are not reporting the events, they pussyfoot around it. ZDF O-tone yesterday: ” already 50 people are dead due to the terror is Israel”. Anyone hearing this will think that the palestinians killed 50 people and the israelis none.
      It is a pity, as if Israel would receive more critic from friendly nations, perhaps they would not elect a Ministerpresident as Bibi and realise that there is no future in Eretz Israel.

      I have read a long time ago that the palestinians first welcomed the jews as return of long lost cousins, however that feeling changed very fast after the occupation from those returnees.

  2. David Green
    October 21, 2015, 11:20 am

    I first noticed this charge in Dershowitz’s The Case for Israel (2003). Abunimah also refers to this book. Interesting that it surfaces now–desperation, I would think.

  3. eljay
    October 21, 2015, 11:29 am

    My intention was not to absolve Hitler of his responsibility, but rather to show that the forefathers of the Palestinian nation, without a country and without the so-called ‘occupation’, without land and without settlements, even then aspired to systematic incitement to exterminate the Jews.

    Bibi “King of all Jews” Netanyahu: Anti-Semite and poster child for the “This is your brain on Ziocaine” campaign.

    • JWalters
      October 21, 2015, 6:48 pm

      There’s also the fact that the Palestinians are extra terrestrial aliens, and don’t even belong on this planet.

    • traintosiberia
      October 21, 2015, 10:08 pm

      Instead of banishing Mufti if only the British ,American,and Russian threw out the Zionist provocatuers amidst their administration ,academy,justice ,defense and media for igniting violence against the Palestinisn from 1890 onwards, the world would have been a lot better place

      • Eva Smagacz
        October 23, 2015, 2:36 pm

        I am not sure world would be a better place, and I wonder if frustrated Zionists would make my country, Poland, a better place.

    • rosross
      October 23, 2015, 12:14 am

      One wonders how, given the Zionist belief that the Palestinians are sub-human, they are capable of such actions or intent.

  4. Don
    October 21, 2015, 11:30 am

    My goodness…that Mufti was one busy guy. I am thinking maybe he had a thyroid disorder…
    https://vimeo.com/

    I am also wondering…is there anyone, anywhere, who was NOT responsible for the Holocaust?

    • Emory Riddle
      October 21, 2015, 1:52 pm

      Yes. The Zionists.

    • Kay24
      October 21, 2015, 1:55 pm

      Those who were not are made to feel they were, and must keep paying for it too.

    • Mooser
      October 23, 2015, 3:24 pm

      “My goodness…that Mufti was one busy guy. I am thinking maybe he had a thyroid disorder… “

      The Mufti? Heck, compared to Noah’s sons, Shem and Ham, the guy was nearly comatose!

      Good Lord, as I say this I am eating a ‘Ham and Swiss’ sandwich, and feeling oddly anthropophagusic.

  5. lysias
    October 21, 2015, 11:31 am

    No historian denies that the German invasion of Russia was accompanied by massive shooting of Jews behind the German lines. But it isn’t clear that at that point or at the time of the meeting with the Mufti (in November 1941) the decision to murder all European Jews had already been made. Historians debate the date of that decision. It might not have been made until after Pearl Harbor and the German declaration of war on the U.S. (in early December). The killings in Russia might merely have been part of the invasion, and motivated by Hitler’s idee fixe that Bolshevism was really Jewish, “Juedo-Bolshevism”. The intent could still have been to allow Jews elsewhere to live on as hostages for the good behavior of neutrals, and of America in particular.

    Myself, I believe, on the basis of my reading of Mein Kampf, that Hitler had always intended to kill as many Jews as he could, as soon as it became possible. But that matter is debated by historians. My view is not obviously correct.

    • Krauss
      October 21, 2015, 12:52 pm

      You’re correct in your analysis lysias. There wasn’t concrete proof of intention to kill Jews as Jews in all instances until later in the war. Hitler actually tried to get rid of Jews via forced repatriation initially but the allied powers wouldn’t take them. We shouldn’t also forget the dirty dealings Nazi Germany had with the pre-Israel Zionist movement in what was then Greater Palestine. Ben-Gurion’s ambivalence about the Jews of Europe (who he knew were mostly non/anti-Zionist) is something that, to this day, is something which is rarely, if ever, spoken about.

      But even as we quibble about the exact sequence of events, nobody can be in doubt that the event did in fact happen and that the Mufti had absolutely nothing to do with it.

      P.S. This event will go a long way to completely delegitimize Netanyahu’s credibility in general, especially as he comes from a family of historians and considers history to be one of his greatest passions. What a public meltdown we are witnessing.

      • YoniFalic
        October 21, 2015, 1:55 pm

        In college I read a lot of primary writings from 1930s Zionist leaders. I had an overall impression that Zionists like Ben-Gurion were hoping the German Nazis would kill approximately one million Jews and scare the rest to Palestine because these Zionist leaders understood that their goal of stealing Palestine from Palestinians was unethical but felt that a million or so murdered Jews would give the Zionist cover to commit outrageously unethical actions while five million new immigrants or so would overwhelm the natives and transform Palestine into a Jewish state as Jewish as France is French. This hypothetical hope of Zionist leaders almost came true except that the German Nazis killed far more Jews than the Zionist leadership expected they would, and the Zionist leadership has ever since lived in fear that their state would be forced to repatriate the natives. This possibility is the real existential threat that Zionist leaders fear.

      • JWalters
        October 21, 2015, 7:25 pm

        Thanks for these historically informative posts. A couple of additional points – Most Western European Jews (and American Jews) opposed Zionism before the Holocaust, but enclaves of Eastern European Jews (mostly from Russia and Poland) were religious extremists eager to carry guns in the campaign to capture Palestine for a Biblical restoration. Ben Gurion (Polish) said he would rather have half of Jewish manhood die capturing Palestine than have them all alive in England. Then there’s the issue of who financed the guns they carried, and why.

        A “public meltdown” is right, desperation on display. Perhaps a tipping point is nearing.

      • inbound39
        October 21, 2015, 9:03 pm

        The Ankara Document shows Avraham Stern attempted to gain support from the Nazi’s for a Jewish State in Palestine if they won the war and that they would fight against the British on Germany’s behalf. He also requested to be allowed to handpick intellectual and educated jews from the captive hungarian jews to be shipped to Palestine to assist setting the State up thus leaving approximately 8000 that still went to slaughter…so Sterngang could be linked as complicit in the deaths of the other 8000. I read that article on the Internet some time ago.

      • Mooser
        October 23, 2015, 12:53 am

        “Most, if not all, of them have forsaken the faith of their forefathers, and divorced from their minds all spiritual hopes of the next world.”

        Churchill was hoping they would become Anglicans, and receive their heavenly reward? Okay, could happen.

    • truthurts
      October 21, 2015, 8:03 pm

      sir winston churchill
      “zionism v bolshevism” ; london sunday herald, 1920

      International Jews

      “In violent opposition to all this sphere of Jewish efforts rise the schemes of the International Jews.

      The adherents of this sinister confederacy are mostly men reared up among the unhappy populations of countries where Jews are persecuted on account of their race.

      Most, if not all, of them have forsaken the faith of their forefathers, and divorced from their minds all spiritual hopes of the next world.

      This movement among the Jews is not new.

      From the days of Spartacus-Weishaupt to those of Karl Marx, and down to Trotsky (Russia), Bela Kun (Hungary), Rosa Luxemburg (Germany), and Emma Goldman (United States), this world-wide revolutionary conspiracy for the overthrow of civilization and for the reconstitution of society on the basis of arrested development, of envious malevolence, and impossible equality, has been steadily growing.

      It played, as a modern writer, Mrs. Webster has ably shown, a definite recognizable part in the tragedy of the French Revolution.

      It has been the mainspring of every subversive movement during the Nineteenth Century; and now at last this band of extraordinary personalities from the underworlds of the great cities of Europe and America have gripped the Russian people by the hair of their heads and have become practically the undisputed masters of the enormous empire.

      There is no need to exaggerate the part played in the creating of Bolshevism and in the actual bringing about of the Russian Revolution by these international and for the most part atheistic Jews.

      It is certainly the very great one; it probably outweighs all others.

      With the notable exception of Lenin, the majority of the leading figures are Jews.

      Moreover, the principal inspiration and driving power comes from the Jewish leaders…

      Thus Tchitcherin, a pure Russian, is eclipsed by his nominal subordinate, Litvinoff, and the influence of Russians like Bukharin or Lunacharski cannot be compared with the power of Trotsky, or of Zinovieff, the Dictator of the Red Citadel (Petrograd), or of Krassin or Radek – all Jews.

      In the Soviet institutions the predominance of Jews is even more astounding. Table Leaders

      And the prominent if not the principal part in the system of terrorism applied by the extraordinary Commissions for combating Counter Revolution has been take by Jews, and in some notable cases by Jewesses. Table all members NKVD

      The same evil prominence was obtained by Jews in the brief period of terror during which Bela Kun (Cohen) ruled in Hungary.

      The same phenomenon has been presented in Germany (especially Bavaria), so far as this madness has been allowed to prey upon the temporary prostration of the German people.

      Although in all these countries there are many nonJews every whit as bad as the worst of the Jewish revolutionaries, the part played by the latter in proportion to their numbers in the population is astonishing.

    • lysias
      October 22, 2015, 6:44 pm

      “Hätte man zu Kriegsbeginn (1914) und während des Krieges einmal zwölf- oder fünfzehntausend dieser hebräischen Volksverderber so unter Giftgas gehalten, wie Hunderttausende unserer allerbesten deutschen Arbeiter aus allen Schichten und Berufen es im Felde erdulden mußten, dann wäre das Millionenopfer der Front nicht vergeblich gewesen. Im Gegenteil: Zwölftausend Schurken zur rechten Zeit beseitigt, hätte vielleicht einer Million ordentlicher, für die Zukunft wertvoller Deutschen das Leben gerettet.”

      ******************************************************************************

      “Siegt der Jude mit Hilfe seines marxistischen Glaubensbekenntnisses über die Völker dieser Welt, dann wird seine Krone der Totenkranz der Menschheit sein, dann wird dieser Planet wieder wie einst vor Jahrmillionen menschenleer durch den Äther ziehen.

      “Die ewige Natur rächt unerbittlich die Übertretung ihrer Gebote. So glaube ich heute im Sinne des allmächtigen Schöpfers zu handeln: indem ich mich des Juden erwehre, kämpfe ich für das Werk des Herrn.”

  6. Kay24
    October 21, 2015, 11:36 am

    May I remind everyone that President Sarkozy was absolutely correct, when he called this man a liar. How many times have we seen him lying to the world. He is now trying to re-write history, and making things up.
    Desperation makes him even blame the victims of Israeli occupation for what happened at the holocaust. This is as low as it can get.
    Notice his arrogance prevents him from admitting it was an mistake, despite historians and other Israeli leaders all criticizing him for this ridiculous statement?

    This is only making him looking more unhinged and deceptive.

    I can’t stand him either, President Sarkozy.

  7. Scott
    October 21, 2015, 11:41 am

    I’m really looking forward to my “Daily TIP” email today, where Josh Block sets out the pro-Bibi line of the day. If you wereJosh, what would you say?

    • a blah chick
      October 21, 2015, 12:21 pm

      I don’t know about Josh but the Bibi apologists on Twitter are defending their hero as best they can. They seem to be dividing up into 3 camps: 1) His words were twisted; 2) Palestinians did support the Holocaust in words if not in deeds 3) can we PLEASE talk about something else! Look, over there! More Pally incitement on Facebook!

      Not everyone can blow up Twitter, that takes skill!

      • ckg
        October 21, 2015, 3:51 pm

        Right wing talk radio is also showing support for Netanyahu today. And Glenn Beck’s Blaze.

  8. Kris
    October 21, 2015, 11:44 am

    Now that the “antisemitism” card has lost much of its power, people are actually talking about the similarities between the Nazis and the Zionist Jews, and noticing that prominent antiZionist Jews are talking about this as well.

    Netanyahu must think that trying to pin responsibility for the Holocaust on a Palestinian is a brilliant deflection.

    • Krauss
      October 21, 2015, 12:55 pm

      That’s total nonsense. Zionists are many things but they aren’t planning industrial mass murder in gas chambers in an effort of total genocide. That’s a grotesque comparison.

      • niass2
        October 21, 2015, 3:42 pm

        well when they move to expel all of them next year we’ll see

      • Maximus Decimus Meridius
        October 21, 2015, 3:56 pm

        ” they aren’t planning industrial mass murder in gas chambers in an effort of total genocide.”

        Well, according to Bibi, the Nazis weren’t either. At least not until they fell into bad company.

      • lysias
        October 21, 2015, 4:35 pm

        The Young Turk government didn’t murder people industrially in gas chambers in the Armenian Genocide, but they nevertheless seem to have murdered quite as effectively, or even a bit more effectively. The Nazis killed about a third of the world’s Jews. The Young Turks seem to have killed about a half of the world’s Armenians.

        I don’t see how the way the Young Turks murdered was any better.

      • MHughes976
        October 21, 2015, 5:25 pm

        They aren’t planning leaving masses of people without food and shelter amid snowy mountains, which is part of the accusation against the Turks, nor yet the kind of mass-participation machete work said to have happened in Rwanda. There is no logical outcome to Zionism except mass departure of Palestinians but I’m sure all Zionists who have any streak of realism have concluded that this time, when the time does finally come, there must be an element of compensation and some (doubtless rather unconvincing) show of consent.

      • Mooser
        October 21, 2015, 5:39 pm

        “There is no logical outcome to Zionism except mass departure of Palestinians…”

        Really? “A mass departure”?

        ” when the time does finally come… “

        As it must? The burgeoning Jewish population and influx of Jewish immigrants will push them out? On a wave of world-wide support for Zionism?

      • RoHa
        October 21, 2015, 7:29 pm

        lysias, suggesting that murdering Armenians or homosexuals is as bad as murdering Jews counts as Holocaust denial, doesn’t it?

      • inbound39
        October 21, 2015, 9:07 pm

        No they aren’t Krauss….they are opting for the slow and subtle intermittent carpet bombing of Gaza every two years to mow the lawn instead…….genocide is genocide.

      • MHughes976
        October 22, 2015, 12:55 pm

        Just to reassure Mooser that I don’t think it predetermined that the Zionists will be able to bring things to the conclusion that their ideas demand, but I think that their ideas do demand reduction of the non-Jewish population, which in their view has no true right to be there, to a small minority existing by grace and favour. That is why most political forces in Israel are at best lukewarm about those Two States.

      • Mooser
        October 22, 2015, 4:08 pm

        Just to reassure Mooser…”

        And I thank you, MHughes76, for doing so. I read more despairing concession into your comment than I should have, and I apologize, and appreciate your consideration.

  9. Mooser
    October 21, 2015, 11:44 am

    SQUELCH!! Ewwwwww! Heavens, what a stench. Not even Marshall wants this half of the pile. He’s content with his half. I was going to link that to Marshalls “Slaves of History” article supporting Goldberg, but I can’t find it. Seems to have gone missing?

    • Mooser
      October 21, 2015, 11:57 am

      Well, there it is, in the picture: “Non-stop Zionism” A direct flight from here to infirmity.

  10. RobertHenryEller
    October 21, 2015, 12:03 pm

    Suppose Netanyahu’s lie was the truth. So what? Would that exonerate Hitler? Would it condemn the Palestinians?

    The ultimate irony, once again painfully obvious: Netanyahu traffics in original sin, in blood libel, against the Palestinians.

    Netanyahu is a racist. No news.

    • Kay24
      October 21, 2015, 12:08 pm

      Make that a lying racist. This holocaust card has never been played well, but this time he has gone too far.

      Nicely disputed by Germany!

    • lysias
      October 21, 2015, 2:55 pm

      I agree, this is blood libel.

  11. Maximus Decimus Meridius
    October 21, 2015, 12:06 pm

    It’s interesting, but not surprising, that these words – obnoxious though they are, they are still just words – are garnering more Western outrage than Netanyahu’s killing of 500 children last summer.

    Priorities, priorities.

    Also, could you imagine if any Arab or Iranian leader made a major speech downplaying Hitler’s role in the holocaust? You wouldn’t be able to move for the accusations of ‘anti-semitism’. It would be brought up time and time again, like Ahmedinejad’s supposed ”Israel must be destroyed” comments, for as long as that leader were in power, if not longer. You’d have hand-wringing editorials from the likes of Jonathan Freedland or Jeffrey Goldberg decrying the innate anti-semitism of Muslim culture. And so on and so forth.

    • Kay24
      October 21, 2015, 12:21 pm

      Good point. What would the howls of outrage sound like had any Arab, or Muslim leader, said a similar thing and downplayed the Holocaust? It would be interesting to see how the notorious zionist media handles this one. What excuses will they come up with for this nutty guy?

      • Maximus Decimus Meridius
        October 21, 2015, 1:48 pm

        Or even a European leader. Imagine a prominent German politician claiming that Hitler wasn’t actually that bad a guy, he just fell in with the wrong sort of people.

        We’d be getting his resignation and abject apology before the week was out.

    • a blah chick
      October 21, 2015, 12:49 pm

      “It’s interesting, but not surprising, that these words – obnoxious though they are, they are still just words – are garnering more Western outrage than Netanyahu’s killing of 500 children last summer. ”

      Good point, but these words effect Jewish people, so that makes them important.

    • oldgeezer
      October 21, 2015, 12:52 pm

      @MDM

      Just more proof that Palestinian lives do not matter. The only basis for such attitudes is racism.

    • atime forpeace
      October 21, 2015, 9:05 pm

      ‘Also, could you imagine if any Arab or Iranian leader made a major speech downplaying Hitler’s role in the holocaust?’

      More proof that Zionism is enforced by Jewish groups pretty much in all western nations.

  12. Herchel
    October 21, 2015, 12:23 pm

    Seems like much ado about nothing.

    Based on the immediate attacks against Israel upon the declaration of its independence by Egypt, Jordan, Syria and all the other arab countries from which the palestinians actually come, there is no dispute that the mufti and his followers were committed to the destruction of the Jewish state long before the so-called occupation.

    That is the larger point.

    Of course, splitting hairs and jumping on Bibi for this comment is a great distraction from yet another Israeli woman stabbed in cold blood today, isn’t it?

    • Annie Robbins
      October 21, 2015, 1:37 pm

      the mufti and his followers

      whom do you mean by “his followers”? he was appointed by the british, he wasn’t elected.

      • Mooser
        October 21, 2015, 1:49 pm

        I am almost persuaded that all of this, Goldberg, Marshall and Nettie, is an attempt to provide a year’s worth of confusion and obfuscation, enough to get the Dem candidate through the election, without confronting the issues. Let’s see if the Dem’s start availing themselves of it.

      • Kay24
        October 21, 2015, 2:01 pm

        That is an attempt to make it as if the Mufti was joined by even more Palestinians, then all Palestinians past and present will look guilty of it. Lame attempt by the hasbara choir.

      • Annie Robbins
        October 21, 2015, 6:19 pm

        yeah for the larger pt mooser. kay, definitely.

      • Mooser
        October 23, 2015, 5:06 pm

        “yeah for the larger pt mooser. kay, definitely.”

        So frustrating! I don’t think I’m too far off if I say we felt some optimism that the Dems couldn’t avoid confronting some of the basic issues in the US-I/P policy and relationships in this coming election. That the discussion may have come that far. Not any more.

    • Emory Riddle
      October 21, 2015, 1:56 pm

      My understanding of that time is that the ethnic cleansing was well underway (about 450,000 of the 750,00 Palestinians who would be expelled in that first year had been already pushed out) by the time Israel got its “independence” (?? from whom??) before the Arab armies attacked Israel. Not to kill Jews but to save Palestinians.

    • John O
      October 21, 2015, 1:59 pm

      @Herschel

      “all the other arab countries from which the palestinians actually come”

      They actually come from Palestine. And before you say it, it is irrelevant that Palestine was ruled by the British or the Jordanians or anyone else. There was a piece of real estate called Palestine, from which they came. Just as my parents came from Ireland: even though it was ruled by the British when they were born, that doesn’t make them British rather than Irish.

      • JWalters
        October 21, 2015, 7:00 pm

        Good point! The argument that Palestinians are fictitious people is so lame.

      • Mooser
        October 23, 2015, 5:09 pm

        “The argument that Palestinians are fictitious”

        Oh, they are better than that. They are completely media-fungible, and can be portrayed as anything, or in any state, which serves Zionist purposes. It is awful.

    • a blah chick
      October 21, 2015, 2:11 pm

      “Seems like much ado about nothing.”

      Yeah, accusing Palestinians of supporting the Holocaust, big deal.

      What’s next, accusing Israeli police of gunning down people because they’re black?

    • talknic
      October 21, 2015, 2:31 pm

      @ Herchel “Based on the immediate attacks against Israel upon the declaration of its independence by Egypt, Jordan, Syria and all the other arab countries..”

      Save it pal. There are no UNSC resolutions against any Arab state for attacking Israeli forces in non-Israeli territories at the time Israel’s borders were proclaimed by the Israeli Government in its plea for recognition http://www.trumanlibrary.org/whistlestop/study_collections/israel/large/documents/newPDF/49.pdf

      In fact the Arab States Declaration of the Invasion of Palestine, was the last legal declaration of war ever declared to the UNSC in keeping with the UN Charter Chapt VII

      Israel’s wars have all been fought in non-Israeli territory “outside the State of Israel” … “in Palestine”

      “Egypt, Jordan, Syria and all the other arab countries from which the palestinians actually come”

      A) Lower case for ‘a’rabs and ‘p’alestinians… you immediately give yourself away as a ghastly (& foolish) bigot http://wp.me/pDB7k-dN
      B) Palestinians come from Palestine. Syrians from Syria, Egyptians from Egypt … you’re spouting Ziopoop

      “Of course, splitting hairs and jumping on Bibi for this comment is a great distraction from yet another Israeli woman stabbed in cold blood today, isn’t it?”

      Netanyahu made his statement 20/10/2015 you stupid person

      I suggest you take your crappolla and go post where there are other like minded idiots who’ll probably think you’re fabulous, because here you simply don’t stand a chance

      • Herchel
        October 21, 2015, 4:33 pm

        I suppose the prohibition against name calling only applies to those with a differing point of view?

        In any event, thank you for correcting my grammar and calling me stupid. It was a delightful distraction from the substance of my post – that Arabs have been committed to the destruction of Jews in Israel long before 1967.

        Also, which UN are you referring to? The UN with how many Arab members that passed 20 resolutions against Israel and only 3 against the rest of the world during last session? Seems like an even playing field.

      • talknic
        October 21, 2015, 7:03 pm

        Herchel “In any event, thank you for correcting my grammar “

        I didn’t you stupid person. It was rather obvious that of all the proper nouns in your post only ‘a’rabs and ‘p’alestinians were lower cased. Quite a common tactic, not an error, by utterly stupid bigots

        “It was a delightful distraction from the substance of my post”

        The substance of your post was to demean ‘a’rabs and ‘p’alestinians any way you could

        “Also, which UN are you referring to? The UN with how many Arab members …. “

        There is only one UN. It does not have a majority of Arab states

        ” … that passed 20 resolutions against Israel and only 3 against the rest of the world during last session?”

        Please cite/quote verbatim … thx

      • inbound39
        October 22, 2015, 2:09 am

        Zionists like Netanyahu and those Zionists supporting him seem blessed with two brains….one brain is lost and the other is out trying to find it.

      • Emory Riddle
        October 22, 2015, 1:02 pm

        “..Arabs have been committed to the destruction of Jews in Israel long before 1967.”

        Really? Seems they had thousands of years prior to 1948 to do this. But did nothing of the sort. Why is that?

        When did this commitment to kill Jews begin? No connection to the introduction of Zionism into the region I suppose.

    • zaid
      October 21, 2015, 2:38 pm

      “Egypt, Jordan, Syria and all the other arab countries from which the palestinians actually come,”

      A Zionist Mythology and a Lie.

      “there is no dispute that the mufti and his followers were committed to the destruction of the Jewish state long before the so-called occupation.”

      Me too , God bless the Mufti.

      European/Khazar Jews donot have any right/claim to Palestine

      • bryan
        October 22, 2015, 5:56 am

        Zaid – calm down – it was probably just a typing mistake – Herschel no doubt intended to say “Egypt, Jordan, Syria and all the other arab countries from which the Israelis actually come,” (apart from those who come from the Americas, Europe, Russia, Australia and the non Arab lands of Africa and Asia.) The vast majority of Israelis indigenous to the land are those the Zionists failed to expel in 1948 and subsequently.

        And let us be honest: not every single Palestinian is a descendant of the original Judeo-Christian population of the land. Palestine was part of the Ottaman Empire for centuries and it was quite nomal for peoples to relocate themselves without paying attention to what would become the post-World-War-One “national” boundaries of the region.

      • zaid
        October 22, 2015, 9:22 am

        Bryan

        Palestinians are a mixture of peoples of course, and in every Palestinians you see an element of various nations.

        and it really doesnot matter who your ancestors are.there is no such thing as historical rights for any one on this earth.the home of your ancestors thousands of years ago doesnot entitle you to any thing, or you have to relocate 90% of humans from their current location.

        I was just responding to the troll.

        Regarding the Mufti, I really have huge respect for him and for what he did for his people.

    • diasp0ra
      October 21, 2015, 2:43 pm

      You’re pathetic.

      Go spin your lies somewhere else.

      It’s like you Zionists can’t make up your minds if Palestinians existed or not. On one hand, if you claim we didn’t exist then you can try and legitimize your colonization, but then how can they play the victim if they didn’t clash with the non-existent Palestinians?

      I also find it deliciously ironic when a Zionist calls the native population as coming from other places, not like you needed massive immigration to not even make up a third of the population.

      Projection. Look it up.

    • traintosiberia
      October 21, 2015, 9:38 pm

      Mufti’s peaceful attempt was destroyed repeatedly by British PM /administration despite the recommendation of the WHITE PAPERS
      KING CRANE COMMISSION, 1919, The 1922 WHITE PAPER,THE SHAW REPORT 1929, HOPE-SIMPSON COMMISSION 1930, The PASSFIELD WHITE PAPER 1930 and more later .(PEEL COMMISSION,1937, then 1939 WHITE PAPER )
      PM Macdonald at the backdoor maneuvering by Weizmann scuttled the recommendation .
      ( Like the way US does today )

      1-Israel’s endless enemies — the dangerous myth in Ari Shavit’s book – Jerome Slater on December 20, 2013

      See more at: http://mondoweiss.net/2013/12/israels-dangerous-shavits#sthash.t7yAy4zD.dpuf

      2 Picking apart the New York Times Zionist narrative on the …
      mondoweiss.net/…/picking-apart-the-new-york-timess-zionis…
      Mondoweiss
      May 17, 2011 – Yesterday’s deaths at various demonstrations commemorating the Nakba remind us of one all-important fact: without a just resolution to the …

      These will throw the light on the machinations and the perversions of the Zionist .

      Then there are plenty of books that will expose the same reality of overwhelming Israeli superiority in manpower and arsenals that were employed by Zionist to attack Egypt,Syria,Jordan and Palestine in 1948 May.

      Mufti was thrown out of Palestine at the suggestions of Zionist .Two attempts were made on his life by Zionist and Britain.

      He understood the Zionist plans when rest of the Arab leaders were still hoping that British would be honest and just and Zionism would remain a social aspect of Jewish revivalism .

      BN is hoping that every else would forget the history of Herzl,Jabotisnky, Rupin,Wise,Silver,Weizmann, and Ben Gurion .He hopes no one will remember the deal between German Zionist and Hitler .

  13. JLewisDickerson
    October 21, 2015, 12:33 pm

    RE: “Despite global disgust, Netanyahu doubles down on claim that Hitler got idea of Final Solution from a Palestinian”

    NMRI OF NETAYAHU’S BRAIN: Severe Ziocaine™ Intoxication Syndrome! ! !

    SEE: “A Boy Called Bibi ~ Netanyahu on the Couch”, by Uri Avnery, CounterPunch.org, May 1-3, 2015

    [EXCERPTS] . . . If it is true that the character of a person is shaped by his early childhood, we must examine the background of Netanyahu in order to understand him.

    He grew up in the shadow of a strong father. Benzion Millikowsky, who changed his foreign name to the Hebrew Netanyahu, was a very dominant and very unhappy person. Born in Warsaw, then a provincial town in the Russian Empire, he immigrated to Palestine as a young man, studied history at the new Hebrew University in Jerusalem and expected to become a professor there. He was not accepted.

    Benzion was the son of an early adherent of Vladimir (Ze’ev) Jabotinsky, the extreme rightist Zionist leader. He inherited from his father a very extremist outlook, and passed it on to his three sons. . .

    . . . Benzion’s rejection by the prestigious young Hebrew University turned him into a bitter man, a bitterness that lasted until his death in 2012, at age 102. He was sure that this rejection had nothing to do with his academic qualification, and everything with his ultra-nationalist opinions.

    His extreme Zionism did not stop him leaving Palestine and seeking his academic luck in the United States, where a second-rate university gave him a professorship. His life’s work as a historian concerned the fate of the Jews in medieval Christian Spain – the expulsion and inquisition. It engendered in him a very dark world view: the conviction that Jews will always be persecuted, that all Goyim (non-Jews) hate the Jews, that a straight line connects the auto-da-fé of the Spanish inquisition with the Nazi Holocaust. . .

    . . . Benzion Netanyahu was not only a very bitter person, who accused the Zionist and Israeli academic establishment of failing to recognize his academic stature. He was also a very autocratic family man.

    The three Netanyahu boys lived in constant awe of Father. They were not allowed to make any noise at home while the Great Man worked in his closed study. They were not allowed to bring other boys home. Their mother was completely devoted to her husband and served him in every way, sacrificing her own personality. . .

    . . . So who is this Netanyahu? Contrary to popular opinion, he is a man of very strong beliefs – the beliefs of his far-right father. The entire world is out to kill us at all times, we need a powerful state to defend ourselves, all of the land between the Mediterranean and the Jordan has been given us by God (whether he exists or not). Everything else is lies, subterfuges, tactics.

    When, in a famous speech at Bar-Ilan university near Tel Aviv, Netanyahu embraced the principle of “Two States for Two Peoples”, those who knew him could only smile. It was as if he had recommended the eating of pork on Yom Kippur.

    He dangled this statement before the eyes of the naive Americans and let his Justice Minister, Tzipi Livni, lead endless negotiations with the Palestinians, whom he despises. Whenever it seemed that the negotiations were nearing some goal, he quickly put up another condition, such us the ridiculous demand that the Palestinians recognize Israel as the Nation State of the Jewish People. He would not dream, of course, of recognizing the Palestinian territories as the Nation State of the Palestinian People – a people he does not really believe exists at all.

    On the eve of the last election, just now, Netanyahu announced that there would not be a Palestinian state as long as he was in power. When the Americans remonstrated, he repudiated himself. Why not? As his Likud predecessor, Yitzhak Shamir, famously said, “It is permitted to lie for the Fatherland.”

    Netanyahu will lie, cheat, repudiate himself, raise false flags – all for the purpose of achieving his one and only real goal, the Rock of our Existence (as he loves to say), the heritage of his father – the Jewish State from the sea to the river. . .

    ENTIRE COMMENTARY – http://www.counterpunch.org/2015/05/01/netanyahu-on-the-couch/

    • JLewisDickerson
      October 21, 2015, 1:12 pm

      P.S. FROM timesofisrael.com:

      [EXCERPT] . . . “This is a dangerous distortion of history and I demand that Netanyahu correct it immediately because it trivializes the Holocaust, the Nazis, and the terrible dictator Adolf Hitler’s share in the terrible tragedy of our people in the Holocaust,” Israeli opposition leader Isaac Herzog said in a statement. “It falls like ripe fruit straight into the hands of Holocaust deniers, and involves them in the Palestinian conflict.

      “Netanyahu has forgotten that he is not only the Israeli prime minister, he is also the prime minister of the Jewish people. No one will teach me what a hater of Israel the mufti was. He gave the order to kill my grandfather, Rabbi [Yitzhak HaLevi] Herzog, and actively supported Hitler,” Herzog added. . .

      SOURCE – http://www.timesofisrael.com/netanyahu-accused-of-absolving-hitler-for-holocaust/

      • eljay
        October 21, 2015, 1:22 pm

        “Netanyahu has forgotten that he is not only the Israeli prime minister, he is also the prime minister of the Jewish people. … ” [Isaac] Herzog added.

        So, not only is “King” Bibi a Jew-hating anti-Semite for questioning Hitler’s motives, but Opposition leader Herzog is also a Jew-hating anti-Semite for conflating all Jews with Israel and Israel with all Jews.

        Why do these hateful and immoral Zio-supremacists hate Jews so much?!

      • oldgeezer
        October 21, 2015, 1:34 pm

        @eljay

        Isn’t Jew hating antisemite somewhat redundant? As he claims to be Jewish shouldn’t that be a self hating antisemite?

        To be fair though if I was bibi then I would hate myself too.

      • eljay
        October 21, 2015, 1:57 pm

        || oldgeezer: @eljay Isn’t Jew hating antisemite somewhat redundant? As he claims to be Jewish shouldn’t that be a self hating antisemite? … ||

        I don’t think he hates himself (“It’s good to be the King!”), but I do think he hates Jews who fail toe his Zio-supremacist line / make proper obeisance.

        || … To be fair though if I was bibi then I would hate myself too. ||

        :-)

      • RoHa
        October 21, 2015, 8:23 pm

        “Netanyahu … is also the prime minister of the Jewish people.”

        Does this mean that Turnbull, Cameron, and Trudeau are not the PMs of Australian, British, and Canadian Jews? That suggests such Jews are not actually Australian, British, or Canadian citizens? It sounds a bit anti-something.

        Or does it mean that Australian, British, and Canadian Jews have two PMs? That must be part of the Jewish suffering we keep hearing about.

      • traintosiberia
        October 22, 2015, 9:33 am

        One of the reasons for shunning Ahamednezad was this trope -he denies Holocaust.
        BN out of his islamophobic hatred and lack of any intellectual self-respect ,he has essentially produced a new line of discourse among the muslim Arab haters in US.
        Instead of asking him to quit the politics what should have been simply accurate and legitimate responses from every souls including presidential candidates like Carson and Huckabee who live and breathe by every letter of the Holocaust ,he is still being seen as peace seeker moderate fighting against terrorism.

        He essentially has denied the Holocaust and has raised the possibility of rehabilitation of Nazi ideology just the way now Crusade has been upgraded and rehabilitated following 911 by the neocons out of the similar islamophobia

  14. zaid
    October 21, 2015, 12:39 pm

    God bless the Mufti of Jerusalem he was a great man indeed.

    • WH
      October 22, 2015, 2:37 am

      Er no… he supported Hitler. But he didn’t plant the Holocaust idea in his head.

      • zaid
        October 22, 2015, 9:36 am

        WH

        What do you mean by Support?

        All the Mufti wanted from Hitler is to support the Arab world in their struggle against the Allies occupation / Mandate and to help Palestinians in their struggle against the Zionist movement..

        Do you have a problem with that.

      • traintosiberia
        October 22, 2015, 9:50 am

        May be now is the time to document and publish the list of leaders who met with Hitler seeking his support ,help,cooperation and inspiration .

        I have doubt that Mufti knew what Hitler was doing to the Jewish people when he suggested that the German Jews be sent to Poland or France. ( Did America know back then ?) Sure the Jewish people knew .But why should he believe them after the lie and the destruction the Jewish people had shown to him they were capable of ?

        Who are we to complain against Mufti against his stance on Jewish immigration to Palestine when US , Canada ,Australia , UK and France have not taken refugees from Afghanistan (1980 onwards ) ,Iraq,Syria or Libya in significant numbers ? Mufti was not responsible .But these countries are .They created the refugee crisis. They destroyed their livelihood and societies .

    • bryan
      October 22, 2015, 6:07 am

      I assume by that, Zaid, you mean he was a great man because Netanyahu believes he swayed the most powerful man in the world at the time of their meeting. I assume you did not mean collaboration with the Nazis indicates greatness, since then we would have to concede that Shamir, Begin and their associates were great men.

      • zaid
        October 22, 2015, 10:02 am

        I have seen many allegations against AlHusseini, but very few evidence.

        In his memoir, Alhusseini responded to Himmler question about how to settle the Jewish Issue by saying that all he wants is for them to go home to their country of origin, and he said that his problem is not with Judasism but with zionism.

        Nothing wrong with these demands.

        After 100000 muslim were were massacred by the Partisans/Allies, he helped recruit Bosnian Muslims in the 13th Waffen, he was clear that their duty was to protect Muslims in Europe only and that they should not participate in any action outside Bosnia.

        He said:

        “The most important task of this division must be to protect the homeland and families [of the Bosnian volunteers]; the division must not be permitted to leave Bosnia”

        God bless the Mufti. He helped save lives.

        As a westerner you are educated to romanticize the Allies and demonize the Axis, and I agree that the Axis were evil, but not an iota more than the Allies.

        Hitler was not worse than Stalin (actually Stalin killed more) and the holocaust were not worse than Hiroshima or Dresden except maybe in the scale. and when the evil Germans invaded France, guess what was the French doing in Algeria and dozen other countries.

        Why would you blame nations that were suffering under GB/FR to seek help from their adversaries.

        yeah one more thing……if you are concerned with his picture with Hitler, dont worry the Pope also met Hitler.

      • a4tech
        October 22, 2015, 10:38 am

        Ignore them Zaid, 99% of the people here think Israel and Zionism dropped down from the sky and is self sustaining purely from the blood of Palestinians. They can’t face the fact that Zionism is rooted from European nation-state ideology that also led to the foundation of USA, Canada, Australia and New Zealand and all these countries are in cohorts in their quest to maintain their hegemony on the world.

        Hitler opposed slavery, imperialism and neocolonialism that a vast majority of readers here directly or indirectly benefitted from. Hence their cognitive dissonance.

      • Annie Robbins
        October 23, 2015, 2:16 pm

        zzzzzzzz

      • Mooser
        October 23, 2015, 3:42 pm

        “Hitler opposed slavery, imperialism and neocolonialism that a vast majority of readers here directly or indirectly benefitted from. Hence their cognitive dissonance.”

        My dear “a4tech” do you have any idea what proposing there is some kind of rational coherence in Hitler’s ideas (especially “Hitler opposed slavery, imperialism and neocolonialism”! Good thing Hitler never did none of that stuff) worth discussing makes you appear? Well, I’m gonna stick with my previous description.

        Yup, that was Adolf, anti-imperialist, stayed offa other peoples countries, and always gave a square day’s Reich-mark for a square day’s work. “Slavery”? Why, they didn’t even have unions in Nazi Germany. They were nobody’s slaves.

        “European nation-state ideology that also led to the foundation of USA, Canada, Australia and New Zealand”

        And you think Israel (whatever and wherever it might be, since they don’t seem to know) can afford to pay the same prices “USA, Canada, Australia and New Zealand” have paid for settlement colonialism, a catastrophic episode?
        Or are you saying that settler-colonialism is a good thing and everybody wins?

      • Mooser
        October 24, 2015, 12:43 pm

        “Hitler opposed slavery, imperialism and neocolonialism” – See more at: http://mondoweiss.net/2015/10/netanyahus-solution-palestinian/comment-page-1#comment-805221

        Before I close my eyes to sleep, I pray God that an “a4” is an inexpensive Audi, and not something medical.

  15. JLewisDickerson
    October 21, 2015, 12:45 pm

    RE: “News sites around the world today are talking about Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s assertion in a speech yesterday that Hitler didn’t want to kill the Jews, just expel them, till he was convinced to exterminate them by the Palestinian leader, Haj Amin al-Husseini, the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem.” ~ Weiss and Horowitz

    SEE – “Christian Zionism: The Root of All Evil?” ~ By Tammy Obeidallah, The Palestine Chronicle, Aug 16 2010

    [EXCERPT] . . . Proponents of Israel will often pander the tired Mufti Haj Amin al-Husseini obfuscation in an attempt to connect all Palestinians to Adolph Hitler. Husseini was imposed upon the Palestinians in 1921 by the British Mandate’s first high commissioner, a British Jew named Herbert Samuel. Husseini was selected over the rival Nashashibi candidate and favored by the Zionist Commission. Husseini allied with Hitler to oppose the British, falling into the trap as so many others who have believed “the enemy of my enemy is my friend.”. . .

    ENTIRE ARTICLE – http://www.palestinechronicle.com/christian-zionism-the-root-of-all-evil/#.Ux5kA_ldV8E

    • Darwin26
      October 22, 2015, 8:44 pm

      Mr. Dickerson, thank you for posting ~ i’ve been digging for this info and did not find it on what a slug/puppet al-Hussenini was… and most importantly how and why he was in the position to totally defecate on the true inhabitants/ owners of Palestine… Viva Palestine.

  16. diasp0ra
    October 21, 2015, 12:48 pm

    How dumb does Netanyahu think the world is?

    Now this is “incitement”.

  17. Laurent Weppe
    October 21, 2015, 1:01 pm

    Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s assertion in a speech yesterday that Hitler didn’t want to kill the Jews, just expel them,

    So, we’re reached that point: an Israeli prime minister is whitewashing Adolph f*king Hitler. For all his pretense that he’s the jewish Churchill, it is quite clear that Netanyahu’s loyalty lies with the racist (and overwhelmingly non-jewish) far-right and nowhere else.

  18. Jon66
    October 21, 2015, 1:06 pm

    The man is an idiot.

  19. hophmi
    October 21, 2015, 1:13 pm

    I think, despite all of the understandably outraged media coverage, that Netanyahu was probably referring to particular episodes during the war where the Mufti asked the Nazis not to permit Jews to emigrate to Palestine, but instead, recommended that they be sent to Nazi-occupied countries, like Poland, i.e., to certain death. The notion that Netanyahu was blaming the Palestinians, and not the Nazis, for the Holocaust, is so ridiculous given Netanyahu’s overall public record, that it’s beyond debate to argue that he believes otherwise here, and can only be regarded as a detraction to cover up both the very real Holocaust denial that exists through the Middle East, as well as the Mufti’s close collaboration with the Nazis.

    There’s no question that the Hajj was a war criminal and a close Nazi collaborator, and no question that the Hajj’s alliance with the Nazis, as well as his Intifada against the British, was all about making sure that Jewish refugees from Europe did not come to Palestine.

    • Maximus Decimus Meridius
      October 21, 2015, 1:43 pm

      “can only be regarded as a detraction to cover up both the very real Holocaust denial that exists through the Middle East”

      LOL. No less a figure than the PM of Israel clearly downplays the role of Hitler in the holocaust, and all you can do is see it as some kind of anti-Zionist conspiracy!

      The only one in denial here is you.

      • Darwin26
        October 22, 2015, 8:52 pm

        this Caca from Nuttyahoo is about NOT looking at the illegal OCCUPATION ~ of which ALL Israeli’s are illegal occupiers, settlers and read my posts ~ how and why the Judaic interests maneuvered themselves into the land that belonged to ‘others’ Palestinians is of prime importance in this discussion …

    • oldgeezer
      October 21, 2015, 1:44 pm

      @hophmi

      I tend to agree, in general terms, with you about the individual based on what I have read

      There is no collective guilt due on the part of the Palestinians. It is clearly racist to suggest otherwise.

    • eljay
      October 21, 2015, 1:44 pm

      || hophmi @ October 21, 2015, 1:13 pm ||

      A Zio-supremacist rushes to the defence of his King and Prime Minister. It warms the heart.

      But what did his King and Prime Minister actually say? Let’s have a look:

      … Hitler didn’t want to exterminate the Jews at the time, he wanted to expel the Jews. And Haj Amin al-Husseini went to Hitler and said, “If you expel them, they’ll all come here.” “So what should I do with them?” he asked. He said, “Burn them.”

      . . .

      My intention was … to show that the forefathers of the Palestinian nation … aspired to systematic incitement to exterminate the Jews.

      So: Hitler did not want to exterminate the Jews until al-Husseini told him what to do (“burn them”) and the “forefathers of the Palestinian nation” pushed him to do it.

      • JWalters
        October 21, 2015, 7:06 pm

        Inside hophmi’s mind: Which to believe? My eyes or my fantasy? Such a tough decision. Guess I’ll go with my fantasy.

      • bryan
        October 22, 2015, 6:20 am

        The whole world would regard it as utterly ludicrous were someone to claim that “My intention was … to show that the forefathers of the [German] nation … aspired to systematic incitement to exterminate the Jews.” Yet Netanyahu and his ilk can get away with it. If Hitler is in no sense the father of the modern German nation how much more implausible is it to make an equivalent claim of a man who was installed as a stooge of the British government and who spent much of his life in exile.

    • Marnie
      October 21, 2015, 2:03 pm

      The only reason I can think of that BN would put the onus of the holocaust on the grand mufti is to attempt to excuse, justify or minimize the holocaust in the making he is perpetrating on Palestinians. I wonder how long he’ll wait before he drags Iran into his revisionist history of the holocaust. There are bigger antisemites than the Grand Mufti and they were made in America, notably Henry Ford.

      Henry Ford was an antisemite through and through, admired Hitler and was admired by Hitler. http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/americanexperience/…/henryford-antisemitism

      “Henry Ford’s anti-Semitic views echoed the fears and assumptions of many Americans in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. Anti-Semitism in America saw a change in expression and virulence when increased immigration from Europe brought millions of Jews to the U.S. during Ford’s childhood in the latter half of the 19th century. It reached its peak during the mid-1920s: a time when Ku Klux Klan membership had reached four million, Prohibition restricted alcohol consumption, and discriminatory immigration policies were enacted favoring immigrants from northern and western Europe over other parts of the world.

      A close friend recalled a camping trip in 1919 during which Ford lectured a group around the campfire. He “attributes all evil to Jews or to the Jewish capitalists,” the friend wrote in his diary. “The Jews caused the war, the Jews caused the outbreak of thieving and robbery all over the country, the Jews caused the inefficiency of the navy…”

      In 1918, Henry Ford purchased his hometown newspaper, The Dearborn Independent. A year and a half later, he began publishing a series of articles that claimed a vast Jewish conspiracy was infecting America. The series ran in the following 91 issues. Ford bound the articles into four volumes titled “The International Jew,” and distributed half a million copies to his vast network of dealerships and subscribers. The rhetoric was not unusual for its content, as much as its scope. As one of the most famous men in America, Henry Ford legitimized ideas that otherwise may have been given little authority.”

      The biggest threat to Jews is this self-proclaimed king. He is a modern-day Haman.

      • Mooser
        October 21, 2015, 9:32 pm

        “Ford bound the articles into four volumes titled “The International Jew,” and distributed half a million copies to his vast network of dealerships and subscribers.”

        “International Jew of Mystery”? Shag-a-riffic! I think Ford may have abandoned his anti-semitism later in life, and burned his library of anti-semitic material. He didn’t send me a Shelby-Mustang, tho, so the jury is still out on him.

      • Mooser
        October 24, 2015, 5:11 pm

        Great, just great, three perfectly good cars (Escape, ZX-2, and F-150) I’ve gotta sell, now. I’ll never ride or drive in them again.

        I hope I never find out Soichiro Honda was an anti-semite.

    • zaid
      October 21, 2015, 2:48 pm

      ” the Mufti asked the Nazis not to permit Jews to emigrate to Palestine”

      I agree with the Mufti.

      “as well as the Mufti’s close collaboration with the Nazis.”

      Why not, The Allies were not much different than the Axis.

      • Jon66
        October 21, 2015, 4:23 pm

        Zaid,
        “Why not, The allies were not much different than the Axis.”
        Is that sarcasm?
        You can’t be serious.

      • Mooser
        October 21, 2015, 9:20 pm

        “You can’t be serious.”

        “Jon66”, he is saying this in the context of this discussion. Since you have no idea what the discussion is about, you’re only going to step in it when you try to apply your pearl-clutching moralism to it. Give it up now, is my advice.

      • Jon66
        October 22, 2015, 10:26 am

        Mooser,
        By context you mean WWII?
        “As a westerner you are educated to romanticize the Allies and demonize the Axis, and I agree that the Axis were evil, but not an iota more than the Allies.

        Hitler wasnot worse than Stalin (actually Stalin killed more) and the holocaust were not worse than Hiroshima or Dresden except maybe in the scale.and when the evil Germans invaded France, guess what was the French doing …”

        Zaid does not mean in the context of Palestinians as you would have it. Rather as he is clear, he thinks both the Axis and the Allies are equally wrong.
        Why would you defend this? Do you agree?

      • Jon66
        October 22, 2015, 6:15 pm

        Mooser,

        Now that we know that Zaid opines that the Allies and Axis were both equally evil, I would like to know your opinion on the matter.

        Your so intent on defending the anti-Zionists.

        I plead guilty, I believe with all of my conviction that the Allies were morally superior to the Axis. Do you?

    • Brown-Eyed Girl
      October 21, 2015, 3:35 pm

      And why did the Grand Mufti want to make sure Jewish refugees from Europe did not come to Palestine? Because he wanted to see them dead, because he was a virulent anti-Semite, or because he did not want to see one colonial master replaced with another? He only wanted to get the British off Palestine’s back and as such, he aligned with whoever he though would help him. Not too different from what the US does today or the way the US supported horrible dictators and looked the other way at their mass murder – think Mobuto in Ziare , as long as they did our bidding and served our interests. (Not unlike what we are doing in the Middle East right now).

    • RoHa
      October 21, 2015, 7:55 pm

      “The notion that Netanyahu was blaming the Palestinians, and not the Nazis, for the Holocaust, is so ridiculous”

      But that isn’t the notion. What N is trying to do is blame the Palestinians as well as the Nazis.

      ” can only be regarded as a detraction” [distraction?] ” to cover up both the very real Holocaust denial that exists through the Middle East”

      Why cover it up?

      “There’s no question that the Hajj was a war criminal ”

      Exactly what war crimes did he commit?

    • traintosiberia
      October 21, 2015, 9:15 pm

      But did he (Mufti ) ask Argentina,Dominican Republic, Roosevelt’sAmerica no to allow Jewish immigration to those countries ? That was done by the zionist .Wasn’t it?
      Didn’t Ben Guiron say he was ready to sacrfice the Jews ( I guess not at the altar of Ebrahim(PBUH) god but at the oven of Hitler to secure able young Jewish for future Israel?

      He said ! He said!

    • bryan
      October 22, 2015, 6:53 am

      hophmi: “There’s no question that the Hajj was a war criminal and a close Nazi collaborator, and no question that the Hajj’s alliance with the Nazis, as well as his Intifada against the British, was all about making sure that Jewish refugees from Europe did not come to Palestine.”

      There are regrettably numerous far-more-obvious examples of war-criminals who escaped punishment (e.g. Kissinger, G.W.Bush, Sharon, Netanyahu – all coincidentally on the same side). The best way to avoid war-crimes charges is to be victorious or seek exile.

      Hajj, by the way is not his name – its is a title preffixed to his name. It would be similarly nonsensical to refer to Mister or Sir or Lady without mentioning the individual you were referring to.

      The mufti’s “crime” was to oppose both British and Jewish rule of his people – thus “freedom-fighter” would be much more apt in this context than “criminal”.

      It may be humane and generous to accept refugees into your country, and for many years the Palestinians were very tolerant of those individuals who came, not as refugees, but motivated by religious devotion. However it would be utter folly to welcome into your land a people whose leaders explicitly proclaimed that their objective was to take over your land and its government, and who argued from a very early date that this would entail transferring (or expelling) your people. The reason the Mufti met with Hitler was to attempt to extract from him a Palestinian “Balfour Declaration”. That surely makes him as noble as Lord Rothschild or Chaim Weizmann – perhaps more so because his argument was based on the natural right of self-determination of the overwhelming majority population, whereas Weizmann played the anti-Semitic card of arguing that Zionism was the solution to the Jewish problem that supposedly afflicted Europe.

  20. Brown-Eyed Girl
    October 21, 2015, 1:18 pm

    I have heard similar remarks (although not quite as extreme) from Alan Dershowitz . He did not say that Hitler got the idea of exterminating Jews from the Grand Mufti but he did call the Grand Mufti a Nazi sympathizer and said Palestinians need to “ask themselves what role they played in the Holocaust.” Really, he said this several years ago on CNN.

    A few years ago when I was without insurance, I went to UCSF Dental school for a low-cost exam and fillings. My student-dentist was an American born 28-year old female, whose family moved to Israel when she was very small. She came back to the states for college and dental school. I asked her where she went to college and she told me about being raised in Israel. We ended up speaking about Israel and Palestinians and I suppose she was what would be termed a liberal Jew.

    I questioned how it was right that she, born in the US to American parents who had European ancestry, could move to Israel and live in the houses and neighborhoods and cities that Palestinians whose parents still had deeds to the houses could not live in and had to stay in refugee camps. She said she did not agree with that. She said that most Israelis did not agree with that either and most of the militant settlers were New York Jews. (Really)

    I told her I did not agree with the partition because the UN and Western powers literally stole the land that a people where living on and gave it to another people to form a nation there. She felt that was just and said that it was the Arabs who did not accept the partition and started the wars. I asked her to tell me about any group of people who would willingly turn the land they lived in continuously for a thousand years over to another people and become second class citizens or refugees. Who would do that: she did not have a specific answer. She told me that archaeologists had proven that Jews lived in the land that was Palestine over a thousand years ago. I said well of course they did and so did lots of other peoples. The reality is that Palestinians had been living there continuously and it was taken from them and given to Europeans as “compensation” for the Holocaust. I said the Palestinians did not participate in the Holocaust, so if European Jews needed a homeland why take Palestine? She then said that the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem was a Nazi sympathizer, who aligned with Hitler. So this view may be common in Israel. I believe they tell themselves the Grand Mufti was a Nazi sympathizer and tried to align with Germany as a way of excusing the theft of Palestine. It is a pathetic way of justifying what they did and continue to do to the Palestinian people. If the Holocaust is history’s greatest crime and the Palestinians played a part (they didn’t) then the creation of Israel was not an injustice to the Palestinian people.

    I looked at the link to the article in the Guardian and unfortunately I found a remark by our illustrious Secretary of State, “Speaking before flying to Berlin to meet the US secretary of state, John Kerry, Netanyahu said he did not mean to diminish Hitler’s responsibility for the Holocaust. “He is responsible for the Final Solution, and he made the decision,” he said. “It is also absurd to ignore the role played by the mufti Haj Amin al-Husseini, who was a war criminal and encouraged Hitler to exterminate European Jewry.” So Kerry is towing this Zionist line in part. Unbelievable.

    • hophmi
      October 21, 2015, 1:48 pm

      “he did call the Grand Mufti a Nazi sympathizer”

      That part is beyond dispute.

      “and said Palestinians need to ‘ask themselves what role they played in the Holocaust.'”

      That part is probably a bit unfair, although on a site that never misses an opportunity to amplify some claim about Zionists collaborating with Nazis (even when the author of the source makes a special trip here to tell Mondoweiss to stop distorting his work), it’s interesting how defensive people get when they have to confront to the reality that the most visible Palestinian leader of the time was a Nazi collaborator.

      Palestinians don’t need to ask themselves about their role in Holocaust. Western activists, however, need to ask themselves whether they’ve properly considered both their own roles in causing the Jews of Europe to be exterminated, either because their ancestors lived in societies that took part, or because they lived in countries that did little to take in refugees, and whether, by targeting Israel, which was created in the Holocaust’s aftermath, they are engaging in activity that would create a further injustice to a people who have experienced too many of them.

      • Annie Robbins
        October 22, 2015, 9:20 am

        Western activists, however, need to ask themselves whether they’ve properly considered both their own roles in causing the Jews of Europe to be exterminated, ….

        uh huh

      • Emory Riddle
        October 22, 2015, 1:08 pm

        “Western activists, however, need to ask themselves whether they’ve properly considered both their own roles in causing the Jews of Europe to be exterminated -”

        I know, I know. We are all responsible for this (well, except for the Zionists) and therefore must do penance and serve these victims until the end of time.

      • Sibiriak
        October 22, 2015, 1:41 pm

        hophmi: Western activists, however, need to ask themselves whether they’ve properly considered both their own roles in causing the Jews of Europe to be exterminated, either because their ancestors lived in societies that took part, or because they lived in countries that did little to take in refugees…. (emphasis added)

        ———————

        One’s “own role” = what one’s ancestors did?

        One’s “own role”=where one lived when something happened?

        Total nonsense.

        I could ask what role my ancestors played in some event, but it’s completely illogical to equate my role with my ancestors’ role. If one of my ancestors murdered somebody, does that mean I played a role in the victim’s death? That’s ludicrous.

        Likewise, mere residence in country where in event occurred cannot be construed as a “role” in that event. Only a person’s actions can define that person’s role in an event.

        Hophmi apparently ascribes to an extremely misguided conception of collective identity and agency.

    • Mooser
      October 21, 2015, 2:23 pm

      “It is also absurd to ignore the role played by the mufti Haj Amin al-Husseini, who was a war criminal and encouraged Hitler to exterminate European Jewry.” Kerry

      Yup, maybe this can get the Dems through the election.

    • ckg
      October 21, 2015, 8:51 pm

      and unfortunately I found a remark by our illustrious Secretary of State..

      Thanks, Brown-Eyed Girl. I read this not as a quote of Kerry but of Netanyahu.

    • traintosiberia
      October 21, 2015, 9:46 pm

      Thank you. This is what I gathered from the book on Mufti by Phillip Mattar
      Britain did not have anything on Mufti to charge him with any crimes.

    • Citizen
      October 21, 2015, 10:18 pm

      If memory servers, the Mufti was placed in charge of the Palestinians by a British Jew handling British Mandate Palestine. The Mufti sided with Germany because Germany was fighting the colonial British.

  21. talknic
    October 21, 2015, 2:11 pm

    I’m continually amazed at why Israel’s pukemeister apologists insist on showing the world just how completely moronic they are.

    Apart from the obvious flaws in their bulls*t, they can’t even do simple maths!

    (2015 minus 1921 = 94 yrs of age) : It’s highly doubtful if any of today’s Palestinians were alive when, against popular vote, al-Husseini was appointed in 1921 by Herbert Samuel, the Jewish administrator under the British Mandate

    Al-Husseini was removed from office by the British in 1937. At the time he met Hitler he didn’t even represent the people of Palestine. He wasn’t the ‘Grand Mufti’ of anywhere, least of all Jerusalem

    ( 2015 minus 1937 = 78 years) : Life expectancy in Palestine 1950 was about 47 years of age, even lower in 1937 .. Life expectancy even today for a Palestinian refugee is about 71 years of age.

    Palestinians still alive today were highly likely to have been babies in the 1920’s/1940’s. They neither voted for or were led by or fought for al-Husseini in the Balkans or fought in any war or committed any violent acts against Jews

    The al-Husseini connection is totally irrelevant to the legal status of Israel’s sovereign extent and its illegal activities over the last 67 years in non-Israeli territories

    ————-

    Kerry “al-Husseini, who was a war criminal …”

    Odd, his whereabouts were known up until his death. He was never brought to trial.

    • Mooser
      October 21, 2015, 2:21 pm

      Talknic, if you will excuse me:

      “Al-Husseini was removed from office by the British in 1937. At the time he met Hitler he didn’t even represent the people of Palestine. He wasn’t the ‘Grand Mufti’ of anywhere, least of all Jerusalem”

  22. Bornajoo
    October 21, 2015, 2:27 pm

    The police all carry guns. All soldiers carry guns and rifles. Most of the sadistic illegal settlers carry guns. All security guards carry guns. The mayor of Jerusalem and Bennett are carrying guns. Record numbers of Israeli civilians are carrying guns and the rules have been relaxed for many more to acquire guns too.

    And here is nutty yahoo telling the world that it was the father of the Palestinian nation who planted the idea in Hitler’s mind to exterminate European Jewry. So the Palestinians were really responsible for the holocaust. Well the Nazis are all dead, they’ve already squeezed the maximum out of the Germans so no more mileage there. Time to use the holocaust in another creative way: now blame it on the Palestinians!

    Another reason – not that they needed one – to gun down even more Palestinians. And now they can add the holocaust to their list of curses as their victims lay dying on the ground

    I have to admit that he’s an even sicker puppy than I thought he was. But this only proves that he can do and say whatever he wants with total impunity. He’s untouchable and fully protected and he knows it. Only an Israeli leader could get away with this as they know that they are immune from any authority and any international law.

    After all nothing is actually going to change

    • Maximus Decimus Meridius
      October 21, 2015, 2:48 pm

      Unbelievably (or maybe not) Kerry has jumped in on the act:

      “Before leaving for Germany for talks with Merkel, as well as the US secretary of state, John Kerry, who will meet him in Berlin, the Israeli prime minister said it was absurd to say he was absolving Hitler of responsibility for the Holocaust. But he added: “It’s equally absurd to ignore the role played by the Mufti, a war criminal” who he said was “instrumental in the decision to exterminate the Jews of Europe”.

      http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/oct/21/germany-refuses-accept-binjamin-netanyahu-claim-adolf-hitler-holocaust

      “Instrumental” eh? That’s a prettty serious claim. Could this student of history, Mr. John Kerry, back it up? I doubt it. So we are to believe that an Austrian leader of a German party steeped in anti-semitism looked to an obscure cleric in the Middle East – an an Arab at that, a member of a group barely placed above Jews in the Nazi racial hierarchy- for inspiration?

      Seriously?

      BTW The Guardian article I linked to above is typical in that, even though it’s a Palestinian who has been accused of basically inspiring the holocaust, not a single Palestinian has been asked for their point of view.

      • diasp0ra
        October 21, 2015, 3:01 pm

        Wow, maybe Mr. Kerry needs to look up what Instrumental means.

        Not only was the Holocaust well underway when the Mufti (actually ex-Mufti, he wasn’t a Mufti when he visited Hitler) actually met him, but he didn’t even know that Jews were being exterminated until 1942 as his memoirs reveal.

        Not to mention that he did not only visit Hitler, he made a tour of multiple countries that opposed the British, such as Italy. He operated on the assumption that “The enemy of your enemy is your friend”.

        Furthermore, why is the Mufti always highlighted for his willing to collaborate with the Nazis when there were also Zionist factions and groups in Palestine who also wanted to collaborate with the Nazis and seeked their support?

        Lehi is not exactly a tiny insignificant faction. It produced future ministers and prime ministers of Israel. Not to mention that its founder, Avraham Stern, who OFFERED TO FIGHT ON THE SIDE OF THE NAZIS IN WW2, has been immortalized as a postal stamp by the government of Israel.

      • Maximus Decimus Meridius
        October 21, 2015, 3:16 pm

        “Not to mention that he did not only visit Hitler, he made a tour of multiple countries that opposed the British, such as Italy. He operated on the assumption that “The enemy of your enemy is your friend”.

        So did Gandhi’s Congress Party in India.

        Can we expect a speech from ”Bibi” wherein he tells us Hitler was just following orders from his good friend the Mahatma?

      • Kay24
        October 21, 2015, 3:22 pm

        Kerry is making himself look stupid by trying to placate the war monger/troublemaker/inciter from Israel. There is a limit to this unwavering support. Sheesh. This is going against what the historians say, and doesn’t Kerry know Netanyahu re-writes history by now?

      • Keith
        October 21, 2015, 5:32 pm

        DIASPORA- “Lehi is not exactly a tiny insignificant faction. It produced future ministers and prime ministers of Israel. Not to mention that its founder, Avraham Stern, who OFFERED TO FIGHT ON THE SIDE OF THE NAZIS IN WW2, has been immortalized as a postal stamp by the government of Israel.”

        That is right. Some of the early Zionists were sympathetic to Nazi Germany and (primarily) Fascist Italy. Netanyahu, however, can engage in his deceitful propaganda secure in the knowledge that neither the political elites nor the main stream media will bring this up.

      • just
        October 21, 2015, 8:14 pm

        “Before leaving for Germany for talks with Merkel, as well as the US secretary of state, John Kerry, who will meet him in Berlin, the Israeli prime minister said it was absurd to say he was absolving Hitler of responsibility for the Holocaust. But he added: “It’s equally absurd to ignore the role played by the mufti, a war criminal” who he said was “instrumental in the decision to exterminate the Jews of Europe”.

        The paragraph is a bit clumsy, but it was Netanyahu who said that ~ not Kerry. At least that’s how I read it.

        Anyway, from your link:

        Writing in the conservative daily newspaper Die Welt, the prominent commentator Alan Posener said Germans were used to despots reinterpreting German history, but it was a shock to hear a Jewish leader apparently trying to belittle Hitler’s role in the Holocaust.

        “His interpretation of history has all the marks of the opportunism that defines his whole behaviour. By exculpating the Germans and incriminating a Muslim, he is hoping to win friends among European Islamophobes. His motivation is understandable, but wrong,” wrote Posener.”

        “His motivation is understandable” ONLY because he’s Netanyahu, the liar and inciter extraordinaire. Posener has him perfectly pegged!

      • Boomer
        October 21, 2015, 9:57 pm

        re Kay 24, “Kerry is making himself look stupid by trying to placate the war monger/troublemaker/inciter from Israel. There is a limit to this unwavering support. Sheesh.”

        There should be a limit, but evidently there isn’t. This is doing the donkey. I wonder if he and Obama spend so much time with Zionists that they actually don’t know what is real and moral, or if they just don’t care.

      • echinococcus
        October 21, 2015, 10:17 pm

        Let’s be our age: the job of Obama, Kerry an Co. is not to know what is real or moral or where the limits are, but to do what they are told.

      • WH
        October 22, 2015, 2:46 am

        Why are people talking about Kerry? He’s not quoted anywhere in this article, those words are Netanyahu’s.

      • Kay24
        October 22, 2015, 7:09 am

        Kerry and Nutty calls for violence and incitement to stop. Kerry DID NOT turn to Nutty and say

        “that goes for you too, Nuts, you have got to stop re-writing history, and stop stealing lands.

        If you want the violence to stop, END THE OCCUPATION, MAN”.

        No, he did not. In fact he has said Israel’s response to the “violence” is proportionate!

        Kerry and Nutty sitting on a tree…….

      • eljay
        October 22, 2015, 7:35 am

        || Kay24: Kerry and Nutty calls for violence and incitement to stop. Kerry DID NOT turn to Nutty and say “that goes for you too, Nuts, you have got to stop re-writing history, and stop stealing lands. If you want the violence to stop, END THE OCCUPATION, MAN”. … ||

        Zio-supremacists and the “Jewish State” are the hateful and immoral rapist and America is the corrupt cop who – rather than liberate the victim, arrest the rapist and have him tried for his crimes – tells the world that the rapist’s actions are justified. “Shared common values”, indeed.

  23. a blah chick
    October 21, 2015, 2:49 pm

    If I am recalling this correctly I believe Haj Amin fled Palestine in the wake of an assassination, namely one of the British commissioners in the Galilee. He ended up in Beirut where the French watched him like a hawk. They wanted a trouble making Palestinian like a hole in the head. But he eventually slipped out of town.

    So, where can he go? Can’t stay in the Middle East because that’s controlled by Britain or France. Can’t go to Asia or the Americas because that’s too far and he wants to stay in touch with Palestine. Europe is the best option but he can’t go where the Brits can get their hands on him. Germany offers him his best chance. He can offer his services to the Germans in helping to drive the Brits out of Palestine.

    Tom Segev in his book, One Palestine Complete, documents how Haj Amin’s influence in Palestine plummeted after he fled the country. He was never an influential figure but the Germans kept him around because he might prove useful.

    Now, can we please stop the hysteria about the Haj and the Holocaust? Ben Gurion and the Jewish Agency were responsible for far more Jewish deaths than Haj Amin ever was.

  24. lysias
    October 21, 2015, 2:58 pm

    Let us not assassinate this people further, Mr. Netanyahu. You have done enough. Have you no sense of decency sir, at long last? Have you left no sense of decency?

    • Kay24
      October 21, 2015, 3:23 pm

      The world”decency” can never be applied to Netanyahu nor his Israel. Just look at the human rights abuses and the long occupation, nothing decent about that.

      • lysias
        October 21, 2015, 4:30 pm

        I guess you didn’t catch the reference. I just altered slightly Joseph Welch’s protest to Joe McCarthy.

      • Kay24
        October 21, 2015, 7:36 pm

        I did not catch it at first, but now I know. :))

  25. niass2
    October 21, 2015, 3:35 pm

    I Need a Miracle Everyday.

  26. Kay24
    October 21, 2015, 4:24 pm

    My sister in Australia says CNN International was covering this and one of the top headlines. I have not seen anything about this in our MSM, maybe I missed it if it was covered. She also said Angela Merkel had said something to the effect that history should not be re-written, and that the nazis were responsible for all the atrocities against the Jews. According to international reports he has caused an uproar with his comments, but the zionist media in the US seems unconcerned.
    Maybe their bosses are covering Bibi’s big blunder by staying mute about it.

    http://bigstory.ap.org/article/61ead35a427a408e9d93d43f41cfa064/netanyahu-causes-uproar-linking-palestinians-holocaust

    • traintosiberia
      October 21, 2015, 8:23 pm

      History shouldn’t be rewritten!

      Is that. Request.?
      Already the neocons have managed to disorient people about their pivotal unique destructive role in the dismemberment of Iraq , role of heir predecessors in the torture program of SABAK and the calculated expulsion of Palestinian in 1947 , the preplanned attacks on Arab countries with the 100,000 trained troops against the 30,000 Arab peasant troops, Lavon Affairs and above all the unique and important roles in Bolshevik torture program in Soviet,in Hungary,and in post WW1 Germany.

    • Brown-Eyed Girl
      October 21, 2015, 9:33 pm

      No, honey the media and neo-cons in the US are not ignoring it, soon they will be repeating it as gospel truth. My bet is that Marco Rubio repeats it in the next Republican debate.

  27. Marshall
    October 21, 2015, 4:33 pm

    How is Liel Liebowitz spinning this?

  28. MHughes976
    October 21, 2015, 5:10 pm

    Among the interesting aspects of this theory is that there is a degree of reduced culpability for the mass of Nazis – on this showing,,they joined an expulsionist,,not an exterminationist, movement and the change in policy was never announced.
    All part of the many implications of the idea that the dire events of WW2 were due to a change in rather than to the continuity of, Nazi policy. There would seem to be a Sudden Change and a Gradual Change version of the basic idea.
    Let us consider these things. If there was a Sudden Change, due ex hypothesi to a meeting with Husseini (the date of Nov.28, 1941 is mentioned) then Hitler, who was not given to policy change, must have been quite extraordinarily impressed by this non-Aryan leader of a religion that lay outside all Euro tradition. Surely something would stand conspicuously on the record, since there is such abundant record of Hitler”s conversations.
    Moreover, it is hard to think that even Hitler could have implemented a major change in policy, giving the necessary instructions and providing the necessary resources, as late in the course of events as this implies, without leaving some clear mark on the record that something different and momentous, a whole new policy for Occupied Poland and E. Europe, was in.hand. But this does not seem to be so. On the contrary, the main burden of accusation against Hitler has dwelt on relentless continuity – see for instance Snyder’s Bloodlands and ‘Generalplan Ost’.
    The second version, suggesting gradual change, does not require any single central,decision, just a gradual coming to accept, perhaps mainly at lowerlevels of command, that dire things would have to be done. But again, this change and its imputed motive would have to leave some mark among the records and memoirs. Yet if ideas like ‘We could do with the Arabs on our side’ ‘Policy must reflect our need for Muslim support’ were around they seem hardly to have been prevalent or powerful enough to change the direction of events so drastically. I’ve never seen any suggestion that conciliating Muslims was a significant policy element at Wannsee.
    Continuity rather than change seems a more likely theme for the dire events and that leaves no real scope for any Muslim to have influenced events to a serious degree.

    • lysias
      October 21, 2015, 5:31 pm

      The following on the Mufti from Hitler’s Table Talk for July 1, 1942 gives no indication that he decisively influenced Hitler’s Jewish policy:

      The other principal actor in this part of the
      world, the Grand Mufti, is also a realist rather than a dreamer,
      where politics are concerned. With his blond hair and blue
      eyes, he gives one the impression that he is, in spite of his sharp
      and mouse-like countenance, a man with more than one
      Aryan among his ancestors and one who may well be descended
      from the best Roman stock. In conversation he shows himself
      to be a pre-eminently sly old fox. To gain time in which to
      think, he not infrequently has things translated to him first into
      French and then into Arabic; and sometimes he carries his
      caution so far that he asks that certain points be committed
      straightway to writing. When he does speak, he weighs each
      word very carefully. His quite exceptional wisdom puts him
      almost on equal terms with the Japanese.

      • MHughes976
        October 23, 2015, 9:42 am

        Today’s Independent has another article arguing at length that ‘even by the standards of Netanyah!s rhetoric this was surely a step too far’ and mentioning Avraham Burg’s belief that these remarks are connected with premature reconciliation with Germany. There certainly is an element of mending fences with everyone except the Palestinians and their supporters here.
        I suppose that the Mufti had to fear that Nazi policy might eventually turn towards a Jewish client state in Palestine – that would have been the logic of the shadowy pre-war Transfer Agreement, of which one aspect was a Germany-Palestine economic link. However, that fact does not show that policy affecting the occupied territories in wartime was, or that he needed to fear that it was, transfer-related. Presumably these matters will be thrashed out more when some academic historians come, as I’m sure they will, to Netanyahu’s defence.

  29. Keith
    October 21, 2015, 5:11 pm

    Folks, I think that a lot of us are missing the obvious. The fact that Netanyahu’s claims are ludicrous is much less significant than the fact that this is becoming a highly effective propaganda offensive. First, it brings up (yet again) the Holocaust and Jewish suffering. Second, it forces pro-Palestinians on the defensive in regards the Mufti. Netanyahu can get away with this because the MSN will not raise the issue of the much greater Zionist collaboration with the Nazis. Don’t hold your breath waiting for a special on Dr. Rudolph Kastner. Lies are an essential part of effective propaganda and this is no exception. Does anyone here expect Hillary or Bernie to make an indignant response? And all of the Republicans have claimed him as their buddy. Therefore, all of the major Democratic and Republican candidates for President are de facto supporters of this latest lie. Perhaps that was Netanyahu’s primary purpose.

    • RoHa
      October 21, 2015, 7:45 pm

      That is exactly the point.

      N wants to make this a standard line, to be repeated endlessly, and thus become part of the mush of fashionable ideas that slosh around the media, the politicians, and the artsy-fartsy chattering classes. Truth is irrelevant.

      “Iran is trying to build nuclear weapons. Russia invaded Crimea. Food X is good for you, and food Y is bad for you. Food Y is good for you, and food X is bad for you. Our law and democracy are based on the Ten Commandments. And so forth.”

      Keep spouting the tripe and you will be accepted by your peers. Just don’t say anything that will cause any problems for Goldman Sachs.

      • RoHa
        October 22, 2015, 7:10 pm

        And there is comment that does need editing!

    • Sibiriak
      October 22, 2015, 5:55 am

      Keith: Folks, I think that a lot of us are missing the obvious. The fact that Netanyahu’s claims are ludicrous is much less significant than the fact that this is becoming a highly effective propaganda offensive. First, it brings up (yet again) the Holocaust and Jewish suffering. Second, it forces pro-Palestinians on the defensive in regards the Mufti. Netanyahu can get away with this because the MSN will not raise the issue of the much greater Zionist collaboration with the Nazis.

      ——————
      Excellent points. Sadly.

    • Darwin26
      October 22, 2015, 8:57 pm

      you are so right on target … Bernie is Israhell First he’ll never say anything, and Pinocchio, she’s all about Israhell as well …any way to get a war going, Frump from the swamps. The Repugs are all wrapped up in Israhell. They’ll be wanting him ‘sainted’

  30. Les
    October 21, 2015, 5:55 pm

    This is the Netanyahu who must take pride in the medal Goebbels had minted to celebrate zionist and Nazi cooperation, with the zionist star on one side and the swastika on the other side.

    Read about it and see the medal at
    http://cosmos.ucc.ie/cs1064/jabowen/IPSC/articles/article0062443.html

  31. MaxNarr
    October 21, 2015, 8:30 pm

    It’s completely true that the mufti was allied with Hitler against the Jews.

    • Mooser
      October 23, 2015, 1:14 am

      “It’s completely true that the mufti was allied with Hitler against the Jews.”

      And put his loyal and well-trained legions, and all his military, financial and diplomatic resources behind Hitler in WW2.

      Or maybe the Mufti was appointed by the British, in oh, 1921, and had been removed and was well off the scene by the time Hitler came to power. Which do you think it is “MaxNarr”?

  32. ckg
    October 21, 2015, 8:43 pm

    I am very sorry about this very long quote, but it’s a bit hilarious. Matt Lee in charge:

    QUESTION: I have one more and then I’ll stop. Just the – Prime Minister Netanyahu has been complaining vociferously about incitement coming from the Palestinian side, and the Secretary and you have all – as well as the President – have all talked about the need to stop incitement. In that context, I’m wondering if you saw Prime Minister Netanyahu’s comments from last night about the Holocaust and about the grand mufti of Jerusalem and whether you think that that, as some Palestinians have suggested, amounts to incitement.

    MR KIRBY: Well, again, I’m not going to get into specific characterizations. I’ve tried to avoid that recently. We’ve certainly seen and we’re aware of the prime minister’s statements. And as President Obama said, certainly Secretary Kerry has made clear, we want to stress publicly and privately the importance of preventing inflammatory rhetoric, accusations, or actions on both sides that can lead to violence.

    QUESTION: Well, can I pick up on that?

    QUESTION: Does this count? I mean, does this go – does that – does this enter that category?

    MR KIRBY: I’m not going to characterize each and every statement or action. I think we’ve been clear about what we want to see, which is moving away from rhetoric or actions that just encourage the violence. But I’m not going to get into characterizing each one.

    QUESTION: Is it historically correct? Do you believe that —

    MR KIRBY: I’m also not going to get into a historical debate about this. We’ve seen the press reports of his comments, and if you look at them they would connote that the scholarly evidence does not support that position.

    QUESTION: Well, can I – may I?

    MR KIRBY: Do I really have a choice? (Laughter.)

    QUESTION: Not really. When you say something like that, I mean, come on. You stand at this podium day after day and you talk about incitement and the Palestinians incite something, and then the prime minister says something that is not only obviously factually incorrect but just so exploitative in this environment, and you’re dancing around the fact that it was inappropriate without just kind of saying what you’re hinting at, that these were inflammatory remarks that only contribute to the type of destabilization that you’re asking.

    MR KIRBY: Right. No, Elise, I mean, I understand where you’re coming from. I’ve been, I think, consistent and I’m going to stay consistent that we’re not going to get into a characterization of each and every incident and each and every word spoken. What we want to see and we want – I think what we want to do is for everybody to take a few steps back, and we want to see the inflammatory rhetoric, we want to see inflammatory actions, we want to see provocative movements, all that stuff stop so that there can be an end to the violence, so that there can be some political breathing space for some real solutions.

    QUESTION: (Off-mike.)

    QUESTION: May I? When you go – I mean, you do say when there are Holocaust deniers and such, you’re quick to point out the inaccuracy of their statements. So I take it to mean that the reason that you’re not publicly criticizing it is because you think that this would just contribute to a bad climate of – what?

    MR KIRBY: Well, I think I’m going to leave my answer the way it was. We’ve seen the press reports of the prime minister’s comments, and in those reports you can see for yourself the scholarly evidence obviously supports a different position. But again, what we – what needs to happen here and why the Secretary is going is to try to find ways – practical, tangible, concrete ways – to reduce the violence.

    QUESTION: Two last quick ones. First of all, you just mentioned that he was going to Jordan to meet with leaders there. I assume you mean that he’s going to meet with President Abbas and King Abdullah.

    MR KIRBY: He is expected to meet with – well, I should say planning to meet with President Abbas and the king, yes.

    QUESTION: And then one last one. You talk about kind of you want to discuss practical ways and have a meaningful discussion. Do I take that to mean that you – while this is not obviously the beginning of a restarting of the peace process, do you consider this trip as kind of the beginning of a discussion where you see the Secretary might be traveling there a little bit more often to try and calm the situation? Like, it doesn’t seem like these two meetings in and of themselves are going to reach some kind of big agreement where things are going to be able to calm down.

    MR KIRBY: Well, let’s not get ahead of meetings that haven’t happened yet and discussions that haven’t taken place. I think I’d just go back to my answer to Matt. I mean, the Secretary believes right now this is an important trip for him to make, these are important discussions for him to have given the spate of violence, and to try to work towards practical ways in which political breathing space can be had, that – to help end the violence. That’s really the focus here —

    QUESTION: But do you see this – but do you see this as the beginning of a dialogue or do you – like, are you hoping for deliverables out of these particular meetings?

    MR KIRBY: Again, I don’t want to get ahead of meetings that haven’t happened yet. I’d – I would say – I would characterize this as a continuation of a dialogue, Elise, that you know the Secretary continues have with leaders in the region, and to include Prime Minister Netanyahu.

    QUESTION: John, let me just follow up on the issue that we began the discussion with. So you don’t find it outrageous that the prime minister of Israel is basically trying to say that the Holocaust was inspired by a Palestinian?

    MR KIRBY: Said, I think I’ve answered the question.

    QUESTION: Well, I mean, try again. Let’s see – because your answer was not very clear. You find – don’t you find this outrageous?

    MR KIRBY: I think I’ve answered the question, Said. We’ve seen the reporting on his comments and in those reports, yourself, you can see that the scholarly evidence doesn’t hold that same view.

    QUESTION: Well, past evidence shows that when there’s that kind of rhetoric – I mean, we can go back all the way to 1995 when such rhetoric resulted in the assassination of the prime minister of Israel. I mean, not the same kind of rhetoric, but saying that the Israeli public or Israeli citizens are compromised by such efforts and so on led in fact – or inspired someone to assassinate the Israeli prime minister, for instance. So with this kind of rhetoric, what kind of atmosphere is the prime minister of Israel fomenting?

    MR KIRBY: Well, I – again, I’m not going to characterize or – every term and every line uttered. What we’d like to see are steps being taken, whether they’re in word or in deed, to reduce the tensions, to try to restore some calm, and to end this terrible violence that’s going on. And that’s what the Secretary’s trying to do on this trip, that’s why he’s going, and that’s where his focus is.

    QUESTION: But that’s not really – forgive me, but that’s not parsing every word or every incident and so on. This is the prime minister of Israel, with whom the Secretary of State will be meeting in a day or two. I mean, coming out to say something that is outrageous, to say – as Elise said – is not historically accurate and so on. So doesn’t that warrant some sort of a statement by you guys, in this case, by the Administration on such inflammatory rhetoric?

    MR KIRBY: Again, Said, we’d made our desires plain and clear about what we want to see happen there in the region.

    QUESTION: What about the point that what he said is basically wrong? Doesn’t the Administration have an obligation to call out an ally and say, “What you said is inaccurate”?

    MR KIRBY: Roz, I’m going to say the same thing here. What we want to see if for calm to be restored, for any inflammatory rhetoric on any side to stop, because ultimately anything that encourages the violence to continue is unhelpful to the security environment there. The Secretary talked about this a little bit last night at the Foreign Policy dinner, about the desire by everybody here at the State Department for innocent men, women, and children to be able to walk the streets safely and to go about their lives normally, and that’s what we want to see here. But I’m simply not going to get into characterizing each and every line.

    QUESTION: That’s right, but —

    MR KIRBY: Again, the scholarly evidence and the press reporting itself speaks for what the position is with respect to the history of the Holocaust.

    QUESTION: But when the German Government has to come out and say that what Netanyahu said was wrong; when the leadership of Yad Vashem has to come out and say that what he said was wrong; when the opposition leader, Mr. Herzog, comes out and says that what Mr. Netanyahu said was wrong; shouldn’t the U.S. at the very least challenge the accuracy of what Mr. Netanyahu said?

    MR KIRBY: I think what we’re trying to do here is take a larger view. And rather than getting into commentary on every word uttered and every act taken –

    QUESTION: Sorry, sorry.

    MR KIRBY: That’s a really nice ring tone.

    QUESTION: No, I’m sorry. I’m sorry. (Laughter.)

    MR KIRBY: We’re trying to get to a point – I mean, I think try – the Secretary wants to take a larger view here, and that is to get the violence to stop, get calm to be restored, and to try to find ways – concrete ways – that we can get to that outcome. And that’s what he’s focused on, and I think that’s the right – I think that is the right focus here.

    QUESTION: John, how —

    QUESTION: And I can appreciate that, but it’s one thing to say something that could be construed as being bigoted or prejudiced or racist. It’s another thing to say something that is a lie. Shouldn’t the U.S. say, “Mr. Prime Minister, what you said is wrong”?

    MR KIRBY: What the Secretary believes the U.S. should do is to look for ways to end the violence and to move forward, so that eventually we can make progress towards a two-state solution. That’s what the Secretary thinks the U.S. should be doing, and that’s why he’s making this trip.

    QUESTION: Yeah, but —

    QUESTION: Change of subject?

    QUESTION: No, no, no, no, hold on.

    QUESTION: The problem —

    MR KIRBY: You said you were done with this.

    QUESTION: No. Well, you opened the door. No one’s asking you to comment on every single comment that’s been made.

    MR KIRBY: Yeah.

    QUESTION: No, we’re not – not every single one. We’re asking about one specific one, which you even yourself acknowledge is historically inaccurate.

    MR KIRBY: What I said was the scholarly evidence takes a different view, a different position on that.

    QUESTION: Okay, scholarly evidence takes a different view and —

    MR KIRBY: And I said that.

    QUESTION: So no one’s asking you about anything else. It’s not – you say, “I’m not going to comment on every single word that comes out” – we’re not.

    MR KIRBY: No, but Matt, you can see where we’ll get into this day by day, and what I’m trying to do is tamp down your expectations for me to characterize each and every comment made, because there’s going to – there could very well be more coming from who knows who. So what I’m trying to do —

    QUESTION: (Inaudible.)

    MR KIRBY: What I’m trying to do is stress where the Secretary’s head is, which is —

    QUESTION: Well, my expectations can’t be tamped down much further than they already are, so —

    MR KIRBY: Well, then —

    QUESTION: — I wish you luck with that.

    MR KIRBY: Then I win, I guess.

    QUESTION: (Laughter.) Well, it’s not a question of winning or losing. It’s a question of whether you’re willing to stand up and take a stand, and it sounds like you’ll say that the scholarly evidence supports a different position, but you won’t say that you think that this was an unhelpful – these were unhelpful comments to make in the broader scheme of what’s going – the intense atmosphere and tensions that are – that exist there. Now, if you’re not willing to do that, I guess that you’re not. So – but I mean, I don’t think – but I don’t think it should go – be – I don’t think it should be glossed over or passed unnoticed that you’re not – that you’re refusing – that the Administration is refusing to take a critical position on this.

    • RoHa
      October 21, 2015, 8:54 pm

      I think your State Department spokesmen are wonderful.

      “What I’m trying to do is stress where the Secretary’s head is, which is -”

      Somewhere near his shoulders, I would hope.

    • just
      October 21, 2015, 8:57 pm

      Thanks very much for sharing that, ckg.

      The rot runs so darn deep and wide in the US government and the halls of power. Kudos to the reporters for their tenacity and their ability to so clearly illustrate the moral cowardice and hypocrisy emanating from this (and every) US administration wrt Israel.

      • inbound39
        October 21, 2015, 9:31 pm

        Just….it’s like they are oblivious to the damage they are doing to America by supporting these clowns in Israel who have never honoured any agreement they have ever signed and who show no respect for anyone at all including themselves. Are they aware the World is laughing at Americas stupidity. I swear I feel like the whole American Government has taken a dumb pill.

      • Boomer
        October 22, 2015, 12:13 pm

        re, inbound39: “I feel like the whole American Government has taken a dumb pill.”

        You are not alone. But maybe there is hope. Everyone in official Washington reads WaPo. As it happens, WaPo has a piece up now titled “How to Act Less Stupid.” It concludes:

        “The worst thing someone can do is act confidently, and seriously, and still not act rationally. That’s as stupid as it gets.”

    • WH
      October 22, 2015, 2:52 am

      The spokespeople of state are so unbelievably pathetic. As if this were just a matter of historical detail, rather than an outrageous smear on a whole people.

    • NickJOCW
      October 22, 2015, 6:18 am

      When I read that I felt ashamed. Then I thought: Why should I feel ashamed. I’m neither American nor Jewish. What it is though is shame for the Western world and Western self proclaimed ‘civilisation’.

  33. Qualtrough
    October 21, 2015, 10:48 pm

    And this mother of all blood libels comes from a soi-disant historian. Funny how Zionists question even the existence of a Palestinian people, except when they want to disparage them. Netanyahu is the gift that keeps on giving. He has done more to jeopardize Israel’s future as a Jewish state than anyone I can think of. Thank you Bibi, we will miss you when you are gone!

  34. Qualtrough
    October 21, 2015, 11:41 pm

    Further to my previous comment, I found this gem on Reddit:

    And he is stating that Palestine existed during Hitlers reign, double rainbow here!

  35. John Turnbull
    October 21, 2015, 11:59 pm

    Dead Cat Strategy. (see Throw a dead cat on the table.).

    While we ridicule, the IDF continues to kill and injure.

  36. amigo
    October 22, 2015, 7:58 am

    It seems to me , that nietanyahu has done far more damage to the Jewish people than the mufti ever did , if indeed , he did.

    In time , all this zionist hasbara will be wiped from the history books and the Mufti will be exonerated and nietanyahu will go down as one of the worst war criminals of the early 21st century.

    Of course , revisionist zionists will still pop up every now and again to “correct” the truth.They will quote every UNSCR/GC article and Hague convention , in a vain effort to convince us that their land was stolen from them in contravention of international law, the same laws , that were ignored by them when the shoe was on the other foot.

    I just hope I am still around to watch that cabaret show.

    I may even have to rethink my doubts in the existence of a God .

  37. Pretext
    October 22, 2015, 8:01 am

    So yesterday he condemns vigilantism, then he accuses Abbas and others of incitement, and today he tells the public that the Palestinians are responsible for the Holocaust.

    Either he’s depending on a sympathetic media to let him have his cake and eat it too, or he’s convinced the world doesn’t even have a 24 hour attention span.

    • John O
      October 22, 2015, 8:31 am

      Quite a lively discussion on this over at the Guardian earlier today (the hasbaristas and CiFWatchers were pretty slow off the mark), although it’s now degenerated into chaos:

      http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/oct/21/netanyahu-faitytale-hitler-mufti-holocaust
      One or two interesting things, though, from well-informed readers, including a fascinating quotation from an Israeli history book:

      ‘It was, however, very much in line with the specific political and pedagogical aspect that Ben-Gurion wanted to assign to the trial. The inflation of the Mufti’s image and his role in the extermination of European Jewry was not confined to the educational and political act of the Eichmann trial. It also seeped into serious historiography of the Holocaust, and found a place, both overtly and by implication, even in a publication which was supposed to be an indisputable and authoritative source of knowledge of the Holocaust. I am referring to the Encyclopedia of the Holocaust, a Yad Vashem international project, which was completed in the 1980s. In his book on the presence of the Holocaust in American life, the American historian Peter Novick noted the astounding fact that the Mufti was depicted by the Encyclopedia’s editors as one of the great designers and perpetrators of the Final Solution: his entry is twice as long as each of the entries devoted to Goebbels and Goering, longer than the two combined entries for Heydrich and Himmler and longer than the entry on Eichmann.39 One might add that in the Hebrew edition of the Encyclopedia, the entry on El-Husseini is almost as long as that on Hitler.’ (Idith Zertal published in Hebrew in 2002, English translation (Cambridge University Press) 2005, ‘Israel’s Holocaust and the Politics of Nationhood’.

      • Sibiriak
        October 22, 2015, 9:10 am

        John O American historian Peter Novick noted the astounding fact that the Mufti was depicted by the Encyclopedia’s editors as one of the great designers and perpetrators of the Final Solution..
        ————
        Here is the passage from Peter Novick’s book:

        Beyond a diffuse relationship between the Holocaust and Israel’s cause, specific themes were developed. One was connecting Arabs in general, and Palestinians in particular, with Nazism. In part this was just a matter of rhetorical flourishes. (“The checkered kaffiya of the PLO has replaced Hitler’s blackshirt.”)

        In part it was a trope of shlock fiction. In Leon Uris’s Exodus (both the novel and the film), Palestinian terrorism is masterminded by an escaped Nazi in the background. In dozens of thrillers (like Frederick Forsyth’s The Odessa File), unrepentant Nazis collaborate with Arabs to destroy Israel.

        But serious arguments were also advanced about continuity between Nazism and the Palestinian movement. “The Arabs cannot pretend they played no role in the Holocaust,” said I. L. Kenen, the head of AIPAC. “The Palestinians, or many of them,” wrote Leon Wieseltier, “were Hitler’s little helpers in the Middle East.”

        The claims of Palestinian complicity in the murder of the European Jews were to some extent a defensive strategy, a preemptive response to the Palestinian complaint that if Israel was recompense for the Holocaust, it was unjust that Palestinian Muslims should pick up the bill for the crimes of European Christians.

        The assertion that Palestinians were complicit in the Holocaust was mostly based on the case of the Mufti of Jerusalem, a pre-World War II Palestinian nationalist leader who, to escape imprisonment by the British, sought refuge during the war in Germany. The Mufti was in many ways a disreputable character, but postwar claims that he played any significant part in the Holocaust have never been sustained.

        This did not prevent the editors of the four-volume Encyclopedia of the Holocaust from giving him a starring role. 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.

        ——————

        Peter Novick, “The Holocaust in American Life”

      • Boomer
        October 22, 2015, 12:06 pm

        Fascinating. I infer that both Zertal’s book and Novick’s would be worth reading, for those with a serious interest.

      • Sibiriak
        October 22, 2015, 12:22 pm

        Regarding the Eichmann trial, “the Mufti,” Zertal and Holocaust ideology, Baruch Kimmerling writes:

        One striking effort of the attorney general during Eichmann’s trial was to equate the Arabs with the Nazis. This was achieved by inflating the role of Haj Amin al-Husseini, the prominent Palestinian political and religious leader (chairman of the Supreme Muslim Council and the mufti of Jerusalem) in the extermination of the Jews. In 1937, a year after the outbreak of the Arab Revolt, the British tried to arrest Husseini, among other Arab rebels, in the hope of quelling the uprising. Husseini escaped to Fascist Italy and then to Germany, where he offered his services to Hitler.

        There is no doubt that he saw in Nazi Germany an important ally against Zionism and, in at least one case, he tried to intervene to prevent the rescue of 10,000 Jewish children to Palestine. Husseini probably knew and approved of the Nazi plan to annihilate the Jewish people and hoped to receive a proper position in “liberated Palestine.” He helped the Nazis form a collaborationist Muslim brigade in Bosnia, and to broadcast propaganda to the Arab world.

        However, the argument that he was a chief adviser to the Nazis on the “solution of the Jewish problem”–an argument on prominent display at Yad Vashem, Israel’s Holocaust Museum–is preposterous. The Germans did not need Husseini’s advice and in fact scorned the non-Aryan religious cleric.

        Since then, however, “the mufti” has become one of the major assets of pro-Israel propaganda. The argument was and is as follows: The Arabs do not accept the establishment of a Jewish state in Palestine, therefore they are anti-Semites who want to annihilate all the Jews and to accomplish the Nazi program–the best example being the mufti’s alliance with Nazi Germany. This social construction of reality ignores not only the complexity and the fundamentally different basis of the Israeli-Arab conflict but also some inconvenient historical facts.

        One such fact is that while assisting the Nazis, the mufti lost almost all his influence over the Palestinian Arabs, which he never regained. Another is that during the 1930s and ’40s Palestine was the only country in the region (and perhaps in the whole world) where no Nazi party or organization was established. During the 1930s, some Arab, as well as some Jewish, leaders expressed admiration for fascist regimes, but this was before the racist bases of these regimes became clear. It was only much later that Arabs borrowed anti-Semitic literature and motifs from the Europeans and used them in their propaganda.

        […]

        Zertal cogently demonstrates how a social construction of a “second coming Holocaust” was built before and during the wars of 1948 and 1967 for the mobilization of domestic public opinion, world Jewry and Western nations. In fact, this campaign of fear directly contradicted the Zionist dogma asserting that a Jewish state in Palestine would insure Jewish security (and normalize Jewish existence).

        This inherent paradox was ironically expressed by Israeli Prime Minister Levi Eshkol, who referred to the Jewish state as Shimshon der Nebedicher (in Yiddish “the Wretched Samson”), the mighty military superpower that considers itself a victim. By invoking the Holocaust as a catastrophe whose repetition had to be avoided by any means (such as Abba Eban’s famous definition of the Green Line as “Auschwitz borders”), Israeli leaders unburdened themselves of almost any moral restrictions, or even obedience to internal and international laws, whether it came to the making of nuclear weapons (with France’s assistance and America’s tacit acceptance), the occupation of the West Bank and Gaza or the invasion of Lebanon.

        Faced with political problems, Israel saw only existential threats. Once the Palestinian national movement was defined as a mortal threat to Jewish survival, any response to it, from the demolition of homes to the bombing of refugee camps, could be justified as legitimate self-defense.

        ————————

        Baruch Kimmerling, “Israel’s Culture of Martyrdom”
        http://www.thenation.com/article/israels-culture-martyrdom/

      • Keith
        October 23, 2015, 7:54 pm

        SIBIRIAK- (Kimmerling quote) “However, the argument that he was a chief adviser to the Nazis on the “solution of the Jewish problem”–an argument on prominent display at Yad Vashem, Israel’s Holocaust Museum–is preposterous.”

        Preposterous but useful. All of these Holocaust museums/movies which sprouted-up after 1967 are evidence of power, not victimhood. The power to control the narrative and substitute myth-history for unvarnished history.

  38. debs bleicher
    October 22, 2015, 8:22 am

    This propagandistic comment is consistent with all the other racist remarks made by both Bibi and all the other zionist Ideologues . This fear mongering is not a sign of historical inaccuracy but an attempt to stampede world wide jewry to side with the zionist project to continue to create apartheid in Israel. “bibi” wants to be the super jew of the planet.

  39. Ossinev
    October 22, 2015, 8:26 am

    And Haj Amin al-Husseini went to Hitler and said, ‘If you expel them, they’ll all come here (to Palestine).’ According to Netanyahu, Hitler then asked: “What should I do with them?” and the mufti replied: “Burn them.”

    Just a minor technical point and apologies if I have missed something in the mix. There is an implicit verbatim element here. Was Nitaycase quoting from the minutes of a meeting where the comments were recorded ? Highly unlikely to put it mildly .If not and again, apologies if I have mixed something in the mix,if not quoting from actual minutes who was the source and when was the information revealed and to who ?

    • Boomer
      October 22, 2015, 12:03 pm

      “who was the source and when was the information revealed and to who ?”

      Probably the same source as for all those conversations God used to have with various people, as recorded in the Bible. What matters is the narrative, the story, the myth. Facts are unimportant.

      • MHughes976
        October 22, 2015, 12:46 pm

        There are a couple of accounts of the meeting – I can’t claim more than having read some of them on Wikipedia. Today’s Independent has a front page picture and a long inside article (Ben Lynfield). There’s a quote from Moshe Zimmerman of Hebrew University: ‘A protocol of the meeting written by Hitler’s translator, Paul Scmidr, contains no quotation like the one Netsnyahu made – Netanyahu just invented a dialogue of which there is nothing in the protocol’. The other account of the meeting seems no different in this resoect. Zimmerman’s statement is surely pure truth,, Netanyahu’s irresponsible fabrication.
        Keith has suggested that N is doing well in the propaganda arena, but I think that on balance this is bad for him. Those who approve are probably those who were absolutely on his side already. Waverers, I suppose the sort of people who linger a little over discussion, are likely to be unimpressed.
        Meanwhile, thanks to lysias for that useful report from Table Talk.

      • MHughes976
        October 22, 2015, 12:56 pm

        Sorry, Paul Schmidt

  40. Boo
    October 22, 2015, 9:59 am

    Well, at least we finally have Bibi acknowledging that there are such people as Palestinians, and that they existed in Palestine before there was such a place as Israel. That’s one he won’t be able to walk back.

  41. traintosiberia
    October 22, 2015, 12:15 pm

    Martin Gilbert in his book : CHURCHILL AND THE JEWS
    A Lifelong Friendship
    Documents on numerous pages following facts
    Arab revolt was in response to the Jewish immigration and nation building efforts
    Churchill would fight for the establishment of state of Israel
    Jewish mega donors were his boss
    State of Israel had to wait until Hitler and Mussolini were defeated because only the defeat would make that possible.
    He was denouncing not only Chamberlain and later Baldwin but also any British officials who for moral,ethical as well as for British national interests were speaking against the immigration and Jewish nation building effort .
    Churchill denounced Mufti because he could have hindered his plan .
    He admitted not only the influence of Russian and German Jews but also the power of the American Jewry in the activities of the Zionists both terrorists and non terrorists ( if narrowly defined on the target of terrorism : Jews were called terrorists when hey killed British )

    From Martin Gilbert .

    Churchill ,if had the power would definitely have Mufti executed through show trial at Nuremberg but British Home Office had nothing and they exposed the attempted forgery to implicate Mufti .

    Fact of the matter is that all of the Zionist leaders were guilty of the crimes that Mufti was accused of but not proved .

  42. Rashers2
    October 22, 2015, 1:46 pm

    That Mr. Miliekowsky’s “lost the plot” on the Holocaust narrative may not be so great a surprise; given his upbringing, it’s arguable that he hadn’t much chance to become closely acquainted with some aspects of reality in the first place. This, however, is a true “own goal” even by the standards of ineptitude and lack of judgment for which Hasbara-mongers are notorious. Was it a hackneyed attempt at projection (“It’s not the Nazis but the Palestinians who were/are REALLY responsible for the Holocaust…”) in the light of the current upswing in Palestinian unrest, coupled with a wildly ill-starred and ill-advised attempt to be “nice” to the Germans who, this week, were hosting him?

    Chancellor Merkel, who is rumoured to dislike Mileikowsky personally at least as much as does Obama, rapidly put him right: Merkel, one; Mileikowsky, nil.

    What prompted such a wild and readily-refutable piece of revisionism to be articulated by the Israeli P. M. is open to conjecture. The respected British chronicler of 20th Century conflicts and expert on WWs I and II, Max Arthur, gave a restrained interview to AJ News where he was questioned about Mileikowsky’s attempted “whitewashing” of the Nazi dictator and demonization of the [former] Grand Mufti. Arthur, whose war studies for the Imperial War Museum in London have earned him critical acclaim and an honour, demolished the Mileikowsky claim (as have numerous other equally credible, academic sources), simply pointing out that the meeting at which the ex- Grand Mufti allegedly urged Hitler to “burn the Jews” occurred late in 1941, by which time hundreds of thousands of Jews (and others) had already been murdered by the Nazis both domestically and in the occupied European territories; and that the industrial-scale extermination camps which operated from 1942 onwards were, by then, practically ready to be put into commission as part of Himmler’s “final solution” (i. e. they must have been planned years before the alleged exchange occurred between Hitler and Al-Husseini). A causal link is thus wholly implausible.

    Arthur, who described the P. M. as a man of high intelligence (to the former’s credit, he did not use the term “intellect”), figuratively shrugged his shoulders when asked what might have inspired this outlandish “go” at revising the history of Europe between 1933 and 1945, pondering merely that Mileikowsky might, just now, be under considerable strain and pressure (restive natives, etc.). I was thinking, “Perhaps the stress of looking in the mirror every morning and seeing what he really is has robbed him of whatever self-censorship remained.”

    • Jon66
      October 22, 2015, 6:25 pm

      Rashers,

      I’m curious. Do you also refer to Kareem Abdul-Jabbar as Lew Alcindor, Muhammad Ali as Cassius Clay, or Yusuf Islam as Cat Stevens?

      • Annie Robbins
        October 23, 2015, 3:33 pm

        i still refer to yusuf islam as cat stevens but i don’t do it out of disrespect. what difference does it make wrt netanyahu anyway. he’s a racist war criminal responsible for slaughtering thousands. he deserves nothing — no sign of respect from me.

      • Rashers2
        October 23, 2015, 4:15 pm

        I do not call the three you have named by their previous names, although I still think of Cat Stevens and Cassius Clay by the names under which they first achieved prominence. The reason I do not is that their adopted names result from conversion to a religion; in their cases, Islam. The family of the Israeli Prime Minister were as Jewish when they were the Mileikowskys in what was variously, through the ages, part of Lithuania or Poland as they are now that they call themselves something different, somewhere else. The Prime Minister’s father assumed the name “Netanyahu” when he moved to Palestine as a Zionist conceit, not as a result either of a religious conversion or as an aid to assimilation (many European Jews who immigrated to the USA or to my country of origin changed their names in order better to blend in with their new social surroundings and not gratuitously betray that they and their children weren’t from “round here” – “Grünwald”, e. g. would not infrequently become anglicised to “Greenwood” – I would not dream of calling such a person by a name other than “Greenwood”).
        I refer to the response I gave two days ago to Rodneywatts, “… the reasons I call him “Mileikowsky” are: a) it is his family name; b) the adopted name means “Gift from God” and, even as an agnostic myself, Mileikowsky’s conduct makes acquiescing in such a conceit difficult for me; and c) it may serve to remind any who reflect on the usage that he (in common with the great majority of Ashkenazim colonists) has few genuine, Levantine pretensions but that his heritage is solidly European.” I trust this assuages you curiosity.

    • John O
      October 23, 2015, 12:03 pm

      BN’s actions remind me of one of the demented colonels in “Catch 22”, the one who draws up a list of his actions that are either “feathers in the cap” or “black eyes”.

      So BN – get a rebuttal from Mutti Merkel: black eye; get the story of the Mufti and the Fuhrer on front pages worldwide: feather in my cap.

  43. Misterioso
    October 22, 2015, 6:55 pm

    For the record:

    After WWII, a memorandum dated January 11, 1941, was discovered in Ankara. Prepared by the German Naval Attaché in Turkey, it revealed that Naftali Lubentschik, one of the Yishuv’s terrorist Stern Gang’s representatives, had met with German Nazis, Otto Von Hentig and Rudolph Rosen in Vichy controlled Beirut and proposed that in exchange for military aid and freedom to recruit European Jews for Palestine, the Sternists were prepared “…to take an active part in the war on Germany’s side…and [this cooperation] would also be in line with one [of Hitler’s recent speeches, which] stressed that any alliance would be entered into in order to isolate England and defeat it.”

    The proposition presented to the Nazis pointed out that “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 maintaining and strengthening the future German position of power in the Near East.” (Quoted by Klaus Polkehn, “The Secret Contacts: Zionist-Nazi Relations, 1933-1941,” Lenny Brenner, Zionism in the Age of Dictators, and Yediot Aharnot, February 4/1983). Fortunately, the Nazis considered the Stern Gang’s proposal to be sheer lunacy and rejected it out of hand.

    Following Stern’s death at the hands of the British in 1942, three of his lieutenants (one of whom was Yitzhak Shamir) took over leadership of the Stern Gang.

    It is revealing to note that despite Abraham Stern’s ignominious record and his flirtation with the Nazis, Ben-Gurion later referred to him as “one of the finest and most outstanding figures of the era.”

    • Blake
      February 7, 2017, 10:50 pm

      Yes and from that same book on Page 74 Eichmann claimed at his Nuremburg trial he traveled to Palestine to meet the mufti but in actual fact he travelled to meet with Feivel Polkes of Hagannah.

  44. iResistDe4iAm
    October 26, 2015, 7:42 am

    Holocaust Denial Hasbara: “Haj Amin al-Husseini made me do it”

    Haj Amin al… who?

    And how many divisions does the Mufti have?

    And why did the mastermind travel all the way to Berlin to implement his final solution, why not implement it in Jerusalem?

    Perhaps Netanyahu should stop being a Holocaust denier and stick to his anti-Muslim bigotry instead. It’s likely that he would’ve gained the support of millions of racists had he made up a different lie — that Haj Adolf al-Hitler was a secret Muslim (à la Obama).

Leave a Reply