THE END OF PALESTINE


palestine-flag-1939

Daniel Greenfield gives out a dose of reality pertaining to a Two-State Solution between the Jewish State of Israel and the Islamic terrorism of Arabs that made up a non-existent Palestinian nation.

 

JRH 2/18/17 (Hat Tip Donald Moore – Blind Conservatives)

Please Support NCCR

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

THE END OF PALESTINE

 

By Daniel Greenfield

February 16, 2017

FrontPageMag

 

Daniel Greenfield, a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the Freedom Center, is a New York writer focusing on radical Islam

hamas-terrorists

Palestine is many things. A Roman name and a Cold War lie. Mostly it’s a justification for killing Jews.

 

Palestine was an old Saudi-Soviet scam which invented a fake nationality for the Arab clans who had invaded and colonized Israel. This big lie transformed the leftist and Islamist terrorists run by them into the liberators of an imaginary nation. Suddenly the efforts of the Muslim bloc and the Soviet bloc to destroy the Jewish State became an undertaking of sympathetically murderous underdogs.

 

But the Palestine lie is past its sell by date.

 

What we think of as “Palestinian” terrorism was a low-level conflict pursued by the Arab Socialist states in between their invasions of Israel. After several lost wars, the terrorism was all that remained. Egypt, Syria and the USSR threw in the towel on actually destroying Israel with tanks and jets, but funding terrorism was cheap and low-risk. And the rewards were disproportionate to the cost.

 

For less than the price of a single jet fighter, Islamic terrorists could strike deep inside Israel while isolating the Jewish State internationally with demands for “negotiations” and “statehood.”

 

After the Cold War ended, Russia was low on cash and the PLO’s Muslim sugar daddies were tired of paying for Arafat’s wife’s shoe collection and his keffiyah dry cleaning bills.

 

The terror group was on its last legs. “Palestine” was a dying delusion that didn’t have much of a future.

 

That’s when Bill Clinton and the flailing left-wing Israeli Labor Party which, unlike its British counterpart, had failed to adapt to the new economic boom, decided to rescue Arafat and create “Palestine”.

 

The resulting terrorist disaster killed thousands, scarred two generations of Israelis, isolated the country and allowed Jerusalem, Tel Aviv and other major cities to come under fire for the first time since the major wars. No matter how often Israeli concessions were met with Islamic terrorism, nothing seemed able to shake loose the two-state solution monkey on Israel’s back. Destroying Israel, instantaneously or incrementally, had always been a small price to pay for maintaining the international order.

 

The same economic forces that were transforming the world after the Cold War had salvaged “Palestine”. Arafat had lost his sponsors in Moscow, but his new sugar daddy’s name was “Globalism”.

 

The Cold War had been the focus of international affairs. What replaced it was the conviction that a new world tied together by international commerce, the internet and international law would be born.

 

The demands of a clan in Hebron used to be able to hijack the attention of the world because the scope of the clash between Capitalism and Communism could globalize any local conflict. Globalization was just as insistent on taking local conflicts and making them the world’s business through its insistence that every place was connected. The terrorist blowing up an Israeli pizzeria affected stock prices in New York, the expansion prospects of a company in China and the risk of another terrorist attack in Paris. And interconnectedness, from airplane hijacking to plugging into the international’s left alliance of global protest movements, had become the  best weapon of Islamic terrorists.

 

But now globalization is dying. And its death may just take “Palestine” with it.

 

A new generation of leaders is rising who are actively hostile to globalization. Trump and Brexit were the most vocal rebukes to transnationalism. But polls suggest that they will not be the only ones. The US and the UK, once the vanguards of the international order, now have governments that are competitively seeking national advantages rather than relying on the ordered rules of the transnational safety net.

 

These governments will not just toss aside their commitment to a Palestinian state. Not when the Saudis, Qataris and countless other rich and powerful Muslim countries bring it up at every session.

 

But they will be less committed to it.

 

45% of Americans support the creation of a PLO state. 42% are opposed. That’s a near split. These historical numbers have to be viewed within the context of the larger changes sweeping the country.

 

The transnationalists actively believed that it was their job to solve the problems of other countries. Nationalists are concerned with how the problems of other countries directly impinge on them without resorting to the mystical interconnectedness of everything, from climate change to global justice, that is at the core of the transnational worldview.

 

More intense competition by Western nations may make it easier for Islamic agendas to gain influence through the old game of divide and conquer. Nations facing terrorism will still find that the economic influence of Islamic oil power will rally the Western trading partners of Islam against them.

 

But without the transnational order, such efforts will often amount to little more than lip service.

 

Nationalist governments will find Israel’s struggle against the Islamic invaders inconvenient because it threatens their business interests, but they will also be less willing to rubber stamp the terror agenda the way that transnationalist governments were willing to do. The elimination of the transnational safety net will also cause nationalist governments to look harder at consequences and results.

 

Endlessly pouring fortunes into a Palestinian state that will never exist just to keep Muslim oil tyrants happy is not unimaginable behavior even for a nationalist government. Japan has been doing just that.

 

But it will be a less popular approach for countries that don’t suffer from Japan’s energy insecurity.

 

Transnationalists are ideologically incapable of viewing a problem as unsolvable. Their faith in human progress through international law made it impossible for them to give up on the two-state solution.

 

Nationalist governments have a colder and harder view of human nature. They will not endlessly pour efforts and resources into a diplomatic black hole. They will eventually take “No” for an answer.

 

This won’t mean instantaneous smooth sailing for Israel. It will however mean that the exit is there.

 

For two decades, pledging allegiance to the two-state solution and its intent to create a deadly Islamic terror state inside Israel has been the price demanded of the Jewish State for its participation in the international community. That price will not immediately vanish. But it will become easier to negotiate.

 

The real change will be on the “Palestinian” side where a terrorist kleptoracy feeds off human misery in its mansions downwind of Ramallah. That terror state, conceived insincerely by the enemies of the West during the Cold War and sincerely brought into being by Western transnationalists after the Cold War ended, is a creature of that transnational order.

 

The “Palestinian Authority”, a shell company of the PLO which is a shell company of the Fatah terrorists, has no economy worth speaking of. It has foreign aid. Its diplomatic achievements are achieved for it by the transnational network of foreign diplomats, the UN, the media and assorted international NGOs. During the last round of “negotiations”, Secretary of State John Kerry even attempted to do the negotiating on behalf of the Palestinian Authority in the talks with Israel.

 

Take away the transnational order and the Palestinian Authority will need a new sugar daddy. The Saudis are better at promising money than actually delivering it. Russia may decide to take on the job. But it isn’t about to put in the money and resources that the PA has grown used to receiving from us.

 

Without significant American support, the Palestinian Authority will perish. And the farce will end.

 

It won’t happen overnight. But Israel now has the ability to make it happen if it is willing to take the risk of transforming a corrosive status quo into a conflict that will be more explosive in the short term, but more manageable in the long term.

 

Prime Minister Netanyahu, in stark contrast to rivals on the left like Peres and on the right like Sharon, is not a gambler. The peace process was a big gamble. As was the withdrawal from Lebanon and the expulsion from Gaza. These gambles failed and left behind scars and enduring crises.

 

Unlike the prime ministers before and after him, Netanyahu has made no big moves. Instead he serves as a sensible steward of a rising economy and a growing nation. He has stayed in office for so long because Israelis know that he won’t do anything crazy. That sensible stewardship, which infuriated Obama who accused him of refusing to take risks, has made him one of the longest serving leaders in Israeli history.

 

Netanyahu is also a former commando who participated in the rescue of a hijacked airplane. He doesn’t believe in taking foolish risks until he has his shot all lined up. But the time is coming when not taking a risk will be a bigger risk than taking a risk. Eventually he will have to roll the dice.

 

The new nationalist wave may not hold. The transnational order may return. Or the new wave may prove darker and more unpredictable. It’s even possible that something else may take its place.

 

The status quo, a weak Islamist-Socialist terror state in Ramallah supported by the United States, a rising Muslim Brotherhood terror state in Gaza backed by Qatar and Turkey, and an Israel using technological brilliance to manage the threat from both, is already unstable. It may collapse in a matter of years.

 

The PLO has inflicted a great deal of diplomatic damage on Israel and Hamas has terrorized its major cities. Together they form an existential threat that Israel has allowed to grow under the guise of managing it. The next few years may leave Israel with a deadlier and less predictable struggle.

 

“Palestine” is dying. Israel didn’t kill it. The fall of the transnational order did. The question is what will take its place. As the nationalist wave sweeps the West, Israel has the opportunity to reclaim its nation.

_____________

ABOUT DANIEL GREENFIELD

 

Daniel Greenfield, a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the Freedom Center, is a New York writer focusing on radical Islam.

 

READ MORE

 

© COPYRIGHT 2017, FRONTPAGEMAG.COM

 

ABOUT FPM

 

FRONTPAGE MAG IS A PROUD PROJECT OF THE DAVID HOROWITZ FREEDOM CENTER

 

The DHFC is dedicated to the defense of free societies whose moral, cultural and economic foundations are under attack by enemies both secular and religious, at home and abroad.

 

The David Horowitz Freedom Center combats the efforts of the radical left and its Islamist allies to destroy American values and disarm this country as it attempts to defend itself in a time of terror.  The leftist offensive is most obvious on our nation’s campuses, where the Freedom Center protects students from indoctrination and intimidation and works to give conservative students a place in the marketplace of ideas from which they are otherwise excluded.  Combining forceful analysis and bold activism, the Freedom Center provides strong insight into today’s most pressing issue on its family of websites and in the activist campaigns it wages on campus, in the news media, and in national politics throughout the year.

 

David Horowitz began the Center for the Study of Popular Culture in 1988 to establish a conservative presence in Hollywood and show how popular culture had become a political battleground. Over the next 18 years, CSPC attracted 50,000 contributing supporters and established programs such as READ THE REST

 

Chanukah – Christmas, 2016


Intro to ‘Chanukah – Christmas, 2016

John R. Houk, Editor

Posted December 25, 2016

By Ari Bussel

 

I am a Christian Zionist. A person decried by the American Left, many if not most Progressive Christians (typically Mainline Christians) and a lot distrusting Jews (I’m guessing among the Jewish Left and distrustful Observant Orthodox Jews.

 

Being a Christian Zionist means I believe in the sovereign existence of the Jewish State of Israel. AND since I’m a Right Winger that believes Israel is the Promised Land to the Jews, I also fall on the side of the Greater Israel as the Land of the Jews. That belief steps on the toes of a lot of current sovereign Muslim nations and not just the Arabs pretending to be the non-existent Palestinians.

 

I say all this because I am quite appreciative of my online friends Ari Bussel and Norma Zager who often share the Jewish perspectives on current events affecting Israel and the Jews still spread around globally.

 

In this case Ari sends a Christmas message to Christians which includes a very succinct explanation of Chanukah which should bring at least a little self-musing by non-Jews of how God Almighty’s hand is upon the Jews – the Twelve Hebrew Tribes – and their God-given Land.

 

From a Christian perspective, without Jews there would be no Redeemer Jesus the Christ come to save humanity from the curse bequeathed by Adam and Eve to their descendants.

 

JRH 12/25/16

Please Support NCCR

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

 

 My father, Capt. Dr. Bussel, second from left, with friends for life Chanukah in the Sinai Desert, Yom Kippur War, 1973

 

Chanukah – Christmas, 2016

 

By Ari Bussel

Sent 12/23/2016 7:04 PM

 

In Israel, especially in Orthodox neighborhoods, there are candelabra at the balconies, protected by glass structures, illuminating the surroundings.  For eight days, Israel is lit by light, laughter, play and song.

 

 

Candelabra on Balcony

 

In Israel, freshly cut Arizona cypress trees are being distributed for a symbolic price for the Christian community (and foreign diplomats and the foreign press) to utilize and enjoy. 

 

This year, terrorism hit with widespread forest fires.  The headlines read, “Israel is burning.”  Yet, all that terrorism achieved is to galvanize the spirit, reignite the determination and conviction and remind us what is really important.

 

 

As he called to wish Chag Samech (Happy Chanukah), my friend Brad Greenberg said: “Be thankful there is Christmas; be grateful that you can celebrate Christmas!”

 

The joy of the season is magnified this year in light of what is happening all around us.  The mere ability to worship, celebrate and enjoy the spirit of Christmas – something we take so readily for granted – is like the light of candles in the darkness:  fragile, uncertain, yet with immense potential to conquer the darkness.

 

1) Baluza Post  – 14 (002)

 

In Europe, Christmas is being ushered by terrorist attacks (and if last year is any indication, women beware during New Year).  There are entire areas under Sharia Law with no access to Christians, and there are countries where the name “Christ” is no longer allowed.

 

Europeans are dying, and their birthrate is approaching negative territory, whereas the immigrant Muslim population is exploding.  Europe is being replaced by Eurabia.

 

In Israel, the birthplace of Christianity, any connection between the Temple Mount and the Holy Temple with Judaism and Christianity has been conveniently erased by a UN body:  UNESCO declared the place to be a Muslim heritage site.  It may seem inconsequential, but it is not.  The poison is percolating the global mindset.  Another victory has been achieved.

 

The process of erosion has accelerated:  First, physical evidence has been destroyed when hundreds of truckloads of “dirt” from Solomon Stables on Temple Mount were removed by the Muslim Wakf that manages the place and dumped like trash to a ravine.  Then, the spiritual connection is being destroyed, thus leaving humanity with a mere memory of what once were Judaism and Christianity.

 

Nine centuries before the appearance of Muhammad, Jews in Judea and Samaria fought the Greeks and prevailed.  Today we are told these areas of Zion Jerusalem are “occupied” by “settlements,” and the UN is planning to send observers and to segregate any product from there by special markings.  (Some eighty years ago, the Nazis used a Yellow Star to identify Jews.  Today, the UN is marking Israel, in preparation to what may come next.)

 

We already hear the voices that call the Jews to pack their belongings and return to the places from where they came.  Stripped of any connection to the land, Jews may once again become unwanted guests in lands-not-theirs.  The craving of two millennia “for next year in Jerusalem,” the promise “If I forget you, Oh, Jerusalem,” praying toward Jerusalem and the fact that wherever Jews are buried, they always face Jerusalem, are all ignored, as is the Bible, archeology and any historical records.

 

Once before, the Nazis tried to do something similar.  First they started burning books, then they burned the Jews, apparently refusing to acknowledge history:  Empires rose and fell, and the Jewish people are still here.  The Jews are not vermin or cockroaches; the Jews are a Light Unto the Nations.

 

The two centuries leading to the Common Era saw the rule of the Greeks.  From 175 to 164 b.c., Antiochus IV (also known in Judaism as “Antiochus the Evil”) was in charge, and the Jews of Israel were being Hellenized.  The Greeks did not want to eradicate the Jews or erase them off the map.  Quite on the contrary, they had a great respect to the Jews.  But they expected the Jews to become one of them, in behavior and thought.

 

God had to cease, so no circumcision, no Shabbat observance and no other acts unique to Judaism.  The men were to join gymnasiums and dress like the Greeks, and God was to become one of many, reduced to non-being.  Many Jews in Israel followed suit, fully assimilating, but a small group stood firm.

 

A Jewish high priest from Modi-im rebelled.  Matityahu and his five sons, also known as the Hashmonaim or Maccabim prevailed and ruled until 32 b.c. (the Maccabiah Games are derived from the same word, that abbreviates four words from Moses Song, Exodus 15:11: “Who is like unto Thee, O Lord, among the might?”).

 

It was that rebellion that is considered a miracle.  A few against many led by Judea the Maccabi.  Two millennia later, a handful rose again, in the Warsaw Ghetto, and for almost an entire month stood their ground against the Nazi war machine.

 

The miracle of God’s greatness – of a few against the many – is thus remembered and celebrated to this very day.

 

Another miracle is highlighted.  When the Hashmonaim cleared the Temple (the one that is now controlled by the Muslim Wakf and has apparently no connection to Judaism), the olive oil there used to light the Menorah was not sanctified, and it would have taken time to prepare new olive oil suitable for worship.

 

Only a tiny tin was found with olive oil that could be used, enough to last for one day.  Another miracle happened, and the olive oil lasted for eight full days (until new olive oil was available to continue the work of the Cohanim – priests – at the Temple).

 

Thus, to this very day, we light candles for eight days, starting with one on the first night and adding an additional one each night.  These candles are to be watched and enjoyed but not used, so we are not allowed to use them to light one another.  A separate candle is used, “The Server,” or Shamash.

 

Candelabra

 

Eight indicates transcendence from the orderly world (the seven days of creation) to the spiritual.  (Circumcision, for example, takes place on the eight day.)

 

Thus came about Chanukah, the holiday of miracles.  It is also known as the Festival of Lights, or Festival of Inauguration (re-dedication of the Temple).  We are told (Maccabim Book II) that it was really the Festival of Tabernacles postponed (as it could not be celebrated before the rebellion).  For eight days, we eat potato pancakes (“levivot”) and doughnuts (“sufganiot”), all reminding us the miracle of the oil.

 

Latkes for Chanukah – Potato Pancakes

 

Chanukah is not included in the Jewish Bible, but it is mentioned in the New Testament (John 10:22):  It was now winter, and Jesus was in Jerusalem at the time of Hanukkah, the Festival of Dedication. (New Living Translation)

 

Chanukah is celebrated starting the 25th day of the Hebrew month of Kislev for eight days:  25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31st, 1st.  While the Hebrew calendar is a lunar one, the fact that Christmas later evolved to be on the 25th of December, “in the middle of winter,” just eight days before New Year, is not a coincidence.

 

Nor is it a coincidence that this year, when the two calendars (Jewish and Gregorian) identically overlap, we celebrate Christmas Eve and the eve of the first night of Chanukah at the same time.

 

It is a signal to all of us – Jews and Christians alike – that we are one; we must stand together lest “a house divided falls.”  Our roots are one and the same, making us inseparable.  Also, our enemies do not differentiate between us – to them, we are all one enemy, the army of non-believers, composed of “pigs and apes,” the Saturday and the Sunday people.

 

So let us celebrate Christmas; let us celebrate the eight days of Chanukah, for miracles happened at that time so long ago and in these very days.  Let us celebrate the Glory and Might of God, Lord of Hosts, for He is our Salvation, our past, our future and our present.

 

Here is Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s Christmas greetings (2016):

 

To all of our Christian friends around the world, Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year.

 

I send you these greetings from Jerusalem. I’m standing in the courtyard of this magnificent International Christian Embassy. I’m so proud of our relations with our Christian brothers and sisters. I wonder for many of you if you remember the experience you had when you first visited Israel, when you saw the Church of the Holy Sepulcher or the Via Dolorosa or the Sea of Galilee or Nazareth. I’m sure it moved you deeply.

 

And it moves us deeply to have this bond with you because we all know that this land of Israel is the land of our common heritage. It changed the story of humanity, it changed civilization. What a magnificent heritage it is. Yet, we also know that it is under attack these days, that the forces of intolerance, of barbarism that attack all religions attack Christians with particular vehemence. We stand with you and I’m proud of the fact that in Israel, this is the one place in the Middle East that the Christian community not only survives but thrives and it’s no accident. It’s because of our commitment to religious freedom; it’s because of our embrace of our heritage; it’s because of our embrace of our common future.  

 

So please come to Israel. Come and visit me, I’m waiting for you. It will be a great experience for you. Merry Christmas, Happy New Year.

 

_____________________

This is the latest in the series “Postcards from America – Postcards from Israel,” a collaboration between Zager and Bussel, a foreign correspondent reporting from Israel.

 

Ari Bussel and Norma Zager collaborate both in writing and on the air in a point-counter-point discussion of all things Israel related.  Together, they have dedicated the past decade to promoting Israel.

© Israel Monitor, December, 2016

 

First Published December 23, 2016

Contact:  bussel@me.com

Chanukah’s Chanukiah (candelabrum)

State Dept.: No Mention of Netanyahu Quid Pro Quo


islami-jew-hatred-in-color

John R. Houk

© September 13, 2016

 

While examining some of the G+ Communities I belong to, I came across a two-minute video of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu talking about the absurdity for blaming Israel for the disruption of talks between the Palestinian Authority and Israel. Of course those talks are about proceeding with the deplorable plan of a so-called Two-State Solution for the existence of both the Jewish State of Israel and a sovereign nation of Jew-hating Palestinians.

 

As Netanyahu points out, the reason for blaming Israel is absurd because the reality it is the PA holding up talks with racist stipulations. The racist stipulation addressed in the two-minute video is that the PA demands that no Jews be allowed – EVER! – within the boundaries of a Palestinian State.

 

Netanyahu says this is comparable to ethnic cleansing because there is already a sizable presence of Jews of what the Israelis call Judea and Samaria and what the Palestinians (and most of the world) call the Occupied Territories or the West Bank.

 

Netanyahu’s reasoning is if the Jews must leave the homes established in Judea-Samaria then how would the world feel about forcibly removing Arabs from the State of Israel? It is absurd! The world would scream Israel is committing ethnic cleansing.

 

VIDEO: Netanyahu: There will be no ethnic cleansing in Judea, Samaria

Posted by Arutz Sheva TV

Published on Sep 10, 2016

 

Watch: Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu rejects the idea that the presence of Jews in Judea and Samaria is an obstacle to peace.
Click here for more: http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/217578

 

Unsurprisingly the Obama Administration via the auspices of the State Department were not very pleased with Prime Minister Netanyahu “ethnic cleansing” analogy.

 

VIDEO: Daily Press Briefing – September 9, 2016

[Begin at the 19:01 point]


 

 

Posted by U.S. Department of State

Published on Sep 9, 2016

 

Press Relations Director Elizabeth Trudeau leads the Daily Press Briefing at the Department of State on September 9, 2016. A transcript is available at http://www.state.gov/r/pa/prs/dpb/2016/08/261239.htm

 

Elizabeth Trudeau the Prime Minister’s use of the term of “ethnic cleansing” but doesn’t address Netanyahu’s analogy of also expelling the million or so Arabs that are citizens of Israel under the same logic used by the PA. Why? Because if Israel expelled Arabs out of the Jewish State the American government would put the finger of ethnic cleansing accusation at Israel.

 

For the State Department to address the quid pro quo analogy would signal Obama’s antisemitism toward Israel. Ergo it is my guess – as is typical of the Obama led Administration – part of the details for condemning Prime Minister Netanyahu are left out merely to smear Netanyahu.

 

That is absurdly ridiculous!

 

JRH 9/13/16 [Hat tip: G+ Community Crushing Jihad and World Israel News (See Also WIN)]

Please Support NCCR

Answering John Kerry


Intro to Glick’s ‘Answering John Kerry’

Edited by John R. Houk

12/13/15

Caroline Glick posted an essay about John Kerry’s speech at the Brooking Institute’s Saban Forum. This is the same forum that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu video streamed a speech to the Saban Forum from Jerusalem. To comprehend just how idiotic Secretary of State John Kerry is (and by extension President Barack Hussein Obama), let me share some excerpts from Netanyahu’s speech that addresses Islamic terrorism internationally and the terrorism of Arabs calling themselves Palestinians who refuse to accept the existence of the Jewish State of Israel:

I want to thank my friend Haim for giving me the opportunity to address you. This comes at a time when the United States has experienced a terrible and savage attack in San Bernardino, and I wish to offer the condolences of the people of Israel to the families, the aggrieved families, and of course send our wishes for a speedy recovery to the wounded. [Blog Editor: a sentiment rarely shared from Obama and Kerry to Israeli-Jewish victims of Palestinian Islamic terrorism.]

And these values are what makes the bond between Israel and the United States, the American people and the people of Israel, so strong. It’s that identity of values, those very values that are under such fierce attack today. …

Insofar as the Palestinian-Israeli conflict is concerned, I think there is another misunderstanding. People have long said that the core of this conflict is the acquisition of territories by Israel in the 1967 War. That’s an issue that needs to be addressed in any peace process, as is the question of settlements, but it’s not the core of the conflict. In Gaza, nothing changed. In fact, instead of getting peace, we gave territory and got 15,000 rockets on our heads. We took out all the settlements; we disinterred people from their graves; and did we get peace? No. We got the worst terror possible.

… Why has this conflict not been resolved for a hundred years? Why has it not been resolved after successive Israeli prime ministers, six in fact after the Oslo Agreement, have offered to make peace, have offered the Palestinians the possibility of building a state next to Israel – it’s because the Palestinians have not yet been willing to cross that conceptual bridge, that emotional bridge, of giving up the dream not of a state next to Israel, but a state instead of Israel.

And that’s why they persistently refuse – not only Hamas in Gaza, but the PA – they consistently refuse to accept that in a final peace settlement, they will recognize the Jewish state, they will recognize a nation-state for the Jewish people. They ask that we recognize a nation-state for the Palestinian people, but refuse to accord that same right to us. I have said and I continue to say it, that ultimately the only workable solution is not a unitary state, but a demilitarized Palestinian state that recognizes the Jewish state. That’s the solution. But the Palestinians have to recognize the Jewish state and they persistently refuse to do so. They refuse to recognize a nation-state for the Jewish people in any boundary. That was and remains the core of the conflict. Not this or that gesture or the absence of this or that gesture, but the inability or unwillingness of the Palestinian leadership to make the leap.

You got a hint of that the other day when Abu Mazen spoke about the “occupation of Palestinian lands for the last 67 years”. Did you hear that? Occupation of Palestinian lands? For the last 67 years? Sixty-seven years ago was 1948. That’s when the State of Israel was established. Does Abu Mazen mean that Tel Aviv is occupied Palestinian territory? Of Haifa? Or Beer Sheba? He refuses to fess up to his people and say it’s over, from their point of view what they say are the borders they wish, the final borders they wish. They refuse to recognize that they will have no more claim on the territory of the Jewish state, that they will not try in any way to flood it with the descendants of refugees. After all, we in Israel took in an equal and even larger number of Jewish refugees from Arab lands. You should READ the ENTIRE Speech (Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s Remarks to the Saban Forum; By PM Benjamin Netanyahu; Release by Israel GPO posted at SlantRight 2.0; posted 12/7/15)

Now as you read Glick’s essay you will notice that Secretary Kerry acts like he is completely deaf and blind about the intentions of the Arabs that call themselves Palestinians to not only establish a state out of some territory of Jewish heritage but also the complete destruction of Israel to be replaced by an Arab State. In case you haven’t been paying attention to what ISIS is doing to the Christians that have lived in Syria and Iraq that means a brutal genocide against the Jews of Israel.

JRH 12/13/15

Please Support NCCR

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

Answering John Kerry

By Caroline Glick

December 11th, 2015

CarolineGlick.com

On Saturday, US Secretary of State John Kerry gave a speech before the Brookings Institute’s Saban Forum. Kerry focused on the Palestinian conflict with Israel and sought to draw a distinction between the two-state policy model, which he supports, and the one-state policy model, which he rejects.

To justify his rejection of a policy based on Israeli sovereignty over areas beyond the 1949 armistice lines, Kerry raised a series of questions about what a one-state policy would look like.

I answered all of his questions, as well as many others, in great detail in my book The Israeli Solution: A One- State Plan for Peace in the Middle East. I will do so again here, albeit with the requisite brevity.

But before discussing the specific questions Kerry raised with regard to the one-state model, it is important to discuss the nature of the policies Kerry described in his speech.

Kerry argued Israel should deny civil and property rights to Jews beyond the 1949 armistice lines, and ignore the building and planning laws of both Israel and the military government in Judea and Samaria in order to allow unrestricted Arab construction in Judea, Samaria and Jerusalem.

Such steps, he argued, will advance the cause of peace because they will pave the way for an Israeli withdrawal from the vast majority of these areas. Such a withdrawal in turn will bring about the desired two-state solution.

Since the two-state solution is supported by the whole world, Kerry argued that once Israel withdraws from the areas, it will gain the support of the world, peace with its Arab neighbors as well as the Palestinians, and become more prosperous and happy than it is today. It will also secure its democracy.

On the other hand, Kerry argued, if Israel respects the civil and property rights of Jews and continues to enforce the law toward Arabs as well as Jews, and if it eventually applies its laws to any or all of Judea and Samaria, Israel will enter a state of perpetual war with the Palestinians and the wider Arab world. Israel will cease to be a democracy. Israel will be impoverished.

Israel will be isolated internationally even more than it is today.

If Kerry’s options were real options, then Israel would have a clear and easy choice, just as he argues it has.

But unfortunately, they aren’t real options. They are fantasies.

Today Israel has three options. As Kerry advocates, it can withdraw from Judea and Samaria and partition Jerusalem. But if it does so, there is no reason to believe that the outcome will be a Palestinian state, let alone peace.

Rather, it is far more likely that an Israeli withdrawal will lead to the establishment of a second independent Palestinian enclave that the Palestinians and the international community will insist is still under occupation, just as the Palestinians and the international community insist that Gaza remains under Israeli occupation 10 years after Israel vacated the Gaza Strip entirely.

Without Jerusalem, Judea and Samaria, Israel will become a strategic basket case in an increasingly chaotic region. It will invite aggression from the Palestinians and from the east that it will be hard pressed to defend against.

Just as Israel is condemned for every action it has taken to defend against Palestinian aggression from Gaza, so it will be condemned for the actions it will be forced to take to defend itself from Palestinian aggression in Judea, Samaria, Jerusalem and beyond.

In other words, the so-called “two-state solution” is a recipe for war and expanded international isolation for the Jewish state.

The second option for Israel is to maintain the status quo. Today, Israel shares governing power in Judea and Samaria with the PLO. Sometimes the PLO cooperates with Israeli security forces, and sometimes it cooperates with terrorist groups.

The PLO rejects Israel’s right to exist. It uses every available platform to undermine Israel’s legitimacy and wage economic and political war against the Jewish state.

The advantage of the status quo is that under it, Israel has security control over Judea and Samaria. Consequently, it is able to prevent Judea and Samaria and Jerusalem from becoming strategically indistinguishable from Gaza, where Hamas is now openly collaborating with Islamic State forces in Sinai.

Israel’s third option is to apply its laws over all or parts of Judea and Samaria. The first benefit of this option is that it maintains Israel’s ability to defend itself against security threats emanating from the Palestinians and from the east.

Beyond that, under Israeli law, the civil rights of Palestinians and Jews in Judea and Samaria will be vastly improved. Israel’s liberal legal code is superior to both the military code governing the Jews and the Palestinian Authority’s law of the jackboot which governs the Palestinians.

Whereas the status quo invites and engenders politicization of Israel’s military commanders who serve as the governing authorities of the areas, the third option would end the politicization of the IDF. Generals would take a backseat to elected leaders and government ministries. Police would be responsible for law enforcement. Rather than deploy regular and reserve units to dispel rioters, police, who are better trained for such events, would be judiciously deployed in areas where they are most needed. The IDF’s operations would be limited to counterterrorism.

None of Israel’s actual three options will necessarily enhance its international standing. This is the case because, as we have seen, Israel’s international standing has little to do with anything Israel does.

But then again, by exhibiting strength, and forcefully asserting its rights, Israel may find itself winning the respect of some foreign governments that currently view it is weak and open to blackmail.

This brings us to Kerry’s questions about a one-state model.

Kerry asked, “How does Israel possibly maintain its character as a Jewish and democratic state when from the river to the sea there would not even be a Jewish majority?” The answer is easily. Israel will retain its strong Jewish majority, and its commitment to democracy, after it applies its laws to Judea and Samaria.

Kerry asked, “Would millions of Palestinians be given the basic rights of Israeli citizens including the right to vote, or would they be relegated to a permanent underclass?” The answer is yes, they would be given the basic rights of Israeli citizens, including the right to vote, and no, they would not be relegated to a permanent underclass.

Kerry asked, “Would the Israelis and Palestinians living in such close quarters have segregated roads and transportation systems with different laws applying in the Palestinian enclaves?” The answer is, no.

Kerry asked, “Would anyone really believe they were being treated equally?” The answer is that, as we have seen repeatedly, no matter what Israel does, and no matter what the Palestinians do, people like Kerry will always claim that Israel is mistreating the Palestinians.

Kerry asked, “What would the international response be to that, my friends, or to a decision by Israel to unilaterally annex large portions of the West Bank?” The answer, again, is that the international response to such a move would be about the same as the international response to the continuation of the status quo or to an Israel withdrawal. To wit, the response will be hostile to Israel.

Kerry asked, “How could Israel ever have true peace with its neighbors, as the Arab Peace Initiative promises and as every Arab leader I have met with in the last year reinforces to me as recently as in the last month that they are prepared to do?” The answer is that Israel can have true peace with the Arab world when the Arab world accepts the legitimacy and permanence of the Jewish state.

Kerry asked, “How will [Arab states make peace]… if there is no chance for a two-state solution?” The answer is that they will make peace when they decide they want peace and they rid their societies of Jew hatred.

Kerry asked, “How will the Arab street in today’s world let… [the two-state solution] go by?” The answer is that the Arab street doesn’t believe in the “two-state solution.” The Arab street wants the dissolution of Israel.

Finally, Kerry asked, “And wouldn’t Israel risk being in perpetual conflict with millions of Palestinian living in the middle of a state?” The answer is that Israel is at risk of perpetual conflict with the Palestinians and the Arab world as a whole for as long as the Arabs hate Jews. The millions of Palestinians living within Israel’s borders constitute a far smaller strategic danger to Israel than the millions of Jew-hating Arabs, who have terrorist armies, perched on its international borders.

At the outset of his remarks, Kerry explained that as far as US Middle East policy is concerned, “Our goal, our strategy is to help ensure that the builders and the healers throughout the region have the chance that they need to accomplish their tasks.”

Sadly, this is neither a goal nor a strategy. It is the sort of platitude you’re likely to find inside a Chinese fortune cookie.

If Kerry is interested in an actual strategy, he can fork out 20 bucks and buy my book.

Originally published in The Jerusalem Post.

____________________

All right reserved, Caroline Glick. 2015

About Caroline B. Glick

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s Remarks to the Saban Forum


Ari Bussel sent the transcript of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s address about Islamic terrorism using the San Bernardino Massacre as a starting point then proceeding to the growth of Islamic terrorism that has plagued Israel from its modern inception in 1948 to the present. PM Netanyahu takes note that the Arabs that call themselves Palestinians have had plenty opportunities to (steal) appropriate Jewish land to create an independent Arab state but have failed to accept the existence of a Jewish State on their ancestral homeland.

The Bussel email included a link to the 14 minute Youtube version of the Prime Minister’s address to the Saban Forum.

VIDEO: PM Netanyahu’s Address to the Saban Forum 2015

 

Posted by IsraeliPM

Published on Dec 6, 2015

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s address to the Saban Forum 2015
דברי ראש הממשלה בנימין נתניהו בפני פורום סבן 2015

JRH 12/7/15

Please Support NCCR

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

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s Remarks to the Saban Forum

By Benjamin Netanyahu

December 6, 2015

Israel Government Press Office

The Prime Minister’s Office

Greetings from Jerusalem.

I want to thank my friend Haim for giving me the opportunity to address you. This comes at a time when the United States has experienced a terrible and savage attack in San Bernardino, and I wish to offer the condolences of the people of Israel to the families, the aggrieved families, and of course send our wishes for a speedy recovery to the wounded.

The terrorists are attacking in California or in Israel, or for that matter in Paris. They are attacking the very values that we hold dear – freedom, tolerance, diversity. All the things that define the value of life and society in our eyes, they find anathema and that’s why they attack us. I think too that this is what makes us strong. They think that we are hedonistic and weak; we’re actually very strong societies, very resilient, because of the very values that they despise so much.

And these values are what makes the bond between Israel and the United States, the American people and the people of Israel, so strong. It’s that identity of values, those very values that are under such fierce attack today. I think nobody should underestimate the resilience and power of our societies. Nobody should underestimate the United States. It was, it remains and will be the leader of the world precisely because it is so rooted in the values that make societies great.

And these are the same values by which we live, and that’s why nobody should underestimate Israel, and nobody should underestimate the strength of our alliance. It’s strong and it will be even stronger in years to come. And I appreciate the President’s willingness to forge a new agreement between Israel and the United States, a ten-year MoU to strengthen Israeli-American cooperation and strengthen Israel’s security with American support. I think everybody in Israel appreciates that, beginning with me.

We face today two challenges that I’d like to briefly discuss with you. One is a global challenge of the battle of militant Islamic terrorism that plagues not only the Middle East, but increasingly Europe and the United States and Asia, everywhere – Africa. And the second is the specific problem of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, which I’d like to address.

On the global front, I have to say that many used to say that the core of the conflicts in the Middle East, and from there the rest of the world, were rooted in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. That was never true, but it’s now demonstrably false. And what we see is the old order established after the Ottoman Empire collapsing and militant Islam, either of the Shiites, Shiite hue led by Iran, or the Sunni hue, led by ISIS, rushing in to fill the void. Now those two forces are clashing with each other because each wants to be the king of the Islamist hill. They hope to first establish in the Middle East and after that in their mad designs throughout the rest of the world, but it nonetheless is a battle of militant Islam against other Muslims and against everyone else.

That is clearly demonstrated in the case of ISIS, that doesn’t mince its words, and is disguised by Iran, that has equal ambitions. The danger that we face is augmented when militant Islam gets a sovereign state, because a state gives them money, in oil revenues in particular for either one, and it gives them the power to develop weapons or acquire weapons – chemical weapons in the case of ISIS and other sophisticated weapons – and of course the quest for nuclear weapons or submarines or satellites and sundry other rockets and precision-guided missiles in the case of Iran.

These battles, these forces are battling each other now over the soil of Syria, and our position has been – my position has been not to intervene because an ISIS-dominated Syria is bad and a Iran-dominated Syria is bad. I think that our policy has been therefore not to try to strengthen one at the expense of the other, but weaken both. But in any case, my policy has been non-intervention with two exceptions. The first is humanitarian. We were among the first countries to offer humanitarian aid to Syria. We established a field hospital right next to the border of, our border in the Golan and have taken in thousands of Syrians who’ve come in, astounded. They were always taught that Israel and Israelis were devils and now they were healing angels. And the second thing that I’ve decided to do is to make it clear that Israel will not tolerate the use of Syrian territory for passing lethal weapons to Hezbollah, to open up a warfront against us in Lebanon, or to use Syrian territory for attacks against us or to enable Iran to build a second terror or military front against us from the Golan or anywhere else in Syria.

These are clear principles which we uphold. I’ve expressed also to President Putin of Russia that these are principles that we’ll continue to uphold and that it makes sense that Russia and Israel have deconfliction. We’ve done that, just as the United States has done that, but it’s very important for me to stress that Israeli policy will continue along the lines that I’ve just outlined.

If I look at the world overall, the core of the conflicts in the Middle East, that is the battle between early medievalism and modernity, is the battle that is being waged now around the world. And the advanced countries in the world, the civilized countries of the world, have to make common cause to contain and ultimately defeat militant Islam. Deep down, human beings want to have freedom and I think that desire and the technology of freedom, the spread of information, will ultimately defeat militant Islam, just as it defeated another murderous ideology bent on world domination: Nazism.

In the case of Nazism, it took down about 60 million people and a third of our own people before it went down, and this cannot allow to happen again. I think it won’t happen again: one, because we have the historical antecedents; and two, because we have the State of Israel, as far as the Jewish people are concerned. We will not allow any one of these violent medievalist forces to threaten our country and threaten our people.

Insofar as the Palestinian-Israeli conflict is concerned, I think there is another misunderstanding. People have long said that the core of this conflict is the acquisition of territories by Israel in the 1967 War. That’s an issue that needs to be addressed in any peace process, as is the question of settlements, but it’s not the core of the conflict. In Gaza, nothing changed. In fact, instead of getting peace, we gave territory and got 15,000 rockets on our heads. We took out all the settlements; we disinterred people from their graves; and did we get peace? No. We got the worst terror possible.

I think that happened earlier too, when we left Lebanon and people said, “Well, if you leave Lebanon, then Hezbollah will make peace with you.” And in fact, we got 15,000 rockets from there too. And so people are naturally saying, look, if we want a solution vis-à-vis the Palestinians in Judea and Samaria, in the West Bank, how can we ensure that this doesn’t happen again? Well, in order for us to ensure that it doesn’t happen again, we have to address the root cause of the problem. Why has this conflict not been resolved for a hundred years? Why has it not been resolved after successive Israeli prime ministers, six in fact after the Oslo Agreement, have offered to make peace, have offered the Palestinians the possibility of building a state next to Israel – it’s because the Palestinians have not yet been willing to cross that conceptual bridge, that emotional bridge, of giving up the dream not of a state next to Israel, but a state instead of Israel.

And that’s why they persistently refuse – not only Hamas in Gaza, but the PA – they consistently refuse to accept that in a final peace settlement, they will recognize the Jewish state, they will recognize a nation-state for the Jewish people. They ask that we recognize a nation-state for the Palestinian people, but refuse to accord that same right to us. I have said and I continue to say it, that ultimately the only workable solution is not a unitary state, but a demilitarized Palestinian state that recognizes the Jewish state. That’s the solution. But the Palestinians have to recognize the Jewish state and they persistently refuse to do so. They refuse to recognize a nation-state for the Jewish people in any boundary. That was and remains the core of the conflict. Not this or that gesture or the absence of this or that gesture, but the inability or unwillingness of the Palestinian leadership to make the leap.

You got a hint of that the other day when Abu Mazen spoke about the “occupation of Palestinian lands for the last 67 years”. Did you hear that? Occupation of Palestinian lands? For the last 67 years? Sixty-seven years ago was 1948. That’s when the State of Israel was established. Does Abu Mazen mean that Tel Aviv is occupied Palestinian territory? Of Haifa? Or Beer Sheba? He refuses to fess up to his people and say it’s over, from their point of view what they say are the borders they wish, the final borders they wish. They refuse to recognize that they will have no more claim on the territory of the Jewish state, that they will not try in any way to flood it with the descendants of refugees. After all, we in Israel took in an equal and even larger number of Jewish refugees from Arab lands.

I mention this point about mutual national recognition because it is so fundamental, and like the mantra that was raised time and time and time again, that the core of the conflict, always in the singular, the conflict in the Middle East was the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, that has turned out to be even childish and irrelevant. The same thing I am saying will happen with the argument about the core of the conflict being the settlements or the territories. They’re an issue to be resolved, but they are not the core of the conflict.

And I think it’s important if we’re ever going to resolve this issue is to demand from the Palestinian leadership to recognize the Jewish state. We’ll still have many, many issues to resolve, but it begins with the recognition of the right of the Jewish people to have a state of their own. This is the fundament of peace and the absence of this recognition is the real obstacle.

I don’t lose hope. You can’t be a leader of the Jewish people and not have hope because we’ve overcome so many travails in the last thousands of years and in the last hundred years. We have clawed our way back to a sovereign existence. We built a remarkable state. It’s a world leader in technology, in agriculture, in irrigation, in cyber, in medicine – in so many areas. And we’ve made peace with two countries: Jordan and Egypt. And as the picture that I described about the threat of militant Islam to Arab and Muslim society emerges, we are making inroads and a lot of contacts with Arab countries – a lot of contacts that are not Arab countries as well: the leading countries of Asia, China, India, Japan; dozens of African countries; countries in Latin America. And it’s heartening. It’s heartening to see how Israel is being received and how people are changing their view of Israel as they change their view of the essential conflict between medievalism and modernity that is now spreading throughout the entire world.

But I know, with all the openness that we have with dozens and dozens of countries, including in our own region, I still know that we have no better friend than the United States. This is a partnership of solid values. It’s the deepest partnership there is. I value it across the partisan divide – Democrats, Republicans, Independents – we cherish your support. We value it and we believe that this partnership between Israel and the United States of America is the axis around which many other partnerships can be built in our region and beyond for the betterment of all humanity.

Thank you.

__________________________

Edited by John R. Houk

 

Sent by Ari Bussel

 

Israel Government Press Office

NETANYAHU BOMBSHELL: Palestinian leader led Holocaust


Photo: Five SS officers on the staff of Adolf Eichmann who were involved in the extermination of Slovakian Jewry. In the photo Dieter Wisliceny (second from the right); Viktor Nagler (center); Viktor Hahn; Guedler (first name unknown); Franz Matz. – Ghetto Fighters House Archives

 

Intro to: NETANYAHU BOMBSHELL …

Intro by John R. Houk

Posted 11/2/15

In conjunction with the post “Genocidal Jew-Hater Amin al-Husseini,” I found an email notification in my Gmail account I wish I would have read earlier. The email was sent on October 27 from Historical and Investigative Research (HIR) and was in response Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s speech placing the blame for the Holocaust on then Grand Mufti Haj Amin al-Husseini inspiring Adolf Hitler.

Unsurprisingly in the Antisemitic climate so pervasive in the world today, Netanyahu has received irascible hostility for his thoughts. By the way in case you have had your head in the sand, Netanyahu’s thoughts on Arab-Muslim Jew-hatred are the result of the latest round of attacks by Arabs who call themselves Palestinians against Israeli Jews with knives. The knife attacks were first incited by PA President Mahmoud Abbas with Hamas having no problem in joining in the indiscriminate targeting of Jewish men, women, and children, young and old.

The HIR article linked to in the email was posted on October 23 right the time of Netanyahu’s speech to the 37th Zionist Congress in Jerusalem. Here is the HIR teaser in the email that then links to the October 23 article:

NETANYAHU BOMBSHELL: Palestinian leader led Holocaust

Sent by HIR

October 27, 2015

Part 1 | Is this true?

Historical and Investigative Research – 23 Oct 2015
by Francisco Gil-White

___

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, in a speech to the World Zionist Congress, stated that Hajj Amin al Husseini, the founding father of the Palestinian movement, had convinced the Nazis to exterminate the European Jews. We examine here the evidence relevant to this claim.

___

According to my own opinion, the Grand Mufti [Hajj Amin al Husseini], who has been in Berlin since 1941, played a role in the decision of the German Government to exterminate the European Jews, the importance of which must not be disregarded. He had repeatedly suggested to the various authorities with whom he has been in contact, above all before Hitler, Ribbentrop and Himmler, the extermination of European Jewry. He considered this as a comfortable solution of the Palestine problem. In his messages broadcast from Berlin, he surpassed us in anti-Jewish attacks. He was one of Eichmann’s best friends and has constantly incited him to accelerate the extermination measures. I heard say that, accompanied by Eichmann, he has visited incognito the gas chamber at Auschwitz.

Nuremberg testimony of
SS Hauptsturmfuehrer
Dieter Wisliceny
(Adolf Eichmann’s right-hand man)

READ THE FULL ARTICLE

WATCH THE DOCUMENTARY

This is what I’m going to do. I going to cross post the article and the documentary. The documentary is about 15 minutes long and HIR links to the VIMEO version. There are more video parts that I am not going to cross post, but if you want to be educated on the true nature of the Jew-hating movement inspired by Haj Amin al-Husseini. The article has the video at the top so I am going to actually begin with that. I’m going to use the Youtube version because it is more compatible with all more blog platforms.

 

JRH 11/2/15

Please Support NCCR

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

VIDEO: THE NAZIS AND THE PALESTINIAN MOVEMENT

 

Posted by Changeling9au

Published on Jul 30, 2013

!!IMPORTANT UPDATE 28th Oct 2015!! With Netanyahu’s recent comments pertaining to this history, and the media’s and “experts’ ” hysterical reactions to them, a lot of fog has been generated. Carve through the fog here – http://www.hirhome.com/israel/nazis_palestinians_2.htm

For a better version of this video: https://vimeo.com/69991225

See also https://www.youtube.com/user/FACESHIRHOME

Documentation, chapters, and videos at: http://www.hirhome.com/colapso/colapso.htm  [Spanish Language]

See also: http://www.hirhome.com/israel/nazis_palestinians.htm  for an analysis of the likely reason why Youtube are blocking this video in Israel, as well as an analysis of Wikipedia’s whitewash of Haj Amin Al Husseini.

See also: http://www.hirhome.com/israel/netanyahu_bar_ilan_husseini_nazis.htm  for an analysis of Netanyahu’s speech at Bar Ilan University, and why he was forced to make it.

In short, it’s an attempt to placate those who are aware of the history documented in this video. It is likely also an attempt by Netanyahu to kind of cover his back and avoid charges of Treason – http://www.hirhome.com/israel/netanyahu_bar_ilan_husseini_nazis2.htm

Traces the history of PLO/Fatah, now better known as the ‘Palestinian Authority,’ the organization that will govern a future Palestinian State. The video shows how PLO/Fatah emerged from the German Nazi Final Solution. Hajj Amin al Husseini, father of the Palestinian Movement, creator of Fatah, and mentor to Yasser Arafat and Mahmoud Abbas, was co-director with Adolf Eichmann of the death camp system that exterminated between 5 and 6 million European Jews in WWII.

JRH 8/2/15

Please Support NCCR

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

THE NETANYAHU BOMBSHELL:

Founder of Palestinian movement instigated the Holocaust

Part 1 – Is this true?

Historical and Investigative Research – 23 Oct 2015
by Francisco Gil-White

__

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, in a speech to the World Zionist Congress, stated that Hajj Amin al Husseini, the founding father of the Palestinian movement, had convinced the Nazis to exterminate the European Jews. We examine here the evidence relevant to this claim.

__

Read also: The Nazis and the Palestinian Movement

According to my own opinion, the Grand Mufti [Hajj Amin al Husseini], who has been in Berlin since 1941, played a role in the decision of the German Government to exterminate the European Jews, the importance of which must not be disregarded. He had repeatedly suggested to the various authorities with whom he has been in contact, above all before Hitler, Ribbentrop and Himmler, the extermination of European Jewry. He considered this as a comfortable solution of the Palestine problem. In his messages broadcast from Berlin, he surpassed us in anti-Jewish attacks. He was one of Eichmann’s best friends and has constantly incited him to accelerate the extermination measures. I heard say that, accompanied by Eichmann, he has visited incognito the gas chamber at Auschwitz.

Nuremberg testimony of
SS Hauptsturmfuehrer
Dieter Wisliceny
(Adolf Eichmann’s right-hand man)
[11]

Photo: May 17, 1947 – Other Arab States Support Iraq Revolt

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu recently stated that the father of the Palestinian movement, Hajj Amin al Husseini, convinced the Nazis to exterminate the European Jews. Here is a brief summary of what happened, published by the Jerusalem Post on 21 October 2015:

“In a speech to delegates at the 37th World Zionist Congress in Jerusalem on Tuesday, the premier claimed that Hitler’s original intentions were solely to expel the Jews.

According to Netanyahu, the Fuhrer changed his mind at the insistence of the Palestinian Arab leader at the time, Haj Amin al-Husseini, who argued that the expulsion of the Jews would result in their arrival en masse to Palestine, which at the time was under British Mandatory rule.”[1]

This has created a storm. Immediately, authorities of all sorts were quoted in the media stating that Netanyahu’s claims were outrageous and untrue. I will examine the outraged reactions in a future piece. Here, I examine Netanyahu’s claim in light of the available historical evidence, so that readers may form an opinion as to whether they are true.

For context, I begin with a short summary of what is not in dispute.

First, Hajj Amin al Husseini is the father of the Palestinian movement, and mentor to such figures as Yasser Arafat and Mahmoud Abbas, the current leader of this movement.

Second, Husseini organized several mass terrorist attacks against the Jews in British Mandate Palestine. The first was in 1920. Then, after the British made him the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, he used that position to launch new terrorist attacks in 1921, 1929, and 1936-39. The last was called the ‘Arab Revolt’ and Husseini and allies waged it with weapons supplied by Adolf Hitler.

Third, after he left the Mandate in 1939, Husseini went to Iraq to organize a pogrom against the Iraqi Jews that destroyed the Jewish community there (the Farhud).[2]

Fourth, Husseini traveled to Italy and then to Berlin, where he was received with full honors and sat down for a high-profile chat with none-other than the Führer himself. The Nazi film (included in the documentary shown at top right) and a Nazi memorandum of this meeting both survived.

An especially relevant excerpt from that memorandum is the following:

“The Führer then made the following statement to the Mufti, enjoining him to lock it in the uttermost depths of his heart

1. He (the Führer) would carry on the battle to the total destruction of the Judeo-Communist empire in Europe.

2. At some moment which was impossible to set exactly today but which in any event was not distant, the German armies would in the course of this struggle reach the southern exit from Caucasia.

3. As soon as this had happened, the Führer would on his own give the Arab world the assurance that its hour of liberation had arrived. Germany’s objective would then be solely the destruction of the Jewish element residing in the Arab sphere under the protection of British power…” [3]

So Husseini got assurances from Adolf Hitler that the German Nazis would exterminate the Jews in British Mandate Palestine. This is what the father of the Palestinian movement most wanted.

Fifth, Husseini spent the rest of the war in the German-occupied sphere and played an important role in Nazi propaganda inciting Muslims on the German radio to murder Jews.

Sixth, he recruited and supervised the formation of large SS divisions made up of Bosnian and Albanian Muslims that participated in the massacres of the Yugoslav chapter of the Holocaust (photographic evidence for these latter activities is abundant, and may be found on the internet [Blog Editor: Many of those photos can be found on the HIR webpage. I’m not posting those numerous photos]).

All of the above points are uncontroversial, and for those not specifically footnoted here you may consult the relevant documentation in a different HIR article.[4] You may also consult the documentation put together by The Nation in the 1947 article reproduced at right.

So what is the great brouhaha in the media all about? It is about the following two questions:

1) Did the Nazis, as Netanyahu claims, initially mean to expel the Jews, rather than kill them all?

2) Did Hajj Amin al Husseini, as Netanyahu claims, convince the Nazis to abandon the expulsion programme for a death camp system that would kill every Jew?

There is very little controversy on the point that the Nazis initially meant to expel the European Jews.

At the Eichmann trial in Jerusalem, the Attorney General expressed in his opening statements that “At the beginning, when the Nazis were still sensitive to the reaction of world opinion, the solution took the form of forced emigration.” After summarizing at some length that very policy, he states: “The pressure on Jews to emigrate was not discontinued after the outbreak of war.” In fact, “it was only as the invasion of the Soviet Union drew near that the Germans went over to ‘the final solution’ in the new sense, that is, utter physical extermination.” The Attorney General interprets Hermann Goering’s instructions to Heydrich, issued on 31 July 1941, as marking the change to a policy of extermination, but these instructions state explicitly that Goering was giving Heydrich special powers “ ‘In order to complete the mission imposed on you in the order of 24 January 1939, to solve the problem of the Jews by means of emigration or evacuation’ ” (my emphasis). This was the middle of the summer of 1941, and still they were talking about expulsion. It was not until 27 October 1941 that Himmler “issued a decree forbidding any emigration of Jews from the areas of German rule.”[5]

Thus it seems that, until the fall of 1941, to the Nazis ‘Final Solution’ still meant pushing most of the Jews out. As explained in another HIR article on this question,[5a] a number of historians have concluded precisely this from the bulk of the evidence.

For example, Gunnar Paulsson explains that “expulsion”—not extermination—“had initially been the general policy of the Nazis towards the Jews.”[6] Tobias Jersak writes: “Since the 1995 publication of Michael Wildt’s documentation on the SS’s Security Service (Sicherheitsdienst SD) and the ‘Jewish Question,’ it has been undisputed that from 1933 Nazi policy concerning the ‘Jewish Question’ aimed at the emigration of all Jews, preferably to Palestine.”[7] Even after the conquest of Poland, writes Paulsson, “Jewish emigration continued to be permitted and even encouraged, while other expulsion plans were considered.”[8] Christopher Simpson points out that, though many Jews were being murdered, and people such as Reinhard Heydrich of the SS pushed for wholesale extermination, “other ministries” disagreed, and these favored “deportation and resettlement,” though they disagreed about where to put the Jews and how much terror to apply to them.[9]And so, “until the autumn of 1941,” conclude Marrus & Paxton, “no one defined the final solution with precision, but all signs pointed toward some vast and as yet unspecified project of mass emigration.”[10]

It is true that a great many Jews were being killed on the Eastern front, and these deaths of course must be counted in what is called the Shoa (or ‘Holocaust’), but, according to these historians, “until the autumn of 1941” there wasn’t as yet a decision to kill all of the European Jews in death camps. Husseini arrived in Berlin in “the autumn of 1941” (November 1941, to be precise). Husseini thus arrived right on time to argue powerfully in favor of what became the Wannsee Conference decision to kill every last living European Jew. This agrees nicely with Netanyahu’s claims.

But, in fact, the evidence is even more agreeable than this to Netanyahu’s claims.

At his trial, Adolf Eichmann confessed that he made an early trip to British Mandate Palestine in 1939 to see if the Jews could be sent there. Another objective of his trip, he confessed, was to meet with ‘Grand Mufti’ Hajj Amin al Husseini.[10a] So Husseini had ample opportunity to argue influentially in favor of total extermination well before November of 1941, for he was in contact with the very Nazi leaders who wanted to send the Jews to Palestine much earlier than that (something that is obvious, anyway, from German Nazi shipments of weapons to Husseini’s terrorists during the so-called ‘Arab Revolt’ of 1936-39). Nothing necessarily hinges, therefore, on Husseini’s arrival in Berlin, or on the exact date of the first killings to be labeled ‘Holocaust,’ as many seem to think.

Finally, according to Dieter Wisliceny, right-hand man to Adolf Eichmann, Husseini did contribute to the Nazi decision to create a death camp system, precisely in the manner that Netanyahu claims.

After the war, and prior to his execution for crimes against humanity, Wisliceny was asked to comment on the testimony of one Eng. Andrej or (Endre) Steiner. During the war, according to Steiner’s testimony, Wisliceny had stated that the Mufti Husseini had played an important role convincing the Nazis to opt for extermination. Wisliceny confirmed the testimony. This was all summarized by State Attorney Bach at the Eichmann trial in Jerusalem:

[Excerpt from the Eichmann trial transcript begins here]

 

State Attorney Bach: This is our document No. 281. Mr. Steiner first tells us that Wisliceny described his talks with Eichmann, why Palestine cannot be considered as the destination for emigration: “When I asked him why, he laughed and asked whether I had never heard of the Grand Mufti Husseini. He explained that the Mufti has very close contact and cooperation with Eichmann, and therefore Germany cannot agree to Palestine being the final destination, as this would be a blow to Germany’s prestige in the Mufti’s eyes.”

 

Then he goes on: “At this further conversation Wisliceny gave me more details about the cooperation between Eichmann and the Mufti. The Mufti is a sworn enemy of the Jews and has always fought for the idea of annihilating the Jews. He sticks to this idea always, also in his talks with Eichmann” – and here we have one of the points about which Wisliceny has reservations – “who, as you know, is a German who was born in Palestine. The Mufti is one of the originators of the systematic destruction of European Jewry by the Germans, and he has become a permanent colleague, partner and adviser to Eichmann and Himmler in the implementation of this programme.”

 

Here Wisliceny adds: “I have read these descriptions and find them correct, except for this, that Eichmann was born in Palestine, and that the Mufti was a permanent partner of Himmler’s; this is not what I said.”[11]

 

[Excerpt from the Eichmann trial transcript ends here]

Wisliceny, an eyewitness to the relationship between the Mufti Husseini and Eichmann, agreed to everything that Steiner had said except for the bit about Eichmann having been born in Palestine and about his relationship with Himmler. So Wisliceny agreed that “The Mufti is one of the originators of the systematic destruction of European Jewry by the Germans”—in other words, that he had played an important role in the decision to set up the death camp system.

Those who disagree with Netanyahu cannot simply express ‘outrage’ and claim, in the abstract, that Netanyahu is wrong. No matter that they consider themselves great ‘authorities’ invested with institutional prestige. No matter that they claim to speak for Yad Vashem, or ‘Holocaust survivors,’ or the ‘Jewish people’ or ‘real’ or ‘serious’ historians—or any other category of presumed scientific or moral authority which they hope will seem like a big enough stick to beat Netanyahu with. The sources are the sources. If Netanyahu’s detractors wish to disagree with the sources that support his claims, they must speak directly to their content and make a specific argument. That is the sport of historical interpretation. We’ll be waiting.

In closing, I will add that I find the moral arguments brandished to attack Netanyahu especially interesting. And they are most revealing, I believe, about a number of things, including who really has influence over media content, and which forces are ultimately responsible for shaping Israeli politics. I shall have much to say about this in a future piece, soon to come.

Read also:

How did the ‘Palestinian movement’ emerge? The British sponsored it. Then the German Nazis, and the US. http://www.hirhome.com/israel/pal_mov4.htm

The CIA protected Adolf Eichmann, architect of the Holocaust
Has the US ruling elite been pushing a pro-Nazi policy? http://www.hirhome.com/israel/eichmann.htm

PLO/Fatah’s Nazi training was CIA-sponsored http://www.hirhome.com/israel/cia-fatah.htm

The Collapse of the West: The Next Holocaust and its Consequences http://www.hirhome.com/colapso/colapso.htm

Footnotes and Further Reading:

[1] “Palestinian mufti convinced Hitler to massacre Europe’s Jews, Netanyahu says”; Jerusalem Post; 21 October 2015. http://www.jpost.com/Israel-News/Politics-And-Diplomacy/Palestinian-mufti-convinced-Hitler-to-massacre-Europes-Jews-Netanyahu-says-427592

[2] Black, E. (2010). The Farhud: Roots of the Arab-Nazi Alliance in the Holocaust. Washington DC: Dialog Press. http://www.farhudbook.com/

[3] Author: Germany. Auswärtiges Amt. Title: Documents on German foreign policy, 1918-1945, from the archives of the German Foreign Ministry. Akten zur deutschen auswärtigen Politik. English Publisher: Washington, U.S. Govt. Print. Off., 1949- Description: Book v. fold. maps. 24 cm. [Series D, Vol. XIII no. 515] http://www.hirhome.com/israel/muftihitler.htm

[4] “How did the ‘Palestinian movement’ emerge? The British sponsored it. Then the German Nazis, and the US.”; from UNDERSTANDING THE PALESTINIAN MOVEMENT; 13 June 2006; by Francisco Gil-White http://www.hirhome.com/israel/pal_mov4.htm

[5] SOURCE: The Trial of Adolf Eichmann, Sessions 6-7-8. http://www.nizkor.org/hweb/people/e/eichmann-adolf/transcripts/Sessions/Session-006-007-008-05.html

[5a] “The Nazis and the Palestinian Movement: Documentary and discussion”; Historical and Investigative Research; 26 July 2013; by Francisco Gil-White http://www.hirhome.com/israel/nazis_palestinians.htm

[6] Paulsson, G. S. (1995). The ‘Bridge over the Oresund’: The Historiography on the Expulsion of the Jews from Nazi-Occupied Denmark. Journal of Contemporary History, 30(3), 431-464. (p.442)

[7] Jersak, T. (2000). Blitzkrieg revisited: A new look at Nazi war and extermination planning. The historical journal, 43(2), 565-582 (p.571)

[8] Paulsson, G. S. (1995). The ‘Bridge over the Oresund’: The Historiography on the Expulsion of the Jews from Nazi-Occupied Denmark. Journal of Contemporary History, 30(3), 431-464. (p.442)

[9] Simpson, C. (1995). The Splendid Blond Beast: Money, Law, and Genocide in the Twentieth Century. Monroe, ME: Common Courage Press. (p.77)

[10] Marrus, M. R., & Paxton, R. O. (1982). The Nazis and the Jews in occupied Western Europe, 1940-1944. Journal of modern history, 54, 687-714. (p.687)

[10a] Here follows what Eichmann stated on the question of an early meeting with Hajj Amin al Husseini:

[Prosecution lawyer] Q. You have told us of your programme to “put soil under the feet” of the Jewish people. I assume that this was not your personal invention. Could you tell us who were the righteous men who conceived this programme: Heydrich, Himmler, Streicher, Rosenberg – which one of them?

[Eichmann] A. As far as I know, at that time, when I tried to sell this idea within the Service, no one else expressed it.

Q. Only you?

A. At that time, in any event, I did not hear it from anyone else and I also know that this idea was, at that time, ridiculed and scoffed at by some. My impetus came from Adolf Boehm’s book, and there I recognized the root of all evil in the homelessness of this people, and I made no bones about it, within my official sphere of service.

Q. And a clear expression of the need to give this people a homeland, you gave, for instance, in the report about your journey to Palestine in 1939, correct?

A. This is not my report. I have said so myself, and it was confirmed recently in testimony by the person who had then been the superior in command of both myself and the author.

Q. That is not correct, but let me refer only to what you have stated. You have said, in your interrogation, that this report had been corrected by you in your handwriting. This appears on page 341 and 342 of your Statement, where you said that the report had been shown to you before being passed on. Is that correct?

A. I corrected it, but only the spelling, as one can easily find out.

Q. Your journey was designed among other things, to establish contact with Hajj Amin al-Husseini, isn’t that correct?

A. The purpose was, first, to get to know the land and its people, and secondly, to establish contact with all kinds of persons.

Q. I am talking about Hajj Amin al-Husseini.

A. If this were possible, yes, that too, of course.

Q. One of the objects of your journey was to establish contact with Hajj Amin al-Husseini, is that correct? “Yes” or “no”?

A. Yes, that too.

SOURCE: The Trial of Adolf Eichmann, Session 90. http://www.nizkor.org/hweb/people/e/eichmann-adolf/transcripts/Sessions/Session-090-01.html

[11] http://www.nizkor.org/hweb/people/e/eichmann-adolf/transcripts/Sessions/Session-050-07.html

For the Rudolf Kastner testimony, also confirmed by Wisliceny at Nuremberg,see the reproduction of the relevant pages, below, of:

Pearlman, M. (1947). Mufti of Jerusalem: The story of Haj Amin el Husseini. London: V Gollancz. (pp.71-73)

Photo: Mufti of Jerusalem: The story of Haj Amin el Husseini

_______________________

Edited by John R. Houk

Any comment text enclosed by brackets are by the Editor

How Historical and Investigative Research (HIR) came to be…

SHORT SUMMARY

Historical and Investigative Research was created to make important documentation available to the general public, because the academic system is rife with politically biased censorship when it comes to examining the foreign policy of the United States.

Francisco Gil-White found out about this censorship the hard way, when, as a result of his discovery of the vastly important research done by Jared Israel and other journalists at Emperor’s Clothes, he began investigating the official and media representation of the civil wars in the former Yugoslavia, and the relationship of the US government to terrorist forces in that country. Without ever complaining that Gil-White had made a single error of documentation, Gil-White’s employer, the University of Pennsylvania psychology department, began harassing the young assistant professor, making it clear that it didn’t want him doing this kind of research. But Gil-White ignored this and continued his work, casting his eye now also on the Arab-Israeli conflict, for there appeared to be some interesting similarities in the demonization of Serbs and Jews. In time, he published a documentation of PLO origins, showing that this organization traced its roots to the German Nazi Final Solution (the most complete documentation on this is here), which explained why it was chartered to exterminate the Israeli Jews.

After this, Gil-White was threatened with the loss of his job unless he ceased doing this kind of investigative work. Francisco Gil-White has now been fired from the University of Pennsylvania despite READ THE REST

Genocidal Jew-Hater Amin al-Husseini


An Introduction by John R. Houk

© October 31, 2015

About a week ago in Jerusalem Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu spoke at the World Zionist Organization’s 37th Zionist Congress. At the Congress the Prime Minister spoke of the Jerusalem Grand Mufti Haj Amin al-Husseini’s participation in Hitler’s Holocaust against the Jews which resulted in their brutal murders to the tune of about SIX MILLION human beings by the end of 1945.

It boggles my mind that the Leftist media has joined in a chorus of heated criticism of Netanyahu’s finger-pointing at al-Husseini as a joint Holocaust instigator with Hitler. SO WHAT if Netanyahu was off about the degree of pivotal involvement in convincing Hitler to cleanse Europe of Jews rather than deport them?

The real point should be that al-Husseini cooperated so much with Hitler’s Final Solution against European Jews that he brought the Nazi Jew-hatred ideology back to Muslim dominated areas inspiring genocidal concepts against Jews that continue to this very day. This is evidenced in particular by the Arabs who call themselves Palestinians current murder spree against Jews in Israel.

Haj Amin al-Husseini

Below is a Middle East Forum backgrounder on al-Husseini followed by a more in depth look at the dead Jew-hater by Pamela Geller.

JRH 10/31/15

Please Support NCCR

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

Backgrounder: Hajj Amin al-Husseini

Compiled by Gary C. Gambill

October 30, 2015

Middle East Forum

MEF backgrounders highlight select news-relevant research and analysis from Middle East Forum staff, fellows, and publications. Sign up to the MEF mailing list to stay abreast of our work.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu caused a storm of controversy on October 20 by quoting Hajj Amin al-Husseini, the infamous grand mufti of Jerusalem during the interwar years, as having told Adolf Hitler in 1941 to “burn” rather than deport the Jews of Europe, insinuating that this influenced the unfolding Nazi genocide.

Hitler and Husseini in Berlin, November 1941

While the veracity of this quote is in question, few dispute that Husseini could well have said something to this effect given his genocidal hatred of Jews, penchant for blood-curdling rhetoric, and determination to prevent Jewish immigration to Palestine. However, opinions differ sharply, even among MEF staff and fellows, as to the degree of Hussein’s influence, both in Nazi Germany and the Middle East.

MEF Hochberg Family Writing Fellow Wolfgang G. Schwanitz, coauthor of Nazis, Islamists, and the Making of the Modern Middle East (2014), argues that two components of this question are unmistakably clear. First, Husseini’s overarching goal prior to and during Hitler’s reign, he notes, was that “whatever happens with Jews under Hitler’s reign in Europe, they should not come to the Middle East.” At the very least, the Germans understood that deportation as a solution to Europe’s “Jewish Question” risked alienating their top protégé in the Arab world – a region they expected in 1941-42 to be invading soon.

Second, Schwanitz notes that the historical record shows the mufti to be unquestionably the “foremost extra-European adviser in the process to destroy the Jews of Europe.” Adolf Eichmann and his subordinates frequently briefed Husseini as the genocide unfolded, “as if to reassure him that Hitler had not changed his mind,” he writes in a forthcoming article.

Husseini (left), Indian nationalist leader Subhash Chandra Bose, and Iraqi leader Rashid Ali al-Gaylani in Berlin, 1943

In contrast, MEF fellow Jeffrey Herf, author of Nazi Propaganda for the Arab World (2010), contends that the Husseini’s “importance in Nazi Berlin lay far more in assisting the Third Reich’s Arabic language propaganda … and in mobilizing Muslims in Eastern Europe to support the Nazi regime.” Although these achievements surely facilitated Nazi atrocities, Hitler “made the decisions to implement the Final Solution and had communicated those decisions to key actors in the Nazi regime at the latest a month before his [1941] meeting with Husseini.”

Whatever his role in the Holocaust, MEF staff and fellows widely agree that Husseini was a critical ideological progenitor of Middle Eastern extremism today. The mufti was among the first to “exploit the draw of the Islamic holy places in Jerusalem to find international Muslim support” for the anti-Zionist cause, notes MEF President Daniel Pipes, a theme very much in evidence today among Palestinian Islamists.

Moreover, Husseini “can be largely held responsible for the Middle East’s endemic antisemitism,” writes Daniel Pipes in a recent Washington Times op-ed, pointing to his postwar tutelage of Yasser Arafat and other rising Palestinian figures, as well the Muslim Brotherhood during his stay in Egypt after the Nazi defeat.

Hitler’s Mein Kampf has been a bestseller in the Middle East since the 1930s.

As Boris Havel illustrates in a recent Middle East Quarterly article, Husseini’s propaganda traced “alleged Jewish power and ambitions” in the here and now “to supposed Jewish activities at the time of Muhammad,” a theological innovation that is today a staple of Islamist discourse.

Because of Husseini, there remains an “inescapable and inextricable connection between Islamists … and the Nazi movement” today, MEF Director Gregg Roman told Al-Jazeera English on October 22. In an early Middle East Quarterly article, famed Princeton University historian Bernard Lewis notes (without specific reference to Husseini) the “astonishing degree” to which “the ideas, the literature, even the crudest inventions of the Nazis and their predecessors have been internalized and Islamized” in the Middle East.

At the same time, it is important not to overstate Husseini’s influence. When the American Freedom Defense Initiative (AFDI) placed ads on Philadelphia buses displaying a photo of Husseini and Hitler with a caption reading “Adolf Hitler and his staunch ally, the leader of the Muslim world,” Daniel Pipes cautioned that the “text is factually inaccurate,” calling Husseini “a British appointee in the Mandate for Palestine, where Muslims constituted less than 1 percent of the total world Muslim population.”

Compiled by Middle East Forum web editor Gary C. Gambill

+++

Pamela Geller, WND Column: Netanyahu tells truth about mufti’s role in Holocaust

By Pamela Geller

October 29, 2015

Pamela Geller – Atlas Shrugs

The mufti of Jerusalem, Muhammad Hajj Amin Husseini, visits the volunteer Nazi Waffen-SS division in Bosnia, made up of Bosnian Muslims

If case you missed my column at WND this week:

DEFENDING THE WEST
Netanyahu tells truth about mufti’s role in Holocaust

Exclusive: Pamela Geller defends Bibi against onslaught of media attack

The condemnations have been way over the top: Benjamin Netanyahu is being denounced by the media and political elites all over the world, in a way that the openly genocidal jihadist Mahmoud Abbas never has been. Netanyahu’s crime? He told the Zionist Congress last Tuesday, “Hitler didn’t want to exterminate the Jews at the time; he wanted to expel the Jews.” Netanyahu quoted Hitler asking the mufti, “So what should I do with them?” The mufti responded, according to Netanyahu, “Burn them.’”

Those who are excoriating Netanyahu for this are overlooking one fact: Netanyahu was right.

The mufti of Jerusalem, Haj Amin al-Husseini, lived in Berlin from 1941 to 1945 and recruited a Muslim SS division for Hitler. And Netanyahu was correct: The Nazis originally pursued a policy of exiling Jews to Eastern Europe, and even to Palestine – until the mufti protested that they must not be sent there. The decision to exterminate the Jews came soon after that.

It is good to see that Netanyahu is not backing down. He called the criticism of his remarks “absurd,” which it is: Netanyahu’s remarks mirror my ads highlighting the role of the Muslim world during the Holocaust, and Netanyahu is experiencing the same blowback from Islamic supremacists and Islamic apologists that I got.

The premier front man for the failed idea that we should place all our hope in “moderate Islam,” Daniel Pipes, claimed several months ago that our ad campaign in Philadelphia calling attention to the mufti’s relationship with Hitler was a failure. Pipes took issue with our factual assertions, asserting that the mufti’s meeting with Hitler was a “one-time, opportunistic consultation.” Really? Tell that to the 400,000 Jewish women and children Husseini sent to their deaths at Nazi concentration camps. Tell that to the victims of the Muslim armies in Bosnia that Husseini raised for Hitler.

Pamela Geller’s commitment to freedom from jihad and Shariah shines forth in her books – featured at the WND Superstore

Al-Husseini lived in Berlin during World War II on Hitler’s dime and made weekly radio addresses from Berlin to the Axis power nations and the Muslim world. In one, he screamed: “Arabs, rise and fight as one for your sacred rights. Kill the Jews wherever you find them. This pleases Allah, history and religion. This saves your honor, Allah is with you.”

The mufti made similar appeals, always pointing to the Quran, time and time again in his radio addresses during the war. He organized propaganda services to the Muslims of the world from Berlin. He used Axis radio stations calling Muslims to arms in a holy war against the Allies. He aided the Nazi espionage service. He raised Muslim parachute groups for sabotage in the Middle East. He raised Muslim formations to fight the allies. He helped in the Nazi plan to exterminate nearly 6 million Jews.

“Hitler,” Netanyahu said in further remarks after the media firestorm began, “was responsible for the Final Solution to exterminate six million Jews; he made the decision. It is equally absurd to ignore the role played by the mufti, Haj Amin al-Husseini, a war criminal, for encouraging and urging Hitler.”

Right again. At my website, PamelaGeller.com, I have been calling attention to this for years. SS Hauptsturmfuehrer Dieter Wisliceny, a close collaborator of Adolf Eichmann, testified that “the grand mufti, who had been in Berlin since 1941, played a role in the decision of the German government to exterminate the European Jews the importance of which must not be disregarded. He had repeatedly suggested to the various authorities with whom he had been in contact, above all before Hitler, Ribbentrop and Himmler, the extermination of European jury. He considers this as a comfortable solution of the Palestine problem. In his messages broadcast from Berlin, he surpassed us in anti-Jewish attacks. He was one of Eichmann’s best friends and has constantly incited him to accelerate the extermination measures. I heard say that, accompanied by Eichmann, he has visited incognito the gas chamber it Auschwitz.”

Eichmann made the statement referred to in the affidavit in his office in Budapest on June 4, 1944; the confirmation by Wisliceny was given some days later also in Budapest.

To his Eminence the Grand Mufti, a Souvenir, July 4, 1943” H. Himmler

Not only that: According to testimony at the Nuremberg trials, “[T]he mufti was a bitter arch enemy of the Jews and had always been the protagonist of the idea of their annihilation. This idea the mufti had always advanced in his conversations with Eichmann.”

The mufti’s role in the Holocaust has been covered up. The New York Post reported back in 1948 that “on Aug. 28, 1946, Dean Acheson, then Acting Secretary of State, announced that ‘the State Dept. is preparing a White Paper concerning the activities of the ex-Mufti of Jerusalem.’ Acheson said the publication would be in the form of a book, which would cover all the documents concerning the ex-Mufti seized from German files. This White Paper has not yet been published, although 17 months have passed. What keeps the State Dept. from publishing it? Who is interested in the delay? Are all the documents safe?”

That delay has now continued for nearly seventy years. The white paper was never published. I submitted a Freedom of Information Act request several years ago, asking for a copy of it, as well as of all State Department correspondence relating to it. The State Department responded that such a white paper did not exist and had never existed, and that there was no correspondence about it.

So what did happen to that promised white paper? Under whose auspices, and for what reason, has the mufti’s role in the Holocaust been shrouded in silence?

Netanyahu did the world a great service by calling attention to this. The intensity of the attacks against him only testifies to how much he struck a nerve. In the mainstream media, Islam and Muslims must never, ever be criticized. We may only hope that the controversy will lead to some of the details being revealed about the mufti’s role in Hitler’s genocide.

__________________________

Genocidal Jew-Hater Amin al-Husseini

An Introduction by John R. Houk

© October 31, 2015

___________________________

Backgrounder: Hajj Amin al-Husseini

 

This text may be reposted or forwarded so long as it is presented as an integral whole with complete and accurate information provided about its author, date, place of publication, and original URL.

 

©1994-2015 The Middle East Forum

__________________________

Pamela Geller, WND Column: Netanyahu tells truth about mufti’s role in Holocaust

 

About Pamela Geller

 

Pamela Geller is the founder, editor and publisher of Atlas Shrugs.com and President of the American Freedom Defense Initiative (AFDI) and Stop Islamization of America (SIOA). She is the author of The Post-American Presidency: The Obama Administration’s War on America, with Robert Spencer (foreword by Ambassador John Bolton) (Simon & Schuster) and Stop the Islamization of America: A Practical Guide to the Resistance (WND Books). She is also a regular columnist for World Net Dailythe American ThinkerBreitbart.com and other publications.

 

Geller’s activism on behalf of human rights has won international notice. She is a foremost defender of the freedom of speech against attempts to force the West to accept Sharia blasphemy laws, and against Sharia self-censorship by Western media outlets. Her First Amendment lawsuits filed nationwide have rolled back attempts to limit Americans’ free speech rights and limit speech to only one political perspective, and exposed attempts to make an end-run around the First Amendment by illegitimately restricting access to public fora. Her free speech event in Garland, Texas led to the capture or killing of several murderous jihadists, smoking out terror cells, leading to an increase in the threat level to BRAVO and to the consequent arrests of jihadists in several states.

 

Geller has also led awareness campaigns in U.S., Europe, and Israel on behalf of the victims and potential victims of honor killing, for the human rights of apostates from Islam, for the freedom of speech, and more. She has placed ads nationwide on READ THE REST