Fatah blatantly supports terror – findings presented in US Congress


In case you were unaware, Fatah is the terrorist organization of the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) umbrella of Jew-hating Islamic terrorists. AND the PLO is the backbone of the Palestinian Authority (PA) – HERE & HERE. The PA is the so-called governing organization that four military/economic powers – Quartet (which includes the U.S. government) have demanded Israel commit national suicide to create a sovereign nation for the fake Palestinian people.

 

Palestinian Media Watch (PMW) has presented a roughly 47-page report on how Fatah is supporting blatant terrorism against the Jewish people of Israel.

 

JRH 3/20/17

Please Support NCCR

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

Fatah blatantly supports terror – findings presented in US Congress

 

By Itamar Marcus and PMW staff

Mar. 17, 2017

Palestinian Media Watch

 

Yesterday, Palestinian Media Watch presented its report Fatah Votes for Terror to the House of Representatives’ Foreign Affairs Subcommittee on the Middle EastIncluded as an appendix to that report is a new collection of examples which show that Fatah continues to blatantly incite and glorify terror in 2017.

 

 

Posted text: “My weapon has emerged”

Text on image: “From my wounds, my weapon has emerged.

Oh, our revolution, my weapon has emerged.

There is no force in the world that can remove the weapon from my hand.

My path is bitter, your path is bitter, tread on my ribs and advance

How much this revolutionary people has sacrificed to live freely.”

[Official Fatah Facebook page, Feb. 7, 2017]

 

The picture to the right, which Fatah posted on its official Facebook page and appears in Appendix 2 of PMW’s report, is just one of countless examples of the party’s violence promotion.

 

Click to view Fatah Votes for Terror Appendix 2: Fatah terror promotion continues in 2017

 

Fatah promotes terror during times characterized by daily terror attacks as well as during relatively peaceful times. In Fatah Votes for Terror Appendix 3, PMW documents that Fatah actively glorified terrorism on its Facebook page throughout the terror wave of 2015-2016.

 

The image below, which Fatah posted to its official Facebook page and appears in Appendix 3, glorified the ongoing violence and promised more to come:

 

Posted text: “We march, we are not afraid of the fire and we do not fear death. With blood we will redeem the homeland and saturate its ground. The anniversary is approaching.” #The_51st_anniversary_of_the_beginning _of_Fatah’s_activity”

Text on image: “Half a century has passed and we have never abandoned our weapons”

[Official Fatah Facebook page, Dec. 26, 2015]

 

Click to view Fatah Votes for Terror Appendix 3:

Fatah Facebook posts glorifying Palestinian terrorists during the 2015-2016 terror wave

 

The large number of examples documented in these appendices show that terror support is fundamental to Fatah’s ideology. This documentation is of paramount importance when examining whether the Palestinian Authority, with the Fatah Movement as its leading party, can be seen as a peace partner. Is Fatah leading the Palestinian people toward peace or toward continued terror?

 

Click to view PMW special report Fatah Votes for Terror in pdf

 

Click to view Appendix 2: Fatah terror promotion continues in 2017

 

Click to view Appendix 3: Fatah Facebook posts glorified

 

Palestinian terrorists during the 2015-2016 terror wave

 

__________________

© 1997-2017 Palestinian Media Watch|Reproduction Rights

 

About PMW

 

Founded in 1996, Palestinian Media Watch is an Israeli research institute that studies Palestinian society from a broad range of perspectives by monitoring and analyzing the Palestinian Authority through its media and schoolbooks. PMW’s major focus is on the messages that the Palestinian leaders, from the Palestinian Authority, Fatah and Hamas, send to the population through the broad range of institutions and infrastructures they control.

PMW’s many reports and studies on Palestinian summer camps, poetry, schoolbooks, crossword puzzles, religious ideology, women and mothers, children’s music videos and the PA’s indoctrination of adults and children to seek Shahada (Martyrdom), have had significant impact on the way the world sees the Palestinians. PMW has presented its findings before members of US Congress and READ THE REST

 

PMW open letter to the Danish Foreign Minister


BHO-Kerry prepare to stab Israel in back toon

Palestine Media Watch takes on Denmark’s Foreign Minister Kristian Jensen support for the Fatah terrorist organization the backbone for both the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) and the Palestinian Authority (PA) – See Also HERE. Here is an excerpt from Wikipedia on Jensen:

 

Kristian Jensen (born May 21, 1971) is a Danish politician who has been Minister for Foreign Affairs of Denmark and Deputy Prime Minister since 2015. He is a spokesperson for the Liberal party Venstre. He was the Minister for Taxation from 2004 to 2010 and has been a member of parliament (Folketinget) since March 11, 1998.[1]During his time as Tax Minister, Kristian Jensen was a keen proponent of a “tax freeze.”

 

Jensen was the Venstre’s spokesman on information technology and sports from 1998 to 2001 and became its spokesman on finance policy, as well as Vice-Chairman of the Financial Affairs Committee, in 2001.[1]

 

At the liberal party’s congress on 17 May 2009, Kristian Jensen was elected as vice president of the liberal party, without any other candidates running for the post.

 

If Venstre lost the 2015 election, then Kristian Jensen was considered very likely to be the next leader of the political party. Unlike the current leader of Venstre, who is rated as very untrustworthy in polls,[2] there are no controversies associated with Kristian Jensen. In the event, Venstre was able to form a minority government, with Jensen becoming Minister of Foreign Affairs on 28 June 2015. (last modified on 13 February 2016, at 09:25.)

 

Kristian Jensen

 

Denmark’s Foreign Minister Kristian Jensen believes the Palestinian Authority is a Moderate representative of the Palestinians residing in Israel’s hereditary area of Judea and Samaria (Palestinian supporters prefer West Bank or Occupied Territories) rather than permeated with Islamic Jew-hating terrorists. Palestinian Media Watch (PMW) sets him straight.

 

JRH 3/30/16

Please Support NCCR

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

PMW open letter to the Danish Foreign Minister:

Fatah promotes terror

 

Sent by Palestine Media Watch

Sent: Mar 29, 2016 10:17:43

 

PMW SPECIAL REPORT

Bulletin    

March 29, 2016

By Itamar Marcus and Nan Jacques Zilberdik

 

Open letter to the Danish Minister for Foreign Affairs:

Fatah promotes terror 

 

Palestinian Media Watch (PMW) calls on Danish Minister for Foreign Affairs to reassess Denmark’s relationship to Fatah due to Fatah’s ongoing terror support

 

  • Responding to Palestinian Media Watch documentation, Danish Minister for Foreign Affairs Kristian Jensen admitted he “opposes” a Fatah official’s terror glorification. However, the minister continues to view Fatah as “moderate” because the official, he believes, did not speak “on behalf of Fatah, the PLO, the Palestinian Authority or the Palestinian government.” [Danish Ministry of Forein (sic) Affairs, Jan. 22, 2016]

 

  • This PMW report corrects the Danish minister’s mistake. It documents that numerous senior Fatah leaders, Abbas’ advisors, Mahmoud Abbas himself, the Fatah Central Committee headed by Mahmoud Abbas, and official Fatah media are all actively supporting and glorifying the current terror. Neither Fatah, nor any of its leaders, have condemned even one murder of an Israeli during the last 5 months of terror. To the contrary, they have glorified the terror and the terrorists.

 

  • PMW welcomes the statement by the Danish Minister for Foreign Affairs indicating that were Fatah, its leaders and the PA glorifying terror, Denmark would “reassess” its categorization of Fatah as “moderate.”

 

The following is an excerpt from the report that Palestinian Media Watch 

 sent to the Danish Minister for Foreign Affairs on March 20, 2016

 

Click here to read the full report as a PDF

 

PART 1

 

  1. Letter from Palestinian Media Watch

to Minister for Foreign Affairs of Denmark Kristian Jensen

 

Dear Minister for Foreign Affairs of Denmark Kristian Jensen,
This letter and report is in response to your recent answer to Question S507 asked by MP Søren Espersen in Danish Parliament regarding statements published by PMW made by Abbas Zaki, a member of the Palestinian Fatah Central Committee, in which he glorified terror against Israelis, stating that “Allah loves our young people with rocks and knives.” You described Zaki’s words as “a sad example of inflammatory rhetoric” that you “oppose,” adding, however, that you would not reassess whether Fatah remains a “moderate” partner for Denmark because Zaki is:

“A Fatah member residing in Lebanon, who is not considered to have spoken on behalf of Fatah, the PLO, the Palestinian Authority or the Palestinian government… The statement does not give the government any reason to reconsider the assessment of Fatah and the movement’s leader, President Abbas.” [Danish Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Jan. 22, 2016, the question and answer appear at the end of the report]

 

However, this report shows that your refusal to “reconsider the assessment” of Fatah as “moderate” is based on wrong information. Not only does Zaki reside in the PA, but more importantly, Fatah has not been a moderating voice during this current terror campaign. On the contrary, Fatah and its senior leadership are actively promoting terror against Israelis, including the unequivocal glorification of those who have killed and injured Israelis in terror attacks.

 

Accordingly, PMW welcomes your statement implying that Denmark would “reassess” and take action if senior Fatah officials, the PLO, or the PA were shown to engage in hate speech, encourage terror attacks, and glorify terrorists. This document shows that a reassessement by the Danish government is warranted.

  1. Documentation of Fatah actively promoting terror – in brief

The following are brief examples of Fatah actively promoting terror (additional and detailed documentation appears later in the report):

 

Jibril Rajoub, Deputy-Secretary of the Fatah Central Committee promotes terror

Jibril Rajoub is Deputy-Secretary of the Fatah Central Committee. He is also Head of the Supreme Council for Sport and Youth Affairs, Chairman of the Palestinian Football Association, and Chairman of the Palestinian Olympic Committee. Several times, Rajoub has endorsed and praised the terror attacks against Israelis and lauded the terrorists carrying them out:

 

Dep. Sec Fatah-terrorism are acts of Bravery

Dep. Sec Fatah-terrorism are acts of Bravery

 

Jibril Rajoub: “These are individual acts of bravery, and I am proud of them. I congratulate everyone who carried them out. I say to you, we are proud of you… Whoever confronts, fights, dies as a Martyr, is arrested or injured – his identity is known. What I mean is that the fighter, the prisoner, or the Martyr, they are assets to the entire Palestinian people… The international community does not agree to a bus exploding in Tel Aviv. But the international community does not ask what happens to a settler or soldier in the occupied territories at the wrong time and in the wrong place. No one asks about him! Therefore, we want to fight in such a way that the world and the international community will remain by our side.” [Official PA TV, Oct. 17, 2015]

 

Dep. Sec Fatah-Terrorists are heroes

Dep. Sec Fatah-Terrorists are heroes

Jibril Rajoub: “Yesterday in Hebron, they escorted 17 Martyrs to burial. This is of course a source of pride for all of us. I say that whoever carried out individual acts of heroism, we in the Fatah movement bless and encourage them. We consider them heroes and a crown on the head of every Palestinian. At this point, when there is weakening and frustration, there is a group of people, beginning with our brother Muhannad Halabi (i.e., terrorist who murdered 2) and ending with the last Martyr… There is a competition between individuals. This is one of the issues we need to address – are we for or against it? I say that we in the [Fatah] Central Committee have discussed this matter, and we are in favor.” [Official PA TV, Jan. 2, 2016]

 

Fatah Central Committee promotes and endorses terror

Very significantly, in the above statement about attacks carried out by individuals, Rajoub expressed the Fatah Central Committee’s support for the terror when he stated that “we in the [Fatah] Central Committee have discussed this matter, and we are in favor.”

It must be stressed that the Fatah Central Committee is Fatah’s governing body and headed by Mahmoud Abbas.
Official Fatah TV promotes murder

Official Fatah TV broadcast a music video calling for murder of Israelis: “Besiege them in all their neighborhoods, Drown them in a sea of blood, Kill them as you wish”

 

Pal Media- Drown Jews in Sea of Blood

Pal Media- Drown Jews in Sea of Blood

 

Fatah’s official Facebook page and Twitter account promote terror

Fatah’s official Facebook page and Twitter account have been a central part of this terror campaign, glorifying the terror almost daily. From the outset, Fatah has been glorifying murder using numerous posts, including the following examples which visually express Fatah’s explicit promotion of stabbing murders:

 

Fatah Facebook page- Terrorists be victorious or die

Text: “We’ll be victorious or die”
[Official Fatah Facebook page, Oct. 23, 2015]

 

Fatah Facebook- (killing jews) 'so what'

Text on photo: “#so_what”

[Official Fatah Facebook page , Nov. 7, 2015]

 

Jew screaming in pain- stabbed back with knife PA-flag-colors

Jew screaming in pain with a knife stuck in his shoulder. PA flag on the blade of the knife and Jerusalem in the background.

Text: “Here is Jerusalem, you crazies, beware!” 

[Official Fatah Facebook page, Oct. 4, 2015]

 

Fatah Terrorist plays knife-fiddle - Jerusalem Mosques

A masked man plays a knife as a violin, with Al-Aqsa  Mosque and the Dome of the Rock in the background.

Posted text: “A symphony of love for Jerusalem.” 

[Official Fatah Twitter account, Oct. 12, 2015]

 

Fatah has also glorified several murderers on its Facebook page, among them Muhannad Halabi who stabbed 2 to death in the Old City of Jerusalem, Nashat Melhem who shot and killed 3 in Tel Aviv, and Bashar Masalha who killed 1 in Tel Aviv-Jaffa:

 

Fatah brought soil from the Al-Aqsa Mosque to the grave of terrorist Muhannad Halabi, who murdered two in the Old City of Jerusalem “so that the dead body of Martyr Muhannad Halabi can hug the soil for which he died a Martyr.” [Fatah Twitter account, Oct. 8, 2015]

 

Fatah glorified Tel Aviv murderer of 3: “Congratulations and may Allah receive you in Heaven”

 

Abbas’ Fatah movement posted an uncensored version of the picture of dead terrorist Nashat Melhem lying in a pool of blood. It also praised the killer of 3 as a “Martyr” and congratulated him on its official Facebook page. Nashat Melhem was a 29-year-old Israeli Arab terrorist who carried out a shooting attack, killing 3 Israelis and wounding 8 others in Tel Aviv on Jan. 1, 2016:

 

Soil in yellow bags at murderer's grave

Soil in yellow bags at murderer’s grave

Text: “Nashat Melhem died as a Martyr (Shahid) after an armed confrontation in the courtyard of a mosque in Umm Al-Fahm on blessed Friday, congratulations and may Allah receive you in Heaven” [Official Fatah Facebook page, Jan. 8, 2016]

 

Fatah honored murderer who killed 1 and injured 11 in an attack in Tel Aviv-Jaffa 

Fatah’s official Facebook page posted a drawing of a knife held over the PA map of “Palestine” that includes all of Israel and the PA areas, with the name of the murderer written on it.

 

The heroic Martyr (Shahid)

Text on arm: “The heroic Martyr (Shahid)”  

Text on map is name of murderer: “Bashar Masalha” 

[Official Fatah Facebook page, March 9, 2016]

 

Official Fatah anniversary celebrations in Bethlehem promote terror

Another example of Fatah showing itself as a terror promoting organization was seen in January this year, when Fatah held a march in Bethlehem to mark its 51st anniversary. To celebrate, Fatah had children parade in the streets of Bethlehem wearing suicide belts and carrying knives, guns and RPGs, alongside Fatah flags. [Official PA daily Al-Hayat Al-Jadida, Jan. 8, 2016]

 

(All photos are from Ma’an, independent Palestinian news agency, Jan. 7, 2016)

Ma'an Photo 1

Ma'an Photo 2

Ma'an Photo 3

Ma'an Photo 4

 

Fatah Central Committee members promote and glorify terror

As was shown above, in the words of Deputy-Secretary of the Fatah Central Committee Jibril Rajoub, the Fatah Central Committee is “in favor” of “attacks by individuals” against Israelis. The following are statements by three members of the Central Committee corroborating this Fatah support for terror. (More statements by these and additional members of the Central Committee appear later in the report.)

 

Sultan Abu Al-Einein, Fatah Central Committee member and advisor to Mahmoud Abbas, promotes terror

One Fatah Central Committee member who also serves as an advisor to Mahmoud Abbas, Sultan Abu Al-Einein, likewise promotes terror. Abu Al-Einein blessed the terrorists from the current terror campaign, saying: “We bow before every drop of blood that has dripped from our children and women… and every… Martyr’s mother, who… when they notified her of his death as a Martyr, she let cries of joy loose to the Heavens.” [Falestinona, website of Fatah’s Information and Culture Commission in Lebanon, Jan. 16, 2016] Abu Al-Einein also glorified a terrorist who killed 1 and wounded 11 as “Martyr”: “We loved you, while you sowed life for all Palestinians” [Sultan Abu Al-Einein’s Facebook page, Oct. 19, 2015] He has openly declared his total support for the terror campaign, saying that he “supports, with all his might, the uprising and intifada… aimed at defending the Al-Aqsa Mosque” from “defilement” and “Judaization.” [Falestinona, Oct. 14, 2015]

 

Abbas Zaki, Fatah Central Committee member and advisor to Mahmoud Abbas, promotes terror

Abbas Zaki is a member of the Fatah Central Committee. He is close to Mahmoud Abbas and has travelled internationally as Abbas’ personal emissary. Zaki stated that the murderers of four Israelis are “giants and leaders” and went on to say that “whoever succeeded in killing, this is a big thing.” He added that such a terrorist should have “an institution named after him, and a statue [made] of him.”

 

Succeed in killing is big thing

Whoever succeeded in killing [Jews], this is a big thing

[Official PA TV, Oct. 31, 2015] 

 

Mahmoud Al-Aloul – member of Fatah Central Committee and Commissioner for Mobilization and Organization encourages terror  

Fatah official Al-Aloul encouraged Palestinian youth to “make the country a hell for the enemies”

Shortly after the murders of 4 Israeli civilians in two separate attacks on Oct. 1 and 3, 2015, Fatah Central Committee member Mahmoud Al-Aloul addressed Palestinian youth on his Facebook page, encouraging them to “rise up against the enemies”:

 

Mahmoud Al-Aloul:  “#Resist_boycott_rise up (literally “make intifada”)

More resistance and escalation against the occupation everywhere. Let us make the country a hell for the enemies… all the members of the Shabiba (i.e., Fatah youth and student movement) are potential Martyrs for the beloved Palestine.”

[Fatah Central Committee member Mahmoud Al-Aloul’s Facebook page, Oct. 5, 2015]

 

Al-Aloul called to “continue attacks” against Israelis

In another post, Al-Aloul stated that “whoever loves the Shahada (Martyrdom death) is not afraid of the settler herds.” He ended with the following words of encouragement: “and #let’s_continue_the_attacks.” [Fatah Central Committee member Mahmoud Al-Aloul’s Facebook page, Oct. 5, 2015]

 

Fatah glorifies and honors the terrorists of the current terror campaign

 

Fatah leader sponsors sporting event after murderer of two

As an unequivocal expression of support for murder, Fatah continues to honor and glorify the killers of the current terror campaign. For example, Jibril Rajoub, Central Committee member mentioned above, who is also Head of the Supreme Council for Sport and Youth Affairs and Chairman of the PA Olympic Committee, sponsored a table tennis tournament, named after murderer Muhannad Halabi, who murdered two people and stabbed a woman and her baby in October 2015. Rajoub mentioned Halabi by name when he described the “heroes” who constitute “a crown on the head of every Palestinian.” [Official PA TV, Jan. 2, 2016]

 

 

table tennis tournament, named after murderer Muhannad Halabi

table tennis tournament, named after murderer Muhannad Halabi

 

Mahmoud Abbas denies murdering Israelis is wrong. Terror campaign is a “popular peaceful uprising” 

Finally, Abbas himself has not been a moderating influence. Abbas has not condemned even one terror attack during this entire violent period, and worse still, he has justified these attacks by claiming they were part of a “popular peaceful uprising”: “We want peaceful popular uprising, and that’s what this is. That’s what this is.” [Official PA TV, Nov. 16, 2015] Abbas made this statement after Palestinians had carried out 65 stabbing attacks, 8 shooting attacks, and 8 car ramming attacks, in which a total of 14 Israelis were murdered and 167 were wounded.

 

Not even when US Vice President Joe Biden urged Abbas to condemn a terror attack in Tel Aviv-Jaffa, where a Palestinian stabbed a US citizen to death and injured 11 Israelis, did Abbas comply. He “offered condolences,” but never condemned the attack. [The Jerusalem Post, March 10, 2016]

 

Abbas’ frequent referral to all the terror attacks as part of the Palestinian “peaceful” or “nonviolent” “uprising” may have been what has led the Danish Minister for Foreign Affairs and other international spectators to wrongly conclude that Abbas is against the current wave of terror attacks against Israelis.

 

PLO leader: Murdering Israeli civilians is “national duty”

A statement which expresses the Fatah and PLO leaders’ attitude towards the current terror campaign was made by PLO Executive Committee member Mahmoud Ismail, who defined the killing of Israelis as a “national duty.” In a conversation about the murder of a young Israeli couple, which took place while their 4 children watched from the back seat of the car, Ismail said the following: “There is no need to return to the argument and dispute about who carried out the operation (i.e., the killing)… There is no need to announce it and boast of having done it. One fulfills his national duty voluntarily, as best as one can.” [Official PA TV, Oct. 6, 2015]

 

One fulfills his national duty voluntarily - Killing Jews

One fulfills his national duty voluntarily, as best as one can

 

This attitude is representative of the PA’s and Fatah’s approach throughout this terror campaign. The Fatah leadership has not condemned the terror, but has presented it as patriotic and a legitimate part of the Palestinian “struggle” and “resistance.” Killing soldiers or civilians anywhere is presented as a “national duty.”

 

Fatah proud of its leading role in the current terror campaign

Finally, Fatah is proud of its leading role in the current terror campaign. Several Fatah leaders have specifically mentioned Fatah’s central role in the terror campaign.

 

Fayez Abu Aita, Fatah Spokesman, stated that Mahmoud Abbas is leading the “blessed popular uprising”: 

 

Fatah Spokesman Fayez Abu Aita… emphasized in a press statement published by the [Fatah] Information and Culture Commission today [Jan. 7, 2016]… that it is necessary to take into account the difficult and sensitive situation our people is experiencing, as it fights the battle for independence and an [independent] state, led by President Mahmoud Abbas, through the blessed popular uprising and the unlimited political confrontation with the occupation in the UN corridors and the International Criminal Court.'” [WAFA (the official Palestinian news agency), Jan. 7, 2016]

 

Amal Hamad, Fatah Central Committee member: 

 

“I say that if one has a responsible national feeling, on is supposed to thank Fatah for its resolve, and for its ability to say ‘No!’ to the Americans, ‘No!’ to the occupation, ‘No!’ to all regional, Arab and international pressures… We are still leading the popular uprising, with true resistance, 80 percent of the Martyrs (Shahids) are Fatah people. If so, the movement is deeply rooted…” [Official PA TV, March 1, 2016]

 

Jamal Muhaisen, Fatah Central Committee member, Commissioner for Diaspora Branches and PLO Central Council member: 

 

“They [Hamas] talk about resistance. What is happening today? Today there is a struggle on two fronts. There is the struggle in the field, by the popular resistance, and I say that 90 percent of the Martyrs (Shahids) are from Fatah. I say to Abu Marzouq (a senior member of Hamas -Ed.) that 90 percent of the Martyrs are from Fatah, and I would like Hamas to be present in the popular uprising in the field, matching its size. Hamas’ presence does not match its size.” [Official PA TV, Feb. 14, 2016]

 

Abbas Zaki, Fatah Central Committee member and Commissioner of Arab and China Relations: 

 

The Fatah movement draws its strength from its people, and noted that its fingerprints are clearly evident in the popular Palestinian uprising… Fatah is carrying the flag of victory, through the national measures and that the fact that it is currently leading the mass uprising is the best proof of this.” [Official PA daily Al-Hayat Al-Jadida, Dec. 30, 2015]

 

  1. Summary and conclusions

 

In summary, it is imperative that this hate speech, violence promotion and terror glorification be condemned – by you, the Danish government, and other members of the international community who wish to see peace in the Middle East. Denmark and other supporters of the PA have a unique position as financial donors to the PA to demand that the PA, including Fatah as the ruling party in government, honors the commitments it has made in the past: to stop incitement and to renounce terror. The PA’s donors have tremendous potential influence to demand a change in the messages and policies that PA and Fatah leaders transmit to Palestinians.

 

When Rajoub, the Deputy-Secretary of Fatah’s Central Committee, which is headed by Mahmoud Abbas, refers to the the [sic] murder of Israelis as “individual acts of heroism” and publicly says on official Palestinian Authority TV that the Fatah Central Committee supports them, it must not be ignored by the international community.

 

In your answer to MP Søren Espersen, you indicated that if “Fatah, the PLO, the PA, or the Palestinian government” were actively supporting the terror campaign, the Danish government would reassess its attitude toward them.

 

The documentation in this letter and report shows that the Danish government must “reconsider its assessment” of Fatah, the PA, and Mahmoud Abbas, and take the necessary steps when dealing with a political governmental body that openly supports terror as Fatah does.

 

Click here to read the rest of the report as a PDF

 

_____________________

PMW, Palestinian Media Watch, Jerusalem, Israel

 

About PMW

 

Founded in 1996, Palestinian Media Watch is an Israeli research institute that studies Palestinian society from a broad range of perspectives by monitoring and analyzing the Palestinian Authority through its media and schoolbooks. PMW’s major focus is on the messages that the Palestinian leaders, from the Palestinian Authority, Fatah and Hamas, send to the population through the broad range of institutions and infrastructures they control.

PMW’s many reports and studies on Palestinian summer camps, poetry, schoolbooks, crossword puzzles, religious ideology, women and mothers, children’s music videos and the PA’s indoctrination of adults and children to seek Shahada (Martyrdom), have had significant impact on the way the world sees the Palestinians. PMW has presented its findings before members of US Congress and to members of Parliament in numerous countries, including the READ THE REST

Palestinian Incitement Leads to Violence Recent Examples


Muslim terrorists among the Arabs that call themselves Palestinians continue on their ungodly rampage of indiscriminate killing of Israeli-Jewish men, women, children, young and old. Yesterday Ari Bussel sent me an Israel Government Press Office update about the horrific nature of the process and joy of Palestinians in killing Jews. The update is in a PDF document and I reformatted it for this blog.

JRH 10/15/14

Please Support NCCR

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

Palestinian Incitement Leads to Violence Recent Examples

Sent by Ari Bussel

October 14, 2015

GPO Press Conference

Mahmoud Abbas

We welcome every drop of blood spilled in Jerusalem

They (Israelis) have no right to desecrate the Al-Aqsa Mosque with their filthy feet. (Official Palestinian Authority TV Channel, September 16, 2015)

VIDEO: Abbas: “We welcome every drop of blood spilled in Jerusalem”

 

Published by explorefearless

Published on Sep 18, 2015

Palestinian Authority Chairman Abbas: “We welcome every drop of blood spilled in Jerusalem…blood on its way to allah … they |Israel| have no right to desecrate them with their filthy feet and we won’t allow them to.”

Lies by PLO Secretary General Saeb Erekat

On Palestinian terrorists who perpetrated murderous attacks against Israelis

 

PLO Secretary General Saeb Erekat

Israel is killing civilians and children in field executions. (October 13, 2015 Press Conference)

Lies by President Abbas Spokesman Nabil Abu Rudineh: On the teenage Palestinian terrorist who tried to murder two Israelis, was neutralized and is now in an Israeli hospital.

The execution is similar to the killing of Palestinian boy Muhammad al-Dura (October 13, 2015 – Palestinian News Agency Wafa)

Incitement by senior PLO official Mahmoud Ismail

On the murder of the Henkin couple: This act is a national duty. (Official Palestinian Authority TV Channel, October 6, 2015)

VIDEO: PLO official: Killing Israeli parents of 4 children is “national duty”

 

Published by palwatch

Published on Oct 8, 2015

Official PA TV program The State of Politics hosted PLO Executive Committee member Mahmoud Ismail:

Official PA TV host: “Are they [killers of Henkin couple] from the Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades (Fatahs military wing) or from Hamas?”

PLO Executive Committee member Mahmoud Ismail: There is no need to return to the argument and dispute about who carried out the operation. There is no need to announce it and boast of having done it. One fulfills his national duty voluntarily, as best as one can.
[Official PA TV, Oct. 6, 2015]

The Henkin murders – Israelis Naama and Eitam Henkin (also an American citizen) were murdered in a shooting attack on Oct. 1, 2015, on the road between Itamar and Elon Moreh near Nablus. Their four children, aged 9, 7, 4, and 4 months, who were in the car and witnessed the murders, were not physically injured.

Although the Al-Aqsa Martyrs’ Brigades of Fatah originally took credit, five Hamas terrorists were arrested by Israel and confessed to the murders.

 Naama and Eitam Henkin were shot to death in front of their children (October 1, 2015)

President Abbas Fatah organization: praise for terrorists who stabbed Israelis

 Ishak Badran, age 16, who stabbed two Israelis in Jerusalem (October 10, 2015) – Muhammed Ali, age 16, who stabbed two Israel policemen in Jerusalem (October 10, 2015)

President Abbas Fatah organization: Online Incitement to violence against Israelis

 

Fatah Online Jew-Hatred Incitent

Calls to stab and murder Israelis – Fatah Online Jew-Hatred Incitement

President Abbas Fatah organization: Online Incitement to violence against Israelis

 Calls to murder Israelis using syringes filled with poison – Calls for Palestinian women to perpetrate terrorist attacks

Online Palestinian incitement calling to stab Israelis

 

Stab, stab, stab. Tomorrow is stabbing day

Resist. O the pulse of the West Bank, dont be still, declare it a revolution – Stab, stab, stab. Tomorrow is stabbing day in all the west bank and Jerusalem

Online Palestinian incitement calling to stab Israelis

 

You will not have security anywhere Go away before your turn to die will come

Online Palestinian incitement calling to stab Israelis

 

Online Palestinian incitement calling to stab Israelis

 

Facebook post by an 18 year old Palestinian terrorist, hours before she stabbed an Israeli

Honey, where are you going?? Mommy, I’m going to be a martyr. I want to ask a request of you. Dont cry about me, when I become a martyr #Our_highest_hope_is to_die_for_Allah (October 7, 2015)

 Photo of 18 yr old Social Media in Arabic

Videos encouraging and teaching Palestinians to murder Israelis

 

Photo of Video Screen Captures in Pal Murder Education

VIDEO: كيف تطعن مستوطن (#شو بتستنى)

[Google Translate: How challenging settlers (# Shaw Ptstny)]

 

Published by  إنتقادات عشوائية

[Google Translate: Random criticism]

Published on Dec 27, 2014

Photo of Video Screen Captures of Palestinians Celebrating Murder of Naama and Eitam Henkin

VIDEO: فلم يحاكي عملية نابلس

[Google Translation: Film simulates the Nablus operation]

 

Published by Saleem Elwan

Published on Oct 2, 2015

 

___________________________________________

About Israel’s Government Press Office (GPO)

 

The Government Press Office (GPO) is responsible – on behalf of the Prime Minister’s Office – for coordination between the Government of Israel and the community of journalists and media personnel working in Israel. For the foreign press corps, the GPO serves as the central address for contact with the government and the Israel Defense Forces.

 

The GPO works to facilitate appropriate media coverage of key elements in Israel, state visits and foreign VIPs visiting Israel. The GPO issues press cards for permanently stationed and visiting journalists, as well as a range of cards for other media personnel (broadcast technicians, documentary film producers, media assistants, etc.). The GPO offers media representatives a sophisticated briefing room, television studio and professional support materials.

 

The GPO is equipped to operate in Hebrew, Arabic, English and Russian, thanks to the professional staff in its various departments. A separate department deals with the economic press. The GPO regularly monitors articles in the overseas press regarding the State of Israel and forwards a daily summary to the relevant Government offices. It also distributes daily summaries – in English – of the main items in the Hebrew-language press to foreign correspondents stationed in Israel.

 

The GPO Photography Department is responsible for photographing the President and Prime Minister at official events and press conferences in Israel and abroad. The READ THE REST 

Netanyahu in a Rock and Hard Place Gamble?


John R. Houk

September 10, 2015

I have typically been a supporter of Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. In part because Netanyahu has stood up to America’s Leftist-in-Chief Barack Hussein Obama. That drove BHO and his Leftist minion Democrats nuts. I am still okay with that. I am on the Historical and Investigative Research (HIR) email list. I finally took the opportunity to read an August 31 email from HIR which highlighted some disturbing news about Iran, Judea/Samaria, the Palestinian Authority (PA) and unfortunately Benjamin Netanyahu.

This email provides an understanding of a possible reason Netanyahu may face some hostility from the further Right Wing of his Conservative base. In summary the more Conservative faction is a bit upset their Prime Minister that Iran has a path to acquire nuclear WMD which will be used against Israel but still supports the idea (at least publically) for the existence of Palestinian State in which the PA leadership is receiving clandestine financial and military aid from Iran. The more Conservative Israel Right is seeing a big load of hypocrisy from Benjamin Netanyahu.

It is my humble opinion though that Netanyahu is dealing with the realities of a rock and a hard place.

The rock is Israeli Leftists promoting the concept of land for peace under the delusion it will bring peace to the Jewish State of Israel. The hard place is President Barack Hussein Obama trying to court Muslim favor a la idiotic Jimmy Carter that sold out the Shah-ruled Iran (See Also HERE) to the psycho-Shi’ite Ayatollah-rule. As if exchanging the despotism of the Shah (American Leftist, CIA-Mossad Impact, Neocon Perspective, U.S.-British Oil Interests, Pro-Shah Perspective and fsmitha.com Perspective) for the despotism of the Ayatollah’s (See Also HERE) would be better for America and global peace. The Carter concept was erroneous in the late 1970s and the Obama concept is just as ludicrous in 2015 and beyond.

Obama is willing to throw Israel under the bus either under the delusion of peace in our time (can you say Neville Chamberlain?). OR Obama is embarking on a more nefarious agenda of disrupting the current global power structure which includes weakening the USA, to usher in a more Left Wing globalist power structure paradigm. Either way Obama sells out both America and our closest ally in the Middle East – Israel.

I am still convinced Netanyahu is the best man for the job in Israel. He is simply being forced into a geopolitical game in which Netanyahu is waiting to see who the next U.S. President will be, with the hope the new President understands the danger of a nuclear armed Iran and proceeds accordingly.

On the other hand, if Netanyahu’s geopolitical gamesmanship fails between Obama and Israel’s Jewish Left then followed by Iran actually acquiring nuke WMD resulting in a Palestinian State carved out of Israel’s heritage with Iran as hegemonic master and the new Palestinian State the new client. The next domino would be the destruction of Israel and a second modern Holocaust so devastating that Hitler’s final solution look like a picnic.

JRH 8/10/15

Please Support NCCR

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

An important Israeli politician, Moshe Feiglin, has reposted on his Facebook Page an Arutz 7 article written by Rob Muchnick, his US director, asking the question:

Will the Israeli government give Judea and Samaria to Iran?

Email sent by Professor Francisco Gil-White

Sent from Historical and Investigative Research

Sent August 31, 2015 9:46 PM

The article makes reference to HIR’s short documentary film: PLO/Fatah and Iran: The Special Relationship (on Vimeo, on YouTube), which tells the story documented in an earlier HIR piece. This is exciting, because it is the beginning of political awareness on this crucial issue.

Here is Moshe Feiglin’s post:

I wholeheartedly support this very important article from our US Director, Rob Muchnick.

Please read it and demand that Bibi answer the questions that Rob poses.

Dear Friends,

I wish to ask you a question.

Will the Israeli government — the government of the Jewish State — give Judea and Samaria to Iran?

That may seem impossible.

First, because our prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, daily warns that Iranian leaders wish to destroy us.

Second, because the media, although they discuss the connection between Hamas, Hezbollah, and Iran, never mention the deeper ties that bind Iran and PLO/Fatah (better known as the ‘Palestinian Authority’).

And what is not in the news goes to sleep in the mind.

But a few days ago, Iran’s official news agency brought this connection back into view by reporting that PLO/Fatah and Iran have signed an “all-out cooperation agreement.”

PLO/Fatah will cooperate fully with Iran!

As a recent documentary reminds me, such cooperation is nothing new. (1) (2)

In the Second Intifada, the Iranian ayatollahs were running PLO/Fatah’s deadliest terrorists, the Al Aqsa Martyrs, and mobilized them to ensure that Mahmoud Abbas became Yasser Arafat’s replacement. At the same time, Iran also sent the Karin a freighter with 50 tons of weapons to the PLO/Fatah. Thankfully, this ship was intercepted by Israel.

But the relationship is older.

In 1979, when the Iranian Islamist regime came to power, the New York Times reported on its front page that PLO/Fatah had been architect of that revolution:

• Yasser Arafat and Mahmoud Abbas armed and trained Ayatollah Khomeini’s troops;

• Yasser Arafat and Mahmoud Abbas were invited, before any others, to celebrate with Khomeini in Teheran; and then

• Yasser Arafat and Mahmoud Abbas helped created the Iranian security services and the Iranian Revolutionary Guard.

As they celebrated in Teheran, Arafat declared that PLO/Fatah and Iranian aims were identical: the violent destruction of the Jewish people and State.

Meanwhile, Mahmoud Abbas explained to Arab reporters how it would be done:

First, promise peace. Then, gain some territory. And last: annihilate Israel. Abbas called it the ‘Plan of Phases’; the media called it the ‘Peace Process.’

So far, all goes according to plan. But will they conclude it?

Will we let them?

Join me, as Israeli citizens and Jews worldwide, in demanding from our prime minister answers to these questions:

Why is PLO/Fatah still in Israel?

Will our government give Judea and Samaria to Iran?

(1) http://www.hirhome.com/iraniraq/plo-iran2.htm

(2) https://vimeo.com/130162877

Please go to Moshe Feiglin’s Facebook page and show your support by sharing, and by clicking “like” on his posting.

________________________

[Blog Editor: Below are the cross posts of Notes one and two. Instead of Vimeo I’ll be using the Youtube version]

PLO/Fatah and Iran: The Special Relationship

By Francisco Gil-White

May 25, 2010

Revised and improved, 8 September 2010

Historical and Investigative Research

Vimeo video link: WILL ISRAEL GIVE YESHA (‘WEST BANK’) TO IRAN?

Youtube Link: WILL ISRAEL GIVE YESHA (‘WEST BANK’) TO IRAN?

Published by FACESHIRHOME

Published on Jun 19, 2015

PLO/Fatah, now better known as the “Palestinian Authority,” will govern a Palestinian State in the militarily strategic territories of Judea and Samaria (or “West Bank”) if the Middle East “peace process” concludes with a “Two-State Solution.” Given that Iranian leaders daily promise the destruction of Israel, most people assume that PLO/Fatah has nothing to do with Iran. It would be absurd, they implicitly reason, for Israeli leaders to give strategic territory to an Iranian proxy. And yet, it is a historical fact that PLO/Fatah helped install Ayatollah Khomeini in power and helped create the current Iranian Islamist regime. It has maintained a close relationship with this regime ever since. This short film documents that relationship.

Short Preface

The Obama administration, like any government, routinely makes public statements about its intentions, values, and policy imperatives. For example, the Obama administration claims publicly to be enemy of Iran[1] and friend of Israel. In fact, the US government claims that “‘concerning policy, we have done everything that we can that is in Israel’s security – and long-range interests.”[2]

But what if PLO/Fatah, also known as the ‘Palestinian Authority,’ is a proxy of Iran?

The US government pushes very hard for Israel to give strategic territory to PLO/Fatah in exchange for a promise of ‘peace.’ So if PLO/Fatah is helping Iran destroy Israel, the US government’s behavior is quite interesting.

About the future PLO/Fatah state, the Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu states: “I think it’s important to make peace with the Palestinians. And I’m prepared to negotiate that peace right away. …They should have their own independent country.” Consistent with this, Netanyahu is rushing to give PLO/Fatah its independent state, and has even put Jerusalem on offer. But Netanyahu has also said: “We should be assured that this country [the future PLO/Fatah state] is not used as a staging ground for Iranian-sponsored terrorist attacks on us.” So if PLO/Fatah is a proxy of Iran, the Israeli government’s behavior is also quite interesting.[3]

One should then ask: What in the world are the US and Israeli governments doing?

This must be answered, because PLO/Fatah, like Hamas and Hezbollah, is indeed part of an Iranian offensive to destroy Israel.

We will show here that PLO/Fatah has always been and continues to be very closely allied with Iran.

PLO/Fatah’s role in Ayatollah Khomeini’s coup

The regime that still rules Iran was inaugurated by Ayatollah Khomeini (see pictures, top right), a ferocious Islamist terrorist who led the 1979 Iranian Revolution to depose the previous ruler, the Shah of Iran. With whom did the Ayatollah Khomeini want to celebrate, right away and before sharing the joy with anybody else?

With Yasser Arafat, then head of PLO/Fatah.

It was just two weeks after the Ayatollah Khomeini returned to Iran and took power that the New York Times reported how Yasser Arafat had accepted an invitation to visit Teheran. Why so soon? Why so much deference? Because the Ayatollah Khomeini was grateful: “Palestinian sources said that Mr. Arafat’s group had sent arms to the [Iranian] revolutionary forces in the last four months and had trained Iranian guerillas since the early 1970s.”[4] Only four days later Arafat was already in Teheran, celebrating the Iranian theocratic Islamist revolution, and promising to help export it everywhere. Wrote the New York Times: “Bantering and grinning, the guerrilla leader declined to furnish details about support the PLO had given to various Iranian guerrilla organizations.”[5]

Fact: PLO/Fatah played a key role in the Iranian revolution, arming and training Khomeini’s troops.

Naturally, PLO/Fatah expected the favor to be repaid, and the Iranians rushed to state that they would honor their debts. The Globe and Mail reported:

[Quote from Globe and Mail begins here]

Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat said yesterday that Iranian guerrillas would fight alongside Palestinian forces against Israel.

… Mr. Arafat, the first prominent visitor to Iran since the revolution, said the Palestinian and Iranian aims were identical. “We will continue our efforts until the time when we defeat imperialism and Zionism,” he said.

A close aide of Ayatollah Khomaini, Deputy Premier Ibrahim Yazdi, also attended the inauguration of the PLO office and referred to the identity of the two causes and the large number of Palestinian sacrifices in the PLO’s struggle against Israel.

… The son of Ayatollah Khomaini, Seyyed Ahmad Khomaini, a Moslem clergyman who also spoke at the inauguration of the new PLO office, pledged Iran would continue its revolutionary struggle until all Islamic countries had been set free.

The bearded, black-turbanned Seyyed Khomaini said: “We will continue our struggle until we free all Islamic countries and hoist the Palestinian flag together with ours.”[6]

[Quote from Globe and Mail ends here]

Soon after this Arafat bestrode the world stage as the indispensable best friend of Khomeini, negotiating the safety of the Americans held hostage in the US Embassy in Teheran at the request of …(drum roll)… the US government.[6a]

This makes it rather obvious that the PLO was very powerful in Iran.

In fact, the New York Times wrote in November of 1980 that “The P.L.O. currently enjoys close ties with some of the Iranian revolutionary leaders who rose to power with the Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini,” including the Defense Minister Mustafa Chamran and the leader of the Revolutionary Guards Abu Sharif. “Like Yasir Arafat,” wrote the New York Times,“both Abu Sharif and Mustafa Chamran are fervent advocates of exporting Iran’s Islamic revolution to the rest of the Middle East – in particular, to the conservative states of the Arab Gulf” (emphasis added). The Times also explained that PLO/Fatah had played a role in the creation of the Revolutionary Guards (for it trained Abu Sharif) and in creating the new Iranian secret police: SAVAMA (because Sharif and Chamran “relied heavily on their P.L.O. contacts” in setting it up). The Times added:

“The current head of the P.L.O. network in Iran is Hani al-Hassan, alias Abu Hassan, a Jordanian citizen who belongs to Arafat’s inner circle of advisers. Before he was sent to Teheran, Abu Hassan served as deputy chief of Fatah’s security department. He enjoys a remarkable entree to Khomeini and other key members of the Iranian regime — so much so that one Western diplomat suggests that the P.L.O. envoy should be counted as one of the most influential men in Teheran.”[6b] [(HIR) emphasis added]

The picture is clear.

1) PLO/Fatah played a key role in the creation of the Iranian Islamist terror state.

a) It armed and trained Khomeini’s troops for his revolution.

b) It helped create the all-important Revolutionary Guards.

c) It helped create the Iranian secret service SAVAMA.

2) The idea of spreading Iranian Islamist terror everywhere was closely associated with “the PLO’s struggle against Israel.”

a) Iran pledged itself to assist PLO/Fatah against Israel.

b) PLO/Fatah pledged itself to export the Iranian Islamist Revolution.

For years now PLO/Fatah has been represented not only as unlinked to Iran, but also as a secular organization, to be distinguished from the ‘fundamentalists’ and ‘Islamist’ Iranian terror proxies of Hamas and Hezbollah. Most people accept this, and that is a testament to how a media barrage can alter the perception of history. It is obvious, however, that if Yasser Arafat’s ideology was to spread the Iranian Revolution, then he was an Islamist. Historian Howard Sachar, writing in 1982, agreed with how the New York Times represented things back then: “from the outset… the Fatah’s reputation depended largely upon the success of its Moslem traditionalist approach of jihad against Israel.”[6c]

Not just any kind of jihad: Iranian jihad.

PLO/Fatah’s alignment during the Iran-Iraq war

To understand just how intimate the relationship between the Islamist Iranian government and PLO/Fatah, one must take into account that such a strong alliance with the Iranian Shiites angered almost every Arab government that was supporting PLO/Fatah. One cannot imagine that they were pleased to hear Arafat announce his goal of exporting the Iranian revolution to the Gulf States (see above), because this would mean deposing the governments in the Gulf States. And yet Yasser Arafat remained close to his friend Khomeini.

A month after the Iran-Iraq war broke out in late 1980, the Arab governments had sided with Iraq and the situation had become politically dangerous for Arafat. So much so that Saudi Arabia and other Persian Gulf states cracked down on their Palestinian populations. “The reason,” reported the Globe and Mail, “is that the authorities are suspicious of Palestinian ties to the militant Shiite Moslems in Iran, who have vowed to export their Islamic revolution.” And it observed: “Palestinian opinion, while reflecting the PLO’s reluctance to choose sides in a war between its two allies, appears much more pro-Iranian than that of conservative Gulf governments” (emphasis added).[7]

That was October 1980. In December, this was the situation:

[Quote from Washington Post begins here]

Dependent on fellow Arab governments for virtually everything — physical protection, diplomatic backing, arms, money — Arafat has had to watch helplessly as the Persian Gulf war split his benefactors into antagonistic blocs with the PLO caught uncomfortably in the middle.

More damaging was the way the PLO’s much advertised independence crumbled under the arm-twisting pressures of the two camps. When the showdown came before last month’s divided Arab summit meeting, Arafat and the PLO were forced by Syrian President Hafez Assad, leader of the pro-Iran axis, to join a boycott of a summit whose aim was to organize a long-term strategy for the Palestinians’ crusade against Israel.[8]

[Quote from Washington Post ends here]

I would call this remarkable. Even though the PLO was dependent on Arab states for everything, when these states got together to plan a long-term strategy for the PLO’s fight with Israel, the PLO sides with Iran. It was “uncomfortable,” sure, but it sided with Iran.

In March 1981 Arafat had a sympathetic meeting with Iraqi Shiites allied with Iran, as reported by Tehran’s news service.[9]

‘Estrangement’ leads to renewed love

But this could not last. As observed above, the PLO’s entire infrastructure was based in the Arab states. Soon the PLO was forced to take a more pro-Arab position. And then, as the Iran-Iraq war was ending with the cease-fire in 1988, the prelude to the Oslo ‘Peace’ Process was getting into high gear. This process quite suddenly represented the terrorist PLO/Fatah as a moderate organization that wanted to make peace. So to keep matters propagandistically consistent, Iran just had to accuse Arafat of ‘treason’ against the Palestinian cause, while Arafat just had to pronounce himself in public against Iranian terrorism.

Thus, for example, when a bomb exploded in Tel Aviv in 1996, the Egyptian news agency MENA reported that Arafat was blaming the Iranians: “Nabil Abu Rudaynah, adviser to Palestinian President Yasir Arafat, …accused foreign, non-Palestinian, elements in the region of being behind these terrorist incidents to wreck the peace process. He specifically accused Iran…”[10] Shortly before that, Arafat had claimed that two Palestinians working for Iran had tried to assassinate him.[11] This is how a story of ‘estrangement’ between Arafat (formerly Khomeini’s best friend) and the Iranian regime was built.

But was it true?

Just one year later, the Palestinian daily Al Quds reported that a top PLO/Fatah leader had come back from Iran with a renewed relationship. What’s an assassination attempt between friends? But in fact this made perfect propaganda sense, because the newly elected Iranian president Mohammad Khatami was supposed to be an Iranian Gorbachev pushing liberal reforms, and Arafat was ‘making peace’ with Israel. Under this guise, an open friendship could resume.[12]

In 2002 the Second Intifada, a series of hair-raising terrorist attacks against Israeli civilians, was raging. This was Arafat’s — that is to say, PLO/Fatah’s— war. Not even the mainstream Western media, so often a cheerleader for Arafat, was denying that most of the violence was due to the activities of Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigade, a Fatah terrorist group. Here is the Times of London, in April 2002: “A new group directly linked to Yasser Arafat’s Fatah movement through its Tanzim military wing, the [Al Aqsa Martyrs] brigades are behind the majority of recent shootings and suicide attacks against Israelis.”[14] And here is The Australian, in September of 2003:

 

[Quote from The Australian begins here]

 

Israeli officials said documents captured last year in a massive military raid on the West Bank after a series of suicide bombings inside Israel showed the Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades, which carried out many of the attacks, was an arm of Fatah, Arafat’s political organisation. They also said the documents proved the Palestinian Authority’s intelligence apparatus, also headed by Arafat, was involved in planning terror activity.

 

Israeli officials said the documents showed Arafat had personally authorised fund transfers for such activity. ‘Arafat views terrorism as a legitimate tool for obtaining the Palestinian national goal,’ said one official.[15]

 

[Quote from The Australian ends here]

 

In the Second Intifada, behind PLO/Fatah, was Iran. Here is the Christian Science Monitor, writing in January 2002 under the headline: “Palestinian ties to Iran, Hizbullah look firmer”:

 

[Quote from the Christian Science Monitor begins here]

 

… [T]he once-frosty relationship between Iran and Arafat appears to have thawed since the outbreak of the [second] intifada in September 2000. Iran, which opposes Israel’s very existence, is a staunch backer of the intifada, opening its hospitals to wounded Palestinians, training fighters, and rallying support for the uprising.

 

In April last year, Tehran hosted a conference for 34 Arab and Islamic countries and organizations. All the hard-line Palestinian groups were there as well as Hizbullah. But also attending was a representative of the Palestinian Authority, Salim Al Zeenoun, who admitted that the Oslo Accords had turned out to be a “sandcastle of illusion.”

 

Two months later, Arafat sent a telegram to Iranian President Mohammed Khatami to congratulate him on his re-election.

 

“We look to all the people of the Islamic world, foremost among them the Muslim Iranian people and their faithful leadership, to support, aid, and assist [Palestine],” Arafat said. He also asked Iran to “work fast to end this bloody and savage war which the Israeli government has been waging for eight solid months.”

 

Israel says that the military alliance between Iran and Arafat and the scheme to smuggle a shipload of [Iranian] weapons to the Palestinian Authority [the famous Karine A incident] was born at around this time. [13]

 

[Quote from the Christian Science Monitor ends here]

 

So PLO/Fatah, once installed inside Israel thanks to the Oslo ‘Peace’ Process, began functioning as a terrorist proxy of Iran.

 

At the same time, however, the road was being prepared for Mahmoud Abbas to posture as the anti-terror ‘peacemaker.’ Notice what The Australian wrote in September 2003:

 

“Palestinian prime minister Mahmoud Abbas resigned last month after Arafat refused to hand over control of the security forces Abbas said he needed to make Hamas and Islamic Jihad halt their suicide bombings.”[15]

 

So, yes, the terrorist activity is all being directed by Arafat, but when Abbas takes over there will be peace, became the media message. In fact, the mainstream Western media went quite out of its way to laud Mahmoud Abbas (alias Abu Mazen) as a supposed arch moderate.

 

Only one problem with this. The Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigades — the most violent Palestinian terrorists, and the ones most involved in the Second Intifada that Iran was sponsoring — in fact preferred Abbas to their own Tanzim boss Barghouti as a replacement for Arafat when the latter died. An Associated Press wire dated December 2004 reports that:

 

“Abbas already has been nominated as Fatah’s presidential candidate, so Barghouti must run as an independent. But as a leading Fatah member, he would likely undermine Abbas’ prospects… Zakaria Zubeidi, the 29-year-old West Bank leader of the Al Aqsa Martyrs’ Brigades, a violent group linked to Fatah, said he would back Abbas. ‘Barghouti … should resign from Fatah,’ he told The Associated Press.”[16]

 

It is already clear that Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigades was linked to Iran, because Iran was sponsoring the Second Intifada, which was being waged especially by the brigades. In fact, only two months earlier, with Arafat still alive, the Daily Telegraph had reported: “Israel believes that much of the Fatah-affiliated armed faction, calling itself the Al-Aqsa Martyrs’ Brigades, has now come under Iran’s sway, especially in the West Bank.” Who were they directly working with? None other than Hezbollah, the Iranian proxy Fatah is supposedly so different from: “Scores of Palestinian attacks, accounting for roughly a third of the 98 Israelis killed so far this year, are believed to have been orchestrated by the Lebanese Hizbollah movement.” Arafat did not deny this, though he tried to give it a different spin: he claimed to be upset, and accused Iran of trying to “infiltrate Fatah.”[17]

 

The upshot is that nobody was denying that Iran was heavily involved with the PLO/Fatah terrorists, the same terrorists who pushed for Mahmoud Abbas becoming the new PLO/Fatah leader.

 

Oh wait. Somebody would deny the link between PLO/Fatah and Iran. Guess who? The Israeli government.

 

As Frontpage magazine explained in 2007:

 

“Iran’s direct connection to Hamas is openly discussed and widely acknowledged. Where Fatah is concerned, the issues are more complex; but the link has been established. In March, Brig. Gen. (res.) Shalom Harari, a Senior Research Scholar with the Institute for Counter-Terrorism (ICT) at the Interdisciplinary Center in Herzliya, wrote an Issue Brief for the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs in which he noted: ‘There is a growing strategic alliance between Iran and the radical Palestinian forces in the territories. Iran is involved in supporting both the Islamic factions and Fatah, as well. Today, at least 40 percent of Fatah’s different fighting groups are also paid by Hezbollah and Iran.’

 

Corroborating Harari’s analysis, Maj.-Gen. Yoav Galant, head of the IDF Southern Command, wrote an Issue Brief for the JCPA one month later in which he observed: ‘A few years ago, Fatah’s Al Aqsa Brigade in Judea and Samaria was bought out by Iran.’ Checks with various security and intelligence sources have provided additional confirmation of this information. Iranian funding of Fatah is not direct, but comes through the conduit of Hezbollah and goes in the main to Al Aqsa Brigades.

 

The government of Israel… maintains that Al Aqsa, although originally a spin-off from Fatah, is no longer part of Fatah and no longer answers to Abbas. This spin makes it possible to continue to promote Fatah as potentially moderate, in spite of Al Aqsa’s very radical connections. Experts refute this scenario, however. Said one security source who provided background information: ‘Abbas is formally the commander of Al Aqsa…he has little to do with them to ensure deniability…but privately supports Al Aqsa. US money to PA security agencies go to Al Aqsa people as well. Indeed, Abbas has ensured that most of the Al Aqsa people are on the payroll.’”[17a]

 

The Israeli government goes out of its way to pretend that Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigades is not part of Al Fatah, thus supporting Abbas, who pretends that he has nothing to do with them in order “to ensure deniability” for Al Aqsa’s murders of Israeli civilians. The Israeli government is covering for those who murder Israeli citizens. We have already seen above how absurd the Israeli government’s position, for Abbas owes his position to Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigades: they were the ones lobbying for him—marching in the streets, in fact—and intimidating his competition.

 

 

So PLO/Fatah (or the ‘Palestinian Authority’) is allied with Iran to destroy the State of Israel.

 

But the US government wants PLO/Fatah to inherit strategic Israeli territory. And the Israeli government is cooperating. What are they doing?

 

What are the US and Israeli governments doing?

 

It is now probably a good idea to review HIR’s First Principles, in order to do some hard thinking about US geopolitics.

 

ARGUMENT A.

Premise 1. The way to do better geopolitics is to have a more accurate representation of the intentions and capabilities of other players in the international system.

 

Premise 2. The Government of the United States, the most important geopolitical player, has the strongest motivation to do better geopolitics.

 

Therefore: The Government of the United States works very hard to obtain a better understanding of the intentions and capabilities of other players in the international system.

 

Fact: CIA director George Tenet said in the year 1998 that the budget on that year had been a little under 27 billion. Recently, a US Intelligence official said in a press conference that the yearly budget was now 44 billion. But the truth is that nobody knows for sure, because the budget for US Intelligence is a state secret.

 

Hypothesis: The Government of the United States has very good information—definitely better than my own—on which to base its geopolitical decisions.

 

ARGUMENT B.

 

Premise 1. The Government of the United States, for many years running, has been the most powerful in the world.

 

Premise 2. Idiots don’t become the most powerful people in the world.

 

Therefore: The Government of the United States is not run by idiots.

 

Hypothesis: If the Government of the United States behaves in ways that seem idiotic to me, then a) there is something I don’t yet understand; or b) this government has different values than my own. Or both. (And I have yet to accept this, which is why I think the behavior is idiotic.)

 

ARGUMENT C.

 

Premise 1. The true preferences of someone are revealed in his/her expensive behaviors.

 

Premise 2. Saying “My intentions are X” is not expensive but cheap.

 

Therefore: Speech acts (e.g. public and official declarations) don’t necessarily convey information about the true intentions of a government.

 

Hypothesis: If the Government of the United States consistently, year after year, spends billions of dollars and achieves always similar results, and if these results contradict the government’s publicly declared intentions, the publicly declared intentions must be deliberate deceptions.

 

US Intelligence knows perfectly well everything that I have documented in this article. And it knew it long before I did. Hence, the US Government is applying very strong pressure on Israel to create a ‘Palestinian State’ run by PLO/Fatah on strategic Israeli territory knowing full well that PLO/Fatah is allied with Iran to destroy Israel.

 

Is this consistent with other expensive US Government behaviors? It is.

 

As we have documented on HIR, the entire history of US foreign policy toward Iran, despite the loud public condemnations, is one of consistent and dramatic assistance to Iran’s long-term goals.[19]

 

On the basis of this evidence we may conclude that when President Obama’s chief of staff Rahm Emmanuel states to a group of rabbis that “ ‘concerning policy, we have done everything that we can that is in Israel’s security — and long-range interests,’ ” the Obama administration is lying.[2] If the US government is lying, then we must consider the alternative hypothesis: that the US Government — not the American people, but the US Government — is an enemy of Israel.

 

Does this make sense?

 

It is certainly consistent with HIR’s detailed investigation of US foreign policy toward the Jewish people and state since the 1930s, which shows conclusively that — contrary to popular belief — the US ruling elite has always worked hard to undermine Israeli security.[21]

 

Israeli leaders are cooperating with this process, because they have not yet expelled PLO/Fatah from Israel. On the contrary. Though they pretend to drag their feet, they are engaged in an on-again, off-again process with PLO/Fatah that (let’s face it) is designed to give it everything it wants, in exchange for… Well, for nothing, because PLO/Fatah has not laid down its arms and does not intend to.

The Israeli government is also much better informed than I am, and likewise knew everything I have reviewed here long before I did. After all, the documentation I use is publicly available, and one of the main targets of Israeli intelligence-gathering is, naturally, PLO/Fatah.

 

So what are Israeli leaders doing? It is an important question.

 

Any effort to begin answering this question must examine what certain important Jewish leaders did in the prelude to, and during, World War II. HIR has much documentation on this topic, but two articles in particular offer a good place to start.

 

First, to examine the behavior of (soon-to-be) Israeli leaders during the Holocaust, please read:

 

► “The responsibility of the mainstream (Labor Zionist) Israeli leaders during the Shoah (‘Holocaust’)”; from THE PROBLEM OF JEWISH SELF-DEFENSE: An HIR series; Historical and Investigative Research; 21 February 2007; by Francisco Gil-White
http://www.hirhome.com/israel/leaders4.htm

 

Then, to examine the behavior of a string of Israeli prime ministers, consistent with the history documented above, please read:

 

►”Leaders Lied, Jews died: Why have Israeli leaders been lying to their fellow citizens about the PLO/Fatah?; Historical and Investigative Research; 10 July 2007; by Francisco Gil-White (with the editorial assistance of Ted Belman)
http://www.hirhome.com/israel/leaders_lied.htm

 

If History is indeed repeating itself, then the Jewish people is in great peril, for when the causes recur, so do the consequences. And if the Jewish people is in peril, then so are ordinary people all over the West, because 2500 years of Western history show conclusively that periods of Jewish persecution coincide with periods of savage oppression against non-Jews (a recent and dramatic example is the 20th c. Holocaust).
www.hirhome.com/colapso/colapso_eng.htm

 

Footnotes and Further Reading

 

[1] Last Friday it was reported that “Secretary of State Hillary Clinton is pushing for another round of United Nations sanctions against Iran.”  Here, the US government is projecting that Iran is the bad guys and that the US will work to undermine Iran.

 

SOURCE: “Obama the appeaser; The transnational dove has left a vacuum that Iran is filling”; The Washington Times, May 21, 2010 Friday, B, COMMENTARY; Pg. 3, 777 words, By Jeffrey T. Kuhner SPECIAL TO THE WASHINGTON TIMES

 

[2] A week ago, President Obama’s chief of staff Rahm Emmanuel stated to a group of rabbis that “‘concerning policy, we have done everything that we can that is in Israel’s security – and long-range interests. Watch what the administration does.’ ” Here, the US government is projecting that Israel is the good guys and will work to strengthen Israel.

 

SOURCE: “US ‘screwed up’ message on Israel, Emanuel tells rabbis. Officials deny administration changing view on Israeli nuclear policy”; The Jerusalem Post, May 16, 2010 Sunday, NEWS; Pg. 1, 1197 words, HERB KEINON, JTA contributed to this report.

 

[3] Interview With Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu; CNN; July 7, 2010 Wednesday; NEWS; International; 5805 words; Larry King
http://www.hirhome.com/israel/netanyahu_eng.htm#_ftn9

[4] “The PLO announced today that its chairman, Yasser Arafat, had accepted an invitation to visit Teheran soon. It also said that followers of Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini had seized the former Israeli diplomatic mission in Teheran, and the PLO had accepted an offer to turn it into a Palestinian embassy.

 

Wafa, the Palestinian press service, reported that the Ayatollah’s forces had contacted Mr. Arafat by telephone yesterday and proclaimed their solidarity and gave their thanks.

 

Palestinian sources said that Mr. Arafat’s group had sent arms to the revolutionary forces in the last four months and had trained Iranian guerillas since the early 1970s.”

 

SOURCE: P.L.O. Is Cool to Dayan Remarks; Statements Given Prominence; By MARVINE HOWE Special to The New York Times. New York Times (1857-Current file). New York, N.Y.: Feb 15, 1979. p. A12 (1 page)

 

[5] “An exultant Yasir Arafat, leader of the Palestine Liberation Organization, proclaimed here today that the Iranian revolution had ‘turned upside down’ the balance of forces in the Middle East.

 

‘Today Iran, tomorrow Palestine,’ he said.

 

Mr. Arafat received a pledge from Ayatollah Khomeini that the Iranians would ‘turn to the issue of victory over Israel’ after Iran had consolidated its strength, the Teheran radio reported.

 

…Bantering and grinning, the guerrilla leader declined to furnish details about support the PLO had given to various Iranian guerrilla organizations, saying:

 

‘It is enough that we are here, and no matter how much we have helped we cannot offer as much back as the Iranian people have offered us. It is enough for us to be among the Iranian people.

 

Asked whether the Palestinian movement felt ‘stronger’ since the Iranian uprising, he said:

 

‘Definitely. It has changed completely the whole strategy and policy in this area. It has been turned upside down.’ ”

 

SOURCE: Arafat, in Iran, Reports Khomeini Pledges Aid for Victory Over Israel; Visit a Sign of Iran’s Sharp Turn; ARAFAT, IN TEHERAN, PRAISES THE VICTORS; By JAMES M. MARKHAM Special to The New York Times. New York Times (1857-Current file). New York, N.Y.: Feb 19, 1979. p. A1 (2 pages)

 

[6] “Four more generals executed; PLO, Iran will fight Israel, Arafat says”; The Globe and Mail. Toronto, Ont.: Feb 20, 1979. p. P.10

[6a] “Grand Theater: The US, The PLO, and the Ayatollah Khomeini: Why did the US government, in 1979, delegate to the PLO the task of negotiating the safety of American hostages at the US embassy in Tehran?”; Historical and Investigative Research; 10 December 2005; by Francisco Gil-White
http://www.hirhome.com/iraniraq/plo-iran.htm

[6b] “The P.L.O. currently enjoys close ties with some of the Iranian revolutionary leaders who rose to power with the Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini. One of the most intriguing delegates at the Fatah conference in Damascus at the end of May, for example, was Arbas-Agha Zahani whose nom de guerre is Abu Sharif. He was then the head of the Ayatollah’s Revolutionary Guards, or Pasdaran Enghelab, a post he resigned in a power play in June that was designed to weaken the position of the relatively ”moderate” President Abolhassan Bani-Sadr. (Abu Sharif was subsequently reappointed deputy chief of the Pasdaran Enghelab.) Abu Sharif rose to a position of influence thanks to the patronage of the present Iranian Defense Minister, Mustafa Chamran. Like Yasir Arafat, both Abu Sharif and Mustafa Chamran are fervent advocates of exporting Iran’s Islamic revolution to the rest of the Middle East – in particular, to the conservative states of the Arab Gulf.

 

Abu Sharif’s links with Arafat, Abu Jihad and other key figures in the P.L.O. leadership date back to the early 1970’s, when he attended a guerrilla training course at a Fatah camp in Lebanon. After the downfall of the Shah, Abu Sharif and Mustafa Chamran relied heavily on their P.L.O. contacts for help in setting up a new secret police to replace the Sha’s notorious Savak. A special P.L.O. unit, whose members had received intelligence training in the Soviet Union, was dispatched to Teheran to assist in rooting out ‘counterrevolutionaries.’ Abu Sharif repaid his personal debt to the P.L.O. by successfully lobbying — with the backing of, among others, one of the Ayatollah’s grandsons — for a big Iranian contribution to the Palestinian war chest and for the dispatch of more than 200 Iranian ‘volunteers’ to fight with the P.L.O. in southern Lebanon

The current head of the P.L.O. network in Iran is Hani al-Hassan, alias Abu Hassan, a Jordanian citizen who belongs to Arafat’s inner circle of advisers. Before he was sent to Teheran, Abu Hassan served as deputy chief of Fatah’s security department. He enjoys a remarkable entree to Khomeini and other key members of the Iranian regime — so much so that one Western diplomat suggests that the P.L.O. envoy should be counted as one of the most influential men in Teheran.” [(HIR) emphasis added]

 

SOURCE: “TERROR: A SOVIET EXPORT”; New York Times. (Late Edition (East Coast)). New York, N.Y.: Nov 2, 1980. pg. A.42; by Robert Moss

 

NOTE: though the PLO supposedly rooted out “counterrevolutionaries” to help create the Ayatollah’s new secret service, exiled Iranians were pointing out that the new SAVAMA was almost identical in all its personnel to the old CIA-created SAVAK. This would make sense if the Islamist Iranians and PLO/Fatah all answered to the same (US) master. Otherwise it is very strange.

 

[6c] Sachar, H. 1982. A history of Israel: From the rise of Zionism to our time. New York: Knopf. (pp. 698)

[7] MANAMA BAHREIN — MANAMA, Bahrain (AP) – Saudi Arabia and other Persian Gulf states have tightened restrictions on an estimated 400,000 Palestinians since the outbreak of the Iran-Iraq war, diplomatic sources say.

 

A ban on political gatherings by Palestinians has been imposed and strict visa requirements are being rigidly enforced. The reason is that the authorities are suspicious of Palestinian ties to the militant Shiite Moslems in Iran, who have vowed to export their Islamic revolution.

 

Other sources said that Yasser Arafat, head of the Lebanon-based Palestine Liberation Organization, has reassured Persian Gulf governments that his guerrilla movement would never upset the stability of the oil- rich area and ordered his representatives in Gulf capitals to remain neutral in the Iran-Iraq conflict. “The PLO has been treading a delicate path of neutrality between Iraq and Iran and that has not been easy,” one Arab diplomat said. “Iraq, and all other Arab powers, insist that the PLO must put its political cards on the table and declare its unchangeable commitment to the Arab cause against that of the (non-Arab) Persians.” At the same time, Iranian leaders are reported to have asked the Palestinians to support Iran in return for their support of the guerrilla movement.

 

Palestinian opinion, while reflecting the PLO’s reluctance to choose sides in a war between its two allies, appears much more pro-Iranian than that of conservative Gulf governments.” [(HIR) emphasis added]

 

SOURCE: “Gulf states tighten hold on Palestinians”; The Globe and Mail. Toronto, Ont.: Oct 23, 1980. p. P.14

 

[8] “War, arab Feuding Leave Arafat, PLO in Disarray; Gulf War and Arab Feuding Leave Arafat and PLO in Disarray”; The Washington Post, December 14, 1980, Sunday, Final Edition, First Section; A1, 1487 words, By Loren Jenkins, Washington Post Foreign Service

[9] “Arafat’s Meeting with Iraqi Da’wah Party Delegation”; BBC Summary of World Broadcasts, March 3, 1981, Tuesday, Part 4 The Middle East and Africa; A. THE MIDDLE EAST; ME/6663/A/8; , 395 words.

 

TEXT:

 

BBC Summary of World Broadcasts
March 3, 1981, Tuesday
Arafat’s Meeting with Iraqi Da’wah Party Delegation
SOURCE: Tehran in Arabic for abroad
 1430 gmt 1 Mar 81
Excerpt from abroad
SECTION: Part 4 The Middle East and Africa; A. THE MIDDLE EAST; ME/6663/A/8;
LENGTH: 395 words

 

A delegation representing the Da’wah Islamic Party in Iraq met with Brother Yasir Arafat the Chairman of the PLO Executive Committee and member of the delegation commissioned to study the issue of the war that has been imposed on Iran by the Iraqi regime, at noon today.

 

The spokesman for the Iraqi Da’wah Islamic Party briefed Brother Arafat on the measures of suppression, oppression and banishment that have been carried out by the infidel Tikriti regime against the Iraqi Mujahidin. The spokesman, who supported his statement with pictures, statistics and documents, added that during the past year alone, Saddam’s regime had killed and executed 100,000 Iraqi strugglers. The spokesman added that the Iraqi regime’s suppressive measures have escalated to the extent that even women, children and old men are not spared. They, too, have been subjected to tyranny, injustice, imprisonment and execution.

 

The spokesman stressed that the stance of the government of the Islamic Republic of Iran did not represent the stance of the Government and people of Iran alone, but also the claims of more than 60,000 exiled Iraqis and the claims of the help- less Iraqi people. Speaking to Brother Arafat, the Iraqi spokesman added: We ask you, as a true revolutionary, not to deal with us in terms of international political principles and international relations; we call upon you to help our voice of truth be heard through- out the world and to pressure Saddam’s bloody infidel regime to change its position on the oppressed Iraqi people and end the war he has imposed on both of the Muslim peoples in Iraq and Iran.

 

Then one of the Iraqi mujahidin spoke and said to Brother Arafat: O Brother Abu Ammar, I am a struggler and revolutionary just as you are, and my duty is to fight at your side against the Zionist regime and for the liberation of Palestine and not to be exiled by Saddam’s regime to Iran after a period of torture. Then the struggler showed the marks that remained on his body after being tortured by the Iraqi regime to Brother Arafat, and said that the torture carried out by Saddam’s gang against the Iraqi mujahidin was much more than that carried out by the Zionist entity against the Palestinian combatants. Seeing and hearing all this, Brother Arafat could not prevent his tears of sympathy for the Iraqi brothers from falling. . .

 

[10] “PALESTINIAN REACTION; Arafat’s adviser accuses Iran of sheltering terrorism”; BBC Summary of World Broadcasts, March 5, 1996, Tuesday, Part 4 The Middle East; THE MIDDLE EAST; AFTERMATH OF TEL AVIV BOMBING; EE/D2553/ME, 326 words

[11] “ ‘SABOTAGE’ ATTEMPT; Two pro-Iran Palestinians reported arrested for plotting to kill Arafat”; BBC Summary of World Broadcasts, February 21, 1996, Wednesday, Part 4 The Middle East; THE MIDDLE EAST; ISRAELI-PALESTINIAN AFFAIRS; EE/D2541/ME, 79 words

[12] “Bethlehem: Brig-Gen Abu Khalid al-Lahham, who recently returned from Iran, said that Hojjat ol-Eslam Mohammad Khatami is considered a close friend of Palestine and the Palestinian people, as well as a personal friend of President Yasir Arafat. Moreover, he called him the Iranian Napoleon and described him as Iran’s saviour.

 

In an exclusive interview, Lahham said… the new Iranian leadership will strive to refute its image of exporting revolution and interfering in the internal affairs of other people.

 

On the internal level, the new leadership will engage in building a free economy and will allow freedom of thought and faith and the formation of political parties.

 

Lahham, who arrived in Iran 10 days before the elections on an assignment by President Yasir Arafat, added that the new leadership will support the Palestinian people with all their leaders and inclinations, including the peace process, but it will fight to defend its role and presence as a major Middle Eastern state. The Palestinian people will be able to ask for Iran’s support”

 

SOURCE: “Arafat adviser visits Iran, brings message of support for Palestinians”; BBC Summary of World Broadcasts, June 12, 1997, Thursday, Part 4 The Middle East; THE MIDDLE EAST; ISRAEL; ME/D2943/MED, 428 words

 

[13] “Palestinian ties to Iran, Hizbullah look firmer”; Christian Science Monitor (Boston, MA), January 18, 2002, Friday, WORLD; Pg. 08, 1353 words, Nicholas Blanford Special to The Christian Science Monitor

[14] “A bitter taste for vengeance”; Sunday Times (London), April 7, 2002, Sunday, Features, 2938 words, Marie Colvin in Ramallah

[15] “Arch-terrorist or hero of peace: Arafat’s enduring image”; The Australian, September 25, 2003 Thursday All-round Country Edition, WORLD-TYPE- FEATURE-BIOG- YASSER ARAFAT; Pg. 8, 1079 words, Abraham Rabinovich

[16] Barghouti Seeking Palestinian Presidency, Associated Press Online, December 1, 2004 Wednesday, INTERNATIONAL NEWS, 836 words, MOHAMMED DARAGHMEH; Associated Press Writer, RAMALLAH, West Bank

[17] “Israel believes that much of the Fatah-affiliated armed faction, calling itself the Al-Aqsa Martyrs’ Brigades, has now come under Iran’s sway, especially in the West Bank.

 

Scores of Palestinian attacks, accounting for roughly a third of the 98 Israelis killed so far this year, are believed to have been orchestrated by the Lebanese Hizbollah movement.

 

The Shia group pioneered the use of suicide bombings in the 1980s, kidnapped westerners and successfully drove the Israeli army out of south Lebanon in 2000. Hizbollah is now a political party in Lebanon.

 

‘Hizbollah is a finger of Iran’s hand,’ the senior Israeli security source said. ‘In the past year we can see increasing Iranian influence in Palestinian attacks on Israel.

 

‘The same people sometimes receive money both from Arafat’s headquarters and from Hizbollah. If the attack succeeds in causing fatalities, they get a bonus from Hizbollah.’

 

Another security source said Hizbollah rewards Palestinian cells to the tune of $5,000 (pounds 2,900) for each Israeli killed.

 

Israel regards Teheran as its mortal enemy, and has every interest in presenting Iran as a dangerous state sponsor of international terrorism. But on the issue of penetrating Fatah, Israel is in unusual agreement with Palestinian leaders.

 

Yasser Arafat, the Palestinian ‘president’ who has been confined to his Ramallah headquarters for more than three years, said this week that Hizbollah was trying to infiltrate Fatah.

 

He said Iran was financing radical Islamist groups, and denounced Iran’s spiritual leader, Ali Khamenei.

 

He said: ‘Khamenei is working against us. He is giving money to all these fanatical groups. Khamenei is a troublemaker.’ ”

 

SOURCE: “Iran ‘in control of terrorism in Israel’; Hizbollah, described as a ‘finger of Teheran’s hand,’ is said to be paying $5,000 for every Israeli killed.” Anton La Guardia reports from Tel Aviv; THE DAILY TELEGRAPH (LONDON), October 15, 2004, Friday, 803 words, by Anton La Guardia

 

[17a] “The Fatah–Iranian Connection”; Frontpage June 8, 2007; By Arlene Kushner.
http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=28658

 

[18] The Israeli soldiers were under orders to protect civilians (apparently no matter the cost, because they defended themselves, at first, with non-weapons such as paint-ball guns). It was only after one of the wounded Israeli soldiers was thrown from the upper deck and the lethal weapons of the soldiers were taken from them by the attackers, that their fellow soldiers opened fire to protect them. The result was that some of the attackers died.

 

The images of the brutal attack against the Israeli soldiers—a blood curling lyinching (sic)—are available to the public.
http://www.vimeo.com/12555636

[19] “Will the US attack Iran?: An alternative hypothesis”; Historical and Investigative Research; 23 February 2006; by Francisco Gil-White
http://www.hirhome.com/iraniraq/attack_iran.htm

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

[21] “Is the US an ally of Israel?: A chronological look at the evidence”; Historical and Investigative Research; by Francisco Gil-White
http://www.hirhome.com/israel/hirally.htm

________________________

Netanyahu in a Rock and Hard Place Gamble?

John R. Houk

September 10, 2015

_______________________

Will the Israeli government give Judea and Samaria to Iran?

 

PLO/Fatah and Iran: The Special Relationship

 

HIR About Page:

 

Francisco Gil-White has a Masters in Social Sciences from the University of Chicago and a PhD in biological and cultural anthropology from UCLA. His PhD thesis work was in rural Western Mongolia, where he did 14 months of fieldwork studying the mutual ethnic perceptions of neighboring Torguud Mongol and Kazakh nomadic herders. Until June 2006, he was Assistant Professor of Psychology at the University of Pennsylvania. Today he teaches at ITAM, in Mexico City. His research is broadly concerned with the evolution of the proximate mechanisms responsible for social learning and social perception and cognition. His main interests are the evolution of ethnic processes, with a special focus on racism, and particularly anti-Semitism; prestige processes; the evolution of language; the structure of narrative memory; the structure and interaction of media and political processes; the laws of history; Western geopolitics; and the political history of the West.

 

About the HIR Method

 

Support HIR

Time for consequences


Rd Map To Peace Farce toon

Blog Editor Introduction to Glick’s “Time for consequences”

Blog Editor: John R. Houk

4/28/14

(The intro is in no way associated with the Glick’s original essay.)

 

Hamas and Islamic Jihad (aka Palestine Islamic Jihad or PIJ) are both on the U.S. government terrorist list. Which translate to the fact their leadership then are war criminals. A couple of weeks ago Mahmoud Abbas signed a bunch of international protocols as if the Palestinian Authority (PA) was a sovereign nation. The PA is not a sovereign nation. The PA is an autonomous governing body legitimized by the Oslo Accords which was supposed to build a situation between the Jewish State of Israel and the PA of agreed upon building blocks that would lead to a sovereign Palestinian State. The problem has been Israel has given and given while the PA has refused to recognize Israel as a Jewish State, uses their Media and schools to inculcate Jew-hatred and demands that Jerusalem – Israel’s Capital City – should be split back to pre-1967 when the so-called West Bank was part of sovereign Jordan and that portion of the Jerusalem become a Palestinian State Capital City. Oh yes we can add to the PA demand of flooding descendants of refugees that were told to flee the new Jewish State while about 5 or 6 invading armies made an effort to drive Jews into the sea make the Jewish land all Muslim controlled. Of course all of the PA demands are unworkable for Israel to remain a secure nation. It would set up Israel for a combined Palestinian State invasion undoubted coupled with the military of other Jew-hating nations to again drive Jews into the sea and initiate yet another Holocaust. (By the way starting at sunset on 4/27/14 and lasting through sunset on 4/28/14 is Holocaust Memorial Day – aka Yom HaShoah)

 

Abbas’ signing of those international protocols was yet another breach of the Oslo Accords. Just to place the icing on the duplicitous PA intentions Mahmoud Abbas has signed a unity agreement with both the Islamic terrorist organizations Hamas and Islamic Jihad. Caroline Glick points that Abbas’s unity agreement and the signing of the international accords (like the Geneva Convention) immediately turns the PA and its new partners into war criminals. Do you think Obama will disdain the PA and Abbas in the Quartet-Israel-PA peace negotiations?

 

JRH 4/28/14

Please Support NCCR

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

Time for consequences

 

By Caroline Glick

April 25th, 2014

CarolineGlick.com

 

It’s hard not to admire Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas’s brazenness.

 

Two weeks ago, Abbas signed on to 15 international agreements that among other things require the PA to respect human rights and punish war criminals.

 

And this week, he signed a unity deal with two genocidal terror groups all of whose leaders are war criminals. Every leader of Hamas and Islamic Jihad, the two parties that signed the deal with the PLO, are war criminals. Under the Geneva Conventions, which Abbas signed onto just a couple of weeks ago, he is required to put them on trial, for their war crimes.

 

Here it is worth noting that under the Geneva Conventions, every single rocket launch from Gaza into Israeli territory is a separate war crime.

 

Abbas was only able to sign the Geneva Conventions on the one hand, and the unity deal with terrorist war criminals on the other, because he is utterly convinced that neither the US nor the European Union will hold him accountable for his actions. He is completely certain that neither the Americans nor the Europeans are serious about their professed commitments to upholding international law.

 

Abbas is sure that for both the Obama administration and the EU, maintaining support for the PLO far outweighs any concern they have for abiding by the law of nations. He believes this because he has watched them make excuses for the PLO and its leaders for the past two decades.

 

When it comes to the Palestinians, the Western powers are always perfectly willing to throw out their allegiance to law – international law and their domestic statutes – to continue supporting the PLO in the name of a peace process, which by now, everyone understands is entirely fictional.

 

Why do they do this?

 

They do it because the peace process gives them a way to ignore and wish away the pathologies of the Islamic and Arab world.

 

The peace process is predicated on the notion that all those pathologies are Israel’s fault. If Israel would just surrender Jerusalem, Judea and Samaria to the Palestinians, then the Arabs writ large, and the Muslim world as a whole will cast aside their support for jihad and terrorism and everything will be fine.

 

 
At least that is how Abbas analyzes the situation.

 

And so far, the US has not disappointed him.

 

The Obama administration’s immediate response to Abbas’s unity with terrorist war criminals deal involved pretending it didn’t understand what had just happened.

 

In a press briefing on Wednesday, shortly after Hamas war criminal Ismail Haniyeh signed the deal with Fatah and Islamic Jihad, State Department spokeswoman Jen Psaki acknowledged that the deal is bad for the peace process. But she wasn’t willing to reach the inevitable conclusion.

 

Rather, she averred, idiotically, “I think the ball, at this point, is in the Palestinians’ court to answer questions to whether this reconciliation meets the US’s long-standing principles.”

 

Two days before the unity deal, a reporter from Al-Monitor asked Hamas leader Mahmoud Zahar if Hamas has given up terrorism.

 

Zahar responded, “Anyone who claims so must be drunk. How has Hamas abandoned the resistance [that is, terrorist] effort? What are the manifestations of it doing so? Where have we prevented the launching of rockets?” No ambiguity whatsoever there.

 

And Abbas just signed a deal Hamas, and with Islamic Jihad, the official representative of the Iranian mullahs in the Palestinian war criminal lineup.

 

No ambiguity there, either.

 

If the US is willfully blind to who the Palestinians are, what they are doing, and what they stand for, the Europeans are so committed to the Palestinians that they invented an imaginary world where international law protects war criminals and castigates their Jewish victims as international outlaws.

 

In the EU’s view, Hamas is an attractive organization.

 

During a meeting with Abbas last October, Catherine Ashton, the EU’s foreign policy chief, urged Abbas to sign a unity deal with Hamas. A statement from her office read that she views reconciliation between Fatah and Hamas “as an important element for the unity of a future Palestinian state and for reaching a twostate solution.”

 

And while unity between terrorist factions is something that Ashton considers conducive to peace, in her view, Jewish presence in Jerusalem, Judea and Samaria is tantamount to a war crime.

 

In a statement released by her office last week, after Baruch Mizrahi was murdered by Palestinian terrorists while driving in his family car, with his wife and young children, to a Passover Seder, Ashton gave no more than a perfunctory condemnation of the war crime.

 

 
Four-fifths of her statement involved condemning Israel for respecting Jewish property rights and the rules of due process and international law in Jerusalem, Judea and Samaria.

 

In the EU’s imaginary world, being in Judea, Samaria and Jerusalem while Jewish is a war crime. Murdering Jews is merely impolite.

 

The deal signed on Wednesday is the fourth unity deal Fatah has signed with Hamas. After the first one was signed in 2007, the so-called Middle East Quartet, which includes the US, the EU, the UN and Russia, issued three conditions for accepting the unity government: Hamas has to recognize Israel’s right to exist, abjure terrorism and accept the legitimacy of the previous agreements signed by the PLO with Israel.

 

As Zahar and every other Hamas leader has made clear repeatedly, these conditions will never be met.

 

But regardless of how Hamas views them, in and of themselves the Quartet’s conditions are deeply problematic. They themselves constitute a breach of international law.

 

The Quartet’s conditions assert that if Hamas and Islamic Jihad agree to them, they will be accorded the same legitimacy as the PLO. In other words, the Quartet members have committed themselves to granting immunity from prosecution for war crimes to all Palestinian terrorists.

 

Providing such immunity is arguably a breach of international law. And it exposes a profound and irrational dependence on the mythical peace process on the part of Western policy-makers.

 

Reacting to this week’s unity deal, Economy Minister Naftali Bennett said, “The agreement between Fatah, Hamas and Islamic Jihad brings the Middle East to a new diplomatic era. The Palestinian Authority turned into the largest terrorist organization in the world, 20 minutes from Tel Aviv.”

 

And under international law, including the agreements that Abbas acceded to just two weeks ago, Bennett is absolutely right.

 

Apologists for Abbas note that this week’s deal is as unlikely as all its predecessors to be implemented.

 

But even if they are right this doesn’t mean that Abbas’s repeated practice of signing unity deals with war criminals should be cast aside as insignificant.

 

They expose the lie at the heart of the peace process. The time has come to call things by their names.

 

Abbas is a terrorist and the PA is a terrorist organization.

 

In light of this incontrovertible fact, the time has come to treat the PA in accordance with international law.

 

Perhaps shocked by Abbas’s behavior, perhaps overwhelmed by the serial failure of every one of its foreign policies, the administration acknowledged that Israel can’t be expected to negotiate with a government that doesn’t accept its right to exist.

 

Administration officials even said that the US would have to revisit its relationship with the PA in light of the agreement with Hamas.

 

No doubt, the administration is convinced that it can revert to form and ignore reality once again the moment the smoke as cleared. But whatever its intentions, the administration’s acknowledgment of Abbas’s bad faith opens the door to action by both Israel and the US Congress.

 

The Israeli government and the US Congress should take the steps necessary to bring their national policies toward the Palestinians into accordance with the law of nations.

 

On Thursday, the security cabinet rightly decided to end negotiations with the PA. But this cannot be the end of the line. Israel must also stop all financial transfers to the PA.

 

Just as critically, Israel must stop cooperating with PA security forces in Judea and Samaria.

 

It must end its support for US training of those forces and call for the US to end its mission to assist PA security forces.

 

 

Israel must begin arresting and prosecuting Palestinian officials who incite for the murder of Jews, and charge them with solicitation of murder.

 

The government should assist Israeli citizens in submitting war crimes complaints against Palestinian officials and the PA generally at international tribunals for their involvement in war crimes, including their incitement of genocide.

 

As for the US Congress, last week, with the passage into law of Sen. Ted Cruz’s bill banning terrorists from serving as UN ambassadors, the Congress showed that it is capable of acting to force the administration to uphold US anti-terror laws.

 

To this end, in accordance with those laws, Congress must act to immediately end US military support for Palestinian security services.

 

The Office of the US Security Coordinator for Israel and the Palestinian territories that trains Palestinian military forces should be closed straightaway. Its personnel should be redeployed out of the area forthwith.

 

So, too, given that the Palestinian Authority now inarguably meets the US definition of a foreign terrorist organization, the US must end all financial assistance to its operating budget. Also, in accordance with US law, the US banking system must be closed to PA entities. Foreign banks that do business with these entities should be barred from doing business with US banks.

 

Abbas is not interested in peace. The two-state model isn’t about achieving peace. It is about blaming the victim of the absence of peace for the absence of peace.

 

Abbas knows his apologists, both in Israel, and most important in the US and Europe. He knows they will go to any length to defend him.

 

The Israeli Left does so because without the phony peace process, Justice Minister Tzipi Livni, the Labor Party and Meretz become political irrelevancies.

 

The administration and the EU defend Abbas and the phony peace process because they don’t want to acknowledge the plain fact that Israel is the only stable ally they have in the Middle East and the stronger Israel is the more protected they are. Doing so contradicts their ideology.

 

So now Abbas is telling them that the deal is good for peace since it brings Hamas-controlled Gaza into the PLO and so reunifies the PA, which has been operating as two separate entities for seven years. And they may go along with it.

 

They’ve been perfectly willing to embrace utter nonsense countless times over the years.

 

Only the Israeli government and Congress can stop them. And they must stop them.

 

These phony peaceniks’ preference for Jew-killers over international law comes with a prohibitive price tag. Jews are murdered, war criminals are embraced, and the rule of law is rent asunder.

 

Originally published in The Jerusalem Post. 

____________________________

All right reserved, Caroline Glick.

 

About Caroline Glick

Know your Nazi-Arab Connection to Jew-Hatred


Hajj Amin al Husseini - Adolf Hitler

 

John R. Houk

© September 16, 2013

 

I received an email from the Historical and Investigative Research (HIR). The purpose of the email is to spread information on a fifteen minute documentary “The Nazi’s and the Palestinian movement”. I have known about this information on this so-called Palestinian movement for some time. Incredulously too many Americans are completely out of touch of the Nazi-Radical Islamic cooperation that began in WWII. You have to ask, “What in the world did Aryan-Nazi Supremacists and Muslim-Arabic (of a Semitic language group) have in common?”

 

Of course the answer is JEW-HATRED. Islam has never been Jew-friendly especially since old Mo conquered Medina and began the execution of Arab-Jewish tribes of the Arabian Peninsula. Jew-hatred became elevated among Arab Muslims largely at the Nazi support of the WWII Grand Mufti of Jerusalem Hajj Amin al Husseini. Al-Husseini propagandized Jew-Hatred because European Jews had begun flooding back into their ancestral homeland largely with initial British help – See HERE and HERE (sadly the British transitioned to a pro-Arab stand by the time Israel proclaimed their independence in 1948).

 

So this is what is going to happen in this post. I am going to begin with the email which has two links. One to the documentary which is linked on Vimeo and the second link is to the HIR text. I am going to use a Youtube version of the Vimeo link because it is easier to post on my blogs. On the HIR text link there is a side panel which you will have to go to the website to read. I am just cross posting the text pertaining to “The Nazi’s and the Palestinian movement”.

 

JRH 9/16/13

Please Support NCCR

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

HIR: New Documentary: The Nazis and the Palestinian Movement

 

Sent by Francisco Gil-White

From Historical and Investigative Research

Sent: Aug 6, 2013 at 11:07 PM

 

The Israeli government is negotiating to give PLO/Fatah (the ‘Palestinian Authority’) the strategic territories of Judea and Samaria. This is only possible because ordinary Israelis, and ordinary Westerners, still don’t know about the German Nazi roots of PLO/Fatah.

 

FACES/HIR has produced:

 

1) A (short) new documentary about this question, available on Vimeo:
https://vimeo.com/69991225

 

2) An article to accompany the video (it contains all the relevant documentation): http://www.hirhome.com/israel/nazis_palestinians.htm                        

 

Please give both a wide circulation

 

HISTORICAL AND INVESTIGATIVE RESEARCH
F.A.C.E.S. (Foundation for the Analysis of Conflict, Ethnic and Social)

_____________________

VIDEO: The Nazi’s and the Palestinian movement

 

Posted by jomjomnl

Published on Aug 20, 2013

______________________

THE NAZIS AND THE PALESTINIAN MOVEMENT

Documentary and discussion

 

By Francisco Gil-White

26 July 2013

Historical and Investigative Research

 

Hajj Amin al Husseini is the father of the Palestinian Movement. He created PLO/Fatah (now better known as the ‘Palestinian Authority’), the organization that will govern any future Palestinian state. And he was mentor to Yasser Arafat and Mahmoud Abbas, the leaders of that organization. Husseini was also, during World War II, a top Nazi leader who co-directed with Adolf Eichmann the death camp system that murdered between 5 and 6 million European Jews, also known as the Final Solution. These facts are not widely known or understood. Neither has their implication for our understanding of Israeli ruling elite behavior been properly appreciated. We present a short documentary and a discussion.

……………………………………………

Table of Contents

 

o   Introduction

 

o   The Video

 

o   Discussion

 

o   Readings relevant to this video

 

Introduction

 

For many years now, almost every day, all over the world, the Arab-Israeli conflict is headline news. And yet most people still don’t know that PLO/Fatah (now better known as the ‘Palestinian Authority’), the organization that will govern any future Palestinian state, was created by a top leader of the German Nazi Final Solution. In other words, the ‘Palestinian state’—to be carved out of strategic territory of the Jewish state—will be governed by the spawn of the man responsible for the Nazi murder of between 5 and 6 million European Jews.

 

The short documentary below explains PLO/Fatah’s history.

 

This documentary is now on Vimeo, but it was first uploaded to You Tube. In the first two days, almost with no publicity, the You Tube webpage quickly logged more than 1,500 visits. Then, on the third day, Israelis began reporting that You Tube was not allowing them to access the video. You Tube’s explanation is that when a video is blocked in this manner it can be due to only one of two reasons:

 

1)     the You Tube account-owner placed country restrictions on the video; or else

 

2)     You Tube is complying with local laws

 

We did not place country restrictions on the video. That leaves us with the second possibility.

 

But what local laws can You Tube be complying with? To my knowledge, no laws have yet been passed by the Israeli Knesset against the dissemination of historical facts.

 

Some have speculated that “we are complying with local laws” is a cover for “the Israeli government told us to block it.” Others ask: “But why would the Israeli government even want to block this video?”

 

Let us consider the following:

 

1)     PLO/Fatah—created by a leader of the Final Solution—was brought inside the Jewish state—created (supposedly) to protect the Jewish people from Final Solutions—because the Israeli government signed the 1993-94 Oslo Accord.

 

2)     But why? In 1982 Menachem Begin had already (essentially) destroyed PLO/Fatah and chased the remnant out of Lebanon to its new base in Tunis. So in 1993-94 the Israeli government was breathing new life into a defeated, moribund PLO/Fatah.

 

3)     In doing so the Israeli government gifted PLO/Fatah with its most important victory: legitimacy on the world stage, and lordship over the Arab Muslims in the strategic ‘disputed territories’ of Judea and Samaria.

 

4)     The Israeli government did all this this without informing ordinary Israelis about the roots of PLO/Fatah in the German Nazi Final Solution. Instead, it legitimized PLO/Fatah’s claim to have abandoned terrorism for ‘peace.’

 

5)     With PLO/Fatah’s entry, terrorism against Israelis immediately quintupled, and the security situation worsened for the long term because PLO/Fatah has been indoctrinating the Arab Muslims in the disputed territories into its ecstatic genocidal ideology (not precisely a secret).

 

6)     The Israeli government is still trying to sell the Israeli people—and Jews worldwide—on the idea that a sensible solution to Israel’s security woes is to give the strategic high ground of Judea and Samaria (a.k.a. the ‘West Bank’) to PLO/Fatah.

 

7)     There is a real possibility that the Israeli government will make this strategic territory judenrein (this is a German Nazi term meaning ‘cleansed of Jews’) for PLO/Fatah. They already did it in Gaza.

 

8)     During the long years since the so-called Oslo ‘Peace’ Process began, the Israeli government still hasn’t informed the Israelis about PLO/Fatah’s origins in the German Nazi Final Solution.

 

But perhaps the most important points are the following:

 

9)     This Oslo ‘Peace’ Process could have been quickly killed in its tracks if, when the US government first began bullying for it, the prime minister of Israel had simply called an international press conference to explain the origins of PLO/Fatah in the German Nazi Final Solution.

 

10)  At any point since 1993-94, by holding such a press conference, the Israeli government could have scored a major propaganda victory in favor of Israeli Jews, and in favor of ejecting PLO/Fatah from Israel. But no such press conference has yet been called.

 

On the basis of the above 10 points one may conclude that, if the information in this video becomes widely known, those running the Israeli government will have some egg on their faces. In fact, this information raises the sharpest questions about them, and about their intentions. Here then is a plausible motive for the Israeli government to block the video: to stop Israelis from asking such questions.

 

But in fact questions must be asked not merely about the Israeli government (in the narrow bureaucratic sense) but also about the Israeli ruling elite more broadly. For none of the major politicians who declare themselves opponents of the Oslo ‘Peace’ Process and its ‘Two State Solution’ have educated Israelis about the German Nazi Roots of PLO/Fatah. Why?

 

The video follows below. And below the video is a discussion about the evidence it presents, and how this evidence has been either ignored or lied about for many years.

 

The Video

 

THE NAZIS AND THE PALESTINIAN MOVEMENT from FACESHIRHOME on Vimeo. [SlantRight Editor: You can click the Vimeo link or watch the Youtube version above]

 

Discussion

 

Immediately after the war, Husseini’s Nazi activities were well understood, as the article from The Nation (1947) which I have posted to the right of this column attests. But then a tremendous silence about Husseini and his Nazi years developed. Certainly the media, which displays always the latest news on the Arab-Israeli conflict in its front pages, has had nothing to say about the Nazi origins of PLO/Fatah ever since PLO/Fatah was created in the 1960s. The silence in academia has been equally deafening.

 

Historian Rafael Medoff, in an article from 1996, wrote the following:

 

“Early scholarship on the Mufti, such as the work of Maurice Pearlman and Joseph Schechtman, while hampered by the inaccessibility of some key documents, at least succeeded in conveying the basic facts of the Mufti’s career as a Nazi collaborator. One would have expected the next generation of historians, with greater access to relevant archival materials (not to mention the broader perspective that the passage of time may afford) to improve upon the work of their predecessors. Instead, however, a number of recent histories of the Arab-Israeli conflict have played fast and loose with the evidence, producing accounts that minimize or even justify the Mufti’s Nazi activity.”[1]

 

What Medoff refers to above as “early scholarship on the Mufti” is early indeed. The work of Pearlman and Schechtman that he cites is from 1947 and 1965:

 

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

 

Joseph B. Schechtman, The Mufti and the Fuehrer, New York, 1965.

 

After this ensued a tremendous academic silence on the Mufti Husseini. In fact, Medoff can refer us to no academic work on Husseini before 1990. His article, recall, is from 1996. The few academic mentions of Husseini that he could find from 1990 to 1996 were either completely silent on the Mufti’s Nazi years—as if they had never happened—or else they relegated a ‘summary’ of those years to a single paragraph (or even just a sentence) that left almost everything out. Some authors even claimed (entirely in passing) that Husseini’s Nazi activities had been supposedly imagined by “Zionist propagandists.”

 

But recent scholars who have studied Hajj Amin al Husseini in depth, such as Rafael Medoff, have confirmed what his early biographers had already established:

 

1)     that Husseini traveled to Berlin in late 1941, met with Hitler, and discussed with him the extermination of the Middle Eastern Jews (whom Husseini had already been killing for some 20 years);

 

2)     that Husseini spent the entire war in Nazi-controlled Europe as a Nazi collaborator;

 

3)     that Husseini helped spread Nazi propaganda to Muslims worldwide (one of his famous exhortations goes like this: “Arabs, rise as one man and fight for your sacred rights. Kill the Jews wherever you find them. This pleases God, history, and religion. This saves your honor. God is with you.”[2]);

 

4)     that Husseini recruited thousands of Bosnian and Kosovo Muslims to Heinrich Himmler’s SS, who went on to kill hundreds of thousands of Serbs, and tens of thousands of Jews and Roma (‘Gypsies’).

 

It is beyond dispute that Husseini did all that. And in fact photographic evidence of Husseini’s Nazi collaboration abounds on the internet.

 

But there has been quite an effort to whitewash Husseini’s responsibility in the German Nazi death camp system specifically—in other words, his responsibility in the Holocaust, or as the Jews more properly say, in the Shoah (‘Catastrophe’). One example of this whitewashing effort is Wikipedia’s page on Husseini.

 

Because of its emblematic nature, I shall now quote from the Wikipedia article on Hajj Amin al Husseini as I found it on 14 July, 2013 and then comment.

 

[Quote from Wikipedia begins here]

 

Al-Husseini settled in Berlin in late 1941 and resided there for most of the war.[153] Various sources have repeated allegations, mostly ungrounded in documentary evidence, that he visited the death camps of Auschwitz, Majdanek, Treblinka and Mauthausen.[153] At the Nuremberg trials, one of Adolf Eichmann‘s deputies, Dieter Wisliceny, stated that al-Husseini had actively encouraged the extermination of European Jews, and that he had had an elaborate meeting with Eichmann at his office, during which Eichmann gave him an intensive look at the current state of the “Solution of the Jewish Question in Europe” by the Third Reich. Most of these allegations are completely unfounded.[153]

 

[Quote from Wikipedia ends here]

 

Consider first the phrase “completely unfounded” as it attaches to any part of Wisliceny’s Nuremberg testimony.

 

As part of the legal proceedings at the Nuremberg War Crimes Tribunal, two independent witnesses (Andrej or Endre Steiner and Rudolf Kasztner)—both of whom had had personal contact with Dieter Wisliceny during the war—reported to the Tribunal that in wartime conversations with Wisliceny he had said certain things about Husseini’s role in the Final Solution (the genocidal enterprise in which Wisliceny was not just anybody but a highly-placed administrator). The Steiner and Kasztner testimonies are quite similar to each other. Before his execution for crimes against humanity, Nuremberg Tribunal investigators called on Wisliceny to either confirm or deny what these two independent witnesses had said. Wisliceny did correct them on minor points but he confirmed what they had both stated concerning Husseini’s central and originating role in the extermination program (consult footnote [3] to read the Steiner and Kasztner testimonies).

 

So are these “completely unfounded” allegations? If so, that would mean:

 

1)     that in light of other, better established evidence, what Wisliceny stated is impossible; and/or

 

2)     that Wisliceny is less credible as a witness than witnesses who contradicted his statements.

 

So I ask: On the basis of what evidence do the Wikipedia editors argue that “most of these allegations are completely unfounded”?

 

At first it seems as though Wikipedia editors have provided three sources but on closer inspection it is the same footnote, repeated three times (in the space of four sentences). The footnote contains this:

 

Gerhard Höpp (2004). “In the Shadow of the Moon.” In Wolfgang G. Schwanitz. Germany and the Middle East 1871–1945. Markus Wiener, Princeton. pp. 217–221.

 

The title is incomplete. Gerhard Höpp’s article is: “In the Shadow of the Moon: Arab Inmates in Nazi Concentration Camps.” The full title makes it obvious that this article is not about Husseini, something that readers who see only the truncated title in the Wikipedia reference will not realize.

 

But, anyway, what does Höpp say—entirely in passing—about Wisliceny’s testimony concerning Husseini? He says this (and only this):

 

“Al-Husaini… is said not only to have had knowledge of the concentration camps but also to have visited them. Various authors speak of the camps at Auschwitz, Majdanek, Treblinka, and Mauthausen. While the assumption that he visited the Auschwitz camp in the company of Adolf Eichmann is supported by an affidavit of Rudolf Kasztner, referring to a note by the Eichmann collaborator Dieter Wisliceny, the other allegations are entirely unfounded.” (p.221)

 

Recall that Höpp is Wikipedia’s thrice-cited source to ‘support’ that “most” of the following three allegations are “completely unfounded”:

 

1)     that Husseini visited death camps

 

2)     that Husseini encouraged the extermination of the Jews;

 

3)     that Husseini met with Eichmann to discuss said extermination.

 

But notice that Höpp says absolutely nothing about allegations 2 and 3.

 

And notice that, concerning allegation 1, Höpp uses the phrase “entirely unfounded” in a manner exactly opposite to the Wikipedia editors who invoke him. For the Wikipedia editors, “most” of what Wisliceny says is “completely unfounded,” whereas for Höpp it is those allegations not backed by Wisliceny’s testimony that he considers “entirely unfounded.”

 

Moreover, Höpp states:

 

“Speculation on this and other misdeeds by the Mufti appear unnecessary in view of his undisputed collaboration with the Nazis…” (p.221)

 

In other words, since we already know that Husseini was a rabid anti-Semite who himself organized mass killings of Jews before he met the Nazis, and then also with the Nazis, and discussed with Hitler the extermination of the Middle Eastern Jews, and shouted on the Nazi radio “Kill the Jews wherever you find them,” is it not a waste of time to argue back and forth whether Husseini did or did not visit this or that death camp with Eichmann?

 

But, I might add, why doubt it? And why doubt that such a man encouraged the Nazis to exterminate the European Jews and also met with Eichmann to discuss this program? (Unless, of course, such expressions of doubt are intended as an apology for the Mufti…)

 

Let us now continue with the Wikipedia article:

 

[Quote from Wikipedia continues here]

 

A single affidavit by Rudolf Kastner reported that Wisliceny told him that he had overheard Husseini say he had visited Auschwitz incognito in Eichmann’s company.[154] Eichmann denied this at his trial in Jerusalem in 1961. …Eichmann stated that he had only been introduced to al-Husseini during an official reception, along with all other department heads. In the final judgement [sic], the Jerusalem court stated: “In the light of this partial admission by the Accused, we accept as correct Wisliceny’s statement about this conversation between the Mufti and the Accused. In our view it is not important whether this conversation took place in the Accused’s office or elsewhere. On the other hand, we cannot determine decisive findings with regard to the Accused on the basis of the notes appearing in the Mufti’s diary which were submitted to us.”[157] Hannah Arendt, who attended the complete Eichmann trial, concluded in her book Eichmann in Jerusalem: A Report on the Banality of Evil that, “The trial revealed only that all rumours about Eichmann’s connection with Haj Amin el Husseini, the former Mufti of Jerusalem, were unfounded.”[158]

 

[Quote from Wikipedia ends here]

 

I am confounded by Wikipedia’s choice of reliable experts. The Jerusalem court that tried Eichmann for Crimes Against Humanity concluded that “we accept as correct Wisliceny’s statement about this conversation between the Mufti [Husseini] and the Accused [Eichmann]” (the topic of which was to discuss how to exterminate the European Jews); but Wikipedia editors prefer the contrary opinion of philosopher Hannah Arendt, according to whom any claim of a relationship between Husseini and Eichmann is “unfounded.” And why do they prefer Arendt? Because she “attended the complete Eichmann trial.”

 

Didn’t the judges also attend?

 

Anyway, let’s look at Arendt more closely. To her, two independent testimonies at Nuremberg concerning Husseini’s relationship with Eichmann, later corroborated by Wisliceny, a highly-placed eyewitness, are “rumours.” This is strange. And, against this, Arendt simply accepts Eichmann’s denial. Doubly strange. Why has Eichmann earned so much respect from Hannah Arendt?

 

But more to the point: Do we have reasons to consider Eichmann a more credible witness than Wisliceny?

 

Arendt shouldn’t think so. She wrote Eichmann in Jerusalem: A Report on the Banality of Evil so that she could extend herself in deep ruminations about the human soul based on (odd choice) Eichmann’s strange behavior at trial, which led her to call him a “clown.” Wisliceny, by contrast, was universally considered by prosecutors as a very careful witness, who was painstaking in correcting the smallest details in the testimony he was asked to comment on.[4]

 

(And Eichmann most certainly had motive to lie in order to diminish Husseini’s role in the Holocaust relative to his own, for he was obviously proud of what he had done. Moreover, Husseini was still at large, and busy organizing the ‘Palestinian’ movement, so better not to say anything that could support a manhunt plus extradition procedures that might derail Husseini’s ongoing effort to exterminate the Jews in Israel, a project certainly dear to Eichmann’s putrefacient heart, a project that, as he sat in the witness box, no doubt swam before his mind’s eye as a pleasant future outcome to engulf those sitting in judgment of him, or their children.)

 

Let us continue:

 

[Quote from Wikipedia continues here]

 

Rafael Medoff concludes that “actually there is no evidence that the Mufti’s presence was a factor at all; the Wisliceny hearsay is not merely uncorroborated, but conflicts with everything else that is known about the origins of the Final Solution.”[159]

 

[Quote from Wikipedia ends here]

 

Rafael Medoff is expressing an opinion. Is it reasonable? Here is the full passage in Medoff’s article:

 

“With regard to the crucial question of what the Mufti knew and when he knew it, the evidence requires especially careful sifting, and earlier scholars did not always take sufficient care. Pearlman, for example, accepted as fact the unfounded postwar claim by Wisliceny that the Mufti was “one of the initiators” of the genocide. Of course, Pearlman was writing in 1946-1947, when the genesis of the annihilation process was not yet fully understood. Other accounts at that time, such as a 1947 book written by Bartley Crum, a member of the Anglo-American Commission of Inquiry on Palestine, likewise accepted Wisliceny’s claim. Schechtman, writing in 1964-1965, should have known better. He made much of the fact that the Mufti first arrived in Berlin shortly before the Wannsee conference, as if the decision to slaughter the Jews was made at Wannsee, when in fact the mass murder began in Western Russia the previous summer (at a time when the Mufti was still deeply embroiled in the pro-Nazi coup in Baghdad). Schechtman eventually conceded that ‘it would be both wrong and misleading to assume that the presence of Haj Amin el-Husseini was the sole, or even the major factor in the shaping and intensification of the Nazi ‘final solution of the Jewish problem,’ which supplanted forced emigration by wholesale extermination.’ Actually, there is no evidence that the Mufti’s presence was a factor at all; the Wisliceny hearsay is not merely uncorroborated, but conflicts with everything else that is known about the origins of the Final Solution.”[5]

 

Medoff’s argument turns on a semantic point. If we agree with him that the mass killings of Jews on the Nazi Eastern front, which began before Husseini arrived in Berlin, are part of the ‘Final Solution,’ then Husseini is not “one of the originators” of the ‘Final Solution.’ But the question is not what we agree to call ‘Final Solution.’ The question is whether the Nazis had yet decided, before Husseini alighted in Berlin, to create a death camp system to kill all of the European Jews. They had not. And that decision was formalized at Wannsee, indeed shortly after Husseini arrived in Berlin.

 

 

Consider what historians say about the established chronology of changes in Nazi policy on the so-called ‘Jewish Question.’

 

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]

 

Hajj Amin al Husseini arrived in Berlin in “the autumn of 1941”—to be precise, on 9 November 1941. So yes, there had already been mass killings of Jews on the Eastern front, but for the hypothesis that Husseini had something to do with the Nazi decision to set up the death camp system in order to kill every last living European Jew (instead of sending most to ‘Palestine’), Husseini arrived right on time.

 

The last part of Medoff’s passage—the one that Wikipedia quotes—is especially problematic. He writes:

 

“Actually, there is no evidence that the Mufti’s presence was a factor at all; the Wisliceny hearsay is not merely uncorroborated, but conflicts with everything else that is known about the origins of the Final Solution.”

 

Medoff disparages the evidence we have as “hearsay.” Is it?

 

Wikipedia explains the legal definition of ‘hearsay’:

 

“information gathered by one person from another person concerning some event, condition, or thing of which the first person had no direct experience.”[11]

 

In US law there is a famous “hearsay rule,” which says that if en (sic) eyewitness cannot present his or her testimony in court, then another’s report of the supposed testimony is inadmissible.[11a] Medoff is turning this legal tradition into a historiographical principle in order to do away with the evidence from Wisliceny. Is this a proper maneuver?

 

A historian is not subject to the caution of a court of law, which must err on the side of presumption of innocence in order to safeguard a person’s rights. But even if a historian were Medoff’s reasoning does not apply. We have two independent testimonies before the Nuremberg Tribunal, by Andrej (Endre) Steiner and Rudolf Kasztner, about their wartime conversations with Wisliceny, the topic of which was Husseini’s key role in 1) the decision to exterminate all of the European Jews and, 2) the administration of the death-camp system with Adolf Eichmann. These two testimonies, by themselves, count as ‘hearsay.’ But are they inadmissible? Actually the hearsay rule has exceptions that a judge may invoke, and having two consistent and independent testimonies could favor such an exception. But this is not even the case. Both testimonies were corroborated by Wisliceny, whose “direct experience” of the relationship between Husseini and Eichmann is well established, since Wisliceny was Eichmann’s right-hand man. In other words, Wisliceny’s testimony is not hearsay; he is an eyewitness. Medoff is wrong.

 

So:

 

1)     we do have evidence that the Mufti’s presence was a factor;

 

2)     this evidence is not hearsay because it comes from Wisliceny; and

 

3)     given what we know about Husseini’s character, deeds, and timely arrival in Berlin, Wisliceny’s claims certainly do not conflict “with everything else that is known about the origins of the Final Solution.”

 

So every word in the Medoff passage that Wikipedia quotes is false.

We continue:

 

[Quote from Wikipedia continues here]

 

Bernard Lewis also called Wisliceny’s testimony into doubt: “There is no independent documentary confirmation of Wisliceny’s statements, and it seems unlikely that the Nazis needed any such additional encouragement from the outside.”[160]

 

[Quote from Wikipedia ends here]

 

The full passage from Bernard Lewis’s work is the following:

 

“According to Wisliceny, the Mufti was a friend of Eichmann and had, in his company, gone incognito to visit the gas chamber at Auschwitz. Wisliceny even names the Mufti as being the ‘initiator’ of the policy of extermination. This was denied, both by Eichmann at his trial in Jerusalem in 1961, and by the Mufti in a press conference at about the same time. There is no independent documentary confirmation of Wisliceny’s statements, and it seems unlikely that the Nazis needed any such additional encouragement from outside.” [12]

 

So Eichmann and Husseini deny it and this is enough for Lewis… If we apply his standards to any ordinary criminal investigation we will be forced to let the main suspect go the minute he himself and/or his alleged accomplice deny the charges. Presto! This will save a lot of unnecessary police work.

 

The same can be said for his curious insistence that without “independent documentary confirmation” the testimony of witnesses can be dispensed with. But, naturally, a great many things that happen in the world are not recorded in a document. Eyewitness testimony must be considered carefully, but saying that “there is no independent documentary confirmation” of a particular piece of testimony is not the same thing as producing good reasons to doubt it. And to say, in the absence of conflicting evidence, that our null hypothesis will be to consider as true the opposite of what was testified to, why that is simply absurd.

 

The above is obvious but Lewis’s last argument—“it seems unlikely that the Nazis needed any such additional encouragement from outside”—will appeal to many as reasonable, so it deserves a more extended comment.

 

What Lewis is saying is that the Nazis decided on total extermination for reasons that were ‘endogenous’ to their ideological program. But though killing lots of Jews as part of a campaign of terror and to make lebensraum for deserving Aryan specimens on the Eastern front was certainly part of general Nazi policy, the ‘Final Solution,’ as pointed out above, was initially and for a long time a program of mass expulsion, and did not contemplate (yet) exterminating the entire European Jewish population. Getting to that point required some ‘exogenous’ prodding (“from outside”); it was not an ideological requirement.

 

Historian Thomas Marrus writes: “After the riots of Kristallnacht in November 1938, SS police boss Heydrich was ordered to accelerate emigration, and Jews were literally driven out of the country. The problem was, of course, that there was practically no place for them to go.”[13] The reason there was no place for them to go is that no country would receive them. As historian James Carroll points out:  “The same leaders, notably Neville Chamberlain and Franklin D. Roosevelt, who had denounced the anti-Jewish violence of the Nazis declined to receive Jews as refugees. …Crucial to its building to a point of no return was Hitler’s discovery (late) of the political indifference of the democracies to the fate of the Jews…[14] Though one may argue that this was not really “indifference” on the part of Roosevelt et al. but a very special interest (in their doom).[15] The main point here is that, as historian Gunnar Paulsson points out: “Expulsion had initially been the general policy of the Nazis towards the Jews, and had been abandoned largely for practical, not ideological, reasons” (my emphasis).[16]

 

The Nazis were right bastards. No disagreement. But they did need some encouragement to go that far. They needed to be told, first, that they would not get rid of any Jews by pushing them out to the ‘Free World.’ And then they needed to be told, by British creation Hajj Amin al Husseini, that neither could they push them out to ‘Palestine.’ Bernard Lewis is wrong.

 

Perhaps Wikipedia would like to try again with a new set of ‘supporting’ sources? We will be waiting to examine them.

 

[SlantRight Editor: There is more reading under the headings Readings Relevant to this Video” and “Footnotes and Further Reading”.]

_____________________________

Know your Nazi-Arab Connection to Jew-Hatred

John R. Houk

© September 16, 2013

____________________________

THE NAZIS AND THE PALESTINIAN MOVEMENT

 

About HIR

 

Francisco Gil-White has a Masters in Social Sciences from the University of Chicago and a PhD in biological and cultural anthropology from UCLA. His PhD thesis work was in rural Western Mongolia, where he did 14 months of fieldwork studying the mutual ethnic perceptions of neighboring Torguud Mongol and Kazakh nomadic herders. Until June 2006, he was Assistant Professor of Psychology at the University of Pennsylvania (he was fired for investigating the real aims of US foreign policy). His research is broadly concerned with the evolution of the proximate mechanisms responsible for social learning and social perception and cognition. His main interests are the evolution of ethnic processes, with a special focus on racism, and particularly anti-Semitism; prestige processes; the evolution of language; the structure of narrative memory; the structure and interaction of media and political processes; the laws of history; Western geopolitics; and the political history of the West.

 

The story behind Historical and Investigative Research

 

Opportunity Missed, Opportunity Made


Mahmoud Abbas & Ismail Haniyeh

 

The Leslie J. Sacks organization sent an article by Mark Y. Rosenberg that is critical of the Palestinian Authority and Hamas hook-up because Hamas is overtly for the destruction of Israel and the murder of Jews.

 

Where I disagree with Rosenberg is his assertion that Israel should abandon the “West Bank” to allow a Palestinian State to come into existence because that is the only way for peace between Israel and the Arab world. Also Rosenberg believes that Israeli control of “occupied” West Bank is not a sustainable situation for Israel. Rosenberg does not enter the debate of borders such as Israel drawing to 1967 borders including the eastern half of Jerusalem. I would have been interested on his take on the borders and if the Jewish heritage of Jerusalem should be turned over to Jew-hating Muslims.

 

Finally noticed I placed quotes over “West Bank” and “occupied”. The reason for this is that I am a Christian Zionist. The so-called West Bank is part of the Land of Israel known as Judea and Samaria. Israel did not occupy it their land, they retrieved from Jordanian occupation. Since Israel retook Judea and Samaria they did not occupy it, rather Israel liberated from hostile Muslims that defaced and committed acts of sacrilege against Jewish holy places, relics and ancient possessions such as Synagogues and cemeteries.

 

Other than that Rosenberg’s article is good.

 

JRH 6/4/11