THE MOST POPULAR EUROPEAN IN HISTORY
Michael Walsh - email@example.com
"I have never met a happier people than the Germans and Hitler is one of the greatest men. The old trust him; the young idolise him. It is the worship of a national hero who has saved his country.” - David Lloyd George, Daily Express, 17.9.1936
WINSTON CHURCHILL: If our country were defeated I should hope we should find a champion as indomitable to restore our courage and lead us back to our place among the nations." - 'Step by Step', p.143.
WINSTON CHURCHILL: "In fifteen years that have followed this resolve, he has succeeded in restoring Germany to the most powerful position in Europe, and not only has he restored the position of his country, but he has even, to a very great extent, reversed the results of the Great War.... the vanquished are in the process of becoming the victors and the victors the vanquished.... whatever else might be thought about these exploits they are certainly among the most remarkable in the whole history of the world.” – 1935. Ironically the author of these comments had directly the opposite effect on his own country.
THEODOR HEUSS: "He moved souls, the will to sacrifice, and great devotion, enthralling and enthusiastically inspiring everyone by his appearance."
VISCOUNT ROTHERMERE: "He has a supreme intellect. I have known only two other men to whom I could apply such distinction - Lord Northcliffe and Lloyd George. If one puts a question to Hitler, he gives an immediate, brilliant clear answer. There is no human being living whose promise on important matters I would trust more readily. He believes that Germany has a divine calling and that the German people are destined to save Europe from the revolutionary attacks of Communism. He values family life very highly, whereas Communism is its worst enemy. He has thoroughly cleansed the moral, ethical life of Germany, forbidden publication of obscene books, and performance of questionable plays and films.
No words can describe his politeness; he disarms men as well as women and can win both at any time with his conciliatory, pleasant smile. He is a man of rare culture. His knowledge of music, the arts and architecture is profound.” - 'Warnings and Predictions', p.180 – 183.
HANS GRIMM: "I witness with awe and admiration, that he, as nearly the first in the world, caused multitudes without force or any personal benefits to follow him of their own free will and volition."
G.E.O KNIGHT: “Altogether, Herr Hitler has worked miracles for the new Germany. I anticipate that in a very short time, the Chancellor will have shown the world more than it ever bargained for in its wildest efforts to crush the new regime." - In Defence of Germany
JACQUES BAINVILLE: "For Stressseman represented political parties which no longer existed, whereas Hitler enjoys the confidence of the whole of Germany expressed by the votes of over forty million electors.' " - l'Action Francais
HOUSTON STEWART CHAMBERLAIN: "At one stroke you have transformed the state of my soul. That Germany in the greatest hour of its need can produce a Hitler testifies to its vitality."
THE DAILY MAIL: "He succeeded in ascending to the highest power-position in Germany with very little spilling of blood or loss of human life in a land of 68 million inhabitants. Austria was annexed without one shot being fired." - Daily Mail, 20th, May, 1938
THE OBSERVER: “I have talked with the humblest type of labourers, with merchants, professional men. I have yet to discover a dissenting voice to the question of loyalty to the Fuehrer." - John L. Garvin.
GEORGE BERNARD SHAW: "When I said that Herr Hitler's action was right and inevitable, the storm of abuse that was about to burst on me was suddenly checked by Mr. Lloyd George saying exactly the same thing. It is inconceivable that a single vote should be cast against him."
DOUGLAS REED: "Germans in their country are not less well cared for than the English people in theirs, but better."
JOHN F. KENNEDY, U.S PRESIDENT: “After visiting these two places (Berchtesgaden and Obersalzberg) you can easily understand how that within a few years Hitler will emerge from the hatred that surrounds him now as one of the most significant figures who ever lived. He had in him the stuff of which legends are made.” - Prelude to Leadership, The European Diary of J.F Kennedy, Summer, 1945.
JESSE OWENS, AMERICAN NEGRO OLYMPIC ATHLETE: "When I passed the Chancellor he arose, waved his hand at me, and I waved back at him. I think the writers showed bad taste in criticising the man of the hour in Germany." - Richard D. Mandell. The Nazi Olympics
THE MARQUESS OF LOTHIAN: "I think that it must be admitted that National Socialism has done a great deal for Germany. It has undoubtedly cleaned up Germany in the ordinary moral sense of the word. The defeatism, the corruption so manifest a characteristic in the days after the war has disappeared, at any rate from public view. It has given discipline and order and a sense of purpose to the great majority of young people who in earlier days did not know where to go or what they were living for." - British Ambassador, Washington, June 29th, 1937.
EVE BRAUN TO HER SISTER: "I must write you these words so that you will not feel sad over our end here in the shelter. It is rather we who are filled with sorrow because it is your fate to live on into the chaos that will follow. For myself, I am glad to die here; glad to be at the side of the Fuehrer; foremost of all, glad that the horror now to come is spared me.
Dr. JOSEPH GOEBBELS TO HIS STEPSON, HARALD: My Dear Harald / We sit locked in the Fuehrer's shelter in the R.C., fighting for lives and honour. I hardly believe that we shall ever see each other again; therefore, it is likely that these will be the last lines you will ever receive from me. I expect from you, should you outlive this war, that you do only that which will honour your mother and father.
Germany will outlive this terrible war, but only if it has examples upon which to guide its reconstruction. Such an example we want to give here. Do not let yourself be confused by the uproar that will now reign throughout the world. The lies will one day break down under their own weight and the truth will again triumph. The hour will come when we shall stand pure and undefiled as our aims and beliefs have always been.
Farewell, my dear Harald. Whether we shall ever see each other again lies in the hand of God. If it is not to be, then always be proud to have belonged to a family that even in the face of disaster remains true to the Fuehrer to the very last and true to his pure and Holy cause. All the best and my heartfelt greetings. Your Papa.
GENERAL LEON DEGRELLE: "Hitler was the greatest statesman Europe has ever known. History will prove that when whipped up emotions have died down. He was more matter of fact, generally more unfolded than Napoleon. Napoleon was more of a vanquishing, empire-founding Frenchman than a true European. Hitler, in his being a man of his time, dreamed of an enduring, just, honest Europe, unified by the initiative of the victor. A Europe however in which each ethnic group could develop according to their merits and accomplishments. The proof of this is that he offered Petain his hand. Just as Bismarck knew how to outgrow Prussia and become a German, so Hitler soon changed from being a German to being a European. At an early stage he disconnected himself from imperialistic ambition.
Without any difficulty he began to think of himself as a European and initiated the creation of a Europe in which Germany - like Prussia in Bismarck's time, was to be the foundation stone.
Some comrades of the Fuhrer might still have been short-sighted Pan-Germanists. But Hitler had the genius, the right scale, the absence of bias and the necessary vision to accomplish the terrific task.
He had an authority, not to be found a second time in the history of the continent. His success would have established wealth and civilisation of Europe for centuries, probably forever. Hitler's plans for Europe would have meant a blessing for us all."
HITLER’S LAST WILL AND TESTAMENT: “It is not true that I wished for war in 1939, neither I nor anyone else in Germany. War was provoked exclusively by those international statesmen who were of Jewish race or who worked in the interests of international Jewry....
"I nourish the conviction that the hour will come when millions of men who now curse us will take a stand behind us to welcome the new Europe, our common creation born of a painful and laborious struggle and an arduous triumph - a Europe which is the symbol of greatness, honour, strength, honesty and justice."
"At the time of supreme peril I must die a martyr's death for the people. But after my death will come something really great, an overwhelming revelation to the world of my mission." / "My spirit will rise from the grave, and the world will see I was right."
"The day will come when we shall make an agreement with the men of other Aryan nations. Then there will come a union between all of the one, good, ruling race throughout the world.”
Dr. JOSEPH GOEBBELS: “Do not let yourself be confused by the uproar that will now reign throughout the world. The lies will one day break down under their own weight and the truth will again triumph. The hour will come when we shall stand pure and undefiled as our aims and beliefs have always been.” / "This century will be named and shaped after Adolf Hitler."
NOBEL PRIZE WINNER: “I am not worthy to speak aloud of Adolf Hitler. And his life and work do not invite sentimental words. He was a warrior for mankind and a herald of the gospel of justice for all nations. He was a reformative figure of the highest rank, and it was his historic fate that he had to work in a time of unprecedented baseness, which in the end brought him down.
“Thus, I suppose, must the ordinary Western European look upon Adolf Hitler. And we, his closest followers, now bow our heads before his immortal shroud.” - Norwegian writer. Nobel Prize winner, Knut Hamsun, upon the death of Adolf Hitler, Aftenposten, 1 May 1945.
‘The enemy of subversive thought is not suppression, but publication: truth has no need to fear the light of day; fallacies wither under it. The unpopular views of today are the commonplaces of tomorrow, and in any case the wise man wants to hear both sides of every question.’ - Sir Stanley Unwin.
David Miliband’s family ‘lied’ to enter UK
Brendan Montague, The Sunday Times, April 6, 2008
Left: David Miliband, Right: Ralph Miliband – D.M.’s grand-uncle
THE family of David Miliband, the foreign secretary, was branded untrustworthy and misleading by Home Office and Foreign Office officials when it tried to migrate to Britain, documents to be released tomorrow will reveal.
The foreign secretary will find his department thought that his father and grandfather played fast and loose with the truth and lied to immigration officers.
The government papers accuse Miliband’s late grandfather, Samuel, a Polish migrant, of exaggerating the antisemitism he faced in Belgium after the second world war in order to move to Britain. A hand-written Home Office report from March 8, 1949, doubts the Milibands’ honesty, stating: “Miliband, father and son, have so misrepresented the case in the past, I am afraid we can place no reliance on their statements.”
Samuel’s claim that he faced “Nazi” style antisemitism were dismissed as “very thin”. His son Ralph (the foreign secretary’s father) was accused by the Home Office of making repeated “misrepresentations” to support Samuel’s application.
The files also reveal that when embassy officials interviewed Samuel directly he admitted the claims of Nazi-style persecution were untrue and that he was not being expelled from Belgium.
The revelation of the way in which the foreign secretary’s forebears talked their way into Britain is particularly piquant given Labour’s record on migration. When David Miliband took up the post last year, he said immigration would remain a key issue. Since then, however, Labour has continued to preside over record levels of immigration despite concern among voters that the rate is too high.
The documents, obtained by The Sunday Times under a freedom of information request, reveal how a struggle over migration played a key part in the fortunes of the Miliband family.
When the Germans overran Belgium in May 1940, Samuel and Ralph fled because they were Jews. They were given refuge in Britain. Ralph stayed and later became an influential Marxist academic and close friends with Tony Benn and other Labour grandees until his death in 1994.
Samuel returned to Belgium in 1946. Finding his business destroyed and refused a work permit, he tried to return to Britain. Between 1948 and 1954 he applied nine times to be made a British citizen or to have six-month visas extended.
The documents, which include reports from Special Branch, show that immigration officials recorded Samuel had “misrepresented the case” when he claimed there was growing antisemitism in Belgium.
They also cast doubt on his claims that he needed to visit his son Ralph in England because the young academic was suffering “nervous depression”.
A letter sent on behalf of Ernest Bevin, then foreign secretary, in May 1948 stated: “Mr Miliband was interviewed by a representative of His Majesty’s embassy and stated there had never been any question of his expulsion from Belgium.
“The suggestion the Belgian authorities are adopting a ‘Nazi’ or antisemitic policy . . . seems to be without foundation.”
After the war, hundreds of thousands of Jewish people were left homeless and stateless and millions of people were beginning to understand the enormity of the Holocaust. In 1948, however, Belgium was under the relatively liberal rule of Paul-Henri Spaak, the Socialist.
Martin Conway, a historian at Balliol College, Oxford, said there was almost no evidence of government or police persecution of Jews in Brussels after the war. “It could not be said they were forced out of Belgium because of antisemitism,” he said.
Harold Laski, the eminent intellectual, came to the aid of the Milibands. In personal correspondence with James Chuter Ede, then home secretary, Laski asked him “as one socialist to another” to allow Samuel residency to show the world that the West was more compassionate than “the Russian way”. In the end Samuel’s application was successful.
Yesterday David Miliband and his brother Ed, the Cabinet Office minister, declined to comment. The Foreign Office said: “This is a personal matter for the foreign secretary.”
The documents have echoes of the position Michael Howard found himself in when he was Tory leader. While his party was opposed to mass immigration, Howard was forced to admit that his father had lied about his circumstances when he applied for British citizenship in 1947.
World still silent about Gaza holocaust
By our staff writer, Tehran Times, Sunday, March 9, 2008
The Zionists falsified history and exaggerated the number of Jews who died during World War II in order to justify the establishment of the Israeli entity -- and have even convinced some countries to pass laws making it a criminal offense to question the Holocaust myth -- but today the Israelis themselves are creating a holocaust in Gaza.
The recent Israeli attacks on occupied Palestinian territory have been accompanied by an increase in human rights violations and war crimes. Everyone’s life is in danger in the Gaza Strip. As one Israeli official shamelessly stated, the Zionist regime is massacring Palestinians with the intention of creating a “holocaust” in Gaza. Only two months ago, the Israeli attacks on Gaza made December 2007 the month with the highest death toll in the Gaza Strip for the year.
The newly established UN Human Rights Council censured Israel for the aggression during its sixth special session in Geneva on January 23 and 24. It also called for urgent international action to put an end to the Zionist regime’s serious human rights violations in Palestine, especially drawing attention to Israel’s military attacks on Gaza and the blockade of the region. But nothing happened.
The UN Human Rights Council also censured Israel during three other special sessions on the human rights situation in Palestine. However, despite their claims about being champions of human rights, most Western countries have refused to vote for UN resolutions condemning Israel for its attacks on Gaza. Unfortunately, such resolutions have repeatedly failed in the past because of objections by the United States and certain European countries, giving the impression that the Zionist regime can act with impunity.
Thus, with the open support of the United States, Israel launched its second major assault on the Gaza Strip in the past three months, which has caused the death of many Palestinians in the bloodiest deadliest time period since the Al-Aqsa Intifada began in September 2000. On March 1, the overall death toll in Gaza was 58, which was the highest in a single day since the beginning of the Al-Aqsa Intifada. The highest previous death toll for a single day was 38 on March 8, 2002. Over 116 Palestinians have been killed since February 27, 2008. About half of the victims were civilians, including a number of women and children.
Some of the most critically injured were sent home from Shifa Hospital, Gaza’s largest hospital, because there was no more room for them. A doctor at the hospital said that the beds crammed hospital corridors and the intensive care unit was overflowing. The doctors union urged its members to cancel leaves and appealed for blood donations. Christopher Gunness, a spokesman for the UN agency for Palestinian refugees (UNRWA), said that the UN shuttered 37 schools which it runs in northern Gaza because of the fighting, and about 40,000 students are affected. The Israelis are inflicting collective punishment on the Palestinians and pursuing a genocide policy in Gaza.
In Syria, exiled Hamas leader Khaled Mashaal described Israeli attacks against civilians in Gaza as “the real Holocaust”. Unfortunately, the United Nations Security Council, the European Union, and the organizations that claim to be defenders of human rights have all remained silent about the merciless assault on the Palestinians and the humanitarian tragedy which is unfolding in Palestine.
The UN Security Council met behind closed doors on March 1 in an emergency session held at the request of the Palestinians and their Arab supporters. The Arab League’s UN observer, Yahya Mahmassani said, “We want a condemnation of the killings from the Security Council. Regrettably, because of the United States’ objection, the Security Council failed to issue even an official statement.” The Zionist regime’s relentless air and land attack on the Gaza Strip is a clear violation of international humanitarian law and the Geneva Convention of 1949 and Israeli officials must be brought before the International Criminal Court and charged with committing war crimes.
The Zionist regime’s wanton slaughter of the people of Gaza is a new holocaust, and if the situation is not addressed immediately, the violence will most likely spill over to the rest of Palestine. After the UN Security Council’s failure to address the tragic situation in Palestine, the international community is looking to the Human Rights Council, which recently started its seventh session in Geneva, to see how this body is going to deal with the situation.
"No one is such a liar as the indignant man." - Friedrich Nietzsche
Norway refused to give Mordechai Vanunu asylum
From: Mathias Bismo firstname.lastname@example.org Date: Wed, 09 Apr 2008 16:08:38 +0200
In 2004, Norwegian authorities refused to give Mordechai Vanunu asylum in Norway, and today it was revealed that the authorities responsible were instructed by then responsible minister and now leader of the Norwegian conservative party, Erna Solberg, as it was more important to remain on good terms with Israel than to defend his human rights.
Representatives of the current government, however, now say that Vanunu should be given a new chance to seek asylum in Norway. I will not put my hopes too high, but at least it may reveal something about the "special relationship" between Norway (which provided Israel with heavy water for their nuclear weapons programme) and Israel.
For full story: http://www.aftenposten.no/english/local/article2357455.ece
From the BBC Archives
1961: Nazi war crimes trial begins
The trial has begun in Israel of the man accused of helping Hitler in his plan to exterminate the Jews. Adolf Eichmann faces 15 charges, including crimes against humanity, crimes against the Jewish people and war crimes. He sat in a bullet-proof glass dock flanked by two guards specially chosen because their families had not suffered directly at the hands of the Nazis.
The three judges hearing the case in Jerusalem were all refugees from the Nazi regime in Germany. The charges were read out in Hebrew by chief judge Mr Justice Moshe Landau and translated into German for the prisoner.
It took one hour and 15 minutes to list all the details of the charges against Adolf Eichmann during which time the 55-year-old stood stiffly in the dock.
The first issue the court dealt with was its competence to hear the Eichmann case at all. His lawyer, Dr Robert Servatius, argued that as the state of Israel did not exist at the time of the alleged offences it had no jurisdiction.
Dr Servatius said that his client was "free of guilt" and was being prosecuted for things he was drawn into by the Nazi state.
Whatever the judgement, many say it is remarkable the case against Adolf Eichmann has even been brought.
After the end of the Second World War he escaped from a prison camp and avoided facing the Nuremberg War Crimes Tribunal.
In 1950 he arrived in Argentina which was a safe haven for many Nazi war criminals. However, last year a team of Israeli secret agents abducted him and smuggled him to Israel.
From: Lasse Wilhelmson email@example.com
Date: Fri, 11 Apr 2008 08:38:58 +0200
Here is a 3-part article, "Is Zionism the ideology of The New World Order?", which might be of interest for you. The first two parts of this article were published in www.PalestineChronicle.com on this date. You are free to publish all parts or just republish the PC-version. Yours sincerely, Lasse Wilhelmson
Is Zionism the ideology of The New World Order?
By Lasse Wilhelmson
There is a debate currently taking place in Sweden concerning the national institute, Forum for Living History (FFLH). It was established by the social democrats when they were in power in 2003. Its, probably unique, undertaking is to spread knowledge and to engage predominantly young people, for “democracy, tolerance and human rights with the Holocaust as the starting point” and to create awareness of the threat posed by so-called anti-Semitism. “The Story Must be Told” they say, so that it will never occur again. Hitherto however, the FFLH has not concerned itself with The Palestinian catastrophe, Al Nakba.
The FFLH mainly supervises projects in schools and carries out dubious opinion polls
http://altahrir.blogspot.com/2006/04/are-40-percent-of-all-swedes-anti.html among the general public. It also cooperates quite overtly and shamelessly with the Zionist propaganda institute Middle East Media Research Institute – MEMRI. The head is Yigal Carmon who worked for the Israeli intelligence service 1968-88 and now appears as an expert on Anti-Semitism in Arabic and Iranian press for a Swedish governmental organisation
Hence, we have here a unique example of the production of Zionist ideology, authorised by the state and spread through official government campaigns including large amounts of ready-made material, free of charge.
FFLH has recently been commissioned by the present conservative government to carry out a new school project in 2008, concerning oppression and terror during communist regimes, mainly those of the Soviet Union, China and Cambodia.
Researchers of history have protested in an appeal, saying among other things, “(we) nurture a growing concern that history, as a school subject, is being turned into a battlefield for the government’s ideological campaigns and that the openness and critical attitudes FFLH purports to stimulate, are being threatened”.
They further question whether it is “ the task of the government to replace the normal teaching of history with campaign history, along with issuing detailed directions as to how history should be interpreted and used.” The appeal ends with a quotation from the campaign’s instructions for teachers. “In a dictatorship, the way history is told always aims at serving the state”. And, lastly, the researchers pose a rhetorical question, wondering what conclusions of all this the pupils risk making.
This initiative is commendable, but less so than if the appeal had been made when the FFLH was starting up. There have been no appeal from researchers until communism came next on the agenda for scrutiny. And why is al Nakba not among the genocides and persecutions referred to by the protesting historians? There seems to be an agreement between them and FFLH . The Story of Al Nakba Must not be Told. Obviously, the political Left must take some responsibility for this.
An illustrative example is the Swedish communist party’s foremost spokesman on the situation in Palestine. He carries out his political work in an exclusive Jewish Zionist “organisation for peace”, although as a Marxist he ought to be both an atheist and anti-Zionist. In the organisation he takes upon himself to fight “anti-Semitism” within the solidarity movement for Palestine, a movement that willingly works together with Jewish leftwing Zionists and allows them to set the agenda; as they say themselves, so as not to risk being accused of “anti-Semitism”.
The result of this cooperation is that issues of the Palestinians’ inalienable right to return from expulsion, the Jewish state, the Israeli lobby, the Ziocons, and Zionism become so-called non-questions, not only for the Palestine solidarity movement but for all anti-imperialists, for whom oil becomes the sole factor that causes all the evil in the world. This ideological Zionisering of the western world is essential for carrying on neo-colonial wars, especially those against Islam and the Arab world.
In Sweden’s largest daily tabloid newspaper, Expressen, however, a prominent liberal person of Rumanian Jewish ancestry, criticises the newly launched FFLH campaign against communism. In answer to this, I submitted the article “Comparing Zionism with Fascism is Quite in Order”, see below. A week passed, and I received the answer that the editor had had no success in trying to engage more people in the debate, not surprisingly, and that “ your article as you will understand, is no longer of current interest”.
No other newspaper or magazine has published the article and several have said that they find it too controversial, or that they lack the expertise needed to scrutinise the article which, despite this, they all find “very interesting and well written.” I could not in my wildest dreams have imagined the creativity of “radical” editors. They put forward incredibly far-fetched apologies for not publishing the article.
Apologies that went against all the publicist principles they claim to adhere to. Here follows the article:
Comparing Zionism with Fascism Is Quite in Order
On the 17th of March 2008, in the tabloid newspaper Expressen entitled “Comparing Communism with Fascism is quite in order”, Ana Maria Narti discusses the connection between ideology and practice in Communism. She maintains that Forum for Living History (FFLH) refuses to see this link, thus causing confusion rather than enlightenment. The reason behind this is that the leading campaign researcher is of the opinion that there can be no comparison between Communism and Fascism, because there was “much light” in the Communist utopia.
I am inclined to agree with Narti’s criticism, but it also applies to Fascism, or National Socialism, whose totalitarian ideologies also contained “much light”. I would go as far as to say that this is typical of all so-called ideologies, this inclusion of “much light”, and that, because of this, it is vital to make the connection to their role in society before arriving at a reasonable assessment of their merits. Not the least, because ideologies are always used to justify “much darkness”.
I am personally sceptical of all ideologies. They consist of locked dogmas that leave no room for people’s own thoughts, thus making them easier to rule and control. The significance of the media and of education as producers of ideology in today’s global world can hardly be overstated in this context. Governments also realise this, FFLH itself is an example. This should, however, in principle, make us cautious.
Independent institutes would be preferable for historical research and we already have a form for political expression in the right to build parties and in our parliamentary liberal democracy.
Narti’s article touches on the important question of the method the Swedish people choose to gain knowledge of history for purposes of prevention ie so that they are able to recognise totalitarian ideologies before it is too late, by looking at their role in society. The story must be told in order for us to prevent the recurrence of atrocities to human nature. So let as get to the roots of not only Communism but also of Zionism, another ideology born in the middle of the nineteenth century.
The fundaments of Zionism were laid down by Moses Hess, called the communist rabbi. He was one of Germany’s earliest renowned socialists and Karl Marx’s mentor in his search for socialism. He is considered by Zionists as the first Zionist and wrote the book “Rome and Jerusalem” (1862 ). In the book Hess emphasises the Jewish “race” as superior and chosen, and the Jewish religion as the best guarantee for Jewish nationality.
Theodor Hertzl is usually considered to be Zionism’s founder. Later on, he referred to Hess’s book as the one that says everything worth saying about Zionism. Hertzl presented a plan for the colonisation of Palestine in his book “The Jewish State” (1896), which was affirmed at the first Zionist congress in 1897. The Jewish “race” is seen as a people with a right to their own state in Palestine, the location of Mount Zion. The goal is a Socialist Utopia – a model state - with “light” similar to that of Communism.
The Zionist Project was further developed by Ber Beorochov who argued “territorial concentration” as a solution to the Jewish question. He founded Poale Zion, the Marxist Zionist Party which supported the Russian Revolution in 1917. Ben Gurion, one of the Party members and Israel´s founder, came to Palestine at the beginning of the twentieth century. He considered himself a Bolshevik and was in favour of the dictatorship of the proletariat in all countries, except Palestine where he favoured the dictatorship of Zionism. What, then, are the practical politics of Zionism?
The Zionist slogan ‘A land without people to a people without land’ has engineered the Jewish colonisation of Palestine for a hundred years or more. To realise its goal, a ‘Jewish State’, there is a need for a substantial majority of Jews, hence the ethnic cleansing of the people who originally lived there, a so-called lebensraum. Israel is, therefore, essentially a racist state. Jewish superiority is maintained by a system of apartheid, inherent in laws, administration and religion.
To this day, Israel lacks a constitution and official borders, entirely in keeping with Zionism’s demand for more land.
Of what was originally Palestine, 85 percent has been stolen or annexed, and the rest is occupied. In 1948, 800 000 Palestinians were driven off or fled the country, and are denied their right to return, a right laid down by the UN. The Palestinians call this the catastrophe - Al Nakba.
The West Bank consists of walled-in enclaves which are controlled by hundreds of checkpoints and Gaza has become the largest open-air prison/ghetto in the world, blockaded and suffering starvation. About 10 000 Palestinians, many of them children, are in Israeli jails without trials or judgements. Israel’s dealings with the Palestinians amount to what is formally named genocide.
Zionism puts together “Race”, People, Nation and “the Chosen” to make a National Socialist version of colonialism – “lebensraum” and “blut und boden” – and it existed as early as the nineteenth century. Later, German National Socialism was created with the same ideological components and with similar policies for society. If Nazism is the Germans’ version of National Socialism, then Zionism is the Jews’.
"I too, like Hitler, believe in the power of the blood idea"
This is written by Chaim Nachman Bailik, Israel’s national poet, in “The Present Hour” (1934).
The crimes committed by Zionism are the result of the Zionist ideology.
This story should be told, Forum for Living History.
Täby, 19th March 2008.
Lasse Wilhelmson: Partakes in the debate about the situation in the Middle East. Member of the local government of Täby for 23 years, 4 of which in an executive position. Lived in Israel for a few years in the early 1960s.
Sending the article to many newspapers and private persons in Sweden caused quite a commotion, with comments such as “but Lasse, you turn everything upside down…” or “you must have known you can’t write things like that..”. This is rather ironic, considering I have written other articles from 2003 and onwards with exactly the same content, but perhaps this time the result was all too obvious. It would seem that the reader resists taking in the facts presented, thus inhibiting thoughts from grasping the content.
Those close to me say I should be careful about what I say and write, even if it is true, because people can take offence and become sad. You know better than anyone how sensitive the ”Jewish taboo” is, they say to me. Leftwing people try to convince me that Zionism is just an invention of imperialism and that my articles contain “racist conspiracy theories”. Believe it or not, I have even been told that the issues I raise lack relevance because Jews do not really exist. That is like saying that Nazism lacks relevance because Germans do not really exist.
The Left’s indulgence towards Zionism is probably not just an expression of the fear of having “anti-Semitic” smeared all over it, or of the limitations of Marxism. Perhaps the common ground shared by the Left and Zionism is finally coming to light. It is hardly a coincidence that many neo-conservative Jewish Zionists used to be Trotskyites, or that Wall Street financed the overthrow of the Bolsheviks in Russia. Could it be, in fact, that Karl Marx and Moses Hess developed two branches of the same project, back then in the middle of the 19th century when political ideologies were beginning to take form?
The mentality of the western world, evolved since the second world war and ultimately legitimising criminal neo-colonial wars, is that “we” must defend ourselves against “them” by waging preventive warfare in the service of democracy. Our noble goals give us the moral right to treat “them”, the terrorists who are all that are against us, with no concern for existing laws or international human rights. We place ourselves above these “terrorists”. To protect our own safety, we even agree to diminish our own human rights, a dire necessity, in this noble fight for humanity. This is how it goes, this upside down morality. Racist tribe mentality for the chosen are the morals of The New World Order, totally at odds with humanity and international solidarity.
May what happened to the Jews in the Holocaust never happen again, it is the opposite of the democracy our boys and girls are risking their lives for, in peace- keeping missions around the world. “The Story Must be Told” and we must not question it, not even remotely. Those who do, are correctly imprisoned. How can they make a mockery of the dead and their families. Here, if anywhere, freedom of speech has its limits. Let us defend the Jewish state from being annihilated. Never again let “anti-Semitism” raise its ugly head. Leave no new Hitler alone, even if he happens to be a Muslim.
Hence this western mentality merges into a political ideology, or rather into a kind of religion that controls and rules the thoughts of people.
In the New World Order, the Holocaust is the new church. That is why anyone who is against us is actually an “anti-Semite” and must be imprisoned together with the “Holocaust-deniers”. FFLH in Sweden is one example of all these churches. Questioning the authority of this church is thus today the biggest of all crimes that can be committed against the New World Order.
Zionism is shown here as increasingly becoming the important tool of the New World Order. If or when its model state Israel has served its purpose, it will be sacrificed by the Power Elite who will develop the ideology needed for a single Big Brother State which will “save” the world. Crises of population and environment are already being launched to support the arguments for such a development.
Humanity is, perhaps, entering a new stage of development. A stage when people’s thoughts are becoming increasingly collective, a result of migration and the possibilities created by communicating.
We are facing a fight for human thought. Obstacles and taboos that limit it must be deconstructed. Human thought must be liberated if it is to collectively achieve the international solidarity needed to confront the Power Elite’s Big Brother society and cause its acolytes to disperse.
Lasse Wilhelmson firstname.lastname@example.org
Also by Lasse Wilhelmson:
1. Zionism as Jewish National Socialism
2. “Anti-Semitism” as a Political Weapon
3. Solidarity with Palestine in Sweden
Thursday, 10 April 2008
This is a film you MUST look at. The film, found in 2007, was made by UFA during/after Norway's capitulation to Germany in 1940, was shown for the first time ever yesterday on Norwegian TV NRK2. It is a VERY good film because it tells the truth about why Norway was occupied - the English and French were about to occupy us.
As in the rest of Western world, the Jews have stopped Norway from telling the truth. Then if Norway told the truth she would have to annul all sentences given to members of Nasjonal Samling – Quisling's party – after WWII.
All the world agrees that Norway capitulated to The Third Reich on June 10, 1940, but Norway says: WE NEVER CAPITULATED.
The agreements signed on June 10, 1940 was a regional capitulation meaning the king and the government had NOT said the high command could sign a capitulation agreement with the Third Reich. They have a lot of idiotic explanation to why two agreements were signed on that day, one in Bjoernefjell, outside Narvik, signed in the morning, and in Trondheim, signed in the afternoon. The agreement signed in Trondheim was signed by a representative of the high command of Norway, Oberstleutnant im Generalstabe R. Roscher Nielsen, and Oberst im Generalstabe Buschenhagen. I have copy of both agreements. Do you want to see them?
A Question: Have you ever heard of any Jew-lackeys agreeing to have lost to The Third Reich? And have you ever heard of anyone saying the Third Reich was honest and treated them well?
SHOAH DENIAL CONFERENCE: DAMAGE ASSESSMENT, BY JUDEA PEARL, JEWISH JOURNAL, JANUARY 29, 2007
While world Jewry recovers from the shock of Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's Holocaust conference in Tehran, emotions are slowly giving way to analysis.
Why is Ahmadinejad pursuing this foolish crusade against the Holocaust? After all, even he must know that the Holocaust is one of the most documented events in human history and, hence, that denying its reality or even questioning its magnitude and significance is likely to end up in embarrassment. Why then is he so insistent?
The three main reasons analysts cite for Ahmadinejad's obsession with the Holocaust are themselves questionable. We understand, of course, that by questioning the Holocaust, Ahmadinejad hopes to undermine what he believes was the main justification for the creation of the State of Israel in 1948.
We also accept Newsweek's Fareed Zakaria's explanation that "Iran is seeking leadership in the Middle East, and what better way to do so than by appropriating the core grievance of the Sunni Arabs: Israel."
Finally, Ahmadinejad clearly enjoys ridiculing what he sees as a European double-standard – criminalizing Holocaust deniers on the one hand and advocating free speech on the other. But these reasons, if they are the real reasons, entail heavy risks for Ahmadinejad. First, a serious risk exists that driven by all the media attention, curious, bright youngsters in Iran and Arab countries will venture to dig into the vast evidence for the Holocaust and upon realizing its magnitude and veracity, begin to ask what other parts of history were purged from their state-controlled education.
Second, promoting the Palestinian cause through Holocaust denial tarnishes the former with all the absurdities of the latter, in much the same way that post-Sept. 11 conspiracy theories have discredited Muslims and weakened their claims.
Lastly, using Holocaust denial as an instrument for delegitimizing Israel may actually backfire. Columbia professor Joseph Massad argued (Al Ahram, 2004) that Arabs' preoccupation with Holocaust denial creates the impression that the Holocaust, if it were true, suffices to justify the establishment of Israel. This, according to Massad, serves the Zionist agenda, hence, "All those in the Arab world who deny the Jewish Holocaust are in my opinion Zionists."
My concerns lie elsewhere. I fear that as the buzz winds down and the dust settles, there will be only one thing remembered from the Holocaust Conference in Tehran: Israel and the Holocaust are one. That is, Israel owes its existence to one and only one factor: European guilt over the crime of the Holocaust. Once this is established, the next obvious question is: Why should the Palestinians pay for Europe's crime?
We, of course, do not see things that way. For us, the State of Israel is the culmination of a long historical process of collective homecoming, not a rescue boat from the claws of Germany. While the Nazi genocide definitely accelerated that process, it did not initiate or redirect it.
The concepts of "Holy Land," "Shivat Zion," "Kibbutz Galuyot" -- the ingathering of the exiles -- three vital engines of Jewish history, are as old as Judaism itself. The majority of the 600,000 Jews who immigrated to Palestine prior to 1940 did not flee the Holocaust nor did the 580,000 Jews who came to Israel from Arab countries in the early 1950s.
Jews are generally aware of the immutable connection between Eretz Israel and Jewishness. We know deep down that Shimon Peres is not less indigenous to the Land of Canaan than, say, Mahmoud Abbas. Yet, we seem unwilling to openly assert it.
Take the movie, "Munich," for example, written and produced by two educated Jewish artists. While a Palestinian terrorist in the movie is shown yearning for his father's orchard, you will be wasting your time combing the script for a hint that Israeli society has any clue why they are in Israel and not, say, in Uganda. Tony Kushner knows why; he also knows that every Israeli knows why, yet he apparently did not feel comfortable enough to articulate it anywhere in his script.
I see a similar pattern in the criticism of the Holocaust Conference in Tehran. I hear tons of well-deserved condemnations of Ahmadinejad for orchestrating such an offensive conference but not one voice saying: Hey man! What a waste of time. We don't need a Shoah to justify a Jewish state on that sliver of land. Our history was born there, and our collective consciousness has remained there.
The main danger that I see emerging from Ahmadinejad's conference is that the international community, busy to rectify his misconceptions about the Holocaust, would ignore, and in fact mimic, his wanton disregard of the historical, national and religious ties that bind the Jewish people to their ancient land.
They ought to be reminded, and Ahmadinejad has given us a stage to do so.
Judea Pearl is a professor at UCLA and president of the Daniel Pearl Foundation www.danielpearl.org . He is a co-author of "I am Jewish: Personal Reflections Inspired by the Last Words of Daniel Pearl (Jewish Lights, 2004). Beginning this week, he starts a monthly column in The Jewish Journal http://www.spme.net/cgi-bin/articles.cgi?ID=1737
ON THE HOLOCAUST CONFERENCE SPONSORED BY THE GOVERNMENT OF IRAN
By Gholam Reza Afkhami and over one hundred others
The New York Review of Books, 54, 2 February, 2007, www.nybooks.com/articles/19831
To the Editors:
We the undersigned Iranians, Notwithstanding our diverse views on the Israeli–Palestinian conflict; Considering that the Nazis' coldly planned "Final Solution" and their ensuing campaign of genocide against Jews and other minorities during World War II constitute undeniable historical facts;
Deploring that the denial of these unspeakable crimes has become a propaganda tool that the Islamic Republic of Iran is using to further its own agendas;
Noting that the new brand of anti-Semitism prevalent in the Middle East today is rooted in European ideological doctrines of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, and has no precedent in Iran's history;
Emphasizing that this is not the first time that the government of the Islamic Republic of Iran has resorted to the denial and distortion of historical facts;
Recalling that this government has refused to acknowledge, among other things, its mass execution of its own citizens in 1988, when thousands of political prisoners, previously sentenced to prison terms, were secretly executed because of their beliefs;
Strongly condemn the Holocaust Conference sponsored by the government of the Islamic Republic of Iran in Tehran on December 11–12, 2006, and its attempt to falsify history;
Pay homage to the memory of the millions of Jewish and non-Jewish victims of the Holocaust, and express our empathy for the survivors of this immense tragedy as well as all other victims of crimes against humanity across the world.
Abadi, Delnaz (Filmmaker, USA), Abghari, Shahla (Professor, Life University, USA), Abghari, Siavash (Professor/Chair, Department of Business Administration, Morehouse College, USA), Afary, Janet (Faculty Scholar/Associate Professor of History, Purdue University, USA), Afkhami, Gholam Reza (Senior Scholar, Foundation for Iranian Studies, USA), Afkhami, Mahnaz (Executive Director, Foundation for Iranian Studies/Women's Rights Advocate, USA), Afshar, Mahasti (Arts/Culture Executive, USA), Afshari, Ali (Human Rights Advocate/Political Activist, USA), Ahmadi, Ramin (Associate Professor, Yale School of Medicine/Founder, Griffin Center for Health and Human Rights, USA), Akashe-Bohme, Farideh (Social Scientist/Writer, Germany), Akbari, Hamid (Human Rights Advocate/Chair/Associate Professor, Department of Management and Marketing, Northeastern Illinois University, USA), Akhavan, Payam (Jurist/Senior Fellow, Faculty of Law of McGill University, Canada), Amin, Shadi (Journalist/Women's Rights Activist, Germany), Amini, Bahman (Publisher, France), Amini, Mohammad (Writer/Political Activist, USA), Amjadi, Kurosh (Human Rights Advocate), Apick, Mary (Actress/Playwright/Producer/Human Rights Advocate, USA), Ashouri, Daryoush (Writer/Translator, France) Atri, Akbar (Student Rights and Political Activist, USA), Bagher Zadeh, Hossein (Human Rights Advocate/Former Professor, Tehran University, Great Britain), Bakhtiari, Abbas (Musician/Director, Pouya Iranian Cultural Center, France), Baradaran, Monireh (Human Rights Advocate/Writer, Germany), Behnoud, Massoud (Writer/Journalist, Great Britain), Behroozi, Jaleh (Human Rights Advocate/Iranian Mothers' Committee for Freedom, USA), Beyzaie, Niloofar (Theater Director/Playwright, Germany), Boroumand, Ali-Mohammad (Lawyer, France), Boroumand, Ladan (Historian/Research Director, Boroumand Foundation, USA), Boroumand, Roya (Historian/Human Rights Advocate, USA), Chafiq, Chahla (Sociologist/Writer/ Women's Rights Advocate, France), Dadsetan, Javad (Filmmaker), Daneshvar, Abbas (Chemist, Netherlands), Daneshvar, Hassan (Mathematician, Netherlands), Daneshvar, Reza (Writer, France), Davari, Arta (Painter, Germany), Djalili, Mohammad Reza (Professor, L'Institut Universitaire de Hautes Études Internationales, Switzerland), Ebrahimi, Farah (USA), Eskandani, Ahmad (Entrepreneur, France), Fani Yazdi, Reza (Political Activist, USA), Farahmand, Fariborz (Engineer, USA), Farssai, Fahimeh (Writer, Germany), Ghahari, Keivandokht (Historian/Journalist, Germany), Ghassemi, Farhang (Professor in Strategic Management, France), Hejazi, Ghodsi (Professor/Researcher, Frankfurt University, Germany), Hekmat, Hormoz (Human Rights Advocate/Editor, Iran Nameh, USA), Hojat, Ali (Entrepreneur/Human Rights Advocate, Great Britain), Homayoun, Dariush (Writer, Switzerland), Idjadi, Didier (Professor/Associate Mayor, France), Jahangiri, Golroch (Women's Rights Advocate, Germany), Jahanshahi, Marjan (Professor, Institute of Neurology, University College London, Great Britain), Karimi Hakkak (Director, Center for Persian Studies, University of Maryland, USA), Kazemi, Monireh (Women's Rights Advocate, Germany), Khajeh Aldin, Minoo (Painter, Germany), Khaksar, Nasim (Writer, Germany), Khazenie, Nahid (Remote Sensing Scientist/Program Director, NASA, USA), Khodaparast Santner, Zari (Landscape Architect, USA), Khonsari, Mehrdad (Political Activist, Great Britain), Khorsandi, Hadi (Poet/Writer, Great Britain), Khounani, Azar (Educator/Human Rights Advocate, USA), Mafan, Massoud (Publisher, Germany), Malakooty, Sirus (Composer/Chairman, Artists Without Frontiers, Germany), Manafzadeh, Alireza (Writer, France), Mazahery, Ahmad (Engineer/Political Activist, USA), Mazahery, Lily (Lawyer, President of the Legal Rights Institute/Human Rights Advocate, USA), Memarsadeghi, Mariam (Freedom House, USA), Mesdaghi, Iraj (Human Rights Advocate/Writer, Sweden), Milani, Abbas (Director, Iranian Studies Program, Stanford University, USA), Mohyeddin, Samira (Graduate Student, University of Toronto, Canada), Moini, Mohammadreza (Journalist/ Human Rights Advocate, RSF, France), Molavi, Afshin (Journalist, USA), Monzavi, Faeze (Women's Rights Advocate, Germany), Moradi, Golmorad (Political Scientist/Translator, Germany), Moradi, Homa (Women's Rights Advocate, Germany), Moshaver, Ziba (London Middle East Institute, SOAS, ResearchFellow, Great Britain), Moshkin-Ghalam, Shahrokh (Ballet Dancer/Actor, France), Mourim, Khosro (Sociologist, France), Mozaffari, Mehdi (Professor of Political Science, Denmark), Naficy, Majid (Poet/Writer, USA), Nafisi, Azar (Writer/Johns Hopkins University, USA), Nassehi, Reza (Human Rights Advocate/Translator, France), Pakzad, Jahan (Teacher/Researcher, France), Parham, Bagher (Writer/Translator, France), Parsipour, Shahrnush (Writer, USA), Parvin, Mohammad (Human Rights Advocate/Founding Director of Mehr/Adjunct Professor, California State University, USA), Pirnazar, Jaleh (Professor, Iranian Studies, University of California, Berkeley, USA), Pourabdollah, Farideh (Human Rights Advocate, USA), Pourabdollah, Saeid (Human Rights Advocate, USA), Rashid, Shahrouz (Poet/Writer, Germany), Royaie, Yadollah (Poet, France), Rusta, Mihan (Human Rights Advocate/Refugee Adviser, Germany), Sadr, Hamid (Writer, Austria), Sarchar, Houman (Independent Scholar, USA), Sarshar, Homa (Journalist, USA), Satrapi, Marjane (Writer, France), Sayyad, Parviz (Actor/Playwright, USA), Shahriari, Sheila (World Bank, USA), Soltani, Parvaneh (Actor/Theater Director, Great Britain), Tabari, Shahran (Journalist, Great Britain), Taghvaie, Ahmad (Founding Member, Iranian Futurist Association, USA), Toloui, Roya (Human Rights Advocate, USA), Vaziri, Hellen (Germany), Wahdat-Hagh, Wahied (Social Scientist, USA), Zarkesh Yazdi, Fathieh (Human Rights and Refugee Rights Advocate, Great Britain), Ziazie, Arsalan (Writer, Germany).
Top | Home
©-free 2008 Adelaide Institute