Do Jews Owe Anything to the Democratic Party? Any thanks or gratitude?

expanded on 27 October 2020

Of course, we owe the Democratic Party nothing. We can look at Roosevel's shameful treatment of Jews persecuted in Europe and North Africa before and during the Shoah. Then there was Jimmy Carter's hostility for Israel in the 1970s. And another low point was reached in the presidency of Barak Hussein Obama which saw support for Israel's Islamist enemies and saw the     US undermining Israel at the UN Security Council  [for example, SC Res 2334 of December 2016], in which the Obama gang worked, as it did in various venues for eight years, in favor of apartheid against Jews in the Land of Israel.

Perhaps most damning is the complicity of the revered Democratic president, Franklin Delano Roosevelt, in the Shoah. Despite the liberal and humanitarian rhetoric that poured out of FDR, his administration did not work to stop the German nazi mass murder machine nor did they do more than token acts to help Jews escape from the Nazi-fascist domain in Europe. This was true in the 1930s before the Shoah actually got started but Hitler and his gang were already persecuting Jews. It was also true during the years when the Shoah was working at high speed. 

Rabbi Eliezer Berkovits concluded in his book, Faith After the Holocaust, that Roosevelt and his government wanted the Jews to die. It certainly seems that way. 

Even in the 1930s, when German Jews wanted to leave Germany because of the persecutions, FDR's officials imposed obstacles in their way to coming to the United States. It is important to know that at that time immigration to the United States was governed by quotas for different countries. Germany had one of the biggest quotas. Yet this large quota was not filled in the years after Hitler took power [30 January 1933]. Officials of FDR's State Department put up obstacles [on this episode see books and articles by David Wyman, a non-Jew, by the way]. 

During the war, American warplanes could and did reach the area of Poland where the Auschwitz camp was located starting in August 1943 when Sicily was liberated. US  bombers then bombed industrial plants in the area of Auschwitz but not the death camps. When in 1944 Jewish leaders implored the Allies to bomb the railroad tracks that led to Auschwitz and other camps, Roosevelt and Churchill refused, makiing the usual excuses. Jewish-American Democratic politicians were of little help in pushing FDR to help save Jews.

And Roosevelt, sometimes called Saint FDR by detractors, was a Democrat, a hero to the party, and most damning about the Democratic Party is that it still holds annual celebrations to honor and commemorate Roosevelt and his ill legacy.

In subsequent posts, we will look at anti-Israel policies by Democratic presidents Carter and Obama. Recall that both were mentored by the sinister Zbigniew Brzezinski. 

Democratic Party candidate for president, Joe Biden, was a willing partner in Obama administration schemes to harass and discriminate against Jews. I had a personal encounter with Biden in 1975 and I have disliked him ever since. God willing, he will not become the president of the USA.

- - - - - - - - - - - - 

References among others:

Josiah E Dubois, Jr, The Devil's Chemists (Boston: Beacon Press 1952). Dubois was a US Treasury official who studied what the US Govt was doing to help Jews under German-Nazi control during the war, Jews who slated for mass murder by the German Nazis. Dubois issued a report under the broad sponsorship of Treasury Secretary Morgenthau entitled: "The Acquiescence of this Government in the Murder of the Jews." After the war, Dubois served as a prosecutor at the Nuremberg Trials foccusing on the case of the German chemical giant, I G Farben.

- - - - - - -about Dubois, see Rafael Medoff, Blowing the Whistle on Genocide - Josiah E. DuBois, Jr. and the Struggle for a U.S. Response to the Holocaust (Purdue U Press 2009). 

Jan Karski, The Story of a Secret State (1944). Karski was the messenger sent by the Polish national underground to the West to tell about events in German-occupied Poland, including the mass murder of Jews that he witnessed first hand. After meeting with Anthony Eden and other British leaders he went to Washington and met with President Roosevelt, among others. He spoke to FDR about various matters, the events in Poland, the starving people, the oppression, etc, he came to the situation of the Jews. He tried to tell FDR about the horrible conditions that the Jews were living under in the Warsaw Ghetto and the Belzec concentration camp [where he had visited]. But Roosevelt did not want to hear about the Jews' suffering and changed the subject.

Arthur D Morse, While Six Million Died (1968)

David Wyman, The Abandonment of the Jews (1984)

Rafael Medoff, The Jews Should Keep Quiet: Franklin D. Roosevelt, Rabbi Stephen S. Wise, and the Holocaust (2020)  here

The BBC Favors Islam & Muslims, according to Sikh Leader

BBC favoritism for Arabs and Muslims goes far back, maybe as far back as its founding in 1927. Likewise, the BBC. either openly or by omission, has long been hostile to Jews. After all, if the BBC omits from its broadcasts during the Shoah the news that organized, systematic mass murder of Jews is going on in Nazi-occupied territory, then that is obvious Judeophobia. For several reasons, but let us consider just two: If people in the BBC's home country, that is the United Kingdom, do not know about the Shoah, then they will not demand that their government do anything about it. The British Jews too may remain in the dark. Of course, it is and was the duty of the BBC to inform British people about what is going on in the world, and during WW2 in particular, to inform them of what is happening in the Nazi-ruled countries. One would think that news about the Shoah would have increased the disgust of British people for the Nazi Germans. But this cannot happen if people do not know about the ongoing Shoah.

On the other hand, during WW2 people in occupied countries often depended on BBC radio broadcasts to inform them. That included many Jews. If the Jews do not know about the ongoing Shoah, then they are not likely to take steps to save themselves or to fight the Wehrmacht and SS or the local armed forces that collaborated with the Germans, such as the SS Handschar Division which was made up of Bosnian Muslims and had been recruited  for the Germans by Haj Amin el-Husseini, the top leader of the Palestinian Arabs at the time. This SS division plus the Skanderbeg SS division, recruited among ethnic Albanian Muslims in Kossovo, were guilty for mass slaughter of Serbs, Jews and Gypsies in that order [this applies more to the Handschar, as far as I know].

At the same time, it has been BBC policy to whitewash wrongs done by Muslims, whether Arabs or Pakistanis, etc. This policy caused a minor storm lately when a leader of the Sikh religion in the UK, Lord Indarjit Singh [he is a British peer] quit his long time  participation on a  radio show focused on religion, called Thought for a Day on BBC Radio Four. Here is a summary of highlights of Lord Singh's complaints:

Celebrated interfaith activist Lord Indarjit Singh has sensationally quit BBC Radio 4 after accusing it of behaving like the "thought police". He alleges that the corporation tried to prevent him discussing a historical Sikh religious figure who stood up to Muslim oppression -- in case it caused offence to Muslims, despite a lack of complaints.
The Sikh peer, who has been a contributor on Radio Four's Thought For The Day programme for more than three decades, is also accusing Radio Four bosses of "prejudice and intolerance" and over-sensitivity in relation to its coverage of Islam, after he says he was "blocked" from discussing the forced conversion of Hindus to Islam, under the Mughal emperors in 17^th century India.

 - - - - - - - - - - - -

The segment, originally aired on November 28, 2018 -- and in spite of Singh's script containing no criticism of Islam -- is the latest in a long line of suspect BBC decisions enforced by seemingly over-zealous producers. [Gatestone Institute]

- - - - - - - - - - - - -ss
Subsequently, Lord Singh told the London Times:

 Another time "when I wanted to include the words 'the one God of us all' [central to Sikh teachings], I was told I could not mention this 'because it might offend Muslims.'" . . . . 

Of course, overlapping with the BBC's pro-Muslim favoritism is its anti-Israel hostility. See at link:
here.

Do American Jews Owe Their Votes to the Democratic Party?

expanded 11-4-2018

A number of my fellow American Jews seem to think that there is a moral imperative for them to vote for the Democratic Party. This is a tragic misunderstanding. Despite its egalitarian and inclusive rhetoric over the years, presidents and other high officials belonging to the Democratic Party have inflicted or helped to inflict incalculable harm on the Jewish people. We need only go back to the period of the German National Socialists, Hitler's Nazis, which coincided with the period of Franklin Delano Roosevelt in the USA to see how FDR --despite his liberal rhetoric-- helped the Hitler regime to consolidate itself. Meanwwhile FDR and his State Dept made it difficult for Jewish refugees to come to the USA in order to flee from Hitler & his Nazis. Even German Jews who legally should have been covered by the large immigration quota for Germany, were kept out on various pretexts. David Wyman made this very clear in his books and articles.

After WW2 began in late 1939, this policy was maintained even as the Nazi policy of mass murder of Jews had begun to be implemented. Likewise, after the USA entered the war in 1941 the policy continued although the Shoah was now operating in high gear. Yet FDR and his administration tried to suppress the information known to Washington intelligence agencies as early as 1942 about mass murder concentration camps, However, the administration did hold a briefing on the subject for congressional leaders of both parties, although no Jewish congressemen were invited as far as I know. These congressmen were clearly told that genocide was going on against the Jews. And they were asked to keep the subject secret. Nevertheless, one brave congressman, Hugh Scott of Pennsylvania ---a Republican by the way-- released the info to an activist for the Committee for a Jewish Army that wanted the USA to sponsor the creation of a Jewish army to fight the Nazis under Allied command.

Later in the war, as the knowledge of the ongoing tragedy. of the mass murder became more widely known, Jewish leaders such as Haim Weizmann tried to move Allied leaders, Churchill and FDR, to do something to help stop or alleviate the mass murder process. They suggested bombing the railroad tracks leading to the concentration camps and perhaps asked also that the crematoria and gas chambers be destroyed by Allied air power, which was possible by mid-1943 when the USA had control of Tunisia. Of course no such help was given. Not long after the American army took Sicily putting American air power even closer to the murder camps in Germany and Poland. This subject has been studied by Arthur Morse, Monty Penkower, William Perl, David Wyman [a non-Jew by the way], Yitshak Ben-Ami, and others. Dwight MacDonald [who called himself an independent Marxist at that time, I believe] published a weekly of sophisticated political commentary called Politics. MacDonald spread knowledge of the Shoah during the war among independent "leftist" intellectuals so the so-called New York intellectuals were aware of the ongoing tragedy and FDR's refusal to act to alleviate it.

Rabbi Eliezer Berkovits wrote in his book, Faith after the Holocaust, that Western leaders wanted the Jews to die. Is there another rational explanation for FDR's inaction?

So much for Saint FDR whom Democrats still honor with yearly dinners honoring him. Obama took part in those dinners.

Without going into detail about other Democratic presidents, jimmy carter and his national insecurity advisor Zbigniew Brzezinski were fairly obvious in their antisemitism, both in regard to Israel and domestically. Abroad Carter and Zbig helped to put the Khomeini regime in power in Iran. Domestically, after General George Brown made derogatory, antisemitic comments about American Jews, the Carter administration refused to dismiss him. Instead Carter worked to get rid of Jewish Democratic congressman Joshua Eilberg, who ironically represented a Pennsylvania congressional district partly overlapping the one Republican Hugh Scott had represented during WW2. Eilberg had called for Brown's dismissal.

Since they took over Iran, the ayatollahs' regime has regularly threatened to destroy Israel and has funded the Lebanese Hizbullah which has made war on Israel, shooting rockets at Israeli population centers in order to kill civilians. The mullahs' Iran also denies the Holocaust but says in so many words that another Shoah would be deserved by the Jews and Israel. This brings us to Iranian efforts to build an A-Bomb or H-Bomb, a very heartwarming effort no doubt meant to bring peace and harmony to the Middle East. This effort has  also been done in violation of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation treaty which apparently bothers very few of those who constantly refer to the notion of interanational law when it comes to vilifying Israel. In 2015 Obama announced his JCPOA, the Iran nuclear deal which left plenty of loopholes for Iran to go through in order to soon get The Bomb. One loophole is the ridiculously inadequate and ineffective inspection regime. In other words, Iran can foreclose IAEA inspectors from inspecting many of the suspect nuclear development sites in Iran.

Regarding Israel, Obama favors applying apartheid against Jews keeping them out of most or all of the Judea-Samaria region, the so-called West Bank, although all that region is part of the internationally recognized Jewish National Home [San  Remo 1920, League of Nations 1922]. That is part of the meaning of UN Security Council resolution 2334 passed when Obama was a lame duck president after the election of 2016. Obama worked hard to push that resolution through with approval of all Security Council members save for the US itself which abstained, pretending to US public opinion to be neutral on the matter. Furthermore, Obama subtly derided and defamed Israel in his speeches to the UN General Assembly. Besides that, Obama refused to identify the Jewish victims in the Hypercacher supermarket as Jews or the crime as antisemitism. Instead he called them "random folks in a deli." He repeated this offense in regard to the Pittsburgh massacre of last week by refusing to identify the victims as Jews [to quote him: "We grieve for the Americans murdered in Pittsburgh"]  although he did call for a fight against antisemitism. Of course the victims in Pittsburgh were Americans. But they were murdered because they were Jews. The problem  here is that politicians and anti-Jewish, anti-Israel ideologues define the word antisemitism to suit their own political and ideological purposes,

In light of all the above, and much much more that it would be tedious to include in this short piece, it is obvious that Jews do not owe their votes to the Democratic Party. Neither do Republicans  have a perfect record regarding Jews and Israel. Look at the Eisenhower and Nixon administrations. Jews have a right and duty to evaluate candidates based on their records on life and death Jewish issues and not just on their rhetoric, and rather than on some ignorant simplistic "universal" values while not taking real facts into account [such as Franklin Forer's screed in the Atlantic]. At this time the Republicans are more sympathetic to Jews and Israel while the Democratic Party is more and more under the sway of the Muslim woman-abuser Keith Ellison and of Linda Sarsour who seems in turn  to be the favorite of wealthy and influential movers and shakers behind the scenes.

Top Palestinian Arab Leader Collaborated with the Nazis & in the Holocaust -- PLO/PA Calls Israel "Nazi"

In another one of the outrageous and deceitful statements of the PLO and its embodiment in the "palestinian authority," the PLO/PA delegate to the UN accused Israel of acting like Nazis by calling Arab terrorists terrorists. The terrorists don't like to be called terrorists.

First, let's clear up the issue of "occupation." The PLO/PA delegate, one Riyad Mansour, claims:
". . . all colonizers, all occupiers, including those who suppressed the Warsaw [Ghetto] uprising, labeled those who resisted them as terrorists.” [i24 news TV - 4-27-2016]

As a matter of fact, Germany, Austria and Japan were occupied after World War 2. Germans (including Austro-Germans) or Japanese who resisted that occupation in any violent manner might have been called terrorists. In any case, they would have been suppressed violently and firmly. They would have found little sympathy in the world of that time, outside the Arab lands and Franco Spain, for example. Nazi German war criminals were given refuge in Egypt, Syria, Spain and several South American countries. In Egypt and Syria, Nazi veterans like Johannes van Leer obtained high positions in the state apparatus, where they often were used to work against Jews, such as making propaganda against them. The USA, USSR, UK and France were proud of occupying the former Axis powers. They were not ashamed. Russia still occupies vast expanses of pre-WW2 Japan at first occupied by its forerunner, the USSR.

Another point is that Mansour did not specifically mention the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising of 1943. Someone at i24 TV, perhaps someone ignorant of real history, inserted the word         "[Ghetto]" into Mansour's text in brackets. In fact, there was a Polish nationalist uprising in Warsaw in 1944, a year after the Jewish ghetto revolt. Maybe Mansour was referring to that revolt. Be that as it may, this Polish uprising was suppressed in blood, as the Jewish uprising had been the year before. In both cases, by the German SS and Wehrmacht. 

Now, the main problem with Mansour's words is that precisely the top leader of the Palestinian Arabs in the 1920s, 1930s, and 1940s, Haj Amin el-Husseini, was a Nazi collaborator. He spent most of the war years in the Nazi-fascist domain in Europe, with a Nazi-subsidized headquarters [by Himmler] in Berlin. He visited Auschwitz and broadcast over Radio Berlin calls to murder Jews ["Kill them wherever you find them . . . "]. He also helped recruit a SS division made up of Bosnian Muslims which was called the Handschar [after khanjar - a kind of traditional Muslim sword]. This Handschar SS division became notorious for its massacres and atrocities in Bosnia and elsewhere in Yugoslavia, Serbia, Croatia, etc.
During and after WW2, Husseini and his criminal acts were notorious in the civilized world. However, the Big Four Powers, USA, UK, USSR & France protected him from being prosecuted at Nuremberg as a war criminal, which he surely was. Indeed, Yugoslavia put him on the UN's list of war criminals but the secretary-general of the newly formed Arab League, Azzam Pasha, went to Yugoslavia and persuaded the country's new Communist dictator, Tito, to allow Husseini to go without being prosecuted or punished for his crimes in Yugoslavia [recruiting the Handschar].

It needs to also be stated that in the Spring of 1941, Husseini was in Baghdad, Iraq, then under a pro-Nazi regime where he agitated against the local Jews. This culminated in the Farhud massacre which took place in Baghdad on the Shavu`ot holiday of 1941. In Berlin, his headquarters and institute for training pro-Nazi imams included sons of most of the leading Palestinian Arab families. So Husseini's pro-Nazi crimes were not  individual acts but acts for which most of the Palestinian Arab leadership was responsible.
It is regrettable that Israeli ambassador to the UN, Danny Danon, assumed that Mansour was referring to the 1943 Jewish Warsaw Ghetto Revolt rather than the 1944 Polish uprising. On the other hand, maybe Mansour was deliberately being vague, trying to allow people to read into his words whatever they wanted. Maybe he was intimating that he recognized the Jewish Ghetto Revolt without explicitly mentioning it. Because in their Arabic-language statements, the PLO/PA does not recognize the Holocaust [nor does the Hamas]. Or only seldom. As we know, Mahmoud Abbas himself, accused the Jews/Zionists of exaggerating the numbers of Jews killed by the Nazis.

Here is the article from i24 where Danny Danon objects to Mansour's hypocritical statements:

Israeli Ambassador Danny Danon calls on the international community to condemn the comparison.

The Palestinian representitive to the United Nations on Wednesday said that Israel labels its opponents as terrorists in similar fashion to the Nazi regime's suppression of Warsaw Ghetto uprising fighters.

✕"[Israel’s] representative on the UN Security Council trying [sic] to show that all the Palestinian people who have legitimate rights to resist occupation in legitimate ways he paints them as terrorists," said Palestinian UN ambassador Riyad Mansour, speaking at a press conference in New York.

"Guess what, all colonizers, all occupiers, including those who suppressed the Warsaw [Ghetto] uprising, labeled those who resisted them as terrorists,” the Times of Israel quotes Mansour.

Israel's UN ambassador Danny Danon rejected the comparison, calling on the international community to condemn the accusation.

"Any equalization between the Nazi’s and Israeli democracy is despicable and is worthy of denunciation from the international community," Danon said.

"The Palestinians continue to lie to the world and to turn to the international community with crazy claims, rather than to fight incitement and terrorism."

GPO
"Israel's Ambassador to the UN Danny Danon speaking at an emergency meeting of the Security Council on March 14, 2016"

✕Mansour has in the past accused Israel of harvesting the organs of dead Palestinians, theTimes of Israelreports, claiming that bodies of Palestinians killed by Israeli security forces have been returned "with missing corneas and other organs." [i23 TV 4-27-2016]

. . . . . . . [the article continues at the link above]

Obama Will Not Go to the 70th Anniversary of the Liberation of the Auschwitz Murder Camp

Obama hates Jews. Why would we expect him to go? What happened to us and what is happening to us is not important to him. He did not go to the Paris march by heads of state against mass murder terrorism. Eventhough the victims in Paris were mostly non-Jews. And Kerry couldn't go, supposedly, because he was on a trip to India. Very nice. Good excuse. So why didn't Obama send vice president Biden? Biden was not busy and he doesn't have much to do anyway. He is high ranking but, as said, does not have much to do. Why didn't Obama send him?

This report is from the Washington Free Beacon. By the way, Auschwitz is called in Polish Oswiecim, a name for the place that was used fairly often 50 and 60 years ago.

Obama Will Not Attend 70th Anniversary of Auschwitz Liberation

Heads of state from France, Germany, Belgium, Austria, the Netherlands, and Denmark will be present

SHARE

TWEET

EMAIL

AP

      

BY: Daniel Wiser
January 23, 2015 5:01 pm

Treasury Secretary Jack Lew will represent the United States at the 70th anniversary ceremony for the liberation of the Auschwitz concentration camp on Tuesday—rather than President Barack Obama or Vice President Joe Biden—while other countries are slated to send their heads of state.

Tuesday’s ceremony will likely be the last major anniversary where a significant number of survivors of the Nazi camp are present. About 300 are expected to attend, and most of them are in their 90s or older than 100. Nazi authorities killed 1.1 million people at the camp, mostly Jews, which was liberated by the Soviet army in January 1945.

The New York Times reported  on the foreign dignitaries that would be present:

A preliminary list of those attending includes President François Hollande of France, President Joachim Gauck of Germany and President Heinz Fischer of Austria, as well as King Philippe of Belgium, King Willem-Alexander of the Netherlands and Crown Prince Frederik of Denmark. The United States delegation will be led by Treasury Secretary Jacob J. Lew.

President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia said he would not attend because his schedule was too crowded and because he had not received an invitation. Museum officials said no head of state had received one. Mr. Putin had attended the 60th anniversary ceremony in 2005 — it was Soviet troops, after all, who liberated the camp in 1945 — but relations between Russia and Poland have soured over the conflict in Ukraine.

British Prime Minister David Cameron visited the camp last month and toured it with the state museum director.

Bernadette Meehan, National Security Council spokeswoman, said in an email that, “President Obama will be in India, on a long-scheduled trip.”

The Obama administration faced a barrage of criticism earlier this month when it declined to send Obama or Secretary of State John Kerry to a march in Paris expressing solidarity with the victims of the Charlie Hebdo terrorist attack. The heads of Great Britain, Germany, and Israel all attended.

Two Aspects of the Holocaust to Keep in MInd

Israel commemorates the Holocaust in several days on the 28th of the month of Nisan, the month of Spring, which falls this year on the 28th of April, actually starting on the evening before, the evening of the 27th. This year, interestingly, it falls close in time to the Armenian commemoration of their genocide, which is on 24 April every year. Israel Radio [Qol Yisrael] discussed the Armenian genocide today on several programs. Right now Israel TV [channel 1] is running Claude Lanzmann's film, The Last of the Unjust.

First, an observation about the earlier genocide, the Armenian at the hands of Ottoman Empire, ruled during WW One by the Young Turks, a group of revolutionaries, supposed progressives. In fact, the formal name of the Young Turks' party was the Committee for Unity and Progress. Many Arab nationalists took inspiration from the Young Turks. Anwar Sadat's parents even named him after one of the Young Turks' leaders, Enver Pasha [Enver = the Turkish form of the Arabic name Anwar].

Although progressives, the Young Turks were imbued in their education with the values of Islam, especially the need for Islam and Muslims to dominate non-Muslims. To be sure, one Armenian historian, Raymond Kevorkian, located in France, wants to believe that the motive for the genocide was Turkish or Pan-Turanian nationalism, rather than Islam. This is very short-sighted but this is not the time to go into my reasoning.

Much has been written about the Jewish Holocaust. I now want to just stress two aspects.
1) The Holocaust was not restricted to Jews living in Europe. Thousands of Jews were sent to death camps in Europe from the North African countries of Libya and Tunisia. And the Germans set up labor camps for Jews in those countries. Pro-Nazi pogromists in Baghdad slaughtered local Jews in the Spring of 1941 in an orgy of violence and brutality called the Farhud. The numbers of Jews murdered range from 179 to 600 or more. It is a common mistake that the Holocaust was restricted to European Jews, or Jews living in Europe. However, Leon Poliakov, one of the most important Holocaust historians wrote long ago about the North African Jews caught up in the Holocaust crimes. Yet, the mistake is still made.

2) The Arab nationalist movement in its  majority was pro-Nazi. The Arab intellectuals who set up the Arab Socialist Ba`ath Party and the Syrian National Socialist Party [often called the Syrian Social Nationalist Party in order to hide its Nazi inspiration] were much interested in and great admirers of Nazi ideology, policies, power, and organization.

The chief leader of the Palestinian Arabs in the 1920s, 1930s, and 1940s, Haj Amin el-Husseini, instigated the Farhud in Baghdad, according to an Iraqi investigating committee. After two days of Farhud massacres, British troops occupied Baghdad and finally suppressed the pogrom after waiting outside the city for two days. At this point Husseini fled Baghdad and made his way through Iran and Turkey to the Nazi-fascist domain in Europe. Greece, bordering on Turkey, was already occupied. While still in Baghdad, Husseini and a small group of other Arab nationalist leaders drew up a draft political statement which they wanted Hitler to make in favor of Arab nationalist ambitions. In essence, this was really a petition to Hitler to recognize what these Arab leaders saw as their rights and interests, including the right to solve the Jewish Question in the Arab lands as it was being solved in Fascist Italy and Nazi Germany. Bernard Lewis supplies a thorough discussion of the several versions of their petition to Hitler in his book, Semites and Anti-Semites.
While in Baghdad Husseini may not have understood the full meaning of "the Final Solution." However, after speaking with Hitler in Berlin, or before, he knew that it meant genocide of the Jews. On his visit or visits to Auschwitz he was able to observe just how this Final Solution was being carried out. The Germans provided Husseini, the British-appointed Mufti of Jerusalem [1922], with a headquarters and money to support a large entourage and used him to make pro-Nazi, pro-Arab nationalist, anti-Jewish propaganda over Radio Berlin. [such as: Kill Jews wherever you find them (see Lukasz Hirszowicz, The Third Reich and the Arab East)].

In their discussion at Hitler's headquarters Hitler promised Husseini that "solving"  the Jewish Question in  the Arab lands was part of Nazi Germany's plan. Husseini, the Mufti, was "fully reassured and satisfied by the words which he had heard from the Chief of the German State. . ."  He was pleased with Hitler's promise.

Later in the war, Husseini addressed the Bosnian Muslim SS division [the Handschar, khanjar]. He told them that Nazi ideology, National Socialism, had much in common with Islam (see Joseph Schechtman's biography of Husseini, The Mufti and the Fuehrer).
- - - - - - - - - - - - - -

24 April 2014 -- Obama continues to evade recognizing the Armenian genocide as genocide. He issued  a statement that danced around a frank statement of the issue [here]. He still wants to protect Erdogan and Turkey and Islam in general.

Obama & FDR --- Who Was in Charge of the War Department during WW2 & the Holocaust?

In the Spring of election year, a young president's fancy lightly turns to thoughts of reelection. As in 2008, Obama is sweet-talking Jews, some of whom have reportedly escaped from the Democratic Party's corral because of his anti-Israel policies since his inauguration in 2009. He sweet-talked Armenian-Americans too in 2008. Once elected of course, he violated his solemn promise to them to recognize the Armenian genocide. Armenians too have escaped from the corral.

In his efforts to hold on to Jewish and other voters, Mr Promise Breaker has compared himself and had himself compared to President Franklin Delano Roosevelt, long a hero of the Democratic Party.
But if the comparison is valid, should it be seen as a merit or demerit of Obama?

That brings us to the AIPAC Conference more than a month ago. In his speech there, Prime Minister Netanyahu brought up a historic fact not known to the general public nor even to many people who consider themselves well-informed. This was the rejection by the US War Department in 1944 of a request by a Jewish organization, the World Jewish Congress, to bomb the crematoria at Auschwitz [Oswiecim in Polish] and the railway lines leading there. Such actions would have significantly delayed the ongoing mass murder process. Here is the relevant excerpt from Netanyahu's speech:

Some commentators would have you believe that stopping Iran from getting the bomb is more dangerous than letting Iran have the bomb.

They say that a military confrontation with Iran would undermine the efforts already underway, that it would be ineffective, and that it would provoke even more vindictive action by Iran. I’ve heard these arguments before. In fact, I’ve read them before. In my desk, I have copies of an exchange of letters between the World Jewish Congress and the US War Department. The year was 1944. The World Jewish Congress implored the American government to bomb Auschwitz. The reply came five days later. I want to read it to you. Such an operation could be executed only by diverting considerable air support essential to the success of our forces elsewhere…..and in any case would be of such doubtful efficacy that it would not warrant the use of our resources….And here’s the most remarkable sentence of all. And I quote: Such an effort might provoke even more vindictive action by the Germans. Think about that – “even more vindictive action” — than the Holocaust. [full text of speech here-- texts of letters to & from War Dept here]

Now just who was in charge of the executive branch of the US Government at that time, 1944? Who was ultimately responsible for the conduct of the war and for the setting of war aims? Who was the commander-in-chief of US armed forces in WW2? Yes, it was none other than the same Franklin Delano Roosevelt to whom Obama and his flunkeys compare him in order to place him on the same pedestal of idolization on which FDR has unjustly remained since his death. If the comparison is valid, it is not to Obama's credit.

This is not meant as an endorsement of Republicans. The president at the time of the Holocaust was not a Republican, however, but a Democrat. He was indeed idolized by millions of Americans including most Jews at the time. We can't know what a Republican president would have done if there had been one at the time. We do know that representatives and senators of both the Democratic & Republican parties were sympathetic to the Jews during the Shoah. One of the notable ones being Hugh Scott, a Republican representative from Pennsylvania, later a senator. Scott was instrumental in bringing news of the Holocaust to the American public through a discussion with a volunteer with the Bergson Group to whom Scott provided little known information. Yet the Dulles family, Allen, John Foster and Eleanor, who held influential offices in the US Government and were also Republicans, were not sympathetic. But clearly, Jews cannot trust Democrats, especially when their lips overflow with generalities and platitudes about stopping atrocities and genocide.

The Liberal Franklin Roosevelt Urged Keeping Vichy Anti-Jewish Laws in Place

Many, probably most, American Jews were great admirers of President Franklin Delano Roosevelt. He was considered a great Liberal. He was said to have brought America out of the Great Depression that began in 1929. He showed his Liberalism by formally recognizing the Communist Soviet Union and establishing diplomatic relations with it. He quietly helped labor unions to organize previously unorganized industries. His time was the heyday of the CIO. What most Jews were unaware of at the time or did not understand was how Roosevelt and his Administration, including some Republicans prominent in the Administration's foreign policy & foreign relations establishment (notably the Dulleses, John Foster, Allen, and their sister Eleanor), were allowing Nazi mass murder of Jews to proceed unhindered during the war that the US and Britain were fighting against Nazi Germany. Yet helping the Jews by interfering with railroad transports of Jews to the death camps, bombing the crematoria and gas chambers, supplying weapons to partisans in the forests and the ghettoes could have severely interfered with the German war effort. As we know, these actions were not taken nor was any substantial number of Jewish refugees allowed into the United States or its dependencies nor was significant pressure put on Britain to obey its commitment to foster Jewish immigration into the internationally designated Jewish National Home, Israel, instead of excluding Jews from the National Home.

Raphael Medoff has recently come up with the shocking story of how Roosevelt actually encouraged French authorities in North Africa to maintain Vichy Nazi-inspired anti-Jewish laws in effect in that region after its liberation from Vichy control in late 1942-early 1943. This info is new even to me. Its relevance for today is what Jews and Israel can expect from so-called Liberal American politicians. Obama has often been described by his own supporters and admirers as a Liberal in the grand tradition of FDR. This new revelation by Medoff shows us what the grand tradition of FDR actually meant for the freedom and the very lives of Jews.

The following is the introduction to Medoff's article by Bataween of the Point of No Return blog, followed by Medoff's own article:

At Purim in 1943, Jews in North Africa were celebrating their liberation by US troops from Vichy and Nazi occupation with their very own Megillat Hitler. But Dr Raphael Medoff, in the Jewish Journal of Los Angeles, reveals how the US authorities dragged their feet when it came to repealing the Vichy regime's anti-Jewish measures :

Among the more remarkable documents of the Holocaust is a scroll, created in North Africa in 1943, called “Megillat Hitler.” Written in the style of Megillat Esther and the Purim story, it celebrates the Allies’ liberation of Morocco, Algeria, and Tunisia, which saved the local Jewish communities from the Nazis. What the scroll’s author did not realize, however, was that at the very moment he was setting quill to parchment, those same American authorities were actually trying to keep in place the anti-Jewish legislation imposed in North Africa by the Nazis.On November 8, 1942, American and British forces invaded Nazi-occupied Morocco, Algeria, and Tunisia. It took the Allies just eight days to defeat the Germans and their Vichy French partners in the region.

For the 330,000 Jews of North Africa, the Allied conquest was heaven-sent. The Vichy regime that had ruled since the summer of 1940 had stripped the region’s Jews of their civil rights, severely restricted their entrance to schools and some professions, confiscated Jewish property, and tolerated sporadic pogroms against Jews by local Muslims. In addition, thousands of Jewish men were hauled away to forced-labor camps. President Franklin Roosevelt, in his victory announcement, pledged “the abrogation of all laws and decrees inspired by Nazi governments or Nazi ideologists.”

But there turned out to be a discrepancy between FDR’s public rhetoric and his private feelings.

On January 17, 1943, Roosevelt met in Casablanca with Major-General Charles Nogues, a leader of the new “non-Vichy” regime. When the conversation turned to the question of rights for North African Jewry, Roosevelt did not mince words: “The number of Jews engaged in the practice of the professions (law, medicine, etc) should be definitely limited to the percentage that the Jewish population in North Africa bears to the whole of the North African population… The President stated that his plan would further eliminate the specific and understandable complaints which the Germans bore toward the Jews in Germany, namely, that while they represented a small part of the population, over fifty percent of the lawyers, doctors, school teachers, college professors, etc., in Germany, were Jews.” (It is not clear how FDR came up with that wildly exaggerated statistic.)

Various Jewish communities around the world have established local Purim-style celebrations to mark their deliverance from catastrophe.

The Jews of Frankfurt, for example, would hold a “Purim Vintz” one week after Purim, in remembrance of the downfall of an antisemitic agitator in 1620. Libyan Jews traditionally organized a “Purim Ashraf” and a “Purim Bergel” to recall the rescue of Jews in those towns, in 1705 and 1795, respectively.

The Jewish community of Casablanca, for its part, declared the day of the 1942 Allied liberation “Hitler Purim,” and a local scribe, P. Hassine, created the “Megillat Hitler.” (The original is on display at the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum.) The seven chapters of the scroll poignantly blend the flavor of the tale of ancient Persia with the amazing stroke of fortune that the Jews of Casablanca had themselves just experienced. It uses phrases straight from Megillat Esther, such as “the month which was turned from sorrow to rejoicing” and “the Jews had light and gladness, joy and honor,” side by side with modern references such as “Cursed be Hitler, cursed be Mussolini.”

The Jews of North Africa had much to celebrate. But after the festivities died down, questions began to arise. The Allies permitted nearly all the original senior officials of the Vichy regime in North Africa to remain in the new government. The Vichy “Office of Jewish Affairs” continued to operate, as did the forced labor camps in which thousands of Jewish men were being held.

American Jewish leaders were loathe to publicly take issue with the Roosevelt administration, but by the spring of 1943, they began speaking out. The American Jewish Congress and World Jewish Congress charged that “the anti-Jewish legacy of the Nazis remains intact in North Africa” and urged FDR to eliminate the Vichy laws. “The spirit of the Swastika hovers over the Stars and Stripes,” Benzion Netanyahu, director of the U.S. wing of the Revisionist Zionists (and father of Israel’s current prime minister) charged. A group of Jewish GIs in Algiers protested directly to U.S. ambassador Murphy. Editorials in a number of American newspapers echoed this criticism [here]
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Rafael Medoff is director of the David Wyman Institute which specializes on research into Roosevelt Administration policy towards the Jews during the Holocaust [here]

For info on the coup d'etat --mainly carried out by Algerian Jews-- to ease the American landing at Algiers as part of Operation Torch, see:
Elliot A Green, "Jewish Anti-Nazi Resistance in Wartime Algeria," Midstream (January 1989)

British Minister Suggested a Boycott of "Settlement" Products to the "Palestinian Authority"

Anti-Zionism is the anti-imperialism of fools

We have said before that the United Kingdom is a great enemy of Israel. Of course, I realize that many British people in all four components of the kingdom, England, Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland, are sympathetic to Israel, even very sympathetic. But the British government has been hostile to Jews and Israel for many years, although this hostility is usually covered by a mist of slick hypocrisy, sanctimonious posing and the like. Yet the hostility goes back to the beginning of British mandatory rule in Israel, designated as the Jewish National Home by the San Remo Conference and the League of Nations. Since then the UK govt has perpetrated several velvet-gloved assaults on the Jews and Israel. Among the highlights are the 1939 "White Paper on Palestine," the refusal to bomb the railroad tracks leading to the death camps like Treblinka, etc., the use of the British armed forces to keep Jews out of the Jewish National Home during the Holocaust, when the Jews most needed a home, the pressure by British diplomats on southern European countries not to let Jewish refugees embark from their ports to escape Nazi genocide, the acquiescence by Britain's Foreign Office in the 1941 Farhud massacre of Jews in Baghdad, the post-WW2 refusal to let Jewish Holocaust survivors into the Jewish National Home, the encouragement to Arab states and the palestinian Arab leadership to fight against the rise of a Jewish state [as envisioned in the Jewish National Home principle]. The last item entailed supplying weapons to Arab armies and actual intervention in combat against the Jewish forces by British tanks, artillery, fighter aircraft, and ground forces.

The rise of Israel and its survival and demonstrated ability to defend itself caused great disappointment among highly placed persons in London and throughout the Empire. The failure of conventional warfare by the Arab armies in 1948-1949 led to an intensified psychological and cognitive warfare effort against the Jews and the Jewish national state. This effort culminated in production of the "palestinian people" notion, a people invented for political/diplomatic purposes, a people that had never existed in history as a people or nation. The harm done to Israel and the Jews by this invented notion is incalculable. Of course, it cannot be easily proven that British psywar experts invented the "palestinian people," but there is much evidence for this assertion.

Now British diplomacy shows once again that the UK is as hostile and dangerous for the Jews as are the Arab states as a group. The Palestinian Authority deputy minister of the economy, Abdel Hafez Nofal, revealed that the British minister of trade had suggested to him that the PA institute a boycott of products of Israeli settlements, that is, products of any Israeli community or factory or plant across the 1949 armistice line from the pre-1967 Little Israel, the rump of the Jewish National Home territory left to the Jews after the War of Independence. So a British minister recently prodded the PA into ordering a boycott by its population of Jewish products made in the wrong place, that is, on the wrong side of the armistice line. To be sure, since Arab workers too work in many of the Jewish-owned plants, we could say that the products are also Arab in part. Here is the quote:

. . . Abdel Hafez Nofal, 56 years old, Palestinian deputy minister of the Economy. He is "Mr Boycott": "Everything started when the English minister of Trade said to me, 'We have decided to boycott the products of the settlements. And you?'"
[Il Sole- 24 Ore, 22 October 2010; p12]

. . . Abdel Hafez Nofal, 56 anni, vice ministro palestinese dell'Economia. "Mister Boycott" è lui. «Tutto è incominciato quando il ministro del Commercio inglese mi disse: "Noi abbiamo deciso di boicottare i prodotti delle colonie. E voi?"
[qui]

It is not fully clear whether, when the British minister said "We have decided. . .", that the "we" referred to the British or to the EU. In any case, it is likely that the UK took the lead in the EU in pushing for a boycott.

So here we have another British effort for greater peace and greater international understanding. And treating Jews like the British govt thinks that they ought to be treated. Of course, Britain, like the Arabs, does not want to admit any wrongdoing against Jews. But if the UK admitted its ugly Holocaust record of refusing refuge to Jewish refugees from the Nazis, that might be a contribution to Middle East peace. And if not to peace, then to a greater understanding of history.

CLARIFICATION:
The statement by the PA economics minister may not be totally accurate. This is because neither the EU nor the UK has an explicit, formal policy to boycott goods produced in Jewish communities across the Green Line [the 1949-1967 armistice line]. However, it's obvious that both EU and UK are tending in that direction.The EU requires products from Judea/Samaria to be labelled as such but does not require a distinction between goods made by Jews and goods made by Arabs. On the other hand, the UK government has a "voluntary" agreement whereby foodstuffs made/grown by Jews in Judea-Samaria are labelled differently from foodstuffs made/grown by Arabs in the same area.

Further, the constant vilification of Israel in UK media --not all to be sure, but significantly on the BBC which is a state body with its policy on foreign affairs dictated by the Foreign Office-- indicates the direction of UK state policy. The Guardian, Independent [sic!] and several other UK papers specialize in vilifying Israel, often using traditional Judeophobic themes. Then several ostensibly non-governmental bodies in the UK, such as the university teachers union, advocate a boycott of Israeli universities, whereas the Trades Union Congress [TUC], I am informed, advocates a boycott of settlement products. I have no doubt that these non-governmental bodies are not only influenced by hostile UK media but by govt officials as well as govt operatives within their ranks.

Both the previous Labour govt and the present "Conservative" govt are capable of favoring a boycott of settlements as well as a total boycott of Israel, as some loud-voiced academics already advocate. These "civil society" groups provide a moral cover for any anti-Israel move by the govt itself now or in the future. The British govt may have already taken a decision to implement a boycott of settlement products at some opportune moment in the future. In such an eventuality, it would be helpful if the Palestinian Authority were already implementing such a policy so that the UK govt would not seem to be "more Arab" or "more palestinian" than the Arabs/palestinians. If such a decision has already been taken and conveyed to the PA, as Minister Nofal asserts, then his statement would be both accurate and instructive.
- - - - - - - - -
The palestinian Authority's boycott policy in action [here].
- - - - - - - - - - - - - -
The notion of a "palestinian people," previously unknown to history, including to Arab historians, has its parallels in other states/peoples/nations without a history created for political convenience by Great Powers. Consider "Panama" which was simply part of Colombia, created in order to facilitate building of the Panama Canal by the USA, and Pakistan, formed by Britain out of mainly Muslim regions of India, to fulfill the demand of the Indian Muslims for a separate state so as not to be ruled by Hindus who were the majority in India.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Other links on British hostility to Israel and Jews.
here1&here2&here3&here4&here5&here6&here7&here8
&here9&here10

Some Ideas for Bibi on What to Say about Peace to Obama & the World

Benyamin Netanyahu, Israel's prime minister, should say a number of things to the world and Obama in his upcoming speech. He should take into consideration that some of Obama's lies and misrepresentations and distortions in the Cairo speech need to be countered.

1- He should stress the long Jewish/Israelite history in the Land of Israel going back more than 3,000 years. The kingdom of David was established around the year 1000 BCE. Jews have always lived in the Land despite massacres --mass slaughter-- by Roman and Byzantine armies, Arab invaders and occupiers [who defeated the Byzantines], and Crusaders. Jews in Exile have always tried to return to the Land when possible.

2-- It is true that Jews suffered persecution in many parts of the world, certainly in Christendom and Islam, although maybe not everywhere as Obama said in Cairo. It is also true that Jews suffered the Holocaust as a kind of culmination of centuries of Judeophobia. But Obama should not be allowed to exculpate the Arabs from guilt either for centuries of oppression/persecution/humiliation/economic exploitation of Jews or for collaboration in the Holocaust. Bibi might add that all non-Muslims under Islamic rule suffered oppression mandated by Islamic law.

3-- Arab collaboration with the Nazis and in the Holocaust was widespread among the Arab nationalists, but one man, Haj Amin el-Husseini, is emblematic of this collaboration. Husseini [Husayni] was the British-appointed mufti of Jerusalem and head of the British-created Supreme Muslim Council. The British tolerated his attacks on Jews --perpetrated by his followers-- in the 1920s and 1930s and even encouraged them. The British also enlarged the scope of Hitler's victims by preventing Jews from escaping from the Nazi-controlled domain in Europe. Hence, the British violated the international commitment they had made to the League of Nations to facilitate development of the Jewish National Home. Like Obama and his administration today, who rail against "Jewish settlements," the British forbid Jews to buy real estate in most of the Jewish National Home. The UK violated international law in harming Jews and their rights and violated their commitment to the Jewish people. How can Israel trust the UK or its cultural offshoot, the English-speaking USA? Neither power did anything major to save Jews during the Holocaust, whereas the British deliberately prevented escape.

4-- Hamas and Hizbullah, which the Obama administration wants to chat with, have clearly stated Nazi principles regarding the Jews. Hamas openly advocates genocide of Jews in its charter, Article 7. The German Nazis never openly advocated genocide of Jews. Hamas and Hizbullah must be taken at their world.

5-- It seems that the Obama administration is trying to disavow commitments made to Israel by previous administrations in return for Israeli concessions. Obama is trying to bury his forerunner Bush's understandings with Israel about the legitimacy of Jewish settlement in Judea-Samaria.

British Subject in Samaria Refuses to Host the Queen

A British Royal Subject Living in Samaria Tells the Queen that She Is Not Welcome while Her Government Tries to Choke the Jews Economically while Denying Jewish Human and National Rights

The British position is in fact Racist. It continues the British policy during the Mandate period in Israel and during the Holocaust to keep Jews out of Judea-Samaria and to allow/encourage the Arabs to drive out the Jews who were already there, especially as expressed in the 1939 White Paper policy. Of course, British policy encouraged Arabs to kill Jews in Baghdad [1941] and during the War of Independence [1947-1949], sending British troops to fight on the side of the Arabs. The official British information policy was to suppress news of the Holocaust as it was happening and could have been alleviated.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Your Majesty, You're Not Welcome

By edict of a subject of Her Britannic Majesty, Queen Elizabeth II

Item: The British Embassy in Tel Aviv has decided to boycott Israeli
companies that invest in Judea and Samaria.

Your Majesty, one of your Ambassadors, Tom Phillips, who represents you in Israel, has recently decided that he would boycott the Kirya Tower in Tel Aviv, because it is partly owned by Africa-Israel whose owner, Lev Levayev, also owns a subsidiary company that has built homes in Judea and Samaria.

Now, I must confess that I am not entirely surprised: the same ambassador, His Excellency Tom Phillips, decided back in July of last year that, even though I am still a British citizen, a subject of the Crown, I am no longer fit to be represented by him, when His Excellency decided to ban "settlers" from British Embassy functions. That is to say, I no longer enjoy your royal protection.

You see, I live in Kfar Tapuach, a "settlement" in the "Israeli-occupied West Bank". To be more precise, I live in the heart of Samaria, just a few miles due south of Shechem. When I go running with my dog to the small hill a few dozen yards from my house, we overlook the city that the Arab occupiers call "Nablus". Because I chose to make my home here, where my ancestors lived millennia ago, I am no longer worthy of the words inscribed in my British passport: "Her Britannic Majesty's Secretary of State requests and requires in the name of Her Majesty all
those whom it may concern to allow the bearer to pass freely without let or hindrance, and afford the bearer such assistance and protection as may be necessary". Unless - we should now add - the bearer happens to be an Israelite living in the heartland of Biblical Israel.

Well, with all due respect to Your Majesty and to His Excellency the British Ambassador to Israel, I am not exactly devastated by the blow. I never really expected your diplomatic services or security forces to look after me or my people, whether in the "West Bank," or "Israel proper," or anywhere else in the world.

I know that Britain was the only country in the entire world to voluntarily declare war against Nazi Germany, and I am aware of Britain's magnificent, impressive war effort during those hideously dark years - a record that will forever stand to Britain's credit - but still, Britain's record concerning Jews during the Holocaust is somewhat dismal. I am too weary to detail, once again, the Royal Air Force's refusal to bomb the railway lines taking Jews to the Nazi death camps even while bombing more distant targets; Martin Gilbert, in Auschwitz and the Allies, has documented this sorry episode far better than I could.

Are you aware that the entire British Empire accepted fewer Jewish refugees than the port of Shanghai? And do you remember the restrictions that the government of your father, King George VI, placed on Jews from Reich-occupied countries finding refuge in Britain? Again, I know that Britain's record in that regard is far better than that of most other countries, but it's not as if there was very stiff competition.

And do you remember that your father's government fought bitterly against Jewish independence anywhere in the Land of Israel? Are you even aware that during and after the Holocaust, when more than ever we needed refuge, and at a time when the God of Israel granted your father the infinite privilege of ruling over the Holy Land, the Royal Navy patrolled these shores to ensure that the survivors of Hitler's accursed inferno would not be allowed home? Are you aware that when the British Army left Haifa, Jaffa, Tzfat (Safed), Lod (Lydda), Ramle, and other places in 1948, they turned the police fortresses with their armouries and weapons over to the Arab forces?

As I said, I am not particularly surprised that His Excellency the British Ambassador is not entirely enamoured of what we Jews are doing today in your former colony.

I look over Shechem - the city where, three and a half millennia ago, when your ancestors in England were still living in trees and painting their faces with woad, my great-great- great (however many times over) grandfather Jacob saw his sons, Shimon (Simeon) and Levi, declare war against the entire city of Shechem because their prince dared to rape their sister Dinah. I needn't go into the gory details here, because it's clearly written in my people's national history book - Genesis, Chapter 34. (In 1611, your ancestor, King James I, commissioned an English translation of my people's holy book, so Your Majesty should have no difficulty reading the text.)

Ever since that day, 3,500 years ago, we have known to rely on no one's protection but our own and God's. It is an interesting concept of time and of history: your roots in England go back to 1066 - almost a thousand years; a history of which to be justifiably proud. Yet when your history was just beginning, our roots were already buried more than 2,500 years deep in Shechem. In fact, the village in which I live, Kfar Tapuach, gets its first mention in the Bible; again, look it up in Joshua 12:17, 16:8, 17:7, and plenty of other places. You see, my people's historical and geographical record pinpointed the location of Kfar Tapuach, and delineated the borders of our Holy Land, and defined the borders of the territory of each of the twelve Tribes of Israel well
over 2,000 years before the Domesday Book was ever compiled.

Well, I suppose that I, and hundreds of thousands of other Jews here in our Holy Land, will just have to get used to the idea that you and your kingdom find the idea of Jews settling their own land most distasteful. Very well, so be it. But I have to tell you, unaccustomed as I am to taking so discourteous a tone to Your Majesty, so long as this policy continues you are no longer welcome in my house here in Kfar Tapuach.

Your government's ideology concerning the appropriate location of Jews in Israel affects me about as much as my proclamation affects you. We will continue to live where we want in Israel, we will continue to build, we will continue to settle our Land as and where we want. Your father's army, navy and air force were unable to prevent us from building our national home even when Britannia ruled the waves and controlled the skies around these parts. Today, the British Empire is but a distant memory and your influence here is even lower than Ehud Olmert's credibility.

I understand that you and your government are anxious to appease the Muslims. On reflection, that's probably a wise policy. As much as we Jews had a written history in Shechem back when your ancestors in England were still living in trees, we will still be living here, building our Land and bringing sacrifices and singing psalms to God in our Holy Temple, long after your descendants will be living as dhimmis in the Islamic Republic of Englandistan.

Adar 12, 5769 / 08 March 2009
~=~=~=~=~=~= ~=~=
IRA L. JACOBSON
- - - - - - - - - - - - - -
[hat tip Sanda Lam]
- - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Unfortunately, Mr Jacobson is too confident that British influence in Israel is low. It is too high. Just consider that a few weeks ago Tony Blair somehow persuaded Ehud Barak, minister of defense, to allow British agent Gerry Adams, who masquerades as an Irish anti-imperialist, into Gaza in order to meet with Hamas for a photo op meant to humanize and defumigate those Nazi murderers.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - -
There have been quite a few encouraging archeological developments recently but I have not had the time to sort them out and report them. Will try soon although the usual political/diplomatic crisis keeps me busy.

Tony Blair Supports Hamas Officially -- Gerry Adams of the IRA [Sinn Fein] now officially a British agent

Peace --the last refuge of the scoundrel
Eliyahu m'Tsiyon [circa 2007]

Tony Blair is the former two-faced prime minister of the UK, called Tony Phoney by his fellow Britishers. After leaving his PM's office, he was appointed as envoy to the "peace process" [that is, to Israel and the palestinian authority] by the Quartet to see how its "Road Map to peace" was being implemented. Yet, true to form, Tony Phoney has disregarded those items in the "Road Map" that required corrective action by the PA. Moreover, he has shown his contempt for peace by promoting the anti-peace Hamas whose very charter openly calls on Muslims to kill Jews. That is, Blair aids a genocidal Islamic jihad gang. One way that he helped them very recently was to intervene with the Israeli government to allow one Gerry Adams into Gaza in order to have a photo op with Hamas leaders and proclaim his "solidarity" with them. Our foreign ministry had wisely --for once-- opposed letting Adams into Gaza, understanding what he was likely to do. Thwarted by the Foreign Ministry, Blair turned to Defense Minister Barak [Labor Party] who complied with Blair's hysterical urgings:

Tony Blair intervened directly with Defense Minister Ehud Barak to enable Northern Ireland politician Gerry Adams through the Erez Crossing and into the Gaza Strip on Wednesday, where he met Hamas Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh, The Jerusalem Post has learned.

The decision to let Adams into the Gaza Strip came against recommendations by the Foreign Ministry, which had urged that Israel not facilitate his passage because he was unwilling to promise not to meet with Hamas representatives.

The Foreign Ministry was concerned that high profile meetings of international politicians with Hamas would only grant the organization legitimacy.

Defense officials said the decision to allow Adams into Gaza was taken by Barak after Blair brought a personal request to him during a meeting earlier this week.

The officials said Blair had told Barak that Adams, the leader of the Irish Republican Army-linked Sinn Fein party, had experience as a mediator, and could pass messages and act as a go-between for Israel and Hamas.

Israeli officials refused to meet with Adams because he was willing to meet with Hamas representatives.

Adams is scheduled to go to Ramallah for talks on Friday.

Adams's meeting with Haniyeh, at an undisclosed location in Gaza City, was not announced ahead of time.

TV footage from a local news outlet showed Adams sitting in an armchair next to Haniyeh. "We want to help. We support the Palestinian people," Adams said. [read more here in Jerusalem Post 4-9-2009]

Blair has been working to promote Hamas as a partner for peace since at least 2002, through his operative in Israel, the appropriately named Alistair Crooke [for more on blair & hamas see here & here]. So we see that Blair is a lover of Hamas, or perhaps he sees Hamas as a convenient tool for helping the Arabs finish Hitler's work, whereas the UK was a silent partner in the Holocaust in the 1930s & 1940s [see earlier posts on the Emet m'Tsiyon blog]. The Hamas quite frankly declares genocide of the Jews to be its goal in its charter, see especially Article 7. This article quotes a medieval Muslim fable from the Hadith in which rocks and trees call on Muslims to kill Jews at the End of Days.

Meanwhile, Gerry Adams, the smooth, oily spokesman for the IRA under the rubric of the Sinn Fein political party demonstrates that he is an agent of British anti-Israel, Judeophobic policy. After all, Blair understood very well what Israel's Foreign Ministry also understood, that Adams would use his visit to Gaza to promote the Hamas. So, for all his anti-imperialist pretensions, Adams works for the same goals regarding Israel and the Jews as does the British Empire. Adams is an agent. Coincidentally, a few days ago, British foreign minister Miliband was in Rabat-Ammon [Amman] in Jordan, complaining that the Jerusalem municipality was wrongly demolishing illegally built Arab houses in the city, not mentioning that the municipality also demolishes illegally built Jewish houses and other structures. This means that Miliband was denying the Jewish right of sovereignty over Jerusalem, a city that owes its importance to the world to its place in Israelite/Jewish history and religion. It is a city where Jews have been the majority since 1853, at least, and that was in the Old City, which was the whole city at that time. Miliband also pretends not to know that the Arab forces, including the British-officered Arab Legion of Jordan [then Transjordan] drove Jews out of parts of Jerusalem that they captured in 1947-1948, including the Old City with its ancient Jewish holy sites & medieval Jewish Quarter. Jews could not return to their homes after that war, ended by an armistice accord in 1949. This part of Jerusalem was Judenrein for 19 years until Israeli forces retook it in 1967, allowing Jews to live there once again. Arab spokespersons have the hhutspah to call that area "traditionally Arab East Jerusalem." Judeophobic Britain denies Jewish rights of residence there, whereas British forces helped the Arabs to drive out the Jews from there in 1947-1948. So the policy of the UK has not changed in 61 years regarding Jewish rights of residence in Jerusalem.
- - - - - - - - -
More on British anti-Israel intrigue: Bill Rammell, a British minister of state, said that the Obama administration is "comfortable" with British overtures to the Nazi Hizbullah [I call them Nazis because they espouse Nazi-like views of the Jewish people]. See Jerusalem Post, 4-5-2009 [based AP report] & Aurora [Spanish-language Israeli weekly 4 (7-15) 2009].