Kasztner - Debating with Zionist Collaborator Mad Mikey Ezra

Well it was an excellent meeting held by Green Left at SOAS on the subject ‘Jewish Perspectives on anti-Zionism’. (see below) A couple of Zionists, including one ‘Mad’ Mikey Ezra [MME] and a couple of friends turned up, but although one of his friends had the courage to tackle me strangely MME, was totally silent, fiddling with his mobile (or something anyway!).

Although quite brave on the internet, MME is quite a coward at public meetings clearly being afraid to be shown up. He did the same at a Lenni Brenner meeting 18 months ago and when he tried to speak to Lenni afterwards was told to get lost because he'd badmouthed Lenni for not having gone to a university (whilst at the same time asking for help!). Elitism doesn't die it just takes on the jaded colours of 'left' Zionism. However Mikey is on the periphery of the ‘Trotskyist’ Zionist group, Alliance for Workers Liberty in Britain which probably says something about that group.

In a recent debate on Socialist Unity about the meeting, MME sought to indulge his favourite pastime - defending the record of the leader of the Zionist movement in Hungary (actually a minority of the movement!) Rudolph Kasztner, who in return for his silence over Auschwitz was allowed to organise a train of the Prominents carrying 1,684 people out of Germany to Switzerland, via Belsen-Bergen. After the war Kasztner hurried along to Nuremburg in order to testify in support of the Nazis he'd worked with. Not as an individual, but as the representative in Hungary of the Jewish Agency, the Palestine wing of the World Zionist Organisation.

I post my reply below and beneath that the original post from MME:

Reply to a Collaborator with Atzmon and defender of Kasztner

I am accused of distorting the truth, well I shall leave it to others to judge!

1. MME accuses me of 'lying' i.e. deliberately telling an untruth, because .5 million rather than .45 million Hungarian Jews died. But historians of the Holocaust cannot be exact because numbers were never recorded, either of those murdered or of those who escaped. Hilberg believes 5.1 millions died, the figure quoted as if it were sacred by the Zionists is 6 million. The truth is noone can know exactly how many died. Indeed Mikey gives a good demonstration of why this only plays into the hands of the Holocaust deniers who are quite able to notice the different totals given by different historians and then use those discrepancies to ‘prove’ how the Holocaust never happened, because they can’t even get the numbers of those murdered right. In fact it is a totally irrelevant point, what matters is that anyone died in the gas chambers or on the steppes of Russia. But if MME wants to say that the Zionists betrayed half a million rather than 450,000 I'm inclined to accept his word.

2. Yes I claimed that about 200,000 Hungarian Jews survived. Some 50,000 from the Labour Brigades and also those who fled, despite Zionist advice, over the Romanian border and about 150,000 in Budapest itself (where the Nyilas fascists killed about 50,000). Mikey being his usual dishonest self, gives us a link to to 'prove' that 255,000 survived. Well again this is, and has to be a matter of conjecture. But having gone to the link, guess what? Clearly MME can’t read or he doesn't understand the very article he refers us to or he is just lying again! Sure it mentions that 255,000 survived but the article also says that 'About 190,000 of these were residents of Hungary in its 1920 borders.' That is ten thousand less than I said survived of Hungary’s Jewish inhabitants! It would help if Mikey could read what he quotes! And the difference? Until 1944 Hungary had been a sanctuary for Jews who managed to escape from all over Europe – Austria, Bohemia and Moravia and Slovakia in particular. It is widely accepted that the pre-war Jewish population of Hungary was about 700,000 so if .5 million died then 200,000 survived.

Of course this is all irrelevant because what matters is the fact that anyone was annihilated in the gas chambers. But when your whole political project depends on exploiting the holocaust to provide you with reparations, which you then deny to the intended recipients - the Jews who survived the Holocaust - then numbers are important. See:

Just 10 of 66,000 Holocaust survivors' heirs get assets back relating to the assets of holocaust victims held in Israel. Or try or how about Yediot Aharanot on-line, entitled 'Struggling Survivors - Holocaust survivors accuse State of stealing their welfare funds'. This is the real scandal that sycophants like MME try to defend.

3. Yes the trial of Kasztner reached the Israeli Supreme Court and 2 of the 5 judges found the arguments of Kasztner's opponents quite persuasive, but the other 3 Judges found for the State. The argument of Kastner's lawyer, Attorney General Chaim Cohen was to the effect that 'if you find Kastner guilty of collaboration then you find the founders of the State likewise guilty'. In fact on one charge the Supreme Court did find the accusation of collaboration proven - Kastner had gone to the Nuremburg trial to exonerate his old friend, Waffen SS Col. Becher, which he did. In fact it later turned out that not only had he given testimony in favour of Becher, but he had also given testimony in favour of Dieter Wisliceny, the butcher of Slovakian Jewry, who was hanged in Bratislava after the war and his deputy Krumey - another SS henchmen and Waffen SS General Hans Juttner. If Mikey doesn't think this is collaboration, regardless of what the placemen of the Israeli Supreme Court say, then it just goes to show that his loyalty to the institutions of the Zionist State are higher than his alleged concerns for the victims of the Holocaust.

In fact we all, i.e. all socialists, know that courts are not neutral and in times danger to the state will act accordingly. But nonetheless the Israeli Supreme Court upheld all the findings of the Jerusalem District Court, which in turn, under Judge Benjamin Halevi, had held that all but one of the accusations of collaboration against Kastner by Malchiel Greenwald were proved. As Judge Goiten stated:
'It is enough that he (Kastner's accuser - Greenwald) has managed to convince the lower court, who fulfilled the task of jury and judge alike... However the facts which were revealed substantiate the findings of the lower court and prevent us as a court of appeal from intervening. I should add also that the evidence that was brought and which is not argued against by anybody on the Kastner-Becher relations after the war and the collaboration of Kastner by rescuing Becher from the gallows do not coincide with viewing Kastner as a National Jewish Zionist personality; and coincide with the findings of the lower court - that the acts committed during the war were acts of collaboration with the Nazis.'
Judge Moshe Silberg was even more forthright:
'We can sum up with these 3 facts:
A. That the Nazis didn't want to have a great revolt - 'Second Warsaw'.... [which Eichmann later confirmed in an interview]
B. That the most efficient means to paralyse the resistance wheel or the escape of a victim is to conceal from him the plot of the coming murder....
C. That he, Kastner, in order to carry out the rescue plan for the few prominents, fulfilled knowingly and without good faith the said desire of the Nazis, thus expediting the work of exterminating the masses.'

In fact Judge Goiten, although he believed and stated that Kastner was a collaborator, nonetheless voted for his acquittal on technical grounds essentially that since the Defendant, Malchiel Greenwald had not proved the truth of all his allegations, that Kastner had dressed up in SS uniform to visit Auschwitz and had financially benefited from his collaboration, it would be artificial to split up the charges of libel. This was also the opinion of Justice Olshan, President of the Court.

More importantly than Israeli judges, who have distinguished themselves by their support for the actions of the Israeli military in the occupation of the last 40 years or who endorsed the position of their fellow Judge Landau in accepting the use of ‘moderate physical’ pressure, i.e. torture by the Israeli military, who have accepted every human rights abuse against the Palestinians, systematic discrimination against Israeli Palestinians etc. was the fact that numerous witnesses who testified in the trial were themselves Hungarian holocaust survivors. They had no doubt about Kastner’s guilt. People like Levi Blum, from Kastner’s own birthplace of Cluj (Kolosvar). So when it comes to a choice between a collaborator and the Jewish survivors of the Hungarian holocaust Mikey chooses the former.

4&5. Mikey denies he is good friends with Gilad Atzmon and a minor collaborator. But he is caught on his own petard, to wit, when asked to dig up information on a fellow anti-Zionist comrade, Roland Rance, what does Mikey say to Atzmon? Piss off? Get lost? Do your own dirty work? This is what he actually wrote:

‘I have been very busy digging up stuff on Tony Greenstein - Roland Rance will have to wait for another day.
Mikey 03.12.07 - 8:53 pm #
‘Mikey, I hope you do not mind me saying that, but your contribution for the pls solidarity movement is priceless. It is crucial that we all know about the racist record of this Greenpiss, a man who was banned time after time for being a racist and an anti Semite!…
However, Good luck with Greenie and thanks for all the info you gave us about this low being.’
Gilad Atzmon 03.04.07 - 10:46 am #

However much Mikey wriggles he’s caught on the hook of his own words.
And we learn from David Taube that ‘Last week, Mikey invited me for a drink with Gilad Atzmon. Mikey's thoughts on Gilad and his worldview follow, below….’ I’ll spare people the gory details.

6. Yehuda Bauer is not reliable on when the Auschwitz Protocols, definitively revealing the existence of Auschwitz, were handed to Kastner, representative of the Zionists and the Jewish Agency in Hungary. According to Zionist and Yad Vashem historian, Yisrael Guttman,

Kasztner was given a copy of the report on 29 April 1944… but at that time he had already made a decision, together with other Jewish leaders, choosing not to disseminate the report in order not to harm the negotiations with the Nazis.

Shoah Vezikaron, cited in Ruth Linn’s ‘Escaping Auschwitz – A Culture of Forgetting’ p.72.

Incidentally even Bauer, dedicated Zionist historian though he is, makes the same estimation in his ‘Jews for Sale?’ pp. 156-7. The reality is that, as even Guttman acknowledges, news of Auschwitz was suppressed in order that the Zionist and Jewish elite could escape whilst half a million were burnt and gassed. And Mikey considers this is not collaboration? Perhaps he would enlighten us as to what he does consider collaboration?

7. Rudolph Vrba, a member of the Auschwitz Underground, who together with Alfred Wetzler, was the 2nd Jewish escapee from Auschwitz, someone who received the highest medal for bravery when fighting in the Slovakian Uprising against the Nazis, is apparently ‘unreliable’ – unlike Mikey. That is why all mention of Vrba was suppressed in Israel from high school holocaust texts, why Vrba and Wetzler were referred to as the 2 Jewish Slovak escapees rather than by name, why the Hungarian translation of the Protocols was hidden away at Yad Vashem and not catalogued separately, why Vrba was deliberately not invited (along with the last surviving commander of the Warsaw Ghetto Resistance, Marek Edelman) to testify at the Eichmann trial. And why were they unreliable? Because these Jewish heroes were not Zionists, were not collaborators, unlike Kasztner and in his own, trivial and pathetic way, Mikey.

The Hungarian Zionist Rescue & Relief Committee worked hand in hand with the Nazi appointed Judenrat. To most Hungarians it would have been indistinguishable. The Judenrat helped with the round up of Jews to the concentration areas, brickyards mainly, prior to deportation. The Rescue & Relief Committee likewise worked with them, ensuring that Jews were kept ignorant of their fate, and threatening the leaderships of those communities if they didn’t accept the central control of the Judenrat. It is a technical ‘mistake’ of no consequence. Vrba’s Report is credited with the saving of 200,000 Jews. Kasztner ‘saved’ 1,684 at the expense of half a million, yet Mikey considers his collaborator hero ‘reliable’.

8. The term ‘Prominents’ to describe the passengers of the Zionist train out of Hungary is that of Kasztner himself in his Report to his employers, the Jewish Agency. Some of the Zionists, being a petit-bourgeois movement were undoubtedly cooks, bakers, butchers and candlestick makers. We are talking about the political elite of Hungarian Jewry. That didn’t debar them from leadership since the big capitalists like the Manfred Weisses negotiated their own rescue via the aforesaid Kurt Becher. http://azvsas.blogspot.com/2008/06/zionist-collaboration-in-hungary-mike.html

9. Mikey claims that it is a blatant lie that ‘Kasztner does not mention the Auschwitz Protocols." Yes he paraphrases from the Report, but doesn’t mention the Report itself, viz. in its references to ‘Hungarian salami’ which was or should have been in the Auschwitz Protocols but which the Slovakian Zionist leaders omitted to insert. But let us see what the acknowledged historian of the Hungarian holocaust, Randolph Braham in the Politics of Genocide has to say:
‘Shortly after liberation, Kasztner brought out a detailed though self-serving report on the wartime activities of the Budapest Rescue Committee. In it, he provides both direct and indirect evidence that he and his colleagues on the Committee were fully aware of the draconic measures that had been adopted against the Jews in Nazi-occupied Europe. He is basically silent about their failure to inform Hungarian Jewry.’ (my emphasis) p. 706.

And Braham, who is himself a critical Zionist, asks a little further on:

‘Why were the Protocols not forwarded to these leaders of the world soon after they were completed on April 26? Why were the Hungarian Jewish masses not alerted about their content? What would have been the consequence had they been alerted before the deportations?… It is safe to assume that Krasznyansky’s recollection about Kasztner’s visit to Bratislava late in April 1944 and about his receiving a copy of the original German text there is correct…. Given the evidence that at the time of the German occupation of Hungary both Kasztner and the official leaders of Hungarian Jewry were aware of the Nazis’ extermination program, how can one explain their silence?’ pp. 718-9.

And this, of course, not Mikey’s pathological nitpicking, is the real question. Why were the Zionist leaders in Hungary, representatives of the Jewish Agency, silent? What did they hope to gain? The answer is all too obvious.

And let us also be clear. Whilst Kasztner was the big shot, the representative of the Jewish Agency, the Palestinian wing of the World Zionist Organisation, there were dissident Zionists, e.g. Moshe Krausz and Joel Brand, who desperately wanted to save their fellow Jews. Not because they were Zionists, if anything despite it. The reality is that Raoul Wallenberg and the other diplomats, including the Papal Nuncio, saved far more than the Zionists and they didn’t in the process help the Nazis in the destruction process.

10. Mikey tells us that ‘Whilst it is true that Kasztner gave testimonies or evidence in support of certain Nazi criminals, he also gave evidence against others.’ Well that makes it ok then!! He alleges that Kasztner made other statements leading to the conviction of other Nazi War Criminals. Not so. Mikey argues that ‘Kasztner stated in his report that Eichmann was determined that not a single Jew should survive.’ And so? Eichmann was not on trial at Nuremburg so this was a safe statement to make!! In fact it is not true because Eichmann was quite happy to help Kasztner ‘save’ a few Jews at the expense of the thousands. Kasztner was able to travel around Hungary, didn’t have to wear a yellow star and ended up sojourning in Berlin in a hotel. There is incidentally evidence that more than the 4 war criminals above, murderers of hundreds of thousands of Jews, were given supportive testimony by Kasztner e.g. Kettlitz, the purchasing agent for Becher. As Dr Robert Kempner, an American prosecutor at Nuremburg explained vs Kasztner:

‘Yes, I invited Kastner from Tel-Aviv to Nuremburg as a witness for the prosecution. Immediately after his arrival I regretted this invitation. Apart from the fact that he turned out to be a very expensive witness… a curious situation developed. We were, after all, the authorities of the prosecution. I consider it my duty to state explicitly that Kastner roamed the Nazi prison camp for Nazi Officers searching for those he could help by testimony or intervention on their behalf. In the end we were very glad when he left Nurenberg.’

Hansi and Joel Brand, Satan and the Soul, Tel Aviv 1960 p.107. cited by Akiva Orr ‘The Kastner Case, Jerusalem 1955’ pp. 97-8, Perdition – A Play in 2 Acts by Jim Allen.

11. MME infers that I distinguish between Zionist and anti-Zionist Jews who were exterminated. Nonsense of course, I merely point out that the Jews of Ukraine and Poland were in their overwhelming majority opponents of Zionism. That was certainly one reason why the Zionists leaders in the West felt little compunction in playing down, or on occasion denying that the Jews of Eastern Europe were being exterminated (see S Beit Zvi, Post Ugandan Zionist in the Crucible of the Holocaust). MME thinks there’s something wrong in saying I’d be happy if those who are responsibility for the murder organisation called the American Israel Public Affairs Committee were vaporised. Why? Their whole mission is supporting, aiding and abetting war crimes. I wouldn’t lose any sleep if the White House and its occupants were also wiped out or if the Christian Zionist movements were likewise obliterated. It has nothing to do with who is Jewish or non-Jewish. You see Mikey, I’m not a racist. It isn’t only Jewish blood that is important. There is nothing morally wrong in wiping out organisations dedicated to murder – the only objection is that there will be other cretins to take their place.

12. MME quotes Zionist propagandist S. Levenberg to the effect that "Zionists are anxious to find any place under the sun which will afford Jewish refugees the prospect of escape." Well of course they would say that! Mikey cites Ben Gurion’s public speech but such words are easy. But in his private letter, as President to the Zionist Executive, (17. 12. 38) he make his real attitude to Jewish refugees quite explicit:
‘If the Jews are faced with a choice between the refugee problem and rescuing Jews from concentration camps on the one hand, and aid for the national museum on the other, the Jewish sense of pity will prevail.... We are risking Zionism's very existence if we allow the refugee problem to be separated from the Palestine problem.’ Y Elam, 'Introduction to Zionist History' Tel Aviv 1972 ppl25/6 cited in Machover/Offenburg Khamsin 6 see also 'Ot, organ of the Youth cadre of the Israeli Labour Party, no 2 Winter 1967.
There are too many other quotations and incidents I could cite but the fact is that Ben Gurion, made one or 2 speeches during the war about the Holocaust and that was it. All Zionist activity had one aim – statehood. All else was secondary.

13. MME wonders whether I think that Zionists in the Holocaust ‘were against advocating resistance in the ghettos.’ and cites Mordechai Anielewicz, of Hashomer Hatzair and commander of ZOB, the Warsaw Ghetto Fighting Organisation. MME misunderstands. Zionism is a political movement which opposed fighting anti-Semitism. In Warsaw some of the worst collaborators and Gestapo agents were Zionists such as the Abraham Gancawajch, also of Hashomer Hatzair. But it isn’t a question of individuals but of politics. Many Zionists did resist, not because they were Zionists but despite that fact. But there is no recorded example, for example in Reuben Ainsztein’s ‘Jewish Resistance in Nazi Occupied Eastern Europe’ of outside help from the Zionist movement, the best organised political current in world Jewry, to the ghetto resistance. Anielewicz himself expressed his regret over the "wasted time" undergoing Zionist educational work. [Gutmann p.143] He went on to say that

"had the fate of the Jews in 1942 lain in the hands only of the political parties (Zionist - TG), the revolt would never have taken place." Y. Guttman, ‘The Jews of Warsaw - 1939-1943, Ghetto Underground Revolt’, Harvester Press, 1982 p. 441 fn. 23.

Likewise Emanuel Ringleblum, the historian of the Warsaw Ghetto, wrote of Anielewicz of Hashomer, the commander of the JFO:
The Mordechai who had matured so rapidly and risen so quickly to the most responsible post as commander of the Fighters Organisation now greatly regretted that his fellows and he had wasted three war years on cultural and educational work. We had not understood that new side of Hitler that is emerging, Mordechai lamented. We should have trained the youth in the use of live and cold ammunition. We should have raised them in the spirit of revenge against the greatest enemy of the Jews, of all mankind, and of all times. [Emmanuel Ringelblum, Comrade Mordechai in Yuri Suhl (ed.), They Fought Back, p.102], cited in Lenni Brenner, Zionism in the Age of the Dictators, Ch. 21.]

14. Mikey complains that I spoke on a Jewish perspective on anti-Zionist on a Friday night! The tradition of Jewish socialism and Marxism was always to reject the babble and mysticism of the rabbis. However I note that the silent Mikey was not prevented from attending!

15. Mikey claims that ‘Far from the BNP being Zionist… a senior BNP spokesman said that paper was the mouthpiece of a "clique of Zionist parasites and crooks." Err yes. That’s exactly my point. The BNP manage to combine both anti-Semitism and Zionism. But come to think of it, so does Mad Mikey Ezra.

Tony Greenstein

>>It becomes tiresome correcting Greenstein’s errors that he regularly makes on numerous matters concerning Zionism and especially about the Holocaust. It is quite clear that he is trying to make a political point and by doing so has no objecting to distorting the truth in a heinous way.
1. Joe90 initially claimed that 200,000 Hungarian Jews were killed in WWII. The person aptly named as "Correction" corrects this outrageous statement to a figure of 500,000. Now Greenstein lies and tells us "As a matter of fact about 450,000 Jews were exterminated in Hungary." He should have listened to "Correction" who was basically accurate. In fact, as the Holocaust Encyclopedia tells us, "Under German occupation, just over 500,000 [Hungarian Jews] died from maltreatment or were murdered."
2. Tony Greenstein claims that "about 200,000" Hungarian Jews survived the Holocaust. The actual figure was closer to 255,000.
3. Tony Greenstein claims that "there’s no doubt" that Kasztner was "a collaborator of the worst sort." This is a deliberate lie. Greenstein is well aware that the accusation that Kasztner was a collaborator reached the Supreme Court in Israel who ruled, "one cannot find moral defects in [Kastzner’s] behaviour, one cannot find any causation between it and the expediting of the deportation and the extermination and one cannot see it amounting to the degree of collaboration with the Nazis." (Ben Hecht, Perfidy Jerusalem: Milah press, 1999 p. 275)
4. Tony Greenstein claims that I imitate Kasztner in my own way. This is nonsense, he has simply made it up.
5. Tony Greenstein claims that I am a friend of Gilad Atzmon. This is again a pathetic lie. Far from being a friend, I have attacked and ridiculed Atzmon on numerous occasions on the internet and it is there for anyone to verify.
6. Tony Greenstein claims that Kastzner was given the Auschwitz Protocols on April 29. This is not known for certain. For more information of the uncertainties surrounding this, see Yehuda Bauer, "The ‘Protocol of Auschwitz,’" Yalkut Moroshet, No. 3, Winter 2005.
7. To suggest what Kastzner did with the Auschwitz Protocols, Greenstein relies upon Vrba, but Vrba was not in Hungary and as such would not have known. In any event, Vrba is notoriously unreliable. For example, even in the very short passage by Vrba that Greenstein quotes, Vrba makes a big error by suggesting that Kasztner was a member of the Hungarian Judenrat. Not only is this wrong, Greenstein knows it is wrong as he admits that Kasztner was not on the Judenrat later in his own post! One may well wonder why Greenstein relies upon the work of someone he knows to be unreliable?
8. Vrba also makes the error that Greenstein repeats that the train full of Jews that Kasztner managed to save from the Nazis were all "prominent." This is nonsense, as an analysis of the passengers shows. An analysis of the occupations of passengers carried out Ann Pasternak Slater from the passenger list shows for example there to have been 40 workmen or labourers, 27 teachers, 25 tailors, 18 nurses, 12 gardeners, 3 shoe makers, 2 bakers, 2 cooks and the list goes on with 10 secretaries, 7 locksmiths, 7 mechanics, 7 hairdressers etc etc. (Ann Pasternak Slater, "Kasztner’s Ark" Areté 15 Autumn 2004, pp. 5-40
9. Greenstein claims that he has read kastzner’s report and goes on to say using capitals for greater emphasis: "NOT ONCE IN THE REPORT DOES HE [Kastzner] MENTION THE AUSCHWITZ PROTOCOLS." This is a blatant lie. I direct Greenstein to section II:18 of the report where Kasztner clearly states:
"According to these reports, the SS was ready to repair and renovate the gas chambers and crematoria of Auschwitz… one of the guards was overheard saying, ‘Soon we’ll eat good Hungarian salami,’ referring to the provisions the Jews took with them.."
10. Whilst it is true that Kasztner gave testimonies or evidence in support of certain Nazi criminals, he also gave evidence against others. Kasztner made other statements leading to the conviction of other Nazi War Criminals. For example Kasztner stated in his report that Eichmann was determined that not a single Jew should survive. For more information on these testimonies see Shoshana Barri (Ishoni), "The Question of Kasztner’s Testimonies on behalf of Nazi War Criminals," The Journal of Israeli History, Vol 18, nos. 2 and 3 1997 pp. 139-165.
11. Greenstein makes the following disgusting statement: "Hitler wiped out the reserves of anti-Zionist Jewry in Poland and the Ukraine." What Greenstein does not mention is that Hitler also wiped out Zionist Jews in Poland and Ukraine. It was not as if they got to the gates of Auschwitz and the Nazis said All Zionists to the left for safety and all anti-Zionists to the right for gas chambers. Maybe Greenstein simply does not care that Hitler killed Zionist Jews, after all Greenstein has admitted elsewhere he would not lose any sleep if thousands of Jews who work for AIPAC were vaporised.
12. Greenstein says that it is "well documented" that "Zionists were more concerned about statehood than saving the remnant." The official view of the Zionist Jewish Agency in so far as Jewish refugees from Nazi Germany was defined the following month, in the January 19, 1939 edition of London’s Zionist Review, "Zionists are anxious to find any place under the sun which will afford Jewish refugees the prospect of escape." (Quoted by S. Levenberg, Guardian "Letters," January 29, 1987) To complete refute Greenstein’s argument, This is what Ben-Gurion stated very clearly in September 1943:
"We must do whatever is humanly possible, whatever a human being of flesh and blood is capable of doing, in order to render material assistance to those on the forefront of rescue, in order to save those who can still be saved, to delay the disaster to the extent that it can be delayed. We must do it now, to the best of our will and ability." ( quoted by Tuvia Frieling, "Ben-Gurion and the Holocaust of European Jewry 1939-1945: A Stereotype Reexamined," Yad Vashem Studies XVIII 1987 pp. 199-232)
13. I have no idea if Greenstein thinks that I, or the Zionists in the Holocaust were against advocating resistance in the ghettos. Unlike Greenstein, I remember the activities of Mordecai Anielewicz, an activist within the Zionist youth movement, Hashomer Hatzair and other Zionist youth including those active within the socialist Zionist Dror and religious Zionist Akiva youth movements who were part of the ZOB (Jewish Fighting Organisation) in the Warsaw Ghetto. Given Greenstein has admitted elsewhere that he used to be a member of Bnei Akiva he should know this.
14. The use of the David Irving and Nick Griffin analogy was to show that that they do not represent mainstream British Jews. In a similar way Greenstein does not represent mainstream Jewish views. The views he holds would be agreed with by a tiny tiny minority of Jews in the country. The talk at SOAS is billed as, "Anti-Zionism. A Jewish Perspective." Not a single spokesperson from mainstream Jewish body is billed. I am in favour of freedom of speech and I am not against Greenstein exercising his right to it. The title of the talk is misleading. Tony Greenstein is a self declared Marxist and I am sure readers of this blog do not need me to remind them that Marx viewed religion to be an opiate of the masses. Marxists reject religion. The title of the speech might be better as "Anti-Zionism: An anti-Zionist perspective." I can make a further observation and that is that this speech by Greenstein is being held on a Friday night and as such, no religious Jew would be able to attend. Does it show even the slightest sensitivity the concerns of the Jewish community in Britain when a talk is held offering a Jewish perspective on a Friday night by someone who has rejected the religion he claims to speaking from the perspective of! It is a farrago of nonsense.
Finally, on this point, given Greenstein makes so many errors about Zionism and Jewish history as can be seen in this response to his nonsense, if anyone takes him seriously and considers him some form of authority, they are seriously deluded.
15. Far from the BNP being Zionist as Greenstein alleges, as the Jewish Chronicle reported a few months ago, a senior BNP spokesman said that paper was the mouthpiece of a "clique of Zionist parasites and crooks." In fact, the view of the organised Jewish community was elaborated by Mark Gardner of the Community Security Trust in a letter to the Guardian on April 14, 2008 where he said that the message from the Jewish community was "whoever you vote for, use your vote to stop the BNP."
Comment by Mikey — 1 September, 2008 @ 1:49 pm
http://www.socialistunity.com/?p=2767

Harry’s Place Praises Atzmon on BDS

Harry’s Place: Atzmon is Right - The Academic Boycott is ‘book burning’

In the course of an otherwise demented blog seeking to ‘prove’ that opponents of Atzmon are in fact the same as him (a favourite bourgeois philosophy which holds that extremes are the same and polar opposites are really their equals), one of the regular posters, in the course of the usual ad hominems gives the game away. The argument of HP is quite simple – if you oppose Israel you are anti-Semitic therefore the opponents of Atzmon are no different from him.

Of course this involves small things like ignoring Israel’s far-right government, the evictions of Bedouin, the attacks on NGO’s etc. etc. but who cares on this Islamaphobic sewer of a site:

According to regular HP poster, Lamia, when Atzmon stated that:

“the academic boycott is ‘book burning’. On that at least Atzmon is correct.”

Atzmon has proved a very useful brush with which to tar the supporters of the Palestinians. A few fools like Gill Kaffash, Roy Ratcliffe, Tony Gratrext and Roy Bard (ftp) have been happy to play along with the Zionist Atzmon.

But first a joke by veteran Israeli peacenik, Uri Avnery with a core kernel of truth, i.e. that every fascist and far-right party of significance in Europe (bar the NPD in Germany and Jobbik in Hungary)

The New Anti-Semitism

By Uri Avnery, 07 August, 2011, Gush Shalom

The Nazi Propaganda Minister, Dr. Joseph Goebbels, calls his boss, Adolf Hitler, by hell-phone.

“Mein Führer,” he exclaims excitedly. “News from the world. It seems we were on the right track, after all. Anti-Semitism is conquering Europe!”

“Good!” the Führer says, “That will be the end of the Jews!”

“Hmmm…well…not exactly, mein Führer. It looks as though we chose the wrong Semites. Our heirs, the new Nazis, are going to annihilate the Arabs and all the other Muslims in Europe.” Then, with a chuckle, “After all, there are many more Muslims than Jews to exterminate.”

“But what about the Jews?” Hitler insists.

“You won’t believe this: the new Nazis love Israel, the Jewish State - and Israel loves them!”

Harry’s Place is well known as a byword for bigotry, ad hominems and anti-Arab racism. Coupled of course with blind Zionism. Whilst being concerned about anti-Semitism in Palestine Solidarity Campaign, they have developed tunnel vision when it comes to the open support of the BNP for Israel and Zionism. They like to be reminded of the EDL’s connections with Zionism even less. Little things like the EDL parades with Israeli flags and its joining up with Zionist demonstrators as at Ahava.

Yet despite the fact that someone like Mad Mikey Ezra, an open collaborator with Atzmon, still posts, like Nelson they can only see what they want to see and that is ‘anti-Semitism’. In the tortured logic employed on the blog, those who oppose anti-Semitism and fascism are somehow the same as those who support it. Being opposed to the Israeli state, i.e. an anti-Zionist, is no different from being opposed to Jews per se, the old Zionist hymn tune.

Lamia’s comments came in an otherwise appalling blog, PSC supporters supporting Atzmon This was itself a response to an article by an Anthony Cooper who at least tried to make some differentiation between Jews opposed to Atzmon and those who support him.

Cooper's article 'A (small) Thank you to anti-Israel Jews a-small-thank-you-to-anti-israel-jews/ was based on his article in the Jewish Chronicle ‘The Jews who can distinguish antisemitism from anti-Israel’

In fact if anyone has collaborated with Atzmon it is members of HP itself. In an article ‘Gilad Atzmon and Jewishness’

David Toube, who used to run HP, on March 19th 2007, wrote how:

‘Last week, Mikey invited me for a drink with Gilad Atzmon. Mikey’s thoughts on Gilad and his worldview follow, below….. Is Gilad Atzmon a racist? Not in the narrow sense of being preoccupied by genetic differences between people, certainly. He is rather, I think, a ‘cultural essentialist’: if such a term exists.’

A cultural essentialist. In fact this is probably the least of Atzmon’s sins, given his record as a jazz player.

But Mikey, a regular HP poster, was not to be deterred. On the blog of Atzmon collaborator, Mary Rizzo, the following exchange occurred between Atzmon and Mikey Ezra:

‘Mikey, can you provide us with the criminal record of this Bugger-Rance. Is he on spent conviction like greenie l or is he just an ordinary liar? Gilad Atzmon | 03.12.07 - 8:00 pm | #
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I have been very busy digging up stuff on Tony Greenstein - Roland Rance will have to wait for another day. Mikey | 03.12.07 - 8:53 pm | #
‘Mikey, I hope you do not mind me saying that, but your contribution for the pls solidarity movement is priceless. It is crucial that we all know about the racist record of this Greenpiss, a man who was banned time after time for being a racist and an anti Semite! I really want to believe that this revolting violent man will feel some shame and take some time off to think about it all. But I doubt it.’ Gilad Atzmon | 03.04.07 - 10:46 am | #

Again, again, I believe that Zionists like you can cope with philosophical thinking because Zionism is a Jewish ideological stand. RK, Ben Gurion and later Begin and Shmuel Tamir were operating within different interpretation of the very the same ideology. The political and legal aspects are nothing but a cover up of the real meaning of this saga. You can cope with it, Greenie and Brenner can't. However, Good luck with Greenie and thanks for all the info you gave us about this low being. Peace is the way forward
G
Gilad Atzmon | 03.08.07 - 4:02 pm |

Zionist Collaboration in Hungary - Mike Ezra attempts to Defend the Indefensible

An interesting debate has, of all places, been taking place on the Alliance for Worker's Liberty site. A particularly fervent Zionist, 'mad' Mike Ezra, has attempted to defend the indefensible, viz. the collaboration of the Zionist movement and its representatives in Hungary, notably Rudolph Kasztner, with the Nazis.

I post the last two contributions, starting with Mr Ezra's. The debate was begun with a 'defence' of me vs Indymedia because of the latter having banned me. The story was taken up and equally quickly dropped by Engage when I pointed out that their 'support' was akin to the rope that supports the hanging man (Lenin on the British Labour Party!). A couple of the nuttier Zionists, the frothing Paul Bogdanor and Mad Mikey Ezra objected to the AWL, which is a pro-Zionist grouping on the left, supporting me. After all anti-Zionism = anti-Semitism therefore... In fact, as the debate shows and is documented here and elsewhere, Mike Ezra is good friends with and has collaborated with Atzmon.

Tony Greenstein

http://www.workersliberty.org/story/2008/02/14/defend-tony-greenstein?page=1

Submitted by MikeyMikey on 11 June, 2008 - 17:14.
Greenstein is out of ideas and keeps repeating the same point about Atzmon. I have already answered him. Anyone who can be bothered will see who is lying. I shall ignore Greenstein's personal insults and his hysterical fabrications about my personal life.
What I will do is comment on Greenstein's disgusting scholarship, not that it deserves to be called scholarship.
Readers will have noted that Greenstein has continually referred to Hilberg and in his recent message has suggested that I consult Hilberg. I have read Hilberg on Kasztner. To show how disgraceful Greenstein's posts are, I copy from the third edition of Hilberg's The Destruction of European Jews (Yale University Press, 2003) p. 903:
"There are two versions of the ensuing discussions.
"According to Kastner, the SS man promised that, for 6.5 million pengö (ca. RM 4,000,000 or $1,600,000 at the official rate of exchange), 600 Jews would be permitted to leave for Palestine. The committee immediately turned to the Central Council for financial help, and after weeks of canvassing, the Council managed to collect five million pengö from the rich Jews. The committee itself added the missing million and a half. The Germans then raised the number of prospective emigrants by a thousand. [166] Eichmann stated in his memoirs that Kastner "agreed to keep the Jews from resisting deportation – and even keep order in the camps – if I would close my eyes and let a few hundred or a few thousand young Jews emigrate illegally to Palestine. It was a good bargain." [167]
The relevant footnotes are:
166. Kasztner, "Bericht," pp. 24-27, 58, 63167. Life, December 5, 1960, p. 146
Hilberg provides two alternate accounts. This is perfectly reasonable. Greenstein uncritically accepts Eichmann's account ("invaluable") while dismissing Kasztner's ("self-serving"). When his own source mentions two alternative witnesses – a mass murdering Nazi or a Jewish leader - Greenstein believes the Nazi and not the Jew.
A further example is his description of all the passengers as "prominents." I pointed out that they were not all prominent and quoted Lob's breakdown. Greenstein dismisses Lob as a "Zionist historian." One wonders how Greenstein can tell if Lob is or is not a Zionist. His book does not discuss the State of Israel, but such is Greenstein's modus operandi: if he doesn't like the evidence, he denounces the source as a Zionist or a "rabid dog" in true Stalinist fashion.
Greenstein then backs away from his claim that they were all prominent: "Hilberg's description of the passengers on the train, and I suggest Mikey tries looking it up, makes it clear that those who were saved were in a number of categories, primarily Zionist but including rabbis." I have looked it up. It is on the same page:
"[The Zionists'] first reaction was to select only children. [Eichmann's deputy] Wisliceny, however, vetoed this plan on the ground that the Hungarians would notice a children's transport. The Jews thereupon proceeded to compile a list of ten categories: Orthodox Jews, Zionists, prominent Jews (Prominente), orphans, refugees, Revisionists, and so on."
Another Greenstein fabrication.
Bogdanor, above, summarised Hilberg's conclusion that the Zionists had helped save the 200,000 Jews of Budapest. Greenstein replied that he'd "be interested to see the source for the Hilberg quote that the Zionists saved 200,000 in Hungary." If he had checked Bogdanor's page references he would have seen this:
"The Hungarians in their eagerness had intercepted the messages [transmitted by the Jewish relief committee in Budapest] and had thereupon managed to frighten themselves. On July 6 Veesenmayer was informed by Sztojay that the Regent had ordered the deportations to stop."
So much for Greenstein's methods.»
reply

Mad Mikey Ezra fails to explain his Collaboration & much else
Yes, it is true. Mikey has already answered me, by evasion, regarding his relationship with Gilad Atzmon. What he hasn't explained is how come he came to work with him in the first place. So please tell us Mikey. What was it, when I and others were attacking Atzmon for trying to gain an audience for anti-Semitism amongst a fringe element of Palestine solidarity activists, that led you to lend him a helping hand? Was it the enemy of my enemy principle? After all it makes sense. If the main enemy for Zionists like you is anti-Zionism then an alliance with anti-Semites makes sense. Indeed given Atzmon’s increasingly pro-Zionist sentiments it makes even more sense: Because there is no other way to interpret lines such as:

'Mikey, can you provide us with the criminal record of this Bugger-Rance. Is he on spent conviction like greenie l or is he just an ordinary liar?'

To which you could of course have told him to get lost, that you wouldn't be seen dead with anti-Semites and people who subscribe to Jewish conspiracy theories. Instead the response is:

'I have been very busy digging up stuff on Tony Greenstein - Roland Rance will have to wait for another day.'

Roland is a long-standing anti-Zionist comrade, who has been equally active in combatting people like Atzmon. But your only response was to say that Atzmon will ‘have to wait for another day’. You really are condemned out of your own mouth.

Mikey complains that 'Greenstein objects to quotations from Kasztner but he is happy to rely on Eichmann!' until I pointed out to him that I am merely citing Hilberg's quotation of Eichmann in his Destruction of European Jews! Now he complains I didn't cite everything. But that is the job of any historian, to make selections. In fact Hilberg's whole treatment of the Kasztner affair, and he doesn't give it much treatment at all, is second hand at best. But clearly he gives credence to Eichmann's version, which as I say was unforced and for which he had no discernible motive to lie. On the contrary he bragged about his role in the Final Solution and wished he could have completed it. I would say this is pretty powerful evidence that he was speaking the truth. And the question of keeping order in the camp was raised in the Kastner trial in Israel by those who didn't perish. And it is also pretty convincing evidence with which to dismiss those other flat earthers – the Holocaust Deniers – since it comes from one of the main architects of the final solution.

But at least Mad Mikey Ezra (MME) cites the professions and political attachments of those who left on the train, though other accounts state that some 300 or so Jews leapt on the train at the last moment. In other words it was not only class but political attachment that was decisive. Anti-Zionists, socialists or communists were not considered. But even now MME can't resist the temptation to quote selectively. After admitting that the categories included Orthodox Jews, Zionists, Prominents, Revisionists among others he omits the following from Hilberg:

'One category consisted of "paying persons. The geographic distribution was a bit lopsided: 388 persons, including Kastner's father-in-law came from the Transylvaia city of Cluj.' In other words mainly Zionists and the Orthodox, but also large numbers of friends and family, for which news about Auschwitz and reassurance about being transported for labour in the Reich was the deal.’

But what’s MME’s explanation for the end to the deportations. I asked for the location of the claim by Bogdanor that Hilberg had said that the Zionists had saved the 200,000 Jews of Budapest and he quotes what is really a throwaway line from Hilberg, viz. that

"The Hungarians in their eagerness had intercepted the messages [transmitted by the Jewish relief committee in Budapest] and had thereupon managed to frighten themselves. On July 6 Veesenmayer was informed by Sztojay that the Regent had ordered the deportations to stop."

"The Hungarians in their eagerness had intercepted the messages [transmitted by the Jewish relief committee in Budapest] and had thereupon managed to frighten themselves. On July 6 Veesenmayer was informed by Sztojay that the Regent had ordered the deportations to stop."

Even Mikey should possibly see what is wrong with this except that he is such a hack Zionist propagandist that he can’t. Hilberg is a brilliant historian concerning the mechanics of the Final Solution, but he is not so brilliant when it comes to political speculation about an area in which, by his own admission, he would have had little information that was original.

Instead Mikey distorts even when it is not necessary. For example when I said that Kastner’s Report to the Jewish Agency was ‘self-serving’ this is not to be contrasted with Eichmann, as if it is a choice between the mass murderer and the collaborator. Both can be wrong, or Eichmann alone can be right. In fact Eichmann’s testimony is backed up by other sources. Of course one wouldn’t condemn Kastner simply because Eichmann says he collaborated but there is pretty good evidence. And the reference to ‘self-serving’ is not mine anyway, but is quoted from Randolf Braham’s Politics of Genocide and is made specifically about the complete absence of or mention of the Auschwitz Protocols of Vrba from Kastner’s tediously long-winded Report to the Jewish Agency on his war-time activities.

MME fails to tell us how and why Kastner went to Nuremburg to testify for 4 Nazi war criminals (at least). Col. Becher of the Waffen SS, Wisliceny and Krumey of Eichmann’s 4 B IV SS Jewish Department and SS Lt. Gen. Hans Juttner. This in itself was, as even the Israeli Supreme Court, anxious to exonerate him was forced to admit, collaboration.

But yes I disagree with Hilberg and accept the main thrust of the account of Eugene Levai in his Black Book of Hungarian Jewry, which both Braham and Hilberg accept as authoritative. Let me cite excerpts from Levai:

229 on June 26th through Swiss Legation, Roosevelt ‘threatened the Hungarian Government with grave reprisals and a relentless bombing of Hungarian towns.’ On June 27th Secretary of State Hull protested against the ‘massacre of the majority of the Hungarian Jews.’ The first news regarding the fate of the Hungarian Jews appeared in the Swiss papers towards the end of June and the beginning of July. [so much for the nonsense about the Zionists publicising the Report they undoubtedly had - TG]. … On July 8th the ‘Gazette de Lausanne’ published on its front page a very effective leader by its editor, Mr Georges Rigassi ‘les Juifs persecutes’. Talked of the deaths of 400,000 in Auschwitz and the ‘stain on the honour of the Hungarian nation, which could never be removed.’

230 Article presented to Regent Horthy by his son.231 On June 25th Pope sent personal message to Horthy. General message of hope that ‘Your Serene Highness will do everything in your power to save many unfortunate people from further pain and sorrow.’

235 On June 21st Baky and Endre attended Cabinet meeting where they read their reports ‘especially the more detailed one of Endre… gave an extraordinarily reassuring description of the position the Jews found themselves in.’240 In response Minister Jugerth-Arnothy remarked sarcastically: ‘One almost regrets not having been born a Jew and thus not to be able to join these pleasure trips.’…

243 Following day Field Marshall Faragho was summoned before Horthy, who declared that he would not permit further deportations.’ On 26th June Crown Council. Horthy stipulated that ‘I won’t stand it any longer. I won’t allow the deportations to bring more shame upon Hungary! The Government shall take measures to remove Endre and Baky from their positions. The deportation of the Budapest Jews shall be stopped.

244 Cabinet meeting of 27th ‘consented in part to the proposals of the Deputy Foreign Minister but actually did nothing to put an end to the deportations. They dared not even inform the Germans of the Regent’s point of view.’ 4th and 5th ‘cleaning up operations’ were in full progress.

247 Attempted coup….Baky turned out 1,600 gendarmerie on streets. Purpose deportation of Jews.

249 Middle of July finally brought a turning point in the fate of the Jews of Budapest. Great Soviet summer offensive of 1944 in the Tarnopol-Luck area had just begun. Horthy and advisors at last realised that Germany stood on the brink of collapse. ‘This enlightenment as well as the easy victory gained over Baky acted as a stimulant to the Regent and his entourage. They even dared challenge the Germans in matters relating to the Jewish question.’

253 ‘Horthy no longer accepted the explanations given by Sztojay and Jaross… Finally the Regent ‘issued the plain order: the deportation of the Jews has to be stopped.’ A number of reasons for which included the Allied invasion was proceeding to plan, the victory gained over the ‘Baky attempt’ by the vigorous action of the Christian churches, the ‘menacing attitude of the enemy countries’ the protests of the neutral countries and ‘last not least by the insistence of members of his family, summoned Prime Minister Sztojay.’ The last deportation train left Bekasmegyer Hev station on Saturday night, July 8th.

254 New deportation train to leave Kirstaczy on July 14th. Horthy ordered Jarossy to have it stopped. It was recalled and back the same evening. ‘Every one of the 1,500 occupants were safe, even those who had previously been detained at Rokk Szilard Street and Horthy-Liget. (This is an indisputable proof of the ability of the Regent and his Government to enforce their orders as far as the Jewish question was concerned, provided they wanted, or chiefly, if they dared to do so…)

267 Towards the beginning of May the reports arriving from Slovakia contained the first authentic account of the horrors of Auschwitz…. It seems clear therefore that Eichmann suggested the idea of the consignments at precisely the same moment in which 300,000 Jews had to face the catastrophe of deportation….’ Of Kasztner, As member of the Zionist Federation, he judged nearly every question from that point of view.'

268 ‘It must be borne in mind that Kasztner was never willing to inform the Jewish leaders as to the progress of the negotiations without being pressed to do so, although he was acting with the authorisation of the Jewish Council…. It was obvious that he intended to be the only one to have a grasp on the situation, fearing that possibly somebody might contest his leadership.’

270 ‘the Jewish Council – by virtue of a concession obtained from Eichmann through Freudiger and Wyslizeni – managed to rescue several prominent Jews from the provincial ghettos and to have these brought to Budapest. Kasztner himself, with the assistance of Eichmann, rescued 350 Zionists from his home town, Kolozsvsar. In Budapest these people were held in a so-called ‘Vorzugslager’ in the Deaf-Mute Institute in Columbus Street, which had been equipped by the ‘Sonderswtab’ and was guarded by SS-men in order to protect the inmates against the gendarmerie and the Hungarian Gestapo.’

So when Mikey insists, not only on defending the collaboration of Kastner and the Jewish Agency but that of the Zionist movement as a whole re Hungary and even has the audacity to suggest that the Zionists ‘saved’ 200,000 Jews in Hungary, when it was they, under the leadership of Stephen Wise who bitterly opposed doing anything in the USA which might jeopardise the establishment of the Israeli state, then one is entitled to kick a little sand in his face.
Rudolph Vrba, one of only 5 Jewish escapees from Auschwitz, wrote to the Observer on 22.9.63. after Hanna Arendt had come under attack by the Zionist professor, Jacob Talmon, for daring to raise the question of collaboration. He described how:
‘In April 1944 we handed to a high representrative of the Zionist movement, Dr Oskar Neumann, a 60 page detailed report on the fact that extermination of 1,760,000 Jews had taken place in Auschwitz…. Did the Judenrat (or the Judenverrat) in Hungary tell their Jews what was awaiting them? No, they remained silent and for this silence some of their leaders – for example Dr. R. Kasztner – bartered their own lives and the lives of 1684 other ‘prominent’ Jews directly from Eichmann…’.

Yehuda Bauer, the main Zionist historian at Yad Vashem, writes in his ‘Jews for Sale’ that the Auschwitz Protocols, which Vrba and his fellow Wetzler had written in Slovakia for the Judenrat, arrived in Hungary ‘perhaps through Kasztner at the end of April and have been handed over to the leading members of the Judenrat.’ pp. 156/7.

As Ruth Linn explains in, ‘Escaping Auschwitz – a Culture of Forgetting’

‘Like Freudiger, Kasztner was convinced from reading the Vrba-Wetzler report that the entire Jewish community in Hungary was doomed to be liquidated. In his mind the only hope was to try to save the few.’ And that is the real story. The Zionist strategy throughout the holocaust of saving the few, the elect, the prominents, call them what you will as opposed to rescuing or saving the poor, the working class, the socialists. Linn, who is a Professor at Haifa University, no she is no anti-Zionist, goes on to describe how ‘during his intense negotiation with the SS, Kasztner kept the Vrba-Wetzler report secret in order not to create panic among the potential deportees to Auschwitz.’ p.27.

And therein lies the real crime.

And as for the fable that the Zionists were responsible for saving 200,000 Hungarian Jews, we learn that not only were the Auschwitz Protocols sent to the Pope but

‘they also sent the Vrba-Wetzler’ report to the Zionist liaison committee in Istanbul and to the Zionist representative in Switzerland, Nathan Schwalb.’ Schwalb was the representative of Hehalutz, the Zionist young pioneers, in Europe. However

‘Schwalb’s primary interest in this instance was to prevent the Vrba-Wetzler report from being published so as not to disrupt Kasztner’s negotiations with Eichmann.’

Maybe this is an instance of ‘saving Jews’?!! p.28 Linn.

And citing Braham’s Politics of Genocide, Linn describes how:

‘On July 5, Eden stated that the BBC would be employed to warn the Hungarian leaders. On July 7 1944, Admiral Miklos Horthy ordered a halt to the deportations from Hungary, which became effective only on July 9. Almost 200,000 Jews in Budapest were thus saved from deportation.’

And what was the reaction of those Jews who hadn’t been informed of Auschwitz, bearing in mind that many Jews in Hungary were but a short distance away from safety in Rumania? Linn again describes an incident in the Eichmann trial when ‘during Freudiger’s testimony [Zionist Chief Rabbi of Hungary] at Eichmann’s trial, a Hungarian survivor screamed at him from the gallery,

‘You duped us so you could save yourselves and your families. But our families were killed.’ This man was apparently attacking Freudiger as a representative of the Jewish Council, for he added, referring to another Judenrat member, ‘He gave us injections to numb our minds. But he took his own parents out… and left mine there to die.’ citing Pearlman ‘The Capture and Trial of Adolf Eichmann’. p. 38 Linn.

The holocaust survivor was then ejected from the Eichmann trial.

And just in case Mikey has still not got it then Andrea Biss, who helped compile the lists of the Prominents, ‘further provides the moral rationale for the Judenrat’s decision to conceal the Vrba-Wetzler report:

‘It was part of Klages’ job… to keep an eye on Eichmann and to see that everything was done to ensure that the secret behind the ‘final solution’ should be completely guarded. It was therefore necessary that the object of the deportations should remain unknown.’

Linn p.80. And just in case Mikey still doesn’t get the message, let us cite a few more opinions:
‘Here [in Hungary] the protocol acquired some kind of publication. It was taken to heads of churches and leaders but it was not distributed to the Jewish communities generally….‘It is beyond question: The Auschwitz Protocols did reach the Jewish Council and Zionist activists, including the Halutz Underground. Yet they did not transmit this information to the Jewish public when the deportation began.‘The report remained unknown to the Jewish population inside Hungary itself.’

[Linn p.81 citing reports such as Cohen’s ‘Holocaust Hungarian Jews in Light of the Research of Randolph Braham’ 381.

And even in Bauer’s Rethinking the Holocaust ‘Bauer admits that ‘the protocols were an important factor in stopping the deportations.’

One could go on but the idea that the Zionists, having suppressed all news of Auschwitz as long as they dare, can then claim to have ‘saved’ the 200,000 Jews of Hungary is plain sick. It was Chaim Cohen, the Attorney General who defended Kastner in the Jerusalem District Court trial, who explained that saving the few from the many was a Zionist principle, even if as in Hungary it meant sacrificing close to half a million Jews for the sake of ‘The Prominents’.

I hate to be so dismissive of Mikey’s zionised version of history but one has to be hard – be it on Holocaust Deniers or Holocaust Falsifiers (and of course Nakba Deniers). It is little wonder that in their attacks on Vrba, for not following the Zionist line on the Holocaust, that the Zionist historians – Bauer, Porat, Kulka et al. have simply provided ammunition for the Holocaust Deniers who use their attacks as a way of casting doubt on the Auschwitz Protocols. Therein lies their real crime.

Tony Greenstein

International Jewish anti-Zionist Network is Born

When I became an anti-Zionist as a teenager, there were no role models or indeed any examples that I knew of. Being a Jewish anti-Zionist was a lonely and solitary experience. True when I joined the International Socialists (SWP) there were a number of Jewish members, but anti-Zionism was not a hot topic.

Today the situation has changed out of all recognition. Meetings of hundreds of Jews questioning Israel are now the norm, as the non-Zionist Independent Jewish Voices demonstrate.
And now the explicitly International Jewish anti-Zionist Network has been formed. Jews have not only begun to recognise that the Jewish experience of anti-Semitism is not compatible with supporting the same form of racism when perpetrated by Israel, but that Zionism can only endanger their own position in society.

It was therefore doubly welcome that a packed meeting of IJAN launched the network in Israel tonight in a church hall in north London. Chaired by Selma James there was a large platform of speakers, including Professor Moshe Machover, founder of the Israeli anti-Zionist organisation Matzpen and Ghada Kharmi, a distinguished Palestinian doctor and academic, author of ‘Married to Another Man – Israel’s Dilemma in Palestine’. Messages of support to the meeting and the presence of people like Omar Deghayes, the Libyan refugee who was imprisoned for 5 years in Guantanamo where he was blinded in one eye, emphasised the importance of the occasion. Other speakers included Michael Kalmanovitz.

The meeting took the decision to prioritise the campaign against the openly racist Jewish National Fund, which together with the Israeli Lands Administration, controls 93% of Israeli land, which can only be leased, rented or sold to Jews. Tony Greenstein introduced the discussion on the JNF giving a short history of the JNF’s inglorious history.

A meeting has been arranged for 6th November when further decisions on the JNF campaign will be planned. There are a number of things which will have to be discussed including putting the group on a democratic footing, debating the Charter of IJAN since many of us don’t agree with some of the analysis e.g. on Misrahi/Oriental Jews in Israel.

Addendum

A couple of Zionist interlopers at the meeting, including Mad Mikey Ezra, were given short shrift especially when Mikey tried to trip me up. Mikey, who only last week at the debate betwen the AWL and CPGB started pushing me and Roland Rance, was apparently left with a sore foot as a result of his attempts to commit another assault. At a previous meeting he deliberately trod on the foot of an anti-Zionist. He and his friend were left in no doubt that their presence, with blackberries texting reports of the meeting to others, were not welcome. Mikey is a strange character who goes around anti-Zionist meetings saying nothing but reporting or recording them. He works with the fascist Kach group in Israel, and their academic supporter one Prof. Steve Plaut of Haifa Universit with whom he bombards the Alef (Academic Left) e-list with fake messages.

This hasn't stopped Mikey claiming that he was the victim of an unprovoked assault claiming he was only sprawling, with his feet adrift in the aisles! Naturally his plight has been taken up by the racist pro-war blog, Harry's Place where David 'necklace' Herman posted his usual advice:

''At the risk of sounding thuggish you should have headbutted the motherfucker.'
What this incident does point to though is the need for more security at anti-Zionist meetings due to the fact that there is a history of attacks by Zionist thugs on people who attend them.

Witch-hunt of Jenna Delich - Pro-Boycott Academic – Zionist Hypocrisy over anti-Semitism

The facts behind the latest witch-hunt, of Jenna Delich, a Business Studies tutor at The Sheffield College are quite clear.

Ms Delich, quite inadvertently, posted a short message on the activist list of the University & College Union [UCU] which referred to an article written in 2006 by Joe Quinn The article ‘Racism, not Defence, at the heart of Israeli politics was, as are many things that people on the Left write, purloined by ex-Grand Wizard of the Ku Klux Klan and white supremacist, David Duke. It is an unfortunate fact that the far-right, having few ideas of their own, often steal articles of their opponents to bolster their own academic credentials.

Ms Delich is a refugee from Jugoslavia. Her explanation is quite simple, she hadn’t heard of David Duke, and quoted from the article without looking at the site. This is quite easy to do and many of us have gone to far right sites without at first realising their credentials. Indeed a number of such sites go out of their to hide their political allegiances. As Ms Delich explained:

"I didn’t realise who David Duke was nor did I hear of him. I just looked at the article not the website where it appeared. Apologies for picking up that website as I personallly am strongly against any racists, anti-semitists and the likes of them. I just found the article quite powerful, and none are saying that Joe Quinn (the author of the article) is a racist or anti-semitist, and the article is quite interesting. So, perhaps we should focus on the article itself and not where it appeared (if we look at it in a broader sense, the website itself appeard on Google and so did the article)? Anyone can put anything on their website… Sincere apologies once again though for picking the wrong website, but it’s the article that I found interesting as it gives some amazing facts and it was not written by David Duke (who, I most certainly agree, has no place in UCU but is the author of the website and not the article)."

As Ms Delich wrote in an e-mail to me:

‘I had no idea who David Duke was (being an Eastern European I didn't study US history or culture, mention their far-right let alone the likes of David Duke).
Joe Quinn, in his new article also published my apology (in a blue box, bottom of the article) which is clearly my statement on acknowledging the error, explaining and apologising. It was my first apology but I also made several individual ones that were addressed to the Zionist members of the Forum who tried to attack me on the list (not for the first time though) but with the copies received by all the participating members of the Forum.’

But of course the Zionists went to town on this. Engage, an organisation dedicated to villifying supporters of the academic boycott as anti-semites could barely restrain itself.

The pro-war, racist blog Harry’s Place printed a number of disgusting attacks on Jenna Delich. One David T[aube] who used to be an anti-Zionist (!) wrote that ‘It is therefore reasonable to infer that Jenna Delich reads and takes her information on world events from neo Nazis.’ In other words that Ms Delich is herself a neo-Nazi. Not surprisingly Ms Delich threatened HP’s ISP with a libel writ until it took action. This resulted in HP being taken down, Amidst the furore, even socialist sites like Socialist Unity managed to miss the plot entirely, by seeing it as an issue of ‘free speech’ rather than the witch-hunt of an anti-racist lecturer.

But, as everyone knows, the Zionists who are attacking Delich have no interest whatsoever in opposing anti-Semitism. On the contrary, without anti-Semitism there would be no Zionism, which is why the founder of Political Zionism, Theodore Herzl, could write that

‘the anti-Semites will become our most dependable friends, the anti-Semitic countries our allies. We want to emigrate as respected people.’ Diaries of Theodore Herzl, pp. 83/4.

This has always been the way. In World War 2, despite their ‘concern’ about anti-Semitism today, the role of the Zionist movement was to prioritise building their State over and above saving Jews which was at best, of secondary importance.
Rudolph Vrba and Alfred Wexler were the first Jewish escapees from Auschwitz. In a letter in the Observer on 22.9.63., in a reply to Zionist professor, Jacob Talmon who had attacked Hanna Arendt for mentioning Zionist collaboration during the Nazi period, he stated:

‘In April 1944 we handed to a high representrative of the Zionist movement, Dr Oskar Neumann, a 60 page detailed report on the fact that extermination of 1,760,000 Jews had taken place in Auschwitz…. Did the Judenrat (or the Judenverrat) in Hungary tell their Jews what was awaiting them>? No, they remained silent and for this silence some of their leaders – for example Dr. R. Kasztner – bartered their own lives and the lives of 1684 other ‘prominent’ Jews directly from Eichmann…’.

The same Kasztner gave evidence in SUPPORT of at least 4 Nazi war criminals at Nuremburg – Waffen SS Col Becher, Kurt Wisliceny, responsible for the deportation of Slovakian Jewry who was hanged in Czechoslovakia after the war, Krumey, Eichmann's henchman and SS Lt. General Hans Juttner.

Lest anyone think this is an aberration, lost in history, then let us note what Rabbi Yehudah Amital, Rosh Yeshiva of Har Etzion described in the Jewish Chronicle of 15. 4. 1983:

‘…some elements, especially the Religious Zionists, expressed satisfaction at the clear and open display of anti-Semitism which took shape during and after ‘Operation Peace for Galilee’ [the invasion of Lebanon in 1982 – TG]...It is felt that the more overt anti-Semitism becomes, the more beneficial it will prove for the Jews, because through anti-Semitism, the Jews of the Diaspora will come to the realisation that they must move to Eretz Yisrael. The Red Lights are Flashing’,

And on April 10th 2008 the Guardian carried a news story which, for some of us at least, was no revelation. ‘BNP seeks to bury antisemitism and gain Jewish votes in Islamophobic campaign’.· We were told by one Ruth Smeed of the Board of Deputies of British Jews that ‘The BNP website is now one of the most Zionist on the web - it goes further than any of the mainstream parties in its support of Israel’.

But there is an even more interesting example, not least because it involves Engage, the organisation which has spearheaded attacks on supporters of the Boycott of Israel as ‘anti-Semitic’: One of its guest posters, one Michael Ezra, is good friends with Gilad Atzmon. On Harry’s Place, before being taken down, we had this delightful post from solicitor David Taube, who is happy to front the attack on Jenna Delich:

‘Gilad Atzmon and Jewishness
Last week, Mikey invited me for a drink with Gilad Atzmon.
Mikey's thoughts on Gilad and his worldview follow, below.
Gilad was, I have to say, utterly charming and a delightful drinking companion. He arrived with a copy of his album "Exile" and his new work, Artie Fishel and the Promised Band. On the way home in the taxi, we played the first of the two albums. My taxi driver thought it excellent, and so did I.’ March 19 2007.

Such good friends have Mikey and Atzmon become, (Atzmon is an ex-Israeli and a Zionist who is also a holocaust denier and a believer in the bona fides of the Protocols of the Elders of Zion) that he has become Atzmon’s errand boy undertaking ‘research’ into anti-Zionist Jews like Roland Rance & myself. ’

Repeatedly I have asked David Hirsh, who runs the Engage site, to stop using Mikey as a guest poster given his record of consorting with anti-Semites. To date there has been no response, so again – David Hirsh – are you going to stop working with Mikey rather than going with him to meetings like the Independent Jewish Voices one on the Boycott earlier this year?

But maybe this is why even Hirsh has now admitted that ‘Not knowing who Duke was is a fair enough excuse.’

The attack on Jenna Delich is nothing but pure hypocrisy. It is motivated by nothing other than the success that the Boycott and Disinvestment campaign is having. Jenna made a mistake, for which she is being pilloried. However it was quite an easy mistake to make. David Duke is hardly a household name and it is quite easy to be wise in hindsight.

What we do know is that if Jenna Delich were not a supporter of the Palestinians and Boycott then she could have become David Irving’s wife and she would have received no attention from the hypocrites of Harry’s Place.
Tony Greenstein

Gilad Atzmon Comes Out - Now an open anti-Semite

I am not a Jew anymore.  I despise the Jew in me. I absolutely detest the Jew in you.

This blog was set up in 2007 to combat the pernicious influence of Gilad Atzmon, who operated on the fringes of the Palestine solidarity campaign.  To me and others anti-Zionist Jews it was clear that Atzmon was, without doubt, anti-Semitic.  Unfortunately this wasn’t at all clear to many others in the movement.

The Socialist Workers Party in particular couldn’t see the light and for a long time defended Atzmon.   See for example Time to say goodbye Why does the SWP not break its links withholocaust-denier Gilad Atzmon? 

The anti-Semitic Jazzman

What was decisive in breaking the influence of Atzmon over many in the Palestine solidarity movement was the joint call by Ali Abunimah, Omar Barghouti, Joseph Massad and other Palestinians for the movement to dissociate itself from Atzmon.  Granting NoQuarter: A Call for the Disavowal of the Racism and Antisemitism of GiladAtzmon

I had many long arguments with many people who just didn’t seem to get it.  Not just common and garden fools like Roy Ratcliffe of Exeter PSC, who composed lengthy treaties proving that the Eart was flat and Atzmon was an anti-racist  but people who had a much higher intellectual calibre.

For example Richard Falk, the distinguished professor and UN representative in Gaza, provided a  blurb for Atzmon’s book The Wandering Who.  In an email to me of 18 December 2011 Richard wrote ‘I appreciate some of the points and arguments that are made. Nevertheless, having re-read Atzmon's book and his responses to comparable lines of criticism I am not prepared to alter, much less renounce, my endorsement…. Atzmon may have pushed his basic argument too far, but it seems to me a valid inquiry that can lead to debate and discussion, but is not appropriate to denounce, and to go further, and denounce those who endorsed the reading of the book.’  

I found it frustrating that people like Richard Falk could not see what was in front of their eyes, but he was not alone.  The primary reason for the difficulty in persuading people that Atzmon was an anti-Semite was because of the determined efforts of the Zionist movement to equate all support for the Palestinians and opposition to Zionism as anti-Semitic.  It had indeed blurred the distinction between anti-Zionism and anti-Semitism, such that people could no longer tell the difference between the two.

As I wrote at the height of the controversy in Seamy Side of Solidarity 'Like the boy who cried wolf, the charge of "anti-semitism" has been made so often against critics of Zionism and the Israeli state that people now have difficulty recognising the genuine article.'

Falk had written that Atzmon’s book was "A transformative story told with unflinching integrity that all (especially Jews) who care about real peace, as well as their own identity, should not only read, but reflect upon and discuss widely."

Ramzy Baroud, Editor of the Palestine Chronicle wrote in the blurb of Atzmon's book, The Wandering Who that “Gilad Atzmon decided to open Pandora’s Box, and ignite a debate that has been frustratingly dormant for too long. His experiences are most authentic, views are hard-hitting, and, at times, provocative. It must be read and discussed.”  Ramzy Baroud is not stupid yet he too did not get it.

Professor John J. Mearsheimer of The Israel Lobby saw The Wandering Who as ‘Essential to an understanding of Jewish identity politics and the role they play on the world stage.’

The idiotic Dr. Samir Abed-Rabbo splutterd that Atzmon’s book was "A pioneering work that deserves to be read and Gilad Atzmon is brave to write this book!"

Lauren Booth, Cherie Blair’s brain dead sister-in-law, wrote that “It is more than an academic exercise. It is a revelation!” Booth is clearly easily satisfied!

Eric Walberg of Al Aharam Weekly believed that ‘'In his inimitable deadpan style, Atzmon identifies the abscess in the Jewish wisdom tooth – exilic tribalism – and pulls it out. Ouch!” 

Jeff Blankfort an anti-Semite from the USA who used to be on the left, described Atzmon’s  book as "A brilliant analysis that makes what appear to be contradictions in Jewish identity based political behavior not only comprehensible but predictable."

One suspects Blankfort would have difficulty predicting a restaurant menu.

And Professor James Petras, who believes that the Israeli tail wages the American dog,  wittered on about how "Atzmon has the courage - so profoundly lacking among Western intellectuals"

Karl Sabbagh wrote that ‘Atzmon’s insight into the organism created by the Zionist movement is explosive.’  Quite how a vacuum can be explosive is best left to better minds than Sabbagh.

The unknown and best forgotten academic Dr. Makram Khoury-Machool wrote that  “Having known Gilad for 25 years, I read the book in English, I heard it in Hebrew and reflected on it in Arabic. Gilad Atzmon is astonishingly courageous” Makram Khoury-Machool has the ability to speak and read in 3 languages yet he is incapable of thinking in even one of them.

To the Israeli lecturer Oren Ben Dor, for whom the Holocaust is god's just revenge on the Jews, preordained in the thicket of his academic prose, Atzmon’s book was ‘A fascinating achievement”.

To Kim Petersen of the anti-Semitic Dissident Voice “Gilad Atzmon is someone who encompasses what it means to be an intellectual.” Thus demonstrating above all that she is no intellectual.

For Dr. Kevin Barrett “Gilad Atzmon is the Moses of our time” in other words another false Messiah.

What these and other eulogies to the Atzmon's ego demonstrate is not merely the stupidity of so many academics, whose use of long words and complicated phrases is designed to mask their own superficiality, but how Atzmon managed to pull the wool over peoples’ eyes.

It was that which I found most frustrating.

David Taube of Harry's Place and Mike Ezra excuse Atzmon's anti-SemitismMany Zionists too were fascinated by Atzmon because he was repeating many of their tropes, not least that Zionism and Judaism were inextricably linked.   People like Mikey Ezra and David Taube of Harry’s Place were fascinated.  Taube described a jaunt that he and Mikey Ezra had gone on with Atzmon:

'Last week, Mikey invited me for a drink with Gilad Atzmon.  Mikey’s thoughts on Gilad and his worldview follow, below. 

‘Gilad was, I have to say, utterly charming and a delightful drinking companion....
Is Gilad Atzmon a racist? Not in the narrow sense of being preoccupied by genetic differences between people certainly. He is rather, I think, a ‘cultural essentialist’: if such a term exists.'  

You get that?  A cultural essentialist, not a racist!

But with his latest tweet, there can be no doubt about Atzmon’s anti-Semitism.

‘1.        I am not a Jew anymore.  2.  I indeed despise the Jew in me (whatever is left).  3.  I absolutely detest the Jew in you.’

Arthur Topham - holocaust denier for whom Atzmon gave 'expert' evidence - KKK leader David Duke who wanted to give evidence was refused entry  into Canada

Last November Atzmon gave expert witness testimony (!) on behalf of Arthur Topham, an anti-Semite and holocaust denier, to a Canadian court.   Despite this Topham was convicted of racial hatred and is awaiting sentence.  

I have previously posted a compendium of Atzmon’s anti-Semitic sayings.  It can be found at:  A Guide to the Sayings of Gilad Atzmon, the anti-Semitic jazzman.  According to Atzmon, I am a Zionist because he too, like the Zionists, argues that any Jew who is politically active as a Jew must be a Zionist.

It is somewhat ironic that Atzmon is a fierce opponent of BDS.  For him it is a Jewish enterprise.  Atzmon makes a nasty, vicious attack on Omar Barghouti, who is facing the possibility of Israeli reprisals and deportation, despite being a long-standing Israeli resident.  In Omar Accomplished His Job, Omar Is Free To Go Atzmon says that 

'BDS was an Israeli controlled opposition maneuver.  For Israel, BDS presented the ideal front on which to fight. Instead of battling for a Palestinian Right Of Return, that is ethically solid and backed by UN resolutions, the solidarity movement was reduced to an internal Jewish debate over the “Right to BDS.”    

I just hope that Ramzy Baroud, Karl Sabbagh and co. have the honesty to admit that they made a mistake.