The Zionist Movement is happy to use the Holocaust to justify its crimes but doesn't want people to understand what its relationship with the Nazis was
On 19th March the
Jewish Chronicle led with what it termed an ‘Exclusive’. Jeremy Corbyn had intervened
over the expulsion of Israeli dissident Professor Moshe Machover whom it
described as a “'Nazis supported Zionism’
activist.’
The Jewish Chronicle and the
Zionist Jewish Labour Movement objected to the fact that the ‘Tel Aviv-born academic quoted architect of
Final Solution in article distributed at Labour conference.’ You will note
that they did not assert that Machover was wrong. What they objected to was
that he was telling the truth! According to Zionism’s junk academic David
Hirsh, Moshe was guilty of “monstering of
Jews and of Israel” although Israel wasn’t even in existence when Heydrich,
the engineer of the Final Solution, was speaking favourably of Zionism.
 |
| The Gestapo were more than willing to concentrate Jews in just one place |
All this was in the context of
the fake anti-Semitism smear campaign. It is difficult to imagine a better way to legitimise anti-Semitism than
to equate telling the truth with anti-Semitism. However since Zionists aren’t
interested in combating anti-Semitism then that is an irrelevant consideration
for them.
 |
| Moshe Machover |
Almost alone amongst the
suspensions and expulsions in the past three years there is one that rankles
with the JLM and the Israel lobby more than any other and that is the case of
Moshe Machover, Emeritus Professor at King’s College, London University.
Moshe was auto expelled, i.e. without a hearing, by Sam
Matthews at the beginning of October 2017 and by the end of the month he had
been reinstated. Up and down the country CLPs, trade union branches and other groups
passed resolutions opposing the expulsion.
Ostensibly Moshe was expelled
because it was alleged he was a member of the Communist Party of Great Britain. This was an assertion
made without a shred of evidence. The real reason was because Moshe had penned
an article Anti-Zionism does not equal
Anti-Semitism.
 |
| A novel on a romance between an Israeli Jew and Arab was banned from the English high school syllabus because inter-racial marriages are considered a social taboo in Israel |
To most people it was
incomprehensible that the one of the founders of Matzpen, the Socialist
Organisation in Israel and a distinguished academic in Britain, had been
expelled at all. The idea that expelling Jewish people helps Labour combat anti-Semitism
is one of the more bizarre features of the fake anti-Semitism witchhunt and should
be perverse even to the dimmest Zionist mind.
 |
| Herzl's Jewish State pamphlet - he welcomes the fact that the antisemites will be 'keenly interested in helping us' |
Moshe’s real offence was having
written the above article but instead of prosecuting him over this they tried a
bureaucratic approach. A false allegation
that he was a member of the CPGB. Since
then there has been no further attempts to expel Moshe.
 |
| From Herzl's pamphlet The Jewish State |
That was why the Jewish Chronicle
has decided to test the waters afresh after the adoption of the IHRA misdefinition of anti-Semitism. The IHRA is
designed to smear as anti-Semitic anyone who makes any fundamental criticism of
Israel and Zionism. In particular the Zionists believe that Moshe has infringed
one of the IHRA’s illustrations of ‘anti-Semitism’ namely ‘Drawing comparisons of contemporary Israeli policy to that of the
Nazis’.
 |
| Zionist historian David Cesarani saying the same thing in his book as Ken Livingstone - that the Nazis supported Zionism pre 1939 |
Moshe’s ‘crime’ was drawing
attention to the Zionist record during the period of the Nazis. That is quite
understandable. The JLM do not want people to know that during the Nazi period
the Zionists took a conscious decision NOT to fight fascism but to collaborate
with it and use it to their advantage. That was why Ken Livingstone was hounded
out of the party.
So in the interests of telling
the truth, I thought it might be helpful to illuminate a few facts that the JLM
would prefer were kept hidden.
Zionist Exploitation of the Holocaust
As we know,
from their repetitious accusations of ‘anti-Semitism’ Zionism never fails to use
the Holocaust as a propaganda weapon. The examples are legion. For example when
Matan Vilnai, Israel’s Deputy Defence Minister threatened the
Palestinians of Gaza with a Holocaust or when Israeli Foreign Minister, Abba
Eban described the Green Line separating the West Bank from Israel as ‘Auschwitz borders.’
 |
| From the Jewish State - the phrase 'the terrible power of our purse' is clearly antisemitic - this page demonstrates how Herzl rejoiced in the support of antisemites |
Israel has only
just commemorated Yom Ha Shoah, Holocaust
Remembrance Day. However Zionism doesn’t remember the Holocaust in order to
learn and impart the lessons that most people would draw from such a terrible
event, namely that we should renew our opposition to racism. That genocide must
never be repeated.
On the
contrary the lesson that Zionism draws from the Holocaust is that the ‘Jewish
People’ itself a racial mystification, in the form of a ‘Jewish’ State should
be militarily strong. Which means the continued subjugation of the
Palestinians.
 |
| Rohinga children - the Burmese army uses Israeli weaponry |
So we have
the obscenity of Israel arming and equipping the Burmese regime whilst it slaughters the Rohinga
people. A carbon copy of what happened in the 1970’s when Israeli support played a
crucial part in the genocide of up to 200,000 Mayan Indians in
Guatemala.
The other
lesson that Zionism imparts is that anti-Semitism is inherent in non-Jewish
society and cannot be eradicated and that Jews will only be safe in their
racial paradise. For example the article Israel marks Holocaust Remembrance
Day amid fears of resurgent anti-Semitism, after going through a list of anti-Semitic incidents
in the past year, it quotes researchers at Tel Aviv University as concluding
that ‘Many Jews in the Diaspora feel
increasingly insecure and are questioning their place in society.’ This is,
what they like to call, Zionist wishful thinking.
 |
| From Herzl's Diaries - he tried to enlist the support of British imperialist Cecil Rhodes - nowadays the Zionists pretend that they are a movement of national liberation |
There is no mention of the fact that
the shooting of Jews in the United States just happened to occur as a result of
the Presidency of Donald Trump, a White Supremacist who also just happens to be
the best friend Israel has ever had in the White House.
The
Holocaust is deliberately used to foster Israeli nationalism and the hatred of
non-Jews. For Zionism there are no universal or moral lessons from the
Holocaust. The slogan ‘never again’
only applies to Jews.
That is why
it is necessary to examine what exactly was the role that Zionism played with
the accession to power of the Nazis in 1933.
Zionist
Relations with the Nazi from 1933 Onwards
 |
| This was the Zionist attitude to anti-Semitism throughout its history, including today |
Firstly
there was nothing unique about the Zionist attitude to the Nazis. From the very start Zionism had acted
according to Theodor Herzl’s maxim at the time of the Dreyfus Affair. In his
Diaries Herzl, the founder of Political Zionism had written:
In
Paris... I achieved a freer attitude towards anti-Semitism, which I now began
to understand historically and to pardon. Above all, I recognise the emptiness
and futility of trying to 'combat' anti-Semitism. [Diaries of Theodore Herzl, Gollancz, London
1958 p.6, May 1895].
Herzl’s attitude, that anti-Semitism
must be exploited to Zionism’s advantage and that without anti-Semitism there
would be no Zionism held true in the era of the Nazis. As Herzl noted,
‘the governments of all countries scourged by
Anti-Semitism will be keenly interested in assisting us to obtain the
sovereignty we want.’ [Theodor Herzl, The
Jewish State, p.28 H Pordes, London 1972]
When Hitler
came to power in Germany it was clear to most Jews throughout the world that the
Nazis were no ordinary anti-Semitic regime. Throughout Eastern Europe, from
Poland to Romania and the Baltic states, anti-Semitism was rife. Ghetto benches
in Polish universities had been introduced in 1935 and anti-Semitic laws had
been introduced in Hungary and other countries.
The Nazis however
represented something entirely different from the feudal and religious anti-Semitism
of the Eastern Europe. The Nazis were unconcerned with the myth that the Jews
killed Christ. They were anti-communists who believed that the Jews were the
germ carriers of Bolshevism, engaged in a world-wide conspiracy to undermine
every nation bar their own. The Jews were a devil people. The Nazis had
contempt for the unsystematised anti-Semitism that ended up in pogroms, a few
deaths, but a continuation of the ‘Jewish problem’. They were scientific racists.
The Nazis
began with a concerted legislative attack to drive the Jews out of society
beginning on April 7th 1933 with the Law for the Restoration of the Professional Civil
Service which resulted in the dismissal
of Jews (apart from veterans of the first world war and their offspring) from
the civil service. It proceeded via the 1935 Nuremburg Laws, which removed
citizenship from the Jews and made them subjects. The Zionists welcomed the
Nuremburg laws as clarifying the situation of Jews in Germany.
For the
Nazis it didn’t matter whether or not someone who was Jewish converted to
Christianity. Once a Jew always a Jew. Being Jewish was a racial not a
religious category, unlike the situation in the anti-Semitic countries of
Eastern Europe. Thus there appeared the Christian
Jew, Jews who had converted to Christianity. In Nazi eyes they remained
Jewish. The Protestant Reich Church in particular went along with this and
barred them from their precincts.
Jews the
world over knew that the advent of Hitler in a country that was the citadel of European
civilisation, Goethe, Schiller and Beethoven, was entirely different from the
plethora of anti-Semitic regimes in Eastern Europe. The result was that when
Hitler took power there was an instant reaction from world Jewry. The Daily
Express described it as ‘Judea Declares War on Germany’ but of
course it was the other way around (though fascists have subsequently used this
headline to justify Hitler’s war on the Jews).
World Jewry
were united in seeing the advent of Hitler as a menace and threat to the
existence of German Jewry. An international Jewish boycott of Nazi Germany grew
up almost instantaneously supported by the labour movement and many non-Jews.
The history of the Boycott is best described in Edwin Black’s book, The Transfer Agreement.
There was no
section of Jewry who welcomed or saw any good in the advent of the Nazis bar
one. Most Jews feared for the German Jewish community. The Zionist leaders
however only saw good coming from the rise of Hitler to power. Their only
concern was whether or not the Nazis would benefit the Jewish
state-in-the-making. They were determined to exploit the rise of Hitler to
their own advantage.
Francis
Nicosia, Professor of Holocaust Studies at Vermont University, cites Berl
Katznelson, second only to David Ben Gurion, as describing the rise of the
Nazis as ‘an opportunity to build and
flourish like none we have ever had or ever will have.’ [Zionism and
Anti-Semitism in Nazi Germany, p.91, CUP 2008] Tom Segev, the Israeli
journalist and historian, ascribes the same comments to a report from Moshe
Beilinson, a Mapai activist, to Katznelson..
Ben Gurion,
the leader of Palestinian Zionism and the first Israeli Prime Minister
expressed the hope that the Nazi victory would become a ‘fertile force for Zionism.’ [Tom Segev, The Seventh Million,
p.18, 1993 Hill and Wang]
Of course it
can be argued that very few people in 1933 could foresee the Holocaust but most
Jews feared the worst in respect of the Nazis’ intentions. Both Ben Gurion and Jabotinsky foresaw the
extermination of the Jews. [Segev, p.18]
 |
| In New York 55,000 packed inside Madison Square Gardens with another 35,000 outside. To prevent this rally on March 27th Goering had summoned the leaders of the German Jewish community to get them to try and get it called off - only the Zionists agreed to do so |
Every
section of Jewish society bar the Jewish bourgeoisie and the Zionist movement
supported the campaign to boycott Nazi Germany.
In August
1933 the Zionist movement reached agreement with the Nazis for a trading
agreement, Ha'avara. It involved the use
of the assets of German Jews who emigrated to purchase German goods which were
exported to Palestine. The same Jews were allowed to take £1,000 in foreign
currency with them in order to enter Palestine as capitalists, without the need
for an immigration certificate. When these goods were sold in Palestine, the migrants
whose money it was received a fraction of the value of their money.
This
benefited the Zionists enormously since it enabled whole industries like
brewery and printing to develop. Ha’avara accounted
for 60% of total capital investment in Jewish Palestine. [David Rosenthall, Chaim Arlosoroff
65 Years After his Assassination, Jewish
Frontier, May-June 1998, p. 28]. Literally Hitler built the Zionist economy in
Palestine.
What
was the reason for Nazi Germany agreeing to this deal which on the face of it
involved a unilateral transfer of German wealth to the Zionist economy in
Palestine? Initially at least they gained no foreign currency though it did
keep German factories working.
‘One of the German authorities’ principal
goals in negotiating with the Zionist movement was to fragment the Jewish
boycott of German goods...
Correspondence between Heinrich Wolff, the German consul in Palestine,
and the German Foreign Ministry shows that shattering the boycott was a key
motive for the German authorities in concluding the Transfer Agreement.’
Whilst
most Jews were boycotting the Nazi economy the Zionists were doing their best
to expand their trade with them. Ha'avara acted as the spearhead of a concerted
attempt to increase the market for German goods throughout the Middle East.
It
was condemned vociferously by Jews the world over. Baruch Vladeck, the editor
of the Yiddish daily Forward and
Chairman of the Jewish Labor Committee in the United States described how
‘The whole organized labor
movement and the progressive world are waging a fight against Hitler through
the boycott. The Transfer Agreement scabs on that fight.’
Vladeck
contended that
‘The main purpose of the Transfer is not to
rescue the Jews from Germany but to strengthen various institutions in
Palestine.’
Vladeck termed Palestine ‘the
official scab agent against the boycott in the Near-East’ because ‘without the worldwide effort to topple the
Third Reich, Hitler would have never agreed to the Transfer Agreement.’ [Lenni
Brenner, pp. 92-93, 51 Documents: Zionist
Collaboration with the Nazis’, Barricade Books, 1972].
There
is no doubt, as Edwin Black argued, that the aim of Ha'avara was not to rescue
German Jews but to rescue their wealth. Some 20,000 Jews were able to emigrate from
Germany under Ha'avara but these were among the richest Jews who would have had
least difficulty in emigrating anyway. What Ha'avara did was to take the
pressure off the Nazis. Zionism prioritised its own needs above the needs of
Jews.
Whereas
most Jews did all they could to try and help destroy the Nazi government in its
infancy, the Zionist movement took a different position altogether. So keen was it to collaborate and work with
the Nazis that it couldn’t even condemn the Nazi government and its
anti-Semitism at its 1933 Congress in Prague.
Even
Elie Wiesel, the arch Zionist, who was a survivor of Auschwitz, admitted that
the
‘Jewish
leaders of Palestine never made the rescue of European Jews into an
overwhelming national priority. We know that Zionist leader Itzhak Gruenbaum...
considered creating new settlements more urgent than saving Jews from being
sent to Treblinka and Birkenau.’
Wiesel cited approvingly Tom Segev’s conclusion
that ‘Only a few survivors owed their
lives to the efforts of the Zionist movement’ [The Land That
Broke Its Promise : THE SEVENTH
MILLION: The Israelis and the Holocaust].
Prior
to 1939 the Zionist leaders lobbied the Gestapo not to allow emigration to any
other destination bar Palestine, so much for the nonsense that Ha'avara was
about saving Jews. As Saul Friedland wrote, ‘the Palestine leadership refused to extend any help to emigrants whose
destination was not Eretz Israel.’ [Nazi
Germany and the Jews, 1933-1945, p.57, Orion Books, 2009]
Ben
Gurion’s official biographer, Shabtai Teveth quotes Ben Gurion as saying that
where there was ‘a conflict of interest
between saving individual Jews and the good of the Zionist enterprise, we shall
say that the enterprise comes first.’ For Ben Gurion ‘there were no “personal” cases, no individual Jews for him’ there was
only ‘the Jewish people.’ [Teveth, The Burning Ground 1886-1948, pp. 855,
857, Houghton Mifflin, Boston, 1987].
This
was demonstrated in what was termed ‘cruel Zionism’. When the Western powers
held a conference in Evian in France to discuss the Jewish refugee question in
Europe, the Zionists hoped that it would fail.
They repeatedly expressed their fears that discussion of the refugees
would take the spotlight off the building up of the ‘Jewish’ state in
Palestine. The Western leaders were also opposed to letting the Jews of Germany
into their countries. The only positive outcome from Evian was the offer from
Gen. Trujillo of San Domingo to accept 100,000 Jewish refugees. Brazil’s
representative, Helio Lobo, indicated that Brazil could accept 40,000 emigrants
a year, though nothing like this number were admitted. [S Beit Zvi, Post-Ugandan Zionism on Trial, A Study of the
Factors That Caused the Mistakes Made by the Zionist Movement During the
Holocaust, 1991, p. 170, Zahala, Tel Aviv].
The
Jewish Agency headed by Berl Locker, was unremitting in its hostility to the
offer of the Dominican Republic and did their best to destroy it.
Ben
Gurion wrote a memo to the Jewish Agency Executive in 1938 explaining that
‘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 in
Palestine on the other, the Jewish sense of pity will prevail and our people's
entire strength will be directed at aid for the refugees in the various
countries. Zionism will vanish from the agenda and indeed not only world public
opinion in England and America but also from Jewish public opinion. We are
risking Zionism's very existence if we allow the refugee problem to be
separated from the Palestine problem.’ [Memo of 17.12.38 to Zionist Executive,
Arie Bober, The Other Israel, p.171
After the Nazi pogrom of Kristalnacht, when nearly
all German synagogues were set on fire, hundreds of Jews murdered and property
destroyed, the British agreed to admit 10,000 Jewish children (though not their
parents). The Zionists were furious that they were not going to Palestine and
Ben Gurion expressed his anger in a speech to Mapai’s Central Committee on 9th
December 1938, he said:
‘If
I knew that it would be possible to save all the children in Germany by
bringing them over to England, and only half of them by transporting them to
Eretz Yisrael, then I would opt for the second alternative. For we must weigh
not only the life of these children, but also the history of the People of
Israel.’ [Yoav Gelber, ‘Zionist policy and the fate of European Jewry 1939-42,
Yad Vashem Studies,, Vol. 12.;, p.199, Segev, p.28].
‘No,
and I say it again – no! This tendency to consider Zionisactivities secondary
must be resisted….’
‘readily
fit with activities for the benefit of the Diaspora, and this is our tragedy.’
But if a choice had to be made between the two, then ‘Zionism comes first.’ The
Blue & Yellow Stars of David The Zionist Leadership and the Holocaust,
1939-1945, Harvard University Press, 1990, Cambridge Massachussets, p.76.
 |
| Rudolf Kasztner |
The Nazi patronage of Kasztner, and their agreement
to let him save six hundred prominent Jews, were part of the plan to
exterminate the Jews. Kasztner was given a chance to add a few more to that
number. The bait attracted him. The opportunity of rescuing prominent people
appealed to him greatly. He considered the rescue of the most important Jews as
a great personal success and a success for Zionism.’
Halevy found that Kasztner had lied when he denied giving testimony at
Nuremburg after the war in favour of a leading Nazi, Himmler’s personal
emissary in Hungary, Col. Kurt Becher. What the court didn’t know was that
Kasztner had given testimony in favour of 7 Nazis including Wisliceny, the
butcher of Greek and Slovakian Jewry and Herman Krumey, the man who implemented
on a day to day basis the extermination of Hungarian Jewry. Kasztner did all
these things as an official emissary of the Jewish Agency, not as an
individual.
From
the beginning of the Nazi regime, Zionism
‘became a
central component of Nazi Jewish policy as the Nazi state sought to reverse
Jewish emancipation and assimilation in Germany and to end Jewish life in the
Reich…’[Nicosia, p. 105].
A
‘generally ‘pro-Zionist’ stance had emerged as a result of the Ha’avara
strategy in Nazi Jewish policy.’ [Nicosia ZANG,
p. 89]
On
28th January 1935 Reinhardt Heydrich, issued a directive stating:
‘the activity of the Zionist-oriented youth organizations
that are engaged in the occupational restructuring of the Jews for agriculture
and manual trades prior to their emigration to Palestine lies in the interest
of the National Socialist state’s leadership.’
These organisations therefore ‘are not to
be treated with that strictness that it is necessary to apply to the members of
the so-called German-Jewish organizations (assimilationists)’. Lucy Dawidowicz,;
The War Against the Jews 1933-45, Penguin, London 1987.
In
May 1935 Schwarze Korps, paper of the SS, wrote in a similar vein that
‘the
Zionists adhere to a strict racial position and by emigrating to Palestine they
are helping to build their own Jewish state.... The assimilation-minded Jews
deny their race and insist on their loyalty to Germany or claim to be
Christians because they have been baptised in order to subvert National
Socialist principles.’ Randolph Braham, The
Politics of Genocide – The Holocaust in Hungary, Vol. 1. Columbia
University Press, 1981 p. 484, fn. 94., 5 May 1935, L. Dawidowicz, p.118,
Zionism
sought to build a Jewish state in order to perpetuate what it called the
‘Jewish people’. It was a movement based on a racial fantasy. At critical
times, not only during the Nazi era, the Zionist movement has prioritised
either building its own movement or the Israeli state above the interests of
Jews. It did this during the Hitler era,
it did it during the period of the neo-Nazi Junta in Argentina between 1976 and
1983. It did this in the civil war in Russia when the leader of the Revisionist
Zionism Vladimir Jabotinsky allied with the leader of the White Russians
Petlyura, despite his forces having massacred thousands of Jews.
Despite its
accusation of ‘anti-Semitism’, the Zionist movement has never opposed
anti-Semitism. Of course many individual
Zionists fought anti-Semitism including in the Warsaw Ghetto. Just as many
Zionists supported the Boycott of Nazi Germany but Zionism is an elitist
movement. During the Nazi era the
Zionist movement set their face against any campaign against the Nazis.
Below are
extracts from the letter sent by the Zionist Federation of Germany to Hitler.
Extracts - Memo from the German Zionist Federation to Adolf Hitler (21st
June 1933)
The full text can be found
in Lucy Dawidowicz’s Holocaust
Reader, pp. 150-155
May we
therefore be permitted to present our views, which, in our opinion, make
possible a solution in keeping with the principles of the new German State of
National Awakening and which at the same time might signify for Jews a new
ordering of the conditions of their existence ... Zionism has no illusions
about the difficulty of the Jewish condition, which consists above all in an
abnormal occupational pattern and in the fault of an intellectual and moral
posture not rooted in one’s own tradition ...
... an
answer to the Jewish question truly satisfying to the national state can be
brought about only with the collaboration of the Jewish movement that aims at a
social, cultural, and moral renewal of Jewry ...
Zionism
believes a rebirth of national life, such as is occurring in German life
through adhesion to Christian and national values, must also take place in the
Jewish national group. For the Jew, too, origin, religion, community of fate
and group consciousness must be of decisive significance in the shaping of his
life ...
On the
foundation of the new state, which has established the principle of race, we
wish so to fit our community into the total structure so that for us too, in
the sphere assigned to us, fruitful activity for the Fatherland is possible ...
Our acknowledgement of Jewish nationality provides for a clear and sincere
relationship to the German people and its national and racial realities.
Precisely because we do not wish to falsify these fundamentals, because we,
too, are against mixed marriage and are for maintaining the purity of the
Jewish group ...
... fidelity
to their own kind and their own culture gives Jews the inner strength that
prevents insult to the respect for the national sentiments and the
imponderables of German nationality; and rootedness in one’s own spirituality
protects the Jew from becoming the rootless critic of the national foundations
of German essence. The national distancing which the state desires would thus
be brought about easily as the result of an organic development.
Thus, a
self-conscious Jewry here described, in whose name we speak, can find a place
in the structure of the German state, because it is inwardly unembarrassed,
free from the resentment which assimilated Jews must feel at the determination
that they belong to Jewry, to the Jewish race and past. We believe in the
possibility of an honest relationship of loyalty between a group-conscious
Jewry and the German state ...
For its
practical aims, Zionism hopes to be able to win the collaboration even of a
government fundamentally hostile to Jews, because in dealing with the Jewish
question no sentimentalities are involved but a real problem whose solution
interests all peoples, and at the present moment especially the German people.
The
realisation of Zionism could only be hurt by resentment of Jews abroad against
the German development. Boycott propaganda – such as is currently being carried
on against Germany in many ways – is in essence un-Zionist, because Zionism
wants not to do battle but to convince and to build ... Our observations,
presented herewith, rest on the conviction that, in solving the Jewish problem
according to its own lights, the German Government will have full understanding
for a candid and clear Jewish posture that harmonizes with the interests of the
state
