Showing posts with label Eichmann. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Eichmann. Show all posts

24 August 2024

Why did Jonathan Freedland Defend the Silencing of anti-Zionist Auschwitz Escapee, Rudolf Vrba, in The Escape Artist?

 Freedland Justified the Rewriting of History in order that the Holocaust could be Exploited by Zionism to Justify Genocide & Ethnic Cleansing

 'The Escape Artist: The Man Who Broke Out of Auschwitz to Warn the World, by Jonathan Freedland, John Murray (paperback edition, 2023)

 




The Vrba Wetzler Report

My Review of Freedland’s book has just been published by the Electronic Intifada. Below is a slightly amended version.

Freedland is an integral part of Britain’s Foreign Policy Establishment. He is a patron of Chatham House, the Royal Institute of International Affairs where our rulers discuss British foreign policy whilst taking a vow of silence about what they discuss outside its hallowed portals. 

There is no doubt that Freedland has strong Mossad/MI5 connections. He has ensured, with the Guardian's Editor, Katherine Viner, that the Guardian has become a lapdog of the British state, refusing as it did to support Julian Assange.

Freedland played the 'Jews as an ethnic minority' card to undermine Corbyn

Freedland is a ‘liberal’ Zionist which means that he uses multi-culturalism, positing British Jews as an ethnic minority, in order to defend the far-right Israeli state and its government. 

For Freedland, Jews are equally oppressed as Muslims and because most Jews define being Jewish in terms of Israel, we must not criticise the current genocide or Israel's Jewish Supremacist i.e. Zionist ideology.

The job of liberal Zionism is to do what right-wing Zionism cannot do abroad which is to pretend that Israel is the embodiment of Jewish, democratic values..

I confess I was somewhat surprised when 2 years ago Freedland brought out a biography on Rudolf Vrba, the man who, with his friend Alfred Wetzler, escaped from Auschwitz.  The book has had rave reviews in the right-wing press by those who know next to nothing about the holocaust except how to best exploit it for Israel’s genocidal purposes.

Today it is clear that you cannot be an anti-racist if you are a Zionist. When I grew up this wasn’t so clear but today it should be clear to all except the politically blind that a Jewish ethno-nationalist state cannot be anything other than a racist apartheid state. Just as the Christian nationalist states of Eastern Europe were the most enthusiastic about participating in the holocaust so it is with Israel, which today identifies with Nazi values.

When neo-Nazis and the far-right wax lyrical about Israel’s ethno-religious nationalism only the dishonest and stupid can have any illusions about where Israel is heading. It is the job of the Freedlands of this world to paint Israel in rosy colours and hide the fact that it has been a key supporter of fascism and repression the world over. What’s happening in Gaza happened many times over in Guatemala in the 1980s where Israel supplied the arms and training to the genocidal regime there.

Read and enjoy!

Tony Greenstein 

Jonathan Freedland is a senior journalist at The Guardian as well as a columnist for the Jewish Chronicle. He is the latter’s figleaf liberal Zionist. It was therefore a surprise that Freedland should choose to write about Rudolf Vrba, an anti-Zionist Jewish hero of the Holocaust.

Freedland’s problem was that the Zionist movement, because of its collaboration with the Nazis, in its desire to use their rise to power to build a ‘Jewish’ state, has virtually no Jewish anti-Nazi resistance heroes to its credit.

On 10 April 1944, alongside Alfred Wetzler, Vrba escaped from Auschwitz with the aim of warning Hungarian Jewry of the Nazis’ plans to exterminate the last major surviving Jewish community in Europe.

Noah Lucas, a critical Zionist historian described how,

As the European holocaust erupted, Ben-Gurion saw it as a decisive opportunity for Zionism ... Ben-Gurion above all others sensed the tremendous possibilities inherent in the dynamic of the chaos and carnage in Europe In conditions of peace, it was clear, Zionism could not move the masses of world Jewry. The forces unleashed by Hitler in all their horror must therefore be harnessed to the advantage of Zionism ... By the end of 1942 … the struggle for a Jewish state became the primary concern of the movement."

Those few Zionists who did fight in the Resistance, like Chajka Klinger were extremely critical of the role that the Zionist movement played.

My first criticism of The Escape Artist is its title. It gives the impression that Vrba was a circus act, another Houdini. Indeed Freedland makes just such a comparison. Freedland manages, in one short phrase, to both demean and trivialize Vrba’s bravery and heroism. Vrba was no escape artist or magician. He was someone whose survival was a combination of extreme bravery, good judgment and pure luck.

Vrba had very good reasons to hate the Zionist movement but Freedland is careful not to allow them space in his biography. Born Walter Rosenberg, Vrba lived in Slovakia, a puppet Nazi state which had been separated off from Czechoslovakia when Hitler invaded and dismembered it in 1939. It was ruled by the Hlinka or Slovak People’s Party. The president was a Catholic priest Father Tiso.

Freedland describes how as a 17-year-old, in February 1942, Vrba received a summons to report for deportation. Slovakia was the first country to deport its Jews. From March to October 1942 some 57,000 out of 88,000 Jews were deported.

Vrba’s reaction, in March 1942, was to flee to Hungary where he made contact with the socialist underground in Budapest. What Freedland doesn’t mention is that after staying with the underground Vrba visited Hungary’s Zionists. In Vrba’s autobiography, I Cannot Forgive, he describes what happened:

That afternoon I went to OMZsA House, headquarters of the Zionist organization in Budapest. There I told my story in detail to a stern-faced man in his middle thirties.

He pondered a while before he said: “You are in Budapest illegally. Is that what you are trying to say?

 “Yes.”

“Don’t you know you’re breaking the law.”

I nodded, wondering how a man with such a thick skull could hold down what seemed like a responsible position.

“And you expect to get work here without documents?”

“With false documents.”

Had I torn up the Talmud and jumped on it, I do not think I could have shocked him more. His mouth opened once or twice and then he roared: “Don’t you realize it’s my duty to hand you over to the police?”

Now it was my turn to gape. A Zionist handing over a Jew to Fascist police. I thought I must be going mad.

“Get out of here! Get out as fast as a bad wind!”

I left utterly bewildered. It was nearly three years before I realized just what OMZsA House and the men inside it represented.

When his contacts in the Underground warned him that the Zionist official might report him to the police Vrba decided to leave Budapest for Slovakia. Naturally not a word of this appeared in Freedland’s book.

Freedland had access to the personal papers of Vrba from his first wife Gerta Vrbova and his second wife, Robin, as well as other relatives. There is therefore a lot of useful and interesting information that he acquired on the personal life of Vrba but the use to which he put this is questionable, in particular the judgements he made about Vrba’s relationship with Vrbova.

Gerta Vrbova

Freedland never interviewed or met Vrba. He only talked to a bitter ex-wife, Gerta Vrbova, who blamed her ex-husband for the marital breakdown. So what did Freedland think he was doing making an assertion that "their lovemaking lacked the tenderness, the gentleness, she craved. Instead she felt it carried a trace of violence."

This is more than just prurience. It is an attempt to sow the seeds of doubt as to Vrba's character. Jane Bennett, Vrba's step-daughter, had memories of a "lovely, modest man." Freedland comments that "It was Rudi’s side of the acrimonious family story they heard." Well yes, but the same is true of Freedland! [pp. 318, 319]

Because the hardback preceded the paperback by a year, Bennett was able to come forward with another side to the story. According to her Rudi experienced "distress that, when he sent gifts to his two daughters, his presents would be returned, unopened." It would seem that Gerta, who had taken Freedland into her confidence, had a vengeful side to her. Not something she would admit to the credulous Freedland.

This biography is not a disinterested account of Vrba’s life. From the start Freedland had a hidden political agenda, prime amongst which was whitewashing the record of the Zionist movement during the Holocaust. Vrba was prime amongst the critics of the Zionist movement in Hungary in enabling the extermination of Hungarian Jewry.

When Vrba and Wetzler escaped from Auschwitz and reached the Jewish Council offices in Zilina, Slovakia they immediately set down their accounts of what was happening in Auschwitz, the only functioning Nazi extermination camp by then.

The report they compiled, the Vrba-Wetzler Report [VWR] (also known as the Auschwitz Protocols) revealed for the first time that Auschwitz was not, as was widely believed, a concentration and labor camp but an extermination camp.

Vrba and Wetzler were desperate to reveal the deadly preparations being made in Auschwitz to receive the 800,000 strong Hungarian Jewish community.

Rudolf Kasztner

The VWR, which was completed by 26 April by the Slovakian Judenrat [Jewish Council], was handed to the leader of Hungarian Zionism, Rudolf Kasztner by 29 April. Instead of distributing it and using it to inform Hungarian Jews of what would happen if they boarded the deportation trains, Kasztner covered its existence up and then used it as part of his negotiations with Adolf Eichmann, whose task it was to implement the Final Solution, in order to secure a train out of Hungary for the Zionist and Jewish elite.

On June 30 1944, 1,684 ‘Prominent’ Jews left Hungary, first for the Bergen-Belsen concentration camp and then for Switzerland. They comprised Kasztner’s extended family along with Jewish and Zionist leaders. Meanwhile, from 15 May to 7 July when Admiral Horthy, the ruler of Hungary called a halt to the deportations, some 437,000 Hungarian Jews had been deported to Auschwitz, the vast majority of whom were led straight to the gas chambers.

Freedland obscures the reasons why Kasztner did not distribute the VWR and omits his role in not only keeping the truth of Auschwitz from its victims but in actually misinforming them.

In Israel some years later, Kasztner was accused by a fellow Hungarian Jew, Malchiel Gruenwald, of collaborating with the Nazis. Because by then he had become a senior government official, Kasztner was forced by the state to sue for libel. However the trial of Gruenwald rapidly became effectively a trial of Kasztner. 

Dieter Wisliceny

Kasztner’s undoing came when he denied giving testimony at Nuremberg in favor of Kurt Becher, a Nazi leader and Heinrich Himmler’s personal emissary in Germany. Gruenwald's attorney Shmuel Tamir (who later became a Kahanist) then produced Kasztner’s affidavit in support of Becher. Later it transpired he had given favorable testimony to a host of other Nazi war criminals including two of Eichmann’s closest butchers, Dieter Wisliceny and Hermann Krumey.

Freedland’s explanation for Kasztner testifying in favor of mass murderers was that "perhaps Kasztner’s motivation was less compassion for Nazis in need than a blackmailed man’s fear of exposure."

This "explanation" is a novel one. Nazi war criminals on trial for their lives in Nuremberg were unlikely to be in a position to blackmail anyone. Kasztner’s efforts were not only on his behalf but that of the Jewish Agency and the World Jewish Congress.

Kurt Becher

Freedland’s suggestion that Kasztner’s appeal was upheld by the Supreme Court (by which time he was dead, assassinated by agents of Shin Bet in 1957), because

they accepted that Kasztner had in good faith believed that he was engaged in an effort to save the many, rather than the few

Haim Cohen

is the precise opposite of what happened. The Supreme Court found no such thing. Haim Cohen, Israel’s attorney-general, conducted the appeal. He argued that:

If in Kasztner’s opinion, rightly or wrongly, he believed that one million Jews were hopelessly doomed, he was allowed not to inform them of their fate; and to concentrate on the saving of the few. He was entitled to make a deal with the Nazis for the saving of a few hundred and entitled not to warn the millions ... that was his duty… It has always been our Zionist tradition to select the few out of many in arranging the immigration to Palestine ... Are we to be called traitors?

Judge Cheshin summed up the viewpoint of the majority of the Supreme Court when he ruled that:

A person sees that an entire community is doomed, is he allowed to make efforts to save the minority, although some of the efforts consist in hiding the truth from the majority or must he reveal the truth to all.

The decision of Israel’s Supreme Court was primarily political not legal. Cheshin voiced the fears of Israel’s Zionist Establishment that:

if we rule that Kasztner collaborated with the enemy because he failed to inform those who boarded the trains in [Kasztner's hometown] Kluj that they were heading for extermination, then it is necessary to bring to court today …. many other leaders and half-leaders who also kept silent in times of crisis, who didn’t inform others about what they knew.

Being a modest man, Freedland begins the book with "Praise for The Escape Artist" and there are 39 examples which demonstrate not so much the brilliance of his book as the ignorance of his admirers.

Adjectives such as "riveting," "thrilling" and "fascinating" abound. To Jamie Susskind Freedland’s book is "not just one of the best books I’ve read about the Holocaust, it is one of the most important books I’ve ever read."

To Zionist historian Simon Schama, the book is "immersive, shattering and ultimately redemptive." To Tom Holland The Escape Artist ranks alongside Anne Frank’s Diary and Primo Levy.

All I can say to these "experts" is that they should read Vrba’s book I Cannot Forgive. There is nothing of importance in The Escape Artist that isn’t in Vrba’s book. It is Vrba’s book, not Freedland’s cheap imitation thriller that ranks alongside Anne Frank’s Diary and Is This a Man.

According to the Financial Times, "Vrba died almost forgotten." Melissa Fay Green told how "I didn’t know Vrba’s name previously." For C.J. Carey it was a "little-known story."

The real question is why Vrba was unknown. The Holocaust has produced thousands of books and articles. Why then was it that the names of the first Jewish escapees from Auschwitz (leaving aside Siegfried Lederer who was taken out by an SS man) were almost entirely missing from the history of the Holocaust and Auschwitz?

The simple answer is that a conscious decision was taken by the Zionist Holocaust historians, led by Yehuda Bauer and Yisrael Gutman, to erase all mention of Vrba and Wetzler. Freedland justifies this and Zionism’s distortion of history because of the need to preserve Zionism’s monopoly when it comes to Holocaust history.

Freedland writes that “even in Israel … Vrba and Wetzler were barely recalled at all" and that it was only because of Ruth Linn’s "tireless campaign" that his memoir was eventually translated into Hebrew in 1998.

Even at Yad Vashem, the country's official Holocaust archive, museum and memorial in Jerusalem, the Auschwitz Report was filed away without the names of its authors."

Argentina's Jewish Mothers of the Disappeared Demonstrated Against Israel's Support for a Junta that Murdered Thousands of Jews

Freedland notes that the escapee’s two names had been anonymised yet he found this acceptable "because he was not an easy sell in Israel or in the mainstream Jewish diaspora." But Vrba’s memoirs were published in the diaspora. They were not however published in Israel, despite it being the nation that "stops once a year" to remember a Zionist version of the Holocaust. A sanitized Holocaust which justifies the very racism that European Jews experienced during the Nazi era.

Freedland claimed, in a dishonest rendition of the historical record, that what made Vrba "a more awkward witness still was his tendency to refer to the Jews whom he blamed as 'Zionists." This is untrue. Vrba was careful to distinguish between Zionists and Jews. It is Freedland himself who is guilty of this crime.

Freedland’s book is part of the process of manipulating and changing the historical record to accord with a false narrative of Zionist heroism. Freedland pretends that Vrba was a supporter of Israel "and rooted for it" believing that its existence "was a good thing for Jews."

The idea that Vrba was some kind of Zionist is absurd. Freedland provides no evidence for his assertion. On the contrary when he first met Ruth Linn, a Haifa University professor of education, he told her that he had no interest in “your state of the Judenrats and Kastners."

After the war Vrba was employed as a researcher in biochemistry in Czechoslovakia. But as time went on he became dissatisfied with Stalinist Czechoslovakia and decided to escape to the West.

Thus it was that Vrba escaped to Israel where he could claim citizenship under the Law of Return. But as Freedland concedes "this was no journey of Zionist homecoming." Israel was a gateway to the West.

(Vrba)did not take to Israel … nor was he much moved by the romance of a perennially persecuted nation … But there was something more painful. He looked around this new state and, often in high places, he saw the very individuals he believed had failed the historic test that had confronted them all less than fifteen years earlier.

Freedland describes how Vrba

could not contain his anger against those Zionists who he felt had betrayed the Jewish people, starting with Kasztner and, in his view the early Israeli leaders.

Freedland takes issue with Vrba’s attitude to the Zionists citing a few who had not collaborated such as Moshe Krausz, the head of the Palestine Office in Budapest.

This is true. In my book Zionism During the Holocaust I explain the  background to the establishment of the United State's War Refugee Board in January 1944, which was responsible for saving 200,000 Jews. It had been undertaken by the dissident revisionist Zionists ShmuelMerlin and Peter Bergson. But this was in the teeth of opposition by America’s Zionist leaders, Stephen Wise and Nahum Goldmann.

Freedland spoke of "a hinted suggestion that Zionism was prepared to sacrifice the mass of European Jewry in order to establish" the Israeli state. It was more than a hinted suggestion. The Zionist leaders repeatedly made it clear that saving Jews was secondary to building a "Jewish" state. For example Ben-Gurion argued that:

“It is the job of Zionism not to save the remnant of Israel in Europe, but rather to save the land of Israel for the Jewish people and the Yishuv.”

As Marek Edelman, the last Commander of the Warsaw Ghetto Resistance said:

“[During the war] it never even entered any of our minds that the Zionists were deliberately remaining passive in regard to the physical destruction of the Jews in order to additionally justify the founding of the State of Israel…

Instead of attacking the resulting distortion of Holocaust history Freedland justifies Vrba’s silencing because "handing a platform to Rudolf Vrba may have come to seem like a risk." A risk to whom or what? The truth or the Zionist rewriting of Holocaust history?

Freedland, despite his exploitation of Vrba’s memory, deplores the fact that Vrba was not minded to "soften his message to make it more palatable." Why should Vrba have softened his message? Is that what historians should do: adjust to the political climate of the day? Or is telling the truth more important?

Even worse Vrba speculated that Zionists such as Kasztner "like Hitler believed in a ‘master race.'" But such a belief is integral to Zionism as we can see today in Gaza.

Freedland justifies Bauer’s attempt to erase Vrba from history because of what the Zionist historian claimed was his "deep hatred for the Jewish leadership, Zionism. etc." Bauer is one of the main defenders of Kasztner, arguing that even if the Auschwitz Protocols and the secret of Auschwitz had been known, Hungarian Jews would not have believed it.

This is not the place to analyze this bogus argument -- knowing yet not knowing. The fact is that Kasztner had no right to make a decision on behalf of Hungary’s Jews to keep the secret of Auschwitz from them after the sacrifice made by Vrba and Wetzler.

As Israel's attorney-general Haim Cohen said at Kasztner’s appeal:

Eichmann, the chief exterminator, knew that the Jews would be peaceful and not resist if he allowed the prominents to be saved, that the "Train of the Prominents" was organized on Eichmann’s orders to facilitate the extermination of the whole people … if all the Jews of Hungary are to be sent to their death he is entitled to organize a rescue train for 600 people. He is not only entitled to it but is also bound to act accordingly.

Moshe Silberg

Moshe Silberg, the sole dissenting Supreme Court Judge, savaged this argument that even if de facto Kasztner facilitated the extermination of the Jews he was not guilty of collaboration:

"I must say that I cannot accept this argument. Is this ‘innocence’? Is there ‘representation’ of despair? Can a single individual, even jointly with some friends, despair on behalf – and without the knowledge – of 800,000 people? … The burning question of ‘By what authority’ and ‘quo warranto’ is an adequate answer to such a claim of Bona Fide.

Freedland tells how Vrba "refused to conform to what the world expects of a Holocaust survivor." Instead of praising Vrba’s determination to tell the truth Freedland sides with those who tried to silence him.

It was the leadership  of the Zionist movement -- whether it was in Hungary, Palestine or the United States -- who collaborated with the anti-Semites and obstructed rescue.

Stephen Wise and Nahum Goldmann tried to get Zionist dissidents Bergson and Merlin deported from the United States. In Israel after the war, Budapest Zionist functionary Moshe Krausz complained to the Jewish Agency about Kasztner only to find himself sacked.

Ruth Linn wrote a book describing how Vrba and the Auschwitz Protocols had remained unknown, not by accident but because of the deliberate decision of Bauer and the Zionist historians of Yad Vashem to erase him from history.

Freedland cites Linn’s book Escaping Auschwitz – A Culture of Forgetting in his bibliography but chose not to quote from it. In many ways Freedland’s biography of Vrba is really a response to Ruth Linn’s description of the process of erasure. Linn wrote that:

Whereas the two escapees accurately predicted the fate of the Hungarian Jews, what they could not have foreseen was that their postwar memoirs and documented report would be kept from the Israeli Hebrew-reading public …

Although I am a native Israeli who graduated from a prestigious private high school, I had never heard about the escape from Auschwitz at the numerous Holocaust ceremonies I attended. Nor had I ever read about it in any detail in any of the Hebrew Holocaust textbooks at school.

Linn told how "no [Israeli] publishing house, including Yad Vashem, would show any interest at all." Linn therefore set out to

trace the use the family of Israeli historians have made of misnaming, misreporting, miscrediting and misrepresenting in the secretive tale of the escape from Auschwitz.

Linn gives as an example the decision of Bauer in his best-known Hebrew textbook The Holocaust: Some Historical Aspects to devote just one sentence to the escape from Auschwitz and to render the two Jewish escapees anonymous. Both Bauer and fellow Yad Vashem historian Yisrael Gutman mention the escape at length in their 1994 English publications, yet it is absent in the Hebrew versions.

In 1999, a year after Vrba’s memoirs had been published in Hebrew, "an account of the escape from Auschwitz was finally included in Gutman’s Hebrew writings for high-school students." As Linn remarks:

Could a narrative of an individualistic escape, by a non-Zionist Jew critical of his Jewish leaders, ever be made to harmonize with the ‘collective aura’ that dominated the state of Israel?"

Netanyahu and Hungary's anti-Semitic Prime Minister - Viktor Orban

Zionism has always found its friends among the anti-Semites. Its founder, Theodor Herzl, wrote in his diaries that

the anti-Semites will become our most dependable friends, the anti-Semitic countries our allies.

Netanyahu’s friendship with Hungary’s Victor Orban is but one example.

Sanitized biography

Freedland had access to the personal papers of Vrba. Now that Vrba and his first wife Vrbova are dead, he has an obligation to place these papers in an academic archive and let others decide for themselves whether Freedland’s interpretation of them is skewed or not.

Freedland used his Guardian column to repeatedly attack Corbyn for 'antisemitism'

Freedland was a leading protagonist in the false anti-Semitism campaign in the Labour Party between 2015 and 2019. His choice of an anti-Zionist Jewish Holocaust hero as the subject of a book is therefore curious to say the least. It appears that one of Freedland’s motives in writing the biography was in order to both justify Vrba’s silencing by Zionism’s Holocaust historians and to obscure his message that Zionism was a quisling Jewish movement during the Holocaust.

What didn’t see the light of day in Freedland’s book was Vrba’s response of 22 September 1963 in The Observer to a letter the previous week by Jacob Talmon, who had complained bitterly when Hannah Arendt's reports of the Eichmann trial were published earlier that month.

Jacob Talmon, a professor at the Hebrew University, criticized Arendt for raising the question of the Judenrate (Jewish councils) and their collaboration with the Nazis in the implementation of the Final Solution. Vrba asked:

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, Kasztner -- bartered their own lives and the lives of 1,684 other 'prominent' Jews directly from Eichmann.

Nor did Freedland refer to Vrba’s memoirs in the Daily Herald of February 1961 when he wrote:

I am a Jew. In spite of that, indeed because of that, I accuse certain Jewish leaders of one of the most ghastly deeds of the war. This small group of quislings knew what was happening to their brethren in Hitler's gas chambers and bought their own lives with the price of silence … I was able to give Hungarian Zionist leaders three weeks’ notice that Eichmann planned to send a million of their Jews to his gas chambers … Kasztner went to Eichmann and told him, 'I know of your plans; spare some Jews of my choice and I shall keep quiet.

This is the story that Freedland chose not to tell in his sanitized biography of Vrba.

Tony Greenstein is the author of Zionism During the Holocaust

20 January 2024

The Nazification of Israel – When Israelis Talk about Extermination and Annihilation It’s Easy to Understand Why the German State Supports Them

Holocaust Memorial Day Meeting

Saturday 27 January 7 pm

Register here

http://tinyurl.com/4ka2x3ss

Never Again means Never Again for Everyone 

Palestinians Included



Yeshayahu Leibowitz

Yad Vashem is Israel’s Holocaust Remembrance Museum. Its is devoted to using the Holocaust, not as a way of warning the world of the dangers of fascism and racism but as a means of creating a particular Zionist narrative of the Holocaust as a means of legitimising the Israeli state.

As I show in my book, Zionism During the Holocaust, Yad Vashem distorts and manipulates the historical record in order to magnify Zionist resistance during the Holocaust whilst at the same time erasing the much larger role that anti-Zionist Jews (the vast majority of European Jews) played.

In particular Zionism has glossed over and condoned the collaboration of Zionist leaders with the Nazis. It has rehabilitated the most notorious of their collaborators, Rudolf Kasztner, the leader of Hungarian Zionism and the representative of the Jewish Agency in Hungary.

After the war Kasztner went to Nuremberg to testify in favour of several Nazi war criminals including Hermann Krumey, Eichmann’s second in command in Hungary who was in charge of the mechanics of the deportation process. Some 437,000 Hungarian Jews were deported to Auschwitz. Nearly all died in its gas chambers.

Yeshayahu Leibowitz was an Orthodox Jews, he turned down the Israel Prize and Professor at the Hebrew University Jerusalem - he was a polymath and had doctorates in medicine and philosophy. President Ezer Weizman described him as the 'spiritual conscience of Israel.' He called the settlers of the West Bank 'Judeo-Nazis'

Earlier this year 50 leading holocaust researchers in Israel wrote to Dani Dayan, Yad Vashem Chairman, asking him to speak out against those in Israel, including the Prime Minister himself, who were openly calling for genocide in Gaza.

Dayan himself is no slouch when it comes to racism. Former Chair of the Yesha Settlers Council he stood for the Knesset for the racist Tehiya settler party and then for Jewish Home. That a racist such as this could be Chairman of Israel’s Holocaust Memorial Museum is in itself proof of the poison at the heart of Israel’s abuse of the memory of the Holocaust.

You might think that it was a no-brainer for the Chair of Israel’s holocaust memorial centre to condemn calls for the extermination and murder of Palestinians. It’s like asking the Pope to condemn abortion. But no, you would be wrong. In Israel you can shed tears over the extermination of the Jews (but not the Disabled, Gypsies or Gays) but you can also be, at one and the same time, an out and out racist towards every other victim.

Dayan claimed that those calling for genocide in Israel were marginal, despite them including the President and Prime Minister. He doubled down on this: 

the State of Israel does a lot within the constraints Hamas imposes on us to comply with the proper moral standards and the laws of war.

He then let slip the real reason that Yad Vashem won’t be condemning a genocide that has already claimed over 30,000 lives, notwithstanding those dying of hunger and disease.

"Our area of concern is the Holocaust, and only the Holocaust,"

And there you have it. As far as Zionism and the Israeli state is concerned, there are no lessons to be learnt from the Holocaust other than that Jews are perpetual victims of anti-Semitism, even when genocide is being carried out in their name.

South Africa and the International Court

We should therefore be grateful to South Africa for doing what none of the corrupt Arab regimes (except for the Houthis) are doing. Despite the howls of Genocide Joe and his poodles Sunak and Starmer that their claims were ‘meritless’ it has put Israel, and with it the United States and the West on trial.

The South African Application Instituting Proceedings is meticulous and well worth reading. The meat of South Africa’s case can be found in paragraphs 100-109 on pages 59-70.

To take but a few examples Netanyahu, in the Knesset on 16 October 2023 described Israel’s attack on Gaza as

“a struggle between the children of light and the children of darkness, between humanity and the law of the jungle”

On 28 October 2023, as Israeli forces were preparing the ground invasion of Gaza, Netanyahu told Israelis that:

“you must remember what Amalek has done to you, says our Holy Bible. And we do remember”.

Netanyahu again referred to Amalek in a letter  of 3 November 2023 to Israeli soldiers. The relevant biblical passage reads:

Now go, attack Amalek, and proscribe all that belongs to him. Spare no one, but kill alike men and women, infants and sucklings, oxen and sheep, camels and asses”

The message could not be clearer.

Israeli Labor Party President Yitzhak Herzog was explicit. Israel should not distinguish between fighters and civilians, referring to Palestinians in Gaza, over one million of whom are children, as:

an entire nation out there that is responsible. It’s not true this rhetoric about civilians not aware not involved. It’s absolutely not true. … and we will fight until we break their backbone.


 

On 9 October 2023, War Minister Yoav Gallant stated that Israel was imposing a complete siege on Gaza.

No electricity, no food, no water, no fuel. Everything is closed. We are fighting human animals

In referring to ‘human animals’ Gallant was repeating, word for word, Himmler’s description of the Jews. Himmler said, in a speech in Posen/Posnan on October 4 1943 that:

We Germans, who are the only people in the world who have a decent attitude towards animals, will also assume a decent attitude towards these human animals.

It is not known whether Gallant was aware of this but the very fact that he used the same words as the man responsible for implementing the Final Solution is sufficient in itself.

On 10 November the Kahanist Minister of Police and Security, Itamar ben Gvir, clarified that:

when we say that Hamas should be destroyed, it also means those who celebrate, those who support, and those who hand out candy — they’re all terrorists, and they should also be destroyed.

There are many more such statements from Israeli leaders.

Nor was it a case of politicians engaging in rhetorical outbursts. On the ground in the Gaza Strip soldiers were assimilating these messages and acting accordingly.


Videos from the field of soldiers dancing and singingWipe out the seed of Amalek,” or saying, “With God's help,” Gaza City's Shujaiyeh neighborhood “will be the late Shujaiyeh” or “We've taken down 30 houses. Wonderful."

Israeli liberals, in the form of Ha’aretz newspaper complained that ‘Israel Is Paying the Price for Its Bigmouths’.

Ha’aretz liberals would rather that the ‘bigmouths’ kept quiet and let the soldiers get on with genocide. Instead the far-right (which today means most Israelis) boasts of their intentions knowing full well that the western media can be relied on to say nothing or brush it off.

Ha’aretz complained that South Africa’s Genocide Case at the ICJ had an Unwitting Ally: Israeli Politicians and asked its readers:

Can you imagine a defendant presenting the court with an amicus curiae to assist it and the prosecution in their case against him? That's what the Israeli government is unwittingly doing.

Israel has a very impressive gallery of utterly unimpressive politicians. It also parades a messianic collection of fools for ministers who just can't keep their mouths shut and are proud of their verbose gibberish.

Incitement to Genocide

On 3 January, well before the launch of the ICJ proceedings a group of prominent Israelis accused the country’s judicial authorities of ignoring

“extensive and blatant” incitement to genocide and ethnic cleansing in Gaza by influential public figures.’

In a letter to the attorney general and state prosecutors, they demanded action to stop the normalisation of language that breaks both Israeli and international law.

“For the first time that we can remember, the explicit calls to commit atrocious crimes, as stated, against millions of civilians have turned into a legitimate and regular part of Israeli discourse. Today, calls of these types are an everyday matter in Israel.”

The letter quoted Ben Gvir and Yitzhak Kroizer, MK for Otzma Yehudit, who in a radio interview explained that:

“The Gaza Strip should be flattened, and for all of them there is but one sentence, and that is death.”

Tally Gotliv of Likud demanded the use of a nuclear bomb on Gaza for “strategic deterrence before we consider inserting ground troops, doomsday weapon.”

Boaz Bismuth

Likud MP, Boaz Bismuth evoked the mythical biblical massacre of the Amalek nation saying: “It is forbidden to take mercy on the cruel, there’s no place for any humanitarian gestures,” adding that “The memory of Amalek must be erased.”

Among other commenters cited is journalist Zvi Yehezkeli, who said on Channel 13:

“[We] should have killed many times 20,000 people, [we] should have begun with a blow of 100,000.”

Palestinian Israelis who expressed sympathy for the people of Gaza have been routinely arrested. Michael Sfard said

I never could have imagined that I would need to write such a letter. The fact that this type of talk has completely left the far, unimportant fringes and came into the mainstream in such a massive way, for me it’s incomprehensible.

 Sfard is naive. Such language has long entered the mainstream. It wasn’t long ago that Ben Gvir and Otzma Yehudit were considered beyond the pale. Today they are outflanked by many in Likud.

In 1984 when Rabbi Meir Kahane, whom Gvir venerates, was elected to the Knesset he was shunned – by all parties. In 1988 his party, Kach, was banned altogether yet today the Religious Zionism bloc is the third largest group in the Knesset.

Israeli Genocide is NOT the result of October 7

We should not fall into the trap of believing that Israeli genocide in Gaza is simply a reaction to the breakout on October 7.

October 7 provided the opportunity for Israeli leaders to fulfill their life’s ambition of ethnically cleansing Gaza. Up to then the intention had been to concentrate first on the Palestinians of the West Bank but to Israeli leaders it was a once in a lifetime’s opportunity and they took it with both hands.

As the Misgav Institute explained in a position paper

There is at the moment a unique and rare opportunity to evacuate the whole Gaza Strip in coordination with the Egyptian government.

The Holocaust has been harnessed to Israeli settler colonialism and October 7 compared several times to the Holocaust itself. It is claimed that this was the largest massacre of Jews since the Holocaust itself. I have dealt with this lie previously. It assumes that Hamas attacked Israelis because they were Jews and not because they were occupiers.


That Israel was intent of using October 7 for political purposes is clear from their attempt to rewrite what happened that day. They deliberately concocted fables about 40 beheaded babies, a baked baby, a baby hung from a clothes line and most importantly the mass rape of Israeli women. Jonathan Cook has shown how this false narrative, peddled by the New York Times and The Guardian, has no basis in fact.

The Guardian rested its story on a whole series of improbable events and in particular the Zaka volunteers, a group of Jewish religious extremist men who previously had invented the story of the beheaded babies, which is still doing the rounds.

Ha’aretz of 4 December 2023 described a number of examples of Zaka volunteers inventing atrocities. One volunteer described how a 6 or 7 year-old boy was found shot in the safe room. He also described how, in House 426 on Kibbutz Beria he had found a woman whose abdomen had been split open and a foetus cut out. Nir Hasson and Liza Rozovsky commented that

no children 6 or 7 or near those ages were killed on Be'eri. House 426 is in the Ashelim neighborhood, which largely houses kibbutz veterans – older people. House 426 is also a two-family house where elderly families lived;

The Guardian however had no problem relying on these lying messianic nuts. Zaka has been plagued by allegations of wrongdoing for years.

Its founder Yehuda Meshi-Zahav and the main figurehead for more than 30 years was forced to resign after multiple accusations surfaced of his having committed sexual assaults against women, girls and boys over several decades. All with the knowledge of others in Zaka.

The same is true of the New York Times. On December 28 the NYT published a report on gender-based violence committed by Palestinians during the October 7 attack. The story concluded that Hamas fighters engaged in systematic rape and sexual violence against Israeli women.

The story repeated October 7 testimonies that had already been discredited. The Times investigation hinged predominantly on alleged rape of “Gal Abdush,” who was described by as “The Woman in the Black Dress.” The only problem was that the Abdush family themselves said that there was no proof that their daughter was raped, and that Times reporters interviewed them under false pretenses.

The allegations that Hamas fighters took time out to serially rape a woman at the Nova festival, cut off her breast and play football with it defies logic. The purpose of the attack was to capture Israelis in order to exchange them with Palestinians in Israeli prisons. They were in a hurry to capture the hostages as quickly as possible before the arrival of the Israeli army.

What the Guardian and NYT did was indulge in the familiar depiction of indigenous people as violent sexual predators which was how Jews were portrayed in Nazi Germany and Black people in the Deep South.

It is highly unlikely that Hamas, with its strict moral codes, would indulge in such behaviour. This is not speculation. Hin and Ajam, captive mother and daughter, testified they were treated with kindness and respect and in their own words like Queens. If there were any truth in these allegations, then both women would have come back to Israel to tell a tale of rape and torture, yet they did the exact opposite.


Yocheved Lifshitz told how she had been treated humanely. So angry were the Israeli authorities at her testimony that the person who arranged her press conference at Ichilov hospital was sacked.

Chen Goldstein-Almog told how the main danger came from Israeli air strikes: "Our guards, our captors ... were on top of us, protecting us with their bodies from the strikes," Chen said. "We were very valuable to them," she added.

The Israeli woman recalled asking her captors if they were going to kill them "and they would tell us: We will die before you."


If It’s Not the Holocaust Then Why Israel’s Hysterical Genocidal Reaction to October 7?

In my view the Holocaust is a red herring, a means of winning sympathy. The reaction of Israelis to October 7 was the typical reaction of settler colonials to the nightmare scenario of the natives, who they’ve mistreated for so long, getting their revenge. Exactly this same horrific nightmare was common to whites in southern Africa. Having trodden on Black people for so long they expected them to exact their revenge.

And sometimes this nightmare comes true. One only has to think of the revolt of Black slaves in Santo Domingo/Haiti in August 1791 who killed every single White French person.

The Holocaust is merely the prism through which these fears are refracted. It is one more attempt to portray the Zionist settlers as the victim.

Those who condemn October 7 and I certainly don’t, should note the thousands of Palestinians who have been slaughtered since 1948.  That the death of a few hundred Israelis by comparison evokes such condemnation in the West merely indicates the hypocritical racism of the imperialist media – the BBC, NYT and all the other White journalists and pundits.

What Did Happen on October 7, 2023?

Slowly but surely the truth is coming out about what happened on October 7. It is almost certain that apart from the near 400 military deaths, many of whom were also victims of ‘friendly’ fire, that the majority of civilians were killed by Israel and its Hannibal Directive which decrees it is better to shoot one of your own citizens than to let them be taken hostage.

As Israel’s Y-Net put it, the order went out to prevent ‘terrorists from returning to Gaza "at all costs", even if they have hostages with them.’ In other words kill both hostages and captives.

The Times of Israel reported that families of 13 people killed at Kibbutz Be’eri have demanded an investigation

due to the likelihood that at least some of the civilians were killed by army fire, including tank fire, at the house where they were being held hostage by terrorists.

None of these facts, the murder of its own civilians, is mentioned either by the BBC or Guardian even though it’s common knowledge in Israel.

General Barak Haram told the NYT that he gave orders to a tank commander to “break in, even at the cost of civilian casualties.” As result a tank fired shells at a house,

only one person emerged alive from the carnage — Hadas Dagan. The remains of 13 hostages and dozens of terrorists were ultimately recovered and identified.

See Families of Israelis Killed in Be'eri Home Hit by IDF Tank on October 7 Demand Probe.


Germany and Its Support for Israel at the ICJ

The lesson that Israel drew from the Holocaust was not an anti-racist one but its opposite. Zionism was a racial preservation project whose aim was to preserve and ‘purify’ the Jewish ‘race’. It is little wonder that the German state loves Israel.

The lessons Germany drew from the Holocaust were also not anti-racist ones. How could it be otherwise when the German state was not deNazified after the war? Hans Globke was Chancellor Konrad Adenaeur’s closes advisor. To the German state Israel was the living embodiment of the Jewish holocaust dead because Israel was an ally of imperialism. Noone of course had asked whether those who died in the Holocaust were in agreement with this, because most European Jews at the time hated Zionism.

Globke was a senior civil servant in the Reich Ministry of Interior. According to Daniel Rogers Globke was involved in drafting legislation that required Jews to add either "Israel" or "Sara" to their legal names in order to brand them publicly. He was heavily involved in drafting legal ordinances allowing the confiscation of the property of Jews and the removal of their citizenship, an essential precondition to extermination.

In a sordid deal between David Ben-Gurion, Israel’s first Prime Minister and Adenaeur, ‘extraordinary precautions’ were taken to keep  Globke’s name out of the Eichmann trial, according to Ian Lustick’s The Holocaust in Israeli Political Culture. This was part of the deal by which Germany paid Israel reparations and supplied it with weaponry.

It is often thought that Germany’s support for Israel is simply because of its guilt over the holocaust but Germany has no guilt over the Roma. Nor does it have any guilt over the presence in the German parliament of Alternative for Germany which is riddled with neo-Nazis and holocaust deniers. A party whose leading members have advocated shooting refugees. The AfD is also the most pro-Zionist party in Germany!

The Nazification of Israel

What the war on Gaza has done is accelerate the move to the right in Israeli politics. The Zionist left has all but disappeared. Democratic freedoms, even for Jews, are now being eroded.

When the Joint List’s only Jewish MK Ofer Casif supported Germany’s application to the ICJ a petition was immediately signed by 70 members of the Knesset calling for his expulsion.

Whereas Israeli Jews are free to incite hate against Israel’s Palestinian minority, the slightest protest or indication of opposition to Israel’s genocidal attack on Gaza can result in arrest. Dozens of Palestinian citizens of Israel are estimated to have been arrested for speech-related offenses. One woman was reportedly charged with inciting terrorism over her WhatsApp status, which read, “may God grant them victory and protect them.

According to Aida Touma-Sliman, a Hadash MK, what is taking place is ‘an attack on the entire Arab population.”

Israeli Palestinians have no freedom of speech. Palestinians living in annexed East Jerusalem are residents not citizens of Israel and two-thirds of those who apply for citizenship are rejected. For example a Palestinian woman who applied for citizenship was told by Varda Cohen, head of the Population Authority's Registration and Status Team that:

"the ministry is considering refusing the application in question, in light of the content you post and share on social media. The posts show a clear nationalist consciousness that is inconsistent with the application to receive Israeli citizenship, recognition of the state's goals, and declaring allegiance to its flag."

It is welcome that hundreds of Israelis have signed a petition organized by Anat Matar supporting the application by South Africa to the ICJ. However they represent a tiny minority of Israeli Jews, less than 1% and mostly from academia.

It is also welcome that a group called the "pro-human camp coalition" published a letter signed by public figures, artists and academics, declaring their commitment to fight the dehumanization of Gazans, Palestinians and Muslims:

Signatories include one of Israel’s top scientists, the Royal Society member Prof David Harel, alongside other academics, former diplomats and , former members of the Knesset, journalists and activists.

Represented by the human rights lawyer Michael Sfard, their 11-page letter contains multiple examples of “the discourse of annihilation, expulsion and revenge”.

The letter contrasts the lack of action on even “the gravest and most dangerous instances of incitement against residents of Gaza” with an intense campaign against incitement “whose potential victims are Israeli Jews”.

Huge resources have been devoted to tracking down people over speech that authorities interpreted as supporting Hamas, the letter notes. By late November, 269 investigations had been opened and 86 indictments filed.

It is quite amazing the number of criminal investigations, when it comes to Palestinian citizens of Israel, most of them completely anonymous, many of them almost with no audience,” Sfard said. “The gap between that and the freedom and impunity for those who advocate all kinds of things – ethnic cleansing, killing civilians, bombarding civilian areas, and even genocide – doesn’t square up, and that’s something for the authorities to explain.

The language of genocide risks influencing how Israel wages war, the letter says.

Normalised discourse which calls for annihilation, erasure, devastation and the like is liable to impact the manner by which soldiers conduct themselves.

The letter was sent before South Africa filed a case at the international court of justice accusing Israel of genocide and of failing to stop incitement to genocide.

Come to the meeting on 27th January. We are determined to reclaim the memory of the Holocaust from the Zionists whose only objection to what happened is that Jews were the victims.

Tony Greenstein