THE RED FLAG WARNS: DON'T LET HITLER WIN BY MAKING EUROPE JEW FREE

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_0V_xf3OQgM

In 1939, in a speech to the Reichstag, Hitler had said:

If international finance Jewry in and outside Europe should succeed in thrusting the nations once again into a world war, then the result will not be the Bolshevisation of the earth and with it the victory of Jewry, but the destruction of the Jewish race in Europe.[86]

The view of most historians is that the decision to proceed with the extermination of the Jews was taken at some point in late 1941.[87]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qe-HUn1Te7Y

Sir Ian KershawFBA (born 29 April 1943) is a British historian and author whose work has chiefly focused on the social history of 20th century Germany. He is regarded by many as one of the world's leading experts on Adolf Hitler and Nazi Germany, and is particularly noted for his monumental biography of Hitler.

He was the leading disciple of the late West German historian Martin Broszat, and (until his retirement) professor at theUniversity of Sheffield. Kershaw has called Broszat an "inspirational mentor" who did much to shape his understanding of National Socialist Germany.[1] Kershaw served as historical adviser on numerous BBC documentaries, notably The Nazis: A Warning From History and War of the Century. He taught a module titled 'Germans against Hitler'.[2]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=45vJaaGrIGk

Israel Beefs Up Plans To Help European Jews Move To Israel

FEBRUARY 16, 2015 4:56 AM ET

After a deadly attack outside a synagogue in Copenhagen, Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu said his government is considering a fund to support Jewish immigration from France, Belgium and Ukraine.

Copyright © 2015 NPR. http://www.npr.org/2015/02/16/386635187/israel-calls-for-mass-immig...

BEFORE YOU LEAVE FOR ISRAEL

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q812FdHh6T4

Before any Jew leaves France to live in Israel he/she should read what Noam Chomsky & Gilbert Achcar say about race and ethnicism in Israel.  In Perilous Power: The Middle East and U.S. Foreign Policy (2007), Chomsky dialogs with Achcar about the internal ethnic politics within Israel itself.

Chomsky writes that there’s [a] problem we should consider if we’re discussing the situation within Israel, and that’s the problem of the Mizrahim, the “oriental Jews.”  The majority of the population is Israel is from the Arab world, and they’re harshly oppressed.  In other words, Jews who are not of Ashkenazi (European) background face fierce racism within Israeli society, though a few have made it to elite sectors.

Some of the Mizrahim who came to Israel were relatively well off, such as the Iraqi Jews.  Both the Moroccans and others were poor people.  After 1948, some Moroccans went to France and some went to Israel.  The ones who went to France are today doctors, lawyers, college-educated.  The ones who went to Israel are manual laborers, or unemployed.

In past times during Chomsky’s kibbutz stay in 1953, the Moroccan Jews were considered worse than Arabs, and he found this very striking.

WHAT’S IN A NAME IN ISRAEL?

I experienced this phenomenon for myself when I attended a meeting of the University of Iowa International Writers Program in 2004 where I heard Sami Berdugo, the author or “Yaldah shehorah : sipurim”  or, “Black Girl,” which was published in 2013, say that he was considered as black in his home country of Israel because of his last name.  An image of Mr. Berdugo can be seen at: http://digital.lib.uiowa.edu/cdm/singleitem/collection/vwu/id/2649/rec/2

By any American standards of “race,” Burdugo is White.  But by Israeli standards because his last name reflects his North African Mizrahim ancestry, he is black.  Therefore, before any Jews decide to leave for life in Israel, you should check out your last name because you will lose the White Privilege and identity that you enjoy as a French citizen and exchange it for that of a black person in the “home of the Jews.”  In Israel, naming is everything.

THE HOLOCAUST IS OVER FOR ALL BUT BENJAMIN NETANYAHU

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu (right) meets with US Rep. Dennis A. Ross (R-FL) at the Prime Minister's Office in Jerusalem on February 17, 2015. (photo credit: Haim Zach/GPO) 
 

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu declared Tuesday that while he has every intention of going ahead with a controversial speech about Iran to the US Congress in March, he is open to hearing the reasoning of those who oppose the address.

The prime minister accepted an invitation last month from Rep. John Boehner (R-Ohio), the speaker of the US House of Representatives, to speak to Congress, but the White House complained that Boehner had not cleared the invitation with President Barack Obama or Democrats in Congress.

Netanyahu intends to argue before Congress on March 3 that the international community should increase the pressure on Iran, rather than ease sanctions against it under the terms of an emerging deal.

Britain, China, France, Russia, the United States and Germany — known as the P5+1 — have been seeking a comprehensive accord that would prevent Tehran from developing a nuclear bomb in return for an easing of economic sanctions.

Read more: PM bent on Congress speech, but 'open' to arguments against | The Times of Israel http://www.timesofisrael.com/netanyahu-open-to-hear-case-against-congress-speech/#ixzz3S2GT0Tem
Follow us: @timesofisrael on Twitter | timesofisrael on Facebook

Avraham "Avrum" Burg (Hebrew: אברהם בורג‎, born 19 January 1955) is an Israeli author and politician; he was formerly a member of the Knesset, a chairman of the Jewish Agency for Israel and a Speaker of the Knesset. He was the first Speaker of the Knesset to have been born in Israeli territory after independence in 1948. A member of the Labor Party when a member of the Knesset, Burg announced in 2015 that he has joined Hadash.[1]

Avraham Burg in The Holocaust Is Over, We Must Rise From Its Ashes (2008) warns that the world must be wary of Netanyahu because he shares too much in common with Adolf Hitler himself in his thirst for power.

In “Lessons From The Holocaust,” Burg writes that there was a time when the sun never set on the British Empire.  It was a political as well as a natural phenomenon—the territory was so vast that it included all the world’s datelines.  The new German Empire of Emperor Wilhelm II and Reichskanzler Otto von Bismarck envied Great Britain.

The Germans also wanted a United Kingdom, elevated international status, and colonies to enrich their domestic economy at the expense of distant peoples basking under an imperial sun.  Thus the German empire developed a rhetoric that expressed its entitlement to a “place under the sun.”  This was thanks to a combination of an inferiority complex in the face of Great Britain’s might, a dash of German hot-tempered quarrelsomeness, and above all, a willingness to fight and sacrifice to get that place in the sun.  When their rhetoric ripened and was ready for action, Germany launched occupation wars in Africa and elsewhere.

One generation later, there was no empire or emperor, just a weak and defeated Weimar Republic.  The rhetoric remained, but the reasons had changed.  Germany was feeling claustrophobic within its borders.  The demagoguery of place fell on willing ears, and Germany felt compelled to create a Lebensraum, living space, for itself in the East.  Lebensraum was one of Hitler’s two obsessions; the other was the Jews.

Poland, perceived as a thorn in German’s side [just as Iran is a thorn in Israel’s side], was the challenge, a seductive prize for the Nazi hunters.  Late in 1939 Hitler began his campaign to erase Polish “nationhood,” including is intelligentsia, the standard-bearers of Polish nationalism.  Hitler hoped to annex Polish lands to Germany and to populate them with Volksdeutche, Aryans, and ethnic Germans who lived in the Baltic States and Eastern Poland.  “A place under the sun,” in the Judeo-German lexicon, means something very specific and sinister.

Burg asks, Why, then did Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu, name his book (in Hebrew), of all names, A Place Under the Son?  Is it because the narrative speaks of the rightist, paranoid belief in nothing but power and settlements to counterbalance the Arab demographic threat?

Is power and settlements to counterbalance the Arab demographic threat?  Is this a subliminal admission that with the expansion to the east and the defacto annexation—an Anschluss—of Judaea, Samaria, and the Golan, an Israeli Empire was born?  Is it a manifestation of claustrophobic pangs in the Jewish ghetto mindset that seeks relief by breaking out into a broader living space?  It may just be literary insensitivity on Netanyahu’s part, another instance of the endless paradoxical expressions that Hitler and the Shoah [Holocaust] left us to struggle with.

During the Nazi regime and World War II, the leaders of the pre-state of Israel (Yishov) did very little in response to the annihilation of Europe’s Jews.  There was little knowledge and awareness “here” about the events “there” in distant Europe.

The answer to the disaster of German’s Jews,” Ben-Gurion told the Jewish Agency Executive in 1935, “must be Zionist: to convert the disaster into a resource for building the land, to save the lives and property of Germany’s Jews for the land.  This salvation comes before anything else.”

During the early days of danger, before the violence became deadly, the Jewish Agency, representing the local Israeli-Jewish population, negotiated with the Nazis.  It was a cynical meeting of interests: neither the Zionists nor the Nazis wanted the Jews to remain in Germany.  The Nazis wanted them far away, and the Zionists wanted them in their own, no-yet born state.

This dialogue produced economic agreements between the Zionists and the Nazis that enabled the transfer of funds and goods to the would-be state.  This resulted in economic prosperity and the building of much of the infrastructure that served the pre-state Israel in the 1930s, some even during the Great Arab Revolt.

It turns out that before the Nazis started to slaughter Europe’s Jews, they enabled us to build the foundations of our state-to-be, Israel. After Israel was born [and recognized by the UN and President Harry S Truman] in 1948, the German reparations and compensation agreement of 1952 helped the state regenerate itself.  Israel absorbed new immigrants and rehabilitated the war refugees, in effect resurrecting a new Israeli nation that was essentially different from the sum of the ragtag Jewish refugees.  Thus, the Nazis, in their cruel way, were involved in promoting the idea of the Zionist state and fulfilling it in three ways: before the war with the transfer agreements, during the war and its aftermath with the tidal waves of refugee migration, and after the war with the great sums of money that the “new” Germany paid on behalf of the “old” Germany.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/podcasts/series/ht

Michael Fuchs 27 Feb 15

Fri, 27 Feb 15

Duration:
24 mins

Berlin doesn’t house any of the European Union’s key institutions, but there is no doubt this is the power capital of Europe – something Greece’s new left-wing Government now knows all too well. Germany calls the shots when it comes to shaping Europe’s economic policy. HARDtalk’s Stephen Sackur speaks to an influential member of Chancellor Merkel’s CDU party – Vice-Chairman of the parliamentary party Michael Fuchs. In the high stakes showdown over Greece’s debt, has Germany used its power wisely?

Download 11MB (right click & "save target as / link as")

Views: 57

Comment by mary gravitt on February 27, 2015 at 3:14pm

In 1939, in a speech to the Reichstag, Hitler had said:

If international finance Jewry in and outside Europe should succeed in thrusting the nations once again into a world war, then the result will not be the Bolshevisation of the earth and with it the victory of Jewry, but the destruction of the Jewish race in Europe.

The view of most historians is that the decision to proceed with the extermination of the Jews was taken at some point in late 1941.

Avarham

Burg asks, Why, then did Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu, name his book (in Hebrew), of all names, A Place Under the Son?  Is it because the narrative speaks of the rightist, paranoid belief in nothing but power and settlements to counterbalance the Arab demographic threat?

Is power and settlements to counterbalance the Arab demographic threat?  Is this a subliminal admission that with the expansion to the east and the defacto annexation—an Anschluss—of Judaea, Samaria, and the Golan, an Israeli Empire was born?  Is it a manifestation of claustrophobic pangs in the Jewish ghetto mindset that seeks relief by breaking out into a broader living space?  It may just be literary insensitivity on Netanyahu’s part, another instance of the endless paradoxical expressions that Hitler and the Shoah [Holocaust] left us to struggle

Comment by koshersalaami on February 27, 2015 at 6:59pm

I can answer some of this. Not all of it. I don't appreciate the divisions between Ashkenazim (European Jews, particularly Northern and Eastern) and Sephardim (Mediterranean and Middle Eastern Jews), though I think they're exaggerated above. It wasn't that bad when I visited in 1980 or so and I doubt it's gotten worse. I am also absolutely not a fan of Netanyahu; I have probably criticized him more in my posts than any other public figure. 

I thought the CBN report was pretty good, particularly for CBN. 

However, the conversation about Iran is way, way off base. The idea that Israel has territorial designs on Iran can be contradicted by looking at a map. Though I am in favor of American efforts rather than the Israeli stance, keep a few things in mind:

Militarily, Hezbollah has served as an Iranian proxy, armed by Iran, trained by Iran. What this means functionally is that Iran has been responsible for killing Israelis while Israel had not been responsible for killing Iranians until Israel started retaliating. 

The anti-Israeli rhetoric in the Iranian press was huge, particularly during the Ahmedinejad regime. Public officials were talking about the elimination of Israel (though this may have been more in predictive terms than in planning terms). The military held parades with Israeli destinations written on their missiles, WWII style. And, at the time, Ahmedinejad was holding Holocaust denial conferences in Tehran.

What the Israelis are afraid of is that Iran is led by religious fundamentalists who regard dying in a holy war as a good thing. (That is not part of Judaism.) Taken to extremes, they could in theory not be afraid of a nuclear exchange. While I don't think that's why Iran wants nukes (I actually think it's more about fear of the US), the Israelis are afraid of that gamble, at least some of them. Reportedly, Mossad does not agree with Netanyahu. There are a lot of reasons an exchange is unlikely, such as that Iran could not attack Israel without killing millions of Muslims because of proximity, that holy sites in Jerusalem could be damaged, and that Israel's nuclear force is partially sea-based, so Iran would absolutely face nuclear retaliation. 

Regardless of what title is similar to what other title, the point behind what expansionism you're talking about isn't a simple matter of lebensraum. In the case of the Golan, it is quite simply that on a clear day you can see from the Golan to the Mediterranean. It is strategically too dangerous to give up. Syria has nothing like symmetrical vulnerability as a result. 

People in the West tend to forget how little territory is in question here. For the Palestinians it's certainly a lot, but in American terms it's tiny. Israel is roughly the size of a skinnier New Jersey. Let's put this in perspective: this summer's land seizure in the West Bank after the Gaza war, the largest land confiscation by Israel in a quarter of a century, which I wrote a post protesting, was measured in acreage, not mileage. Comparisons to Hitler are ludicrous. He'd basically have said: Lebensraum? You forgot the raum." The scale we're talking about is about neighborhoods, more like zoning than grand conquest. Claims that Israel has designs on Iran, which isn't anywhere near Israel to begin with, are silly. 

Understanding that we're talking about land on an extremely small scale, that translates to military vulnerability. Decent military hardware can reach most of the population. Hell, last summer, a lot of the population could be reached from Gaza. There is very little room for error, and that counts way, way more when there are local populations quite literally interested in destroying you. 

While I disagree with Netanyahu and while I think a two-state solution is possible if you don't continuously sabotage it, don't underestimate the threat level he perceives and, more importantly, why he perceives it. When people say Israel feels threatened, a lot of Westerners think that's a joke or a ruse. It's not, it's Israel's geographic circumstances. During Gaza, even with Iron Dome, because it was so expensive to operate the Israelis didn't shoot down rockets going to lightly populated areas. Most of the whole country's population ended up in bomb shelters. We can't relate to that. Everyone knows people killed in war and/or by terrorist attack. Remember how that affected Netanyahu personally - his brother led the rescue mission in Entebbe and was the only Israeli soldier killed there. 

This does not justify Israeli treatment of Palestinians, but this talk about Hitlerian expansionism is ridiculous. We're talking more on the scale of New Jersey conquering Staten Island. 

Comment

You need to be a member of Our Salon to add comments!

Join Our Salon

NEW BLOG POSTS

Divided, We Fell.

Posted by Robert B. James on April 20, 2019 at 2:21pm 0 Comments

A Public Service Message

Posted by Robert Young on April 19, 2019 at 9:00am 3 Comments

So What Else Is New?

Posted by Robert B. James on April 19, 2019 at 8:00am 2 Comments

As Civil As I Can Be

Posted by Robert B. James on April 18, 2019 at 8:30am 0 Comments

© 2019   Created by lorianne.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Privacy Policy  |  Terms of Service