geek tragedy
geek tragedy's JournalNetanyahu Reduced to Defending Hitler. Really ...
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/edblog/netanyahu-reduced-to-defending-hitler-reallyJews of all people can usually be expected to accept that Hitler didn't need any convincing or nudging or encouragement to order the Final Solution. There have been some fringe scholars who've tried to portray al-Husseini as somehow one of the architects of the Final Solution. But these claims have never been accepted by mainstream or legitimate Holocaust scholars. It's just not true. The origins of the alleged exchange Netanyahu quotes is even more obscure. It doesn't even have a documented history as propaganda or conspiracy theory. Regardless, no legitimate scholars believe any of this.
But this is about more than mere historical error. And it's worth considering what this was all about. Despite cases like that of al-Husseini, the Palestinians were essentially uninvolved bystanders to the Holocaust, though one can argue that they were also its indirect victims. Nonetheless, here Netanyahu is trying to reframe them as actual instigators of the Holocaust. The Palestinians thus become a sort of moral one-stop-shopping for the entire drama of 20th century Jewry.
Now, propagandists are capable of almost anything. But here, it is simply amazing that the need to do this brings Netanyahu so far as to actually advance a limited exoneration of Adolf Hitler. Adolf Hitler. And make no mistake: that is what it is. Hitler only wanted to deport Jews, says Netanyahu - an outrage and a crime, but hardly unprecedented in history. He had to be convinced to order extermination rather than expulsion.
When you, as a Jew, get to the point of making excuses for Adolf Hitler, partly exculpating him to make some political point, you really need to step back and ask how you got there.
There's really nothing more to say.
No one from the center-right in Israel has criticized Netanyahu for this.
Netanyhau: Hitler only wanted to expel Jews, but Jerusalem mufti told him to burn them
Source: Haaretz
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu sparked public uproar when on Wednesday he claimed that the Mufti of Jerusalem, Haj Amin al-Husseini, was the one who planted the idea of the extermination of European Jewry in Adolf Hitler's mind. The Nazi ruler, Netanyahu said, had no intention of killing the Jews, but only to expel them.
Read more: http://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/.premium-1.681525?v=5F5E7462DD9B28912285B2F7FD52B0CB
Look for Netanyahu to be the keynote speaker at Iran's next Holocaust 'revisionism' conference.
Here's the language in question copied and pasted directly from the Israeli government's website:
And this attack and other attacks on the Jewish community in 1920, 1921, 1929, were instigated by a call of the Mufti of Jerusalem Haj Amin al-Husseini, who was later sought for war crimes in the Nuremberg trials because he had a central role in fomenting the final solution. He flew to Berlin. Hitler didn’t want to exterminate the Jews at the time, he wanted to expel the Jews. And Haj Amin al-Husseini went to Hitler and said, "If you expel them, they'll all come here." "So what should I do with them?" he asked. He said, "Burn them." And he was sought in, during the Nuremberg trials for prosecution. He escaped it and later died of cancer, after the war, died of cancer in Cairo. But this is what Haj Amin al-Husseini said. He said, ":The Jews seek to destroy the Temple Mount." My grandfather in 1920 seeks to destroy…? Sorry, the al-Aqsa Mosque.
http://www.pmo.gov.il/English/MediaCenter/Speeches/Pages/speechcongress201015.aspx
For the record, the Final Solution was fully underway well before Hitler met the mufti.
This should end his career, but won't.
David Irving made the same claim, that Hitler only wanted to deport them.
Yes, that David Irving.
http://www.hdot.org/en/trial/defense/evans/340c.html
UNESCO chief ‘deplores’ bid to name Western Wall part of Al-Aqsa
http://www.timesofisrael.com/unesco-chief-deplores-bid-to-name-western-wall-part-of-al-aqsa/The executive board had been scheduled to vote Tuesday on a resolution submitted by Arab states that would officially recognize the Western Wall as part of the Muslim holy site, but Bokova postponed the vote until Wednesday. United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) sources say a number of countries are attempting to postpone the vote beyond Wednesday.
“We all have responsibility to UNESCO’s mandate, to take decisions that promote dialogue, tolerance and peace,” Bokova said.
The director-general urged both sides to ensure that the cultural and religious heritage at the holy site is preserved and accessible to everyone, and encouraged a return to dialogue “in the spirit of mutual understanding.”
I agree with her--that resolution is deplorable and would only make things a lot worse. It also confirms a lot of the criticism that gets lobbed at UNESCO.
An Iran-Deal Skeptic (Adam Schiff) Becomes a Supporter
Source: The Atlantic
Earlier this year, California Representative Adam Schiff, the ranking Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, told me he had serious doubts about Iran’s intentions as it pursued a nuclear deal with the United States and five other world powers. He also said he was somewhat worried about the scale of possible American concessions during the talks. Schiff, who I described in a post at the time as a “moderate’s moderate,” suggested to me that he wanted to see President Obama achieve an important foreign-policy success, but as a Jew, he wanted to make sure that an anti-Semitic regime—both he and Obama agree that Iran is ruled by an anti-Semite—would not be allowed to become a nuclear-weapons state. At the time, he told me he was “uncommitted” and that he would “remain uncommitted” until he had time to review a final deal, should a final deal materialize.
Well, the final deal has materialized, and Schiff, in a telephone call over the weekend, told me that, based on an “extensive review,” he has decided to come out in favor of the deal. He said he plans to formally announce his support later on Monday, but that he has already informed the White House of his intentions. His decision should carry some weight with national security-minded Democrats, and with still-undecided members of the House Jewish caucus.
In our conversation, Schiff told me wants to see Obama and Congress work together to strengthen key aspects of the deal—most notably, he wants the administration to promise Iran that the United States will have zero tolerance for any instances of Iranian cheating. But he said he believes the deal could serve its stated purpose: to keep Iran south of the nuclear threshold.
“At the end of the day, I could not find an alternative that would turn out in a better way than the deal,” he said. “Rejection of the deal would not lead to something credible. And I think that there are enough ways to mitigate the risks associated with the deal that it makes sense to me to move forward.” He went on, “The risks associated with rejection of the deal are quite a bit higher than the risks associated with going forward.”
Read more: http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2015/08/adam-schiff-iran-nuclear/400280/
Very glad to see Schiff get on board. It's very hard to argue with his conclusions.
Supporting Hillary and opposing the TPP?
There's been lots of speculation as to both her position and her decision to avoid taking a public position. An obvious question is what effect this has on primary voters.
Profile Information
Member since: Thu May 13, 2004, 12:50 PMNumber of posts: 68,868
