Newsgroup: it.politica.internazionale
Titolo: Lo scheletro piu' marcio nell'Armadio della storia Israeliana

http://www.cpgb.org.uk/worker/631/zionism.htm
Zionism and the holocaust
Tony Greenstein continues his examination of the unholy alliance
between anti-semitism and Zionism. With the coming to power of the
Nazis the collaboration reached new depths
In his address to the 20th Zionist congress in August 1937, Chaim
Weizmann recalled being asked whether he was saying that Palestine
could accommodate all six million of Europe?s Jews. He replied:
?The old ones will pass, they will bear their fate or they will not.
They are dust, economic and moral dust, in a cruel world ? Two
millions, and perhaps less She?erit Hapletah. We have to accept
it.?1
Six years later, Ben-Gurion, chair of the Jewish Agency (JA) in 1943,
warned that ?Hitler?s regime puts the entire Jewish people in
danger.?2  The Nazis had made their intentions very clear. On January
30 1939 Hitler, in a speech to the Reichstag, declared: ?Today I will
once more be a prophet. If the international Jewish financiers inside
and outside Europe should again succeed in plunging the nations into a
world war, the result will not be the Bolshevisation of the earth and
thus the victory of Jewry, but the annihilation of the Jewish race
throughout Europe.?3
The Zionist record in relation to the holocaust was the logical outcome
of a movement which, throughout the war, and in the face of the Nazi
exterminations, prioritised above everything the building of a Jewish
state.
Racial definitions of Jewry
German anti-semites had long given their seal of approval to Zionism.
Heinrich Class, president of the Pan German League, was made an
honorary member of the Reichstag on Hitler?s assumption of power.
?German anti-semites regarded Class?s book as ?trailblazing?
and his influence on the National Socialists was decisive ...?4
In his book If I was the kaiser he wrote: ?Those who regard the Jews
as a foreign race ? must honour the fact that among the Jews
themselves the nationalist movement called Zionism is gaining more and
more adherents ... They also declare openly that a true assimilation of
the Jewish aliens to the host nations would be impossible according to
the natural laws of race ... the Zionists confirm what the enemies of
the Jews, the adherents of the racial theory, have always asserted
...?5
Kurt Blumenfeld of the Union of German Zionists wrote to Walter
Rathenau, a government minister: ?Under no circumstance does a Jew
have the right to represent the affairs of another people.?6
At no time did the Zionist movement join any campaign against the
Nazis.7  Rabbi Joachim Prinz, who later became chairman of the American
Jewish Congress (AJC), wrote: ?[The Jews] have been drawn out of the
last recesses of christening and mixed marriages. We are not unhappy
about it ? We want to replace assimilation by something new. The
declaration of belonging to the Jewish nation and the Jewish race. A
state built according to the principles of purity of the nation and
race can only be honoured and respected by a Jew who declares his
belonging to his own kind.?8
On June 21 1933, the German Zionist Federation wrote a memorandum to
the Nazi government: ?On the foundation of the new state, which has
established the principle of race, we wish so to fit in our community
into the total structure so that for us too, in the sphere assigned to
us, fruitful activity for the fatherland is possible ? Zionism hopes
to be able to win the collaboration even of a government fundamentally
hostile to Jews.?9
On January 28 1935, Reinhard Heydrich, the ?real engineer of the
final solution?10 , issued a directive stating: ?The activity of
the Zionist-orientated youth organisations ? lies in the interest of
the National Socialist state?s leadership ? [these organisations]
are not to be treated with the strictness that it is necessary to apply
to the members of the so-called German Jewish organisations
(assimilationists).?11
In April 1935 Heydrich issued another directive advocating the
harassment of the non-Zionist German Jewish organisations. The result
was that ?Zionist groups were the only ones of a political nature
that were allowed to continue functioning.?12
In October 1941 the Gestapo demanded that the renamed
Reichs-vereinigung hand over several thousand names to them and
questionnaires. They acceded to the demand ?in order to be able to do
as much good as possible in the interests of the victims.?13
On May 15 1935, Schwarze Korps argued that ?The Zionists adhere to a
strict racial position and by emigrating to Palestine are helping to
build their own Jewish state ... The assimilation-minded Jews deny
their race and insist on their loyalty to Germany ... in order to
subvert National Socialist principles.?14
As Hanna Arendt pointed out, ?It is indisputable that during the
first stages of their Jewish policy, the National Socialists thought it
proper to adopt a pro-Zionist attitude.?15  Arendt?s book caused
outrage in the Zionist movement. Her crime was to shine a light on
events that the Eichmann trial had been designed to bury. A campaign of
smears and disinformation against Arendt began.
?Even before its publication, this book became both the centre of a
controversy and the object of an organised campaign ... The clamour
centred on the ?image? of a book which was never written ? I
allegedly had claimed that the Jews had murdered themselves. And why
had I told such a monstrously implausible lie? Out of
?self-hatred?, of course.?16
One of the most infamous of the Nazi measures was the requirement for
Jews to wear the yellow star. Robert Weltsch, editor of the Zionist
Judische Rundschau, coined the slogan ?Wear it with pride, the yellow
star.?17
On September 15 1935, the Nuremburg laws, ?the most murderous
legislative instrument known to European history?18 , were enacted,
depriving German Jews of their citizenship and forbidding sexual
relations between Jews and Aryans. The introduction to the Nuremburg
laws stated: ?The least amount of opposition to the underlying ideas
of the Nuremburg laws has been raised by the Zionists, because they
know at once that these laws represent the only correct solution for
the Jewish people as well.?19
Arendt noted in the Eichmann trial that ?there certainly was
something breathtaking in the naivety with which the prosecution
denounced the infamous Nuremberg laws of 1935, which had prohibited
intermarriage and sexual intercourse between Jews and Germans, [since]
Israeli citizens ? seem agreed upon the desirability of having a law
which prohibits intermarriage.?20
Transfer agreement
At a time when Jews, trade unionists and anti-fascists were launching a
worldwide economic boycott of Nazi Germany, the World Zionist
Organisation was secretly negotiating an economic agreement which
allowed richer German Jews to liquidate their property in Germany and
redeem part of the money in Palestine. This agreement was announced by
the Nazis shortly before the 18th Zionist congress in Prague, in
September 1933.
The Jewish Chronicle reported: ?The spectacle is puzzling to the
world, whose sympathy we bespeak, and disheartening to Jews for whom
the boycott is one of the few weapons to their hand and who now see
themselves deserted by the movement which they most have a right to
claim as an ally in their fight.?21
Some 60% of all capital invested in the settler economy in Palestine
between 1933 and 1939 came from Nazi Germany!22  By June 1937, the
largest exporter to Palestine was Germany.23  As Baruch Vladeck,
chairman of the Jewish Labor Committee in the USA described it,
Palestine had become ?the official scab-agent against the boycott in
the Near East?.24
There were some boycotts that the Zionists did support. In 1941 Agudat
Yisrael began sending food packages to the inhabitants of the ghettos
in Poland. In July the AJC and the Zionist Organisation of America
began picketing their offices. It is estimated that 25% of the Warsaw
ghetto and 18% of the L?dz ghetto died from hunger and disease even
before the deportations had begun.25  Hans Frank spoke of a ?sentence
of hunger death? against 1.2 million Jews.26
The Judenr?te
Everywhere the Nazis conquered, ?the most important concentration
measure prior to the formation of the ghettos was the establishment of
Jewish councils (Judenr?te).?27  As Eichmann commented, ?The
assimilated Jew was, of course, very unhappy about being moved to a
ghetto. But the orthodox were pleased with the arrangement, as were the
Zionists.?28  Some two-thirds of the Judenr?te consisted of Zionist
supporters.29
There were three stages to the final solution - concentration in
ghettos, deportation to the east and extermination. Everywhere there
were functioning Judenr?te, the Nazis were successful in their plans.
The Prague Community Council was to provide the model for the
Judenr?te, which in the towns of Poland and Russia in 1941-43
registered the names of their flock, brought them to the assembly
place, and eventually followed them to the execution pits and death
camps.30
The Judenr?te were reviled by the Jewish population and with good
reason. The Nazis insisted that ?the authority of the Jewish council
be upheld and strengthened under all circumstances?.31
Unable to fulfil their welfare function, ?they made themselves felt
all the more in their implementation of Nazi decrees. With the growth
of the destructive function of the Judenr?te, many Jewish leaders
felt an almost irresistible urge to look like their German masters.?
A Nazi observer in Krak?w in March 1940 ?was struck by the contrast
between poverty and filth in the Jewish quarter and the businesslike
luxury of the Jewish community headquarters.? In Warsaw, ?the
Jewish oligarchy took to wearing boots?.32  In L?dz, Rumkowski had
his portrait put on ghetto stamps and currency.
Arendt?s conclusion provoked outrage among the Zionists: ?The whole
truth was that if the Jewish people had really been unorganised and
leaderless, there would have been chaos and plenty of misery, but the
total number of victims would hardly have been between four and a half
and six million people.?33
As Steinberg observed, ?This argument provoked a general outcry among
the Jewish historians of the catastrophe, but could not be refuted.?
After all ?The Jewish Councils had been created by the Germans for
the sole purpose of destroying the Jews ??34
SS captain Dieter Wisliceny explained: ?Our system is to exterminate
the Jews through the Jews. We concentrate the Jews in the ghettos -
through Jews; we deport the Jews - by the Jews; and we gas the Jews -
by the Jews.?35
Selectivity
The Zionists negotiated with the SS to secure facilities to train their
pioneers in Europe and then bring them to Palestine. Ehud Avriel noted
that ?? there is keen competition for patronage of our work among
the Nazis.?36
?? these Jews from Palestine spoke a language not totally different
from that of Eichmann. They had been sent to Europe by the communal
settlements in Palestine and they were not interested in rescue
operations. That was not their job ... They wanted to select
?suitable material?...?37
The ?rescue activities? of the Zionist movement were concentrated
on saving the elite of their own organisations in Europe. Henry Montor,
executive vice-president of the United Jewish Appeal explained: ?By
?selectivity? is meant the choice of young men and women who are
trained in Europe for productive purposes either in agriculture or
industry and who are in other ways trained for life in Palestine ...
There could be no more deadly ammunition provided to the enemies of
Zionism ... if Palestine were to be flooded with very old people or
with undesirables ? Until the resources of Palestine are adequately
developed, immigration of 30,000 to 60,000 a year may be possible.?38
Selectivity was the explicit policy of the Zionist movement, as Chaim
Cohen, attorney general confirmed, when conducting the appeal of
Rudolph Kastner: ?If in Kastner?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 ... 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??39
Lucy Dawidowicz explained: ?The Zionist movement itself set up rigid
standards for prospective immigrants, ? which to begin with excluded
anti-Zionists as applicants for certificates. Young people in good
health, with some training for agricultural work or manual trades, and
persons with capital were the preferred candidates for Aliyah in a
process where the needs and interests of Palestine took precedence over
a strategy of rescue.?40
Refugeeism and territorialism
Why did all wings of the Zionist movement play down reports of
annihilation and obstruct the rescue efforts of others? Nathan Schwalb,
Hehalutz representative in Switzerland, provided one explanation, in a
letter to Rabbi Michael Weissmandel in late 1942:
?After the victory [of the Allies], they will once again divide up
the world between the nations, as they did at the end of the first war
? we must be aware that all the nations of the Allies are spilling
much blood and if we do not bring sacrifices, with what will we achieve
the right to sit at the table when they make the distribution of
nations? territories after the war? ... Because only through blood
will the land be ours.?41
There was no more determined opponent of ?refugeeism?, as it was
termed, than Ben-Gurion: ?? are we again, in moments of
desperation, going to confuse Zionism with refugeeism, which is likely
to defeat Zionism ... Zionism is not a refugee movement. It is not a
product of the second World War, nor of the first. Were there no
displaced Jews in Europe ... Zionism would still be an imperative
necessity.?42
In a letter December 17 1938 to the Zionist Executive, Ben-Gurion
explained: ??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 ? 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.?43
Zionist historian Noah Lucas commented: ?As the European holocaust
erupted, Ben-Gurion saw it as a decisive opportunity for Zionism. Just
as Weizmann in the first world war had realised the opportunities
presented by the fluid political situation, so now Ben-Gurion above all
others sensed the tremendous possibilities inherent in the dynamic of
the chaos and carnage in Europe.?44
Describing a press conference he gave on his return from the USA,
?Ben-Gurion dwelt at length and replied to questions on the following
topics: America in general and American Jewry in particular,
anti-semitism in America, the Biltmore Plan ? As for the holocaust -
not a word. Nothing was said, nothing was asked; the subject was simply
not on the agenda.?45
The Evian conference, which met from July 6-15 1938, was called by
president Roosevelt to try and find a solution to the problem of Jewish
refugees. It was a face-saving exercise and very few offers to take in
refugees were made.
Christopher Sykes wrote: ?The Zionists, who played no part in the
conference, were not worried by its failure ... From the start they
regarded the whole enterprise with hostile indifference ... If the 31
nations had done their duty and shown hospitality to those in dire
need, then the pressure on the National Home and the heightened
enthusiasm of Jews with Palestine would both have been relaxed. This
was the last thing the Zionist leaders wished for ...?46
Lucas reached exactly the same conclusion: ?The Zionists were not
displeased by the failure of the Evian conference, since the opening up
of the barriers to immigration elsewhere would have eased the pressure
in Palestine.?47
Apart from the Dominican Republic, which offered to admit 100,000 Jews,
virtually no other state was willing to accept Jewish refugees. Beit
Zvi describes in detail how the Zionist movement set out to prevent the
offer of the Dominican Republic being implemented.48  Richard Crossman,
a vehemently pro-Zionist Labour cabinet minister wrote: ?The
Zionists? ... main preoccupation is not to save Jews alive out of
Europe, but to get Jews into Palestine.?49
The chairman of the ?Rescue Committee? of the JA in Palestine was
Yitzhak Greenbaum. Not only did the committee lack an organisational
base, budget and administration, but for a long time it even lacked a
permanent name!50  Greenbaum?s explained his policy: ?And when I
was asked, ?But could you donate from the resources of the United
Jewish Appeal (Foundation Fund) for the rescue of Jews in Europe,? I
said no. And I say again no ? In my opinion one should resist this
wave which relegates the Zionist activities to secondary importance.
And because of that I was called anti-semitic and was judged to be
responsible for the fact that we do not absorb ourselves completely in
the rescue activity.?51
Greenbaum was consistent in his views that the needs of Zionism took
precedence over the need to save European Jewry. He faced criticism, in
particular from Melech Neustadt of Poalei Zion-Hitahdut, yet even
Neustadt sought only to save the activists of the Zionist movement, not
Jewry as a whole. 52  Greenbaum related in Haboker of December 7 1942
how his comrades from Poland ?would always ask me to sound the alarm
and I would throw cold water on their ideas and cool their
enthusiasm.?53
By 1936 there was an extensive system of Zionist agricultural training
centres throughout north Germany. Throughout 1935-36 the JA was
permitted to send training instructors from Palestine to Germany.54
Hagannah agent Feivel Polkes ?declared himself ready to gather
information for Germany that did not conflict with his own political
ends. Among other things, he would vigorously support German foreign
policy interests in the Middle East and use his influence to secure
sources of oil for the German Reich ? if German foreign currency
regulations for Jews emigrating to Palestine would be relaxed.?55
Polkes wanted the Nazis to use their powers of persuasion to ensure
that German refugees only went to Palestine. The Gestapo were happy to
do ?everything in those days to promote emigration, particularly to
Palestine.?56  SS files show that in return for information from
Polkes on Jewish attempts to kill Hitler, ?pressure will be exerted
on the Reichsvertretung der Juden in Deutschland to oblige Jews who
emigrate from Germany to go exclusively to Palestine, and not to other
countries.?57  Not only were the Zionists trying to close the doors
of Britain and the USA to Jewish refugees: they were pressing the Nazis
not to allow anyone to leave unless it was for Palestine, and passing
information to the Gestapo.
Suppressing the holocaust story
Davar, the official JA newspaper, stated in an editorial in 1944 that
?The Nazi denial of extermination has a good foundation.?58  On
April 11 of that year the concentration of Hungary?s Jews begins. No
mention is made in the Zionist press. On May 11 1944 another speech of
Ben Gurion and again no mention of Hungary. On May 15 the deportations
begin. Moshe Sharrett makes a speech - again no mention of the danger
to the Hungary?s Jews. On May 21, after some 60,000 Jews have been
deported, Ben-??????? Gurion delivers a speech - again no
mention of Hungary?s Jews. On May 23, Ehud Avriel sends a cable from
the Zionist information office in Istanbul concerning the murder of
Hungary?s Jews in Auschwitz. It has had this information since the
end of April. On July 10 Davar publishes a small item of news about the
deportations from dissident Zionist Moshe Krauss in Budapest. One day
earlier, Horthy had ordered a halt to the deportations. For six weeks,
until July 16, the JA utters not a single word about the deportations
from Hungary.
Kastner, leader of Hungarian Zionism testified that: ?I learned that
the Jewish Agency and the Joint Distribution Committee representatives
in Switzerland, Moshe Schwalb and Saly Mayer, did not give out
information to the press about the mass killings: they failed to give
the press the news I sent from Budapest. I sent cables also to Istanbul
Rescue Committee (of the Jewish Agency). They were also kept secret
from the press. I informed them almost daily by cable about the pace of
extermination. My cables were never published anywhere.?59
When confronted at the annual meeting of the WJC by Jewish survivors
from Poland as to why they had refused to publicise the exterminations,
the executive stated candidly: ?The opinion of the executive board
was that it was inadvisable because of our diplomatic ties with these
governments.?60
In a Histadrut Council meeting in early December 1942, Anshel Reis,
from the Association of Polish Immigrants, mentioned the pamphlet Stop
them now of Zygelbolm and Wedgewood containing details of the
exterminations. ?Where were we? Why did our news agencies not report
this? What did we do to stop the slaughter?? And Moshe Aram replied
?Reis is right. For months, we - the Yishuv and the Histadrut and the
haverim and the functionaries - have been unwitting accomplices to
murder.?61
As early as 1940, Beit Zvi notes that the first direct reports of the
killings in Poland had reached the JA from Zionist activists Bartglass
and Koerner, and again in 1941 when Jewish refugees had reached
Palestine from Vilna via the USSR.62
There were two reports published in Palestine concerning the
exterminations citing Hungarian soldiers returning home, who stated
that nearly a quarter a million Ukrainian Jews had been massacred. The
second report, emanating from Molotov, cited the murder of 100,000
Ukrainian Jews.
Alongside these reports was an editorial comment: ?There is no doubt
that the Nazi murderers spilled blood like water in the areas of
occupation. However, all the large numbers cited from ?soldiers
returning from the front? must naturally be taken with considerable
restraint.?63
The following day there was a longer piece by one of the paper?s
editors, Dan Pines, which spoke of ?various irresponsible informants
(who) are continuing to kill Jews with their own hands. They scoop up
every rumour ? and submit it to the papers ? Do the disseminators
of the reports ? not realise that many people are not inclined to
become overly excited about the facts and figures in these reports
because their exaggerated character renders them untrustworthy??64
Coming from the official paper of the JA, Pines?s comments carried
significant weight with the other Zionist papers. For example,
Hamashkif reduced the number of Jews murdered to ?thousands?. Beit
Zvi comments that G?bbels ?in his wildest dreams? could not have
dreamt of the kind of treatment that the Zionist press accorded the
holocaust. On March 23 1943, Davar was reprimanded by Yosef Gravitzky
of Palcor for copying a ?report? from the Nazi paper Ostland, that
two million Jews remained in Poland.
Numerous ?reports? and false information were concocted by the
ministry of propaganda in Berlin. Unfortunately they found an echo in
the Palestine press. The religious Zionist paper, Hatzofeh, printed an
editorial ?The high price of blood?, four days before the Zygelboim
report. It declared that ?if authentication should prove impossible,
it is better not to carry the report?. As Beit Zvi remarked,
?Before a report concerning the annihilation of Jews could be
absorbed in the country ? it required confirmation by the information
apparatus of the Third Reich.?65
On August 10 1942 in an editorial Davar argued: ?Some of the numbers
concerning the slaughter of tens of thousands which were published
recently seemed to be exaggerated ? From this point of view, the Nazi
denial may be trustworthy.?66  On November 8 it reported that its
information on Poland was being supplied ?according to German
statistics, which are faithful in these instances?.67
Finally on November 12 1942 a JA communiqu? admitted that the final
solution was underway. This was because of reports from a group of Jews
from Europe, including Poland, coming to Palestine in exchange for
German citizens interned by the British.68
On December 7 of that year Haboker ran an item, ?Sensational
announcement by Y Greenbaum, chairman of the Rescue Committee: We knew
about the massacres in August but didn?t make them public?69
A further report arrived in Geneva concerning the Vatican?s apostolic
mission, Monsignore Martilotti, of Slovakia. It detailed the
deportation of Slovakia?s Jews. For two weeks, until August 30,
Richard Lichteim of the JA delayed sending it to Palestine.70
Notes
 1. A Hertzberg The Zionist idea - a historical analysis and reader New
York 1981, p588.
 2. S Teveth Ben-Gurion - the burning ground 1886-1948 Boston 1987,
p445.
 3. G Reitlinger The final solution London 1953, p22.
 4. L Dawidowicz The war against the Jews 1933-45 London 1975, p88.
 5. P Massing Rehearsal for destruction New York 1949, p247.
 6. N Weinstock Zionism - a false messiah London 1979, p135.
 7. DL Niewyk The Jews in Weimar Germany Louisiana, p372.
 8. Wir Juden Berlin 1934, p154.
 9. L Dawidowicz op cit pp231-2; F Nicosia The Third Reich and the
Palestine question London 1985, p42; L Brenner Zionism in the age of
the dictators Croom-Helm1983, pp48-49.
 10. G Reitlinger op cit p13.
 11. Ibid pp118, 240.
 12. F Nicosia op cit p57.
 13. Ibid p179.
 14. L Dawidowicz op cit p.118, citing Schleunes The twisted road to
Auschwitz.
 15. H Arendt Eichmann in Jerusalem - the banality of evil London 1994,
p58.
 16. Ibid pp282-84.
 17. Ibid p59.
 18. G Reitlinger op cit p7.
 19. F Nicosia op cit p51.
 20. H Arendt op cit p7.
 21. L Brenner Zionism in the age of the dictators Westport 1983, p73.
 22. Ibid p65.
 23. F Nicosia op cit p49.
 24. L Brenner 51 documents New Jersey 2002, p93.
 25. L Steinberg Jews Against Hitler New York 1978, p182.
 26. Ibid p216.
 27. R Hilberg The destruction of European Jews New York 1985, p75.
 28. L Brenner 51 documents New Jersey 2002, p274.
 29. I Trunk Judenrat: the Jewish councils in eastern Europe under Nazi
occupation New York 1972.
 30. G Reitlinger op cit p24.
 31. Ibid p299.
 32. R Hilberg op cit pp76-77.
 33. Ibid p125.
 34. L Steinberg op cit p109.
 35. B Hecht Perfidy New York 1961, fn 68, p261. Hecht?s book shook
the Zionist movement to its foundations. The Zionists attacked Hecht
for not being a good Zionist (ie, not keeping quiet!).
 36. E Avriel Open the gates London 1975, p72.
 37. H Arendt op cit p61.
 38. B Hecht op cit fn 7, p255.
 39. Ibid p195.
 40. Report to the 19th Zionist congress and 4th council of the JA,
July 1935; cited in L Dawidowicz op cit pp238-39.
 41. R Moshe Shonfield Documents and testimony on Jewish war criminals
1977, p27-28. When this quote was used in the play Perdition, Uri
Davies was sued by Schwalb for libel. Schwalb subsequently withdrew his
action. See also S Beit Zvi Post-Ugandan Zionism on trial Tel Aviv
1991, pp295-96.
 42. 49th annual convention of Zionist Organisation of America, New
York Times October 27 1946. Eliezer Livneh declared during a symposium
organised by Maariv in 1966 that ?For the Zionist leadership, the
rescue of Jews was not an aim in itself, but only a means? (Communist
Party of Israel Information Bulletin 1969, pl97).
 43. Y E1am Introduction to Zionist history Tel Aviv 1972, pp125-26.
See also Ot, paper of youth cadre of Mapai, No2, winter 1967.
 44. N Lucas The modern history of Israel 1975.
 45. Ibid p89, citing Ha?aretz October 9 1942.
 46. C Sykes Crossroads to Israel 1917-1948 London 1973, p188-91.
 47. N Lucas op cit fn 2, p458.
 48. S Beit Zvi op cit pp315-64.
 49. RH Crossman Washington Diary 1946.
 50. S Beit Zvi op cit p99.
 51. ?Statement to Zionist executive council on the holocaust and on
the reaction?, February 18 1943.
 52. S Beit Zvi op cit p107.
 53. S Beit Zvi op cit p45.
 54. F Nicosia op cit p58-60.
 55. Ibid p62.
 56. Ibid p57.
 57. Ibid p63. Polkes?s file in the Hagannah Archives in Tel Aviv
remains closed to researchers for reasons which are self-evident (see F
Nicosia op cit fn65, p245). Polkes arranged in his contacts with
Eichmann and other Jewish ?experts? for arms supplies, Mauser
pistols in particular, to be smuggled to Palestine in barrels of
cement.
 58. B Hecht op cit p145.
 59. Ibid p91.
 60. Davar January 12 1945.
 61. Davar December 4 1942.
 62. S Beit Zvi op cit p34, citing Etgar June 29 1961.
 63. S Beit Zvi op cit p39.
 64. Davar March 17 1942.
 65. Ibid p51.
 66. Ibid p52.
 67. Ibid p54.
 68. S Beit Zvi op cit p59-60.
 69. Ibid p64.
 70. Ibid p69.

between anti-semitism and Zionism.
Toh! Uno dei tanti coglioni antisemiti.
-Stefano

Eccellente thread per ricordare chi sia Giorgio Torreri Ph. D., come 
nascano e a quali "fonti" si ispirino le sue tristi tirate 
negazioniste.
Da un post di 
webm...@olokaustos.org
=======================================================================
Il thread sulla morte di Vrba (il fuggitivo da Auschwitz) che fece
conoscere al mondo ciò che accadeva nei lager nazisti è secondo me
interessante. Da modo infatti di valutare il livello di un fenomeno 
che
proviene da alcuni ambienti statunitensi che si autodefiniscono
"trotzkisti" e che è recentemente dilagato anche in Italia di recente.
Un elemento di base - un leit-motiv quasi - di questi neotrotzkisti è
l'attacco costante a Israele. Bisogna premettere un dato: Israele è
uno Stato identico ad altri ed è criticabile come si vuole. Non è la
critica l'oggetto della riprovazione ma "come" la critica viene
esercitata e gli esiti finali che ha.
I neotrotzskisti per muovere le loro critiche a Israele si sono
impossessati negli anni di un armamentario ideologico e concettuale
identico a quello dei negazionisti nazisti e da molto tempo lo
utilizzano a piene mani.
A CHI SI ISPIRA TORRIERI
Un esempio di questo negazionismo neotrotzkista in Italia è dato da
Cesare Saletta. Saletta è autore di "Premessa a La Guerre Sociale,
Dallo sfruttamento nei Lager allo sfruttamento dei Lager", Graphos 
1994
e di "Per il revisionismo storico contro Vidal-Naquet", Graphos 1993.
Gigi Vianelli ha dato una idea di sintesi del lavoro di Saletta
scrivendo:
"ll sionismo per Saletta è la trionfante "soluzione reazionaria
della questione ebraica" alla quale bisogna marxisticamente
rispondere con una scelta di verità, dato per assunto che ci sia un
importante "ruolo della menzogna nell'ordine sociale borghese",
ecco già definiti i cardini fondamentali del perché Saletta sia un
negazionista, pur non avendo svolto alcuna ricerca autonoma sulla
Shoah. Per descrivere ancor meglio quali siano le premesse ideologiche
del negazionismo di Saletta - che in definitiva ne costituiscono
l'essenza - bisogna anche ricordare la ripresa dell'assunto di
Amedeo Bordiga per la quale "il peggior prodotto del fascismo sarebbe
stato l'antifascismo". In ultima analisi, Saletta ritiene che chi
afferma la veridicità della Shoah abbia servito il doppio imperialismo
sovietico/americano, entrambi di fatto succubi degli ebrei: "un
popolo che aveva cessato di essere tale da circa duemila anni per
trasformarsi in un gruppo sociale a caratterizzazione religiosa".
Più specificamente, gli strali di Saletta si rivolgono verso
"l'élite economica ebraica, [la] porzione ebraica della élite
economica mondiale". Che cos'è quindi il Lager per i negazionisti
marxisti? E' il luogo in cui avviene la "caricatura del lavoro
salariato", "un fenomeno generale dell'epoca moderna [...], una
risposta al problema delle migrazioni forzate economiche o
politiche". Concretamente, "i campi sono un prodotto del
capitalismo non solo nella loro origine ma anche nel loro
funzionamento". In conclusione, l'inserimento del concetto di
sterminio - e del concetto di sterminio a sfondo razziale - è quindi
per i negazionisti un ballon d'essai, lanciato dal totalitarismo
capitalista e dal totalitarismo stalinista per controllare il passato 
e
controllare il futuro." (vedi originale con note
http://www.olokaustos.org/saggi/saggi/negaz-ita/negaz2.htm
)
LE FONTI DI TORRIERI: LENNI BRENNER
Questo è il quadro concettuale in cui - più rozzamente - si muove
Torrieri nel suo post. Le premesse si vedono anzitutto nella scelta
delle fonti. La principale è un volume di Lenni Brenner: "Zionism in
the age of the dictators, London Westport, Conn, Croom Helm L. Hill,
1983 (Brenner ha scritto altri volumi tutti sull'argomento: The lesser
evil, Seacaucus, N.J, Lyle Stuart, 1988; Jews in America today,
Secaucus, N.J, L. Stuart, The iron wall : Zionist revisionism from
Jabotinsky to Shamir, London Totowa, N.J, Zed Books, 1984; 51
documents: Zionist collaboration with the Nazis, Fort Lee, NJ,
Barricade Books, 2002).
Anzitutto Lenni Brenner non è uno storico e non ha nemmeno un titolo
accademico ma è un attivista politico attivo sin dagli anni 60 che si
definisce "marxista dall'età di 15 anni" legato al movimento delle
Black Panther e autore di pamphlet più o meno efficaci.
All'inizio degli anni '90 insieme a Kwame Ture (al secolo Stokely
Carmichael meglio noto per essere stato marito della cantante Miriam
Makeeba), leader del Student Non-Violent Coordinating Committee
(braccio politico delle Black Panther), fonda il "Comitato contro il
Sionismo e il razzismo".
Il "valore" di Lenni Brenner come storico è assolutamente risibile. La
sua capacità di analizzare i fatti, l'inconsistenza delle tesi e l'uso
strumentale delle fonti è stato oggetto di un articolo comparso Su
"New Republic" del 2 novembre 1987 intitolato "L'antisionismo degli
imbecilli". L'articolo è firmato da Walter Laquer che - oltre ad
essere professore alla Georgetown University - è autore di "The
Terrible Secret: Suppression of the Truth About Hitler's "Final
Solution" nel quale esamina la sostanziale paralisi del mondo (ivi
compresi i Sionisti) di fronte alla soluzione finale nazista. Di
Laqueur uscirà a maggio "The Changing Face of Anti-Semitism: From
Ancient Times to the Present Day" che conterrà le sue conclusioni
sull'antisemitismo mascherato da antisionismo.
Dopo aver esaminato il lavoro di Brenner in quell'articolo del 1987
Laqueur concludeva: "Se l'argomentazione razionale e l'onestà
storiografica avessero una conseguenza reale la discussione su questi
scrittori [Brenner e un altro che recensisce] e le loro stupidaggini
potrebbero terminare qui e ora. Ma non c'è ragionamento che possa
valere di fronte alla compulsività di quelle persone le cui menti sono
chiuse: le argomentazioni non li toccano, il ridicolo non li 
preoccupa.
John Locke che prestò molta attenzione alla natura dell'argomentare
razionale, una volta definì la differenza tra i pazzi e gli idioti
notando che gli idioti non hanno perso la facoltà di ragionare "ma
hanno messo insieme alcune idee totalmente sbagliate scambiandole per
verità". Per questa sola ragione i loro argomenti sono irrefutabili.
Gli idioti avranno sempre lettori ed ascoltatori"
GLI OBIETTIVI DEL NEOTROTZSKISMO .....
Cosa nega il neotrotzkismo? Non l'Olocausto. Anzi sta molto attento a
non cadere in questa trappola. In una lettera in proposito di Brenner
(
http://www.ihr.org/conference/beirutconf/010408brenner.html
)
l'agitatore sostiene che "In any case, the antidote to Zionist misuse
of the holocaust is to expose Zionism's role in repeatedly
collaborating with Hitler.". Il che significa che il neotrotzkista si
impegna non a negare l'Olocausto ma a sostenere che l'Olocausto fu il
fruttodi una stretta collaborazione tra Nazisti e Sionisti.
Tutto ciò per amore della verità storica? Neppure per sogno. In
realtà si tratta di dimostrate l'assunto che lo Stato di Israele non
ha diritto di esistere perché nazismo e sionismo collaborarono in
quanto portatori dei medesimi ideali razzisti. Poiché Israele sarebbe
il frutto di questo connubbio e di questa vicinanza esso è
illeggittimo. Insomma per il neotrotskista "Nazismo = Sionismo" e
viceversa.
Questo ragionamento è molto di moda e Torrieri non ci racconta niente
di nuovo. Se andiamo a vedere cosa è previsto  tra le varie
discussioni che si terranno al "Campo estivo antimperialista" che si
terrà tra il 5 e il 10 agosto all'Isola Polvese notiamo che luned' 8
agosto il tema affrontato sarà: "L'INDUSTRIA DELL'OLOCAUSTO
L'uso di una tragedia storica per giustificare il genocidio sionista
in Palestina"
..... SONO GLI STESSI DEL TROTZKISMO VECCHIA MANIERA
Qualcuno potrebbe dire: i neotrotkisti in fondo non negano l'Olocausto
stanno solo criticando Israele e delegittimandolo attraverso il
sionismo. Sono antisionisti non antisemiti. Discorso che fila solo
apparentemente perché il trotzkismo sin dalle sue origini è un
movimento fortemente orientato verso pulsioni antisemite. Werner Cohn
nel 1991 sul Journal of Communsit Studies scrisse un articolo dal
titolo "The New Image of the Jew in the Trotskyist Movement" che 
spiega
bene come il trotzkismo nella sua evoluzione dagli anni 20 ad oggi
abbia mantenuto costantemente una ossessione verso l'ebraismo.
L'articolo è recuperabile integralmente in rete all'indirizzo
http://www.wernercohn.com/Trotsky.html
CONFUTARE TORRIERI?
Serve confutare le falsità e manipolazioni sparse da Torrieri in base
alla rimasticatura dell'impresentabile Brenner? No se lo scopo fosse
far ragionare Torrieri, sì se invece aiuta a rintracciare il legame
tra il finto antisionismo e il vero antisemitismo.
Torrieri nel thread parte sostenendo l'esistenza di una mai esistita
"dirigenza sionista della comunità ungherese" e continua in modo
compulsivo a parlare di "leadership sionista ungherese". Inutile
dimostrargli come si è fatto che la Comunità Ebraica Ungherese non
aveva una leadership sionista. Per Torrieri accettare il dato storico
significherebbe far crollare il palco del teorema neotrotzskista.
Torrieri utilizza i piani storici mischiandoli in modo da riscostruire
anche contro ogni evidenza il suo teorema. Quando gli si ricostruisce
il percorso del documento Vrba che passa a Weissmandel e da 
Weissmandel
alla Comunità Ebraica Ungherese rigira le carte in tavola citando
questo passo di Vrba:
 >> 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. Among them was Dr. Kastner, leader of the council which 
spoke
 >> for all Jews in Hungary.
Vrba sostiene che Kastner era capo del Consigli della Comunità Ebraica
quando ciò non fu mai e mai poté parlare a nome degli ebrei
ungheresi.
Torrieri poi fa finta di dimenticarsi che Weissmandel ha un percorso
politico molto chiaro: nel 1944 è sionista e lavora
nell'organizzazione sionista di salvataggio in Slovacchia elaborando 
il
piano di salvataggiodenominato "Europa Plan".
Torrieri infine appare completamente dipendente dallo screditato
Brenner che cita abbondantemente nonostante le evidenti sciocchezze. 
La
sciocchezza più grandiosa è l'idea che la "leadership sionista"
nascondesse il documento Vrba mentre lo stesso documento veniva reso
noto in tutto l'Occidente dal Presidente degli USA, pubblicato dai
giornali statunitensi e inglesi e persino reso oggetto di una
esplicità minaccia ai governanti ungheresi. Una idea assolutamente
ridicola visto che sono proprio le organizzazioni sioniste
internazionali che cercano di dare la massima pubblicità al rapporto.
Sempre in stile Trotzskista Torrieri vorrebbe introdurre un elemento
distintivo tra i "sionisti" e gi ebrei di Budapest. Così sostiene
l'esistenza di un fantomatico "tribunale popolare ebraico" che avrebbe
condannato a morte Kasztner. La fonte citata da Torrieri è un altro
non storico, questa volta il regista Haim Bresheeth (avrebbe potuto
citare il massimo studioso dell'Olocausto in Ungheria Randolph Braham
ma Torrieri non lo fa perché una simile notizia gli si sarebbe ritorta
contro). Bresheeth è quelpersonaggio che in un suo documento sostiene
che è Israele che ha fatto nascere i terroristi suicidi perché "ha
tolto la speranza" al popolo palestinese
(
http://www.doublestandards.org/bresh1.html
) e guarda caso fa parte 
del
gruppo "Jews against Zionism" insieme al suo amichetto Brenner
(
http://www.inminds.co.uk/jews-against-zionism.html
).
Bene Bresheeth è un propalatore di idiozie e lo si può facilmente
dimostrare leggendo questa sua frase:  "Like elsewhere, the only 
people
who had the information and the ear of the frightened Jewish 
population
were the Judenrat. In this case the Judenrat comprised mainly the
Zionist Federation members"  ossia Breesheeth sostiene che il 
Consiglio
Ebraico Ungherese era composto "principalmente" ("mainly") da 
sionisti:
una menzogna perché come abbiamo già detto di sionista all'epoca ce
ne era solo uno nel Consiglio (testo integrale di Breesheeth in
http://www.fantompowa.net/Flame/perdition_comments.htm#Haim%20Breshee...
).
Non mi stupisce che Breesheeth abbia sostenuto l'esistenza di un
"tribunale popolare ebraico".  E' noto che vennero creati tribuanli
estemporanei subito dopo l'arrivo delle truppe sovietiche ed è
altrettanto noto che si trattò di giustizia sommaria amministrata
politicamente. Si trattava di "tribunali popolari" non di "tribunali
popolari ebraici" che sono una invenzione del propagandista Breheeth.
Torrieri poi si dedica alle persone salvate da Kasztner. Che sarebbero
stati "altolocati ebrei". Una volta dimostratogli che si trattava di
tutto meno che di altolocati e che tra di essi c'erano italiani, 
rumeni
e jugoslavi ci risponde che
 >> Questa poi e' veramente fantastica:  La "grande Ungheria", sai, 
quella
 >> per la quale gli Ungheresi si allearono con i nazisti, 
comprendeva,
 >> appunto... parti della Romania, della Slovacchia e della 
Yugoslavia.
Il che la dice lunga sulla conoscenza della storia di Torrieri.
L'Ungheria durante la Seconda Guerra Mondiale non ebbe dalla sua
alleanza con la Germania alcun beneficio territoriale rispetto al
Trattato di Trianon del 1920. La Slovacchia divenne stato indipendente
satellite della Germania con monsignor Tiso, la Romania si tenne i
territori ungheresi. Soltanto una piccola parte della Jugoslavia venne
affidata in amministrazione agli ungheressi che vi compirono un bel 
po'
di massacri.
Poi assistiamo ad un misto di ignoranza e di malafede in questo
passaggio:
 >> In Ungheria, centinaia di migliaia di Ebrei sono stati deportati 
da 90
 >> ufficiali SS e poche centianaia di poliziotti.   Nel 1944, la
 >> situazione in Germania era catastrofica, con ritirata su due 
fronti e
 >> attivi movimenti di resistenza in tutti i paesi occupati.
 >> Come scrive Brenner, Eichmann si e' rivolto a Kasztner proprio 
perche'
 >> sapeva che la deportazione degli Ebrei Ungheresi sarebbe saltata 
se
 >> questi si fossero ribellati.
E' ben noto che il governo ungherese utilizzò l'intero apparato di
polizia per sostenere la deportazione ungherese e che TUTTI i
rastrellamenti di popolazione ebraica vennero compiuti dagli ungheresi
stessi. Il ministro Jaross e il sottosegretario Endre misero in piedi
l'intera operazione di cui Eichmann fu consulente. Ma Brenner fa finta
di non saperlo e Torrieri gli va dietro.
Sull' argomento e sulla bibliografia in materia:
http://www.olokaustos.org/geo/ungheria/index.htm
Altra panzana: la deportazione avvenne quando oramai la Germania era
spacciata. Sia Brenner che Torrieri non sanno forse che le operazioni
di deportazione iniziarono il 16 aprile 1944 ben prima che gli
americani sbarcassero in Normandia e vennero concluse in meno di due
mesi.
IN CONCLUSIONE .....
Torrieri è il triste epigono di una tendenza tardotrotzkista che negli
ultimi tempi si è saldata in nome dell'antimperialismo con la peggiore
feccia neonazista in Italia e fuori. Le sue fonti provengono non da
storici ma da vecchi attivisti e cineasti. Le sue conclusioni sono
ideologiche e la sua coonoscenza dei testi storici sull'argomento
nulla. Ciononostante affronta la questione. Perché? Perché la storia
per lui è solo una puttana con cui copulare a seconda della
convenienza.

 Eccellente thread 
interessante. 
Sei in grado di smentire l'articolo da solo invece di ricorrere a chi hai
definito in questo ng come fiancheggiatore di antisemiti e terroristi? 
-- 
visitate 
http://www.comunisti-italiani.it/frames/index.htm
http://cubainforma.interfree.it/
il film sul 9/11 : 
http://www.loosechange911.com/
http://www.churchill-society-london.org.uk/Berlin.jpg
questo articolo e` stato inviato via web dal servizio gratuito 
http://www.newsland.it/news
 segnala gli abusi ad 
ab...@newsland.it

 Sei in grado di /GLOB/
Bravo sergio. Ora che hai ingollato la sbobbina negazionista, 
gorgoglia bene.
Tb 

 Bravo sergio. 
bene, TU non sei in grado di smentirlo eppure ricorri a chi diffamavi come
fiancheggiatore di antisemiti e terroristi.
LOL!


 Tonibaruch ha scritto:
/GLOB/
L'igoio si è già visto.
Ora il gorgoglio, sù.
Tb 

  70. Ibid p69.
