Showing posts with label Haj Amin al-Husseini. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Haj Amin al-Husseini. Show all posts

Thursday, June 29, 2023

Arab leaders and pundits habitually warn, in English, that Israel is threatening to threatening to turn the conflict into a religious war. 

A recent example comes from Ramzy Baroud in Arab News, saying, 

What is currently taking place in Palestine is not a religious war, but some Israeli officials and political parties are keen on turning it into one. 

Though warnings against “religious wars” in Palestine — in fact, the entire region — have been mostly linked to Israel’s current “most rightwing government in history,” religious discourses have been the most dominant since the establishment of Israel’s founding ideology, Zionism, in the late-19th century. 
This is absurd to the extreme. 

This has been a religious war for decades, and it has been Palestinians making it one.

From their first leader, the Mufti of Jerusalem, their claims have been based primarily on religious themes and arguments. Religion suffuses everything they do - their words, their actions, their thinking - all the way back to the Mufti's claim that "Al Aqsa is in danger!" from Jews.

The Palestinian Arab armed forces in both the 1936 riots and the 1948 war were called the "Army of the Holy War."

The Palestinian constitution says, "Islam is the official religion in Palestine. ...  The principles of Islamic Shari’a shall be a principal source of legislation."

The Palestinian Authority has a Ministry of Religious Endowments.

Members of the PLO executive Committee marked Eid yesterday by laying a wreath on the grave of Yasir Arafat. 

Mahmoud Abbas' speeches - even to the UN - all begin with "In the name of God, the most gracious, the most merciful."

Abbas referred to rebuilding Gaza in 2016 as a "jihad."

Every Palestinian media outlet refers to those killed by Israeli forces as "martyrs," not "victims."


The religious aspect is so ingrained that a supposedly secular UNRWA is asking for Muslims to give it "zakat" (religious charity) funds, quoting the Quran. Do any other UN agencies ever quote any other religious texts?  (I found an exception that proves the rule.)

And, of course, Gaza groups like Hamas and Islamic Jihad are Islamic extremist groups which use Islam to justify attacking Jews. 

It isn't Israel that seeks a religious war. It is the Palestinians, and their own religious justifications are accepted without any objection by the world.

But whenever Jews assert their own religious desires in the land of the Torah, they are demeaned - not only by Palestinians - for acting in such a primitive, non-enlightened manner.

The Palestinians claim, and much of the world accepts, the idea that only Muslims have an unquestioned religious claim on the land and the holy sites that were all invariably Jewish holy sites 1500 years before Mohammed was born. 

Jewish religious claims are treated with scorn while Muslim religious claims are accepted without question. And part of the reason is exactly because religion is the major component of the Palestinian nationalist philosophy.

Disparaging the Jewish religious claims to the land - especially while not questioning the Palestinian Islamic-based claims - is another manifestation of the antisemitism that is accepted as normal nowadays.. 




Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism  today at Amazon!

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424. 

Read all about it here!

 

 

BEIRUT, Lebanon, Sept. 16— Haj Amin el Husseini, the exiled Mufti of Jerusalem, and his Arab Higher Committee have started. a move to create a solid belt of Palestine Arab settlements around Israel and prevent-the moving of refugees away from Israel borders.

This change of front has come with the present evident collapse of the. former insistence by the Arab League, the Arab Higher Committee -and the Arab governments on the return of Palestine Arab refugees to their original homes under the terms of a 1948 United Nations resolution.,

The Arab Higher Committee was the last to demand that the refugees must return to the territory now under Israeli control. This demand not only has been abandoned. for practical, as opposed to political, purposes but the Arab Higher Committee and certain Arab statesmen now are opposed to. any return of Palestine Arabs to Israel territory. This change has been brought about by the fact that Israel will accept only a few Arabs into their old home, and that it is better to avoid the impression that the Palestine case has been settled. by agreement for a few to return.

...Strongly nationalist elements apparently are rallying around the Mufti and the Arab Higher Committee’s program for a belt of thickly settled Palestinians surrounding Israel.

...‘The shift in. the Mufti’s policy was apparently connected with the enthusiasm which Saudi Arabia, Egypt and Syria displayed for the preservation of the independent Kingdom of Jordan, and their strong opposition to its unification with Iraq. The Palestinian element is becoming increasingly predominant in Jordan in which it constitutes not only some two-thirds of the. population but is an educated and trained element that is pushing the original Jordanians, largely of Bedouin stock, into the background.
At the time, UNRWA was actually trying to solve the problem: it was pushing hard for Palestinian Arabs to be resettled in areas of Syria and Lebanon where they would be given plots of land and could become financially independent. And Israel had agreed to allow tens of thousands of Arabs to return but only in conjunction with the Arab world naturalizing the rest. 

But the Mufti did not care about what was best for the Palestinian Arabs. He wanted to destroy Israel. If he couldn't flood Israel with hundreds of thousands of refugees, he intended to turn Jordan into a temporary Palestinian state whose only purpose would be to destroy Israel - and that included building settlements surrounding Israel where they could be used as a means to attack Israel from a short distance. 

While his entire plan was not realized, during the 1950s and 1960s Israel suffered numerous terror attacks from Palestinian "fedayeen" who lived in nearby communities in Syria, Jordan and Gaza.

The Mufti's plan still lives, though. The PA, with the EU, are building their own settlements non-stop in Area C specifically to block Israel from controlling the land it is supposed to control in the Oslo Accords. Hundreds of illegal structures and ramshackle communities have been built, and Palestinians moved in from Areas A and B, daring Israel to tear them down in front of the cameras. 

It is an updated version of the Mufti's plan for settlements being built in Judea and Samaria not to benefit Palestinian Arabs but to hurt Israel. 

(h/t Charles)



Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism  today at Amazon!

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424. 

Read all about it here!

 

 

Sunday, June 18, 2023


Palestinian media are celebrating the murderous pogroms that targeted unarmed and innocent Jews in Jerusalem, Hebron, Safed and elsewhere in 1929.

June 17th was the anniversary of the 1930 British execution of three Arabs who were convicted of murdering Jewish civilians during the pogroms.

Originally, the British court found 25 Arabs guilty and deserving of the death penalty; 22 of them had their sentences commuted to life imprisonment. The three who remained were clearly found guilty of multiple murders and premeditation, two of them in Hebron and one in Safed.

The three murderers are being hailed as heroes in Palestinian media, in print and on video, and the murders of Jews are being called the beginning of the "Al Buraq Revolution." 

The Palestine Bulletin in 1930 noted that they were hailed as heroes then, too, with an Arab Execuitve Committee notice that looks strikingly like those of Hamas and Islamic Jihad today.

Strikingly, many prominent Jews - including Einstein - lobbied against the death penalty for the murderers, on principle against the death penalty altogether.





Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism  today at Amazon!

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424. 

Read all about it here!

 

 

Monday, April 10, 2023


World Islamic Congress in Jerusalem, 1931

In the Winter 2022 edition of the Institute of Palestine Studies journal, pseudo-historian Ilan Pappe puts forth a theory:

This article asks, why was there no Arab university in Mandatory Palestine (while there were two Jewish universities). Apparently, the colonial mentality of the British authorities who deemed the Palestinians yet another colonized people who had to be oppressed, while regarding the Zionist settlers as fellow colonialists, feared that such a university would enhance the Palestinian national movement. At the same time, Zionist pressure, British anti-Arab racism, and lack of resources also combined to undermine the emergence of a proper Palestinian higher education system.
According to Pappe's abstract, the main reason an Arab university was not established was British racism. Yet even he admits that the British allowed other Arab institutions of higher learning to be established in Palestine.

The truth is only partially mentioned in the article:

After the Buraq disturbances, some members of the Palestinian political leadership and most notably Mufti Hajj Amin al-Husayni attempted a different path. It was in the wake of the All-Islamic Congress convened in Jerusalem in 1931 that the real efforts to open such a university began in earnest in 1932. The coordinating committee of the All-Islamic Congress sent delegations to Egypt, Iraq, Afghanistan, and India for fundraising for an Islamic University in Jerusalem.
... [British] opposition was not the only reason that the idea of the Islamic university in Jerusalem petered out. Unfortunately, these fundraising missions, particularly the mufti’s long fundraising trip to Iraq and India in 1933, were not successful in raising the funds necessary to establish a university in Jerusalem. Nor was there enough interest among activists in convening a second congress in the city, and that led to the collapse of the organizational capacity of the World Islamic Congress by the end of 1934.48 Although the local press constantly mentioned the idea of reviving the university project and holding another congress in Jerusalem in the years that followed, those plans came to nothing and were soon forgotten. As mentioned, even after the mufti’s escape from Palestine in 1937, he was still involved in the efforts until 1940; soon after he also lost interest in the project. 

The antisemitic Mufti of Jerusalem couldn't galvanize nearly enough interest in the Arab world to build the "Islamic University in Jerusalem." He couldn't raise the funds and he lost interest himself. It doesn't appear that British opposition had much if anything to do with this - the Mufti certainly didn't consider that an obstacle.

Which means that Pappe is not telling the truth.

Other sources fill in more gaps. Pappe touches on this, but this article notes Egyptian opposition to the university:

The news that the [Islamic] conference would support the creation of an Islamic university in Jerusalem was seen as a direct threat to the dominating status of al-Azhar as the most prestigious university in the Islamic world. Thus, for example, Muhammad Bakhit, former Mufti of Egypt, in his public statement against the conference, also criticised the 'dreams' of those who pretended to establish a new university which would become the new scientific centre of the Muslim world. The loud opposition of al-Azhar to the conference must have also affected the cautious reaction of the opposition parties in Egypt. Although they might have been eager to use it as a stage to attack Sidqi's regime, Wafdist and Liberal leaders, being Egyptian nationalists, could not accept the eventuality that a non-Egyptian caliph would be nominated at the conference. Similarly, these leaders opposed any alleged attempt to erode the prestige of al-Azhar as the most respected centre of Islamic teaching. Even Egyptian advocates of the Palestinian Arab cause, such as Muhammad Ali Alluba and Ahmad Zaki, called for its postponement.
The entire purpose of the university was to help the Mufti's power base as well as to oppose the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, which had attracted prestige very quickly. But it was also a means to make land unavailable for Jews to buy, as Pappe notes:

Some funding did come through. The nizam (ruler) of Hyderabad donated one million rupees. ...That sum of money was used to buy land in the Tulkarm district that was endowed as a waqf for the future university. At least in this respect, the mufti could have been satisfied; he prevented the sale of the land coveted by the Zionist movement and ensured a future investment for the university. Alas, it was a short-lived victory as the village (Raml Zayta/Khirbat Qazaza) was destroyed in 1948 and on its ruins Jewish settlements were built and the university was not established. 

This nexus between endowment, struggling against Zionist purchase of land, and the university enthused also Christian activists in the national movement. Members of the Christian Orthodox community were prepared to do more than send words of congratulations. Most notable in this respect was ‘Isa al-‘Isa, the editor of Filastin, who sent the World Islamic Congress a proposal outlining a scheme for saving Palestinian lands from the Zionists by creating endowments on the coveted land...
The proposed Islamic University of Jerusalem was not conceived as a positive way for Palestinian Arab youth to improve themselves, but as a way to counter Jewish progress. 

As with Palestinian nationalism itself, it wasn't pro-Palestinian. It was anti-Jew.





Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism  today at Amazon!

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424. 

Read all about it here!

 

 

Monday, March 27, 2023

Last Friday, some 100,000 Muslims visited and prayed in the courtyards of the Temple Mount.


That's not even close to a record - in previous Ramadans, some crowds were estimated at 250,000. 

From all accounts, these numbers are far, far higher than the number of Muslims who visited the Temple Mount on any day from the dawn of Islam to 1967.

I cannot find any news articles about more than several thousand Muslims going to the Haram al Sharif on any occasion before 1967. None I can find any that say "tens of thousands," certainly none say "hundreds of thousands" of Muslims making a pilgrimage there. 

It seems that more Muslims visit the site every week under the supposedly draconian Israeli limitations - between 40,000 and 70,000 - than ever did under Jordanian, British or Ottoman rule 

That has only happened under Jewish rule.

Before Jews returned to the Land, Muslims really didn't make a big deal over the Al Aqsa Mosque. There were certainly some pilgrims, and to many Muslims in Jerusalem it was important, but it wasn't a major symbol. Only once the Mufti started baseless rumors that the Jews planned to take over Al Aqsa did the Muslim masses start to pay attention. 

And even today, when we see Palestinian leaders exhorting the faithful to visit Al Aqsa, they are calling on them to "defend" it from a few dozen Jews taking strolls there and the police who are there to avoid the Jews getting lynched. The Palestinians don't say to visit it for its inherent importance.

The huge crowds that visit under Jewish rule - especially considering that according to Jewish law, every one of them is desecrating the holy site - proves beyond a doubt that if one cares about freedom of access of holy sites to all, Israel must maintain control over where those sites are. 

It is only one example of hundreds that prove that all the accusations hurled against Israel are not just lies, but the exact opposite of the truth. 



Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism  today at Amazon!

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424. 

Read all about it here!

 

 

Monday, February 27, 2023


Today's news has uncomfortable echoes in the events of 75 years ago.






On February 22, 1948, three trucks filled with explosives were exploded by Arabs in British Army uniforms on Ben Yehuda Street in Jerusalem. Over 50 people were killed, including several children.



The "Army of the Holy War" led by Abd al-Qadir al-Husayni took responsibility for the attack several days later. He was a relative of the Nazi-allied Mufti of Jerusalem. His group was essentially the Hamas of its day. 

Two British Army deserters also participated in the attack. While the Mufti of Jerusalem denied any responsibility, and his Arab Higher Committee distanced itself from it, saying that the attack was "'depravity unfit for the Arab spirit," those British soldiers said that they had been promised a huge reward from the Mufti for their part of the plot. The story is that when they went to claim that reward, the Mufti laughed at them. 

As with yesterday's murderous terror attack, Jewish leaders called for restraint - but many did not listen. The Irgun and Lehi groups, blaming the attack on the British, attacked and killed a number of British soldiers in revenge, while Arab snipers killed several Jews.


The real difference between then and now, of course, is that now the Jews can defend themselves. Then, the British were still responsible for security, and they didn't hold on to their end of the bargain. Even though they knew that their own vehicles had been stolen days before this attack, they didn't inform the Jewish guards in Jerusalem, who let the bomb-laden British trucks into the heart of the city assuming they were safe. (One heroic guard challenged the "British soldiers" and was immediately murdered by them.) 






Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism  today at Amazon!

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424. 

Read all about it here!

 

 

Wednesday, February 22, 2023

Itamar Ben Gvir caused a furor when he visited the Temple Mount back in January. But not really. All the umbrage regarding his “provocation”—walking while Jewish—was manufactured  by bored reporters who have nothing else to write about; by left-wing reporters who lust to smear Israel in print; by Hamas, the PA, Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Jordan, and yes, the United States of America. The latter, of course, demanded that Israel maintain the “status quo” at holy sites, which means that the Jordanian Waqf remains in charge; Arabs get the full run of the Temple Mount; but Jews are rushed through the compound under guard and may not linger or pray. The thrust of all this is that Jews are somehow intruders in their own land, in their holiest city, on their holiest spot, and that they are stealing them from the Arabs.

It’s not a new accusation. As Alex Sternberg noted in a recent piece, ‘Al-Aqsa is in danger’ The history of a 100-year-old lie, the libel that Jews are taking over the Al-Aqsa Mosque is old. The falsehood, motivated by politics, originates with Haj Amin El-Husseini, the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem:

An early enemy of Zionism, Husseini regularly engaged in incitement against the Jews of then-Palestine. In 1920, this resulted in five deaths and 211 injured. In 1929, Husseini used the occasion of Tisha B’Av to tell an Arab crowd that the Jews were coming to destroy Al-Aqsa and rebuild the Temple in its place. “Al-Aqsa is in danger!” he shouted, pointing to throngs of Jews squeezing into the narrow alleyway at the Western Wall to commemorate the Temple’s destruction.

Angry mobs surged through the Jewish communities of then-Palestine, attacking peaceful Jews and raping, killing and looting. Hundreds were killed in Hebron, Safed and Jerusalem.

Husseini was jailed by the British, released shortly after and then appointed Mufti of Jerusalem. This new title gave him a coveted position within the Arab community.

Dr. Sternberg goes on to discuss Ariel Sharon’s infamous visit to the Mount which has long been said to be the catalyst for the Second Intifada, also known as the “Al-Aqsa Intifada”:

Following [Sharon’s] visit, the Palestinians launched a terrorist war that resulted in thousands of Israeli and Palestinian deaths.

Despite the claim that Sharon started the intifada, the truth was revealed years later and confirmed by Arafat’s wife and Nabil Shaath, a Fatah Central Committee member.

Sternberg’s otherwise excellent account of the events here falters. The truth was not revealed later, but immediately after the peace talks. Or at least to the Israeli army, who sent IDF representatives to brief the members of the small Judean hilltop settlement where I resided at the time, Metzad.

Sternberg description of events taking place at that time offers us the background for that briefing:

In July of 2000, Arafat returned from peace talks at Camp David with then-President Bill Clinton and Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak. Barak had offered Arafat 97% of Judea and Samaria, which Arafat refused.

One of the sticking points was sharing the Temple Mount with the Jews. While Clinton considered this reasonable, it was a condition Arafat was unwilling to accept. Clinton was furious and blamed Arafat for the breakdown of the talks. Needing a diversion to deflect Clinton’s anger, Arafat ordered his underlings to plan the new intifada. Sharon’s trip to the Temple Mount took place two months later, providing a convenient excuse to launch the wave of terror.

Here too, Sternberg’s account appears to miss a crucial point: that Sharon’s visit to the Temple Mount was an annual visit. This fact was well known to all, up to and including “Arafat and his underlings.” Sharon went up to the Temple Mount every year before the High Holidays—and that yearly visit was factored into the planning of the intifada from its very inception.

I know this because the same July that Arafat returned from Camp David in a tizzy, I sat among the other 30-some residents of Metzad, waiting to hear why we had been assembled. We soon learned that the army had come to warn us of a large and serious wave of Arab terror planned for September, around the time of the High Holidays (and my due date). The IDF not only had intelligence that the intifada would occur, but they had that intelligence already in July, when the intifada would have been in the earliest stages of its planning.

Already then, the Israeli army knew the Arabs would justify their unbridled slaughter of the Jews by blaming it on Ariel Sharon’s visit to the Temple Mount. This was alluded to by the IDF at that meeting of July 2000 on Metzad. You might have called it a guess—the prediction that terrorists would use the annual Sharon Temple Mount visit as a pretext for violence. It wouldn’t have been a difficult guess, considering it was Sharon’s custom to visit the Temple Mount every year before the holidays. But the army didn’t need to guess, because they had cold, hard intelligence. Right from the very beginning, as things were going down.

For argument’s sake however, let’s stipulate that my memory is faulty. Let’s say the army did not know and did not actually tell us that Ariel Sharon’s impending, regularly scheduled visit to the Mount would be used to justify the slaughter. It would still have come as no surprise: El-Husseini did it 100 years ago when he incited the mobs to slaughter Jews by telling them that the “Yahud” were taking over Al-Quds. That same 100-year-old excuse was still going strong in 2000 when Sharon dared walk on the Temple Mount and it is still strong now in 2023, when Ben Gvir does the same.

Terrorists like to accuse Jews of taking over the Mount and the mosque. As much as many Jews wish that were true, the reality is that the Temple Mount is administrated by the Jordanian Waqf; and Jews aren’t even allowed to pray on the Mount, let alone enter or even go near the mosque.

Ariel Sharon, for example, did not enter the mosque or even approach it. Yet this is how his visit—the planned excuse for the intifada—was reported by the Guardian (emphasis added wherever the Guardian fudged the truth, outright lied, engaged in hyperbole, or omitted salient facts—the “people” are JEWS, the “riots” are TERROR, the “West Bank” is Judea and Samaria, the “Haram” is the Jewish Temple Mount, and so on and so forth):

Dozens of people were injured in rioting on the West Bank and in Jerusalem yesterday as the hawkish Likud party leader, Ariel Sharon, staged a provocative visit to a Muslim shrine at the heart of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

Surrounded by hundreds of Israeli riot police, Mr Sharon and a handful of Likud politicians marched up to the Haram al-Sharif, the site of the gold Dome of the Rock that is the third holiest shrine in Islam.

He came down 45 minutes later, leaving a trail of fury. Young Palestinians heaved chairs, stones, rubbish bins, and whatever missiles came to hand at the Israeli forces. Riot police retaliated with tear gas and rubber bullets, shooting one protester in the face.

The symbolism of the visit to the Haram by Mr Sharon - reviled for his role in the 1982 massacre of Palestinians in a refugee camp in Lebanon - and its timing was unmistakable. "This is a dangerous process conducted by Sharon against Islamic sacred places," Yasser Arafat told Palestinian television.

All of this was and remains a lie. There was no provocation resulting in a “riot.” The intifada and its pretend catalyst had all been meticulously planned two months earlier. You might even say 100 years earlier, when El-Husseini launched the time-honored tradition of Arab terrorists blaming their Jewish victims for getting dead, a popular sport for more than 100 years.

Ben Gvir should have sold tickets.



Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism  today at Amazon!

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424. 

Read all about it here!

 

 



Monday, January 02, 2023

Continuing my review of the Palestine Post articles from 75 years ago, we see this interesting piece from January 2, 1948:


It turns out this was far from the only reporting in 1948 of close cooperation between Arabs who wanted to murder the Jews and the Nazis who were experts on the topic.

January 6:




January 9:



Arab agents are today recruiting mercenaries to fight against the Jews in Palestine from among the Yugoslav Ustashi and Chetniks and the Ukrainians, Albanians, Circassians (former inhabitants of the northwestern area of the Caucasus) and other groups here who were on Hitler’s side during the war, and are now under the care of the International Refugee Organization.

Able-bodied men, both inside and outside the I.R.O. camps, who are between 22 and 32 years of age, and who accept the Arab terms of payment–their fares to the middle East and maintenance of their families in exchange for their pledge to serve in the Arab forces for at least one year–are being given visas by the governments of Egypt, Syria and Transjordan. Where the mercenaries are of Moslem origin they are being officially resettled” by formal negotiations between the governments concerned and the I.R.0. which, however, disclaims any knowledge of what use the individuals are put to on arriving in the Middle East.
April 1:




April 9:

July 28 (JTA):

Several hundred former members of the Nazi Prinz Even, Division, recruited by Egyptian authorities in Austria as farm workers, immediately upon their arrival in Egypt joined the Arab Legion of Transjordan and departed for the Palestine front to fight against the Jews, the Socialist newspaper Well Am Abend reported today.

The newspaper charged that Dr. Ismail Hassan, Egyptian representative in Austria, toured the U.S. zone several weeks ago and succeeded in obtaining exit visas for the several hundred, most of whom were Bosnian Moslems and held the rank of major to the Prinz Eugen Division. The disclosure of the identity of the men followed the capture of several of them by the Israeli forces, Welt Am Abend stated.


September 5:



There is surprisingly very little literature about the Nazi contribution to the 1948 war.. There are lots of books about Arabs collaborating with Nazis during World War II,, and more with the false accusations of Zionists collaborating with Nazis, but I cannot find any on Nazis collaborating with Arabs after the war.

The most comprehensive account I could find was a contemporaneous article by International News Service correspondent Kenneth Dixon written on February 22, 1948, where he viewed the evidence of the Palmach from papers on captured Nazis as well as German-style fighting techniques from Arab soldiers.




Barry Rubin and Wolfgang G. Schwanitz, in their 2014 book "Nazis, Islamists, and the Making of the Modern Middle East," have one chapter on "The Arab States' Useful Nazis." It does not talk about the Nazi role in the 1948 war, but they note that the number of Nazi officials that escaped to Arab countries dwarfed the number that fled to South America - over 4,000 Nazis officials in Arab countries (some estimate over 6,000)  compared to less than a thousand in Latin America. (And many of those who fled to South America later relocated to the Middle East.)

The authors say  (p. 216)  that a few years after World War II, the Allies were unenthusiastic about seeking out Nazi war criminals for punishment. They then acidly note that "the only ones who seemed to be avidly seeking to find Nazi war criminals were Arab governments who wanted to offer them jobs."

This is all after the Nuremberg Trials when Nazi crimes were well known. The Arab leadership at the time were attracted, not repulsed, by the details of the Holocaust. 

If Arabs were not antisemitic, then why did they so enthusiastically recruit known Nazi war criminals for their war against Israel?

And if leftist "anti-Zionists" today abhor antisemitism, why have they remained so silent when confronted with countless stories that prove Arabs have been enthusiastic antisemites? Why can one not find virtually any condemnation of Arab antisemitism from these social justice warriors?

Because they share the same mindset as the Arabs who recruited Nazis in the 1940s.



Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism  today at Amazon!

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424. 

Read all about it here!

 

 

Wednesday, December 07, 2022

There has been a lot of coverage of the Jordanian film Farha, now available on Netflix, which includes a scene of Israeli soldiers execute a family with a baby for sheer pleasure. 

Israellycool excerpts some scenes.

His characterization of the film as a blood libel is accurate. People assume that a historic drama is based on reality, and while there were scattered instances of Israeli outrages in 1948 as in any war, they were most definitely the exception and were generally punished. Farha says that this was - and is - the norm for Israel, and as such it is outrageous. 

But let's do a thought experiment. 

Let's pretend that someone made an accurate drama about the massacre of Jews in Hebron in 1929.

The reality is that the Arabs did do atrocities then. As survivors testified, these included "widespread rape. The castration of seven men, including rabbis in their 60s and 70s. A seventy year old tied to a door and tortured until he died. A two-year-old with his head torn off. A rabbi set on fire. An elderly disabled pharmacist tortured to death, his wife mutilated, his daughter raped and murdered."

It would be a compelling story, with real drama and real facts. And it would never be shown on Netflix.

Movies about Nazis massacring Jews are fine, and the more detail, the better. But movies about Arabs abusing Jews? No, that would be considered Islamophobic, and wouldn't be touched by any mainstream streaming service or distributor. Imagine the outcry that would accompany such a film - it would make the Jewish reaction to Farha look like nothing.

Furthermore, imagine what such a film would include. Even if made by a fervent Zionist, it would feature subplots of Arabs saving Jews - which some did - to humanize the Arab side and ensure that the film is not incitement against Arabs as a whole.

Now, can you imagine a Jordanian or Palestinian film about the Nakba that would humanize Jews?  

documentary was once made about Hebron, in 1999, where survivors told about what they witnessed. It had decent reviews. 

And you essentially cannot find it nowadays. It isn't streamed anywhere, and the only place I can find to buy a DVD is here at the National Center for Jewish Film. 

Why is such a seminal event in Zionist history virtually ignored in film? 

We know the answer. 


UPDATE: The Hebron documentary is (unlisted) on YouTube with the English subtitles. You can watch it here:


(h/t GnasherJew)




Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism  today at Amazon!

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424. 

Read all about it here!

 

 

Monday, December 05, 2022

From Ian:

A Blood Libel Against Israel on Netflix
On Dec. 1, Netflix started streaming the Jordanian film "Farha," which depicts fictionalized, heartless Israeli soldiers viciously killing Palestinian men, women and children in cold blood. These events never actually happened and the film admits that it is "dramatized." But that does not mean it will not have an outsized impact on anti-Jewish hate and violence.

The movie offers a fanciful retelling of the 1948 war in which the would-be genocidal Arab armies failed to destroy a newborn Jewish state (and kill all its inhabitants in the process). Those who tried to help them do it are romantically recast as the helpless victims of a horrible catastrophe.

Yet primary sources - from the Arab side - attest to the fact that the vast majority of Arabs who left their homes did so voluntarily, or under orders from the invading Arab armies, not the Israeli armed forces.

This is not a matter of perspective or worldview. A movie that malevolently depicts Israeli forces murdering defenseless Arab children in order to feed the nakba mythology is nothing short of a modern blood libel.

In a world of rising antisemitism, it is dangerous and disgusting for Netflix to feed false and anti-Jewish information to the masses by giving a film like this a platform.


Anger over Netflix film ‘aiming to destroy Israel’
Netflix is under fire for screening a movie depicting Israeli soldiers executing a Palestinian family in cold blood, made by filmmakers who have a track record of inflammatory comments about the Jewish state.

The film, Farha, set in the 1948 Israeli War of Independence, is being launched on Netflix in most countries from 1 December, and is likely to be Jordan’s entry to next year’s Oscars.

Dan Diker, president of the Jerusalem Centre for Public Affairs, told the JC that the film was intended to “destroy [Israel] by all means possible”.

He said: “I find it deeply troubling that Netflix has apparently failed to do the most basic due diligence before supporting and promoting this project.”

In an investigation into the filmmakers, the JC and activist group GnasherJew discovered that producer Ayah Jardaneh tweeted last year that “Israel is the real terrorist” and posted a “map of Palestine” that erased all trace of Israel.

She also tweeted that Mike Pence was supporting “an apartheid state, an occupier and Zionism”.

Addressing Mr Pence, she wrote: “If you love them so much give them your land and leave your house live as a refugee and let them live there instead”.

In 2014, Ms Jardaneh retweeted a post that said “Hamas or his firecracker rockets is not a problem, but seven decades of Israeli brutality and oppression is”.

She has also used the hashtag #27027KM, described as “the area of all Palestine from the river to the sea”.

Ms Jardaneh, who works at the Amman-based company TaleBox, is not the only member of the team to have made such controversial statements online, the JC found.


Netflix blocks controversial Nakba film for Israeli subscribers
The Jordanian movie "Farha" – which shows Israeli soldiers executing a Palestinian family - became available on Netflix several days ago, but it seems not for all the subscribers of the popular streaming service.

Although many Israelis have expressed outrage and terminated their Netflix subscription after the streaming platform announced that it would upload the film, Israelis who chose to keep their subscription would not be able to view it after it was blocked for them.

Many Netflix subscribers in Israel said that when they tried to upload "Farha" in the Netflix search engine, and could not find it, while others received a message saying "this title cannot be viewed in your country." It should be noted that for some subscribers who had an English interface, the film remained available for them, but still many had an error message and couldn't watch it.

Last week, Far-right lawmaker and destined National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir slammed the new Jordanian film.

"The inciteful Jordanian film that will be broadcast on Netflix demonstrates how hypocritical the world could be," Ben-Gvir said.

"Israel has been attacked by murderous terror before it was even established, this consciousness engineering should be handled by the Foreign Ministry with advocacy that shows the real picture, and who the real bloodthirsty murderers are," he said.

Tuesday, July 26, 2022




I came across an online copy of Arab-Israeli Conflict: The Essential Reference Guide, a 2014 volume that attempts to distill the conflict to less than 400 pages, including source materials. 

Written and edited by southeast Asia-based academic Priscilla Roberts, it attempts to be even-handed and there is little that is offensive or too inaccurate (it certainly has mistakes.) 

But when I searched the book for "antisemitism," it mentions only the European version. It says nothing about Arab antisemitism. It doesn't have a separate entry on the Mufti of Jerusalem and his virulent hate nor anything about his Nazi collaboration. It mentions the Hebron pogrom of 1929 only as an aside in the article on United Kingdom Middle East policy: "Sporadic armed conflict between the two communities simmered until, in August 1929, 67 Jews were murdered by rioters in Hebron. This shocking event eroded what little confidence Jewish leaders had in a binational compromise future for the region and led to the rapid expansion of the paramilitary Jewish self-defense force known as the Haganah."

Throughout the book, Arab antipathy towards Jews is framed as a logical response to Zionism and the history of Islamic and Arab antisemitism is simply not there.

This is what we see in the media as well as academia. Jew-hatred is fundamentally irrational and no one wants to accuse Arabs or Muslims of being irrational, because that sounds Orientalist. Ignoring the very real history of antipathy towards Jews in the Arab world is not doing anyone any favors, though - if one ignores a fundamental reason for the conflict, one cannot possibly pretend to explain it.

Since the beginning of Islam, Jews were regarded as dhimmis in Muslim-majority (mostly Arab) lands. They were second class citizens with limited rights. They were tolerated, mostly, as long as they kept in their place. When they were perceived as having crossed some imaginary line, they were subjected to pogroms no less violent than those in eastern Europe. And the very existence of a Jewish state in the midst of Arab lands is hated not because of pro-Palestinian sentiment: it is from the shame that the weak, hated, dhimmi Jews defeated the combined Arab armies.

To ignore that history in describing the Arab Israeli conflict is to effectively censor an important narrative. Even worse, it ignores the antisemitism that is still seen in Arab media, today. 

Roberts worked with a larger team on the four volume 2008 "The Encyclopedia of The Arab-Israeli Conflict: A Political, Social, and Military History" which is also online. In that work, Arab antisemitism is not ignored, but it is minimized.
Its entry on antisemitism concentrates on how historic European antisemitism has animated modern Zionism, while Arab and Muslim antisemitism is mentioned only as a logical result of Jewish ambition. Even the Mufti's antisemitism, which is well documented from his own writings and radio broadcasts, is  downplayed as a response to Jewish power or realpolitik:
 The figure of Haj Amin al-Husseini, grand mufti of Jerusalem, serves as an excellent indication of growing anti-Jewish sentiment during this period. A significant leader of the Palestinian Arabs, al-Husseini moved incrementally toward anti-Semitism as he opposed Jewish ambitions in the region. While he had economic dealings with the Jewish population, he also inspired and organized the growth of Arab paramilitary groups intent on thwarting the growth of Jewish power. When disputes over access to the holy places in Jerusalem led to open conflict in 1929, he proved unable to control his followers and ultimately gave assent to their actions. 

...The grand mufti of Jerusalem gained notoriety for his active courting of the Axis powers. However, his motivations also involved significant anti-British sentiment, for he viewed the Germans as the likely victors in the war and sought to gain influence with them.   

This is ahistorical but it reflects the general attitude of scholars towards Arab antisemitism: when it is mentioned at all, it is regarded as an unfortunate consequence of Jewish greed and power or an unintended result of other historical events. It is never considered on its own, and it is not mentioned as a continuation of centuries of Muslim attitudes towards Jews, as well as the influence of virulent Christian Arab antisemitism on Arab nationalism in the early 20th century which converted the Arab attitude towards Jews into full blown hate. 

The bias is clear when we see the full-page entry on "Anti-Arab Attitudes and Discrimination:" 
 Anti-Arab attitudes, especially toward Muslim Arabs, as well as formal and informal policies and codes of conduct that unfairly target Arabs and are sometimes known as anti-Arabism have been especially virulent in Israel since 1948
From reading this encyclopedia, one would believe that the only irrational hate in the conflict is that of Jews towards Arabs!

There is a major gap in scholarship towards the Middle East, and there are no signs that anyone is interested in filling it.





Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism  today at Amazon!

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424. 

Read all about it here!

 

 

Sunday, July 10, 2022

In the early 1930s, the antisemitic Mufti of Jerusalem convened a series of meetings where Arab sheikhs pledged not to sell their land to Jews - a policy that continues today with the Palestinian Authority.

November 21,1934 Palestine Post:


January 1, 1935 Palestine Post:


But as this was happening, landowners in Transjordan compared their poverty with the prosperity in neighboring Palestine, and concluded that Jewish investments was what Transjordan needed.

JTA reported on January 18, 1933:

The Hebrew paper “Davar” discloses today that Transjordanian tribe heads have for some time been approaching the Jewish Agency with offers for the sale of land. The miserable situation of Transjordania as compared with the prosperity in Palestine convinces them that the salvation of Transjordania can come only through the Jews, the tribe leaders are reported to have said. These same leaders have urged Emir Abdullah to encourage the Jews to settle in Transjordan, the paper writes.

From JTA, February 6, 1933:


Permission to sell Transjordan land to foreigners is requested in a petition signed by twenty-one of the most influential Transjordan tribal leaders and members of the Legislative Assembly, which has been submitted to the Palestine Government and Emir Abdullah.

The petition emphasizes that the precarious condition of the country calls for such action.

The petition, which was drawn up following a meeting of Arab chieftains, in Amman, adds a new chapter to the Transjordan matter which was apparently closed on January 25th when Emir Abdullah announced the cancellation of an option he had granted to a Jewish company for the lease of 70,000 dunams of his personal domain in Transjordan.

The Arab chieftains at their meeting in Amman discussed Emir Abdullah’s communique announcing the cancellation of the lease to Jews. The majority of those present, however, found that the sale of land to Jews is the only solution for the present acute situation.

Seventy percent of the cattle owned by the Arabs in Transjordan have perished from starvation, it was stated.
Transjordan and Palestine had similar climates, similar resources, and the Arabs were from similar tribes. The only reason Palestine was thriving and Transjordan was failing was because of Jewish energy and investments. This was obvious to everyone at the time, including Arabs.






Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism  today at Amazon!

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424. 

Read all about it here!

 

 

Thursday, July 07, 2022

In April 1921, British High Commissioner of Palestine Herbert Samuel met with Amin al-Husseini who assured him that he was supportive of British rule and would work hard to keep things peaceful. Samuel said:

I saw Haj Amin Husseini on Friday [April 8] and discussed with him at considerable length the political situation and the question of his appointment to the office of grand Mufti. Mr. Storrs was also present, and in the course of conversation, he declared his earnest desire to cooperate with the government and his belief in the good intentions of the British Government towards the Arabs. He (e.g. Haj Amin al-Husseini) gave assurance that the influence of his family and himself would be devoted to maintaining tranquility in Jerusalem and he felt sure that no disturbances need be feared this year. He said that the riots of last year were spontaneous and unpremeditated. If the government took reasonable precautions, he felt sure they would not be repeated.

He was referring to the 1920 Nebi Musa riots which killed 5 Jews - and which Husseini had himself provoked.

Nevertheless, Samuel accepted Husseini's assurances and supported his appointment to the position of Mufti of Jerusalem.

Here is an account of the new Mufti's appearance at the Nebi Musa festival procession only two days later, on Easter Sunday, April 10:
Although we were less than a mile away from the place where the procession first came into sight several hours elapsed before they passed the place where we stood. The procession of which the mufti of Jerusalem, who had but recently been inducted into office, and other Moslem dignitaries made up the rear, moved so slowly because dozens of circles composed of dervishes moved forward ahead of the mufti only as the dancing circle advanced. Terrible fanaticism was discernible in their distorted faces as they danced. In the characteristically Oriental rhythmic song, or call, repeated in chorus after their leader, they called out sentences that they were interpreted to me as follows: "This place has been conquered by the sword. Jerusalem is the city of Allah. Our banner enters into it. Get out, you dogs, you Jews, you Zionists. Our banner enters Medina. We will draw the sword against any one that opposes us.

While they spoke these threatening words a dervish who as lifted on the shoulders of others frantically brandished two swords over his head. Last year a number of Jews were killed at this festival. (The Evening Kansan-Republican, July 5, 1921)

Samuel's quote above was made on the following day. It is unclear if he was aware of the blatant incitement that the Mufti was provoking.

What is clear is that this appointment resulted in the deaths of thousands of Jews at the hands of the Mufti's own people as well as his followers during the 101 years since. The Jew-hating Mufti is still considered an "icon" of Palestinian history and is universally venerated by all Palestinians. 




Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism  today at Amazon!

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424. 

Read all about it here!

 

 

Monday, July 04, 2022

July 4 is the anniversary of the death of the notorious Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, Hajj Muhammad Amin Al-Husseini, who died in Beirut in 1974.

News site Safa commemorates his life with this poster, calling him "the icon of the Palestinian struggle."


Husseini wasn't even initially a Palestinian nationalist. up until 1921, he strongly supported a Greater Syria, not an independent Palestine. 

Husseini was behind numerous terror attacks. He constantly incited against Jews. He was the creator of the "Al Aqsa is in danger" lie. He was involved in the murderous attacks on Jews in 1920, 1921, 1929 and 1936. But that wasn't enough - he collaborated with the Nazis to block Jewish emigration from Europe. He personally toured at least one concentration camp. By any measure, he was an enthusiastic supporter of genocide against Jews.

And he is a Palestinian hero.

You will not find Palestinian articles asking to reconsider whether he is someone who should be lionized. He is simply an "icon" and whatever he did is therefore praiseworthy. 



Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism  today at Amazon!

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424. 

Read all about it here!

 

 

AddToAny

EoZ Book:"Protocols: Exposing Modern Antisemitism"

Printfriendly

EoZTV Podcast

Podcast URL

Subscribe in podnovaSubscribe with FeedlyAdd to netvibes
addtomyyahoo4Subscribe with SubToMe

search eoz

comments

Speaking

translate

E-Book

For $18 donation








Sample Text

EoZ's Most Popular Posts in recent years

Hasbys!

Elder of Ziyon - حـكـيـم صـهـيـون



This blog may be a labor of love for me, but it takes a lot of effort, time and money. For over 19 years and 40,000 articles I have been providing accurate, original news that would have remained unnoticed. I've written hundreds of scoops and sometimes my reporting ends up making a real difference. I appreciate any donations you can give to keep this blog going.

Donate!

Donate to fight for Israel!

Monthly subscription:
Payment options


One time donation:

subscribe via email

Follow EoZ on Twitter!

Interesting Blogs

Blog Archive