Tuesday, July 26, 2011


When in the course of human history an organization, such as the United Nations, which was intended to serve the interest of humanity, to advance the cause of justice, and to promote ‘the economic and social advancement of all peoples,’1

When an international organization like the United Nations comprised of virtually all states that proclaimed their dedication to the maintenance of ‘international peace and security, to take effective collective measures for the prevention and removal of threats to the peace, and for the suppression of acts of aggression or other breaches of the peace, and to bring about by peaceful means, and in conformity with the principles of justice and international law, adjustment or settlement of international disputes or situations which might lead to a breach of the peace;’ 2

When such an organization is subverted, perverted and becomes a glove that the dominant group of imperial powers use as a ‘rubber stamp’ for their aggressive wars, for their wars of conquest upon peaceful peoples and nations,

When despite the stated aims of affirming the ‘fundamental human rights, in the dignity and worth of the human person, in the equal rights of men and women and of nations large and small, and

to establish conditions under which justice and respect for the obligations arising from treaties and other sources of international law can be maintained, ’

When such an organization turns its eyes to the conquest of a country, Palestine, by European colonizers intent on the ethnic cleansing of a whole country, driving the indigenous peoples from their homes, farms, businesses, villages, towns and cities, and turning the whole country into an armed camp that keeps the conquered living in squalor and in a state of Apartheid, and with the support of the imperial powers,

When the most powerful of countries on the face of the Earth, most notably, the United States of America wages continuous wars, overthrows governments, has its intelligence agency, the CIA, kidnap and take as hostage innocent persons, and denies them due process, the most fundamental human rights, tortures and murders human persons without charge, trial or any sense of due process,
such a country makes a complete mockery of its commitment ‘To develop friendly relations among nations based on respect for the principle of equal rights and self-determination of peoples, and to take other appropriate measures to strengthen universal peace;’ 3

When a handful of great powers with a monopoly on weapons of mass destruction (WMD’s) do not work ‘to strengthen universal peace;’4 but use their monopoly of such weapons to threaten, bully and intimidate the rest of the planet full of peace loving peoples,

When a handful of such countries wage continuous wars for the domination and conquest over other countries, regions and continents for control of their natural resources and minerals for the benefit of private bankers, corporations and ruling classes,

When the promise of commitment ‘to promote social progress and better standards of life in larger freedom,’5 becomes empty words as the dominant financial powers attempt to drive all of humanity into a new form of serfdom as is occurring now,

When all of these abuses, outrageous, manipulations and bullying renders the organization an effective puppet of the dominant powers, and these powers work against the interests of all humanity,
And threatens the very survival of the human race, or large parts of it with extinction from nuclear war, and uses nuclear blackmail as part of its policy,

Then, it is long past time for the community of nations to take steps and measures that will isolate these imperial tyrants in the eyes of the world, and call them out for what they are persistent violators of the peace, and a threat to humanity, and aggressive war-like forces on the world stage.

In such a time it is most important to take away any legitimacy that they lay claim to for their barbaric and aggressive conduct and wars.

It is time for the nations of the world to withdraw en masse form the present United Nations, and to found a new international organization that will be reflective of the needs and desires of the human family to live in peace, and to truly

‘reaffirm faith in fundamental human rights, in the dignity and worth of the human person, in the equal rights of men and women and of nations large and small, and

to establish conditions under which justice and respect for the obligations arising from treaties and other sources of international law can be maintained, and
to promote social progress and better standards of life in larger freedom,

to practice tolerance and live together in peace with one another as good neighbours, and

to unite our strength to maintain international peace and security, and’6

and to make it a supreme principle that the use of ‘armed force shall’7 never be used, and any
forces of the Community of Human Nations shall be used to disarm aggressors.

A new organization is needed that truly serves the interests of humanity, and not a dominant group of criminal financial and imperialist powers. The new organization must seek to organize newer methods of interactions that will, in time, eventually eliminate the use of money as we know it. For if we, the human race are to evolve to a higher state as a species, then we must learn to become more cooperative and eliminate the use of money, which allows a few to dominate the many.

The human race is chained to fossil fuels that are no longer needed. We are chained to their use by the banks and energy companies even though Nikola Tesla showed that energy is everywhere and that the energy of the universe can be tapped freely and with no pollution.

The present United Nations claims to ‘based on the principle of the sovereign equality of all its Members.’ 8 This is absolutely untrue, and must be acknowledged. At present, a handful of nuclear powers sit as permanent members of the Security Council, and they have veto power in their hands over the wishes, needs and demands of the rest of the nations on the face of the Earth.

This is not an organization ‘based on the principle of the sovereign equality of all its Members.’9
The present United Nations is a vehicle to serve the interests of the dominant powers and give it the cloak of respectability, a pretence of democracy. But, it is not. One nation using its veto can thwart the wishes of humanity. That is not democratic; it is tyranny!

Article 2.3 of the Charter states ‘All Members shall settle their international disputes by peaceful means in such a manner that international peace and security, and justice, are not endangered.’10 This is not so; the dominant powers use armed force regularly to enforce their wishes. To these powers, principally, the United States of America, the United Kingdom, France, Israel ‘War is…nothing but the continuation of state policy with other means,’ as stated by Karl Von Clausewitz in his essay of 1812 ‘Principles of War.’11

The present Charter lays down as a requirement for membership in the world body that ‘Membership in the United Nations is open to all other peace-loving states which accept the obligations contained in the present Charter and, in the judgment of the Organization, are able and willing to carry out these obligations.’ 12

At this time the United States of America, Israel, the United Kingdom, and France, more than any other nations have been persistent violators during the whole of their membership. They have continually waged wars upon people of colour throughout the world from Korea, Vietnam, Cambodia, Cuba, Malaysia, Laos, India, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Iraq, Algeria, Libya, Palestine to name a few.

Therefore when such is the reality I submit that the non-nuclear nations of Africa, Asia, South America, and the islands of the seas, and very few if any European countries, perhaps with the exception of Ireland, and some former Soviet republics should withdraw en mass from the present United Nations and set up a new organization of peace loving countries dedicated to the advancement of the human family. All indigenous peoples within all countries must be treated as equals in all respects in the new organization.

It is submitted that the United States of America, the United Kingdom, France, Israel, the Russian Federation, The People's Republic of China, the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, the Republic of India and the Commonwealth of Australia, Germany and Canada should be barred from the new nations of the human family until, and under inspection thoroughly and completely rid themselves of all weapons of mass destruction, nuclear, chemical, biological; all.

Secondly such countries must reduce their military forces to patrolling their coastlines.
Their military industries must be closed and shut down, and prosecution be initiated for any political, military or economic leaders who committed war crimes, or profited from aggressive war.

The rights of indigenous people, and this also means the Palestinian people, and the descendants of former slaves must be fully recognized, their lands returned and reparations made as a fundamental principle to begin to address the most egregious violations committed by majority populations.

It is submitted that The Holy See, or the Vatican should not have, nor be granted membership to the new organization. The very existence of this so-called state derives from the ‘Lateran Pacts of 1929 or Lateran Accords’13 and agreement between the Catholic Hierarchy and the fascist government of Benito Mussolini, in which the Catholic bishops swore allegiance to the fascist government. It should not be treated any different than the state of Manchukuo set up by the Japanese government during World War II, and not recognized, and non-existent today.

The time is overdue and I humbly submit this proposal for the betterment of humanity
Paul Meuse
27 July 2011

1. Preamble to ‘The Charter of the United Nations’ signed on 26 June 1945, in San Francisco.
3. Ibid. Article 1.2
4. Ibid.
5. Preamble, op. cit.
6. Ibid.
7. Ibid.
8. Article 2.1 ‘The Charter of the United Nations.’
9. Ibid.
10. Article 2.3
11. Clausewitz K. P. G. Von. ‘Principles of War,’ 1812.
12. Article 4.1 ‘The Charter of the United Nations.’
13. ‘Lateran Pacts of 1929 or Lateran Accords’ http://www.claremontmckenna.edu/hist/jpetropoulos/holocaust/laterantreaty.htm
14. ‘MANCHUKUO: Puppet's Poppies’ Monday, Nov. 13, 1933

Friday, July 22, 2011

Zionism and the Third Reich' by Mark Weber an excellent piece



Institute for Historical Review

Zionism and the Third Reich

by Mark Weber

Early in 1935, a passenger ship bound for Haifa in Palestine left the German port of Bremerhaven. Its stern bore the Hebrew letters for its name, "Tel Aviv," while a swastika banner fluttered from the mast. And although the ship was Zionist-owned, its captain was a National Socialist Party member. Many years later a traveler aboard the ship recalled this symbolic combination as a "metaphysical absurdity."1 Absurd or not, this is but one vignette from a little-known chapter of history: The wide-ranging collaboration between Zionism and Hitler's Third Reich.

Common Aims

Over the years, people in many different countries have wrestled with the "Jewish question": that is, what is the proper role of Jews in non-Jewish society? During the 1930s, Jewish Zionists and German National Socialists shared similar views on how to deal with this perplexing issue. They agreed that Jews and Germans were distinctly different nationalities, and that Jews did not belong in Germany. Jews living in the Reich were therefore to be regarded not as "Germans of the Jewish faith," but rather as members of a separate national community. Zionism (Jewish nationalism) also implied an obligation by Zionist Jews to resettle in Palestine, the "Jewish homeland." They could hardly regard themselves as sincere Zionists and simultaneously claim equal rights in Germany or any other "foreign" country.

Theodor Herzl (1860-1904), the founder of modern Zionism, maintained that anti-Semitism is not an aberration, but a natural and completely understandable response by non-Jews to alien Jewish behavior and attitudes. The only solution, he argued, is for Jews to recognize reality and live in a separate state of their own. "The Jewish question exists wherever Jews live in noticeable numbers," he wrote in his most influential work, The Jewish State. "Where it does not exist, it is brought in by arriving Jews ... I believe I understand anti-Semitism, which is a very complex phenomenon. I consider this development as a Jew, without hate or fear." The Jewish question, he maintained, is not social or religious. "It is a national question. To solve it we must, above all, make it an international political issue ..." Regardless of their citizenship, Herzl insisted, Jews constitute not merely a religious community, but a nationality, a people, a Volk.2 Zionism, wrote Herzl, offered the world a welcome "final solution of the Jewish question."3

Six months after Hitler came to power, the Zionist Federation of Germany (by far the largest Zionist group in the country) submitted a detailed memorandum to the new government that reviewed German-Jewish relations and formally offered Zionist support in "solving" the vexing "Jewish question." The first step, it suggested, had to be a frank recognition of fundamental national differences: 4

Zionism has no illusions about the difficulty of the Jewish condition, which consists above all in an abnormal occupational pattern and in the fault of an intellectual and moral posture not rooted in one's own tradition. Zionism recognized decades ago that as a result of the assimilationist trend, symptoms of deterioration were bound to appear ...

Zionism believes that the rebirth of the national life of a people, which is now occurring in Germany through the emphasis on its Christian and national character, must also come about in the Jewish national group. For the Jewish people, too, national origin, religion, common destiny and a sense of its uniqueness must be of decisive importance in the shaping of its existence. This means that the egotistical individualism of the liberal era must be overcome and replaced with a sense of community and collective responsibility ...

We believe it is precisely the new [National Socialist] Germany that can, through bold resoluteness in the handling of the Jewish question, take a decisive step toward overcoming a problem which, in truth, will have to be dealt with by most European peoples ...

Our acknowledgment of Jewish nationality provides for a clear and sincere relationship to the German people and its national and racial realities. Precisely because we do not wish to falsify these fundamentals, because we, too, are against mixed marriage and are for maintaining the purity of the Jewish group and reject any trespasses in the cultural domain, we -- having been brought up in the German language and German culture -- can show an interest in the works and values of German culture with admiration and internal sympathy ...

For its practical aims, Zionism hopes to be able to win the collaboration of even a government fundamentally hostile to Jews, because in dealing with the Jewish question not sentimentalities are involved but a real problem whose solution interests all peoples and at the present moment especially the German people ...

Boycott propaganda -- such as is currently being carried on against Germany in many ways -- is in essence un-Zionist, because Zionism wants not to do battle but to convince and to build ...

We are not blind to the fact that a Jewish question exists and will continue to exist. From the abnormal situation of the Jews severe disadvantages result for them, but also scarcely tolerable conditions for other peoples.

The Federation's paper, the Jüdische Rundschau ("Jewish Review"), proclaimed the same message: "Zionism recognizes the existence of a Jewish problem and desires a far-reaching and constructive solution. For this purpose Zionism wishes to obtain the assistance of all peoples, whether pro- or anti-Jewish, because, in its view, we are dealing here with a concrete rather than a sentimental problem, the solution of which all peoples are interested."5 A young Berlin rabbi, Joachim Prinz, who later settled in the United States and became head of the American Jewish Congress, wrote in his 1934 book, Wir Juden ("We Jews"), that the National Socialist revolution in Germany meant "Jewry for the Jews." He explained: "No subterfuge can save us now. In place of assimilation we desire a new concept: recognition of the Jewish nation and Jewish race." 6

Active Collaboration

On this basis of their similar ideologies about ethnicity and nationhood, National Socialists and Zionists worked together for what each group believed was in its own national interest. As a result, the Hitler government vigorously supported Zionism and Jewish emigration to Palestine from 1933 until 1940-1941, when the Second World War prevented extensive collaboration.

Even as the Third Reich became more entrenched, many German Jews, probably a majority, continued to regard themselves, often with considerable pride, as Germans first. Few were enthusiastic about pulling up roots to begin a new life in far-away Palestine. Nevertheless, more and more German Jews turned to Zionism during this period. Until late 1938, the Zionist movement flourished in Germany under Hitler. The circulation of the Zionist Federation's bi-weekly Jüdische Rundschau grew enormously. Numerous Zionist books were published. "Zionist work was in full swing" in Germany during those years, the Encyclopaedia Judaica notes. A Zionist convention held in Berlin in 1936 reflected "in its composition the vigorous party life of German Zionists."7

The SS was particularly enthusiastic in its support for Zionism. An internal June 1934 SS position paper urged active and wide-ranging support for Zionism by the government and the Party as the best way to encourage emigration of Germany's Jews to Palestine. This would require increased Jewish self-awareness. Jewish schools, Jewish sports leagues, Jewish cultural organizations -- in short, everything that would encourage this new consciousness and self-awareness - should be promoted, the paper recommended.8

SS officer Leopold von Mildenstein and Zionist Federation official Kurt Tuchler toured Palestine together for six months to assess Zionist development there. Based on his firsthand observations, von Mildenstein wrote a series of twelve illustrated articles for the important Berlin daily Der Angriff that appeared in late 1934 under the heading "A Nazi Travels to Palestine." The series expressed great admiration for the pioneering spirit and achievements of the Jewish settlers. Zionist self-development, von Mildenstein wrote, had produced a new kind of Jew. He praised Zionism as a great benefit for both the Jewish people and the entire world. A Jewish homeland in Palestine, he wrote in his concluding article, "pointed the way to curing a centuries-long wound on the body of the world: the Jewish question." Der Angriff issued a special medal, with a Swastika on one side and a Star of David on the other, to commemorate the joint SS-Zionist visit. A few months after the articles appeared, von Mildenstein was promoted to head the Jewish affairs department of the SS security service in order to support Zionist migration and development more effectively. 9

The official SS newspaper, Das Schwarze Korps, proclaimed its support for Zionism in a May 1935 front-page editorial: "The time may not be too far off when Palestine will again be able to receive its sons who have been lost to it for more than a thousand years. Our good wishes, together with official goodwill, go with them."10 Four months later, a similar article appeared in the SS paper: 11

The recognition of Jewry as a racial community based on blood and not on religion leads the German government to guarantee without reservation the racial separateness of this community. The government finds itself in complete agreement with the great spiritual movement within Jewry, the so-called Zionism, with its recognition of the solidarity of Jewry around the world and its rejection of all assimilationist notions. On this basis, Germany undertakes measures that will surely play a significant role in the future in the handling of the Jewish problem around the world.

A leading German shipping line began direct passenger liner service from Hamburg to Haifa, Palestine, in October 1933 providing "strictly kosher food on its ships, under the supervision of the Hamburg rabbinate." 12

With official backing, Zionists worked tirelessly to "reeducate" Germany's Jews. As American historian Francis Nicosia put it in his 1985 survey, The Third Reich and the Palestine Question: "Zionists were encouraged to take their message to the Jewish community, to collect money, to show films on Palestine and generally to educate German Jews about Palestine. There was considerable pressure to teach Jews in Germany to cease identifying themselves as Germans and to awaken a new Jewish national identity in them." 13

In an interview after the war, the former head of the Zionist Federation of Germany, Dr. Hans Friedenthal, summed up the situation: "The Gestapo did everything in those days to promote emigration, particularly to Palestine. We often received their help when we required anything from other authorities regarding preparations for emigration." 14

At the September 1935 National Socialist Party Congress, the Reichstag adopted the so-called "Nuremberg laws" that prohibited marriages and sexual relations between Jews and Germans and, in effect, proclaimed the Jews an alien minority nationality. A few days later the Zionist Jüdische Rundschau editorially welcomed the new measures: 15

Germany ... is meeting the demands of the World Zionist Congress when it declares the Jews now living in Germany to be a national minority. Once the Jews have been stamped a national minority it is again possible to establish normal relations between the German nation and Jewry. The new laws give the Jewish minority in Germany its own cultural life, its own national life. In future it will be able to shape its own schools, its own theatre, and its own sports associations. In short, it can create its own future in all aspects of national life ...

Germany has given the Jewish minority the opportunity to live for itself, and is offering state protection for this separate life of the Jewish minority: Jewry's process of growth into a nation will thereby be encouraged and a contribution will be made to the establishment of more tolerable relations between the two nations.

Georg Kareski, the head of both the "Revisionist" Zionist State Organization and the Jewish Cultural League, and former head of the Berlin Jewish Community, declared in an interview with the Berlin daily Der Angriff at the end of 1935: 16

For many years I have regarded a complete separation of the cultural affairs of the two peoples [Jews and Germans] as a pre-condition for living together without conflict... I have long supported such a separation, provided it is founded on respect for the alien nationality. The Nuremberg Laws ... seem to me, apart from their legal provisions, to conform entirely with this desire for a separate life based on mutual respect... This interruption of the process of dissolution in many Jewish communities, which had been promoted through mixed marriages, is therefore, from a Jewish point of view, entirely welcome.

Zionist leaders in other countries echoed these views. Stephen S. Wise, president of the American Jewish Congress and the World Jewish Congress, told a New York rally in June 1938: "I am not an American citizen of the Jewish faith, I am a Jew... Hitler was right in one thing. He calls the Jewish people a race and we are a race." 17

The Interior Ministry's Jewish affairs specialist, Dr. Bernhard Lösener, expressed support for Zionism in an article that appeared in a November 1935 issue of the official Reichsverwaltungsblatt: 18

If the Jews already had their own state in which the majority of them were settled, then the Jewish question could be regarded as completely resolved today, also for the Jews themselves. The least amount of opposition to the ideas underlying the Nuremberg Laws have been shown by the Zionists, because they realize at once that these laws represent the only correct solution for the Jewish people as well. For each nation must have its own state as the outward expression of its particular nationhood.

In cooperation with the German authorities, Zionist groups organized a network of some forty camps and agricultural centers throughout Germany where prospective settlers were trained for their new lives in Palestine. Although the Nuremberg Laws forbid Jews from displaying the German flag, Jews were specifically guaranteed the right to display the blue and white Jewish national banner. The flag that would one day be adopted by Israel was flown at the Zionist camps and centers in Hitler's Germany. 19

Himmler's security service cooperated with the Haganah, the Zionist underground military organization in Palestine. The SS agency paid Haganah official Feivel Polkes for information about the situation in Palestine and for help in directing Jewish emigration to that country. Meanwhile, the Haganah was kept well informed about German plans by a spy it managed to plant in the Berlin headquarters of the SS.20 Haganah-SS collaboration even included secret deliveries of German weapons to Jewish settlers for use in clashes with Palestinian Arabs. 21

In the aftermath of the November 1938 "Kristallnacht" outburst of violence and destruction, the SS quickly helped the Zionist organization to get back on its feet and continue its work in Germany, although now under more restricted supervision. 22

Official Reservations

German support for Zionism was not unlimited. Government and Party officials were very mindful of the continuing campaign by powerful Jewish communities in the United States, Britain and other countries to mobilize "their" governments and fellow citizens against Germany. As long as world Jewry remained implacably hostile toward National Socialist Germany, and as long as the great majority of Jews around the world showed little eagerness to resettle in the Zionist "promised land," a sovereign Jewish state in Palestine would not really "solve" the international Jewish question. Instead, German officials reasoned, it would immeasurably strengthen this dangerous anti-German campaign. German backing for Zionism was therefore limited to support for a Jewish homeland in Palestine under British control, not a sovereign Jewish state. 23

A Jewish state in Palestine, the Foreign Minister informed diplomats in June 1937, would not be in Germany's interest because it would not be able to absorb all Jews around the world, but would only serve as an additional power base for international Jewry, in much the same way as Moscow served as a base for international Communism.24 Reflecting something of a shift in official policy, the German press expressed much greater sympathy in 1937 for Palestinian Arab resistance to Zionist ambitions, at a time when tension and conflict between Jews and Arabs in Palestine was sharply increasing. 25

A Foreign Office circular bulletin of June 22, 1937, cautioned that in spite of support for Jewish settlement in Palestine, "it would nevertheless be a mistake to assume that Germany supports the formation of a state structure in Palestine under some form of Jewish control. In view of the anti-German agitation of international Jewry, Germany cannot agree that the formation of a Palestine Jewish state would help the peaceful development of the nations of the world."26 "The proclamation of a Jewish state or a Jewish-administrated Palestine," warned an internal memorandum by the Jewish affairs section of the SS, "would create for Germany a new enemy, one that would have a deep influence on developments in the Near East." Another SS agency predicted that a Jewish state "would work to bring special minority protection to Jews in every country, therefore giving legal protection to the exploitation activity of world Jewry."27 In January 1939, Hitler's new Foreign Minister, Joachim von Ribbentrop, likewise warned in another circular bulletin that "Germany must regard the formation of a Jewish state as dangerous" because it "would bring an international increase in power to world Jewry." 28

Hitler himself personally reviewed this entire issue in early 1938 and, in spite of his long-standing skepticism of Zionist ambitions and misgivings that his policies might contribute to the formation of a Jewish state, decided to support Jewish migration to Palestine even more vigorously. The prospect of ridding Germany of its Jews, he concluded, outweighed the possible dangers. 29

Meanwhile, the British government imposed ever more drastic restrictions on Jewish immigration into Palestine in 1937, 1938 and 1939. In response, the SS security service concluded a secret alliance with the clandestine Zionist agency Mossad le-Aliya Bet to smuggle Jews illegally into Palestine. As a result of this intensive collaboration, several convoys of ships succeeded in reaching Palestine past British gunboats. Jewish migration, both legal and illegal, from Germany (including Austria) to Palestine increased dramatically in 1938 and 1939. Another 10,000 Jews were scheduled to depart in October 1939, but the outbreak of war in September brought the effort to an end. All the same, German authorities continued to promote indirect Jewish emigration to Palestine during 1940 and 1941. 30 Even as late as March 1942, at least one officially authorized Zionist "kibbutz" training camp for potential emigrants continued to operate in Hitler's Germany. 31

The Transfer Agreement

The centerpiece of German-Zionist cooperation during the Hitler era was the Transfer Agreement, a pact that enabled tens of thousands of German Jews to migrate to Palestine with their wealth. The Agreement, also known as the Haavara (Hebrew for "transfer"), was concluded in August 1933 following talks between German officials and Chaim Arlosoroff, Political Secretary of the Jewish Agency, the Palestine center of the World Zionist Organization. 32

Through this unusual arrangement, each Jew bound for Palestine deposited money in a special account in Germany. The money was used to purchase German-made agricultural tools, building materials, pumps, fertilizer, and so forth, which were exported to Palestine and sold there by the Jewish-owned Haavara company in Tel-Aviv. Money from the sales was given to the Jewish emigrant upon his arrival in Palestine in an amount corresponding to his deposit in Germany. German goods poured into Palestine through the Haavara, which was supplemented a short time later with a barter agreement by which Palestine oranges were exchanged for German timber, automobiles, agricultural machinery, and other goods. The Agreement thus served the Zionist aim of bringing Jewish settlers and development capital to Palestine, while simultaneously serving the German goal of freeing the country of an unwanted alien group.

Delegates at the 1933 Zionist Congress in Prague vigorously debated the merits of the Agreement. Some feared that the pact would undermine the international Jewish economic boycott against Germany. But Zionist officials reassured the Congress. Sam Cohen, a key figure behind the Haavara arrangement, stressed that the Agreement was not economically advantageous to Germany. Arthur Ruppin, a Zionist Organization emigration specialist who had helped negotiate the pact, pointed out that "the Transfer Agreement in no way interfered with the boycott movement, since no new currency will flow into Germany as a result of the agreement..." 33 The 1935 Zionist Congress, meeting in Switzerland, overwhelmingly endorsed the pact. In 1936, the Jewish Agency (the Zionist "shadow government" in Palestine) took over direct control of the Ha'avara, which remained in effect until the Second World War forced its abandonment.

Some German officials opposed the arrangement. Germany's Consul General in Jerusalem, Hans Döhle, for example, sharply criticized the Agreement on several occasions during 1937. He pointed out that it cost Germany the foreign exchange that the products exported to Palestine through the pact would bring if sold elsewhere. The Haavara monopoly sale of German goods to Palestine through a Jewish agency naturally angered German businessmen and Arabs there. Official German support for Zionism could lead to a loss of German markets throughout the Arab world. The British government also resented the arrangement.34 A June 1937 German Foreign Office internal bulletin referred to the "foreign exchange sacrifices" that resulted from the Haavara. 35

A December 1937 internal memorandum by the German Interior Ministry reviewed the impact of the Transfer Agreement: "There is no doubt that the Haavara arrangement has contributed most significantly to the very rapid development of Palestine since 1933. The Agreement provided not only the largest source of money (from Germany!), but also the most intelligent group of immigrants, and finally it brought to the country the machines and industrial products essential for development." The main advantage of the pact, the memo reported, was the emigration of large numbers of Jews to Palestine, the most desirable target country as far as Germany was concerned. But the paper also noted the important drawbacks pointed out by Consul Döhle and others. The Interior Minister, it went on, had concluded that the disadvantages of the agreement now outweighed the advantages and that, therefore, it should be terminated. 36

Only one man could resolve the controversy. Hitler personally reviewed the policy in July and September 1937, and again in January 1938, and each time decided to maintain the Haavara arrangement. The goal of removing Jews from Germany, he concluded, justified the drawbacks. 37

The Reich Economics Ministry helped to organize another transfer company, the International Trade and Investment Agency, or Intria, through which Jews in foreign countries could help German Jews emigrate to Palestine. Almost $900,000 was eventually channeled through the Intria to German Jews in Palestine.38 Other European countries eager to encourage Jewish emigration concluded agreements with the Zionists modeled after the Ha'avara. In 1937 Poland authorized the Halifin (Hebrew for "exchange") transfer company. By late summer 1939, Czechoslovakia, Romania, Hungary and Italy had signed similar arrangements. The outbreak of war in September 1939, however, prevented large-scale implementation of these agreements. 39

Achievements of Haavara

Between 1933 and 1941, some 60,000 German Jews emigrated to Palestine through the Ha'avara and other German-Zionist arrangements, or about ten percent of Germany's 1933 Jewish population. (These German Jews made up about 15 percent of Palestine's 1939 Jewish population.) Some Ha'avara emigrants transferred considerable personal wealth from Germany to Palestine. As Jewish historian Edwin Black has noted: "Many of these people, especially in the late 1930s, were allowed to transfer actual replicas of their homes and factories -- indeed rough replicas of their very existence."40

The total amount transferred from Germany to Palestine through the Ha'avara between August 1933 and the end of 1939 was 8.1 million pounds or 139.57 million German marks (then equivalent to more than $40 million). This amount included 33.9 million German marks ($13.8 million) provided by the Reichsbank in connection with the Agreement.41

Historian Black has estimated that an additional $70 million may have flowed into Palestine through corollary German commercial agreements and special international banking transactions. The German funds had a major impact on a country as underdeveloped as Palestine was in the 1930s, he pointed out. Several major industrial enterprises were built with the capital from Germany, including the Mekoroth waterworks and the Lodzia textile firm. The influx of Ha'avara goods and capital, concluded Black, "produced an economic explosion in Jewish Palestine" and was "an indispensable factor in the creation of the State of Israel."42

The Ha'avara agreement greatly contributed to Jewish development in Palestine and thus, indirectly, to the foundation of the Israeli state. A January 1939 German Foreign Office circular bulletin reported, with some misgiving, that "the transfer of Jewish property out of Germany [through the Ha'avara agreement] contributed to no small extent to the building of a Jewish state in Palestine."43

Former officials of the Ha'avara company in Palestine confirmed this view in a detailed study of the Transfer Agreement published in 1972: "The economic activity made possible by the influx German capital and the Haavara transfers to the private and public sectors were of greatest importance for the country's development. Many new industries and commercial enterprises were established in Jewish Palestine, and numerous companies that are enormously important even today in the economy of the State of Israel owe their existence to the Haavara."44 Dr. Ludwig Pinner, a Ha'avara company official in Tel Aviv during the 1930s, later commented that the exceptionally competent Ha'avara immigrants "decisively contributed" to the economic, social, cultural and educational development of Palestine's Jewish community.45

The Transfer Agreement was the most far-reaching example of cooperation between Hitler's Germany and international Zionism. Through this pact, Hitler's Third Reich did more than any other government during the 1930s to support Jewish development in Palestine.

Zionists Offer a Military Alliance With Hitler

In early January 1941 a small but important Zionist organization submitted a formal proposal to German diplomats in Beirut for a military-political alliance with wartime Germany. The offer was made by the radical underground "Fighters for the Freedom of Israel," better known as the Lehi or Stern Gang. Its leader, Avraham Stern, had recently broken with the radical nationalist "National Military Organization" (Irgun Zvai Leumi) over the group's attitude toward Britain, which had effectively banned further Jewish settlement of Palestine. Stern regarded Britain as the main enemy of Zionism.

This remarkable Zionist proposal "for the solution of the Jewish question in Europe and the active participation of the NMO [Lehi] in the war on the side of Germany" is worth quoting at some length:46

In their speeches and statements, the leading statesmen of National Socialist Germany have often emphasized that a New Order in Europe requires as a prerequisite a radical solution of the Jewish question by evacuation. ("Jew-free Europe")

The evacuation of the Jewish masses from Europe is a precondition for solving the Jewish question. However, the only way this can be totally achieved is through settlement of these masses in the homeland of the Jewish people, Palestine, and by the establishment of a Jewish state in its historical boundaries.

The goal of the political activity and the years of struggle by the Israel Freedom Movement, the National Military Organization in Palestine (Irgun Zvai Leumi), is to solve the Jewish problem in this way and thus completely liberate the Jewish people forever.

The NMO, which is very familiar with the good will of the German Reich government and its officials towards Zionist activities within Germany and the Zionist emigration program, takes that view that:

1. Common interests can exist between a European New Order based on the German concept and the true national aspirations of the Jewish people as embodied by the NMO.

2. Cooperation is possible between the New Germany and a renewed, folkish-national Jewry [Hebr_ertum].

3. The establishment of the historical Jewish state on a national and totalitarian basis, and bound by treaty with the German Reich, would be in the interest of maintaining and strengthening the future German position of power in the Near East.

On the basis of these considerations, and upon the condition that the German Reich government recognize the national aspirations of the Israel Freedom Movement mentioned above, the NMO in Palestine offers to actively take part in the war on the side of Germany.

This offer by the NMO could include military, political and informational activity within Palestine and, after certain organizational measures, outside as well. Along with this the Jewish men of Europe would be militarily trained and organized in military units under the leadership and command of the NMO. They would take part in combat operations for the purpose of conquering Palestine, should such a front by formed.

The indirect participation of the Israel Freedom Movement in the New Order of Europe, already in the preparatory stage, combined with a positive-radical solution of the European Jewish problem on the basis of the national aspirations of the Jewish people mentioned above, would greatly strengthen the moral foundation of the New Order in the eyes of all humanity.

The cooperation of the Israel Freedom Movement would also be consistent with a recent speech by the German Reich Chancellor, in which Hitler stressed that he would utilize any combination and coalition in order to isolate and defeat England.

There is no record of any German response. Acceptance was very unlikely anyway because by this time German policy was decisively pro-Arab.47 Remarkably, Stern's group sought to conclude a pact with the Third Reich at a time when stories that Hitler was bent on exterminating Jews were already in wide circulation. Stern apparently either did not believe the stories or he was willing to collaborate with the mortal enemy of his people to help bring about a Jewish state. 48

An important Lehi member at the time the group made this offer was Yitzhak Shamir, who later served as Israel's Foreign Minister and then, during much of the 1980s and until June 1992, as Prime Minister. As Lehi operations chief following Stern's death in 1942, Shamir organized numerous acts of terror, including the November 1944 assassination of British Middle East Minister Lord Moyne and the September 1948 slaying of Swedish United Nations mediator Count Bernadotte. Years later, when Shamir was asked about the 1941 offer, he confirmed that he was aware of his organization's proposed alliance with wartime Germany. 49


In spite of the basic hostility between the Hitler regime and international Jewry, for several years Jewish Zionist and German National Socialist interests coincided. In collaborating with the Zionists for a mutually desirable and humane solution to a complex problem, the Third Reich was willing to make foreign exchange sacrifices, impair relations with Britain and anger the Arabs. Indeed, during the 1930s no nation did more to substantively further Jewish-Zionist goals than Hitler's Germany.


1.W. Martini, "Hebr_isch unterm Hakenkreuz," Die Welt (Hamburg), Jan. 10, 1975. Cited in: Klaus Polken, "The Secret Contacts: Zionism and Nazi Germany, 1933-1941," Journal of Palestine Studies, Spring-Summer 1976, p. 65.

2.Quoted in: Ingrid Weckert, Feuerzeichen: Die "Reichskristallnacht" (Tübingen: Grabert, 1981), p. 212. See also: Th. Herzl, The Jewish State (New York: Herzl Press, 1970), pp. 33, 35, 36, and, Edwin Black, The Transfer Agreement (New York: Macmillan, 1984), p. 73.

3.Th. Herzl, "Der Kongress," Welt, June 4, 1897. Reprinted in: Theodor Herzls zionistische Schriften (Leon Kellner, ed.), erster Teil, Berlin: Jüdischer Verlag, 1920, p. 190 (and p. 139).

4.Memo of June 21, 1933, in: L. Dawidowicz, A Holocaust Reader (New York: Behrman, 1976), pp. 150-155, and (in part) in: Francis R. Nicosia, The Third Reich and the Palestine Question (Austin: Univ. of Texas, 1985), p. 42.; On Zionism in Germany before Hitler's assumption of power, see: Donald L. Niewyk, The Jews in Weimar Germany (Baton Rouge: 1980), pp. 94-95, 126-131, 140-143.; F. Nicosia, Third Reich (Austin: 1985), pp. 1-15.

5.Jüdische Rundschau (Berlin), June 13, 1933. Quoted in: Heinz H_hne, The Order of the Death's Head (New York: Ballantine, pb., 1971, 1984), pp. 376-377.

6.Heinz Höhne, The Order of the Death's Head (Ballantine, 1971, 1984), p. 376.

7."Berlin," Encyclopaedia Judaica (New York and Jerusalem: 1971), Vol. 5, p. 648. For a look at one aspect of this "vigorous life," see: J.-C. Horak, "Zionist Film Propaganda in Nazi Germany," Historical Journal of Film, Radio and Television, Vol. 4, No. 1, 1984, pp. 49-58.

8.Francis R. Nicosia, The Third Reich and the Palestine Question (1985), pp. 54-55.; Karl A. Schleunes, The Twisted Road to Auschwitz (Urbana: Univ. of Illinois, 1970, 1990), pp. 178-181.

9.Jacob Boas, "A Nazi Travels to Palestine," History Today (London), January 1980, pp. 33-38.

10.Facsimile reprint of front page of Das Schwarze Korps, May 15, 1935, in: Janusz Piekalkiewicz, Israels Langer Arm (Frankfurt: Goverts, 1975), pp. 66-67. Also quoted in: Heinz H_hne, The Order of the Death's Head (Ballantine, 1971, 1984), p. 377. See also: Erich Kern, ed., Verheimlichte Dokumente (Munich: FZ-Verlag, 1988), p. 184.

11.Das Schwarze Korps, Sept. 26, 1935. Quoted in: F. Nicosia, The Third Reich and the Palestine Question (1985), pp. 56-57.

12.Lenni Brenner, Zionism in the Age of the Dictators (1983), p. 83.

13.F. Nicosia, The Third Reich and the Palestine Question (1985), p. 60. See also: F. Nicosia, "The Yishuv and the Holocaust," The Journal of Modern History (Chicago), Vol. 64, No. 3, Sept. 1992, pp. 533-540.

14.F. Nicosia, The Third Reich and the Palestine Question (1985), p. 57.

15.Jüdische Rundschau, Sept. 17, 1935. Quoted in: Yitzhak Arad, with Y. Gutman and A. Margaliot, eds., Documents on the Holocaust (Jerusalem: Yad Vashem, 1981), pp. 82-83.

16.Der Angriff, Dec. 23, 1935, in: E. Kern, ed., Verheimlichte Dokumente (Munich: 1988), p. 148.; F. Nicosia, Third Reich (1985), p. 56.; L. Brenner, Zionism in the Age of the Dictators (1983), p. 138.; A. Margaliot, "The Reaction...," Yad Vashem Studies (Jerusalem), vol. 12, 1977, pp. 90-91.; On Kareski's remarkable career, see: H. Levine, "A Jewish Collaborator in Nazi Germany," Central European History (Atlanta), Sept. 1975, pp. 251-281.

17."Dr. Wise Urges Jews to Declare Selves as Such," New York Herald Tribune, June 13, 1938, p. 12.

18.F. Nicosia, The Third Reich (1985), p. 53.

19.Lucy Dawidowicz, The War Against the Jews, 1933-1945 (New York: Bantam, pb., 1976), pp. 253-254.; Max Nussbaum, "Zionism Under Hitler," Congress Weekly (New York: American Jewish Congress), Sept. 11, 1942.; F. Nicosia, The Third Reich (1985), pp. 58-60, 217.; Edwin Black, The Transfer Agreement (1984), p. 175.

20.H. H_hne, The Order of the Death's Head (Ballantine, pb., 1984), pp. 380-382.; K. Schleunes, Twisted Road (1970, 1990), p. 226.; Secret internal SS intelligence report about F. Polkes, June 17, 1937, in: John Mendelsohn, ed., The Holocaust (New York: Garland, 1982), vol. 5, pp. 62-64.

21.F. Nicosia, Third Reich (1985), pp. 63-64, 105, 219-220.

22.F. Nicosia, Third Reich (1985), p. 160.

23.This distinction is also implicit in the "Balfour Declaration" of November 1917, in which the British government expressed support for "a national home for the Jewish people" in Palestine, while carefully avoiding any mention of a Jewish state. Referring to the majority Arab population there, the Declaration went on to caution, "...it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine." The complete text of the Declaration is reproduced in facsimile in: Robert John, Behind the Balfour Declaration (IHR, 1988), p. 32.

24.F. Nicosia, Third Reich (1985), p. 121.

25.F. Nicosia, Third Reich (1985), p. 124.

26.David Yisraeli, The Palestine Problem in German Politics 1889-1945 (Bar-Ilan University, Israel, 1974), p. 300.; Also in: Documents on German Foreign Policy, Series D, Vol. 5. Doc. No. 564 or 567.

27.K. Schleunes, The Twisted Road (1970, 1990), p. 209.

28.Circular of January 25, 1939. Nuremberg document 3358-PS. International Military Tribunal, Trial of the Major War Criminals Before the International Military Tribunal (Nuremberg: 1947-1949), vol. 32, pp. 242-243. Nazi Conspiracy and Aggression (Washington, DC: 1946-1948), vol. 6, pp. 92-93.

29.F. Nicosia, Third Reich (1985), pp. 141-144.; On Hitler's critical view of Zionism in Mein Kampf, see esp. Vol. 1, Chap. 11. Quoted in: Robert Wistrich, Hitler's Apocalypse (London: 1985), p. 155.; See also: F. Nicosia, Third Reich (1985), pp. 26-28.; Hitler told his army adjutant in 1939 and again in 1941 that he had asked the British in 1937 about transferring all of Germany's Jews to Palestine or Egypt. The British rejected the proposal, he said, because it would cause further disorder. See: H. v. Kotze, ed., Heeresadjutant bei Hitler (Stuttgart: 1974), pp. 65, 95.

30.F. Nicosia, Third Reich (1985), pp. 156, 160-164, 166-167.; H. H_hne, The Order of the Death's Head (Ballantine, pb., 1984), pp. 392-394.; Jon and David Kimche, The Secret Roads (London: Secker and Warburg, 1955), pp. 39-43. See also: David Yisraeli, "The Third Reich and Palestine," Middle Eastern Studies, October 1971, p. 347.; Bernard Wasserstein, Britain and the Jews of Europe, 1939-1945 (1979), pp. 43, 49, 52, 60.; T. Kelly, "Man who fooled Nazis," Washington Times, April 28, 1987, pp. 1B, 4B. Based on interview with Willy Perl, author of The Holocaust Conspiracy.

31.Y. Arad, et al., eds., Documents On the Holocaust (1981), p. 155. (The training kibbutz was at Neuendorf, and may have functioned even after March 1942.)

32.On the Agreement in general, see: Werner Feilchenfeld, et al., Haavara-Transfer nach Palaestina (Tübingen: Mohr/Siebeck, 1972).; David Yisraeli, "The Third Reich and the Transfer Agreement," Journal of Contemporary History (London), No. 2, 1971, pp. 129-148.; "Haavara," Encyclopaedia Judaica (1971), vol. 7, pp. 1012-1013.; F. Nicosia, The Third Reich and the Palestine Question (Austin: 1985), pp. 44-49.; Raul Hilberg, The Destruction of the European Jews (New York: Holmes and Meier, 1985), pp. 140-141.; The Transfer Agreement, by Edwin Black, is detailed and useful. However, it contains numerous inaccuracies and wildly erroneous conclusions. See, for example, the review by Richard S. Levy in Commentary, Sept. 1984, pp. 68-71.

33.E. Black, The Transfer Agreement (1984), pp. 328, 337.

34.On opposition to the Haavara in official German circles, see: W. Feilchenfeld, et al., Haavara-Transfer nach Palaestina (1972), pp. 31-33.; D. Yisraeli, "The Third Reich," Journal of Contemporary History, 1971, pp. 136-139.; F. Nicosia, The Third Reich and the Palestine Question, pp. 126-139.; I. Weckert, Feuerzeichen (1981), pp. 226-227.; Rolf Vogel, Ein Stempel hat gefehlt (Munich: Droemer Knaur, 1977), pp. 110 ff.

35.W. Feilchenfeld, et al., Haavara-Transfer (1972), p. 31. Entire text in: David Yisraeli, The Palestine Problem in German Politics 1889-1945 (Israel: 1974), pp. 298-300.

36.Interior Ministry internal memo (signed by State Secretary W. Stuckart), Dec. 17, 1937, in: Helmut Eschwege, ed., Kennzeichen J (Berlin: 1966), pp. 132-136.

37.W. Feilchenfeld, et al, Haavara-Transfer (1972), p. 32.

38.E. Black, Transfer Agreement, pp. 376-377.

39.E. Black, Transfer Agreement (1984), pp. 376, 378.; F. Nicosia, Third Reich (1985), pp. 238-239 (n. 91).

40.E. Black, Transfer Agreement, p. 379.; F. Nicosia, Third Reich, pp. 212, 255 (n. 66).

41.W. Feilchenfeld, et al., Haavara-Transfer, p. 75.; "Haavara," Encyclopaedia Judaica, (1971), Vol. 7, p. 1013.

42.E. Black, Transfer Agreement, pp. 379, 373, 382.

43.Circular of January 25, 1939. Nuremberg document 3358-PS. International Military Tribunal, Trial of the Major War Criminals Before the International Military Tribunal (Nuremberg: 1947-1949), Vol. 32, pp. 242-243.

44.Werner Feilchenfeld, et al., Haavara-Transfer nach Palaestina (Tübingen: Mohr/Siebeck, 1972). Quoted in: Ingrid Weckert, Feuerzeichen (Tübingen: Grabert, 1981), pp. 222-223.

45.W. Feilchenfeld, et al., Haavara-Transfer nach Palaestina (1972). Quoted in: I. Weckert, Feuerzeichen (1981), p. 224.

46.Original document in German Ausw_rtiges Amt Archiv, Bestand 47-59, E 224152 and E 234155-58. (Photocopy in author's possession).; Complete original German text published in: David Yisraeli, The Palestine Problem in German Politics 1889-1945 (Israel: 1974), pp. 315-317. See also: Klaus Polkhen, "The Secret Contacts," Journal of Palestine Studies, Spring-Summer 1976, pp. 78-80.; (At the time this offer was made, Stern's Lehi group still regarded itself as the true Irgun/NMO.)

47.Arab nationalists opposed Britain, which then dominated much of the Arab world, including Egypt, Iraq and Palestine. Because Britain and Germany were at war, Germany cultivated Arab support. The leader of Palestine's Arabs, the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, Haj Amin el-Husseini, worked closely with Germany during the war years. After escaping from Palestine, he spoke to the Arab world over German radio and helped raise Muslim recruits in Bosnia for the Waffen SS.

48.Israel Shahak, "Yitzhak Shamir, Then and Now," Middle East Policy (Washington, DC), Vol. 1, No. 1, (Whole No. 39), 1992, pp. 27-38.; Yehoshafat Harkabi, Israel's Fateful Hour (New York: Harper and Row, 1988), pp. 213-214. Quoted in: Andrew J. Hurley, Israel and the New World Order (Santa Barbara, Calif.: 1991), pp. 93, 208-209.; Avishai Margalit, "The Violent Life of Yitzhak Shamir," New York Review of Books, May 14, 1992, pp. 18-24.; Lenni Brenner, Zionism in the Age of the Dictators (1983), pp. 266-269.; L. Brenner, Jews in America Today (1986), pp. 175-177.; L. Brenner, "Yitzhak Shamir: On Hitler's Side," Arab Perspectives (League of Arab States), March 1984, pp. 11-13.

49.Avishai Margalit, "The Violent Life of Yitzhak Shamir," New York Review of Books, May 14, 1992, pp. 18-24.; Lenni Brenner, Zionism in the Age of the Dictators (1983), pp. 266-269.; L. Brenner, Jews in America Today (1986), pp. 175-177.; L. Brenner, "Skeletons in Shamir's Cupboard," Middle East International, Sept. 30, 1983, pp. 15-16.; Sol Stern, L. Rapoport, "Israel's Man of the Shadows," Village Voice (New York), July 3, 1984, pp. 13 ff.

From The Journal of Historical Review, July-August 1993 (Vol. 13, No. 4), pages 29–37.

Mark Weber studied history at the University of Illinois (Chicago), the University of Munich, Portland State University and Indiana University (M.A., 1977). In March 1988 he testified for five days in Toronto District Court as a recognized expert witness on Germany's wartime Jewish policy and the Holocaust issue.

Wednesday, July 13, 2011

Libya, a talk with a Moroccan friend

I had a talk with a Moroccan friend today, and the subject
quickly went to Syria, and then Libya. My friend is astute
politically and over the years I've learned a lot from him,
and his insights. Just growing up in two different places does
this. He grew up in Morocco, and I was born in Boston, and grew
up in the US.

My friend and I both view the NATO intervention in Libya as criminal,
and also another aggressive war by the US. NATO is the US, and NATO
is an international criminal organization. NATO is an organization
that has nothing to do with defense, and everything to do with aggressive
war making.

At one point my friend mentioned that Gaddafi had to go, and quick. He
reasoned that Gaddafi is very corrupt, and things would be better if he
left soon. He also said that there were many Libyan refugees abroad, and
he said that there were many in Ireland.

On the last point, I had known Cubans when I lived in Boston. Their
families had been relatively well-off and left during and after the

I had also known Iranians during the 1970s who were in self exile because
living under the Shah of Iran, a brutal dictator installed by the US in an
August 1953 coup détat which deposed Prime Minister Mohammad Mosaddegh who
had nationalized the oil industry which the British had controlled since 1913.

The coup was called Operation Ajax, and there are similarities to what
happened in Libya in one respect. An uprising of by armed gangs created
mayhem, and this was used as an excuse to force Dr. Mosaddegh to step down.

The CIA then created in intelligence and secret police force called SAVAK.
It was estimated that thousands of Iranians were killed in the first weeks
after the coup. They were active in the US and could kill Iranian dissidents
with impunity as the US government looked away.

I also knew Chileans who left Chile after the CIA blessed Coup by General
Augusto Pinochet and cohorts. The popularly democratic elected President
Salvador Allende had nationalized the copper mines (Anaconda) owned by the
Rockerfeller family, and he was deposed in a bloody coup.

I have also known Argentinians who escaped Argentina after another coup
in 1976. The Dirty War lasted from 1976 to 1983, and it is estimated that
at least 10,000 disappeared. They were known as 'The Disappeared.' Many,
many in both Chile and Argentina were shoved out of helicopters and into the
ocean below. This tactic was used and perfected by the CIA as an interroragtion
technique in the Vietnam War. And you thought that waterboarding was bad!

I also had friends from the Philippines who had escaped another brutal and
murderous dictator Ferdinand Marcos who reigned from 1965-1986.

And, I also had become friends with people from South Africa who were part
of the African National Congress (ANC). Others were from Guatemala, Brazil,
brutal dictatorial rule, Uruguay...

In every case these people were fleeing either a revolution (Cuba) that
would change their privileged status, or as in all the others they were
fleeing brutual dictators installed by the US.

Before the overthrow of those democratic systems by the CVIA working in the
in the interests of US corporations and banks the leader that they were about
to depose was demonized in the media.

However, some leaders were not demonized, and were held up as stalwart anti-
communist fighters like the leaders of the South African Apartheid regime.
It was the Nelson Mandelas of the world who were called terrorist by the USA.
There are two in particular, the Apartheid leaders of South Africa and the
Zionist leaders of Israel.

The Apartheid regime's best supporter was the illegal and rogue state known
as Israel. Israel was the biggest arms supplier of the Apartheid regime, and
helped the Apartheid regime develop its nuclear program. Israel!! Who would
those nuclear weapons be used against?

No Sharpville Massacre 21 March 1969(at least 69 dead) nor Soweteo uprising
16 June 1976 (176 students killed) upwards of 500 injured, none of these
cause the US to break ties with the Apartheid regime that idolized Adolph

And, in the 1940 in Palestine a steady ethnic cleansing began which is still
in progress today. The so-called War of Independence was in reality a war of
colonial conquest mostly by newly arrived Jewish people from Europe, and led
by others who had lived in Palestine for one to three generations.
With every massacre from Dier Yassin to the refugee camps of Sabra and Shatila
with death figures rangind from 328-3,500, to Jenin with low figures of 23
dead and 52 wounded(and probably much higher) to Operation Cast Lead.

Crime after crime, nothing seems to affect the conscience of wester leaders
when Israel doing the killing. Like the South African revolutionaries who
were once called terrorist by the West, so too with the Palestinians
whenever they lift their hand to resist oppression and the genocide that
is being committed against them!

So, To get back to my friend I reminded him that Gaddafi was demonized on
totally unproven claims...rape and massacrers. The Russian satellites
disproved the alleged massacres, and NATO could not reply to that. But, the
war had already begun. I told my friend that NATO is waging aggressive war
against Libya and the Libyan people. The war party that brought war to
Afghanistan, Iraq, Somalia, Yemen, and now Libya are trying to
assassinate Gaddafi.

Even progressive people were talking about the need for Gadaffi to go
forgetting that this is part of a broader US agenda, and the European
re-colonization of Africa! This was a pre-planned war. The distraction of
the US military's tectonic warfare on Japan the Earthquake in March that
was the product of a WMD in Alaska better know as HAARP (H.A.A.R.P. Was a
Direct hit on Japan March 11, 2011 Causing Earthquake, Inside Government
Sources Say. http://bit.ly/h9xYWo) was used while the US and it's allies
ignored and still do the enormous humanitarian crisis in Japan.

In February 2004 the US pulled a coup against the democratically elected
government of President Jean-Bertrand Aristide. He was literally woken up
with US troops in his bedroom, and a gun flashed and he was told 'unless
you leave we can't protect your life. Then, he and his family were flown
to the Central African Republic and later South africa.

This is the United States, a criminal rogue government that needs to be
dragged before an international criminal court, but as Glen Ford, of Black
Agenda Report said the international criminal court (ICC)seems to have
and indict Africans only policy.

If there need be a revolution in Libya that is a matter for the Libyan
people not the US which is on the warpath in six countries in three continents!

Saturday, July 9, 2011

On the Eve of a Great War It is time to revolt and wage revolution

In 'War is a Racket' (1933)* Major General Smedley D. Butler
USMC (Ret) spoke of the significant results of World War I
in the United States. As he put it 'At least 21,000 new
millionaires and billionaires were made in the United States
during the World War.' 21,000 new millionaires and billionaire;
that's astounding!

What his research demonstrated was durings wars 'a few people
make huge fortunes.' War is an extremely profitable business.
That is the organized mass murder that occurs every so often is
to some 'a business.' Who are the millionaires and billionaires
that General Butler talked of?

'Take our friends the du Ponts, the powder people – didn't one of
them testify before a Senate committee recently that their powder
won the war? Or saved the world for democracy? Or something? How
did they do in the war? They were a patriotic corporation.' On average,
the du Ponts made $6,000,000 yearly in profits between '1910 to 1914.'
Smedley Butler, in that sharp sarcasm of his said 'It wasn't much, but
the du Ponts managed to get along on it.'

The good general then noted that during the course of the war (1914-1918)
the du Ponts made an 'average yearly profit' of 'Fifty-eight million dollars.'
Not bad. It was an increase of 'ten times that of normal times...An increase
in profits of more than 950%!!

War IS a Racket. War is good business for some.

Bethlehem Steel also had a yearly profit of $6,000,000 before the war.
General Butler notes that the company 'promptly turned to munitions
making'and made an average yearly profit of $49,000,000 between 1914-1918.

Then, there's Nickel, 'you can't have a war without nickel.' Between 1914-
1918 International Nickel Company went from an average yearly profit of
$4,000,000 'to $73,000,000' over the four years of war.

And then there are 'the bankers who financed the great war. If anyone had
the cream of the profits it was the bankers. Being partnerships rather than
incorporated organizations, they do not have to report to stockholders.
And their profits were as secret as they were immense. How the bankers
made their millions and their billions I do not know, because those little
secrets never become public – even before a Senate investigatory body.

War IS a Racket. War is good business for some. War is a business funded by
the Banksters, or more properly Gangsters!

Vladimir Lenin stated that the reason why America entered the World War I
was to give 'The American capitalists...an excuse, behind a smoke-screen
of lofty ideals championing the rights of small nations, for building up a
strong standing army.' His reasoning was that since the end of the Civil War
multimillionaires have mushroomed. They have the whole of America in their
financial grip.

Lenin said that the American capitalists were headed for a future 'war
with Japan over a carve-up of the Pacific'(he said this in 1917), and
that their 'real aim in entering the war '(World War I)is to prepare for
this future war with Japan.'**

Today, the American Capitalists are preparing for another Great War...one
that they think will give them complete control over the entire planet.
The missile shields being put up in Europe aren't to protect Europe, but
to give the US an early shot at shooting down Russian missiles after the
US launches the war. If some of these missiles fall on Europe it's of no
consequence to the Banksters and capitalists (read Gangsters).

And they also plan to attack China. One aim of the war in Libya is to
drive the Chinese from Libya and also Africa. The uprisings going on
in Syria are also partly formented by the CIA, and Israel too. The aim of
the US is to drive the Russian navy out of the Mediterranean Sea. At
present Russia has a naval base in Syria.

The US military sees control of the Mediterranean and Suez as vital.
But in this war for all the money and fleets that the US has it's naval
forces will be toast in the opening round of this great war-a Holocaust
on humanity.

Lenin speaks of Imperialst wars as wars between two sets of robbers. The
governments of the warring nations scheme to show that it was the other
party who forced war upon them so that war is presented as it was on 9/11,
and before that after the attack on Pearl Harbor, but all the main powers
are preparing fror the war.

As for who shot first among the thieves Lenin said this 'Obviously, the
question of which of these two robbers was the first to draw the knife
is of small account to us.' And, that is how we the people must see it.

But, there is a lesson to be learned from World War I, and that is this:
the robbing class causes great harm to its own and other peoples in the
course of the robbery that they plan to perpetuate. War is for the expansion
of their criminal empires. What we must do is to wage a revolutionary
struggle against their attempts to drag us into war.

If it is blocking naval bases with masses of people, and calling to the
sailors to 'join us', to disabling planes or any, any weapons of war.we
must, we have the duty, the right and the obligation to make it difficult
for our own capatalists to have secure areas. and we must try to capture
the principal ones, the military chiefs and their political whores.

We must render them to our own hidden detention centres to await trial,
and when we do, we must treat them with full respect for their human
dignity and person. It is time to revolt and wage revolution.

* 'War Is A Racket'
A speech delivered in 1933, by Major General Smedley Butler, USMC.

** 'War and Revolution' V. I. Lenin

Monday, July 4, 2011

A Toast to American Independence: July 4th Waging War on six countries in two continents

Two Hundred and thirty five years ago today-I'll check that
figure after my triple shot of expresso Americano(my drug)...on this day
a revolutionary document was produced by the leaders of the revolutionary
movement. That document is known as 'The Unanimous Declaration of the
Thirteen United States of America.'

Whilst there was a celebratory mood in towns and cities that got word
of the Declaration it was under the the eyes of the British administration and
military. The propertied and moneyed classes of the colonies were declaring
their independence from the occuppying power Great Britain. This was no small
matter; at that time the British army was the most formidable army on the planet.

July 4th was not a cause for celebration for three groups. One was those
African men, women and children who were held hostage in slavery. Though the Declaration states '‘We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.’ The framers of the Declaration and later the Constitution did not intend to extend
the same reight to African slaves, or indentured servants.

A little known fact of American history is that many who came to the
colonies had to serve a period of between three and six years working without
pay for families.

The framers of the Declaration were acutely aware of the contradiction
between the espoused values and beliefs of the Declaration and the reality
of slavery.

There was another group that was hugely affected by the Declaration, and
they do not celebrate Independence Day. They are Native Americans. The victory
of the colonists guaranteed the rapid expansionb across the continent, and the
ethnic cleansing and almost complete genocide of Native peoples.

Red Cloud of the Lakota Sioux once said "The white man made us many
promises - more than I can remember, but he never kept but one: he promised
to take our land - and he took it". As each Indian tribe was conquered they
were put into concentration camps that are politely called 'Reservations.'
They are an eary version of Gaza.

America was made much like the colonies in Central and South America,
Australia, New Zealand, the islands of the Caribbean, and later Rhodesia (now
Zimbabwe), South Africa and Israel. Ethnic cleansing of the native population
was the manner in which those countries were formed.

American history books do not teach much of the truth. Just as in Vietnam
where I served as part of an occupying force, or Iraq, Libya...everywhere that
American armies are sent they are not conquerers; we are humanitarians helping people. That's what I thought at first in Vietnam, but I came to realize that
'we weren't the 'good guys.'

And so on this July Fourth, 2011 whilst America's leaders will sing the
praises of American style democracy and freedom America is waging wars and occupying at least six countries: Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya (President OBOMBA says this is not a war), Pakistan, Somalia and Yemen. Those are the ones listed by most commentators, but I would add a seventh country to that list Palestine, and in particular Gaza, for America largely funds the Israeli military.

So, let's also no forget Lebanon, Bahrain...

But, Hey it's Independence Day so go on out and have a barbecue and fry something because American weapons will be frying human beings on this day, and dropping Depleted Uranium and Cluster Bombs in Libya to save the Libya people.

A Toast to American Independence!

had the

Saturday, July 2, 2011

On Libya, the non war (OBOMBA), false mass rape claims, and mass killing of Black Africans by US rebels

The United States, France, United Kingdom (1st class 'Robber Barons')
claimed that the Libyan War-the NATO Imperialist African War...oops i'm sorry I
said 'War', but President Barack OBOMBA says that it's not a war, so please keep
that in mind, and ignore my mistake:-

However, most people would think that Mr. OBOMBA is either a straight-faced
liar, or on LSD to insist on that claim. I don't wish to speculate; the truth is
we don't really know who Prez. OBOMBA really is. What we do know is that his first
job out of Harvard was Business International corporation (BIC)is a CIA front

'Bombshell: Barack Obama conclusively outed as CIA creation'

'a CIA front that conducted seminars with the world’s most powerful leaders and used journalists as agents abroad, dovetails with CIA espionage activities conducted by his mother, Stanley Ann Dunham in 1960s post-coup Indonesia on behalf of a number of CIA front operations,...' Mayne Madsen Report above link
'Barack Obama Worked For The CIA - John Pilger' (http://bit.ly/fbwLmp)

We do know that President OBOMBA promised to end these wars, to close
Gitmo the American Gulag known as Guantanamo Bay,and the secret prisons across
the globe that are part of this Gulag chain, plus part of the to restore 'the rule of law', and more. which has kept innocent people from the age of 14 to 89.
'Nearly 800 detainees have been held in Guantánamo, the vast majority without charge or trial.' Amnesty International (http://bit.ly/jw3toz) http://www.amnesty.org.au/guantanamo/comments/20054/

'Mohammed el Gharani was held for seven years at Guantánamo Bay from the time he was 14!' US judge orders release of child ‘enemy combatant’

But with his Nobel Peace Prize in hand (perhaps the first Noble Peace Prize given to an indivindual who did absolutely nothing for peace) then opened up the attack on Africa. It is no accident that Wall St. chose a Black man (a Black face) to lead the assault on an incredibly mineral resource rich continent.

The Libyan War was justified by a media frenzy (as was Iraq) about stories
of mass rape by Gaddafi's soldiers. Hillary Clinton stated that Gaddafi was using rape as a 'weapon of war.' See: 'Clinton Condemns Use of Rape, Sexual Violence in Libya Conflict.' TIME magazine (http://bit.ly/j4hMhn). There were stories that Gaddafi's troops were fed viagra and used 'rape as a weapon of war'...kind of like the CIA created, trained and financed Nicaqraguan Contras in the 1980s.

Such claims were used as the basis for the US/NATO (really US led) 'humanitarian intervention. But, I ask the reader, when does the US, or NATO act as
humanitarians? Certainly not at Fallujah November 2004 in which they waged chemical warfare. The US or NATO being humanitarian would be 'acting out of character.'

No! Wars are built upon mountains of lies. It was the Greek tragic dramatist
Aeschylus who said 'In war, truth is the first casualty.'

In Libya the only mass rapes that are occurring are by the US created, financed
and trained so-called rebels; really counter revolutionaries.

An official from Amnesty International said this
"We have not found cases of rape, which does not mean that there have
not been any, but, nonetheless, it is problematic. Not only have we not met any victims, but we have not even met any persons who have met victims."

Glen Ford of Black Agenda Report writes 'U.S. Media Imagine Nonexistent Mass
Rape in Libya, But are Blind to Mass Murder of Black Africans' In his article he notes “The rebels have put up signs vowing to “purge slaves [and] black skin.”
It is the NATO rebels who are committing atrocities, and 'threatening to erase
the mostly Black city of Tawergha, just 25 miles south of, off the face of the earth, and to bar the Black Libyans from working or going to school ever again
in Misrata. '

When a country wages war on our brothers and sisters no matter where they