Celebrating Genocide


Many are puzzled by the widespread support in European democracies of Palestinian groups and Arab states that promote genocidal anti-Semitism. After all, Palestinian and broader Arab anti-Semitism draws heavily, in its anti-Jewish propaganda, on Nazi models, and Western Europe and the European Union are supposed to be opposed to everything touching on Nazism and its genocidal policies.

Hamas’s charter quotes a Hadith in which Allah declares that the Day of Judgement will not come until the Jews are all killed and even the stones and trees will assist in murdering them. The charter adds that Hamas “aspires to the realization of Allah’s promise, no matter how long that should take.” Hamas employs its media, mosques and schools to convey the same message. Its schools and children’s television programming teach their young audience the necessity of killing Jews.

Nevertheless, in many quarters of the European mainstream, the Hamas rulers of Gaza are besieged heroes and Israel and “the Jews” are the villains.

Despite recent statements to the contrary by Mahmoud Abbas at the White House, the Palestinian Authority hardly lags behind its Islamist rivals in peddling genocidal Jew-hatred. PA media depict Jews as a cancer that must be excised and, like Hamas, insist it is a religious duty to do so. PA indoctrination includes delineations of the nature of Jews that entail virtually every hoary anti-Semitic caricature. PA leaders use their vehicles of incitement to instill in Palestinians not only commitment to annihilating Israel but also dedication to extirpating the Jews.

For example, a recent official Palestinian Authority Friday sermon, broadcast on PA TV and translated by The Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI), had the preacher declaring: “The Jews are the enemies of Allah and His messenger… the enemies of humanity in general… Our mutual enmity with the Jews is a matter of faith more than an issue pertaining to occupation and land… The prophet Muhammad said: ‘You will fight the Jews, and you will kill them…’”

Yet there is virtually universal clamor in Europe for Israeli concessions to the PA, universal impatience with any invoking by Israel of a need to be able to defend itself, and universal silence on the PA’s genocidal objectives.

In the wider Arab world, even in countries allied to the West, the same Nazi-like message is incessantly promoted. A recurrent feature of Saudi government television is of clerics or other authority figures demonizing Jews, often with the speaker having children present to whom they are imparting their Jew-hating wisdom.

Even in countries with which Israel is officially at peace, such as Egypt, variations on the same theme are prominent in government-controlled media. Egyptian television and government newspapers have, for example, featured clerical and academic authorities confirming that Jews do indeed use the blood of non-Jews in their recipes for Passover matzoh.

Again, the primary European response to all this is silence, together with castigation of Israel and its Jewish supporters for not being more accommodating of Arab demands.

But puzzlement over this reality is misplaced. The truth is that, during the Nazi era as today, to the extent that the peoples of Europe’s democracies regarded the Jews as an inconvenience, they were not only indifferent to the genocidal intent directed at them but in various ways abetted it.

Two democracies on the Continent remained unoccupied by Hitler. Switzerland handed over an estimated 30,000 Jews to the Nazi death machine. The victims were people who had either found their way to Switzerland’s borders and were turned away or had crossed into Switzerland but were rounded up and pushed back into Nazi-occupied territory, often transferred directly to German authorities. Swiss citizens who sought to shelter Jews were subject to prosecution and imprisonment. Switzerland also aided the Nazis financially, not least in receiving and managing resources stolen from Holocaust victims.

Sweden, the other unoccupied democracy, had a mixed history during the Nazi era. In the latter part of the war, it took in Jews fleeing Denmark and Norway. But it was essentially closed to Jews seeking refuge in the preceding years, and throughout the war it provided extensive industrial and financial support to Hitler’s regime. Aftenbladet, Sweden’s largest newspaper and recently the notorious inventor and purveyor of an anti-Jewish blood libel claiming that Israeli forces killed Palestinians to harvest their organs for transplants, was staunchly pro-Nazi through the Hitler years.

As to the United Kingdom, its wartime record is illustrated by a spring, 1943, Foreign Office memorandum to the State Department opposing efforts to rescue Europe’s Jews:

“There is a possibility that the Germans and their satellites may change over from the policy of extermination [of the Jews] to one of extrusion, and aim as they did before the war at embarrassing other countries by flooding them with alien immigrants.”

Other Foreign Office memos conveyed the same message, referring repeatedly to, in the words of one, “the difficulties of disposing of any considerable number of Jews should they be rescued.”

In fact, Great Britain’s abetting the Nazi genocide went far beyond merely discouraging rescue efforts by others and was directly linked to British policies regarding the Jewish presence in what was then Mandate Palestine. Those policies, and British behavior before as well as during the war, foreshadow current British attitudes towards Israel.

In the context of the post-World War I reallocation of some German, Austro-Hungarian, Ottoman, and czarist Russian territories, nations were created for previously subjugated peoples. Europe saw the birth, for example, of a new Latvia, Estonia, Lithuania, and Poland, together with other states. In the Middle East, France was granted a mandate by the League of Nations for establishment of a new Arab nation, Syria, and Britain was, of course, given mandates for creation of another Arab state in Mesopotamia (Iraq) and for establishment of a Jewish national home in what was labeled the “Palestine Mandate.”

The League of Nations delineated among Britain’s Mandate responsibilities in Palestine promoting “close settlement of the land” by Jews. But local British authorities, as well as many in London officialdom, repeatedly balked at carrying out Britain’s Mandate obligations to the Jews, moved both by anti-Jewish bias and by perceptions of imperial pragmatism. With regard to the latter, the British generally viewed the Arabs of the region as more pliant to British hegemony than the Jews.

Britain’s betrayal of the Jews included the use of agents provocateurs to encourage Arab attacks on the Jews, as well as standing by while Jews were slaughtered, after which British officials would claim that carrying out commitments to the Jews was impossible because there was violent Arab resistance which could not be controlled. It included giving public lands to Arabs while withholding such lands from Jews, in direct violation of Mandate stipulations. It entailed turning a blind eye to large-scale Arab migration into the Mandate territory, drawn mainly by Jewish-driven economic growth, while repeatedly creating obstructions to Jewish immigration. It also entailed illegally transferring a substantial portion of the Golan Heights, part of Mandate Palestine, to French control in 1923 in exchange for French acquiescence to British steps elsewhere in the Middle East. (Article 5 of the League of Nations Mandate states: “The Mandatory shall be responsible for seeing that no Palestine territory shall be ceded or leased to, or in any way placed under the control of the Government of any foreign Power.”)

(The British also closed to Jews about 77% of Mandate territory, all the land east of the Jordan River. This was done after approval of the mandate for creation of the Jewish national home by the victorious World War I allies at San Remo in 1920, but before League of Nations adoption of the Mandate in 1922.)

The League of Nations Permanent Mandate Commission repeatedly censured Britain for betrayals of its Mandate obligations to the Jews, and at times Britain would reverse some anti-Jewish measure, only to re-institute it at a later date.

With the rise of Nazism and Nazi inroads in winning Arab support and stoking anti-British sentiment in the Arab world, the British – if somewhat disabused of their convictions of Arab affection for them – were now eager to appease Arab opinion and so had another motive for reneging on their Mandate commitments.

Shortly before the start of World War II, despite the desperate plight of Europe’s Jews, and despite yet another censure by the Permanent Mandate Commission, Britain implemented a sharp curtailment of Jewish immigration to Palestine with a view to ending Jewish entry entirely in five years and allowing Palestine to become one more Arab state, with an ongoing British presence.

The subsequent Nazi genocide was viewed by many in the Foreign Office as a way of permanently assuring realization of Britain’s objectives in Palestine. If no Jews survived in Nazi-controlled territories, there would be little remaining rationale for creation of the Jewish national home.

Consistent with this objective, Britain went to great lengths to prevent Jews from escaping Europe. Illustrative is the story of the Struma, one of many ships that carried Jews who had boarded overcrowded and unseaworthy vessels in the Rumanian Black Sea port of Constanta in doomed efforts at escape. The Struma, with 761 Jews aboard, limped into Istanbul harbor on December 15, 1941, its engine malfunctioning and a leak in its hull. The Turkish authorities said it would allow the passengers to disembark if Britain would grant them entry to the Mandate territory. Britain refused. In the course of negotiations that dragged on for weeks, Britain was asked to admit at least the children aboard. At one point it appeared that permission would be given for some seventy of the children, but Britain never officially authorized this. Its stance remained one of refusal. After some two months, the Turkish government gave up on any British change of heart and had the ship tugged into open water. It sank the next day with one survivor.

Then as now, there were those in Britain who strongly objected to anti-Jewish strains in national opinion and national policy. In particular, there were those who led public campaigns aimed at changing policy and promoting rescue of European Jews. Especially notable among these voices were the Archbishop of Canterbury, William Temple, and the leader of Britain’s Catholics, Arthur Cardinal Hinsley. But there was no change in policy.

Those in the Foreign Office who initiated and carried out anti-Jewish policies were not, of course, pro-Nazi, nor were most of their sympathizers among the British public. But they had their biases, and their views of Britain’s interests in the Middle East, and in these lights the Jews were expendable. Anthony Eden was a leading Conservative Party opponent of Chamberlain’s policy of appeasement before the war, but as wartime foreign minister he was a key architect and enforcer of British opposition to rescuing Jews from the Nazi genocide. Eden’s personal secretary wrote of him in 1943: “A.E. is immovable on the subject of Palestine. He loves Arabs and hates Jews.”

British policy after the war remained directed at thwarting establishment of the Jewish national home. When, in November, 1947, the United Nations voted for partition of Mandate Palestine west of the Jordan into a Jewish state and an Arab state, Britain aided attacks on Jewish enclaves by irregular Arab forces entering the Mandate from surrounding nations. When Israel declared its independence the following spring, Britain supported the ensuing invasion by Arab armies.

The most effective of those armies was that of Transjordan (the Arab entity created by Britain in the Mandate territories east of the Jordan that had been closed to Jews). Its Arab Legion, commanded by a British general and staffed by a number of senior British officers, conquered what became known as the West Bank, as well as eastern parts of Jerusalem including the Old City. The Legion killed or expelled every Jew living in the areas it seized. Transjordan subsequently annexed the conquered areas, an act endorsed by only two of the world’s nations: Britain and Pakistan.

Attitudes in Britain today – among both leaders and much of the general public – towards Israel and the Jews closely resemble the biases of the past, most notably of the 1940′s. Perhaps this is hardly surprising, given that the importance on the world stage of Arab oil, and Arab political and economic clout, has, of course, only grown in the past six decades.

Exemplifying such attitudes is Nick Clegg, head of the Liberal Democrats and now deputy prime minister. Not long ago Clegg questioned the concept of a “Jewish state” and Israel’s insistence – consistent with the 1947 UN partition plan – that it be recognized as such by its neighbors. Clegg has expressed no similar misgivings about the world’s several dozen officially Muslim states.

Now, too, as in the 1940′s, there are voices in Britain protesting the demonization of Israel, the support given its enemies and the silence regarding those enemies’ genocidal agenda that are so prevalent in British media, academia, unions and other circles. But now as then, those protesting voices are of very limited impact.

Two hundred years ago, Lord Byron, in his Hebrew Melodies, wrote, “The wild-dove hath her nest, the fox his cave,/ Mankind their Country – Israel but the grave!” For Byron, the lines were a reproach to a bigoted world. For many in Britain today, they are an enthusiastically embraced objective.

While no other nation had Britain’s direct involvement with Israel’s modern rebirth, Britain’s record on Jewish matters in the 1940′s has its parallels, as noted, in other European democracies.

That “decent” Britons and other Europeans can today embrace Israel’s enemies and be indifferent to their Nazi-like genocidal incitement and aspirations is not an anomaly but all too familiar. We’ve seen it before.

Kenneth Levin is a psychiatrist and historian and author of The Oslo Syndrome: Delusions of a People Under Siege.

  • DAG

    I'm glad I live in America, people hate Muslims here! Many community's won't allow mosques built in their neighborhoods.

    • http://intensedebate.com/people/ihateretards TNM

      You a racist also?

  • Ron Grant

    "I'm glad I live in America, people hate Muslims here! Many community's won't allow mosques built in their neighborhoods."

    A disturbing comment,given that the article under discussion could just have easily voiced the concern that "people hate Jews there (Europe)".And I don't think synagogues were the most popular religious sites in wartime Europe.We must be careful what we wish for,DAG.

    • maria

      I think you do not know how many mosques there are already here in the USA.
      The Islamic schools, the madrasses and in New York and Philadelphia with their certain religious holiday, they are beating themselves bloody. That crazy religious stuff was not even allowed under Saddam Hussein, as crazy as he was, but they apparently can do it over here.
      Is the next thing that at the end of Ramadan they are going to slaughter their sheep in the street?
      Unfortunately the hate towards the Jewish people is not only in Europe, but alive here too.

  • USMCSniper

    The younger Jewish people had better learn from their elders what "Never Again" really means.

    • http://intensedebate.com/profiles/themadjewess themadjewess

      USMC, actually the younger are onto this, whereas the older are NOT!

      • MixMike

        I would argue the "boomers" are the ones that are not onto this. The "greatest generation" (including Holocaust survivors) get "Never Again" as do "generation Y" and younger (generation x is a largely mixed bag).

    • Ron Grant

      "The younger Jewish people had better learn from their elders what "Never Again" really means."

      From the Jews behavior in Israel towards the Palestinians I would say they have learned their lessons too well,USMCSniper. Truly the worm turns.Another victim of mans inhumanity to man.Muchiboy

      • MixMike

        "From the Jews behavior in Israel towards the Palestinians I would say they have learned their lessons too well,USMCSniper."

        Jews have learned what "Never Again" means, that is why Israel provides over 1 ton per resident in aid to the Palestinians in W. Bank and Gaza in addition to water, electricity and economic partnerships/opportunities.

        It is also Israels and Jews who are the first in line to protests genocide worldwide like in Darfur. Of course you conveniently ignore real genocide because there is no way to pin it on the Jews.

  • wsk

    We don't hate Muslims here. We hate what radical do in the name of Islam.

    • Jaladhi

      . "We hate what radical do in the name of Islam. "

      This is what Islam teaches them to do. Not radical nor moderate – it is all regular day to day Islam teaching them what is in Quran!!!

      • Hooah

        I agree with Jaladhi.

        The greatest misconception today is that Islam is a great religion hijacked by a minority of zelots. NOT TRUE! And while I'm no expert on Islam I can read a book and understand it's ideology and message. In other words I've read the quran and still refere to it while shaking my head wondering how 1.5 billion humane beings can be fooled by that trash.

        The quran is evil and barbaric just like it's author mohammed.

        LIVE FREE OR DIE!!!

  • EdwinS

    I'm warmed when I think of Israel's nuclear arsenal…

    • Ron Grant

      "I'm warmed when I think of Israel's nuclear arsenal.."

      Edwin,given Iran's nuclear ambitions and potential you or yours may someday be a little "hotter" then you imagine or like.Muchiboy

  • Ron Grant

    "Many are puzzled by the widespread support in European democracies of Palestinian groups and Arab states that promote genocidal anti-Semitism.."

    Anyone with a modicum of common sense and reality would not be puzzled at all,in fact,they just wouldn't believe this of the European democracies.But the paranoid would believe such an absurdity.Or those with an equally absurd or sinister political or religious agenda.
    Because we are dealing with Jewish and Islamic religious bigots and fundamentalists who believe they have God given rights the conflict is particularly difficult.Because it is about land and history it is particularly bloody and complex.
    Perhaps it is more a case of "half empty/half full." Jews see what is favorable to them and the case for Zionism.They do not acknowledge or they in fact rationalize the demise of the majority of Palestinians denied their birth right and homeland.What they see is the minority of Palestinians living under a democratic Israeli government.The majority of Palestinians with their burdensome hardships are conveniently invisible to the Jews.
    And while many Palestinians acknowledge that their occupiers and oppressors,i.e. the Jews,were victims of oppression and Antisemitism,(Palestinians refer to themselves as "victims of victims") they miss many opportunities by counter productive acts and policies.
    Both parties obviously are more or less blameworthy here,the Israelis more,the Palestinians less.Muchiboy

    • MixMike

      "Jews see what is favorable to them and the case for Zionism.They do not acknowledge or they in fact rationalize the demise of the majority of Palestinians denied their birth right and homeland."

      Israel and Jews (clearly you conflate the two) do not rationalize or in any way want the "demise of the majority of Palestinians." I know you like to falsely accuse Israel of "ethnic cleansing" but the facts don't support your nonsense. The Palestinian population has increased exponentially since Israel acquired the W. Bank and Gaza. Israel provides tons of aids and civil services (electricity, water, medical care etc.) to the Palestinians in the W. Bank and Gaza. Israel has been in the practice of bolstering the Palestinians, not ethnic cleansing.

      Additionally, the Palestinians are not "denied" their homeland. There are over 1 million Arab citizens of Israel (approximately 20%). And as you like to conveniently forget, Israel was created on vacant, legally acquired and TENANT-FREE land. In 1948 Jews agreed to a state in Jewish majority areas, and the Palestinians rejected this choosing war over peace.

      "What they see is the minority of Palestinians living under a democratic Israeli government."

      A SECULAR democratic Israel that gives Palestinians full rights (with affirmative action programs) and more civil rights than any Muslim or Arab nation in the World.

      "The majority of Palestinians with their burdensome hardships are conveniently invisible to the Jews."

      Jews are the first ones to recognize the hardships of the Palestinians. It is conveniently invisible to you the amount of aid Israel gives to the Palestinians. What do the Palestinians give back? Terrorism, death, murder, xenophobia…

      "Both parties obviously are more or less blameworthy here,the Israelis more,the Palestinians less."

      Wrong as usual. Palestinians are almost entirely to blame for this conflict. If they weren't xenophobic and accepted Israel there would be no conflict.

      • courtnye

        what tv do you watch?

        • MixMike

          I can tell you that I do not watch Al Jazeera.

    • Hooah

      "Both parties obviously are more or less blameworthy here, the Israelis more, the Palestinians less". Ron, talk about not bothering to learn the facts. Your analysis is lazy.
      Yes its complex but you fail to acknowledge the 3,000 years of continuous Jewish presence in Israel, whereas the Arab's presence is much less, not only in time, but in jurisprudence. This lack legitimate governance greatly reduces their claim to the land. Squatters can only kick and scream so much.
      You lump everything together without examining the facts, resorting to play ground rules made to control children instead of giving it the cold hard analytical examination it deserves, like what would be found in a court of law. This is not the way adults govern nations or solve problems Ron.
      Ron, it does matter who started it first, it does matter who does it the most, and it does matter who said what and why.
      Jews believe this tiny piece of land is what God gave them. Muslims believe Allah gave them all the land of the world. Think about that Ron. This is a war against Islamic supremacy & imperialism, not the alleged suffering of the muslims at the hands of Jews.

    • David Tsal

      Ron Grant, let me make it simple for you. The whole conflict boils down to: Arabs want to extermnate Israeli Jews, and Israeli Jews don't want to be exterminated.

      Underneath all the complexity, it is that simple.

      It is quite clear which side you are on.

  • Vic

    It is interesting that there are more Christians on the earth today than any other religious group yet more hatred for God's chosen than at any other time. Gen 12:3

    • http://intensedebate.com/profiles/themadjewess themadjewess

      Vic; If you support Israel and Jews (that are sane) you are in the same suffering!!

    • Hooah

      Not sure what you’re getting at Vic but from a psychological perspective I should point out to you one of its basic tenets found in the field of psychology…"correlation does not prove causation".
      Cold hard facts prove causation. Jew hatred in the quran and hadiths indicate the cause for so much hatred among muslims, world wide, towards Jews, and all other non muslims.

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/DagW DagW

    Well, I hope no one confuses me with my namesake above.

  • Mike K.

    This was an amazing article by Mr. Levin! So much history described so clearly. I'm certainly buying the book.

    In any case, it's obvious that the Arab mind is not fit for democracy, and will eventually reject whatever pseudo-democratic facade is installed. Nor do Muslims deserve democracy. Free thinking Muslims are a rarity in the free world, even among those who have lived here for generations. Oil and water will never mix, and Islam and democracy will never work together. Hamas, after all, was "elected" under the watchful eye of western advisors. But elections without a literate people, without a free press, free speech, court system, etc. etc. is a sham. A version of Muslim democracy can be seen even now as Afghanistan's, Pakistan's, Iran, and Turkey's leaders are already caving in to ancient tribalism. The West should stop force-feeding "freedom" down the unwilling throats of desert tribes just because there is oil under their tents. We need a Plan B.

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/AL__ AL__
  • Ron Grant

    "Jews should one day be healed of the obsession with the Holocaust. But that can only happen when the world."

    Let's hope sooner then later,Robert.And in the meantime,the Jews must be vigilant that they in turn do not victimize another innocent and vulnerable people,the Palestinians.And let us all know that Antisemitism,ethnic cleansing,genocide are not so much crimes against a particular people,e.g.Jews,Palestinians,Tutu,etc. but rather humanity itself.I will fight to the death,I will council my son and daughter to go to war so that Jews will "never again" face the horrors of the Holocaust.Far from altruistic,such an act would be in everyone's self interest myself and family included.After "they" come for you and yours,they can just as readily come for me and mine.Before all else,there is humanity.Muchiboy

  • http://www.irvinecachiropractic.com gerly ginger

    I really hate those Muslim guys, especially here in our place. They fell they are the kings that no one could be above them. They're idiot! Ampatuan in Maguindanao and the other Political Families lived in that area.

  • Duran

    I didn't know that the British were that bad in mandatory Palestine. No wonder the Irgun and "Stern Gang" rose up against them. (The "Stern Gang" was indeed crazy and extreme, but it looks like there was a real grievance).

  • Lawrence Kohn

    Grant should review his history. The Jews were wiling to compromise on land; the Arabs were not. Transjordan was given statehood in 1946 contrary to League of Nations mandate. This 77 percent of Palestine as Levin pointed out was the first Palestinian Arab state though its rulers came from Arabia. The Jews agreed to the partition of the remainder but the Arabs launched a war and lost territory to the Israelis but also to Egyptians and Jordanians who wouldn't resettle refugees (some removed from their place but many just fled and others were told to leave by the Arab leadership). Nor would Jordan or Egypt allow a state in the area they captured (Gaza and Judea/Samaria renamed in 1950 the West Bank by Jordan). Arabs continued to try to destroy Israel without the current territories. Israel only captured them after Egypt blockaded it and moved its troops to the border made an alliance with Jordan and Syria and Jordan after Israel had destroyed the Egyptian air force on the ground (after waiting for 2 weeks for the promised support of the West which never came) and then Jordan despite being asked to stay out attacked West Jerusalem. btw in 1948 Jordan exiled the ancient Jewish community of east Jerusalem the old city and vandalized its synagogues. Israel has made some mistakes along the way but it isn't 50 – 50. The Arab world refuses to accept Jewish sovereignty in its own land in a space of any size despite compromises, withdrawals, concessions and despite fact that Jews too are indigenous to the land, always had Jews there even after a majority left and even though 100,000 Arabs entered (as Levin noted) the land from outside Palestine in the 30s and 40s due to Jewish development of industry and agriculture.

  • hmm

    so much pseudo-history here; it's great. just keep perpetuating the myths…

  • Eric

    What a great article, I found this to be quite an enjoyable read.
    Pittsburgh chiropractor

  • http://www.mercurytaxisoftware.co.uk Taxi Software

    Yes there are bad Muslims but there are also good ones remaining i believe. Those terrorist are the one that should be punished.

  • KindleinColor

    All these sound threatening … I can only hope that history does not repeat itself …

  • Sesame_Chicken

    True, history repeating itself will not be unacceptable to me.

  • Brian Boolz

    'Britain’s betrayal of the Jews included the use of agents provocateurs to encourage Arab attacks on the Jews' – wow I never know that!

    Stop Binge Eating

  • pete

    Thanks very much for the information. Google finally led me to what I was looking for :) Dublin Storage Serviced Office Dublin office share