<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>FrontPage Magazine &#187; nazism</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.frontpagemag.com/tag/nazism/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 31 Dec 2014 07:56:08 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en-US</language>
		<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
		<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	
	<item>
		<title>The Nazi Romance With Islam Has Some Lessons for the United States</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/david-mikics/the-nazi-romance-with-islam-has-some-lessons-for-the-united-states/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=the-nazi-romance-with-islam-has-some-lessons-for-the-united-states</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/david-mikics/the-nazi-romance-with-islam-has-some-lessons-for-the-united-states/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 01 Dec 2014 05:09:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[David Mikics]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Hitler]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Islam]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Muslims]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[nazism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[turkey]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=246238</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Two new important histories look at Hitler’s fascination with Islam and Atatürk, the founder of modern Turkey.]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<div class="story-category"><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/mikics_620.png"><img class="alignleft  wp-image-246240" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/mikics_620-450x301.png" alt="mikics_620" width="278" height="186" /></a><strong>Reprinted from <a href="http://tabletmag.com/">Tabletmag.com</a>.</strong></div>
<div class="story-category"></div>
<div class="story-category">Both Hitler and Himmler had a soft spot for Islam. Hitler several times fantasized that, if the Saracens had not been stopped at the Battle of Tours, Islam would have spread through the European continent—and that would have been a good thing, since “Jewish Christianity” wouldn’t have gone on to poison Europe. Christianity doted on weakness and suffering, while Islam extolled strength, Hitler believed. Himmler in a January 1944 speech called Islam “a practical and attractive religion for soldiers,” with its promise of paradise and beautiful women for brave martyrs after their death. “This is the kind of language a soldier understands,” Himmler gushed.</div>
<p>Surely, the Nazi leaders thought, Muslims would see that the Germans were their blood brothers: loyal, iron-willed, and most important, convinced that Jews were the evil that most plagued the world. “Do you recognize him, the fat, curly-haired Jew who deceives and rules the whole world and who steals the land of the Arabs?” demanded one of the Nazi pamphlets dropped over North Africa (a million copies of it were printed). “The Jew,” the pamphlet explained, was the evil King Dajjal from Islamic tradition, who in the world’s final days was supposed to lead 70,000 Jews from Isfahan in apocalyptic battle against Isa—often identified with Jesus, but according to the Reich Propaganda Ministry none other than Hitler himself. Germany produced reams of leaflets like this one, often quoting the Quran on the subject of Jewish treachery.</p>
<p>It is not surprising, then, that there are those today who draw a direct line between modern Jew-hatred in the Islamic world and the Nazis. A poster currently at Columbus Circle’s subway entrance proclaims loudly that “Jew-hatred is in the Quran.” The poster features a photograph of Hitler with the notoriously anti-Jewish Mufti al-Husaini of Palestine, who is erroneously labeled “the leader of the Muslim world.” The truth is considerably more complex. The mufti made himself useful to the Nazis as a propagandist, but he had little influence in most Muslim regions. Few Muslims believed Nazi claims that Hitler was the protector of Islam, much less the Twelfth Imam, as one Reich pamphlet suggested.</p>
<p>The Nazis’ anti-Jewish propaganda no doubt attracted many Muslims, as historian Jeffrey Herf has documented, but they balked at believing that Hitler would be their savior or liberator. Instead, they sensed correctly that the Nazis wanted Muslims to fight and die for Germany. As Rommel approached Cairo, Egyptians started to get nervous. They knew that the Germans were not coming to liberate them, but instead wanted to make the Muslim world part of their own burgeoning empire. In the end, more Muslims wound up fighting for the Allies than for the Axis.</p>
<p>Hitler’s failed effort to put Muslim boots on the ground still stands as the most far-reaching Western attempt to use Islam to win a war. Such is the judgment of David Motadel, the author of a new, authoritative book, <em><a href="http://www.hup.harvard.edu/catalog.php?isbn=9780674724600" rel="external">Islam and Nazi Germany’s War</a> .</em> Motadel’s detailed and fascinating explanation of how and why the Nazis failed to get Muslims on their side is a must-read for serious students of World War II, and it has an important message as well for our own policy in the Middle East.</p>
<p>***</p>
<p>To grasp why the Nazis had such high hopes for Muslim collaboration—and why their hopes failed—we need to go back to the great war that made Hitler the fanatical monster he was. One hundred years ago, a few months into World War I, Germany looked like it might be in trouble. The German offensive had failed to break through at Ypres after a month of bloody fighting. The waves of German soldiers stumbling through no-man’s land slowed to a stop. The kaiser’s army was exhausted, and its commanders suddenly realized that the quick Western Front victory they had dreamed of was impossible. Meanwhile, Russia was massing troops around Warsaw, and the tsar had just declared war on the Ottoman Empire.</p>
<p>There was one bright spot, though. On Nov. 11, 1914, the highest religious authority of the Ottoman caliphate, Sheikh al-Islam Ürgüplü Hayri, issued a call for worldwide jihad against Russia, Britain, and France. Suddenly, the Great War was a holy war. Surely, the Germans dreamed, Muslims would join their side en masse and turn the tide of battle.</p>
<p>In the early years of World War I the German Reich caught Islam fever: Muslims became the great Eastern hope against the Entente. Helmuth von Moltke, chief of the German general staff, planned to “awaken the fanaticism of Islam” in the French and British colonies, making the Muslim masses rise up against their European masters. <a href="http://tabletmag.com/jewish-arts-and-culture/books/141788/hitler-jews-oppenheim" rel="external">Max von Oppenheim</a> , the German diplomat and orientalist, described Islam as “one of our most important weapons” in his famous position paper of October 1914. Oppenheim wanted to spark a Muslim revolt stretching from India to Morocco that Germany could use for its own purposes. Germany just needed to get the message across, Oppenheim insisted: Russia, Britain, and France were the oppressors of Muslims, whereas the Germans would liberate them.</p>
<p>The German strategy didn’t work. Instead, Britain and France won the game when they capitalized on the Arab uprising against a crumbling Ottoman Empire. T.E. Lawrence, rather than the kaiser, inspired the Arabs. After the war, Britain and France sliced up the Middle East pie between them in the Sykes-Picot agreement of 1916.</p>
<p>Germany tried once again to mobilize Islam in WWII. Astonishingly, in 1940 Oppenheim, at that point 80 years old, championed the same plan that had failed so badly in the previous war. Even more surprising, Hitler and Himmler warmly embraced the part-Jewish Oppenheim’s idea: They too thought that Islam would help bring about a Nazi triumph.</p>
<p>“German officials would always refer to global Islam, to pan Islam,” Motadel told me over the phone from his home in Cambridge, England, where he is Research Fellow in History at the University of Cambridge’s Gonville and Caius College. The Nazis spoke of the Muslims as a “bloc” that could be “activated” against the British, the French, and the Soviets. Their belief that Islam was monolithic led them to ignore differences of region, sect, and nationality, which helped to ensure the failure of their efforts.</p>
<p>As Motadel documents, those efforts were indeed considerable. Germans sought out imams who would issue fatwas for their side, and they told their soldiers to be especially careful of religious sensibilities when traveling through Muslim territory. They gave special privileges to Muslims who joined the Wehrmacht: The Nazi leadership even allowed them to follow Muslim dietary laws. Astonishingly, German forces in the East permitted Muslims to practice both circumcision and ritual slaughter, proving more liberal on these two issues than many Europeans are today. At the beginning of Operation Barbarossa, the Germans murdered many Muslims because they were mistaken for Jews: They didn’t realize that Muslims were also circumcised. But Berlin soon corrected the error and cautioned troops in the East to make sure to treat Muslims with respect, since they were Germany’s potential allies. In December 1942 Hitler decided he wanted to recruit all-Muslim units in the Caucasus. He distrusted Georgians and Armenians, but the Muslims, he said, were true soldiers.</p>
<p>The Germans assumed that the Muslim world would naturally flock to the Nazi banner, since Muslims like Germans knew that Jews were the enemy, and since Germany was offering them freedom from France, Britain, and Russia. But for the most part, they were wrong. Muslims only embraced the Nazi cause in places where they were desperate to arm themselves against local persecutors, the Crimea, the Caucasus, and the Balkans. In most of the Muslim world, Hitler failed to attract a large following.</p>
<p>North Africa was a miserable failure for German recruitment. “230,000 Muslims fought for the Free French against the Axis from North Africa,” Motadel pointed out to me in our interview, far more than those who enlisted with Germany. The Germans had their millions of leaflets, but they were not the only propagandists in the field. “The Free French mobilized them with anti-colonial rhetoric. The British and French were the ruling powers; they had much more control over propaganda.”</p>
<p>The East was much more favorable than North Africa to the German recruitment drive. The Muslims of the Caucasus and the Crimea had many reasons to choose Germany over Stalin’s Soviet Union. “In the East the Muslim population had really suffered under Stalin, economically and religiously,” Motadel remarked to me. They had nothing to lose, they thought, by siding with “Adolf Effendi.” The Crimean Tatars took a notorious place among Germany’s most loyal and ruthless battalions, fighting both in the East and, near the end of the war, in Romania. The Tatars made the wrong choice: Stalin mercilessly deported many of them to his gulags after the war.</p>
<p>In the Balkans many Muslims turned to Germany in the middle of a brutal civil war, fleeing the rampages of the Croatian Ustase. The infamous all-Muslim Handžar battalion of the SS, organized in the Balkans late in the war, committed many atrocities. In Serbian areas, noted one British officer, the Handžar “massacres all civil population without mercy or regard for age or sex.”</p>
<p>The Nazis made sure, with few exceptions, that the Nuremberg laws could be applied only to Jews, not to those other Semites, the Arabs, nor to Turks and Persians—which paradoxically allowed certain communities of Jews in Muslim regions to also survive the Shoah. In Crimea, two puzzled officers of the Wehrmacht, Fritz Donner and Ernst Seifert, reported on “Near Eastern racial groups of a non-Semitic character who, strangely, have adopted the Jewish faith,” while also noting that “a large part of these Jews on the Crimea is of Mohammedan faith.” What to do? In the end the Reich ruled that the Karaites, traditionally seen as a Turkic people, could be spared, while the Krymchaks should be murdered as Jews, though both these Crimean tribes followed Jewish law. In the northern Caucasus, the Nazis decided that the Judeo-Tats, a tiny Torah-observant island in a sea of Muslims, had only their religion in common with Jews. In effect, they became honorary Muslims and were saved from death. The Karaites were close to the Muslim Crimean Tatars, and the Judeo-Tats also had deep ties to their Muslim neighbors. It was their supposed affinity to Islam that saved the lives of these observant Jews. In these cases the Nazi wish to cultivate the Muslim world even affected to a small degree their anti-Semitic policy—to the Jews’ advantage.</p>
<p>***</p>
<p>Hitler cultivated many parts of the Muslim world, but he was fanatically enthusiastic about only one country: Turkey (the Nazis officially decided in 1936 that the Turks were Aryans). Stefan Ihrig’s brilliant new book <em><a href="http://www.hup.harvard.edu/catalog.php?isbn=9780674368378" rel="external">Atatürk in the Nazi Imagination</a> </em> demonstrates convincingly that Mustafa Kemal Atatürk’s conquest of Turkey was the most important model for the Nazis’ remaking of Germany, far more so than Mussolini’s 1922 March on Rome, which is usually cited as Hitler’s main inspiration. Turkey had taken control of its destiny in manly fashion, in proud defiance of the international community—if only Germany would do the same! So argued many on the German right, including Hitler, during the 10 years between Atatürk’s victory and the Nazi seizure of power.</p>
<p>The victorious Entente had vastly curtailed Ottoman territory under the Treaty of Sèvres after WWI, just as the Treaty of Versailles shrank German territory. But the new nation of Turkey threw off the victors’ shackles and, after Mustafa Kemal (later renamed Atatürk) marched from Ankara westward, the Turks won the right to a homeland in the 1923 Treaty of Lausanne. The Weimar Republic’s newspapers obsessively celebrated the Turks’ victory and endorsed their claims to the disputed region of Hatay (the Turks’ Alsace-Lorraine), portraying the Turks as more advanced than the Germans, trailblazers on the path to strong nationhood. “If we want to be free, then we will have no choice but to follow the Turkish example in one way or another,” the right-wing military man and journalist Hans Tröbst announced in the newspaper <em>Heimatland</em> in 1923. Nearly every item in Hitler’s playbook can be found in such Weimar-era endorsements of Atatürk: All Turkey had mobilized for the war; strong faith in their leader had saved them.</p>
<p>Ihrig argues that the Turkish treatment of minorities, both under Atatürk and earlier, was the true precursor for Hitler’s murderous policy in the East. Those “bloodsuckers and parasites,” the Greeks and Armenians, had been “eradicated” by the Turks, Tröbst explained in <em>Heimatland</em>. “Gentle measures—that history has always shown—will not do in such cases.” The Turks had achieved “the purification of a nation of its foreign elements on a grand scale.” He added that “Almost all of those of foreign background in the area of combat had to die; their number is not put too low with 500,000.” Here was a chilling endorsement of genocide, and one that surely did not escape Hitler’s eye. Shortly after his articles appeared, Hitler invited Tröbst to give a speech on Turkey to the SA.</p>
<p>From 1923 on, Hitler consistently praised Atatürk in his own speeches as well. Berlin, like Istanbul, was cosmopolitan and decadent. Munich, site of Hitler’s beer-hall putsch, was the place for a German “Ankara government.” When Hitler seized power in 1933 his <em>Völkischer Beobachter</em> cited Atatürk’s victory as the “star in the darkness” that had shone for the beleaguered Nazis in 1923, after the putsch’s failure. Turkey was “proof of what a real man could do”—a man like Atatürk, or Hitler.</p>
<p>The Third Reich produced many idolizing biographies of Atatürk. Six years after the Turkish leader’s death, in late 1944, a delusional Hitler was still dreaming of a postwar alliance between Turkey and Germany. He never got his wish. During the war, Turkey, as a neutral power, kept its distance from the Nazis until it finally declared war against Germany in February 1945.</p>
<p>In Turkey, criticizing Atatürk can still get you three years in jail, though the country’s increasingly <a href="http://tabletmag.com/jewish-news-and-politics/37048/fantasia" rel="external">unhinged</a> President Recep Tayyip Erdogan broke the law himself last year when he called Atatürk a drunkard. While Erdogan wants to reverse his predecessor’s program for secularizing Turkey, he appears to be imitating Atatürk’s extravagant cult of personality along with his habit of demonizing his enemies. But while Atatürk disdained Hitler’s anti-Semitism, Erdogan is obsessed with Jews. The 2014 Gaza operation, he has <a href="http://forward.com/articles/202423/turkey-leader-slams-israel-attack-on-gaza-as-more/" rel="external">remarked</a> , was worse than anything Hitler ever did, and the Israelis have been committing “systematic genocide every day” since 1948. Perhaps if Erdogan had been in power in the 1940s, the Nazis would have found the Muslim ally they so desperately sought.</p>
<p>Weaponizing Islam has often been a temptation for the United States, just as it was for Germany. In its battle against Moscow, Washington recruited Islamic leaders after WWII, most famously Said Ramadan, a major figure in the Muslim Brotherhood. The United States even smiled on Saudi Arabia’s funding of radical Islamist organizations, hoping that religion would serve as a bulwark against Soviet Communism. Then the Muslim Brotherhood killed U.S. ally Anwar Sadat, and its follower Ayman al-Zawahiri became, along with Osama Bin Laden, the founder of al-Qaida. We supported the Mujahedeen in Afghanistan, until the Mujahedeen turned into the Taliban.</p>
<p>We are still trying to turn the Muslim world to our own purposes, but this time by supporting Shiite against Sunni. In addition to courting Erdogan, President Barack Obama hopes to make use of Iran as a stabilizing regional force. In his most recent personal letter to Ayatollah Khamanei, Obama seems to have made a promise: We will repeal sanctions, fight against ISIS, and preserve the rule of Iran’s client Bashar al Assad as long as Iran agrees to a deal on nuclear weapons. But what will the United States get in return? In the best-case scenario—which is far from assured—Iran’s bomb-making abilities will be hindered by the deal they sign. But even an Iran without the bomb cannot be relied on to make the Middle East less conflict-riven, unless we are aiming at the kind of stability famously mocked by Tacitus: They make a desert and call it peace. Iranian actions speak for themselves: support for Hezbollah, with its hundred thousand weapons aimed at Israel, and support for Assad, who has massacred his people endlessly and thrown massive numbers of them into concentration camps. Anyone who looks at the Syrian defector “Caesar” ’s <a href="http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/07/31/syrian-defector-assad-poised-to-torture-and-murder-150-000-more.html" rel="external">photographs</a> of the thousands of starved, mutilated bodies produced by Syria’s bloodthirsty optometrist-in-chief, which are now on permanent exhibition at the Holocaust Museum in Washington, a few blocks from the White House that has refused to grasp their meaning, will ask the same question: Don’t these Arab bodies, resembling so exactly the bodies of Jews at Auschwitz, have the same call on our conscience?</p>
<p>One thing is certain: If Khamanei and Rouhani are given a larger role in the Middle East, they will not serve U.S. interests, nor those of the majority of Muslims. They will serve their own interests, which are inimical to ours. We still have not learned the major lesson of 20th-century history so adeptly conveyed by Motadel and Ihrig: Western leaders who try to get Islam on their side through propaganda and favors will be unpleasantly surprised.</p>
<p class="story-author-bio"><em>David Mikics is the author, most recently, of</em> <a href="http://www.hup.harvard.edu/catalog.php?isbn=9780674724723">Slow Reading in a Hurried Age</a><em>. He lives in Brooklyn and Houston, where he is John and Rebecca Moores Professor of English at the University of Houston.</em></p>
<p><strong>Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: </strong><a href="http://www.amazon.com/s/ref%3dnb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Ddigital-text&amp;field-keywords=david+horowitz&amp;rh=n:133140011%2ck:david+horowitz&amp;ajr=0#/ref=sr_st?keywords=david+horowitz&amp;qid=1316459840&amp;rh=n:133140011%2ck:david+horowitz&amp;sort=daterank"><strong>Click here</strong></a><strong>.   </strong></p>
<p><a href="http://horowitzfreedomcenter.us1.list-manage.com/subscribe?u=caa6f67f1482e6214d83be62d&amp;id=c761755bdf"><strong>Subscribe</strong></a><strong> to Frontpage&#8217;s TV show, <em>The Glazov Gang</em>, and </strong><a href="https://www.facebook.com/glazovgang"><strong>LIKE</strong></a><strong> it on </strong><a href="https://www.facebook.com/glazovgang"><strong>Facebook.</strong></a></p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/david-mikics/the-nazi-romance-with-islam-has-some-lessons-for-the-united-states/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>8</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The Stalin-Hitler Pact Turns 75</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/lloyd-billingsley/the-stalin-hitler-pact-turns-75/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=the-stalin-hitler-pact-turns-75</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/lloyd-billingsley/the-stalin-hitler-pact-turns-75/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 22 Aug 2014 04:10:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Lloyd Billingsley]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[75]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[anniversary]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Communism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Hillary]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Hitler]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[nazism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Obama]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[pact]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Stalin]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=239135</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Why a memorial would be useful for Vladimir Putin, Barack Obama, and Hillary Clinton.]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/genocide_template_clip_image002.jpg"><img class="alignleft  wp-image-239136" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/genocide_template_clip_image002.jpg" alt="genocide_template_clip_image002" width="306" height="267" /></a>In June, Western democratic leaders invited Vladimir Putin to the 70th anniversary of D-Day memorial in France, but there’s no good reason he should have been there. Putin is an autocrat, not a democrat. He laments the demise of the Soviet Union, a dictatorship that played no role in the D-Day operation. And since Putin is now conducting an incremental invasion of Ukraine, a different memorial would be more suitable. As it happens, this one is long overdue and remains shrouded in ignorance.</p>
<p>Seventy-five years ago, on August 23, 1939, the USSR and Nazi Germany became allies through the Stalin-Hitler Pact. Joachim von Ribbentrop signed for Hitler and Soviet foreign minister Vyacheslav Molotov signed on behalf of Stalin. Molotov said that Hitlerism was “a matter of taste,” and that it was “not only senseless, but criminal” to wage war on Hitler “camouflaged as a fight for democracy.” Though often described as a “non-aggression pact,” the reverse was true.</p>
<p>The month after the Pact, Stalin and Hitler both invaded Poland, starting World War II. The Pact also gave Stalin control of Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia, which he retained after the war, along with other conquests such as Czechoslovakia, Hungary and what became the German Democrat Republic, the regime that made emigration an exciting experience.</p>
<p>While the pact was in effect, Soviet and Nazi intelligence agencies worked together and American Communists did everything in their power to keep the United States from coming to Britain’s aid. During the Pact, the Soviets murdered 22,000 Polish officers in the Katyn forest. That came at the direct order of Stalin, as Russia now acknowledges. Less well known is the reality that Stalin also handed over German Jewish Communists to Hitler’s Gestapo. At the Nuremberg trials after the war, Joachim von Ribbentrop was convicted for signing the Pact while Molotov, who signed for Stalin, sat in the accuser’s chair. So Stalin and his gang got away with it.</p>
<p>A Nazi-Soviet Pact memorial would be a great opportunity for Putin to express his admiration for Stalin. Maybe he could provide some enlightenment on what happened to the Jews Stalin handed over to Hitler. And as a former KGB man, maybe he could bring out more details of Soviet-Nazi intelligence cooperation during the Pact. This could be a shining moment for Putin, but the memorial would also do others some good.</p>
<p>American educators, for example, could familiarize themselves with these events and gauge the depths of their ignorance and denial. Some might even decide to make the Stalin-Hitler Pact into a college course. That would tell students something they don’t know. American politicians would also benefit.</p>
<p>It’s a good bet that most of them, regardless of party, know little if anything about the Stalin-Hitler Pact. A 75th anniversary memorial would help educate them, and would be particularly relevant for Barack Obama, President of the United States. He could use the memorial to expand on one of his mentors.</p>
<p>That would be Frank Marshall Davis, an orthodox Stalinist of exceptional ferocity, with an absolutely sulfuric hatred of the United States. Davis joined the Communist Party USA after the Pact was signed, at the same time others were leaving the ranks, never to return. The Pact memorial would be an opportunity for Obama to provide a full profile of the man his handlers disguised simply as “Frank” in &#8220;Dreams From My Father.&#8221; If Frank Marshall Davis ever believed, said, or did anything with which Obama disagreed, a Stalin-Hitler Pact memorial would be the ideal time to set the record straight. After all, the Obama administration is the most transparent in history, with not a smidgeon of corruption. And of course, it would be another photo op he could use to raise funds. He could even bring along his travelling studio audience.</p>
<p>Former First Lady and current presidential candidate Hillary Clinton could also benefit. One of her mentors is Robert Treuhaft, a Stalinist lawyer who joined the Communist Party USA after the Stalin-Hitler Pact and served faithfully in the USSR’s alibi armory. Hillary Clinton, who interned for Treuhaft, could use a Pact memorial to clarify Treuhaft’s career, and explain why he left the Communist Party in 1958, as he claimed. And she could go on record if she ever disagreed with anything her Stalinist mentor believed, said or did.</p>
<p>That could prove enlightening, but as with Benghazi she might just say “what does it matter?” Actually, it matters quite a bit, especially for someone who wants to be president, and the one who already is.</p>
<p><b>Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: </b><a href="http://www.amazon.com/s/ref%3dnb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Ddigital-text&amp;field-keywords=david+horowitz&amp;rh=n:133140011%2ck:david+horowitz&amp;ajr=0#/ref=sr_st?keywords=david+horowitz&amp;qid=1316459840&amp;rh=n:133140011%2ck:david+horowitz&amp;sort=daterank" target="_blank"><b>Click here</b></a><b>. </b></p>
<p><a style="line-height: 1.5em;" href="http://horowitzfreedomcenter.us1.list-manage.com/subscribe?u=caa6f67f1482e6214d83be62d&amp;id=c761755bdf" target="_blank"><b>Subscribe</b></a><strong style="line-height: 1.5em;"> to Frontpage&#8217;s TV show, <i>The Glazov Gang</i>, and </strong><a style="line-height: 1.5em;" href="https://www.facebook.com/glazovgang" target="_blank"><b>LIKE</b></a><strong style="line-height: 1.5em;"> it on </strong><a style="line-height: 1.5em;" href="https://www.facebook.com/glazovgang" target="_blank"><b>Facebook.</b></a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/lloyd-billingsley/the-stalin-hitler-pact-turns-75/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>135</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>No Mere &#8220;Hate Crime&#8221;</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/matthew-vadum/no-mere-hate-crime/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=no-mere-hate-crime</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/matthew-vadum/no-mere-hate-crime/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 17 Apr 2014 04:56:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Matthew Vadum]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Anti-Semitism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[HATE]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[hate crime]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[JCC]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[nazism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[shooting]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=223574</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[How the "hate crime" label diminishes the evils of anti-Semitism and Nazism. ]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><span style="line-height: 1.5em;"><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/WPTV-JCC-shooting-suspect_1397419397369_4064091_ver1.0_320_240.jpg"><img class="alignleft  wp-image-223576" alt="WPTV JCC shooting suspect_1397419397369_4064091_ver1.0_320_240" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/WPTV-JCC-shooting-suspect_1397419397369_4064091_ver1.0_320_240.jpg" width="288" height="216" /></a>Former KKK leader Frazier Glenn Cross&#8217;s Sunday shooting spree that left three dead outside a Jewish retirement home and a Jewish community center in the Kansas City, Mo., suburbs was a heinous atrocity, and the reflexive &#8220;hate crime&#8221; label being applied to it diminishes the true scope of the evil at its core. </span></p>
<p>Calling Miller&#8217;s acts hate crimes trivializes anti-Semitism, the evil that was Nazism and the monstrosity that was the Holocaust. The &#8220;hate crime&#8221; designation is over-relied on nowadays and this overuse has diluted its meaning. Spray-painting graffiti on a church or defacing a statue can be considered hate crimes.</p>
<p>The bar has been set so low that refusing to bake a wedding cake for a same-sex couple is a hate crime in the eyes of many left-wingers. Miller&#8217;s acts hardly belong in the same category.</p>
<p><span style="line-height: 1.5em;">Although all three apparently randomly selected victims were Christians, not Jews, the feds appear to be leaning in the direction of a hate crime prosecution. The attack &#8220;strikes at the core fundamental freedoms &#8230; of how our country was founded and what we live by every single day,&#8221; said FBI agent Michael Kaste. &#8220;We&#8217;ve now determined that the motivation behind this was a hate crime. The acts that this person committed were the result of beliefs &#8230; that he had.&#8221;</span></p>
<p><span style="line-height: 1.5em;">Interviewed in 2010, the now 73-year-old Miller </span><a style="line-height: 1.5em;" href="http://www.nytimes.com/2014/04/14/us/3-killed-in-shootings-at-jewish-center-and-retirement-home-in-kansas.html?_r=1">was asked</a><span style="line-height: 1.5em;"> whether he hated Jews or African-Americans more. He replied, &#8220;Jews. A thousand times more. Compared to our Jewish problem, all other problems are mere distractions.&#8221;</span></p>
<p><span style="line-height: 1.5em;">Miller complained that Jews were running the U.S. government, mass media, and the Federal Reserve Bank. &#8220;And with those powers, they&#8217;re committing genocide against the white race,&#8221; he said. Miller also said he had &#8220;a great deal of respect for Muslim people&#8221; and referred to Adolf Hitler as &#8220;the greatest man who ever walked the earth.&#8221;</span></p>
<p><span style="line-height: 1.5em;">People like Miller &#8220;praise Hitler and they praise [Nation of Islam leader Louis] Farrakhan and of course Farrakhan was one of this guy&#8217;s heroes along with Hitler and David Duke,&#8221; </span><a style="line-height: 1.5em;" href="http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-TV/2014/04/14/Alan-Dershowitz-extreme-left-and-extreme-right-have-only-one-thing-in-common-they-hate-Jews">said</a><span style="line-height: 1.5em;"> Harvard Law Professor Alan Dershowitz, reacting to the events of Sunday.</span></p>
<p><span style="line-height: 1.5em;">Dershowitz seemed to suggest that the very idea of a hate crime is constitutionally dubious. It&#8217;s an Orwellian concept wherein the ideological component of an ordinary crime is singled out for special punishment over and above the underlying crime itself.</span></p>
<p><span style="line-height: 1.5em;">In other words, even in America, with its extraordinary protection for free speech and freedom of conscience you can be prosecuted for your ideas and beliefs. No matter how odious or unpopular those ideas and beliefs may be, it is unjust for courts to pass judgment on them.</span></p>
<p><span style="line-height: 1.5em;">“When we were kids we learned sticks and stones will break your bones but names will never harm you,&#8221; Dershowitz told MSNBC&#8217;s Ronan Farrow. &#8220;That’s a lie. Names hurt. They are horrible, and we shouldn’t be tolerating them in society. But the law under our Constitution can’t move against people simply for expressing views.”</span><span style="line-height: 1.5em;"> </span></p>
<p>For his part, President Obama <a href="http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2014/04/14/remarks-president-easter-prayer-breakfast">condemned</a> the attacks, saying the right things as he pretended to be religious for the benefit of the assembled media.</p>
<p><span style="line-height: 1.5em;">&#8220;We have to keep coming together across faiths to combat the ignorance and intolerance, including anti-Semitism that can lead to hatred and to violence, because we’re all children of God.&#8221;</span></p>
<p><span style="line-height: 1.5em;">It was &#8220;all the more painful&#8221; because the attacks came as Jews were preparing to celebrate Passover and Christians were observing Palm Sunday. &#8220;Nobody should have to worry about their security when gathering with their fellow believers. No one should ever have to fear for their safety when they go to pray.&#8221;</span></p>
<p><span style="line-height: 1.5em;">Obama&#8217;s words may have comforted some people, but they ring hollow.</span></p>
<p>Some of the president&#8217;s best friends are terrorists and Jew-hating Islamists. It was just a few days ago that Obama attended a New York rally hosted by longtime anti-Semite Al Sharpton and his thug protest group, National Action Network, whose inflammatory motto is, &#8220;No justice, no peace.&#8221;</p>
<p><span style="line-height: 1.5em;">And it was President Obama who tried to steer aid to an al-Qaeda affiliate in Syria last year and who threw his support behind former Egyptian President Mohamed Morsi, leader of the genocidally anti-Semitic Muslim Brotherhood, who called Jews the &#8220;descendants of apes and pigs.&#8221; </span></p>
<p>Miller&#8217;s views aren&#8217;t markedly different from those held by Morsi, former Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Islamic scholars, Louis Farrakhan, or President Obama&#8217;s longtime pastor, Jeremiah Wright. Their hatred is derived from a common, age-old bloodlust that, if not challenged, metastasizes in horrific ways. Unfortunately, the disease appears to be once again on the rise.</p>
<p><b>Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: </b><a href="http://www.amazon.com/s/ref%3dnb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Ddigital-text&amp;field-keywords=david+horowitz&amp;rh=n:133140011%2ck:david+horowitz&amp;ajr=0#/ref=sr_st?keywords=david+horowitz&amp;qid=1316459840&amp;rh=n:133140011%2ck:david+horowitz&amp;sort=daterank" target="_blank"><b>Click here</b></a><b>. </b></p>
<p><a style="line-height: 1.5em;" href="http://horowitzfreedomcenter.us1.list-manage.com/subscribe?u=caa6f67f1482e6214d83be62d&amp;id=c761755bdf" target="_blank"><b>Subscribe</b></a><strong style="line-height: 1.5em;"> to Frontpage&#8217;s TV show, <i>The Glazov Gang</i>, and </strong><a style="line-height: 1.5em;" href="https://www.facebook.com/glazovgang" target="_blank"><b>LIKE</b></a><strong style="line-height: 1.5em;"> it on </strong><a style="line-height: 1.5em;" href="https://www.facebook.com/glazovgang" target="_blank"><b>Facebook.</b></a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/matthew-vadum/no-mere-hate-crime/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>65</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Why Did So Many Wanted Nazis Convert To Islam?</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/giulio-meotti/why-did-so-many-wanted-nazis-convert-to-islam/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=why-did-so-many-wanted-nazis-convert-to-islam</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/giulio-meotti/why-did-so-many-wanted-nazis-convert-to-islam/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 11 Nov 2013 04:30:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Giulio Meotti]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Islam]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Israel]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[koran]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[nazism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Terrorism]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=210170</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The list is long - but is there a connection?]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/hn.jpg"><img class="alignleft  wp-image-210185" alt="hn" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/hn-447x350.jpg" width="313" height="245" /></a><strong>Reprinted from <a href="www.israelnationalnews.com">IsraelNationalNews.com</a>.</strong></p>
<p>There are Nazi grafts in Arab-Islamic terrorism.</p>
<p>At the top of the most wanted list of the Simon Wiesenthal Center there is a man who today would be one hundred years old. His name is Alois Brunner and he is responsible for the deaths of over 130,000 Jews. The Nazi hunters still place him in Syria, where he was last seen in 2001, protected by the regime of Bashar al-Assad.</p>
<p>Brunner was one of the most zealous ideologues and officials of the “Final Solution,” the plan for the extermination of the Jews. The idea haunted him to the point that in 1985 he said to the German magazine<em> Bunte</em>: “I regret that I didn’t finish the job.”</p>
<p>When the United Arab Republic of Syria was formed, Dr. Brunner took up residence at 7 George Haddad, in the embassy district of Damascus. In 1961, the year that Adolf Eichmann was captured by the Israelis in Buenos Aires, Brunner received a bomb-letter, probably from the Mossad and lost an eye.</p>
<p>Brunner, a personal friend of Hafez el Assad, took part in the construction of Syria&#8217;s secret services on the model of the Gestapo.</p>
<p>In November 1967, the neo-Nazi organization Bund Heimattreuer Jugend published in Esslingen Hegensberg, West Germany, the obituary of Karl van Kynast: “Lieutenant (res.) of the Bundeswehr, Captain in the army of the United Arab Republic, he felt at the Suez Canal on 12 September, 1967”.</p>
<p>Brunner is, in fact, only the best known of a number of Nazi officials who participated in the construction of of the Islamic regimes and who died in those lands after converting to Islam.</p>
<p>This alliance between the Nazi swastika and the Islamic Koran is well explained in a 1942 article written by Johann von Leers, the best known of Nazi converts to Islam. Published in the newspaper “<em>Die Judenfrage</em>”, the article presented Judaism and Islam in terms of Hegel’s thesis and antithesis: “The hostility of Muhammad towards the Jews had a consequence: the Oriental Jews were totally paralyzed. If the rest of the world had adopted a similar policy, we would not have the ‘Jewish question’. Islam has made an eternal service to the world by preventing the conquest of Arabia by the Jews.”</p>
<p>One of the leaders of the “Jewish Affairs” in Galicia, Altern Erich, converted to Islam and took the name of “Ali Bella” in Egypt, where he trained Palestinian terrorists.</p>
<p>Leopold Gleim was known through his original name as a head of the Gestapo in Poland, but became “Ali al- Nahar” at the service of the Egyptian dictator Nasser.</p>
<p>Oskar Dirlewanger, after killing tens of thousands of Jews in the Ukraine, became the bodyguard of the Egyptian dictator. Dr. Heinrich Willerman, famous for some of the most atrocious experiments at Dachau, and directed the terrorist “Camp Samarra” in Egypt.</p>
<p>After having “liquidated” the Warsaw ghetto, Kurt Baurnann joined the Ministry of War in Cairo and trained the Front for the Liberation of Palestine.</p>
<p>The head of the Gestapo in Düsseldorf, Joachim Daemling, went to work at the Egyptian prison system.</p>
<p>Even François Genoud, the famous banker of Nazism, testamentary heir of Adolf Hitler and Joseph Goebbels, used the war treasure of the Reich to finance the Arab- Muslim anti-Jewish causes, and in 1959, gave birth to “International Association of Friends of the Arab World”.</p>
<p>Walter Rauff, who invented the “gas vans” which killed at 97,000 Jews during the Holocaust, in 1948 tortured Jews in Damascus.</p>
<p>Boeckler Wilhelm became “Abd al Karim”, the SS Wilhelm Berner instructed Palestinian terrorists, the SS Gruppenführer Alois Moser became “Hassan Sulayman”.</p>
<p>In Cairo lived Hans Eisele, “Dr. Eisele”, who in Dachau became notorious for torturing prisoners with injections of cyanide. Even Otto Skorzeny, the SS commander who freed Mussolini from his prison on the Gran Sasso, lived in Cairo, where he perfected the Intelligence Services of Nasser&#8217;s regime.</p>
<p>Among the collaborators of Skorzeny there was also an official of the Goebbels Ministry of Propaganda, Franz Buensch, an “expert on the Jewish problem” who had worked with Adolf Eichmann on the “Final Solution” and had also written a book entitled “Sexual Habits of the Jews”, perhaps the most repugnant document produced by the Nazis.</p>
<p>In the Egyptian capital there was another infamous doctor, Aribert Heim, “Dr. Tod”, Dr. Death, so named because of the cruelty of his experiments in the camps of Buchenwald, Sachsenhausen and Mauthausen. Heim converted to Islam under the name of “Tarek Hussein Farid”. He sported an Islamic beard, he went to the al Azhar mosque every morning and read the Koran in the German translation.</p>
<p>The collaborator of Goebbels, Johann von Leers, was solemnly received in Cairo by the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, Haj Amin al Husseini: “We thank you for having fought against the powers of darkness incarnated by world Jewry”. After converting to Islam, Von Leers assumed the name of “Omar Amin von Leers” and in Cairo occupied many posts in the administration of Nasser.</p>
<p>When Tom Cruise in 2008 produced the movie “Valkyrie”, Major Otto Ernst Remer, who in the film has the face of Thomas Kretschmann, was portrayed as a key figure in the bloody suppression of the conspiracy that tried to assassinate Adolf Hitler. In 1993, an Egyptian newspaper interviewed Remer, who hailed the Khomeini revolution, said that the gas chambers were “lies” and who compared the defeat of Nazi Germany to that of the Palestinian Arabs, “both victims of the Jews, both suffered under occupation”.</p>
<p>And how to forget that neo-Nazis helped Yasser Arafat in 1972&#8242;s Munich massacre?</p>
<p>This is not an exotic, distant story, it sheds a dramatic light on the existential war between political Islam and the Jews.</p>
<p>While reading these and other stories of Nazi officials who fought for Islam, I am reminded of the project of the Mufti of Jerusalem, Haji Amin al Hussein, who planned to install a gas chamber and a crematorium near Nablus/Shechem. That is the real “occupation,” that of a genocidal and totalitarian ideology at war with the Jews in their own land.</p>
<p>A Birkenau in the desert. A Mauthausen which would have liked to set foot on Mount Zion.</p>
<p><b>Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: </b><a href="http://www.amazon.com/s/ref%3dnb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Ddigital-text&amp;field-keywords=david+horowitz&amp;rh=n:133140011%2ck:david+horowitz&amp;ajr=0#/ref=sr_st?keywords=david+horowitz&amp;qid=1316459840&amp;rh=n:133140011%2ck:david+horowitz&amp;sort=daterank" target="_blank"><b>Click here</b></a><b>.   </b></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/giulio-meotti/why-did-so-many-wanted-nazis-convert-to-islam/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>36</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Columbia Prof: WWII-Era Zionists Colluded with Nazis</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/salomon-benzimra/columbia-prof-wwii-era-zionists-colluded-with-nazis/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=columbia-prof-wwii-era-zionists-colluded-with-nazis</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/salomon-benzimra/columbia-prof-wwii-era-zionists-colluded-with-nazis/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 22 May 2013 04:15:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Salomon Benzimra]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Anti-Semitism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Israel]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Jews]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[nazism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Zionism]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=190093</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Prestigious university faculty member unleashes his hate.]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><i><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/5631469502_4bb576195b_z.jpg"><img class="alignleft  wp-image-190317" alt="5631469502_4bb576195b_z" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/5631469502_4bb576195b_z-450x298.jpg" width="270" height="179" /></a>&#8220;There are some ideas so stupid that only an intellectual could believe them&#8221; (George Orwell)</i></p>
<p>Columbia University Professor Joseph Massad is blind to reality.  His virulent anti-Zionist streak leads him to the most laughable constructs:  In <i>“<a href="http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/2013/05/201351275829430527.html">The last of the Semites</a>,”</i> Massad wants us to believe that the Zionist effort to remove the Jews from Europe in the 1930s and 1940s (to save them from imminent extermination) is undistinguishable from Nazi anti-Semitism! (<span style="text-decoration: underline;">Update</span>: Al-Jazeera just pulled Massad’s article from their website, as announced <a href="http://electronicintifada.net/blogs/ali-abunimah/al-jazeera-management-orders-joseph-massad-article-pulled-act-pro-israel">here</a> on May 19, 2013).</p>
<p>Two parties can be ferociously opposed to each other’s ideologies and yet unite temporarily to pursue a common strategic objective.  If Massad is not aware of this reality, he should revisit WWII and extend his ludicrous parallels between the Zionists and the Nazis to the British-American Allies who pursued the same military objective as the Soviets, while they despised Stalin’s ideology.  Is this too hard for Massad to comprehend?</p>
<p>It is clear that the sole purpose of Massad’s article is to delegitimize Israel.  This tiresome propaganda – driven primarily by envy, and buttressed by bankrupt Marxist dogmas and their unholy alliance with radical Islam – has been peddled over and over again to little or no effect.  Now, Massad tries a new thread, plucked out of ludicrous fantasies, without the slightest corroborating facts and with omissions galore not to disturb his narrative.</p>
<p>And so we read one enormity after another in Massad 4,000-word article:</p>
<ul>
<li>The ancestral connection of the Jewish people to the Land of Israel was concocted by the Protestant Reformation;</li>
<li>Most Jews were opposed to Zionism, up to the 1940s;</li>
<li>Lord Balfour was an anti-Semite;</li>
<li>The Nazis and the Zionists showed <i>“ideological similitude”</i>;</li>
<li>The totalitarianism inherent in Nazism and Communism was mere U.S. propaganda;</li>
<li>The (derisively called) <i>“Judeo-Christian civilisation” </i>was the product of European and American white supremacy, now turned against Arabs and Muslims;</li>
<li>The current relations between Germany and Israel are a continuation of past Nazi policies;</li>
<li>Israel and Zionism were not the victims of Nazis because <i>“[the Nazis] killed the majority of Jewish enemies of Zionism”</i>;</li>
<li>The Palestinians are the only remaining <i>“Semites”</i> and the last remaining bastion against anti-Semitism;</li>
<li>The Jews <i>“have nothing to do with Palestine”</i>;</li>
<li>The Zionist project is aggressive, colonialist, imperialist and tainted by <i>“racial discrimination”</i>;</li>
<li>The Jews had their <i>“nations”</i> in Europe before they <i>“forcibly settled the land of another people”</i>;</li>
<li>Israel’s claim of being the land of the Jewish people is <i>“the most anti-Semitic claim of all.”</i></li>
</ul>
<p>And what is the main voice that Massad quotes to support his narrative? Yasser Arafat, in his speech at the UN in November 1974!  In the wake of multiple <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dawson's_Field_hijackings">plane hijackings</a>, the massacre at the <a href="http://global-directions.com/Articles/Peace%20and%20Conflict/MunichMassacre1972.pdf">Munich Olympics</a> and the murder of school children in <a href="http://www.zionism-israel.com/dic/Maalot_Massacre.htm">Ma’alot</a> – acts of terror committed by the PLO and its affiliates – Arafat delivered his infamous speech at the UN.  This was the first time a terrorist leader was welcomed and applauded at the General Assembly. He rehashed all the Marxist buzzwords (aggression, imperialism, colonialism, racism, etc.) that he diligently learned from his KGB handlers to attack Israelis and Zionists, which he branded “terrorists [and] war criminals”.  This is the kind of inversion of reality that Massad embraces in his fantasy world of historical revisionism.</p>
<p>Furthermore, in his desperate attempt to deny the Jewish people their national aspirations in their ancestral land, Massad declares that <i>“the Palestinians have always insisted that the homelands of European Jews were their European countries and not Palestine.”</i> Quite an authoritative source! This blatant theft of identity from the Jewish people, which is still condoned with impunity in many quarters, is specifically hailed as an undisputed truth in Article 20 of the <a href="http://avalon.law.yale.edu/20th_century/plocov.asp#art20">PLO National Charter (1968)</a>.</p>
<p>It must be hard for anyone to be proven wrong after a lifetime spent in defending a losing cause.  The burning envy generated by Israel’s survival, progress and astonishing accomplishments against all odds in just a few decades must reduce its detractors to resort to claims of victimhood and self-righteousness, no matter how baseless.  Massad does not hesitate to escalate the accusations directed against Zionism to ever more ridiculous levels:  Now, the Zionists are the real Nazis and the Palestinians are the last remaining fighters against anti-Semitism!  Considering the growing anti-Jewish indoctrination of Palestinian school children and the hateful admonitions contained in the <a href="http://avalon.law.yale.edu/20th_century/hamas.asp">Hamas Charter</a>, Massad’s ludicrous claims are nothing but a thinly veiled burst of Freudian projection.</p>
<p>The unusual insistence on race-related notions in Massad’s article (no less than 18 instances) betrays an obsession dear to the anti-Israel crowd.  Launched at the UN General Assembly in 1975 (<a href="http://www.un.org/Depts/dhl/resguide/r30.htm">Resolution 3379</a>), the slanderous accusation equating Zionism – the legitimate national movement of the Jewish people – to racism is a reflection of the speech Arafat delivered at the UN a year earlier, and is now raised again by Massad <i>(“European Jews &#8230; became the elements of settler colonialism intimately allied to racial discrimination”),</i> even though this infamous resolution was rescinded in 1991.  But anti-Jewish hatred never seems to go away.  The “Zionism = racism” slander was revived at the Durban Conference in 2001, to give Massad and his fellow travelers a new lease on a life of hatred.</p>
<p>Massad cannot admit that the Jews have returned to <i>their</i> ancestral land and that the <i>reconstitution</i> of the Jewish State was enshrined in international law in 1920.  This incontrovertible truth would blow his narrative to pieces and would deprive him of his raging outbursts against Israel, Zionism and the Jewish people.</p>
<p>I know it’s next to impossible to have a diehard propagandist acknowledge factual evidence, but can one still hope that a professor of Intellectual History at Columbia University is not totally impervious to established historical and legal facts?  In his latest article, Massad offers only a crude sophistry that may be welcomed as profound insight by many among the biased Middle East academics who are, often wilfully, disconnected from factual reality.</p>
<p><strong>Salomon Benzimra is the co-founder of <i><a href="http://www.cilr.org/">Canadians for Israel’s Legal Rights</a>.</i><a href="http://www.cilr.org"><br />
</a></strong></p>
<p><strong>Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: <a href="http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Ddigital-text&amp;field-keywords=david+horowitz&amp;rh=n%3A133140011%2Ck%3Adavid+horowitz&amp;ajr=0#/ref=sr_st?keywords=david+horowitz&amp;qid=1316459840&amp;rh=n%3A133140011%2Ck%3Adavid+horowitz&amp;sort=daterank">Click here</a>.</strong></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/salomon-benzimra/columbia-prof-wwii-era-zionists-colluded-with-nazis/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>27</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The Palestinian Lie Machine Welcomes Obama, Defames America and Declares Its Love For Hitler</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/itamar-marcus-and-nan-jacques-zilberdik/the-palestinian-lie-machine-welcomes-obama-defames-america-and-declares-its-love-for-hitler/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=the-palestinian-lie-machine-welcomes-obama-defames-america-and-declares-its-love-for-hitler</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/itamar-marcus-and-nan-jacques-zilberdik/the-palestinian-lie-machine-welcomes-obama-defames-america-and-declares-its-love-for-hitler/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 20 Mar 2013 04:33:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Itamar Marcus and Nan Jacques Zilberdik]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Hitler]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Israel]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[nazism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Obama]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[palestinian authority]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=182314</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Official PA daily praises Nazism ahead of the president's visit. ]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><strong><a href="http://frontpagemag.com/2013/itamar-marcus-and-nan-jacques-zilberdik/the-palestinian-lie-machine-welcomes-obama-defames-america-and-declares-its-love-for-hitler/c7-fatah/" rel="attachment wp-att-182316"><img class="alignleft  wp-image-182316" title="C7 Fatah" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/C7-Fatah.jpg" alt="" width="248" height="198" /></a>Reprinted from <a href="http://palwatch.org/main.aspx?fi=157&amp;doc_id=8684">Palestinian Media Watch</a>. </strong></p>
<p>Two days before US President Barack Obama&#8217;s visit to Israel and the PA, the official PA daily chose to print anti-American hate speech along with pro-Hitler comments in an op-ed:</p>
<blockquote><p>&#8220;Our history is replete with lies&#8230; [including] the lie about Al-Qaeda and the September 11 events, which asserted that Muslim terrorists committed it, and that it was not an internal American action by the Freemasons.&#8221;</p></blockquote>
<p>The op-ed further implies that Hitler was greater than both Churchill and Roosevelt, who were &#8220;alcoholics&#8221;:</p>
<blockquote><p>&#8220;Churchill and Roosevelt were alcoholics, and in their youth were questioned more than once about brawls they started in bars, while Hitler hated alcohol and was not addicted to it. He used to go to sleep early and wake up early, and was very organized. These facts have been turned upside down as well, and Satan has been dressed with angels&#8217; wings.&#8221;</p></blockquote>
<p>The PA daily op-ed further asserts that negative attitudes toward Nazism are not objective but the result of the West&#8217;s victory:</p>
<blockquote><p>&#8220;Had Hitler won, Nazism would be an honor that people would be competing to belong to, and not a disgrace punishable by law.&#8221;</p></blockquote>
<p><a href="http://www.palwatch.org/"><strong>Palestinian Media Watch</strong></a> has documented <a href="http://palwatch.org/main.aspx?fi=623"><strong>anti-US messages</strong></a> promoted by the PA. PMW has also documented the PA&#8217;s praise for the <a href="http://www.palwatch.org/main.aspx?fi=818"><strong>September 11 terror attacks</strong></a>.</p>
<p><strong><em>The following is a longer excerpt from the op-ed printed in the official PA daily:</em></strong></p>
<p><em>Op-ed by Hassan Ouda Abu Zaher:</em></p>
<blockquote><p>&#8220;&#8216;History is a great lie written by the victors&#8217; &#8211; said Napoleon Bonaparte, the source of dubious historical writing and father of Freemasonry in France. If so, is the history planted in us through TV and the standard educational curriculum indeed true? The source of this history is the West &#8211; the victor ever since the fall of Andalusia (Muslim Spain)! &#8230;Our history is replete with lies, from lies about the corrupt [Caliph] Harun Al-Rashid, which ignore the sources indicating that he dedicated one year to pilgrimage [to Mecca] and one year to Jihad (i.e., he was a good Muslim), to the lie about Al-Qaeda and the Sept. 11 events, which asserted that Muslim terrorists committed it, and that it was not an internal American action by the Freemasons, which was mentioned in the Illuminati game cards ten years before it took place, and in over 15 Zionist and Freemason Hollywood-produced films in the 1990s. The method of repeating [the lies] over and over has authenticated false facts. Had Hitler won, Nazism would be an honor that people would be competing to belong to, and not a disgrace punishable by law. Churchill and Roosevelt were alcoholics, and in their youth were questioned more than once about brawls they started in bars, while Hitler hated alcohol and was not addicted to it. He used to go to sleep early and wake up early, and was very organized. These facts have been turned upside down as well, and Satan has been dressed with angels&#8217; wings&#8230;&#8221;</p></blockquote>
<p><strong>Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: <a href="http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Ddigital-text&amp;field-keywords=david+horowitz&amp;rh=n%3A133140011%2Ck%3Adavid+horowitz&amp;ajr=0#/ref=sr_st?keywords=david+horowitz&amp;qid=1316459840&amp;rh=n%3A133140011%2Ck%3Adavid+horowitz&amp;sort=daterank">Click here</a>.</strong></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/itamar-marcus-and-nan-jacques-zilberdik/the-palestinian-lie-machine-welcomes-obama-defames-america-and-declares-its-love-for-hitler/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>25</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Raoul Wallenberg’s Legacy for America’s Patriots</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2012/phil-orenstein/raoul-wallenberg%e2%80%99s-legacy-for-america%e2%80%99s-patriots/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=raoul-wallenberg%25e2%2580%2599s-legacy-for-america%25e2%2580%2599s-patriots</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2012/phil-orenstein/raoul-wallenberg%e2%80%99s-legacy-for-america%e2%80%99s-patriots/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 03 Aug 2012 04:05:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Phil Orenstein]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Communism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Frank Marshall Davis]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Marx]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[nazism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Obama]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Raoul Wallenberg]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=139254</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[An enduring symbol of individual initiative, freedom and the sanctity of the individual against the all-powerful state.]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/raoul.jpg"><img class="alignleft size-full wp-image-139257" title="raoul" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/raoul.jpg" alt="" width="306" height="436" /></a><em>Editor&#8217;s note: August 4, 2012 marks the centennial birthday of World War II hero, Raoul Wallenberg. The following article commemorates his life and legacy. </em></p>
<p>The Colorado movie massacre was a tragedy and the worst mass shooting in U.S. history. It’s still in the news. Every commentator and so-called social science authority has a theory and root cause analysis. Worst of all, people are politicizing the issue. New York Mayor Bloomberg, along with his call for banning super-sized sugary drinks, salt, trans fats, cigarettes, baby formula and Orthodox circumcisions, is getting up on his soap box for stricter gun control. Every cockroach is coming out of the woodwork to sound off. Nassau County Congresswoman Carolyn McCarthy, who never speaks in public, is also suddenly grandstanding gun control, her one-issue agenda. Liberal commentators are blaming everyone from Bush for overturning the assault weapons ban and the Colorado Tea Party as the cause of the shooting. But all this grandstanding is just deflecting us from the real issues. The real issues affecting America that no one wants to talk about are what we are going to talk about here. It’s a message of truth, hope and strength for the Tea Party and for freedom loving people everywhere.</p>
<p>I am involved in a community project in Queens, New York, to place a statue of Raoul Wallenberg, one of the foremost heroes of WWII, at the Holocaust Center at Queensborough Community College.  The message of his life and legacy is particularly germane to the Tea Party which is all about individual initiative, constitutionally limited government and free enterprise. Raoul Wallenberg epitomizes individual initiative, freedom and the sanctity of the individual against the all-powerful state.</p>
<p>Comfortable in his affluent Swedish homeland, while nearly everyone was steeped a culture of denial and submission, Wallenberg was alarmed and stood up fearlessly taking action during WWII when millions of Jews were being rounded up and sent to be slaughtered in the Nazi death camps. Jews were considered traitors and sub-human parasites in Hitler’s Germany and civilized people in German and European high society turned away from the horrors of the concentration camps believing it can’t happen here.</p>
<p>Jews were well off and no one wanted to believe that millions of European Jews were being massacred right next door. Life was comfortable outside the war zone in Wallenberg’s homeland of Sweden and good people believed they were insignificant and powerless in the face of Hitler’s mighty authoritarian state. But Wallenberg, a righteous Christian stood up alone against all odds and became a heroic figure in the fight of good against hatred and evil saving 100,000 Hungarian Jews from extermination toward the closing days of WWII.</p>
<p>He stood eyeball to eyeball with Nazi colonel Adolf Eichmann in Hungary, who was charged with rounding up all the Hungarian Jewish men women and children, the remaining large concentration of Jews left alive in Europe in the last days of WWII, and deporting them to the Auschwitz and Birkenau concentration camps in neighboring Poland for slaughter. He bluntly told Eichmann you cannot kill the Jews and that he, Raoul Wallenberg would stop him. He did so with the spirit of his fierce determination and diplomacy and the bold strategy of issuing 1000’s of protective Swedish passports to Hungarian Jews. He was the hero that appeared in times of great danger to win the battle against great evil. We will be erecting the statue at Queensborough Community College, the first Wallenberg memorial on a U.S. college campus, to model his life as an example for our youth and all good people to follow today.</p>
<p>Fast forward to the present. Today we are beaten down by the growing power of the state. We live in a communist state in the USA run by the ruling elites. Communism, Nazism, Fascism, Islamism are all the same. They are all about big government control by an authoritarian party. They function to eradicate the people’s freedom of speech, thought, property, guns and money and place total power in the hands of the minority elites, destroying the middle class in the process, leaving just the peasants and the ruling class.</p>
<p>Obama’s first term is the tip of the iceberg. Today our conditions are very much like pre-war Nazi Germany when Hitler rose to power, was appointed chancellor and started nationalizing the banks, auto industry and healthcare and then seized absolute power.</p>
<p>Similarly Obama took control of the auto industry, the banks and nationalized healthcare. The state now controls the schools, the press, our cultural institutions, our healthcare and large sectors of the economy. Our freedoms are being stripped away. Soon the internet will be a tool of the government and free enterprise will no longer be free. They will soon seize control of our property, our money through undue taxation, our guns and our total welfare from cradle to grave.  Government is the biggest criminal element in the world. The government is stealing your money, not the rich, not Bain Capital, not the banks.</p>
<p>Obama is the master of manipulating the system for power. Nine million people are now on the federal disability rolls. It has increased five million since Obama took office. People are gaming the system with back problems, depression and anxiety so they can collect lifetime disability payments, encouraged by the Obama administration, since it takes millions of people off the unemployment statistics who are not counted as unemployed. This keeps the unemployment numbers down, a key economic indicator for the coming presidential election. Likewise, 46 million people are on food stamps. Food stamp commercials, on TV for the first time in U.S. history, are Obama’s taxpayer funded campaign commercials, since people getting government handouts will vote to have them continue. And over 100 million people are now getting welfare payments from the government. This 35% of the American people are guaranteed votes come Election Day. National security secrets were leaked by the White House putting the lives of our field agents in jeopardy in order to boost Obama’s national security resume.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2012/phil-orenstein/raoul-wallenberg%e2%80%99s-legacy-for-america%e2%80%99s-patriots/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>11</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Freedom Center Hits Back Against BDS in New York Times Ad</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2012/frontpagemag-com/freedom-center-hits-back-against-bds-in-new-york-times-ad/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=freedom-center-hits-back-against-bds-in-new-york-times-ad</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2012/frontpagemag-com/freedom-center-hits-back-against-bds-in-new-york-times-ad/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 27 Apr 2012 04:55:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Frontpagemag.com]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Anti-Semitism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[BDS]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[boycott]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Israel]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[nazism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[New York Times]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=130195</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The Freedom Center names names in a hard-hitting ad -- and David Horowitz goes toe-to-toe with two of its critics. ]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><em>Editor&#8217;s note: To spread awareness of the eliminationist agenda of the anti-Israel Boycott/Divestment/Sanctions (BDS) movement and its elite supporters in the American university system, the David Horowitz Freedom Center placed the following ad in the op-ed section of the April 24, 2012 edition of </em>The New York Times<em>. The ad elicited objections from numerous </em>Times<em> readers, some of which are printed below the ad along with responses from David Horowitz. </em></p>
<p><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/poh-ad1.gif"><img class="aligncenter size-full wp-image-130199" title="poh-ad" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/poh-ad1.gif" alt="" width="500" height="640" /></a></p>
<p><strong>Response from <em>Times</em> reader Robert P. Khoury:</strong></p>
<p>I read your ad on today’s Op-ed page of the NY Times.  I am curious just what arguments/statements by the BDS contributed “to the atmosphere of hate that spawned these and other murders of Jews.”  Presumably, if one disagrees with a statement of the Israeli President or Foreign Minister, or simply disagrees with a policy such as allowing continuing settlement on the West Bank, one is allowed to express one’s opposition, correct?  What were the statements that contributed to the slaughter of the people in Toulouse?  Did not the murderer also kill non-Jews in his rampage before the slaughter at the synagogue?  Why does the ad assume that the murderer was not beyond crazy—he also killed a Muslim correct?  The ad connects dots that I have not seen in newspapers.  I would like to see substantiation of the accusations.</p>
<p>As someone who does not want anyone driven into the sea, but as someone who does not believe in bigotry, I have thrown up my hands about the Middle East.  I have read quotes in the NY Times from speeches by both the Iranian President and the Israeli Foreign Minister.  Except for substituting/changing one word:  Jew or Muslim, they were nearly identical, full of what I would call outright bigotry.  I do not see anyone leading the charge to get rid of the bigotry of the Israeli Foreign Minister, as they should as far as I am concerned.  [You can get rid of the Iranian President as far as I am concerned.]    I remember when some leaders in the Middle East were not bigots, something that does not appear to be the case today.   Abba Eban, for example.  The former King of Jordan, whose name is escaping me at the moment.</p>
<p>It would seem to me that if any country has a bigot as its leader or foreign minister, that country should be called on it, correct?</p>
<p>Please provide me with examples of language of BDS that somehow influenced the murderer.  If you cannot substantiate your allegations, then your group, as well intended as it may be, is just more noise being added to the problems in the Middle East and is not being helpful.</p>
<p>I look forward to your response.  Thank you.</p>
<p>Robert P. Khoury<br />
Los Angeles, CA</p>
<p><strong>Reply to Robert Khoury from David Horowitz:</strong></p>
<p>Excuse me, but Palestinian leaders have openly called for the extermination of the Jews and the obliteration of the Jewish state in so many words. Where is the Israeli leader who has said anything remotely comparable? Israel&#8217;s leaders have offered the Palestinians a state more than once, and continue to promote a two-state solution. Name me one Palestinian leader who supports the existence of the Jewish state. So don&#8217;t tell me there&#8217;s anything remotely parallel on both sides of this conflict. There is one side that wants peace and has already made enormous sacrifices and compromises to achieve peace (surrender of the Sinai, failure to annex the aggressors territories on the West Bank and in Gaza, unilateral withdrawal from Gaza and so forth). On the other side are religious xenophobes who have conducted a 60 year war whose stated goal is to destroy the Jewish state and who have either openly called for or have not condemned calls from Hamas, Hizbollah and Iran for the extermination of the Jews.</p>
<p>*</p>
<p><strong>Response from <em>Times</em> reader Jay Gillen:</strong></p>
<p>Friends,</p>
<p>As a Jew and supporter of Israel, I was concerned and saddened by your advertisement today on the NY Times op-ed page.</p>
<p>I fully understand your disagreement with the divestment movement, and I also understand the parallel with Nazi and other anti-Semitic economic attacks on Jews.</p>
<p>It is wrong, however, to equate the divestment movement with anti-Semitism.</p>
<p>There must be a way to criticize Israeli policy without being labelled an anti-Semite or supporter of anti-Semites. We must enlarge the dialogue about Israel in such a way that people can speak together, act politically without violence, communicate, and not attribute motives that put the &#8220;other&#8221; into the category of evil.</p>
<p>I think you agree with me, and in fact that you reject the divestment movement precisely because it seems to attack Israelis as &#8220;evil&#8221;. There are anti-Semites. They do hate Jews and Israel. They do take comfort from the divestment movement. But the professors you mention are not anti-Semites and do not hate Jews. You should be able to distinguish them from others. And you should not hate them, even if you believe they hate you. Disagree with them, if you choose; but disagree on the merits of their arguments, not by associating them with the truly evil. Let us have done with that as a tactic, on our side at least.</p>
<p>Thank you for your attention.</p>
<p>Jay Gillen, Ph.D.<br />
Baltimore, Maryland</p>
<p><strong>Reply from David Horowitz:</strong></p>
<p>With all due respect you need to familiarize yourself with the sponsors, spokespeople and agendas of the BDS movement before drawing such facile and comforting conclusions. This is Hamas in action and its agenda is the liberation of &#8220;Palestine&#8221; from the river to the sea &#8212; in other words the destruction of the Jewish state. It is not about policies of the Israeli government which can be amended. It is about the &#8220;crime&#8221; of Israel&#8217;s very existence. To support such a movement you have to be ignorant and a dupe, or an anti-Semite. I grant you that there is a sucker born every minute and there may be several in this movement. But the organizers of the BDS conference are not among them.</p>
<p><strong>Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: <a href="http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Ddigital-text&amp;field-keywords=david+horowitz&amp;rh=n%3A133140011%2Ck%3Adavid+horowitz&amp;ajr=0#/ref=sr_st?keywords=david+horowitz&amp;qid=1316459840&amp;rh=n%3A133140011%2Ck%3Adavid+horowitz&amp;sort=daterank">Click here</a>.</strong></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2012/frontpagemag-com/freedom-center-hits-back-against-bds-in-new-york-times-ad/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>99</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Oxford&#8217;s Nazi Scientists</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2012/bruce-bawer/oxfords-nazi-scientists/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=oxfords-nazi-scientists</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2012/bruce-bawer/oxfords-nazi-scientists/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 05 Mar 2012 04:15:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Bruce Bawer]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[disabled]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[infanticide]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[killing newborns]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Melbourne]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[nazism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Oxford]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Philip K. Dick]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=124492</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Elite "medical ethicists" take a page out of horrifying science fiction novels.]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/15519374.gif"><img class="alignleft size-full wp-image-124494" title="15519374" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/15519374.gif" alt="" width="375" height="245" /></a>In my teenage years, I was a devout fan of science fiction.  I subscribed to several science-fiction magazines, which I read from cover to cover, and belonged to a science-fiction book club.  I don&#8217;t know how many science-fiction novels and stories I devoured during that time.  Hundreds, at least, maybe thousands.</p>
<p>I wasn&#8217;t interested in the inane cosmic-cowboy stuff that reached its apotheosis in the <em>Star Wars </em>series<em>.  </em>No, the stories that made me keep coming back for more were the ones that made me think, wonder, look at the world afresh, recognize connections across time and space, contemplate the nature of consciousness, and confront moral questions that I had never thought about before.  In many ways, the best science-fiction writers seemed to me to have more to say about questions of real urgency and timeliness than did some of the far more respected “literary” writers of the day.</p>
<p>One story that affected me in the way I&#8217;ve described was Ray Bradbury&#8217;s “A Sound of Thunder,” about a man who uses a time machine to travel back thousands of years, inadvertently kills a butterfly, and upon returning to his own time finds everything changed – subtly, darkly – as a result of that action.  Other such stories were Arthur C. Clarke&#8217;s “The Star” and “The Nine Billion Names of God.” And Isaac Asimov&#8217;s “Nightfall.” (Weirdly, despite the fact that I read hundreds of writers during those years, it wouldn&#8217;t be until much later that I would discover, and revere, the masterly Robert Heinlein.)</p>
<p>But there was no writer who awed me more than Philip K. Dick – and no story that had a more powerful impact on me than Dick&#8217;s “The Pre-Persons,” which I read upon its first appearance in <em>The Magazine of Fantasy and Science Fiction </em>in October 1974, the month I turned eighteen.  The story takes place in a time in the near future when abortion is not only legal, but has been redefined in such a way that parents may “abort” their children up until age twelve.  The opening image has stayed with me ever since: a boy who is out playing in the park sees the “abortion truck” heading for some home in his neighborhood and, fearing it is coming for him, sequesters himself in some bushes until he realizes, to his relief, that the “abortion” victim in question is someone other than himself.</p>
<p>The story, which appeared on the heels of the landmark Supreme Court decision in <em>Roe v. Wade, </em>had a powerful impact not just on me but on countless other readers. Implicitly. it was making a slippery-slope argument about abortion: if it&#8217;s acceptable to kill a fetus, why not a newborn?  If not a newborn, why not a child of two, or four, or eight, or ten?  Where to draw the line?</p>
<p>If I had ever taken lightly the concept of abortion, Dick&#8217;s story made certain that I never would do so again.  Some readers of Dick&#8217;s story were enraged, including his fellow science-fiction writer Joanna Russ.  As Dick later <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Pre-persons">recounted</a>, “The Pre-Persons” caused him to incur “the absolute hate of Joanna Russ who wrote me the nastiest letter I&#8217;ve ever received; at one point she said she usually offered to beat up people (she didn&#8217;t use the word &#8216;people&#8217;) who expressed opinions such as this.”</p>
<p>Just now, because I was writing this piece, I did some Googling and actually managed to find Dick&#8217;s story <a href="http://www.octobot.net/library/Dick,%20Philip%20K/Dick,%20Philip%20K%20-%20The%20Eye%20of%20Sibyl%20and%20Other%20Stories.pdf">online</a>.  I was surprised how quickly I turned into an emotional basket case after I began re-reading it for the first time in decades.  It is just that powerful.  (I also discovered, to my surprise, that Dick&#8217;s story inspired the subplot of a 1998 <a href="http://www.spscriptorium.com/Season2/E202script.htm">episode</a> of <em>South Park </em>in which Cartman&#8217;s mother looks into the possibility of having her son “aborted” in the fortieth trimester.  I&#8217;m a big <em>South Park </em>fan, but I missed that one.)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2012/bruce-bawer/oxfords-nazi-scientists/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>38</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Harvard’s Academic Pogrom</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2012/steven-plaut/harvard%e2%80%99s-academic-pogrom/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=harvard%25e2%2580%2599s-academic-pogrom</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2012/steven-plaut/harvard%e2%80%99s-academic-pogrom/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 22 Feb 2012 04:45:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Steven Plaut]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Anti-Semitism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Arabs]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Conference]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Harvard]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Hitler]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Israel]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[nazism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[One-State solution]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[palestinians]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=123114</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The university's upcoming Destroy Israel conference.]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/Harvard1.gif"><img class="aligncenter size-full wp-image-123123" title="Harvard" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/Harvard1.gif" alt="" width="375" height="246" /></a></p>
<p>Harvard University is a school of rich tradition. And in a few days it will be restoring a great Harvard tradition dating back to the 1930s: the tradition of hosting Nazis and violent anti-Semites on campus seeking the mass murder of Jews.</p>
<p>Harvard is <a href="http://www.onestateconference.org/speakers.html">to hold a pseudo-academic conference</a> devoted to calls for Israel’s extermination. This “academic conference” will be little more than a genteel campus pogrom. Misnamed the “One State Conference,” it will definitely <em>not</em> have any discussion of any “one-state solution” under which all of Western “Palestine” remains one single Jewish state, while “Palestinians” unhappy about living there as a political minority move to one of the 22 Arab states. When the conference organizers and speakers talk about a “one-state solution,” what they mean is a Rwanda solution, a final one, to the “Jewish Problem” of the Middle East. They want Israel annihilated and replaced by a “bi-national” state with an Islamist Arab majority in control. And it does not take a great imagination to understand just how Jews will fare under such a “solution.”</p>
<p>Naturally, Harvard is defending this campus atrocity with the usual protestations about academic freedom and freedom of speech. The administrators who justify such open and violent bigotry in the guise of an academic conference are the very same people who never seem to express any objections when campus hooligans disrupt and harass talks by Israeli diplomats and rallies by Jewish students. Harvard administrators would be the first ones in the Ivy League to shut down as “hate speech” any “conference” devoted to proving that black people have lower IQs than others, that called for evicting all illegal Hispanics from the nation, or that promoted the view that homosexuality is a mental disorder.</p>
<p>In any case, a brief review of pedigrees of the participants in this “conference” illustrates just how clearly this is to be nothing more than a bash-the-Jews campus crusade.</p>
<p>The “star” of the Harvard pogrom will be Ilan Pappe, who is arguably the most <a href="http://isracampus.org.il/third+level+pages/third+level+pages/outside+Israel+-+Exeter+-+Ilan+Pappe+-+gets+pass.htm">thoroughly discredited pseudo-academic</a> on the planet. Pappe is a <a href="http://www.camera.org/index.asp?x_print=1&amp;x_context=8&amp;x_nameinnews=122&amp;x_article=994">notorious fabricator</a>, someone who <a href="http://www.camera.org/index.asp?x_context=2&amp;x_outlet=38&amp;x_article=1299">claims proudly that facts</a> and truth are of no importance. &#8220;Indeed the struggle is about ideology, not about facts. Who knows what facts are? We try to convince as many people as we can that our interpretation of the facts is the correct one, and we do it because of ideological reasons, not because we are truthseekers,&#8221; the French newspaper <em>Le Soir</em>, has cited Pappe as saying.</p>
<p>Pappe is an expatriate Israeli who devoted one of his “books” to his sons with the wish that they may grow up in a world without Israel. His own University of Exeter recently <a href="http://isracampus.org.il/third+level+pages/outside+Israel+-+Exeter+-+Ilan+Pappe+-+gets+pass.htm">chastised him</a> for his infamous habit of playing fast and loose with facts. Pappe is best known as a fulltime anti-Israel propagandist who <a href="http://www.bintjbeil.com/articles/en/021020_pappe.html">has done more than any</a> other <a href="https://israel.indymedia.org/newswire/display/5305/index.php">anti-Israel Israeli</a> to promote the moral equivalence of &#8220;Nakba denial&#8221; with Holocaust denial. (For those who are unaware, &#8220;Nakba,&#8221; meaning &#8220;catastrophe,&#8221; is the term Arabs use to refer to Israel&#8217;s birth.) He is a &#8220;<a href="http://www.meforum.org/article/302">new historian</a>&#8221; in the sense of pseudo-historian. His mission in life is to invent an imaginary Palestinian historic “narrative.” Nearly all those <a href="http://www.dissidentvoice.org/Mar07/Petersen18.htm">beating the &#8220;Nakba</a>&#8221; drum today <a href="http://www.counterpunch.org/bendor05212005.html">cite Pappe</a> and his books about the supposed &#8220;<a href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1851684670/002-5347975-9078422?ie=UTF8&amp;tag=dissidentvoic-20&amp;linkCode=xm2&amp;camp=1789&amp;creativeASIN=1851684670">ethnic cleansing</a>&#8221; of Arabs by Israel in its war of independence.</p>
<p>Pappe was a lecturer in political science at the University of Haifa, but moved to resume <a href="http://isracampus.org.il/third+level+pages/third+level+pages/outside+Israel+-+Exeter+-+Ilan+Pappe+-+another+Final+Solution.htm">a pseudo-academic propagandist position</a> at the University of Exeter in the UK. Even other<a href="http://www.tnr.com/doc.mhtml?i=20040322&amp;s=morris032204"> anti-Zionists</a> have repudiated Pappe as a <a href="http://www.meforum.org/article/897">liar and fabricator</a>. <a href="http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=16099">He openly calls</a> for Israel to be exterminated and <a href="http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1173879227334&amp;pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull">endorses Hamas</a> terrorism. He <a href="http://ww4report.com/node/1826">considers Noam Chomsky</a> insufficiently anti-Israel.</p>
<p>Pappe, who ran for the parliament in Israel on the slate of the Stalinist communist party and played a <a href="http://www.camera.org/index.asp?x_context=7&amp;x_issue=55&amp;x_article=991">central role</a> in fomenting boycotts of Israel in the UK and elsewhere, was also the central figure in <a href="http://www.weeklystandard.com/Utilities/printer_preview.asp?idArticle=99&amp;R=EB972A018">the now infamous &#8220;Tantura Affair</a>.&#8221; In this incident, Pappe coached a graduate student of his <a href="http://www.meforum.org/article/87">into inventing</a> a non-existent &#8220;massacre&#8221; of Arabs by the Hagana Jewish militia (Alexandroni Brigade) in Tantura, south of Haifa, a &#8220;massacre&#8221; that Pappe claims took place in 1948. Not a shred of any evidence for any such &#8220;massacre&#8221; exists. Arab and other journalists who were present at the time of the battle that took place in Tantura reported no massacre. Arabs living in the town at the time confirmed that a battle did occur, but that after the battle the Jewish militiamen aided and assisted the townspeople, not massacring anyone. The graduate student in question was sued for libel by the veterans of the Hagana militia. He later <a href="http://www.weeklystandard.com/Utilities/printer_preview.asp?idArticle=99&amp;R=EB972A018">admitted in court</a> with his lawyer present that the entire massacre was an invention.</p>
<p>No matter – Pappe <a href="http://mediacrity.blogspot.com/2005/06/tharoor-does-it-again-this-time-its.html">roams the world</a> and continues to spread the lie about the imaginary Tantura &#8220;massacre,&#8221; a lie that has found its way into nearly every <a href="http://www.palestineremembered.com/Haifa/al-Tantura/Story560.html">anti-Semitic web site</a> and <a href="http://www.zundelsite.org/english/news/070410_Arnold_Zionism.php">Neo-Nazi magazine</a> on Earth, and even a <a href="http://hnn.us/roundup/entries/41768.html">handful of otherwise respectable mainstream</a> journalists foolishly rely upon him. Pappe has lied about practically everything else, including about <a href="http://www.monabaker.com/pMachine/more.php?id=A2812_0_1_0_M">being &#8220;persecuted</a>&#8221; by <a href="http://archive.ramallahonline.com/modules.php?name=News&amp;file=article&amp;sid=2095">his own university</a> in Israel. In fact, Pappe was never fired for his fraud and fabrication by <a href="http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/pages/ShArt.jhtml?itemNo=167664">the University of Haifa</a>, although he should have been. (Some wags even suggested the university should be boycotted for <em>not</em> firing Pappe.) That did not stop Pappe from <a href="http://www.zionismontheweb.org/AUT/arguments.htm">waving his stigmata</a> as a &#8220;victim of Zionism&#8221; before the European anti-Semites <a href="http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/pages/ShArt.jhtml?itemNo=569361">promoting &#8220;divestment</a>&#8221; from Israel. His recruitment by the University of Exeter proves how indifferent that school is to scholarly standards. His coming appearance as the star of the Harvard academic pogrom shows that things are not much better there.</p>
<p>While Pappe may be the most notorious fabricator at Harvard’s Destroy Israel Conference, he is hardly the only one. A close runner-up will be Stephen M. Walt, who – along with his sidekick John Mearsheimer – is best known for proliferating medieval “theories” about a grand Jewish cabal plotting to control the world. Walt and Mearsheimer spin yarns about the imaginary power of the “Jewish lobby” that sound very much like German propaganda from the 1930s. It would be an exaggeration to say that there is no Israel lobby whatsoever in the United States, but only a small exaggeration. The “Israel lobby” does not come up to the pinky toes in terms of the power of the farm lobby and the teachers union lobby. Walt’s partner Mearsheimer has been in the news the past few weeks for <a href="http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2011/09/john-mearsheimer-endorses-a-hitler-apologist-and-holocaust-revisionist/245518">endorsing</a> and <a href="http://www.commentarymagazine.com/article/the-big-lie-returns">celebrating</a> a notoriously deranged British Israel-born Holocaust denier, Gilad Atzmon. Walt <a href="http://walt.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2011/09/25/mearsheimer_responds_to_goldbergs_latest_smear">also defends Mearsheimer’s choice of Nazi chums on his own personal</a> blog.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2012/steven-plaut/harvard%e2%80%99s-academic-pogrom/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>24</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Understanding the Islam in Muslim Jew-Hatred, Part II</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2012/mark-tapson/understanding-the-islam-in-muslim-jew-hatred-part-ii/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=understanding-the-islam-in-muslim-jew-hatred-part-ii</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2012/mark-tapson/understanding-the-islam-in-muslim-jew-hatred-part-ii/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 24 Jan 2012 04:03:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Mark Tapson]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Anti-Semitism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Islam]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Jihad]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[koran]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[nazism]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=120151</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Scholar Andrew Bostom discusses Islam's nexus with Nazism.]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/antis1.jpg"><img class="aligncenter size-full wp-image-120159" title="antis" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/antis1.jpg" alt="" width="450" height="642" /></a></p>
<p>Yesterday FrontPage Magazine ran <a href="http://frontpagemag.com/2012/01/23/understanding-the-islam-in-muslim-jew-hatred/">the first part of this interview </a>with scholar of Islam Andrew Bostom, on the roots of Islamic Jew-hatred. In this second and final part, Dr. Bostom details the facts about the often-misunderstood connection between Islam and Nazism, and describes his new upcoming book, <em>Sharia versus Freedom – The Legacy of Islamic Totalitarianism </em>(to be published by Sept 2012 with a foreword by the incomparable Andrew C. McCarthy).</p>
<p><a href="http://www.andrewbostom.org/blog/">Andrew Bostom</a>, M.D., M.S., is an Associate Professor of Medicine at Rhode Island Hospital, the major teaching affiliate of Brown University Medical School. He is the author of two essential, extraordinary, and meticulously documented works of scholarship, <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Legacy-Jihad-Islamic-Holy-Non-Muslims/dp/1591023076/ref=sr_1_1/102-8993833-1476108?ie=UTF8&amp;s=books&amp;qid=1184607889&amp;sr=1-1"><em>The Legacy of Jihad</em></a> and <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Legacy-Islamic-Antisemitism-Sacred-History/dp/1591025540/ref=sr_1_3/102-8993833-1476108?ie=UTF8&amp;s=books&amp;qid=1179229261&amp;sr=1-3"><em>The Legacy of Islamic Antisemitism</em></a>. He has published articles and commentary on Islam here on FrontPage and in the Washington Times, National Review Online, Revue Politique, American Thinker, and elsewhere in print and online.</p>
<p>This Tuesday in Los Angeles, Dr. Bostom will present “Understanding the Islam in Muslim Jew-Hatred.” <a href="http://www.cjhsla.org/2012/01/05/understanding-the-islam-in-muslim-jew-hatred-tues-jan-24/">See here for information about attending</a>.</p>
<p><strong>Mark Tapson</strong>: <em>Dr. Bostom,</em><em> some say that modern Islamic anti-Semitism was shaped by the influence of Nazism – but isn’t it the other way around? Can you elaborate on their symbiotic relationship?</em></p>
<p><strong>AB:</strong> There are concordances between Nazism and jihadism over an historical continuum evident since the advent of the Nazi movement. This nexus was already apparent in Hitler’s own observations from 1926, elaborated upon over the following decades by both the Nazi leader, and other key Nazi officials, and ideologues. Not surprisingly, there are two predominant, recurring themes in this discourse: jihad as total war, and the annihilationist jihad against the Jews.</p>
<p>Perhaps the earliest recorded evidence of Hitler’s serious interest in the jihad was provided by Muhammad ‘Inayat Allah Khan (who adopted the pen name “al-Mashriqi”—“the Orientalist” or “the Sage of the East”). Born in the Punjab in 1888, al-Mashriqi was a Muslim polymath who attended Cambridge on a government scholarship, and excelled in the study of oriental languages, mathematics, engineering, and the sciences.</p>
<p>Not only did Mashriqi translate the standard abridged version of Mein Kampf (then commonly available) from English into Urdu, during one of his sojourns in Europe, which included time spent in Berlin, he met Hitler in the early years of the Fuehrer’s leadership of the National Socialist [Nazi] Party. Their meeting took place in 1926 at the National Library. <sup>4k</sup> Here is the gist of Mashriqi’s report on his interaction with Hitler as described in a letter to the renowned scholar of Indian Islam, J.M.S. Baljon:</p>
<blockquote><p>I was astounded when he [Hitler] told me that he knew about my Tazkirah. The news flabbergasted me. . . I found him very congenial and piercing. He discussed Islamic Jihad with me in details. In 1930 I sent him my Isharat concerning the Khaksar movement with a picture of a spade-bearer Khaksar at the end of that book. In 1933 he started his Spade Movement.</p></blockquote>
<p>Mashriqi also wrote this independent summary of his 1926 encounter with Hitler on May 31, 1935:</p>
<blockquote><p>If I had known that this was the very man who was to become Germany’s savior I would have fallen around Hitler’s neck, but on the occasion I was engaged in small talk and tried to find out what he understood about Germany’s weakness at the time. Professor [Weil, the host] said, introducing Hitler to me: “This is also a very important man, an activist from the Worker’s Party.” We shook hands and Hitler said, pointing to a book that was lying on the table: “I had a chance to read your al-Tazkirah.” Little did I understand at that time, what should have been clear to me when he said these words! The astonishing similarities—or shall we say the unintentional similarity between two great minds—between Hitler’s great book and the teachings of my Tazkirah and Isharat embolden me, because the fifteen years of “struggle” of the author {Hitler] of “My Struggle” [Mein Kampf] have now actually led his nation back to success. But only after leading his nation to the intended goal, has he disclosed his movement’s rules and obligations to the world; only after fifteen years has he made the means of success widely known. It is possible that he has arrived at those means and doctrines by trial and error, but it should be absolutely clear that Mashriqi [referring to himself in the third person] has identified those means and doctrines in al-Tazkirah a full nine years and in the Isharat a full three years before the success of the Nazi movement, simply by following the shining guidance of the Holy Koran.</p></blockquote>
<p>Albert Speer, who was Hitler’s Minister of Armaments and War Production, wrote a contrite memoir of his World War II experiences while serving a 20-year prison sentence imposed by the Nuremberg tribunal. Speer’s narrative includes a discussion which captures Hitler’s effusive praise for Islam, “…a religion that believed in spreading the faith by the sword and subjugating all nations to that faith. Such a creed was perfectly suited to the Germanic temperament.” Hitler, according to Speer’s account, repeatedly expressed the conviction that, “The Mohammedan religion…would have been much more compatible to us than Christianity. Why did it have to be Christianity with its meekness and flabbiness?” These sentiments were also expressed by Hitler to Dr. Herman Neubacher, the first Nazi Mayor of Vienna, and subsequently, a special delegate of the Nazi regime in southeastern Europe. Neubacher wrote that Hitler had told him Islam was a “male religion,” and reiterated the belief that the Germans would have been far more successful conquerors had they adopted Islam in the Middle Ages. <sup>4t</sup> Additional confirmation of Hitler’s very favorable inclination towards Islam is provided by General Alexander Loehr, a Lutwaffe commander (executed in 1947 for the mass-murders of Yugoslav civilians). Loehr maintained a smiling Hitler had told him that Islam was such a desirable creed the Fuehrer longed for it to become the official SS religion.</p>
<p>Hitler appears to have viewed the uniquely Islamic institution of jihad as an appropriate model for waging genocidal, total war. During the mid to late 19th century, jihad total war campaigns—adapted to the conditions of modern warfare—were waged by the Ottoman Empire against its Bulgarian and Armenian Christian minorities. The Ottoman tactics included innumerable atrocities, mass slaughter, and extensive, murderous deportations. Official Ottoman jihad declarations during World War I assured that the genocidal aspects of Islamic doctrine were “updated” by the application of modern total war offensive doctrines, and directed at the Armenians, in particular. This jihad-inspired policy begot razzias (raids), massacres of villagers, massacres of Armenian conscripts in work battalions, and mass deportations—all representative of an overall total-war strategy implemented by the Ottoman state, and military high command.</p>
<p>And the disintegrating Ottoman Empire’s World War I jihad genocide against its Armenian minority,<sup>  </sup>specifically, served as an “inspirational” precedent to Hitler. During August of 1939, Hitler gave speeches in preparation for the looming invasion of Poland which admonished his military commanders to wage a brutal, merciless campaign, and assure rapid victory. Hitler portrayed the impending invasion as the initial step of a vision to “secure the living space we need,” and ultimately, “redistribute the world.” In an explicit reference to the Armenians, “Who after all is today speaking of the destruction of the Armenians?,” Hitler justified their annihilation (and the world’s consignment of this genocide to oblivion) as an accepted new world order because, “The world believes only in success.”</p>
<p>Vahakn Dadrian—the foremost scholar of the Armenian genocide—observes that although Hitler’s motives in seeking to destroy the Jews were not identical with those of the Ottoman Turks’ in their attempts to eliminate the Armenians, “…the two victim nations share one common element in Hitler’s scheme of things: their extreme vulnerability.” Moreover, Hitler emphasized the urgent task, “…of protecting the German blood from contamination, not only of the Jewish but also of the Armenian blood.” Predictable impunity—the ease with which the Armenian genocide was committed and how the perpetrators escaped retributive justice—clearly impressed Hitler and his henchmen, considering a similar action against the Jews. Indeed, the German Jew, Richard Lictheim who as a young Zionist leader had negotiated with Ottoman leaders in Turkey during World War I, characterized the “…cold-bloodedly planned extermination of over one million Armenians…[as] akin to Hitler’s crusade of destruction against the Jews…” And as historian Abram Sachar noted, “…the genocide was cited approvingly twenty-five years later by the Fuehrer…who found the Armenian ‘solution’ an attractive precedent.”</p>
<p>Heinrich Himmler, head of the SS (Nazi Secret Service), and eventually all German police forces, was another champion of Islam’s singular bellicosity. Accordingly, Himmler foresaw that within the framework of the Waffen-SS, several Muslim divisions would be created to wage jihad “shoulder to shoulder” with Nazi and Axis power soldiers. Himmler was the guiding force behind the establishment of a Waffen-SS 13th (later dubbed Handzar) Division—comprised exclusively of Muslims from Bosnia and Herzegovina. He argued in support of the creation of this Muslim division that the global Islamic community (umma) was very sympathetic to Nazism, and that the targeted Balkan Muslims had a special consciousness of their Muslim Bosnian-Herzegovinian identity. Indeed, Himmler and his collaborators believed that these Balkan Muslims were ideally suited to forge a nexus between the Nazi Germanic “racial north,” and the Islamic east. SS General Gottlob Berger described how Himmler’s creation of the Handzar division was the apotheosis of this vision:</p>
<blockquote><p>For the first time a connection is being established between Islam and National Socialism on an open, honest base, since it will be ruled from the North where blood and race are concerned, and from the East ideologically and spiritually.</p></blockquote>
<p>As the ultimate fulfillment of his vision, Himmler also strove to re-create a contemporary version of the Ottoman Muslim devshirme levy [the Ottoman practice of expropriating some 500,000 to 1 million Balkan Christian children during a period of 300 years, forcibly converting them to Islam, and making them slave soldiers—“janissaries”—waging jihad against their indigenous Christian societies), and form a modern janissary corps, not only in Bosnia-Herzegovina, but the Sanjak (regions in Serbia and Montenegro), most of Croatia, and the major part of Srem (which includes provinces in Serbia and Croatia between the Danube and Sava rivers). Historian Jennie Lebel describes this effort:</p>
<blockquote><p>In order to supply the Reich on time with a “loyal population” for this planned SS border area [i.e., as outlined above in Bosnia-Herzegovina, Croatia, and Serbia], Himmler gave orders to collect children, male and female, who had been left without one or both parents and send them to Germany in order “to create a kind of Janissaries” and the “future soldiers and soldiers’ women of the old military border of the Reich.” The collection of the children was to be taken care of by the commanders of the Waffen-SS divisions. They had to report once monthly to Himmler personally on the number of children collected. This was stated in two letters by Himmler, one addressed to General Arthur Phleps on May 20, 1944, and the other to General Gottlob Berger on July 14 of the same year. Copies were sent to General Kammerhofer, SS representative for the NDH [Croatia], to General Erwin Rosener in Slovenia, General Hermann Behrends in Serbia and General Herman Foegellein, liason officer of the Waffen-SS with Hitler.</p></blockquote>
<p>Almost 40 years ago (1973/74) Bat Ye’or published a remarkably prescient analysis of the Islamic antisemitism and resurgent jihadism in her native Egypt, being packaged for dissemination throughout the Muslim world. The primary, core Antisemitic and jihadist motifs were Islamic, derived from Islam’s foundational texts, on to which European, especially Nazi elements were grafted.</p>
<p>Nazi academic and propagandist of extermination Johannes von Leers’ writings and personal career trajectory — as a favored contributor in Goebbels’ propaganda ministry, to his eventual adoption of Islam (as Omar Amin von Leers) while working as an anti-Western, and antisemitic/anti-Zionist propagandist under Nasser’s regime from the mid-1950s, until his death in 1965— represents the apotheosis of this convergence of jihad, Islamic antisemitism, and racist, Nazi antisemitism, described by Bat Ye’or.</p>
<p>Upon his arrival in Egypt in 1956, it was the jihadist and Nazi ally, Hajj Amin el-Husseini, former Mufti of Jerusalem, who welcomed von Leers, stating, “We are grateful to you for having come here to resume the struggle against the powers of darkness incarnated by international Judaism.” The ex-Mufti oversaw von Leers’ formal conversion to Islam, and remained one of his confidants. And von Leers described the origins of the Muslim “forename,” Omar Amin, that he adopted as part of his conversion to Islam in a November, 1957 letter to American Nazi H. Keith Thompson,</p>
<blockquote><p>I myself have embraced Islam and accepted the new forename Omar Amin, Omar according to the great Caliph Omar who was a grim enemy of the Jews, Amin in honor of my friend Hajj Amin el Husseini, the Grand Mufti.</p></blockquote>
<p>Already in essays published during 1938 and 1942, the first dating back almost two decades before his conversion to Islam while in Egypt, von Leers produced analyses focused primarily on Muhammad’s interactions with the Jews of Medina. These essays reveal his pious reverence for Islam and its prophet, and a thorough understanding of the sacralized Islamic sources for this narrative, i.e., the Koran, hadith, and sira. which is entirely consistent with standard Muslim apologetics.</p>
<p>Von Leers’ 1942 essay simultaneously extols the “model” of oppression the Jews experienced under Islamic suzerainty, and the nobility of Muhammad, Islam, and the contemporary Muslims of the World War II era, foreshadowing his own conversion to Islam just over a decade later. <sup>21</sup> And even earlier, in a 1938 essay, von Leers sympathized with, “the leading role of the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem in the Arabians’ battles against the Jewish invasion in Palestine.” Von Leers observes that to the pious Muslim,</p>
<blockquote><p>…the Jew is an enemy, not simply an ‘unbeliever’ who might perhaps be converted or, despite the fact that he does not belong to Islam, might still be a person of some estimation. Rather, the Jew is the predestined opponent of the Muslim, one who desired to bring down the work of the Prophet.</p></blockquote>
<p>Von Leers, for example, offers this reverent summary characterization of Muhammad’s activities in Mecca, and later Medina, which is entirely consistent with standard Muslim apologetics:</p>
<blockquote><p>[Mecca] For years Muhammad sought in Mecca to succeed with his preaching that there was only one God, the sole, all-merciful king of Judgment Day. He opposed to the Christian Trinity the unity of God, rejected the Christian doctrine of original sin and salvation, and instead gave every believer as a guiding principle the complete fulfillment of the commands of the righteous, given by a compassionate and just God, before whom every individual person had to account for his acts.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2012/mark-tapson/understanding-the-islam-in-muslim-jew-hatred-part-ii/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>3</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Nazism Returns to Germany</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2012/frontpagemag-com/nazism-returns-to-germany/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=nazism-returns-to-germany</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2012/frontpagemag-com/nazism-returns-to-germany/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 05 Jan 2012 04:00:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Frontpagemag.com]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Anti-Semitism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[german police]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[germany]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[israeli flags]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[nazism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[palestinians]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=118096</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[German police tear down Israeli flags that enrage a Palestinian hate rally in Berlin.]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/pal.jpg"><img class="aligncenter size-full wp-image-118098" title="pal" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/pal.jpg" alt="" width="450" height="255" /></a></p>
<p>German police remove Israeli flags posted in defiance to a Palestinian hate rally in Berlin:</p>
<p><object style="height: 390px; width: 440px;" width="440" height="360" classid="clsid:d27cdb6e-ae6d-11cf-96b8-444553540000" codebase="http://download.macromedia.com/pub/shockwave/cabs/flash/swflash.cab#version=6,0,40,0"><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true" /><param name="allowScriptAccess" value="always" /><param name="src" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/LlWl4KV9Pgg?version=3&amp;feature=player_detailpage" /><param name="allowfullscreen" value="true" /><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always" /><embed style="height: 390px; width: 440px;" width="440" height="360" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" src="http://www.youtube.com/v/LlWl4KV9Pgg?version=3&amp;feature=player_detailpage" allowFullScreen="true" allowScriptAccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" allowscriptaccess="always" /></object></p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2012/frontpagemag-com/nazism-returns-to-germany/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>72</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The Last Best Hope</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2010/dennis-prager/the-last-best-hope/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=the-last-best-hope</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2010/dennis-prager/the-last-best-hope/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 26 May 2010 04:01:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Dennis Prager]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Arizona]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[branches of christianity]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Cambodia]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[China]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Christian]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Christian Auschwitzes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Christian Gulags]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[christian leaders]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Christian West]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Communism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Congo]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[cruelty]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[East Jerusalem]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[enlightened thinking]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[european christians]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[false propaganda]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[genocides]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Iran]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Left]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[man woman and child]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Mexico]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[moral progress]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[nazism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[opinion]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[reason]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Religion]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[religious left]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Russia]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Rwanda]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[secular]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[secular world]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Syria]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[today]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[turkey]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Ukraine]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Western Islam]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[World]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=61098</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The world is a cruel place -- and if America weakens, it will get crueler.]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/05/american_flag4.jpg"><img class="aligncenter size-full wp-image-61138" title="american_flag4" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/05/american_flag4.jpg" alt="" width="375" height="284" /></a></p>
<p>One of the many beliefs — i.e., non-empirically based doctrines — of the post-Christian West has been that moral progress is the human norm, especially so with the demise of religion. In a secular world, the self-described enlightened thinking goes, superstition is replaced by reason, and reason leads to the moral good.</p>
<p>Of course, it turned out that the post-Christian West produced considerably more evil than the Christian world had. No mass cruelty in the name of Christianity approximated the vastness of the cruelty unleashed by secular doctrines and regimes in the post-Christian world. The argument against religion that more people have been killed in the name of religion than by any other doctrine is false propaganda on behalf of secularism and Leftism.</p>
<p>The amount of evil done by Christians — against, for example, &#8220;heretics&#8221; and Jews — in both the Western and Eastern branches of Christianity — was extensive, as was the failure of most European Christians to see Nazism for the evil that it was. The good news is that Christian evils have been acknowledged and addressed by most Christian leaders and thinkers.</p>
<p>But there were never any Christian Auschwitzes — i.e., systematic genocides of every man, woman and child of a particular race or religion. Nor were there Christian Gulags — the shipping of millions of innocents to conditions so horrific that prolonged suffering leading to death was the almost -inevitable end.</p>
<p>The anti-religious Left offers two responses to these facts: The first is that modern technology made the Nazi and Communist murders of scores of millions possible; had the church been technologically able to do so, it would have made its own Auschwitz and Gulag. The second is that Nazism and Communism were religions and not secular doctrines.</p>
<p>The response to the first is that technology was not necessary for the Communist murders of over a hundred million innocent people in the Soviet Union, China, Cambodia and elsewhere. In Cambodia, millions were murdered with hammers, in Rwanda with machetes.</p>
<p>The response to the second is that Communism and Nazism were secular movements and to deny that is to tell a gargantuan lie. Even if one argues that Nazism and Communism were religions, they were nevertheless secular religions. That too many Christians morally failed when confronted with Nazism is true, but irrelevant to the fact that Nazism was in no way a Christian movement.</p>
<p>And now the post-Christian world is getting worse.</p>
<p>The moral news about the world in which we live is almost unremittingly negative.</p>
<p>Russia</p>
<p>Russia is devoid of a moral values system. Whatever moral role the Russian Orthodox Church played was largely extinguished during the seven decades of Communist suppression of religion. Today, pockets of religious morality notwithstanding, Russia is essentially a nihilistic state. Under the leadership of a former KGB director, Russia now plays a destructive role in world affairs. Russia today is characterized by major arms shipments to Syria, protecting Iran while it becomes a nuclear power, forcing its will on Ukraine and other neighboring states, and the violent suppression of domestic critics who shed any light on the organized crime syndicate that rules the geographically largest nation in the world.</p>
<p>Turkey</p>
<p>The Ataturk Revolution is being undone. Turkey, the country long regarded as the bridge between the West and Islam, is rapidly moving away from the West and to an increasingly anti-Western Islam.</p>
<p>Iran</p>
<p>Iran is ruled by the heirs of Nazism, if that word still means anything after being cheapened by the Left for decades, most recently by the Left&#8217;s comparison of Arizona to a Nazi state. The rulers of Iran boast of their desire to initiate a second Holocaust against the Jews, all the while denying that the first Holocaust took place. And the country&#8217;s treatment of Iranians who seek elementary human freedoms and of Iranian women is among the worst on earth.</p>
<p>Congo</p>
<p>According to all reports, nearly 6 million people have been killed in the Congo in the last decade. The great secular liberal hope in &#8220;humanity&#8221; and &#8220;world opinion&#8221; has once again been shown to be the false hope it is. World opinion and &#8220;humanity&#8221; have rarely done anything to help the truly persecuted.</p>
<p>But there is more to the Congolese genocide — the absence of reporting about it in the world&#8217;s media and its being a non-issue at the United Nations. If an Israeli soldier kills a rock-throwing Palestinian, or even worse, makes plans to build 1,600 apartments in east Jerusalem, the U.N., world opinion and the world media cover it as if it were the primary evil on earth. But the Congolese deaths are barely worth a mention.</p>
<p>Mexico</p>
<p>Mexico is fighting for its life against narcotics gangs that compete with Islamists in their sadism. Mexico could become the largest narco-state in the world. To be a good person in Mexico today, i.e., to oppose the drug lords in any way, is to put oneself in danger of being slowly tortured to death.</p>
<p>Europe</p>
<p>Europe long ago gave up fighting for or believing in anything other than living a life with as much economic security, as many days off and as young a retirement age as possible. World War I killed off European idealism. And whatever remained was destroyed by World War II. What I have written about the Germans is true for nearly all of Europe: Instead of learning to fight evil, Europe has learned that fighting is evil.</p>
<p>Other consequences of European secularism and the demise of non-materialistic ideals include a low birthrate (children cost money and limit the number of fine restaurants in which one can afford to dine), and appeasement of evil. Thus most European nations are slowly disappearing and nearly every European country has compromised Western liberties in order to appease radical Muslims.</p>
<p>Radical Islam</p>
<p>Polls taken in the Muslim world regularly report that about 10 percent of the world&#8217;s Muslims say they support radical Islam — meaning Islamic totalitarianism as practiced by the Taliban and terror as practiced by Al-Qaida. That means at least one hundred million people. Add to that the unspecified number of Muslims who support the Nazi-level and Nazi-like anti-Semitism promulgated in much of the Middle East and you have an enormous body of people committed to the death of the West.</p>
<p>China</p>
<p>As in Russia, traditional Chinese virtues were largely destroyed by Communism, and China, too, is essentially a nihilistic state whose government spends its vast sums of foreign currency in buying influence in some of the cruelest places on earth (Zimbabwe, for example) and protecting the genocide-advocating regime of Iran.</p>
<p>The United Nations</p>
<p>The net result of the United Nations is an increase in evil on earth. Whatever good is performed by some of its institutions, like the World Health Organization or UNICEF, that good is outweighed by the amount of evil the U.N. either abets or allows. It has supervised genocide in Rwanda, done nothing to stop genocide elsewhere (e.g., Congo and Sudan), gives a respectable forum to tyrannies, and is preoccupied with vilifying one of its relatively few humane states, Israel. Its contributing to human suffering is exemplified by Libya being elected to its Human Rights Commission and Iran&#8217;s election to its Commission on the Status of Women.</p>
<p>The United States</p>
<p>The United States was described by President Abraham Lincoln as The Last Best Hope of Earth. Most Americans agreed then. However, with the ascent of the Left in America — in our educational institutions, news and entertainment media, and arts world — fewer and fewer Americans believe this. On the contrary, the Leftist view of America, which pervades American life, is of a country deeply morally compromised by endemic racism, sexism, homophobia, xenophobia, militarism, imperialism and a rapacious capitalism, leading to immoral levels of economic inequality.</p>
<p>As in Europe, these views are leading America to avoid offending its enemies. The American attorney general recently refused to answer a congressman&#8217;s repeated question about whether he believes that radical Islam might have been one factor motivating recent Muslim terrorists in America.</p>
<p>With America more interested in being like Europe and being liked rather than in fighting its enemies, more and more countries are identifying with America&#8217;s enemies than with America. Last week&#8217;s three-way hug among the leaders of Brazil, Turkey and Iran was a clear example of such.</p>
<p>Meanwhile, America is rapidly accumulating unpayable debts that will render it not very different from Greece. Indeed, California, once the grease of the American economy, has become the Greece of the American economy.</p>
<p>As the Left&#8217;s power increases, America&#8217;s power recedes — and the world further deteriorates. Under Democratic Party rule, the Last Best Hope of Earth has decided that the United Nations and Western Europe deserve that title, not the United States.</p>
<p>Those of us working to remove Democrats from power regard this November&#8217;s election as not only a referendum on the direction of America, but of the world itself.</p>
<p><em>Dennis Prager hosts a nationally syndicated radio talk show and is a visiting fellow at the Hoover Institution at Stanford University. He is the author of four books, most recently &#8220;Happiness Is a Serious Problem&#8221; (HarperCollins). His website is www.dennisprager.com.</em></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2010/dennis-prager/the-last-best-hope/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>38</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Tutu&#8217;s Crusade Against Israel</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2010/john-perazzo/desmond-tutus-crusade-against-israels-%e2%80%9capartheid%e2%80%9d/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=desmond-tutus-crusade-against-israels-%25e2%2580%259capartheid%25e2%2580%259d</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2010/john-perazzo/desmond-tutus-crusade-against-israels-%e2%80%9capartheid%e2%80%9d/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 19 May 2010 04:07:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[John Perazzo]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Alison Weir]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[America]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Amin]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Amir-Abdel Malik-Ali]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[apartheid]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[apartheid regime]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Berkeley]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[California]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Cape Town]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Desmond Tutu]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Divest]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[divestment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[end]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Irvine]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Israel]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[israel movement]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Middle East]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[movement]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Muslim]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[muslim students association]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[nazism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Nobel]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[nobel award]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Nobel Peace Prize]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[nobel peace prize winner]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Norman Finkelstein]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Palestine]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[peace prize winner]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[San Diego]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[South Africa]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[state]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[today]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[uc san diego]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[University]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[university of california campuses]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[week]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=60344</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The former South African archbishop embraces the anti-Semitic message on the American campus.]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/05/tutu.jpg"><img class="aligncenter size-full wp-image-60345" title="tutu" alt="" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/05/tutu.jpg" width="375" height="270" /></a></p>
<p>At first blush, the suggestion that a <a href="http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/groupProfile.asp?grpid=6979">Nobel Peace Prize</a> winner would have anything in common with a pack of unabashed, poison-tongued Jew-haters seems preposterous. But Desmond Tutu, the former archbishop of Cape Town, South Africa, who in 1984 won the coveted Nobel award for his campaign against apartheid in that country, is today one of the most celebrated supporters of the “Divest from Israel” movement. Particularly widespread on university campuses across America, this movement routinely offers a high-visibility propaganda forum for some of the most rabid, combative anti-Semites of our time.</p>
<p>At its heart, the campus divestment movement aims to cripple Israel&#8217;s economy by compelling universities to withdraw whatever funds they may have invested in Israeli-based or -affiliated corporations. These efforts are founded on the premise that Israel is guilty of practicing apartheid and ethnic cleansing against the Palestinian people. According to the divestment movement&#8217;s leaders, the human rights violations perpetrated by Israel are on par with those of the former apartheid regime in Desmond Tutu&#8217;s South Africa; many critics go so far as to liken modern Israel to Nazi Germany. When the Associated Students of UC Berkeley recently expressed their wish to have the university divest its money from Israel, Tutu praised their “principled stand” against the “injustice of the Israeli occupation of Palestinian land and violation of Palestinian human rights.” “[I]t is always an inspiration when young people lead the way and speak truth to power,” said Tutu.</p>
<p>The philosophy underlying the divestment movement has been displayed in stark relief recently at a number of University of California campuses, where Muslim student groups sponsored events under the banner of “Israeli Apartheid Week: A Call to Boycott, Divest, and Sanction Israel.” At a <a href="http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/viewSubCategory.asp?id=250">Muslim Students Association</a> (MSA) event at UC San Diego, for instance, one MSA member <a href="http://www.campusreform.org/blog/david-horowitz-exposes-genocidal-student-activists">explicitly affirmed</a> that she supported <a href="http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/groupProfile.asp?grpid=6256">Hezbollah</a> leader <a href="http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/individualProfile.asp?indid=1257">Hassan Nasrallah</a>&#8216;s <a href="http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9B0CEEDB1F3CF930A15756C0A9629C8B63&amp;sec=&amp;spon=&amp;pagewanted=2">assertion that </a>“if Jews all gather in Israel, it will save us [jihadists] the trouble of going after them worldwide.” Meanwhile, UC Irvine&#8217;s <a href="http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/groupProfile.asp?grpid=7382">Muslim Student Union</a> promoted its own “Israeli Apartheid Week” festivities by featuring, as <a href="http://www.msuuci.com/?p=2098%20">guest speakers</a>, such luminaries as <a href="http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/individualProfile.asp?indid=2204">Norman Finkelstein</a> (who asserts  that the Holocaust has been exaggerated and exploited by Jews to justify Israeli human-rights violations and crimes against humanity); <a href="http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/individualProfile.asp?indid=2096">Hedy Epstein</a> (who contends that the only “lesson” Jews “learned from the Holocaust” was how to “become the persecutors” of vulnerable people like the Palestinians); <a href="http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/individualProfile.asp?indid=2173">Hatem Bazian</a> (who, at an <a>American Muslim Alliance</a> conference promoting the creation of an Islamic State of Palestine, approvingly quoted a <a href="http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/hadith">hadith</a> calling on Muslims to “come and kill” the Jews); <a href="http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/individualProfile.asp?indid=1599">Alison Weir</a> (who characterizes the Israeli-Arab conflict as nothing more complex than a battle between “the brutalizer and the brutalized”); and <a href="http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/individualProfile.asp?indid=2102">Amir Abdel Malik-Ali</a> (an open supporter of <a href="http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/groupProfile.asp?grpid=6204">Hamas</a> and Hezbollah who has warned that he and his fellow Muslims “will fight” the Jews “until we are either martyred or until we are victorious”). (Note: the Alison Weir referred to here is not to be confused with the British historian and author <a href="http://alisonweir.org.uk/">Alison Weir</a>)</p>
<p>Such are the worldviews and sentiments of the leading lights in today&#8217;s “Divest from Israel” movement. By no means, however, is it surprising that Nobel Peace Prize winner Desmond Tutu would support such bellicose rhetoric, given his own long history of condemning and smearing Israel and the Jews. Noting that divestment campaigns helped bring about the end of apartheid in South Africa, a development he calls “one of the crowning accomplishments of the past century,” Tutu is delighted that a “similar movement” now aims to put “an end to the Israeli occupation” in the Middle East. Notably, Tutu makes no call for divestment from any other Middle Eastern nation &#8211; though the political oppression, human rights abuses, and barbaric atrocities characterizing life throughout much of that region dwarf anything that the Palestinians have ever suffered in Israel, to which Tutu refers as America’s “client state.”</p>
<p><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2002/apr/29/comment%20">Tutu informs us</a> that his heart breaks whenever he sees “the humiliation of the Palestinians at checkpoints and roadblocks,” and he explains that their evident “suffering” evokes memories of what South African blacks once experienced “when young white police officers prevented us from moving about.” Asserting that “Israel is like Hitler and apartheid,” Tutu has urged Americans to oppose Israeli “injustices” as fervently as they once opposed Nazism and South Africa’s system of racial separation. Putting his contempt for the Jewish state in still fuller context, he once said: “The [South African] apartheid government was very powerful, but today it no longer exists. Hitler, Mussolini, <a>Stalin</a>, Pinochet, Milosevic, and Idi Amin were all powerful, but in the end they bit the dust.”</p>
<p>In an October 2007 <a href="http://www.zoa.org/sitedocuments/pressrelease_view.asp?pressreleaseID=208%20">op-ed piece</a>, Tutu lamented that because of unnecessarily restrictive Israeli policies, the Palestinian people “cannot move freely from one place to another”; that “a wall separates them from their families and from their incomes”; and that “they are arbitrarily demeaned at checkpoints and unnecessarily beleaguered by capricious applications of bureaucratic red tape.” These things, said Tutu, were reminiscent of “the yoke of oppression that was once our burden in South Africa.” Absent from his lamentations was any recognition that Israel&#8217;s checkpoints and security barrier had been established in direct response to the Palestinians&#8217; relentless campaign of genocidal terrorism. Instead, Tutu reminded his readers that “God’s dream begins with this mutual recognition – we are not strangers, we are kin.” But there again, he had nothing to say about the wholesale rejection of so-called “kinship” by Hamas, the terrorist group whose <a href="http://www.mideastweb.org/hamas.htm">founding charter</a> explicitly calls <em>jihad </em>“an individual duty [that is] binding on every Muslim man and woman,” while it condemns “the Nazism of the Jews” and calls for their extermination.</p>
<p>Tutu&#8217;s morally inverted worldview is not confined solely to matters involving Israel. In the wake of the 9/11 attacks, for instance, he described America&#8217;s retaliatory military campaign (against the Taliban and <a>al-Qaeda</a>) as an “utterly reprehensible” exercise in “vengeance” rather than justice. He explained that the hijackers had been “willing to pilot a plane and go to their deaths” because they were making a desperate plea for relief from the “poverty, hunger, and disease” that plagued the people of their homelands. Condemning America&#8217;s greed and self-absorption, Tutu suggested that “a minute fraction of [U.S.] defense budgets would ensure that God’s children everywhere would have clean water, enough to eat, a decent home, a proper education, and accessible and affordable health care.” The terrorists, in other words, were trying to strike a blow for charity and social justice, not Islamic <em>jihad</em>.</p>
<p>While Tutu has been relentless in ridiculing Israel and the United States, he has been far more forgiving of Winnie Mandela, South Africa&#8217;s so-called “Mother of the Nation,” whom the former archbishop professes to love “very deeply.” Prominent in the Soviet-sponsored African National Congress (ANC), which was closely aligned with the South African Communist Party, Mrs. Mandela used her notorious bodyguards in a protracted reign of terror, torture, and murder during the 1980s. The ANC committed innumerable atrocities in the name of liberation, prompting a 1988 Pentagon Report to list it as one of the world&#8217;s “more notorious terrorist groups.” Many ANC victims were physically pummeled and brutalized to death – some of them on the direct orders of Mrs. Mandela. Among the ANC’s preferred methods of torturing suspected political opponents was “necklacing” – a barbaric practice where automobile tires were tied around the necks of victims, filled with gasoline and lit on fire. It is estimated that some 1,000 people were set ablaze in this manner. “With tires and matches we will liberate this country,” crowed the celebrated “Mother” of Tutu&#8217;s nation.</p>
<p>To recap: Desmond Tutu “loves” Winnie Mandela “deeply”; he blames the United States for provoking the 9/11 attacks; and he supports worldwide divestment from a purportedly “Nazi”-like nation that gives its Arab citizens more rights and freedoms than they would be able to enjoy anywhere in the Arab world. These views prove conclusively that honorific titles and prestigious awards do not necessarily correlate with sound moral judgment in their recipients.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2010/john-perazzo/desmond-tutus-crusade-against-israels-%e2%80%9capartheid%e2%80%9d/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>68</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The Triumph of Soviet Deception</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2010/jamie-glazov/the-triumph-of-soviet-deception/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=the-triumph-of-soviet-deception</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2010/jamie-glazov/the-triumph-of-soviet-deception/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 23 Mar 2010 04:04:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Jamie Glazov]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Asia]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Bolshevism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Communism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Dr. Alfred Rosenberg]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[dual capacity]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[God]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Hitler]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[imperialism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[introductory words]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[katyn forest massacre]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Mackiewicz]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[nation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[nazism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Poland]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[policy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[polish novelist]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[polish officers]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[polish prose]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[political writer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ponary]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[prose writers]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Russia]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Stalin]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[War]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Western Europe]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[yale university press]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=55434</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Why the spirit of Communism is alive and well.]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><strong> </strong></p>
<p><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/03/triumph1.jpg"><img class="aligncenter size-full wp-image-55436" title="triumph1" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/03/triumph1.jpg" alt="" width="450" height="214" /></a></p>
<p>Frontpage Interview’s guest today is Nina Karsov, the head of a London-based company, Kontra, which has been publishing Polish and Russian books since 1970, including the <em>Collected Works</em> (19 volumes in print, but more are planned) by Józef Mackiewicz, a great Polish novelist and political writer (1902-1985).</p>
<p>Mackiewicz’s analytical work, <a href="http://yalepress.yale.edu/yupbooks/book.asp?isbn=9780300145694"><em>The Triumph of Provocation</em></a>, written in 1962, and now published in English by the Yale University Press, examines the history and nature of Communism as it developed in the Soviet Union and in Poland. His unique interpretation of the differences and similarities between Communism and Nazism is highly relevant to debates about these two systems and to major contemporary issues which are of particular importance to the U.S. and Europe.</p>
<p style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/03/JM-3g.jpg"><img class="aligncenter size-full wp-image-55439" title="JM-3g" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/03/JM-3g.jpg" alt="" width="300" height="354" /></a><strong>Józef Mackiewicz</strong></p>
<p><strong>FP:</strong> Nina Karsov, welcome to Frontpage Interview. Could you please say a few introductory words about Józef Mackiewicz?</p>
<p><strong>Karsov:</strong> Mackiewicz was the first author to write books about two chilling episodes of the Second World War. These were <em>The Katyn Wood Murders</em> and <em>Kontra</em>, a novel about the Allies’ handing over of Cossack troops to Stalin after the war.</p>
<p>In May 1943, he travelled to Katyn to witness the exhumation of the bodies of Polish officers murdered there by the Soviets. By chance, in the autumn of the same year, he witnessed a massacre of Jews in Ponary and later described this in an account entitled: “Ponary-Baza” and in the novel <em>Better Not to Talk Aloud</em>.</p>
<p>In 1952, a U.S. Congressional Select Committee which investigated the Katyn Forest Massacre heard Mackiewicz in his dual capacity of witness and expert.</p>
<p>He is the author of several novels; these form a cycle which spans the first half of the twentieth century. He also wrote short stories, political books and essays. Milosz considers him one of the greatest Polish prose writers of the century.</p>
<p>Unfortunately, only four of his books have been published in English: <em>The Katyn Wood Murders</em>, <em>Road to Nowhere</em>, a novel on life in Lithuania as it was being converted into a republic of the Soviet Union, <em>In the Shadow of the Cross</em>, on the conciliatory<em> </em>policies of John XXIII toward Communism, and now <em>The Triumph of Provocation.</em></p>
<p><strong>FP:</strong> When and where did Mackiewicz live?</p>
<p><strong>Karsov: </strong>He was born in St Petersburg in 1902. He fought as a Polish volunteer in the Soviet-Polish war of 1920 and later studied at Warsaw University. He worked in Wilno (now known as Vilnius) as a journalist until the Red Army drove him west in 1945. As an émigré, he lived briefly in Rome, then in London, and finally in Munich, where he died in 1985.</p>
<p><strong>FP:</strong> So what are your thoughts on <em>The Triumph of Provocation</em>? Why is it important and what does it offer that is unique and profound?</p>
<p><strong>Karsov: </strong>One of the most important subjects of this book is the perception of Communism by the Western democracies, in other words by “deaf and dumb blind men”, as Mackiewicz called them after Lenin. Of particular significance is Mackiewicz’s analysis of the West’s wishful thinking reaction to a sequence of perestroikas: beginning with “Operation Trust” in the 1920s, followed by the “de-Stalinisation” initiated by Khrushchev (the book was written in 1962, and Mackiewicz died in 1985, so he did not analyze Gorbachev’s “de-Communisation”). Despite the West’s hopes and predictions, which were actually based on masterful deception by the Soviets, Communism remained fundamentally the same. The term “provocation” in the title of this book covers every ruse Communists might devise to provoke a credulous response.</p>
<p>When dealing with an internal crisis, every dictatorship makes concessions of some sort, adopts a liberal attitude or invites “oppositionists” to share power. And it does this not to undermine its own rule, but to strengthen it.</p>
<p>Mackiewicz’s theory of anti-Communism rejects the view, generally accepted in the West, that the Soviet Union was a historical successor to old Russia and that it was a typically Eastern creation, just as Russia itself was always supposed to be a creation of the East (“Asia”). Mackiewicz explains that this portrayal misrepresents the nature of old Russia, which was no different from any other country in Western Europe, and had nothing in common with the Soviet Union.</p>
<p>It was the Bolshevik Revolution which brought about changes in Russia and overturned the existing order. It abolished the old class-based culture, and “rescued” the masses from illiteracy but only to the level of pseudo-culture. A law dispensed with questions about God and Truth. In the old Russia a spy or informer was despised even by those who used his services, whereas in the Soviet Union denunciation was raised to the level of a civic virtue. Doubt became punishable, and where there is no doubt there can be no reflection and, therefore, no spirit of inquiry.</p>
<p>There are those who often talk about many similarities between Soviet foreign policy and that of tsarist Russia, forgetting that foreign policy is, in general, determined by geographical position. Soviet policy was not, however, a state policy; it was a policy of conspiracy against other states, and this is what set it apart from the old Russia. So it was not Russian imperialism which used international Communism but international Communism which used the methods of Russian imperialism whenever it was convenient.</p>
<p>People would sometimes ask “How come Communism took root only in Russia?” Mackiewicz retorts with: How come the cradle of European romanticism, the nation of “poets and thinkers,” allowed Nazism to come to power? Nazism was obviously a repugnant phenomenon, but there is no basis for the claim that Nazism reflected a specifically German mentality. Bolshevism is also repugnant, but there is no basis for the claim that it could not rear its head and prosper elsewhere and that the teachings of Marx were corrupted by certain purely Russian characteristics.</p>
<p>The idea that Bolshevism is a product of “Asia” was spread in the Third Reich by Dr. Alfred Rosenberg, who convinced Hitler that “Bolshevism replaced the old ruling class with a new class of Caucasian-Asiatic descent.” In fact, the Asiatic provinces of Russia carried on fighting Bolshevism longer than others, up to 1927.</p>
<p>Mackiewicz points out that Lenin’s ideological inspiration came from Western  Europe rather than Russia. Lenin was opposed to all of the typically Russian, non-Marxist revolutionary parties; so Marxism went from the West to the East, rather than the opposite.</p>
<p>The main instrument of subjugation of other nations, was not, as under the Tsarist rule, Russification, but the opposite, that is to say, Communism was instilled through each nation’s own language and its suitably distorted, or adjusted, history, literature and tradition. Nationalism is an instrument of Communisation, and not, as most people believe, a bulwark against Communism. So only anti-Communist Internationalism would have been able to counter International Communism, that is, the system which ruled in Russia after 1917 and, when Mackiewicz wrote <em>The Triumph of Provocation</em>, controlled almost half of the planet.</p>
<p>Trying to explain Communist expansion by invoking “Russian imperialism” or “neo-colonialism” misses the point. Imperialism brings obvious material benefits to the imperialist, as in Imperial Russia, or any other colonial power, but the Soviet “parent state” did not benefit materially from exporting Communist ideology. The standard of living in Russia was usually much lower than in the so-called satellite states. But these states were crucial in spreading Communism, particularly through disinformation.</p>
<p>Mackiewicz criticised Polish and other émigré leaders for their misguided interpretation of Communism. He also claimed that if Pilsudski had supported the Whites in 1919-20, Bolshevism would have been crushed. Unfortunately, Pilsudski thought that “the Reds” were less of a threat to Poland than “the Whites”.</p>
<p><strong>FP:</strong> How does Mackiewicz perceive Communism and Nazism as being different and yet similar? And how are his observations significant and relevant for us today?</p>
<p><strong>Karsov:</strong> Mackiewicz answers the question about the difference between Communism and Nazism most succinctly in his novel <em>Better Not to Talk Aloud</em>:</p>
<p>“I do not agree that the Germans are the worst enemy. The Bolsheviks are worse, because they are more dangerous to any nation. For the simple reason that no Pole can simultaneously be a German. But every Pole can simultaneously be a Communist. We fabricate reality, on occasion putting an equals sign between the German and Soviet occupations. The German occupation makes heroes of us, while the Soviet one makes filth of us. The Germans shoot at us, and the Soviets take us with their bare hands. We shoot at the Germans and lick the Soviet asses. There is thus no equivalence, but the opposite.”</p>
<p>And in <em>The Triumph of Provocation</em> he said:</p>
<p>“At the peak of the Cold War, one could have compared Stalin to Hitler, but never the other way around. Had one said that Stalin was always worse than Hitler, one would have turned upside down the whole hierarchy of saints and devils in the new chronology, and the whole meaning of the last war and of the postwar arrangements would have been thrown into question. And so one is allowed to blame Stalin for the treaty with Hitler, but it is unthinkable to blame Hitler for the treaty with Stalin; it is permissible to compare Soviet labour camps with Hitler’s concentration camps, but the reverse comparison is unthinkable. History tells us something else, however.”</p>
<p>At the time when any suggestion of war against Communism was condemned, Mackiewicz argued that it would be difficult to imagine anyone describing the war against Hitler as a crime. Many people would be surprised to hear that Mackiewicz’s view on war corresponds with that of Ghandi. The eminent Polish ethicist, Henryk Elzenberg (1887-1967), discussing the teachings of Gandhi on non-violence, said that, for Ghandi, there are things worse than war and there are situations in which a moral person ought to choose war, as a lesser evil, because there are two things worse than war, namely, cowardice and passive sufferance of opprobrium or of obvious injustice.</p>
<p><strong>FP:</strong> What do you think Mackiewicz would have made of Gorbachev’s Glasnost’ and the fall of the Soviet Empire – but the KGB still being in power, albeit in new clothes and with different rhetoric? Would Mackiewicz’s theory reveal that some kind of secret ploy took place?</p>
<p><strong>Karsov: </strong>I would never dare to presume what Mackiewicz, or anyone else who is no longer alive, would think or say. However, if I understand Mackiewicz’s thoughts correctly, it is difficult to imagine that he would have shared the universal euphoria at the alleged fall of the Soviet bloc (he would not have called it an “empire” for the reasons which I mentioned earlier) or believed that “the wolf has become a vegetarian.”</p>
<p>Mackiewicz held that objective knowledge can be attained only by comparisons. We know that there aren’t many historical examples of regimes which relinquished power voluntarily, and Mackiewicz presented ample evidence that Communism – which, unlike any other political system, is both total and totalitarian – was never interested in any true compromise, but only in the shrewd application of the tactics of compromise. He did not live to see how Gorbachev had succeeded in persuading Western political leaders to endorse his agenda, but, in 1981, he updated his <em>Triumph of Provocation</em> adding a number of comments. He said, for example: “On June 20, 1981, the leader of the Opposition in Communist Poland, the world-famous Lech Wałęsa, declared on state television that the opposition Solidarity movement was striving for peaceful cooperation with the (Communist) government, which must be strong and have the right conditions to govern the country.” And: “the Polish October (1956) became virtually a model for the subsequent manipulations of this nature in the years 1980–81.”</p>
<p>The “Round Table” arrangements in Poland, and “revolutions” (significantly, always revolutions, but not counter-revolutions!) in various colors carried out simultaneously elsewhere, seem to have confirmed Mackiewicz’s view.</p>
<p><strong>FP:</strong> Can you summarize for us Mackiewicz’s main message and the crucial lessons it teaches us about our totalitarian and terrorist enemies.</p>
<p><strong>Karsov: </strong>It seems likely that, if he had observed the incremental, but rapid, erosion of our liberties and the amassing of state powers over the individual in the West, Mackiewicz would have wondered – but let me emphasize that this is an extrapolation of his teaching – whether we were not approaching a global catastrophe, that is to say, the total victory of authoritarian and totalitarian power, albeit without starvation or labor camps. One of his main messages might be, therefore, to warn us against a collective way of thinking and a tendency toward uniformity and conformity because – if one adds modern technological advancements to the concoction of collective thinking and the accumulation of state powers – the dangers are obvious.</p>
<p>Communism is generally considered a system which is defined primarily by the centralized economy, the monopoly of the political process and mass repression, and people do not always see that the essence of this system is a sense of world mission. Many people think that Communism represents everything that is abhorrent to human nature, but one might ask, to quote another twentieth century Polish writer, whether Communism, or an authoritarian and totalitarian system, is not, in fact, a system which suits mankind best, precisely because of characteristics inherent in human nature.</p>
<p>This system readily adapts to circumstances, but this does not mean that its nature changes: it simply learns, often by studying its critics diligently, how to improve the chances of the final victory. China, for example, has gleaned that her Communist system would benefit by the adoption of the free market economy (interestingly, Gorbachev refused to abolish the centralized economy) – and it has certainly done so, with the party remaining supreme. We ought to remember that, although we do not pay much attention to China’s expanding military and technological power, Communism is flourishing there and in some other countries. When Khomeini took power in Iran, few people realized that he was implementing Lenin’s program in the guise of a religion.</p>
<p>Certain books are always relevant because they were written by wise and talented men. Mackiewicz says things which were never said before him and no nuance of the word “provocation,” as used by him, is obsolete. I firmly believe that he is a writer whose work will become even more pertinent in future.</p>
<p><strong> </strong></p>
<p><strong>FP: </strong>Nina Karsov, thank you for joining Frontpage Interview.</p>
<p><strong>To order <em>The Triumph of Provocation</em>, <a href="http://yalepress.yale.edu/yupbooks/book.asp?isbn=9780300145694">click here</a>.</strong></p>
<p><strong><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/03/josef.jpg"><img class="aligncenter size-full wp-image-55442" title="josef" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/03/josef.jpg" alt="" width="300" height="347" /></a><br />
</strong></p>
<p><input id="gwProxy" type="hidden" /> <input id="jsProxy" onclick="jsCall();" type="hidden" /></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2010/jamie-glazov/the-triumph-of-soviet-deception/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>14</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Symposium: Is Hannah Arendt Still Relevant?</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2010/jamie-glazov/symposium-is-hannah-arendt-still-relevant/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=symposium-is-hannah-arendt-still-relevant</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2010/jamie-glazov/symposium-is-hannah-arendt-still-relevant/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 26 Feb 2010 05:03:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Jamie Glazov]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[attempt]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[barrage balloons]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[bernard wasserstein]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Communism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[core]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[david satter]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[definition of totalitarianism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[financial times of london]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Hannah Arendt]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Ideology]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[intellectual rigor]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[johns hopkins university]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Lawrence]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[michel foucault]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Moscow]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[moscow correspondent]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[nazism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[nitze school]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Oxford]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[reality]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[society]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[totalitarian]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[totalitarianism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[War]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=52102</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[David Satter and Bernard Wassertein battle it out on Arendt's definition of totalitarianism and its relevance for the terror war.]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/02/hanna.jpg"><img class="aligncenter size-full wp-image-52105" title="hanna" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/02/hanna.jpg" alt="" width="450" height="477" /></a></p>
<p>In this special edition of Frontpage Symposium, we have invited two distinguished guests to discuss the question: Is Hannah Arendt still relevant?<strong> </strong>We ask this in the context of whether Arendt&#8217;s definition of totalitarianism is still relevant and whether it can shed light on the conflict the West now faces.</p>
<p>Our guests today are:</p>
<p><strong> </strong></p>
<p><strong>Bernard Wasserstein, </strong>a professor of history whose are area of interest is Jewish history. He is currently teaching at the University  of Chicago. In early 2009, he wrote a long and critical essay on Hannah Arendt that called her methods and arguments into question. He argued, among other things, that totalitarianism is not a useful analytical category, that Arendt relied in her writing on pro-Nazi sources and that she showed barely concealed hostility toward the Jewish people. His essay has evoked a big response both in Britain and the U.S.</p>
<p><strong> </strong></p>
<p>and</p>
<p><strong> </strong></p>
<p><strong>David Satter,</strong> a senior fellow of the Hudson Institute and a visiting scholar at the Johns Hopkins University Nitze School of Advanced International Studies (SAIS). He was Moscow correspondent of the <em>Financial Times </em>of London from 1976 to 1982, during the height of the Soviet totalitarian period and he is the author of <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Age-Delirium-Decline-Soviet-Union/dp/0300087055/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&amp;s=books&amp;qid=1256004140&amp;sr=1-1"><em>Age of Delirium: the Decline and Fall of the Soviet Union</em>,</a> which is being made into a documentary film. His most recent work is <em><a href="http://www.amazon.com/Darkness-Dawn-Russian-Criminal-State/dp/0300098928">Darkness at Dawn: The Rise of the Russian Criminal State.</a></em><strong> </strong></p>
<p><strong> </strong></p>
<p><strong>FP:</strong> David Satter and Bernard Wasserstein, welcome to Frontpage Symposium.</p>
<p>Prof. Wasserstein, let me begin with you.</p>
<p>I think the best way to start would be for you to briefly lay out your position on Arendt and her relevance. Kindly also touch on your take on Arendt’s relationship with the Jewish people and, in turn, with her own Jewishness.</p>
<p><strong>Wasserstein: </strong>Hannah Arendt is one of those twentieth-century figures, like Edward Said or Michel Foucault, who have acquired absurdly inflated reputations on the basis of work in which lack of intellectual rigor is concealed behind barrage-balloons of overblown rhetoric.</p>
<p>My essay, published in the Times Literary Supplement in October 2009, was concerned specifically with puncturing Arendt&#8217;s claim to be taken seriously as a historian. I pointed out that the concept of totalitarianism, basic to the interpretation of Nazism and Communism that she presented in her book <em>The Origins of Totalitarianism</em>, is now treated with reserve by most professional historians.</p>
<p>I discussed her treatment of imperialism, especially British imperialism, and her absurd attempt to equate that with totalitarianism. And I focused on her analysis of modern Jewish history, showing that this was heavily derived from Nazi historians. From these and from the German academic environment in which her outlook was formed Arendt drew her contemptuous attitude towards Jews, an attitude that was basic to her interpretation of modern history and that infected her relationship to everything Jewish, including Zionism and Israel.</p>
<p><strong>FP:</strong> David Satter?</p>
<p><strong> </strong></p>
<p><strong>Satter: </strong>I agree with Bernard that Arendt was no historian. The one thing that she does not explain about totalitarianism in “The Origins of Totalitarianism” are its origins. Her description of the roots of Nazism is used mechanically and completely unconvincingly to describe the rise of Stalinism. And her explanation of the rise of Nazism neglects the role of the Western spiritual crisis in making possible the rise of both communist and Nazi ideology. In fact, it was the victory of communism – in which for the first time the moral edifice of 2500 years of Western civilization was totally rejected – that contributed to the victory of Nazism rather than the other way around. This is a reality that Arendt muddles completely.</p>
<p>Nonetheless, I believe that Arendt’s contribution is absolutely seminal because she explains as no one else had not the origins of totalitarianism but its fundamental nature. Totalitarianism existed not just in Stalinist Russia and Hitler’s Germany but in Brezhnev’s Soviet Union, where I witnessed it first hand. Briefly put, it consists of the attempt to create reality by force. This was brilliantly explained by Arendt in the concluding chapter of <span style="text-decoration: underline;">The Origins of Totalitarianism</span>, “Ideology and Terror.”</p>
<p>It can be argued that Arendt was guilty of oversimplification and revisionists always point to the extent to which Stalinist Russia and Hitler’s Germany were not totalitarian. But Arendt sought to characterize the essence of the phenomenon and to describe its basic structure. This is something that she achieved and, as an analytical model that can be applied not only to the past but to fanatical Islamic movements and doomsday cults it remains highly relevant today.</p>
<p>Regarding Arendt’s attitude toward Jews and anti-Semitism, I think that Gershom Scholem, the great scholar of Jewish mysticism, was, in part, correct when he wrote that Arendt, in her work, did not show a love for her people. But her purpose was to describe reality not to praise her own origins. I believe that she felt that her strictures against her own people (her comments about Germans were considerably more devastating) were a demonstration of love in that they showed that a Jew could value the truth above clan loyalty and, as such, could be fully developed as a human being. Whether in fact she always correctly identified the truth is another matter. Her description of the role of the Judenrat (Jewish councils) in <span style="text-decoration: underline;">Eichmann in Jerusalem </span>is not so much untrue as lacking an appreciation of the excruciating circumstances in which the Jewish leaders found themselves. But I think this attests to Arendt’s uncompromising personality rather than to anti-Semitism. Insofar as it reflected a demand for almost superhuman behavior from the Jewish leaders, one could argue that it also showed a kind of love.</p>
<p><strong>Wasserstein:</strong> David Satter has started off a number of hares (the nature of Communism, Islamism, etc.) that I shall not pursue here. Let&#8217;s keep the focus on Arendt and totalitarianism and Arendt and the Jews.</p>
<p>Let&#8217;s deal first of all with totalitarianism and then proceed to Arendt and the Jews at a later stage:</p>
<p>One of the problems with Arendt&#8217;s discussion of totalitarianism is that she nowhere defines this elusive and slippery term. Without a definition it is hardly worth discussing or taking seriously. I do not think that there is, in fact, a definition that would turn this word into a methodologically helpful concept. It is, in fact, a tired old cold-war slogan, not an intellectually respectable or useful heuristic device.</p>
<p>I do not find the final chapter of &#8220;Origins&#8221; nearly as persuasive as Satter. I would indeed maintain, as he suggests, that she was guilty of gross over-simplification. He defends her as an essentializer. But that is precisely the problem. She discounted the role of contingency in history and tried to fit everything into one overall pattern to which she claimed to have discovered the key. Nor did she succeed even there in the sense that Marx and Marxists (or, to take another example, Christians), certainly did so. That is to say, they at least succeeded in creating an internally coherent system of thought and interpretation of social reality. One may argue against it on empirical and other grounds. I would certainly do so very strongly.</p>
<p>But Marxism (like Christianity) at least has the virtue of internal consistency. Of course, that is also its vice: it sees the whole of reality within a supposedly unifying theory. Isaiah Berlin, in his life&#8217;s work exposed the fallacy and the dangers of such a view of the world. Arendt attempted something similar to Marx, though she was certainly no Marxist &#8211; this notwithstanding her celebration of Rosa Luxemburg and the workers&#8217; councils movement of 1918-19 in Germany and Italy &#8211; which she falsely equated with the phenomenon of that name in Hungary in 1956.</p>
<p>The reasons for her mouthing of certain Marxist slogans probably had something to do with her relationship to her Communist husband &#8211; from whom she derived many of her ideas &#8211; and perhaps explains her attractiveness to some neo-Marxists today &#8230; but that is another hare that I shall not pursue here.</p>
<p>Where the Marxists produced a theory that is wholly self-contained and sustainable within its own logic which, like Christianity, claims universal and total validity, Arendt produced nothing comparable.  Her supposed theoretical framework (at any rate as presented in the &#8220;Origins&#8221;) is, in fact, a mishmash. There is no &#8216;analytical model&#8217; here worthy of the name. As Berlin put it: ‘She produces no arguments, no evidence of serious philosophical or historical thought. It is all a stream of metaphysical associations.’</p>
<p>There is a lot of sound and fury, most of it hollow rhetoric, but no sustained argument worthy of serious attention.  The closest parallel in modern thought is, in my view, L. Ron Hubbard, another thinker who claims to have discovered the key to a totalizing universally valid idea but whose work, like Arendt&#8217;s, is a hotchpotch of slogans and semi-digested pap that, again like Arendt, Said, and Foucault, impresses weak minds, especially on the old/new left in search of intellectual crutch on which to lean because they are tired of thinking for themselves. I am surprised, to put it mildly, to find Satter in such company.</p>
<p><strong>Satter: </strong>I think Arendt made three important contributions to our understanding of totalitarianism. First, she described the totalitarian movement as a series of concentric circles spreading out from an ideological core. Second, she defined ideology as the logic of an idea pursued without reference to external reality and, finally, she defined totalitarianism itself as the combination of ideology and terror, in effect, the use of total terror to remake reality.</p>
<p>Regarding the first point, she identified that lack of moral grounding and escalation of cynicism that allowed fanatical movements to attract followers and sympathizers among wide segments of the population. The followers provided the ideological hard core with vital support and made it seem more reasonable than it really was. In fact, the ability of an ideological hard core to attract persons who share their values but may balk at their methods is an important reason why small groups of fanatics can pose such a lethal threat.</p>
<p>In her discussion of ideology, Arendt defines a word that is widely used but little understood. The search for truth is a dialogic process in which a person must always be ready to test his conclusions against a changing reality. Ideology interrupts this process. It takes a single proposition and applies it to all aspects of reality. It is, as Arendt wrote, the “logic of an idea” but a logic which is never tested against empirical reality but, on the contrary, re-envisages reality in accordance with its own internal requirements.</p>
<p>With Arendt’s definition in mind, we are equipped to understand the monomaniacal core of modern ideologies, their contempt for reality and emancipation from, “all the plausibilities of the world,” (Burke). We can also see the ways in which ideological thinking pervades political discourse even in a democratic society.</p>
<p>Finally, Arendt defines totalitarianism as the combination of ideology and terror. Observers have often been mystified by the apparent irrationality of totalitarian behavior, the decision of Hitler to destroy the European Jews instead of putting them to work on behalf of the German war machine, the decision of Stalin to destroy the Soviet officer corps on the eve of war or annihilate the country’s most productive farmers. But the objectives of a totalitarian regime, as Arendt shows, have nothing to do with practical concerns but only the realization of a deranged ideology. Since reality inevitably resists the imposition of irreality, this can only be accomplished through the use of massive force.</p>
<p>Arendt does not enunciate a new universal theory. She is a political theorist concerned to describe and illuminate a new political phenomenon. Did she do this accurately? At this point, I need to refer to my personal experience. I wrote a graduate thesis at Oxford on Hannah Arendt and then was posted to Moscow as the correspondent of the Financial Times. As a result, I had the rare opportunity of studying a theory and being able, immediately afterward, to test its conclusions against reality. What I witnessed in the Soviet  Union was an entire society organized to act out a view of reality contained in Marxist-Leninist ideology, including a population that supposedly demonstrated voluntary unanimity, rulers who were supposedly infallible and a guiding ideology that was as inarguable as the axioms of geometry. All of this was supported by mirage-like pseudo democratic institutions: courts to which there was no recourse, trade unions that were part of management and a parliament that always supported the government. It goes almost without saying that such a system of massive and continuous lying could only be held together by force.</p>
<p><strong> </strong></p>
<p><strong>Wasserstein: </strong>I have no substantial quarrel with Satter&#8217;s description of Arendt&#8217;s propositions. What I reject is his evaluation of them. Arendt&#8217;s &#8216;totalitarianism&#8217; is primarily an attempt to explain Nazism, not Communism, as she herself admitted. Yet she brings in lengthy discussion of both Communism and Imperialism in an effort to conflate all three within what appears to be her understanding of the totalitarian phenomenon.  The effort at conflation is central to her approach and indeed the chief reason for its attractiveness to such a varied and contradictory set of constituencies. But her attempt falls flat, however much rhetorical huffing and puffing she funnels into it.  Lawrence, Rhodes, and Disraeli, to whom she devotes considerable space in the first section of her magnum opus, were no doubt exemplary imperialists but to see their thought or historical role as related in any way to totalitarianism is far-fetched. Arendt does not in fact argue this: she rather lets it be understood implicitly &#8211; which is why her work has such an uncanny attraction for anti-imperialists of various hues. As for the attempt to conflate Nazism and Communism, allow me to refer to what I wrote in my recent book &#8220;Barbarism and Civilization:</p>
<blockquote><p>&#8220;Both Nazism and Communism became deeply attractive belief systems for millions. Both in their day offered emotional comfort and to the disoriented, reassurance to the bewildered.  Both demanded surrender of self to the mass, offering in return the comfort of suspension of individual moral responsibility. Both dispensed with the rule of law, elevated the secret police to the highest authority in the land, constructed vast systems of slave labour, and killed millions of their subjects. Yet in the supreme test of total war both sustained the morale and adhesion of their followers at least as well as the liberal democracies. Both succumbed on battlefields of their own choosing: Nazism by defeat in war, Communism by its failure to create a classless society free from material want. Yet so long as they could plausibly claim success, most of their subjects willingly did as they were told.</p></blockquote>
<blockquote><p>&#8220;We should not, however, fall into the common error trap of imputing a false parallelism between the two great warrior ideologies. Nazism, for all its revolutionary jargon, represented in its essence a reaction against the nineteenth-century faith in human progress. It was an attempt to seize history by the collar and frog-march it in a direction determined primarily by the selfish interests and obsessive beliefs of those in power. From the outset it was an anti-intellectual movement, offering its adherents the spurious solidarity of the street gang and the prospective enjoyment of stolen booty.</p></blockquote>
<blockquote><p>&#8220;Communism, by contrast, was a sophisticated and internally coherent framework of thought. It was not, as it is sometimes portrayed, a manic delusion of the intelligentsia but rather a modern transformation of the utopian chiliasm of the most enlightened elements in European thought since the seventeenth century. As distinct from the cave-man morality of Nazism and from the individualist ethic of liberalism, Communism sought to achieve a higher collective good that derived from Rousseau’s concept of the general will and Gerard Winstanley’s idea of the common weal. The source of its special appeal to several generations of European intellectuals, perhaps also one of the reasons why it survived in power so much longer than Nazism, was its (ultimately self-falsified) claim, derived from Marx, to be able to discern and to accelerate the underlying motive forces of history. That both Communism and Nazism developed into mechanisms of brute force and thuggery should not blind us to their distinctive origins and aspirations.&#8221;</p></blockquote>
<p>Nor is the view that Soviet Russian Communism or Nazism (or for that matter British or French imperialisms) were held together only by force borne out by historical research. In the case of Nazism (let us again recall, Arendt&#8217;s primary concern), Ian Kershaw and others have shown the very broad degree of support that the regime maintained among the German people at least until Stalingrad and the continuing general acquiescence that it retained until near the end of the war. As for the USSR, Sheila Fitzpatrick&#8217;s work has shown how the rapid social mobility that Communism offered to the incipient &#8216;New Class&#8217; helped create a not inconsiderable constituency of willing collaborators who profited from Stalinism and even more perhaps from post-Stalinism. Imperialism too depended on what Gallagher and Robinson in their &#8220;Africa and the Victorians&#8221; termed the &#8220;collaborative equation&#8221; between rulers and important sections of the ruled. To see these systems, as Arendt did, simply as regimes of blind terror is to fall into an ahistorical trap.</p>
<p>Which brings us to Arendt and the Jews. The passages in &#8220;Origins&#8221; on anti-semitism and its supposed origins are absolutely central to Arendt&#8217;s argument about totalitarianism &#8211; though that very purported centrality in itself robs her argument of any validity since anti-semitism patently had very different valencies and functions in the Nazi, Soviet and imperial contexts. I should be interested to hear how Satter proposes to defend Arendt&#8217;s position here. Perhaps he does not wish to come to her defence on this &#8211; but in a sense he must, since this if he gives way here he dismantles a flying buttress on which the entire edifice of the &#8220;Origins&#8221; depends. I therefore await his response with interest.</p>
<p><strong>Satter: </strong>Let’s consider Arendt’s attitude toward the Jews. This attitude is expressed principally in “The Origins of Totalitarianism,” where the relation of the Jews to the nation state is invoked as an important factor in the rise of totalitarianism and in “Eichmann in Jerusalem” where Arendt’s discussion of the role of the Jewish councils under the Nazis led to accusations that she was unfair to her own people and to charges that she was a “self-hating Jew.”</p>
<p>In “The Origins of Totalitarianism,” Arendt argued that because of the Jews’ identification with the state, every social group that came into conflict with the state became anti-semitic and the anti-semitic parties became murderous because, unlike other parties, their goal from the start was not to change the state but rather to take it over and dominate it. Arendt makes this argument at considerable length and it does shed some light but I have never found it convincing as an explanation for the origins of Nazism much less communism. Arendt herself acknowledged that the title “The Origins of Totalitarianism” was inappropriate and that in her historical sketches of anti-semitism and imperialism she was describing the elements that crystallized into totalitarianism rather than its causes. Arendt, however, also analyzes totalitarianism and describes it. It is this part of her theory that is most valuable.</p>
<p>Because it placed European Jewry in a social context and did not view Jews purely as victims, Arendt’s discussion of anti-semitism in “The Origins of Totalitarianism,” led to unease about Arendt’s attitude toward her own people which was greatly increased by her treatment of the Jewish councils in “Eichmann in Jerusalem.” Oddly, Arendt’s understanding of the impossible moral choices that are forced on the victims under totalitarianism does not always lead her to view with informed sympathy the choices faced by those victims who, I would like to believe, should have been closest to her.</p>
<p>In “Eichmann in Jerusalem,” Arendt describes the roles of the Jewish councils and the Jewish police in facilitating the deportations of Jews to the death camps. She argues, as did Bruno Bettelheim in a different context, that non-cooperation and armed resistance would have saved many more lives and at least would have forced the Nazis to pay a price for their barbarity. But her solution begs the question that her analysis describes. In a situation of total terror and robotically organized masses, it is only rare exceptions who have the will to resist. And this applies not just to Jews but to any victims of totalitarianism who are deprived of any means of collective action that is not outright suicidal.</p>
<p>In this respect, however, it does not pay to accuse Arendt of anti-semitism or self-hatred as some have done. Such a charge suggests that Jewish people cannot be self critical and do not seek to be and clearly indicates that, since there are self-hating Jews, there is something to hate. In the early 19<sup>th</sup> century, the Russian writer Pyotr Chaadaev had this to say about the Russian people:</p>
<p>We are an exception among people. We belong to those who are not an integral part of humanity but exist only to teach the world some type of great lesson… Alone in the world, we gave the world nothing and have taken nothing, we have in no way contributed to the progress of human reason and everything that came to use as a result of this progress, we distorted. (First Philosophical Letter)</p>
<p>Was Chaadaev (who was thrown in a mental hospital for his writing) a self-hating Russian? Or did he want more for his people than they themselves envisaged? With regard to Arendt and the accusations against her, I think that her arguments about the Jewish councils, with which I don’t agree, are nonetheless a valuable contribution. They also convey the implicit message that Jews should be open to the widest possible discussion no less than anyone else. The choice is clear. If we wish for the world to believe in the positive contribution to humanity of the Jewish spirit we must first of all believe in ourselves.</p>
<p><strong>FP: </strong>Well gentlemen, we have entered our final round.  Concluding thoughts please.</p>
<p><strong> </strong></p>
<p><strong>Wasserstein: </strong> I did not accuse Arendt of being ‘a self-hating Jew.’ That term is not part of my vocabulary. What I do, however, maintain is that when she refers to Gideon Hausner, the chief prosecutor at the Eichmann trial as ‘a typical Galician Jew, very unsympathetic’ or when she enthusiastically adopts the virulent vocabulary and imagery of anti-Semites like Edouard Drumont and J. A. Hobson in denouncing Jewish capitalists, it is surely a rather strained reading that sees such borrowings as evidence of Arendt’s desire to appeal to the better instincts of her fellow-Jews. A more plausible interpretation is that Arendt herself internalized the attitudes of many of the anti-Semitic writers, including the Nazi historians on whom she relied.</p>
<p>Arendt&#8217;s interpretation of modern Jewish history rests on crude reductionism, on a primitive taxonomy of Jewish society, on a simplistic and exaggerated ascription of social roles to Jews as a collectivity, and on the lumping attribution to certain groups of Jews such as the wealthy ‘parasites’ in the Third Republic of a coherence and semi-criminal agency that Arendt was later, with equal ahistoricity, to pin on the <em>Judenräte </em>in occupied Europe. Much of this she got directly from her Nazi and other anti-semitic authorities.</p>
<p>As regards the question of Jewish resistance and the &#8216;Jewish Councils&#8217; during World War II, it seems Satter and I agree that Arendt&#8217;s wild pronouncements on this issue were both ahistorical and morally misconceived. The question remains, therefore, why a writer with such a perverse view of the role of Jews in the world should be regarded as any sort of authority on modern Jewish history.</p>
<p><strong> </strong></p>
<p><strong>Satter: </strong>Ultimately, Arendt is not regarded as an authority on modern Jewish history although she wrote a great deal on this subject. She is seen as a profound investigator of totalitarianism and it on this that her reputation depends.</p>
<p>I think that Arendt’s notion of totalitarianism as the combination of ideology and terror and her understanding of ideology as a substitute for empirical reality is very important to us today. The totalitarian worldview is deeply counter-intuitive. There is a tendency to treat it as a joke and to underestimate its murderous potential. We therefore need to understand, as Arendt shows us, that what is at stake is an attempt to destroy what is human under the overwhelming pressure of a deluded view of reality.</p>
<p>Arendt’s work, along with that of George Orwell, Arthur Koestler, Czeslaw Milosz, and many others helped to turn the West against communism and against the Soviet Union. But this should be seen as their great achievement. We excluded a consideration of Islamic fanaticism from our discussion but the relevance of Arendt’s definitions for an understanding of radical Islam is striking. A man made ideology is again trying to impose itself with the help of unlimited terror. The West can and will make many mistakes in its struggle with totalitarianism but we have the means to understand what it is that threatens us. For this, we owe a great deal – despite its shortcomings – to the work of Hannah Arendt.</p>
<p><strong>FP:</strong> David Satter and Bernard Wasserstein, our time is up, thank you for joining Frontpage Symposium.</p>
<p><strong> </strong></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2010/jamie-glazov/symposium-is-hannah-arendt-still-relevant/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>13</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Eric Kurlander: Empathy for Hitler? What in the World is Oliver Stone Talking About? &#8211; HNN</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2010/jlaksin/eric-kurlander-empathy-for-hitler-what-in-the-world-is-oliver-stone-talking-about-hnn/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=eric-kurlander-empathy-for-hitler-what-in-the-world-is-oliver-stone-talking-about-hnn</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2010/jlaksin/eric-kurlander-empathy-for-hitler-what-in-the-world-is-oliver-stone-talking-about-hnn/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 20 Jan 2010 07:35:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Jacob Laksin]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Adolf Hitler]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[America]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[approach]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[cannot]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[cause]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[connection]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[consultant]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[decent human]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[director]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[director oliver stone]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[empathy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[first world war]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[furor]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[gaab]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[german chancellor]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[great depression]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[historian]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[History]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[history of america]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[hitler and the nazis]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[HNN]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[internal circumstances]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Jeffrey Gaab]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[jewish groups]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[mini-series]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[nazi movement]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[nazism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[novel]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Oliver Stone]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[person]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Peter Kuznick]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[point of departure]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[political crises]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[precise point]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[product]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[reference]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ron radosh]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[scapegoat]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[secret history]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[sensationalism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[series]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Showtime]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Stalin]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Versailles]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[versailles treaty]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[week]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Weimar Republic]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[World]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[WWI]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[WWII]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=46999</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Last week the director Oliver Stone caused quite a stir when, in describing his new Showtime mini-series, &#8220;A Secret History of America,&#8221; he declared that Adolf Hitler was an &#8220;easy scapegoat throughout history… [who]&#8216;s been used cheaply.&#8221; &#8220;We can&#8217;t judge people as only &#8216;bad&#8217; or &#8216;good,&#8217;&#8221; Stone continued. Even Hitler was &#8220;the product of a [&#8230;]]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://www.hnn.us/articles/122342.html"><img src='http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/01/51tAa8ZT0HL._SL500_AA240_.jpg' alt='' /></a></p>
<p>Last week the director Oliver Stone caused quite a stir when, in describing his new Showtime mini-series, &#8220;A Secret History of America,&#8221; he declared that Adolf Hitler was an &#8220;easy scapegoat throughout history… [who]&#8216;s been used cheaply.&#8221;  &#8220;We can&#8217;t judge people as only &#8216;bad&#8217; or &#8216;good,&#8217;&#8221; Stone continued.  Even Hitler was &#8220;the product of a series of actions.  It&#8217;s cause and effect.  People in America don&#8217;t know the connection between WWI and WWII.&#8221;  “You cannot approach history,” Stone added in reference to Stalin and Hitler, “unless you have empathy for the person you may hate.&#8221;</p>
<p>The furor, as one can imagine, was immediate; not only from historians and Jewish groups, but journalists and politicians as well.  As Ron Radosh wrote in his own scathing HNN reply to Stone and the director’s main consultant, the historian Peter Kuznick, it&#8217;s hardly novel for academics to argue that Nazism was a product of external and internal circumstances.  Without the First World War, Versailles Treaty, or the Great Depression, the Nazi movement could never have achieved the success that it did.  And without the repeated social and political crises that defined the latter years of the Weimar Republic, Hitler would not have been named German Chancellor in January 1933.  We don’t need “empathy” for Hitler to understand the way that people, even Hitler and the Nazis, were shaped by circumstances.  So what in the world is Stone talking about?</p>
<p>One can only speculate as to the director’s precise point of departure.  But I’m going to presume that Stone, despite his penchant for sensationalism, is hardly going to make the case that Hitler was a decent human being.  The question he probably intends to answer is the same one I address in my recent book, Living With Hitler (reviewed by Jeffrey Gaab in the September 2009 HNN newsletter):  How could so many educated, liberal-minded Germans have actively supported, or at the very least passively accommodated, a fanatic like Hitler?</p>
<p>via <a href="http://www.hnn.us/articles/122342.html">What in the World is Oliver Stone Talking About?</a>.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2010/jlaksin/eric-kurlander-empathy-for-hitler-what-in-the-world-is-oliver-stone-talking-about-hnn/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Performance optimized by W3 Total Cache. Learn more: http://www.w3-edge.com/wordpress-plugins/

Object Caching 1512/1599 objects using disk
Content Delivery Network via cdn.frontpagemag.com

 Served from: www.frontpagemag.com @ 2014-12-31 04:55:48 by W3 Total Cache -->