The Mufti, Nazism, and the naqba

December 3, 2011 at 11:50 pm (anti-semitism, fascism, history, islamism, israel, Jim D, Middle East, palestine)

This looks like an interesting (though very expensive) book – but you might be able to get it from a university library.

Edgware  Vallentine Mitchell, 2010.  256 pp. $74.95, ISBN 978-0-85303-844-3.
Reviewed by Norman Goda (University of Florida) Published on H-Judaic (December, 2011) : ‘The Riddle of the Mufti’:
.

Above: the Mufti with Hitler (December 1941)

The enduring nature of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, the attacks of September 11, and the antisemitic rhetoric of Mahmud Ahmadinejad and other extreme Islamists has produced contemporary interest in the history of antisemitism in the Arab/Muslim world. Specifically, scholars and journalists have asked whether there exists a link between Nazi thinking on the Jewish question and current discourse in the Arab/Muslim world on Jews and on Western modernity. These questions are of great importance. Current “anti-Zionist” rhetoric is said to center on anticolonial narratives, which carry moral authority with many on the political left in Europe and in formerly colonized regions. But this moral authority would vanish should the roots of anti-Israel thinking be shown to have its roots in Nazism.

.
Scholars have tackled the problem from many angles.[1] But a key piece to the puzzle is Haj Amin al-Husseini, the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem from 1921 to 1948. In 1941 the mufti, having triggered failed revolts against the British in both Palestine and Iraq, gravitated to Berlin, where for four years he tried to tighten bonds between Nazi Germany and the Arabs and Muslims of the Middle East. After Germany’s defeat he fled to Paris, then Cairo, then Beirut, while styling himself as a nationalist and anti-imperialist. Was the mufti’s policy in Berlin simply a question of anti-British pragmatism? Or was he the missing link between the Nazis’ war against the Jews and more extreme forms of Muslim antisemitism today? And whom did the mufti ultimately speak for in the Middle East?

.
The complex of issues is the subject of Klaus Gensicke’s _Der Mufti von Jerusalem und die Nationalsozialisten _(2007), now translated and updated as _The Mufti of Jerusalem and the Nazis_. The book is based primarily on German and British records and shows that the mufti’s role in Berlin was multilayered yet telling. On the one hand, he never convinced the Germans to back his geopolitical aim of an independent Middle East under his own leadership. On the other, he endorsed Nazism’s war against the Jews on ideological grounds, and contributed where he could to the Jews’ destruction.

.
Amin al-Husseini was initially a clan leader and uncompromising political agitator. He worked against the Balfour Declaration from the moment it was issued in 1917 and helped trigger riots against the settlement of European Jews in the 1920s. The British hoped to co-opt him and the Husseini clan by making him the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem in 1921. The position made Husseini responsible for Islamic holy sites, but Husseini used it to argue that the Jews were trying to control the al-Aqsa Mosque and to augment his political standing. By 1936 he was head of the Arab Higher Committee, a position from which he claimed to speak for all Arabs. The revolt he triggered in Palestine from 1936 to 1939 sought to end British rule and to eliminate the mufti’s more moderate Arab political opponents

Husseini adopted an uncompromising antisemitism that viewed Jews not just as Western interlopers in Palestine and not just as religious infidels, but as an existential threat as per the modern European antisemitic tradition. He rejected British partition schemes for Palestine in 1937 as well as the 1939 White Paper, which sharply limited Jewish immigration and was accepted by the more moderate Nashishibi faction. Instead the mufti courted Nazi Germany from the moment Hitler came to power in part because Hitler, at least when it came to Jews, spoke his language. Husseini argued to German interlocutors that, “Current Jewish influence on economics and politics is injurious all over and has to be combated” (p. 29). Living in exile in Baghdad after his failure in Palestine, he further demanded the expropriation of the 135,000 Jews there–who were hardly part of the European Zionist movement–and he instigated the pogrom that eventually erupted in Baghdad after the failed anti-British revolt in 1941.

.
Most crucial is the mufti’s period in Berlin from 1941 to the end of the war. On the one hand, Husseini hoped to win Hitler’s support for an independent Middle East while outflanking his Arab rivals in Berlin, namely Rashid Ali al-Kailani, who led the coup against the British in Iraq and whom the Germans hoped they might return to power there. On the other, he hoped to enlist the Germans to help with the eradication of the Jews in the Middle East. It was one of the mufti’s great disappointments that Hitler, realizing Italian aims in the Middle East and viewing the Arabs as another inferior Asiatic race, refused to back Arab independence openly. Husseini was sure that such a statement would deliver the Arab world to the Axis while cementing his own position in the Arab world. But Hitler and the mufti were in full accord that when Germany defeated the British, the Jews of Palestine would be destroyed. The mufti knew what this meant. When he met personally with Hitler in November 1941, Nazi propaganda on the Jews had been clear for two decades, and the Germans, with local help, had been killing Jews in the Soviet Union for four months.

.
Here indeed was the crucial link between the mufti and the Nazis. Unable to agree on Middle Eastern geopolitics, they could agree that Jews controlled the governments in Moscow, London, and Washington, and that murder was a desirable policy by which to eradicate Jews from the Middle East. The mufti was pleased to broadcast this message to the Arab world through the use of German radio facilities, and the Germans were pleased to have him do so, particularly after June 1942 when it looked as though the Afrika Korps, with an attached SS murder squad, would break through British defenses. As late as December 1942, with the Allies having taken the offensive in North Africa, Husseini, on the opening of the new Islamic Central Institute in Berlin, proclaimed that “the Holy Koran … is full of evidence of Jewish lack of character and their insidious lying and deceitful conduct” and that the Jews “will always remain a divisive element in the world … committed to devising schemes, provoking wars, and playing people off against one another” (p. 108). As scholars have pointed out, the tone and content of Arab propaganda from Berlin, speaking as it did of Jewish global conspiracies, has much in common with extreme Arab narratives today.

.
Gensicke points out, however, that the mufti was more than a propagandist while in Berlin. He conducted his own diplomacy, acting as a mediator between Berlin and King Farouk of Egypt in 1942. He tried to create an Arab legion with French POWs from North Africa to help the Germans and he also helped with the recruitment of the Bosnian Muslim SS division in 1943 that fought against Josef Tito’s partisans in Yugoslavia. Berlin’s desire to use him for German ends rather than place him at the head of an Arab independence movement infuriated him. Yet as Gensicke points put, the mufti openly committed himself to the Germans past the point of no return. Besides, the German Foreign Ministry kept him in opulent comfort, providing him with immense sums for his work and living expenses.

.
And regardless of the mufti’s frustrations with Hitler, the Jews remained his existential enemy. In spring 1943 when gas chambers in Poland murdered Jews from all over Europe, the mufti engaged in quiet diplomacy with the Romanian, Bulgarian, and Hungarian governments, urging them not to allow a few thousand Jewish children to travel to Palestine as was then being discussed in London. The Jews would be better off, the mufti said, in Poland where the Germans could keep an eye on them. Husseini enjoyed a close relationship with Heinrich Himmler and knew what awaited deported Jews. The mufti never drove the Final Solution–Himmler was unwilling to allow Jews to escape in any event–but he worked to ensure that as many Jews were killed as possible. In the meantime he tried to fuse Islam with Nazism, creating seven new “pillars” that included the thesis that, “In the struggle against Jewry, Islam and National Socialism come very close to one another” (p. 149).

.
Gensicke points out that Husseini could easily have been tried for war crimes, particularly in Yugoslavia where Bosnian Muslims he recruited engaged in various excesses. But following his escape to France in the war’s final days, neither then French nor the British wished to inflame radical Arab opinion by extraditing him. The mufti’s apologists in Palestine and Egypt could thus claim that he tried to use the Germans for anticolonial aims rather than collaborating with them. Moreover, his role in the Final Solution did not come up in postwar trials. The distortion had immediate effects in Cairo, where Arab nationalists launched a pogrom to celebrate his arrival in 1946. It also had effects in Palestine, where as a hero with _bona fides_ he effectively agitated against 1947 UN partition schemes, called for the immediate destruction of the Jews once the British left, and branded Arabs who accepted the partition as traitors. It all backfired. “The Mufti,” concludes Gensicke, “bore much of the blame for the naqba,” by which the attack on Israel in 1948 created throngs of Arab refugees (p. 189).

After 1948 the mufti waned into political insignificance. The new generations of Arab leaders such as Egypt’s Gamal Abdel Nasser were committed to destroying Israel. So was the new generation of Palestinian students who came of age in the 1960s and formed the PLO. A former clan based-leader Arab leader whose Nazi collaboration sullied an anticolonial narrative and was surely yesterday’s man. Still none openly condemned the connection between Husseini and Hitler. Yassir Arafat was among Husseini’s mourners when he died in exile in 1974, and he referred to Husseini as “our hero” as late as 2002 (p. 203). And as Gensicke shows in this important book, the mufti threw a long shadow as a precursor to the Arab and Muslim factions who reject all compromise with Jews in the Middle East and whose brand of antisemitism borrows much from the Western traditions that they otherwise despise.

.
Notes
[1]. See especially Matthias Küntzel, _Jihad and Jew Hatred: Islamism, Nazism and the Roots of 9/11_ (New York: Telos, 2007); Klaus-Michael Mallmann and Martin Cüppers, _Nazi Palestine: The Plans for the Extermination of the Jews in Palestine _(New York: Enigma, 2010); Ian Johnson, _A Mosque in Munich: Nazis, the CIA, and the Rise of the Muslim Brotherhood in the West _(Boston: Hoghton Mifflin, 2010); Jeffrey Herf, _Nazi Propaganda for the Arab World _(reprint, New Haven: Yale University Press, 2010); and Jeffrey Herf, ed., _Anti-Semitism and Anti-Zionism in Historical Perspective: Convergence and Divergence_ (London: Routledge, 2006).
Citation: Norman Goda. Review of Gensicke, Klaus, _The Mufti of Jerusalem and the Nazis: The Berlin Years, 1941-1945_. H-Judaic, H-Net Reviews. December, 2011. URL: https://www.h-net.org/reviews/showrev.php?id=32099
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 United States License.

H/t: Cathy

53 Comments

  1. Emma Goldman said,

    I’m sure that Jim Denham would like to comment on the attempt by the Fascist Zionist Stern Gang to form an alliance with the Nazis.

    http://www.palestineremembered.com/Acre/Palestine-Remembered/Story799.html

    And what happened to one of the leaders of the Stern Gang who wanted to fight against the British on behalf of the Nazis?

    Yitzhak Shamir became Prime Minister of Israel.

    ps He’s still alive.

    • Argaman said,

      When I was living in Israel in the late 1980s, I happened to catch the broadcast on Yom ha-Shoah of people reading the names of Jews who died in the Holocaust. Shamir read the names of his family members who died at the hands of the Nazis.

      • Emma Goldman said,

        Did anyone question his hypocrisy, seeing as he was a (failed) Nazi collaborator?

    • Monsuer Jelly est Formidable said,

      antisemitic pissflap – besmirching name as well.

      • Monsuer Jelly est Formidable said,

        that was directed at E G cuernt – just to be clear

  2. Argaman said,

    And, while I’m here, Emma, why on earth is your comment relevant to the topic of the post?

    • Emma Goldman said,

      It was about collaboration with the Nazis. I gave an example – you’ve got a problem with that?

      • Ben said,

        Shamir did not collaborate with the Nazis to murder Jews – he offered the Nazis a deal in order to save Jews.

        The British had effectively given the Germans a green light to do to the Jews as they will, by ending immigration to Palestine at the moment of greatest need of the Jews. This was in direct contravention of the Mandate given to the British Government by the League of Nations, and facilitated the holocaust by shutting off a critically important haven to European Jews. Furthermore, by sabotaging the earlier Evian conference and ensuring that no refuge be given to Jews in British Empire territories and elsewhere, the British had made the situation of Europe’s Jews even worse. As a consequence, millions of Jews died who would otherwise have lived.

        Shamir felt that after the 1939 White Paper the only way to save the Jews of Europe from certain death was to cut a deal with the Germans. Objectively, it is hard to dispute that analysis.

  3. johng said,

    “Current “anti-Zionist” rhetoric is said to center on anticolonial narratives, which carry moral authority with many on the political left in Europe and in formerly colonized regions. But this moral authority would vanish should the roots of anti-Israel thinking be shown to have its roots in Nazism.”

    The ideological roots of this argument could not be clearer. An attempt to argue that Palestinian nationalism has its roots in fascism. Given the wealth of critical literature on the Mufti and his collaboration with the Nazis that already exists the only addition here is the pretty transparent political agenda.
    .

    • Monsuer Jelly est Formidable said,

      Methink’st thou art a general offence and every man should beat thee.

  4. Sarah AB said,

    Just a comment on the post’s title – I assume you could also order the book from your local (non university) library. My local library website says it will try to get any book free of charge, although if it has had to pay to get the book via ILL it will advise the customer and then pass that charge on.

  5. charliethechulo said,

    A rather more sympathetic account of this Nazi collaborator (some might say “whitewash”) from a predictable quarter:
    http://www.newstatesman.com/books/2010/12/palestine-pappe-husaynis

  6. Jim Denham said,

    Gameboy sez: “Given the wealth of critical literature on the Mufti and his collaboration with the Nazis that already exists ….”
    Reply: But sadly, many of the left seem unaware, especially younger comrades. When did the SWP or similar (or the Palestine Solidarity Campaign) last mention it – even in passing?

    Gameboy: “…the only addition here is the pretty transparent political agenda.”
    Reply: A political agenda ?!? On a political blog? How outrageous!

  7. Monsuer Jelly est Formidable said,

    GameboY is such a grand tosser. Much Palestinian and arab antisemitism does indeed have its roots in a portable nazi ideology. That is a fact. something that GamebOy is unfamiliar with. Or is in denial about. ThicKK fuckking cuernT.

  8. johng said,

    No Jim. We can disagree as socialists about the history of Zionism, Palestinian nationalism etc. But I still think if your a leftist you should eschew arguments which are really the property of the extreme right in Israeli politics (I’ll leave aside the rather bizarre currents associated with the anti-Germans in Germany). Its surely possible to be a two stater and not argue that Palestinian nationalism is the product of Nazi anti-Antisemitism. The second world war cut across existing struggles between anti-colonial movements and colonialism. Most of the worlds empires were run by the allies. This produced some rather well known acrobatics on the Stalinist left when Hitler invaded the Soviet Union. However in the colonial world it meant that anti-colonial movements split-some going over to ‘my enemies enemy is my friend’ others eschewing this kind of a position. Those who took the first option had varying degrees of ideological contamination: my own feeling is that Bose in India had far less then that of the Mufti who became much more entangled with the Nazis. But the truth is that like Bose he had by then become a somewhat marginal figure (even if, like Bose, he loomed large in the consciousness of many afterwards). Logically it makes no sense to argue as if his collaboration with the Nazis proves that Palestinian nationalism was not ‘an anti-colonial movement’. Because similar figures existed in almost all of the anti-colonial movements at the time, and given the relationship between the allies and colonialism this can surely not be a surprise. It is equally not a surprise that despite this the whole question of the grand Mufti becomes a stake in contemporary arguments about the Israel-Palestine conflict. Socialists should however realise the political stakes involved, and should not contribute to a deranged political atmosphere where it becomes possible for some to seek to argue that the Nazi Holocaust was the scheme of Palestinians rather then Germans, and where attempts are made to argue that Palestinian nationalism is simply Nazi anti-semitism. Its actually shameful Jim. You seem to believe that much of the left made similar ideological flips. Its no excuse for you to do the same.

  9. Jim Denham said,

    Gameboy: “Its surely possible to be a two stater and not argue that Palestinian nationalism is the *product* of Nazi anti-Antisemitism” (my emphasis -JD)

    Reply to Gameboy: Yes it is; and who *does* claim that “Palestinian nationalism is the *product* of Nazi anti-Antisemitism” ?

    Certainly not me or anyone from the AWL. And I defy you or anyone else, to find anything any of us have ever written or said that means that.

    What we’re saying is that the all-too-common (in SWP-influenced and Arab-nationalist /Islamist circles, and the likes of the leftist playwrite Jim Allen) equation of Zionism and Nazism is extremely inappropriate, given the fact that at least one current of the Palestinian movement (ie the Mufti and his supporters) had actively and willingly collaborated with the Nazis, and that that tradition is still to be found in Arab and even some leftist “anti Zionism.” The sax-playing lunatic and racist Gilad Atzmon, for instance

    The present dispute within the PSC seems to be between those (like Lauren Booth and other white Muslim converts) who do not recognise antisemitism as a problem, and the “left” group in the leadership (not mainly SWP, but supported by the them), who have – belatedly – become concerned at the antisemitism within PSC.

    PS: Gameboy, who the hell (the “some” you refer to) argues this: “it becomes possible for some to seek to argue that the Nazi Holocaust was the scheme of Palestinians rather then Germans”????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????

    Are you mad? Tell us who the hell argues that? Names, please!

    • johng said,

      I quoted this:

      “Current “anti-Zionist” rhetoric is said to center on anticolonial narratives, which carry moral authority with many on the political left in Europe and in formerly colonized regions. But this moral authority would vanish should the roots of anti-Israel thinking be shown to have its roots in Nazism”

      posted by you on this very blog. The argument here is that Palestinian nationalism is not anti-colonial but has its roots in ‘Nazism’. Do you disagree that this paragraph (which you posted) says this?

      You then go on with a number of conflations (ie Islamist, SWP etc) which obviously I don’t accept. You then make a number of allegations conflating Palestinian nationalism with the Nazis. Which I believe belong to the far right of Israeli politics which I do not accept (anymore then I accept that because the far right of Zionist movements collaborated with Nazis and actually accepted in part fascist ideology this makes it legitimate to compare Zionism with Nazism: just to be clear I don’t think its acceptable).

      I am unaware of any dispute ‘within the PSC’ (as far as I can see what your referring to is someone attacking the PSC for distancing themselves from Atzmon. I’m unclear why you find it neccessary to refer to the persons religious beliefs).

  10. Jim Denham said,

    Let’s take things one point at a time, Gameboy.

    Firstly, who had you in mind when you wrote this:

    “it becomes possible for some to seek to argue that the Nazi Holocaust was the scheme of Palestinians rather then Germans”

    ?????????????????????????????

    A simple question; a simple answer will do.

  11. johng said,

    Well on these threads in shiraz socialist about two years ago when I got accused of being ‘an apologist’ for the grand mufti for suggesting that I didn’t believe the standard (far right and mad importantly) allegation that because the grand mufti had been in germany at the time of the wanasee conference it was possible that he was the architect of the nazi holocaust. Importantly neither you or anyone else from the AWL stepped in to attack what was in effect holocaust revisionism. Its not something I’d raise but it was personally very disturbing and (for me) effectively put you outside any civilized discussion amongst socialists. Look at your own threads. Aside from this it is of course common currency on the far right of Israeli politics.

  12. Jim Denham said,

    Eh, John: you haven’t answered the question: “who had you in mind?”

    This isn’t SOAS.

    A straight answer is required.

    Bullshit won’t do.

    Then we can move on to your other points.

  13. Jim Denham said,

    I hate to interrupt this fascinating exchange, but just on the subject of the “dispute within the PSC” that Gameboy is “unaware of”, I offer this from a source not usually quoted at ‘Shiraz’:

    http://azvsas.blogspot.com/2011/11/atzmon-friends-declare-war-on-palestine.html

    Now, to get back to the matter at hand, Gameboy: “who had you in mind?”

    Answer that and we can move on to you next point.

  14. sackcloth and ashes said,

    Bear in mind that John Game has continually acted as an apologist for Haj Amin al-Husseini, and to deny that there was anything significant about his ties with the Nazis.

    He’s a lousy scholar and a lousy excuse for a human being.

    • skidmarx said,

      Coming from Sickbag, who showed himself recently that he’s such a fan of tens of thousands of people being burned to death in Dresden in WW2 that he claims to actually teach people that it was a good thing (I didn’t know there was a university for psychotic arsonists), the claim that anyone else is a lousy human being is one of the more laughable I’ve seen today.

      • sackcloth and ashes said,

        ‘who showed himself recently that he’s such a fan of tens of thousands of people being burned to death in Dresden in WW2′

        Got any way of substantiating that smear, shitstain?

        Of course not.

        And talking of apologias for mass murder, you’re the one who endorses genocide denial, you Strasserite piece of walking sewage.

      • skidmarx said,

        Pretending amnesia now, Sickbag? I know that you enthused about the firebombing of Dresden on this thread:http://hurryupharry.org/2011/11/22/bradford-psc-karl-dallas-john-hamilton-and-raise-your-banners/
        are you seriously denying it?

  15. sackcloth and ashes said,

    For an example, here’s a comment by Gameboy which appeared on this thread:

    http://hurryupharry.org/2011/05/23/the-mufti-of-jerusalem-and-the-nazis/

    ‘johng (23 May 2011, 3:47pm): Is this an attempt to argue that Arabs were responsible for the Nazi Holocaust? That the grand mufti is somehow in the same league as Heinrich Himmler? I cannot see any difference between this kind of filth and standard holocaust revisionism. This rubbish is shameful beyond words. I guess its pretty cool stuff if your a German’.

    Par for the course for the pseudo-leftist, pseudo-academic but genuine wanker who’s polluted this thread.

    • skidmarx said,

      And Sickbag complains about pollution the same way the Nazis used to talk about dirty Jews.

  16. Argaman said,

    No one here is arguing that Husseini was an architect of the Final Solution, but on the other hand he did spend the war years in Berlin and was involved in organizing a Waffen SS regiment in Yugoslavia – thus contributing in his own way to the Nazi war effort. He was also very important in the broadcasting of antisemitic Nazi propaganda to the Middle East.

    Before he was kicked out of Palestine by the British he was the head of the Arab Higher Committee and the leader of the Arabs of Palestine, and not incidentally the instigator of the Arab revolt of 1936-39 against both British rule and the Jewish population in Palestine – thus a very important actor for the Palestinian national movement before WWII.

    • Emma Goldman said,

      Was that similar to the way Prime Minister of Israel Shamir and his Stern Gang tried to contribute in their own way to the Nazi war effort?

  17. Jim Denham said,

    To avoid distraction, I repeat my last point to Gameboy:

    Eh, John: you haven’t answered the question: “who had you in mind?” (my question to you after you wrote “some to seek to argue that the Nazi Holocaust was the scheme of Palestinians rather then Germans”).

    You still haven’t answered.

    This isn’t SOAS.

    A straight answer is required.

    Bullshit won’t do.

    Then we can move on to your other points.

  18. johng said,

    Jim I already told you. Its an argument that comes up whenever the issue is debated (including on these threads a couple of years ago). I can’t tell who it is because they don’t leave their names. But it would be far better if you responded to all the points. You give the impression of not being able to answer them. In the meantime far right nutcases like sack cloth libel socialists freely on your threads. You should be ashamed of yourself.

  19. Jim Denham said,

    Gameboy: I’m quite capable and willing to answer all your points. I just want you to first answer mine, instead of avoiding it with bluster and bullshit:

    You claim that “some to seek to argue that the Nazi Holocaust was the scheme of Palestinians rather then Germans”:

    I ask you again: WHO are you talking about?

    If these people are so significant, and their “argument comes up whenever the issue is debated”, then you must have some idea who “they” (aka “some”) are, even if you don’t have the names of individuals.

    Come on, Gameboy: who are “they”?

  20. Emma Goldman said,

    Perhaps Jim Denham could address my post rather than blustering. Doers he believe it’s OK to collaborate with the Nazis as long as you are a Zionist?

  21. Jim Denham said,

    I don’t debate with outright antisemites, “Emma”: So just fuck off, eh?

    • Emma Goldman said,

      So, what makes me an anti-semite?

  22. Jim Denham said,

    Just a reminder, Gameboy:

    You claim that “some to seek to argue that the Nazi Holocaust was the scheme of Palestinians rather then Germans”:

    I ask you (yet) again: WHO are you talking about?

    If these people are so significant, and their “argument comes up whenever the issue is debated”, then you must have some idea who “they” (aka “some”) are, even if you don’t have the names of individuals.

    Come on, Gameboy: who are “they”?

    Just give me a clear answer to that, and then I’ll deal with your other points.

  23. Emma Goldman said,

    I see pointing out collaboration with the Nazis makes me an anti-semite, whereas those who try to cover it up…

  24. johng said,

    People on this site two years ago probably inspired by this kind of bigoted rubbish:

    http://bigjournalism.com/pgeller/2010/02/07/the-mufti-of-jerusalem-architect-of-the-holocaust/

    Its a well known right wing meme. However when I challenged it I was then accused of “defending the grand mufti’ and other ridiculous things. It left a bad taste. Its possible that you can’t control who posts here. But you can control whether you let such rubbish go unchallenged.

    Now I’m not interested in the kind of discussion where you just dodge every substantive argument and spend most of your time trying to libel whoever your arguing with. Could you just answer the points I made?

    • Emma Goldman said,

      Denham doesn’t just libel people who point out facts he doesn’t like – he deletes their comments.

  25. Argaman said,

    John – Are you trying to fake us out? That was an article at Breitbart, not Shiraz. How about providing us with a link, and some names from that?

    Emma – are you making the antisemitic argument that there were Jews who wanted the Nazis to exterminate them? I refer you back to Shamir reading aloud the names of his family killed in the Holocaust.

    • Emma Goldman said,

      ‘Emma – are you making the antisemitic argument that there were Jews who wanted the Nazis to exterminate them?’

      Not at all – I’m just pointing out that the Mufti was not the only Nazi collaborator in the region. As for Shamir reading out names, how does that excuse his attempt to form an alliance with the Nazis? By the way, while the British were fighting the Nazis, fascist groups like the Irgun and the Stern Gang were fighting the British. Their leaders, Begin and Shamir became Prime Ministers of Israel. Are you trying to deny any of this?

  26. sackcloth and ashes said,

    ‘I know that you enthused about the firebombing of Dresden on this thread:http://hurryupharry.org/2011/11/22/bradford-psc-karl-dallas-john-hamilton-and-raise-your-banners/
    are you seriously denying it?’

    You lying little sack of shit.

    I pointed out on the thread that the trick of mentioning Dresden alongside the Holocaust was a standard far-right tactic, as practiced repeatedly by the NPD (and as rejected by anti-fascist Germans).

    If you actually quoted something I’d written on that particular comments thread you could see that for yourself. But instead you resort to the cheap smear, just like the Strrasserite scum that you are.

    • skidmarx said,

      If I had access to that comments thread I’d quote you directly, Sickbag. Are you denying that you support the firebombing of Dresden?

  27. sackcloth and ashes said,

    ‘However when I challenged it I was then accused of “defending the grand mufti’ and other ridiculous things’.

    John Game – you are on record (as per my comments above) as denouncing Klaus Gensicke and Karl Pfeiffer (someone who has done more to combat fascism than you will ever achieve) as being akin to Holocaust deniers. If anyone has been resorting to shrill accusations and cheap smears, it is you.

    You don’t like being reminded of the Grand Mufti’s collaboration with the Nazis, and his willingness to assist them in their efforts to exterminate the Jewish people. Tough shit, you charlatan.

  28. sackcloth and ashes said,

    ‘I’m just pointing out that the Mufti was not the only Nazi collaborator in the region’.

    True, there was Rashid Ali as well.

    You and skidmark should date. You’d get on well with each other.

    • skidmarx said,

      Now the implied homophobic abuse. Are there no lows you won’t stoop to, Sickbag?

  29. holy joe said,

    “This isn’t SOAS.”
    Ain’t that the truth. I think there would be very little chance of anybody confusing this blog with an institution of higher education, except perhaps for the mythical establishment where Sackcloth and Ashes is enthroned as Professor Emeritus, presumably of scatology studies since it seems to be the only field he has any expertise in.

  30. Jim Denham said,

    Gameboy: I do not consider that you have properly answered my question (re the claim that “some seek to argue that the Nazi Holocaust was the scheme of Palestinians rather then Germans”), though I note you’ve eventuallly come up with one article from a source I’ve never heard of and that certainly has no connection with Shiraz, despite your scurrilous and entirely unsubstantiated claim that “people on this site (ie Shiraz) (were) probably inspired by this kind of bigoted rubbish.” You really need to back that up with names and links, etc, otherwise it’s a slander/libel that you should withdraw.

    When you’ve done that we can have a serious debate on the issues.

  31. SteveH said,

    Wait til your boys start laying waste to Iran. Shit it’s going to get really ugly then!

    I’ll warn you in advance, I ain’t siding with Israel.

    • Monsuer Jelly est Formidable said,

      “I’ll warn you in advance, I ain’t siding with Israel.”

      that will make it to the top of bbc news 24 – news flash!!$!!!! stEveH Sez

  32. Rosie said,

    Well on these threads in shiraz socialist about two years ago when I got accused of being ‘an apologist’ for the grand mufti for suggesting that I didn’t believe the standard (far right and mad importantly) allegation that because the grand mufti had been in germany at the time of the wanasee conference it was possible that he was the architect of the nazi holocaust. Importantly neither you or anyone else from the AWL stepped in to attack what was in effect holocaust revisionism. Its not something I’d raise but it was personally very disturbing and (for me) effectively put you outside any civilized discussion amongst socialists. Look at your own threads. Aside from this it is of course common currency on the far right of Israeli politics.

    Could you point to the thread? I would say that if anyone made that argument – that the grand mufti was the “architect” of the Nazi holocaust, I would think that it was deranged – showing a kind of Protocols of the Elders of Zion derangement. So deranged it wouldn’t be worth arguing with.

    “it becomes possible for some to seek to argue that the Nazi Holocaust was the scheme of Palestinians rather then Germans”

    The “some” you refer to must be out there with David Icke.

  33. Clive said,

    Loath as I am to get sucked into this….

    1. To whoever it is who asked: obviously, anyone collaborating with Nazis is wrong. (I leave aside historical evidence one way or the other; I’m speaking in principle).

    It’s a peculiar response to an argument about the Mufti, though, to say – aha! But Zionists did it too! Suppose they did. What about the Mufti?

    2. Johng – some of what you say (too tired to spell it out) I accept, actually. But – there’s a difference surely between arguing that *Palestinian nationalism* has its roots in Nazism, and that *anti-Zionism* does.

    I wouldn’t argue the latter either; only that there are themes in some anti-Zionist discourse which echo classical anti-semitism.

    But a claim about ‘anti-Zionism’ is not the same as a claim about Palestinian nationalism (ie a much more broadly-definable response to Palestinian dispossession, among other things).

  34. charliethechulo said,

    A not-very-good article by Owen Jones at the New Statesman blog about some antisemitic comments by Labour leftie (and generally quite good) MP Paul Flynn. Jones seems more concerned about the “ammunition” that Flynn has given to “Zionists” than the antisemtic comments themselves; still the article does at least criticise Flynn. Many of the comments that follow, presumably from New Staesman readers, are (to say the least) disturbing:
    http://www.newstatesman.com/blogs/the-staggers/2011/12/jewish-flynn-israel-gould

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 88 other followers