Netanyahu slammed for 'inaccurate' Holocaust comments

[dexterm]

It would not surprise me at all if Hitler initially intended to force all the Jews out of Europe and eventually decided that murdering them all would suit his purposes more exactly. There were plenty of hate-filled lunatics who would have been happy to influence him in that direction back then, including the Grand Mufti.

Why on earth would the arch Aryan supremacist Hitler take advice from an Arab, a Semite .... lunacy.

And if the Mufti were the mastermind or inspiration for the Holocaust, as you and Netanyahu suggest, why did Israel allow him to die peacefully of old age in Beirut in 1974 and did not send a hit squad to assassinate or capture him as they did Eichmann..

Netanyahu was simply trying to pour gas on the current conflagration, and it has backfired on him.

Edited October 25, 2015 by dexterm

[Morch]

According to some guy on the internet who does not seem to be an expert on much of anything.

You mean this guy Ulysses?

http://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/.premium-1.681718

(this is unique btw. Its the first time I refer to an article from the Haaretz. But because that newspaper generally speaks your language, I dont have to translate it)

UG would have us believe that his ability to read Hitler's mind and what actually motivated him to murder 6 million Jews trumps the Holocaust Memorial's Vad Yashem chief historian Dina Porat.

Yad Vashem’s Chief Historian on Hitler and the Mufti: Netanyahu Had It All Wrong

"There is no evidence that Haj Amin al-Husseini proposed the ‘final solution’ to Hitler, according to Yad Vashem chief historian Dina Porat.

Prof. Dina Porat, chief historian of Yad Vashem, called Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s claim that Hitler did not seek to exterminate the Jews until his meeting with the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem at the time, Haj Amin al-Husseini “completely erroneous, on all counts"

http://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/.premium-1.681718

Gives a "like" to a post describing Zionists as liars, manipulators, lacking ethics and deniers of truth.

Gives a "like" to a post describing Israelis as distorting history.

Cites criticism by an Israeli Zionist historian.

As previously pointed out by another, got to be one of the oddest topics on issues related to the conflict.

[Petchou]

Imagine

Someone comes into your home door with a bible in one hand and a gun in another, and tells you, his ancestors lived at your place. Would you leave?

This is the stupidest and irrelevant argument to occupy someone else land while yours is in central Europe, Russia, or somewhere else....

[Seastallion]

It would not surprise me at all if Hitler initially intended to force all the Jews out of Europe and eventually decided that murdering them all would suit his purposes more exactly. There were plenty of hate-filled lunatics who would have been happy to influence him in that direction back then, including the Grand Mufti.

What's behind all this hate?

In the Grand Mufti's case, by the 1930's the Zionist Movement was gaining traction and momentum. They had made their goal clear.

How would you feel if a bunch of people, some of them influential, and with the political and financial means, made it clear that they intended to drive you and your people out of your ancestral home?

The Nazis were after the Jews, Zionist or otherwise. Allying and collaborating with them carries far greater implication than defending any "ancestral home".

The enemy of my enemy is my friend. Not unusual. But you're ignoring the "why". Why were the Jews an enemy of a Palestinian? Because they were moving in with a declared goal to drive the Arabs out.

I ask again, how would you feel towards a group that is moving in on your ancestral home?

[arunsakda]

It would not surprise me at all if Hitler initially intended to force all the Jews out of Europe and eventually decided that murdering them all would suit his purposes more exactly. There were plenty of hate-filled lunatics who would have been happy to influence him in that direction back then, including the Grand Mufti.

Why on earth would the arch Aryan supremacist Hitler take advice from an Arab, a Semite .... lunacy.

And if the Mufti were the mastermind or inspiration for the Holocaust, as you and Netanyahu suggest, why did Israel allow him to die peacefully of old age in Beirut in 1974 and did not send a hit squad to assassinate or capture him as they did Eichmann..

Netanyahu was simply trying to pour gas on the current conflagration, and it has backfired on him.

You are suffering from a fundamental misunderstanding of history. Hitler needed to defeat Britain and France and Arabs were tribal people suffering under their Colonialism. The first call for Jihad (against the Colonials) was issued by the Nazis. (The English had promised Arabs various things for rising up against Turks, and promised other things to Jews, having a bad tendency to reneg on these comittments to both sides). The collaboration between revisionist zionism and facsism is also well documented. Everyone knows of the SS Newspapers pushing Zionism in the 1930's, the BETAR Naval academy which was a nucleus of the Israel Navy in Italy under Mussolini, and Lehi (Stern Gang) etc., offering to join the war against Britain in exchange for a future Jewish state based on totatalitarian principles. None of this however means zionists are Nazis or that Hitler held any favor towards Arabs. The Nazis supported The Arabs necause they were against Britain and France. Period. They are just historical facts, which came from political expediency, and have no relevence really to the current situation whatsoever. By the time Mr. Mufti was meeting with Hitler the "final solution" was underway and the "Einsatzgruppen" were commiting unspeakable atrocities in the East.

What Bibi said is the worst kind of revisionism as it will give fodder to those mouth breathing morons who will continue to claim The Nazis were just some kind of reasonable Nationalist and then Hitler was influenced by a crazy Arab, when all he wanted to do was "expel them".

Rubbish.

Edited October 25, 2015 by arunsakda

[Andaman Al]

It would not surprise me at all if Hitler initially intended to force all the Jews out of Europe and eventually decided that murdering them all would suit his purposes more exactly. There were plenty of hate-filled lunatics who would have been happy to influence him in that direction back then, including the Grand Mufti.

Ulysses. Don't be going to Germany or Austria any time soon. By your own written words you are guilty under Holocaust Denial laws. Check it out . Wow, Ulysses, the Holocaust Denier.

[Morch]

Predictably the left wing press are making a storm in a teacup here yet studiously ignoring the systematic incitement of the Palestinian leaders. There is also the most egregious whopper from Erekat who magics up more Palestinian history claiming they fought against the Nazis when the exact opposite is common knowledge. Little wonder the MSM ignored this as it's just too embarrassing for esteemed western guardianistas to talk about.

http://ukmediawatch.org/2015/10/21/guardian-piles-on-bibi-historical-distortion-omits-erekat-lie-that-palestinians-fought-nazis/

There were Palestinians (or rather, Arabs from Palestine, at the time) who served in the British Army during WWII. The call for volunteers was not restricted to Jews, and there were active recruitment efforts aimed at the Arab population. In terms of figures, Jewish volunteers totaled circa 40,000, while the Arab volunteers were about 10,000 strong (estimates vary), Factoring the relative demographics, obviously it was of a Jewish thing. It should be mentioned that this was shortly after the 1936-1939 Arab Revolt, so cooperation with the British authorities was not a trivial concept. The main motivation seemed to be economic, with both the revolt's aftermath and the onset of the war effecting conditions.

Therefore, Erekat is not wrong when he claims there were Palestinians fighting the Nazis, but he certainly spins it some by calling it a "deep rooted part of our history" or saying that "Palestinians will never forget" - both counterfactual, to put it mildly. There was much criticism and some violence directed toward volunteers and their families. Not quite the hero's return as well, in all cases.

The volunteers were organized in designated mixed units, and overall, accounts indicate that relationship among the troops were generally good. Those wishing to delve more into this part of history may try to look up details on the Middle East Commando, No. 51 Commando or Henry Cater. As far as Arab attitudes toward volunteers and such - harder to come by (which refutes Erekat's spin).

[Andaman Al]

An English translation of the Hitler/Mufti meeting transcript:

http://www.worldfuturefund.org/wffmaster/Reading/Total/hitler.mufti.htm

http://destination-yisrael.biblesearchers.com/destination-yisrael/2010/02/the-jerusalem-grand-muftis-diary-on-his-meeting-with-adolf-hitler.html

Translation of the Mufti's diary regarding his one meeting with Hitler

Well these official translations are clearly rubbish. I have read them and all the associated official links and nowhere does it say that the Mufti suggested that Hitler 'burn the Jews', nor do any of the Documents say that Hitler was proposing to 'move all the Jews out of Germany and Europe' (Ulysses please note). In fact it is quite specific in that Hitler claims he will not stop until the Jewish people are eradicated.

So with that in mind it would seem that official documentation recording the meetings from sources that include the Grand Mufti show that the Grand Mufti played no part in persuading Hitler of anything. Therefore Pakboong, according to Netanyahu, Ulysses and a number of others on here willing to switch versions of History to justify the massacre of innocent women and children in Palestine your post and the official documents in it are nonsense.

[Morch]

It would not surprise me at all if Hitler initially intended to force all the Jews out of Europe and eventually decided that murdering them all would suit his purposes more exactly. There were plenty of hate-filled lunatics who would have been happy to influence him in that direction back then, including the Grand Mufti.

What's behind all this hate?

In the Grand Mufti's case, by the 1930's the Zionist Movement was gaining traction and momentum. They had made their goal clear.

How would you feel if a bunch of people, some of them influential, and with the political and financial means, made it clear that they intended to drive you and your people out of your ancestral home?

The Nazis were after the Jews, Zionist or otherwise. Allying and collaborating with them carries far greater implication than defending any "ancestral home".

The enemy of my enemy is my friend. Not unusual. But you're ignoring the "why". Why were the Jews an enemy of a Palestinian? Because they were moving in with a declared goal to drive the Arabs out.

I ask again, how would you feel towards a group that is moving in on your ancestral home?

It is unusual, when considering the nature of the Nazis. Sometimes, even the enemy of an enemy must be shunned.

Defending an ancestral home is one thing, happily teaming with a force bent on eradicating all the Jews, even those having nothing to do with said ancestral home, is vile.

A "declared goal to drive the Arabs out"? Really? I seem to recall a few committees attempting partition proposals, legal acquisition of land (with claims that Jewish owned lands were minimal at the time, on other topics), less by way of "drive the Arabs out" or visiting violence upon them. Also, again a failure to acknowledge that al-Husseini's activities started much earlier, and that for years, he wished to see Palestine incorporated withing a greater Arab state. The nationalistic angle only came later on. And of course, nothing made of his anti-Jewish rhetoric and positions.....

[Soutpeel]

It would not surprise me at all if Hitler initially intended to force all the Jews out of Europe and eventually decided that murdering them all would suit his purposes more exactly. There were plenty of hate-filled lunatics who would have been happy to influence him in that direction back then, including the Grand Mufti.

Ulysses. Don't be going to Germany or Austria any time soon. By your own written words you are guilty under Holocaust Denial laws. Check it out . Wow, Ulysses, the Holocaust Denier.

Even more troubling is the fact Merkel, in response to the holocaust denial remarks by the Israeli PM, stated Germany accepted all responsibilty for the Holocaust, so one is even calling the German pm a liar as well...

It seems to me the Zionists are that blinded by their own fanactical beliefs and hatred of their neighbours that they would even deny the accepted narrative of the holocaust to forward their agenda...

If a "gentile" on here was questioning the accepted narrative of the holocaust one suspects they would be branded a neo nazi, jew hater, anti-zionist or Arab apologist by the glee club by now

Edited October 25, 2015 by Soutpeel

[dexterm]

It would not surprise me at all if Hitler initially intended to force all the Jews out of Europe and eventually decided that murdering them all would suit his purposes more exactly. There were plenty of hate-filled lunatics who would have been happy to influence him in that direction back then, including the Grand Mufti.

Why on earth would the arch Aryan supremacist Hitler take advice from an Arab, a Semite .... lunacy.

And if the Mufti were the mastermind or inspiration for the Holocaust, as you and Netanyahu suggest, why did Israel allow him to die peacefully of old age in Beirut in 1974 and did not send a hit squad to assassinate or capture him as they did Eichmann..

Netanyahu was simply trying to pour gas on the current conflagration, and it has backfired on him.

You are suffering from a fundamental misunderstanding of history. Hitler needed to defeat Britain and France and Arabs were tribal people suffering under their Colonialism. The first call for Jihad (against the Colonials) was issued by the Nazis. (The English had promised Arabs various things for rising up against Turks, and promised other things to Jews, having a bad tendency to reneg on these comittments to both sides). The collaboration between revisionist zionism and facsism is also well documented. Everyone knows of the SS Newspapers pushing Zionism in the 1930's, the BETAR Naval academy which was a nucleus of the Israel Navy in Italy under Mussolini, and Lehi (Stern Gang) etc., offering to join the war against Britain in exchange for a future Jewish state based on totatalitarian principles. None of this however means zionists are Nazis or that Hitler held any favor towards Arabs. The Nazis supported The Arabs necause they were against Britain and France. Period. They are just historical facts, which came from political expediency, and have no relevence really to the current situation whatsoever. By the time Mr. Mufti was meeting with Hitler the "final solution" was underway and the "Einsatzgruppen" were commiting unspeakable atrocities in the East.

What Bibi said is the worst kind of revisionism as it will give fodder to those mouth breathing morons who will continue to claim The Nazis were just some kind of reasonable Nationalist and then Hitler was influenced by a crazy Arab, when all he wanted to do was "expel them".

Rubbish.

I think there are plenty of similarities with the way Nazis behaved towards Jews, and the way some right wing fanatical Zionists behave towards the Palestinians. But that's not the topic, another thread another time maybe.

Probably in an attempt to score a few cheap shots and as a deflection away from the usual IDF overeaction to the recent unrest Netanyahu was the first to introduce into the narrative this straw man of the Palestinians are Nazis who somehow have a pathological hatred of Jews. As though their resistance occurs completely in a vacuum...no mention of 100 years of Zionist colonialism, ethnic cleansing, occupation, and Palestinian suffering and oppression,

He is an irresponsible looney to blame the Hollocaust on the Mufti, thereby excusing Hitler's monstrous murders, and that he was somehow not so bad and only really wanted to exile Jews.

I merely pointed out early on in the thread that he was treading on very dangerous ground bringing up the topic of dealings with the devil, because none other than Israel's future Prime Minister Yitzhak Shamir did so too, offering the services of his Stern Gang to Hitler to open up another front by attacking British forces in Palestine.

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

Better for Netanyahu not to deflect for domestic or his own right wing cabinet's consumption, but to deal with the root cause of the problem...the occupation.

Edited October 25, 2015 by dexterm

[Pakboong]

An English translation of the Hitler/Mufti meeting transcript:

http://www.worldfuturefund.org/wffmaster/Reading/Total/hitler.mufti.htm

http://destination-yisrael.biblesearchers.com/destination-yisrael/2010/02/the-jerusalem-grand-muftis-diary-on-his-meeting-with-adolf-hitler.html

Translation of the Mufti's diary regarding his one meeting with Hitler

Well these official translations are clearly rubbish. I have read them and all the associated official links and nowhere does it say that the Mufti suggested that Hitler 'burn the Jews', nor do any of the Documents say that Hitler was proposing to 'move all the Jews out of Germany and Europe' (Ulysses please note). In fact it is quite specific in that Hitler claims he will not stop until the Jewish people are eradicated.

So with that in mind it would seem that official documentation recording the meetings from sources that include the Grand Mufti show that the Grand Mufti played no part in persuading Hitler of anything. Therefore Pakboong, according to Netanyahu, Ulysses and a number of others on here willing to switch versions of History to justify the massacre of innocent women and children in Palestine your post and the official documents in it are nonsense.

Maybe so but it is quite rare that I get a mention with Ulysses G and Netanyahu, on that side of the issue. I may have misread your post but that is the way it reads. Read the whole thread and you might see it differently.

[Morch]

There is no hidden agenda, he was trying to kiss Germans arse, who just happens to be the head of the EU, by trying to infer it wasnt Hitlers fault, it was a bad arab man putting ideas in his head....but yes it back fired badly

Maybe there is.... This being the second time Netanyahu publicly airs his view on the Mufti and the Holocaust, he might also wish to pull this one again:

http://www.news.com.au/technology/online/germanys-angela-merkel-gets-hitler-moustache-from-benjamin-netanyahu-in-unfortunate-photo/story-fnjwnhzf-1226837795741

[Jingthing]

As I've said, I agree that Netanyahu voiced significant historical inaccuracies.

Some people are now questioning his sanity based on that. I think that might be a reasonable concern.

However, I suppose a silver lining is that more people are becoming aware of the activities of that great and supremely important historical leader of the Palestinian Arab political identity movement and his UNDENIABLE ties/active collaboration to the Nazi regime and UNDENIABLE knowledge of the death camps and Nazi intentions of TOTAL GENOCIDE of the Jewish people.

So a big problem that still exists today towards any hope of peace between the Jews of Israel and Arab/Muslim world (localized there as "Palestinian Arabs") is a SEVERE lack of trust ... on both sides.

This documentary explores the question of the roots of Arab/Muslim Jew hatred, asking is it really rooted in the Koran or is IMPORT of European style/Nazi style Jew hatred into the Middle East a more important factor.

Keeping in mind of course, that the Nazis certainly didn't invent European style Jew hatred, rather they took something that was already there and became unspeakably EXTREME about it.

Edited October 25, 2015 by Jingthing

[Thorgal]

The IHRA (International Holocaust Remembrance Association) is an organisation with 31 member countries and 10 observer countries who adopted the “Working Definition of Holocaust Denial and Distortion” at IHRA’s Plenary meeting in Toronto on 10 October 2013.

They contribute against the goals of Holocaust denial who often are the rehabilitation of an explicit antisemitism and the promotion of political ideologies and conditions suitable for the advent of the very type of event it denies.

Holocaust denial in its various forms is an expression of antisemitism.

Netanyahu broke 2 of their rules with his latest quote:

1. Intentional efforts to excuse or minimize the impact of the Holocaust or its principal elements, including collaborators and allies of Nazi Germany;

5. Attempts to blur the responsibility for the establishment of concentration and death camps devised and operated by Nazi Germany by putting blame on other nations or ethnic groups.

https://www.holocaustremembrance.com/working-definition-holocaust-denial-and-distortion

The IHRA has seven Permanent International Partners: United Nations, UNESCO, OSCE/ODIHR, International Tracing Service (ITS), European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights (FRA), Council of Europe, and the Claims Conference.

Looks like exceptional immunity has to be adopted somewhere, somehow...because Netanyahu should face prosecution in at least 31 countries...

Edited October 25, 2015 by Thorgal

[Seastallion]

As I've said, I agree that Netanyahu voiced significant historical inaccuracies.

Some people are now questioning his sanity based on that. I think that might be a reasonable concern.

However, I suppose a silver lining is that more people are becoming aware of the activities of that great and supremely important historical leader of the Palestinian Arab political identity movement and his UNDENIABLE ties/active collaboration to the Nazi regime and UNDENIABLE knowledge of the death camps and Nazi intentions of TOTAL GENOCIDE of the Jewish people.

So a big problem that still exists today towards any hope of peace between the Jews of Israel and Arab/Muslim world (localized there as "Palestinian Arabs") is a SEVERE lack of trust ... on both sides.

This documentary explores the question of the roots of Arab/Muslim Jew hatred, asking is it really rooted in the Koran or is IMPORT of European style/Nazi style Jew hatred into the Middle East a more important factor.

Keeping in mind of course, that the Nazis certainly didn't invent European style Jew hatred, rather they took something that was already there and became unspeakably EXTREME about it.

Or...is it simply that after 3 generations of oft-times brutal occupation and stealing of lands and demolition of homes,, an oppressed people hate their oppressors?

I think that is the most reasonable and likely scenario. To always try to make it something to do with Jew-hatred is just playing the Jew victim card again....YET again.

[dexterm]

As I've said, I agree that Netanyahu voiced significant historical inaccuracies.

Some people are now questioning his sanity based on that. I think that might be a reasonable concern.

However, I suppose a silver lining is that more people are becoming aware of the activities of that great and supremely important historical leader of the Palestinian Arab political identity movement and his UNDENIABLE ties/active collaboration to the Nazi regime and UNDENIABLE knowledge of the death camps and Nazi intentions of TOTAL GENOCIDE of the Jewish people.

So a big problem that still exists today towards any hope of peace between the Jews of Israel and Arab/Muslim world (localized there as "Palestinian Arabs") is a SEVERE lack of trust ... on both sides.

This documentary explores the question of the roots of Arab/Muslim Jew hatred, asking is it really rooted in the Koran or is IMPORT of European style/Nazi style Jew hatred into the Middle East a more important factor.

Keeping in mind of course, that the Nazis certainly didn't invent European style Jew hatred, rather they took something that was already there and became unspeakably EXTREME about it.

You mention the Koran and some sort of imported European/Nazi style pathological anti semitism as a source of Muslim hatred of Israeli Jews, but ignore the enormous elephant in the room...well how about the 100 years of Zionist colonialism, ethnic cleansing, occupation, and thousands of Palestinians killed including over 500 children in Gaza last year alone, over 120 univestigated attacks by fanatical Jewish settlers this year alone, and the daily humiliations, beatings and murders at checkpoints in the occupied West Bank to name but a very small list of possible reasons for Palestinians to dislike occupying Zionists.

Let's have a semblance of reality checking here.

The Mufti and most Palestinians would probably not have given a hoot about Hitler and the Nazis, if they had been given their own nation as promised by the British for helping them defeat the Ottomans in World War 1, and if the waves of illegal Zionist immigrants intent on establishing a Jewish state by displacing Palestinians had never arrived.

Edited October 25, 2015 by dexterm

[Morch]

Or anti-zionist , Arab apologist, Pro-Islamist or Neo-Nazi ....take your pick they have a whole list for people who dont support or agree with their agenda and rather than debating, they just start hurling insults

Whereas the opposite is not in evidence?

[Morch]

The truth speaks for itself. The Ju-wish people are not Hebrew Isralites, and they are not Semites, as the media has been propagandizing the Jews to be, for the past 70-years. I do not hate Jews. I hate liars.

Whatever, dude. Life is too short to deal with such ignorant toxic racist poison as you're posting. There is no rational debate that would ever have an effect, so, welcome to my ignore list. BTW, I think I recognize the origin of the anti-Jewish racist propaganda you're promoting ... I reckon it's from African American Jew hating Islamists like FARRAKHAN. Your rhetoric sounds exactly like that flavor of fanatic.

And this post is a perfect example of why there will never be peace between the Zionists and the rest in the middle east, there is no middle ground with them, if you dont support us and buy into the propaganda....you are a...."take your pick of some hysterical inflammatory label"....attack attack attack...

Were the posts JT was responding to a "middle ground"? Seemed more like a collection of bigoted statements aimed at getting a rise.

Perhaps it was the bit about Jews (not, mind, them Zionists) going back to Kazakhstan (where they apparently originated from), as a solution to the conflict?

[Morch]

The biggest fascist leader of our time? Hardly, though I can concede some may feel this way, its just not factually correct, What is factually accurate, however, is the role the Arabs played in insinuating into Hitler's design for the Jews, This is an uncontestable fact, and the Grand Mufti was the vital face of this relationship. Hitler even had considerable praise for the Arab/Muslim ability to raise and justify their hatred for jews with the koran. That Netanyahu chooses to discuss this now should raise questions of motive or intent, but it is entirely factual. Having emotive disdain for him does not make one's position sound only... dubious.

Can you elaborate what you call : "the ability to raise and justify their hatred for Jews with the Koran" ?

If not, forum rules should be applied...

Your post 9/11 agenda is once again too transparent !

Are you denying that passages from the Koran and Hadith are used by Muslims to justify animosity and violence toward Jews? Israelis? This is not a question regarding the the correct interpretation of religious texts, but rather pertains to use made of such passages.

[Morch]

What I find ironic is that all the anti-Israel posters decrying the Zionists pushing for punishment of Holocaust deniers (which is not the whole story), and then turning around and slinging 'Holocaust-denier!' at Netanyahu and saying he should be jailed. Talk about hypocrisy! Even criticism from other Zionists within Israel has not called for him to be accused of Holocaust denial. Just a convenient ploy of the emotionally-rabid Jew-haters.

Let me be clear: I am no fan of Netanyahu. He exists as a reaction to Palestinian hatred, and violence, and intolerance. If Hamas were not obsessed with Israel's utter destruction, he would be superfluous, and unlikely to be elected dog-catcher in Israel. 67 years of attack and duplicity of Arabs upon Israel has created him...

If Palestinians would like peace and self-determination, let them agree to Israel's right to exist, declare a moratorium on attacks against Israelis, and propose a solution to their liking.

If Hamas/militant Palestinians disarmed today, tomorrow there would be peace. If Israel disarmed today, tomorrow there would be no Israel.

The Palestinians have long ago accepted the state of Israel. Arafat did so in 1993

Letter from Yasser Arafat to Prime Minister Rabin. September 9, 1993

"Yitzhak Rabin

Prime Minister of Israel

Mr. Prime Minister,

The signing of the Declaration of Principles marks a new era in the history of the Middle East. In firm conviction thereof, I would like to confirm the following PLO commitments:

The PLO recognizes the right of the State of Israel to exist in peace and security."

http://www.haaretz.c...rders-1.2569155

Hamas’ Meshal Agrees for Palestinian State Based on 1967 Borders

http://www.haaretz.c...remium-1.614309

The problem has always been: Will Israel reciprocate and accept a state of Palestine within the 67 borders?

The ball is in Israel's court. They hold all the power.

Still trying to sell those busted links?

Here we go again, one by one....

Arafat's letter (1993) wasn't quite the end of it, as no actual changes were made in the Palestinian National Covenant at the time. This caused quite a lot of difficulties between the sides, with a few repeat acts of Arafat providing partial and unsatisfactory clarifications. The ordeal was supposedly officially concluded in 1998 (in Gaza and with Clinton present). Only it wasn't, quite. More like transferred to a committee etc. The result it that one can find various versions of the covenant, even on official Palestinian websites (mostly in Arabic), with the same evident at the education system. It keeps popping back every now and then (this quote from 2009, for example, and note that the reference to the covenant as if it wasn't changed):

Nabil Shaath, a veteran member of Fatah's ruling Central Committee, told Reuters that the charter "cannot be changed." Azzam al-Ahmad, another senior Fatah leader, said: "It will remain as is. It won't be subject to discussion."

"We have the right to practice all forms of national struggle," Ahmad said. "We are in the phase of national liberation and we have the right to use all means in the fight to end the occupation until we establish the state."

Palestinian analysts said Fatah, seeking to infuse its top ranks with new blood, would find it hard to compete with Hamas if it amended its charter before reaching any deal with Israel to establish an independent Palestinian state.

http://ca.reuters.com/article/topNews/idCATRE57264N20090803?pageNumber=2&virtualBrandChannel=0

If one holds that the Covenant was amended,, and that as such it reflects the notions meant to guide the Palestinians - might be worth to bear in mind that some of the articles supposedly nullified include denial of Israel's legitimacy, denial of the historical-religious connection of the Jews to Palestine, defining Zionism as colonialism, fascism, imperialism and racism. There more in that vein, Wonder is some of our esteemed members would see fit to adopt these amendments?

(the above is from a post of mine made earlier this month)

Next...

You are still linking the wrong peace initiative (must be all that copy/paste effort) - the one here is an Israeli plan. What you refer to is the Arab Peace Initiative (aka the Saudi proposal). Despite your claims, Hamas rejected the plan, and actually carried out one of its deadliest suicide-bomber attacks a day earlier. And no, Iran was not party to this offer - the occasions were Arab League Summits.

The offer also includes topics which are not easily agreed upon and some which are brushed aside (but would inevitably resurface). For those posters not keeping in line with current events - things have moved on in the Middle East. Syria, Iraq and Libya won't be coming back as such, Lebanon is still dysfunctional. But nothing easier than saying that the offer is on the table, eh?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arab_Peace_Initiative

Last but not least...

The two Hamas links loop back to topic (at least for me). Not that it matters much....same old.

The first statement was made in 2008, to an EU delegation. The context was trying to secure Hamas from being further blacklisted, and facilitate aid transfers. The statement does not include recognition of Israel nor is it a peace offer. Nor does the article cite the insistence on the Palestinian Right of Return.

The second statement was reported in 2014, at a meeting with Abbas. This was following that summer's fighting in Gaza. Hamas was beaten and with very little by way of outside support. The only possible avenue was patching up things with the PA. Abbas pretty much milked it for all he could. However things didn't get better between the sides, and by the end of the year Hamas was back to its old hardliner slogans (posters are welcome to look up quotes from Hamas's 27th anniversary). Again, the Hamas is not recognizing Israel, but referring to a Palestinian state within the 1967 lines. No, not semantics.

These two statements simply show that Hamas says what it needs to say in order to survive, but tries to do so with the least amount of diversion from its ideology. There is no outright wish for peace, there is nothing permanent subscribed to. In very much the same way, Hamas switched sponsor states as fortune and politics dictated.

Don't let facts confuse you.

[Morch]

IMO, getting all worked up about who inspired Hitler to do what he did is just plain foolish. There is no way to know for sure and I could care less anyway. Both Hitler and the Mufti were hateful war criminals who would have been happy to kill every last Jew if given the chance. They were both scum. Who thought of it first does not really matter to me.

It matters to those who have been accused of being holocaust deniers. It renews their opportunity to have a voice in the matter. Just one of many laws I don't like but it is a law none the less and when in countries where the law exists, I observe it to the letter. I have always maintained that the truth does not need protection. It also does not need sarcasm and condescending language to protect it.

Although Netanyahu's comments appear at first to have backfired the Pro-Palestinian lobby are in danger of scoring an own goal if the role of the (still venerated) Mufti becomes common knowledge. The incitement we see from the Palestinian leaders echoes the views and tactics of the Mufti.

King Hussein of Jordan just told Abbas to cool it and the world is starting to wake up to the cynicism, racism and fanaticism of the Palestinian leaders. UNRWA have just sacked or suspended several of their workers due to racist incitement on social media. The more people look into the history of the Palestinians and their supporters the worse it looks for both of them.

http://legalinsurrection.com/2015/10/an-inconvenient-history-the-grand-mufti-hitler-and-the-knife-intifada/

Claims that Israel is intending to destroy the al-Aqsa mosque persist in Palestinian propaganda to incite violence — and have since before the current knife attacks, as David Horvitz writes in The Times of Israel:

The message that “the Jews are plotting against Al-Aqsa” has been pushed for months by Palestinian political chiefs, spiritual leaders, mainstream and social media: Mahmoud Abbas in speeches to his people (he finally lost the Israeli middle ground with his false accusation last week that Israel executed the teen Pisgat Zeev stabber); Fatah in leaflets and Facebook posts; Hamas in videos; the Islamic Movement agitating inside Israel; Arab Knesset members… all these and others have been throwing fuel onto the fire.

How very convenient to conjure up a diversionary shit storm when the evidence of Palestinian incitement is overwhelming.

A general comment -

Posters seem to be having a hard time accepting that both sides engage in incitement against each other. Claiming, correctly, that "they" do it, does not mean that the pointing side is not doing the same. Both try to divert attention to the other side's sins, faults and transgressions - big surprise. As for all the endless they-started-it, it's-all-their-fault, they-did-more-than-us etc....kinda sounds ridiculous when put like that. Think we all know better than that.

[arjunadawn]

The biggest fascist leader of our time? Hardly, though I can concede some may feel this way, its just not factually correct, What is factually accurate, however, is the role the Arabs played in insinuating into Hitler's design for the Jews, This is an uncontestable fact, and the Grand Mufti was the vital face of this relationship. Hitler even had considerable praise for the Arab/Muslim ability to raise and justify their hatred for jews with the koran. That Netanyahu chooses to discuss this now should raise questions of motive or intent, but it is entirely factual. Having emotive disdain for him does not make one's position sound only... dubious.

Can you elaborate what you call : "the ability to raise and justify their hatred for Jews with the Koran" ?

If not, forum rules should be applied...

Your post 9/11 agenda is once again too transparent !

Are you denying that passages from the Koran and Hadith are used by Muslims to justify animosity and violence toward Jews? Israelis?

This is not a question regarding the the correct interpretation of religious texts, but rather pertains to use made of such passages.

Not sure what a "post 9/11 agenda" is or even means; my observations began long before that landmark date cited. In fact, my observations are substantially in accordance with a wide world of scholarly research and irrefutable facts. The innuendo that should this self evidence I posted not be elaborated moderators will be sought to silence me (...forum rules...) is an intellectual hail mary. This is a response of coercion. Of course I am correct and of course the post is relevant.

The Israeli leader's comments remain quite curious if not unnecessary, at this present time, though they are substantially accurate. The connection between arabs/islam and national socialism are overwhelming in the historical record. Only disassembling and redirection can revise these concrete connections. The presumption in these forums that what are commonly accessible facts to high schoolers, if not cited upon request, result in neutralizing the assertion posted is ridiculous.

The connections to Hitler's adoration of the Arabs/Muslims was predicated upon his appreciation for the militaristic nature of Islam (a point watered down today in modern revision), the ability of islam to promise its adherents tomorrow if they were tools of the state today, the ability of islam to harness the secular/political state, as evidenced by then Turkey, and the shared disdain for Jews and Bolsheviks (these points are taken directly from Hitler's own words, variously cited below). The issue of the Jews is central to this OP, the Israeli leader's statement, and the enduring legacy of Nazi relations with the Grand Mufti, and other current regional actors. Islam was, to Nazi Germany, a kindred spirit with its own aims. This does not then indict islam rather the actions of the islamic world in entering this alliance presents the indictment of those days; and the legacy continues to exist.

Islamic Jihad is inextricably linked to koranic mandate. A Hitler overwhelmingly praised islamic jihad.

http://www.andrewbostom.org/2008/10/hitler-and-jihad-part-1/

http://www.nybooks.com/articles/archives/2015/apr/02/hitler-and-muslims/

https://shariaunveiled.wordpress.com/2013/09/22/evidence-mounting-that-hitler-was-a-muslim-and-practiced-islam/

http://wikiislam.net/wiki/Quotations_on_Islam_from_Notable_Non-Muslims#Adolf_Hitler

http://www.wsj.com/articles/book-review-ataturk-in-the-nazi-imagination-by-stefan-ihrig-and-islam-and-nazi-germanys-war-by-david-motadel-1421441724

http://www.tabletmag.com/jewish-arts-and-culture/books/187128/nazi-romance-with-islam

http://www.billionbibles.org/sharia/hitler-muslim-brotherhood.html

http://www.tellthechildrenthetruth.com/gallery/

http://www.theblaze.com/blog/2015/01/19/the-ignored-historical-nazi-islamic-supremacist-alliance/

http://www.wsj.com/articles/book-review-ataturk-in-the-nazi-imagination-by-stefan-ihrig-and-islam-and-nazi-germanys-war-by-david-motadel-1421441724

http://wilsonquarterly.com/quarterly/fall-2014-the-great-wars/the-swastika-and-the-crescent/

[Ulysses G.]

What I find ironic is that all the anti-Israel posters decrying the Zionists pushing for punishment of Holocaust deniers (which is not the whole story), and then turning around and slinging 'Holocaust-denier!' at Netanyahu and saying he should be jailed. Talk about hypocrisy! Even criticism from other Zionists within Israel has not called for him to be accused of Holocaust denial. Just a convenient ploy of the emotionally-rabid Jew-haters.

Let me be clear: I am no fan of Netanyahu. He exists as a reaction to Palestinian hatred, and violence, and intolerance. If Hamas were not obsessed with Israel's utter destruction, he would be superfluous, and unlikely to be elected dog-catcher in Israel. 67 years of attack and duplicity of Arabs upon Israel has created him...

If Palestinians would like peace and self-determination, let them agree to Israel's right to exist, declare a moratorium on attacks against Israelis, and propose a solution to their liking.

If Hamas/militant Palestinians disarmed today, tomorrow there would be peace. If Israel disarmed today, tomorrow there would be no Israel.

The Palestinians have long ago accepted the state of Israel. Arafat did so in 1993

Letter from Yasser Arafat to Prime Minister Rabin. September 9, 1993

"Yitzhak Rabin

Prime Minister of Israel

Mr. Prime Minister,

The signing of the Declaration of Principles marks a new era in the history of the Middle East. In firm conviction thereof, I would like to confirm the following PLO commitments:

The PLO recognizes the right of the State of Israel to exist in peace and security."

http://www.haaretz.c...rders-1.2569155

Hamas’ Meshal Agrees for Palestinian State Based on 1967 Borders

http://www.haaretz.c...remium-1.614309

The problem has always been: Will Israel reciprocate and accept a state of Palestine within the 67 borders?

The ball is in Israel's court. They hold all the power.

Still trying to sell those busted links?

Here we go again, one by one....

Arafat's letter (1993) wasn't quite the end of it, as no actual changes were made in the Palestinian National Covenant at the time. This caused quite a lot of difficulties between the sides, with a few repeat acts of Arafat providing partial and unsatisfactory clarifications. The ordeal was supposedly officially concluded in 1998 (in Gaza and with Clinton present). Only it wasn't, quite. More like transferred to a committee etc. The result it that one can find various versions of the covenant, even on official Palestinian websites (mostly in Arabic), with the same evident at the education system. It keeps popping back every now and then (this quote from 2009, for example, and note that the reference to the covenant as if it wasn't changed):

Nabil Shaath, a veteran member of Fatah's ruling Central Committee, told Reuters that the charter "cannot be changed." Azzam al-Ahmad, another senior Fatah leader, said: "It will remain as is. It won't be subject to discussion."

"We have the right to practice all forms of national struggle," Ahmad said. "We are in the phase of national liberation and we have the right to use all means in the fight to end the occupation until we establish the state."

Palestinian analysts said Fatah, seeking to infuse its top ranks with new blood, would find it hard to compete with Hamas if it amended its charter before reaching any deal with Israel to establish an independent Palestinian state.

http://ca.reuters.com/article/topNews/idCATRE57264N20090803?pageNumber=2&virtualBrandChannel=0

If one holds that the Covenant was amended,, and that as such it reflects the notions meant to guide the Palestinians - might be worth to bear in mind that some of the articles supposedly nullified include denial of Israel's legitimacy, denial of the historical-religious connection of the Jews to Palestine, defining Zionism as colonialism, fascism, imperialism and racism. There more in that vein, Wonder is some of our esteemed members would see fit to adopt these amendments?

(the above is from a post of mine made earlier this month)

Next...

You are still linking the wrong peace initiative (must be all that copy/paste effort) - the one here is an Israeli plan. What you refer to is the Arab Peace Initiative (aka the Saudi proposal). Despite your claims, Hamas rejected the plan, and actually carried out one of its deadliest suicide-bomber attacks a day earlier. And no, Iran was not party to this offer - the occasions were Arab League Summits.

The offer also includes topics which are not easily agreed upon and some which are brushed aside (but would inevitably resurface). For those posters not keeping in line with current events - things have moved on in the Middle East. Syria, Iraq and Libya won't be coming back as such, Lebanon is still dysfunctional. But nothing easier than saying that the offer is on the table, eh?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arab_Peace_Initiative

Last but not least...

The two Hamas links loop back to topic (at least for me). Not that it matters much....same old.

The first statement was made in 2008, to an EU delegation. The context was trying to secure Hamas from being further blacklisted, and facilitate aid transfers. The statement does not include recognition of Israel nor is it a peace offer. Nor does the article cite the insistence on the Palestinian Right of Return.

The second statement was reported in 2014, at a meeting with Abbas. This was following that summer's fighting in Gaza. Hamas was beaten and with very little by way of outside support. The only possible avenue was patching up things with the PA. Abbas pretty much milked it for all he could. However things didn't get better between the sides, and by the end of the year Hamas was back to its old hardliner slogans (posters are welcome to look up quotes from Hamas's 27th anniversary). Again, the Hamas is not recognizing Israel, but referring to a Palestinian state within the 1967 lines. No, not semantics.

These two statements simply show that Hamas says what it needs to say in order to survive, but tries to do so with the least amount of diversion from its ideology. There is no outright wish for peace, there is nothing permanent subscribed to. In very much the same way, Hamas switched sponsor states as fortune and politics dictated.

Don't let facts confuse you.

Good show. I meant to demolish this dishonest post - yet again - but had forgotten about it. He keeps recycling the same disproved lies.

[Ulysses G.]

Your war was lost in 1945, but that won't stop your ilk. Jingthing is right to ignore you.

[Scott]

Please stay on topic and STOP making comments about other members.

Rhetorically speaking, is it possible to have a civil discussion on the issue?

[Soutpeel]

Your war was lost in 1945, but that won't stop your ilk. Jingthing is right to ignore you.

And here we ago again....I suspect 99.9% of the posters on here who disagree with the Zionist propaganda had relatives who fought against the Nazis, and your suggesting they are Nazi's and they fought for the Nazi's because they dont buy into your Zionist propaganda....

you should be ashamed of yourself....but then again you denied the holocaust as well in another post because your that fanantically blinded in your hatred

[Pakboong]

I don't think Netanyahu will ever be charged but his "above the law arrogance", which he displays routinely on the world stage, will come into question. It is being questioned around the world and it is certainly being questioned within Israel.

I have never been able to stand the guy for many reasons but this clearly points out he doesn't have all his oars in the water.

This is a wake-up call for many causes around the world and I don't think anything could be worse for World Jewry than for the leader of the Jewish State to question the official narrative of the sacred Holocaust.

Edited October 26, 2015 by Pakboong

[Jingthing]

A lot could be worse.

But it was certainly damaging and BIZARRE.

As he's a big macho PM of Israel and needs to save face, he can't easily say just fully apologize and say he had a major league brain fart. Too bad about that.

[dexterm]

What I find ironic is that all the anti-Israel posters decrying the Zionists pushing for punishment of Holocaust deniers (which is not the whole story), and then turning around and slinging 'Holocaust-denier!' at Netanyahu and saying he should be jailed. Talk about hypocrisy! Even criticism from other Zionists within Israel has not called for him to be accused of Holocaust denial. Just a convenient ploy of the emotionally-rabid Jew-haters.

Let me be clear: I am no fan of Netanyahu. He exists as a reaction to Palestinian hatred, and violence, and intolerance. If Hamas were not obsessed with Israel's utter destruction, he would be superfluous, and unlikely to be elected dog-catcher in Israel. 67 years of attack and duplicity of Arabs upon Israel has created him...

If Palestinians would like peace and self-determination, let them agree to Israel's right to exist, declare a moratorium on attacks against Israelis, and propose a solution to their liking.

If Hamas/militant Palestinians disarmed today, tomorrow there would be peace. If Israel disarmed today, tomorrow there would be no Israel.

The Palestinians have long ago accepted the state of Israel. Arafat did so in 1993

Letter from Yasser Arafat to Prime Minister Rabin. September 9, 1993

"Yitzhak Rabin

Prime Minister of Israel

Mr. Prime Minister,

The signing of the Declaration of Principles marks a new era in the history of the Middle East. In firm conviction thereof, I would like to confirm the following PLO commitments:

The PLO recognizes the right of the State of Israel to exist in peace and security."

http://www.haaretz.c...rders-1.2569155

Hamas’ Meshal Agrees for Palestinian State Based on 1967 Borders

http://www.haaretz.c...remium-1.614309

The problem has always been: Will Israel reciprocate and accept a state of Palestine within the 67 borders?

The ball is in Israel's court. They hold all the power.

Still trying to sell those busted links?

Here we go again, one by one....

Arafat's letter (1993) wasn't quite the end of it, as no actual changes were made in the Palestinian National Covenant at the time. This caused quite a lot of difficulties between the sides, with a few repeat acts of Arafat providing partial and unsatisfactory clarifications. The ordeal was supposedly officially concluded in 1998 (in Gaza and with Clinton present). Only it wasn't, quite. More like transferred to a committee etc. The result it that one can find various versions of the covenant, even on official Palestinian websites (mostly in Arabic), with the same evident at the education system. It keeps popping back every now and then (this quote from 2009, for example, and note that the reference to the covenant as if it wasn't changed):

Nabil Shaath, a veteran member of Fatah's ruling Central Committee, told Reuters that the charter "cannot be changed." Azzam al-Ahmad, another senior Fatah leader, said: "It will remain as is. It won't be subject to discussion."

"We have the right to practice all forms of national struggle," Ahmad said. "We are in the phase of national liberation and we have the right to use all means in the fight to end the occupation until we establish the state."

Palestinian analysts said Fatah, seeking to infuse its top ranks with new blood, would find it hard to compete with Hamas if it amended its charter before reaching any deal with Israel to establish an independent Palestinian state.

http://ca.reuters.com/article/topNews/idCATRE57264N20090803?pageNumber=2&virtualBrandChannel=0

If one holds that the Covenant was amended,, and that as such it reflects the notions meant to guide the Palestinians - might be worth to bear in mind that some of the articles supposedly nullified include denial of Israel's legitimacy, denial of the historical-religious connection of the Jews to Palestine, defining Zionism as colonialism, fascism, imperialism and racism. There more in that vein, Wonder is some of our esteemed members would see fit to adopt these amendments?

(the above is from a post of mine made earlier this month)

Next...

You are still linking the wrong peace initiative (must be all that copy/paste effort) - the one here is an Israeli plan. What you refer to is the Arab Peace Initiative (aka the Saudi proposal). Despite your claims, Hamas rejected the plan, and actually carried out one of its deadliest suicide-bomber attacks a day earlier. And no, Iran was not party to this offer - the occasions were Arab League Summits.

The offer also includes topics which are not easily agreed upon and some which are brushed aside (but would inevitably resurface). For those posters not keeping in line with current events - things have moved on in the Middle East. Syria, Iraq and Libya won't be coming back as such, Lebanon is still dysfunctional. But nothing easier than saying that the offer is on the table, eh?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arab_Peace_Initiative

Last but not least...

The two Hamas links loop back to topic (at least for me). Not that it matters much....same old.

The first statement was made in 2008, to an EU delegation. The context was trying to secure Hamas from being further blacklisted, and facilitate aid transfers. The statement does not include recognition of Israel nor is it a peace offer. Nor does the article cite the insistence on the Palestinian Right of Return.

The second statement was reported in 2014, at a meeting with Abbas. This was following that summer's fighting in Gaza. Hamas was beaten and with very little by way of outside support. The only possible avenue was patching up things with the PA. Abbas pretty much milked it for all he could. However things didn't get better between the sides, and by the end of the year Hamas was back to its old hardliner slogans (posters are welcome to look up quotes from Hamas's 27th anniversary). Again, the Hamas is not recognizing Israel, but referring to a Palestinian state within the 1967 lines. No, not semantics.

These two statements simply show that Hamas says what it needs to say in order to survive, but tries to do so with the least amount of diversion from its ideology. There is no outright wish for peace, there is nothing permanent subscribed to. In very much the same way, Hamas switched sponsor states as fortune and politics dictated.

Don't let facts confuse you.

Looks like another case of the Israelis never missing an opportunity to miss an opportunity for peace when it is offered.

There will come a time when the Israelis will rip the arms off the Palestinian peace negotiators as they desperately try to shake hands on a 2 state solution. It will be the only chance Zionists will have to form a state with a mainly Jewish character, before the Palestinians outbreed them.

Time is on the side of the Palestinians.