Circus of Recycling – Part III

The last Part from the Circus of Recycling – Part II and I.
(line break)

* * * * * * * * * *

CIA Memo 655104p1

R.H. Hillenkoetter, “Memorandum for the Secretary of Defense: Subject: Clandestine Air Transport Operations” CIA, May 28, 1948.

Full CIA Memorandum for the Secretary of Defense

* * * * * * * * * *

In the art of modern intelligence and counter-intelligence, implementing multiple cloaks are quite useful. Creations of illusion are not magical, or mystical, but they are hints of planned suggestion and a keen understanding of human nature. One of the most historic and prolific examples of intel and counter-intel, or disinformation, was Operation Bodyguard used by the Allies in WWII to hide and deceive the German High Command of the time and place of the 1944 D-Day Normandy invasion. For the removal of Palestinians from the U.N. partitioned land, villages, and homes for Zionist Israel occupation, in comparison there was little difference.

As already examined in the previous Part II, the amount of U.S. funding mobilized for the creation, resettlement, and defense of the new state of Israel was well-organized and well cloaked. Between 1939 and May 1948 the Jewish Agency for Israel raised $3.5 trillion in today’s dollars (New York Times, August 10, 1961). And this agency is simply one Zionist organization out of many more. With the money raised the arms smuggling by The Sonneborn Group – Institute to the Haganah in Palestine followed (see CIA Memorandum above). There was still one major issue, or cloak to be devised. With the Nazis destroyed, the majority of surviving Jews throughout Europe wanted to remain and rebuild their lives. Rabbi Klaussner, a Zionist in charge of displaced persons in post-WWII Europe, reported the difficulty to the Jewish American Conference May 2, 1948…

“I am convinced people must be forced to go to Palestine… We must, instead of providing ‘displaced persons’ with comfort, create the greatest possible discomfort for them.”
What Price Israel?, Alfred H. Lilienthal, Infinity Publishing; Anniversary edition (March 1, 2004)

Hence, the underground campaign of “Chomer ‘Enoshi Tov” began.
(line break)

European Refugee Camps Create Palestinian Refugee Camps
(line break)

If you are curious by what is meant by the Hebrew “Chomer ‘Enoshi Tov“, then the perfect expert to ask is Noam Chomsky. In a 2014 interview he used the term while discussing the Jewish Holocaust:

“Well the translation of the title [ed. Chomer Enoshi Tov] would be something like “Good Human Material.” What [Yosef Grodzinsky] means is that the Zionist emissaries had a doctrine that able-bodied men and women between 18 and 35 had to be compelled to go to Palestine where they would be cannon-fodder for the coming conflict. Now the others they didn’t care much about and even undermined efforts to save children and so on. Well, all of this was going on in the immediate wake of the holocaust involving the survivors. No concern about them. You look through the 1950s, there’s virtually no discussion of the holocaust.”


British containment of the SS Exodus, 1947

“Good Human” cannon-fodder for the conquest of Palestine and the independence and defense of Israel. Ben-Gurion, Rabbi Klaussner, and many other Zionist envoys would use this phrase repeatedly regarding the repopulation of Palestine.

From 1934 as part of the long maritime trail of Jewish refugees escaping Nazi Germany to Palestine, the S.S. Exodus in July 1947 had carried the most passengers, 4,515 Jewish refugees, until the Atzmaut in January 1948. And as Noam Chomsky correctly explains above, in popular American media and literature from 1947 to 1958, no one was interested in the Holocaust until the 1960’s when the fate of world perception and acceptance of Israel hung in the balance. When the film Exodus had hit American theaters in 1960, the general perception began to significantly change. Although Leon Uris’s 1958 bestseller inspired the film, the actual events were far less extraordinary than the book and film both glamorized.

The late Hebrew University of Jerusalem professor of sociology, Baruch Kimmerling, corrects and expounds the misguided literary and cinematic portrayals:

“When the [SS Exodus] embarked, the UN Special Committee on Palestine was holding discussions and Ben-Gurion, the head of the Jewish Agency, the primary governing body of the state-in-formation, felt that the plight of Jewish refugees in Europe needed to be dramatized in order to attract more sympathy for the Jewish struggle over Palestine. The British authorities had refused to let the immigrants disembark in Palestine, or even to take refuge in transitional camps in Cyprus, forcing the boat to be redirected back to Germany. To prevent such a ghastly outcome, Zionist leader Chaim Weizmann persuaded the French Prime Minister, Leon Blum, to host the refugees. Ben-Gurion rejected this solution out of hand, and the poor survivors remained on board for seven months.
Israel’s Culture of Martydom, by Baruch Kimmerling, The Nation, Dec. 22, 2004.

And further, more accurate events are just as astonishing…

“Ben-Gurion’s insensitivity was rooted in his “Palestine-centric” attitude, best exemplified by his 1938 remark that “if I knew it was possible to save all children of Germany by their transfer to England and only half of them by transferring them to the Land of Israel, I would choose the latter, because we are faced not only with the accounting of these children but also with the historical accounting of the Jewish people.” This was not merely a rhetorical declaration. Grodzinsky tells us with great pain how Ben-Gurion and other Zionist leaders vetoed the immigration of 1,000 orphans, who were in physical and emotional danger as a result of the harsh winter of 1945, from the camps in Germany to England, where the Jewish community had managed to secure them permits. Another group of roughly 500 children of camp inhabitants was barred, after Zionist intervention, from reaching France, whose rabbinical institutions had offered them safe haven.”

To add further insult to the plight of Jewish-European Holocaust refugees, few American and Western European newspaper and radio consumers were informed at the time that many of the Exodus passengers had applied for immigration visas to the United States (denied by Zionists) and/or many more were simply wanting to settle in more peaceful countries — a state of affairs Palestine certainly could not claim. Israel was anything but peaceful.

In the end, however, Ben-Gurion’s and Zionism’s propaganda scheme succeeded despite Jewish-European refugees being sick of war, fighting, and concentration-refugee camps and hundreds to thousands had become anti-Zionists!

The Giyus and The Sieff Group

As mentioned before, the ingathering of Jews into Palestine was not going to Zionist expectations; not enough Jewish-European DP’s were flocking voluntarily in rapid waves to the new Israel state. The slow low numbers would not survive the continued Arab conflicts. What was needed to abate Jewish war-fears was a growing army, the Israeli Defense Force (IDF), to wage the conflicts. Because Americans and European Jews would never agree to or publicly side with another militaristic conflict, Zionist came up with an alternative target:  the most desperate of Jewish DP’s. In 1947 these men and their families were still residents of WWII refugee camps throughout Europe. Immediately the American Jewish Joint Distribution Committee implemented a $25-million IDF recruitment campaign. On this campaign David Ben-Gurion and Chief of Staff Israel Galili reported…

“The manpower shortage for the fighting army forced modifications in the illegal immigration plan.

…New operational orders were issued: No more boats to bring homeless refugees to a safe haven. From the moment Ben-Gurion’s new orders were sent to the Mossad people in France through Shadmi, the decisions of the February 29th convention in Paris (with Ha’apaláh, B’richáh, and Haganáh delegates) were getting into effect. Haganáh and Mossad took upon themselves the task of moving fifteen thousand Jews of draft age and capability from Europe to Palestine by May 15th. Quotas were imposed on organizers in the various countries, aimed at carrying out the plan to bring in five thousand in March and April, and another ten thousand in May. Mossad people actually received stricter orders: From this moment on, no immigrants who lacked military capability were to be brought to Palestine. “We need only persons who fit the Haganáh,” wrote Ben-Gurion and Galili to commanders of Mossad in Europe.”
In the Shadow of the Holocaust: The Struggle between Jews and Zionists in the Aftermath of World War II, by Yosef Grodzinsky, Monroe, ME: Common Courage Press, 2004, pp. 187-188.

But this campaign failed, badly.

“Upon being called to fulfill “their duty” and join the IDF… most Jewish DPs were reluctant. A failed voluntary draft drive (to which less than 0.3 percent of the DP population volunteered) led to compulsory conscription.”
Ibid, p. 226.

Mossad-Haganah fighters-1947

Mossad-Haganah fighters, 1947 – Wikipedia

This conscription was called Giyus, and any draft evaders were treated very harshly. Giyus-evaders were blacklisted, fired from jobs, given heavy fines, evicted from their living quarters, food rations cut, and yes, even beaten (Ibid, p. 199). This is quite extraordinary when these “draftees” had never even lived in Palestine, much less became combat soldiers for a foreign nation which did not exist in 1947 and early 1948!

With perpetual Arab-Zionist conflict in Palestine greatly hindering war-efforts, on July 27, 1943, Great Britain and the U.S. State Department came very close to issuing a “reverse Balfour” resolution if the covert Zionist activities didn’t cease. When a Zionist group — which included the aforementioned David Niles (White House official under Roosevelt and Truman), and David Lilienthal (chairman of the Tennessee Valley Authority), Ben Cohen (White House staff), Robert R. Nathan (economist in Dept. of Commerce), and Harvard graduate David Ginsberg (assistant from the Securities and Exchange Commission during Roosevelt’s New Deal plan) all known as The Sieff Group — got wind of the Balfour reversal…

…they took immediate action with further coalition help from Felix Frankfurter, Henry Morgenthau, Jr., Bernard Baruch and others, and effectively killed the reversal.
Israel in the Mind of America, by Peter Grose, New York, NY: Knopf Doubleday, 1st ed., 1983, p. 177, 178-182.

(line break)
The 1949 Palestinian-Arab Refugee Crisis

James G. McDonald was the U.S. envoy to Palestine regarding the Zionist-Arab conflict and the growing displacement of Arab families. Authors Ilan Pappe and Rosemarie Esber describe it as Israel’s ethnic expulsion and cleansing of Palestine. But McDonald reported the crisis in 1948 to President Truman this way:

“The Arab refugee tragedy is rapidly reaching catastrophic proportions and should be treated as a disaster… Of approximately 400,000 refugees approaching winter, with cold heavy rains will, it is estimated, kill more than 100,000 old men, women and children who are shelterless and have little to no food.”
Fallen Pillars: U.S. Policy towards Palestine and Israel since 1945, by Donald Neff, Reprint Ed. Washington D.C.: Institute for Palestine Studies, 2002, p. 68.

From 400,000 refugees in 1948 the numbers jumped to approximately 750,000 in 1949. Many of them fled to neighboring Arab countries. U.S. foreign diplomats in Cairo, Egypt and Amman, Jordan reported that their two countries were so overcrowded with starving weak Palestinian families, their already inundated almost non-existent resources were pushed to near collapse.

Remarkably those Arab states continued to donate some $11-million to refugee aids. The U.S. Department of State tracked these activities from April to December 1948 stating:

“This sum, in light of the very slender budgets of most of these governments, is relatively enormous.

…the total direct relief offered.. by the Israeli government to date consists of 500 cases of oranges. Meanwhile, Israel had acquired formerly Palestinian-owned properties worth at least $480 million.”
Ibid, pp. 69, 72.

Palestinian refugees_Amman_1949

Palestinian refugees in Amman, 1949

President Truman naively believed the Zionist-lead Israeli state could coexist in Palestine with Arabs as a single state of shared power. But Truman’s 1948 Presidential election had also been bought for him by American Zionist leaders and their organization’s funding and was under heavy pressure to immediately recognize the nation of Israel to the world DESPITE equally heavy opposition by the State Department. Truman tried to persuade Israel to allow Arab refugees to return to their original homes under this coexisting belief and had Mark Ethridge negotiate it. After being continually refused by Israel, Ethridge very disgusted reported to the State Department “What I can see is an abortion of justice and humanity to which I do not want to be midwife…” (Ibid p. 75).

Finally the State Department had one last card to play:  the $49-million of unallocated funds from an Export-Import Bank loan to Israel. They threatened to stop it unless Israel allowed at least 200,000 Arab refugees to return to Palestine. When the U.S. coordinator on Palestine Refugee Matters delivered the threat to an angry Israeli ambassador, he returned to his office and in less than an hour received a notification from the White House that Truman was dissociating himself from any withholding of the Ex-Im Bank loan.
(line break)

U.S. Popular Media Post-1953 to Today

(line break)
If you understand what is meant by the concept “a conflict of interest,” then one doesn’t have to search too far to find Zionist backgrounds or sway in key areas. As noted earlier in Part II, Zionist knew how to exploit the basic nature of the American political system including the intimate relationship it had with media sources influencing popular public opinion or pressure.

A noteworthy example of Zionist influence on American media is the acclaimed academic and co-writer co-creator to the U.N. Charter, Virginia Gildersleeve. Her struggle against the creation of Israel is one as well dramatized as David and Goliath, but was nowhere near as popular or familiar in 1930’s – 1940’s America, not even into the 1950’s.


Virginia Gildersleeve

When Gildersleeve wrote in defense of human rights and humanitarian action for Palestine, and for Palestinian families to be allowed to return to their homes and villages, a widespread campaign was launched against her, stereotyping her work as “anti-Semitic” as Zionists pandered upon Holocaust sympathies. Toward the end of her exceptional career she devoted herself to human rights in the Middle East testifying before Congressional committees, even directly lobbying President Truman to rectify the horrible neglect and violations taking place in Palestine, but to no avail. In her memoirs she wrote the defeats…”[were attributed to] the Zionist control of the media of communication.

Zionist control was indeed apparent. A study of 1917 news coverage of WWI and post-war reparations (the contentious roots of the Balfour Declaration) revealed that editorial opinion leaned heavily in favor of the Zionist posture. This continued into the 1920’s. Political analyst and author Kathleen Christison writes…

“…editorials and news stories alike applauded Jewish enterprise, heralding a Jewish return to Palestine as ‘glorious news.’

The relatively heavy press coverage is an indicator of the extent of Zionist influence even in this early period. One scholar has estimated that, as of the mid-1920s, approximately half of all New York Times articles were placed by press agents, suggesting that U.S. Zionist organizations may have placed many of the articles on Zionism’s Palestine endeavors.”
Perceptions of Palestine: Their Influence on U.S. Middle East Policy, by Kathleen Christison, 1st Ed. Berkeley, CA: University California Press, 2000, p. 40.

In 1953 author Alfred Lilienthal described the sweeping capture of American newspapers, magazines, and radio stations as remarkably complete. Their “…stories as well as editorial columns, gave primarily the Zionist views of events before, during, and after partition.” The Saturday Evening Post came under ruthless attack by Zionists for publishing an article by Milton Mayer criticizing Jewish nationalism as overly zealous. Secretary of State George C. Marshall, after threatening Israel’s callous treatment of Palestinians, severely underestimated the American Zionist media networks’ ability to hide opposing views to the conflict.

In a March 1949 study by the Department of State it revealed that the general American public was “unaware of the Palestine refugee problem, since it has not been hammered away at by the press or radio.” Most Americans were consumed by the threat of Soviet communism and the cold war, fed of course by most all major news mediums. Completing his book Palestine Is Our Business, author, Yale alum, and distinguished archaeologist Millar Burrows — also Vice-President of the National Committee to Combat Anti-Seminism — wrote:

“A terrible wrong has been done to the native people of [Palestine]. The blame for what has happened must be distributed among all concerned, including ourselves.

…the [counter]plan for Palestine advocated by the Arabs was a democracy with freedom of religion and complete separation of religion and the State, as in this country.

All the Arab refugees who want to return to their homes must be allowed and helped to do so, and must be restored to their own villages, houses, and farms or places of business, with adequate compensation from the Government of Israel for destruction and damage.”
Palestine Is Our Business, by Millar Burrows, Philadelphia, PA: Westminster Press, 1949, p. 11, 131, 154.

As a result of his book, the American Zionist Council published and distributed articles slandering Burrows’ work as “an anti-Semitic opus.

Dorothy Thompson – “Woman of the Year”


Dorothy Thompson, c. 1937

She was often called “The First Lady of American Journalism” and considered by many colleagues a trailblazer in the field, Dorothy Thompson also made Time magazine’s 2nd most popular woman in America behind Eleanor Roosevelt. Because of Thompson’s poignant criticism of Adolph Hitler’s methods and rise to power while reporting in Germany, she was banned from the country. Upon returning to the U.S., she began writing a very popular syndicated column called “On the Record” which often delivered crisp, outspoken and politically centered analysis of current issues. In her advocacy for the relief of Jews in Europe and Nazi Germany, especially as a woman, Thompson naturally became a celebrity in American journalism, particularly with Zionist. The 1942 box-office hit film by George Stevens “Woman of the Year” with Katharine Hepburn and Spencer Tracy was based upon Thompson’s career. A Broadway play was also made about Thompson played by Lauren Bacall.

Effected by Holocaust atrocities and married at the time to a Hungarian Jewish husband (Josef Bard), Thompson at first favored the creation of the state of Israel in Palestine… until she physically went there herself in 1945. Thompson reversed her pro-Zionist position to a pro-Arab pro-Palestinian one, and what resulted was a complete fall from historical stardom. In his April 2015 article on Gil Maguire gives tribute to Thompson writing…

“Dorothy Thompson’s [career] is truly a remarkable story.  Her apex was probably 1948 when Claire Booth Luce and others wanted her to run for president.  She’d been one of Zionism’s most famous and influential spokesmen.  Her defection, in 1949, created great anger in the Jewish/Zionist communities, and in few short years her career was in tatters and her influence largely gone. Today, Dorothy Thompson is virtually unknown and unremembered.  This fascinating woman who deserves to be an icon of the feminist movement, is rarely, if ever, mentioned as an important female historical figure.”

In the 1950 documentary “Sands of Sorrow” produced by the Council for the Relief of Palestine Arab Refugees, Thompson speaks specifically about the conditions of Palestinian Arab refugee camps. Sadly, in speaking out against Zionism and its conquest and occupation of Palestine, Dorothy Thompson was methodically erased from history.

There is a modern effort to bring back to public light Dorothy’s work in a documentary film entitled “The Silencing – Of Dorothy Thompson” by Alternate Focus. Below is a 4-minute teaser of the upcoming film…

(line break)

* * * * * * * * * *

To conclude this 3-part series I want to repeat a quote I often use which makes a point about sources; that is sources of information we accept, or internalize, or prefer, or for better or for worse… take as gospel. It goes like this:

“To be ignorant of what occurred before you were born
is to remain always a child.”
— Marcus Tullius Cicero

(line break)
But those words of wisdom are not enough. How does one learn whether they have been taught and raised by a family, community, and nation that is on the ‘right side of history’? How can one, as can be humanly possible, decide what is right or wrong as a 4-year old? Or a 10-year old, or even a 19-year old? There is probably no one, perfect, across-the-board answer at any select moment of time and place. However, over time and with the evolution of the collective human brains, greater degrees of right and wrong, and almost right and almost wrong do indeed surface. Yes, many of them are through trial and error, but many are also learned through honest in-depth comparing and contrasting. This comparing-contrasting technique should also include subject matter one might find uncomfortable or offensive — this is truer analysis and broader critical-thinking.

There is however, an identifiable flaw or possible flaw in that process.

Through acts of violence, death, and literal or metaphorical cutting-out-tongues or amputating the ability to write, and so on, that could or does distort history and data which then leads to contaminated conclusions — it becomes even HARDER to decipher ‘the full real story‘. Why? Most often history is written by the Victors and one must dig deeper, literally and metaphorically, to hear, read, and digest the “losers” side of the story. Not too many people I know care to do that sort of legwork-homework.

Coming full circle now, on the historical subject of Easter/Eostre weekend at Starbucks in Part I and then the expansive factors and influences of WWI and WWII Zionist activities and counter-activities for the planned creation of Israel in Part II and III, we’ve discovered a broader lesser-known backdrop (if any at all) of modern Middle Eastern affairs, turmoil, and continued conflict. Obtaining this wider vivid picture created from high-zoom capabilities with multi-colored, multi-textured, multi-layered, more accurate honest representations cannot be achieved with one single camera, from one single angle, or one single frame. One must explore. One must experiment, usually multiple times, to capture the perfect image.

I dare say that my well-intended but very misinformed Fundy-Evangelist that evening at Starbucks likely “faithfully” believed one image, one angle from one camera was all his life and America needed when it came to world politics, religion and terrorism. Please, please don’t make that mistake! Completing difficult intensive homework in school or college should never stop after the graduation.

I welcome any thoughts or questions below. Otherwise, thank you for reading these three rather long extensive posts.

Live Well — Love Much — Laugh Often — Learn Always

(paragraph break)

Creative Commons License
Blog content with this logo by Professor Taboo is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
Permissions beyond the scope of this license may be available at

30 thoughts on “Circus of Recycling – Part III

  1. Fascinating read.

    I’ve often wondered how things would have been different if the Jews had accepted the land offered to them in Australia (Kimberlies) or South America (forgotten where, exactly) instead of Palestine.

    Liked by 3 people

    • Great question John. I would think the chances of those places happening (in Texas as well) would have been very slim to none given the influence and power wielded by Nordau, Scheib, Brandeis, Frankfurter, to name a few Americans, as well as Ben-Gurion, Weizmann, Feinberg, etc, and the many well-funded, well-seeded (publicly & covertly) Zionist organizations in the U.S. and Europe. They ALL (the Zionists) wanted Palestine no matter how convincing other places would have been offered by peace-loving dignitaries and nations JUST TO AVOID another war (ethnic cleansings) which played major parts in instigating WWI and WWII. Sadly, for all of humanity, the Zionists were allowed to ethnically cleanse Palestine; and for what reason?

      It’s truly ridiculous John, to put it mildly. Yet, we continue to repeat history, over and over again. 😦

      Liked by 2 people

    • Indeed. Yet, those genuine efforts were usually not made public in the U.S. because of the aforementioned strategically placed and well-oiled covert Zionist-machine within all of American media forms throughout the early 20th century through the 1960’s. Dorothy Thompson’s ‘silencing’ is the perfect example of supression of the press and free speech! Here is one of her best quotes…

      “The State of Israel has got to learn to live in the same atmosphere of free criticism in which every other state in the world must endure.” (1951)

      Here’s an ironic sidenote… I’ve noticed over the last 2-3 decades as the U.S. as a whole has turned increasingly more Puritan, more Conservative, sometimes more self-righteous (especially in the South), that we will not tolerate criticism — that Thompson refers to — about our political, social, and religious liberties; liberties that are being maligned into forms of Christian theocracy. Now tell me, WHAT is any different in these modern U.S. trends (certainly in the South) in comparison to the conquest and occupation of Palestine, then creation and recognition of 1948 Israel?

      What began in 1904 Eastern Europe (Zionism) is in several ways what is taking place now in the Southern U.S., the bible-belt. It simply has a different name or mask: Christian Fundamentalism/Authoritarianism.

      As always John, thank you very much for your GREAT feedback Sir! ❤

      Liked by 2 people

  2. I’ve got a viral fever and my brain doesn’t work, professor. Right now, I can barely cope with the mindless oblivion that passes for my thought streams. I ought to come back and absorb this at some point though, not least of all as the subject of Zionism is very much on the political agenda over here in England currently, its referencing being used (some claim) as coded anti-Semitism and also as a means of discrediting the current Labour Party leadership. I must say such claims seem rather oblique and arguable to me, but am sure that is down to my wholly inadequate understanding of the matter. Now where are those pills . . .

    Liked by 1 person

    • I’m very sorry Hariod about your fever and its effect right now on your exceptional cognitive powers. Is there ANYTHING I can do to help… besides stop writing 50,000 word posts? 😀

      Very interesting about Zionism over there, especially the part about that old, very over-used Anti-Semitic pandering card. I hope everyone recognizes the big difference between exploiting sympathies and the very REAL fact that an enormous amount has already been done for WWII Holocaust victims and survivors. That has nothing to do with other modern forms/denominations/sects of Judaism, and even LESS to do with what militant Zionism has committed from the 1940’s up to today. It’s important to keep all of those Judeo labels and descriptions separated and distinct! Hmmm, I can certainly understand why the issue of Zionism is a highly controversial topic in England and Britain.

      Please get well my Friend. ❤

      Liked by 2 people

      • Thanks so much professor; it’s just that everything I read at the moment is in one ear and straight out the other, and your fabulously researched article fully deserves a level of sustained attentiveness I just can’t give it currently.

        What happened over here was that the former Mayor of London, Ken Livingstone, who’s very much on the left of the political scene, as is the current Labour Party leader (both Socialists unlike most of the rest of the Labour Party), claimed in a radio interview that Hitler was a Zionist sympathiser, and for which he later was attacked by Blairite (centrist) party members, and suspended from the party. Livingstone alluded to the Haavara (transfer) Agreement of 1933 between Germany and German Zionists to facilitate the emigration of Jews to British Mandate Palestine by ensuring potential Jewish emigrants could transfer part of their property. Of course, Hitler was never sympathetic to any Jewish cause; he just wanted them out of Europe and by whatever means were expedient.

        In his (slightly shaky) defence, Livingstone cites Marxist author Lenni Brenner and his somewhat controversial book ‘Zionism in the Age of the Dictators’, which itself has been cited by holocaust deniers:

        “All the detail is in there. The striking thing that does confirm there was an ongoing dialogue between the Zionists and Nazi government is, in 1935 Hitler passed a law banning any flag being displayed except the swastika and the blue and white Zionist flag, which is pretty amazing . . . [Brenner’s book] confirms there was clearly an ongoing dialogue, even if the Israeli government now tries to pretend that none of that all happened.”

        Liked by 1 person

        • No worries Hariod. If you would like to tackle this later, do so when it pleases you. But if and when you do, you MUST give your excellent feedback and perspective! Deal? 😉

          Hahaha. Sounds as if the political frenzies going on there are in essence the same as they are here: plenty of drama, rhetoric, propaganda, and slandering to make a sitcom on the telly! Yeah, when Holocaust deniers open their mouth about factually documented history, by opening their mouth they comprehensively undermine everything that comes out of that mouth! (laughs and rolls eyes) It does make for good psychiatric comedy though.

          In your Brenner quote, there is evidence (theoretical or plausible) that yes, in the early and mid-thirties Zionists were likely communicating in such covert un-Jewish pro-Zionist ways as they certainly did with Britain, the U.S., and other influential European nations… merely to establish the state of Israel. If there was massive losses in human life to accomphish this “God-ordained” cleansing, even their own people (Jews), then so be it. I find the evidence is compelling and overwhelmingly BAD regarding Zionist activities from 1945 to the present day toward the occupation of Palestine.

          Thank you again Hariod for finding the time and energy to share this 2nd comment. ❤

          Liked by 1 person

      • Okay, I’m still under the cosh, but have just read your piece. As John says, it’s fascinating, and seemingly exceptionally thoroughly researched – congratulations. I’m not qualified to offer any kind of perspective of my own, as you requested, professor. In fact, and in line with your closing sentiments, I generally find myself a little cautious in accepting isolated historical accounts of geo-politics, never knowing who is grinding what axes, but largely suspecting that they are indeed being ground. Perhaps this tendency of mine towards scepticism is far from that which you encourage (again in your closing remarks), and I fully accept that I am guilty of rather burying my head in the sand on such matters, purely for want of knowing whom to trust. [My own primary interests are in the interior life, so to speak, and as you know.] Here in England, we have two largely reliable mainstream media sources – the BBC and The Guardian – and I tend to place such little trust as I have in them for my information on World Politics. ZNet seems good too, for a global perspective. In fact, your very fine article spurred me just now into reading one there, from which this quote is taken:

        “Zionism must be relegated to the history books. There is a state here. It will remain here. Now we must fight over its justness, not its Zionism.


        Liked by 1 person

        • You’ve set me off researching further, professor, and whilst I am indeed mistrustful of mainstream media, and of individual accounts of geo-political history generally (present company excepted – naturally), then two journalists I do trust on Middle Eastern politics are Robert Fisk and John Pilger. After reading your essay, and also having felt a desire to look closer at the human experience of the Palestinians as their lives are lived nowadays, I turned to Pilger, and watched the video below. So, with your permission:

          Liked by 1 person

          • That investigative report by Pilger was exceptional Hariod! Thank you.

            Pilger’s report is spot on in the very first minutes… “Israel has a very strong ally/friend: the United States.” So very true, and once again I empathize with the justified animosity of Palestinians toward the West. The U.S. American citizens are absolutely responsible for what our government allowed to happen and helped with leading up to 1948 and Israel. After 9/11 President George W. Bush told (warned) countries who supported terrorism or harbored terrorist groups, that we would consider them enemies and come after them. By that ‘reasoning’ then, we SHOULD HAVE come after ourselves! We support a terrorist nation: Israel. Period. What a F*CKING double-standard we portray to the world (pisses me right off) and just a year or two ago President Obama ignorantly vowed our continued (military) support to Israel. 😦

            Beyond any shadow of a doubt, the primary reasons we STILL support Israel and consider them “our friend” is because 1) Zionist always pander to our Conservative Christian sensibilities and majority — bogus religion again — and we have too many naive Xian Fundamentalists in this country… and 2) we need a presence in the region to protect our foreign oil interests; i.e. Exxon-Mobil, Chevron, Conoco-Phillips, Occidental Petroleum, EOG Resources, etc, and I should mention (indirectly) Halliburton’s huge interest in the region.

            Once again Hariod, thank you and excellent feedback and video! ❤

            Liked by 1 person

          • Sorry. Forgot to also mention that with the vast complexity of conflict in and around Jerusalem since 100 BCE and after, three major religions all staking their “God-given” rights to the area, and one religion typically blaming a previous wrong by another religion to justify their present vengence… I find there is only ONE peaceful method of reconciliation warranted to STOP the cyclical death-wheel. It is ironically by one of history’s most iconic political activists who was neither Jew, Muslim, or Christian: Mohandas Gandhi.

            His non-violent activism for change is still and SHOULD BE the ultimate standard for all who seek political-social change. 🙂

            Liked by 1 person

        • Again Hariod, thank you for your genuine efforts here while sick. Goodness, you honor me greatly. You could’ve waited if needed my Friend. 🙂

          Nevertheless, we each have our own talents, own gifts, and when life is basically good around us… we have the privilege of our own desires we’d like to fill. Completely understandable. Your explorations Hariod into the “interior life” are exceptional! I am thoroughly enjoying your tours into “The Sway of Contentedness” and where and how to find that human contentedness.

          Perhaps this tendency of mine towards scepticism is far from that which you encourage (again in your closing remarks), and I fully accept that I am guilty of rather burying my head in the sand on such matters, purely for want of knowing whom to trust.

          “Scepticism” sometimes carries with it a connotation of the lack of open-mindedness. I’d prefer YOUR method of exploration, curiosity, giving one’s self a reasonable amount of time to investigate a topic/issue well, then drawing probabilities or high-probabilites afterwards… still leaving some room for refinement, modification later if necessary. That said, reserve to ‘change your mind when the facts change‘ — to borrow a John Maynard Keynes phrase — is a wise “Get Out of Jail” card. 😉

          That Levy ZNet article was good and raised good read-between-the-lines questions, however, personally I would have taken it much further, much deeper. Surprise, huh? (chuckling)

          There is a state here. It will remain here.” Indeed. Being an American citizen it is now ridiculous to think that we will handover all the homelands of all the Native American Indians that we displaced and exterminated in the 19th century. I get it. Only in the last 20-30 years has the U.S. government been making strides to ‘compensate’ the Native Indian tribes for what we did. I feel this is better than nothing. Has Israel made any attempts like this for the Palestinians? On that, here is my opinion on Levy’s article…

          Yes, there is indeed a “state” there, but it isn’t one with borders. It is a mental state. A mental disorder, to be more accurate, that is also suffered by NUMEROUS religious groups in the world; i.e. Wahhabism, Christian-Fundamentalism, Sharia laws or ‘Christian laws’, et al. I might even liken it to a neurological-hormonal virus that wipes out generations of innocent human beings! Therefore, I disagree with Levy’s final assessment. Zionism, along with any other militaristic-based theocracy, is NO DIFFERENT than others today or throughout history, so the virus MUST be fought!

          Now I will watch your John Pilger video. ❤

          Liked by 1 person

  3. Professor, a wonderful read and definitely an eye opener. Thank you for this.
    We are constantly bombarded by a version well fitted and suited by those controlling the media, it’s rare to find historical reads that are authentic and free from being biased.
    Thank you professor.

    Liked by 1 person

Go Ahead, Start the Discussion!

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

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

Facebook photo

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

Connecting to %s