Can you feel the approaching danger ?

[Mineva]

Mineva, et al,

I do not need to justify and leaglize Israel.

Again, what are you trying to prove ? You cant justify and legalize Israel no matter whatever you do.

(COMMENT)

It already is, and has been since 1948.

Most Respectfully,
R

Justified and legalized according to what ? How you do justified stealing someones' lands ?

 

[Phoenall]

montelatici, et al,

This is more of a moral question, than a political question.

The Mufti understood that an allied victory would result in the loss of Palestine and the eviction of the indigenous non-Jews of Palestine to be replaced by Europeans. Do you believe he should have supported the allies?

(COMMENT)

It really is not about what I think; not at all. It is all about the moral turpitude of the Hostile Arab Palestinian that would choose to further the WWII Holocaust Agenda of the Axis Regime and choose to eradicate innocent men, women and children in a bid to achieve a political pursuit.

It is your type of support to this type of outrageous cause that lead many people to believe that their is something inherently wrong with the learned behaviors of those that participate in the Islamic Sharia Teachings and the belief structure. Exactly what kind of culture would support the corrupt, depraved and degenerate acts and practices of the Third Reich, --- and have it supported by such prominent Islamic Leaders as Hajj Amin al-Husseini (Grand Mufti of Jerusalem). What does that tell us about the Arab Palestinian then --- and the Arab Palestinian now that continues to support such means as a justification to achieve political ends????

If for no other reason than the anti-Semitic approach and wholesale extermination programs adopted by the German Leadership of the Third Reich, YES --- the Arabs (in fact the entire Islamic World under Sharia and Islamic Beliefs) should have not only totally rejected the extremist, immoral and criminal behaviors of the Axis Powers; instead the Arab should have gone out of their way to rescue the Jewish Culture. Certainly the Prince of Chivalry (Saladin) and Muslim Icon would rollover in his sarcophagus (in the mausoleum on the gardens of the Umayyad Mosque --- Damascus) to hear of such a thing. In his view, the helpless (women and children especially) were to be saved --- not put to death.

But it is the policy of the HoAP to further conflict by any and all means the deem necessary. That was the policy of the Grand Mufti then, and it is the HoAP policy now. We have argued this point many times in this forum.

Subhas Chandra Bose

, an Indian independence leader actually organized the creation of Indian Waffen SS troops which fought for Germany. It is not unusual.

(COMMENT)

Yes, true. General Subhas Chandra Bose did enjoy the general praise for his anti-British Rule stance. But his alignment with the Axis Power essentially ended any further political aspirations he might have had. While it is very true that he did not support the extremist fascist programs of the Axis Powers, politically he was ended;

Most Respectfully,
R

Because Britain went ahead with independence. Had Britain tried to hold on to India, he would have emerged as a prescient hero. If there had been a population of European Jews that had begun settling in India through a declaration like the Balfour Declaration, he would have probably held the same position as the Mufti. It's just human nature to wish to eliminate those that intend to dispossess eliminate you or your people.

And of course the Palestinian leadership (and the people) was hostile to the people that planned to dispossess them of their homes and land. Do you think that is in any way unusual?

What I see as unusual is how arab muslims that had no homes or land because they were nomadic farm workers suddenly acquired land and homes that had been in Jewish hands for over 1000 years. And then along comes a European invader and coloniser who has decimated an indigenous people so they an live of the fat of the land and tries to put all their guilt onto one section of the indigenous population because of their race and religion. That is the top and bottom of it you have a hatred of the Jews going back to your early teachings of them murdering your god. That is why you hate the Jews so much because your Catholic teachers brainwashed you into believing that the Jews killed Jesus.

ISNT THAT RIGHT

 

[Phoenall]

The Mufti understood that an allied victory would result in the loss of Palestine and the eviction of the indigenous non-Jews of Palestine to be replaced by Europeans. Do you believe he should have supported the allies?

Subhas Chandra Bose an Indian independence leader actually organized the creation of Indian Waffen SS troops which fought for Germany. It is not unusual.

So when you European invaders and colonisers decimated the First Nations people it was all right for you to do so. But it is not all right for the Jews to increase the arab muslim numbers through better health care and food. I still want a link showing that because of Jewish immigration to Palestine the numbers of arabs has dropped to a fraction of their numbers of 1875. In that short a period the European invaders reduced the first Nations people to less than 20% of their original numbers.

Really? Care to provide any evidence for this assertion?

His own words if you bother to look at the last 48 hours posts.

 

[Phoenall]

Mineva, et al,

I would just like to remind you of three points.

What '67 borders, can you produce the treaty signed by an Israeli representative agreeing to borders in 1967.

Its not matter whether or not you will be agree with the borders of UN. You have to comply with it or we have to force you to do that.

(COMMENT)

First: Declaration of Principles

Under the International Law concerning Friendly Relations and Co-operation among States (A/RES/2625):

Every State has the duty to refrain from the threat or use of force to violate the existing international boundaries of another State or as a means of solving international disputes, including territorial disputes and problems concerning frontiers of States.​

Second: International Humanitarian Law

Under the Convention (IV) relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War. Geneva, 12 August 1949. (Article 68):

Protected persons who commit an offence which is solely intended to harm the Occupying Power, but which does not constitute an attempt on the life or limb of members of the occupying forces or administration, nor a grave collective danger, nor seriously damage the property of the occupying forces or administration or the installations used by them, shall be liable to internment or simple imprisonment, provided the duration of such internment or imprisonment is proportionate to the offence committed. Furthermore, internment or imprisonment shall, for such offences, be the only measure adopted for depriving protected persons of liberty. The courts provided for under Article 66 [ Link ] of the present Convention may at their discretion convert a sentence of imprisonment to one of internment for the same period.

The penal provisions promulgated by the Occupying Power in accordance with Articles 64 and 65 may impose the death penalty on a protected person only in cases where the person is guilty of espionage, of serious acts of sabotage against the military installations of the Occupying Power or of intentional offences which have caused the death of one or more persons, provided that such offences were punishable by death under the law of the occupied territory in force before the occupation began.

The death penalty may not be pronounced against a protected person unless the attention of the court has been particularly called to the fact that since the accused is not a national of the Occupying Power, he is not bound to it by any duty of allegiance.

In any case, the death penalty may not be pronounced against a protected person who was under eighteen years of age at the time of the offence.​

There is no such thing as the "UN Agreed Borders" between the 1988 State of Palestine and the 1948 State of Israel. There are:

The international boundary between Israel and Jordan is delimited with reference to the boundary definition under the Mandate as is shown in Annex I(a), on the mapping materials attached thereto and co-ordinates specified therein. The boundary, as set out in Annex I (a), is the permanent, secure and recognised international boundary between Israel and Jordan, without prejudice to the status of any territories that came under Israeli military government control in 1967. (Article 3 of A/50/73 S/1995/83 27 January 1995)​

The permanent boundary between Egypt and Israel in the recognized international boundary between Egypt and the former mandated territory of Palestine, as shown on the map at Annex II, without prejudice to the issue of the status of the Gaza Strip. The Parties recognize this boundary as inviolable. Each will respect the territorial integrity of the other, including their territorial waters and airspace. (Article 2 of Treaty of Peace between Egypt and Israel) (MAP 1)​

At the current time, there is a UN commentary in the Acknowledgement of the "State of Palestine." I believe the last language used was:

4. Affirms its determination to contribute to the achievement of the inalienable rights of the Palestinian people and the attainment of a peaceful settlement in the Middle East that ends the occupation that began in 1967 and fulfils the vision of two States: an independent, sovereign, democratic, contiguous and viable State of Palestine living side by side in peace and security with Israel on the basis of the pre-1967 borders; (A/RES/67/19 4 DEC 2012)​

For such a very small paragraph, it says tome very interesting things. It is very controversial. But, it is non-binding so it really might have a different impact.

Most Respectfully,
R

Again, what are you trying to prove ? You cant justify and legalize Israel no matter whatever you do.

Not even when International Law says that it is justified and legalised as far back as 1923

Which international law was that then?

Mandate of Palestine 1923 that sets in stone the boundaries of the Jewish National Home in Palestine after giving 78% to the arab muslims.

 

[Phoenall]

Mineva, et al,

I do not need to justify and leaglize Israel.

Again, what are you trying to prove ? You cant justify and legalize Israel no matter whatever you do.

(COMMENT)

It already is, and has been since 1948.

Most Respectfully,
R

Justified and legalized according to what ? How you do justified stealing someones' lands ?

When you look at the evidence you find that it was the arab muslims once again stealing the land

 

[Challenger]

Mineva, et al,

I would just like to remind you of three points.

Its not matter whether or not you will be agree with the borders of UN. You have to comply with it or we have to force you to do that.

(COMMENT)

First: Declaration of Principles

Under the International Law concerning Friendly Relations and Co-operation among States (A/RES/2625):

Every State has the duty to refrain from the threat or use of force to violate the existing international boundaries of another State or as a means of solving international disputes, including territorial disputes and problems concerning frontiers of States.​

Second: International Humanitarian Law

Under the Convention (IV) relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War. Geneva, 12 August 1949. (Article 68):

Protected persons who commit an offence which is solely intended to harm the Occupying Power, but which does not constitute an attempt on the life or limb of members of the occupying forces or administration, nor a grave collective danger, nor seriously damage the property of the occupying forces or administration or the installations used by them, shall be liable to internment or simple imprisonment, provided the duration of such internment or imprisonment is proportionate to the offence committed. Furthermore, internment or imprisonment shall, for such offences, be the only measure adopted for depriving protected persons of liberty. The courts provided for under Article 66 [ Link ] of the present Convention may at their discretion convert a sentence of imprisonment to one of internment for the same period.

The penal provisions promulgated by the Occupying Power in accordance with Articles 64 and 65 may impose the death penalty on a protected person only in cases where the person is guilty of espionage, of serious acts of sabotage against the military installations of the Occupying Power or of intentional offences which have caused the death of one or more persons, provided that such offences were punishable by death under the law of the occupied territory in force before the occupation began.

The death penalty may not be pronounced against a protected person unless the attention of the court has been particularly called to the fact that since the accused is not a national of the Occupying Power, he is not bound to it by any duty of allegiance.

In any case, the death penalty may not be pronounced against a protected person who was under eighteen years of age at the time of the offence.​

There is no such thing as the "UN Agreed Borders" between the 1988 State of Palestine and the 1948 State of Israel. There are:

The international boundary between Israel and Jordan is delimited with reference to the boundary definition under the Mandate as is shown in Annex I(a), on the mapping materials attached thereto and co-ordinates specified therein. The boundary, as set out in Annex I (a), is the permanent, secure and recognised international boundary between Israel and Jordan, without prejudice to the status of any territories that came under Israeli military government control in 1967. (Article 3 of A/50/73 S/1995/83 27 January 1995)​

The permanent boundary between Egypt and Israel in the recognized international boundary between Egypt and the former mandated territory of Palestine, as shown on the map at Annex II, without prejudice to the issue of the status of the Gaza Strip. The Parties recognize this boundary as inviolable. Each will respect the territorial integrity of the other, including their territorial waters and airspace. (Article 2 of Treaty of Peace between Egypt and Israel) (MAP 1)​

At the current time, there is a UN commentary in the Acknowledgement of the "State of Palestine." I believe the last language used was:

4. Affirms its determination to contribute to the achievement of the inalienable rights of the Palestinian people and the attainment of a peaceful settlement in the Middle East that ends the occupation that began in 1967 and fulfils the vision of two States: an independent, sovereign, democratic, contiguous and viable State of Palestine living side by side in peace and security with Israel on the basis of the pre-1967 borders; (A/RES/67/19 4 DEC 2012)​

For such a very small paragraph, it says tome very interesting things. It is very controversial. But, it is non-binding so it really might have a different impact.

Most Respectfully,
R

Again, what are you trying to prove ? You cant justify and legalize Israel no matter whatever you do.

Not even when International Law says that it is justified and legalised as far back as 1923

Which international law was that then?

Mandate of Palestine 1923 that sets in stone the boundaries of the Jewish National Home in Palestine after giving 78% to the arab muslims.

....not an international law.

 

[Phoenall]

Mineva, et al,

I would just like to remind you of three points.

(COMMENT)

First: Declaration of Principles

Under the International Law concerning Friendly Relations and Co-operation among States (A/RES/2625):

Every State has the duty to refrain from the threat or use of force to violate the existing international boundaries of another State or as a means of solving international disputes, including territorial disputes and problems concerning frontiers of States.​

Second: International Humanitarian Law

Under the Convention (IV) relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War. Geneva, 12 August 1949. (Article 68):

Protected persons who commit an offence which is solely intended to harm the Occupying Power, but which does not constitute an attempt on the life or limb of members of the occupying forces or administration, nor a grave collective danger, nor seriously damage the property of the occupying forces or administration or the installations used by them, shall be liable to internment or simple imprisonment, provided the duration of such internment or imprisonment is proportionate to the offence committed. Furthermore, internment or imprisonment shall, for such offences, be the only measure adopted for depriving protected persons of liberty. The courts provided for under Article 66 [ Link ] of the present Convention may at their discretion convert a sentence of imprisonment to one of internment for the same period.

The penal provisions promulgated by the Occupying Power in accordance with Articles 64 and 65 may impose the death penalty on a protected person only in cases where the person is guilty of espionage, of serious acts of sabotage against the military installations of the Occupying Power or of intentional offences which have caused the death of one or more persons, provided that such offences were punishable by death under the law of the occupied territory in force before the occupation began.

The death penalty may not be pronounced against a protected person unless the attention of the court has been particularly called to the fact that since the accused is not a national of the Occupying Power, he is not bound to it by any duty of allegiance.

In any case, the death penalty may not be pronounced against a protected person who was under eighteen years of age at the time of the offence.​

There is no such thing as the "UN Agreed Borders" between the 1988 State of Palestine and the 1948 State of Israel. There are:

The international boundary between Israel and Jordan is delimited with reference to the boundary definition under the Mandate as is shown in Annex I(a), on the mapping materials attached thereto and co-ordinates specified therein. The boundary, as set out in Annex I (a), is the permanent, secure and recognised international boundary between Israel and Jordan, without prejudice to the status of any territories that came under Israeli military government control in 1967. (Article 3 of A/50/73 S/1995/83 27 January 1995)​

The permanent boundary between Egypt and Israel in the recognized international boundary between Egypt and the former mandated territory of Palestine, as shown on the map at Annex II, without prejudice to the issue of the status of the Gaza Strip. The Parties recognize this boundary as inviolable. Each will respect the territorial integrity of the other, including their territorial waters and airspace. (Article 2 of Treaty of Peace between Egypt and Israel) (MAP 1)​

At the current time, there is a UN commentary in the Acknowledgement of the "State of Palestine." I believe the last language used was:

4. Affirms its determination to contribute to the achievement of the inalienable rights of the Palestinian people and the attainment of a peaceful settlement in the Middle East that ends the occupation that began in 1967 and fulfils the vision of two States: an independent, sovereign, democratic, contiguous and viable State of Palestine living side by side in peace and security with Israel on the basis of the pre-1967 borders; (A/RES/67/19 4 DEC 2012)​

For such a very small paragraph, it says tome very interesting things. It is very controversial. But, it is non-binding so it really might have a different impact.

Most Respectfully,
R

Again, what are you trying to prove ? You cant justify and legalize Israel no matter whatever you do.

Not even when International Law says that it is justified and legalised as far back as 1923

Which international law was that then?

Mandate of Palestine 1923 that sets in stone the boundaries of the Jewish National Home in Palestine after giving 78% to the arab muslims.

....not an international law.

Then prove that it never entered into International law if you are so certain ?

 

[RoccoR]

Challenger, et al,

What!

Still no link to Deiter Wisliceny's testimony where he actually says, "the Mufti played a role in encouraging the Final Solution and was a close friend and advisor to Eichmann in the Holocaust’s implementation across Europe. Wisliceny testified further that al-Husseini had a close association with Heinrich Himmler and visited the gas chambers at Auschwitz, where he exhorted the staff to be even more dedicated in its important work."

(COMMENT)

I gave you the direct link to the video that shows the introduction of Wislicenry's Testimony at The Nuremberg trials in Posting #34. Fast-forward the video to 00:03:40.

It is a matter of record.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[Challenger]

Challenger, et al,

What!

Still no link to Deiter Wisliceny's testimony where he actually says, "the Mufti played a role in encouraging the Final Solution and was a close friend and advisor to Eichmann in the Holocaust’s implementation across Europe. Wisliceny testified further that al-Husseini had a close association with Heinrich Himmler and visited the gas chambers at Auschwitz, where he exhorted the staff to be even more dedicated in its important work."

(COMMENT)

I gave you the direct link to the video that shows the introduction of Wislicenry's Testimony at The Nuremberg trials in Posting #34. Fast-forward the video to 00:03:40.

It is a matter of record.

Most Respectfully,
R

Thanks, missed the link. I'll look at it.

 

[Challenger]

It's not only Muslim leaders. But yes, fuck them all.

I dunno. There are some Muslims I know who don't seem obsessed with fighting other sects or the Jews. Flat out nice, reasonable people.

I detest their religion, but lots of Muslims seem like darn fine people.

Agreed. But the Muslims you're in contact with are a little different than the ones living in Muslim countries, where they are fed a non stop barrage of anti Semitism and lies about the US, Israel, and the West in general from early childhood.

Much like the Westerners who are fed a non stop barrage of Islamophobia and lies about Iran, Palestine and the Middle east in general from early childhood.

 

[Phoenall]

It's not only Muslim leaders. But yes, fuck them all.

I dunno. There are some Muslims I know who don't seem obsessed with fighting other sects or the Jews. Flat out nice, reasonable people.

I detest their religion, but lots of Muslims seem like darn fine people.

Agreed. But the Muslims you're in contact with are a little different than the ones living in Muslim countries, where they are fed a non stop barrage of anti Semitism and lies about the US, Israel, and the West in general from early childhood.

Much like the Westerners who are fed a non stop barrage of Islamophobia and lies about Iran, Palestine and the Middle east in general from early childhood.

Link to the many cases of islamophobia that are being treated in the west. I have looked and cant find a single reported case

 

[Roudy]

Challenger, et al,

I'm not sure what you are asking for...

There are a lot of books and articles written about the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem by Zionist historiographers, he seems to be a Zionist bogey man, par excellence.

My request was quite simple and straighforward and I'm surprised someone of your obvious intelligence seems unsure of what I'm asking for. Simply this, I've asked Rude-eee to please provide a link to Deiter Wisliceny's testimony where he actually says, "the Mufti played a role in encouraging the Final Solution and was a close friend and advisor to Eichmann in the Holocaust’s implementation across Europe. Wisliceny testified further that al-Husseini had a close association with Heinrich Himmler and visited the gas chambers at Auschwitz, where he exhorted the staff to be even more dedicated in its important work."

There are preserved love letters between the Mufti and Hitler and Himmler, you fucking moron!

The Mufti and the Holocaust Hoover Institution

Stanford University

"Germany stands for an uncompromising struggle against the Jews. It is self-evident that the struggle against the Jewish national homeland in Palestine forms part of this struggle, since such a national homeland would be nothing other than a political base for the destructive influence of Jewish interests. Germany also knows that the claim that Jewry plays the role of an economic pioneer in Palestine is a lie. Only the Arabs work there, not the Jews. Germany is determined to call on the European nations one by one to solve the Jewish problem and, at the proper moment, to address the same appeal to non-European peoples."

—Adolf Hitler to Haj Amin Al-Husseini, mufti of Jerusalem, November 28, 1941

Thus, in March 1933, only two months after Hitler’s appointment as Chancellor, it was in fact the mufti who sought contact to the new German authorities and not vice-versa. In a March 31 telegram to Berlin, the German general consul in Jerusalem, Heinrich Wolff, reported on his meeting with Husseini:

"The Mufti explained to me today at length that Muslims both within Palestine and without welcome the new regime in Germany and hope for the spread of fascist, anti-democratic forms of government to other countries. Current Jewish economic and political influence is harmful everywhere and has to be combated. In order to be able to hit the standard of living of Jews, Muslims are hoping for Germany to declare a boycott [of “Jewish” goods], which they would then enthusiastically join throughout the Muslim world."

On november 28, 1941, three weeks after his arrival in Berlin, the mufti was received by Hitler. As recorded in the minutes of the meeting, Hitler urged his guest to remain patient:

At some not yet precisely known, but in any case not very distant point in time, the German armies will reach the southern edge of the Caucasus. As soon as this is the case, the Führer will himself give the Arab world his assurance that the hour of liberation has arrived. At this point, the sole German aim will be the destruction of the Jews living in the Arab space under the protection of British power.

Among his other activities in Berlin, the mufti served as honorary chair of a newly founded “Islamic Central Institute” The institute was officially opened on December 18, 1942: during Eid al-Adha, the Islamic “Festival of Sacrifice.” In a letter to Hitler on the occasion, the mufti expressed the hope that “thousands of Muslims around the world” would cooperate with Germany in the fight against “the common enemies”: “Jews, Bolsheviks and Anglo-Saxons.” The speech given by the mufti at the opening ceremony provides perhaps the clearest evidence that he required no lessons from the Nazis in anti-Semitism — or, at any rate, that if he did, he had by this time successfully assimilated those lessons into a remarkable synthesis of “traditional” Quranic and “modern” European Judeophobia:

"The Jews and their accomplices are to be counted among the bitterest enemies of the Muslims, who made known . . . their hostility since ancient times and have everywhere and always . . . treated them [Muslims] with guile. Every Muslim knows all too well how the Jews afflicted him and his faith in the first days of Islam and what hatefulness they displayed toward the great Prophet — what hardship and trouble they caused him, how many intrigues they launched, how many conspiracies against him they brought about — such that the Quran judged them to be the most irreconcilable enemies of the Muslims. . . . They will always remain a divisive element in the world: an element that is committed to devising schemes, provoking wars and playing peoples off against one another. . . . In England as in America, it is the Jewish influence alone that rules; and it is the same Jewish influence that is behind godless Communism. . . . And it is also this Jewish influence that has incited the nations into this grueling war. It is only the Jews who benefit from the tragic fate that they [the nations] suffer. . . .
In a subsequent talk at the Islamic Central Institute on November 2, 1943, the mufti called on Muslims to follow the example of National Socialist Germany, since the latter “knew how to save itself from the evil [Unheil] done by the Jews. . . . It had precisely identified the Jews and decided to find a definitive solution to the Jewish menace, in order to eliminate their evildoing [Unheil] from the world.” Gensicke points to the latter remark as evidence that the mufti was “well informed” about the extermination program that was by this time long underway in the Nazi death camps in occupied Poland."

Still no link to Deiter Wisliceny's testimony where he actually says, "the Mufti played a role in encouraging the Final Solution and was a close friend and advisor to Eichmann in the Holocaust’s implementation across Europe. Wisliceny testified further that al-Husseini had a close association with Heinrich Himmler and visited the gas chambers at Auschwitz, where he exhorted the staff to be even more dedicated in its important work."

Are you friggin blind? Read the documents and the quotes. He is clearly trying to convince Hitler and his henchmen to kill the Jews as opposed to letting them leave.

 

[Daniyel]

Alright down to conclusion, I'm thinking of Anti-Mosquito (no not just Mosques..) system instead of worrying about Turkey.

 

[Roudy]

The Mufti's Diary on His Meeting with Hitler

At the eve of the "final solution" to the "Jewish Problem",
the Mufti (Yasser Arafat's father's brother) and Adolf Hitler confer
in Berlin, November 21, 1941
Haj Amin al Husseini, recording in his own handwriting his meeting with Hitler in his diary, says:

The words of the Fuehrer on the 6th of Zul Qaada 1360 of the Hejira (which falls on the 21st of November 1941) Berlin, Friday, from 4:30 P.M. till a few minutes after 6. The objectives of my fight are clear. I am resolved to find a solution for the Jewish problem, progressing step by step without cessation. With regard to this I am making the necessary and right appeal, first to all the European countries and then to countries outside of Europe.

It is true that our common enemies are Great Britain and the Soviets whose principles are opposed to ours. But behind them stands hidden Jewry which drives them both. Jewry has but one aim in both these countries. We are now in the midst of a life and death struggle against both these nations. This fight will not only determine the outcome of the struggle between National Socialism and Jewry, but the whole conduct of this successful war will be of great and positive help to the Arabs who are engaged in the same struggle.

This is not only an abstract assurance.* A mere promise would be of no value whatsoever. But assurance which rests upon a conquering force is the only one which has real value. In the Iraqi campaign, for instance, the sympathy of the whole German people was for Iraq. It was our aim to help Iraq, but circumstances prevented us from fumishing actual help. The German people saw in them (in the Iraqis-Ed.) comrades in suffering because the German people too have suffered as they have. All the help we gave Iraq was not sufficient to save Iraq from the British forces. For this reason it is necessary to underscore one thing: in this struggle which will decide the fate of the Arabs I can now speak as a man dedicated to an ideal and as a military leader and a soldier. Everyone united in this great struggle who helps to bring about its successful outcome, serves the common cause and thus serves the Arab cause. Any other view means weakening the military situation and thus offers no help to the Arab cause. Therefore it is necessary for us to decide the steps which can help us against world Jewry, against Communist Russia and England, and which among them can be most useful. Only if we win the war will the hour of deliverance also be the hour of fulfillment of Arab aspirations.

The situation is as follows: We are conducting the great struggle to open the way to the North of the Caucasus. The difficulties involved are more than transportation because of the demolished railways and roads and because of winter weather. And if I venture in these circumstances to issue a declaration with regard to Syria, then the pro-de Gaulle elements in France will be strengthened and this might cause a revolt in France. These men (the French) will be convinced then that joining Britain is more advantageous and the detachment of Syria is a pattern to be followed in the remainder of the French Empire. This will strengthen de Gaulle's stand in the colonies. If the declaration is issued now, difficulties will arise in Western Europe which will cause the diversion of some (German-Ed.) forces for defensive purposes, thus preventing us from sending all our forces to the East.

Now I am going to tell you something I would like you to keep secret. First, I will keep up my fight until the complete destruction of the Judeo-Bolshevik rule has been accomplished.

Second, during the struggle (and we don't know when victory will come, but probably not in the far future) we will reach the Southern Caucasus.

Third, then I would like to issue a declaration; for then the hour of the liberation of the Arabs will have arrived. Germany has no ambitions in this area but cares only to annihilate the power which produces the Jews.

Fourth, I am happy that you have escaped and that you are now with the Axis powers. The hour will strike when you will be the lord of the supreme word and not only the conveyer of our declarations. You will be the man to direct the Arab force and at that moment I cannot imagine what would happen to the Western peoples.

Fifth, I think that with this Arab advance begins the dismemberment of the British world. The road from Rostov to Iran and Iraq is shorter than the distance from Berlin to Rostov. We hope next year to smash this barrier. It is better then and not now that a declaration should be issued as (now) we cannot help in anything.

I understand the Arab desire for this (declaration-Ed.), but His Excellency the Mufti must understand that only five years after I became President of the German government and Fuehrer of the German people, was I able to get such a declaration (the Austrian Union-Ed.), and this because military forces prevented me from issuing such a declaration. But when the German Panzer tanks and the German air squadrons reach the Southern Caucasus, then will be the time to issue the declaration.

He said (in reply to a request that a secret declaration or a treaty be made) that a declaration known to a number of persons cannot remain secret but will become public. I (Hitler) have made very few declarations in my life, unlike the British who have made many declarations. If I issue a declaration, I will uphold it. Once I promised the Finnish Marshal that I would help his country if the enemy attacks again. This word of mine made a stronger impression than any written declaration.

Recapitulating, I want to state the following to you: When we shall have arrived in the Southern Caucasus, then the time of the liberation of the Arabs will have arrived. And you can rely on my word.

We were troubled about you. I know your life history. I followed with interest your long and dangerous journey. I was very concerned about you. I am happy that you are with us now and that you are now in a position to add your strength to the common cause.


*This is a reply to the insistent request of the Multi for an Axis declaration to the Arabs.

Source: The Arab Higher Committee .... The Documentary Record.

Still no link to Deiter Wisliceny's testimony where he actually says, "the Mufti played a role in encouraging the Final Solution and was a close friend and advisor to Eichmann in the Holocaust’s implementation across Europe. Wisliceny testified further that al-Husseini had a close association with Heinrich Himmler and visited the gas chambers at Auschwitz, where he exhorted the staff to be even more dedicated in its important work."

Like I said read the copies of the original documents, dickhead. The Mufti even convinced the Nazis to slaughter tens of thousands of Jewish children the Nazis had planned to deport.

 

[Challenger]

Challenger, et al,

What!

Still no link to Deiter Wisliceny's testimony where he actually says, "the Mufti played a role in encouraging the Final Solution and was a close friend and advisor to Eichmann in the Holocaust’s implementation across Europe. Wisliceny testified further that al-Husseini had a close association with Heinrich Himmler and visited the gas chambers at Auschwitz, where he exhorted the staff to be even more dedicated in its important work."

(COMMENT)

I gave you the direct link to the video that shows the introduction of Wislicenry's Testimony at The Nuremberg trials in Posting #34. Fast-forward the video to 00:03:40.

It is a matter of record.

Most Respectfully,
R

The video sound quality is appalling. Are you saying the affidavit used at Nuremburg is read out in full, or just the bits relating to the Mufti?

 

[Roudy]

Challenger, et al,

What!

Still no link to Deiter Wisliceny's testimony where he actually says, "the Mufti played a role in encouraging the Final Solution and was a close friend and advisor to Eichmann in the Holocaust’s implementation across Europe. Wisliceny testified further that al-Husseini had a close association with Heinrich Himmler and visited the gas chambers at Auschwitz, where he exhorted the staff to be even more dedicated in its important work."

(COMMENT)

I gave you the direct link to the video that shows the introduction of Wislicenry's Testimony at The Nuremberg trials in Posting #34. Fast-forward the video to 00:03:40.

It is a matter of record.

Most Respectfully,
R

The video sound quality is appalling. Are you saying the affidavit used at Nuremburg is read out in full, or just the bits relating to the Mufti?

Actually the video clearly describes the Mufti's interactions with Hitler, Eichman, and Hitler's other henchmen. Eichmann actually expressed great admiration for the Mufti.

 

[montelatici]

Would you expect that a leader of people that had been targeted for elimination and/or eviction from their land and homes by a particular people, should have behaved differently, i.e. instead of attempting to prevent the dispossession and killing of his people, he should have welcomed the people intending to dispossess and/or eliminate his people from the land? Would you have behaved any differently in his position?

 

[Phoenall]

Would you expect that a leader of people that had been targeted for elimination and/or eviction from their land and homes by a particular people, should have behaved differently, i.e. instead of attempting to prevent the dispossession and killing of his people, he should have welcomed the people intending to dispossess and/or eliminate his people from the land? Would you have behaved any differently in his position?

So explain his attempt at ethnically cleansing the Jews from Palestine that started in 1929 and failed because the Jews formed defence groups to stop the mass murders. He must of learnt those tricks from the Catholics as they practised them all over Europe

 

[Roudy]

Would you expect that a leader of people that had been targeted for elimination and/or eviction from their land and homes by a particular people, should have behaved differently, i.e. instead of attempting to prevent the dispossession and killing of his people, he should have welcomed the people intending to dispossess and/or eliminate his people from the land? Would you have behaved any differently in his position?

Actually this "leader" incited racial riots, organized massacres, and had genocidal intentions for Jews all across the Middle East, just like the Nazis. This leader also helped organize a Muslim nazi army which killed tens of thousands of Christians in Eastern Europe on behalf of the Nazis.

So fuck you, really, truly.

 

[Roudy]

Would you expect that a leader of people that had been targeted for elimination and/or eviction from their land and homes by a particular people, should have behaved differently, i.e. instead of attempting to prevent the dispossession and killing of his people, he should have welcomed the people intending to dispossess and/or eliminate his people from the land? Would you have behaved any differently in his position?

So explain his attempt at ethnically cleansing the Jews from Palestine that started in 1929 and failed because the Jews formed defence groups to stop the mass murders. He must of learnt those tricks from the Catholics as they practised them all over Europe

He can't. Monte is an islamonazi terrorist ass licker who will justify just about any savagery and barbarity by Muslims.