Can you feel the approaching danger ?

[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?

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.

Who are you listening to, the female translator? the male translator? the translator with the American accent? all of whom are saying things that appear to have no bearing on what's being said or had been said in the trial film. The sound is far too confusing to be clear, but I do thank RoccoR for making the effort.

I've since found the only copy of the notes mentioned in the film (T89) apparently written on 26/7/1946, by Wisliceny which mention the Mufti and were written 6 months after the Nurmberg trials; this explains why the Mufti was never mentioned at Nuremburg. Document T89 was sourced from Yad Vashem ( who claim to have obtained it from the British German War Documents Project) for the Eichmann trial and unfortunately there does not appear to be any corresponding documents available electronically in either the British National archives or the US websites.

 

[RoccoR]

Challenger, et al,

Yes,

direct link to the video Fast-forward the video to 00:03:40.

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?

(COMMENT)

SS-Hauptsturmführer Dieter Wisliceny made a half dozen or so confessions and affidavits, as did many of the criminal defendants did for the prosecution at the International Military Tribunal - Nuremberg. He was an Aid to SS-Obersturmbannführer Adolf Eichmann. Hauptsturmführer Wisliceny, was place on trial, convict and executed in 1948.
Obersturmbannführer Eichmann (AKA: Ricardo Klement) was not captured until 1960 from his hideout in Argentina. He did not stand trial until 1961 (12 plus years after Wisliceny was executed). Hauptsturmführer Wisliceny's evidence and previous transcripts, much of which were not used in his conviction, but held for future prosecutions of other criminals by the Tribunal, were retrieved from the evidence archives. Chief Prosecutor and Attorney General Gideon Hausner read the applicable transcripts already submitted and accepted by the 1948 Tribunal during Obersturmbannführer Eichmann's trial.

As for the quality, we are dealing with a technology over a half century old. It is what it is.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[Challenger]

Challenger, et al,

Yes,

direct link to the video Fast-forward the video to 00:03:40.

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?

(COMMENT)

SS-Hauptsturmführer Dieter Wisliceny made a half dozen or so confessions and affidavits, as did many of the criminal defendants did for the prosecution at the International Military Tribunal - Nuremberg. He was an Aid to SS-Obersturmbannführer Adolf Eichmann. Hauptsturmführer Wisliceny, was place on trial, convict and executed in 1948.
Obersturmbannführer Eichmann (AKA: Ricardo Klement) was not captured until 1960 from his hideout in Argentina. He did not stand trial until 1961 (12 plus years after Wisliceny was executed). Hauptsturmführer Wisliceny's evidence and previous transcripts, much of which were not used in his conviction, but held for future prosecutions of other criminals by the Tribunal, were retrieved from the evidence archives. Chief Prosecutor and Attorney General Gideon Hausner read the applicable transcripts already submitted and accepted by the 1948 Tribunal during Obersturmbannführer Eichmann's trial.

As for the quality, we are dealing with a technology over a half century old. It is what it is.

Most Respectfully,
R

See post #81

 

[RoccoR]

Challenger, et al,

This really annoys me! ---- So I went to look harder for something on-line. The testimony is spread-out between Decision 7 and Decision 9.

Who are you listening to, the female translator? the male translator? the translator with the American accent? all of whom are saying things that appear to have no bearing on what's being said or had been said in the trial film. The sound is far too confusing to be clear, but I do thank RoccoR for making the effort.

(REFENRENCE)

The Trial of Adolf Eichmann - Session 16 (Part 3 of 6)

Attorney General: I now want to submit Wisliceny's notes dated 26 July 1946, which were also written in prison, and verified by Mr. Hagag, and which are already in your possession arising out of Bar-Shalom's evidence regarding the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem and his connections with Adolf Eichmann. I have the original. The Court will observe that this document served as a subject for interrogation on pages 558-570.

Relying on the Court's decision of this morning, I request you to admit this document on the grounds of its importance, both because of the connection between Eichmann and that man and because of the plans and machinations which were prepared in order to destroy the Jewish population of Palestine after the victory of the Axis Powers, and also because of the fact that the Accused himself was asked to react to this document.

Presiding Judge: Is he mentioned here in this document?

Attorney General: Yes. The relations - according to Wisliceny - between these two personalities, Hajj Amin al- Husseini and Adolf Eichmann, began already in the autumn of 1937.

Dr. Servatius: I wish to voice my objection to the submission of this document, but submit to the Court's decision.

Presiding Judge: Decision No. 9

We admit in evidence the statement of Wisliceny regarding the Mufti, for the reasons that were intimated in Decision No. 7.

Attorney General: With the Court's permission I shall read T/89:

"As I was aware from my activities in the service of the head office of SD in Berlin, there already existed in 1937 an intelligence link between the SD and the Grand Mufti in Jerusalem. These connections operated through the DNB, Official German News Service in Palestine, Dr. Reichert with Otto von Bolschwing and Leopold von Mildenstein, both of whom were with the SD in Berlin. In 1936-1937, Mildenstein was head of the Department for Jewish Affairs of the SD.
Later on, this connection was transferred to Bureau VI of the Secret Overseas Intelligence Service, to the Head Office for Reich Security, the Reichssicherheitshauptamt, created in 1939. Dr. Reichert was the chief confidant of the SD. He lost his life in 1941 in a railway accident in Hanover.

n the autumn of 1937, Adolf Eichmann and Herbert Hagen, previously Sturmbannfuehrer in Paris, who at that time worked in the Jewish Department of the SD, arranged a journey to Palestine and Egypt. This trip was intended to include, incidentally, securing of general information on Zionist questions, and also a visit to the Grand Mufti, and Dr. Reichert was to have acted as intermediary in arranging it. But the visit did not materialize since the British authorities restricted the stay of Eichmann and Hagen to 48 hours, despite their tourist visas. In Cairo the two of them then had discussions with Arab nationalists - amongst them a journalist from Jerusalem who belonged to the circle of the Grand Mufti.

After the Mufti al-Husseini arrived in Germany, he paid a visit to Himmler. A short while thereafter the Grand Mufti visited the director of the Jewish Department at the Gestapo Bureau IV, Obersturmbannfuehrer Adolf Eichmann, in his office in Berlin, 116 Kurfuerstenstrasse. I no longer remember the exact date of the visit. Possibly it was the end of 1941 or the beginning of 1942.

By chance I was with Eichmann in Berlin a few days later, when he told me in detail about this visit. Eichmann lectured to the Grand Mufti in his Map Room, where he had collected statistical accounts of the Jewish population of various European countries - he lectured in detail about the solution of the Jewish Question in Europe.

The Grand Mufti, according to him, was most impressed and said to Eichmann that he had already asked Himmler and had in fact secured Himmler's consent on this point, that a representative of Eichmann should come to Jerusalem as his personal adviser when he, the Grand Mufti, would go back after the victory of the Axis Powers. In that conversation Eichmann asked me whether I was not willing to accept the post. But I rejected in principle such Oriental adventures. Eichmann was greatly impressed by the personality of the Grand Mufti. He repeatedly said to me, both then and on a later occasion, that the Mufti had made a powerful impression on him, and also on Himmler, and that he had an acknowledged influence in Arab-Jewish affairs.

"To my knowledge, Eichmann saw the Mufti from time to time and spoke to him. At any rate he mentioned this in the course of a conversation in the summer of 1944 in Budapest. At the end of 1942 I tried, upon the initiative of a group of the Joint from Bratislava, to influence Eichmann and Himmler to prevent the extermination of the Jews of Europe. One plan was the rescue of Jewish children, whose emigration to Palestine was to be carried out via Romania. Eichmann, with the approval of Himmler, gave an order to bring about ten thousand Jewish children from Poland to Theresienstadt. It was planned to exchange these children for German civilian prisoners, through the services of the International Red Cross. I had already discussed with the representatives of the Joint in Bratislava the possibility of the emigration of adults as escorts to the transport, and the number that could be considered for this purpose. Some of the children actually reached Theresienstadt, as I was told by Dr. Seidel, the person who was then the Camp Commandant, in reply to my question on the subject.



Then I was summoned to Berlin by Eichmann and he disclosed to me that the idea of the planned operation had become known to the Grand Mufti, by means of his intelligence service in Palestine. As a result he protested vigorously to Himmler, using the argument that these Jewish children would, within a few years become adults and would strengthen the Jewish elements in Palestine. Following this, Himmler [as he told me] forbade the whole operation and even issued a prohibition in respect of cases in the future, that no Jew should be permitted to emigrate to Palestine from territories under German control.

"I informed the Joint group of this prohibition which had been secured by the Grand Mufti from Himmler despite Eichmann's forbidding me to do so. This attitude of Himmler had a crucial influence on all these matters, especially in 1944 in Budapest. In this way any chance of reaching a compromise on the question of the Jews in Hungary came to nought, since Palestine was the only country which could be considered for the absorption of a greater number of Jewish women and children.

"I should also add that a liaison officer of the Security Police was attached to the Grand Mufti throughout the duration of his stay in Germany. This was a Hauptsturmfuehrer whose name I no longer remember. General-Major Walter Schellenberg, Head of Bureau VI (the Overseas Intelligence Service) would have to have known about this. Schellenberg was in the Nuremberg prison at the end of June."​

Attorney General: I now want to submit Wisliceny's notes dated 26 July 1946, which were also written in prison, and verified by Mr. Hagag, and which are already in your possession arising out of Bar-Shalom's evidence regarding the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem and his connections with Adolf Eichmann. I have the original. The Court will observe that this document served as a subject for interrogation on pages 558-570.

Relying on the Court's decision of this morning, I request you to admit this document on the grounds of its importance, both because of the connection between Eichmann and that man and because of the plans and machinations which were prepared in order to destroy the Jewish population of Palestine after the victory of the Axis Powers, and also because of the fact that the Accused himself was asked to react to this document.

Presiding Judge: Is he mentioned here in this document?

Attorney General: Yes. The relations - according to Wisliceny - between these two personalities, Hajj Amin al- Husseini and Adolf Eichmann, began already in the autumn of 1937.

Dr. Servatius: I wish to voice my objection to the submission of this document, but submit to the Court's decision.

Presiding Judge: Decision No. 9

We admit in evidence the statement of Wisliceny regarding the Mufti, for the reasons that were intimated in Decision No. 7.​

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[montelatici]

The Mufti seems to have had the same ideas as the current Israeli Minister of Justice.

 

[Phoenall]

The Mufti seems to have had the same ideas as the current Israeli Minister of Justice.

What that the Palestinians should either fight as a whole or sue for peace.

 

[Challenger]

Challenger, et al,

This really annoys me! ---- So I went to look harder for something on-line. The testimony is spread-out between Decision 7 and Decision 9.

Who are you listening to, the female translator? the male translator? the translator with the American accent? all of whom are saying things that appear to have no bearing on what's being said or had been said in the trial film. The sound is far too confusing to be clear, but I do thank RoccoR for making the effort.

(REFENRENCE)

The Trial of Adolf Eichmann - Session 16 (Part 3 of 6)

Attorney General: I now want to submit Wisliceny's notes dated 26 July 1946, which were also written in prison, and verified by Mr. Hagag, and which are already in your possession arising out of Bar-Shalom's evidence regarding the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem and his connections with Adolf Eichmann. I have the original. The Court will observe that this document served as a subject for interrogation on pages 558-570.

Relying on the Court's decision of this morning, I request you to admit this document on the grounds of its importance, both because of the connection between Eichmann and that man and because of the plans and machinations which were prepared in order to destroy the Jewish population of Palestine after the victory of the Axis Powers, and also because of the fact that the Accused himself was asked to react to this document.

Presiding Judge: Is he mentioned here in this document?

Attorney General: Yes. The relations - according to Wisliceny - between these two personalities, Hajj Amin al- Husseini and Adolf Eichmann, began already in the autumn of 1937.

Dr. Servatius: I wish to voice my objection to the submission of this document, but submit to the Court's decision.

Presiding Judge: Decision No. 9

We admit in evidence the statement of Wisliceny regarding the Mufti, for the reasons that were intimated in Decision No. 7.

Attorney General: With the Court's permission I shall read T/89:

"As I was aware from my activities in the service of the head office of SD in Berlin, there already existed in 1937 an intelligence link between the SD and the Grand Mufti in Jerusalem. These connections operated through the DNB, Official German News Service in Palestine, Dr. Reichert with Otto von Bolschwing and Leopold von Mildenstein, both of whom were with the SD in Berlin. In 1936-1937, Mildenstein was head of the Department for Jewish Affairs of the SD.
Later on, this connection was transferred to Bureau VI of the Secret Overseas Intelligence Service, to the Head Office for Reich Security, the Reichssicherheitshauptamt, created in 1939. Dr. Reichert was the chief confidant of the SD. He lost his life in 1941 in a railway accident in Hanover.

n the autumn of 1937, Adolf Eichmann and Herbert Hagen, previously Sturmbannfuehrer in Paris, who at that time worked in the Jewish Department of the SD, arranged a journey to Palestine and Egypt. This trip was intended to include, incidentally, securing of general information on Zionist questions, and also a visit to the Grand Mufti, and Dr. Reichert was to have acted as intermediary in arranging it. But the visit did not materialize since the British authorities restricted the stay of Eichmann and Hagen to 48 hours, despite their tourist visas. In Cairo the two of them then had discussions with Arab nationalists - amongst them a journalist from Jerusalem who belonged to the circle of the Grand Mufti.

After the Mufti al-Husseini arrived in Germany, he paid a visit to Himmler. A short while thereafter the Grand Mufti visited the director of the Jewish Department at the Gestapo Bureau IV, Obersturmbannfuehrer Adolf Eichmann, in his office in Berlin, 116 Kurfuerstenstrasse. I no longer remember the exact date of the visit. Possibly it was the end of 1941 or the beginning of 1942.

By chance I was with Eichmann in Berlin a few days later, when he told me in detail about this visit. Eichmann lectured to the Grand Mufti in his Map Room, where he had collected statistical accounts of the Jewish population of various European countries - he lectured in detail about the solution of the Jewish Question in Europe.

The Grand Mufti, according to him, was most impressed and said to Eichmann that he had already asked Himmler and had in fact secured Himmler's consent on this point, that a representative of Eichmann should come to Jerusalem as his personal adviser when he, the Grand Mufti, would go back after the victory of the Axis Powers. In that conversation Eichmann asked me whether I was not willing to accept the post. But I rejected in principle such Oriental adventures. Eichmann was greatly impressed by the personality of the Grand Mufti. He repeatedly said to me, both then and on a later occasion, that the Mufti had made a powerful impression on him, and also on Himmler, and that he had an acknowledged influence in Arab-Jewish affairs.

"To my knowledge, Eichmann saw the Mufti from time to time and spoke to him. At any rate he mentioned this in the course of a conversation in the summer of 1944 in Budapest. At the end of 1942 I tried, upon the initiative of a group of the Joint from Bratislava, to influence Eichmann and Himmler to prevent the extermination of the Jews of Europe. One plan was the rescue of Jewish children, whose emigration to Palestine was to be carried out via Romania. Eichmann, with the approval of Himmler, gave an order to bring about ten thousand Jewish children from Poland to Theresienstadt. It was planned to exchange these children for German civilian prisoners, through the services of the International Red Cross. I had already discussed with the representatives of the Joint in Bratislava the possibility of the emigration of adults as escorts to the transport, and the number that could be considered for this purpose. Some of the children actually reached Theresienstadt, as I was told by Dr. Seidel, the person who was then the Camp Commandant, in reply to my question on the subject.



Then I was summoned to Berlin by Eichmann and he disclosed to me that the idea of the planned operation had become known to the Grand Mufti, by means of his intelligence service in Palestine. As a result he protested vigorously to Himmler, using the argument that these Jewish children would, within a few years become adults and would strengthen the Jewish elements in Palestine. Following this, Himmler [as he told me] forbade the whole operation and even issued a prohibition in respect of cases in the future, that no Jew should be permitted to emigrate to Palestine from territories under German control.

"I informed the Joint group of this prohibition which had been secured by the Grand Mufti from Himmler despite Eichmann's forbidding me to do so. This attitude of Himmler had a crucial influence on all these matters, especially in 1944 in Budapest. In this way any chance of reaching a compromise on the question of the Jews in Hungary came to nought, since Palestine was the only country which could be considered for the absorption of a greater number of Jewish women and children.

"I should also add that a liaison officer of the Security Police was attached to the Grand Mufti throughout the duration of his stay in Germany. This was a Hauptsturmfuehrer whose name I no longer remember. General-Major Walter Schellenberg, Head of Bureau VI (the Overseas Intelligence Service) would have to have known about this. Schellenberg was in the Nuremberg prison at the end of June."​

Attorney General: I now want to submit Wisliceny's notes dated 26 July 1946, which were also written in prison, and verified by Mr. Hagag, and which are already in your possession arising out of Bar-Shalom's evidence regarding the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem and his connections with Adolf Eichmann. I have the original. The Court will observe that this document served as a subject for interrogation on pages 558-570.

Relying on the Court's decision of this morning, I request you to admit this document on the grounds of its importance, both because of the connection between Eichmann and that man and because of the plans and machinations which were prepared in order to destroy the Jewish population of Palestine after the victory of the Axis Powers, and also because of the fact that the Accused himself was asked to react to this document.

Presiding Judge: Is he mentioned here in this document?

Attorney General: Yes. The relations - according to Wisliceny - between these two personalities, Hajj Amin al- Husseini and Adolf Eichmann, began already in the autumn of 1937.

Dr. Servatius: I wish to voice my objection to the submission of this document, but submit to the Court's decision.

Presiding Judge: Decision No. 9

We admit in evidence the statement of Wisliceny regarding the Mufti, for the reasons that were intimated in Decision No. 7.​

Most Respectfully,
R

Thaks for posting, I'd already found this along with a .pdf of the original notes in German that it was based on; I thought I'd made that clear in post #81. There was no intent to cause you annoyance; but what you chose to get annoyed about is purely up to you.

 

[montelatici]

The Mufti seems to have had the same ideas as the current Israeli Minister of Justice.

What that the Palestinians should either fight as a whole or sue for peace.

No, she agrees with the Mufti on what to do with the women and children:

"Behind every terrorist stand dozens of men and women, without whom he could not engage in terrorism. Actors in the war are those who incite in mosques, who write the murderous curricula for schools, who give shelter, who provide vehicles, and all those who honor and give them their moral support. They are all enemy combatants, and their blood shall be on all their heads. Now this also includes the mothers of the martyrs, who send them to hell with flowers and kisses. They should follow their sons, nothing would be more just. They should go, as should the physical homes in which they raised the snakes. Otherwise, more little snakes will be raised there."

Israel s new justice minister considers all Palestinians to be the enemy - The Washington Post

 

[flacaltenn]

The Mufti seems to have had the same ideas as the current Israeli Minister of Justice.

What that the Palestinians should either fight as a whole or sue for peace.

No, she agrees with the Mufti on what to do with the women and children:

"Behind every terrorist stand dozens of men and women, without whom he could not engage in terrorism. Actors in the war are those who incite in mosques, who write the murderous curricula for schools, who give shelter, who provide vehicles, and all those who honor and give them their moral support. They are all enemy combatants, and their blood shall be on all their heads. Now this also includes the mothers of the martyrs, who send them to hell with flowers and kisses. They should follow their sons, nothing would be more just. They should go, as should the physical homes in which they raised the snakes. Otherwise, more little snakes will be raised there."

Israel s new justice minister considers all Palestinians to be the enemy - The Washington Post

Even tho you left out the part where she (future Min of Justice) did not write this herself, and merely linked to it on FaceBook -- It would be appalling -- IF it were to be as you misread it. But fails to be the indictment of "all Palestinians" you make it out to be. Perhaps your reading comprehension is just that bad, or merely your hate doesn't allow you to read it as it is ACTUALLY written.

"Behind every terrorist stand dozens of men and women, without whom he could not engage in terrorism."

That sentence is the QUALIFIER for exactly who are the "snakes" and should go to hell. And it's really really hard to argue that the author is wrong about whom the finger is pointed.

 

[montelatici]

You are full of it buddy. This is what she wrote. You don't intimidate me, trust me.

"

The Mufti seems to have had the same ideas as the current Israeli Minister of Justice.

What that the Palestinians should either fight as a whole or sue for peace.

No, she agrees with the Mufti on what to do with the women and children:

"Behind every terrorist stand dozens of men and women, without whom he could not engage in terrorism. Actors in the war are those who incite in mosques, who write the murderous curricula for schools, who give shelter, who provide vehicles, and all those who honor and give them their moral support. They are all enemy combatants, and their blood shall be on all their heads. Now this also includes the mothers of the martyrs, who send them to hell with flowers and kisses. They should follow their sons, nothing would be more just. They should go, as should the physical homes in which they raised the snakes. Otherwise, more little snakes will be raised there."

Israel s new justice minister considers all Palestinians to be the enemy - The Washington Post

Even tho you left out the part where she (future Min of Justice) did not write this herself, and merely linked to it on FaceBook -- It would be appalling -- IF it were to be as you misread it. But fails to be the indictment of "all Palestinians" you make it out to be. Perhaps your reading comprehension is just that bad, or merely your hate doesn't allow you to read it as it is ACTUALLY written.

"Behind every terrorist stand dozens of men and women, without whom he could not engage in terrorism."

That sentence is the QUALIFIER for exactly who are the "snakes" and should go to hell. And it's really really hard to argue that the author is wrong about whom the finger is pointed.

This is what she wrote. You can try to rationalize it anyway you want to try. Your attempt to use your status as a moderator to twist the facts is not quite Kosher, pardon the pun. Coyote would never interfere as you are.

"Wrote Shaked on Facebook (italics, mine):

The Palestinian people has declared war on us, and we must respond with war. Not an operation, not a slow-moving one, not low-intensity, not controlled escalation, no destruction of terror infrastructure, no targeted killings. Enough with the oblique references. This is a war. Words have meanings. This is a war. It is not a war against terror, and not a war against extremists, and not even a war against the Palestinian Authority. These too are forms of avoiding reality. This is a war between two people. Who is the enemy? The Palestinian people. Why? Ask them, they started.

I don’t know why it’s so hard for us to define reality with the simple words that language puts at our disposal. Why do we have to make up a new name for the war every other week, just to avoid calling it by its name. What’s so horrifying about understanding that the entire Palestinian people is the enemy? Every war is between two peoples, and in every war the people who started the war, that whole people, is the enemy. A declaration of war is not a war crime. Responding with war certainly is not. Nor is the use of the word “war”, nor a clear definition who the enemy is. Au contraire: the morality of war (yes, there is such a thing) is founded on the assumption that there are wars in this world, and that war is not the normal state of things, and that in wars the enemy is usually an entire people, including its elderly and its women, its cities and its villages, its property and its infrastructure.

Behind every terrorist stand dozens of men and women, without whom he could not engage in terrorism. They are all enemy combatants, and their blood shall be on all their heads. Now this also includes the mothers of the martyrs, who send them to hell with flowers and kisses. They should follow their sons, nothing would be more just. They should go, as should the physical homes in which they raised the snakes. Otherwise, more little snakes will be raised there.”



- See more at: The member of Knesset who called for genocide -- especially against the mothers

 

[flacaltenn]

Sorry that you don't read your own links. The WashPost article CLEARLY identifies the REAL author of the piece and the fact that this politician merely posted it on her FaceBook page. What a relief. For awhile there, I was dang sure it was a reading comprehension issue. Now we know, it's just your sloppy vetting of the material you post.

 

[flacaltenn]

From your WashPost article that you did not read...

In July, in a controversial post on Facebook, the then-member of the Knesset posted the text of an article by the late Israeli writer Uri Elitzur that referred to Palestinian children as "little snakes" and appeared to justify the mass punishment of Palestinians living under Israeli occupation. The post has since been deleted, but an archived version remains.

It was put up shortly after the discovery of the bodies of three Israeli teens kidnapped last year while hiking in the West Bank.


The leftist site Mondoweiss offers a full translation of Shaked's controversial posting, which quotes Elitzur, a former Netanyahu adviser, here. Some excerpts:


Like I said -- IT WOULD be extremely troubling IF she had actually wrote it.. Even tho you still insist on misinterpreting large parts of it..

 

[RoccoR]

montelatici, et al,

I don't think I quite understand. I need an interpretation of what you see within her (Ayelet Shaked) commentary.

You are full of it buddy. This is what she wrote. You don't intimidate me, trust me.

The Mufti seems to have had the same ideas as the current Israeli Minister of Justice.

What that the Palestinians should either fight as a whole or sue for peace.

No, she agrees with the Mufti on what to do with the women and children:

"Behind every terrorist stand dozens of men and women, without whom he could not engage in terrorism. Actors in the war are those who incite in mosques, who write the murderous curricula for schools, who give shelter, who provide vehicles, and all those who honor and give them their moral support. They are all enemy combatants, and their blood shall be on all their heads. Now this also includes the mothers of the martyrs, who send them to hell with flowers and kisses. They should follow their sons, nothing would be more just. They should go, as should the physical homes in which they raised the snakes. Otherwise, more little snakes will be raised there."

Israel s new justice minister considers all Palestinians to be the enemy - The Washington Post

Even tho you left out the part where she (future Min of Justice) did not write this herself, and merely linked to it on FaceBook -- It would be appalling -- IF it were to be as you misread it. But fails to be the indictment of "all Palestinians" you make it out to be. Perhaps your reading comprehension is just that bad, or merely your hate doesn't allow you to read it as it is ACTUALLY written.

"Behind every terrorist stand dozens of men and women, without whom he could not engage in terrorism."

That sentence is the QUALIFIER for exactly who are the "snakes" and should go to hell. And it's really really hard to argue that the author is wrong about whom the finger is pointed.

This is what she wrote. You can try to rationalize it anyway you want to try. Your attempt to use your status as a moderator to twist the facts is not quite Kosher, pardon the pun. Coyote would never interfere as you are.

"Wrote Shaked on Facebook (italics, mine):

The Palestinian people has declared war on us, and we must respond with war. Not an operation, not a slow-moving one, not low-intensity, not controlled escalation, no destruction of terror infrastructure, no targeted killings. Enough with the oblique references. This is a war. Words have meanings. This is a war. It is not a war against terror, and not a war against extremists, and not even a war against the Palestinian Authority. These too are forms of avoiding reality. This is a war between two people. Who is the enemy? The Palestinian people. Why? Ask them, they started.

I don’t know why it’s so hard for us to define reality with the simple words that language puts at our disposal. Why do we have to make up a new name for the war every other week, just to avoid calling it by its name. What’s so horrifying about understanding that the entire Palestinian people is the enemy? Every war is between two peoples, and in every war the people who started the war, that whole people, is the enemy. A declaration of war is not a war crime. Responding with war certainly is not. Nor is the use of the word “war”, nor a clear definition who the enemy is. Au contraire: the morality of war (yes, there is such a thing) is founded on the assumption that there are wars in this world, and that war is not the normal state of things, and that in wars the enemy is usually an entire people, including its elderly and its women, its cities and its villages, its property and its infrastructure.

Behind every terrorist stand dozens of men and women, without whom he could not engage in terrorism. They are all enemy combatants, and their blood shall be on all their heads. Now this also includes the mothers of the martyrs, who send them to hell with flowers and kisses. They should follow their sons, nothing would be more just. They should go, as should the physical homes in which they raised the snakes. Otherwise, more little snakes will be raised there.”

- See more at: The member of Knesset who called for genocide -- especially against the mothers

(COMMENT)

Did she really advocate "genocide?" Did she use that terminology even once?

I do not believe that she call on the mass killing of the Palestinian. Surely Ayelet Shaked is not making the suggestion that the Palestinian People should be exterminated. And she is not coming anywhere near the original threat the Palestinian's made on the initiation of war:

The Arabs of Palestine consider that any attempt by the Jews or any power group of powers to establish a Jewish state in Arab territory is an act of aggression which will be resisted in self-defense.
The Arabs of Palestine made a solemn declaration before the United Nations, before God and history, that they will never submit or yield to any power going to Palestine to enforce partition. The only way to establish partition is first to wipe them out — man, woman and child. SOURCE: A/AC.21/10 16 FEB 1948

I believe she is expressing her opinion on the culpability of the Palestinian in their entirety; as people responsible for the war. That --- it was a decision by the People and for their agenda that they enter into Jihad. And in this case it appears that Ayelet Shaked believes that the burden and responsibility for the conduct of war belongs to the Mothers of the Palestinian Jihadist; which is in keeping with the original solemn declaration. I don't think she is making a point any different from what the Palestinians have already declared.

Or! Am I misunderstanding the allegation against Ayelet Shaked? But she cannot be held accountable for repeating the "solemn declaration" already made by the Hostile Arab Palestinians themselves.

Or again! Am I wrong...

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[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.

Who are you listening to, the female translator? the male translator? the translator with the American accent? all of whom are saying things that appear to have no bearing on what's being said or had been said in the trial film. The sound is far too confusing to be clear, but I do thank RoccoR for making the effort.

I've since found the only copy of the notes mentioned in the film (T89) apparently written on 26/7/1946, by Wisliceny which mention the Mufti and were written 6 months after the Nurmberg trials; this explains why the Mufti was never mentioned at Nuremburg. Document T89 was sourced from Yad Vashem ( who claim to have obtained it from the British German War Documents Project) for the Eichmann trial and unfortunately there does not appear to be any corresponding documents available electronically in either the British National archives or the US websites.

Remove your head from uranus. Whether or not the Mufti was a genocidal Islamist mass murderer who conspired with the Nazis to kill hundreds of thousands of Jews and Christians was not dependent on the testimony of a single person in Hitler's regime. The video is just further confirmation of who he was.

 

[Roudy]

You are full of it buddy. This is what she wrote. You don't intimidate me, trust me.

"

The Mufti seems to have had the same ideas as the current Israeli Minister of Justice.

What that the Palestinians should either fight as a whole or sue for peace.

No, she agrees with the Mufti on what to do with the women and children:

"Behind every terrorist stand dozens of men and women, without whom he could not engage in terrorism. Actors in the war are those who incite in mosques, who write the murderous curricula for schools, who give shelter, who provide vehicles, and all those who honor and give them their moral support. They are all enemy combatants, and their blood shall be on all their heads. Now this also includes the mothers of the martyrs, who send them to hell with flowers and kisses. They should follow their sons, nothing would be more just. They should go, as should the physical homes in which they raised the snakes. Otherwise, more little snakes will be raised there."

Israel s new justice minister considers all Palestinians to be the enemy - The Washington Post

Even tho you left out the part where she (future Min of Justice) did not write this herself, and merely linked to it on FaceBook -- It would be appalling -- IF it were to be as you misread it. But fails to be the indictment of "all Palestinians" you make it out to be. Perhaps your reading comprehension is just that bad, or merely your hate doesn't allow you to read it as it is ACTUALLY written.

"Behind every terrorist stand dozens of men and women, without whom he could not engage in terrorism."

That sentence is the QUALIFIER for exactly who are the "snakes" and should go to hell. And it's really really hard to argue that the author is wrong about whom the finger is pointed.

This is what she wrote. You can try to rationalize it anyway you want to try. Your attempt to use your status as a moderator to twist the facts is not quite Kosher, pardon the pun. Coyote would never interfere as you are.

"Wrote Shaked on Facebook (italics, mine):

The Palestinian people has declared war on us, and we must respond with war. Not an operation, not a slow-moving one, not low-intensity, not controlled escalation, no destruction of terror infrastructure, no targeted killings. Enough with the oblique references. This is a war. Words have meanings. This is a war. It is not a war against terror, and not a war against extremists, and not even a war against the Palestinian Authority. These too are forms of avoiding reality. This is a war between two people. Who is the enemy? The Palestinian people. Why? Ask them, they started.

I don’t know why it’s so hard for us to define reality with the simple words that language puts at our disposal. Why do we have to make up a new name for the war every other week, just to avoid calling it by its name. What’s so horrifying about understanding that the entire Palestinian people is the enemy? Every war is between two peoples, and in every war the people who started the war, that whole people, is the enemy. A declaration of war is not a war crime. Responding with war certainly is not. Nor is the use of the word “war”, nor a clear definition who the enemy is. Au contraire: the morality of war (yes, there is such a thing) is founded on the assumption that there are wars in this world, and that war is not the normal state of things, and that in wars the enemy is usually an entire people, including its elderly and its women, its cities and its villages, its property and its infrastructure.

Behind every terrorist stand dozens of men and women, without whom he could not engage in terrorism. They are all enemy combatants, and their blood shall be on all their heads. Now this also includes the mothers of the martyrs, who send them to hell with flowers and kisses. They should follow their sons, nothing would be more just. They should go, as should the physical homes in which they raised the snakes. Otherwise, more little snakes will be raised there.”



- See more at: The member of Knesset who called for genocide -- especially against the mothers

Wrong again. The Mufti's ideological descendants are today's IslamoNazis such as Hamas, Al Queda, Hezbollah, the Ayatollahs and ISIS, and Arab Nationalist Baathist Nazis such as Assad and Sadam. They repeat the same mantra of Arab Islamic supremacism and terror that the Mufti did.

 

[Roudy]

From your WashPost article that you did not read...

In July, in a controversial post on Facebook, the then-member of the Knesset posted the text of an article by the late Israeli writer Uri Elitzur that referred to Palestinian children as "little snakes" and appeared to justify the mass punishment of Palestinians living under Israeli occupation. The post has since been deleted, but an archived version remains.

It was put up shortly after the discovery of the bodies of three Israeli teens kidnapped last year while hiking in the West Bank.


The leftist site Mondoweiss offers a full translation of Shaked's controversial posting, which quotes Elitzur, a former Netanyahu adviser, here. Some excerpts:


Like I said -- IT WOULD be extremely troubling IF she had actually wrote it.. Even tho you still insist on misinterpreting large parts of it..

That's basically all that this false propagandist liar does. He's an expert at mutilation and distortion of "sources".

 

[Roudy]

montelatici, et al,

I don't think I quite understand. I need an interpretation of what you see within her (Ayelet Shaked) commentary.

You are full of it buddy. This is what she wrote. You don't intimidate me, trust me.

The Mufti seems to have had the same ideas as the current Israeli Minister of Justice.

What that the Palestinians should either fight as a whole or sue for peace.

No, she agrees with the Mufti on what to do with the women and children:

"Behind every terrorist stand dozens of men and women, without whom he could not engage in terrorism. Actors in the war are those who incite in mosques, who write the murderous curricula for schools, who give shelter, who provide vehicles, and all those who honor and give them their moral support. They are all enemy combatants, and their blood shall be on all their heads. Now this also includes the mothers of the martyrs, who send them to hell with flowers and kisses. They should follow their sons, nothing would be more just. They should go, as should the physical homes in which they raised the snakes. Otherwise, more little snakes will be raised there."

Israel s new justice minister considers all Palestinians to be the enemy - The Washington Post

Even tho you left out the part where she (future Min of Justice) did not write this herself, and merely linked to it on FaceBook -- It would be appalling -- IF it were to be as you misread it. But fails to be the indictment of "all Palestinians" you make it out to be. Perhaps your reading comprehension is just that bad, or merely your hate doesn't allow you to read it as it is ACTUALLY written.

"Behind every terrorist stand dozens of men and women, without whom he could not engage in terrorism."

That sentence is the QUALIFIER for exactly who are the "snakes" and should go to hell. And it's really really hard to argue that the author is wrong about whom the finger is pointed.

This is what she wrote. You can try to rationalize it anyway you want to try. Your attempt to use your status as a moderator to twist the facts is not quite Kosher, pardon the pun. Coyote would never interfere as you are.

"Wrote Shaked on Facebook (italics, mine):

The Palestinian people has declared war on us, and we must respond with war. Not an operation, not a slow-moving one, not low-intensity, not controlled escalation, no destruction of terror infrastructure, no targeted killings. Enough with the oblique references. This is a war. Words have meanings. This is a war. It is not a war against terror, and not a war against extremists, and not even a war against the Palestinian Authority. These too are forms of avoiding reality. This is a war between two people. Who is the enemy? The Palestinian people. Why? Ask them, they started.

I don’t know why it’s so hard for us to define reality with the simple words that language puts at our disposal. Why do we have to make up a new name for the war every other week, just to avoid calling it by its name. What’s so horrifying about understanding that the entire Palestinian people is the enemy? Every war is between two peoples, and in every war the people who started the war, that whole people, is the enemy. A declaration of war is not a war crime. Responding with war certainly is not. Nor is the use of the word “war”, nor a clear definition who the enemy is. Au contraire: the morality of war (yes, there is such a thing) is founded on the assumption that there are wars in this world, and that war is not the normal state of things, and that in wars the enemy is usually an entire people, including its elderly and its women, its cities and its villages, its property and its infrastructure.

Behind every terrorist stand dozens of men and women, without whom he could not engage in terrorism. They are all enemy combatants, and their blood shall be on all their heads. Now this also includes the mothers of the martyrs, who send them to hell with flowers and kisses. They should follow their sons, nothing would be more just. They should go, as should the physical homes in which they raised the snakes. Otherwise, more little snakes will be raised there.”

- See more at: The member of Knesset who called for genocide -- especially against the mothers

(COMMENT)

Did she really advocate "genocide?" Did she use that terminology even once?

I do not believe that she call on the mass killing of the Palestinian. Surely Ayelet Shaked is not making the suggestion that the Palestinian People should be exterminated. And she is not coming anywhere near the original threat the Palestinian's made on the initiation of war:

The Arabs of Palestine consider that any attempt by the Jews or any power group of powers to establish a Jewish state in Arab territory is an act of aggression which will be resisted in self-defense.
The Arabs of Palestine made a solemn declaration before the United Nations, before God and history, that they will never submit or yield to any power going to Palestine to enforce partition. The only way to establish partition is first to wipe them out — man, woman and child. SOURCE: A/AC.21/10 16 FEB 1948

I believe she is expressing her opinion on the culpability of the Palestinian in their entirety; as people responsible for the war. That --- it was a decision by the People and for their agenda that they enter into Jihad. And in this case it appears that Ayelet Shaked believes that the burden and responsibility for the conduct of war belongs to the Mothers of the Palestinian Jihadist; which is in keeping with the original solemn declaration. I don't think she is making a point any different from what the Palestinians have already declared.

Or! Am I misunderstanding the allegation against Ayelet Shaked? But she cannot be held accountable for repeating the "solemn declaration" already made by the Hostile Arab Palestinians themselves.

Or again! Am I wrong...

Most Respectfully,
R

When confronted with the truth, they throw out false comparisons or divert to another subject.

Thank you for your time.

 

[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?

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.

Who are you listening to, the female translator? the male translator? the translator with the American accent? all of whom are saying things that appear to have no bearing on what's being said or had been said in the trial film. The sound is far too confusing to be clear, but I do thank RoccoR for making the effort.

I've since found the only copy of the notes mentioned in the film (T89) apparently written on 26/7/1946, by Wisliceny which mention the Mufti and were written 6 months after the Nurmberg trials; this explains why the Mufti was never mentioned at Nuremburg. Document T89 was sourced from Yad Vashem ( who claim to have obtained it from the British German War Documents Project) for the Eichmann trial and unfortunately there does not appear to be any corresponding documents available electronically in either the British National archives or the US websites.

Remove your head from uranus. Whether or not the Mufti was a genocidal Islamist mass murderer who conspired with the Nazis to kill hundreds of thousands of Jews and Christians was not dependent on the testimony of a single person in Hitler's regime. The video is just further confirmation of who he was.

Well it is to all the Zionist "historians" and "biographers" who use it as the basis of their allegations towards him. The Mufti was first and foremost, a nationalist who it has to be said, made some poor decisions, with hindsight. There is, however, no credible evidence the nazis took any notice of him at all, but instead used him merely as a propaganda pawn against the British and French rule in the Middle East.

If the Mufti was so "evil incarnate" as the Zionists claim, I'm led to wonder why they would spend the time and resources to travel 8000miles to kidnap Eichmann to bring him to justice, but allow the Mufti to live peacefully less than 100 miles away in Lebanon until his death in 1974.

Perhaps this is as good an explanation as any and helps to explain your continuing hysterical attacks.

"...Zionist and Israeli leaders, however, have exploited the Mufti's activities to denigrate the Palestinian resistance against Israeli occupation as in fact Nazi inspired from the beginning and thus as fundamentally anti-Semitic. The latest example for these efforts is Israeli Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman's circulating a photograph of a meeting between the Mufti and Adolf Hitler in Berlin in 1941 in order to provide a convincing argument why Israel had the right to expand building activities in East Jerusalem."-- "The Suppressed Discourse: Arab Victims of National Socialism", by Gerhard Hōpp and Peter Wien, (2010).

 

[Challenger]

From your WashPost article that you did not read...

In July, in a controversial post on Facebook, the then-member of the Knesset posted the text of an article by the late Israeli writer Uri Elitzur that referred to Palestinian children as "little snakes" and appeared to justify the mass punishment of Palestinians living under Israeli occupation. The post has since been deleted, but an archived version remains.

It was put up shortly after the discovery of the bodies of three Israeli teens kidnapped last year while hiking in the West Bank.


The leftist site Mondoweiss offers a full translation of Shaked's controversial posting, which quotes Elitzur, a former Netanyahu adviser, here. Some excerpts:


Like I said -- IT WOULD be extremely troubling IF she had actually wrote it.. Even tho you still insist on misinterpreting large parts of it..

Whether she wrote it or not is irrelevant, the fact that she published it implies, at the very least, an endorsement of these views.

 

[P F Tinmore]

From your WashPost article that you did not read...

In July, in a controversial post on Facebook, the then-member of the Knesset posted the text of an article by the late Israeli writer Uri Elitzur that referred to Palestinian children as "little snakes" and appeared to justify the mass punishment of Palestinians living under Israeli occupation. The post has since been deleted, but an archived version remains.

It was put up shortly after the discovery of the bodies of three Israeli teens kidnapped last year while hiking in the West Bank.


The leftist site Mondoweiss offers a full translation of Shaked's controversial posting, which quotes Elitzur, a former Netanyahu adviser, here. Some excerpts:


Like I said -- IT WOULD be extremely troubling IF she had actually wrote it.. Even tho you still insist on misinterpreting large parts of it..

That's basically all that this false propagandist liar does. He's an expert at mutilation and distortion of "sources".