-- If you are abgered by these headlines - 5/20/17
-- The Nazi Connection To Modern Islamic Jihad - 11/21/07
-- Minutes of the meeting with Hitler and Husseini - 11/28/1941 - 1964 London pp 881ff. - posted 11/15/16
-- H.i.m. Haile Selassies appeal to the league of nations against the fascist invasion of ethiopia - 1936 posted 11/15/16
you are angered by these attacks, then stand with the President,
and the thousands of brave men and women protecting our freedom.
|Manchester, England – May 22, 2017
Suicide bomber kills 22 and injures more than 120 at an Ariana Grande concert.
Stockholm, Sweden – April, 2017
A man in a hijacked truck kills four pedestrians at a department store.
St. Petersburg, Russia – April, 2017
Suicide bomber attacks subway car killing 14, wounding over 70.
London, England – March, 2017
A man drives an SUV into pedestrians on Westminster Bridge, killing five, including a police officer.
Fort Lauderdale, Florida, US – January, 2017
Terrorist opens fire on random airport goers killing five, injuring six.
Berlin, Germany – December, 2016
A hijacked truck plows through a Christmas market killing 12.
Columbus, Ohio, US – November, 2016
Radicalized refugee plows into fellow students on college campus, injuring 11.
New York, NY, US – September, 2016
Terrorist plants series of bombs across New York City wounding 31.
St. Cloud, Minnesota, US – September, 2016
Terrorist knifes random shoppers in shopping mall, wounding 10.
Nice, France – July, 2016
A terrorist in a stolen truck plows through the Bastille Day festival killing 86, wounding 308.
Orlando, Florida, US – June, 2016
Terrorist attacks Pulse nightclub killing 49, wounding over 50 others.
Istanbul, Turkey – June, 2016
Terrorists bomb Ataturk International Airport killing 45 and wounding over 240.
Brussels, Belgium – March, 2016
Suicide bombers attack an airport and subway killing 32 and injuring over 300.
|San Bernadino, California, US – December, 2015
Terrorists open fire on crowded office party killing 14 and wounding 21.
Paris, France – November, 2015
Terrorists attack a concert hall and other locations, killing 130 people and wounding more than 400.
Hasanah, Egypt – October, 2015
Terrorists take down a Russian airliner killing 224.
Chattanooga, Tennessee, US – July, 2015
Terrorist attacks U.S. Navy facility killing five; one sailor and four U.S. Marines.
Sousse, Tunisia – June, 2015
Terrorists kill 38 and wound 39 at a beach frequented by westerners.
Tripoli, Libya – January, 2015
Terrorists attack popular western hotel killing 10, including one American.
Paris, France – January, 2015
Terrorists attack the Charlie Hebdo offices and kosher grocery store killing 14.
New York, New York, US – October, 2014
Terrorist attacks police officers with axe, injuring 3.
London, England – May, 2013
Terrorists run down a soldier in the street before stabbing and hacking him to death.
Boston, Massachusetts, US – April, 2013
Two terrorists detonate bombs at the end of the Boston Marathon killing three, injuring over 260.
Frankfurt, Germany – March, 2011
A terrorist guns down two U.S. airmen and injures two others at an airport.
Fort Hood, Texas, US – November, 2009
Radicalized terrorist opens fire on Fort Hood murdering 14, wounding 28.
Haile Selassies appeal to the league of nations against the fascist invasion
of ethiopia 1936
I, Haile Selassie I, Emperor of Ethiopia, am here today to claim that justice which is due to my people, and the assistance promised to it eight months ago, when fifty nations asserted that aggression had been committed in violation of international treaties.
There is no precedent for a Head of State himself speaking in this assembly.
But there is also no precedent for a people being victim of such injustice and being at present threatened by abandonment to its aggressor. Also, there has never before been an example of any Government proceeding to the systematic extermination of a nation by barbarous means, in violation of the most solemn promises made by the nations of the earth that there should not be used against innocent human beings the terrible poison of harmful gases. It is to defend a people struggling for its age-old independence that
the head of the Ethiopian Empire has come to Geneva to fulfil this supreme duty, after having himself fought at the head of his armies.
I pray to Almighty God that He may spare nations the terrible sufferings that have just been inflicted on my people, and of which the chiefs who accompany me here have been the horrified witnesses.
It is my duty to inform the Governments assembled in Geneva, responsible as they are for the lives of millions of men, women and children, of the deadly peril which threatens them, by describing to them the fate which has been suffered by Ethiopia.
It is not only upon warriors that the Italian Government has made war. It has above all attacked populations far removed from hostilities, in order to terrorize and exterminate them.
At the beginning, towards the end of 1935, Italian aircraft hurled upon my armies bombs of tear-gas. Their effects were but slight. The soldiers learned to scatter, waiting until the wind had rapidly dispersed the poisonous gases. The Italian aircraft then resorted to mustard gas. Barrels of liquid were hurled upon armed groups. But this means also was not effective; the liquid affected only a few soldiers, and barrels upon the ground were themselves a warning
to troops and to the population of the danger.
It was at the time when the operations for the encircling of Makalle were taking place that the Italian command, fearing a rout, followed the procedure which it is now my duty to denounce to the world. Special sprayers were installed on board aircraft so that they could vaporize, over vast areas of territory, a fine, death-dealing rain. Groups of nine, fifteen, eighteen aircraft followed one another so that the fog issuing from them formed a continuous sheet. It was thus that, as from the end of January, 1936, soldiers, women,
children, cattle, rivers, lakes and pastures were drenched continually with this deadly rain. In order to kill off systematically all living creatures, in order to more surely to poison waters and pastures, the Italian command made its aircraft pass over and over again. That was its chief method of warfare.
Ravage and Terror
The very refinement of barbarism consisted in carrying ravage and terror into the most densely populated parts of the territory, the points farthest removed from the scene of hostilities. The object was to scatter fear and death over a great part of the Ethiopian territory.
These fearful tactics succeeded. Men and animals succumbed. The deadly rain that fell from the aircraft made all those whom it touched fly shrieking with pain. All those who drank the poisoned water or ate the infected food also succumbed in dreadful suffering. In tens of thousands, the victims of the Italian mustard gas fell. It is in order to denounce to the civilized world the tortures inflicted upon the Ethiopian people that I resolved to come to Geneva. None other than myself and my brave companions in arms could bring the League of Nations the undeniable proof. The appeals of my delegates addressed to the League of Nations had remained without any answer; my delegates had not been witnesses. That is why I decided to come myself to bear witness against the crime perpetrated against my people and give Europe a warning of the doom that awaits it, if it should bow before the accomplished fact.
Is it necessary to remind the Assembly of the various stages of the Ethiopian drama? For 20 years past, either as Heir Apparent, Regent of the Empire, or as Emperor, I have never ceased to use all my efforts to bring my country the benefits of civilization, and in particular to establish relations of good neighbourliness with adjacent powers. In particular I succeeded in concluding with Italy the Treaty of Friendship of 1928, which absolutely prohibited the resort, under any pretext whatsoever, to force of arms, substituting for force and pressure the conciliation and arbitration on which civilized nations have based international order.
Country More United
In its report of October 5th 193S, the Committee of Thirteen recognized my effort and the results that I had achieved. The Governments thought that the entry of Ethiopia into the League, whilst giving that country a new guarantee for the maintenance of her territorial integrity and independence, would help her to reach a higher level of civilization. It does not seem that in Ethiopia today there is more disorder and insecurity than in 1923. On the contrary, the country is more united and the central power is better obeyed.
I should have procured still greater results for my people if obstacles of every kind had not been put in the way by the Italian Government, the Government which stirred up revolt and armed the rebels. Indeed the Rome Government, as it has today openly proclaimed, has never ceased to prepare for the conquest of Ethiopia. The Treaties of Friendship it signed with me were not sincere; their only object was to hide its real intention from me. The Italian Goverment asserts that for 14 years it has been preparing for its present conquest. It therefore recognizes today that when it supported the admission of Ethiopia to the League of Nations in 1923, when it concluded the Treaty of Friendship in 1928, when it signed the Pact of Paris outlawing war, it was deceiving the whole world. The Ethiopian Government was, in these solemn treaties, given additional guarantees of security which would enable it to achieve further progress along the specific path of reform on which it had set its feet, and to which it was devoting all its strength and all its heart.
The Wal-Wal incident, in December, 1934, came as a thunderbolt to me. The Italian provocation was obvious and I did not hesitate to appeal to the League of Nations. I invoked the provisions of the treaty of 1928, the principles of the Covenant; I urged the procedure of conciliation and arbitration. Unhappily for Ethiopia this was the time when a certain Government considered that the European situation made it imperative at all costs to obtain the friendship
of Italy. The price paid was the abandonment of Ethiopian independence to the greed of the Italian Government. This secret agreement, contrary to the obligations of the Covenant, has exerted a great influence over the course of events. Ethiopia and the whole world have suffered and are still suffering today its disastrous consequences.
This first violation of the Covenant was followed by many others. Feeling itself encouraged in its policy against Ethiopia, the Rome Government feverishly made war preparations, thinking that the concerted pressure which was beginning to be exerted on the Ethiopian Government, might perhaps not overcome the resistance of my people to Italian domination. The time had to come, thus all sorts of difficulties were placed in the way with a view to breaking up the procedure; of conciliation and arbitration. All kinds of obstacles were placed in the way of that procedure. Governments tried to prevent the Ethiopian Government from finding arbitrators amongst their nationals: when once the arbitral tribunal a was set up pressure was exercised so that an award favourable to Italy should be given.
All this was in vain: the arbitrators, two of whom were Italian officials, were forced to recognize unanimously that in the Wal-Wal incident, as in the subsequent incidents, no international responsibility was to be attributed to Ethiopia.
Following on this award. the Ethiopian Government sincerely thought that an era of friendly relations might be opened with Italy. I loyally offered my hand to the Roman Government.
The Assembly was informed by the report of the Committee of Thirteen, dated October 5th, 1935, of the details of the events which occurred after the month of December, 1934, and up to October 3rd, 1935.
It will be sufficient if I quote a few of the conclusions of that report Nos. 24, 25 and 26 "The Italian memorandum (containing the complaints made by Italy) was laid on the Council table on September 4th, 1935, whereas Ethiopia's first appeal to the Council had been made on December 14th, 1934. In the interval between these two dates, the Italian Government opposed the consideration of the question by the Council on the ground that the only appropriate procedure was that provided for in the Italo-Ethiopian Treaty of 1928. Throughout the whole of that period, moreover, the despatch of Italian troops to East Africa was proceeding. These shipments of troops were represented to the Council by the Italian Government as necessary for the defense of its colonies menaced by Ethiopia's preparations. Ethiopia, on the contrary, drew attention to the official pronouncements made in Italy which, in its opinion, left no doubt "as to the hostile intentions of the Italian Government." From the outset of the dispute, the Ethiopian Government has sought a settlement by peaceful means. It has appealed to the procedures of the Covenant. The Italian Government desiring to keep strictly to the procedures of the Italo-Ethiopian Treaty of 1928, the Ethiopian Government assented. It invariably stated that it would faithfully carry out the arbitral award even if the decision went against it. It agreed that the question of the ownership of Wal-Wal should not be dealt with by the arbitrators, because the Italian Government would not agree to such a course. It asked the Council to despatch neutral observers and offered to lend itself to any
enquiries upon which the Council might decide.
Once the Wal-Wal dispute had been settled by arbiration, however, the Italian Govemmcnt submitted its detailed memorandum to the Council in support of its claim to liberty of action. It asserted that a case like that of Ethiopia cannot be settled by the means provided by the Covenant.
It stated that, "since this question affects vital interest and is of primary importance to Italian security and civilization" it "would be failing in its most elementary duty, did it not cease once and for all to place any confidence in Ethiopia, reserving full liberty to adopt any measures that may become necessary to ensure the safety of its colonies and to safeguard its own interests."
Those are the terms of the report of the Committee of Thirteen, The Council and the Assembly unanimously adopted the conclusion that the Italian Government had violated the Covenant and was in a state of aggression. I did not hesitate to declare that I did not wish for war, that it was imposed upon me, and I should struggle solely for the independence and integrity of my people, and that in that struggle I was the defender of the cause of all small States exposed to the greed of a powerful neighbour.
In October, 1935. the 52 nations who are listening to me today gave me an assurance that the aggressor would not triumph, that the resources of the Covenant would be employed in order to ensure the reign of right and the failure of violence.
I ask the fifty-two nations not to forget today the policy upon which they embarked eight months ago, and on faith of which I directed the resistance of my people against the aggressor whom they had denounced to the world. Despite the inferiority of my weapons, the complete lack of aircraft, artillery, munitions, hospital services, my confidence in the League was absolute. I thought it to be impossible that fifty-two nations, including the most powerful in the world, should be successfully opposed by a single aggressor. Counting on the faith due to treaties, I had made no preparation for war, and that is the case with certain small countries in Europe.
When the danger became more urgent, being aware of my responsibilities towards my people, during the first six months of 1935 I tried to acquire armaments. Many Governments proclaimed an embargo to prevent my doing so, whereas the Italian Government through the Suez Canal, was given all facilities for transporting without cessation and without protest, troops, arms, and munitions.
Forced to Mobilize
On October 3rd, 1935, the Italian troops invaded my territory. A few hours later only I decreed general mobilization. In my desire to maintain peace I had, following the example of a great country in Europe on the eve of the Great War, caused my troops to withdraw thirty kilometres so as to remove any pretext of provocation.
War then took place in the atrocious conditions which I have laid before the Assembly. In that unequal struggle between a Government commanding more than forty-two million inhabitants, having at its disposal financial, industrial and technical means which enabled it to create unlimited quantities of the most death-dealing weapons, and, on the other hand, a small people of twelve million inhabitants, without arms, without resources having on its side only the justice of its own cause and the promise of the League of Nations. What real assistance was given to Ethiopia by the fifty two nations who had declared the Rome Government guilty of a breach of the Covenant and had undertaken to prevent the triumph of the aggressor? Has each of the States Members, as it was its duty to do in virtue of its signature appended to Article 15 of the Covenant, considered the aggressor as having committed an act of war personally directed against itself? I had placed all my hopes in the execution of these undertakings. My confidence had been confirmed by the repeated declarations made in the Council to the effect that aggression must not be rewarded, and that force would end by being compelled to bow before right.
In December, 1935, the Council made it quite clear that its feelings were in harmony with those of hundreds of millions of people who, in all parts of the world, had protested against the proposal to dismember Ethiopia. It was constantly repeated that there was not merely a conflict between the Italian Government and the League of Nadons, and that is why I personally refused all proposals to my personal advantage made to me by the Italian Government, if only I would betray my people and the Covenant of the League of Nations. I was defending the cause of all small peoples who are threatened with aggression.
What of Promises?
What have become of the promises made to me as long ago as October, 1935? I noted with grief, but without surprise that three Powers considered their undertakings under the Covenant as absolutely of no value. Their connections with Italy impelled them to refuse to take any measures whatsoever in order to stop Italian aggression. On the contrary, it was a profound disappointment to me to learn the attitude of a certain Government which, whilst ever protesting its scrupulous attachment to the Covenant, has tirelessly used all its efforts to prevent its observance. As soon as any measure which was likely to be rapidly effective was proposed, various pretexts were devised in order to postpone even consideration of the measure. Did the secret agreements of January, 1935, provide for this tireless obstruction?
The Ethiopian Government never expected other Governments to shed their soldiers' blood to defend the Covenant when their own immediately personal interests were not at stake. Ethiopian warriors asked only for means to defend themselves. On many occasions I have asked for financial assistance for the purchase of arms That assistance has been constantly refused me. What, then, in practice, is the meaning of Article 16 of the Covenant and of collective security?
The Ethiopian Government's use of the railway from Djibouti to Addis Ababa was in practice a hazardous regards transport of arms intended for the Ethiopian forces. At the present moment this is the chief, if not the only means of supply of the Italian armies of occupation. The rules of neutrality should have prohibited transports intended for Italian forces, but there is not even neutrality since Article 16 lays upon every State Member of the League the duty not to remain a neutral but to come to the aid not of the aggressor but of the victim of aggression. Has the Covenant been respected? Is it today being respected?
Finally a statement has just been made in their Parliaments by the Governments of certain Powers, amongst them the most influential members of the League of Nations, that since the aggressor has succeeded in occupying a large part of Ethiopian territory they propose not to continue the application of any economic and financial measures that may have been decided upon against the Italian Government.
These are the circumstances in which at the request of the Argentine Government, the Assembly of the League of Nations meets to consider the situation created by Italian aggression.
I assert that the problem submitted to the Assembly today is a much wider one. It is not merely a question of the settlement of Italian aggression.
It is collective security: it is the very existence of the League of Nations. It is the confidence that each State is to place in international treaties. It is the value of promises made to small States that their integrity and their independence shall be respected and ensured. It is the principle of the equality of States on the one hand, or otherwise the obligation laid upon smail Powers to accept the bonds of vassalship. In a word, it is international morality that is at stake. Have the signatures appended to a Treaty value only in so far as the signatory Powers have a personal, direct and immediate interest involved?
No subtlety can change the problem or shift the grounds of the discussion. It is in all sincerity that I submit these considerations to the Assembly. At a time when my people are threatened with extermination, when the support of the League may ward off the final blow, may I be allowed to speak with complete frankness, without reticence, in all directness such as is demanded by the rule of equality as between all States Members of the League?
Apart from the Kingdom of the Lord there is not on this earth any nation that is superior to any other. Should it happen that a strong Government finds it may with impunity destroy a weak people, then the hour strikes for that weak people to appeal to the League of Nations to give its judgment in all freedom. God and history will remember your judgment.
I have heard it asserted that the inadequate sanctions already applied have not achieved their object. At no time, and under no circumstances could sanctions that were intentionally inadequate, intentionally badly applied, stop an aggressor. This is not a case of the impossibility of stopping an aggressor but of the refusal to stop an aggressor. When Ethiopia requested and requests that she should be given financial assistance, was that a measure which it was impossible to apply whereas financial assistance of the League has been granted, even in times of peace, to two countries and exactly to two countries who have refused to apply sanctions against the aggressor?
Faced by numerous violations by the Italian Government of all international treaties that prohibit resort to arms, and the use of barbarous methods of warfare, it is my painful duty to note that the initiative has today been taken with a view to raising sanctions. Does this initiative not mean in practice the abandonment of Ethiopia to the aggressor? On the very eve of the day when I was about to attempt a supreme effort in the defense of my people before this Assembly does not this initiative deprive Ethiopia of one of her last chances to succeed in obtaining the support and guarantee of States Members? Is that the guidance the League of Nations and each of the States Members are entitled to expect from the great Powers when they assert their right and their duty to guide the action of the League? Placed by the aggressor face to face with the accomplished fact, are States going to set up the terrible precendent of bowing before force? Your Assembly will doubtless have laid before it proposals for the reform of the Covenant and for rendering more effective the guarantee of collective security. Is it the Covenant that needs reform? What undertakings can have any value if the will to keep them is lacking? It is international morality which is at stake and not the Articles of the Covenant. On behalf of the Ethiopian people, a member of the League of Nations, I request the Assembly to take all measures proper to ensure respect for the Covenant. I renew my protest against the violations of treaties of which the Ethiopian people has been the victim. I declare in the face of the whole world that the Emperor, the Government and the people of Ethiopia will not bow before force; that they maintain their claims that they will use all means in their power to ensure the triumph of right and the respect of the Covenant.
I ask the fifty-two nations, who have given the Ethiopian people a promise to help them in their resistance to the aggressor, what are they willing to do for Ethiopia? And the great Powers who have promised the guarantee of collective security to small States on whom weighs the threat that they may one day suffer the fate of Ethiopia, I ask what measures do you intend to take? Representatives of the World I have come to Geneva to discharge in your midst the most painful of the duties of the head of a State. What reply shall I have to take back to my people?
of the meeting with Hitler and Husseini
Source: Documents on German Foreign Policy 1918-1945, Series D, Vol XIII, London, 1964, pp.881 ff.
German Chancellor Adolf Hitler and Grand Mufti Haj Amin al-Husseini:
Zionism and the Arab Cause (November 28, 1941)
Haj Amin al-Husseini, the most influential leader of Palestinian Arabs, lived in Germany during the Second World War. He met Hitler, Ribbentrop and other Nazi leaders on various occasions and attempted to coordinate Nazi and Arab policies in the Middle East.
Record of the Conversation between the Fuhrer and the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem on November 28, 1941, in the Presence of Reich Foreign Minister and Minister Grobba in Berlin.
The Grand Mufti began by thanking the Fuhrer for the great honor he had bestowed by receiving him. He wished to seize the opportunity to convey to the Fuhrer of the Greater German Reich, admired by the entire Arab world, his thanks of the sympathy which he had always shown for the Arab and especially the Palestinian cause, and to which he had given clear expression in his public speeches. The Arab countries were firmly convinced that Germany would win the war and that the Arab cause would then prosper. The Arabs were Germany's natural friends because they had the same enemies as had Germany, namely the English, the Jews, and the Communists. Therefore they were prepared to cooperate with Germany with all their hearts and stood ready to participate in the war, not only negatively by the commission of acts of sabotage and the instigation of revolutions, but also positively by the formation of an Arab Legion. The Arabs could be more useful to Germany as allies than might be apparent at first glance, both for geographical reasons and because of the suffering inflicted upon them by the English and the Jews. Furthermore, they had had close relations with all Moslem nations, of which they could make use in behalf of the common cause. The Arab Legion would be quite easy to raise. An appeal by the Mufti to the Arab countries and the prisoners of Arab, Algerian, Tunisian, and Moroccan nationality in Germany would produce a great number of volunteers eager to fight. Of Germany's victory the Arab world was firmly convinced, not only because the Reich possessed a large army, brave soldiers, and military leaders of genius, but also because the Almighty could never award the victory to an unjust cause.
In this struggle, the Arabs were striving for the independence and unity of Palestine, Syria, and Iraq. They had the fullest confidence in the Fuhrer and looked to his hand for the balm on their wounds, which had been inflicted upon them by the enemies of Germany.
The Mufti then mentioned the letter he had received from Germany, which stated that Germany was holding no Arab territories and understood and recognized the aspirations to independence and freedom of the Arabs, just as she supported the elimination of the Jewish national home.
A public declaration in this sense would be very useful for its propagandistic effect on the Arab peoples at this moment. It would rouse the Arabs from their momentary lethargy and give them new courage. It would also ease the Mufti's work of secretly organizing the Arabs against the moment when they could strike. At the same time, he could give the assurance that the Arabs would in strict discipline patiently wait for the right moment and only strike upon an order form Berlin.
With regard to the events in Iraq, the Mufti observed that the Arabs in that country certainly had by no means been incited by Germany to attack England, but solely had acted in reaction to a direct English assault upon their honor.
The Turks, he believed, would welcome the establishment of an Arab government in the neighboring territories because they would prefer weaker Arab to strong European governments in the neighboring countries and, being themselves a nations of 7 million, they had moreover nothing to fear from the 1,700,000 Arabs inhabiting Syria, Transjordan, Iraq, and Palestine.
France likewise would have no objections to the unification plan because she had conceded independence to Syria as early as 1936 and had given her approval to the unification of Iraq and Syria under King Faisal as early as 1933.
In these circumstances he was renewing his request that the Fuhrer make a public declaration so that the Arabs would not lose hope, which is so powerful a force in the life of nations. With such hope in their hearts the Arabs, as he had said, were willing to wait. They were not pressing for immediate realization for their aspirations; they could easily wait half a year or a whole year. But if they were not inspired with such a hope by a declaration of this sort, it could be expected that the English would be the gainers from it.
The Fuhrer replied that Germany's fundamental attitude on these questions, as the Mufti himself had already stated, was clear. Germany stood for uncompromising war against the Jews. That naturally included active opposition to the Jewish national home in Palestine, which was nothing other than a center, in the form of a state, for the exercise of destructive influence by Jewish interests. Germany was also aware that the assertion that the Jews were carrying out the functions of economic pioneers in Palestine was a lie. The work there was done only by the Arabs, not by the Jews. Germany was resolved, step by step, to ask one European nation after the other to solve its Jewish problem, and at the proper time to direct a similar appeal to non-European nations as well.
Germany was at the present time engaged in a life and death struggle with two citadels of Jewish power: Great Britain and Soviet Russia. Theoretically there was a difference between England's capitalism and Soviet Russia's communism; actually, however, the Jews in both countries were pursuing a common goal. This was the decisive struggle; on the political plane, it presented itself in the main as a conflict between Germany and England, but ideologically it was a battle between National Socialism and the Jews. It went without saying that Germany would furnish positive and practical aid to the Arabs involved in the same struggle, because platonic promises were useless in a war for survival or destruction in which the Jews were able to mobilize all of England's power for their ends.
The aid to the Arabs would have to be material aid. Of how little help sympathies alone were in such a battle had been demonstrated plainly by the operation in Iraq, where circumstances had not permitted the rendering of really effective, practical aid. In spite of all the sympathies, German aid had not been sufficient and Iraq was overcome by the power of Britain, that is, the guardian of the Jews.
The Mufti could not but be aware, however, that the outcome of the struggle going on at present would also decide the fate of the Arab world. The Fuhrer therefore had to think and speak coolly and deliberately, as a rational man and primarily as a soldier, as the leader of the German and allied armies. Everything of a nature to help in this titanic battle for the common cause, and thus also for the Arabs, would have to be done. Anything however, that might contribute to weakening the military situation must be put aside, no matter how unpopular this move might be.
Germany was now engaged in very severe battles to force the gateway to the northern Caucasus region. The difficulties were mainly with regard to maintaining the supply, which was most difficult as a result of the destruction of railroads and highways as well as the oncoming winter. If at such a moment, the Fuhrer were to raise the problem of Syria in a declaration, those elements in France which were under de Gaulle's influence would receive new strength. They would interpret the Fuhrer's declaration as an intention to break up France's colonial empire and appeal to their fellow countrymen that they should rather make common cause with the English to try to save what still could be saved. A German declaration regarding Syria would in France be understood to refer to the French colonies in general, and that would at the present time create new troubles in western Europe, which means that a portion of the German armed forces would be immobilized in the west and no longer be available for the campaign in the east.
The Fuhrer then made the following statement to the Mufti, enjoining him to lock it in the uttermost depths of his heart:
1. He (the Fuhrer) would carry on the battle to the total destruction of the Judeo-Communist empire in Europe.
2. At some moment which was impossible to set exactly today but which in any event was not distant, the German armies would in the course of this struggle reach the southern exit from Caucasia.
3. As soon as this had happened, the Fuhrer would on his own give the Arab world the assurance that its hour of liberation had arrived. Germany's objective would then be solely the destruction of the Jewish element residing in the Arab sphere under the protection of British power. In that hour the Mufti would be the most authoritative spokesman for the Arab world. It would then be his task to set off the Arab operations, which he had secretly prepared. When that time had come, Germany could also be indifferent to French reaction to such a declaration.
Once Germany had forced open the road to Iran and Iraq through Rostov; it would be also the beginning of the end of the British World Empire. He (the Fuhrer) hoped that the coming year would make it possible for Germany to thrust open the Caucasian gate to the Middle East. For the good of their common cause, it would be better if the Arab proclamation were put off for a few more months than if Germany were to create difficulties for herself without being able thereby to help the Arabs.
He (the Fuhrer) fully appreciated the eagerness of the Arabs for a public declaration of the sort requested by the Grand Mufti. But he would beg him to consider that he (the Fuhrer) himself was the Chief of State of the German Reich for five long years during which he was unable to make to his own homeland the announcement of its liberation. He had to wait with that until the announcement could be made on the basis of a situation brought about by the force of arms that the Anschluss had been carried out.
The moment that Germany's tank divisions and air squadrons had made their appearance south of the Caucasus, the public appeal requested by the Grand Mufti could go out to the Arab world.
The Grand Mufti replied that it was his view that everything would come to pass just as the Fuhrer had indicated. He was fully reassured and satisfied by the words which he had heard form the Chief of the German State. He asked, however, whether it would not be possible, secretly at least, to enter into an agreement with Germany of the kind he had just outlined for the Fuhrer.
The Fuhrer replied that he had just now given the Grand Mufti precisely that confidential declaration.
The Grand Mufti thanked him for it and stated in conclusion that he was taking his leave from the Fuhrer in full confidence and with reiterated thanks for the interest shown in the Arab cause.
THE NAZI CONNECTION TO MODERN ISLAMIC JIHAD
A Short History of Islamic Radicalism
By Gary Aminoff
Posted October 21, 2007
Many people buy into the premise that the World Trade Center attack on September 11 was a result of some misguided foreign policy of the United States. Others believe that Islamist terror attacks began in the 1970's, 1980's or 1990's as a result of something that we, as a country, have done to provoke such an attack.
When confronting an enemy it is helpful to know what it is that drives him. The U.S. and the West need to realistically look at the true motives of Islamic terrorists in order to properly confront them. In this talk I will present the facts that support the notion that Islamic Jihad is not motivated by any specific policies of the US or the West, but instead is principally motivated by a fanatic, obsessive hatred of Jews, and that Islamic Jihad was, and continues to be, strongly influenced by the Nazis.
The idea of using suicide pilots to fly airplanes into high-rise office buildings in Manhattan did not originate with Osama bin Laden in the 1990's - it originated with Adolf Hitler in the 1940's.
Albert Speer, Hitler's famous architect and chronicler, wrote in his diary, "In the latter stages of the war, I never saw Hitler so beside himself as when, as if in a delirium, he was picturing to himself and to us the downfall of the skyscrapers of New York in towers of flame. He described the skyscrapers turning into huge burning torches and falling hither and thither, and the reflection of the disintegrating city in the dark sky."
Hitler's fantasy, and his plan of action foreshadowed September 11: He envisioned having suicide pilots fly light aircraft packed with explosives into Manhattan skyscrapers.
The drawings for the Daimler-Benz Amerikabomber from the spring of 1944 show giant four-engine planes with raised under-carriages for transporting small bombers. The bombers would be released shortly before the planes reached the East Coast, after which the mother plane would return to Europe.
Hitler's rapture at the thought of Manhattan in flames reflects his underlying motive: not merely to fight a military adversary - the United States - but to kill Jews everywhere. Hitler thought of the US as a Jewish state, and New York as the center of world Jewry. From 1941 on, Hitler pushed to get the bombers into production, wrote Speer, "in order to be able to teach the Jews a lesson in the form of terror attacks on American metropolises."
It was no coincidence that sixty years later the assault on the World Trade Center by suicide pilots was coordinated from Germany.
Mohammed Atta, the Egyptian who piloted the plane that struck the North Tower, Marwan Al-Shehhi, from the United Arab Emirates, who steered the plane into the South Tower, Ziad Jarrah, from Lebanon, who crashed United 93 in Shanksville, PA, Ramzi Benalshibh, a Yemini, and the Moroccan student Mounir al-Motassedeq were all members of an Al Queda cell in Hamburg, Germany where they held regular "Quran Circle" meetings with sympathizers.
Where did Mohammed Atta get the ideas that caused him to decide to fly airplanes into New York high-rises?
Witnesses provided part of the answer at the worlds first 9/11-related trial, the prosecution of al-Motassedeq, which took place in Hamburg between October 2002 and February 2003.
One participant in the "Quran Circle" meetings that the cell regularly held, testified that Atta was a diligent student of the National Socialist way of thinking and was a strong admirer of Nazi philosophy and of Adolf Hitler. Atta also was convinced that the Jews were striving for world domination, and he considered New York City the center of World Jewry, just as Hitler did some sixty years earlier.
Amazingly, neither the American media, nor the international press took notice of this astounding testimony - refusing to report anything about Atta's and Motassedeq's explicit Jew-hatred.
The trial information was available and much of it reported in Der Spiegel, and there were ample notes of the testimony taken by journalist Michael Eggers who attended every session of the trial and covered it for Reuters. No mention of the Jew-hatred or interest in Hitler on the part of Atta and Motassedeq.
If it had been someone from the political right, and they had expressed Nazi-like views of exterminating Jews, that surely would have received world-wide headlines. But in this case, since the attackers were of Arab background, journalists amazingly found this information irrelevant.
It is highly relevant, as you will see.
Even the 9/11 Commission Report falls short.
Osama Bin Laden has publicly declared that, "The enmity between us and the Jews goes back far in time and is deep rooted. The hour of resurrection shall not come before Muslims kill the Jews."
Even though there are many such examples of Bin Laden's declaring his hatred of Jews, the 9/11 Commission, in its chapter on Bin Laden's world view, makes no mention of his hatred for Jews or how this might possibly have been the motivation for an attack on New York.
The 9/11 Commission Report also falls short when it discusses the history of Islamic Jihad. It accords the entire pre-1945 period just five lines. Yet...it is precisely this period of time that fostered the personal contacts and ideological affinities between early Islamic radicals and late Naziism - the direct linkage between Jew hatred and Islamic Jihad.
Despite common misconceptions, modern Islamic Fascism was not born during the 1960's, but during the 1930's. Its rise was not inspired by the failure of Nasserism in Egypt, but by the rise of Naziism in Germany, and prior to 1951 all of its campaigns were directed, not against Western colonialism, but against the Jews.
It was the Organization of the Muslim Brotherhood, founded in Cairo in 1928, that established Islamic Jihad as a mass movement. The significance of the Muslim Brotherhood to Islamic Fascism is comparable to the significance of the Bolshevik Party to Communism: It was, and it remains to this day, the ideological reference point and the organizational core for all later Islamist groups, including Al Queda and Hamas.
While British colonial policy contributed to the rise of Islamic radicalism, the Brotherhood's jihad was not directed toward the British, but focused almost exclusively on Zionism and the Jews.
Membership in the Brotherhood rose from 800 members in 1936 to 200,000 in 1938. In those two years the Brotherhood conducted a major campaign in Egypt, and it was against the Jews, not against the British occupiers. This campaign against the Jews, in the late 1930's, which established the Brotherhood as a mass movement of Islamic Jihadists, was set off by a rebellion in Palestine directed against Jewish immigration from Europe and Russia. That campaign was initiated by the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, Haj Muhammed Amin al-Husseini.
Let me tell you a little bit about the Grand Mufti. Grand Mufti is a term not much used anymore, but it meant the senior Muslim cleric in an area. The Gran Mufti of Jerusalem, Al-Husseini, was very impressed with Adolf Hitler and his anti-Jewish rhetoric. In 1941 he visited Hitler in Berlin. He was so impressed with Hitler and the Nazis, and their plans to exterminate the Jews, that he decided to stay in Berlin. He lived there from 1941 to 1945 and recruited Muslims in Europe for the Waffen-SS. He was very close to Hitler. His best friends were Heinrich Himmler and Adolf Eichmann.
He convinced Hitler that he would be able to have his Muslim brothers in the Arab world carry out extermination of the Jews in the Middle-East, just as the Nazis were doing in Europe.
In November, 1943, In appreciation of the work that al-Husseini was doing in exterminating Jews, Himmler wrote the following telegram to him:
"To the Grand Mufti: The National Socialist movement of Greater Germany has, since its inception, inscribed upon its flag the fight against the world Jewry. It has therefore followed with particular sympathy the struggle of freedom-loving Arabs, especially in Palestine, against Jewish interlopers. In the recognition of this enemy and of the common struggle against it lies the firm foundation of the natural alliance that exists between the National Socialist Greater Germany and the freedom-loving Muslims of the whole world. In this spirit I am sending you on the anniversary of the infamous Balfour declaration my hearty greetings and wishes for the successful pursuit of your struggle until the final victory. Signed: Reichsfuehrer S.S. Heinrich Himmler"
In his memoirs after the war, Al-Husseini noted that "Our fundamental condition for cooperating with Germany was a free hand to eradicate every last Jew from Palestine and the Arab world. I asked Hitler for an explicit undertaking to allow us to solve the Jewish problem in a manner befitting our national and racial aspirations and according to the scientific methods innovated by Germany in the handling of its Jews." The answer I got from the Fuehrer was: 'The Jews are yours.'"
The Muslim Brotherhood organized mass demonstrations in Egyptian cities during the late 1930's under the slogans, "Down with the Jews", "Jews get out of Egypt and Palestine", and the like. Leaflets called for a boycott of Jewish goods and Jewish shops, and the Brotherhood's newspaper, Al-Nadhir, carried a regular column on "The Danger of the Jews of Egypt."
The Brotherhood's campaign against the Jews in the 1936-1938 period used not only Nazi tactics, but also Nazi funding. As the respected Norwegian historian Brynjar Lia recounted in his monograph on the Muslim Brotherhood, "Documents siezed in the flat of Willhelm Stellbogen, the Director of the German News Agency in Cairo show that prior to 1939 the Muslim Brotherhood received financial subsidies from the German Legation in Cairo. Stellbogen was instrumental in transferring these funds from the Nazi regime to the Muslim Brotherhood."
From August 1938 through the end of the Second World War, Amin al-Husseini received financial and military assistance and supplies from Nazi Germany and fascist Italy which he sent to Egypt and Palestine. From Berlin, al-Husseini would play a significant role in inter-Arab politics.
At the same time as the Brotherhood was receiving funding from the Nazis, it became the first organization to propagate, in modern times, the archaic idea of a belligerent and violent jihad and the culture of longing for death. In 1938, Hassan al-Banna, the Brotherhood's charismatic founder, published his concept of Jihad in an article entitled "The Industry of Death." He wrote: "To a nation that perfects the industry of death and which knows how to die nobly, Allah gives proud life in this world, and eternal grace in the world to come."
This slogan was enthusiastically taken up by the "Troops of God", as the Brothers had begun to call themselves.
As they held demonstrations in the late 1930's in Cairo, marching in fascistic formation they would sing: "We are not afraid of death, we desire it. Let us die to redeem Islam"
The death cult that became a hallmark of modern Islamic Fascism was laced with Jew-hatred from the very beginning. This attitude sprung not only from Nazi influences but it also drew directly on Islamic sources.
First, Islamic Jihadists considered, and still to this day consider, Palestine (that includes present-day Israel) an Islamic territory (Dar al-Islam), where, according to the Quran, Jews must not run a single village, let alone a state. At best, in their view, this land should be Jew-free (Judenrein); at the very least Jews there should be relegated to subservient status and should live under Sharia law. The existence of a Jewish State in Dar al-Islam contradicts the word of the Quran, which is why they are so intent on destroying Israel. There are a lot of passages in the Quran and in the history of Muhammed and his conquests that justify to Muslims the killing of Jews.
In 1946, the Brotherhood made sure that The Grand Mufti, Amin Al-Husseini, who was then being sought as a war criminal by both Britain and the U.S. was granted asylum, and a new lease on his political life, in Egypt.
Al-Husseini had been a close ally of both the Muslim Brotherhood and the Nazis. In addition to directing the Muslim SS divisions in the Balkans during the Second World War he had been personally responsible for blocking negotiations late in the war that might have saved thousands of Jewish children from being exterminated in the gas chambers.
All of this was known in 1946 by both Britain and the U.S. Nonetheless both Britain and the US chose to forego criminal prosecution of al-Husseini in order to avoid hurting their relations with the Arab world after WWII. France, which was holding Al-Husseini, deliberately let him go at the request of the Arab League.
For many in the Arab world, what amounted to amnesty for this prominent Islamist who had spent years broadcasting Nazi propaganda to the Arabs in the Middle East from Berlin was seen as a vindication of his actions.
The Arabs started to view Al-Husseini's past with pride rather than with shame. Escaped and wanted Nazi criminals now flooded into the Arab world where they knew they would have sanctuary.
Both the Muslim Brotherhood's unconditional solidarity with Al-Husseini and with his Nazi compatriots now in the Middle East led to anti-Jewish riots throughout Egypt and the Middle East just months after the the liberation of Auschwitz.
In 1946,Yugoslavia requested extradition from Egypt of Amin Al-Husseini for War Crimes, and Crimes against Humanity. The Egyptian government refused to release him.
Al-Husseini used recently acquired Nazi methodology to implement his vision of an Arab World free of Jews.
The attitude of a world-wide Jewish conspiracy had migrated from Nazi Germany to the Middle East after the Second World War where it survived and flourished. In particular, Nazi-like Jewish conspiracy thinking persisted and grew in Egypt and Palestine.
An especially striking example of its continuing influence is the charter adopted in 1988 by the Muslim Brotherhood in Palestine, which is now known as Hamas. In this Charter, the following language appears: Hamas defines itself as the "spearhead and the avant-garde of the struggle against World Zionism." "The Jews," the charter explains, "were behind the French Revolution, and the Communist Revolution. They were behind World War I and World War II. There is no war anywhere without the Jews having their hand in it."
That is the language of the charter establishing Hamas.
In 1930's and 1940's Europe, the sheer absurdity of the claims made against the Jews by the Nazis made it difficult for educated Europeans to take them seriously. In the Arab world, when the Islamists make the same absurd claims, they are taken seriously.
The 9/11 Commission fails when, instead of discussing the fact that Jew-hatred in the Middle East had reached epidemic proportions well before September 11, and that New York was considered the center of World Jewry by Islamic Jihadists, its report gives the impression that Islamism originally arose in response to recent American and Western policies.
When the 9/11 Commission report states that Bin Laden's grievance with the United States may have started in reaction to specific US policies, the report also gets history wrong.
Understanding the real motive for Islamic Jihad, and the 9/11 attack on New York, is important if we are going to confront Islamic Fascism.
Bin Laden was first politicized, not by specific US policies, but by the writings of Sayyid Qutb and the Jihadist lectures of Abdullah Azzam of the Muslim Brotherhood.
Let me tell you a little bit about Qutb and Azzam.
Qutb was the son of a highly-educated Egyptian nationalist. He traveled to the United States and lived for two years in Colorado while attending University. Qutb was a devout Muslim and wrote of the United States: "No one is more distant than the Americans from spirituality and piety." American sexual permissiveness and promiscuity particularly appalled Qutb. He was incredulous at the liberties permitted American teenagers. He feared the same influences would invade Egypt.
Qutb concluded that major aspects of American life were "primitive" and "shocking." His experiences in the U.S. partly formed the impetus for his total rejection of Western values and his move towards pure Islamic traditionalism upon returning to Egypt. Resigning from the civil service, he joined the Muslim Brotherhood in the early 1950s and became editor-in-chief of the Brothers' weekly newspaper, and later became head of the Muslim Brotherhood propaganda section, as well as an appointed member of the the Guidance Council, the highest branch in the Muslim Brotherhood.
Qutb believed that the timeless message of the Koran included the sacred duty of faithful Muslims to wage jihad "against the corrupt new "Kingdom of Israel, its imperial American sponsor, any other Western influences, and corrupt Muslim rulers." According to Qutb, a Muslim must wage war against any influences in opposition to traditional Islam, and especially against a "Zionist Entity" in Dar al-Islam.
For some reason, the writings of Qutb resonated with many Muslims, who were radicalized by them. He developed a huge following in Egypt and eventually throughout the Arab World. His writings contributed greatly to recruiting Egyptians and other Arabs to the cause of Islamic Jihad. Most of today's Islamist leaders are followers of the writings of Qutb.
Abdullah Azzam was a Palestinian who went to Egypt to continue his Islamic studies at Cairo's Al-Azhar University. During his studies he met Sheik Omar Abdel-Rachman, the man behind the 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center, now serving a life sentence in the U.S., Dr. Ayman Al-Zawahiri, a member of the Muslim Brotherhood and now Al-Queda's number 2 man, and other followers of Sayyid Qutb. Azzam was a visionary. He was heavily influenced by the writings of Qutb. He envisioned a pan-Islamic trans-national movement that would transcend the political map of the Middle East. He also envisioned the restoration of the Caliphate and the removal of the "Zionist Entity" from Dar al-Islam. Azzam was one of the founders of Hamas.
In 1976 Azzam moved to Saudi Arabia and became a lecturer at the King AbdulAziz University in Jeddah where he became a mentor to a young student by the name of Osama Bin Laden. Both Azzam and Qutb planted the seeds that drove Bin Laden to his destiny.
Communists also used the Muslim world to further their own aims during the 1950's, 1960's and 1970's. Their contributions to Islamic Jihad are well noted, but that will be the subject of another discussion.
Keep in mind that Islamofascism is not an ideology that ignites protest in its followers as they rub up against social injustice. On the contrary, what provokes Islamic violence is any sign of modern development in the Muslim world, such as scientific inquiry, political or personal self-determination, women's equality, the existence of religions other than Islam, especially the existence of the State of Israel, and freedom of expression. The radicalization of Islam is not the consequence of poverty and lack of opportunity. It is the result of their cause to destroy the Jews and establish Islamic rule of the world.
The failure to see this, and the failure to recognize the substance of Islamist ideology - the Death Cult, the Hatred of Jews, and their profound dislike of freedom, leads back again and again to the mistaken belief that the root cause of terrorism is U.S. policies.
This approach is appealing to the West because of the specious hope it holds out: If Islamic terrorism has its roots in American policy, then a change in that policy can lessen terrorism. These views are strongly held by the American Left.
Ultimately, the refusal on the part of the West to recognize the Islamists true motives results in a reverse of responsibility: The more deadly the terrorism the greater is American guilt - believing that it is our policies that cause it.
The Jihadists benefit from this approach since the greater and bloodier its attacks the greater anger Americans have against their own government.
A struggle against Islamism waged in ignorance of their history and ideology weakens the West. Not to confront the real ideological roots of Islamic Jihad, especially its well-documented connection to Nazi Jew-hatred, stymies any Western push for political, economic or cultural modernization of the Muslim world.
Without challenging the ideological roots of Islamic Jihad, it is impossible to confront the Muslim world with the real choices before it.
The greatest threat to our freedom and to the future of America as we know it is the Islamist threat. It is the overriding issue of our day.
When choosing a Presidential candidate for 2008 one has to consider whether we are going to elect someone who recognizes that threat, understands what it will take to defeat it, and has the will and determination to do whatever is required to succeed in achieving that objective.
Neville's Comments: to read more about this subject check out "Unholy Alliance" by David Horowitz, "Preachers of Hate" by Kenneth Timmerman and "The Looming Tower" by Lawrence Wright...all available on Amamzon.com
Gary Aminoff writes at Bear to the Right, is the president of the San Fernando Valley Republican Club and a successful commercial real estate advisor in Los Angeles.
|Home Back Top|