Divide And Destroy.

[Billy_Dean]

Divide and destroy

Israel's separation wall is creating a new kind of humanitarian crisis for the Palestinians who live in its shadow. Christian Aid's Alex Klaushofer witnesses the devastation of communities

Thursday November 13, 2003

Over the past few months, the barrier that Israel is building to cut itself off from the occupied Palestinian territories of the West Bank has come to symbolise the divide between the two peoples at the heart of the Middle East crisis.

Cutting into Palestinian lands by up to six kilometres, the barrier takes different forms along its length - here an imposing concrete construction, there a steel fence and a tangle of barbed wire.

But whatever the barrier's form, its impact on the communities it dominates is devastating. In the farming villages of the northern West Bank, what was once a self-sufficient way of life is dying out because farmers cannot access their land.

The fertile valley that supported most of Jayyous's 3,500 people with yields from olive groves and citrus orchards is now locked behind the barrier, accessible to some only through gates administered by the Israeli army.

A few farmers are just managing to cling onto their land, forced to accept the permit system imposed by the Israeli authorities to get through the gate. Yet even with permits they must queue for the gate openings at the beginning and end of each day.

Sometimes the soldiers refuse to open the gate at all. In September it was closed for 20 days during the Israeli holiday season. At other times the soldiers just do not allow farmers through.

To combat this problem, a new population of farmer-campers has sprung up behind the gate, living away from their families in sheds and tents rather than risk being refused access to their land by the soldiers. They risk arrest as they are not meant to stay on their land overnight.

They are the lucky ones. Jayyous resident Faheema Saleem has 11 children and a disabled husband. Her family is now one of the poorest in the village because most of their land was confiscated and destroyed by Israeli construction workers who cleared it to make way for the barrier.

"All our land is behind the wall," she says. "We had two greenhouses, two acres of irrigated land, a big orchard of olives and open grazing land of up to 25 acres. Now we have this" - she gestures to a small garden plot in front of her house - "and 13 olive trees."

To keep the family afloat, Faheema receives food parcels of basics such as lentils and flour as part of a new programme run by the Palestinian Agricultural Relief Committee, an organisation supported by Christian Aid.

"We have a new humanitarian problem in the village and we now have a large number of families who are totally dependent," says Marian Shamasanah, the food programme co-ordinator and assistant head of the Jayyous women's club.

"I have been 14 years in this club. We never thought about humanitarian support until this year. In normal times it's not socially accepted to take food. Normally, we hold classes in first aid, family planning and handicrafts, but we are not involved in a humanitarian programme like this."

A few miles over the hills, the people of Jbarra are also turning to humanitarian aid as a direct result of the barrier. Most of the greenhouses in this farming hamlet of 350 people lie empty and its one road is lined with dying fruit trees as landowners outside the gate have been denied access to water their crops.

But Jbarra's odd status as one of 15 villages caught between the barrier and the Green Line that separates Israel from the West Bank has created further deprivations. In October the Israeli authorities declared the area a closed military zone and tried to issue its inhabitants with permits to access their land on the other side of the wall. Jbarra residents rejected the permits. For them it was a matter of principle. In response the Israeli army has refused to let them leave their village.

As a result, people have been unable to get to their jobs and businesses in the neighbouring towns and villages, or to the markets where they sell their produce.

Access to healthcare is also a problem. Ennas Awad tried to take her month-old baby to the doctor in Tulkarem but was denied access. "I told the soldiers the baby was ill, but they didn't believe me," she says. "They said: 'Everyone who wants to go to Tulkarem says their son or daughter is ill. But we will not allow you to pass. You are a liar.'"

Temporary relief has come in the form of a mobile clinic run by the Union of Palestinian Medical Relief Committees - another local charity supported by Christian Aid. The clinic was hastily assembled in someone's house and announced over the mosque Tannoy by the sheik. But Azam Mahmoud, one of the doctors in the clinic, is clear about the limitations of this one-off healthcare solution. "To resolve the problem in Jbarra, you must start a permanent clinic with doctors and medicines in the village," he said.

Malnutrition is already affecting villagers' health, he says. "I saw a pregnant woman who has very rough skin. It is a deficiency of vitamin A. I told her to eat egg and milk. She said: 'In Jbarra there is no egg, no milk.' It is difficult to believe this is the situation of a village in the 21st century."

The new dependency emerging in the communities destroyed by the barrier is yet another example of how the poverty afflicting the Palestinians is a human creation. Here aid is not just part of the solution, it's a symptom of the underlying problem.

As William Bell, Christian Aid's advocacy officer for Israel and the Palestinians told the parliamentary international development committee: "This is a political problem created by the occupation of the Palestinian territories. A political solution is needed to tackle this ongoing humanitarian crisis."

· Alex Klaushofer is the Middle East communications manager at Christian Aid.

Source (http://www.guardian.co.uk/israel/comment/0,10551,1084168,00.html)


:)

[Rat Faced]

And to think we spent all those years trying to get rid of one....

http://www.cnn.com/interactive/specials/9904/nato.timeline/content/15.berlin.wall.jpg

[hobbes]

I cannot find any justification for placing a wall between a man and his land. If you do so for logistic reasons, you must still make a full effort to make sure that those entitled should have free access to their land, rather than holding them for ransom by barring their entrance.

I'm glad I read this, this is stuff I need to know to understand the sentiment of the average Palestinean. I find the lack of emotive language to be much more condusive to making the reader consider what has been posted, rather than reacting to it.

I would like a reply from someone who can explain how this wall is anything other than intentional oppression masked as a security issue.

[J'Pol]

Will you be expressing an opinion Billy - or just another cut and paste job.

[protak]

Originally posted by hobbes@16 November 2003 - 01:08
I cannot find any justification for placing a wall between a man and his land. If you do so for logistic reasons, you must still make a full effort to make sure that those entitled should have free access to their land, rather than holding them for ransom by barring their entrance.

I'm glad I read this, this is stuff I need to know to understand the sentiment of the average Palestinean. I find the lack of emotive language to be much more condusive to making the reader consider what has been posted, rather than reacting to it.

I would like a reply from someone who can explain how this wall is anything other than intentional oppression masked as a security issue.
The Brit's took back the Falkland Island's in 1982, North Korean president Kim Jong think's he's God, it's not only black and white Hobbes. Hopefully this will help you and other's understand this conflict a little more, to be honest I have a hard time understanding the whole mess sometimes....And I'm not Jewish, nor Palestinian.

quick overview (http://198.173.255.220/conen/conflict_2.html)
a little more (http://www.masada2000.org/geography.html)

[Billy_Dean]

Originally posted by J'Pol@16 November 2003 - 11:45
Will you be expressing an opinion Billy - or just another cut and paste job.
Just for you JP***.

In my opinion; Scotland did well to beat Holland.
Citroens drive well, but look shit.
Manchester United should never have sold David Beckham.
Baby seals should not be clubbed to death.
Australia is a better place to live than Britain.

Is that enough? Thank you for being interested in my opinions, I shall try hard to reciprocate.



:)

[J'Pol]

That would be no.

[Rat Faced]

Originally posted by protak+16 November 2003 - 06:30--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (protak @ 16 November 2003 - 06:30)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-hobbes@16 November 2003 - 01:08
I cannot find any justification for placing a wall between a man and his land.&nbsp; If you do so for logistic reasons, you must still make a full effort to make sure that those entitled should have free access to their land, rather than holding them for ransom by barring their entrance.

I&#39;m glad I read this, this is stuff I need to know to understand the sentiment of the average Palestinean. I find the lack of emotive language to be much more condusive to making the reader consider what has been posted, rather than reacting to it.

I would like a reply from someone who can explain how this wall is anything other than intentional oppression masked as a security issue.
The Brit&#39;s took back the Falkland Island&#39;s in 1982, North Korean president Kim Jong think&#39;s he&#39;s God, it&#39;s not only black and white Hobbes. Hopefully this will help you and other&#39;s understand this conflict a little more, to be honest I have a hard time understanding the whole mess sometimes....And I&#39;m not Jewish, nor Palestinian.

quick overview (http://198.173.255.220/conen/conflict_2.html)
a little more (http://www.masada2000.org/geography.html) [/b][/quote]

The following Macromedia Flash presentation was created by Udi Ohana of Kfar-Saba, Israel.



If I make a presentation, showing something that is wholley one sided.....this does not mean that it is true.

To start with..."The Balfour Declaration" was a means of gaining Jewish allies for WWI.

Britain could only legitimately create an independant State within its own borders; not in land occupied by itself but not owned by itself (Palestine was a Mandate, not a colony)

It excludes the years that the Jewish were using the same tactics as the Palestinians are using now, to create a State. It excludes the UN resolutions against Israel, it impies that 1967 it was defending itself...Israel was the aggressor in that war. It excludes the fact that Arafat and the PLO gave up on terrorism in the mid 1970&#39;s and recognised Israels right to exist...indeed it actually says he&#39;s still sending terrorists, when this is going against his best interests.


If you want to be recognised as posting fairly, then at least try and use balanced methods to get your viewpoint across. There are posters that are on Israels side, on Pallestinians side and that think both sides are at fault.....however they at least find stuff to support their view that is not so obviously one sided in its viewpoint.....

Believe me, any stuff as one sided as this will be used against you, by the Pro-Pallestinian lobby. ;)

[Billy_Dean]

Originally posted by J&#39;Pol@16 November 2003 - 19:51
That would be no.
If you were to ask Sharedholder the same question I may find time to take you seriously. As it is, I&#39;m still pissed off that you took my shit stirring crown from me.


:)

[J'Pol]

Originally posted by Billy_Dean+16 November 2003 - 18:13--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Billy_Dean &#064; 16 November 2003 - 18:13)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteBegin-J&#39;Pol@16 November 2003 - 19:51
That would be no.
If you were to ask Sharedholder the same question I may find time to take you seriously. As it is, I&#39;m still pissed off that you took my shit stirring crown from me.


:)[/b][/quote]
:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

As I understand it the chap is a young Romanian, living in Italy. I can understand why he does what he does.

On the other hand, you just cutting and pasting these long articles without so much as

"I agree with the above .... " or whatever, just seems pointless.

To each their own tho&#39;. If it keeps you happy then what the heck, you fill your boots.

[Billy_Dean]

Thank you JP***, that was very magnanimous (http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=magnanimous) of you.




:)

[protak]

To start with "The Balfour Declaration" was a means of gaining jewish allies for WWI That was the theory of some...The Balfour Declaration (http://www.mideastweb.org/britzion.htm)


It excludes the UN resolutions against Israel, it impies that 1967 it was defending itself...Israel was the aggressor in that war.
No Israel was the winner, and I believe they struck first tactically.
The 6 Day War (http://www.npr.org/news/specials/mideast/history/history4.html)


It excludes the fact that Arafat and the PLO gave up on terrorism in the mid 1970&#39;s and recognised Israels right to exist...indeed it actually says he&#39;s still sending terrorists, when this is going against his best interests

Are you suggesting Arafat, has nothing to do with, the terrorist attack&#39;s that take place everyday?
You lost me on the, Israel&#39;s wright to exist :blink:
I think the question is, was it Isreali land to begin with?
R.F. I am not trying to post unfairly, if someone takes my Opinion to heart , or out of context so be it. They will speak there mind, and I will listen.

Cheer&#39;s
Tim

[Rat Faced]

Originally posted by protak@16 November 2003 - 19:19

To start with "The Balfour Declaration" was a means of gaining jewish allies for WWI That was the theory of some...The Balfour Declaration (http://www.mideastweb.org/britzion.htm)


It excludes the UN resolutions against Israel, it impies that 1967 it was defending itself...Israel was the aggressor in that war.
No Israel was the winner, and I believe they struck first tactically.
The 6 Day War (http://www.npr.org/news/specials/mideast/history/history4.html)


It excludes the fact that Arafat and the PLO gave up on terrorism in the mid 1970&#39;s and recognised Israels right to exist...indeed it actually says he&#39;s still sending terrorists, when this is going against his best interests

Are you suggesting Arafat, has nothing to do with, the terrorist attack&#39;s that take place everyday?
You lost me on the, Israel&#39;s wright to exist :blink:
I think the question is, was it Isreali land to begin with?
R.F. I am not trying to post unfairly, if someone takes my Opinion to heart , or out of context so be it. They will speak there mind, and I will listen.

Cheer&#39;s
Tim
From your Link... Clicking the first link of that Historical "British Support for a Jewish State"...which i am not desputing.. Balfour Declaration (http://www.mideastweb.org/mebalfour.htm).

Quoted directly from that:


that the declaration was intended to curry favor with the Jews, so that the Jews in the United States and Russia would influence their governments to support the British cause in the war.

The war in question was WWI... which ended 30years before 1948 <_<

Would you agree that the UK had no right to issue that declaration, as the land they were offering was not theirs to give?


As to Israels "Right to Exist"...yes they have. They are a recognised country, and deserve the same "Right to Exist" as any other country....now. Then however, i would have opposed its creation.


No Israel was the winner, and I believe they struck first tactically.


The USSR used to gather their forces in East Germany on exercise, even at times of great International Tension. It is a common political ploy. Do you wish the USA had "Tactically" struck first?

You said it in your own response...yes, they were the winner. They were also the agressor... ie "Struck First"


Are you suggesting Arafat, has nothing to do with, the terrorist attack&#39;s that take place everyday?
You lost me on the, Israel&#39;s wright to exist&nbsp;
I think the question is, was it Isreali land to begin with?


Arafat and Sharron hate each other, and have since the Israeli&#39;s got the Lebanese Christians to massacre the Pallestinian women and children in Lebanon...then watched it happen (despite the fact that they were under "Israeli Protection" at the time). At that time Sharron was in charge of the Israeli Defence Force, and was instrumental in that massacre.

The PLO (of which Arafat was the leader) denounced terrorism in the mid 1970&#39;s, and recognised Israel&#39;s "Right to Exist". In the 1990&#39;s the PLO formed the Pallestinian Authority and were well on the road to peace. The PLO was a "Nationalist" organisation, that prior to the mid 1970&#39;s was a very active terrorist organisation.

Since the early 1990&#39;s when Israel&#39;s new Government tore up the Peace Agreement, the Pallestinian Authority has not been involved in any terrorist acts against Israel.

There are other Terrorist Groups; mainly Hamas, that have been very active. Arafat is not a member of Hamas, which is a Religious group, with support throughout the Middle East. (The PLO didnt have nearly this amount of support, being only a Nationalist Organisation, and was never Religious. It recognised Jews that lived in Palestine before 1948 as Palestinians, as part of their charter).

As i&#39;ve said before; Israel has, in effect, tied the Pallestinian Authorities hands... The Palestinians want to fight the Israeli&#39;s incursions but the Authority wants dialogue, so they turn to the other Groups. In any Civil War in the Palestinian area between Hamas etc and the Authority...the Authority would lose.

Its quite hard to keep people under arrest when they are not only more powerful than your own organisation, but your organisation has no outside support...but the other has huge resources to call upon. Arafat just does what he can to stay in power, and in my opinion has probably done more for Peace since 1975 than anyone else. The temptation to go back to Fighting must be huge...its what his people want, as they were stabbed in the back by Sharron and co...


R.F. I am not trying to post unfairly, if someone takes my Opinion to heart , or out of context so be it. They will speak there mind, and I will listen.


Im not saying you are trying to "Post unfairly"...but if you post then you must also weigh up the evidence. There is a huge "Propaganda Machine", not always intentional, of misinformation out there.

I was trying to point out that "Facts" from an Israeli source like this are as reliable as "Facts" coming out of Hamas; as an example... ie Not much weight will be put on the evidence by most people that post here.

The more independant the source, the better the evidence as a general rule of thumb.

;)

[protak]

R.F. If your going to cut and paste do it in context.
From your Link... Clicking the first link of that Historical "British Support for a Jewish State"...which i am not desputing.. Balfour Declaration.

Quoted directly from that:
QUOTE
that the declaration was intended to curry favor with the Jews, so that the Jews in the United States and Russia would influence their governments to support the British cause in the war.

No from my link.
. Another hypothesis, is that the declaration was intended to curry favor with the Jews, so that the Jews in the United States and Russia would influence their governments to support the British cause in the war. However, the declaration did not fall as a bolt from the blue, but was rather the culmination of a long tradition in Britain that supported restoration of the Jews to their own land for philosophical, religious and imperialistic motives.
Note the word Hypothesis.
Anyway they can&#39;t and probably won&#39;t resolve their problem&#39;s, and the question still remains, was it Israeli land to begin with?
Cheer&#39;s
Tim ;)

[Rat Faced]

Touche..

I did say i did not dispute that the Uk was in favour of it anyway, however did they have the right to offer someone elses land?

[MediaSlayer]

Originally posted by protak@17 November 2003 - 19:14
R.F. If your going to cut and paste do it in context.

9 posts down (http://www.klboard.ath.cx/index.php?showtopic=81639&st=30) :lol:

[protak]

Originally posted by MediaSlayer+17 November 2003 - 16:22--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (MediaSlayer @ 17 November 2003 - 16:22)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-protak@17 November 2003 - 19:14
R.F. If your going to cut and paste do it in context.

9 posts down (http://www.klboard.ath.cx/index.php?showtopic=81639&st=30) :lol: [/b][/quote]
You shit disturber M.S. :D :P

[Alex H]

What would happen if Isreal and Palestine joined the EU? The rest of Europe decided to argue about trade and industry instead of having wars all the time, and they have common currency and people can travel freely, aswell as having set standards and arbitrators to settle disputes. Granted the area is not quite Europe, but it is close enough to be consided.

Opinions on this?

[MediaSlayer]

It would never work. First of all, the EU would never accept Israel as one of their own. Even if they did, the situation would soon revert back to open hostility. This thread (http://www.klboard.ath.cx/index.php?showtopic=82065) is a good example of what hostility Israel would face if they joined. That&#39;s another thing, Israel probably wouldn&#39;t join anyway. You don&#39;t kill millions of people then turn around and say, "hey, we&#39;ve changed&#33;" "we learned our lesson&#33;". Nope. Actions speak louder than words. Until there is a genuine change of heart within the EU about Israel/Jews there won&#39;t be much chance for any end to the current situation. What would those "politically correct" european leaders say if Israel killed 6 million arabs? They would have a field day. It amounts to hypocrisy imho. The bottom line is there is still too much distrust, there are too many people who want to incite hatred on both sides because of what has happened, it would require sacrifices and change on both sides, which is just too difficult at the moment.

[Billy_Dean]

Originally posted by Tim
.... and the question still remains, was it Israeli land to begin with?
NO

Unless, of course, you agree that jews are God&#39;s chosen people, and therefore something special, better than all other races on Earth. The conduct of the Israeli government should answer that one for you.


:)

[ilw]

What would those "politically correct" european leaders say if Israel killed 6 million arabs? They would have a field day. It amounts to hypocrisy imho.
What would you expect them to do if you killed 6 million Arabs? Say fair enough? And it wasn&#39;t all of europe that committed the holocaust which i assume your referring to. It wasn&#39;t even as though Europe completely looked the other way while the holocaust was going on, I seem to recall there was the small matter of a war? Even back then the most Germans were not even aware of the attrocities going on and most of the German population alive today were either small children or not even born when the holocaust was going on, are they still to blame? All germans through perpetuity?
The leaders of European countries can&#39;t give a carte blanche simply because of guilt over what are basically someone elses attrocities, they have to make their decisions based on the situation today and the ideals they wish to uphold. I don&#39;t think thats hypocrisy.

[MediaSlayer]

Originally posted by ilw@18 November 2003 - 11:25
What would you expect them to do if you killed 6 million Arabs? Say fair enough? .
I would expect them to react badly if that happened, just as we reacted badly when it happened to us. I would not expect them to just forget all about it, that&#39;s not the type of thing you sweep under the rug. Oddly enough, they DO expect the entire world to just say "oh well, that was a long time ago, and it was the government doing it". Who would Israel have to negotiate with for a membership in the EU? The governments of the member states, no? At any rate, I was making a point about hypocrisy, not proposing the actual murder of 6 million arabs. As I said in another thread, they are closely related to us. Even if they weren&#39;t, violence is not the answer. It begins that all too familiar cycle of hatred>revenge>more violence.


It wasn&#39;t even as though Europe completely looked the other way while the holocaust was going on, I seem to recall there was the small matter of a war?

Really? Do you also recall the small matter of a certain thule society which provided the core nazi ideologies that ultimately culminated in open aggression on a massive scale? It didn&#39;t happen overnight, and I suspect some nations that were officially "neutral" were not as neutral as you might think. I&#39;m sure I don&#39;t have to remind you that the word "holocaust" itself literally means "burnt offering". Burnt offering to who? Good question. Pretty bizarre stuff, imho. Anyway, the point of the matter is I don&#39;t think a membership in the EU would be helpful. I already gave reasons in the last post.

[Billy_Dean]

Are we forgetting the work of the Stern Gang here? This jewish terrorist group went to Germany in the 30&#39;s and asked the Nazis to expel all the jews from Europe. The rich ones got out, the poor, who found it difficult to leave were mostly murdered. If they hadn&#39;t done a deal with the Nazis, would the holocaust have happened? The Stern Gang wanted jews expelled so they would flood Palestine and drive all arabs out, that was the first part of their plan for a greater Israel. Not something the jewish people like to talk about is it? To think jews may have caused the holocaust, and the death of six million of their own people.


:)

[MediaSlayer]

The stern gang&#39;s presence did not affect the root cause of WWII/holocaust. The root cause was an increasing Jewish population in Europe in general, coupled with an increasingly hostile political movement in germany. Also factor in economic woes, around the same time frame. It&#39;s a recipe for disaster. During hard times, people look for scapegoats. They look for reasons as to why they are suffering. They look at things they don&#39;t normally pay much attention to, because they are desperate. What did they find? Hmm..... I think the reich figured they could kill all the Jews and take Israel for itself. This would solve the problem of too many Jews in Europe that don&#39;t belong there and also give it some much needed Lebensraum. I don&#39;t think the stern gang "caused" the holocaust(it was already in motion by the time they were speaking with the nazi&#39;s), but their input definitely added a complexity to the situation that was unhelpful imho. So when all is said and done, when all the different aspects are considered, I don&#39;t think Israel should join the EU, even if offered.

[Billy_Dean]

One day there will be a *United States of the Middle East* and Israel will have a big part to play, it&#39;s a pity Turkey is close to joining the EU, they would also be a big bonus.

When you say the holocaust was already happening when the Stern Gang were there, when are you talking about? They first went there in 1936 I believe it was, before Crystal Night even. The word Holocaust is used to signify the death camps, they started long after that.



:)

[Billy_Dean]

This was the first contact with the Nazi party, it may seem innocuous, but it was the first spark.

On June 21, 1933, the German Zionist Federation sent a secret memorandum to the Nazis:

"Zionism has no illusions about the difficulty of the Jewish condition, which consists above all in an abnormal occupational pattern and in the fault of an intellectual and moral posture not rooted in one&#39;s own tradition. Zionism recognized decades ago that as a result of the assimilationist trend, symptoms of deterioration were bound to appear, which it seeks to overcome by carrying out its challenge to transform Jewish life completely.

"It is our opinion that an answer to the Jewish question truly satisfying to the national state can be brought about only with the collaboration of the Jewish movement that aims at a social, cultural and moral renewal of Jewry--indeed, that such a national renewal must first create the decisive social and spiritual premises for all solutions.

"Zionism believes that a rebirth of national life, such as is occurring in German life through adhesion to Christian and national values, must also take place in the Jewish national group. For the Jew, too, origin, religion, community of fate and group consciousness must be of decisive significance in the shaping of his life. This means that the egotistic individualism which arose in the liberal era must be overcome by public spiritedness and by willingness to accept responsibility."


This continued well into the war, after the first concentration camps had opened.



Zionist factions competed for the honor of allying to Hitler. By 1940-41, the "Stern Gang," among them Yitzhak Shamir, later Prime Minister of Israel, presented the Nazis with the "Fundamental Features of the Proposal of the National Military Organization in Palestine (Irgun Zvai Leumi) Concerning the Solution of the Jewish Question in Europe and the Participation of the NMO in the War on the Side of Germany."

Avraham Stern and his followers announced that

"The NMO, which is well-acquainted with the goodwill of the German Reich government and its authorities towards Zionist activity inside Germany and towards Zionist emigration plans, is of the opinion that:

1. Common interests could exist between the establishment of a new order in Europe in conformity with the German concept, and the true national aspirations of the Jewish people as they are embodied by the NMO.

2. Cooperation between the new Germany and a renewed folkish-national Hebraium would be possible and,

3. The establishment of the historic Jewish state on a national and totalitarian basis, bound by a treaty with the German Reich, would be in the interest of a maintained and strengthened future German position of power in the Near East.

Proceeding from these considerations, the NMO in Palestine, under the condition the above-mentioned national aspirations of the Israeli freedom movement are recognized on the side of the German Reich, offers to actively take part in the war on Germany&#39;s side."


Doesn&#39;t make good reading does it?


:)

[J'Pol]

Billy

You usually give us your source for these, could you possibly do so this time. I would very much like to read your last post in context.

Thanks.

[Billy_Dean]

Sorry JP, forgot, don&#39;t usually.

Lenni Brenner. (http://www.counterpunch.org/brenner1223.html)


:)

[J'Pol]

Thanks

[Billy_Dean]

Information on this, whilst often alluded to, can be difficult to find. I&#39;ve been studying this now for weeks, some documents I have found have been scans of originals, all in German and what i suppose is hebrew. I have come across dozens of interesting sites, I chose to quote this one as it purports to quote actual documents. The Stern Gang manifesto is easy to find tho, some of the others aren&#39;t.


:)

[protak]

Originally posted by Billy_Dean+18 November 2003 - 04:27--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Billy_Dean &#064; 18 November 2003 - 04:27)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-Tim
.... and the question still remains, was it Israeli land to begin with?
NO

Unless, of course, you agree that jews are God&#39;s chosen people, and therefore something special, better than all other races on Earth. The conduct of the Israeli government should answer that one for you.


:) [/b][/quote]
Doh &#33;&#33; Ah man and here I&#39;ve been under the impression it was there land..
I don&#39;t recall God saying they "We&#39;re better than all other races on Earth"
Source please B.D.&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;
The conduct of every fucking government is something to ponder....
I guess bribary, corruption, adultery...etc..etc.. is much more tolerable, or maybe we should let our own starve to death, maybe they can freeze to death in the winter, I here that&#39;s much more painful than a bullet in the head.......Please B.D.
And yes Jews are God&#39;s people...... But so is everyone else that accepts him.
This ones for you mate.....Verse 3
God Bless you B.D. (http://www.bartleby.com/108/43/3.html) :lol: :D ;)

[J'Pol]

According to Source (http://www.history-of-the-holocaust.org/LIBARC/LEXICON/LexEntry/ZionFede.html)


Zionist Federation of Germany (ZVfD)

The German branch of the World Zionist Movement, founded in 1897. In its first few years, the Federation was typified by a moderate Zionist ideology that avoided confrontation with the liberal majority of German Jews. However, shortly before World War I, when the young generation took over the movement under Kurt Blumenfeld, the Federation took a radical turn, placing a greater emphasis on the intent to emigrate to Palestine and thereby creating a schism with the Liberal organisations, foremost the CV. During World War I, the Zionist Federation became a more significant minority among German Jews; in the Weimar era, it steadily widened its influence in German Jewish politics as an opposition to the Liberal Jewish establishment. The Federation&#39;s strength peaked in the first few years of the Nazi tenure, especially among the young, until the Nazis dissolved it late in 1938.

If this is the organisation you refer to then it is difficult to see how


This continued well into the war, after the first concentration camps had opened.

If they had been dissolved, by the Nazi, prior to it starting.

According to Source (http://www.nationmaster.com/encyclopedia/Stern-Gang)


Stern gang
Lehi (Hebrew acronym for Lohamei Herut Israel, "Fighters for the Freedom of Israel") was a Jewish nationalist group, widely considered to be terrorist and radical. It was active during the British Mandate of Palestine prior to the founding of the State of Israel and during the first part of the 1948 Arab-Israeli War. The British authorities dubbed it the Stern gang, after its founder, Avraham Stern.

The group was founded by Stern in 1940 as an offshoot from Irgun. It was initially named Irgun Zvai Leumi be-Yisrael (National Military Organization in Israel). Following Stern&#39;s death in 1942, and the arrest of many of its members, the group went into eclipse until it was reformed as "Lehi" under a triumvirate of Israel Eldad, Natan Yellin-Mor, and Yitzhak Shamir. Shamir became the Prime Minister of Israel forty years later.

Lehi was known for its Anti-Imperialist ideology. It considered the British rule of Palestine to be an illegal occupation, and concentrated its attacks mainly against British targets (unlike the other underground movements, which were also involved in fighting against Arab militant groups).

Lehi prisoners captured by the British generally refused to present a defence when brought to trial in British courts. They would only read out statements in which they declared that the court, representing an occupying force, had no jurisdiction over them and is illegal. For the same reason, Lehi prisoners refused to plea for amnesty, even when it was clear that this would have them spared from the death penalty. In one case two Lehi men killed themselves in prison to deprive the British of the ability to hang them.

Late in 1940, the Lehi representative Naftali Lubenchik was sent to Beirut where he met the German official Otto von Hentig and delivered a letter from Lehi offering to "actively take part in the war on Germany&#39;s side" in return for German support for "the establishment of the historic Jewish state on a national and totalitarian basis, bound by a treaty with the German Reich". Von Hentig forwarded the letter to the German embassy in Ankara, but there is no record of any official response. Lehi tried to establish contact with the Germans again in Dec 1941, also apparently without success.

Apart from the small number of high-profile operations, Lehi mostly conducted small-scale operations such as assassination of British soldiers and police officers and, on occasion, Jewish "collaborators". Another operation (1947) was to send bombs in the mail to many British politicians. Other operations included sabotaging infrastructure targets: bridges, railroads, and oil refineries. Lehi financed their operations from private donations (not always voluntary) and robbing banks.

After the state of Israel was created, Lehi was mostly disbanded and integrated into the Israel Defence Forces. Members of the Lehi founded a political party known as "Fighters," and Yellin-Mor was elected to the first Knesset, but the party soon disbanded.


It would seem that the "Stern Gang, so named by the British apparently, were more anti-British, than pro anything else.

[protak]

Yes J.P., and thank you, I was posting another message but was going to get onto this next, As I too wanted to read it in CONTEXT&#33;&#33;&#33; :lol: ;)

[MediaSlayer]

Originally posted by Billy_Dean@18 November 2003 - 17:28
This was the first contact with the Nazi party, it may seem innocuous, but it was the first spark.

On June 21, 1933, the German Zionist Federation sent a secret memorandum to the Nazis:


that was not the stern gang, that was the german zionist federation


When you say the holocaust was already happening when the Stern Gang were there, when are you talking about?

the ankara document came later than June 21, 1933--the ankara document was dated January 11, 1941

It&#39;s hard to define the "official" beginning of the end(holocaust) but I think the point of no return was roughly 1930. I think by that time, all of the preparations were in place for the basic scheme, the negative feelings were present that would feed the brutal killings, ect... Does anyone agree? When did the Iraq war "start"?