Views in Zionism

July Tuesday 03 -2001:

How an entire industry has hijacked memories of the Holocaust…(1)

Make no mistake, this book is a bombshell. Published last year, The Holocaust Industry: Reflections on the Exploitation of Jewish Suffering, not only braces with a provocative title, but adds to one’s amazement when it is revealed that its author, Norman G. Finkelstein, is Jewish and the son of Holocaust survivors.
Strange, then, that this man decided to study a phenomenon of which the world is becoming increasingly aware: the packaging, marketing and selling of a historical event, totally divorced from its context and used as a tool for extortion and guilt where resistance might have lay.
On second thought, is the fact that an author with these stellar “credentials” has penned this book such a surprise? For he too, at the end, is a consequence of the “industry” he decries, for in today’s world, only a few can utter such criticisms without being slurred as anti-Semites.
Finkelstein gets down to work from the first page. In this concise and slender book, which has been translated into dozens of languages, we are faced with truths long denied and facts as yet untold. Whether one agrees with the author’s premise or not, the extent and thoroughness of his research are unquestionable.
From the outset, the author separates the Nazi Holocaust which is the historical event that occurred between 1939 and 1945, resulting in the mass murder of Europe’s Jewry, and “The Holocaust” which is its ideological representation. The purpose of this Holocaust dogma, he argues, is to portray both the Jewish people and the Jewish state as victims. Thereby, they become immune to criticism.
Finkelstein states that Holocaust awareness did not take place in the States prior to 1967. Before that, the genocide of 6 million Jews was never given prominence in American life. It was the period of the Cold War and Germany was realigned as a partner, hence references to German war crimes would have been counter-productive. All this changed after the 1967 war, when “Israel” defeated Jordan, Syria and Egypt, securing its position as the dominant power in the Middle East.
The United States, mired in the humiliation of a war with Vietnam that it was in the process of losing, saw “Israel” as a willing ally in a region where Syrian and Egyptian regimes were taking increasingly defiant and independent stances.
“This was a windfall for American Jews,” Finkelstein writes. He explains how this ethnic group in America, which always sought success and access to power, found in “Israel” its vehicle. They set in motion the “holocaust industry” to justify American support and “Israeli” excesses while benefiting from this newly acquired victim status, becoming the go-betweens in a very lucrative business.
Finkelstein puts it clearly: “Everybody knows (that of) the … contributions collected in … America, (in) the name of “Israel”, about half of the sum goes not to “Israel” but to Jewish institutions in America.”
There are a few stars in Finkelstein’s book, most notably the Godfather of the Holocaust industry, Nazi-hunter Elie Wiesel. Wiesel comes from a school of thought that places the Holocaust as an event totally out of the ordinary, so unique as to be sacred, so horrific as to be incomprehensible; therefore any attempt at studying it or rationalizing it is tantamount to denying it. All this, Finkelstein points out, done at the rate of $25 000 a lecture plus limousine.
It is Wiesel who introduced the concept of the Holocaust as being the climax of Gentile hatred for Jews. According to his interpretation, this is no less then a 2,000-year-old hatred stemming from the crucifixion of Christ and leading up to this inevitable horror. Thus by divorcing a historical event (which was never exclusively Jewish) from its appropriate context and placing it in a romanticized chronicle of the Jewish people, its historical value is totally stripped from it and its dogmatic purpose made clear: The world is out to get the Jews.
This, Finkelstein says, explains their need for a sanctuary (“Israel”) and greater security (atomic weapons and immunity from criticism.) All this has led to the turning of the Holocaust into the new religion of the secular American Jew, the new tie that binds in an otherwise threateningly assimilating culture.
One of the strengths of Finkelstein’s book is his guidance through the minefield that is modern-day propaganda. His clarity of thought holds the reader’s attention while his undeniable humor (“if the world wants the Jew dead, truly the wonder is that they are still alive ­ and, unlike much of humanity, not exactly starving”) makes of for an interesting read. One by one, false assumptions fall to reveal the less enchanting purposes behind them.
In the first two chapters we are faced with the cultural and political ramifications of the Holocaust industry. In his third and final chapter we are introduced to the chilling ways it does business.
Finkelstein illuminates astonishing facts about the mechanics that made a country such as Switzerland buckle and pay $1.25 billion to Jewish organizations such as the World Jewish Congress, which claims to represent all Jewish Holocaust survivors. According to Finkelstein’s research, the money has yet to be given to the people in whose name it were claimed but rather fills the already overflowing coffers of these institutions.
Finally, as proof is given of lawyers and senators charging up to $640 per hour for their work on these cases, it is again Finkelstein’s wit and perceptiveness that keeps us reading as he cleverly points out that the American record in dealing with dormant Jewish accounts is just as bad as Switzerland’s, if not worse.
Critics, unable to deny his well-supported arguments, have resorted to attacking his style, which they qualify as endless ranting and angry diatribe.
Most moving of all is his demand that the victims of the Nazis be left to rest in peace, and as for the survivors, he shares his mother’s wisdom: “If everyone who claims to be a survivor actually is one, who did Hitler kill?”
Indeed everyone is a survivor if there is money to be had and sainthood to be awarded, but at the end of the day only a few truly survived and they did not do so to watch their real suffering be used for material and political gain.

1- The Daily Star, 3-7-2001.

July Wednesday 04 -2001:

UN draft: Zionism 'a movement based on racial superiority'…(1)

Despite the threat of an American boycott, the latest draft of a declaration up for adoption at a UN conference on racism next month includes references to “Israel’s” treatment of the Palestinians as a "crime against humanity" and revives the classification of Zionism as a "movement which is based on racial superiority."
A copy of the latest version of the text - which also refers to Arabs who suffered as a result of the 1948 Arab-”Israeli” war as victims of "ethnic cleansing" - was obtained yesterday by The Jerusalem Post. The document is slated for final approval by the conference's preparatory committee when it convenes in Geneva on July 30 for the last time ahead of the late August "World Conference against Racism, Ra­cial Discrimination, Xeno­phobia, and Related Intolerance" to be held in the South African port city of Durban.
Following are clauses that relate to “Israel” and Zionism:
Clause 25, listed in a section entitled "Ethnic cleansing, genocide, slavery, and similar crimes," reads:
"We affirm that a foreign occupation founded on settlements, its laws based on racial discrimination, with the aim of continuing domination on the occupied territory, as well as its practices, which consist of reinforcing a total military blockade, isolating towns, cities, and villages under occupation from each other, totally contradict the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations and constitute a serious violation of international human rights and humanitarian law, a new kind of apartheid, a crime against humanity and a serious threat to international peace and security."
Clause 29, in a section entitled "Victims of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia, and related intolerance," begins: "We salute and acknowledge the memory of all victims of racism, and racial discrimination, xenophobia, and related intolerance, slavery, and slave trade, colonialism.
Items where there is still disagreement among delegates refer both to the Holocaust and to "ethnic cleansing of the Arab population in historic Palestine."
There are also references to "racial discrimination against the Palestinians as well as other inhabitants of the Arab occupied territories" and a call for the cessation of such practices.
The draft of Clause 55, on which there are also conflicting opinions, reflects deep concern at the worldwide increase in anti-Semitism and "the increase of racist practices of Zionism... as well as the emergence of racial and violent movements based on racism and discriminatory ideas, in particular, the Zionist movement, which is based on racial superiority."
“Israeli” and American diplomats, as well as Jewish groups such the Anti-Defamation League, have been lobbying delegates to the conference to try to make sure the resolution does not include the clauses hostile to “Israel”.
Deputy Foreign Minister Michael Melchior, who will be representing “Israel” at the event and who is spearheading “Israel’s” fight against the anti-Semitic and anti-Zionist proposals, convened a conference in London yesterday of some 60 Jewish leaders from around the world to discuss the proposals and how best to lobby against them.
The proposals, said Melchior, undermine the legitimacy of the State of “Israel” and even the existence of Judaism. By using words like genocide in relation to settlements, and by criticizing the Law of Return as an absolute evil, the proposals cheapen what is truly evil," he added.
"If to build an apartment in Gilo is genocide, if the Law of Return is racism and apartheid, the expressions of absolute evil are watered down. If all is genocide, then nothing is genocide," Melchior said.
In addition to delegitimizing “Israel” and Zionism, Melchior said, "the proposals also attempt to delegitimize Jewish death and suffering of the past," by lumping anti-Semitism with a variety of other "phobias."
"I don't mind condemning Islamophobia, but you can't compare it with anti-Semitism - they are two different phenomena," he said.
"It resurrects the Zionism-Racism issue in a way that brings back the bad old days, suggests that the deep hostility and hatred toward “Israel” is an ongoing feature of the international landscape," said Jess Hordes, director of the ADL's Washington office. "And it really hijacks a conference that should be devoted to addressing the real and serious problems of racism and xenophobia."
The US is also opposed to parts of the resolution that would reinforce claims by African Americans and African nations demanding reparations from countries that were involved in the slave trade in the 18th and 19th centuries.
US Secretary of State Colin Powell met last month with UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Mary Robinson, who will chair the week-long conference, which opens August 31.
Powell, who has not yet decided whether he will attend, informed senators at a committee hearing that he told Robinson he is anxious to see strong US participation in the conference, but some serious work had to be done to eliminate such issues as a Zionism-is-racism proposition, or dealing with slavery and compensation and other matters which would detract from the purpose of the conference.
The dispute is the latest rough spot in US-UN relations. Earlier this year, the US was voted off a UN human rights body and America has in the past withheld its payment of UN dues. Diplomatic sources in Washington say if the resolution passes in its current form, Congress could move again to deny those payments.

1-      Jerusalem Post, 4-7-2001.