« "Mick" Trainor - dead at 89 | Main | No friends but the mountains… or BOHICA - TTG »

06 June 2018


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.


LeaNder, you wrote, "yes, there was a Jewish boycott of Nazi Germany, justifiably so,"

On what basis was the Jewish boycott justified?

Hitler had been in power for fewer than 90 days. Arthur Ruppin negotiated the Transfer Agreement with Nazis in 1933 -- presumably before Samuel Untermyer and other met in Europe to plan the boycott.

According to Etan Bloom, Arthur Ruppin had been at work "producing" the elements of Hebrew Culture in Palestine since 1908, with no small measure of German and NASDP support; Tel Aviv was over 10 years old by 1933; at least four aliyehs had taken place, selected according to Ruppin's eugenic plan that he formulated in close collaboration with German colleagues. Parties, kibbutzim, and other institutions had been formed in Palestine, on models from Ruppin's German correspondents. Whether Nazis thought Jews could create a state in Palestine or not, Ruppin and others had gone ahead and created the elements of a state.

I have not been able to determine WHEN the plan for the "World Capital Germania" was conceived. Was it before the March 1933 Jewish boycott of Germany, or after?

The newspaper headline can scarcely be called a "half-truth;" it's as factual as factual can be. And it scarcely seems ambiguous, but even if one might somehow assign a claim of ambiguity to the March 23 headline and the action it announced, Samuel Untermyer clarified the issue unmistakably by repeating the press release in NYTimes in August 1933, and enlarging on the situation by speaking and writing that Germans owed their prosperity to Jews, who were the "aristocrats" of the world, and referring to Germans as "brutes and barbarians."


William R Cummings, I disagree entirely with your assertion that Nazis would have targeted Arabs. That makes no sense.

Nazism was a nationalist reaction to what was perceived by many Germans to be too much influence and impact on German culture and economics by Jewish financiers, merchants, media, and academics, exacerbated by the great influx of Jews fleeing Russia and bringing Communist ideas with them to Germany.

Arabs were not involved in any such activities that impacted German society.

It's important to recognize that German antipathy to Jews was NOT "just because they're Jews," nor was the animus based on religion -- Hitler spells that out quite plainly in "Mein Kampf." There were CAUSAL factors based on Jewish behavior and actions towards Germany (like boycott), NOT existential factors.

Causal factors are important to recognize inasmuch as Netanyahu has set up an equivalence between Iran and Hitler/1938: Take a rational look at who is imposing punishments on whom, and for what reasons (real or imagined).


I also doubt that the Nazis thought at the time that a small Jewish colony in Palestine would be a threat to the German Empire, but if you can provide me something on why Germany feared that I will be glad to read it.

The whole discussion started after the Arab Revolt and the recommendations of the Peel Commission. I know some of the sources. I do find Nicosia much more easy to read than most of these documents.

Zionism and anti-semitism in Nazi Germany, Francis R. Nicosia, starting page 126, A Jewish State.

Walter Hinrich, Referat Deutschland, a member of the Nazi government:

Therefore it should be noted that a Jewish state in Palestine would strenghten Jewish influence in the world to unimaginable levels. Just as Moscow is the central authority for the Comintern, Jerusalem would become the base for a Jewish world organization that, like Moscow, would be in a position to carry out its work with diplomatic means.
...Referat-Deutschland's Vicco von Bülow-Schwandte, hitherto an ardent proponent of Jewish emigration from Germany to Palestine, also warned that an independent Jewish state would be admitted to the League of Nations and would attach itself to the growing coalition of states hostile to a new Germany. Fears about the possible creation of an independent Jewish state in Palestine mounted in government and party circles in Berlin during the spring of 1937. Suddenly, the possibility of an independent Jewish state brought a major approach to Jewish policy into open conflict with Nazi ideology and propaganda. For some, traditional anti-Semitic myths of a monolithic, all-powerful international Jewry generated fears that Jews would be in a better position to carry out their alleged conspiracy to dominate the world from their own independent power base in Palestine. For others, the problem was the perceived strategic disadvantage of creating the new state that would join ranks with the states hostile to Germany. For the Foreign Ministry, there had been a clear distinction between indirect support Germany had given in the past to the Jewish National Home under British authority, and an independent Jewish state that it, along with all goverments and party agencies, vehemently rejected.

The funny thing is they wanted to dominate the world themselves, room full of mirrors. But if I remember well, finally Hitler intervened and the support of Zionism and immigration to Palestine continued for a while. There were more urgent things to do, like annexing and dispossessing ...


Look, Fiorangela, the Nazis weren't born in 1933, they had tried to seize power in Munich in 1923. And from 1924 everybody about Hitler's plans, his ideology, in his Mein Kampf. Besides, there were many boots on the ground that showed people their mindsets, and equally many propagandist that made their views known to the wider German and world scene. So your boycott versus Havara Agreement timetable really is futile.


Fiorangela: Years ago on public radio in San Francisco, a news commentator, an Irishman and former BBC ME reporter, announced at the end of his show the subject of his next program would be the collaboration between Zionists and Nazis prior to WWII, aka: The Transfer Agreement. That show was never broadcast, he was terminated immediately.

Clifford Kiracofe

Thoughtful and excellent piece.

One concept for a "solution" is a bi-national state (one state) which perceives itself as part of a Euro- Mediterranean community.

Granted, the construction of a EuroMed community will take a lot of work. But it may be that the present "winds of change" from Morocco to Egypt may be positive for such a project. Libya, after the elimination of the Qaddhafi regime, has a role to play.

So would a bi-national state in historic Palestine.

The present trajectory of the Zionist state/project is, as David Habakkuk says "suicidal" and as Harper says, "tragic."

Prof. Kevin MacDonald in several books has a controversial historical approach to the issue.



".. exacerbated by the great influx of Jews fleeing Russia and bringing Communist ideas with them to Germany.

Thank you mentioning that...what happened in Russia and the Jews emigrating to Germany who were part of it did influence Hitler...yet new historians and popular writers seldom explain that connection.



Thanks for info reply.
I can only say that idea was either propaganda hysterics or very prophetic...maybe both.



Prof. McDonald name sounds familiar but don't believe I have read anything by him.
I will look him up though and do a read.
You say he has a controversial historical approach ...in your opinion does that mean he is sort of 'way out there' or just that he deviates from popular history?


I forgot to compliment Habakkuk on this excellent and accurate article that really does cover all the bases concerning Israel, the Zionist and the Jews.

And I believe this is true..."But I think it is fair to say that a bedrock element is an identification with the fate of fellow Jews which memories of the Holocaust make if traumatic to abandon without a sense of guilt and betrayal."

But I also think some of the most driven Zionist are motivated by revenge and power.. a desire to overcome their reputation as weak and powerless...and they are living out that obsession through Israel.

But the question I always end up with is how much longer will the US, and the world for that matter, be held captive by the nightmares and delusions of a minority of Jews?
At some point this tyranny of a minority visited on the rest of the world has to end.

I wish I believed that they, and that includes the Israeli government and their supporters in the US, were smart enough not to push it to the point where it comes down to them or us.
But I don't see anything in their past or current history that says they are capable of recognizing when enough is enough.
Instead of always asking is it 'good for the Jews' they should be asking themselves why,if they are only for themselves anyone else should be for them.

William R. Cumming

Fiorangela! The fact that the NAZI's eliminated all the Gypsy peoples they could find and intended to eliminate all SLAVS refutes your arguments. There was no room for others once the master race had its ultimate victory. MY heritage is Polish, Welsh and Scot so even with my blue eyes and blond hair probably would not have passed based on NAZI eugenics and race theory.

Clifford Kiracofe

Yes, outside the mainstream interpretation although assembled from standard primary and secondary sources. His methodology is derived from evolutionary biology and the behavioral sciences. He has taught at California State University/Long Beach.

A fascinating study by a well known British historian is: Michael Grant, The Jews in the Roman World (New York: Scribner's, 1973). The parallel is to the USA and Israel today.

You are quite correct to indicate the US Congressional Record as a valuable and authoritative primary source for research on the Zionist Lobby and US politics.


Clifford, what do you think about Kevin MacDonald's historical expertise? His small base in using, some say misusing scholarship?


Fiangorola, I'd suggest you take a closer look at the website: Wintersonnenwende

Then take a look at the bookseller. You have to follow the German link to get there. Bookseller=Buchversand. They adore Hitler and have quite a bit of literature about him. His will to peace, how he was tricked into war and on and on it goes, you will probably find some literature that the Holocaust actually didn't happen and loads of studies about cruelty towards Germans.

Or go to the original document you link to in context. Here the The Jewish Declaration of War, is the second chapter of a book by Ingrid Weckert, the mate of the late German neo-Nazi Michael Kühnen.

You decide whom you trust.

Actually already the name of the site makes me deeply suspicious. But that would lead us deeper into the Aryan mental universe of the Nazis with the many Untermenschen/subhumans that have to be extinguished on their way to power, and their vision of the world to come.


thanks for the link, MRW, I am pleased you are still around.


".. exacerbated by the great influx of Jews fleeing Russia and bringing Communist ideas with them to Germany.

This influx was vastly exaggerated. As it is today? German antisemites didn't differentiate between Jews from the Eastern Prussian territories, that were actually Germans, and immigrants from futher East.


Cal, actually Russian Jews weren't needed to spread socialist ideas on German ground, remember Marx was German. But if you look at networks, you can just as well look at the White Russian networks that found supporters on the right, e.g. the Nazis. These Russian networks were active in the US too. They had close contacts with e.g. Ford.


google online book, url has not made it through the SST filters.

google this 1881 article in Eclectic magazine titled, The Jews in Germany.

I get your point, LeaNder, that antipathy toward Jews predated 1933. My question is, what engendered those attitudes -- Jews and Germans lived together fairly amicably from ~700 AD. What changed? I submit that Jewish financial power was the major factor.

 Charles I

Arafat opined that accepting Oslo would be suicidal for him.


I composed a lengthy response to LeaNder, with links, quotes, etc., but upon pressing 'post' a pop-up said, "Sorry, can't post your comment." I've since checked for spinach in my teeth and used deodorant -- and posted a 'test' reference to an article in an 1881 European magazine.

LeaNder, I chose the wintersonnde site ONLY for the gif of the newspaper, and I selected THAT site rather than one of the three others available because the others are from Christian fundamentalist organizations that seemed less historically grounded. In fact, however, the Christian sites have a print of a different edition of the same newspaper & headline but that also includes an article by a British leader who was negotiating peaceful resolutions in Europe at the time.

Churchill was uninvolved with affairs re Germany. Only when the possibility of a peaceful resolution of European conflicts seemed possible, that would have left Germany in a position to challenge UK empire-dominance, was Churchill induced to rejoin the fray. WWII did not have to happen.

Cal -- Kevin MacDonald has some theory of White European privilege er something; I find it problematic. imo David Irving presents sourced information that is worth assessing with a critical eye.

LeaNder, frankly, I don't have a problem with German "apologetics." Israel's present behavior has made of that state a petri dish, for good or ill. The fact that Jewish people have shut down alternative perspectives on holocaust is unfair from the outset -- Germans should be allowed to tell their own story. Furthermore, censorship suggests that there is information that some prefer to elide -- Graetz wrote 11 volumes of Jewish history but did not mention hundreds of years of Jewish kabbalism because he found the topic disturbing.

William Cummings --
1. Were there Arabs on German lands or lands that Germans sought to annex?
2. You and Edwin Black should get together: Black is attempting to gin up furor over a Nazi-Arab alliance against the Jewish people.


"Sorry, can't post your comment."

if you use Firefox, as I do, I get this almost always. I have found a trick to deal with it, instead of changing to IE.

I clean othe hole cache and open a new window. Then I can post.

ooops, I have updated to Firefox 4, and now have problems to find my old way around. But that with a little time spend on learning, I hope, I will find new error-escape-strategies again.

William R. Cumming

Neither Germany or England had access to oil but a history of the transformation of the British Navy from coal to oil and the German response as its military mechanized over time should be documented and researched carefully by someone as to the links of the NAZI's ambitions and need for petroleum before and during WWI and WWII. Fortunatley the abundance of Oil from the US served the allies well in WWII and US high octane petrol. But what I would call the awakening of various militaries and navies in the need for securing petroleum put much of the ME in play even before WWI. Hey who exactly did the British think would protect there oil concessions in Iran for example? Rommel's efforts were in part driven by the need for secure petroleum resources. And cutting off the Suez Canal!

Keith Harbaugh

I am (trying to) add these references here
because this post, per the SST search machine, contains other significant references to Kevin MacDonald.
I think the references may be of interest to a number of SSTers.

Kevin MacDonald, as many of you know, is quite the controversial character.
To put it mildly, he is a bête noire for the SPLC and ADL.
And much of the intellectual community, following suit, avoids him like the plague.
However, in March of 2018, an academic at Oxford actually published a lengthy (23 page) review of his theories (available for free!):
"Judaism as a Group Evolutionary Strategy
A Critical Analysis of Kevin MacDonald’s Theory"
by Nathan Cofnas,
published in the peer-reviewed academic journal Human Nature, March 2018

MacDonald on 2018-03-20 replied with an even lengthier (41 page) response:
"Reply to Nathan Cofnas
by Kevin MacDonald, 2018-03-20

Some comments from the public, including an interesting comment by "Chinese Nat Maiden"
(HUMINT specialists may find this of interest, not that I have anyone in mind :-)
are at

Next, Cofnas naturally has HIS comments on MacDonald's reply.
Cofnas gives a link to those comments in his comment #1 at the unz.com link above:

Nathan Cofnas says:
March 23, 2018 at 2:51 pm GMT

My comments on Kevin MacDonald’s response to this article: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/323918530_Kevin_MacDonald%27s_Response_with_Comments_by_Nathan_Cofnas

That is a high-tech response, a reprint of MacDonald's response with the areas Cofnas want to discuss highlighted. Moving your cursor to a highlighted area produces Cofnas's response.

As of now, that is as far as the ping-pong match seems to have gone.
But I expect MacDonald will volley back in good time.

Those desiring to witness a good academic debate may enjoy following the arguments.
Which are not entirely irrelevant to the issue of what is driving U.S. policy, both foreign and domestic.

Also, while I am no doubt transgressing on some people's ideas of norms,
I might as well also link to an article not dealing with MacDonald,
but definitely giving a definitely not-politically-correct discussion of the overwhelming Russophobia so much of the American "elite" exhibits:
"It's Time to Drop the Jew Taboo"
by Charles Bausman, 2018-01-15

The comments to this entry are closed.

My Photo

February 2021

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
  1 2 3 4 5 6
7 8 9 10 11 12 13
14 15 16 17 18 19 20
21 22 23 24 25 26 27
Blog powered by Typepad