Farrar on Israeli settlements

David Farrar has posted his thoughts on the UN vote on Israeli settlements (he thinks it was unfair to Israel) but he thinks the settlements are an ongoing problem for Israel.

Personally I support Israel around 95% of the time, especially when it comes to their own security. But I’ve never been persuaded that settlements on occupied territory are a good idea, or will lead to a two state solution. A one state solution is worse for Israel as that would mean having to give citizenship to those living in those areas and Jews would become the minority in Israel.

Hamas are evil and Fatah corrupt and the Palestinian leadership bear most of the blame for there being no peace settlement. They have rejected some very good offers in the past, and I remain sceptical that their leadership are interested in a two state solution.

There’s certainly some serious problems on the Palestinian side. But Israel doesn’t help the situation, especially with the provocative settlements.

In my view the settlements are wrong and provocative. Israel surrenders the moral high ground when they persist with them. The settlements are not the cause of the conflict, but they aggravate it and make peace much harder.

And while some have portrayed the UN vote as the world against Israel there’s a lot of opposition within Israel to the settlements.

The settlement policy is divisive even in Israel. Most acts of the Israeli state have widespread support (such as military action against Hamas) but the settlements are a policy most associated with the Likud party. They do have majority support, but also significant opposition.

There have been some polls inside Israel on them. They have found:

  • 42% say the settlements hurts security and 27% helps security
  • 41% say Israel should leave the West Bank/Judea and Samaria and 48% are against

Farrar’s suggestions for solutions (which hi is not optimistic about):

  1. There should be a two state solution
  2. Palestine should be given territory equal in area to the pre-1967 borders based on the original mandate.
  3. The territory for Palestine must be good enough to allow them to form a viable prosperous state, not just a series of enclaves, and be agreed between the two parties.
  4. The settlements should cease as every extra settlement is less flexibility for agreeing final boundaries.
  5. The Palestinian leadership of Fatah and Hamas must agree in words and actions to the right of Israel to exist and cease terrorism
  6. Palestine would be a demilitarised state
  7. Jerusalem is the most difficult question and is the biggest challenge (after the fact the Palestinian leadership has little interest in peace). In theory it serves as the capital to most countries, with all citizens allowed in all of the city, but different areas under different control.

To get anywhere near solutions like this it would take significant changes in attitude from both the Israelis and the Palestinians. Neither look likely to go there at this stage.

Leave a comment

109 Comments

  1. Can anyone save me some time and explain exactly how Israeli democracy works? As far as I can see Palestinians can’t become Israeli citizens so can’t vote so are effectively excluded from democratic processes. If that’s how it is isn’t that a form of apartheid?

    Reply
    • Google is your friend Pete… Reading this short article makes it clear non-Jewish citizens of Israel proper have the vote. The bulk who don’t have a right to vote are non-Jews in disputed areas of Gaza and the West Bank.

      https://972mag.com/who-gets-to-vote-in-israels-democracy/58756/

      So the apartheid state claim is a bit of a fiction – as its based on the fact that non Jews in the “occupied territories of the West Bank” and Gaza can’t vote in the Israeli elections. But given both those areas claim not to be part of Israeli its a tad bogus don’t you think?

      Also remember that the PLA and Hamas provide government in the parts of the West Bank and Gaza respectively. The PLA used to look after Gaza as well as the West Bank until Hamas exterminated the PLA in Gaza

      The whole thing is made complex by different people using different definitions of Israel in terms of borders…. and the various Jewish enclaves in the West Bank

      Reply
  2. Ray

     /  31st December 2016

    As I understand it Palestinians were offered full citizenship and can still take it up but have refused to mostly because in doing so would be to recognise Israel as a legal identity.

    Reply
  3. The rarity of Arab woman’s voting.

    “Roughly 21% of Israel’s more than eight million citizens are Arabs. The vast majority of the Israeli Arabs – 81% – are Muslims. Arabs in Israel have equal voting rights; in fact, it is one of the few places in the Middle East where Arab women may vote. Arabs currently hold ten seats in the Knesset.

    Arabic, like Hebrew, is an official language in Israel. At the time of Israel’s founding, only one Arab high school was operating, today, there are hundreds of Arab schools. Most Arabs attend these schools.

    The sole legal distinction between Jewish and Arab citizens of Israel is that the latter are not required to serve in the Israeli army. This was to spare Arab citizens the need to take up arms against their brethren. Nevertheless, many Arabs have volunteered for military duty and the Druze and Circassian communities are subject to the draft.”

    http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Society_&_Culture/arabstat.html
    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arab_citizens_of_Israel

    Reply
  4. Israel can hardly claim the moral high ground for any of there actions and its disingenuous to blame just the Palestinians for the lack of peace when half the jewish population wants to keep the West Bank. Water is also a big problem in the area and it will be no surprise to find settlers are allocated more water than palestinians. The Israeli military police fail to prosecute any settlers for attacking palestinians, for throwing rocks or setting fire to their cars, while complaints against palestinians are successfully prosecuted at a rate of 99.7%. Israel has no moral ground here and nor is it trying to bring peace. Politically the status quo is most acceptable to Israel.

    Reply
  5. As I understand it from my web research so far it’s another typically complicated situation.

    1. Palestinian arabs (and Druze) born in Israel after the 1948 declaration of the state of Israel are Israeli citizens, as are those who remained there and immediately took up the offer of Israeli citizenship after that war ended.

    2. Palestinian arabs in East Jerusalem following the annexation of the West Bank in 1967 are conditional residents who can lose the right of residence and return if they do not maintain continuous residence there. While technically they may apply for Israeli citizenship it may be granted or refused at whim and may be taken away at any time – and as many or more who were granted it have been subsequently deprived of it.

    3. Palestinian arabs living in other parts of the occupied territories (Gaza and the West Bank) cannot be Israeli citizens and cannot vote in Israeli elections, although laws passed by the Israeli government are enforced on them. They have limited self-government only and can vote only in elections for the Palestinian Authority.

    4. Those Palestinian arabs who ARE Israeli citizens CAN vote in Israeli government elections, but the crtical factor is that Israeli citizens do not all have the same rights. Citizenship is classified by nationality. Israel is officially and legally a Jewish state and non-Jews have far fewer rights – including to land ownership/leasing, and have and can be deprived of ownership of land at any time.

    5. Although Palestinian arabs can vote in Israeli elections, parties which advocate removing the priveleged status of Jewish citizen nationals under Israeli law are prohibited from being able to take part in elections, so any Palestinian or Jewish citizens who might want to vote a party advocating equal rights for all citizens cannot do so.

    Reply
    • Conspiratoor

       /  31st December 2016

      I prefer travs version G because it suits my views and prejudices. However yours is probably closer to the mark. Well researched and dispassionately presented, so big ups. Cheers,c

      Reply
    • artcroft

       /  31st December 2016

      Thanks. As Israel defines itself as a jewish nation you get the feeling anyone non-jewish is in trouble. This article seems to confirm it. Interestingly the standard line indefense of Israeli discrimination is “its worst for minorities in other arab countries”. Which would be true.
      This article states its worse for arabs in Israel than for jews in France or even Iran.
      http://www.haaretz.com/opinion/.premium-1.695900

      Reply
      • Conspiratoor

         /  31st December 2016

        And because we are all about balance on this blog, here is an alternate view. This one based on research rather than left-wing uncensored opinion…

        “The Hell of Israel Is Better than the Paradise of Arafat”

        “As a general indicator, a recent Harvard study found that 77% of Arab Israelis would rather live in Israel than in any other country. Many Arabs have also stated that they would much rather live in Israel than under Palestinian rule.”

        http://www.meforum.org/702/the-hell-of-israel-is-better-than-the-paradise

        Reply
        • Of course they would

          Reply
          • Conspiratoor

             /  31st December 2016

            The fact that a leading jewish liberal rag can openly and consistently criticize its politicians and their policies, speaks volumes about Israel’s commitment to democratic principles. Would hamas be so accommodating?

            Reply
          • Gezza

             /  31st December 2016

            No. But Hamas has influence & control of Gaza because Israel harrases, humiliates & persecutes arabs – it a legally and socially race-biased state – and occupies all land Palestians could conceivably now accept as a Palestinian state, and the PLO and Palestinian Authority are corrupt & failed to prevent this.

            Reply
          • Gezza

             /  31st December 2016

            (By PLO I mean Fatah.)

            Reply
      • The rights of “Non Jews” in Israel are so far ahead of the rights of non Muslims in just about every Muslim dominated country as to be ridiculous. Liberal chatter, of course, ignores this entirely.

        There will never be any solution until Palestinians, and their wider Pan-Islamist supporters in the ME, agree to the fundamental that Israel has a right to exist. There is simply no point pfaffing about the edges when Palestinians will not come to the table on this issue, let alone refuse to stop terrorising Israel on a daily basis

        Reply
        • Gezza

           /  31st December 2016

          Unfortunately, exactly the same can be said of the Israeli government trav. It refuses to allow palestinians who fled or were expelled from palestine/israel and their descendants to return, and the ME countries they fled to will only allow them refugee status.

          This, despite Israel encouraging & inviting Jews from anywhere to come to Israel, thus how it has increased its Jewish population to 6 million, and the continuing influence of the Zionists still seeking to make the whole of the UN palestine and israel partitioned territory the singular Jewish state of Israel, including all the territories they illegally occupied after the 1948 and 1967 wars – and continuing to pursue that agenda by building settlements and depriving palestinians, even those who are non-privileged-Jewish citizens of their land and properties, and their rights of free travel between the bantustans they have left.

          Until it guarantees Palestinianrefugees right of return to an equal area of viable land in their own independent state (which would be around 6 million each in population) – which they steadfastly refuse to do – the Palestinian extremists who persist in denying the right of even the UN defined state of Israel to exist will have a reasonable level of support in the occupied territories and even because they resist the Israeli occupation, its creeping seizure of all their state, and their denial of their right to an independent state and equal rights and protections to palestinian arab citizens in conquered 1948 Palestinian state territory.

          Most arab countries have tacitly accepted the right of the state of Israel to exist, because they know it is now a demographic fact & they know they cannot defeat it. Israel will not guarantee a proper palestinian state because it wants that land as its own. Terrorism happens on both sides because of this.

          Reply
          • Gezza

             /  31st December 2016

            Sorry … should have said “Palestinian extremists … will have a reasonable level of support in the occupied territories AND EVEN in other parts of Israeli conquered UN designated Palestinian territory … because they resist the Israeli occupation … etc.

            Reply
          • Klik Bate

             /  31st December 2016

            Reply
          • Gezza

             /  31st December 2016

            Clever clogs 😄. But they wouldn’t because if they have been reading my comments over time they will know I don’t support them at all and never would or could until they permanently abandon any notion of destroying the 1947 UN-mandated state of Israel whose existence I support. 😡

            Reply
      • Remember the Holocaust ? Etched into Israeli history, the final solution of Hitler et al was to eliminate all ethnic Jews. Fast forward to today, do you really think ethnic Jews would do the same to other ethnic groups and if so why?
        Samaria and Judea were part of the homeland of Jews 3-4,000 years ago based on archeological evidence. How then are they “new settlements” in those provinces? Surely, like our Iwi and Hapu, they are reclaiming their land, illegally occupied, What complaint has the Arab?
        The distress shown in the UN is counterfeit and has no merit. Now if Israel tried to expand into land never previously owned without full compensation to a willing seller, the let the law decide the lands’ status? Or be prepared to defeat Israel at war.

        Reply
        • Blazer

           /  31st December 2016

          the ‘final solution’ narrative has no substance.Remember Col…as you said,the victors write history,and re the Holocaust and the oppression of the Jews ,hyperbole has been an art form,albeit one that preys on guilt and sympathy that has had its political and economic…rewards.

          Reply
          • Being a Holocaust Denier is par for the course for you. Have you ever read real research on the matter? I suggest you get a copy of Heather Pringle’s book “The Master Plan” published in 2007. This is what has been said about the book”
            In 1935, Heinrich Himmler–chief of the SS and architect of the death camps–founded the Ahnenerbe, a research institute that manufactured archaeological evidence to support the notion of Aryan superiority. His team of adventurers, mystics, and reputable scholars was charged with traveling the globe to compile “proof” that a race of blond haired, blue-eyed conquerors had dominated the world in prehistoric times. The identification of their descendants and the eradication of all others became the cornerstone of the Nazi agenda.

            Drawing on Pringle’s extensive original research, including interviews with surviving members of the Ahnenerbe, “The Master Plan” is a page-turning story of delusion and excess, of scientific and political abuse on a global scale.” The comment relates to the members of the Ahnenerbe, not Heather. Who actually interviewed surviving members during her research.

            Reply
            • Blazer

               /  1st January 2017

              I have read reviews not so positive about Pringles book.Himmler is not Hitler.Well known author David Irving who wrote bestseller ‘Hitlers War’and exposed the ‘Hitler Diaries’ as a fraud is probably the foremost authority on the Nazi regime….’while not denying its occurrence, Irving claimed that Heinrich Himmler and his deputy Reinhard Heydrich were its originators and architects. Irving made much of the lack of any written order from Hitler ordering the Holocaust, and for decades afterward offered to pay £1000 to anyone who could find such an order.'(Wiki)…the reward is still unclaimed.

            • Blazer, here is just one excerpt from the evidence given by Hoess the Commandant at Auschwitz to the Nuremburg Tribunal

              “COL. AMEN: I ask that the witness be shown Document 3868-PS, which will become Exhibit USA-819.
              [The document was submitted to the witness.]
              COL. AMEN: You signed that affidavit voluntarily, Witness?
              HOESS: Yes.
              COL. AMEN: And the affidavit is true in all respects?
              HOESS: Yes.
              COL. AMEN: This, if the Tribunal please, we have in four languages.
              [Turning to the witness.] Some of the matters covered in this affidavit you have already told us about in part, so I will omit some parts of the affidavit. If you will follow along with me as I read, please. Do you have a copy of the affidavit before you?
              HOESS: Yes.
              COL. AMEN: I will omit the first paragraph and start with Paragraph 2:
              “I have been constantly associated with the administration of concentration camps since 1934, serving at Dachau until 1938; then as Adjutant in Sachsenhausen from 1938 to 1 May 1940, when I was appointed Commandant of Auschwitz.. I commanded Auschwitz until 1 December 1943, and estimate that at least 2,500,000 victims were executed and exterminated there by gassing and burning, and at least another half million succumbed to starvation and disease making a total dead of about 3,000,000. This?figure represents about 70 or 80 percent of all persons sent to Auschwitz as prisoners, the remainder having been selected and used for slave labor in the concentration camp industries; included among the executed and burned were approximately 20,000 Russian prisoners of war (previously screened out of prisoner-of-war cages by the Gestapo) who were delivered at Auschwitz in Wehrmacht transports operated by regular Wehrmacht officers and men. The remainder of the total number of victims included about 100,000 German Jews, and great numbers of citizens, mostly Jewish, from Holland, France, Belgium, Poland, Hungary, Czechoslovakia, Greece, or other countries. We executed about 400,000 Hungarian Jews alone at Auschwitz in the summer of 1944.”
              That is all true, Witness?
              HOESS: Yes, it is.”

              I could also provide you with a further 54 pages of direct factual evidence given by German witnesses to the Holocaust but quite frankly I have lost patience with your ability to deal with the facts and have a closed mind. Your claim that the Holocaust did not occur has been the subject of Legal action in a number of nations where the deniers have been found guilty. I, put you Blazer amongst them.

            • Blazer

               /  1st January 2017

              I suggest you do more research Col,and look up hyperbole….
              ‘ He said that he had personally received an order from Himmler to exterminate the Jews. He estimated that at Auschwitz 3,000,000 people had been exterminated, 2,500,000 of them by means of gas chambers. His confessions were false. They had been extorted from Höss by torture, but it took until 1983 to learn the identity of the torturers and the nature of the tortures they inflicted upon him.’

              https://www.google.co.nz/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=6&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwiq8fuN8J_RAhUKerwKHbZbCBAQFgg9MAU&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ihr.org%2Fjhr%2Fv07%2Fv07p389_faurisson.html&usg=AFQjCNE9Njzcw8xp5iy4R7Pu0gzacKNDhQ

    • Oops didn’t read down before I googled and posted. This is more comprehensive than my post…

      Reply
  6. Veering off topic ever so slightly.
    Can anyone explain to me why Progressives hold fast to the concept of a Palestine homeland as a central tenet of leftwingedness? Their wish is to accord Palestinians the right to lands over Jews, and more often than not seek the destruction of Israel itself. This is all advocated in a sneering tone of ingrained anti-semitism, as is the case of the UK Labour Party. It seems to me to be at odds with their position on not wishing to stem the flow of incoming economic migrants, family reunification, arranged marriages etc from Middle Eastern and Nth African countries. Is it just me who sees that in failing to favour protection of the historic rights to jobs and services of the the natives of Germany and England, for example, there is a conflict in their positioning on these two issues?

    Reply
    • Conspiratoor

       /  31st December 2016

      I’m not a progressive Trav so I wouldn’t know. However it appears to hark back to the Spanish Inquisition. Here’s one view from a christian zionist. Cheers,c

      http://www.lonsberry.com/writings.cfm?story=3991&go=4

      Reply
      • Gezza

         /  31st December 2016

        From your link:

        “I recognize that my own perspective is biased.

        I am a Zionist. I am not Jewish, but my Christian faith teaches me that the Bible calls the Jews the chosen people, and makes certain promises to them, including an eventual gathering in their ancestral homeland.

        I believe the gathering of Jews to the Holy Land in the late 1800s, and particularly the establishment of the nation of Israel after World War II, were fulfillments of biblical prophecy and the will of God.”

        FFS, c. Everything else he says is based on this bollocks. Biblical prophecies are being, have been, and will be ‘fulfilled’ all the time since Moses & Jesus were boys, except that when it inevitably turns out they weren’t, it becomes, “oh, no, we got that wrong, there’s another prophecy that also covers that not being the fulfilment of prophecy (properly understood blah blah), but hey, they will be, soon ….”

        Reply
        • Conspiratoor

           /  31st December 2016

          I think I agree G, although I would say show me an unbiased perspective and I’ll show you an honest politician. At least the man acknowledges this. Cheers,c

          Reply
    • artcroft

       /  31st December 2016

      I’m not progressive but on this issue the leftist have decided to follow me, which is good of them. Why am I critical of Israel? Because they use their superior state power to subject an ethnic group to occupation,discrimination and daily violence so that Israel may steal their land. Comes down to right over wrong. And I go with doing the right thing.

      Reply
      • Conspiratoor

         /  31st December 2016

        So what do you think would happen if Israel unilaterally gave the Palestinians ‘their land’ back?

        Reply
        • artcroft

           /  31st December 2016

          Peace if done properly. I hear the jews are a talented Nobel prize winning bunch with the special blessing of God. Surely men and women such as these could fashion an acceptable peace.

          Reply
          • Conspiratoor

             /  31st December 2016

            True but you are forgetting there are two parties involved here and one is committed to the destruction of the other. Suggest you read the Hamas charter esp article 13

            Reply
          • You’re kidding. Show me the Islamic nation according rights to Jews, Christians and atheists please? Let’s not forget those pesky women, covered or bikined as they may be.

            Reply
  7. lucher1948

     /  31st December 2016

    [Deleted, unnecessary and excessive. PG]

    Reply
    • Gezza

       /  31st December 2016

      Would’ve perhaps benefitted from a touch more punctuation, separation of apparently random ideas, and logical and grammatical sentence structure before posting. But scarcely worth mentioning. Possibly something in there has some limited relevance.

      Reply
    • lucher1948

       /  31st December 2016

      Sometimes PG i get a bit carried away forgive me… just saying

      [And if you mistype your pseudonym or email address your comments go into automoderation. PG]

      Reply
    • Conspiratoor

       /  31st December 2016

      pg you should cut lurch some slack. When the brain is affected by solvents released by printers ink over a prolonged period, it can cause behavioural changes, emotional and personality effects, memory impairment, sleep disturbances, and eventually, intellectual capability may diminish.

      Reply
  8. Klik Bate

     /  31st December 2016

    Funny how after the UN vote against Israel, it’s reported schools and synagogues all over Europe are being vandalized. Hmmmm……

    Reply
    • Gezza

       /  31st December 2016

      Odd, given anti-semites don’t usually need a trigger. It’s almost like someone could have deliberately orchestrated it to make ill-informed people think those who voted for a mild and reasonable resolution criticising Israeli Zionists for building settlements in UN mandated land for a Palestinian state are anti-semitic and that such anti-semitism is rife.

      Reply
      • Conspiratoor

         /  31st December 2016

        That could be true G. But what you cant conflate into a conspiracy is the record numbers of Jews fleeing Europe. What do you think is causing this? Anti-semantics or the weather?
        https://www.google.co.nz/amp/s/amp.cnn.com/cnn/2016/01/22/middleeast/france-israel-jews-immigration/index.html

        Reply
        • Gezza

           /  2nd January 2017

          Justifiable condemnations of Israel’s Zionist-driven governments & the worry of being considered to support that, plus generous inducements by Israel would be among the reasons. With especially the recent arrival of large numbers of muslim Arab refugees in Europe and the murder of a small number of Jews by a small number of terrorists (most have killed far larger numbers of non-Jews) almost certainly adding to the fear.

          Reply
  9. Klik Bate

     /  31st December 2016

    An open letter to: Rt Hon Bill English, Prime Minister of New Zealand, from: Dr. Vacy Viazna, Coordinator – Justice for Palestine Matters…..

    http://www.palestinechronicle.com/27779-2/

    Reply
  10. lucher1948

     /  31st December 2016

    I may sound like a WANKER but HAPPY NEW YEAR tomorrow you old fart PG

    [Mispelled email. PG]

    Reply
  11. lucher1948

     /  31st December 2016


    Happy new year you old fart PG from another and i don’t care

    Reply
    • patupaiarehe

       /  31st December 2016

      Happy new year to you too young fella. Treat yourself to a new keyboard, your ‘R’ key seems to be broken now too… 😉

      Reply
  12. lucher1948

     /  31st December 2016

    Reply
  13. For you all, I enclose the telling statement made by Rudolph Hoess to the Tribunal about the “final solution” that Blazer denies:
    “DR. KAUFFMANN: Is it true that in 1941 you were ordered to Berlin to see Himmler? Please state briefly what was discussed.
    HOESS: Yes. In the summer of 1941 1 was summoned to Berlin to Reichsfáhrer SS Himmler to receive personal orders. He told me something to the effect–I do not remember the exact words–that the Fáffrer had given the order for a final solution of the Jewish question. We, the SS, must carry out that order. If it is not carried out now then the Jews will later on destroy the German people. He had chosen Auschwitz on account of its easy access by rail and also because the extensive site offered space for measures ensuring isolation.”
    This is the most direct evidence, given as sworn evidence by a German witness at the Nuremburg Trials post WW2.
    See:https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-best-evidence-that-proves-beyond-r
    Proving that something existed that tends to be so heinous, that one has a hard time even getting one’s brain around it… That said, the “data elements” that the Holocaust happened are numerous – but let’s use “hard data” and numbers.: “I swear by God,the Almighty and Omniscient, that I will speak the pure truth,and will withhold and add nothing.” Hoess testimony.

    Am I the sole believer in the Holocaust. Do you believe a word of Blazers claims?

    Reply
  14. So now Blazer, I am the one using hyperbole?
    This is what David Irving’s worth as a commentator is now:
    “David John Cawdell Irving (born 24 March 1938) is an English Holocaust denier[1] and author who has written on the military and political history of World War II, with a focus on Nazi Germany. His works include The Destruction of Dresden (1963), Hitler’s War (1977), Churchill’s War (1987), and Goebbels: Mastermind of the Third Reich (1996). In his works, he argued that Hitler did not know of the extermination of Jews or, if he did, opposed it.[2] Though Irving’s revisionist views of World War II were never taken seriously by mainstream historians, he was once recognized for his knowledge of Nazi Germany and his ability to unearth new historical documents.
    Irving marginalized himself in 1988 when, based on his reading of the pseudoscientific[3] Leuchter report, he began to espouse Holocaust denial, specifically denying that Jews were murdered by gassing at the Auschwitz extermination camp.[4][5]
    Irving’s reputation as a historian was discredited[6] when, in the course of an unsuccessful libel case he filed against the American historian Deborah Lipstadt and Penguin Books, he was shown to have deliberately misrepresented historical evidence to promote Holocaust denial.[7] The English court found that Irving was an active Holocaust denier, antisemite, and racist,[8] who “for his own ideological reasons persistently and deliberately misrepresented and manipulated historical evidence”.[8][9] In addition, the court found that Irving’s books had distorted the history of Adolf Hitler’s role in the Holocaust to depict Hitler in a favourable light.”
    Such is the quality of your primary source Blazer your arguments are hollow and you have been soundly defeated in your misrepresentation of the History of the Holocaust. I just do not understand why you think the way you do. Is it something in the water>?

    Reply
    • Blazer

       /  1st January 2017

      Very cute Col.I am aware of the libel trial and its conclusions.You need to address your key piece of ‘evidence’…The testimony of..Hoess…

      ‘The book is by Rupert Butler. It was published in 1983 (Hamlyn Paperbacks). Butler is the author of three other works: The Black Angels, Hand of Steel and Gestapo, all published by Hamlyn. The book that interests us is entitled Legions of Death. Its inspiration is anti-Nazi. Butler says that he researched this book at the Imperial War Museum in London, the Institute for Contemporary History and Wiener Library, and other such prestigious institutions. At the beginning of his book, he expresses his gratitude to these institutions and, among others, to two persons, one of whom is Bernard Clarke (“who captured Auschwitz Commandant Rudolf Höss”). The author quotes several fragments of what are either written or recorded statements by Clarke.

      Bernard Clarke shows no remorse. On the contrary, he exhibits a certain pride in having tortured a “Nazi.” Rupert Butler, likewise, finds nothing to criticize in that. Neither of them understands the importance of their revelations. They say that Höss was arrested on 11 March, 1946, and that it took three days of torture to obtain “a coherent statement.” They do not realize that the alleged “coherent statement” is nothing other than the lunatic confession, signed by their quivering victim on the l4th or l5th of March 1946, at 2:30 in the morning, which was to seal Höss’ fate definitely, a confession which would also give definitive shape to the myth. The confession would also shape decisively the myth of Auschwitz, the supposed high-point of the extermination of the Jews, above all due to the alleged use of homicidal gas chambers’….

      Reply
  15. Absolute rubbish Blazer, the facts are that the Holocaust did occur and at least 5 million Jews were killed during the final solutions implementation. You continue to use conspiracy theory authors, I prefer to use the combined research of some of the finest institutions for Historical Research who have concluded it did happen. The claims of Hoess being tortured lack merit. You should take a trip to the US and view all of the records held in the Holocaust Museum and make your claims there. Even the Germans acknowledge the facts of the holocaust,
    But I am not going to waste any more time on you and your mindless commentary of hate. Believe what you want but be assured I am right, you are wrong eat that!

    Reply
  16. The facts of the Holocaust stand, loser.

    Reply
    • Blazer

       /  1st January 2017

      I don’t think that sort of invective becomes you Col.

      Reply
      • Gezza

         /  1st January 2017

        Maybe, but he’s a winner on this issue.

        Reply
        • Blazer

           /  1st January 2017

          if you think that the testimony of Hoess which he relies on is reliable.I have shown it is not.

          Reply
          • PDB

             /  1st January 2017

            All you have shown is that regardless of the new year you continue as you did in 2016 – being wrong in every way.

            Ironically you believe humans are the main cause of global warning which has zero proof but deny the extent of the holocaust which has overwhelming proof.

            Reply
            • Blazer

               /  1st January 2017

              My opinion matches neither of the things you mention.Typical.

        • Gezza

           /  1st January 2017

          Sorry Blazer but I find Hoess’s testimony at Nuremburg so significantly detailed, and well supported by other credible witness testimony and other material I have read over the years about the holocaust and the method of operational instructions for & the establishment of facilities for the murder of Jews on an industrial scale, most specifically at the largest extermination camp in Auschwitz, that although I can well imagine he was mistreated and even beaten up on capture, I don’t find the speculations of your author, about Hoess’s testamentary evidence being false, convincing. I find nothing particularly startling in his being presented with a summary of the admissions he had made for his signature.

          Reply
          • Blazer

             /  2nd January 2017

            So you competely disregard the fact that his ‘confession’ was obtained by torture!The evidence is compelling and from multiple sources
            .I guess you’re not believe the Israelis wired up a defendants jaw in court to stop him speaking either!The Victor’s certainly write history!

            Reply
          • Gezza

             /  2nd January 2017

            My dad fought in World War 2. I’ve had a lifelong fascination with all aspects of World War 2, and most particularly with Nazi Germany. I disregard the claim that his evidence was untrue. His statement at Nuremberg was only part of the total amount of written evidence he provided.

            As I also disregard revisionist claims that gas chambers did not exist at Auschwitz-Birkenau (and at the other Aktion Reinhard camps) & were not used to systematically murder well over a million Jews as well as other prisoners.

            I’m curious about why you are so easily convinced by a tiny number of dingy denialists & so keen to believe this unparalleled atrocity did not happen, and apparently that the numbers of Jews murdered in these operations were far less than generally accepted by so many reputable historians?

            Reply
            • Blazer

               /  2nd January 2017

              Gezza,the so called written evidence he provided was in English!Clarke and Butler were hardly Nazi sympathisers,their testimony that it ‘took 3 days to get a co herent confession’ is compelling.I am hardly ‘easily convinced’ just aware that of the millions and millions killed in WW2 the Jews are the only ones that matter!Why the big discrepencies in the numbers,1 to 2.5 million is a huge margin of error’.My understanding is bullets killed the most.The gas chambers that were evident were far too small to accomodate the numbers claimed.War is hell,and claiming the moral high ground and demonising the losers is very common place.The hearts and minds of the people must be won over to justify war.Recent examples like Iraq and WOMD ,confirm ,nothing has changed.Look at the melo dramatic claim by Israels leader that NZ has declared war on Israel with the U.N resolution.This is how they operate,then and now.Owning a large portion of western media for decades helps immeasurably!

            • Conspiratoor

               /  2nd January 2017

              Blazer, while it’s hard to deny large numbers of Jews were exterminated and they have done a very good job of keeping the memory alive, there were many more Slavs butchered by the Nazis. 20million by some accounts.

  17. Gezza

     /  2nd January 2017

    “I am hardly ‘easily convinced’ just aware that of the millions and millions killed in WW2 the Jews are the only ones that matter!”

    As you obviously seriously believe that statement, and that the Jews controlled all the documentation and witness testimony about Auschwitz-Birkenau, I’ll stop here – because I could go on for days finding posting links to sites detailing corroboratory evidence of the construction, method, daily rates & times required to maximise the killing capacity of the gas chambers (though they and the crematoria also were insufficient to kill as many as desired before they were demolished & burning of bodies in open pits was also undertaken) – but I think for reasons I won’t speculate on here you are predisposed to disbelieve it all.

    The reason there is such a focus on the mass murder of Jews during WW2 is not that ‘the Jews were the only ones that matter’. It is the unprecedented racial focus, organised & brutal nature of their exclusion, captivity, and expiry, efficient & industrialised methods that were part of it, that it was fairly widely known but not spoken about in Germany, & the scale of it.

    Reply
    • Blazer

       /  2nd January 2017

      I looked at the video you presented and quite frankly in poses more questions than it answers.I do note ,chilling background music and all that it says 1.5 mil died at the A-B installation,including Jews,homosexuals,soviet P.O.W’s, and gypsies…and that 150,000 were gassed there.I also note that when the Soviets liberated the camp there were no gas chambers.They had been dismantled by the Germans.

      Reply
      • Gezza

         /  2nd January 2017

        Auschwitz gas chambers
        https://www.hdot.org/debunking-denial/

        I’ve seen more on other sites but didn’t bookmark them – but I don’t doubt the gas chambers’ existence, use, and large-scale killing capacity, and it is the fact they were constructed and used with crematoria to callously, efficiently & cheaply assist in the disposal of hundreds of thousands of Jews that is so repugnant & therefore so notable in history.

        Other persecutions, genocides and mass murders are also notable in history and more will probably sadly continue to be. But there has been nothing like the Nazi programme & operations relating to the Jews for scale and organisation.

        Reply
        • Blazer

           /  2nd January 2017

          Gezza,the video you supplied says 150,000 gassed at the biggest camp Auschwitz-Berkinau,and not solely ..Jews.The figure bandied about under the ‘Holocaust’ label is…6 million!

          Reply
        • Blazer

           /  2nd January 2017

          interesting link Gezza,debunking Holocaust deniers, actually categorically debunks the fantasy of Hitlers ‘Final Solution’….just for you Col….’There was, to a high degree of probability, no one written order from Hitler about the extermination of the Jews as it was not a single solution but a variety of separate solutions in different areas at different times in different manners’!….I should rest my case …on that.

          Reply
          • Blazer

             /  2nd January 2017

            Attn Col….’Tribunal about the “final solution” that Blazer denies’!

            Reply
        • Gezza

           /  2nd January 2017

          The figures are not ‘bandied about’. There are some who maintain the numers were even higher.

          They are the generally accepted result of careful, challenged, researched, reasoned estimates based on multiple sources of evidence, inluding German military & relevant bureucratic & industrial order documents (the SS destroyed their extermination and camp registration records in Auschwitz but copies of many of those documents were found in Gestapo HQ) railway schedules, construction plans, commandant and military commander reports, testamentary evidence in senior officers’ diaries and memoirs, guard & prisoner witness testimony in courts, film & photographs, transcribed radio broadcasts, covertly recorded conversations among senior military officers in captivity in Britain prior to Nuremberg trials, population records pre and post war.

          There is no question that Jews were specifically targetted for extermination, that the methods evolved and expanded throughout the war, and that in the camps & associated slave industries collectively over a million were gassed to death, starved to death, beaten to death, murdered in bizarre medical experiments, frozen to death, died from preventable untreated diseases and fatal injuries, shot to death and hanged.

          The mass executions by shooting in the East are well attested and recorded.

          The numbers are good.

          Reply
          • Blazer

             /  2nd January 2017

            What are the numbers again please?And were gypsies,and homosexuals targeted?

            Reply
          • Gezza

             /  2nd January 2017

            Collectively, I accept 6 million as the most reasonable accepted number, and have no need or desire to spend the next few days chasing down various claims of numbers & posting links to multiple sources to support them.

            The Wikipedia entries on the Final Solution, and on the multitude of individual camps, key personnel and cross links to other associated infromation & sources on associated events & issues, from memory provide plenty of sources that can be chased down & cross-checked if you wish, and may point you to some other suitable google queries to research and documentation if you, like me do not rely on Wikipedia alone. And there are the Wikipedia ‘Talk’ page tabs if you want to view Wiki content debates.

            Reply
            • Blazer

               /  2nd January 2017

              no need to chase down anymore…your link (i’m sure you know its sources) https://www.hdot.org/debunking-denial/..confirms what I said to the Col,no Final Solution instigated by Adolph Hitler and no reliable figures on the numbers …GASSED!

          • Gezza

             /  2nd January 2017

            “And were gypsies & homosexuals targeted?”

            I don’t know if they were all specifically targetted in the same methodically organised way, or some just rounded up and/or sent to camps when come across. I’ve not ever researched that to the same degree as I have the operations against Jews, so don’t remember.

            Certainly there’s reliable evidence they were also rounded up & exterminated in camps. As well as political prisoners, Russians, & other ‘undesirables’ including a few especially troublesome prisoners of war.

            Why do you ask?

            Reply
            • Blazer

               /  2nd January 2017

              well it would be interesting to hear the testimony of a homosexual ,gypsy,’Survivor’….would it …not!

            • Gezza

               /  2nd January 2017

              Yes.

            • Blazer

               /  2nd January 2017

              @ Con…thanks…no compo or a new country for the gypsies though…heres an example I.G.Farben…
              ‘The IGF plants located in the Soviet zone of occupation were nationalised, however, in the zones occupied by the Western powers no change of ownership took place.

              Basically the conglomerate was broken up into its original three major component parts – Bayer, BASF, and Hoechst – whose balance sheet by the end of the 1950’s already exceeded that of the original IGF.

              The final IGF Liquidation Act of the 21 January 1955, removed all the remaining restrictions imposed by the Allies; many of the top officials of IGF including Ter Meer and Ambros were soon again in leading positions in the German chemical industry.

              A court of the Federal Republic of Germany in a 1953 decision established the principle that a Jewish prisoner who had been forced to work for IGF in Monowitz had a right to sue the company for compensation.

              In the wake of this decision and after prolonged negotiations, the residual company IGF in Liquidation agreed to put 27 million deutschmarks at the disposal of the Jewish Material Claims Conference to cover the claims of all Jewish forced labourers and prisoners who had been compelled to work at Monowitz.

              The payment was made on a purely voluntary basis and was not to be classed as an admission of guilt. IGF did not pay any compensation to non-Jewish forced labourers and prisoners. ‘

  18. Pickled Possum

     /  2nd January 2017

    Morena bro Kei to pehea koe 🙂

    I wonder about this as my understanding is not as well versed as yours on this subject;

    “It is the unprecedented racial focus, organised & brutal nature of their exclusion, captivity, and expiry, efficient & industrialised methods that were part of it, that it was fairly widely known but not spoken about in Germany, & the scale of it.”

    Does this mean how the baddies wanted the others/different coloured ones, to be eradicated on a huge scale and set about it with captivity, starvation, torture, no work and oppression?
    Shouldn’t it have been called genocide = the deliberate killing of a large group of people, especially those of a particular nation or ethnic group.

    Which has been going on since mai rano = 1. (particle) ever since, from that time, from long ago, for a long time, right from, from as long ago as, since – a variation of mai rā anō.

    When I say ‘Lest I forget’ I am talking about all peoples who have suffered death at the hands of others. No death is more important than another to me.

    Reply
    • Gezza

       /  2nd January 2017

      Tena koe, kei te pai, sis, kei te pai.

      Yes it was genocide, and yes, there have been several others in history.

      The extermination of Jews didn’t start out as genocide. The Nazi’s earliest ideas were to try & get rid of Germany’s Jews (the solution to the “Jewish problem”) by deporting them en masse to various places, including Madagascar at one point, but for various reasons they were impractical & never implemented, and when their invasions of Western & Eastern Europe resulted in their ending up with enormous numbers more of their ideologically detested Jews under their rule, who they were able to claim that both they and nobody else wanted, the decision was made & communicated orally by Himmler to the SS at the Wansee Conference that the “final solution” was the only option so they must be exterminated.

      After that, they were, and the organised deportation of Jews to the slave & extermination camps to be worked and gassed to death were one of the methods that was designed for that purpose & used.

      Reply
      • Blazer

         /  2nd January 2017

        you have provided the evidence yourself that the ‘Final Solution’ is an emotive fabrication!

        Reply
        • Gezza

           /  2nd January 2017

          No I haven’t.

          Reply
          • Blazer

             /  2nd January 2017

            from your link..’no one written order from Hitler about the extermination of the Jews as it was not a single solution but a variety of separate solutions in different areas at different times in different manners’!….’….so ..oh yes,you …have!

            Reply
            • Gezza

               /  2nd January 2017

              No, I haven’t. I don’t think Hitler ever used it, and nor did he ever issue any written order for it. The problem is you haven’t completed enough research into the term, who used it (many of his subordinates and theirs, it was one of several common euphemisms for the extermination of the Jews by various means) what documents it is actually used in and recorded in.

              And I am moving on to other matters now because my growing belief in your apparent agenda in not doing so disturbs me, & there are other topics & comments I want to read.

            • Blazer

               /  2nd January 2017

              I have done enough research and if you are disturbed by it not corroborating your beliefs,you really should move on and read something…that does.

            • Gezza

               /  2nd January 2017

              No you haven’t, and I’m not disturbed by my research corroborating my beliefs. I’m convinced of my suspicions by yours corroborating your beliefs.

            • Blazer

               /  2nd January 2017

              not really interested in your ‘suspicions’….I will leave you with this,it says alot about the discussion subject’….’IGF did not pay any compensation to non-Jewish forced labourers and prisoners. ‘!

  19. As Miko Peled says in this clip and the longer version it links to –

    1) The so-called “Right of Return” after 2000 years exerted by Zionist Israelis does not extend to Palestinians those same Israelis illegally expelled from their homes within living memory. Homes to which many Palestinians still hold deeds and even door keys. The same Right of Return does not extend to many indigenous peoples throughout the world.

    2) Peace negotiations only came to the table in (about) 1993 after Israel was absolutely assured that settlement of the West Bank, Gaza and the Golan Heights was irreversible … or as Peled puts it, after the possibility of a viable Palestinian state had been extinguished.

    Why people think that their experience of the Holocaust would somehow make Jewish people peaceful and tolerant is quite beyond me and, I believe, beyond the ken of human reason to fathom? As Peled also states, the generals and most politicians were (are) racist, militaristic and belligerent … They removed the British using acts of (you guessed it) ‘terrorism’ …

    Regardless of what the more extreme element of Palestinian leadership says – for there are extremes in any ethnic group or movement – they, the Palestinians, are ultimately holding out against attempts to force their complete surrender under the euphemism “Peace”. A ‘One State Solution’ will be as ‘One People, One Rule’ is for Maori, or “We hold these truths to be self-evident …” is for the Huron, Apache and hundreds of other Native American ‘tribes’ …

    Fabulous sidelining of the issue on this topic …

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s