Dave Emory’s entire life­time of work is avail­able on a flash dri­ve that can be obtained here. The new dri­ve is a 32-giga­byte dri­ve that is cur­rent as of the pro­grams and arti­cles post­ed by 12/19/2014. The new dri­ve (avail­able for a tax-deductible con­tri­bu­tion of $65.00 or more) con­tains FTR #827.  (The pre­vi­ous flash dri­ve was cur­rent through the end of May of 2012 and con­tained FTR #748.)

You can sub­scribe to e‑mail alerts from Spitfirelist.com HERE. 

You can sub­scribe to RSS feed from Spitfirelist.com HERE.

You can sub­scribe to the com­ments made on pro­grams and posts–an excel­lent source of infor­ma­tion in, and of, itself HERE.

COMMENT: In future pro­grams, we will explore the fascist/Zionist con­nec­tion at greater length. Some­thing inter­est­ing to con­tem­plate is this: has the U.S. replaced fas­cist Italy as the “Iron Wall” that Vladimir Jabotin­sky sought to ensure the via­bil­i­ty of Zion­ist devel­op­ment of Israel? See the essay below for more detail.

(For the umpteenth time, we are not say­ing that Zion­ism is fas­cist, but there is a pow­er­ful fas­cist ele­ment with­in it that, in our opin­ion, not only threat­ens to become dom­i­nant, but is the best friend anti-Semi­tism ever had.)

Netanyahu’s con­gres­sion­al appear­ance was a bla­tant attemt at sub­vert­ing, not only Oba­ma’s for­eign pol­i­cy but his admin­is­tra­tion, as well. Netanyahu, the Israeli right wing and their amen cho­rus in the U.S. are play­ing superbly into the theme of “a Jew­ish con­spir­a­cy con­trols Amer­i­ca on behalf of Israel.” This theme res­onates effec­tive­ly with tra­di­tion­al anti-Semit­ic pro­nounce­ments such as “The Pro­to­cols of the Learned Elders of Zion.”

In a future pro­gram, we will rumi­nate about the role of “Bor­mann Jews” in Israel, and the extent to which they MIGHT influ­ence that coun­try’s poli­cies.

“Zion­ist-Revi­sion­ism in the Age of Mus­soli­ni and Hitler” by Lenni Bren­ner; MWC News; 3/9/2011.

If you want to know what Ben­jamin Netanyahu real­ly thinks about coex­ist­ing with Pales­tini­ans, Vladimir Jabotinsky’s 1923 arti­cle, “The Iron Wall (We and the Arabs)”, is a must read. Ben­zion Netanyahu, the Israeli Prime Minister’s father, was Jabotinsky’s sec­re­tary. It is one of six matrix pieces for the mate­r­i­al deal­ing direct­ly with Zion­ist adap­tion to the fas­cist pow­ers in my book “51 Doc­u­ments: Zion­ist Col­lab­o­ra­tion With The Nazis.”

When the British Empire declared Pales­tine to be the future Jew­ish nation­al home, Pales­tine includ­ed today’s Jor­dan. But in 1921 Lon­don sep­a­rat­ed it from Pales­tine and gave it to the son of Britain’s pup­pet Sharif of Mec­ca. As no Jews lived there, the World Zion­ist Organization’s lead­ers accept­ed the loss. But Jabotin­sky insist­ed that the WZO had to “revise” its pol­i­cy. Britain giv­ing part of Pales­tine to an Arab would inspire Pales­tini­ans to strug­gle on until they got it all back.

The Iron Wall opens with a sweet “equal­i­ty” flute tune:

“There will always be two nations in Pales­tine — which is good enough for me, pro­vid­ed the Jews become the major­i­ty.... I belong to the group that once drew up the Hels­ing­fors Pro­gramme.... In draw­ing up that pro­gramme, we had in mind not only the Jews, but all nations every­where, and its basis is equal­i­ty of rights.”

But soon enough you hear his mil­i­tary trum­pet:

“It is utter­ly impos­si­ble to obtain the vol­un­tary con­sent of the Pales­tine Arabs for con­vert­ing “Pales­tine” from an Arab coun­try into a coun­try with a Jew­ish major­i­ty.... Zion­ist col­o­niza­tion must either stop, or else pro­ceed regard­less of the native pop­u­la­tion. Which means that it can pro­ceed and devel­op only under the pro­tec­tion of a pow­er that is inde­pen­dent of the native pop­u­la­tion –- behind an iron wall, which the native pop­u­la­tion can­not breach. That is our Arab pol­i­cy; not what we should be, but what it actu­al­ly is, whether we admit it or not. What need, oth­er­wise, of the Bal­four Dec­la­ra­tion? Or of the Man­date? Their val­ue to us is that an out­side Pow­er has under­tak­en to cre­ate in the coun­try such con­di­tions of admin­is­tra­tion and secu­ri­ty that if the native pop­u­la­tion should desire to hin­der our work, they will find it impos­si­ble.”

The Zion­ist set­tle­ment was then too numer­i­cal­ly weak to dom­i­nate the Pales­tini­ans, so Jabotin­sky hoped Italy would replace the soft­ie Brits as Zionism’s iron wall. He didn’t like dic­ta­tor­ship, in 1926 writ­ing of Mussolini’s par­ty title:

“They had to coin a new term — ‘Duce’ — which is a trans­la­tion of that most absurd of all Eng­lish words — ‘leader’ — Buf­faloes fol­low a leader. Civ­i­lized men have no lead­ers.”

Nev­er­the­less the head buffalo’s con­cen­tra­tion camps and hang­ing of revolt­ing Arabs in Italy’s Libyan colony pleased him. By the mid-1930s, in spite of cav­ils re Fas­cism, Jabotin­sky open­ly ori­en­tat­ed towards Italy. In 1934, Mus­soli­ni respond­ed by estab­lish­ing a squadron of Betar, the Revi­sion­ist youth group, at his mar­itime acad­e­my.

Jabotin­sky became Fas­cis­m’s defense attor­ney. He wrote an April 11, 1935 arti­cle, “Jews and Fas­cism: Some Remarks — and a Warn­ing”, for New York’s Jew­ish Dai­ly Bul­letin. Most Jews fol­lowed com­mon usage and referred to the fight against Hitler as part of the “anti-Fas­cist strug­gle.” Jabotin­sky tried to stop that. If Jews saw Hitler as a Fas­cist, they wouldn’t accept Revisionism’s move towards Mus­soli­ni. The brief for the Fas­cist regime shows how he put objec­tions to buf­fa­lo herd pol­i­tics well after his wish that Italy would replace Britain as Zion­is­m’s iron wall:

“What­ev­er any few think of Fascism’s oth­er points, there is no doubt that the Ital­ian brand of Fas­cist ide­ol­o­gy is at least an ide­ol­o­gy of racial equal­i­ty. Let us not be so hum­ble as to pre­tend that this does not mat­ter – that racial equal­i­ty is too insignif­i­cant an idea to out­bal­ance the absence of civic free­dom. For it is not true. I am a jour­nal­ist who would choke with­out free­dom of the press, but I affirm it is sim­ply blas­phe­mous to say that in the scale of civic rights, even the free­dom of the press comes before the equal­i­ty of all men. Equal­i­ty comes first, always first, super first; and Jews should remem­ber it, and hold that a regime main­tain­ing that prin­ci­ple in a world turned can­ni­bal does, part­ly, but con­sid­er­ably, atone for its oth­er short-com­ings: it may be crit­i­cized, it should not be kicked at. There are enough oth­er terms for cussing use – Nazism, Hit­lerism, Polizeis­taat, etc. – but the word “fas­cis­mo” is Italy’s copy­right and should there­fore be reserved only for the cor­rect kind of dis­cus­sion, not for exer­cis­es in Billings­gate. Espe­cial­ly as it may yet prove very harm­ful. That gov­ern­ment of the copy right is a very pow­er­ful fac­tor, whose sym­pa­thy may yet ward off many a blow, for instance in the League of Nations coun­cils.

Inci­den­tal­ly, the Per­ma­nent Man­date Com­mis­sion which super­vis­es Pales­tin­ian affairs has an Ital­ian chair­man. In short – though I don’t expect street-urchins (irre­spec­tive of age) to fol­low advise of cau­tion – respon­si­ble lead­ers ought to take care.”

The March, 1936 issue of L’Idea Sion­is­ti­ca, pub­lished dur­ing Mussolini’s con­quest of Ethiopia (aka Abyssinia), describes a cer­e­mo­ny at Betar’s head­quar­ters at the scuo­la marit­ti­ma:

“The Order ‘Atten­tion’ — A triple chant ordered by the squad’s com­mand­ing offi­cer — ‘Viva L’Italia! Viva Il Re! Viva Il Duce!’ resound­ed, fol­lowed by the bene­dic­tion which rab­bi Aldo Lattes invoked in Ital­ian and in Hebrew for God, for the King and for Il Duce.”

“Giovinez­za,” the Fas­cist Par­ty anthem, “was sung with much enthu­si­asm by the Betarim.”

The war end­ed in May and they marched in a vic­to­ry parade. Revisionism’s atti­tude towards Mussolini’s war was best described in the June 12, 1936 issue of London’s World Jew­ry mag­a­zine. Wolf­gang von Weisl, Revisionism’s Finan­cial Direc­tor,

“declared that, although opin­ions among the Revi­sion­ists var­ied, in gen­er­al they sym­pa­thized with Fas­cism.... He, per­son­al­ly, was a sup­port­er of Fas­cism, and he rejoiced at the vic­to­ry of Fas­cist Italy in Abyssinia as a tri­umph of the White races against the Black.”

Their rejoic­ing end­ed a few weeks lat­er after Gen­er­al Fran­cis­co Franco’s coup against the left-lean­ing Span­ish Repub­lic. Mus­soli­ni real­ized that a Span­ish work­ers vic­to­ry would inspire Ital­ian work­ers to try to over­throw him. He had com­pet­ed with Ger­many over dom­i­na­tion of Aus­tria, but real­ized that he had to unite with Hitler against the left. He knew that he couldn’t have an alliance with the Nazi and have Jews in his par­ty, so he expelled them and put paid to his ties to Zion­ism.

War broke out in 1939. Jabotin­sky and Ben­zion Netanyahu felt that they had to sup­port Britain. But a Revi­sion­ist minor­i­ty had become so ide­o­log­i­cal­ly fas­cist in the scuo­la marit­ti­ma sea­son that they wouldn’t fight Hitler. He was a per­se­cu­tor, but Britain was the ene­my because a 1939 Lon­don White Paper called off the solu­tion to Euro­pean anti-Semi­tism, i.e., estab­lish­ing a Jew­ish state in Pales­tine. In 1940 they broke with Jabotin­sky. In Jan­u­ary 1941, their leader, Avra­ham Stern, sent a rep­re­sen­ta­tive to Beirut, con­trolled by pro-Nazi Vichy France, to nego­ti­ate with a Ger­man diplo­mat. After the war, their “Pro­pos­al of the Nation­al Mil­i­tary Orga­ni­za­tion (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” was found in the Ger­man Embassy in Turkey. They told the Nazis that:

“The evac­u­a­tion of the Jew­ish mass­es from Europe is a pre­con­di­tion for solv­ing the Jew­ish ques­tion; but this can only be made pos­si­ble and com­plete through the set­tle­ment of these mass­es in the home of the Jew­ish peo­ple, Pales­tine, and through the estab­lish­ment of a Jew­ish state in its his­toric bound­aries....

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 lake part in the war on Germany’s side.

This offer by the NMO... would be con­nect­ed to the mil­i­tary train­ing and orga­niz­ing of Jew­ish man­pow­er in Europe, under the lead­er­ship and com­mand of the NMO. These mil­i­tary units would take part in the fight to con­quer Pales­tine, should such a front be decid­ed upon.

The indi­rect par­tic­i­pa­tion of the Israeli free­dom move­ment in the New Order in Europe, already in the prepara­to­ry stage, would be linked with a pos­i­tive-rad­i­cal solu­tion of the Euro­pean Jew­ish prob­lem in con­for­mi­ty with the above-men­tioned nation­al aspi­ra­tions of the Jew­ish peo­ple. This would extra­or­di­nar­i­ly strength­en the moral basis of the New Order in the eyes of all human­i­ty.”

The Stern­ists declared that “The NMO is close­ly relat­ed to the total­i­tar­i­an move­ments of Europe in its ide­ol­o­gy and struc­ture.”

The Nazis didn’t respond to the Pro­pos­al, but they didn’t lose hope. In Decem­ber 1941 anoth­er agent was cap­tured in Syr­ia by the British, on his way to Germany’s Embassy in Turkey.

Until Men­achem Begin’s l977 elec­tion vic­to­ry, most Israeli his­to­ri­ans dis­missed Revi­sion­ism as Zionism’s fanat­ic fringe. The “Stern Gang”, as their ene­mies called Avra­ham Stern’s NMO (lat­er renamed Lohamei Herut Yis­rael, Fight­ers for the Free­dom of Israel, acronym Lehi) was looked upon as of more inter­est to psy­chi­a­trists than polit­i­cal sci­en­tists. Nev­er­the­less, Begin’s appoint­ment of Yitzhak Shamir (birth name Yizer­nit­sky) as For­eign Min­is­ter was qui­et­ly received, although Shamir was the Gang’s oper­a­tions com­man­der after the British killed Stern.

I was in Jerusalem in 1983, when Shamir became Prime Min­is­ter (1983–84/1986–92). I got an Eng­lish-lan­guage Arab week­ly to run the Stern­ist Pro­pos­al. Days lat­er, in Britain for lec­tures on my first book, Zion­ism in the Age of the Dic­ta­tors, I read that the new PM had been chal­lenged about it. The Octo­ber 21 Lon­don Times report­ed that Shamir

“denied that he had any part in the efforts by Mr. Abra­ham Stern, the orig­i­nal com­man­der of Lehi... to estab­lish con­tact with the Nazis and Ital­ian Fas­cists. ‘There was a plan to turn to Italy for help and to make con­tact with Ger­many on the assump­tion that these could bring about a mas­sive Jew­ish immi­gra­tion to Pales­tine. I opposed this... but I did join Lehi after the idea of con­tacts with the Axis coun­tries was dropped.’”

I went to The Times with their Pro­pos­al, in Ger­man and Eng­lish. After an edi­tor read the sur­re­al doc­u­ment, it ran my Novem­ber 4 let­ter, sure that my claim of his mem­ber­ship, before 1941, was true.

“As an Amer­i­can, away from my files, I can­not be cer­tain exact­ly when in 1940 Shamir joined the group. But in any case, isn’t he con­fess­ing that he know­ing­ly joined an orga­ni­za­tion of trai­tors which had offered to ally itself to the arch-ene­my of the Jews? Nor can there be any doubt that he joined up with Stern before Decem­ber 1941, when the Stern­ists tried to send Nathan Yalin-Mor to Turkey to con­tact the Ger­man ambas­sador there with the same pro­pos­al: that they be allowed to ally them­selves to the Third Reich.”

My source for 1940 mem­ber­ship was Gerold Frank’s 1963 book, The Deed, on the 1944 assas­si­na­tion of Lord Moyne, Britain’s Min­is­ter Res­i­dent in Cairo:

“In Sep­tem­ber Stern walked out of the Irgun and set up his own group.... Eli­ahu and David Danon... were sum­moned to a remote school-house.... the Irgun com­man­der... made a brief speech.... He read Jabotinsky’s cable to Raziel... and the one sent to Stern: ‘Reap­point­ing R’.... Itzhak Yizer­nit­sky.... spoke terse­ly, sum­ming up the rea­son behind Stern’s deci­sion to walk out of the Irgun.... David, for his part, could not for­get Yizernitsky’s ‘fire and pow­der’ remark in the days imme­di­ate­ly fol­low­ing the Raziel-Stern split.”

Shamir’s lie re join­ing the Stern­ists only after they stopped try­ing to fight on Germany’s side, tells us why 51 Doc­u­ments can be a pow­er­ful weapon against mod­ern Zion­ism. Try­ing to ally with Hitler can’t be jus­ti­fied today, not to Jews nor any­one else. Some Revi­sion­ists try to get out from behind Shamir’s Nazi-phil­ia by remind­ing us that most 1940s Revi­sion­ists sup­port­ed Britain. But that Revi­sion­ist major­i­ty lat­er vot­ed for a Prime Min­is­ter who, “on a nation­al and total­i­tar­i­an basis,” want­ed Adolf Hitler to win World War II.

Let’s go fur­ther. Were Jabotin­sky and his sec­re­tary real­ly much bet­ter than Stern and Shamir? Let’s ask Israel’s Prime Min­is­ter if von Weisl also spoke for his father when he cheered for Italy dur­ing the Ethiopi­an war? Did Il Duce break with Jabotin­sky and Ben­jamin Netanyahu’s father? Or did they break with Il Duce? Train­ing the found­ing admi­rals of Israel’s navy at Mussolini’s scuo­la marit­ti­ma dur­ing the Ethiopi­an war can’t be jus­ti­fied today, not to Ethiopi­ans or Ital­ians nor any­one else. . . .