Hitler and Husseini
Regarding “PM’s remarks on Hitler and Mufti Husseini ignite firestorm” (October 22), the mindless assault on Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu for daring to associate the hysterically anti-Semitic grand mufti Haj Amin al-Husseini with Hitler’s plan for the extermination of European Jewry further illustrates the flight from historic truth that marks our benighted age.
Husseini, Hitler’s honored Berlin guest from 1941 to near the end World War II, forged a pact with the Fuehrer on November 28, 1941, five weeks before the Wannsee Conference, which sealed the fate of European Jewry. The evidence against Husseini at the Nuremberg War Crimes Trials clearly stated that Hitler would exterminate the Jews of Europe while the grant mufti enlisted Nazi aid in wiping out the Jews of Palestine.
The Nuremberg Protocols, confirming Husseini’s conviction, include citations by senior SS prosecution witnesses identifying him as being instrumental in Hitler’s decision to exterminate rather than seek to ransom the Jews. He underscored his participation in that decision by recruiting an Islamic division for the Waffen SS that contributed to the subsequent decimation of Yugoslavia’s Jewish population.
Golda Meir is said to have importuned the Mossad to apprehend Husseini so he could be seated in the glass enclosure alongside Adolf Eichmann. Golda had it right, and so does Bibi.
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s remarks play right into the hands of the anti-Zionist haredi camp.
In the October 1977 issue of The Jewish Observer, mouthpiece of Agudat Yisrael, the late Rabbi Isaac Hutner wrote an article on how to teach the Holocaust in which he claimed the idea had originated with the mufti of Jerusalem, who convinced Hitler to annihilate the Jews. Yet ultimately, it was the Zionists who were responsible, because they started the conflict with the mufti.
JPOST VIDEOS THAT MIGHT INTEREST YOU:
I believe the Aguda had an additional objective in trying to find an excuse for the refusal of the haredi rabbinate of Europe to permit congregants to flee to Palestine in the 1930s, and in the Fall 1980 issue of Tradition, Prof.
Lawrence Kaplan of McGill University thoroughly debunked Rabbi Hutner’s thesis.
It is unfortunate that the prime minister has revived this specious argument and given aid and succor to the anti-Zionist haredi camp.SAMUEL DERSHOWITZ
To criticize the prime minister for not seeking historical truth totally misses the point. Benjamin Netanyahu is a politician, which means he needs to make history before he becomes history.MOSHE-MORDECHAI VAN ZUIDEN
Jerusalem Off-putting headline
With regard to “Settler killed by truck in hit-and-run, soldiers wounded in West Bank” (October 21), why does The Jerusalem Post
continue to use the word “settler” when referring to Israelis who live over the “Green Line”? Why can’t you instead use the phrase “a resident of...” as you do for every other Israeli citizen? The word “settler” has a negative connotation. It sends a real negative message and, to some degree, justification to those who do not as yet realize that the State of Israel includes the lands both inside and outside the Green Line.
Let us use accurate language in our reporting.ELLEN SHAFNER
Your headline is terribly offensive.
Why do you not simply note that the victim was a man? That he was a father? Husband? Right-handed person? Driver? Or just plain Israeli? Why must you insist on using the pejorative that seems to almost justify the man’s murder? JONATHAN FELDSTEIN
Showing his religion? Herb Keinon gives a strong and complimentary description of outgoing Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s support for Israel (“There was never any doubt about Harper’s ‘kishkes,’” Comment, October 21). But he omits an important detail.
Harper does not conceal his strong Evangelical religious practice. Evangelicals support the existence of a strong Israel as a matter of religion. Jews have to be present in the Holy Land to usher in the new Evangelical era, including the return of Christ. The ultimate in that new era will be the conversion of all Jews.
With a religious doctrine like that, one has to wonder whether Harper’s support for Israel is truly heartfelt or just a vehicle to ultimately convert all the Jews.
ALLAN J. FOX
Toronto Making an effort
In “Gantz not ruling out entering politics” (October 20), former IDF chief of staff Benny Gantz is quoted as saying that he did not want us to “constantly have to live by the sword,” and said, in your words, that “Israel needed to make more of an effort to achieve peace on behalf of Israelis who risk their lives by serving in the IDF.”
I, personally, am fed up with hearing that Israel needs to make “more of an effort.” When are we going to start hearing about the effort required of the other side to finally bring peace to this area? JOEL BLOCK Haifa Having it one way Susan Hattis Rolef (“The divided city,” Think About It, October 19) cites the “distorted manner in which archeological finds in the City of David are presented to the public” and the “efforts...to settle Jews in Arab neighborhoods by both legal and illegal means,” calling them “offensive and divisive.”
Unfortunately, she does not explain why the large number of Arab residents of Jewish areas of Jerusalem, such as French Hill, fail to be “offensive and divisive.”
Jerusalem Airline horrors
I can match Mark Feldman’s account of a traveler’s unfortunate Aeroflot experience (“Das v’danya, Aeroflot! The Travel Adviser, October 18) with my own, virtually identical, experience with British Airways. It was Manchester rather than Moscow, and “no” rather than “nyet,” but otherwise, the “world’s favorite airline” – thanks to which Delibes’s “Flower Duet” is now indelibly associated with delays and snotty British cabin staff – is no better than its Russian equivalent.
My wife and I had booked a round-trip from Tel Aviv to New York, with an extra leg, on the return, via Manchester, where we attended a wedding. Our flight to London from Manchester was the evening after the wedding, and the onward flight to Tel Aviv was the following morning. With a day to spare, we drove to Birmingham to visit my parents’ graves, expecting to have ample time to return for the 7 p.m. flight. However, heavy rains and extraordinary delays and closures on the M6 made this impossible.
As soon as we realized the situation, we called BA and told them we would continue by road to London and pick up our Tel Aviv flight from there. We were missing a segment of our itinerary and fully expected to have to pay a penalty, but did not anticipate that our no-show in Manchester would result in the cancellation of the London to Tel Aviv segment, and without a refund.
We were told adamantly by three so-called customer service agents that we would have to pay $600 each for a new ticket.
The online travel agent with whom we had booked our flights was unable to make an impression on the BA commissars, so we bought a return flight with EasyJet for less than half of what BA was trying to extort from us. I wrote to the CEO and head of BA “customer experience,” and received a single form letter that in no way addressed my specific complaint.
I will never fly BA again anywhere, although it is da to Aeroflot following a recent round-trip flight to New York with that airline.
Join Jerusalem Post Premium Plus now for just $5 and upgrade your experience with an ads-free website and exclusive content. Click here>>