Genocide, Variations on a Theme #I

Part Two

Genocide, Variations on a Theme #I

Part Two

“Israel has angrily dismissed a UN resolution urging a “humanitarian truce” in Gaza, vowing that it will continue to defend itself,” the BBC reported[1]. “The UN General Assembly overwhelmingly called for an immediate humanitarian truce between Israel and Hamas.

Israeli UN Ambassador Gilad Erdan said the UN no longer held “even one ounce of legitimacy or relevance”. If the truth be told: it NEVER did. The reason is simple: the UN has been, from its very inception, directly responsible for genocide in Palestine. Giving money to the UN to alleviate the misery in Palestine is akin to giving money to Hitler to alleviate the miseries of Auschwitz: it borders on insanity. Only someone completely detached from reality, somebody with either their head in the sand or living in an ivory tower can deny the crimes of the UN. That the UN is involved in the current Genocide by Jab as well as its African predecessor of the 1980s, which is said to have killed 100m, and is currently trying to enslave humanity, should hardly surprise. At its core, the corrupt UN has always been run by Satanists[2] and criminals, as whistleblowers have long pointed out, and it seems very much to be following the Satanist/Freemason agenda adumbrated by Pike in 1871. After all: for Pike the whole raison d’être of the Second World War was the creation of Israel:

The Second World War must be fomented by taking advantage of the differences between the Fascists and the political Zionists. This war must be brought about so that Nazism is destroyed and that the political Zionism be strong enough to institute a sovereign state of Israel in Palestine.

What needs mentioning is the fact that Nazism was instrumental to the creation of Israel and, as Klemperer pointed out: the Zionists even wanted to build, out of gratitude, a statue to Hitler. It shouldn’t surprise that Irgun offered its services to him in 1941:

Es ist des Oefteren von den leitenden Staatsmaennern des nationalsozialistischen Deutschlands ist ihren Aeusserungen und Reden hervorgehoben worden, dass eine Neuordnung Europas eine radikale Loesung der Judenfrage durch Evakuation vorausgesetzt („Judenreines Europa“).

“It is often stated in the speeches and utterances of the leading statesmen of National Socialist Germany that a prerequisite of the New Order in Europe requires the radical solution of the Jewish question through evacuation (“Jew-free Europe”).”

Die Evakuierung der juedischen Massen aus Europa ist eine Vorbedingung zur Loesung der juedischen Frage, die aber nur einzig moeglich und endgueltig durch die Uebersiedlung dieser Massen in die Heimat des juedischen Volkes, nach Palaestina. und durch die Errichtung des Judenstaates in seinen historischen Grenzen, sein kann.

“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.”

Das juedische Problems auf diese Weise zu loesen und damit das juedische Volk endgueltig und fuer immer zu befreien ist das Ziel der politischen Taetigkeit und des jahrelangen Kampfes der Israelitischen Freiheitsbewegung, der Nationalen Militaerischen Organisation in Palaestina (Irgun Zewai Leumi).

“The solving in this manner of the Jewish problem, thus bringing with it once and for all the liberation of the Jewish people, is the objective of the political activity and the years-long struggle of the Israeli freedom movement, the National Military Organization (Irgun Zvai Leumi) in Palestine.”

Die N.M.O., der die wohlwollende Einstellung der deutschen Reichsregierung und ihrer Beboerden zu der zionistischen Taetigkeit innerhalb Deutschlands und zu den zionistischen Emigrationsplaenen gut bekannt ist, ist der Ansicht, dass

“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. eine Interessengemeinschaft zwischen des Belangen einer Neuordnung Europas nach deutscher Konzeption und den wahren nationalen Aspirationen des juedischen Volkes, die von der N.M.O. vekoerpert werden, bestehen koennen,

“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. eine Kooperation zwischen dem Neuen Deutschland und einem erneuerten, voelkisch-nationalen Hebraertum moeglich waere und

“Cooperation between the new Germany and a renewed folkish-national Hebraium would be possible and,”

3. die Errichtung des historischen Judenstaates auf nationaler und totalitaerer Grundlage, der in einem Vertragsverhaeltnis mit dem Deutschen Reiche stuende, im Interesse der Wahrung und Staerkung der zukuenftigen deutschen Machtpositionen im Nahen Orient sei.

“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.”

Ausgehend aus diesen Erwaegungen tritt die N.M.O. in Palaestinam unter der Bedingung einer Anerkennung der oben erwaehnten nationalen Aspirationen der Israelitischen Freiheitsbewegung seitens der Deutschen Reichsregierung, an dieselbe mit denn Angebote einer aktiven Teilnahme am Kriege an der Seite Deutschlands heran.

“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 take part in the war on Germany’s side.”

Das Angebot seitens der N.M.O., darum Taetigkeit auf das militaerische, politische und informative Gebiet, in und nach bestimmten organisatorischen Vorbereitungen auch ausserhalb Palaestinas, sich erstrecken koennten, waere gebunden an die militaerische Ausbildung und Organisierung der juedischeen Manneskraft Europas, unter Leitung und Fuehrung der N.M.O. in militaerischen Einheiten und deren Teilnahme an Kampfhandlungen zum Zwecke der Eroberung Palaestinas, falls eine entsprechende Front sich bilden sollte.

“This offer by the NMO, covering activity in the military, political and information fields, in Palestine and, according to our determined preparations, outside Palestine, 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.”

Die indirekte Teilnahme der Israelitischen Freiheitsbewegung an der Neuordnung Europas, schon in ihrem vorbereitenden Stadium, im Zusammenhange mit einer positiv-radikalen Loesung des europaeischcn Judenproblems im Sinne der erwaehnten nationalen Aspirationen des juedischen Volkes, wuerde in den Augen der gesamten Menschheit die moralischen Grundlagen dieser Neuordnung ungemein staerken.[3]

“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.”

For those who forget, the Irgun is not without importance for contemporary Israel: Menachem Begin, founder of Likud and Prime Minister between June 1977 and October 1983, was its commander between 1943 and 1948, Ze’ev Jabotinsky had that job between 1937 and 1940 (Netanyahu’s father was his secretary), while it was directly responsible for the terrorist atrocities of the King David Hotel bombing and the Deir Yassin massacre.

What would have been the point of the war had they failed to create Israel in its wake? All the death and destruction, especially the Holocaust, would have been in vain.

What was needed was a new international organization: The United Nations. From the UN, and the UN alone, Israel drew its entire legitimacy.

According to the Israeli declaration of independence: “On the 29th of November, 1947, the United Nations General Assembly passed a resolution calling for the establishment of a Jewish State in Eretz-Israel; the General Assembly required the inhabitants of Eretz-Israel to take such steps as were necessary on their part for the implementation of that resolution. This recognition by the United Nations of the right of the Jewish people to establish their State is irrevocable.”

There were a few problems however with this assertion. In 1945 the UN was created with the charter to maintain international peace, develop friendly relations, and achieve international cooperation. Since then none of these tasks have been achieved; strife has followed upon conflict.

Given that its principle function was to “maintain international peace and security”, “develop friendly relations among nations”, and “achieve international cooperation” it didn’t, strictly speaking, have a mandate to deal with the Palestine issue at all.

Above all else: it was not empowered to destroy or create countries; this was not part of its remit. On the contrary its concern for human rights, for the “inherent dignity and of the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family is the foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world,” as set out in December 1948, was quite the opposite of a policy of ethically cleansing Palestinians, which the creation of a state of Israel inevitably entailed.

In the words of one commentator: “The United Nations had no business offering the nation of one people to the people of many nations. Its General Assembly had neither the legal nor the legislative powers to impose such a resolution or to convey title of a territory; Articles 10, 11 and 14 of the UN Charter bestows the right on the General Assembly merely to recommend resolutions.”

“GARes181 never went to the Security Council for approval, therefore, it remained as a ‘recommendation’ ... Broadly speaking, while the General Assembly may discuss any international disputes or situations, it is the Security Council which recommends appropriate procedures or methods of adjustments or terms of settlement for the pacific settlement of disputes and takes preventive or enforcement measures with respect to threats to the peace, breaches of the peace or acts of aggression.”

In the words of Jeremy Hammond: “A simple reading of the text is enough to show that the resolution did not partition Palestine or offer any legal basis for doing so. It merely recommended that the partition plan be implemented and requested the Security Council to take up the matter from there. It called upon the inhabitants of Palestine to accept the plan, but they were certainly under no obligation to do so.”

According to Eli E. Hertz: “What resulted was Resolution 181 [known also as the 1947 Partition Plan], a nonbinding recommendation to partition Palestine, whose implementation hinged on acceptance by both parties — Arabs and Jews.”

Given that the Arabs never accepted the resolution it was effectively null and void. The resolution was never implemented.

The diplomatic wrangling continued and on the 11th of December 1948 UN Resolution 194 resolved “that the refugees wishing to return to their homes and live at peace with their neighbors should be permitted to do so at the earliest practicable date, and that compensation should be paid for the property of those choosing not to return and for loss of or damage to property which, under principles of international law or in equity, should be made good by the governments or authorities responsible;” and instructed “the Conciliation Commission to facilitate the repatriation, resettlement and economic and social rehabilitation of the refugees and the payment of compensation, and to maintain close relations with the Director of the United Nations Relief for Palestine Refugees and, through him, with the appropriate organs and agencies of the United Nations.” Resolution 194 has never been implemented.

---

[1] https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-67245797

[2]

[3] https://www.marxists.org/history/etol/document/mideast/ironwall/irgunazi.htm