by Francisco J. Gil-White Arutz Sheva July 22, 2003

Have Palestinian Leaders Shed Their Nazi Past?

In Part II of this article, I documented that the Palestinian movement has its roots in the Nazi movement and the Final Solution. Here, I examine whether there is any reason to think that Palestinian leaders no longer want to exterminate the Jews.

The first major reorganization of the PLO occurred when Arafat’s Fatah took it over (see Part II of this article). Then, on September 9, 1993, Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin made another PLO incarnation official when he sent Yasser Arafat a letter stating that, as a result of the Oslo negotiations, “the Government of Israel has decided to recognize the PLO as the representative of the Palestinian people.”[1] It was therefore the PLO (essentially Fatah) that went on to form the Palestinian Authority (PA).

The argument one hears in the media is that the Oslo ‘Peace’ Process turned the PLO into doves, but that Israeli crackdowns have led them to support terrorism again. However, at least when they speak in Arabic to Arab audiences, leaders of the PLO and the PA will have nothing to do with this official story. On such occasions they describe the Oslo accords as a ploy, a “Trojan Horse” to destroy Israel in stages.[2] For example, as reported in the Baltimore Sun:[3]

“…Faisal Husseini, the top PLO official in Jerusalem… [was] quoted as likening the Oslo accords to a ‘Trojan horse.’ …the weekly Al-Arabi,[4] quotes Husseini as calling the Oslo accords ‘just a temporary procedure, or just a step towards something bigger… the liberation of all historical Palestine from the (Jordan) river to the (Mediterranean) sea, even if this means that the conflict will last for another thousand years or for many generations.’

“Sharif Husseini, director of international relations at Orient House, Faisal Husseini’s base in Jerusalem, says his relative was quoted out of context.”

Notice that Sharif Husseini is not denying that Faisal Husseini said these things. Instead he is saying that he was quoted out of context.

Looking at the text of the interview, it is obvious that Faisal Husseini was not quoted out of context,[4] (but the Baltimore Sun apparently felt no need to point it out). And who can imagine a context in which Faisal Husseini’s words would mean something other than what they literally say? Moreover, such words are entirely in keeping with who Faisal Husseini really was.[5] Perhaps Sharif Husseini actually meant to say that what a Palestinian official says in Arabic to fellow Arabs is the wrong context for members of a Western audience - for them, an entirely different set of statements must be prepared.[6]

As the Courier Mail points out, “Observers have long criticised Mr Arafat over the gulf between his pronouncements in English to the Western media and what he says in Arabic to his own people… In his speech in Ramallah before a delegation from Hebron in January [2002] (Al Hayat Al Jadeeda) Mr Arafat again urged the crowd on to ‘Jihad.’”[7]

Calls for jihad are not a recent move for Arafat. Here is the Evening Standard (London) reporting on Yasser Arafat in 1994, only one year after the Oslo ‘ Peace’ Process got under way (emphases below are mine):[8]

“A tape-recording has surfaced of PLO leader Yasser Arafat speaking to Moslem followers in a Johannesburg mosque… Mr Arafat was exhorting his followers to prosecute a ‘jihad … to liberate Jerusalem’. Mr Arafat does not deny the tape’s authenticity, but now says he meant ‘jihad’ in a metaphorical sense. A verbal jihad. A jihad of ideas. Nothing to do with violence. Mr Arafat’s effrontery adds insult to injury. In 1980, King Fahd of Saudi Arabia gave a clear definition: ‘What is meant by jihad is a united, comprehensive, integrated Arab-Islamic confrontation in which we place all our resources and our spiritual, cultural, political, material and military potential in a long and untiring ‘ Holy War’ against Israel, of course, who else?’ So even if Mr Arafat really did mean ‘jihad’ in this novel, non-violent sense, his legions of followers would not have picked up the sophisticated nuance. They would have taken it to mean that the peace process was just a stratagem: a Trojan Horse which should now be exploited with maximum violence. At best, Mr Arafat was irresponsible. At worst, deeply dishonest.”

Arafat, too, seems to have thought of the Oslo ‘Peace’ Process, from the start, as a “Trojan Horse.” This is in keeping not only with what his own officials say, but also with the whole pattern of Oslo (that is, Norwegian) diplomacy on behalf of NATO powers around the world, which always has the intent of cleaning up the image and legitimizing politically all sorts of terrorists and fascists.[9]

And notice how in tune the ruler of Saudia Arabia was with the goals of jihad against Israel. Small wonder, given that Saudi Arabia is the main sponsor of Palestinian terrorism, a policy that gets enthusiastic support from the Muslim clerics at Saudi Arabian mosques.

For example, the Associated Press reported in October 2000 that “a Saudi cleric at one of Riyadh’s largest mosques called for jihad holy war against Israel and its supporters, spelling out American embassies, companies and individuals as legitimate targets.”[10] This is the tip of the iceberg.

For good measure, consider the March 2001 statements of the Communications Minister of the Palestinian Authority (again, made to an Arab audience, in Arabic):[11]

“A Palestinian Cabinet minister… Communications Minister Imad Falouji said during a PLO rally that it is a mistake to think that the intifada, or uprising, in which more than 400 people have been killed, was sparked by Israeli Prime Minister-elect Ariel Sharon’s controversial visit to Al-Aqsa mosque compound in late September.

“‘It had been planned since Chairman Arafat’s return from Camp David, when he turned the tables in the face of the former U.S. president (Bill Clinton) and rejected the American conditions,’ Falouji said.

“…Israel long has contended the intifada was planned.

“…Falouji, in Lebanon for an Arab telecommunications conference, was addressing a Palestine Liberation Organization rally at the Ein el-Hilweh refugee camp on the southern edge of this port city, 45 kilometers (28 miles), south of Beirut. He also said the PLO is reviving its ‘military action’ groups to escalate the fighting against Israel.

“‘The PLO is going back to the 60s, 70s and 80s. The Fatah Hawks, the Kassam Brigades, the Red Eagle and all the military action groups are returning to work,’ he told a cheering crowd of nearly 2,500 people, including local Palestinian faction leaders.

“The PLO organized the rally to show support for the uprising.”

When speaking to fellow Arabs, this cabinet minister of the Palestinian Authority proudly denied - at a PLO-sponsored event - that the al-Aqsa Intifada was a spontaneous outburst and explained that it had all been planned. (This is perfectly consistent with Faisal Husseini’s statements to the effect that “the
[Second] Intifada itself is the coming down out of the [Trojan] horse”, which is the Oslo agreement.)[11a] We also learn that the PLO was activating its various military wings.

Thus, it hardly seems as if Palestinian ‘extremists’ dragged the ‘moderate’ PLO into anything. Indeed, given that “Falouji [is] a former Islamic resistance movement Hamas leader,”[12] and that even before the al-Aqsa Intifada - when he was already a Palestinian Authority minister - Falouji “called for the kidnaping of Israelis who could then be exchanged in return for the release of Palestinian prisoners from Israeli jails,”[13] it really is hard to see what distinctions one would make between the various Palestinian organizations. They are cut from the same cloth and appear highly coordinated.

And there is quite a proliferation of organizations and sub-organizations. Apart from the Al-Aqsa Brigades, Fatah has also produced the Tanzim, and the Tanzim played a central role in getting the al-Aqsa Intifada going (emphases below are mine):[14]

“The Tanzim is the armed wing of the Fatah, …[it] serves as an informal, unofficial ‘Palestinian army’ which can engage Israeli security forces and Jewish civilians without officially breaking signed agreements with Israel.[14a]

“Tanzim militants have played a significant military role in demonstrations and clashes with Israeli security forces. The organization has been at the forefront of the violent demonstrations which erupted in October 2000, when peace talks with Israel over a final settlement reached a dead end.

“The Tanzim have played a leading role in the activities of the ‘al-Aqsa Intifada,’ including carrying out ambushes of civilian vehicles and bombings of buses in Israeli cities.” (From the International Policy Institute for Counter-Terrorism)

The Tanzim is “the Fatah militia who take their orders only from Arafat himself.”[14a] And the Tanzim played a leading role in getting the al-Aqsa Intifada started, including attacks on Israeli civilians. So then, it is perfectly clear that when PA Communications Minister Falouji tells his Arab audience that the Second Intifada was planned in advance, he is just saying what we would all know if the Western media did its job.

Indeed, one might well ask, why does the mainstream press so thoroughly not do its job? Consider this, from Newsday:[15] “The al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades was born less than two years ago, when the current intifada, or Palestinian uprising, was already under way. One night in October, seven friends from Yasser Arafat’s Fatah faction met in a Balata alleyway. Frustrated that Fatah had no organized militia, they decided to build one.” [My emphasis.]

“No organized militia”?! Who is supposed to believe that?

Probably those who don’t know that the Tanzim, Fatah’s “informal, unofficial ‘Palestinian army’,” and “who take their orders only from Arafat himself,” helped start the Al-Aqsa Intifada in the first place. The al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigade was just the latest addition to Fatah’s collection of terrorist militias. Newsday is talking nonsense and pulling wool over our eyes. (This is nothing new, given that it was Newsday who fabricated the story that the Bosnian Serbs were running death camps….)[16]

Given that the Tanzim, the armed wing of Arafat’s Fatah, like the Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades, also part of Fatah, carries out terrorist attacks against civilians, it is clear that Arafat does not preside over a conventional nationalist organization. But mainstream media newspapers like the Baltimore Sun (or the New York Times, The Washington Post, etc., etc…) spin a different interpretation by calling upon nameless yet “Prominent Palestinian analysts [who] insist that Palestinian leaders and the vast majority of their people still want a ‘ two-state solution.’”[17] [My emphases] The Baltimore Sun then bemoans the stubborn Israeli perception that “Palestinians… wish to bring an end to the state of Israel,” concluding that “the Israeli perception… casts a shadow over the continuing guerrilla war, now hovering between a doomed cease-fire and possibly greater violence.”[18] Thus, for the Sun, the problem is self-evidently one of Israeli misperceptions.

And I can see their point.

Why should Israelis conclude that Palestinian leaders wish to destroy the state of Israel just because Palestinian leaders - and the founding charters of all their dominant organizations - say they wish to destroy the State of Israel? (See Part I of this article.)

Why should Israelis worry about having, south and east of their diminutive 85-mile wide country, a state led by organizations descended from violent anti-Semites, who helped Hitler conduct his campaign to exterminate every last living Jew (only begging him to please, try harder)? (See Part II of this article.)

And why should Israelis be nervous about negotiating ‘roadmaps’ with Palestinian leaders who told Arab audiences that the Oslo ‘Peace’ Process was just a ” Trojan Horse” to destroy Israel in stages?

Go figure. ——————————————————– Francisco J. Gil-White is Assistant Professor of Psychology at the University of Pennsylvania and a Fellow at the Solomon Asch Center for Study of Ethnopolitical Conflict (SACSEC), at the University of Pennsylvania. He is an anthropologist and psychologist specializing in ethnicity and the psychology of ethnic conflict. He is Deputy Editor of Emperor’s Clothes, and Editor of Emperor’s Clothes Spanish Section. His email address is: fjgil@psych.upenn.edu.

Footnotes:
[1] Jewish Virtual Library;http://www.us-israel.org/jsource/Peace/recogn.html
[2] Palestinian Media Watch has compiled a list of statements by high officials in the PLO and the PA, speaking to Arab audiences in Arabic, where they make clear that their goal has always been, and remains today, destroying Israel utterly. You may read this at: http://www.pmw.org.il/bulletins-280802.html
[3] The Baltimore Sun, July 11, 2001 Wednesday, FINAL EDITION, Pg. 1A, 1574 words, “Israelis taking darker view of Palestinian intentions; Many see existence of Jewish state at risk”, Mark Matthews
[4] To read the key excerpts of Faisal Husseini’s Al-Arabi, 24 June, 2001 interview, translated into English, visit this link: http://www.israeleconomy.org/nbn/nbn379.htm
[5] John Wallach is the author of a biography of Yasser Arafat.(http://www.usip.org/oc/newsroom/pr20020712.html) This man wrote a Washington Post editorial dedicated to lionizing Faisal Husseini as a moderate. Without a hint of irony, he explained that “What angers the Israelis is that [Faisal] Husseini’s well-endowed Arab Studies Society published literature that glorified [my emphasis] some of Israel’s most brutal enemies, including Nazi sympathizers, and circulated ‘historical’ maps that show no place for Israel in the Middle East.”
[The Washington Post, January 31, 1989, Tuesday, Final Edition, EDITORIAL; PAGE A17, 778 words, “A Palestinian Israel Needs”, Janet Wallach, John Wallach, OPINION EDITORIAL]

I suppose Wallach thinks that the Israelis are overly sensitive?

And where do Faisal Husseini’s Nazi sympathies come from? Just possibly, they could have something to do with the fact that he was the great nephew of the Grand Mufti Haj Amin al-Husseini, an enthusiastic Nazi (see Part II of this article): “[Faisal] Husseini was born in Baghdad, the son of a military hero, Abdel Khader Husseini. He was also the great-nephew of the Grand Mufti, and head of the Supreme Muslim Council, Hajj Amin Husseini.” — The Guardian (London), June 1, 2001, Guardian Leader Pages, Pg. 26, 1317 words, Obituary: “Faisal Husseini: Palestinian politician renowned for his commitment to human rights who played a key role in the quest for peace with Israel”, Lawrence Joffe.

And, for good measure, there is the elementary observation that Faisal Husseini’s deathbed statements (he gave the interview mentioned in the main text shortly before expiring) basically repeat the PLO’s millenarian founding charter. Husseini was saying that the Oslo ‘peace’ process had been invented to make Westerners believe in the PLO’s conversion to moderation, duping all sorts of people into supporting terrorists.

Now that we have put Faisal Husseini’s statements in the context of who he really was, do they appear surprising? No. And they are even less surprising if we have a proper understanding of how the Norwegian diplomacy, which Husseini correctly characterized as a “Trojan Horse”, really works, for Norwegian diplomats are in the business of cleaning up the image of terrorist organizations like the PLO. To read about that, visit this link: http://www.psych.upenn.edu/~fjgil/OsloWarb.htm
[6] Palestinian Media Watch has a rather long compilation of statements made by important Palestinian officials to Arab audiences, all of them explicitly stating that the only objective is and has always been the destruction of Israel - negotiations are just a charade. Read their compilation here: http://www.pmw.org.il/bulletins-280802.html
[7] Courier Mail, April 9, 2002, Tuesday, WORLD; Pg. 9, 605 words, “Arafat accused of fueling hatred and inspiring martyrdom”, Yehonathan Tommer
[8] Evening Standard (London) May 19, 1994; SECTION: Pg. 9; LENGTH: 907 words; HEADLINE: “A NEW KIND OF JIHAD”
[9] For an analysis of what Norwegian diplomacy is really for, see: http://www.psych.upenn.edu/~fjgil/OsloWarb.htm
[10] Associated Press Online, October 9, 2000; Monday, International news, 1866 words, “Palestinians Blaming U.S. for Woes”, LAURA KING, RAMALLAH, West Bank
[11] Associated Press Worldstream, March 2, 2001; Friday, International news, 363 words, “Palestinian Cabinet minister says Palestinian uprising was planned “, SIDON, Lebanon
[11a] To read the key excerpts of Faisal Husseini’s Al-Arabi, 24 June, 2001 interview, translated into English, visit this link: http://www.israeleconomy.org/nbn/nbn379.htm
[12] Deutsche Presse-Agentur, May 15, 2000, Monday, International News, 105 words, “Palestinian minister urges kidnaping of Israelis for prisoner swap”, Gaza City
[13] Deutsche Presse-Agentur, May 15, 2000, Monday, International News, 105 words, “Palestinian minister urges kidnaping of Israelis for prisoner swap”, Gaza City
[14] International Policy Institute for Counter-Terrorism; http://www.ict.org.il/inter_ter/orgdet.cfm?orgid=82
[14a] Here is an example of how Arafat uses the Tanzim to continue violence against Israeli civilians even as he signs “cease-fire” agreements. The excerpt is from: United Press International, October 3, 2000, Tuesday, GENERAL NEWS, 1234 words, “Global Impact News Alert”, By ROLAND FLAMINI:

“ISRAEL - Despite a cease fire agreement reached late Monday night, more street fighting broke out Tuesday between Israeli troops and Palestinian demonstrators, and some analysts were blaming Yasser Arafat for the renewed fighting.

“The main flashpoints were in the West Bank town of Nablus, around Joseph’s tomb, and at the Netsarim cross-roads, scene of some of the worst clashes since the long period of recent calm was shattered at the week-end.

“Israel had withdrawn its troops from the streets in the West Bank Monday following a cease fire agreement worked out between the Israeli Defense Force West Bank commander and his Palestinian counterpart. Palestinian television claimed victory, saying the Israeli forces had ‘retreated.’ But Tuesday morning, the fighting flared up again with a fresh degree of intensity. By mid-day another Palestinian has been shot dead in Netsarim, and a second died of wounds received Friday.

“Seasoned analysts - both Western and Israeli — said Yasser Arafat was responsible for the failure of the cease fire. They said the fighting had been orchestrated by the Tanzim, the Fatah militia who take their orders only from Arafat himself. Until the Palestine Liberation Organization chairman personally ordered the Tanzim fighters to stop, the cease fire would have no meaning, and the bloodletting would continue.

“According to this view the fighting will go on Wednesday when Arafat was expected to meet Prime Minister Ehud Barak and Secretary of State Madeleine Albright in Paris to discuss the crisis. The Palestinian leader would use the fighting to maintain pressure on Israel. ‘Arafat will say what he’s been telling Barak since Friday - I want to calm the situation, but my people are angry and frustrated, and I can’t control them,’ an informed Israeli source in Jerusalem said. ‘But in fact, he’s using the situation in the hope of getting what he wants.’”

[15] Newsday (New York, NY), September 8, 2002 Sunday, NASSAU AND SUFFOLK EDITION, Pg. A05, 1333 words, WEST BANK; “Inside the Crucible; An occasional series on the Israel-Palestine conflict; Militia Goes More Quietly; Al-Aqsa changes tactics after losses”, By Matthew McAllester. MIDDLE EAST CORRESPONDENT
[16] The allegation that the Bosnian Serbs were running death camps is false. (The media attack on the Serbs has many similarities to the media attack on the Jews.) The Emperor’s Clothes film “Judgment!” contains footage that shows how the photos which were used to accuse the Bosnian Serbs of running death camps were faked. (http://emperors-clothes.com/milo/freezer1.htm#film)

But not only did the media lie about the Bosnian Serbs, they lied about their enemies: the Bosnian Muslim followers of Alija Izetbegovic. It is child’s play to show that these latter are Serbophobic and anti-Semitic monsters, but they were portrayed as ‘democratic moderates’. For documentation on this, see: “Painting Fascists as Victims, and Their Victims as Fascists: The mainstream media turned Bosnia upside down,” by Francisco Gil-White. (http://emperors-clothes.com/gilwhite/alija2.htm)
[17] The Baltimore Sun, July 11, 2001 Wednesday, FINAL EDITION, Pg. 1A, 1574 words, “Israelis taking darker view of Palestinian intentions; Many see existence of Jewish state at risk”, Mark Matthews
[18] The Baltimore Sun, July 11, 2001 Wednesday, FINAL EDITION, Pg. 1A, 1574 words, “Israelis taking darker view of Palestinian intentions; Many see existence of Jewish state at risk”, Mark Matthews

This entry was posted on Thursday, September 4th, 2003 and is filed under opinion.