Most Read
Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

Al-Jazeera’s AJ+ echoes Rep. Rashida Tlaib’s portrayal of Palestinians as ultimate victims of the Holocaust

Al-Jazeera’s AJ+ echoes Rep. Rashida Tlaib’s portrayal of Palestinians as ultimate victims of the Holocaust

Holocaust inversion and revisionism are common in anti-Israel circles, but while Al Jazeera took down the AJ+ video, Democrats continue to defend Tlaib.

https://www.memri.org/tv/al-jazeera-holocaust-denial-israel-biggest-winner-same-justification-annihilate-palestinians

The recent controversy regarding Rep. Rashida Tlaib focused on her use of the term “calming feeling” regarding the Holocaust. That was an error by those focusing on the term, and a deliberate distraction by those defending the term. The reality of Tlaib’s statement was much worse, because it used Holocaust inversion and revisionism to portray Palestinians as the victims of the Holocaust.

I wrote about Tlaib’s Holocaust inversion and revisionism:

Putting aside the “calming feeling” wording, the Tlaib statement contains two themes: First, the Palestinians are the true victims of the Holocaust because it forced the Jewish survivors on them causing loss of land, property and lives; and Two, Palestinians helped create a safe haven for the Jews at much personal and national sacrifice.

The first point, portraying Palestinians as the true victims of the Holocaust, is a historically perverse and malicious claim. Six millions Jews died, Jewish communities throughout Europe were wiped out, yet it is the Palestinians — who backed the Nazi effort — who are portrayed as the victims. It is fair to consider this an offshoot of Holocaust Inversion, the attempt to portray the Jewish victims of the Nazis as the Nazis. It’s also a historical theft, an attempt to deprive Jews of their history and to repurpose that history to attack Jews.

The second point, that Palestinians supposedly helped provide safe haven to Jews during and after the Holocaust, is a historical falsehood of immense magnitude. We explored this falsehood in our prior post, pointing out that the Arabs of the British Mandate (who did not refer to themselves at that time as Palestinians, a more recent term), boycotted, slaughtered, and discriminated against Jews throughout the time period, and did everything they could to prevent Jews from finding a safe haven. The Grand Mufti was a strong supporter of Hitler and the extermination of the Jews.

The theme of Palestinians as the real victims of the Holocaust is common, as witnessed by another controversy regarding a video by AJ+.

AJ+ Uses Social Justice Themes to Hide Its Anti-Israel Agenda

AJ+ (AJ Plus) is the viral video wing of Qatar-owned Al Jazeera. AJ+ is a social justice fraud, it pushes social justice themes to millenials to draw in viewers by the millions. This is all a ruse for the real purpose, which is to push anti-Israel and sometimes anti-Semitic propaganda to millenials.

Many times on Twitter we have tweeted something along the lines of “This is your periodic reminder that @AJPlus is the viral video wing of the anti-Israel movement.

Do not underestimate the impact of AJ+ — it’s videos help shape the anti-Israel narrative among millenials.

AJ+ Arabic Video Portrays Palestinians as Ultimate Victims of the Holocaust

As deceptive and manipulative as AJ+ is in English, it’s Arabic language videos can be even worse. They present the social justice face to in English, but that’s not what they say in Arabic, as a recent Holocaust video in Arabic shows.

The video presents a view of the Holocaust remarkably similar to that of Tlaib — while acknowledging the horrors of the Holocaust for Jews, the Palestinians are portrayed as the true victims. The key line is “So how can a Palestinian denounce a crime [the Holocaust] that has become the flip side of his own tragedy?”

MEMRI reports (emphasis added):

AJ+ Arabic, an online media platform run by the Qatari Al-Jazeera Network, posted a video on May 18, 2019 about “the story of the Holocaust” on Twitter and Facebook. The video was titled: “The Gas Chambers Killed Millions of Jews – That’s How the Story Goes. What Is the Truth behind the Holocaust and How Did the Zionist Movement Benefit from It?” The video is narrated by Muna Hawwa, a Kuwaiti-born Palestinian who lives in Qatar and works as a producer for the Al-Jazeera Network. In the video, Hawwa claimed that the number of Jewish Holocaust victims remains “one of the most prominent historical debates to this day,” and she said that some people believe that Hitler supported Zionist ideology. She claimed that the “much-regurgitated narrative of the Holocaust sorrows” paved the way for Jewish immigration to Palestine, and although she stressed that “denouncing the Holocaust is a moral obligation,” Hawwa added that Israel is the biggest “winner” from the Holocaust and that it uses the “same justification” as a “launching pad for the racial cleansing and annihilation of the Palestinians.” Hawwa said that the ideology behind the State of Israel “suckled from the Nazi spirit,” and concluded: “So how can a Palestinian denounce a crime that has become the flip side of his own tragedy?” Shortly after its publication, the video could no longer be accessed on Facebook.

Here is the partial transcript via MEMRI:

Muna Hawwa: The narrative that six million Jews were killed by the Nazi movement was adopted by the Zionist movement, and it is being reiterated every year on the so-called “Holocaust Memorial Day.” Let us tell you about the story of the Holocaust.

[…]

More than nine million Jews lived in Europe before World War II, most of them in the countries that would later be taken over by the Nazis. After the Holocaust, the Zionist movement claimed that 2 out of every 3 Jews were killed.

[…]

The Nazis targeted anyone they considered to be “human surplus” – either because they were “racially inferior,” or because they were not accepted politically. This means that the Jews were not the only victims of that era. The Nazis targeted the Romani, the Slavic nations, and some Arabs, as well as other groups like communists, socialists, trade unions, homosexuals, and the handicapped.

[…]

Along with others, the Jews faced a policy of systematic persecution, which culminated in the “Final Solution,” or annihilation. Their books were burned, they were fired from their jobs, their property was confiscated, and they were torn from their homes, in order to live in the secluded ghetto neighborhoods. They were forced to wear a special badge on their clothes. They were sent to detention centers, and they were worked to death in forced labor. The victims of the Nazis – who were following Hitler’s orders – exceeded 20 million people. The Jews were part of them. So why is there a focus only on them? The Jewish groups had financial resources, media institutions, research centers, and academic voices that managed to put a special spotlight on the Jewish victims of the Nazis. Nevertheless, the number of victims of the Holocaust remains one of the most prominent historical debates to this day. People are divided between those who deny the annihilation, others who think that the outcome was exaggerated, and others yet who accuse the Zionist movement of blowing it out of proportion in the service of the plan to establish what would later be known as the “State of Israel.” Let us take a pause here. How did Israel benefit from the Holocaust? In the first months following the Nazis’ rise to power, an agreement was signed between Nazi Germany and the Jewish Agency, the purpose of which was to make it easy for the Jews to immigrate to Palestine, in exchange for surrendering their property to Germany.

[…]

This agreement, along with other documents, made some people believe that Hitler supported Zionism. Former Mayor of London [Ken Livingstone] publicly declared this belief, and he was suspended from the Labour Party because of this. The persecution and the suffering – the much-regurgitated narrative of the Holocaust sorrows – paved the way for the Jewish immigration to Palestine.

[…]

[Germany] is still paying huge reparations for what happened in World War II to a state that did not even exist at the time of the annihilation. Greece, the Serbs, Yugoslavia, and the Romani people have all suffered, but the Germany reparations to those victims cannot be compared to the payments to Israel, which, in turn, devoured the reparations of all the Jewish victims of Nazism. The Holocaust never stops to be a tragic event. Several countries denounce it as a crime. Dozens of institutions sponsor large museums in various capitals in the world commemorating the tragedy of the Jews. This provoked great interest in this incident, even though similar crimes, no less heinous, are still being perpetrated against other peoples. The annihilation of any people because of their race, sex, or religion, is an unacceptable thing that deserves to be strongly denounced. Denouncing the Holocaust is a moral obligation, but Israel is the biggest winner from the Holocaust, and it uses the same Nazi justifications as a launching pad for the racial cleansing and annihilation of the Palestinians. The main ideology behind the “State of Israel” is based on religious, national, and geographic concepts that suckled from the Nazi spirit and its main notions. So how can a Palestinian denounce a crime that has become the flip side of his own tragedy?

https://www.memri.org/tv/al-jazeera-holocaust-denial-israel-biggest-winner-same-justification-annihilate-palestinians

https://www.memri.org/tv/al-jazeera-holocaust-denial-israel-biggest-winner-same-justification-annihilate-palestinians

https://www.memri.org/tv/al-jazeera-holocaust-denial-israel-biggest-winner-same-justification-annihilate-palestinians

MEMRI has the video at its website, but unfortunately it’s embed codes don’t size properly, so here is what the posted on Twitter:

Al-Jazeera Removes AJ+ Video, But Democrats Defend Tlaib

The AJ+ video was taken down by Al Jazeera, which said it didn’t meet its editorial standards.

But of course, the only reason it was taken down was that AJ+ got caught.

There are two lessons here.

First, AJ+ is a social justice fraud and propaganda outlet:

Second, Democrat defended similar comments by Rep. Rashida Tlaib, pushing Holocaust inversion and revisionism, making them worse even than the superficially-apologetic Al Jazeera.

DONATE

Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.

Comments

casualobserver | May 19, 2019 at 12:40 pm

I’m not one who believes easily in conspiracies or thinks there is some well coordinated left cabal. But these days it seems easy to see that in general, the left across the globe is on a march to alter many different aspects of history. Some are more local – like the way to remove the historical context of the first few centuries of the U.S. and its founders in order to denigrate it, and some appear more global – like the whitewashing and changing of the view of the Holocaust.

Maybe there were always conspiracies afloat that kept historical stories less than certain. Like the assassination of JFK, for example. But in the more recent cases, the entire left include media (redundant) seem to readily jump on board so it all “appears” mainstream and therefore immediately more valid.

Here is the problem that exists in with regard to the establishment of the modern Jewish State of Israel.

You have two groups of people who feel that they have a valid claim on this territory. One is the Jewish population and the other is the Muslim Arb population who inhabited the territory in 1948. From a neutral, third party standpoint, both have a valid claim to control of the territory; one based upon historical control and one on possession. And, as with a number of debates, neither side will capitulate.

Tlaib’s remarks represent the view of the Muslim Arab inhabitants of the region. And, it is not historically inaccurate. The Holocaust was one of the driving factors behind the creation of the modern State of Israel, in 1948. And, the creation of that state did, in fact, displace inhabitants of the region. Where Tlaib was unclear, and where the opposition to her point of view were in error, was with her use of the words “calming feeling” and her remark about creating a safe haven for the Jews. Opponents of her position seized upon these portions of her remarks as representing the feelings of Tlaib and Palestinians and their actions. However, it makes considerably more sense to view these remarks as being about the World/European community, at the time. It was the international community which she is saying created the State of Israel as to create a calming feeling for themselves and that Israel was crete4d as a safe haven for Jews by the international community, most notably Europe and the US, not by the people inhabiting Palestine. So, it is historically accurate to say that the Muslim Arabs in Palestine in the late 1940s also suffered because of the Holocaust and its aftermath.

Now, the existence of the modern State of Israel is what it is. It has been in existence for the last 70 years and it is highly successful, based largely upon the efforts of its citizens. It is not likely to go anywhere, in the foreseeable future. So, the Muslims in the region should just accept its existence and move on. After all, this is not the first time in history that a population has been displaced. Get over it and move on.

    casualobserver in reply to Mac45. | May 19, 2019 at 1:52 pm

    The Holocaust was THE driving force, not one. It’s fair to say that the land has a long history for the Jews, but that only impacts the choice for location, not the decisions nor the urgency to move forward.

    It’s hard to accept positions as “reasoned” or “moderate” from Tlaib or any other pro-Palestine voices, Arab or not, Muslim or not. That’s because of the overwhelming abundance of unreasonable sound from the same. Find me ANYONE in a position in the region to decide the outcome who wants ANYTHING other than complete removal of Jews in the region, whether or not marched into to the sea or removed from the Earth. Likewise, even if in context a statement appears moderate from a person, how does it compare in total with other opinions and statements?

    My viewpoint of the conflict is heavily decided by the voices and the actions of the two sides since 1948 and especially since 1967. The fact that land has been ceded only to see the tension and aggression from one side ESCALATE cannot be ignored. Moderate words are less believable when in the context of the whole.

      ” Find me ANYONE in a position in the region to decide the outcome who wants ANYTHING other than complete removal of Jews in the region, whether or not marched into to the sea or removed from the Earth.”

      To understand this, one has to understand the governments of the Muslim countries, in the region. These countries are dominated by a religion which is stuck in the 12th Century, AD. It is much the same as the domination or influence of Europe by the Roman Catholic Church during the Middle Ages and the early Renaissance. Muslim clerics, almost to a man, view the State of Israel as a foreign invasion into Muslim held territory. They indoctrinate their followers to believe this. And, the leaders of these nations have to take that into consideration if they wish to maintain control of their countries. There are some nations which are so dominated by Muslim Clerics, such as Iran, that they actively push the destruction of Israel on a population which really does not care, one way or the other. Then, of course there is pragmatic secular anti-Israel view which is based upon the view that Israel stands as an impediment to the expansion of some nations.

        casualobserver in reply to Mac45. | May 19, 2019 at 8:21 pm

        So? Offering the Arab and Islamic rationalization for removal of the Jews really doesn’t change much. Does it?

          Reality is what it is. Israeli Jews believe that they have returned to THEIR “homeland”. The Palestinians believe that they were driven from THEIR “homeland”. Both may be correct. And, of course, both were originally invaders of the territory under dispute. So, as long as both sides believe THEIR claim is just and refuse to compromise, there is only one way to settle the matter. We’ll see who wins.

          JusticeDelivered in reply to casualobserver. | May 20, 2019 at 7:51 pm

          Personally, having watched this unfold throughout my adult life, I have come to the conclusion that it is large numbers of Muslims which need to be removed from the region.

          I think that Israelis deserve to be able to live in peace, if their neighbors do not want to live in peace than an immediate peace should be their fate.

          That appears to be the only solution.

    The Holocaust was one of the driving factors behind the creation of the modern State of Israel, in 1948.

    And the Palestinians (esp. the Mufti of Jerusalem) participated in The Holocaust on the side of Hitler.

    They got their just deserts in 1948 and since.

We also need to go back to the time of the Versailles Treaty and the tacit agreement amongst both European and Middle East participants that both Arab and Jewish (Zionist) needs should have been addressed. In fact, even the interests of France’s colonial possessions including Vietnam were discussed but tabled as were all other colonial issues.

The major displacement occurred primarily from the following war that was declared on the new state of Israel. Some were forced to leave by fear and others with the promise of return to pick over the remains of the vanqushed Jews. It didn’t happen and the surrounding Arab states did much to keep the displaced as pawns.

The international community failed at Versailles , it failed in the Sudetenland, it saw failure with the partition of India and a year later it almost failed again in the Middle East. The “palestinians” are banking on the international community making another mistake.

    casualobserver in reply to alaskabob. | May 19, 2019 at 1:59 pm

    Historians that I have read that I view as credible tend to summarize it this way: To most of the pro-Palestine movements in the area and now spreading across the globe, there are 2 factors that render it a perennial and unresolvable issue. The pro-Palestine side sees it as a centuries old battle that should not be resolved in a hasty 70 year period (since the founding). And both sides see it as an issue of survival. For the Jews it is a truly existential viewpoint. For those who want the state of Palestine, it is still a matter of survival via a victory of the age old battle. They will be shamed otherwise by Allah and others, so to speak.

    And to be accurate, there isn’t any pro-Palestine party I have noticed that truly wants 2 states. There is only 1 valid state. So, our grandchildren’s grandchildren will be debating it.

Tokyo Rose

DDsModernLife | May 19, 2019 at 9:03 pm

Regarding, “the Arabs of the British Mandate (who did not refer to themselves at that time as Palestinians, a more recent term),..” Winston Churchill made the following observation in “The Grand Alliance,” Volume 3 of his six-volume history of the Second World War published in 1950:

“In all 50,662 were safely brought out including men of the Royal Air Force and several thousand Cypriots, Palestinians, Greeks, and Yugoslavs.”

He was referring to those who were fighting with the British in Greece and were evacuated after, “..the final surrender of Greece to overwhelming German might..,” in April, 1941.

I could be wrong but I’d wager Churchill’s “Palestinians” were largely Jews.

If the Palestinians didn’t want to be victims they should not have allied with Hitler.

Look up ==> Mufti of Jerusalem Haj Amin al-Husseini and his assistance to Hitler.

    JusticeDelivered in reply to MSimon. | May 20, 2019 at 7:55 pm

    It is cruel to leave palestinians in a perpetual state of victimhood, better all the way around to end it.

Font Resize
Contrast Mode
Send this to a friend