Beyond Whale oil and accusations of Holocaust denial

By   /   November 11, 2017  /   8 Comments

TDB recommends Voyager - Unlimited internet @home as fast as you can get

On 31 October 2017, the Whale Oil website posted a Newshub article featuring a photo of the First Secretary of the Iranian Embassy, Hormoz Ghahremani, below the headline: Complaints laid about Iranian hate speech diplomat. Beneath the photo can be seen a video of a meeting at which Ghahremani was the first guest speaker. A casual visitor to the website might be excused for believing that the Iranian Embassy’s First Secretary was guilty of Holocaust denial.

On 31 October 2017, the Whale Oil website posted a Newshub article featuring a photo of the First Secretary of the Iranian Embassy, Hormoz Ghahremani, below the headline: Complaints laid about Iranian hate speech diplomat. Beneath the photo can be seen a video of a meeting at which Ghahremani was the first guest speaker. A casual visitor to the website might be excused for believing that the Iranian Embassy’s First Secretary was guilty of Holocaust denial.

Another speaker at the meeting did, later, question the history of the Nazi Holocaust. However, the article quotes New Zealand historian Professor Paul Moon as saying that diplomats from Iran were “talking about Jewish conspiracies, describing Israel as a cancer that needs to be removed, denying the holocaust”. It should have been made clear that at no point in Hormoz Ghahremani’s speech was there the slightest hint of Holocaust denial. The website also reported Moon as saying that Hormoz Ghahremani, talking about terrorism in the Middle East, made “accusations that . . . somehow the Jews were responsible for terrorism.” This is completely untrue, as the video can prove.

Reference to Jews

The only reference Ghahremani made to Jews was when he said:

“We believe that the only stable solution to the crisis in Palestine is, putting an end to the Occupation, returning of all Palestinian refugees to their homeland, and allowing Palestinians to decide on their country’s future through democratic referendum by respecting the rights of the Muslims, Jews and Christians.”

In an interview with Newshub, Mr Ghahremani thanked the New Zealand Government for playing an active role in co-sponsoring UN Security Council Resolution 2334, which condemns Israel’s illegal Occupation settlement policy.

While Israel calls itself a Jewish state, many see it as a state that identifies more with its founding ideology. The signatories to Israel’s 1948 Declaration of Independence, identified themselves thus:

“. . . We members of the People’s Council, representatives of the Jewish Community of Eretz-Israel and of the Zionist movement . . .”

Zionism holds that hostility to Jews is inevitable and that Jews can only be secure through the creation of a Jewish state. So instead of fighting to put an end to all political racism, the ideology resigns itself to what it believes is the inevitability of endless hatred towards Jews. In the process of achieving its territorial ambitions, the Zionist state constantly violates the Fourth Geneva Convention. The result is an intolerable daily toll upon Palestinian life, limb, liberty and property. Not surprisingly, Israel’s claim, that its actions are on behalf of world Jewry, is received by Jews opposed to Zionism as a grievous insult. The promoters of Zionism are keen to make all opposition to their ideology appear to be anti-Semitic. Unfortunately, many non-Jews are taken in by this and tiptoe around the issue of Palestinian human rights.

Right of Return

Paul Moon’s published views are revealing. On the Balfour Declaration he notes:

“For all its brevity, Balfour’s Declaration was sufficiently nuanced in its assessment of the national status of different groups in the region to make it clear that it aimed to do what was morally right rather than politically expedient . . .”

The Zionist view that the ethnic cleansing of Palestinians is ‘morally right’ is exemplified by Israel’s Law of Return which enables immigrants from Europe and the United States, who have never had any connection with Palestine, to dispossess the Palestinian people. On the other hand, compounding this injustice, Israel refuses to respect the right of return of Palestinian refugees, which is recognised in international law. The Israel Institute of New Zealand would applaud Paul Moon’s justification of Zionist ethnic cleansing. He writes:

“It was Balfour’s intention that the Jewish people – who were indigenous to Palestine – would have a “national home”, while more recent occupiers of the territory were classed as “communities”, and thus could have religious and civil rights, but could not claim the same sovereign status in Palestine.”

To put it plainly, the ideology reduces the population of Palestine to the status of “more recent occupiers of the territory” in order to give precedence to settlers from Europe and the United States.

Fawning over British imperialism

Paul Moon tell us that “Britain had confirmed the undeniable right to Jewish sovereignty in Palestine”. His only criticism of Britain is that it failed to enforce the injustice with sufficient force and alacrity. This blind belief that Britain had the moral authority to override the native population’s right to sovereignty belongs to a darker past. Moon lectures us that “Israel has emerged triumphantly as a modern, sophisticated, egalitarian, liberal democracy, much like our own.” The truth is that Israel, unlike New Zealand, refuses even to define its borders. The Zionist state introduced nuclear weapons to the Middle East and refuses to sign the nuclear non-proliferation agreement. Israel has been forced to apologise for sending its spies to this country in an attempt to fraudulently obtain New Zealand passports. The mission failed and the spies were put on trial and imprisoned here. This unfriendly behaviour was reflected again when Israel reacted to New Zealand’s sponsoring of UNSCR 2334 by describing it as a “declaration of war”.

Paul Moon asserts that Israel is a democracy ‘much like’ New Zealand but New Zealand strives to conduct its affairs in accordance with international law, whereas Israel has a history that demonstrates quite the opposite.

In 1980, the UN Security Council unanimously adopted Resolution 476, which reaffirmed an earlier UN call for Israel to end its 1967 occupation of Palestinian land. The Resolution confirmed that none of the legislative and administrative measures taken by Israel has legal validity and that they all constitute flagrant violations of the Fourth Geneva Convention. The 9 July 2004 International Court of Justice ruling on the illegality of Israel’s Wall in East Jerusalem and other areas of the West Bank confirmed this.

Holocaust denial

Holocaust denial is often inspired by racism but ignorance also plays a part. The scourge of Nazism was the most horrific state-sponsored tragedy in modern history. Evidence for that is overwhelming; a re-broadcast TV series, World at War (available on DVD), with voice-over by Sir Laurence Olivier, was a recent grim reminder, viewable in New Zealand. While Nazism targeted many races and minorities, Jews were its main obsession. To this day, most people do not despise Germans for the Holocaust, realising that people can so easily be brainwashed, even for long periods, by ideological propaganda. All the more credit then to the wonderful heroism of those Germans who resisted Nazism and risked their own lives and those of their families to shelter Jews from the Nazis.

Resisting ideology

A group calling itself Righteous Jews (http://righteousjews.org/) that established itself in 2003 felt that it was a way for its members

“to commemorate the memory of those Palestinians who have been, and continue to be depopulated, dispossessed, humiliated, tortured, and murdered in the name of political Zionism and its quest to create a Jewish state in the lands between the Mediterranean and the Jordan River.”

Righteous Jews tells us that its founding was inspired by the website of the Holocaust Museum at Yad Vashem, located on Mount Herzl on the land of the Palestinian village of Ein Karem, 1400 metres south of the ethnically-cleansed Palestinian village of Deir Yassin. Yad Vashem lists the names of non-Jews who risked their lives, freedom and safety in order to rescue one or several Jews from the threat of death or deportation to death camps. For many years, this list was referred to as the list of ‘Righteous Gentiles’ and is now called ‘Righteous Among the Nations’. According to Righteous Jews:

“Deir Yassin is as important a part of Jewish, as it is of Palestinian, history. Deir Yassin, coming in April 1948, just three years after the liberation of Auschwitz in January 1945, marks a Jewish transition from enslavement to empowerment and from abused to abuser. Can there ever have been such a remarkable shift, over such a short period, in the history of a people?

“Deir Yassin signalled the ethnic cleansing of 750,000 Palestinians, leading to their eventual dispossession and exile and was just one example of a conscious and premeditated plan to destroy the Palestinians as a people in their own homeland.

“ . . . since the establishment of the state of Israel, successive Israeli governments, whether Labour or Likud, and whether by force as at Deir Yassin, or by chicanery as at Oslo and Camp David, have followed the same policy of oppressing and dispossessing Palestinians to make way for an exclusively Jewish state. Even now, when Israel could have peace and security for the asking, Israeli governments persist in their original intention of conquering the whole of Palestine for the use of the Jewish people alone. And all this was done, and is still being done, by Jews, for Jews and in the name of Jews.”

The group lists, among the many people it calls ‘Our Initial List of Righteous Jews’, Albert Einstein, Amira Hass, Anna Baltzer, Antony Loewenstein, Gideon Levy, the late Hedy Epstein, Ilan Pappe, Jeff Halper, Jennifer Lowenstein, Lenni Brenner, Miko Peled, Norman Finkelstein, Richard Falk, Tanya Reinhart and the late Yehudi Menuhin. All have worked to expose the evils of the practise and ideology of political Zionism.

Elizabeth Morley (several of whose relatives died in the Holocaust) of the Palestine Solidarity Campaign in Aberystwyth, Wales, wrote the following to a pro-Zionist UK MP:

“Is it not ironic that millions of Jews from all around the world are invited to claim Israeli citizenship, even if they end up, not in Israel, but in an illegal settlement on Palestinian land? With my Jewish heritage I too could claim Israeli citizenship. How ridiculous is that!

“Although I have a good life here in the UK I could go over there and make use of the privileges that are denied to the Palestinians whose land I would be occupying. I might even be given the house and possessions of a Palestinian family freshly displaced from East Jerusalem. And all the time the Palestinian refugees, turfed out to make room for me and millions like me, are mouldering in refugee camps.”

Speak truth to power

It is right and necessary that Holocaust denial, along with all forms of misleading, racist propaganda, be challenged, preferably through the presentation of the verifiable evidence to the contrary that is so easily accessible. But when the Zionist Lobby makes use of the Holocaust to divert attention away from Israel’s violations of international law, that also must be challenged. Unrestrained political Zionism threatens the very survival of the tragically hard-won Fourth Geneva Convention and undermines the principle of respect for international humanitarian law. For too long, our political leaders and spokespersons have avoided calling Israel to account. Surrendering reason to ideology brings nothing but tragedy. New Zealand’s sponsorship of UNSCR 2334 should signal a determined change of heart and direction – and greater hope for humanity.

***
Want to support this work? Donate today
***
Follow us on Twitter & Facebook
***

About the author

Leslie Bravery

Leslie Bravery is a Londoner with vivid World War Two memories of the Nazi blitz on his home town. In 1947/1948 His father explained to him what was happening to the Palestinians thus: “Any ideology or political movement that creates refugees in the process of realising its ambitions must be inhuman and should be opposed and condemned as unacceptable.” What followed confirmed this assessment of the Zionist entity a hundredfold. Now a retired flamenco guitarist, with a lifelong interest in the tragedy of what happened to the Palestinian people, he tries to publicise their plight. Because the daily injustices they suffer barely get a mention in the mainstream news media, Leslie edits/compiles a daily newsletter, In Occupied Palestine, for the Palestine Human Rights Campaign. These days, to preserve his sanity, he enjoys taking part in a drama group whenever possible!

8 Comments

  1. Pat O'Dea says:

    As a white New Zealandeer, if I converted to Judaism, I could claim the “Right of Return” and settle in Israel. A right of return that is denied to evicted Palestinians “moldering” in refugee camps. (Even if they convert to Judaism.)

    This race based disparity, is one of the many proofs that expose the vicious apartheid nature of the Zionist state of Israel.

    The Right Of Return

    The law since 1970 applies to those born Jews (having a Jewish mother or maternal grandmother), those with Jewish ancestry (having a Jewish father or grandfather) and converts to Judaism (Orthodox, Reform, or Conservative denominations—not secular—though Reform and Conservative conversions must take place outside the state, similar to civil marriages).

    In the Law of Return, the State of Israel put into practice the Zionist movement’s “credo” which called for the establishment of Israel as a Jewish state.

    Those who immigrate to Israel under the Law of Return are immediately entitled to gain citizenship in Israel. However, differences of opinion have arisen as to whether a person who claims citizenship under the Law of Return should be automatically registered as “Jewish” for census purposes. According to the halakhic definition, a person is Jewish if his or her mother is Jewish, or if he or she converts to Judaism. Orthodox Jews do not recognize conversions performed by Reform or Conservative Judaism. However, the Law provides that any Jew regardless of affiliation may migrate to Israel and claim citizenship.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_Return

    The Palestinians evicted from their homes and lands are denied any right of Return. This is one of the main divisions between the Palestinian political parties. The PLO for instance has given up on demanding the right of return for Palestinian refugees, while Hamas sees this as a betrayal of these same refugees.

    If the Palestinian refugees were granted the right of return, it would destroy Israel as a Jewish State. The argument then goes, that by seeking the right of return for Palestinian refugees, “Hamas are seeking the destruction of Israel”, (as a Jewish State), which is conflated into Hamas being “anti-Semitic” and a “Terrorist organisation”.

    • Sam Sam says:

      Well first off all Palstinias are in an almost impossible position, land locked on a small hinterland. Now they have to make a living around a newly formed set of rulz that are determined to cut off there trade. Palestinians either make themselves unusual or perish. Deciding how to differentiate themselves means setting out to create a first world oasis in an open air-prison. So they have create a base for all learning development. To do that Palestinians must have good infrastructure which isn’t difficult to do. What is more difficult is to have people behave like a first world people, not a population of prisoners.

      When you move people from a technologically scarce society with barley a hole in the ground to go to the toilet to a first world way of loving with flushing toilets it takes some time not to get them to bring there chippings and dust out with them. But they must succeed in progressing education, entertainment, leadership. The kids need to behave in a first world way. By stop behaving in a hap hazard way. Or they will perish. The children must give us tremendous motivation to try and deliver on the prospects of a 2 state solution.

      The most difficult thing to do is to carry out industrialisation of services needed to carry out in an open air prison. Because once you pollute the land then you destroy it, and destroy the living conditions. And when you destroy the living conditions then it’s not worth having this place. So every project that Palestinians put up the first concern must be anti-pollution. And the economics of it is a huge price to pay, there is an enormous row. They tried to bargain with Israel. But Israel does not have the stomach to recognise the position the Palestinians are in was once held by Jews during WW2.

      Now we have a kiwi trying to convince every one of the merits of continuing the disastrous policies that our Grandfathers fought to stop. So carful attention to the environment at the same time looking to industry, growth and population challenges looking for away out is how Palestinians will achieve there potential.

  2. Pat O'Dea says:

    When injustice becomes law, resistance becomes duty.

    For the Palestinian national leadership, this is the crux of the conflict. The return of the refugees is the heart of their historical narrative, namely, that Israel was established by robbing the Palestinian inhabitants of their land and homes. Peace and justice can only prevail in this with the return of Palestinian refugees from their diaspora. For Israel, this amounts to national suicide.

    An influx of approximately 5 million Palestinian refugees — those who left and their descendants — into sovereign Israel would put an end to Israel as the national homeland of the Jewish people. Therefore, all Israeli governments have rejected the right of return and treated this demand as an existential danger.

    https://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/originals/2016/06/israel-west-bank-area-c-solve-palestinian-right-of-return.html

  3. Historian Pete says:

    As we speak the unholy alliance between the three main state sponsors of Terrorism in the Middle East, namely the U.S.Empire ,Israel and Saudi Arabia ,are gathering their forces to attack Shia moslem countries. In their sights are Lebanon, home to Shia Hezbollah, and Shia Iran.The U.S.Empire, who has 50% of its GDP directed to war and the manufacture of war munitions and sales, and for whom war and chaos is its only growth industry [apart from domestic gun sales] is determined to correct the unwillingness of Iran to accept U.S. hegemony.

    Saudi Arabia ,who has effectively created Al Qaeda and Isis through its sponsoring of the Jihadi centered Wahabbism sect of Sunni Islam.The Saudis wish Sunni Islam to be pre-eminent over Shia Islam,who they regard as heretics.Shades of the Catholic -Protestant wars of medieval Europe.Their war of extermination against the Shia Yemeni population is going well, thanks to hundreds of billions of dollars of war munition sales with the U.K. and the U.S.

    And Israel, who wants to extend its boundaries further into neighbouring countries, not content with the land stolen from the Palestinians with ethnic cleansing.They already occupy the Golan heights in Syria in breach of international law.They have already illegally invaded Lebanon in the 1980’s, but were driven out and defeated by Hezbollah.And just to make it all more interesting, the main backers of Hamas are Hezbollah and Iran!
    Of course our MSM will paint this struggle in its usual way in a total disregard for the facts.And we will have an increased output from our local Zionist lobby trying to play their holocaust and anti-semitism cards !

  4. Oded Yinon plan says:

    What legacy have the Zionists created for Judaism with this fiat empire? It’s actually relatively easy, despite the new waves of the censorship war, to find plenty of academics, most of them like David Irving are leaders in their fields.
    In the trial of Ernst Zundel, Douglas Christie, Zundel’s lawyer, asked Raul Hilberg, a Professor of the University of Vermont, “Why there was no scientific evidence to support the death camp claims in all of Nazi occupied territory?”
    Hilberg replied, “I am at a loss.”

    The only claims of gas chambers are based in Poland and Russian captured territories, and are at BEST “recreations” at worst outright hoax. The simple fact is these sites were inspected by American gas chamber expert Dr Leuchter, who declared them “incapable” of performing executions.
    The gas proposed, psychlon B was used by all nation’s in controlling otherwise uncontrollable lice; a problem for all internment camps for spreading fatal diseases like TB, as the allies can well attest.
    This gas stains walls of chambers a distinctive dye blue, something you would not find at Auschwitz, nor a justifiable exercise if one were to suppose these were people meant only to die. In fact the Auschwitz director himself has acknowledged there was no homicidal gas chamber at auschwitz at all. A simple comparison of photos before and after the war can confirm this. Where the “reconstruction” sits now is in fact right in front of the sports field and between the brothel and the swimming pool, complete with diving board. I guess the story is after a spot of footy with the guards ( it actually happened ) inmates would trudge past the chambers and crematorium supposedly cremating 20,000 bodies a day. The amount of coke and the facilities to provide it just do not exist. Nor do the mass graves. It’s also worth noting these camps were a Zionist initiative, on the basis that jews were processed in these camps as per the Havaara agreement, before being shipped to Palestine. This agreement was commemorated as early as 1933 on coins struck with a swastika emblazoned over the star of Moloch ( as seen on the Rothschild family shield and the flag israel ). Zionism was the only political entity the National Socialists ever recognised.

    Beyond that we have the claims proven false of so called “eye witnesses” and of surging 7 (!) Gassings; the skin lamp shades, and soap myths, thoroughly debunked and yet rarely mentioned. How many have we seen come forward admitting their holocaust story was a lie? I’ve even seen Jewish people admitting their parents not only lied about the holocaust but knew it was a lie! The reasoning is not so alien if one has not lost all sense of objectivity. After all, the nation’s spilt a great deal of blood so israel could be populated, and it’s position in the heart of the greatest trade nexus on the planet, how can they sit at the same table when it came time to divide up the booty. And of course not one of these holocaust groupies know about Eisenhowers death camps, where up to ten million German civilians were literally kept in open fields to starve to death, all under the watchful eye of American soldiers. Even general Patton declared that we “have defeated the wrong enemy.” Did you know holocaust is a Gnostic Jewish term? It literally means “burnt offering”. If one has done sufficient research into Moloch worship you will understand the connection.

    Study of the Sabbatean and Frankist movements, and especially the work of Rabbi Antlemann will reveal the sickening reality that Hitler was likely a crypto, a Zionist operating to export European Jews to the newly created (1917) Israel. Germany built their rail and electrical grid, and when after no more than 80,000 Jews volunteered for the Havaara transaction carrot, Zionists used anti semitism as a stick.

    Of course at this point most “sane, rational,” and thoroughly indoctrinated folk will completely lose the plot and pull out the denigration and vitriolic contrivances. But even a cursory glance will reveal that America would not allow Jewish immigrants at that time. That Hitler was primarily funded by Wallstreet, the Warburgs and the Oppenheimers, and let’s not overlook the Rockerfellers who kept the Germans in synthetic aviation gas, and the Bush and DuPont families, who all did as well out of world war two as Lucky Larry and Micheal Chertoff, Cheney, Clinton and the Bush family again with the War of terror.
    It’s fitting to close with the fact that the OFFICIAL count at Auschwitz was downgraded a full 2.5 million after Russian (Jewish Communist) records were released with the fall of the USSR. Which puts the count at 3.5 million, despite the countless examples of the magical 6 million appearing in articles as far back as 1905, and Theodore Hertlz’s successors own comments about the coming holocaust in 1890. Nor the Zionist dry run that was the Christian Armenian genocide, nor the Jewish Bolshevik killing of up to 60 million Christians in Russia. Of course if all this was so easily proven why is it that it is illegal to even debate the holocaust narrative is illegal throughout Europe, Canada, and Australia, with no country allowed to join the EU without having these laws and a shoah memorial. Should I mention the government’s $57 million lawsuit in Germany over fraudulent claims to the holocaust reparations fund?

    When one considers all of this, then looks to the fact that over five million Palestinians have been butchered by their white non semantic invaders, and when we know israelis were caught with truck bombs on 911, and have since furthered the greater israel plan at the expense of seven innocent countries that had nothing to do with terrorism, and over five million more lives. One can then understand the recurring theme from Russia, to Britain, to America and now Israel. Of the sickness that is Rothschild fiat imperialism, and America is about to find out just what happens to those who bless this faux jew homeland, and why we now see happening to the Palestinian people, what we were told was done to the wartime Jew.
    When an opponent declares the other party guilty when unwilling to even discuss the issue has logic and reason not already left the building? Is it not in itself, a form of fascism?

    • Leuchter’s report was dismissed as un-scientific when submitted as evidence at a trial in Canada. His credibility was in question also because he lacked the necessary qualifications. Disgusting Nazi films, suggesting Jews were vermin and of sub-normal intelligence, are archived for all the world to see. Holocaust denial is a rejection of history that plays into Zionist hands. It serves as an invaluable distraction to divert attention from Israel’s appalling, racist, human rights violations.

      We must learn from the past and focus upon the present. We have to build upon the foundations of international law that resulted from the rise of Nazism. Today’s intolerable, ideologically-inspired human rights abuses must no longer be ignored or excused.

  5. mary_a says:

    If there had been closer international monitoring of Zionist Israel over the years, the state’s aggressive, murderous intentions might have been realised and controlled somewhat, avoiding the cruel, tragic displacement and virtual annihilation of Palestinian people, which shamefully still prevails today!

    While Zionist Israel in its present state of abhorrent domination, committing atrocities against Palestine is allowed to continue without strict controls, until it’s brought into line by the gutless, US Wall St influenced international community, then terrorism in its current retaliatory form can be expected to rampantly spread throughout the world!

  6. John W says:

    The basis for founding of a state / religious order within an existing state is a deeply flawed argument.

    Deniers of many shades are involved in reinterpreting information about the WWII conflict. In NZ we confined Kiwis with German parentage although we did not set up work camps.

    Many in the German work camps starved when food shortages were the result of the months of allied bombing. Red Cross records do not seem to match claims made by others about work camp deaths.

    Now we cannot get a clear picture as the power of propaganda seems to have changed public discussions from what we understood immediately after the war.

    Who profits from the propaganda. What is it used to justify. Who owns th film industry and much of the media.

    It is refreshing to see discussion that does not bow to the insistence that a code of complying with factional interests should allow ignoring of crimes that are abhorrent and continue.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *