Haavara Agreement: Letter to NY Times' Editor: Ben-Gurion's Zionism By NORMAN G. FINKELSTEIN. Ben-Gurion considered saving Jews outside Palestine as "Witch Doctor's Medicine"!

David Ben-Gurion's Response to the British Kindertransport a month after Kristallnacht: NY Times, July 12th, 1987, citing Ben-Gurion's official biographers, shows how much he "cared" about Europe's Jews who saved themselves by immigrating to countries other than Palestine!

[Prof. Norman Finkelstein wrote the below correction to the NY Times way back in July 1987. Norman simply cited David Ben-Gurion's biographers, but he provided no opinion, no framing, or background context, which is odd in the case of Mr. Finkelstein. As you read his letter, please keep in mind that Ben-Gurion's citations were either spoken in preparation for Evian Conference in the summer of 1938 or a month after the Kristallnacht pogrom of late 1938. Anyhow, in our opinion, Mr. Finkelstein barely scratched the surface of several big taboo subjects in Jewish communities around the world, but he left us with several important clues to many more. To be honest, it took us years to decipher what he was trying to say (his letter was more like a Pandora's Box), and to this date we don't understand why the NY Times published his letter (Arthur Ochs Sulzberger was NY Times' editor at the time). At the end of his letter, we have provided important missing context and analysis. The more we read it, the more we learn about Zionists' treason before, during and after WWII ended. Trust us on this one, reading this letter will be worth your time, but first hang on to your seat. We assure you that your WWII frame of reference will be flipped on its head shortly. PR's Editor]

July 12, 1987

To the Editor:

In his review of Shabtai Teveth's ''Ben-Gurion: The Burning Ground 1886-1948'' (June 21), Martin Gilbert mistakenly reports that Mr. Teveth does not cite 'David Ben-Gurion's controversial remark to a [December 7th,] 1938 Mapai Central Committee meeting:

''If I knew that it was possible to save all the children of Germany by transporting them to England, and only half by transferring them to the Land of Israel, I would choose the latter, for before us lies not only the numbers of these children but the historical reckoning of the people of Israel.''

The quotation does appear (in a slightly different translation) on pages 855-56 of Mr. Teveth's text. I might add that, given Ben-Gurion's Zionist convictions, there is nothing especially surprising about the sentiment he expressed on that occasion. Mr. Teveth rightly points out that, for Ben-Gurion, the Zionist, only a Jewish state could provide an enduring and authentic resolution to the Jewish question. Any rescue operation outside the Zionist framework was - in Ben-Gurion's words - ''witch doctor's medicine'' that would only perpetuate the misery of the Jewish people. Indeed, at least in the early years of the Nazi regime, Ben-Gurion actively opposed any such rescue efforts, precisely because they might have resolved - or from the Zionist perspective, might have appeared to resolve - the Jewish question without a Jewish state. Unfortunately, on this crucial point, Mr. Teveth repeatedly cites the failure of the 1938 Evian Conference to solve the problem of Jewish refugees as evidence that the West was indifferent to their fate, thereby confirming Ben-Gurion's Zionist convictions. But what was Ben-Gurion's approach to Evian? Let me quote from another recent biography, Dan Kurzman's ''Ben-Gurion: Prophet of Fire'' (1983):

The arrival of a Kindertransport at Waterloo Station, Feb. 2nd, 1939

''The Jews could have only one destination - Eretz Yisrael. So in June 1938, shortly before Allied representatives met in Evian, France, to seek ways of rescuing Jews, Ben-Gurion frankly voiced his concern to colleagues in the Jewish Agency Executive. He did 'not know if the conference will open the gates of other countries. . . . But I am afraid [ it ] might cause tremendous harm to Eretz Yisrael and Zionism. . . . Our main task is to reduce the harm, the danger and the disaster . . . and the more we emphasize the terrible distress of the Jewish masses in Germany, Poland and Rumania, the more damage we shall cause .' So be silent, Ben-Gurion cautioned his comrades. . . . And in the silence . . . Evian failed.'' NORMAN G. FINKELSTEIN New York

https://www.nytimes.com/1987/07/12/books/l-ben-gurion-s-zionism-255687.html

PR Editor's Notes

David Ben-Gurion envisioned that Nazis' Nuremberg Race Laws would become the LEVER that would end up creating the "Jewish state," but how? Click the image for the details.

Again, as you contemplate what Ben-Gurion said earlier, please keep in mind that David spoke of them either: A) in preparations for the Evian Conference in the summer of 1938, or B) a month after the Kristallnacht pogrom in late 1938 (in the case of ".. if I knew...") which was followed by Hitler's hate speech at the Reichstag on Jan. 30³⁰, 1939. This implies that both hate speeches were less than two months apart. Was that a coincidence? Well, more on that later! As we shall prove soon, Ben-Gurion's antisemitism was on full display during the 1930s and 40s, and most Zionist leaders subscribed to it. Thus, our citations and analysis were not taken out of context:

1. Hitler's Message To The West: If Jews are such noble citizens, how come you're not letting them in?
   Most Zionists' leadership expressed a similar sentiment during the 1930s and 40s. For example, Chaim Weizmann spoke of something similar almost a year earlier, and here is Rabbi Stephan Wise lobbying US Congress against increasing immigration quotas (concerning German Jewish children) in early 1939, four months after Kristallnacht. Chaim Weizmann was also known to have said something similar to British officials around the same time (see Zionism during the Holocaust, p. 298).
   
   Therefore, Ben-Gurion's remarks were not an aberration or taken out of context. On the contrary, what David said was the norm. Zionists' contempt of Europe's Jewry operated in the open in the 1930s and 40s and drove many to consider Zionists as the enemy from within. That is why the mass majority of Europe's Jews voted with their feet and immigrated to the Americas to live with the Gentiles, not to the emptied country of Palestine.
   
   If you have the time, here are the meeting minutes of the Jewish Agency Executive (a.k.a. JAE) soon after the pogrom. As you shall discover soon, German Jewry's plight was the last thing on their minds. Thus, what we wrote didn't pertain only to Ben-Gurion; Zionist leaders were all determined to block any haven for German Jews unless their destination was Palestine. As we shall prove soon, the Jewish refugee crisis was only the tool (a.k.a. the LEVER) with which the "Jewish state" was built.
2. Which hate speech was worse: Hitler's hate speech at the Reichstag on Jan 30th, 1939, or Ben-Gurion's speech (just two months before Hitler's speech) when he incited the murder of Jews after Kristallnacht?
   Although Ben-Gurion was criticized for his hate speech, he NEVER retracted these antisemitic comments, which were expressed a month after the Kristallnacht pogrom. On the contrary, it seems that Ben-Gurion was known to have doubled down on his antisemitism ten days later when he equated saving Jews with risking the existence of Zionism. As you digest what Ben-Gurion said, please always keep in mind that was four years before the Final Solution was underway:

   "Britain is trying," he wrote, "to separate the issue of the refugees from that of Palestine." Ben-Gurion feared, "If we allow a separation between the refugee problem and the Palestine problem, we are risking the existence of Zionism." (The International Diplomacy of Israel's Founders by John Quigley, p. 51-52 and The Other Israel by Arie Bober, p. 171;
   
   [Also Tom Segev cited Yoav Gelber quoting Ben-Gurion saying something very similar around the same time, see The Seventh Million, p. 28-- note 62 at the end of the book)]

   Abla Mohamad Daoud Dajani outside here family's looted house in Baq'ah neighborhood - Jerusalem. Click the image for more such pictures that document Palestinians' dispossession.
   Just in case you think this was an off-the-cuff remark, it wasn't spoken by design, and nothing was sinister or antisemitic about it, here is Ben-Gurion expressing a similar concern that the US might soften its heart (meaning "god forbid" it becomes less antisemitic than it was), and would open its gates to those Jewish refugees in the DP camps after WWII ended (YES, that was seven years after his earlier statement a month after the Kristallnacht pogrom)! (see Israel In The Mind of America by Peter Grose, p. 210-211)
3. Hitler's infamous hate speech at the Reichstag on Jan. 30th, 1939, almost immediately followed Ben-Gurion's speech by two months, which leads us to believe that David was speaking to Hitler because he (referring to David) refused to retract his antisemitic hate speech. Until now, we have not found a single condemnation of Hitler's infamous hate speech by the Jewish Agency. Isn't that odd?
4. 
   Kastner Saved Lives Too: How does justifying Haavara after the fact not resemble Rudolf Kastner's defense of what happened on his famous train but at a much larger scale? Kastner train passengers on their way to Switzerland, 1944
   Note how Herr Ben-Gurion used the word "save" four years before the Final Solution was in the picture, which is another proof that confirms that Zionist leaders spoke of Shoah in the past tense way before it happened. In Zionists' minds, the calamity is happening anyway, and nothing can stop it; therefore, why not "exploit" it to build the "Jewish state."
5. The Zionist Version Of Lebensraum: A Map Of The Great Israel
   Just in case you think our earlier framing of Zionist leaders' response to the pogrom was an exaggeration, well, wait until you read Beit-Zvi's characterization; hang on to your seat:

   [Chaim] Weizmann himself espoused this stance unflinchingly. According to the minutes of his November 17 [,1938] meeting with British Prime Minister Chamberlain, also attended by the Jewish members of the House of Lords: “They spoke about the rescue of Jews--he spoke [ONLY] about their immigration to Palestine.” Given the political and economic conditions then prevailing in Palestine, this stand was tantamount to laying a siege on Germany’s Jews. Some months later, when concrete emigration plans were broached, a period began in which what had been implicit became unequivocally explicit. The policy of non-participation gave way to an aggressive policy of interference which constantly intensified until its culmination in unbridled incitement (see Post-Ugandan Zionism by Beit-Zvi, p. 193)

6. Ben-Gurion's antisemitic statement was translated into policy, which persisted during the calamity (even endorsed by the American Jewish Conference) and after WWII ended in the DP camps. What was tragically criminal was that Ben-Gurion repeated the same behavior (YES, eight years after the Kristallnacht pogrom) when he heard that hundreds of Jewish children in the DP camps would be transferred to France and Britain rather than Palestine! Actually, Ben-Gurion's statements were as explicit! Thus, in practice, Zionist leaders left Europe's Jews with two options: either they did Aliyah to Palestine or Auschwitz and lobbied like hell against any third alternative. Just in case you think our characterization is over the top, wait until you read it from Ben-Gurion himself when the Holocaust was in its infancy:

   At the Biltmore Conference in May 1942 Ben-Gurion said: “The meaning of these two ships [Patria and Struma -- both were sunk during WWII with Jewish refugees onboard] is simple: Eretz-Israel or death-- and as soon as the war ends, many ships like these will stream to Eretz Israel.” (Beit-Zvi, p. 259)
   
   [Two important points to keep in mind: A) When Ben-Gurion said this statement, he knew that Patria was sunk by the Haganah based on Moshe Sharett's orders in November 1940 (almost 16 months earlier ). That by itself was very telling. B) The mass majority of Europe's Jewry after WWII ended immigrated to the Americas and preferred to live with the Gentiles even after Palestine was emptied of its people.]

   Does this explain why Baghdad's synagogues were bombed in the early 1950s?
   Does this explain the Lavon Affair in the early 1950s?
7. In May 1939, MS St. Louis in Havana was refused to unload its Jewish passengers in Cuba US, and it was forced to go back to Antwerp. Jewish Agency refused to give any of its passengers immigration visas to Palestine. Over 250 of the passengers perished during the Holocaust.
   Notice how Ben-Gurion described such rescue efforts as "Witch Doctor's Medicine." This means the Jews are only alive in Eretz Yisrael; and in any other place they will be dead anyhow. Therefore, from his point of view, it was a waste of resources, money, and manpower. It was as if he was saying: Why bother?
   
   Just in case you think we are implying that Zionism is some apocalyptic cult, well, you are onto something. Zionist and Jewish intellectuals named this phenomenon Catastrophic Zionism. YES, ladies and gentlemen. Zionists were the first to predict the Holocaust three decades before it happened. Instead of warning Jews by saving them anywhere, they focused all their attention, efforts, and resources ONLY on Palestine. It all started when the Israeli founding fathers opposed Theodor Herzl's plan to create Israel in Uganda rather than Palestine, and that was the canary in the coal mine. Jews, please give yourselves a big hand on this "wonderful" ideology. Jews, please give yourselves a big hand on this "wonderful" ideology.
   
   Does this explain why little was spent on rescuing Jews during WWII?
8. Zionist Jews at large NEVER condemned such antisemitic statements from Ben-Gurion and other Zionist leaders.
9. Herzl Died Thinking Israel Would Have Been in Uganda, not in "empty" Palestine
   At the Evian Conference, all Zionist groups lobbied to frustrate any scheme that could rescue Europe's Jews except for Palestine, a fact that you wouldn't believe until you read it on pro-Zionists Wikipedia, which enforces Dan Kurzman's conclusion. Shabtai Teveth went out of his way to concoct excuses for Ben-Gurion, and from our research, we found that many countries wanted to receive Europe's Jews, and it was Zionist groups in the US who lobbied to frustrate their efforts. Just in case you think what was written here is a Palestinian anti-Zionist rant, think twice. Read for yourself how Chaim Weizmann was starving the funds that could have saved Jews in countries other than Palestine just before Evian. God forbid,
   
   
   Fake Valor: Why did two of Israel's future PMs, Menachem Begin and Yizhak Shamir, bomb WWII war efforts while their families were being gassed in Poland?
   Is it possible this evil policy (of starving rescue funds) persisted during WWII and at the peak of the calamity?
    Is it possible that Zionist leaders managed to monetize Jewish pain and suffering and turned them into the LEVER that ended up creating the "Jewish state"?
10. In the last paragraph, note how Ben-Gurion was distraught that emphasizing Jewish persecution would alarm the media and the public, which might force countries (like France and others) to open their gates (God forbid); thus harming the so-called yishuv in the process. YES, you read it correctly. Rescuing Jews in France and other countries was harmful to the yishuv; therefore, be quiet about it, or else Zionism would be doomed. Now, do you understand why the word rescue to Zionists had negative connotations during the 1930s and 40s? To Zionists, rescuing Jews implied a disaster (using Ben-Gurion's terminology) to Zionism! Now allow that to sink in for a minute, and ask yourself why 7/8th of the rescue budget was diverted. The answer is simple: that was good for Zionism! Another question: when antisemitism was not great for Zionism? The answer is simple again: never!
    
    
    The arrival of a Kindertransport, Feb.-Jan., 1939: How did Zionist leaders respond when British people rescued 10,000 German Jewish children after the Kristallnacht pogrom?
    Ironically, during the DP Camp refugee crisis eight years after Evian, Ben-Gurion was known to have said something similar. He was worried that the American people would soften their hearts and open their gates to Jewish refugees, God forbid, of course. (see Israel In The Mind Of America by Peter Grose, p. 210).
11. Referencing the last paragraph again, we find it necessary to dig further into Zionists' minds to understand why they implemented such a policy before, during, and after WWII. We asked ourselves: what if rescuing Jews was successful at Evian and much of the Holocaust was avoided, wouldn't saving Europe's Jews would have rendered the Zionist project mute? In depth, we have addressed that in another section.
12. Were the British so STUPID as to promise COMPLETE INDEPENDENCE to Palestinians in 1939 (who, of course, "didn't exist") while the Indians had been DREAMING of such a thing for 400 years?
    Just in case you think that Ben-Gurion was remorseful during WWII and he softened his heart of stone, well, think twice. The head of yishuv's so-called Rescue Committee (Yizhak Gruenbaum, who was well known for his antisemitic remarks during the war) dared to suggest saving Polish Jewish kids by shipping them to South Africa (instead of Palestine) in the summer of 1943, and as usual, Ben-Gurion quickly shut it down; it was dead in the water. See Dina Porat, p. 138, and pay attention to Dina's Hasbarah at the top of page 139. Her Hasbarah always starts with a "perhaps!"
13. Rabbi Solomon Schonfeld: British Hero of the Holocaust. Was he ever honored by Zionists? Was he thanked?
    The British people and Rabbi Solomon Schonfeld were NEVER recognized for their quick response when they quickly saved those poor children in late 1938 (after the Kristallnacht pogrom). That will be the day we will see their pictures honored at Yad Vashem.
14. How was Ben-Gurion's hate speech not much worse than Chaim Rumkowski's "Give Me Your Children" speech, which he made during WWII in Lodz's Ghetto? The only difference was the geography, four years, and how both died. While Ben-Gurion was safe in Palestine, enjoying Great Britain's protection, Chaim fell under Nazi occupation and later was killed in Auschwitz (by other Jews) when he was identified. Note how Wikipedia's editors still hide the fact that the chief of Kapos was a big Zionist activist who heeded Herzl's advice not to confront antisemites who will become Zionists' biggest friends. (The Transfer Agreement p. 226)

The arrival of a Kindertransport at the Nijmegen train station in 1938

That said, it should be noted that A) easily Ben-Gurion could have ended with a similar fate and reputation as Chaim if Rommel made it to Palestine; that was a real possibility, especially once we took into account the Americans entered the war late the British were stretched thin at the time after their defeat Greece and Crete plus Vichy's forces were in Syria and Lebanon. B) The similarities extend to Rudolf Kastner; click here if you are interested in the boring details about his infamous train.

To learn more about Herzl's antisemitism and how that affected Zionists from the beginning, we urge you to read his Mauschel article, then you will understand that Zionists' antisemitism was done by design. Weaponizing Jewish hate was Zionists' golden goose; it keeps on going, and that is why Europe's Jews didn't want to be part of them

We are compelled to ask the following questions:

Weaponizing Antisemitism in Defense of Israel By Donna Level

• When Zionists fomented antisemitism (as Ben-Gurion did here), did that "save" or endanger Jews? It should be noted that Zionist policies (embodied in Ben-Gurion's remarks) were way ahead of the Nazis in terms of endangering Europe's Jews! The final solution was only formalized in late 1941.
• Does this explain why investigating Zionists' policies and actions during this period was nixed? Here it is from the NY Times; were they afraid of opening Pandora's Box?

Zionism: what a terrible disease of the mind.
ONLY in the Zionist mind, treason is equated with heroism!