Action Reinhard: The Connection Between Food and Genocide

My Recent Posts

Feeling a bit lazy today, I'm just going to post something about the Action Reinhard Camps that I posted on Skeptics.


In this post I wanted to discuss how food and the lack there of led to the murder of some two million Polish Jews, most of them in the Action Reinhard Camps in 1942.
At this point my primary source is Gerlach's "The Extermination of the European Jews." This is from the section of the book titled "Logics of Persecution," Chapter 9, "Hunger Policies and Mass Murder." I will also include other sources where I can.

A major concern for Adolf Hitler and others within the Nazi Government was the morale of the German people. Hitler believed that food scarcity drove the discontent of the Germans during WW I, causing unrest and later revolution. He wanted to avoid this by making sure that Germany was always well supplied with food and it was a driving consideration for the seizure of Ukraine, a breadbasket he thought the Soviets poorly managed (Snyder, Bloodlands). This also extended to the annexed Polish lands, Greiser described them as a "grain factory," words that accurately described what Hitler and Goering wanted from those regions (as well as supplying Polish workers and lands for resettlement).

The problem was that the General Government itself was a food deficit area, exacerbated by the concentration of German troops in 1941 in preparation for the invasion of the Soviet Union. This influx of troops led to drastic cuts in official rations for both Poles and Jewish Poles, with the Jews left with the lowest official rations. This led to a massive increase in starvation related deaths in the closed Warsaw Ghetto.

As a result, both Jewish and non-Jewish Poles began to heavily rely on the black market. Jews had less opportunities to utilize the black market because they could not move about freely, had fewer opportunities for employment and saw their cash and asset reserves dwindle. In 1941 the civil administration enacted a new order authorizing the shooting of Jews found outside the ghettos without a permit.

The Germans became concerned over this for the following reasons:
1) Farmers preferred to sell their products on the black market because they profited a great deal by these transactions.



Jeffrey Kelly Added Jun 9, 2017 - 1:38pm
Additional information posted here:
2) Workers spent a great deal of time procuring food, leading to absences in the work place and loss of productivity. This in turn led to companies hiring more workers to compensate.
As a result the Germans saw a need to find solutions to fix these problems.
1941 saw increasing lethal actions in Poland against the Jews. A famine caused by a flood in the District of Galicia resulted in mass shootings of Jews in the area. These killings resumed in the Spring of 1942 as a way of eliminating the black market issue (and was praised as such in documents during that time period).
At the same there was a dawning realization that the war in the Soviet Union would continue into 1942 and that the hinterlands of the Soviet Union were not a short term option (Snyder, Bloodlands). On October 13th, 1941 Rosenberg told Hans Frank that deporting the Jews from the General Government was not going to happen in the short term, on the same day Himmler commissioned Globocnik to erect Belzec, the first extermination camp in the General Government (Chelmno was in the Warthegau, not the General Government). After a meeting in Berlin, Frank told his administrators on December 16th that the decision to murder the Jews was settled but that he did not know how this was to happen (my paraphrase). At Wansee Buhler, the State Secretary of the General Government, urged that the Polish Jews be killed quicker because of the danger of Jews spreading epidemics and their involvement in the black market. Buhler added that transportation and labor concerns were not an issue.
Going back to the food issue:
By May of 1942 it became apparent that much of the German grain crop was destroyed by the harsh winter. Accordingly, Goering raised the export quotas for food in the occupied territories, including the General Government, usually a net food importer. As a result, in August of 1942 the administration cut food rations to the Poles, including 1.2 million Jews that would no longer receive food. The administration did allow food for 300,000 Jewish workers. Even then, representatives told the armament Inspection of the General Government:
"We must come off the position that the Jew is irreplaceable, according to the opinion of (Goering). Neither the Armament Inspection nor the other authorities in the General Government will keep their Jews until the end of the war." (Gerlach)
As a result, the Germans murdered 750,000 Jews in the General Government from July-September of 1942, with an additional number, 400,000, murdered from October-December of 1942. This same need for food and to eliminate "useless mouths" drove the murder of 300,000 Jews initially spared for labor in the Western Ukraine from August-November of 1942. Reich Commissioner Koch, after a meeting with Hitler on August 28th, 1942, returned to the Ukraine calling for immediate large scale food exports to Germany. Three days after this the Security Police Commander informed his men that
"The actions are to be speeded up in a way that they are to be finished in five has been clarified that generally one hundred percent solutions are carried out..."
In a way this turned out to be a success. For the most part the General Government succeeded in matching its quota. In the Fall of 1943 the General Government actually raised the rations for Poles in the General Government. This also stabilized the food situation in the Reich until 1944.
So, to conclude, ideology and the food crisis went hand in hand in the mass destruction of the Jews in the General Government. A very interesting point that Gerlach makes is that the Germans failed, in large part, to starve the Jews in the General Government because of the access to the black market. It simply wasn't possible to completely shut the ghettos off from the outside world. This worked differently in the camps because security was better...but that the Germans did not have the capacity or the time to erect giant camps to intern the Jews in. They did for the Soviet POWs but that's a different topic.
Jeffrey Kelly Added Jun 9, 2017 - 1:39pm
Original post above.  
Naturally I extend an invitation to anyone who reads this to join us.
John Minehan Added Jun 9, 2017 - 3:30pm
"General Government?"
Jeffrey Kelly Added Jun 9, 2017 - 3:37pm
The areas of Poland not directly annexed to Germany.
John Minehan Added Jun 9, 2017 - 4:54pm
Michael B. Added Jun 9, 2017 - 5:48pm
Yes, you're right about Hitler's insistence on Germans living to a fairly high standard even under wartime conditions. Among the many reasons that Germany failed was its lack of planning for a long war on multiple fronts, and it wasn't until 1943 that Germany's economy was geared to a full war footing. Germany counted on quick victories for its success, which obviously didn't work out that way. Albert Speer said something to the effect that he admired the way that the Western liberal democracies geared up for total war very early in their involvement, while authoritarian Nazi Germany, perhaps ironically, still felt the need to placate its population in order to remain popular with them, which is another reason why slave and forced labor was used by the Nazis on such a large scale. I don't think they made great efforts to mobilize women, as according to them, a woman's place was in the home, having and raising children.
Jeffrey Kelly Added Jun 9, 2017 - 5:52pm
Thank you, good post.
I think Germany did make an effort to mobilize women, I can look it up.
Jeffrey Kelly Added Jun 9, 2017 - 5:57pm
There were women employed in the concentration camp system.
Thomas Napers Added Jun 10, 2017 - 2:20am
That’s three articles and three discussions about the Holocaust.  The event happened almost 80 years ago, isn’t there something more current to be discussed.  Just because some people deny the event happened, means you should spend all of your time proving it did.  After all, even if you produced video evidence of Jews being gassed by the millions, I’m sure deniers would still find a way to cast doubt on your evidence. 
Mircea Negres Added Jun 10, 2017 - 3:03am
Jeffrey, deniers can deny all they want, but the Holocaust did happen. Discussions around this topic often make me think of the dream of mathematicians that they'll one day have a Theory of Everything. I say this because the Holocaust had multiple dimensions and was driven by a myriad of other factors, all of which are impossible to put in one short article or even a very thick book. Good post in my opinion.
Thomas, "be the change you want to see in the world"... Don't like this? Write something.
Jeffrey Kelly Added Jun 10, 2017 - 9:34am
@Thomas Naples:
"That’s three articles and three discussions about the Holocaust. The event happened almost 80 years ago, isn’t there something more current to be discussed. Just because some people deny the event happened, means you should spend all of your time proving it did. After all, even if you produced video evidence of Jews being gassed by the millions, I’m sure deniers would still find a way to cast doubt on your evidence."
Thank you for the comment, Thomas.  This is my interest, it has been for about five years.
You are right, it wouldn't matter what I posted, deniers will never believe it.  I don't necessarily do this for them but for others who have questions about this subject.  I'm happy to show others more and to learn more about this.  I certainly don't have all the answers, I never will.
If nothing else I hope you learned more.  
Jeffrey Kelly Added Jun 10, 2017 - 9:35am
Thank you, Mircea.
Mircea Negres Added Jun 10, 2017 - 12:50pm
Jeffrey, I can say "In the beginning there was nothing, then God put together enough unstable matter to blow up. Creation resulted, the universe expanded, at some point homo sapiens came about. Then they had a few thousand years' worth of shit to go through, then it got better, then it got worse, and now we are where the fuck we are. Amen!" or "A bunch of German nationalists got together, they took out some loans, the debt got really big, so they went to war in order to steal enough to pay the interest or kill the lenders. Along the way, they invaded a bunch of countries, killed millions of people and then got their asses kicked." The first summary would do nothing for the Bible, and the second will do less than stuff-all for the Holocaust. Trying to reduce complexity to absurd levels will get absurdly simple answers which will teach nothing. Thomas Napers can complain all he wants, but you've got my "Like" behind you if you write another exploration of WW2 and the Holocaust. Ain't nothin' to thank me for, bro, just put fingers to keyboard, y'hear? I'll read it... 
Jeffrey Kelly Added Jun 10, 2017 - 4:05pm
Why, thanks.  I appreciate it.  I'm glad you enjoyed it.
Jeffrey Kelly Added Jun 10, 2017 - 7:46pm
I'm aware.  I'm not a blind Israel supporter.
Jeffrey Kelly Added Jun 11, 2017 - 12:12am
@John G.
"I think we have established that you are a zionist sympathiser at the very least."
How fascinating.  You've gleaned all of that from my comments and my three articles?
Jeffrey Kelly Added Jun 11, 2017 - 1:31am
So, my taste in history makes me a Zionist sympathizer?
Jeffrey Kelly Added Jun 11, 2017 - 1:55am
What "beliefs" on Israel have I expressed?
Jeffrey Kelly Added Jun 11, 2017 - 2:15am
@John G:
"I'm not interested in relitigating the issue with you."
Okey dokey.
"Suffice to say that your pathetic attempted smearing of me identified you to me as an apologist for the racist little shit hole."
John, I believe I also voiced criticism of Israel at that time.  I even provided a link showing that I argued with an Israeli over his views (that I found really disturbing, BTW).
So, John, what is to be done with this "racist little shit hole?"  Are all Israelis "racist shits?"  Should we finish what the Nazis started 70 some-odd years ago?  Should we recommission Auschwitz-Birkenau, rebuild the gas chambers and fire up the ovens?
Or, perhaps we should drive them all out again?  Is this a solution that is acceptable, John?  Drive the Jews back out into the wilderness?  
Maybe we could persuade Europe to take them back?  What about the US?
"I have no respect for you and you have zero credibility on any issue as far as I am concerned."
Hey, John?  We seem to have gotten off on the wrong foot.  Is Israel a hot button issue with you?  
Apparently so.
So, my relaying of simple historical facts has no credibility with you?  Are you denying the even happen because I wrote about it?  Seems odd.  Would you not believe if I told you water is wet?

"No better than Billy the nazi in my opinion."
Well, you know what they say about opinions......
Jeffrey Kelly Added Jun 11, 2017 - 1:21pm
@John G.
"So, John, what is to be done with this "racist little shit hole?" Are all Israelis "racist shits?" Should we finish what the Nazis started 70 some-odd years ago? Should we recommission Auschwitz-Birkenau, rebuild the gas chambers and fire up the ovens?
"There you go again. You can't help yourself. As soon as you're challenged you go into low life smearing mode."
John, it's a legitimate question.  What would you do with Israel and all the people that live there?
"Palestine is a signal issue for global geopolitics. If we allow the Palestinians to be erased from history as your 'Israel' is attempting,"
First, I don't want that.  I've said I want a two-state solution.  I'm against the Israelis building any more settlements in the West Bank and those there need to be torn down and the people resettled behind Israel's borders.
Second, it's not "My Israel."  I don't know why you think that.  Are you not paying attention?  Why are you only selectively quoting back some of the things I say to you?
John Minehan Added Jun 11, 2017 - 1:24pm
 "Why are you only selectively quoting back some of the things I say to you?"
I would say it is because he has no interest in a rational discussion.
Jeffrey Kelly Added Jun 11, 2017 - 1:26pm
Michael B. Added Jun 11, 2017 - 1:48pm
I usually apply the Three "I" Rule - people who are Idiotic, Intoxicated, or Insane, or any combination of those three, are neither worth, nor worthy of engaging in any conversation or dialog. At best, they get, as we say in SoCal..."Whatever, dude." lol
John Minehan Added Jun 11, 2017 - 1:57pm
"I hate to advocate drugs, alcohol, violence, or insanity to anyone, but they've always worked for me." Hunter S. Thompson
Jeffrey Kelly Added Jun 11, 2017 - 2:08pm
Michael B. Added Jun 11, 2017 - 2:09pm
@ John M. - Funny, I brought up H.S. Thompson in conversation just yesterday, specifically, his hilarious application letter to a publisher about a job; I think he got it, but nevertheless it's a pretty good example of how NOT to write a cover letter, lol.
Jeffrey Kelly Added Jun 11, 2017 - 2:40pm
@John G.
"First, I don't want that. I've said I want a two-state solution.
"The mythical two-state solution means the status quo and the eventual genocide of Palestinians. It's just a slogan for doing nothing. positive.
The only 'solution' is a single Palestinian state."
So, the solution is to place Palestinians over Jews in a state that they dominate.
First, that has no basis in reality and second, this would mean flipping the script and give Palestinians a chance to persecute Jews.  There is a sense of poetic justice in that, I guess, but completely unworkable.  
You also selectively quoted me.  Again.  Why do you persist in doing that?
John Minehan Added Jun 11, 2017 - 3:08pm
"The mythical two-state solution means the status quo and the eventual genocide of Palestinians. It's just a slogan for doing nothing. positive.
The only 'solution' is a single Palestinian state."
Which, at least as a first approximation, suggests "the eventual genocide of " Jews in the Eretz Israel. 
Possibly (although I rather doubt you have thought this far), you mean this Palestinian state to be secular or, at least, "not a Jewish state."
However, given the current upheaval in the Dar-al-Islam, if current trends continue, it is unlikely that such a Palestinian state would remain secular.  What is going on within the Dar-al-Islam is probably analogous to the Thirty Years War in Europe, a nihilistic religious war which will eventually make people practice relative tolerance out of self-hatred for the blood shed.  Let's try to avoid obvious potential massacres.
Israel has not always treated Arabs in its territory well, particularly those living in the "occupied territories."  In fact, Israel's treatment of Sephardic refugees displaced from the Arab states after 1948 has not always been equitable. 
HOWEVER, compared to Arab treatment of Jewish populations (many of which were decedents of Jews living in that area since the First Century CE), it was the epitome of loving kindness.  The treatment of Palestinian refugees  by Arab states (basically as a sort of permanent underclass/political football) has been a continuing disgrace.
Perhaps with the increasingly open thaw in the relationship between Israel and Egypt and the KSA, something can now be done, where the stated policy is no longer to drive the Jews into the sea.
Ultimately, none of this, John, is your decision or mine to make.
The people, Jews and Arabs (and others, like Armenians and other smaller indigenous groups), who live there have to decide this. 
Israelis who say there is no such thing as a Palestinian and Palestinians who deny that Israel built the Second Temple, do NOTHING to solve the problem of two groups of people who have lived in the same land for about 3 millennia, sometimes in peace and< at other times, in a state of genocidal conflict.              
Peter Corey Added Jun 11, 2017 - 6:06pm
>"General Government"?
On 1 September 1939, Nazi Germany invaded Poland on its western border. On 17 September 1939, Soviet Russia invaded Poland on its eastern border. The two invasions had been agreed upon by Nazi Germany and Soviet Russia in a secret protocol of an August 1939 "Non-Aggression Pact" signed by the Foreign Ministers of each country, Ribbentrop and Molotov, respectively.
Since Nazi Germany and Soviet Russia also knew they didn't like each other, they decided to preserve a swath of centrally-located, neutral territory between the occupied parts of Poland. That swath of neutral territory was called "Le Gouvernement Generale". Although it was technically not occupied by either Nazi Germany or Soviet Russia, it had been previously agreed on by the two belligerents to let the Germans administer it for purely practical reasons; probably because the Germans were very good at keeping records.
Peter Corey Added Jun 11, 2017 - 6:07pm
>Israelis who say there is no such thing as a Palestinian and Palestinians who deny that Israel built the Second Temple, do NOTHING to solve the problem of two groups of people who have lived in the same land for about 3 millennia,
You really don't know what you're talking about.
John Minehan Added Jun 11, 2017 - 6:18pm
"You really don't know what you're talking about."
"And a stranger shalt thou not oppress; for ye know the heart of a stranger, seeing ye were strangers in the land of Egypt." Exodus 23:9 would mean little if there were not Gentiles in Israel by the time the Jewish people controlled it. 
"Palestinian" is as good a word as any to describe the gentile population of the Eretz Israel.  
Peter Corey Added Jun 11, 2017 - 6:24pm
>"Palestinian" is as good a word as any to describe the gentile population of the Eretz Israel.
No it isn't.
Peter Corey Added Jun 11, 2017 - 6:38pm
>Israel's treatment of Sephardic refugees displaced from the Arab states after 1948 has not always been equitable. 
"Sephardic refugees"?
I have no idea what that means. "Sephardic" — originating from the Iberian peninsula — is usually prefixed to the word "Jew", as in "Sephardic Jews", who came from Spain, Portugal, and North Africa.
850,000 Jews from Arab countries were expelled after 1948, after about 700,000 Arabs decided to leave the new state of Israel, later morphing themselves into "Palestinian refugees" whom no Arab country would admit into their general populations.
Peter Corey Added Jun 11, 2017 - 7:02pm
>The only 'solution' is a single Palestinian state."
There's never been a "Palestinian" state there in history (nor a "Palestinian" people, who are really just Syrian Arabs), so why should there be one now?
Oh, because you simply want to abolish the state of Israel? Oh, OK. Now I get it.
Jeffrey Kelly Added Jun 11, 2017 - 7:10pm
Peter, I'm finding what you post very interesting, there are some things I didn't know about.
Peter Corey Added Jun 11, 2017 - 7:44pm
Thanks, Jeffrey. I appreciate that.
Have you read, "From Time Immemorial", by Joan Peters?
Jeffrey Kelly Added Jun 11, 2017 - 7:51pm
No, I haven't.  I'll have to look it up, right now I'm reading "The Trial of Adolf Hitler."
I may post something about that.
Peter Corey Added Jun 11, 2017 - 8:13pm
The thesis of "From Time Immemorial" (which is now confirmed by much more historical evidence by economists) is that Arabs were rather thinly populated in the Holy Land until Jewish settlers from Europe started buying up the land at the end of the 19th century, creating economic opportunities, mainly in agriculture. As wages increased, so did Arab immigration to the area.
The idea that Jews were "interlopers", displacing local Arabs who had putatively lived there since "Time Immemorial" is a myth.
Peter Corey Added Jun 11, 2017 - 8:15pm
By the way, the deeds and purchase invoices of the early European Jewish settlers and land developers are still available and have been preserved in the Peel Commission Archives in the UK.
Jeffrey Kelly Added Jun 11, 2017 - 8:18pm
Sounds interesting.
I've got a lot of books on my plate but I'll try and add it to the pile.
John Minehan Added Jun 11, 2017 - 8:32pm
From Time Immemorial by Joan Peters
Some issues with the research there.
Jeffrey Kelly Added Jun 11, 2017 - 8:35pm
Thanks, John.
John Minehan Added Jun 11, 2017 - 8:59pm
The thing this brings to mind is "Quid est Veritas."  (John 18:38) or "In war, the first casualty is truth." (Misattributed to Aeschylus.)
Peter Corey Added Jun 11, 2017 - 11:51pm
>Some target="_blank">issues with the research there.
The author of the above-linked book review, Yehoshua Porath, writes the following:
"As all the research by historians and geographers of modern Palestine shows, the Arab population began to grow again in the middle of the nineteenth century."
True. Of course, so did everyone else's population. But so far, so good. Porath continues:
"That growth resulted from a new factor: the demographic revolution."
"Demographic revolution" = "making lots of babies." He continues:
"Until the 1850s there was no 'natural' increase of the population, but this began to change when modern medical treatment was introduced and modern hospitals were established, both by the the Ottoman authorities and by the foreign Christian missionaries."
The 1850s? It wasn't until 1878 that Robert Koch discovered infectious diseases caused by bacteria were not airborne but transferred surface-to-surface. That knowledge didn't translate into the universal practice of asepsis in hospitals until the last decade of the 19th century, well after the Arab population under the Ottomans began rapidly increasing; thus, it could not have been modern medicine, clean hospitals, washed hands, etc., that accounted for this increase. If so, then the increase could not have been from the "demographics revolution". 
The New York Times has never been balanced when it comes to the history of Israel. For example, in this editorial (also on Joan Peters's book), the writer (referring to the same Israeli historian, Porath) states:
"On the eve of World War I, Mr. Porath said, citing Ottoman statistics, there were about 600,000 Arabs and 85,000 Jews."
600,000 Arabs and 85,000 Jews WHERE? In an actual place called "Palestine", specifically? Impossible. Those numbers could not have been gleaned from Ottoman/Turk statistics at the time (i.e., 1914) because there was no administrative district called "Palestine" in the Ottoman Empire. "Palestine" was a loose, geographical area within the Ottoman Empire that overlapped several real administrative districts, such as Jerusalem, Acco, Nablus, and Acre. But the Acre district included areas in Lebanon, outside the modern borders of Palestine in which there were no Jews. So there would be a tendency to undercount the number of Jews in such a census.
In any case, the argument made by Joan Peters in "From Time Immemorial" is not that Jews outnumbered Arabs in Palestine under the Ottomans, but that according to census data, Arab populations in the different administrative districts under the Ottomans grew in proportion as Jewish populations grew, especially as European Jewish immigrants came to these various districts and began buying land to develop. E.g., in areas with no Jews, the Arab population increased somewhat; in areas with some Jews, the Arab population increased by a higher percentage than in the district with no Jews; and in areas with a heavy Jewish presence, the Arab population increased many times more than in the other two areas. Her conclusion: Arabs increased their numbers in proportion to the the Jewish population, and they did so as a result of Jews immigrating from Europe, buying land, and developing it.
The gravamen of her book, however, is not so much about pre-1914 census data, but about UNRWA ("United Nations Relief and Works Agency" for Palestine Refugees in the Near East), and how that agency altered the definition of "refugee" in order to inflate the numbers of those needing aid. It appears that many of those being counted as "Palestinians whose ancestors lived in the area of British Mandate Palestine since 'time immemorial'" had in fact been recent immigrants, who came to the Holy Land after the advent of Zionism at the end of the 19th century for reasons of economic advantage: higher wages from the industrial development of agricultural land made possible by capital (including technological know-how) brought over by European Jews.
Porath appears to misunderstand Peters's main argument, as well as misstating the timeline of medical advancements that also made possible increases in population growth.
John Minehan Added Jun 12, 2017 - 2:35pm
Between Peter & John we have some idea of way this problem is so intractable (and an operational definition of the term "invincible ignorance").
Jeffrey Kelly Added Jun 12, 2017 - 2:37pm
I wish that John G. would write something on this on his own.
John Minehan Added Jun 12, 2017 - 2:42pm
"Bele: It is obvious to the most simpleminded that Lokai is of an inferior breed.
Mr. Spock: The obvious visual evidence, Commissioner, is that he is of the same breed as yourself.
Bele: Are you blind, Commander Spock? Well, look at me. Look at me!
Captain James T. Kirk: You are black on one side and white on the other.
Bele: I am black on the right side!
Captain James T. Kirk: I fail to see the significant difference.
Bele: Lokai is white on the right side. All of his people are white on the right side."  Star Trek: Let This Be Your Last Battlefield (Season 3: Episode 15)
Peter Corey Added Jun 12, 2017 - 10:37pm
>about 700,000 Arabs decided to leave the new state of Israel
Were ethnically cleansed/expelled by zionist forces.
The 700,000 Arabs were incited to leave by their religious and political leaders via a barrage of propaganda from radio broadcasts and other venues. 
"Various factors influenced their [the Arabs'] decision to seek safety in flight. There is but little doubt that by far the most potent of these factors were the announcements made over the air by the Arab Higher Committee urging all Arabs in Haifa to quit. The reason given was that upon the final withdrawal of the British the combined armies of the Arab states would invade Palestine and drive the Jews into the sea."

— The Economist, 2 October 1948
Jeffrey Kelly Added Jun 12, 2017 - 10:44pm
Thanks, Peter.
Peter Corey Added Jun 13, 2017 - 4:12am
>That's been shown to be an outright lie. 
No, it's been confirmed by multiple sources, especially after the release of information that had been archived by the British Mandate during its rule from 1920-1948. It has even been confirmed by Arab sources. The Economist quote from 1948 came from eye-witness testimony.
There was no "regime of terror" on the part of the Zionists. That's a revisionist mythology invented by a group of so-called "New Historians" in Israel who cherry-pick their data in order to cast Israel in as bad a light as possible. Among these historians are Benny Morris, Tom Segev, and Ilan Pappe. Pappe, and his nonsense of Zionist "ethnic cleansing" is considered to be one of the sloppiest historians in academia today . . . and that view comes from Benny Morris, another revisionist critic of Israel. You can pretty much dump all of Pappe's historical works into the same rubbish bin as the one in which we've dumped the works of David Irving. They belong together.
We shouldn't be surprised that JohnJohnGooGooGaGa admires Pappe since they are both committed Marxists — and if there's one lesson we should always bear in mind when dealing with committed Marxists, it is that "history" for Marxists is not the objective, neutral, study of past events in order to understand how later events (including, of course, the present) evolved, or grew out of the past; no, history is just one among many weapons of "class warfare", serving a "revolutionary agenda" and the "interests of the bourgeoisie". Marxists get away with this claptrap by also adhering to the notion of "poly-logism", the position that one's logical thinking abilities are determined by one's class affiliation; thus, there's "proletarian logic", "bourgeois logic", "capitalist logic", etc. So if you find an argument to be nonsense, the Marxist can rationalize it by stating, "Oh, you just don't understand proletarian logic, so the truth of my argument eludes you." Obviously, there's no effective arguing against denialists like this except either to walk away, or to say something pithy, such as:
Hey, JohnJohnGooGooGaGa, why don't you remove that ridiculously puerile Guy Fawkes mask you've strapped to your flabby butt . . . Oh, you mean you're wearing the mask on your head? Isn't that funny! I really couldn't tell the difference!
(Pssssst! You're entitled to your own opinions about the facts, but you're not entitled to your own facts. I'm taking a leap of faith in assuming you grasp the difference between those two things.)
Peter Corey Added Jun 13, 2017 - 4:19am
"The American consulate in Haifa had telegraphed Washington on April 25 that "local Mufti-dominated Arab leaders urge all Arabs (to) leave (the) city [Haifa] and large numbers are going." Three days later the consulate followed up this communication with another that said, "reportedly Arab Higher Committee ordering all Arabs (to) leave."
"On April 23, Jamal Husseini, the Acting Chairman for the Arab Higher Committee for Palestine , admitted as much in a speech to the United Nations Security Council:
The Arabs did not want to submit to a truce. They rather preferred to abandon their homes, their belongings and everything they possessed in the world and leave the town. This is in fact what they did.
And on April 27, 1950, only two years after the Arab evacuation of Haifa, the Arab National Committee of Haifa asserted in a memorandum submitted to the governments of the Arab states that:
The removal of the Arab inhabitants... was voluntary and was carried out at our request... The Arab delegation proudly asked for the evacuation of the Arabs and their removal to the neighboring Arab countries.... We are very glad to state that the Arabs guarded their honour and traditions with pride and greatness.... When the [Arab]delegation entered the conference room [for negotiations with the Jewish authorities in Haifa] it proudly refused to sign the truce and asked that the evacuation of the Arab population and their transfer to neighboring Arab countries be facilitated.
"In June 1949, only six months after the conclusion of hostilities, Sir John Troutbeck, the head of the British Middle East office in Cairo and, according to historian Efraim Karsh, "no friend to Israel or the Jews," made a fact-finding visit to Gaza and interviewed some of the Arab refugees there. Troutbeck reported that he had learned from these interviews that the refugees: no bitterness against the Jews (or for that matter against the Americans or ourselves) [but] they speak with the utmost bitterness of the Egyptians and other Arab states. "We know who our enemies are," they will say, and they are referring to their Arab brothers who, they declare, persuaded them unnecessarily to leave their home... I even heard it said that many of the refugees would give a welcome to the Israelis if they were to come in and take the district over.
And the Palestinian Arab newspaper Falastin, only a month after the war ended (Feb. 19, 1949), reported that:
The Arab states which had encouraged the Palestinian Arabs to leave their homes temporarily in order to be out of the way of the Arab invasion armies, have failed to keep their promise to help these refugees."
Jeffrey Kelly Added Jun 13, 2017 - 2:44pm
Here's a suggestion:
Why don't those of you who want to discuss the Israel-Palestinian conflict write an article about it and link it here? This way we can leave this for those who want to talk about the Reinhard Action.
If someone will write something I will read it and the comments.
Peter Corey Added Jun 13, 2017 - 7:39pm
On revisionist historian, Ilan Pappe:
Ilan Pappe's "Ethnic Cleansing": A Hoax Revealed
The Liar as Hero
Re: Ilan Pappe's The Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine
"At best, Ilan Pappe must be one of the world’s sloppiest historians; at worst, one of the most dishonest. In truth, he probably merits a place somewhere between the two . . .

. . . I note also, for accuracy’s sake [regarding Pappe's baseless innuendo that an experimental gas was used by Zionists against Arabs], that, apart from the 1917 battle for Gaza in World War I, the only people in the Middle East who have used poison gas against their enemies in the past century have been Arabs—the Egyptians in Yemen in the 1960s, the Iraqis in Kurdistan in the 1980s. So there can be no escaping the conclusion that Pappe introduced the subject, and perverted the text, for one purpose only: to blacken the image of Israel and its leaders in 1948."
— Benny Morris (one of Israel's revisionist "New Historians")
Peter Corey Added Jun 14, 2017 - 5:24am
Mint Press?
Mint Press is affiliated with wing-nut, conspiracy-obsessed, antisemitic hate sites, such as American Herald TribuneIf Americans Knew, and Veterans Today.
The kooky story about a rabbi condoning rapes of Arab women by IDF soldiers was originally a misquote by some Israeli media, which was then repeated as if it were fact by blogger Matt Agorist, who also spreads disinformation on sites like Alternet, which is also well-known for spreading "Fake News."
Mint Press is so unreliable that even Yahoo! determined not to carry its content on its site.
"MintPress was founded in 2012 by Mnar Muhawesh. At the time, Muhawesh was 24 years old and her only experience in professional journalism was an internship at a local Minneapolis television station and some freelance work. While MintPress is labeled merely “political,” it is an unreliable fringe site that is affiliated with hate sites.

Affiliation with Hate Sites

In January of 2016, CAMERA documented MintPress’s connection with the fringe American Herald Tribune:

American Herald Tribune (AHT), which appeared suddenly in October 2015, is so obscure that even Google searches for the name at the time of this writing yield virtually nothing. There is one glaring exception to its anonymity — MintPress posted AHT articles four times over a span of five days this month …. 

The American Herald Tribune website is registered to Tim King, who also happens to be founder of the crackpot site and a contributor to the rabidly anti-Semitic Veterans Today, a hate site affiliated with none other than Veterans News Now, which Yahoo promoted last year.

American Herald Tribune's output is exactly what one would expect from a site with such unseemly associates.

CAMERA then documented examples of American Herald Tribune’s attacks on Jews, conspiracy theories about Sept. 11, homophobia, and conspiracy theories about the Israeli government paying Nazis.

Indeed, based on its promotion of American Herald Tribune materials, and after contact from CAMERA, Yahoo determined in 2016 not to include MintPress content on its site, with a spokesperson saying, “MintPressNews does not uphold the editorial standards of Yahoo and [it] was immediately blocked on January 21 [2016]."

Another example of this affiliation with fringe or hate sites is MintPress’s reliance on the hate site If Americans Knew. In a July 2016 video interview conducted by Muhawesh, at about 9 minutes in, the video displays information from If Americans Knew. A 2012 MintPress article also relied on a report from If Americans Knew.
According to the Anti-Defamation League, Alison Weir, the founder of If Americans Knew, “employs anti-Semitic imagery and portrays Israel and its agents as ruthless forces that control American policy through brutal intimidation and deception.” CAMERA has also previously debunked the work of Weir and her organization.


On August 29, 2013, MintPress ran a story claiming that anti-Assad rebels, rather than Assad’s government, were responsible for a chemical weapons attack inside of Syria. However, on September 20, the reporter whose byline ran with the story, Dale Gavlack (who was also a stringer for the Associated Press) denied having written it. A September 21, 2013 statement by Muhawesh claimed that “Gavlak wrote the article in it’s [sic] entirety as well as conducted the research.” The New York Times’ Robert Mackey wrote of this dispute that, based on the conflicting accounts between Gavlack and MintPress, it was “impossible to determine who is right.” However, the other reporter whose byline ran with the story, Yahya Ababneh, subsequently “told BuzzFeed he reported the piece himself and merely asked Gavlak, a longtime and well-respected Middle East correspondent … to help him translate and pitch the story.”

In a piece questioning MintPress's reliability over the Syria chemical weapons story, Buzzfeed reporters Rosie Gray and Jessica Testa wrote:

According to the source [a former employee] familiar with Mint Press’ operations, stories about Saudi Arabia and Israel would in particular be edited a certain way. Saudi Arabia-related stories would almos
Peter Corey Added Jun 14, 2017 - 5:24am
"In a piece questioning MintPress's reliability over the Syria chemical weapons story, Buzzfeed reporters Rosie Gray and Jessica Testa wrote:

According to the source [a former employee] familiar with Mint Press’ operations, stories about Saudi Arabia and Israel would in particular be edited a certain way. Saudi Arabia-related stories would almost always be edited to include a line about Saudi financing of terrorist groups, the source said. One writer was forced by Muhawesh to refer to the Palestinian territories as an “open-air prison” in a news piece.

“They’re super anti-Israel,” the source said.

In the same article, Gray and Testa observed that “interviews with former employees and people familiar with the inner workings of Mint Press, and an examination of public records … reveal an agenda that lines up, from its sympathy with the Syrian regime to its hostility to Sunni Saudi Arabia, with that of the Islamic Republic of Iran, where Odeh Muhawesh studied under an ayatollah for five years after the Islamic Revolution, and where he visited as recently as this summer.”

There are other examples of MintPress’s problematic original content as well. For example, a July 22, 2016 article by Muhawash titled, “Documentary Reveals How Israel Convinces Americans Palestine Occupies Israel,” claims that: 

Starting in December of 1947, their [Christian and Muslim Palestinians] land and property was seized and destroyed to make way for the state of Israel, where white only European Jews would live. Over 750,000 Palestinians were expelled and over 10,000 were killed by the British and US armed Zionist militias, and later Israeli forces, during the Nakba, an Arabic word meaning “catastrophe.”

While claims such as these have been made before by anti-Israel activists, they are baseless. The population of Israel today is approximately 20 percent Arab. In addition, non-white and non-European Jews have long been part of the fabric of Israel, and Jewish refugees who were expelled from Algeria, Egypt, Iraq, Libya, Morocco, Syria, Tunisia, and Yemen make up about half of the Jewish population of the country, along with many Jews from Ethiopia and India. The claim, therefore, that Israel was or is a place for “white only European Jews,” is false.

The claim that 750,000 Palestinians were expelled is inaccurate as well. Of the Palestinian Arabs who became refugees after 1948, the majority fled from war, and were not expelled.

A September 14, 2015 article, “Julian Assange: US & Israel Planned To Overthrow Assad In 2006,” claimed that “WikiLeaks cables reveal that these plans [to destabilize Syria] came from the Israeli government, and show that the U.S. government intended to work with Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Qatar and Egypt to encourage the breakdown of the Assad regime as a way of also weakening Iran and Hezbollah.” Neither the cable that appears to be the one referred to (no citation to a cable was provided), nor the interview with Julian Assange that accompanies the article, supports this claim.

As these examples illustrate, MintPress should be labeled extremely biased and unreliable."
Peter Corey Added Jun 14, 2017 - 5:28am
No surprise that JohnJohnGooGooGaGa spreads fake news from sites  like MintPress that "source" their own information from hate sites. Stupid-is-as-stupid-does; and since GooGoo does stupid things, it follows that he's stupid.
But in a special sort of way.
Jeffrey Kelly Added Jun 14, 2017 - 8:43am
@John G.:
"Ilan Pappe's work is based on the documentary evidence.
Did you mean "Little?"
"wonder that the Coreys and the Kellys would smear it rather than address it."
Um, please point out where I said one thing about it.

"Zionist trolls."
John, this post is about Action Reinhard. You are the one that is off-topic, the others are responding to you, making you the troll.
Look, John, why don't you write an article about this, post it and then we can talk about it?
BTW, John?  I'm being reasonably pleasant about the whole thing but my patience is coming to an end.  
Jeffrey Kelly Added Jun 15, 2017 - 7:28am
Very well.
Jeffrey Kelly Added Jun 15, 2017 - 7:33am
John G., I don't mind give and take.  But, you are off topic.
What I've done is remove a lot of your comments as a warning.  Keep it up and I will remove all of them and anything new you post.
Write about Israel in your own article.
Jeffrey Kelly Added Jun 17, 2017 - 9:10am
Yes, I know you are pathetic, John.