Published March 2007
Jewish Political Studies Review 19:1-2 (Spring 2007)
The text of this article is somewhat different from that which appeared in printed JPSR because it contains several new research findings. (Date of posting on the web, 29 July 2007.)
The Big Lie and the Media War Against Israel:
From Inversion of the Truth to Inversion of Reality
Woe unto them that call evil good,
And good evil;
That change darkness into light,
And light into darkness;
That change bitter into sweet,
And sweet into bitter.
From the 1960s, inversion of truth and reality has been one the most favored propaganda methods of Israel's
adversaries. One of its most frequent expressions has been the
accusation that the Jewish people, victims of the Nazis, have now become
the new Nazis, aggressors and oppressors of the Palestinian Arabs.
Contemporary observers have identified this method and described it as
an "inversion of reality," an "intellectual confidence trick,"
"reversing moral responsibility," or "twisted logic." Because Israel's
enemies have, for nearly half a century, repeated such libels without
being challenged, they have gradually gained credence. Since inversion
of reality constitutes the basic principle of current anti-Israeli
propaganda, it is important to understand what it is and how it works.
This propaganda method is a product of Nazi Germany.
It is totalitarian both in its methods, particularly the use of the
paranoiac myth, and in the absolute solution it advocates. It totally
denies all of Israel's claims and leaves no room for introspection and compromise.
The Problem in Historical Perspective: Israel and the Media War
From the 1960s, inversion of truth and reality has been one the most
favored propaganda methods of Israel's adversaries. One of its most
frequent expressions has been the accusation that the Jewish people,
victims of the Nazis, have now become the new Nazis, aggressors and
oppressors of the Palestinian Arabs. Contemporary observers have
identified this method and described it as an "inversion of reality," an
"intellectual confidence trick," "reversing moral responsibility," or
"twisted logic." Because Israel's enemies, for nearly half a century,
have repeated such libels unchallenged, some people have begun to
believe them. Since inversion of reality constitutes the basic principle
of current anti-Israeli propaganda, it is important to understand what
it is and how it works.
It should be noted that scholars of an earlier generation have
researched different aspects of the problem, but from the mid-1980s
on, this subject has attracted much less attention. There are
several explanations. After the fall of the Soviet Union and the
dissolution of the East bloc (1989-1991), there was a feeling that the
world was on the threshold of a new democratic era. And with the
signing of the Oslo Accords (13 September 1993), many actually believed
that anti-Israeli propaganda would cease. Denial may have played a part,
because the persistence of intense anti-Israel and anti-Semitic
agitation represented "inconvenient information." Drawing attention to
the problem became politically incorrect and sometimes dangerous for
those who wished to advance in the academic world.
Since the subject of this essay is the history of propaganda and
fabrication, it is appropriate to add a word about methodology.
Marc Bloch, the eminent historian and medievalist, in his famous book, The Historian's Craft,
explained that proving the existence of a falsehood is not
enough. If one hoped really to learn from a lie, it would be
necessary to identify the perpetrator and his motivation:
But to establish the fact of forgery is not enough. It is further
necessary to discover its motivations, if only as an aid in tracking it
down. So as long as there is any doubt about its origins, there
is something in it which defies analysis and which is, therefore, only
The purpose of this essay is to describe the origins of the Big Lie and,
to the extent possible, identify its modern derivatives.
Definition of the Problem in Historical Perspective
Since many members of Israel's political elite consider that the
country's problem is one of public relations, they have been unable to
come to terms with the fact that the state is confronted with a media
war. It follows, therefore, that there is a need for a modern definition
of propaganda, its main component. According to Prof. Philip M. Taylor,
director of the Institute of Communications Studies at the University
One of the tactical tools of ideological warfare is propaganda, which
has been defined simply "as an attempt to influence the attitudes of a
specific audience through the use of facts, fiction, argument or
suggestion-often supported by the suppression of inconsistent
material-with the calculated purpose of instilling in the recipient a
certain belief, values or convictions which will serve the interests of
the source, by producing a desired line of action."
To this definition one may add the statement of Dr. Joseph Goebbels that
"propaganda as such is neither good nor evil. Its moral value is
determined by the goals it seeks." Here is the classical argument
that the ends justify the means. One may ask, however, if in certain
cases the very means can be morally defective.
In the twentieth century, propaganda served as an important weapon of
war, and its effects could be devastating. Indeed, certain totalitarian
ideologies, when brought to their logical conclusion, have been
genocidal. Historian Jeffrey Herf describes the function and logic of
propaganda in Nazi Germany's war against the Jews:
If sheer repetition, in public and private contexts, can be taken as
proof of belief, then it appears that Hitler, Goebbels, Dietrich
[Director of the Reich Press Office], their staffs, and an undetermined
percentage of German listeners and readers believed that an
international Jewish conspiracy was the driving force behind the
anti-Hitler coalition in World War II.... They certainly acted as if the
Final Solution was Nazi Germany's punishment of the Jews, whom the
Nazis found guilty of starting and prolonging World War II.
In his text Herf gave a chilling example of the link between propaganda
and genocide, namely, Hitler's annual speech to the Reichstag of 30
January1939 which presented "what became the core Nazi narrative of the
"I want today to be a prophet again: if international finance Jewry
inside and outside of Europe should succeed in plunging the nations once
more into a world war, the result will not be the Bolshevization of the
earth and thereby the victory of Jewry, but the annihilation of the
Jewish race in Europe!"
In addition, Herf referred to Hitler's New Year's address to the nation
on 1 January 1940 which contained the "imputation of genocidal war aims
to Nazi Germany's enemies, especially the Jews": "‘The Jewish-capitalist
world enemy that confronts us has only one goal: to exterminate Germany
and the German people...."
Interpreting this language, Ernst H. Gombrich explained that the
ultimate aim of Nazi propaganda was "the imposition of a paranoiac
pattern on world events" in the form of a "paranoiac myth." According
to Gombrich, this procedure represented the "core of the technique":
This is the final horror of the myth. It becomes self-confirming. Once
you are entrapped in this illusionary universe, it will become reality
for you, for if you fight everybody, everybody will fight you, and the
less mercy you show, the more you commit your side to a fight to the
finish. When you have been caught in this truly vicious circle there is
really no escape. Compared with this effect, the principle of
advertising and mass suggestion in war propaganda may almost be called
Inversion of reality as a tool of media war, with its paranoiac state of
mind, has persisted to the present. Although contemporary observers
have been able to describe its manifestations with considerable
accuracy, many have not placed it in historical context. It was in this
sense, for example, that the French researcher and philosopher
Pierre-André Taguieff applied the term "absolute anti-Semitism" to
describe the post-1967 outlook of the Palestinians. He wrote that for
them, "Zionism, then, is a new ‘Nazism' threatening to dominate and
destroy the whole human species.... Thus, in a context where Western
elites never tire of calling for the avoidance of ‘Islamophobic'
utterances, the head of the Islamic Center in Geneva, Hani Ramadan,
coolly denounced ‘the genocide being organized against the
It is noteworthy that Ramadan's story line is nearly identical to that
of Nazi propagandists. Both presented themselves as targets of a Jewish
conspiracy, and the potential outcome of their "logical process"-to use
Hannah Arendt's expression-was genocide. Although both have inverted the
truth, their assertions contain an additional feature which is
disturbing and dangerous: the inversion of morality which leads to
criminal behavior and violence without constraint.
More recently, Melanie Phillips, an outspoken British journalist and
blogger, cited an article by Leo McKinstry, a Belfast-born author and
journalist who writes regularly for the Daily Mail, Daily Express, and Sunday Telegraph.
McKinstry identified the inversion of reality in British public
discourse with regard to Israel and called it by its real name:
In a remarkable inversion of reality, Israel has become a pariah state
because of its determination to defend itself. A grotesque double
standard now operates, where murderous Arab terrorists are hailed as
"freedom fighters" yet Israeli security forces are treated as fascistic
thugs. No nation has been more demonized than Israel. One recent survey
across Europe revealed that Israel is now regarded as "the greatest
threat" to world peace, an utter absurdity given that Israel is actually
the only democratic, free society in the Middle East. But such a
finding reflects the strength of the hysterical anti-Israeli propaganda
that fills the airwaves of Europe. No matter how much this anti-Israeli
feeling is dressed up as support for Palestine, it is in fact profoundly
Inversion of reality as a tool of political warfare may also be used
against non-Jews. For example, its use in December 2006 resulted in a
sharp diplomatic clash between the governments of Poland and Germany
when "a group representing Germans expelled from present-day Poland
after World War II filed suit at the European Court of Human Rights,
seeking restitution of their property." In a statement on 11 December
2006, Polish foreign minister Anna Fotyga condemned the German claims as
"an attempt at reversing moral responsibility for the effects of World
War II, which began with the German attack on Poland and caused
irreparable losses and sufferings to the Polish state and nation."
Inversion of Reality as a Propaganda Method: Historical Roots
If one studies the development of inversion of reality as a propaganda
weapon, it is clear that Nazi ideologues perfected it. They openly took
pride in their accomplishment but credited the British for showing them
the way. During the Great War, British propaganda had successfully
encouraged the desertion of Central Powers troops from the frontlines
and demoralized the public at home. Hitler, for his part, emphasized the
British use of atrocity propaganda and complained that Imperial Germany
never understood the importance of propaganda and those who dealt with
it were incompetent.
The British, under the leadership of Lord Northcliffe, proprietor of The Times,
were the first to exploit the advances of mass media and advertising in
order to target mass public opinion rather than the elite. Their
strategic objective was to "reveal to the enemy the futility of their
cause and the certainty of allied victory." For this purpose, they
devised a number of original propaganda stratagems such as targeting
messages to the civilian population in order to undermine its support
for the government. They also endeavored to break up the Habsburg
Empire by fomenting sedition among its various peoples. In their
efforts, British propagandists first coined the term "national
self-determination," a weapon of political warfare.
One tool which the British employed was atrocity propaganda. Their most
remarkable accusation was that Imperial Germany created a "cadaver
exploitation establishment," the so-called Kadaververwerkungsanstalt,
for the production of soap. British atrocity propaganda demonized the
enemy, but after the war, the public felt duped. It left a residue of
skepticism, betrayal, and a mood of postwar nihilism. Although this
approach worked in the short term, it opened a Pandora's Box.
On the eve of World War II, the memory of atrocity propaganda provided a
compelling argument against American intervention on the side of
Britain and contributed to the denial of compassion to the Jews in their
moment of dire need. In the United States, where isolationist sentiment
ran strong, influential politicians accused the British of having
"tricked America into war." Furthermore, when, in the 1930s, Nazi
Germany began to perpetrate major atrocities, many refused to believe
In The Case for Auschwitz, historian Robert Jan van Pelt reported that:
The American magazine the Christian Century, which in 1944 had
still chided American newspapers for giving much attention to the
discoveries made by the Soviets in Maidanek-claiming at the time that
the "parallel between this story and the ‘corpse factory' atrocity tale
was too striking to be overlooked"-had to (hesitantly) admit in 1945
that it had been wrong, and that the parallel with "the cadaver factory
story of the last war" did not hold. "The evidence is too conclusive....
The thing is well-nigh incredible. But it happened."
After the liberation of the concentration camps, General Dwight D.
Eisenhower arranged for visits of American delegations to bear witness
to the greatest atrocity of all time.
The Big Jump: Some Principles of Nazi Propaganda Theory
During the Great War, the British disseminated propaganda over a finite
period but stopped with the conclusion of hostilities. Fearing that
Britain's wartime propaganda machinery would be turned against him,
Lloyd George quickly dismantled it. Nevertheless, World War I paved
the way for the rise of totalitarian dictatorship. It not only
undermined the traditional order in Russia, Austria-Hungary, Germany,
and Italy but also "hastened the development of the industrial arts,
weapons, communications, and management which facilitated the
According to Hitler and Goebbels, British propaganda produced the
original "Big Lie," but they exploited this breakthrough for their own
ends. For example, they adopted an interpretation of history which
embodied the paranoiac myth that represented Imperial Germany as the
innocent victim of British mendacity. A few citations from Vol. 1, Ch.
6, "War Propaganda," of Mein Kampf, published in1925 and 1926,
clearly reveal Hitler's grasp of the methods of war propaganda.
According to his account, the British spread certain lies, namely, the
accusation of atrocities and that "the German enemy" was "the sole
guilty party for the outbreak of war." Later in the same chapter, he
analyzed their methods and commented on cost effectiveness:
All advertising, whether in the field of business or politics, achieves
success through the continuity and sustained uniformity of its
Here, too, the example of enemy war propaganda was typical; limited to a
few points, devised exclusively for the masses, carried on with
indefatigable persistence. Once the basic ideas and methods of execution
were recognized as correct, they were applied throughout the whole War
without the slightest change. At first the claims of the propaganda were
so impudent that people thought it insane; later, it got on people's
nerves; and in the end, it was believed. After four and a half years, a
revolution broke out in Germany; and its slogans originated in the
enemy's war propaganda.
And in England they understood one more thing: that this spiritual
weapon can succeed only if it is applied on a tremendous scale, but that
success amply covers all costs.
Hitler went further. He explained in Mein Kampf that it really was more worthwhile to tell big lies rather than small ones:
in the big lie there is always a certain force of credibility; because
the broad masses of a nation are always more easily corrupted in the
deeper strata of their emotional nature than consciously or voluntarily;
and thus in the primitive simplicity of their minds they more readily
fall victims to the big lie than the small lie, since they themselves
often tell small lies in little matters but would be ashamed to resort
to large-scale falsehoods. It would never come into their heads to
fabricate colossal untruths, and they would not believe that others
could have the impudence to distort the truth so
The Big Lie would characterize Nazi propaganda, and although, after
World War II, the Soviet Union would later adopt this method, their
techniques of misrepresenting reality, based on dialectical thinking,
were essentially different. Doublespeak was not to be found in the Nazi
A Totalitarian Tool
Having the means of controlling the total environment, blocking
competing information through the use of terror and coercion, and
projecting their messages both domestically and abroad, the new
totalitarian regimes could bend the truth as long as their power held
out. Thus, they were able to transform what originally had been a
defined moment of untruth into a sustained fictional reality. The
difference between the mass propaganda of World War I and the fictional
reality of the totalitarian state was one of degree and intensity.
Political scientist Carl J. Friedrich explained that:
... the totalitarian breakthrough occurred in 1926-27 when the first
Five-Year Plan was adopted. It was this plan that undertook to force the
pace and to bring about almost immediately a radical transformation of
the economy. Thus, the masters of the Soviet Union were the true
originators, the innovators who invented and perfected, in its various
details, totalitarian dictatorship-the secret police techniques, the
mass communication controls, and more especially, the centrally planned
and directed economy.
Indeed, the Bolsheviks were the first to adopt the practice of
propaganda in peacetime.  Shortly thereafter, Hitler emulated
In retrospect, Hannah Arendt explained how totalitarian propaganda
constructs a sustained, competing fictional world of untruth, possessing
its own internal logic. Herein one may identify the big jump from the
inversion of the truth to the inversion of reality. Nazi propagandists
took the idea of the Big Lie and prolonged its duration to create a new
reality based on the paranoiac myth which Gombrich described:
Their art [of the totalitarian leaders] consists in using, and at the
same time transcending, the elements of reality, of verifiable
experiences, in the chosen fiction, and in generalizing them into
regions which then are definitely removed from all possible control by
individual experience. With such generalizations, totalitarian
propaganda establishes a world fit to compete with the real one, whose
main handicap is that it is not logical, consistent, and organized. The
consistency of the fiction and the strictness of the organization make
it possible for the generalization eventually to survive the explosion
of more specific lies-the power of the Jews after their helpless
slaughter, the sinister global conspiracy of Trotskyites after their
liquidation in Soviet Russia and the murder of Trotsky.
Historian Omer Bartov, in his study Hitler's Army, demonstrated
the deep penetration of the paranoiac myth in German consciousness. He
explained that the Wehrmacht was really an integral part of German
society. During the invasion of Russia, when it became clear that
Germany could not win the war, propaganda gained almost a religious
dimension as a binding force for the soldiers. Under the harsh
conditions in mid-July 1941, a Wehrmacht noncommissioned officer wrote
home, producing a document which reveals the absolute and genocidal
effects of Nazi propaganda:
The German people owes a great debt to our Fuehrer, for had these
beasts, who are our enemies here, come to Germany, such murders would
have taken place that the world has never seen before.... What we have
seen no newspaper can describe. It borders on the unbelievable, even the
Middle Ages do not compare with what has occurred here. And when
one reads the "Stuermer" and looks at the pictures, that is
only a weak illustration of what we see here and the crimes committed
here by the Jews. Believe me, even the most sensational newspaper
reports are only a fraction of what is happening here.
Bartov explained that this soldier's perception was a striking inversion
of reality, which ascribed the unprecedented brutality of the Wehrmacht
and the SS to their victims, [and] was the most characteristic feature
of the German soldier's "coming to terms" with his actions in the Soviet
Union.... It is precisely this distorted perception of reality which
gives us the measure of success of Nazi propaganda and
Bartov's remarkable study demonstrated how the paranoiac myth of Nazi
propaganda was so powerful that its logical consequence was an inversion
of morality. Even after Germany's defeat, its effects were so pervasive
that some Nazi veterans continued to mouth these fictions in order to
justify their own criminal deeds.
Using the Inversion-of-Reality Method against Israel and Jews from the 1960s to the Present
During the first postwar decades, the propaganda method of inversion of
reality and the Big Lie appears to have fallen into temporary disuse,
with one notable exception. Prof. Arnold Toynbee delivered a
lecture in Montreal in January 1961 in which he "compared from a moral
standpoint, the attitude of Israel to the Arabs in 1947 and 1948 with
the Nazi slaughter of six million Jews." The ambassador of Israel
to Canada, Yaakov Herzog, read this statement in the Montreal newspapers
and challenged Toynbee to a debate which followed on 31 January 1961 at
McGill University. Ambassador Herzog did well in this disputation,
but it is not clear if Arnold Toynbee's statement represented an
isolated event or, in the years which followed, provided a source of
inspiration to others. (Two years later, in April 1964, Arnold Toynbee
came to Egypt on a twelve day visit to lecture at Egyptian
universities. It would be interesting to know, if, beyond
considerations of academic scholarship, an authoritarian regime such as
Nasser's Egypt had other motives for showing Toynbee such a public sign
of great favor.)
During the 1960s, and particularly after the Israeli victory in the Six
Day War in 1967, the Soviet Union and its allies in the Arab world
reintroduced some of the old propaganda themes. Israel's victory
represented a humiliation to the Soviet cause and posed an internal
danger because it shook the foundations of authority.
Domestically, it heartened the minorities in the Soviet Union, not least
the Jews. Having suffered a major reverse, the Soviet Union and the
Arab countries decided to use political anti-Semitism as a means of
shifting world attention from their defeat. They endeavored to
delegitimize Israel, to brand Israel as the aggressor, and to bring
about its isolation. Some elements of the new propaganda campaign were:
The accusation that Israel was the aggressor in the Six Day War and denial of its right to self-defense.
The passing of UN General Assembly Resolution 3379, "Zionism is
racism," on 10 November 1975 which gave the standing of international
law to a proposition totally based on the inversion of reality. This
resolution transformed Zionism, the Jewish national movement, into the
embodiment of evil by equating it with the depravity of Nazi Germany.
The drafting of the PLO Covenant in its various versions of 1964, 1968,
and 1974. This document claimed that justice was totally on the
Palestinian side and that Israel had no standing at all.
Charter of 1988.
The unprecedented assault on Israel at the end of August and beginning
of September 2001 which took place at the UN Conference in Durban.
Both the Arab world and the Soviet Union used inversion of reality as a
method and drew on the idiom of Nazi propaganda. The transfer of this
expertise cannot be traced in detail because documentary information is
incomplete. It is known, however, that many Nazi fugitives found refuge
in the Arab world. From 1953, Egypt absorbed some two thousand of them.
Some worked in Nasser's secret service and administered concentration
camps. Others were involved in the design and construction of
Among this population were specialists in anti-Semitic propaganda. From
Egypt, they disseminated anti-Semitism and the doctrine of Holocaust
denial in the Arab world and beyond. Writing in 1967, historian Kurt
Tauber described the contemporary situation in Nasser's Egypt:
....In addition to Gestapo and S. S. skills, there are also other
capabilities that appear to be in great demand on the Nile. Former
Goebbels trainees, initially under the supervision of the late Johann
von Leers, are playing - we are told - an important role in Nasser's
anti-Jewish and anti-Zionist propaganda apparatus. In this connection we
hear the names of Werner Witschale, Baron von Harder, Hans Appler, and
Franz Buensche. But Gestapo, SS, and espionage backgrounds do not
hamper access to attractive careers in the Egyptian propaganda
ministry. Walter Bollmann, Nazi espionage chief in Great Britain
before the war, later, as SS major, engaged in antiguerilla and
anti-Jewish operations in the Ukraine; Louis Heiden, an SS official who
was transferred to the Egyptian press office during the war; Franz
Bartel, an "old fighter" and Gestapo officer; Werner Birgel, an SS
officer from Leipzig; Albert Thielemann, a regional SS chief in Bohemia;
Erich Bunz, SA major and expert on the Jewish question; and SS Captain
Wilhelm Boeckler, participant in the liquidation of the Warsaw Ghetto -
all are reportedly engaged in anti-Jewish propaganda on behalf of
Matthias Küntzel described a major outcome of the Egyptian propaganda project:
This penetration of the Egyptian postwar institutions by a band of
national-socialistically oriented opinion makers could only
contribute... to the fact that, even to the present, [knowledge of]
German crimes against the Jews hardly entered the Egyptian public
consciousness. For nearly fifty years the delusion has been dominant in
the Egyptian media that the Holocaust at no time in the Twentieth
Century was anything more than a pretext, which might constantly be put
forward to justify Israel's existence....
"Hitler's Number One Anti-Semite": The Case of Johann von Leers, 
Because issues of historical continuity and particularly the transfer of
ideas and are a matter of importance, special mention should be made of
Prof. Dr. Johann von Leers (1902- 1965). He was one of the most
important ideologues of the Third Reich and later served in the Egyptian
In April 1938 von Leers was named professor at the Friedrich-Schiller
University in Jena, and his area of expertise was "Legal, Economic, and
Political History on a Racial Basis" (Rechts-, Wirtschafts- und politische Geschichte auf rassischer Grundlage).
He mastered five languages: English, French, Spanish, Dutch, and
Japanese. As a young man he participated in the nationalistic youth
movement Adler u. Falken (Eagles and Hawks), where he formed a
lifelong association with Heinrich Himmler. He was one of the early
members of the Nazi Party, and in 1929 Goebbels made him his protégé.
Von Leers had been a committed member of the German Movement of Faith, a
project under Himmler's patronage whose purpose was to "free Germany
from the imperialism of Jewish-Christianity" by creating a new pagan
religion to take its place. An Israeli researcher found indications
that, in cooperation with a certain Friedrich Lamberty-Muck who
advocated polygamy, von Leers became one of the initiators of a plan to
increase the Aryan race through breeding, an initiative which Himmler
enthusiastically adopted and subsequently resulted in the Lebensborn
Von Leers was the expert in Jewish affairs. An open advocate of
genocide, he was one of the most radical anti-Semitic publicists of the
Third Reich. The Jewish philosopher Emil Fackenheim explained that von
Leers took the position that "states harboring Jews were harboring the
plague, and that the Reich had the moral duty and by the principle of
hot pursuit, the legal right to conquer such countries, if only to wipe
the plague out." 
In a personal communication to Fackenheim, historian Erich Goldhagen
explained "that whereas of course the bacilli idea was common among
Nazis, von Leers had the unusual distinction of not bothering to veil
his call for mass murder in euphemistic language." After his death, "his
widow [Gesina Fischer née Schmaltz], who shared his views, returned to
Germany, where she embarrassed Neo-Nazis by defending Hitler's
‘extermination' of the Jews openly, instead of classifying it among his
Von Leers possessed undeniable talent and applied it to construct an
ideological foundation for National Socialism and Islam based on their
shared hatred of the Jews.  He continued this endeavor in
Egypt after the war, and his efforts were welcomed and
Herf reports that in December 1942, von Leers published an article in Die Judenfrage,
a journal which belonged to the anti-Semitic intellectual world,
entitled "Judaism and Islam as Opposites." As the title indicates,
the author's perspective is Hegelian, presenting Judaism and Islam in
terms of thesis and antithesis. This essay also reveals the ingratiating
National Socialist perspective which von Leers projected on the Islamic
past as well as the intensity of his hatred for Judaism and Jewry. The
following passage is part of the original text. The author thanks Prof.
Herf for sharing this remarkable document, parts of which he first
published in paraphrase with direct citations:
Mohammed's hostility to the Jews had one result: Oriental Jewry was
completely paralyzed. Its backbone was broken. Oriental Jewry
effectively did not participate in [European] Jewry's tremendous rise to
power in the last two centuries. Despised in the filthy lanes of the mellah
[the walled Jewish quarter of a Moroccan city, analogous to the
European ghetto], the Jews vegetated there. They lived under a special law [that
of a protected minority], which in contrast to Europe did not permit
usury or even traffic in stolen goods, but kept them in a state of
oppression and anxiety. If the rest of the world had adopted a similar
policy, we would not have a Jewish Question [Judenfrage].... As a religion, Islam indeed performed an eternal service [to the world]: it prevented the threatened conquest of Arabia by the Jews
and vanquished the horrible teaching of Jehovah by a pure religion,
which at that time opened the way to a higher culture for numerous
For his part, the ex-Mufti of Jerusalem,
Haj Amin al-Husseini in his conversation with Hitler of 21 November
1941 and his radio broadcasts contended that Jews were the common enemy
of Islam and Nazi Germany. The ex-Mufti frequently went on tour to
encourage the Balkan SS Muslim units, and the Axis radio stations
faithfully covered these visits. During his broadcast of 21 January
1944, he proclaimed:
The Reich is fighting against the same enemies who robbed the Moslems
of their countries and suppressed their faith in Asia, Africa and
Europe.... National Socialist Germany is fighting against world Jewry.
The Koran says, "You will find that the Jews are the worst enemies of
the Moslems." There are considerable similarities between Islamic
principles and those of National Socialism, namely in the affirmation of
struggle and fellowship, in the stress of the leadership idea, in the
ideal of order. All this brings our ideologies close together and
facilitates cooperation. I am happy to see in this division a visible
and practical expression of both ideologies.
After the war, von Leers lived incognito in Italy until 1950 when he
fled to Argentina, where he served as editor of the Nazi monthly Der Weg
and entered into close contact with Adolf Eichmann. After the fall of
Peron in 1955, he moved to Cairo where he served in the Egyptian
Information Department. Encouraged by the ex-Mufti who was also living
in Egypt, he converted to Islam and assumed the names Mustafa Ben Ali
and Omer Amin Johann von Leers.
Von Leers sponsored the publication of an Arabic edition of The Protocols of the Elders of Zion,
revived the blood libel, organized anti-Semitic broadcasts in numerous
languages, cultivated neo-Nazis throughout the world, and maintained a
warm correspondence encouraging the first generation of Holocaust
deniers, one of whom was Paul Rassinier. One source reported that
von Leers was the first to launch the idea of a separate Palestinian
nationality as part of the wider war against Israel.
In addition to the professional obligations of his day job, Johann von
Leers was "active as the contact man for the organization of former
members of the SS (ODESSA) in Arab territory." It is reported that
his old friend, Haj Amin al-Husseini, secured his post as political
adviser in the Egyptian Information Department, but another source
suggests that a political officer at the Egyptian embassy in Buenos
Aires recruited him. When von Leers arrived in Cairo,
the ex-Mufti, Haj Amin, publicly welcomed him: "We thank you for
venturing to take up the battle with the powers of darkness that have
become incarnate in world Jewry."
If today's Arab anti-Israeli and anti-Jewish propaganda strongly resembles that of the Third Reich, there is a good reason.
An immediate consequence of Israel's victory in the Six Day War was the
unleashing of a virulent campaign of state-sponsored anti-Semitism in
the East bloc. According to Stefan Possony, an American strategist
and specialist in East European affairs, Komsomolskaya Pravda published the real message of this propaganda on 4 October 1967:
"Zionism is dedicated to ‘genocide, racism, treachery, aggression, and
annexation...all characteristic attributes of fascists.'" Leon
Poliakov also identified information in this text which its Soviet
author took from a 1957 pamphlet published at the time Johann van Leers
was in charge of anti-Semitic propaganda in Egypt. Indeed, there are
reasonable grounds, circumstantial and textual, to support the view
that Nazi propaganda themes were transmitted directly from Egypt to the
East Bloc, particularly the DDR.
On September 6, 1968, Dr. Simon Wiesenthal held a press
conference in Vienna where he accused the German Democratic Republic for
its use of language identical to the Nazi era in its condemnation of
Israel. The title of the publication which he distributed on this
occasion was, The Same Language: first for Hitler - now for Ulbricht.
In this solidly documented publication Wiesenthal and his staff
identified thirty-nine Nazis with excellent credentials who found their
way into the service of the G.D.R. Some were extremely well
placed. Not surprisingly, one of the tools of propaganda which
they used was inversion of reality, accusing Israel of being the
J. H. Brinks, in his essay "Political Anti-Fascism in the German
Democratic Republic," wrote that there was no ideological impediment to
prevent the cooperation between Communist party members and National
Socialists, as they had once been allies.  That is, until
Hitler invaded the Soviet Union. Nevertheless, there remained
positive feelings in favor of Russian-German friendship which were based
on considerations of history and geography. For example, after the
First World War, in 1922, Weimar Germany concluded the Treaty of Rapello
which took Bolshevik Russia out of diplomatic isolation. This
transaction became the forerunner of subsequent military and political
arrangements. For example, Chief of the Army Command, General Hans
von Seekt, "arranged for exchanges of military instructors, the
manufacture of weapons [such as aircraft, heavy artillery, tanks, and
poison gas] forbidden to the Germans by Versailles and close cooperation
in other military fields." Charles W. Thayer, an American career
diplomat who served in Germany shortly after the war recounted also that
some of the great German industrialists nostalgically remembered that
Russia had once been a major market and they hoped one day it might
again come back to life.
After the war, some ultra-conservatives and unrepentant Nazis remained
convinced that historical and geographical reasons made Russia a natural
ally, and these transcended the fact that it was under Communist rule.
Members of this school held that for reasons of traditional policy
dating back to Frederick the Great, Russia should be an ally, and, that
if reunification were ever to be, its good will would be of critical
importance. Von Leers belonged to this group.
The real statement of the Soviet party line took the form of a short book titled Beware Zionism! Essays on the Ideology, Organization, and Practice of Zionism.
Its author was given as Yuri Ivanov, a party Central Committee
specialist on Zionism, and at the beginning of 1969 the Moscow Political
Literature Publishing House (Krasny Proletary) distributed
this pedantic book of some 173 pages in an edition of seventy-five
thousand copies. (It was priced to move at a modest 27 kopeks.)
William Korey wrote, "The voice of the official Soviet Authority was not
disguised. It spoke clearly through Pravda: ‘From the pages of
Yuri Ivanov's book emerges the true evil image of Zionism and this
constitutes the undoubted importance of the book.'"
Beware Zionism! is interesting with regard to its antisemitic content. Its thesis, based on the Protocols, was that that world Jewry possessed ubiquitous control of world politics. Indeed, the structure and content of Beware Zionism bear a remarkable resemblance to Johann von Leers' book, The Forces behind Roosevelt [Kraefte hinter Roosevelt] which he published in Berlin in 1942.
The language of Komsomolskaya Pravda, in contrast, represented a
change of direction toward a major inversion of reality compressed into
slogans, such as "Zionism is racism."
Bernard Lewis reported the use of these new slogans at the World
Conference of the International Women's Year held in Mexico City in late
June and early July 1975. He noted that: "the ‘Declaration on the
Equality of Women' issued on that occasion repeatedly stresses the share
of women in the struggle against neocolonialism, foreign occupation,
Zionism, racism, racial discrimination and apartheid."
It should be added that with France's change in diplomatic orientation
in favor of the Arab cause, and as a consequence of its great influence
in Europe, anti-Israeli information steadily gained currency.
Historian Bat Ye'or remarked that the Second International Conference in
Support of the Arab Peoples, held in Cairo in 1969, was a turning point
for Europe. Its chief objective was to "demonstrate hostility to
Zionism and solidarity with the Arab population of Palestine." British
historian Arnold Toynbee and French Arabist Jacques Berque participated
in this event.
It did not take long for the cold winds to blow. At the end of 1968,
Bertrand Russell published an open letter to Wladyslaw Gomulka, first
secretary of the Polish Communist Party, protesting the outbreak of
state-sponsored anti-Semitism in Poland. Russell bluntly likened this
new anti-Semitism to that of Nazi Germany and used the term "twisted
logic" to describe the method of inverting reality:
Over the past eighteen months in Poland, the Press, the secret police
and the Government have instigated anti-Semitism quite deliberately. By
some twisted logic, all Jews are now Zionists, Zionists are fascists,
fascists are Nazis, and Jews, therefore, are to be identified with the
very criminals who only recently sought to eliminate Polish
The Soviet Union spread several other fictions in its new propaganda war
against Israel. One of these was the accusation that Israel was the
aggressor in the Six Day War. Probably the very first observer to
identify and describe this distorted logic was Prof. Richard Pipes of
Harvard University. He called it a "successful technique employed by
Moscow to turn the tables on the opponent by confusing the real issues
at stake." Pipes explained that, normally, when a state is aggressed and
succeeds in defending itself, it sets its terms in the negotiations
which follow. Redress indeed may include taking possession of some of
the aggressor's territory:
In the peace settlement which results, the defeated party usually has
to make concessions to the victor, possibly, territorial ones.... The
peculiar feature of this conflict is that whereas the real issue at
stake is negotiation between the belligerents, Soviet propaganda has
managed to make the main issue appear Israeli withdrawal from the
territories occupied in the course of the war. Thus, a matter which
should be part of the final settlement of the conflict becomes a
precondition of negotiations leading to a settlement. Whatever one's
feelings about the substance of the Israeli-Egyptian dispute, one cannot
but admire the adroit use of an intellectual confidence trick to turn
the tables on an opponent and shift the burden of recalcitrance from
oneself to the other party.
The Covenants of the PLO and Hamas
When discussing the developments of this era, one must include the PLO
Covenant in its different versions from 1964 onward. It provided a
codified ideological statement which embodied Palestinian myths and
claims. At first it did not have much impact, but later, particularly
after 1973, it became the PLO credo. It is noteworthy that Ion Mihai
Pacepa, a former chief of the Romanian secret service who came over to
the West, disclosed that:
... in 1964 the first PLO Council, consisting of 422 Palestinian
representatives handpicked by the KGB, approved the Palestinian National
Charter-a document which had been drafted in Moscow. The
Palestinian National Covenant and the Palestinian Constitution were also
born in Moscow, with the help of Ahmed Shuqairy, a KGB influence agent
who became the first PLO chairman.
Prof. Yehoshafat Harkabi was probably the first to recognize the
importance of this document and carefully analyzed its content and
language. In the introduction to his publication of the text of the
Palestinian Covenant, Harkabi stated in his commentary that the
absoluteness of the Palestinian inversion of reality was inherently
The Palestinian movement claims absoluteness and "totality"-there is
absolute justice in the Palestinian stand in contrast to the absolute
injustice of Israel;...right is on the Palestinian side only; only they
are worthy of self-determination; the Israelis are barely human
creatures who at most may be tolerated in the Palestinian state as
individuals or as a religious community...; the historical link of the
Jews with the land of Israel is deceit; the spiritual link as expressed
in the centrality of the land of Israel in Judaism is a fraud;
international decisions such as the Mandate granted by the League of
Nations and the United Nations Partition Resolution are all consigned to
nothingness in a cavalier manner.
The PLO Covenant is central to our understanding of today's Palestinian Authority.
The fact that Yasser Arafat refused to amend this document, even though
he pretended to do so in the presence of President Clinton on 14
December 1998, is the best indication of his real intentions.
Of related interest is the Hamas Charter of 1988, the text of which may
be found on the Internet. Küntzel traced its distinctive inversion
of reality to Nazi sources:
The renewed impact of Nazi-style conspiracy theories becomes
particularly obvious if we take a look at the Charter of the Muslim
Brotherhood of Palestine, otherwise known as Hamas. Created in 1988, the
Charter pointedly makes use of the antisemitic rhetoric of the ex-Mufti
of Jerusalem which he had adopted from the Nazis. According to this
Charter, "the Jews were behind the French Revolution as well as the
Communist revolutions." They were "behind World War I so as to wipe out
the Islamic Caliphate...and also behind World War II, where they
collected immense benefits from trading in war materials and prepared
for the establishment of their state." They "inspired the establishment
of the United Nations and the Security Council...in order to rule the
world through their intermediaries. There was no war anywhere without
their [the Jews'] fingerprints on them." The original text of the
Charter is clearly stated in Article 32, in which it states that the
intentions of the Zionists "[have] been laid out in the Protocols of the Elders of Zion, and their present conduct is the best proof of what is said there."
The importance of these charters has not been sufficiently appreciated.
Nevertheless, the myths which they embody have become part of the
fictional, paranoiac, and coherent worldview which Palestinian
propaganda has imposed on reality.
"Zionism Is Racism"
On 10 November 1975, the Soviet Union and its supporters passed UN
General Assembly Resolution 3379, "Zionism is racism," which transformed
an anti-Semitic slogan into an internationally accepted "truth."
Rabbis Abraham Cooper and Harold Brackman explained that "the term
‘racism' was coined in 1936 to rally scientific and political opinion
against Nazi doctrines of ‘Aryan superiority' over Jews and other
alleged untermenschen." According to the original meaning
of the term, then, "racism" denotes one of the great abuses of
Nazism. Thus, to equate Zionism with racism represents a serious
accusation and inversion of reality.
Although Resolution 3379 was finally rescinded on 16 December 1991, and
the Soviet Union passed into history shortly thereafter (26 December
1991), the damage to Israel's cause was considerable. By reducing a
complicated issue to a slogan, this libel, which inverted reality,
prevented rational discussion of the real problems of the Middle East.
In an era of mass media, when the study of the past has gone out
of fashion, slogans such as "Zionism is racism" have taken the place of
facts. They have penetrated the popular mainstream idiom and the
consciousness of uncritical mass audiences.
Israel's enemies made many accusations during the years following
Resolution 3379 and for a time they spared Israel another massive
assault on its legitimacy. This changed with the UN World Conference
against Racism which took place in Durban, South Africa, from 28
August-8 September 2001. Durban became the scene of anti-Semitic and
anti-Israeli speeches and agitation of a ferocity unknown since the
Some of the main players who joined this effort were the UN high
commissioner for human rights and secretary-general of the conference,
Mary Robinson; Arafat, Hanan Ashrawi, and Farouk Kaddoumi for the
Palestinian Authority; Ahmed Maher and the Arab Lawyers' Union for
Egypt; Farouk al-Shara for Syria; and the Iranian
delegate. Others included the representatives of the NGOs, the European
Union, the United Arab Emirates, Pakistan, Cuba, China, Sudan, Iraq, Chile, Jamaica, Finland, and South Africa.
Squarely in the tradition of "Zionism is racism," the Durban Conference
made ample use of the inversion of reality. Indeed, the NGOs called "for
the reinstatement of the UN resolution equating Zionism with Racism"
and "the complete and total isolation of Israel as an apartheid state."
They condemned "Israeli crimes against humanity, ethnic cleansing, and
This message was essentially the same as those of the 1960s and 1970s cited above. It fit in well with the statement of Komsomolskaya Pravda
of 4 October 1967 and the "Declaration on the Equality of Women" of the
1975 World Conference of the International Women's Year. Repetition
of the same message, even over decades, remains one of the known
characteristics of modern mass propaganda.
The significance of Durban is yet to be appreciated fully, particularly
because the malicious intentions of its sponsors-Egypt and the
Palestinian Authority, which are supposedly at peace with Israel, and
those of Iran-have not been fully acknowledged. Their excesses even
surpassed Resolution 3379. At one time, those who advocated
reinstatement of the original "Zionism is racism" resolution argued that
opposing Zionism was not anti-Semitic. Now, after Durban, all pretenses
vanished. Anti-Semitism in the name of Palestinian justice became
acceptable. A condition
of "convergence," to use Jeffrey Herf's term, had been reached.
That is, Anti-Semitism and Anti-Zionism merged, probably for the first
time since the Nazi era.
According to Anne Bayefsky and Rabbis Cooper and Brackman, some of the propositions which found expression at Durban were:
Denial of anti-Semitism as a human rights issue of our time.
Acceptance of anti-Semitism in the name of fighting racism.
"Antisemitism is not a manifestation of contemporary racism."
Recognition of the Palestinian people as victims of Israeli racism.
Expropriation of the term Holocaust.
Approval of terrorism-or "armed struggle"-as a means to combat racism.
Exclusion and isolation of the Jewish state in the name of multiculturalism.
Method, Content, and Intent
Shortly before his death, French statesman Georges Clemenceau met with a
friendly representative of the Weimar Republic who raised the question
of guilt for the outbreak of World War I. He asked Clemenceau, "What, in
your opinion will future historians think of this troublesome and
controversial issue?" He replied, "This I don't know. But I know for
certain that they will not say Belgium invaded Germany." In his
time, "the Tiger" enjoyed a sense of certainty which has since
How many people still remember that in June 1967, Israel, in an act of
self-defense, foiled the plans of the real aggressors? These were
the Soviet Union which encouraged the Arab states to foment a crisis,
Gamal Abdel Nasser of Egypt who built an alliance with King Hussein of
Jordan and Hafez al-Assad of Syria for the purpose of annihilating the
Jewish state. And how many remember that the Egyptian blockade of the
Straits of Tiran in May 1967 was an act of war?
It has been the purpose of this study to follow Marc Bloch's
recommendation, to consider the lie as a form of evidence, and to the
extent possible to identify its origins and the motives of those who
propagated it. For more than half a century, inversion of reality has
been the essential characteristic of a media war against Israel and has
caused considerable harm. Its basic untruth rests in the accusation that
Israel is the aggressor. The purpose of this lie is to negate
the legitimacy of the Jewish state, to deprive Israel of its sovereign
right to defend itself, and to justify future aggression against Israel
and violence against Jews in the Diaspora. This propaganda method
descends directly from the paranoiac myth of Third Reich, which framed
world Jewry as endeavoring to destroy Germany and its people.
It is totalitarian in it method and in the "absolute" its telos,
or logical consequence. It totally rejects Jewish nationhood and all of
Israel's claims. Nor does it leave any room for introspection and
compromise. Following the same strategy which the international
community applied against South Africa, the long-term strategic
objective of Israel's enemies is to destroy the Jewish state
incrementally, even if it takes decades. In the context of the
media war, their choice of means reveal their ultimate goal.
For its part, Israel has a strategic need to defend itself on the
battlefield, but in order to exercise this sovereign right, it must
effectively safeguard its legitimacy in the forum of public opinion.
Accordingly, Israel must first recognize the type of war in which it is
engaged and then formulate an effective strategy based on solid
It would be a mistake to overlook the moral dimension of this problem.
As noted above, Goebbels asserted that: "propaganda as such is neither
good nor evil. Its moral value is determined by the goals it seeks."
Because the technique of inversion of reality rests on the violation
the truth, it leads to an inversion of morality and moral
responsibility. Accordingly, this method is inherently flawed,
because one may not use lies in the service of a "Greater Truth" without
becoming a liar. In most cases, when one lies in the cause of some
"Greater Truth," the so-called "Truth" may well turn out to be another
lie. Inversion of truth and reality can never serve a morally positive
Can a cause possess real virtue if it can be advanced only the use of
untruth? Beyond the specific circumstances, inversion of truth
constitutes an assault on empirical and rational thought, the
foundations of modern culture. If this assault succeeds, there is a
danger that language will be debased and society will regress to a
condition of confusion and anomie. There is, therefore, an
urgent need to expose the lies which have become part of the media war
and to discredit those who spread them.
* * *
* The author wishes to acknowledge the kind help and advice of Prof.
Jeffrey Herf, Department of History, University of Maryland; Dr.
Matthias Küntzel, faculty member of the Technical College, Hamburg
and research fellow at the Vidal Sassoon Institute, Hebrew University;
Dr. Daphne Burdman, research associate, Truman Institute, Hebrew
University; Mr. Amnon Lord of Jerusalem; Dr. Shaul Baumann, member of
the Vidal Sassoon Institute, Hebrew University, and Dr. Kevin Coogan of
Long Island City, New York.
 E.g., Leon Poliakov, De l'antisionisme a l'antisémitisme (Paris: Calman Levy, 1969) [French]; Institute of Jewish Affairs, Soviet Antisemitic Propaganda: Evidence from Books, Press and Radio (London: Institute of Jewish Affairs, 1978); Robert Wistrich, Hitler's Apocalypse: Jews and the Nazi Legacy (London: Weidenfeld & Nicolson, 1985); Bernard Lewis, Semites and Anti-Semites (New
York: W. W. Norton, 1986). For a particularly helpful source with
regard to Nazi thought and of the extreme right in post-war Europe,
see: Kevin Coogan: Dreamer of the Day. Francis Parker Yockey and the Postwar Fascist International (New York: Autonomedia, 1999).
 See Yigal Carmon, "Was ist arabischer Antisemitismus?" in Klaus Faber, Julius H. Schoeps, and Sacha Stawski, eds., Neu-alter Judenhass: Antisemitismus, arabisch-israelischer Konflikt und europäische Politik (Berlin: Verlag für Berlin-Brandenburg, 2006), 209-10 [German]. Carmon wrote:
Despite all these widely known manifestations, anti-Semitism in the
Arab world has for a long time been ignored even in Israel. Barring a
few exceptions, the overwhelming majority of Near East experts in and
out of Israel have avoided this theme. Here, the notion that the Zionist
enterprise should have solved the problem of anti-Semitism definitely
plays a part. The conclusion that a hatred that the Jews believed to
have escaped should also strike them in the Near East is something that
many would prefer not to admit. Also, the well-founded fear that the
revelation of antisemitic tendencies on the other side would strengthen a
political unwillingness in Israel to yield and rather helps those
political groups that would turn down any territorial compromise, may
have contributed to this denial. (author's translation)
Also, Martin Kramer, Ivory Towers on Sand: The Failure of Middle Eastern Studies in America (Washington, DC: Washington Institute for Near East Policy, 2001).
 Marc Bloch, The Historian's Craft, tr. Peter Putnam (New York: Vintage Books, 1953), 93. For the original text, see: Apologie pour l'histoire ou Métier d'historien, annoté par Etienne Bloch (Paris: Armand Colin, 2004), 96.
 Philip M. Taylor, "Propaganda from Thucydides to Thatcher: Some
Problems, Perspectives and Pitfalls" (1992),
 "Goebbels on Propaganda," Der Kongress zur Nürnberg 1934 (Munich: Zentralverlag der NSDAP, Frz. Eher Nachf., 1934), 130-41 [German], as cited by Phil Taylor's website, http://ics.leeds.ac.uk/papers/vp01.cfm?outfit=pmt&requesttimeout=500&folder=715&paper=2159.
 Jeffrey Herf, The Jewish Enemy: Nazi Propaganda during World War II and the Holocaust (Cambridge: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 2006), 270-71.
 Ibid., 51-52.
 Ibid., 64-65.
 Ernst H. Gombrich, Myth and Reality in German Wartime Broadcasts (London: University of London, The Athlone Press, 1970), 14, 23. The author thanks Dr. Matthias Küntzel for this reference.
 Ibid., 23.
 Pierre-Andre Taguieff, Rising from the Muck, trans. Patrick Camiller (Chicago: Ivan R. Dee, 2004), 62.
 Ibid., 69.
 "The Monstrous Inversion," 6 January 2006, www.melaniephillips.com/diary/?p=1100.
 Mark Landler, "German-Polish Ties Plummet to New Low; Post-World War II Treaty Is Challenged," International Herald Tribune, 22 December 2006.
 Philip M. Taylor, British Propaganda in the Twentieth Century (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 1999), 27-29.
 Ibid., 23.
 Campbell Stuart, Secrets of Crewe House: The Story of a Famous Campaign (London: Hodder & Stoughton, 1920), 64.
 Taylor, British Propaganda, 56-57.
 The Christian Century, as quoted by Robert Jan van Pelt, The Case for Auschwitz: Evidence from the Irving Trial (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 2002), 133-34.
 Ibid., 133.
 Taylor, British Propaganda, 231.
 Carl J. Friedrich, "The Rise of Totalitarian Dictatorship," in Jack J. Roth, ed., World War I: A Turning Point in History (New York: Knopf, 1968), 53-54.
 "Hitler on War Propaganda from Mein Kampf, Volume One: A Reckoning,
Chapter VI: ‘War Propaganda,'" Phil Taylor's Website,
See particularly Eberhard Jäckel, Hitler's World View: A Blueprint for Power, trans. Herbert Arnold (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1981); Gombrich, Myth and Reality, 4.
 Mein Kampf (James Murphy translation, 134), as cited by
Wikipedia sv, "Big Lie," http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Lie. The
original German of this passage occurs in Book 1, early in Ch, 10, and
is under the rubric #252: "Moralische Entwaffnung des gefährlichen
 Friedrich., 57.
 E. H. Carr explained that: "The Bolsheviks, when they seized power
in Russia, found themselves desperately weak in the ordinary military
and economic weapons of international conflict. Their principal strength
lay in their influence over opinion in other countries; and it was
therefore natural and necessary that they should exploit this weapon to
the utmost." E. H. Carr, Propaganda in International Politics (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1939), 13.
 Hannah Arendt, The Origins of Totalitarianism, 2nd ed. (New York: Meridian, 1958), 361.
 Omer Bartov, Hitler's Army: Soldiers, Nazis, and War in the Third Reich (New York: Oxford University Press, 1991), 106.
 Ibid., 140, 141.
 Misha Louvish, ed., A People that Dwells Alone; Speeches and Writings of Yaakov Herzog (London: Weidenfeld and Nicolson, 1975), 21.
 "Toynbee visits Egypt," Washington Post, 8 April 1964.
 Jennie Lebel, Haj Amin ve-Berlin (Haj Amin and Berlin) (Tel Aviv: by the author, 1996), 210-13 [Hebrew]. See also Sanche de Gramont, "Nasser's Hired Germans," Saturday Evening Post, 13-20 July 1963, 60-64.
 Kurt P. Tauber, Beyond Eagle and Swastika; German Nationalism since 1945 (Middletown, CT: Wesleyan University Press, 1967) II, 1115. The author thanks Kevin Coogan for this reference.
 Matthias Küntzel, Jihad und Judenhass: Über den neuen antijuedischen Krieg (Freiburg: ca ira, 2002), 50-51. [German]
 Description of Kurt P. Tauber, Beyond Eagle and Swastika, II, 1269.
 Bundesarchiv-Findmittelinfo, www.bundesarchiv.de/foxpublic/C22B50860A062212000000001FEE00A6/findmittelinfo.html. See also Robert S. Wistrich, Who's Who in Nazi Germany (London: Routledge, 1995), 153.
 Schaul Baumann, The German Movement of Faith and Its Founder Jakob Wilhelm Hauer (1881-1962), doctoral dissertation, Hebrew University, 1998, 241, n. 49. See also Ulrich Nanko, Die Deutsche Glaubensbewegung: Eine historische un soziologische Untersuchung (Marburg: Diagonal, 1993), passim. [German]
 Karla Poewe, New Religions and the Nazis (New York and London: Routledge, 2006), 25.
 Schaul Baumann, Die Deutsche Glaubensbewegung und ihr Gruender Jakob Wilhelm Hauer (1881-1962), trans. Alma Lessing (Marburg: Diagonal-Verlag, 2005), 171, n. 358. [German]
 Emil L. Fackenheim, To Mend the World: Foundations of Post-Holocaust Jewish Thought (Bloomington and Indianopolis: Indiana University Press, 1994), 184.
 Ibid., footnote.
 See: Jeffrey Herf, "Convergence: The Classic Case, Nazi Germany, Anti-Semitism and Anti-Zionism during World War II," The Journal of Israeli History
25: 1(March 2006), 66-79. Here, Herf established that it was
official policy and "part of a broad strategic effort," as reflected by
press directives and the texts in their own right, "to woo the Arabs to
the side of the Axis powers" (p. 67). This resulted in "The
convergence of anti-Semitism and anti-Zionism in the Nazi regime..."(p.
 "Judentum und Islam als Gegensaetze," Die Judenfrage, Vol. 6, No. 24 (15 December 1942): 278, quoted and paraphrased by Herf, The Jewish Enemy, 181.
 Gerald Fleming, Hitler and the Final Solution (Berkeley:
University of California Press, 1984), 101-05. This chapter describes
the ex-Mufti's visit to Hitler on 21 November 1941 and contains the
protocol of their discussion.
 Maurice Pearlman, Mufti of Jerusalem: The Story of Haj Amin el Husseini (London: Gollancz, 1947), 64.
 Lebel, Haj Amin, 212.
 Les amis de Rassinier.
 Wistrich, Hitler's Apocalypse, 176.
 Lewis, Semites and Anti-Semites, 207.
 Mikhail Heller and Aleksandr M. Nekrich, Utopia in Power: The History of the Soviet Union from 1917 to the Present, trans. Phyllis B. Carlos (New York: Summit Books, 1986), 670:
The Six Day War in 1967 opened a new chapter in the history of Soviet
anti-Semitism. After that, the authorities ceased to be ashamed of
anti-Semitism, and it acquired full rights. Zionism became the latest
approved and authorized object of hatred, just as Nepmen, wreckers, and
kulaks had once been. In books and periodicals, published in millions of
copies, and in movies and television broadcasts, Zionism was depicted
as a most serious threat to the Soviet state. A Permanent Commission was
established under the Social Sciences Section of the USSR Academy of
Sciences "to coordinate research dedicated to the exposure and criticism
of the history, ideology, and practical activity of Zionism."
 Stefan T. Possony, Waking Up the Giant (New Rochelle, NY:
Arlington House, 1974), 473. This book is written in the form of a
fictional account, but the author has found that his references are
 Poliakov, De l'antisionisme, 147. According to Martin A, Lee, the title of the pamphlet in question was, "America - A Zionist Colony." Martin A. Lee, The Beast Reawakens (New York: Routledge, 2000), 168. The author has been unable to find the pamphlet.
 Die gleiche Sprache: Erst feur Hitler - jetzt feur Ulbricht; Pressekonferenz von Simon Wiesenthal am 6. September 1968 in Wien (Bonn: Deutachland-Berichte, 1968).
 See particularly: J. H. Brinks, "Political Anti-Fascism in the German Democratic Republic," Journal of Contemporary History, Vol 32, No. 2 (April 1997): 214. The author thanks Alexander Arndt, Aspen Intern at the JCPA, for this reference.
 Charles W. Thayer, The Unquiet Germans (New York: Harper, 1957), 115-116 and 193ff and Richard Pipes, Russia under the Bolshevik Regime (New York: Vintage Books, 1995), 228.
 William Stevenson, The Bormann Brotherhood (London: Arthur Barker, 1973), 127.
 Yuri Ivanov, Ostorozno: sionizm! As cited by William Korey, Russian Antisemitism, Pamyat, and the Demonology of Zionism (Chur, Switzerland: Harwood Academic Publishers, 1995), 20, n. 20.
 Pravda, 9 March 1969, as cited by Korey, Russian Antisemitism, 21 and n. 21.
 Stefan T. Possony pointed out that variants of the conspiracy
allegation represent an "overlap" of "rightist" with communist
antisemitism. See: "Antisemitism in the Russian Area," Plural Societies, 5:4 (Winter 1974), 59.
 For the use of slogans in Soviet propaganda, see Joel Fishman, "The
Cold-War Origins of Contemporary Antisemitic Terminology," Jerusalem
Viewpoints, No. 517, Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs, 2-16 May 2004.
 Bernard Lewis, "The Anti-Zionist Resolution," Foreign Affairs, October 1976, 54.
 Bat Ye'or, Eurabia: The Euro-Arab Axis (Madison/Teaneck,
NJ: Fairleigh Dickinson University Press, 2005), 44, Of related interest
is Ruth R. Wisse, "Israel and the Intellectuals: A Failure of Nerve?" Commentary,
May 1988, 19. In this fine essay, Wisse raised the issue of President
Charles de Gaulle's "moral inversion of terms" in his accusations
 Bertrand Russell, "Open Letter to Wladyslaw Gomulka," World Jewry, Vol. 11, No. 6 (November-December 1968), 8, first quoted in Possony, Waking Up the Giant, 473.
 Richard Pipes, "Some Operational Principles of Soviet Foreign Policy," in M. Confino and S. Shamir, eds., The U.S.S.R. and the Middle East
(Jerusalem: Israel Universities Press, 1973), 19, 20. Israeli
researchers Gidon Remez and Isabella Ginur, using Russian sources, have
found that the Soviet Union in 1967 actually planned a massive invasion
of Israel but was caught by surprise. Their results will soon be
 "From Russia with Terror," interview of Ion Mihai Pacepa by Jamie
Glazov, 1 March 2004,
 Y. Harkabi, The Palestine Covenant and its Meaning (London: Vallentine, Mitchell, 1979), 12, 13.
 See Khaled Abu Toameh, "Kaddoumi: PLO Charter Was Never Changed," Jerusalem Post, 23 April 2004.
 Ibid., as quoted by Matthias Küntzel, "Islamic Antisemitism and Its Nazi Roots," Antisemitism International ([SICSA] 2004): 47.
 Alex Grobman, Nations United (Green Forest, AR: Balfour Books, 2006), 37-48. See also Yohanan Manor, To Right a Wrong: The Revocation of the UN General Assembly Resolution 3379 Defaming Zionism (New York: Shengold, 1996).
 Abraham Cooper and Harold Brackman, "Through a Glass, Darkly: Durban and September 11th," Midstream, November 2001, 2.
 For Mary Robinson's consistently partisan role, see particularly
Tom Lantos, "The Durban Debacle: An Insider's View of the UN World
Conference against Racism" Fletcher Forum of World Affairs, Vol. 26, No. 1 (2002) and reprinted by the Institute of the World Jewish Congress (Jerusalem, 2002).
 Anne Bayefsky, "The UN World Conference against Racism: A Racist Anti-Racism Conference," ASIL Proceedings (2002): 67.
 Lewis, "Anti-Zionist Resolution," 54.
 "Convergence: The Classic Case, Nazi Germany, Anti-Semitism and Anti-Zionism during World War II."
 Bayefsky, "UN World Conference," 65, 74; Cooper and Brackman, "Through a Glass," 2.
 Hannah Arendt, "Truth and Politics," in Between Past and Future (New York: Viking Press, 1954), 239.
 See: Isabella Ginor/Gideon Remez, Foxbats over Dimona. The Sovjets' Nuclear Gamble in the Six-Day-War
(New Haven & London: Yale University Press, 2007). Their important
study greatly improves our understanding of the strategic goals of the
Soviet Union and its responsibility in causing the outbreak of the
Six-Day War, which they thought would result in a decisive victory for
 More recently related the accusation has become current that Muslims are the victims of prejudice and "Islamophobia."
 Carl von Clausewitz wrote that war is an instrument of policy and
that the statesman and commander must determine the kind of war on which
they are embarking. On War, ed. and trans. Michael Howard and
Peter Paret (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1984), Book I,
Chapter 1, item 27, 88-89.
 "Goebbels on Propaganda."
* * *
DR. JOEL FISHMAN is a fellow of the Jerusalem Center
for Public Affairs and Chairman of the Foundation for the Research of
Dutch Jewry at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem. He is author of "Ten
Years Since Oslo: The PLO's ‘People's War' Strategy and Israel's
Inadequate Response," Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs, Jerusalem Viewpoints No. 503, 1 September 2003 and coauthor (with Efraim Karsh) of La Guerre d'Oslo
(The Oslo War) (Paris: Editions de Passy, 2005). Dr. Fishman is
carrying out research on political warfare, particularly media warfare