Skip to content


Personal tools
You are here: Home » Documents » Nazi-Zionist Collaboration 2: Jewish community reactions

Nazi-Zionist Collaboration 2: Jewish community reactions

Document Actions



There is no doubt that Zionists have become rather frenzied about these allegations of Nazi collaboration and do consider them offensive.  Any Zionist who believes the allegations to be false is naturally offended about a movement he or she supports being accused of collaborating with something so vile as Nazism.


Most people who call themselves Zionists see Zionism as just a sort of Jewish cultural and philanthropic movement friendly to the State of Israel, and have very little idea of what it really involves.


The very small number of hard core Zionists who know anything about Zionist-Nazi collaboration also find it offensive to be reminded about this, and are naturally in a frenzy to prevent others finding out about it, although why they imagine that a public hearing will help suppress the information remains a mystery.


Thus there is no doubt that Zionist indignation about these particular broadcasts is quite genuine, even though a great deal of their outrage about other aspects of 3CR programs is somewhat synthetic.


As for the Jewish community as a whole, there is also no doubt a widespread hostile reaction on this question.


However, it is not all that widespread, and even more important, it is not a hostile reaction to what is actually broadcast on 3CR, but to what Jews have been told is being broadcast on 3CR.


2.1       Anti-Semitism and Anti-Zionism


There are two major anti-Semitic conspiracy theories, which are well known within the Jewish community and give particular offence to Jews.  One is that the holocaust never happened and is essentially a 'Zionist Hoax', as for example put forward by the neo-Nazi Professor Butz in his book 'The Hoax of the Twentieth Century'6.  The other is that the Holocaust was deliberately arranged by the Zionists who more or less tricked the Nazis into it in order to win sympathy.  This theory, based on the 'Protocols of the Elders of Zion' 7, has been put forward by the notorious anti-Semite Eric Butler in his book 'The International Jew'8.


Both these conspiracy theories use the term 'Zionist' primarily as a code word, or else a euphemism, for 'Jew', if they use it at all.


Both draw sustenance from reference to some actual facts about connections between Jews, or Zionists and Nazis, but intertwine them with various fantasies, and are quite clearly examples of anti-Semitic paranoia rather than any genuine analysis of Zionism as a specific political movement.


People in the Jewish community are very conscious that the use of 'Zionist' as a code word for 'Jew' is now quite common in anti-Semitic literature, whether done subtly as, by Professor Butz, and the modern Eric Butler, or crudely as in the old Eric Butler; or in modern neo-Nazi publications such as the newspaper 'Attack' which is freely distributed without legal interference in Australia.


This common use of the term 'Zionist', has been used, for example in 'The Australian League of Rights'9, by Andrew Campbell, an intelligence officer in the 'Civil Service', to suggest that left wing anti-Zionism is strikingly similar to the anti-Semitic views of the League of Rights.


In fact some of Eric Butler's material is strikingly similar, for the simple reason that it is copied directly from anti-Zionist publications, even to the point of enthusiastically endorsing the views of anti-Zionist Jews.


No doubt our evidence at this inquiry will also be used by Eric Butler in that way, but this cannot be helped.


The point is that if one wants to discredit Jews as an ethnic group, it makes a good deal of sense to talk about Zionism and the savage atrocities it has committed, just as it would make sense to talk about Nazism if one wished to discredit Germans.


An examination of League of Rights publications shows quite clearly that there is no flow of anti-Semitic ideas into genuine anti-Zionist material, but simply an adoption of some anti-Zionist arguments by anti-Semites.


There is a flow the other way in some propaganda from the more reactionary Arab governments a decade or so ago.  We have included in our evidence a sample from Israel's good friend of today, the Egyptian Government, in order to highlight the contrast between this sort of material and the purely anti-Zionist, not anti-Semitic material published by the Palestinian liberation forces and used in 3CR broadcasts. 


Nevertheless, considerable emphasis has been given in Zionist propaganda, to the existence of such Arab anti-Semitic literature, even years after it stopped coming out.  For example see Isi Liebler's book 'The Case for Israel'10 which is virtually a text book at Mount Scopus College.


This does create an atmosphere in which broadcasts apparently attacking 'Zionists' rather than 'Jews' will be viewed with some suspicion, rather than simply being taken at face value, within the Jewish community.


It would not be surprising if some anti-Semites did try to attach themselves to genuine anti-Zionist activities as an opportunity to have a go at Jews, just as anti-Catholics may have tended to line up with the left-wing of the Australian Labour Party (ALP) in the 1955 split.


In fact no such tendency has been observed in Australia to our knowledge, and it would not be tolerated if it ever did emerge.  On the contrary, it has always been noticeable that people with anti-Semitic inclinations have tended to favour Zionism, which confirms their prejudice that Jews are somehow alien 'to Australia and belong elsewhere.  Mr. B.H. for example, reflected a much more anti-Semitic attitude than is common in Australia, when as a child he got into a fight with another school student simply because the latter was Jewish, and he also reflects a much more pro-Zionist attitude than is common in Australia. 


He has admitted publicly that his earlier anti-Semitism is connected with his later pro-Zionism. But most Australians who are not particularly interested in bashing Jewish school students are not particularly interested in sponsoring Jewish emigration to the State of Israel either.


Another factor relevant to Jewish reactions to 3CR is widespread concern within the Jewish community about allegedly 'anti-Zionist' campaigns in the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe which appear to have little to do with Middle East politics and have been characterized as essentially anti-Semitic.


Despite 3CR's exclusion of the Australia Soviet Friendship Society in the same way that it excludes 'Paths to Peace', there is a lot of Zionist propaganda within the Jewish community about a sort of 'Soviet, Arab, Left-Wing Conspiracy', rather like the 'International Zionist, Communist Conspiracy'. This lends plausibility to Zionist efforts to picture attacks on Zionism in 3CR broadcasts as a form of anti-Semitism similar to the 'anti-Zionist' campaigns of Eastern Europe.


In fact, anti-Semitic use of the term 'Zionist' as a code word for 'Jew’, has nothing whatever in common with the correct use of this term on 3CR programs dealing with the activities of the State of Israel, and its supporters in Australia, just as normal references to 'Nazism' on 3CR and in other media has nothing to do with anti-German hate propaganda.


'Zionism', and 'Zionist' are simply the only correct terms that can be used in the context 3CR programs use them, and they cannot be avoided simply because anti-Semites also use these terms in a quite different way.  All 3CR programs can do about it is repeatedly state that they do not mean 'Jews', or 'Judaism', which is precisely what those programs do in fact repeatedly say.




The whole difficulty is that this situation is being deliberately exploited by Zionists, who themselves believe that a Jew is or ought to be automatically a Zionist, and who repeatedly confuse the issue by spreading deliberate lies within the Jewish community, saying that this is also the way 3CR programs use the term Zionist.


The responsibility for that clearly lies with the people who are doing it, not with 3CR.

Indeed, there is a problem that 3CR broadcasters tend to bend over backwards not to talk about Jews at all when it would be perfectly legitimate to discuss the fact that most Jews tend to be strongly pro-Israel, and to discuss the influence of the Jewish community in Australia, as an important factor biasing public debate against the Palestinian viewpoint. 


The distinction between ‘Zionist’ and ‘Jew’ is perfectly clear when the pro-Palestinian broadcasts talk about Zionism in connection with the activities of the state of Israel and its supporters in Australia, while anti-Semites also talk about Zionism in connection with the fluoridation of water supplies and other related matters. 


The distinction is also clear when pro-Palestinian broadcasts talk about the pro-Zionist and anti-Palestinian bias of the media in Australia and the various attempts by Zionists to manipulate and control the public debate on Palestine.


Nevertheless, this does leave the way open for Zionists to pick isolated phrases out of context and misrepresent the situation to the Jewish community as though 3CR programs were referring to the familiar anti-Semitic fantasies about a 'Jewish owned press' etc.


This does stimulate some reaction against 3CR, but not a great deal because most people, whether Jewish or not, have at least heard of allegations about the pro-Israeli bias of the media and can understand the distinction between this question and fantasies about 'Jewish ownership'.


Thus, when Rabbi Levi points, out that;

'not one Jew owns or controls a daily newspaper or TV or radio station in Australia'

most people hearing him, are not likely to take it for granted that this is really a refutation of anything said on 3CR.


But when 3CR programs talk about 'Zionist-Nazi collaboration' during the Holocaust, they are NOT using the term 'Zionist' in a similar context to its use in anti-Semitic conspiracy theories well known within the Jewish community, and in a context which has nothing directly to do with the Palestine question, but, which is well known to be a common theme in the propaganda of the Soviet Union, a country whose policies are now widely believed to be anti-Semitic.


Since most people, whether Jewish or not, have never even heard of accusations that there was collaboration between Nazis and Zionists during the Holocaust, except in the context of anti-Semitic conspiracy theories or Soviet propaganda, this is a situation where people are far more likely to readily accept that 3CR programs are saying what Zionists claim they are saying, and it is an almost ideal situation for Zionists to exploit.


Naturally Zionists do not wish to have to actually answer accusations of collaboration, and have in fact scrupulously avoided doing so - preferring to set up the 'expert witness' Dr. Foster as fall guy instead.  They have every reason to wish to create confusion as to what allegations have actually been made on 3CR, and have done so in their usual expert way by quoting isolated accusations without quoting the supporting evidence.


Not only have Zionists managed to create a widespread impression that 3CR is in some way associated with the anti-Semitic conspiracy theories of Professor Butz, in a way documented in 'Nation Review’ of 7 June, but within the Jewish community at least, Zionists have been able to create an impression that 3CR is in some way associated with the theories of Eric Butler.


What is really striking however, is that it is the very people who have been quite deliberately confusing this issue in order to stir up hostility within the Jewish community, who now appear before the Broadcasting Tribunal claiming to be offended!  Moreover, they are 'offended' mainly by broadcasts which have quite clearly been made in direct response to a debate provoked by them, and which are mainly angry responses to the vicious accusations of anti-Semitism that have constantly been made.


Thus, when Rabbi Levi says;

‘the anti-Semitic content of the 3CR programme has included the theory that the Jews murdered themselves in World War Two’

He is not commenting on the content of 3CR programs, as can be seen from the transcripts, but is simply repeating what he has been telling members of the Jewish community over, and over again.


When such lies, supported by quotations taken out of context are circulated widely within the Jewish community over a long period of time, it is not surprising that they can provoke some real indignation which would never have resulted from the actual broadcasts themselves. 


Zionists may not be quite as respected within the Jewish community as they like to think they are, but when they loudly and repeatedly claim that 3CR programs are 'exterminatory anti-Semitism, similar to Nazi propaganda during the holocaust', that the Station 'spews forth anti-Semitic material', and has a 'ban on Jewish groups affiliating' and so on; and when these claims are taken up in the national press, people in the Jewish community, like most others, will not readily assume that those making these statements are simply telling breathtaking lies.


We have submitted as evidence some genuine examples of Nazi propaganda and other examples of what Rabbi Levi calls ‘exterminatory anti-Semitism’ so that the Tribunal can see for itself just how much truth there is in his accusations.


The extreme viciousness of this accusation may also help the Tribunal to understand why some 3CR broadcasters have been provoked, unwisely perhaps, into replying with such terms of abuse as 'lying Zionist' etc.


2.3        How Zionist Misrepresentation of 3CR Can Be Effective


Our main point is that these accusations of Rabbi Levi and company go far to explain whatever hostility there is towards 3CR within the Jewish community.  The plain fact is that Rabbi Levi and company have a very much wider audience within the Jewish community than 3CR does, and most people who have heard the accusations against 3CR and signed petitions etc have never even heard the allegedly offensive programs.

Repeated and well advertised statements that 3CR continually ‘spews forth’ anti-Semitic material will not be taken literally by most Jews, any more than it will by most other Australians.


But there are substantial numbers of Jewish people in Melbourne, as Mr. Bloch, Rabbi Levi, Rabbi Gutnick, Sam Lipski and company well know, who have lived through a time when radio stations and newspapers really did spew forth such material, and who will not take such accusations with the necessary grain of salt and will not feel particularly inclined to tune into the station to check it out.


Quite a few such people do not speak English as a first language and are doubly vulnerable to this kind of cynical political manipulation.


On tuning in to a pro-Palestinian 3CR program and finding that it does attack 'Zionism' and 'Zionists' in a very hostile and uncompromising way, which unfortunately is sometimes not very sophisticated or persuasive, and is always totally opposed to the thoughts and feelings towards Israel of the large majority of Jews in Melbourne, it is not surprising if many Jewish people in Melbourne assume that they are not being lied to by messieurs Bloch, Levi, Gutnick, Lipski and company, and that other broadcasts they have not actually heard really do contain the juicy anti-Semitic sentiments they allege.


Since many people cannot distinguish clearly between being strongly opposed to the views someone else is expressing, and being personally insulted and offended by something 'offensive', it is really rather surprising that the campaign by Rabbi Levi and company, the 'well orchestrated campaign' described by Mr. Bloch, has not been more successful.


Some insight into the way indignation can be provoked by a dishonest campaign of this sort is provided by the evidence of Kim Beazley, of Perth, (Update-2005-leader of the ALP opposition) who would presumably be reliant on the VJBD rather than a radio receiver, for information as to what 3CR broadcasts in Melbourne have been saying, (from some 4500 km away). 


According to Mr. Beazley:

'By the strange perversion of fact which makes the station suggest that Hitler was an instrument of Zionism they would logically have to suggest Arab governments were instruments of Zionism, if persecutions and expulsions are Zionist strategy.  With a twisting of fact which is purely startling, they turn the undoubted fact that persecution of Jews has built up the migration flow to Israel into a plot by the persecuted, as if they were responsible for their own persecution.’

Of course, no 3CR program has ever suggested that Hitler was an instrument of Zionism, just as there has been no claim that Zionists welcomed the Holocaust, let alone organized it.  That Mr. Beazley should believe these are issues raised by 3CR is testimony to the efficiency of the Zionist propaganda machine rather than the transmitting power of that radio station.


Mr. Beazley, may be pleased to note however that Palestinian supporters have denounced reactionary Arab governments for persecuting and expelling Jews, pointing out that this does aid Zionism and has been actively promoted by Zionists.


Let us get it quite clear. The accusation that has been made in some 3CR programs is that some Zionists, including the top Zionist leadership, actively collaborated with the Nazis even to the point of assisting them to exterminate European Jewry. That is a very strong accusation and there is no need to confuse it with any stronger ones.

next: What is Collaboration?

back to CONTENTS

Created by anita
Last modified 2005-08-09 09:58 PM

Powered by Plone

This site conforms to the following standards: