Prague, 1952: When Communists took over Nazism under the guise of antizionism
NOTE: There are a number of errors of detail in the excerpts below -- e.g. it is not Rancrac prison, but Pancrac and the Velvet Revolution refers to the overthrow of Communism in the winter of 1989 and has nothing to do with the peaceful split by Czechs and Slovaks in 2002. The broad point it makes seems of interest, however
At Rankrac prison, Prague, on December 4th 1952, 5 a.m, the prison gallows executed Rudolph Slansky, the last of the eleven high ranking mostly Jewish Czechoslovakian officials who were unjustly convicted in what came to be known as the Slansky or Prague Trial. Fifty years later in November 2002, one month before the "Velvet Revolution" that separated the Czech Republic from Slovakia, Rankrak prison hosted an international conference of 900 scholars, who attempted to understand the monstrosity of the process that had led to the Trial and the executions.
The Prague Trial remains diabolically shocking due to a multiplicity of factors; some such as the extortion of false confessions by moral and physical torture, were apparent in the 1930s Beria Trials as well as in the post WW2 Show Trials in communist Hungary and Bulgaria, vis-a-vis the independent tendencies of Tito's Yugoslavia; however, in contradistinction to these Show Trials, the Prague Trial was the first to frame and charge its defendants as agents of Zionism and the state of Israel. It stands alone as the first of its kind to camouflage anti-Semitism as anti-Zionist and anti-state-of-Israel, significantly, before the 1967 war, and without any reference to the Arab-Israeli conflict.
It was the actual repertoire of the Goebbel's era, that was freely adapted into the Trial's pre-determined and dictated script, that the defendants, witnesses and prosecutors, rehearsed and then repeated during the court sessions, which were then broadcast daily on the country's radio. This pre-determined script recycled Hitleric anti-Semitic terms into the newly emerged communist Czechoslovakia, and post War-of-Independence democratic State of Israel.
The Trial's interchangeable and camouflaged `three ante-isms', although, devoid of any, or almost any, factual truth, proved, as intended by their deployers, absolutely credible and believable to the majority of the Czechoslovakian audience, accessed by the full blast of the country's media. Hence understanding the Trial, requires a thorough understanding of the use of its `three ante-isms': anti-Semitic, anti-Zionist and anti-State-of-Israel components, where, 1. As in Nazi Germany, being a Jew, or a Zionist or an Israeli is a crime in itself; and 2. Where the `three ante-isms' are not merely thematic to the Trial, but are the mechanism that due to its intrinsic popularity transforms the theme into a social and political reality.
The newsreels of the trial are chillingly effective, demonstrating clearly that the confessions are made under duress. The most prominent among the defendants, Rudolf Slansky, was identified in public documents along with ten others as "of Jewish origin." Slansky, a talented man, a good organizer, a tough political bureaucrat, (Meir Copic,, The Prague Trial - The First Anti Zionist Trial in the Communist Bloc, Hertzel Press New York,. 1987, p. 28) had been the General Secretary of the Central Committee of the Communist Party in Czechoslovakia, a key figure in the anti-Nazi resistance in Slovakia and in the 1948 communist seizure of power in Czechoslovakia. His fiftieth birthday on 31.July 1951, just prior to his arrest on 24.November.1951, was celebrated as a national hero. Justman also interviewed Professor Eduard Goldstucker, the first Czech Ambassador to the United Nations, subsequently Ambassador to Israel, who was made a witness at the Trial and was later convicted and imprisoned after a second Show Trial.
Justman weaves the harrowing story from first-hand accounts by the defendants' widows and children. Sharp editing allows two voices to dominate. One is Heda Margolius Kovaly, widow of Rudolf Margolius, the talented former deputy minister of foreign trade, who having survived Auschwitz and Dachau camps, believed, idealistically in Communism as the antidote and remedy to fascism and anti-Semitism. The other is the voice of Lise London, whose husband, Artur London, also former deputy of foreign trade, later survived his hard labor sentence to publish (1968) the first major account of the period. Justman's documentary is as compelling for the painful details, as for the rigorous analysis that ties them together.
While the film "The Confession", based on Artur London's diary, was made in 1970, it took the end of Soviet dominance in Eastern Europe to invoke a serious public interest in the Prague Trial, in Czechoslovakia and in international academia.
In the immediate sense, the 2002 Rankrac Conference is indicative of efforts by post 1989 historians to assist Czech society in coming to terms with its past. Professor Bradley Abrams of Columbia University, who specializes in Czech history, was at the Rankrak conference and answered an interviewer "That maybe nothing ground breakingly new in a factual sense, no new information has come out particularly about the Slansky trial." (Interview with Dean Vuletic, Radio Praha, 26 May 2003)...
The BBC in a program about the Slansky Trial, attempted to find the origin of the fabrication. It played a recording of a speech broadcast by Goebbels in Germany in 1941, which served as a kind of justification to the mass murder of the Jews. Gobbels gave a description of a "secret meeting" in Washington at which the so-called Morgenthau Plan was drawn up - he said by order of the international Jewish capital. The BBC commented that the Prague regime lacked imagination if it needed to resort to Nazi propaganda. Indeed, the similarities between the Hitleric public expressions on Jews and Zionists and those of the Prague Trial are prevalent throughout.
As the arrests began, anti-Semitic manifestations appeared in parts of the country. Although the term "Zionist" was used, the man in the street automatically subsumed "Jew". In Bratislava graffiti "Jewish owned" appeared on Jewish homes, and slogans "out with the capitalists and the Jews". With Slansky's arrest there was an upsurge of anti-Semitism in the communist party proper. Party branches demanded to ban "citizens of Jewish origin" from party membership; and "to transfer Jews from office jobs to manual labor at which they will be able to prove their attitude to the regime" etc. (Cotic The Prague Trial- The First Anti Zionist Trial in the Communist Bloc, p. 232)
In Israel, Member of Knesset Eliezer Livneh (Mapai) lamented:
"What is happening these days has at once a global historical meaning and an immediate political one... The Cominform has become an openly anti-Semitic International. All the Jew hatred that was accumulated by Nazi propaganda has been blended anew in this trial, The Nazi spirit has come to life again. People who heard the German radio quoting from Prague in the German language thought that Ribbentrop and Goebbles, Goring and Streicher, had come back." (Cotic, The Prague Trial- The First Anti Zionist Trial in the Communist Bloc, p.186)
The Islamist Role in the 2008 Canadian Elections
If you are Canadian and Islamist, you probably voted for the New Democratic Party (NDP), which won 18.2% of the vote on October 14, 2008. This was an increase in of about 1% in the vote and led to seven more seats from the 2006 elections. However, the party could not budge itself from its permanent 4th place in Canada's parliament. Endorsed by the Canadian Islamic Congress (CIC), the left-leaning NDP has shown an incredible lack of understanding of the Islamist agenda and how soft jihadis are using democratic institutions by manipulating our respect for multiculturalism.
As a political ideology, in the long-term Islamism seeks to establish an Islamic state in the North America, but this is barely mentioned by the suave and polished young Islamists who appear in expensive suits and with a flourish of legalese and the right disarming accents. While a Taliban style overthrow is unlikely, in the short term, Islamists hope to fundamentally change western foreign policy in favor of the foreign governments that fund them and organizations they ideologically adhere to, such as the Muslim Brotherhood.
Recognizing this threat, Marc Lebuis, who runs "Point de Bascule", invited moderate Muslims Tarek Fatah, Salim Mansur and me to participate in a conference in Montreal to address the infiltration of Islamists into the Canadian political system, where the first real arena has been the NDP.
The NDP was founded by social democrats, and was originally, as noted by Mansur, a critical opponent of Communism, and a key element in "denying communists in Canada the opportunity to acquire any shred of legitimacy by posing as defenders of the working people." Today, however, it allows itself to be used by an equally potent ideological enemy, radical Islamism. The working class in the West now includes immigrants, who as ethnic and religious minorities complain of the classic oppression against which the NDP wishes to be a voice of protest.
But, the NDP fails to distinguish between the socio-economic concerns of Muslim immigrants in Canada and the well-funded, ideological organizations that purport to speak for them.
The Canadian Islamic Congress (CIC) is one such organization. The President of CIC, Mohammad El-Masry, is notorious for his anti-Semitic statements, his call for Sharia courts in Canada, and agitation for an anti-Israeli foreign policy.
Canadian Muslims mattered in this national election because they were, some argued, a swing vote in certain ridings. El-Masry endorsed the NDP, and encouraged voter registration to bolster it. Jack Layton should have repudiated Elmasry's support but did not.
Toronto NDP candidate and lawyer, El Farouk Khaki caused a stir recently when he defended a Muslim youth convicted for his involvement in a terrorist camp in Canada. After the judge threw out the youth's defense that "no real Toronto terrorist group existed because its goals were too fanciful to be achieved," Khaki stated that if you are Muslim in Canadian courts you will be presumed guilty until proven innocent. He went on to accuse the judge of having an anti-Muslim bias. This plays into the victimhood complex Islamists want Muslims in the West to fall into. Khaki was not chastised by NDP leader Jack Layton or any other party candidate.
In Montreal, the NDP paraded Samira Laouni, as "the first veiled candidate," in the province. She ran from the riding of Bourassa and made no attempt to hide her support for what she referred to as "real Shariah." She did not win. Jack Layton should have vetted out NDP candidates who favor Sharia like Laouni, whom Mansur has called a "CIC operative."
It seems strange that with Canadian forces fighting the Taliban in Afghanistan, the same support for Taliban style orthodoxy is allowed in Canada. Besides pro-Sharia politicians like Laouni, Islamists are spreading their message on the street. In Mississauga, Ontario, a woman by the name of Farhat Hashmi runs an Islamic school for girls. Hashmi wears a full niqab (face covering) and encourages young girls to emulate her. She is known for promoting a very conservative Islamic ideology that is based on Wahhabism. She, like other Islamists is in favor of Sharia in Canada.
The results of the Canadian election were an eye-opener because all Muslim candidates from all parties lost, with the exception of Yasmin Ratansi, who for some time has been trying to distance herself from her Muslim identity despite being the first Muslim woman to get elected to the Canadian parliament..
This is a clear indication that because of the incessant and unreasonable demands by Islamists, Canadians punished all Muslims. Most ordinary Canadians, well-meaning and decent folks, are fed up with demands for unreasonable accommodation and are no longer willing to put up with politics disguised as religion in the public sphere. Although Canadians are politically correct and diplomatic in public, the election result shows their true feeling about the trend that Muslims who may have an Islamist agenda are not welcome in Canada. Of course, the usual suspects are already screaming Islamophobia - again...
The lesson for all Muslims is written on the wall: If they are unwilling to stand up to the Islamists in their communities and stop the influence of Saudi Arabia and Iran, we will all suffer because of the actions of a few.
Judas bishops confronted
Anti-abortion Catholics from several Eastern states plan to pull the welcome mat out from under the U.S. bishops in Baltimore next week and replace it with protests alleging that the bishops did not take a strong enough stand against abortion during the election. The bishops' alleged inaction led to the election of Barack Obama as president, said Randall Terry, founder of Operation Rescue and organizer of the protests.
The demonstrations, expected to attract participants from Virginia, Maryland, Delaware, and Pennsylvania, are scheduled to take place outside the Marriott Waterfront hotel Sunday and Monday afternoons. The bishops are meeting there Monday-Wednesday during the annual fall meeting of their umbrella organization, the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB). "A key factor in the election of Barack Obama was the silence of U.S. Catholic bishops," Terry said. "They had a duty to clearly and courageously defend the lives of unborn children. Most of them failed miserably. Their silence and cowardice over the last 12 months paved the way for Obama's victory, and will cost millions of innocent babies their lives."
Some protesters will wear Obama masks and carry signs proclaiming, "Bishops: Thank you for your silence!", Terry said in a news release Friday announcing the protest. Another poster will say, "Bishops: I couldn't have been elected without You!" And still other messages will be unveiled that day, Terry said.
During the run-up to the election, individual dioceses throughout the country based their programs on a statement the bishops approved during their 2007 fall meeting. That statement, "Forming Consciences for Faithful Citizenship: A Call to Political Responsibility from the Catholic Bishops of the United States," covered a range of topics, including abortion, violence in society, marriage issues, poverty, healthcare, immigration reform, and military force the bishops said Catholics should consider in choosing candidates.
Terry and many other advocates have criticized the statement for enveloping too many issues instead of focusing on abortion. He did so again Friday, branding the statement as "a disaster. It was used by every pro-abortion Catholic in the country to justify voting for Obama. "God have mercy on" the bishops, Terry said. "Let's hope they recognize the abject failure of 'Faithful Citizenship,' and formally abandon it, or radically rewrite it in a way that accurately reflects church teaching." A few bishops who took strong stands on the election, such as saying Catholics should not vote for candidates who support abortion, will be acknowledged and honored during the protests, Terry said.
After Obama was elected Tuesday, Cardinal Francis George, archbishop of Chicago and president of the USCCB, sent the president-elect a message on behalf of the bishops saying, "Our country is confronting many uncertainties. We pray that you will use the powers of your office to meet them with a special concern to defend the most vulnerable among us and heal the divisions in our country and our world. We stand ready to work with you in defense and support of the life and dignity of every human person."
Austrian TV pundit says black people 'are not civilised enough to rule'
An adverse reaction to Obama. It is true that Obama could be seen to discredit blacks in many ways -- with his extreme Leftist views, ignorance ("57 States" etc.) and malodorous associations. What is true of one black or even most blacks is not true of all blacks, however. Is this the forerunner of a process where Obama's deeds discredit black political candidates forevermore? Sad if so but Leftists might be pleased to have achieved their usual implicit aim of destruction
Austria's official state broadcaster is refusing to sack a senior political commentator who said blacks were not civilised enough to rule. Klaus Emmerich, the retired editor-in-chief of Austrian broadcaster ORF's news and current affairs service, is the station's top political commentator for U.S. affairs. Der Spiegel likened him to Wolf Blitzer, CNN's legendary political commentator. But covering the election in which Barack Obama was elected American president, Emmerich said: 'I do not want the western world being directed by a black man. And if you say this is a racist remark, I say you are damn right it is.'
Following his outburst, the moderator prevented Emmerich from speaking again. But Emmerich took an even harder line in newspaper interviews later, calling Mr Obama's victory 'a highly disturbing development' because 'blacks are not as far advanced in the civilisation process nor in their political progress'. He went on to tell Die Presse that Mr Obama has 'a devil-like talent to present his rhetoric so effectively'.
Emmerich, who has worked in the news for 61 years, made his incendiary remarks just five weeks after Austria drew international condemnation when two far-right parties won 29 per cent of the vote in national elections.
The row over his comments comes as Italian premier Silvio Berlusconi was blasted for calling Mr Obama 'tanned', apparently in an inept attempt at humour. The 80-year-old pundit called Obama a 'talented man, but a branded man' - apparently referring to the president-elect's skin colour.
ORF bosses disassociated themselves from Emmerich's remarks but have refused to ban him from future work. They say they are still reviewing the situation. 'We have never had any comments from Mr. Emmerich which would indicate he has such opinions,' said Pius Strobl, head of communications at the channel.
Political correctness is most pervasive in universities and colleges but I rarely report the incidents concerned here as I have a separate blog for educational matters.
American "liberals" often deny being Leftists and say that they are very different from the Communist rulers of other countries. The only real difference, however, is how much power they have. In America, their power is limited by democracy. To see what they WOULD be like with more power, look at where they ARE already very powerful: in America's educational system -- particularly in the universities and colleges. They show there the same respect for free-speech and political diversity that Stalin did: None. So look to the colleges to see what the whole country would be like if "liberals" had their way. It would be a dictatorship.
For more postings from me, see TONGUE-TIED, GREENIE WATCH, OBAMA WATCH (2), EDUCATION WATCH INTERNATIONAL, FOOD & HEALTH SKEPTIC, GUN WATCH, SOCIALIZED MEDICINE, AUSTRALIAN POLITICS, DISSECTING LEFTISM, IMMIGRATION WATCH INTERNATIONAL and EYE ON BRITAIN. My Home Pages are here or here or here. Email me (John Ray) here. For readers in China or for times when blogger.com is playing up, there is a mirror of this site here.