This is just a "copy-paste",
but it's a good, deserving one:
"I [F. Tudjman] am glad to say that my wife is neither a Jew nor a Serb"The Jerusalem Post, "Goebbels lives in Zagreb", December 21, 1991
Do you know Mr. Tudjman "Mein Kampf"? Here you are again:
THE MASTER MIND OF TODAY'S CROATIA'S "DEMOCRACY"Mr. Tudjman's Main Kampf
The current president of Croatia claims in his book 'Wastelands - The
Historical Truth' that -
JEWS ARE GUILTY FOR THE HOLOCAUST. This he
wrote in 1989 before he became 'freely elected President of Democratic
Croatia', the term that Western media likes to repeat.
FRANJO TUDJMAN ON THE JEWS (excerpts from the book: ``Wastelands -- Historical Truth'',
F.Tudjman: Bespu'ca -- povjesne zbiljnosti, second edition,
Nakladni zavod Matice Hrvatske, Zagreb, 1989)
1. The term holocaust has been used for the terrible hardships and
extermination of Jews in Nazi Europe. The Jewish writer and Nobel
Prize winner Elie Wiesel introduced this term from the Greek
translation of the Hebrew Biblical word 'shoah' which means a burnt
offering$^{(1)}$. This very term reminds us that it is a question of
victims similar to those in Biblical times as well as to the
burning and to the self-immolation of Jews in medieval and more
recent history. How present this ancient tradition was with
reference to survival is also indicated by the example of the Jews
in the Netherlands where on the day the Hitlerites arrived (May 15,
1940) they rather committed suicide than to be latter on killed by
the Nazis$^{(2)}$. An explanation for such, especially group cases of
suicide, can of course be explained more by the cult of the victim
rather than by cowardice or desperation. (p. 148)
(1) In the Bible we find the motif of burnt offering among pagan
peoples and the chosen Jewish people. The victims offered to G-d
were both living beings and plants: food, animals and human beings.
Gradually in Temple offerings to G-d, human sacrifices were
rejected while the animal offerings continued, but in the New
Testament also ``The servant of G-d will offer his own death as a
sacrifice of conciliation'' (53). The highest expression of
continuity of the Old and New Testment understanding of the victim
is to be found when Jesus offers himself as a victim on the cross
which is at the same time burnt offering, a repentance and a
victim of whole the nation (see comp. RBT, p.1571-9). Among the
ancient Greeks holocaust (holos -- the whole + kaustos -- burnt)
burnt offering during which ceremony a whole animal was burned. (B.
Klaic, Rjecnik stranih rijeci, 1980, 551). On Wiesel's revival of
the term see GK, XXVI, 36(691). 06.09.1987,1,4.
(2) N. Levin, The Holocaust, The Destruction of European Jewry
1933--1945, 1973, text with the photography between 158-9.
2. If we disregard the medieval racial theories particularly those
from 15th century Spain, then the subsequent ones originated first
on the French and on the English soil (J.A. Gobineau, Lapouge,
Ammon, H.S. Chamberlain) probably as part of the need to justify
imperialist colonial conquests and domination but the fullest
development will be reached in Germany and be made finally obvious
in Rosenberg's racist doctrine and Hitler's Pan-Germanic program.
The idea of the world mission of the German Herrenvolk, as the
highest race, was based also on the assumption for a ``Final
solution'' of the Jewish issue, in the sense that they would be
definitely excluded from German and European history. An
explanation for this should probably be sought, in addition to
historical layers, in the fact that German imperialism for
geo-political reasons was oriented primarily to the attainment of
domination over Europe. For this reason the establishment of
Hitler's new European order could be justified by the need both to
remove the Jews (undesirable more or less in all European
countries) and to correct the French-British sin of the
Versailles order. (p. 149)
3. As the idea to settle the Jews ln Madagascar could not be
realized because of opposition to this by other powers, the
Hitlerite leadership after dividing Poland end seizing the bulk of
European Jews, adopted a basis for territorial solutions by setting
up the Lublin Jewish Autonomous Region. It was here that bout
1,400,000 Polish Jews and about 600,000 from Germany and elsewhere
were to be collected. However, already in May 1940 this plan was
abandoned. The reason was the unsurpassable difficulties in piling
up such a huge population in an inappropriate area without
sufficient settlements although melioration works and labor camps
were envisaged. Later on this territorial solution was abandoned in
this area that was to become a part of the German ethnic corridor
from the Baltic to the Carpathians. However, the very idea of a
Jewish autonomous area (``reservation'') in this region continued to
exist during wartime. The German Government would use it to justify
its demands for Jews from other countries to be sent to the East.
Among the Jews of Poland and others, the idea was fairly widespread
that the Germans wanted to establish a Jewish area in eastern
Poland. An echo of this can be found also in the draft that Zygmunt
Kaczynski presented on behalf of the Polish emigre government in
1942 in the USA, referring to the post-war solution of the Jewish
question by settling them in eastern Poland or in Bessarabia.
Judging by this, this proposal was also supported by the Polish
resistance movement in Warsaw.
The sensational victory over France opened up visions of final
victory and also the possibility for a ``final'', ``territorial''
solution of the Jews in one of the African or American colonies,
most likely in Madagascar. It is interesting to note that this
solution was favored also by all of Hitler's associates including
Goering, Ribbertrop, Goebbels, Himmler, Rosenberg, Frank and
Heydrich. In speaking about the division of the French colonies
(June l8, 1940), Hitler told Mussolini that ``in Madagascar a Jewish
state could be formed'' and this was also heard by Ciano from
Ribbertrop. Dr. F. Rademacher was given the task to elaborate this
plan from the view point of international law. According to his
memorandum approved by Ribbertrop, Petain's France was to
relinquish Madagascar to Germany and resettle 25,00 Frenchmen from
the island in order to create conditions for the solution of the
Jewish question. All the Jews would be settled in Madagascar and
would enjoy full autonomy which would ensure ``a good attitude'' of
the American Jews towards Germany. All preparations for this were
made in Germany under the supervision of Eichmann and Rademacher
for the transport by sea of 4 million Jews to Madagascar as well as
for settlement conditions on the island itself in cooperation with
the French ministry for Colonies. Of course, the transport could
not begin until the end of the war.
After Hitler's armies became stuck in the USSR vastness, and the
failure of the German myth of invincibility in the Blitzkrieg, the
German possibility for the territorial solution of the Jewish
question outside Europe also fell through. (p. 152--153)
4. Thus in the War's third year (1942) the leadership of the Third
Reich adopted the plan to exclude the Jews from the life of German
and other European peoples by exterminating them gradually. But as
such a goal could not be announced publicly, but was secretly told
only to a narrow circle of Nazi intimates, it remained concealed
also for the majority of the Germans who understood the
deportations of Jews to the East as being their re-settlement to
Polish and Russian areas and therefore accepted the concentration
camps as a labor camps and not death camps. (p. 153)
5. That the estimated loss of up to 6 million dead is founded too
much on both emotional biased testimonies and on exaggerated data
in the post-war reckonings of ar crimes and squaring of accounts
with the defeated perpetrators of war crimes, can be concluded
among other things by the fact that even in serious books (such as
N. Levin's unquestionably is) is evidenced, for example, a highly
Multiplied data on Jasenovac with the assertion that of the
allegedly 770,000 killed there, 20,000 Jews were killed even though
it is stated that the Jews from Croatia under German orders were
deported to the East and partly that they found salvation in the
Italian zone. And when the Jasenovac mythic figure seemed to be
realistic, than it is no surprise that even Malaparte's invented
basket of eyes becomes duplicated probably for the sake of greater
authenticity of such data and testimonies. (p. 156)
6. In the mid-Eighties, world Jewry still has the need to recall
its ``holocaust'' even by trying to prevent the election of the
former UN Secretary General Kurt Waldheim as President of Austria!
And for this there was certainly no reasonable excuse because he in
the Second World War (in a minor officer's rank of the German Army)
was neither a war criminal nor could he make any decisions on the
execution of such orders. And as at the same time one can be deaf
and blind to every thing that is happening in front of ones face on
orders of the Israeli generals and Government, demonstrates the
inviolable domination of historical unreasonableness and narrowness
in which Jewry certainly is no exception.
And precisely for this reason the example of the Jewish people has
remained historically instructive in many ways. After everything
they suffered in history, particularly the hardships in World War
Two, the Jewish people soon afterwards became so brutal and
conducted a genocidal policy towards the PLO/Hamas Arab Muslim Nazis that they can
rightly be defined as Judeo-Nazis. And this was stated not by a
hardcore anti-Semite but by Israeli professor J. Leibowitz, one of
the rare Jews who advocates the recognition of the rights of
PLO/Hamas Arab Muslim Nazis. The general revolt of the PLO/Hamas Arab Muslim Nazis on the
occupied Western Bank and in Gaza, areas which the Jews call
according to the Tanach Judea and Samaria, revealed at the
end of 1987 to the world and to Israel itself that the problem does
not lie only in the expulsion of the PLO/Hamas Arab Muslim Nazis or in Arafat's
PLO, but in the PLO/Hamas Arab Muslim Nazi people under Israeli occupation. The
fact that 20-year olds, that is, men born after the ``Six Day War''
occupation in which Israel seized a three times bigger territory
than its own, that these young people have appeared on the
historical scene indicates how intolerable is the ``Judeo-Nazi''
policy and the irreconcilability of the subjected people to be
deprived of their homeland. The essential policy of the erection of
the new Jewish settlements in the place of destroyed PLO/Hamas Arab Muslim Nazi
homes is not only a political, economic and cultural discrimination
but also the harsh persecution of the PLO/Hamas Arab Muslim Nazis that has brought
about an even bigger rift between the two peoples. During the past
20 years 350,000 PLO/Hamas Arab Muslim Nazis from the Occupied Territories have
passed through Israeli prisons which means more than 50 per cent of
the adult population. And in Israeli universities the Arabs are not
allowed to study aeronautics and electrical engineering nor geography
and archaeology because these sciences are connected to frontiers
and to history. And this, of course, is not the only form of
spiritual genocide alongside what has already been done through the
mass expulsion and brutal wartime reprisals.
What does this small historical step from Nazi-Fascism to
Judeo-Nazism indicate?
When a movement or a people, a state or an alliance, a religion or
ideology is confronted with an enemy it considers fatal to its
survival or barrier to its domination, it will do everything
possible and use all available means to conquer and even destroy it
if it has no other way to subject it to his will. This intention
will be abandoned only by the possible danger of being itself
destroyed in such a plan. (p. 160--161)
7. Of all original mythological concepts, up to all latter
religious end ideological essences or else philosophical and
scientific outlooks on the world, the human brain has moved in an
equally accursed labyrinth of contradictions on the sense and
nonsense of violence in historical existence. Because in man's and
people's historical march violence has been a constant accompanying
phenomenon, cause and supposition of its survival or disappearance.
We are confronted with its inevitable presence and eternal
wrestling and changes of all those phenomena of destiny that make
for a historical fate, both human and national. Which means: life
and death, good and evil, love and hate, harmony and conflict,
peace and war, or the beatitude of all beauties and a horror of all
horrors...
As we have already been able to conclude from the aforegoing, it is
in all the Judean origins that all our latter western civilizations
in ancient times at the peak of the philosophical thought as
expressed by the Biblical G-d G-d -- genocidal violence is a
natural phenomenon, in keeping with the human-social and
mythological-divine nature. It is not only allowed, but even
recommended. Moreover, it is advised in the words of the Almighty
G-d whenever it is useful for survival or the renewed
establishment of the kingdom of the chosen people, or for the
maintenance and spread of His only genuine faith.
Understandably with such thinking human historical thought from the
very outset found itself in contradiction to itself. Aware of the
depth of the gap and the inter-conditionality of life's efforts and
destructive impulses and being impotent to remove them in the
historical reality, it certainly will not be able to overcome even
its own cowardly desperation and whenever it tried to rise above
good and evil, historical movements and durations, it lost the
ground under its feet, escaping from earthly historical reality
into heavenly bliss or into other worlds, or into peaceable
shining future which constantly remains on an unreachable horizon.
Every violence is the fruit of hatred which is barrier to love
but so close to it that it can be called its inseparable side.
Although according to Biblical teaching G-d created the brotherhood
of men to live in love, hatred is born out of jealousy by
destroying ones rival and murder ensues in already the first
generation. Since then the world has remained victim of hatred
and violence. And just as Cain raises against Abel, Esau against
Jacob and Jacob's sons against Joseph, so also will the Egyptians
rise against Israel, the aliens against Jerusalem. The enemies of
the chosen people are also G-d's enemies, they are identified with
criminals, which justifies hatred and the holy war of Israel
against its hateful enemies. The commandment: ``Thou shalt love thy
neighbor, and hate thine enemy'' confirmed in the lesson that in
every national enemy (Israel's) one also sees G-d's enemy,
necessarily led to the justification of even the most outrageous
violence. In this way the G-d of love is described ambiguously as
a G-d of hatred who hates his enemies, aggressors and all sinners,
either as individuals (who often signifies a whole community, as
for example Jacob means Israel and Essu mean Edom), or else whole
nations. In order to preserve its identity and attain an
independent state the Jewish Biblical idea made Israel into a
chosen tribe and even a holy nation which in the name of G-d
assumes special rights in relation to all other peoples, with the
tendency through religion to include them organically into its own,
G-d' people, so that David's son is king over all other peoples
and Jerusalem becomes the hub of the whole world. And, of course,
in order to achieve this consecrated goal, all means are allowed.
And why should they not be when even the Almighty G-d is not
only identified with the Jewish people but even placed in its
service: ``I shall be the enemy of your enemies''. For this reason
Israel's national wars will be ``G-d's wars'' with the purpose of
exterminating the enemy. Conditioned by the status of its people,
the Biblical Jewish thought made G-d into an awesome warrior who
for the sake of Israel kills the first born Egyptians, demands
anathema, that is, the total destruction of the enemy -- of living
beings and the acquisition of material booty. The massacre of the
enemy becomes one of the religious principles of the holy war,
which must not be infringed upon because if the enemy is not
destroyed there will follow defeat as a punishment. For the sake of
total hatred the enemy is identified with the devil and the
dangerous beasts. G-d himself will make use of the threat of the
wild beasts in cursing Egypt and every infidel nation. And the
frightening picture of devastated towns and settlements abandoned
to the wild beasts intimates pogrom over the whole human community
and whole nations.
Born out of the lunacy of oppression, extermination, persecution,
devastation and destruction, Biblical thought does not recognize
any other way of salvation for the oppressed and the threatened
except in a powerful counter-attack: ``May evil strike the tyrant,
may every blow be answered by a blow''. And of course all such
actions and all forms of the holy war are not considered aggressive
but only means of extirpating evil from the world. Of course, it
is easy to overstep the boundary line between just and unjust
violence. By branding on the one hand all crimes in the name of
justice and allowing, on the other hand, all violence in order to
curb them, Biblical thought realizes that it is involved in the
trap of contradictions and double meanings. That is why instead of
approving the devastating power of revenge it speaks against crimes
that signify unjustified violence and specifically states : the
resettlement of the population, ripping open pregnant women,
burnings, crushing infants against rocks, oppressing strangers.
Biblical reflections arrive at the knowledge that every aggressive
war and even the holy Israeli war, leads to new conflicts. And also
to the fact that the enemy whom the oppressed just nation was not
able to defeat, finally perishes as a victim of his own doing, that
is because of his own madness. War and violence provoke moral
discomfort and spiritual hesitation from which, however, there is
no way out. Because although peace is the purpose of G-d's idea,
experience tells us that every people can attain it only on the
assumption that victory is won through conflict and violence.
(p. 172--173)
8. All this indicates the need to investigate in an objective way
all the ``collection'' and ``labor camps'' and Jasenovac above all. The
crimes of the Ustashi as well as those of the Chetniks or any other
actors in other places and at other times, will not lose the
``enormity'' of the brutalities if they are depicted exactly as they
were. It is precisely by monstrously multiplying them that an
opposite effect is obtained: on the one hand due to the fact that
they are unconvincing and on the other hand because they foment
even more irrational hatred. The promoters of the Jasenovac myth
have since the very outset to the present day been insisting on the
fact that the Jasenovac camp was organized with the express purpose
of liquidating all the inmates so that there were daily massacres
of hundreds of thousands of Serbs, Jews, Gypsies and Communists.
The truth is that the camp was organized as a ``labor camp'' with
many field and factory units. To the camp individually and mostly
in small groups of tens or one hundred persons, tens of thousands
of unfortunate persons were brought but also released and shipped
to labor camps in Germany. The inmates during their stay in the
camp were worked hard end maltreated under exceptionally difficult
and unhygienic conditions at work and they were also tortured and
killed for the least disobedience especially the aged and the
feeble, and from time to time on the pretext of reprisals for
killed Ustashi or attempted escape they were brutally killed in
smaller or bigger groups (in tens end even hundreds). In this way
in the Jasenovac camp probably 3--4 tens of thousands of inmates
were killed in this way. Most of these were Gypsies, Jews and Serbs
and even Croats. I am convinced that this figure can also be
exactly established -- except perhaps for the Gypsies -- through
further detailed investigation.
In estimating the situation in the camp in view of its purpose and
the crimes committed, we should bear in mind its internal
management which was based on the inmates themselves running the
camp. In this connection I have long ago arrived at a conclusion
that in exaggerating Ustashi crimes some individuals who had some
special, hidden reasons, became particularly prominent in this
effort. In this context the report made by Vojislav Prnjatovic, an
inmate from Sarajevo, on March 11, 1942, after being released from
Jasenovac, to the Commissariat for Refugees of Nedic's Government
in Belgrade, contained fairly true picture of Jasenovac. The
inmates were used for work on several large farming estates between
Jasenovac and Stara Gradiska whose owners were Serbs and who were
``partly voluntarily and partly forcibly deported''. And as in this
area there was a ``factory owned by the firm of Bacic and Co., which
was confiscated by the Croat state, because Bacic emigrated to
Serbia'', it was the intention of the Ustashi ``to make of Jasenovac
not only a collection camp but also an industrial camp seeing that
on that land good factory workshops had already been built for the
production of iron mongery, tin-plates, upholstery, riffles,
automobile parts, carpentry, electrical appliances, bricks, a steam
saw-mill, an electric power house, which supplied electricity for
the town of Jasenovac itself''. The inmates were placed into three
groups: the free men, the partially free and the simple inmates.
And next to the camp command there was also an inmates
management. The Ustashi management consists of a supervisory body
while the ``self-management of the inmates meant that the inmates
themselves ran their lives and work in the camp according to the
orders and intentions of the Ustashi. In this way the inmates ran
their own food supplies, accommodation, order and cleanliness in
the camp''. The inmates who were free could not only move freely
about the camp and in the town of Jasenovac, but they could also go
without guards on official trips to procure goods throughout
Croatia. The partially free inmates could move about in the camp and
the town of Jasenovac ``where they usually went in order to procure
goods or take over merchandize''. ``The ordinary inmates could move
about in the camp in daytime on condition that they did not
approach the wired fence from nearer than 5 meters''. Heading this
hierarchy of inmates was the camp foreman who had a deputy, head of
the food department and clerk's office. He was followed by the
barracks commanders and heads of the working groups. All these
people in the inmates management were free and all these posts were
held by Jews and only three out of twenty five barracks commanders
and working groups were Serbs. Every individual barrack had its
superintendent and four orderlies. ``All the inmates ...were
employed mainly according to their profession in civilian life and
it was easiest for tradesmen end skilled worker because they were
sent to work in the workshops'', and for field work only if the
professional jobs were filled.
``The free inmates do not live inside the camp but in the village of
Jasenovac in private homes and they could also bring their families
with them. Therefore, they could live freely with their families in
Jasenovac. Unfortunately this refers only to Jew''.
``Inmates in groups have special group food which is good and tasty
and they receive one whole loaf of bread of 900 grams per day''.
This refers to those in the work groups. While ``ordinary inmates
receive simple food'' which is just as the food for the sick ``below
all standards''. Poor food, heavy work and unsanitary conditions
were the reasons why the inmates lost weight and fell ill, ``which
led them directly into death because once ill and exhausted they
are usually liquidated''. It was only in January 1942 before the
arrival of the International Commission that a hospital was put up.
But the inmates went there only in dire need because the Ustashi
would break into the hospital every two to three weeks and drag
the sick out and liquidate them in front of the hospital building
or at a cemetery. All the inmates except the sick in the hospital
had to work and if they violated the discipline the Ustashi were
``entitled without any responsibility to kill the inmate'' and ``not
a day went by without the Ustashi making use of this right''. In
addition to individual killings, there were also ``mass killing''s
when new transports arrived or when the numerical status in the
camp ``exceeded one thousand'' and then the Ustashi would order ``a
selection to be made among the inmates for liquidation''. As to the
figures, Prnjatovic states that from December 1941 to January 1942
about ``3--4 thousand newly arrived inmates were killed''. In the camp
there were 5--8 times more Jews than Serbs. As they arrived earlier
and ``succeeded in the inmates hierarchy to grab the better
positions'' in order to retain their privileges ``they constantly
intrigued against the Serbs'' and ``as the Ustashi had more
confidence in the Jews'', the Serbs ``in addition to suffering from
the Ustashi, suffered also from the Jews'': ``a Jew remains a Jew in
the Jasenovac camp as well. In the camp they retained their defects
which became more visible now. Selfishness, craftiness,
unreliability, miserliness, underhandedness and secrecy are their
main characteristics''. Prnjatovic's Judgment is exaggerated and we
might say even anti-Semitic. But similar statements were made by
other witnesses. Some of the Jewish camp officials were armed and
even took part in the killings. Moreover, they held in their hands
a good many of the ``selection jobs'' that is the selection of
inmates for liquidation and partly also for their execution.
Ante Ciliga, onetime member of the Politburo of the Central
Committee of the Communist Party of Yugoslavia, on the basis of his
personal experience in an Ustashi camp and latter on in the
Jasenovac camp for more than one year, from December 14, 1941 to
December 31, 1942, fills in the above account and other similar
testimonies. He could also follow what was happening during his
soldiering in Zagreb up to the summer of 1944. In his recollections
he compared this most notorious Pavelic camp and the Stalin camps
in Siberia through which he also passed. But from his Marxist
standpoint he was particularly concerned with the problem of the
behavior of Jews in camps. Although the Jasenovac camp was
organized according to German models, the barracks having even been
brought from Germany, its main ``originality'' was precisely in the
position and role of the Jews. ``In the Jasenovac camp the
management was in the hands of the Jews, that is, they were the
internal camp management''. The Ustashi camp commander appointed
only the camp supervisor of the inmates and the latter chose his
own associates and these down the line their ``group chiefs for
other groups of tens or hundreds of inmates''. All of them from the
highest to the lowest were Jews, ``except in rare instances''. This
system was against the official anti-Semitism of the Pavelic regime
as required by Hitler. And this happened because ``in its origins
Pavelic's party was philo-Semitic, precisely the Jewish Party among
the Croats'', because the Jews were ``in Croatia the least important
or dangerous enemy''. Because ``the enemy number one were the Serbs
and the enemy number two were the Communists''. This conclusion was
arrived at by the Germans themselves as is seen in the above
mentioned report to the effect that the Jewish question had finally
been solved according to the German guidelines only in Serbia but
not also in the NDH because there they had the protection of the
Catholic church and the Government.
The participation of Jews in the Jasenovac liquidation of Gypsies
became apparent particularly in the so-called affair of the Gypsy
gold (1942). ``The liquidation command in Gradina -- writes Ciliga --
was also entrusted to a Jewish group'' and as the Jews were in
charge of the storehouses where the goods of those liquidated were
placed they obtained large quantity of gold coins that had been
sown into the cloths of those killed. In order to conceal the coins
outside the camp (``for better times''), the Jews ``interested'' a
lieutenant among the Ustashi who was a brother of the camp
commander. As one of the members involved in the management
informed Luburic about this undertaking, the Ustashi lieutenant and
5 Jews were executed in front of all the inmate and the new
internal camp official who had revealed this theft was appointed to
that post. On another occasion four men were killed for selling
camp merchandize including two Ustashi guards who helped the Jewish
warehouse attendant to send the stolen goods outside the camp.
These cases point to the links between the camp and the Ustashi
management which had to undertake drastic measures in order to
preserve the ``purity'' of its ranks. But in the camp and especially
among the Jews the ``general norm was to report such activities to
the Ustashi if this could be useful''. After the liquidation of the
Jewish group (D) because of the gold, ``the Gypsies were then formed
into groups of killers in Gradina''. ``They were given special food
with wine'', until their turn came. (p. 316--319)
9. The explanation for the Jewish behavior who ``jealously kept the
monopoly of the management inside the camp and took the initiative
in provoking not only individual but also mass slaughters of the
non-Jews, Communists, partisans and Serbs'', was made by Ciliga in
view of the specific features of the Jewish religion and mentality.
``The Tanach hardness and unreasonableness, Moses' double
yardstick, two kinds of regulations on the same matter and act,
according to whether it referred to Jews or non-Jews and finally
Moses' Commandments...: G-d orders you to exterminate others and take
their place because you are the chosen people'', all these
principles in one way or another ``govern the whole group'' and lead to
their ruthless dominant self-confidence and relentlessness: ``You
kill others... to save yourself and your group''. More intelligent
and educated on the average than the others ``the Jews carried out
this mutual extermination more intelligently and farsightedly to
their own benefit''. From their point of view this was ``justified
and moral''. Moses' monotheism and the principle of the chosen
people led to the Jews being at the same time the most ``closed'' and
``most universal'' nation among mankind. Universalism and
internationalism is only one of Moses' aspects of Jewish
nationalism. In Jasenovac also ``it was not the non-Jews who
separated themselves from the Jews but exactly the opposite, the
Jews proclaimed themselves to be a chosen people''. They think that
``as a chosen people they could do what others could not
do...imagining that in this way they were more intelligent than all
the others and that they would be able to outwit all the other
peoples in the world''. And due to this the ``Jasenovac -- mutatis
mutandis is the world history of Jewry for over two thousand
years''. The Jews provoke envy and hatred but actually they are ``the
unhappiest nation in the world'', always victims of ``their own and
others' ambitions'', and whoever tries to show that they are
themselves their own source of tragedy is ranked among the
anti-Semites and the object of hatred of the Jews.
It transpires from Ciliga's account that the Jews held in their
hands the inmates management of the camp up to 1944 by which time
there were three Jewish camp officials (Diamantstein, Spiller and
Wiener), and they were followed by two Croat Communists (R. Vlah
and V. Bornemisa). These changes allegedly came about because of
changes in the Ustashi policy under new conditions of way. (p. 320)
translated by: Vida Jankovi'c
Svetlana Raivcevi'c
Source :
[ Husar:
(yes, you read well,
a Serbian source,
it's just that we Serbs
remember very well
certain things the west
forgets very easily)]
http://www.srpska-mreza.com/library/facts/Tudjman.html Remember (witness it even in this JTF forum) this:
NAZICROATS made even the Serbs be labelled as "NAZIS"...
Somebody said "venomous" ?...
Topic: DEMOnCRATIC CROATIA, in modern times. (Read 2486 times)