Last modified: 2014-05-29 by zoltán horváth
Keywords: palestine | germany | nazi | world war ii |
Links: FOTW homepage |
search |
disclaimer and copyright |
write us |
mirrors
image located by Victor Lomantsov, 04 August 2012
Interesting photo of Palestinians with flags
http://www.diletant.ru/blogs/1321/2528/ Inscription: "Palästina".
Photo made in 1937.
Victor Lomantsov, 04 August 2012
This seems to be a photo of Palestinian Arab members of the
German (Nazi) military, as borne out by the other
photos, which show Haj Amin Al-Husseini, the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, meeting
with Hitler and Himmler. Husseini was an enthusiastic supporter of the Nazis and
helped raise (albeit not too successfully) Muslim units for the
Waffen-SS and Wehrmacht.
(Of course, he and the Nazis saw eye to eye on the "Jewish Problem" and saw this
cooperation as part of that cause in their respective spheres.) I've read about
Bosnian and Azerbaijani units, but it's news to me that there were units (if
indeed there
were, and this isn't just propaganda) from Palestine.
It should also be pointed out that there was Nazi sympathy among some (but, it
should be stressed, not nearly all) of the Templers, Christian German settlers
in Palestine. (They were the namesakes of the "German Colony," a neighborhood
not far from where I live in Jerusalem, and other neighborhoods around Israel,
for example one right in the middle of the Defense Ministry campus in Tel Aviv.
A couple of years ago, if I recall correctly, Nazi flags and even a
swastika-patterned inlay floor were discovered in an old house in the Jerusalem
neighborhood, interestingly but perhaps coincidentally not far from the old
headquarters of the Mufti.) Some of these sympathizers enlisted in the German
military and there was even a Hitler Youth branch in Jerusalem, so this photo
may well not be a picture of Arabs at all but of one of those groups, and the
author of the linked page may have made a mistake.
Nachum Lamm, 04 August 2012
This flags are flags of the Nazi Youth Organisation "Hitler-Jugend", regional
branch of Palestine. The historical context to the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, Haj
Amin Al-Husseini, is correct.
Jens Pattke, 05 August 2012
Actually, I would tend to doubt the 1937 date unless there is some compelling
reason to believe it. What we have here is a scene of the "victors" (for want of
a better term) displaying the symbols of the "vanquished". The uniforms of the
military personnel appear to be British-style, not German, to me and the fact
that civilians are involved tell a specific story even if we are not privy to
it.
The two flags, that of the "Palestine" regiment of the Hitler Youth and of the
German Young People, are, I think, being displayed as trophies. Here is my
theory on when and where and why:
There was a German settlement in the British mandate of Palestine founded in
1908 named Waldheim. The citizens of this town were all German citizens. After
the Nazis took power in Germany, that government handled all of the affairs of
Waldheim, including supplying appropriate Nazi teachers and establishing Nazi
institutions such as the Hitler Youth. A branch of the latter, including a large
camp, for all of Palestine was established there in the 1930s (likely 1935-36).
By the time the war started some 350 men from Waldheim had returned to Germany
to serve in the German Army.
In 1939, after hostilities were commenced between Germany and Great Britain, the
remaining settlers, mainly the old, the sick, and the fanatical evangelicals,
were interned there along with other Axis soldiers captured during the course of
the war. By the end of the war and shortly thereafter, almost all of the German
residents were either transported to Australia or were otherwise expelled from
Waldheim.
The Haganah entered the nearly abandoned settlement 17 April 1948 and on 12 May
1948 a group of young Zionist pioneers from Czechoslavakia, Austria and Romania
established Kibbutz BaMa'avak (lit. "In The Struggle") in the abandoned colony.
Three years later, the name was changed to Alonei Abba in memory of Abba
Berdichev, who was parachuted into Czechoslovakia in 1943 to assist clandestine
British forces, but was captured and executed in 1945. (See Wikipedia entry on
Alonei Abba.)
I'm guessing the photo shows the members of the new kibbutz displaying the
trophies of their taking of the settlement in April or May 1948, or some such.
Dave Martucci, 05 August 2012
A big mistake, I am afraid, for it conveys a very incorrect idea of the
political situation in Palestine in the 1930s and 1940s. Given the
politically-charged connotations of this photo (notably the word "Palestina" on
Swastika flags), and given the propensity of Zionist revisionists to willfully
or ignorantly distort the historical context of this photo in order to advance
current propaganda, it behooves us to set the record straight.
The Russian blogger (Dmitry Puchkov) who originally posted
this photo, stated
incorrectly that it was 1937 with "happy faces of Palestinians" (presumably
Palestinian Arabs.) This is impossible on many levels. His linkage of this photo
to the schemes of Haj Amin al Husseini, the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, is also
disingenuous at best.
Jens Pattke and Dave Martucci are, of course, correct that the two flags are
Third Reich youth flags. Dave is also very much on the right track with his
speculation about the historical context.
The German consulate in Jerusalem was closed when the British captured the city
in 1917. It reopened in 1924 and enjoyed perfectly good relations with both
German Jews and Palestinian Jews. With Hitler's accession to power in 1933, the
consulate in Jerusalem entered a surreal period of enforcing Nazi racial policy
on German Jews (such as professors at the Hebrew University) while
simultaneously continuing cordial relations with Palestinian Jews (even though
consul staff had been quickly replaced with loyal Nazis.) Hitler's
Englandpolitik and Britain's strong German sympathies (including notably King
Edward VIII in 1936) meant that both sides strained until the outbreak of war in
1939 to remain friendly. This also meant that the substantial German community
in British Mandate Palestine operated freely and openly under the aegis of their
internationally-recognized Nazi government in Berlin. Here are photos of Germans
freely flying swastika flags in British Palestine between 1933 and 1939:
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_eQNPu6zzxaU/SGxXOoB2Q6I/AAAAAAAACrw/A8iEUsk8ugQ/s1600-h/m.0.2902.20.1.9.jpg
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_eQNPu6zzxaU/SGlLmLmNd3I/AAAAAAAACqI/iJ3ePH9R2vA/s1600-h/64754700.jpg
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_eQNPu6zzxaU/SGlLmc0dM8I/AAAAAAAACqQ/vp4ytvrmlrQ/s1600-h/80744257.jpg
Note that these are Germans in Palestine, not Palestinian Arabs. I challenge
anybody to find a legitimate instance of Palestinian Arabs embracing the Nazi
swastika as their own in British Palestine, even in the entourage of al
Husseini. (It's not impossible, but the probability is almost nil.) After the
Arab Revolt of 1936, al Husseini fled first to Lebanon (where he subsequently
escaped French house arrest), then to Baghdad where he fomented a little trouble
for the British, then to Italy and finally to Germany. Despite the smiling
photos of al Husseini with Hitler and Himmler in 1941, the Nazis did not give
him all he wanted, and historians differ as to whether al Husseini was driven by
genuine antisemitism or rather by opportunistic nationalism at a time when he
thought the Germans would win the war. Al Husseini's influence in British
Palestine after his 1937 departure was very limited, and later quite discredited
amongst Palestinian Arabs.
So what about that photo? (and here is a slightly
larger copy)
Dave Martucci is absolutely correct that this is a classic victor's pose with
war trophies. (Note that the flag in the foreground is soiled.) The uniforms of
the men in the back row are definitely British. Although the cap badges are
indistinguishable, they are possibly Jewish remnants of the (British)
Palestine Police. They do not appear to be Haganah (but I could be
mistaken.) Nothing about this photo would have been possible in 1937.
Dave speculates that these trophies were found in Waldheim (Alonei Abba), but I
think the buildings in the background suggest a much more built-up area like
Jerusalem. During the 1948 war Israeli soldiers found a cache of Nazi flags,
badges, and documents (including passport applications) in a disused building on
the southern outskirts of Jerusalem, thought to have been the Nazi headquarters
in Palestine in the 1930s. (When the German consultate closed in 1939, many
records were passed to the Spanish consulate for safe-keeping, and perhaps later
conveniently "misplaced" by the Spanish.) After the fighting stopped, H.D.
Schmidt went to examine the artifacts and described his findings in "The Nazi
Party in Palestine and the Levant 1932-9" (International Affairs, v. 28, no 4,
Oct 1952, p. 460-469.
Our photo in question almost certainly depicts this 1948 find in Jerusalem. The
men are Jews triumphantly displaying Nazi trophies found three years after the
defeat of Germany. Neither the men nor the flags are Arab.
T.F. Mills, 06 August 2012
Somewhat larger at
http://isradem.com/uploads/posts/2010-05/1272742598_0_40f4e_23d45034_xl.jpg,
but I can't find the article to go with it.I'm not sure what we're seeing,
though. Apart from maybe the man in the middle, nobody in the picture seems to
like being there. If they are "Palestinians", whatever that meant at the time of
the photograph, they apparently are not the kind who like such flags.
In the comments, other years are mentioned, and someone with a name I can't
transliterate seems to insist on 1948. I was going to ask whether anyone could
ask the author how he dated the photograph, but it would seem this already
happened in the comments. Could someone check those comments further; there's
are whole blocks of text in there, and the style suggests added information.
Maybe some of it pertains to the photograph.
Anyway, which flags do we see, and are these specimen different in anyway?
Peter Hans van den Muijzenberg, 26 August 2012
The more I look at that photo the more I am persuaded that the men in the
picture, although in British uniform (or British-style, note) are in fact
Israelis; this is buttressed by the young boys up front, who certainly are
neither British nor Arab. That would likely date this picture as the 1948 war,
and not earlier. I couldn't find the text on isradem.com that went with the flag
(they have some 26 pages of photos) but that might help.
One further comment: I ran a Google translation of the last two Russian
paragraphs above the photo. Allowing for the awkwardness of machine translation,
they read: "See for yourself. This is a picture of 1937. Her joyful faces of
Palestinians. In fact, no state of Israel also, did not. There is some (already
considerable, however, especially after 33 years) the number of Jewish settlers
living in the Promised Land. And it is in the hands of the Palestinian youths?
Under which banners they intend to go to the fight against the infidels? With
whom to fight? And who are considered allies in the "holy war"? "
It should be noted that the Jewish settlers of Palestine before 1948 referred to
themselves as "Palestinians", whereas the Arabs of the area did not. They only
assumed that label after the '48 war.
Albert S. Kirsch, 26 August 2012
For some reason, the two messages that give what I think are the definitive
answer to the question are not automatically included in the thread. Simply put,
this flag was among Nazi paraphernalia, about a decade old, found by
Jewish soldiers in a building in Jerusalem's German Colony during the 1948 war.
They had been used by Nazi groups in Jerusalem in the 1930's; when the Nazis
were thrown out by the British, the possessions of the consulate (or related
bodies) were given to another embassy, which put them in storage until they were
found.
Nachum Lamm, 26 August 2012
Let me emphasize what I was being too polite to say the first time. I wrote that
blogger Dmitry Puchkov's "linkage of this photo to the schemes of Haj Amin al
Husseini, the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, is also disingenuous at best." It is, in
fact, part of the virulently nasty propaganda that the Nazi Germans and the
Palestinian Arabs are "the same enemy" of Jews. And many perfectly decent
people fall for this, because, as archaeologist Graham Hancock says, humans are
a species with amnesia. How quickly we forget our own times, let alone that of
our parents and grandparents, let alone truly ancient history.
Historians call this delusional process the nunc pro tunc (now for then)
fallacy, or prolepsis, or presentism. Out of ignorance we try to understand the
past through the lens of our often flawed conception of the present. In the case
of our controversial photograph of "Nazis in Palestine" very few people
remember, let alone can conceive, of a German colony in what is now Israel,
especially Germans identifying themselves with Nazi paraphernalia. So we try to
understand the photo in the context of the only present that we know, that is
one of conflict between Jewish Israelis and largely Muslim "Palestinians." Part
of our evolutionary nature is a duality, the uglier side of which tends to view
survival as being at the expense of others. So, we inject denigration of the
"others" into our mythological understanding of ourselves. Or worse, when we
imagine our survival instincts to be seriously threatened, we demonize and
dehumanize them. There is hardly anything more demonic in our post-1945 memory
than swastikas (even if few recognize the real fascist sentiments that continue
to thrive in our midst.) Whilst ignorance is understandably at the root of
misidentifying this photo, it is hard to believe that prejudice is not the
motivation for unquestioningly flying with the wrong narrative.
As evolutionary biologist E.O. Wilson says, our brains evolved to help us
survive in this world and only incidentally to understand it at greater depth
than needed for survival. See for instance Michael Shermer's "The Believing
Brain" for an excellent analysis of the political and religious implications of
brains that have little adaptive use for "truth" unless we choose against the
grain to devote ourselves to the "incidental" science of history and the history
of science. It is only in the 18th-20th century that we have truly begun to
understand our environment, both natural and historical. Yet 21st century
nation-states and religions still define themselves not by a rigorous
examination of the complicated threads of history, but by simplistic mythology
rooted in our forgetfulness and penchant for self-serving distortion.
Flags, both in design and in interpretation, are largely an auxiliary of
mythology, i.e. how people define themselves rather than what they really are.
I think it behooves us to persistently push vexillology a step beyond mere
identification into the "incidental" realm of true wisdom, acknowledging the
difference between mythology and history. We have done a good job of debunking
the Betsy Ross myth. We need to apply that sort of care in everything we do, not
fearing to tread into contentious myths. Perhaps in so doing we can help make
the planet a little more harmonious
T.F. Mills, 29 August 2012
A brilliant analysis!
I know that it isn't usual to quote whole message of such a length, especially
for a short answer like this, but I felt it wouldn't be right to omit anything
only for the sake of brevity.
Tomislav Todorović, 29 August 2012
That's the best post I've had the pleasure of reading on FOTW-ml for a very long
time. I urge the relevant editor to quote it at length when he uses it for
FOTW-ws.
André Coutanche, 29 August 2012
The ideas emphasized by T.F. Mills are not much off from the views Riceour has
on ideology. In peril to move off the flags topic too much, so I'll try to keep
it brief, one of the most respected sociologists regarding the issue of
ideology, Paul Riceour wrote about three functions of ideology: first, the
reality dissimulation; second, the authorities legitimacy and third, the social
integration.
(RICOEUR, Paul. Lectures on ideology and utopia. Chicago: University of Chicago
Press, 1975.) It is appropriate to use sociological concept of ideology when
studying flags - as in most cases - flags are graphical and material expression
of ideological concepts of whomever devised them and use them. Therefore, in
this regard, flags serve to dissimulate, legitimate and integrate. With
dissimulation Riceour considers a form of deception in which one conceals the
truth, or in other words a creation of a false picture of oneself. Using flags
to dissimulate consists of concealing the truth, or in the case of half-truths,
concealing parts of the truth, like inconvenient or secret information. Thus
using symbols on a flag is a choice of showing things that one finds positive
and omitting and showing them differently those that one considers negative -
giving impression that one is not what one is. Together with functions to
legitimate one's authority and integrate certain group, the use of such
photographs of flag use out of context indeed seems to be prime example of
ideology at work.
Considering humans to be amnesic animals, to paraphrase Hancock mentioned by
Mills, it does not take much graphical skills to include dissimulating elements
in flags (or in the use of them), to be able to deceive intended audience in
promotion of one own ideology. And one should not blame flags, as they are
inherently simplistic in presentation of one's identity - they tend to include
and emphasize only a small number of mythological concepts - if they would not
be so simple they would not easily function as flags - as we know from, for
example, Ted Kaye's Good Flag Bad Flag manual. And once you have to choose only
a few ideas, they are necessarily based on mythology and have no ability to
express all the facets and intricacies of the modern post-industrial society. In
that regard, on can easily consider that flags, especially those of nations, are
concept of pre-21st century nation-states ideologies and even earlier
"simplistic mythology rooted in our forgetfulness and penchant for self-serving
distortion".
It is the role of modern vexillology, as I see it, to debunk the myths, make
them known and understandable and thus disarming them from misunderstanding and
misuse. It would, I believe, not make these symbols any less effective and
potent in their positive social function, but would render them less prone to be
misinterpreted as a vehicle for spreading intolerance.
Željko Heimer, 29 August 2012
As much as I hesitate to intrude in the impressive discussion being held by T.E.
Mills and Željko Heimer on what I'll label "Flags as an Auxiliary of Mythology,"
as a retired lower level educator, I add that one of the hardest things faced by
the practicing educator/teacher is helping students understand the motives and
meanings of symbols used by those who were contemporaries of historical events.
Students, who see all things in black and white and through their own
contemporary eyes continually make judgments about historical events and people
based on their modern perceptions of events and find it difficult to see them
through the eyes of those who lived it. Simply saying that the meaning of
historical actions, events, or symbols, such as those used on flags, had a very
differently meaning to those not blessed with historical hindsight, doesn't in
many cases help their historical understanding because of the modern mythology
that has grown up around them. Today's youth can't understand that the bigotry
and prejudices of the 19th and 20th Centuries were in many cases not even
conscious to those living then, and their acceptance of what we now view as
outrageous and unacceptable behavior is partly based on completely different
perceptions of reality.
My apologies for inserting the mundane into the discussion, but it triggered my
memories of my own teaching years and the difficulties I had in setting aside my
own cultural preconceptions and trying to make a balanced presentation of
historical events.
Pete Loeser, 29 August 2012
We have accomplished so much in vexillology, documented a mountain of
information, but are still just crossing the frontier of analysis. That is why I
took a cursory look at science and flags in my ICV24 paper, which was less well
said than you have done in one short paragraph.
Lee Herold, 29 August 2012