First Annual Review of US Holocaust Memorial Museum’s Progress on Confronting

HM Watch Issues 2006 Report Card
on US Holocaust Museum's
Failure to Address Islamic Genocidal Threat to World Jewry

"The steps taken have been so limited, so lacking in imagination as to be unworthy
of the creative energy and large resources of this Museum which are generously bestowed on other projects.
There is no sense of either commitment or urgency in what the Museum has done."

"This is the first time since 1941 that the Jews are targeted for annihilation, and it is by both a state
and by non-state terrorist organizations. By not taking full note, and bringing these facts to the public,
the Holocaust Memorial Museum is failing its mission."

The US Holocaust Memorial Museum’s Progress on

Confronting the Threat of Islamic Genocide against the Jews

The US Holocaust Memorial Museum’s mandate is to record the genocide against Jews carried out by the Nazis and to serve as a voice to warn against future genocides. The Museum has interpreted its responsibility broadly, and has devoted considerable resources to war crimes being committed currently. Yet, the Museum has been silent about Islamist advocacy of a new genocide against world Jewry.

In January 2006, Holocaust Museum Watch (HMWatch) held its first community forum in Washington D.C. to discuss whether Islamic anti-Semitism belongs on the agenda of the US Holocaust Museum. The Community Forum, attended by congressional leaders, leading rabbis and Holocaust historians concluded: It was appropriate and essential for the Museum to focus on Arab and Muslim anti-Semitism and Holocaust denial. The Museum would be derelict in its duty if it did not change its policy of silence on threats to Jews by Islamists.

This Report judges how and to what extent the Museum has changed its policy. On the positive side, we can report that the Museum has taken a few, very limited steps to address Islamic terrorist threats. When the community forum was held in 2006, Holocaust Museum Watch reported that the USHMM had NEVER held a conference, lecture, temporary exhibit nor published research that focused on Arab or Islamic anti-Semitism. Nor did it provide any information on the role of Muslims in the Holocaust. Its website which reported on current anti-Semitic incidents world-wide listed no Muslim incidents.

HMWatch cannot lay the same charge a year later. The Museum now highlights Iranian Holocaust denial and threats to Israel in its fund-raising appeals and claims “We cannot remain silent… We must also use this as an important warning about how much we need to do to educate the world.” The Museum posted information about Iranian threats on its web page – but only briefly. In 2006, the Museum had one lecture on current Arab anti-Semitism. It included in one temporary exhibit on the Protocols a section dealing with Arab publications. It has on occasion on its web-site and in letters responded to calls by Iranian President Ahmadinejad for genocide against the Jews. It has added to its dictionary of the Holocaust the Farhud, thus recognizing that Jews outside of Europe were killed by Arabs as part of the Nazi scourge. But the steps taken have been so limited, so lacking in imagination as to be unworthy of the creative energy and large resources of this Museum which are generously bestowed on other projects. There is no sense of either commitment or urgency in what the Museum has done.

HMWatch does not see its role as proposing specific programs for the USHMM. The Museum has a large and well funded staff that has shown it to be very creative when it cares about a subject. Instead, we will judge what it has done compared to what it does in other program areas. Our overall judgment is that the Museum has moved from an F grade to a D minus.

The Report Card for 2006

PROGRAM GRADE

LECTURES F

The Museum sponsored only one lecture on current Islamic anti-Semitism. In keeping with its tentative approach to the subject, the speaker was a Muslim who embarrassed the Museum by blaming current Muslim anti-Semitism on the actions of Israel and Muslim anti-Americanism on America’s support of Israel.

2. EXHIBITS

Permanent Exhibit F

In the permanent exhibit, there is no mention of the role that Muslims and Arabs played in the Holocaust. For example, both the role of the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem during the War, and the role the Arabs played in keeping Palestine closed as a haven of refuge, are totally ignored. There is no film on the role played today by Islam in fomenting anti-Semitism although there is a film on the role played historically by Christianity.

Temporary Exhibits D

In 2006, the Museum had its first temporary exhibit which included any mention of current Muslim anti-Semitism. A temporary exhibit tucked into the basement of the Museum on the book, The Protocols of the Elders of Zion, was reconfigured after heavy criticism of its failure to discuss current uses of the Protocols to spread anti-Semitism by the Muslim world. The revised exhibit did have a panel which reported the use of the Protocols by Arab governments and Muslim communities. But the exhibit itself was so makeshift and uninteresting as to typify the Museum’s lack of interest in bringing to public attention the way this hate document is used in large areas of the Muslim world.

3. PUBLICATIONS F

There are still no publications by the Museum which discuss the rise of Arab/Muslim anti-Semitism.

4. CONFERENCES F

The Museum has not sponsored any conferences to raise awareness of the genocidal threat of current Muslim anti-Semitism.

5. HOLOCAUST REMEMBRANCE DAY F

The Museum’s website suggests that the next Holocaust Remembrance Day be commemorated by essays about Darfur. Arab/Moslem anti-Semitism and nuclear threats from Iran are ignored.

6. WEBSITE D

a. The Museum has on occasion used its website to call attention to particularly egregious Islamic anti-Semitic hate speech. It did react to the President of Iran’s call for genocide against Israel, with a letter to the Iranian president, lodging it prominently on its website. We note, however, that the posting of this letter followed, and did not lead, the widespread protest around the world. This was also true of the letter posted in response to the December 2006 Holocaust denial conference in Tehran.

b. The Museum has added to its website a new section called Voices on Anti-Semitism which purports to feature a “broad range of perspectives about anti-Semitism and hatred today.” Of the four speakers interviewed in 2006, only Ruth Bader Ginsburg mentions, and that very briefly in passing, Muslim anti-Semitism and the threat it poses. Robert Satloff has said that he is very proud that his book on the long reach of the Holocaust into Arab lands is equally divided between villains and heroes. However, the Museum’s website never mentions the villains, only the Arab heroes.

c. The Museum has added to its website links to other websites like MEMRI which track the anti-Semitism of the Muslim media.

d. The Museum has added the word Farhud to its definitions in the encyclopedia of the Holocaust on its website, thus recognizing in a 2000 word essay that there were Jewish victims of Arab Nazis outside of Europe.

e. The Museum’s website definition of anti-Semitism now includes a paragraph which discusses HAMAS’s and Hezbollah’s anti-Jewish speech and that the HAMAS charter calls for the destruction of Israel.

7. TRAVELING EXHBITS F

The Museum maintained its total silence on state-sponsored Moslem Holocaust denial, threats to world Jewry and the role played by the Arabs in the Nazi era.

8. EDUCATIONAL MATERIALS F

The Museum maintained its total silence on state-sponsored Moslem Holocaust denial, threats to world Jewry and the role played by the Arabs in the Nazi era.

9. COMMITTEE ON CONSCIENCE’S GENOCIDE PREVENTION INITIATIVE F

The Committee on Conscience had devoted its efforts in 2006 only to Africa. When challenged on its almost complete silence about the genocidal rhetoric of Iranian president Ahmadinejad, the director of the Committee responded that “there are a lot of issues out there that do pose threats, whether it is the Congo, Darfur or Chechnya.” Notice the absence of any concern for the Jews or Israel.

10. PROPOSED PROGRAMS in 2007 C

We are not privy to all of the Museum’s proposed changes in 2007, but those that the Museum has made public include:

Lecture by Alan Dershowitz on the subject, Is There a New Anti-Semitism. The talk is scheduled for Jan. 17, 2007 in Houston. We give the Museum an A for the choice of speaker and topic and a C for scheduling the talk in Houston and not in Washington DC where it might have received national attention.
Website changes: 1. The Museum announced that it would translate its website into Farsi and Arabic so that knowledge of the Holocaust would be more easily available in the Muslim world. We give the Museum an A minus on this proposal. We applaud their doing this, but note that if the website continues to deny the current threats from Islamic fascism, then the Museum has limited the usefulness of these changes.

2. Satloff has said that the Museum will be putting up on their website two chapters from his new book on the experience of Jews in North Africa under the Nazis; one on Arab villains and one on Arab heroes. We applaud that the Museum is taking note of Arab involvement in the Holocaust; we cannot grade the results of this proposal until we actually read what they select.

Educational materials: Satloff said that the Museum has asked him to develop school curriculum about the role of Arab rescuers in the Holocaust in North Africa. Again, until we see the material it is hard to grade it. It seems the Museum plans to discuss Arab heroes in North Africa and ignore with total silence the role of the Bosnian Muslims in wiping out the Jews of the Balkans or the role of Palestinian Arabs in closing Palestine as a place of refuge for Jews after 1939.

11.Appeals to Donors F

The F is for hypocrisy. The Museum has begun to highlight Moslem anti-Semitism in their fundraising letters, implying that they are seriously addressing the issue, when they are not.

Conclusion: Overall Grade D minus

The US Holocaust Memorial Museum is a memorial to the terrible past and an educational institution to prevent a repetition. It was established by taxpayer funds and is supported by public donations. The Museum has failed its mandate by not aggressively presenting programs about the genocidal ideology of radical Islam. The Nazi Holocaust of the Jews was a precedent and a warning: it is not only about the past. This is the first time since 1941 that the Jews are targeted for annihilation, and it is by both a state and by non-state terrorist organizations. By not taking full note, and bringing these facts to the public, the Holocaust Memorial Museum is failing its mission.

The Museum has manipulated its supporter’s desire for it to assume a leading voice in the fight against genocidal anti-Semitism by using the letter it wrote protesting the genocidal hate-speech and Holocaust denial of the President of Iran as the basis of a fund-raising letter. The Museum thus gave the false impression that it saw fighting the current genocidal threat to the Jews as central to its mission.

The Museum should be instituting programs that are cutting edge, that are not yet politically correct, that others are not yet talking about in this increased assault and threat to the lives and existence of the Jewish people. The threat is not just limited to Israel. There is nothing in the programming of the US Holocaust Memorial Museum during 2006 that indicates that the Museum takes seriously the genocidal threat of Islamic fascism. The Museum is never a leader in this area in which it should be the pre-eminent voice. Instead, it only issues protests after many other non-Jewish institutions and leaders have spoken.

This can be seen in the Museum’s reaction to the well publicized Iranian Holocaust Denial conference in Teheran in December 2006. This conference had been announced well in advance so one would have thought that the Museum would have been ready with a major response. Instead, it posted another letter on its website decrying the conference. At the initiative of a local Muslim cleric, the Museum held a news conference with some local Washington D.C. area Muslims. It was a misleading depiction of Balkan Muslims’ actions to highlight one Jew who had been hidden by Albanian Muslims when the Museum has never reported a word on the thousands of Jews killed by the 20,000 Muslim troops in Bosnia, the Hanjar S.S. Waffen.

One of the speakers, Akbar Ahmed, compared anti-Semitism with Islamophobia and said they were both threats to all of us as a world civilization. He did not point out, nor did the Museum’s Executive Director Sara Bloomfield who was standing next to him, that there is no state sponsor of genocide against Muslims as there is in Iran against Jews.

The Museum’s website, while better, still is not reporting Islamic anti-Semitism. The daily litany of hate speech broadcast over Arab media is ignored by the Museum.

The Museum should be focusing on the threat to the Jewish people as it claimed it would do in its fundraising letter of December 2005. Where are the television ads, television shows, the innovations of using the building’s exterior as a movie screen, as they have done for other current issues, to publicize the extent of hatred that is being spewed in an organized way from the Muslim world toward the annihilation of world Jewry. The Museum’s name after all is HOLOCAUST MEMORIAL and Jews were the central victim of the Holocaust.

Carol Greenwald, Chairman

Board of Holocaust Museum Watch