I'm not
@RayanOO but I will try. I actually love history and I'm incredible bored in bed so it can try to unpack it:
Avraham Stern was a man that took as his life mission, as I interpret it, to create a land for the Jewish people. One of the Tenets of the Lehi was that only by opposing the british they could create a jewish state (while others more moderates focused on cooperation). One of the things he was obsessed about was the refugees from Europe and creating a safe haven for them in Palestine (which wasn't allowed by the British). He was claimed as a ally to Nazi Germany because he offered to help the nazis if they allowed Jews to immigrate and give suppport to a Jewish state. Anyone with basic history knowledge knows that this wasn't a feasible idea, but at the time, even most germans didn't knew about the death camps. Basically he was desperate and tried to ally with anyone that he thought could help the jewish people to a point that it was used as propaganda against him by the British.
The Lehi was a terrorist group that killed a lot of innocent people and is actually incredible similar to Hamas (while having fascist ideas that Hamas don't openly support) but claiming that they would approve Hitler and Nazi policies as we know it now is absurd. They actually have a very fair representation in most materials with people recognizing that they did war crimes but also acknowledging how they helped to form Israel. The difference is that, while both Lehi and Hamas are terrorists that did war crimes, one is exalted and another demonized.
In general, if he had focused on talking about the
hypocrisy of having statues, monuments and other things for Lehi but treating Hamas as something different he would not be wrong. It's incredible hypocrite to do that since they basically act the same and I agree with this idea. The issue is claiming ties to Nazi Germany that didn't exist and couldn't exist even if they tried.