Vol. 40-No. 4 ISSN 0892-1571 March/April 2014 - Adar ... · Vol. 40-No. 4 ISSN 0892-1571...

IN THIS ISSUEASYV conference on Holocaust education...................................................1

Deal with the devil...........................................................................................2

Holocaust documentary raises questions of guilt........................................3

Two Among the Righteous Few......................................................................4

How America saved paintings while letting Jews die...................................5

Jewish children hidden twice over by the Church........................................7

ASYV hosts inaugural Florida Tribute Dinner...............................................8

Photos from the ASYV Young Leadership Associates winter gala.............9

“I know tomorrow will be my last day”........................................................10

Three children under the swastika...............................................................11

Vol. 40-No. 4 ISSN 0892-1571 March/April 2014 - Adar/Nissan 5774

AMERICAN & INTERNATIONAL SOCIETIES FOR YAD VASHEMAMERICAN & INTERNATIONAL SOCIETIES FOR YAD VASHEM

THE CHANGING IMAGE OF HOLOCAUST VICTIMS

This program is a collaborativeeffort with the Association of

Teachers of Social Studies of theUnited Federation of Teachers, theEducators’ Chapter of the UFT JewishHeritage Committee, and the Schoolof Education of ManhattanvilleCollege. Participants in this year’sconference, which included educatorsfrom six states, received in-servicecredit for attending the program.

This conference, organized by Dr.Marlene W. Yahalom, Director ofEducation of the American Society forYad Vashem, has proven to be animportant educational resource foreducators interested in enriching theirknowledge and educational toolsabout this subject. The mission of theAmerican Society — Holocaustremembrance and commemorationthrough education — is presentedand promoted through this program.This conference was created in 1999by Caroline Massel, Founding Chairof the Young Leadership Associates.

Through the workshops offered thisyear, participants were encouraged tolearn more about the importance ofusing survivor testimonies in theclassroom, the experience of growingup as a member of the “SecondGeneration” and the valuable educa-tional resources developed by theInternational School for HolocaustStudies of Yad Vashem. Dr. Yahalompresented a workshop introducingthese resources and a second work-shop introducing participants to thedangers and challenges of Holocaustdenial and the need to include thistopic in Holocaust lesson plans andcurricula.

Barry Levine, co-chair with AbbiHalpern of the Young Leadership

Associates, gave the opening greet-ings of the program. He spoke abouthis family’s connection to theHolocaust and their experiences dur-ing the war years, and how thisimpacted his own understanding ofthe importance of documentingHolocaust survivor testimonies to

commemorate the event and honorthe memory of the victims. CarolynHerbst, Past President and PastChairperson of the Association ofTeachers of Social Studies of theUnited Federation of Teachers, spokeabout the relevance of Holocausteducation as a vehicle to raise aware-ness about intolerance and injustice.She also offered insight about the les-sons of the Holocaust and their con-nection with current education legisla-tion.

Professor Mordecai Paldiel, former

director of the Department ofRighteous Among the Nations at YadVashem, led an engaging discussionabout the significance of the heroesof the Holocaust who helped saveJewish lives despite the grave risk tothemselves and their families. Hisremarks and workshop, which were

well received, included case studiesof non-Jews who were recognized byYad Vashem as Righteous Among theNations, and offered recommenda-tions on how to incorporate this topicinto the classroom as a tool for teach-ing students the importance of havingthe courage to “do the right thing”despite overwhelming challenges.

Dr. Yahalom spoke about howstudying the Holocaust allows

us to see a range of behavior: thebeauty and the horror, the hope andthe despair, the thoughtfulness and

the thoughtlessness, and the kind-ness and the cruelty of which humanbeings are capable.

“The main point to keep in mind inthis regard is the magnitude of theloss to the Jewish people.Specifically, students should betaught about the lives and rich civiliza-tion of the Jewish world before 1939.The total loss is examined and appre-ciated in the context of what was lostrather than of how the destructionwas carried out.

“Rather than emphasizing deadbodies and horrific methods of massmurder, we remind students that eachvictim had a face, a life built around afamily, and a community that wasdestroyed. Each victim was a mother,a father, a daughter, a son, a neighborand a friend. When we present thefacts as a chain of events not limitedto death and destruction, our stu-dents’ comprehension is increasedand the learning process can be mostfruitful. Students can then evaluatethe loss in terms of the dangers ofinjustice, discrimination, and intoler-ance so that they can become sensi-tive to the consequences of extremebehavior.”

Dr. Yahalom added that “our ownawareness of Holocaust survivorsshould include the changing image ofHolocaust victims who survived andwho perished. For those who perished,we need to consider how they want tobe remembered. For those who sur-vived, we should realize how theyhave been transformed from victims toheroes. They are our eyewitnesses tohistory, and their resistance efforts aresymbols of the strength and of theresilience of the human spirit.”

(Continued on page 3)

THE EDUCATION DEPARTMENT OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR YAD VASHEM AND ITS YOUNG LEADERSHIP

ASSOCIATES HELD ITS SIXTEENTH PROFESSIONAL CONFERENCE ON HOLOCAUST EDUCATION MARCH 9, 2014.

Carolyn Herbst, Past President/Past Chairperson of the ATSS/UFT; Abbi Halpern, YLA co-chair;

Professor Mordecai Paldiel; Barry Levine, YLA co-chair; Peppy Margolis, workshop presenter;

Dr. Marlene W. Yahalom, ASYV Director of Education; Helene Alalouf, workshop presenter.

Page 2 MARTYRDOM & RESISTANCE March/April 2014 - Adar/Nissan 5774

The first part of this article appearedin the preceeding issue.

BY JOANNA M.SADELTHE TIMES OF ISRAEL

This section of the testimony pro-vides a fascinating look into the

psychology of the negotiations withHimmler.

Tamir: Why was it to his advantageto release the Jews?

Hecht: We received informationthen from Musy that a struggle forpower had developed between Hitlerand Himmler. Hitler wanted to fightuntil the end and to annihilate theJews, and Himmler wanted toapproach the West. He had illusionsin this matter that this was possible,and that he wanted to utilize. Ourhope was to make clear to him that hehad no hopes because of his atroci-ties toward the Jews, but if he ceasedthese atrocities immediately andreleased the remnant of six hundredto eight hundred thousand Jews, thisterrible impression would be some-what reduced.

Tamir: And you thought that it wouldconvince Himmler to tell him that hehad no hopes, only that the terribleimpression would be less terrible?

Hecht: No, this is a bit complicated.Tamir: Your line was more far-

reaching… you raised in him hopeson purpose?

Hecht: This is the same thing. Wewanted to show him that by not anni-hilating Jews, it could be that he hada chance to find a way by means of allthese actions.

Tamir: What chance? Which way? Ido not ask through what and by whatmeans.

Hecht: To bring before the publicthrough the press in America, whichwould see that the annihilation of theJews had stopped.

Tamir: What chance would he havefrom this?

Hecht: That he would think he hada better chance to negotiate with theAllies in some way. This was his idea.

Tamir: Your line was to convinceHimmler that by releasing the Jewshe could get nearer to the Allies?

Hecht: I would formulate this differ-ently. Our line was to free Jews and toexploit the illusion which seemed rightto us for achieving this line.

Tamir: You wanted to misleadHimmler?

Hecht: It is difficult to answer thequestion.

Tamir: Did you tell Himmler thetruth? Answer my question: Did youwish to mislead him or, on the con-trary, awake in him illusions andhopes?

Hecht: We certainly had no inten-tion to do Himmler any favor at all.

Tamir: I did not ask you whetheryou wanted to do Himmler a favor.Why do you evade answering everysingle question?

Hecht: It is difficult to reply to thosequestions yes or no.

Tamir: It is definitely possible to

answer yes or no. Answer the ques-tion.

Hecht: We wanted to exploit thepolitical situation in order to explain toHimmler that, by releasing the Jews,he was approaching more his politicalintentions.

Tamir: What were his political inten-tions which he would haveapproached more?

Hecht: He wanted to get in touchwith the West, and for that he neededsome point of connection. And prooffor this is that the negotiations withthe Jews served him in this.

Tamir: To approach the West — thatmeans to divide between the Allies,between Russia and the West, is itnot so?

Hecht: In our opinion no, but inHimmler’s opinion yes.

Tamir: So you misled him at leaston this point?

Hecht: Yes. We knew from theAmericans that this was out of thequestion, but they agreed that weshould give him this answer.

Tamir: Did you think that you coulddeceive Himmler?

Hecht: Yes.Tamir: And this without expertise in

the international political situation?Hecht: On the basis of talks with

Woods, it was possible to assumethis. He explained to us that if it was

necessary to pay compliments to thedevil in order to save Jews, it wasallowed to do so. We would do thereckoning with him later on.

Tamir: Instead of encouraging theNazis with a hope of money, youwanted to awake a hope of politicaladvantage?

Hecht: Yes, because in this manner,we wanted to solve the entire prob-lem, whereas with money we wereconvinced that there would be everytime additional expulsions in order tomake additional extortions.

Tamir: And based on what did youbelieve that those Nazis, those crimi-nals, after they murdered six millionJews, would fall into your trap?

Hecht: Because part of the Nazicriminals were in a great panic andwere convinced that the war was lost.

Tamir: Among them was Himmler?

Hecht: Himmler, if I could believeMusy, understood that the war waslost.

Tamir: Since when did he under-stand this?

Hecht: Since the end of 1944. Thatwas the basis which made this nego-tiation possible.

By April 1945, Musy was told thatHimmler had agreed to the nonevacu-ation of the camps (which violated theorders of Hitler) by bargaining for aguarantee of nonexecution of thecamp guards. The United States wasconsulted and agreed to the terms.

Tamir: Do you know anything, notfrom hearsay only, about Himmler’scommand against the annihilation ofthe Jews in the camps?

Hecht: Through Musy’s connectionwith Himmler, we transmittedHimmler’s request to Eisenhower, that,under the condition of not fulfillingHitler’s command, one would deal withthe guards of the concentration campsas with prisoners of war. That was forus proof. In addition, the promise wasgiven by Eisenhower that, if theseguards would wear the uniform of theWehrmacht, they would personally beresponsible for all their crimes, butbefore a military court. This example,which I brought before (in previous tes-timony) about Bergen-Belsen, was forus additional proof, when the highest

levels of the Wehrmacht alleged beforeMusy that the occupying armies hadarranged a lynch-trial of the guards,and they applied again to the Americanchief of staff, in order to renew the…according to the Eisenhower-Himmler-Musy agreement.

The Court: All this went through theCommittee?

Hecht: All this was discussed in theCommittee at the time. An additionalproof is that Musy junior arrived just atthe moment in which, in spite of theagreement, one had to evacuate thecamp — I think that was theBuchenwald camp — for the deathmarch. And Musy was even told thatabout 40% of those participating inthose marches would die on the road.This was told to the senior Musy.Musy junior went therefore immedi-ately to Berlin, to the Nazi head of for-

eign intelligence, Walter Schellenberg,and Schellenberg instructed, accordingto the Himmler-Musy agreement, bymeans of radiotelephone toBuchenwald, that they should cancelthose evacuation orders and not carrythem out.

CONFIRMATION AT NUREMBERG

In testimony which he gave toColonel John Harlan Amen, chief

interrogator during the Nuremberg wartrials, on January 4, 1946,Schellenberg confirmed that Hitler hadoverruled Himmler’s command not toevacuate the camps. Himmler thencountered Hitler’s order with a secondcommand to stop the evacuations.

Walter Schellenberg: I mean, forinstance, the fact that after theReichsfuehrer SS (Himmler) veryreluctantly agreed, through my per-suasion, not to evacuate the concen-tration camps, Kaltenbrunner — bygetting into direct contact with Hitler— circumvented this order ofHimmler’s and broke his word inrespect to international promises.

Ernst Kaltenbrunner was chief of theReichssicherheitshauptamt — ReichMain Security Office — and presidentof Interpol. He was one of the highest-ranking members of the SS to facetrial at the Nuremberg trials. He deliv-ered Hitler’s orders.

John Amen: Do you know of anyparticular case in whichKaltenbrunner had ordered the evac-uation of any one concentrationcamp, contrary to Himmler’s wishes?

Schellenberg: Yes.Amen: Will you tell the Tribunal

about that?Schellenberg: I cannot give you the

exact date, but I believe it was in thebeginning of April 1945. The son ofthe former Swiss president, Musy,who had taken his father toSwitzerland, returned by car to theBuchenwald concentration camp, inorder to fetch a Jewish family which Imyself had set free. He found thecamp in process of being evacuatedunder the most deplorable conditions.When he had, three days previously,driven his father to Switzerland, hewas given definite assurance beforehe left that the camps would not beevacuated. Since this assurance wasalso intended for GeneralEisenhower, he was doubly disap-pointed at this breach of promise.Musy junior called on me personallyat my office. He was deeply offendedand reproached me bitterly. I couldnot understand what had happened,and I at once contacted Himmler’ssecretary, protesting against this sortof procedure. Shortly after, it wasadmitted that the facts, as depicted byMusy junior, were true, although itwas still incomprehensible, becauseHimmler had not given these orders. Iwas assured that everything would bedone to put an immediate halt to theevacuations. This was confirmed onthe telephone personally by Himmler


DEAL WITH THE DEVIL

Hungarian Jews on the Judenrampe (“Jewish ramp”) after disembarking from the transport trains

at Auschwitz-Birkenau, May 1944. To be sent rechts! — to the right — meant the person had been

chosen as a laborer; links! — to the left — meant death in the gas chambers.

March/April 2014 - Adar/Nissan 5774 MARTYRDOM & RESISTANCE Page 3

(Continued from page 1)Dr. Yahalom concluded that “we

need to remember that although theinitial master plan of the Final Solutionwas to divide, destroy and annihilatea nation, this chapter in history hasbeen transformed into a topic andtheme that createsunity, builds com-munities of respectrather than division,and opens a door toa better understand-ing of human rightsand of the dangersof extreme andbaseless hatred, topromote toleranceamong individuals.Through teachingabout the Holocaust,our program aims to raise ethical ques-tions, praise rescuers as models ofbehavior, and help students findsources of strength, hope, resilience,identity and renewal.”

Dr. Yahalom also spoke about EliZborowski, z”l, founding Chairmanof the American Society, and hisencouragement of the educationefforts of the American Society eachyear, and the value of partneringwith dedicated educators to pre-serve and disseminate Holocausthistory through programs such asthis conference.

She also acknowledged the inspira-tional leadership of Leonard Wilf,Chairman of the American Society,and how “through programs such asthe conference we can teach partici-pants about the many themes to con-sider in this undertaking: the multifac-

eted contours of human behavior, thedangers of extreme and baselesshatred, the role of the Holocaust inpublic memory, the lives of the heroesand the victims, and the overarchingchallenge to make sure neither groupis forgotten.”

For more information about ourEducation Department, YoungLeadership Associates and TravelingExhibits, please contact Marlene W.Yahalom, PhD, Director of Education;(ph) 212.220.4304; email: [email protected]

THE CHANGING IMAGE OF HOLOCAUST VICTIMS

(Left to right) Workshop presenter Helene Alalouf, Tracy Garrison-

Feinberg, and other engaged educators.

When your enemy is sworn toexterminate every one of you,

can you — should you — try to cut adeal with him to at least save somelives, knowing that others aredoomed?

The question lies at the heart of anew documentary by ClaudeLanzmann, author of Shoah, thehugely acclaimed tableau of theHolocaust.

The Last of the Unjust, explores amoral dilemma that Lanzmann brieflytouched on his 1985 masterpiece.

For three and a half hours, the view-er is taken through an exploration ofBenjamin Murmelstein, the last presi-dent of the Jewish Council in the“model ghetto” of Theresienstadt inNazi-annexed Czechoslovakia.

Set up by SS colonel AdolfEichmann as abogus town run byJews themselves —a Potemkin villagedesigned to dupe theworld — Theresienstadtwas one of thegrimmest chapters inthe long record ofNazi atrocities.

It housed 50,000Jews at its peak peri-ods. Over four years,more than 150,000inhabitants werekilled, many of themshipped to the gas chambers ofAuschwitz.

“It was the peak of Nazi cruelty andperversity... a unique combination oflies and naked violence,” Lanzmann,87, said in an interview with AFP inFebruary.

To run Theresienstadt, the Nazisformed a Jewish Council, comprising12 members and a leader, “the Elderof the Jews,” or Judenaeltester inGerman. Those who refused theappointment were killed.

The first Elder was sent toAuschwitz in 1943 and killed sixmonths later; the second was execut-ed in Theresienstadt in 1944.

The documentary describes theextraordinary and controversial tale ofBenjamin Murmelstein, a formerGrand Rabbi of Vienna who becamethe third and final Elder inTheresienstadt and the only one in allof eastern Europe to survive the war.

Survival meant that he became atarget. In the early 1960s,Murmelstein was bitterly attacked bysome Holocaust survivors, whoaccused him of collaboration. Therewere even calls for him to behanged, like Eichmann, whomMurmelstein knew intimately fromVienna.

The documentary is based on hoursof filmed interviews that Lanzmannhad with Murmelstein in 1975, 14years before his death.

In it, Murmelstein comes across ashugely compelling, a man fiercelyintelligent, courageous and ironic,

harsh with others but also with him-self.

Every day, he faced demandsfrom the Nazis that he was

obliged to comply with — but he didhis utmost to delay or subvert them,and in the process enabled some toavoid the death marches ordered byHitler, while knowing that others weredoomed.

He is far from being a stooge orpower-mesmerized monster, as otherElders in the eastern European ghet-tos were and as he himself was laterportrayed.

“By taking huge risks (in Vienna), hemanaged to get 120,000 AustrianJews out of the clutches of their per-secutors, and what he recounts is amagisterial lesson in history,” saidLanzmann.

“(...) One of the lessons of The Last ofthe Unjust, in my view, is that at a cer-tain point you no longer have any otherchoice than to comply and obey, that allresistance becomes impossible.

“That said, Benjamin Murmelsteinfought tirelessly right to the endagainst the killers. As he said, theNazis wanted to make him into a pup-pet, but the puppet had learned to pullthe strings.”

As the holder of a diplomatic pass-port issued by the Red Cross,Murmelstein could have fled abroadafter the war.

Instead, he voluntarily put himselfforward for arrest by theCzechoslovak authorities after a num-ber of Jews accused him of collabo-rating with the enemy.

He spent 18 months in prison beforebeing acquitted of all charges. Hewent into exile in Rome, where hefound life tough, but he never went toIsrael.

Murmelstein’s recollections, saidLanzmann, are doubly precious, asthey prompt a new interpretation ofEichmann, who was kidnapped byMossad agents in Argentina andhauled to Israel for trial, culminating inhis execution in 1962.

German philosopher HannahArendt, in her account of the trial,described Eichmann as the stereotyp-ical bureaucrat, embodying “thebanality of evil.”

But Murmelstein portrays Eichmannas a “demon,” fanatical in his anti-Semitism, violent and corrupt.

HOLOCAUST DOCUMENTARY RAISES

QUESTIONS OF GUILT

Lanzmann and Murmelstein in Rome, 1975.

BY ALEXANDER BODIN SAPHIR,TABLET

You know the legend: At theheight of the Nazi occupation of

Denmark, Berlin ordered all DanishJews to don the infamous yellow staron the outside of their clothes. But themorning the decree was set to takeeffect, Denmark’s King Christian Xrode out into the city wearing a yellowstar of his own. By evening, the mes-sage had spread and the entire popu-lation of Copenhagen was wearingyellow stars, thwarting the Nazi pro-gram by making it impossible to tellJew from gentile.

It’s an incredible story — probablythe best-known example of mass civildisobedience and nonviolent resist-ance to come out of World War II. Thetrouble is it’s just that — a story. Itnever happened, and couldn’t have,because the Danish Jews were neverforced to wear the yellow star. But thetale was prominently featured inAmerican news outlets during thewar, and after making its way intoLeon Uris’ novel Exodus became oneof the great unchallenged myths ofEuropean resistance.

Nevertheless, the fact remains thatthe Nazis failed to deport DanishJews in significant numbers, thanks toan operation that became known asthe “Miracle Rescue,” by which thevast majority of Danish Jews were

spirited away in October 1943 toSweden, a neutral country, wherethey lived out the rest of the war in rel-ative safety. I first became aware ofthe story of the “Miracle Rescue” frommy grandfather, Raphael “Folle”Bodin, who was a young, talented,up-and-coming Jewish tailor inCopenhagen when the Nazis invadedDenmark. In late 1943, a high-rankingNazi broke party rules prohibiting frat-ernization with Jews and came to buya new suit at the tailor shop owned bymy grandfather’s father-in-law onIstedgade, in the red-light district ofCopenhagen, where my grandfatherworked along with his brother-in-law,Nathan Golman.

Iimagine my grandfather takingmeasurements and calling them

out to Nathan, who noted them downon a small index card to be filed away.I imagine him trying to stop his handsfrom shaking and sweating as hestuck pins into the trouser hems of aman who symbolized everything evilin occupied Europe. And I imagine hisastonishment when the Nazi, uponreturning to collect his new garment,turned to the two Jewish men andwarned them that a roundup of theJews was imminent, telling them toflee.

They took the warning seriously andset about telling everyone they knew.Thanks to this, as well as a subse-


REMEMBER HOW DANES DONNED YELLOW

STARS TO PROTECT THE JEWS?

THAT NEVER HAPPENED


B O O K R E V I E W SB O O K R E V I E W STwo Among the Righteous Few: A

Story of Courage in the Holocaust.By Marty Brounstein. Tate

Publishing & Enterprises: Mustang,Ok., 2011. 191 pp. $11.01 softcover.

REVIEWED BY DR. DIANE CYPKIN

Both pure evil and pure goodfascinate! Indeed, when it

comes to evil, the countless booksand materials in all kinds of media onHitler and every kind of follower ofhis — including the common and theuncommon man and woman — morethan prove that. (And with the years,the numbers of these items show nosign of diminishing!) We are anxiousto know where evil comes from andwhere brutality is born. We want toknow how it is “nurtured” and whatsupplies the “food” it needs to thriveand grow. For perhaps, having suchknowledge — we sincerely hope —will somehow make it possible for usto prevent its destructive presence inour midst!

Our reaction to absolute good ismuch the same. We want to knowwhere it comes from. We want toknow what nurtures it. We want toencourage its development.

Unfortunately, however, the amountof material on this in books and thegeneral media is much, much less . . .and we all so desperately need it!For, in fact, all those who studyhumans already know how powerfulgood role models are. The social sci-ence literature is full of this finding.Role models show us the good andthe way .... And this, in fact, makes

Marty Brounstein’s slim, unpreten-tious volume entitled Two Among theRighteous Few so very important anda worthy gift to us all!

Brounstein introduces us to two sim-ple people who did the extraordinary,the couple Franciscus and HerminaWijnakker (Frans and Mien). Bothgrew up in the small town of Haren, a“relatively poor” agricultural area “inthe southern part of thenation of the Netherlands,commonly referred to asHolland.” When they mar-ried in 1936 they went tolive in the nearby agricul-tural town of Diedenwhich “together withDemen, its closest neigh-boring village” had a pop-ulation of “a few hun-dred.” There this gentlecouple looked forward toa future where they would “work hard,be good Catholics, and raise a fami-ly.” Heroics of any kind were not ontheir minds nor even imagined! Butthen the war came . . . and Frans andMien easily slipped into another roleentirely . . . .

Frans was traveling in Amsterdamselling meat and eggs (money wasalways in short supply, so Frans didthis, undoubtedly, to supplement whathe was making as a miller). Whilethere, he met a doctor who, learningthat Frans lived in a rather isolatedarea, asked a favor of him. Could hetake in a child for — say, threeweeks? She was underfed and need-ed time outside the city to gain back

her strength. Frans quickly answered,“‘Yes, for three weeks. . . . We haveenough food.’” Then he went to seethe girl and learned she was Jewish.It didn’t change his mind at all abouthelping her. True, at first Frans didn’treally know the dangers he wouldface by doing this. (The Nazis gener-ally murdered those who helpedJews). Still, even when he did realize

them, nothing changed.Moreover, as it turned out,this young girl would staywith Frans and Mien formuch longer than threeweeks, as would the goodlynumber of other Jewish chil-dren and adults whom Fransand Mien took in or Fransfound places for, “brokering”refuge for them. Soon theDutch underground heardabout what he was doing

and eagerly supported his work inevery way! Then there were otherimportant connections Frans himselfmade to feed and care for those Jewswho came to him.

Needless to say, though, the dan-gers arrived too! There was the

town priest — all-powerful in such asmall community — who was horrifiedwhen he learned what Frans andMien were doing. Moreover, he could-n’t understand WHY they were doingit. In fact, at one point he frustratedlycried out, “‘They hung our dear LORDon the cross, and you take them inyour home!’” Then there was thepolice chief in the town who threat-ened Frans .... Then, too, while the

Nazis had not been visible in Dieden inthe early part of the war, soon theystarted to appear in town .... All of thisincalculable fear Frans and Mienfaced, courageously and voluntarily!

No, it isn’t at all surprising that in1983 Frans and Mien were recog-nized as “Righteous Among theNations” by Yad Vashem. They morethan deserved it! Indeed, Brounstein,our author, would more than agreesince his wife’s parents and his wifewere saved by these wonderful peo-ple. More wonderful still is that, afterthe war, the actions of Frans andMien would even be celebrated bytheir non-Jewish neighbors. For,sadly, in many cases such did nothappen. In other places those whosaved Jews during the war had toquickly leave their homes and escapefrom their non-Jewish neighbors,angered at what they had done andmore than ready to do somethingabout it!

Finally, this reviewer can’t help butthink how strange it is that Hollandand Germany are so very close . . .and the people so very different.Then again, Norway is also very closeto Germany . . . and look at whatNorway did for its Jews, intent on sav-ing them; and what Germany did, hell-bent on murdering every one of themit could find! It really is curious, amaz-ing, and exceptionally thought-pro-voking!

Dr. Diane Cypkin is a Professor ofMedia, Communication, and VisualArts at Pace University.

TWO AMONG THE RIGHTEOUS FEW

FDR and the Jews.By Richard Breitman and Allan J.

Lichtman. Harvard University Press:Cambridge, Mass., 2013. 464 pp. $22.69.

REVIEWED BY J. SCHUESSLER,THE NEW YORK TIMES

For decades, it has been one ofthe most politically charged

questions in American history: Whatdid Franklin D. Roosevelt do — or,more to the point, not do — inresponse to the Holocaust?

The issue has spawned a large liter-ary response, with books often bear-ing polemical titles like TheAbandonment of the Jews or Savingthe Jews. But in a new volume fromHarvard University Press, two histori-ans aim to set the matter straight withwhat they call both a neutral assess-ment of Roosevelt’s broader recordon Jewish issues and a corrective tothe popular view of it, which they sayhas become overly scathing.

In FDR and the Jews, RichardBreitman and Allan J. Lichtman, pro-fessors at American University, con-tend that Roosevelt hardly did every-

thing he could. But they maintain thathis overall record — several hundredthousand Jews saved, some of themthanks to little-known initiatives —exceeds that of any subsequent pres-ident in responding to genocide in themidst of fierce domestic politicalopposition.

“The consensus among the public isthat Roosevelt really failed,”Mr. Breitman said in a recentinterview. “In fact, he hadfairly limited options.”

Such statements, backedup by footnotes to hundredsof primary documents (somecited here for the first time),are unlikely to satisfyRoosevelt’s fiercest critics.Even before the book’sMarch 19 release, the DavidS. Wyman Institute forHolocaust Studies, a research organ-ization in Washington, has circulateda detailed rebuttal, as well as a rivalbook, FDR and the Holocaust: ABreach of Faith, zeroing in on what itcharacterizes as Roosevelt’s person-al desire to limit Jewish immigration to

the United States. But some leading Holocaust histori-

ans welcome FDR and the Jews forremaining dispassionate in a debatetoo often marked by anger and accu-sation.

“Ad hominem attacks don’t helpuncover the historical truth,

and this book really avoids that,” saidDeborah Lipstadt, a pro-fessor at Emory Universityand a consultant on theUnited States HolocaustMemorial Museum’s per-manent exhibition aboutthe American response tothe Holocaust. “If peopleread it and don’t ascribe tothe authors an agenda, itcould be very important.”

FDR and the Jews offersno dramatic revelations of

the sort Mr. Breitman provided in2009, when he and two other col-leagues drew headlines with evi-dence, discovered in the papers of aformer refugee commissioner for theLeague of Nations, that Roosevelthad personally pushed for a 1938

plan to relocate millions of threatenedEuropean Jews to sparsely populatedareas of Latin America and Africa. Butit does, the authors say, provideimportant new detail and context tothat episode, as well as others thathave long loomed large in the popularimagination.

They pointed in particular to the fateof the 937 German Jewish refugeeson the ocean liner St. Louis, who wereturned away from Cuba in May 1939and sent back to other Europeancountries, where 254 died after warbroke out. The episode, made famousin the 1974 book Voyage of theDamned and a subsequent film, hascome to seem emblematic ofAmerican callousness.

There is simply no evidence, Mr.Breitman and Mr. Lichtman say, tosupport accounts that the UnitedStates Coast Guard was ordered toprevent the refugees from comingashore in Florida. What’s more, theywere turned away from Cuba, theauthors argue, as part of a backlashagainst a previous influx of some


BOOK TRIES FOR BALANCED VIEW ON ROOSEVELT AND JEWS


BY RAFAEL MEDOFF, TABLET

The story behind the creation ofthe “monuments men” team,

depicted in George Clooney’s newfeature film by the same name,begins in the spring of 1943, after theAllies had confirmed that Hitler wascarrying out what they called “his oft-repeated intention to exterminate theJewish people in Europe” — whilelooting priceless works of art from hisvictims. Jewish leaders and membersof Congress asked Allied leaders totake steps to aid the refugees.Roosevelt administration officialsreplied that they could not divert mili-tary resources for nonmilitary purpos-es; the only way to rescue the Jews,they claimed, was to win the war. Butto head off growing calls for rescue,the U.S. and British governmentsannounced they would hold a confer-ence in Bermuda to discuss therefugee problem. The talks had been“shunted off to an inaccessible cornerso that the world would not be able tolisten in,” American Zionist leaderAbba Hillel Silver charged.

Assembling the American delega-tion to Bermuda proved to be no sim-ple task. President Franklin D.Roosevelt’s first two choices to chairthe U.S. delegation, veteran diplomatMyron Taylor and Yale PresidentCharles Seymour, turned him down.

So did Supreme Court Justice OwenRoberts. FDR expressed disappoint-ment that Roberts would not be able toenjoy the lush beauty of the island,“especially at the time of the Easter lil-lies!” In any event, the presidentjoshed, “You can tell the Chief Justicethat while I yield this time, I will issue asubpoena for you the very next timeyou are needed!” And as it turned out,that next time was coming soon.

The conference was doomed beforeit started — because, as SynagogueCouncil of America President Dr. IsraelGoldstein pointed out, its real purposewas “not to rescue victims of Nazi ter-ror, but to rescue our State Departmentand the British foreign office from pos-sible embarrassment.” The Americandelegates (led by last-minute choiceHarold W. Dodds, president ofPrinceton University) arrived with strictinstructions: no focus on Jews as theprimary victims of the Nazis; noincrease in the number of refugeesadmitted to the United States, eventhough immigration quotas were noteven close to full; and no use ofAmerican ships to transport refugees— not even troop supply ships thatwere returning from Europe empty.

The conferees also rejected theidea of food shipments to starvingEuropean Jews. That would violatethe Allied blockade of Axis Europe,and no exceptions could be made,they declared. Closing off the lastremaining options, the British dele-gates at Bermuda refused to discuss

opening Palestine to refugees andscotched the idea of negotiating withthe Nazis for the release of Jews. Therelease of large numbers of Jews“would be relieving Hitler of an obliga-tion to take care of these useless peo-ple,” one British official asserted.

When the Bermuda conferenceended, the two governments

kept the proceedings secret ratherthan acknowledge how little had beenaccomplished. But the meager resultswere obvious. As CongressmanAndrew Somers (D-N.Y.) put it in aradio broadcast, Bermuda proved that“the Jews have not only faced theunbelievable cruelty of the distortedminds bent upon annihilating them,but they have to face the betrayal ofthose whom they called ‘friends.’”

It was becoming painfully obviousthat when it came to saving EuropeanJews, nobody had much interest.When it came to saving Europeanpaintings, however, the response wasvery different. Which is where thestory behind Clooney’s TheMonuments Men came in.

***

Shortly after the Bermuda meet-ings ended, The New York

Times published an editorial titled“Europe’s Imperiled Art.” The newspa-per, which showed little interest in thefate of Europe’s imperiled Jews,urged strong government action torescue “cultural treasures” from thebattle zones. The White Houseagreed: Here was something that didmerit the diversion of American mili-tary resources. In June 1943, theRoosevelt administration announcedthe establishment of a U.S. govern-ment commission “for the protectionand salvage of artistic and historicmonuments in Europe.”

Finding a chairman for the new res-cue agency was not too difficult: FDRturned to Justice Roberts, who maynot have had time for the task of res-cuing Jews but quickly found the timeto chair a commission to rescue paint-ings and statues. The RobertsCommission set to work planning themission that was to be carried out bythe team that would come to beknown as the Monuments Men.

Some refugee advocates openlyquestioned the administration’s priori-ties. In full-page advertisements in theNew York Times and elsewhere, theactivists known as the Bergson Groupsaid the establishment of the monu-ments group was “commendable. … Itshows the deep concern of the [Allies]toward the problems of culture and civ-ilization. But should [they] not at leastshow equal concern for an old andancient people who gave to the worldthe fundamentals of its Christian civi-lization, the Magna Carta of Justice —the Bible — and to every generationsome of its most outstanding thinkers,writers, scholars and artists? A govern-mental agency with the task of … sav-ing the Jewish people of Europe is theleast the [Allies] can do.”

In the autumn of 1943, the BergsonGroup’s allies in Congress introduceda resolution urging the president tocreate a commission to rescue Jews.At a hearing on the resolution, NewYork City Mayor Fiorello La Guardiapointed to the creation of the monu-ments commission: “This very impor-tant problem … is not like the destruc-tion of buildings or monuments, asterrible as that may be, because, afterall, they may be rebuilt or even repro-duced; but when a life is snuffed out,it is gone; it is gone forever.”

The Roosevelt administration dis-patched Assistant Secretary of StateBreckinridge Long to Capitol Hill totestify against Bergson’s rescue reso-lution. Long declared that the UnitedStates was deeply concerned aboutthe Jewish refugees, but after all, “youcannot send a regiment in there topull people out.” Paintings presentedno such difficulties, apparently.

Historians have noted that the work ofthe Monuments Men was not the onlyinstance in which the Roosevelt admin-istration diverted military resources, oraltered military plans, because of non-military considerations. A U.S. Air Forceplan to bomb the Japanese city ofKyoto was blocked by Secretary of WarHenry Stimson because of the city’sartistic treasures. Assistant Secretaryof War John McCloy intervened todivert U.S. bombers from striking theGerman city of Rothenburg because

he feared for the safety of its famousmedieval architecture. (That was thesame McCloy who rebuffed requests tobomb Auschwitz, on the grounds thatsuch air strikes would require “divert-ing” planes from battle zones. In fact,throughout mid- and late 1944, U.S.bombers — including one piloted byfuture U.S. Sen. George McGovern —repeatedly struck German oil factoriesadjacent to Auschwitz, some of themless than five miles from the gas cham-bers.)

No doubt part of the problem washuman psychology. When tens

of thousands, then hundreds of thou-sands, then millions of people are mur-dered, they become a kind of facelessblur, a numbing statistic in the public’smind. By contrast, the specific imagesof famous Rembrandt or Picassopaintings were personally familiar tomany Americans — and that familiarityengendered the sympathy needed tobring about intervention.

Perhaps there is also something to belearned from the mass outpouring ofsympathy for endangered animals. In abiting essay at the peak of the Darfurgenocide, New York Times columnistNicholas Kristof complained thatAmericans would care more aboutDarfur if the victims were puppies. Herecalled that the public contributed$45,000 to rescue a terrier stranded ona burned-out oil tanker in the Pacific in2002. And the eviction of a red-tailedhawk from its nest atop a Manhattanapartment building sparked an interna-tional outcry, with actress Mary TylerMoore and others rising up in passion-ate defense of the bird’s rights. “A sin-gle homeless hawk aroused moreindignation than 2 million homelessSudanese,” Kristof commented.

During the 1940s, some refugeeadvocates noted the same phenome-non. Meeting with a U.S. senator in1943, Rabbi Meyer Berlin (namesakeof the future Bar-Ilan University)remarked: “If horses were beingslaughtered as are the Jews ofPoland, there would by now be a louddemand for organized action againstsuch cruelty to animals. Somehow,when it concerns Jews, everybodyremains silent, including the intellec-tuals and humanitarians of free andenlightened America.” Two yearslater, in a sad fulfillment of RabbiBerlin’s dire prediction, U.S. Gen.George Patton diverted U.S. troops torescue 150 prized Lipizzaner dancinghorses, which were caught betweenAllied and Axis forces along theGerman-Czech border.

None of this detracts from what theMonuments Men accomplished, ofcourse. Their rescue of precious artworkand other historical treasures is deserv-ing of praise. But it’s also a story that hasto be told within its historical context: thefailure of the Roosevelt administration toaccord the rescue of human beings thesame level of concern it accorded therescue of cultural treasures.

“THE MONUMENTS MEN” SHOWS

HOW AMERICA SAVED PAINTINGS WHILE LETTING JEWS DIE

Left to right: Dimitri Leonidas, John Goodman, George Clooney, Matt Damon, and Bob Balaban

in The Monument Men.


S U R V I V O R S ’ C O R N E RS U R V I V O R S ’ C O R N E R

BY SHARON COHEN, HUFFINGTON POST

Listen to the many harrowing sto-ries of war, suffering and sur-

vival, all under one roof.On the third floor, there’s Margie. A

prisoner of Nazi labor camps, shehauled backbreaking cement bagsand was beaten with clubs.Sometimes, she had only a piece ofbread to eat every other day. Sheweighed 56 pounds when she wasfreed.

Down the hall, there’s Edith. Thoughpregnant, she miraculously avoidedthe gas chamber at Auschwitz. Shelost her mother, father and husband inthe camps. After liberation, she facedeven more heartbreak: Her son dieddays after his birth.

Up on the eighth floor, there’s Joe.As a boy of 10, he was herded onto acattle car and transported to a con-centration camp — the first of fivehe’d be shuttled to over five cruelyears.

These Holocaust survivors share ahistory and a home: a retirement com-munity founded more than 60 yearsago for Jews who’d been victims ofNazi persecution. For decades, it wasa refuge for those who’d endured theliving hell of Auschwitz,Theresienstadt, Mauthausen andother camps. And a haven, too, forthose who’d fled before the dark nightof German occupation fell over theirhomeland.

In its heyday, the Selfhelp Home, asit’s called, bustled with Jewishrefugees from Germany, Austria andCzechoslovakia, the dining room ababel of central European tongues.Hundreds were on a waiting list. Butthat was long ago. As time passed,the need for a special sanctuaryfaded. Others who had not enduredthe genocide moved in.

Only 12 Holocaust survivors — theyoungest in their mid-80s, the oldest102 — remain. So do a few dozenother Jews who escaped Hitler’sreach, often leaving behind family asthey started new lives in Kenya,China, Colombia and other distantlands.

They’re now the last generation tobear witness to one of the greatesthorrors of all time, a resilient commu-nity of friends and neighbors sharingwhat once seemed impossible: longlives. When they’re gone, their storieswill be preserved in history. But fornow, their voices still echo in thesehalls.

Seventy-five years ago, MargieOppenheimer awoke with a Nazipointing a rifle in her 14-year-old face.

It was November 9, 1938,Kristallnacht — the night of brokenglass — when the Nazis coordinated awave of attacks in Germany andAustria, smashing windows, burningsynagogues, ransacking homes, loot-ing Jewish-owned stores. They trashedthe family’s apartment and smalldepartment store in Oelde, Germany.

So began seven years of terror thattook Oppenheimer from the Rigaghetto — escaping mass killings byGerman squads — to a series of laborand concentration camps. She brokeconcrete, shoveled sawdust, laidbricks, glued U-boats. She foughthunger and fear, lice and typhus,repeating to herself: “I will be strong. Iwant to live.”

One day at the Stutthof concentra-tion camp in Poland, Nazis marchedOppenheimer and others naked intoan open field for inspection. Thosestrong enough to work were directedto the right. Oppenheimer, who wasemaciated, was ordered to the leftwith hundreds of older women. Shewas placed into new barracks andhad the Roman numeral II scrawledon her left forearm.

Death seemed inevitable.“I’m thinking this is the last time I will

see the sun,” she recalls.That night at the camp two friends

did the unimaginable: without sayinganything, they pulled Oppenheimerunder an electrified fence to anotherside of the camp. She scrubbed offone number on her arm so she wasno longer marked for death. Shestayed in those quarters and at thenext day’s 6 a.m. roll call, she tried tohide her skeletal, barely 5-foot framebehind a tall woman.

“The commander said, ‘There is oneperson extra. Who IS that person?Come forward!’” Oppenheimerrecalls, her high-pitched voice imitat-ing his stern tone. “My face was hot. Itwas on fire. I thought if anybody seesme, they’ll know I am the one whoisn’t supposed to be there.” An elder-ly woman was pulled from the lineand dispatched to her death.

“She was killed because of me,because I wanted to be free,”Oppenheimer says, her eyes cloudingwith tears. “And I feel guilty about thatuntil this living day.”

Oppenheimer eventually became anurse, but couldn’t bear to work withchildren. “Here you have happy, love-ly kids,” she explains. “All I saw werekids being pulled from their mothersand killed. Those are the pictures thatI still have in front of me.”

The past never totally disappears.One night at dinner someone asked ifeveryone had received plum cake.Oppenheimer pointed to two table-

mates. Suddenly she was remindedof a Nazi commander dubbed “thedeath finger” because he’d point, thendeclare with a “you, you, you,” thoseto be exterminated. She trembles justthinking about it.

Oppenheimer now lives in a cozy,sunlit apartment filled with four gener-ations of family photos. She and herhusband — an Auschwitz survivor —had decided long ago they’d eventu-ally move to Selfhelp, but he diedbefore there was a need.Oppenheimer has found comfortthere. “I’m happy to know that thereare people here who went through thesame thing,” she says.

Oppenheimer doesn’t share herstory unless asked, but has written amemoir to record events her threechildren weren’t all that eager to hear.“My kids didn’t want us to talk aboutit,” she says. “They’d say, ‘You’re in afree country now. Enjoy the freedom.Forget the past.’”

She can’t.“What happened yesterday — I

can’t remember,” she says, “but whathappened at that time ... it’s still withme. I can never forget it.”

Even when it’s unspoken, thepast is the emotional glue for

these survivors.“I think it has been very important for

them to live as a group, even thoughthey don’t talk about it,” says EthanBensinger, who made a 2012 docu-mentary, Refuge, about the place his101-year-old mother, Rachel, callshome. “Whether it’s subliminally orunconsciously ... there’s a feeling oftogetherness.”

Rachel Bensinger’s story is notuncommon. She left Germany asHitler’s dictatorial grip tightened. Shemoved to what was then Palestine,but her life was unalterably shaped bythe Holocaust — she lost 25 mem-bers of her family.

These traumas have been enor-mous, but they’ve not been all-con-suming.

“They don’t want it to be the focus ofwho they are, they don’t want to bemarked,” says Hedy Ciocci, thehome’s administrator. “They want tobe defined by who they became andwhat life they’ve had.”

Many became doctors, lawyers,artists, businessmen, teachers, nurs-es. With roots in Berlin, Prague andVienna, many also had developed alove for the arts that the home sus-tains today with lectures, Sunday con-certs and visits from a movie critic.

“It represents this world that theyremember, that they had to leave,”Bensinger says. He describes it withthe German word: gemutlichkeit —comfort or coziness.

The home actually started as anassociation in the mid-1930s

when a branch of a New York organi-zation called Selfhelp formed inChicago. Selfhelp was more than aname; it was a philosophy forrefugees who didn’t want to dependon public aid. Instead, they started asupport group, collecting meagerdues to help each other find jobs orapartments, learn English and navi-gate daily life.

“The mission was to create a safeoasis where they could start again,”says Ciocci, whose husband’s grand-mother was an early member.

Gerry Franks, one of the home’sfounders, had come from Berlin. Now92, he still remembers being 17 yearsold, watching from his bicycle thehateful frenzy of Kristallnacht as Nazistorm troopers painted small crossesin the corner of windows of Jewish-owned businesses so mobs wouldknow where to attack.

He saw a schoolmate pick up achair lodged in an already-shatteredstore window and hurl it into a magnif-icent chandelier. “I tell you, it brokesomething within me,” Franks says. “Ithought, ‘What the heck am I doing inthis country anymore?’” His family leftsoon after.

As a Selfhelp founder, Franks alongwith others decided after about adecade to start a retirement communityfor their parents and other refugees,many attached to Old World ways.

About 15 years ago, with increasingnumbers of survivors dying, Selfhelp— which offers everything from inde-pendent living to around-the-clockcare — began opening its doors toJews who weren’t European warrefugees.

Soon, the reason this home wasfounded will cease to be.

“In a matter of years, this communi-ty will be gone, this sense of culturewill be gone, these last links to whatcentral Europe was before the war willno longer be with us,” Bensingersays. “There’s a great sense of sad-ness for all of us.”

That sorrow, though, has been tem-pered, by those still here to write thelast chapter.

Edith Stern sometimes thinks hermemory is too strong.

She remembers her improbablewedding ceremony in Theresienstadt.A concentration camp inmate withmeningitis, she was too weak tostand, but strong enough to take hervows. Her head was bandaged and apink silk gown peeked out from herblanket. Her groom stood at her side.

“All the people cried,” she says with (Continued on page 12)

SELFHELP HOME HOUSES WORLD’S LAST GENERATION

OF HOLOCAUST SURVIVORS


BY REBECCA BENHAMOU, THE TIMES OF ISRAEL

Reopening a scandal that brokein 2004, the new French book

L’Eglise de France et les enfants juifs(The French Church and JewishChildren) is a 10-year investigationinto one of the most controversialpostwar Catholic Church policies.

The book, which recently hit Frenchbookstores, opens with an October23, 1946, directive from the FrenchApostolic Nunciature that authorCatherine Poujol found in the Churcharchives in 2004 in Issy-les-Moulineaux, a commune in the south-western area of Paris.

Leaked to the Italian daily newspa-per Corriere Della Sera without herpermission on December 28, 2004,the document — written in Frenchand “approved by the Holy Father” —forbids Catholic authorities fromallowing Jewish children who hadbeen sheltered by Catholics and bap-tized to be returned to their familiesand communities.

“For Jews today, children or grand-children of Shoah survivors, the letterfrom the Nunciature is written evi-dence of what was once feared,”Poujol writes. “We knew that after thewar, Jewish organizations did every-thing in their power to obtain a letterfrom the pope, a memorandum ask-ing institutions looking after hiddenJewish children to hand them over.

“Today, we have the evidence that acontrary order came from the Vatican,and affected some of these children,”she adds.

The formal Church directive outlin-ing how to deal with requests fromJewish organizations looking for hid-den children throughout Europe failsto mention the atrocities of theHolocaust.

“Children who have been baptizedmust not be entrusted to institutionsthat would not be in a position to guar-antee their Christian upbringing,” the

document says. “For children who nolonger have their parents, given thefact that the Church is responsible forthem, it is not acceptable for them tobe abandoned by the Church orentrusted to any persons who haveno rights over them, at least until theyare in a position to choose them-selves.”

A rchbishop of Lyon MonsignorGerlier — credited with rescu-

ing 120 Jewish children from deporta-

tion in Vénissieux — received the let-ter on April 30, 1947, along withanother document, entitled “Notefrom the Abbot Blanc.”

Explaining the opinion of a theolo-gist consulted by the Vatican envoy inFrance, Angelo Rocalli, the documentstates: “Baptism is what makes aChristian, hence it ‘cancels the Jew,’which allowed the Church to protectso many endangered Israelites.”

To this day, there are no reliable fig-ures on how many French Jewishchildren were hidden and saved byCatholics, or directly affected by thisChurch directive.

For almost a decade, Poujol hasrefused to talk to the press about herdiscovery. Now, she explains the rea-sons behind her silence.

“I didn’t want to add fuel to the firewithout properly investigating the sub-ject — and this was a very complex,lengthy process,” she told The Timesof Israel.

“When the media published thedirective, they had no evidence what-soever of its origin and its actualimpact on the field,” she continues.

“For a historian, it is very tempting totalk to the press, especially when youdiscover something big. But had Italked, I would have lost my credibili-ty and the Church’s trust.”

Poujol admits, however, that withoutthe 2004 scandal, the French Churchwould probably not have granted heraccess to its private archives.

“The Church felt cornered, and atfirst adopted an inward-lookingstance. But soon it realized that deny-

ing the access to these postwar doc-uments would fuel the scandal evenmore.”

After examining countless sourcesand traveling throughout Europe, theUS and Israel, Poujol came to theconclusion that even if this documentclearly outlines the Church’s intentionof keeping baptized Jewish childrenunder its custody, it doesn’t castblame on the entire Catholic Church.

“Many priests and bishops actedcompletely independently and didn’tabide by the directive,” she says.

Poujol notes that there is very littleevidence as to which members of theChurch did receive the note.

“After the war, the Church was in anunprecedented, exceptional situation— and wasn’t prepared for it,” shesays. “On the one hand, a sacrament,in this case baptism, was adminis-tered to save individuals from a likelydeath. But on the other hand,Catholics truly believe in the rescue ofsouls via this sacrament.”

Amid numerous, well-documentedexamples, Poujol mentions the FinalyAffair, which consumed and divided

France in 1953.

In 1944, two Jewish boys, Robertand Gerald Finaly, were sent by

their parents to a Catholic nursery inGrenoble. After the parents weredeported and died at Auschwitz, theiruncle and aunt, who were living inIsrael, attempted to get the childrenback.

In 1948, French Catholic nurseAntoinette Brun baptized the childrenwithout the family’s permission andformally adopted them, omitting to tellthe judge about the existence of otherrelatives.

The affair reached the national spot-light when a police investigation foundthat several nuns of the Notre Damede Sion order and Basque priests hadarranged and executed the kidnap-ping and smuggling of the children inSpain in February 1953.

The boys were returned to their fam-ily on July 25 after an eight-year legalbattle that divided the French publicopinion.

Poujol explains, “The Finaly Affair isthe most emblematic example of theChurch’s ambivalent attitude. Thedebate opposed on the one handMonsignor Gerlier, who did everythinghe could not to hand over the chil-dren, and on the other hand,Monsignor Caillot, archbishop ofGrenoble and fervent supporter of theVichy government, who lobbiedactively to return the boys to theirfamily.

“French public opinion was dividedinto two opposing camps, clericalsagainst anticlericals, Zionists againstanti-Zionists, and canon law againstrepublican law,” she adds.

In France, 11,600 Jewish childrendied during World War II, but another72,400 survived.

“There are many gray areas when itcomes to the role of the CatholicChurch during and after the war; wecannot jump to a clear-cut, black orwhite conclusion,” says Poujol. “Thevery goal of my book is to show thatwe need to adopt a nuanced stance.”

JEWISH CHILDREN HIDDEN TWICE OVER BY THE CHURCH

Robert and Gerald Finaly, the most notorious case of French baptized Jewish children hidden after

World War II.

Inside the walls of the transit campof Terezin, Jewish footballers used

their favorite sport as a means of psy-chological escape from Nazi tyranny– if only for the duration of a match.The league was finally granted officialrecognition by the Czech FootballAssociation.

Locked up in the Nazi transit camp ofTerezin, Jewish prisoners created theirown football league, which Czech foot-ball recently commemorated by finallygranting it official recognition.

“Playing football, we didn’t think ofdeportation or the stress caused by lifein the ghetto,” famed Czech novelistand playwright Ivan Klima once said.Sent to the ghetto near Prague agedjust 10, Klima played for the children’steam “Blauweiss” (Blue-whites).

He was far from alone.Inside the walls of the former

Theresienstadt, the Jewish footballersused their favorite sport as a means ofpsychological escape from Nazi tyran-ny — if only for the duration of a match.

Between 1941 and 1945, a total of152,659 Jews passed through thegiant Terezin complex. About 34,000of them perished from disease due topoor sanitation, while 87,000 othersmet their death after being deportedto Auschwitz-Birkenau.

Just 16,852 of the Jews who passedthrough Terezin camp survived the war.

In March, the Czech FootballAssociation executive committeedeclared “the football competitionsand their organization in the Terezinghetto during World War II an integraland important part of its history.”

In 1943, a committee of Czech,Austrian, German, Danish, French

and Italian Jews led by German Fredy

Hirsch — who later perished inAuschwitz-Birkenau — created a sys-tem of football leagues including the“Terezin League,” several divisions, aswell as children’s and junior leagues.

“Even in such cruel conditions thefolks played football — and footballhelped them survive,” says StanislavHrabe, head of a Czech FootballAssociation historical committee.

Named after the jobs the players hadin the ghetto, such as “Cooks,” “UsedClothes Storage,” “Electricians,” and“Butchers,” the seven-a-side teamsplayed games of two 35-minute halvesin the courtyard of a former army bar-racks as thousands of fans watched.

In 1943, the “Used Clothes Storage”team came top of the first TerezinLeague, after six victories and threedraws. The “Butchers” won the firstTerezin Cup in the same year.

The ghetto prisoners also playedinternational games, such as Pragueversus Vienna.

But player transfers scheduledevery Monday from 10 am to 2 pmwere a cruel reminder of the horrifyingsituation the footballers found them-selves in: the lineups changed fromweek to week as players were deport-ed to death camps.

Terezin players included ones withinternational careers, such as PaulMahrer of the “Butchers” team, whoas a DFC Prague star had played sixgames for the former Czechoslovakiain 1923–1926.

Mahrer survived Terezin and hassince spoken of his experience, tellingFrantisek Steiner, author of FootballUnder a Yellow Star, “For us, footballwas a kind of comfort in hell’s waitingroom.”

CZECHS HAIL WARTIME JEWISH LEAGUE


Representative of major commu-nity organizations and three

generations of South Floridians gath-ered at the B’nai Torah Congregationin Boca Raton on Sunday, March 2,2014, for the Society’s InauguralFlorida Tribute Dinner. Two hundredseventy guests came topay tribute to honoreesAron Bell (Bielski) andBrenda Weil Mandel. AronBell, who lives in PalmBeach, is the last survivingmember of the Bielski fami-ly and a founder, along withhis older brothers, of theBielski partisans. BrendaWeil Mandel is a Trustee ofYad Vashem and a mem-ber of the second genera-tion of survivors. ConsulGeneral for Israel to FloridaChaim Shacham updatedthe audience on currentevents in the State of Israel.Yad Vashem Builder JimmyResnick introduced SenatorMarco Rubio, our keynotespeaker, who participated in the eventthrough the help of BenefactorNorman Braman. A Yad Vashem videopresentation, “Remembering the Past,Shaping the Future,” introduced byYad Vashem Benefactor Jack Pechter,provided a panoramic view of the YadVashem campus on the Mount ofRemembrance in Jerusalem. ShellyPechter Himmelrich, a member of theASYV board of directors, ably andgraciously presided over the dinnerprogram.

Greetings and tributes were provid-ed by a number of dignitaries.Leonard Wilf, Chairman of the Board,recalled the founders of the Society inhis remarks:

”At this Inaugural Dinner — a mile-stone event for the Society — I wouldlike to pay tribute to the memory of EliZborowski, its founder. For more than

three decades, Eli was the drivingforce behind this organization. In theearly ‘80s, Eli marshaled the efforts ofsurvivors like my father, Harry Wilf, ofblessed memory, and my Uncle Joe

to become active in raising money forYad Vashem. Both of them assumedleadership positions in the Societyand in turn have inspired me andother members of the Wilf family tofollow in their footsteps.”

Consul General Chaim Shachamspoke about the important role

of Yad Vashem in the face of numer-ous threats that currently face theState and people of Israel:

“Yad Vashem means Holocaustremembrance. Israel is built onremembrance. For most states,remembrance is a pastime. ForIsrael, remembrance is our purpose.And for Israel, Holocaust remem-brance is a permanent proactive pol-icy.”

Shacham stated that “For Israel, formy government, this is 1938.” He thenemphasized the danger of historyrepeating itself if Iran were to gainnuclear capabilities. “No Israeli gov-ernment will sit idly by as Iran gainsnuclear capability. This is truebecause Holocaust remembrance is apermanent and proactive policy of the

State of Israel.”Shelly Pechter Himmelrich talked

about her family’s role in her introduc-tion of her father, Yad VashemBenefactor Jack Pechter:

“Though he is a Holocaust survivor,my father is by far the most forward-thinking and optimistic person I haveever met…. His interest in YadVashem is about our future as a glob-al community with human rights for allpeople. Two decades ago our family

undertook to establish theInternational School for HolocaustStudies. Today, each year, the School

attracts more than 100,000 students,50,000 soldiers and thousands ofeducators from Israel and around theworld. Courses are taught in eight lan-guages other than Hebrew.”

In her acceptance speech, BrendaWeil Mandel said:

“I was just a little girl in 1965 whenmy parents, Julius and Tony Mandel,took me on a trip to Israel to visitmembers of our family. At that timethere were many places we were notallowed to go, including the WesternWall, the Kotel. Two years ago myhusband, Lou, and I travelled to Israelwith 80 congregants and friends fromour synagogue with the specific pur-pose to visit Yad Vashem, where Louand I dedicated the Flag Terrace inremembrance of our family.

“The theme of this year’s tribute din-

ner is ‘Global Guardian of HolocaustRemembrance.’ Yad Vashem wasestablished in 1953 through an act ofthe Knesset. In 1965 Yad Vashemwas small. Now, with the help of manyloyal supporters, it has grown into theimpressive structure it is today.

“One of the purposesof Yad Vashem is

to remember the six millionJews who perished, whichincluded members of myfamily…. So many inno-cent lives snuffed out.Loving life is not enough.Doing for others is the realpurpose of life. It is a won-derful feeling to continue inthe tradition of my parentsand family to support wor-thy causes. Lou and I tryto follow this principle, hop-ing to be a link in the chainto bring about a betterworld. I know my parentsand family of blessedmemory would be veryhappy to see that we are

doing this. Yad Vashem needs to existto ensure that future generationsremember the past.”

The tribute to the Bielski Brigadebegan with Stuart Schulman, whoassisted Aron Bell in the writing of hisreminiscences in the forest. Stuartpresented a dramatic reading fromthe book, Forest Scout. He was fol-lowed by Mickey Bielski, the oldestson of Tuvia Bielski, the commanderof the Bielski Brigade. Mickey sharedsome thoughts about his father:

“Tuvia Bielski, my father, was anextraordinary man who was caughtup in one of the most horrificmoments of the twentieth centurywhen the extinction of an entire peo-ple had been set in motion by theNazis. Tuvia became the command-er, the visionary, the holy warrior ofthe Bielski Otriad. Because of hisleadership, Tuvia, along with broth-


AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR YAD VASHEM

HOSTS INAUGURAL FLORIDA TRIBUTE DINNER

From right to left: Chairman Leonard Wilf, Honorable Chaim Shacham, Shelly Pechter Himmelrich, Senator Marco Rubio,

Brenda Weil Mandel, Jack Pechter.

Aron Bell accepting the Yad Vashem Remembrance Award. From right to left: Mickey Bielski (son

of Bielski Brigade leader Tuvia Bielski), Chairman Leonard Wilf, Aron Bell (Bielski), Henryka

Bell, Leah Johnson (Bielski partisan).

Brenda Weil Mandel accepting Yad Vashem Guardian of Remembrance Award. From right to left:

S. Isaac Mekel, Director of Development at ASYV; Louis Frock (husband to Mandel); Brenda Weil

Mandel; Chairman Leonard Wilf.


PHOTO HIGHLIGHTS FROM THE AMERICAN SOCIETY

FOR YAD VASHEM YOUNG LEADERSHIP ASSOCIATES WINTER GALA

Barry Levine and Abbi Halpern, co-charis, Young Leadership Associates; and Leonard A. Wilf,

chairman of the American Society for Yad Vashem.

2014 Young Leadership Associates Gala Committee.


REPORT FROM REPORT FROM YAD VASHEMYAD VASHEMFor years Soviet Jewry’s

Holocaust was a forbidden secret.Now, through letters found inarchives, Yad Vashem is workingto make the voices silenced behindthe Iron Curtain heard.BY SMADAR SHIR, YNET NEWS

“To my dear brother, our cityPriluki was taken over quite

suddenly and very quickly by theGerman occupiers. My brother — youcannot imagine what terrible monthswe have been through — famine,extreme cold, abuse, looting, humilia-tion…. I wanted to die so many timesinstead of continuing this life! Evenwhen I regretted not dying in thebombings, I still retained one hope —to see you again — even if for just a

minute — before my eyes are closed.But this wish will also not be realized.Yuzik, I know that tomorrow is my lastday, but I am strong and do not fearthe end of my life. I am certain thatyou will avenge the death of your sis-ter. Take revenge on those responsi-ble for the deaths of Tulya, Mara andthousands of others. I kiss you andsend greetings to your friends, to mybrothers and sisters, and I hope thatone day you will avenge our spiltblood.”

This farewell letter, which is now yel-low and fading, is signed EleonoraParmut, from the city of Priluki,Ukraine. She was 15 years old andwas not expecting a miracle. It wasclear to her that within hours of the inkdrying on the paper, they would standher in a line, and aim their rifles at her,and her body would plunge into thekilling pit.

And that is how it was. Around 6,000Jews lived in Priluki at the end of the1930s. Many of them fled inSeptember 1941 when the city wasseized by the Nazis. Some of thoseleft were sent to the ghetto, and oth-ers were sent to hard labor that manydid not survive. In the end, the major-ity of the Jews remaining in the city —1,300 men, women and children —

were murdered in two operations, inMay and September 1942. They werelined up and shot into the killing pits.Some of them were buried alive.

But who was this Eleonora Parmutwho left us this chilling letter? Andwhat was the fate of her brotherYuzik?

BRUTAL AND QUICK OPERATION

“We will never know,” says Dr.Lea Prais of the

International Institute for HolocaustResearch, who is attending a confer-ence in Kharkov dedicated to the col-lection, research and mapping of themurder sites of the Jews from the for-mer Soviet Union. “In Poland,Germany and France we founddiaries that people wrote in hiding, butfrom the Holocaust in the SovietUnion we found only one diary.”

The absence of such diaries is notaccidental. “The Holocaust in the for-mer Soviet Union was very brief,” sheexplains. “The country was occupiedwithin several months — the opera-tion was brutal and quick and theJews were exterminated before theyhad an opportunity to develop a com-munal life under occupation.

“The Soviet Jews were also afraid ofwriting diaries. This was a result ofyears of the Stalinist regime whereany personal writings put them in dan-ger. They didn’t know who was goingto find the diary. For the same reasonthey also spoke little and sparinglyeven during conversations with familymembers. Instead of diaries they leftbehind letters. A letter is a small thingthat does not require a lot of time orthought, and I see them as a moredemocratic way of expression. Theyare the voice of everyone.”

Eleonora’s letter from Priluki wasfound by Dr. Prais in the Yad Vashemarchives. “Her family members livedin Azerbaijan and kept this letter andher picture like a lucky charm. Whenthey came to visit friends in Israel,they gave the letter and the picture toa woman named Leah Basentin whoin turn gave them to Yad Vashem. Butshe didn’t have any additional infor-mation and also didn’t know how tolocate the visitors from Azerbaijan.

“In the last few years we have triedto make contact with Basentin, with-out any luck. Let’s hope that as aresult of this article someone will turnto us. Perhaps we will be successfuland find a clue that will lead us to therelatives of this girl.”

“The Holocaust is the mostresearched topic in the world,” saysYad Vashem Chairman Avner Shalev.“In our library we have 140 thousandtitles, and the research will never becompleted, since the deeper wedelve, the more we find that there wasunique behavior in each place. Thegeneral pattern and the basic

approach were quite similar — theygathered the Jews together and thenmurdered them — but for us it isimportant to learn how they coped.We are speaking about enormousamounts of material — diaries, andletters that will require many moreyears of work.”

Around one and a half million Jewswere murdered in the territories of theformer Soviet Union, “mainly inravines — the most famous of whichis Babi Yar,” says Shalev. “The Nazisled the Jewish village to large killingpits where they threw the slain —sometimes 10,000 people. Theseplaces have never been documentedand this is the task before us now. Wehave identified more than 2,000 deathpits and we are researching each site:who fired, in what language the orderwas given and the level of satisfactionreflected in the reports detailing thecompleted mission.”

The written eyewitness accountsspeak for themselves. A report

from July 16, 1941, which is catego-rized “Confidential Matter of theReich,” states: “In the first hours afterthe Bolsheviks’ retreat the localUkrainian population undertook somepraiseworthy actions against theJews. For example, the synagogue inDovreimil was torched. In Sambur, 50Jews were beaten to death by anangry crowd. The Security Policerounded up 7,000 Jews and shotthem as revenge for their horrific andinhuman actions.”

A soldier called Franz proudly wroteto his parents: “Until now we havesent around a thousand Jews to thenext world,” and SS officer AugustHepner wrote from the town BelayaTserchov, Ukraine: “The Wehrmachtsoldiers have already dug a ditch thatwill serve as a grave. The childrenwere brought by tractor. They werelined up on the edge of the ditch andshot to death so that they fell within.It’s impossible to describe the howl-ing. Some children had to be shot fouror five times until they stopped.”

The research at Yad Vashem hasled to the conclusion that theHolocaust in the former Soviet Unionmust receive special consideration.

“During the Soviet period theHolocaust was presented as an inte-gral part of the World War in which theNazis murdered Soviet citizens —some of whom were Jews,” explainsShalev. “The Holocaust was not men-tioned in the government educationalsystem and harsh sanctions wereapplied to any researcher that daredto study this area. Some lone sur-vivors, those whose entire familieswere murdered in the killing pits whilethey were fighting at the front, latercame to the killing pits, collected eye-witness accounts and passed themon by word of mouth. Nevertheless,

the authorities accused them of beingtraitors.”

Masha Yonin, born in St.Petersburg and now working at

Yad Vashem, grew up in the shadowof this ambiguity.

“After high school I went to study inEstonia because in the city where Iwas born, Jews were not accepted tostudy the humanities,” she relates. “Istudied literature and Russian lan-guage and then returned to St.Petersburg, and together with my hus-band we joined the new Jewish move-ment that was set up by refuseniks.The Holocaust ripped up our roots,and we met in the refusenik under-ground, in private homes, to studyHebrew. Under the Stalinist regimeJews changed their surnames andwere afraid to go to the synagogue,Jewish culture was wiped out, andcases of assimilation were wide-spread. The proof of this is in the factthat by the time the gates were closed,most of the Jews who wanted to leavethe Soviet Union did not request to goto Israel but to United States.”

Unsurprisingly, the KGB did notrelate positively to the Jewish Hebrewstudies in private homes.

“They used to come and turn thehouse upside down searching forIsraeli newspapers, and if they foundthem they accused the house ownerof undermining the state. When theyconfiscated the papers, they planteddrugs among the bookshelves inorder to accuse all present of dealingin drugs, which carried a more severepunishment than nationalism. Theywanted to ensure that we wouldreceive long prison sentences, as inthe case of Minister Edelstein who satin prison, and they also wanted tohumiliate the movement. They oftenused to say: “Who are the membersof this movement? They are bothnationalists and drug dealers.”

Despite the fear of being sent toprison, the movement’s memberscontinued to meet in the Jewishunderground, “and alongside learningHebrew we studied Torah, Jewish his-tory and also about the Holocaust thatwas never mentioned in the SovietUnion,” Yonin relates.

“The Soviet ideology was that all areequal, that all the Soviet people suf-fered during the Great Patriotic War,


“I KNOW TOMORROW WILL BE MY LAST DAY”

The only picture left of Eleonora.Tomer and Aharon Guntser’s letter to their

sons a day before they were murdered.


BY JONATHON VAN MAREN, THE TIMES OF ISRAEL

Ioften think that it is difficult formembers of Generation Y to fully

grasp the reality of the Holocaust andjust how recent the geographicallysprawling and bloody events actuallywere. Living in widespread prosperi-ty — almost unprecedented in humanhistory — and possessing attitudes ofentitlement proportionate to that, theyoung people of the West in my gen-eration have, generally speaking,never had to deal with the horrificreality of Western governmentsslaughtering human beings based onrace or religion on a mass scale, orhad to experience house-to-housewarfare that might very well includeour own house, or watch invaders gundown neighbors in the streets of ourown villages and cities. We are thegeneration that possesses so muchmaterial wealth that we’ve coined theterm “First World problems” — per-haps not realizing that a mere 70years ago, the problems of the “FirstWorld” looked much different. In the1930s and ‘40s, the unimaginablebecame a horrific reality.

I’ve had several opportunities overthe last several years to interviewHolocaust survivors, and have alwaysfound it hard to reconcile the calm,collected demeanor of those I’mspeaking with to the brutal realitiesthey are describing, from the horrorsof Auschwitz to family members whodisappeared without a trace into themaw of the Nazi inferno. Then,recently, I spoke by phone with a love-ly Vancouver woman, MarietteRozen, who survived the Holocausthidden in the Netherlands. Whilethinking about her story, I struck upona way of contextualizing it by contrast-ing her experience with those of mymaternal grandparents, both of similarage and both of whom grew up in theNetherlands through the gruelingyears of the Nazi occupation. As theirgrandson, I can better connect withand understand their experiences —and then, perhaps, Mariette’s, as shelived through the war in the same tinycountry, but under drastically differentcircumstances.

The Nazis swept into theNetherlands in May of 1940 — andmy grandfather Joe den Bok, whopassed away last year, rememberedthe event clearly. The Nazi bombersbegan to fly over his parents’ house inthe village of Veen on May 10 — hisseventh birthday.

“I didn’t have much understandingof war yet,” he told me.

“I heard that the Germans, theyentered the country…those planescame very low and they went toRotterdam, and Rotterdam was bom-barded very heavily. By nine o’ clock,the German troops came through thetown. There were a lot of troops andhorses, and so we were laying at theside of the road and just observing it

because we were children and a littlebit more free to stare than the olderpeople.”

The planes Joe den Bok saw, itturns out, were only the first wave —the Rotterdam Blitz, in which much ofthe city was leveled by the Luftwaffe,was to happen on May 14.

My grandmother Pia Dam alsoremembers the beginning of

the German occupation, even thoughshe was only three (born September17, 1936). On May 13, the day beforethe Rotterdam Blitz, Pia was in thecity with her mother — “just beforePentecost,” as she remembers it.They were shopping for churchclothes, and Pia’s mother bought hera pair of beige leather shoes. The fol-

lowing morning, Pia stood outsideand watched “the smoke and fire ofRotterdam rising in the sky.” Theentire city center — including thedepartment store she had been at theday before — had been destroyed byGerman bombers.

Mariette Rozen’s memories of theyear 1940 are much different — she,unlike my grandparents, was Jewish.She was born on May 10, 1935, inBrussels, and the Nazis marched intoBelgium four years later in 1939. Oneof the few memories she has beforeshe was taken into hiding was:

“My mother and my sister Estherand my brother Jack and my brotherHenri were walking down a road —turns out we were walking towardsParis to escape Brussels. On the roadwe met thousands and thousands ofpeople who were walking from Paristo Brussels — of course, I didn’t knowthis ‘til years later. I know the memorybecause I looked up and I saw silverbirds, which turned out to beplanes…and those planes were div-ing down the road where all the peo-ple were and they were shot at. Mybrother pushed my mother, my sister,and my two brothers and I into theditch. And that was my first encounterwith death — people were falling andblood all over.”

Her slow realization that anti-Semitism was a new and enforcedpolicy started to surface around thesame time — around 1939 to 1940,Mariette supposes. “Not just kids onthe street, but kids I was playing with!”she told me.

“They started to call me names, andI thought it was because my motherhad sewn a yellow star on my dress. Iused to tear it off my clothes becauseI wanted the kids to play with me. Butthey wouldn’t play — they started call-ing me a ‘dirty Jew,’ or ‘a dog.’ I could-n’t understand — I kept saying to mymother, ‘I don’t think they like the yel-low star!’”

Indeed, immediately after the inva-sion of Belgium, the Nazis instituted

anti-Jewish policies, including severerestrictions of their civil rights and theoutright confiscation of their proper-ties and businesses.

Across the border in theNetherlands, the Nazis lost no time ininstituting similar measures againstDutch Jews as well. ManyNetherlanders moved quickly toassist their Jewish countrymen —often at great cost. Pia remembersbeing sick at home one day and see-ing a group of Dutch prisoners acrossthe street at a truck station, arrestedby the Germans for hiding Jews. Theywere wearing thin clothes and theirwooden shoes, she recalled, as theGermans clearly hadn’t given themenough time to get dressed. Whenthe Nazis spotted little Pia peering outthe window, they pointed their rifles ather to scare her away. She laterlearned that those arrested were mur-dered by the Nazis.

In spite of new Nazi policiesagainst Dutch Jews, Mariette’s

family decided that sending her to theNetherlands would be safest. Hermother, unfortunately, had believedthe Nazi lies that if she registered herfamily with the authorities, they wouldbe safe from arrest and deportation.Her brother Jean, Mariette remem-bered, was furious, and her family

went into hiding. Little Mariette wasfirst hidden in an orphanage, andthen, she remembers, in Holland.

“I left the orphanage, [and] mybrother had taught me how to read amap. You don’t need to read, you can[just] follow the road,” she told me.

“Henri had taught me all thesethings and I smuggled myself. Ialways left people without saying agoodbye. That was the first thing Iwas taught, you never say anything. Ileft the orphanage and I was to meetsomeone on a motorcycle that was ata corner. It was a young man, and heput me in the side cart and neverspoke to me the whole time he tookme from Brussels to Holland. It wasalways at night.

“I remember the house with thewindmills,” she recalls, “and that ishow I knew I was in Holland.

“[My brother] dropped me off out-side of this little town and I had towalk and I followed the map. Mybrother told me…you can’t askquestions, you can’t ask anybodyanything. This was always at night,anyways — very few people wereout there. I walked to this farm, andthe lady knew I was coming. I wentto bed and the next morning I had togo to the city hall to tell the Mayor amessage which I can say today wasthat there was eighty Jews hiding inthis town and he had to tell them toleave because the Gestapo werecoming. I stayed with this lady [and]acted like I was deaf and dumb tothe neighbors until I learned tospeak and understand. It [took]three months to learn [the] languageand speak it.”

Mariette was entering a countryunder siege — the Germans wereeverywhere. Joe den Bok recalledthat by the end of 1943, twenty-fiveGermans were living in the large denBok farmhouse and barn, taking upresidence to look after the bridges inthe town of Veen. “First the Dutchblew them up so that the Germans


THREE CHILDREN UNDER THE SWASTIKA

German forces rolling into Amsterdam. The Netherlands was occupied by Nazi Germany for five years, from May 1940 until May 1945.


(Continued from page 6)a wistful smile. “I laughed. I’d marriedthe man of my dreams.”

She remembers months later, her-self and her mother on a transport,thinking they were heading to aGerman labor camp where they’d bereunited with their husbands. Instead,they arrived at Auschwitz. Her motherwas dispatched to the gas chambers,Stern to work. She was ushered intothe camp by a female guard whopointed to the chimneys, and deliv-ered a chilling taunt:

“You see those flames? Those areyour parents, your husbands, yourchildren burning.”

Stern also remembers the anguishwhen the pregnant young widow,newly freed, arrived at a Prague hos-pital. The staff, seeing a scrawnywoman with a shaved head, thoughtshe was a prostitute and the baby’sfather a Nazi. Stern says she wastreated roughly at first. After three gru-eling days of labor, her son, Peter,was born. He had blood in his skull.He died three days later.

“He was,” she says, “a beautiful

baby.”Stern moved to Chicago in 1965

and joined the staff of Selfhelp, devel-oping an instant rapport with the otherrefugees. “The reason I wanted towork there was I could never do any-thing for my parents because theywere killed,” she says. “These peoplecould have been my parents .... Iloved them and they loved me.”

Now a stylish, lively 92-year-oldgrandmother, Stern says she alwaysknew she’d return. Moving in 14 yearsago, she says, was “like cominghome.” Her younger sister, Marietta,who spent the war with a foster fami-ly in England as part ofKindertransport, a rescue mission forJewish children, lives across the hall.

Stern says she and other survivorsare forever bound by experiences fewcan comprehend.

“We had these terrible mutual mem-ories,” she says. “When I tell you aboutmy life, you cannot imagine it. Butthese people can. For you, my story islike a novel. For them, it’s real life.”

Every one of their stories has beenrecorded on DVDs.

Bensinger, the documentary maker,conducted 30 interviews five yearsago. Since then, more than two-thirdshave died.

But on any evening, there are silver-haired, slightly stooped survivors,profiles of sheer will, determinationand fate, who gather for dinner andend another day.

There’s Paula, 102, an artist andsculptor, who was on the run inFrance during the war with her hus-band and young son.

There’s Trudy, 100, who settled inKenya with her husband, leaving herparents in Germany. She never sawthem again.

There’s Hannah, 93, the sole sur-vivor among her family, who’s neverforgotten her sister’s parting words:“Hannah, you were my best friend.”

And there’s Joe Chaba, 85, and hiswife, Helen. Married 55 years, they’reinseparable, holding hands on therooftop garden, whispering to oneanother, sharing meals. Helen, 89,has dementia; they have 24-hournursing care.

Now in his twilight years, Chabathinks more about his days in a campat age 10, constantly staring death inthe face — sometimes unloadingpiles of bodies from trucks — butnever contemplating it for himself. Lifewas a day-to-day proposition.

He quietly pulls two snapshots fromhis wallet, handsome young men withthick crowns of wavy hair. One is him,the other, his older brother, David, hisprotector in five camps, now dead.They were the only survivors amongtheir family of seven.

“By God’s sake I’m still alive,” hesays, his voice quavering. “Godhelped me. I believe in God.”

The Selfhelp home has plaques andart — some created by the residents— that recognize the terrible events oflong ago. But there is no singlememorial to the Holocaust that hasbrought them together.

It’s part of the home’s philosophy,says Efrat Stein, an outreach worker.

There’s no need for constantreminders of the past, she says: “Thisis a place to LIVE.”

SELFHELP HOME HOUSES WORLD’S LAST GENERATION

OF HOLOCAUST SURVIVORS

(Continued from page 10)which is what they called World WarII, and that the Jews were murderedlike other Soviet citizens. If there wasmaterial in the library or the archiveabout the Holocaust it was in aclosed, secret section which requireda special pass from the director of thatplace, who in turn had to get approvalfrom the KGB. Ninety-nine percent ofthe Holocaust survivors left in theUSSR did not speak about what hap-pened to them. Grandfathers wereafraid to tell their grandchildren — forfear that tomorrow the grandchildwould say something in school andthen all the family would be in troubleand go to prison.”

In 1990, with the opening of thegates, Yonin and her extended

family emigrated to Israel. She was33 at the time and married. “A miraclehappened to me,” says Yonin, gettingemotional. “A friend of mine met withDr. Krakowsky, director of thearchives at Yad Vashem, who wassearching for a professional archivist.My Hebrew was not good then, butwithin a month after making aliyah, Ibegan working.”

The connection between the YadVashem archive and the governmentarchive in Moscow was established ayear before the opening of the gatesand the establishment of diplomaticrelations between Israel and USSR.According to Shalev, only after the fallof the Iron Curtain did the voidbecome apparent.

“They were eager for knowledgeabout the Holocaust. In the last twoyears, thanks to support from theGenesis Philanthropy Group and theEuropean Jewish Fund, a quiet revo-lution has begun in the research and

teaching of the Holocaust of SovietJewry.”

These activities include increas-ing dramatically the collection of

materials from archives in Russia,Ukraine, Belarus, the Baltic statesand other places; uploading a newand comprehensive website inRussian which incorporates educa-tional materials, virtual tours andonline exhibitions; launching aYouTube channel in Russian; increas-ing the number of academic publica-tions in Russian; displaying varioustravelling exhibitions in Moscow; pub-lishing stories of the RighteousAmong the Nations who functioned inthese regions on Yad Vashem’sRussian-language website; creatingeducational curricula for teachers andfor youth movements; and more.

Yonin was the first from YadVashem to go to Belarus, and discov-ered the personal questionnaires ofmore than 12,000 Jews in itsarchives. “It turns out that the Nazisrequired that each Jew fill out a formin order to renew his passport, includ-ing pictures and fingerprints. I openedone file and then another, and therewas no end to these surprises. Thiswas a period of discoveries. Even thearchive director had no idea whattreasures were hiding there.”

The Belarus visit was also a strongpersonal jolt for her. “My father camefrom there,” she explains. “I foundsomething that was connected to hisaunt who was murdered in the ghetto.Her Russian husband locked her inthe house so that she would not befound, and one of the neighbors, whowas a policeman, reported to theauthorities that a Jewish woman washiding in that house. In the archive I

found his letter informing on her.“We searched thoroughly — until we

discovered the fate of each Jew —who died, who fled to the easternparts of Russia and was able to sur-vive, and who went to fight on thefront and returned or died there. Andso we were able to connect thepieces of the puzzle, which until nowwas full of holes.

“But the picture is far from complete.In the area of the former SovietUnion, between one and a half andtwo million Jews were killed, and wehave only 25,000 names and person-al stories. We clearly understand thatwe will never succeed in findingeveryone, because in the easternparts of the Soviet Union entire fami-lies were murdered without anythingbeing recorded.”

DON’T CRY FOR US

Dr. Lea Prais, together with hercolleague from the Genesis

Philanthropy Group, found more than200 letters in the archive. Many ofthem, like the letter of Eleonora, aged

15, express the desire for revenge. “We don’t like to stress the part

about revenge since generally wewant to be perceived as cultured peo-ple,” says Prais, “but it is impossibleto deny the fact that in their final let-ters upon parting from this life, theJews expressed anger, humiliationand a desire for revenge. Some of theletter writers did not know what await-ed them, but in the project ‘TheUntold Stories — the Murder Sites ofthe Jews in the Occupied Territoriesof the Former Soviet Union,’ we willpresent parting letters from those whoperished. They knew that they weregoing to be murdered and they weretotally helpless.”

Each letter represents a mysterythat is not always possible to unravel,like the one from Tomer and AharonGuntser from Vinnitsa, Ukraine, totheir two sons Yasha and Matya, whowere serving in the Red Army.

“I am writing to you both, my dearchildren, perhaps for the last time.There are no words that can expressour passion to continue living but it isclear that this will not be. We wouldwant at least to see you, my dearones,” their mother writes to them.“Don’t cry. Don’t be sad. If both of youreturn from the front, don’t abandoneach other. Forgive us if we ever hurtyou. Our only sin is that we did not walk to where you are, but who couldhave imagined that this is what wasgoing to happen?

“Your dear Grandma is with us. Shesends you kisses and also asks thatyou don’t cry for us. I am leaving tenpictures to remind you of us. That isall that is left.”

And the father writes to his sons: “I (Continued on page 15)

“I KNOW TOMORROW WILL BE MY LAST DAY”

The last letter from 15-year-old Eleonora

Parmut to her brother Yuzik.


(Continued from page 8)ers Asael, Zusha and Aaron, waged awar of survival and rescue for close tothree years in the forests of what istoday the country of Belarus. In 2012on Yom Hashoah, at Yad Vashem, theKnesset, the President, the PrimeMinister and the entire country lis-tened to the ceremonies inJerusalem. Five minutes into the cer-emony Tuvia Bielski was quoted fromhis 1946 book Jews of theForest. Tuvia describes an argu-ment among the very firstarrivals when he orders the res-cue of all Jews. ‘There won’t beenough food.’ ‘They will find us.’‘They will kill us.’ Tuvia declares,‘Let thousands come.’

“Towards the end of the war,Tuvia and his brothers emergedfrom the forest, having savedover twelve hundred Jewishlives. There are over twelvehundred stories of triumph to betold. To the partisans and theirdescendants, I send my loveand respect. Those twelve hun-dred Jewish lives leave a legacythat numbers in the tens of thou-sands.”

Finally, Leah BedzowskiJohnson, one of the oldest

surviving Bielski partisans, leftthe audience with this message: “Letus never forget the struggles of ourpast. Stand up for what is right! It iswith remembrance and support ofIsrael that we continue to build astrong community. You are thefuture.”

Senator Marco Rubio concluded theprogram with very moving remarksabout his visit to Yad Vashem as thefirst act he took after being elected tothe US Senate, and about the impor-tance of Yad Vashem:

“We’ve all grown up, certainly herein the United States and I hope

around the world, learning about thehorrifying realities of the Holocaust,something that happened within thelifetime of those, many of those, whostill live among us here today. Andyet, no matter how much you readabout it, no matter how many docu-mentaries you watch, the reality of it istruly indescribable. And perhaps theonly place on earth that allows you tocome face to face with it, in an unde-

niable way, a way that truly shakespeople to the core, is Yad Vashem.And I had the opportunity to go therein November of 2010 upon my elec-tion.

“I must say that before going there,I had thought that I knew everythingthere was to know about this horrify-ing period in world history. I had readabout it extensively, I knew peoplethat had survived it, I knew familiesthat had been impacted by it, and yetnever in my life have I been impactedby an experience as much as I wasupon that visit. Because in Yad

Vashem you learn the names and thefaces and the stories of those, not justwho lost their lives, but entire familiesthat were destroyed and histories thatwere rewritten and people’s lives. Andpeople that were never able to recap-ture the promise of their youth.”

The Senator continued by mirroringthe warning CG Shacham gave theaudience earlier in the program:

“The lessons of the past inform us

for the future. Because, while thethreats are different and the worldlooks different, the threats are stillreal. There is still hatred in the world;there is still evil in the world, and thereare still hateful, evil people who are incharge of some governments in theworld. Some of whom openly seek theextermination of entire nations. Onewas mentioned here this evening.And this comes at a moment where inreality, though I don’t intend to give apolitical speech, I believe that never inour history has the nation, has Israel,been in more dire straits than it finds

itself in today. A nation, as it hasalready been mentioned here by theConsul General, that was born of theHolocaust, born of the memory of it toensure that there would always be aplace on this earth where the Jewishpeople could find a home and refuge.And yet today, Israel is surrounded byuncertainty and danger unlike at anytime in its modern history.”

Senator Rubio closed by saying:

“The lesson of Yad Vashem thatone takes away as a visitor to

it for the first time is how unbelievableit is that something like that truly couldhave happened. How difficult it is tofathom that human beings can do thatto other human beings … That thatlevel of inhumanity and atrocity couldbe systemized, that it can be carriedout at this level of government overan extended period of time. That peo-ple could be relegated to simply num-bers and statistics …. And while theworld, I believe, is a better placetoday and has institutions put in placeto prevent something like this fromhappening, it requires us to remainvigilant. To ensure that this not onlynever happens again to the Jewishpeople, but that it never happens toany people ever again.

“The time will come when none ofus will be here. For, no matter howlong we live, all of our times are limit-ed. But Yad Vashem will be there toremind future generations of whatonce did happen and what mustnever be allowed to happen again.”

The American Society for YadVashem is grateful to the many organ-izations who assisted in this inauguraleffort: The B’nai Torah Congregation,the Boca Raton Synagogue, the NewSynagogue of Palm Beach, theWeinbaum Yeshiva High School, NextGenerations and the Florida AtlanticUniversity Center on the Holocaustand Human Rights.

Bielski partisans joining together on stage to sing the Partisan Hymn.

AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR YAD VASHEM

HOSTS INAUGURAL FLORIDA TRIBUTE DINNER

(Continued from page 2)a few hours later.

I believe it was on the same day,after a meeting of office chiefs, that Iinformed Kaltenbrunner of the situationand expressed my profound concernat this new breach of internationalassurances. As I paused in the conver-sation, the chief of the state police,Gruppenfuehrer Muller, interruptedand explained that he had started theevacuation of the more importantinternees from the individual campsthree days ago on Kaltenbrunner’sorders. Kaltenbrunner replied withthese words: “Yes, that is correct. Itwas an order of the Fuehrer which wasalso recently confirmed by the Fuehrerin person. All the important interneesare to be evacuated at his order to thesouth of the Reich.” He then turned tome mockingly and, speaking in dialect,said: “Tell your old gentleman (i.e.,

Musy, senior) that there are stillenough left in the camps. With that youtoo can be satisfied.” I think this wason April 10, 1945.

WHEN THE COMMANDERS FLED

Summing up these final days,Hecht spoke of Himmler in a

January 1982 interview withProfessor Penkover:

Hecht: He made a demand that allthese leaders, these camp-beasts,should not be treated as war crimi-nals, but as prisoners of war. This, inmy opinion, was the biggestachievement of Musy’s action.Because this was the reason that,from a lot of these camps, the campcommanders fled in the night, andthe next morning the people sawthat the camps were open, andthrough this Musy-Himmler agree-ment the rest of the Jews, a fewhundred thousand, were saved….

Himmler’s betrayal enraged Hitlerand resulted in Himmler’s dismissalfrom all posts in April

1945, and an order by

Hitler for Himmler’sarrest. In his last willand testament, Hitler

accused Himmler of

betrayal and treach-ery.

Hitler wrote:

“Before my death, I

expel the formerReichsführer-SS andMinister of the

Interior, Heinrich

Himmler, from theparty and from alloffices of State…

“Göring and Himmler, quite apart

from their disloyalty to my person,

have done immeasurable harm to thecountry and the whole nation by

secret negotiations with the enemy,which they conducted without my

knowledge and against

my wishes, and by illegal-ly attempting to seizepower in the State for

themselves.”

Unsuccessful in anattempt to hide after flee-ing in disguise from Berlin

to Flensburg, Himmler

continued 120 milessouth toward the ElbeRiver, and, on May 21,

1945, was arrested at a

checkpoint on a bridge atBremervorde.

On May 23, 1945, in

British custody at the 31st Civilian

Interrogation Camp near Luneburg,southeast of Hamburg, HeinrichHimmler bit into a cyanide pill and

committed suicide.

DEAL WITH THE DEVIL

Walter Schellenberg.


(Continued from page 3)quent warning issued by RabbiMarcus Melchior on the morning ofErev Rosh Hashanah, the vast major-ity of Denmark’s Jews escaped theNazis and the terrible fate of thecamps. It was an operation thatrequired coordination between theDanish resistance and ordinaryDanes who hid Jews in their homes,churches, and hospitals. Fishermenrisked their lives to ferry strangersacross the Øresund, the narrowwaterway between Denmark andSweden, in an estimated 900 boattrips. Of the nearly 8,000 Jews livingin Denmark in 1943, only 472 werecaptured, and incredibly, only 53 per-ished — that’s just 5.9 percent of thepopulation captured and 0.66 percentkilled. Given that 90 percent ofPoland’s Jews were killed and thatHolland, a country as liberal asDenmark and an equally proudresister of the Nazis, lost 75 percentof its Jews, these figures are trulyremarkable.

What I was always told was that theDanes’ superior sense of morality,and the energy of their resistancemovement, had caused the hardest ofhardline Nazis to soften: that was the“miracle.” Denmark was commonlyreferred to as the “Cream Puff Front”by German soldiers, and maybe theeasy lifestyle the Nazi occupiersfound in their northern neighborsomehow rubbed off on them.

But 70 years after the event, a newcrop of Danish historians has discov-ered something even more miracu-lous — that the mastermind behindthe “Miracle Rescue” was, in fact, theNazi whose job it was to eliminateDenmark’s Jews.

***

On April 9, 1940, the Germansinvaded Denmark. Hitler initial-

ly had no intention of occupyingDenmark at all and merely wantedaccess to its air bases as a stagingpoint for invading Norway — but

changed his mind and ordered thebombardment of Århus andCopenhagen, Denmark’s two maincities, with leaflets claiming the Naziswere defending Danish neutralityagainst the threat of British aggres-sion. The leaflets included a warning,or a threat, that if Denmark resisted,the next time the harmless pamphletswould be replaced with explosives.The Danish government capitulated;the battle for Denmark lasted just a lit-tle over two hours.

So began the Danish policy of nego-tiation with Germany. The policyallowed Denmark to maintain its ownautonomy: its own parliament, royalfamily, judiciary, police force, firebrigade and, amazingly, a standingarmy of 3,000 troops. It’s this policy ofnegotiation that has been creditedwith saving Danish lives, but recentrevelations have uncovered a darkertruth: Denmark supplied Germanywith up to 15 percent of its agricultur-al needs, earning the country thenickname “Germany’s Pantry,” while

small-arms factories on Danish soilproduced munitions for the Germanwar effort, and Danish constructioncompanies built German roads andbunkers.

These revelations have shocked theDanish public, whose contemporarynational identity is built, at least inpart, on grandiose stories of resist-ance to the occupation and an unim-peachable moral character. (Indeed, ithas recently emerged that many fish-ermen who ferried Jews to Swedentook payment for these trips, and insome cases charged incredibly steepprices; no Jew was left behind notbecause they weren’t charged, butthanks to a fund set up by the Danishresistance to cover the costs of pas-sage.) As a result, Danes no longertalk about the resistance throwing offthe yoke of Nazi oppression, butrather acknowledge the fact that wecooperated with the Germans. Somehistorians are even saying, in hushedtones, that we “collaborated.” Indeed,

former Danish Prime Minister AndersFogh Rasmussen recently said thatDenmark’s cooperation with Nazioccupiers during WWII was “morallyunjustifiable” and that “if everyone inEurope, if the Americans and theRussians, had thought the same asthe Danish lawmakers, then Hitlerwould have won the war.”

But while researching this emergingcontroversy of conflicting narrativesfor a play I was writing, I delved intomy own family’s story and discoveredsomething startling: Before my grand-father’s brother-in-law Nathan died,he revealed the identity of the high-ranking Nazi officer who warned themto leave Denmark to one of mycousins, Margit. The problem wasthat it didn’t make any sense: the NaziNathan claimed had come into the tai-lor’s shop all those years ago to deliv-er a warning to Copenhagen’s Jewswas Werner Best, the plenipotentiaryoverseeing the Danish occupation —a man better known as “The Butcherof Paris.”

Best was a lifelong mem-ber of the Nazi Party —

as a teenager, he founded achapter of the National YouthLeague — and a protégé ofHeinrich Himmler. As secondin command of the SS, he wasalso a close member ofHitler’s inner circle. Whywould such a man haveshown compassion towardDenmark’s Jews?

Margit, who worked in thefamily tailor shop many yearslater, knew the only way toverify Nathan’s story was tofind Werner Best’s measure-ment card. She went to thebureau that housed all theircustomer records and pulledout a dusty shoebox labelled“1940-43.” Inside, amid hun-

dreds of cards that had been hiddenaway for decades, was the one thatsent a chill down her spine: it waslabeled “Dr. Karl Rudolph WernerBest.”

But that left an unanswered ques-tion: Why would the Nazi plenipoten-tiary of Denmark, a lifelong Fascist,order the round-up of the Jews oneday and then undermine his ownoperation the next? The answer, Ibelieve, lies in the most human of allimpulses: ambition.

Werner Best was nothing if notambitious. As a Himmler favorite, hewas being groomed for the very topof the SS, but an internal powerstruggle in 1939 resulted in hisouster by Reinhard Heydrich.Instead, Best was posted to France,where he took out his aggression onthe French, earning his nicknameand a reputation for ruthlessness.Berlin took notice and asked him towrite a paper on how to maintain theThousand-Year Reich after “their

inevitable victory.” His conclusionwas simple: Each country shouldthink that it remained an

autonomous state under the aus-pices of a Nazi umbrella. Whenasked where this theory of the “idealsatellite state” could be tested, Bestimmediately suggested Denmark.

A t the end of 1942, Best arrivedin Copenhagen and soon went

about trying to prove this theory. Butwith the upswing of sabotageattacks in 1943 he was instructed byBerlin to deliver a statement to theDanish resistance by makingDenmark Judenrein. With limitedGerman troops at his disposal, andfearing — probably rightly — a civiluprising if he deported 8,000 Danesto certain death he went about ful-filling Hitler’s order to the letter,although not in the spirit the Führerlikely intended.

Best sent his naval attaché, GeorgDuckwitz, to Sweden to arrange safepassage and accommodation forDenmark’s Jews. (Duckwitz wouldlater become West Germany’sambassador to Denmark in the1950s and be awarded the honor ofRighteous Among the Nations for hispart in the Danish Jewish rescue.)And then Best himself walked into aJewish tailor’s shop in Copenhagenand warned my grandfather and hisbrother-in-law to leave — effectivelysaving their lives and by extensionmany more.

Ultimately, Denmark was tem-porarily emptied of Jews. But Bestundermined his own operation notout of an altruistic desire to savehuman life, but out of a pragmaticneed to maintain a stable status quoin occupied Denmark and prove histheory of preserving the Reich’sinfluence. His success depended onthe willingness of the Danish peopleto save their Jewish neighbors — torefuse to see them as anything butfellow Danes. Maybe that, in theend, is the true miracle of the Danishrescue.

REMEMBER HOW DANES DONNED YELLOW STARS

TO PROTECT THE JEWS? THAT NEVER HAPPENED

The author holds a photo of his grandfather.

Werner Best, 1942.


(Continued from page 4)5,000 refugees to that country, whomay have been admitted under theterms of a previously unknown dealbetween Roosevelt and the Cubanleader Fulgencio Batista, who gotreduced tariffs for his nation’s sugar inreturn.

The book notes that the St. Louisaffair unfolded against a back-

drop of intense isolationist and anti-immigrant sentiment in the UnitedStates while Roosevelt was preparingto press Congress to allow the sale ofweapons to nations victimized byGerman aggression.

“Imagine if Roosevelt had let in 937passengers but had limited successeasing the Neutrality Act,” Mr.Lichtman said. “He would be far morenegatively judged by history than heis now.”

The authors offer a similar calculusfor one of the most contentious issuesthey discuss: the Allied refusal tobomb Auschwitz. The idea that theAllies could and should have bombedthe crematories or the rail lines lead-ing to them came to wide public atten-tion with a 1978 article inCommentary by Mr. Wyman, whoreprised it in a best-selling book, TheAbandonment of the Jews, whichbecame the basis for the 1994 PBS

documentary America and theHolocaust.

Many people, the authors say,believe that Roosevelt refused tobomb the camp (an option, historiansnote, that became feasible only inMay 1944, after 90 percent of Jewishvictims of the Holocaust were alreadydead). But the book contends thatthere is no evidence that any suchproposal came to him, though a num-ber of Jewish leaders did meet withlower-level officials to plead for bomb-ing. And while the authors call theobjections raised by those officials“specious,” they maintain (echoingothers) that bombing would not havesignificantly impeded the killing.

“You’ve got two symbols” — the St.Louis and the absence of Auschwitzbombing — “taken as the bookends ofAmerican indifference and worse,”Mr. Breitman said. “But both symbolsare off.”

By contrast, the book points to theWar Refugee Board, established byRoosevelt in 1944, which they saymay have helped save about 200,000Jews — a number that, if even 50 per-cent accurate, they write, “compareswell” with the number that might havebeen saved by bombing Auschwitz.

Such claims are not convincing toRafael Medoff, the founding director

of the Wyman Institute, which is dedi-cated to furthering the research of Mr.Wyman, a former professor at theUniversity of Massachusetts Amherstwho is not directly involved in its day-to-day activities. In A Breach of FaithMr. Medoff argues that Jewish immi-gration levels in the 1930s were large-ly below established quotas becauseof Roosevelt’s animus, not as a resultof anti-immigrant and anti-Semiticsentiment in Congress and the StateDepartment.

Roosevelt’s vision for Americawas “based on the idea of hav-

ing only a small number of Jews,” Mr.Medoff said in an interview. Mr.Breitman and Mr. Lichtman’s book, headded, is just an effort “to rescueRoosevelt’s image from the over-whelming evidence that he did notwant to rescue the Jews.”

Mr. Breitman and Mr. Lichtmanscoffed at that charge, noting thattheir book is certainly not always flat-tering to Roosevelt. They depict himas missing many opportunities to aidJews and generally refusing to speakspecifically in public about Hitler’sJewish victims, lest he be accused offighting a “Jewish war.”

“This is not an effort to write a pro-Roosevelt book,” Mr. Breitman said.“It’s merely pro-Roosevelt in compari-

son to some things that are out there.” In the end, however, their verdict is

favorable, crediting Roosevelt’s poli-cies with helping to save hundreds ofthousands of Jews, as well as pre-venting a German conquest of Egyptthat would have doomed any futureJewish state.

“Without F.D.R.’s policies and leader-ship,” they write, “there may well havebeen no Jewish communities left inPalestine, no Jewish state, no Israel.”

Mr. Lichtman pointed out that con-temporary disagreements about Israelloom behind the Roosevelt debatetoday. Last year, the book notes, PrimeMinister Benjamin Netanyahu of Israelcited America’s refusal to bombAuschwitz as providing potential justifi-cation for a preemptive strike againstIran’s nuclear facilities.

Henry L. Feingold, the author of ThePolitics of Rescue: The RooseveltAdministration and the Holocaust,1938-1945, bemoaned the rise of“accusatory” history that elevates ret-rospective “what ifs” over historicalcontext. Roosevelt, he said, had oneoverriding concern: to win the war.

“The survivors said, ‘You didn’t doenough to save us,’ and who coulddeny it?” Mr. Feingold said. “But doyou write history as it should havebeen or as it was?”

BOOK TRIES FOR BALANCED VIEW ON ROOSEVELT AND JEWS

(Continued from page 12)am leaving you this letter, perhaps mylast. Tomorrow we are going to the sta-dium; if they will leave us there, then Iwill write again. In meantime I will saygoodbye to you. Be happy and healthy.Behave well and remember us andwhat we are going through. Continue togrow and be good. Look out for andprotect each other. If you are still alive,it is a sign that you will continue to live.Yours, Father, Aharon Guntser, withlove and kisses.”

The day after writing the letters, theGuntsers were taken to the stadium inVinnitsa and from there by trucks to thekilling pits where they were murdered.

“After much hard searching we dis-covered that one son died in a battleand did not get the parting letter fromhis parents, but the other brother sur-vived and did get the letter,” recallsPrais. “We tried to find him, but it turnedout that his wife is not Jewish and shedidn’t want to hear anything about YadVashem, Israel or the Holocaust.”

The information about the family ofEleonora is also short on details, butPrais focuses on the photo of her inwhich she is holding a book.

“Three years ago I was in Paris atan exhibition arranged by the munici-pality displaying photographs ofJewish children sent to the camps,particularly to Auschwitz, and all ofthem were memorialized while theyare reading. I also have a picture likethat, from first grade, holding a bookin my hand. To me, that is a typicalJewish pose.”

“I KNOW TOMORROW

WILL BE MY LAST DAY”(Continued from page 11)couldn’t use them,” he explained,“and in the meantime some of thebridges were rebuilt again, becausethe Germans did that. And as ’43went on, we basically had Germans inour house…yeah, until the end of thewar.”

In Nieuw Beyerland, the Dam familywas also forced to host Germans. Piaremembers two German soldiersmoving into their house. “Everythingwas nice and clean, the house hadbeen whitewashed and painted,” shesaid, “but the very first day, the twoGermans went next door, stole theneighbor’s chickens, and slaughteredthem in an upstairs room.” Pia’s moth-er, of course, was as furious as shewas helpless.

Not all Netherlanders, however,were satisfied with being help-

less. Joe den Bok’s uncle, herecalled, was the head of a resistancecell in that part of the country. “Theytried to sabotage the Germans,” hetold me. “When [the Germans] werepicking up people in town again, hewould try to reach our house and hidein the haystack by us, so he did makeit to the end of the war.”

However, not all resistance activitiesended well. Pia recalls that the Dutchresistance in her area ambushed andkilled the Nazi-appointed Dutchmayor of her city. In retaliation, theGermans “picked out the first tenDutchmen on bikes, lined them up onthe side of the road, and gunned themdown. One boy, about seventeen tonineteen years old, was one of them

— he screamed ‘Murder!’ so loud youcould hear it miles away.”

Mariette Rozen’s memories of thewar years in Holland are also disjoint-ed and traumatic. “Seeing peoplepicked up,” she said in another inter-view, “I remember a man with no nailsor toenails. I found out later on thathis nails were pulled out and he wastortured. Hunger. I don’t think I wantto go into any more details than that.”

The war ended in May of 1945,with the Netherlands being lib-

erated by Canadian forces. TheNetherlands was plunged into cele-bration and an explosion of revenge.“I’ll never forget that morning whenthe neighbor came and said that thewar was over,” Joe den Bok recalled.

“And even on that particular morn-ing there was a German who was stilltrying to shoot and kill some peo-ple…and as soon as the war wasover [the Dutch] got out the truck andloaded up all the NSBers [the NSBbeing the Dutch Nazi organization].”

“On a Friday night,” Pia Damremembered, “a neighbor tapped onthe window saying ‘We’re free! We’refree!’ Then the family knelt down andprayed.”

For the den Bok and Dam families,the end of the war meant the longprocess of struggling to support theirfamilies in a country shattered by thefour long years of Nazi occupation.For little Mariette Rozen, the Jewishgirl from Brussels, the future lookedquite different. “We were all picked upand put in different age categories oforphanages and held there,” she said.

“They came and said that anyonethat wanted to leave the country wasto go to the city hall and fill out thisform. I went because I didn’t trustanybody, and acted like I was some-body else picking up papers foranother child and that my mother wassick at the time.”

Two years later, in 1947, at the ageof eleven, Marie Doduck left forCanada along with three of her sib-lings, reunited by the JewishCongress. She had lost her motherand several of her siblings to theHolocaust, the horrors of which theworld was only just beginning tograsp.

Fifteen years later, in 1960, Joe denBok met Pia Dam and married her,and they too headed to Canada. Theysettled down and raised a family inChilliwack, British Columbia, a merehour away from where Mariette nowlives.

Mariette now focuses on bringingher story to people like myself. Whilemy family, too, experienced Nazi per-secution, their experience pales incomparison to the horrors that sheand Jews from Belgium, theNetherlands and across Europe weresubjected to. The message shebrings, however, is one of hope.

“To us, we believe there is only oneGod,” she told me from her home inVancouver, “and we believe that oneperson can save the world. One per-son can save the world. Change it.That is what I am saying to you.”

And perhaps, if enough people hearher, we can.

THREE CHILDREN UNDER THE SWASTIKA

Am

eric

an

& In

tern

atio

na

l So

cie

ties fo

r Yad

Vash

em

MA

RT

YR

DO

M &

RE

SIS

TA

NC

E

50

0 F

IFT

H A

VE

NU

E, 4

2n

d F

LO

OR

NE

W Y

OR

K, N

.Y. 1

011

0-4

299

Page 16 MARTYRDOM & RESISTANCE March/April 2014 - Adar/Nissan 5774N

ON

-PR

OF

IT O

RG

.U

.S. P

OS

TP

AID

NE

W Y

OR

K, N

.Y.

PE

RM

IT N

O. 9

313

We

b s

ite:

ww

w.y

ad

va

sh

em

usa.o

rg

Martyrdom & Resistance

Leonard Wilf,

Editor-in-Chief

Yefim Krasnyanskiy, M.A.,

Editor

*Published Bimonthly by the American Society

for Yad Vashem, Inc.500 Fifth Avenue, 42nd Floor

New York, NY 10110(212) 220-4304

EDITORIAL BOARD

Eli Zborowski**

Marvin Zborowski

Mark Palmer

Sam Skura**

Israel Krakowski**

William Mandell

Sam Halpern**

Isidore Karten**Norman Belfer

Joseph Bukiet**

*1974-85, as Newsletter for the AmericanFederation of Jewish Fighters, CampInmates, and Nazi Victims**deceased

Date post:	24-Aug-2020
Category:	Documents
Upload:	others
View:	2 times
Download:	0 times

Vol. 40-No. 4 ISSN 0892-1571 March/April 2014 - Adar ... · Vol. 40-No. 4 ISSN 0892-1571...

Documents