Documents

Grosvenor William, Telusplanet-com 4 – p1

From [email protected] Thu Oct 15 19:40:06 EDT 1998
Article: 123158 of soc.culture.polish
Path: hub.org!hub.org!news.maxwell.syr.edu!cyclone.news.idirect.com!island.idirect.com!nntp.cadvision.com!news.agtac.net!news.telusplanet.net!news
From: [email protected]
Newsgroups: soc.culture.polish,soc.culture.russian,soc.culture.ukrainian,soc.culture.usa,usa.general,soc.culture.swiss,soc.culture.australian,soc.culture.europe
Subject: MORE- JEW RABBIS LAUNDER DRUG MONEY IN NY!!!!
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 14:39:30 GMT
Organization: TELUS Communications Inc.
Lines: 159
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: edtnpx08-port-25.agt.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 1.5/32.451
Xref: hub.org soc.culture.polish:123158 soc.culture.russian:95089 soc.culture.ukrainian:42085 soc.culture.usa:265279 soc.culture.swiss:27279 soc.culture.australian:78552 soc.culture.europe:131344

Another JEW Rabbi in NY state has been caught dealing drugs – this
time inside a prison!!!

Rabbi Eli Gottesman,a chaplain at a federal medium security prison at
Ray Brook, NY got caught with a large bottle filled with sealed
balloons of cocaine and marijuana.

He is a former head of the “who’s Who in canadian Jewry”, and has been
a chaplain of the year named by the NY Board of rabbis.

On Tue, 29 Sep 1998 13:52:54 GMT, [email protected] wrote:

>It seems that JEWS are not satisfied with having murdered Jesus
>Christ.

>Now some of them are involved, even from synagogues, in the DRUGS
>business.
>On Tue, 17 Jun 1997 07:10:26 -0800, in alt.revisionism
>[email protected] (Michael A. Hoffman II) wrote:

>>Michael A. Hoffman II comments: Why didn’t these two Orthodox Hasidic
>>(Bobover sect) rabbis enjoy the usual rabbinic immunity from arrest for
>>their crimes? Could it be that their mantle of protection was removed by
>>the more powerful Reform and Conservative Jews in America with whom they
>>are at war in occupied Palestine over issues pertaining to modernity and
>>conversion? Is this a warning to the Orthodox to back off from their
>>assaults on Reform and Orthodox Jews? For more go to:
>>http://www.hoffman-info.com
——————————————————————————
2 Rabbis Charged With Money Laundering

By ROBERT D. McFADDEN NY Times June 17, 1997

NEW YORK — A dozen men, including two identified as Orthodox Jewish
rabbis, were charged by federal authorities Monday with conspiring to
launder and hide $1.75 million in drug profits for Colombian
narcotics dealers by routing the cash through the bank accounts of a
synagogue and a yeshiva in Brooklyn.

The bizarre case, federal prosecutors in Brooklyn said, brought
together a collection of strange bedfellows — five New York
representatives of Colombian drug traffickers, three go-betweens who
purportedly transported cash in suitcase quantities, and four men with
ties to a close-knit Jewish community.

At one point, the officials charged, the rabbis ran tens of millions
of dollars in drug profits through the bank accounts of a relatively
modest Borough Park synagogue and provided nearly $3.5 million from
American and Swiss accounts for the purchase of an aircraft for the
Colombian drug lords.

“Money launderers are the indispensable partners of major drug
traffickers, and the cynical act of using religious institutions to
conceal drug proceeds is particularly reprehensible,” said Zachary
Carter, the U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of New York, in
announcing the charges.

Seven defendants, including Rabbi Mahir Reiss, 47, of 3543 Bedford
Ave., and Rabbi Bernard Grunfeld, 64, of 1417 46th St., both in
Brooklyn, were arrested Monday and were arraigned late in the day
before U.S. Magistrate Judge Roanne L. Mann, charged with conspiracy
to launder money. Two suspects, Grunfeld and Israel Knobloch, 24, of
5200 15th Ave., Brooklyn, also were charged with conspiring to avoid
federal cash-transaction reporting requirements.

Six defendants were held without bail, and one, Abraham Reiss, 48, of
320 Riverside Drive in Manhattan, a brother of Mahir Reiss, was
released on $750,000 bail. Three other men named in the federal
complaint were listed as fugitives, and two more were being held in
custody elsewhere in New York in other cases, according to Lee Dunst,
the assistant federal attorney prosecuting the case.

Unveiling a three-year undercover investigation that used
court-authorize wiretaps and other surveillance, the federal complaint
charged that the two rabbis and Abraham Reiss laundered $750,000 by
taking cash from go-betweens, depositing it in the bank accounts of a
synagogue-based organization and, after subtracting commissions,
writing checks to drug traffickers.

Investigators said the bank accounts used in the scheme, held in the
name of Chaim Shel Shulem, which shares quarters with Congregation
Eitz Chaim at 1577 48th St. in Borough Park, held deposits of more
than $19 million during the 10-month period when the laundering
transactions occurred, between August 1995 and May 1996.

Grunfeld, listed as the president of Chaim Shel Shulem, was said to
have written all the checks that went to the drug traffickers. He and
Knobloch were also accused of concealing the movement of $1 million in
drug money by making 95 deposits and withdrawals of just under $10,000
— the amount that triggers a government cash-transaction reporting
requirement — through the bank accounts of Congregation Eitz Chaim
and Bobover Yeshiva, at the same location.

The defendants made no statements in court Monday. While Grunfeld was
listed by prosecutors as the head of Chaim Shel Shulem, dozens of
people at Congregation Eitz Chaim late Monday declined to say anything
about him or the case. Some seemed not to recognize the name Chaim
Shel Shulem.

The synagogue and yeshiva are in a five-story building with a brick
front and a small awning imprinted with the institution’s name in
Hebrew. The only words in English on the facade call it “the Katz
Family of Mexico Building.”

In a ground-floor, two-room school lined with books, about 100 people
were studying at tables. A man who appeared to be in charge, but who
would not give his name, said he knew nothing about the two rabbis
named in the federal complaint.

The federal investigation — an undertaking of the U.S. Attorney’s
Office, the Drug Enforcement Agency and the Internal Revenue Service
— began in 1994, when agents detected a pattern of cash deposits and
withdrawals intended to circumvent the government’s reporting rules in
various bank accounts held in the name of the synagogue and yeshiva,
officials said.

With court-authorized telephone wiretaps, surveillance and other
techniques, the investigators said they uncovered a conspiracy in
which Grunfeld and Knobloch eventually made more than $1 million in
deposits and withdrawals — transactions, they said, that let the
conspirators move large sums of illicit drug profits.

Later, in 1995 and 1996, investigators said, the 12 men named in
Monday’s complaint conducted a full money-laundering operation. Five
of them — Lisandro Montes De Oca, 29; Francisco Gil, 30; Estenio
Rodriguez, 30; Juan Suarez, 39, and Alvaro Duque, 36 –were said to
have brought in large sums that Colombian drug dealers wanted to
launder.

The money was given to three men described as intermediaries — Jack
Pinski, 35, a Colombian who is a fugitive, and Roberto Buendia, 40,
and Fabio Arana, both of Medford, N.Y. They were said to have counted
and stashed the money at an apartment at 243 West 75th St.

There, prosecutors said, Abraham Reiss picked up the money. It was
later deposited in various accounts held in the name of Chaim Shel
Shulem.

Grunfeld, the organization’s president, signed checks that were made
out to “entities in accordance with drug traffickers’ instructions,”
the federal complaint said.

Those instructions were communicated through Rabbi Reiss, who had no
formal connections to Chaim Shel Shulem, investigators said.
Commissions of 13 percent to 15 percent were deducted from the
laundered money and divided among the intermediaries.

Prosecutors said they did not know how members of a deeply religious
community came into contact with professional money launderers and
drug traffickers. But they charged that in 1994, Rabbis Reiss and
Grunfeld, and Abraham Reiss arranged $3.4 million in financing to buy
a Beech Super King aircraft, a type commonly used by drug smugglers.
================================================================================
The Campaign for Radical Truth in History: http://www.hoffman-info.com
——————————————————————————–
News Bureau and Archives Online

From [email protected] Thu Oct 15 19:40:06 EDT 1998
Article: 123171 of soc.culture.polish
From: [email protected]
Newsgroups: soc.culture.palestine,alt.politics.nationalism.white,alt.revisionism,soc.culture.islam,soc.culture.malaysia,soc.culture.australian,soc.culture.polish
Subject: Re: Nazi — Jewish Zionist Collaboration
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 15:14:47 GMT
Organization: TELUS Communications Inc.
Lines: 638
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: edtntnt4-port-108.agt.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 1.5/32.451
Path: hub.org!hub.org!darla.visi.com!chippy.visi.com!news-out.visi.com!newshub.northeast.verio.net!cyclone.news.idirect.com!island.idirect.com!news.oanet.com!news.agtac.net!news.telusplanet.net!news
Xref: hub.org soc.culture.palestine:53077 alt.politics.nationalism.white:175196 alt.revisionism:269915 soc.culture.islam:4186 soc.culture.malaysia:196090 soc.culture.australian:78556 soc.culture.polish:123171

On Wed, 14 Oct 1998 16:31:36, [email protected] wrote:

On Tue, 13 Oct 1998 11:38:31, [email protected] wrote:

>On 28 Sep 1998 01:44:48 -0000, Anonymous wrote:
>>Death to each and every kike in the JDL only after hours of torture.

On Thu, 10 Sep 1998 22:56:46 GMT, [email protected] wrote:
trying to stimulate more interest in this topic,
On Sat, 15 Aug 1998 18:45:47 GMT, [email protected] wrote:
>On Fri, 03 Jul 1998 15:00:35 GMT, [email protected] wrote:
>>On 3 Jul 1998 06:38:05 GMT, wrote:

Orest Slepokura wrote:
…fully documented *Perfidy* blatantly exposes the degree to which
Zionists cooperated in the persecution of their fellow Jews…

Here is more evidence of NAZI-ZIONIST JEW COLLABORATION.

The Kastner Case

The most notorious case of Nazi-Zionist collaboration is that
involving a Jew – Rudolf Kastner.

Most Jewish people have never heard of Rudolf Kastner. Those who have,
are generally under the impression that there is some ‘controversy’
about negotiations he undertook for ‘the purchase of Jewish lives for
money and military equipment’, but that he was ‘fully rehabilitated’
by the Supreme Court of Israel.

The Accusations

Briefly, the accusations against Kastner are as follows:

Dr. Rudolf Verba, a Doctor of Science now serving at the British
Medical Research Council, was one of the few escapees from Auschwitz.
In his memoirs published in February, 1961, in the London Daily
Herald, he wrote:

I am a Jew. In spite of that – indeed because of that – I accuse
certain Jewish leaders of one of the most ghastly deeds of the war.

This group of quislings knew what was happening to their brethren in
Hitler’s gas chambers and bought their own lives with the price of
silence.

Among them was Dr. Kastner, leader of the council which spoke for all
Jews in Hungary. While I was prisoner number 44070 at Auschwitz – the
number is still on my arm – I compiled careful statistics of the
exterminations.

I took these terrible statistics with me when I escaped in 1944 and I
was able to give Hungarian Zionist leaders three weeks notice that
Eichmann planned to send a million of their Jews to his gas
chambers…Kastner went to Eichmann and told him, ‘I know of your
plans; spare some Jews of my choice and I shall keep quiet.’

Eichmann not only agreed, but dressed Kastner up in S.S. uniform and
took him to Belsen to trace some of his friends. Nor did the sordid
bargaining end there. Kastner paid Eichmann several thousand dollars.
With this little fortune, Eichmann was able to buy his way to freedom
when Germany collapsed, to set himself up in the Argentine…(Ben
Hecht, Perfidy, pp261-2)

These accusations are confirmed by the ‘Eichmann Confessions’
published in Life magazine, 28 November and 5 December 1960:

I resolved to show how well a job could be done when the commander
stands 100% behind it. By shipping the Jews off in a lightning
operation, I wanted to set an example for future campaigns
elsewhere…In obedience to Himmler’s directive I now concentrated on
negotiations with the Jewish political officials in Budapest…Among
them Dr. Rudolph Kastner, authorized representative of the Zionist
Movement. This Dr. Kastner was a young man about my age, an ice-cold
lawyer and a fanatical Zionist. He agreed to help keep the Jews from
resisting deportation – and even keep order in the collection camps –
if I could close my eyes and let a few hundred or a few thousand young
Jews emigrate illegally to Palestine.

It was a good bargain. For keeping order in the camps, the price was
not too high for me.

We trusted each other perfectly. When he was with me, Kastner smoke
cigarets as though he was in a coffeehouse. While we talked he would
smoke one aromatic cigaret after another, taking them from a silver
case and lighting them with a silver lighter. With his great polish
and reserve he would have made an ideal Gestapo officer himself.

Dr. Kastner’s main concern was to make it possible for a select group
of Hungarian Jews to emigrate to Israel…

As a matter of fact, there was a very strong similarity between our
attitudes in the S.S. and the viewpoint of these immensely idealistic
Zionist leaders. I believe that Kastner would have sacrificed a
thousand or a hundred thousand of his blood to achieve his political
goal ‘You can have the others’, he would say, ‘but let me have this
group here’. And because Kastner rendered us a great service by
helping keep the deportation camps peaceful, I would let his groups
escape. After all, I was not concerned with small groups of a thousand
or so Jews…That was the ‘gentleman’s agreement’ I had with Kastner
(Hecht, ibid., p.260-61)

Quite clearly these accusations, do not relate merely to ‘the purchase
of Jewish lives for money and military equipment’.

Are the accusations against Kastner true?

According to the Government of Israel, they are a lie. When Malchiel
Greenwald, a strongly pro-Zionist Israeli citizen published these
accusations against Kastner, the Israeli Government did rather more
than demand that his views should not be broadcast. Because a
prominent Zionist official (Dr. Kastner was a spokesman for the
Ministry of Trade and Industry) was involved, the Attorney General of
the State of Israel prosecuted Greenwald for criminal libel.

The Verdict

Let the verdict of Judge Benjamin Halevi (who later became one of the
panel of three judges that tried Eichmann) in Israel’s District Court
of Jerusalem speak for itself, given in criminal case No. 124 of 1953.

The Attorney General v. Malchiel Greenwald. This material should be
studied carefully.

The masses of Jews from Hungary’s ghettos obediently boarded the
deportation trains without knowing their fate. They were full of
confidence in the false information that they were being transferred
to Kenyermeze.

The Nazis could not have misled the masses of Jews so conclusively had
they not spread their false information through Jewish channels.

The Jews of the ghettos would not have trusted the Nazi or Hungarian
rulers. But they had trust in their Jewish leaders. Eichmann and
others used this known fact as part of their calculated plan to
mislead the Jews.

They were able to deport the Jews to their extermination by the help
of Jewish leaders.

The false information was spread by the Jewish leaders. The local
leaders of the Jews of Kluj and Nodvarod knew that other leaders were
spreading such false information and did not protest.

Those of the Jews who tried to warn their friends of the truth were
persecuted by the Jewish leaders in charge of the local ‘rescue work’.

The trust of the Jews in the misleading information and their lack of
knowledge that their wives, children and themselves were about to be
deported to the gas chambers of Auschwitz led the victims to remain
quiescent in their ghettos. It seduced them into not resisting or
hampering the deportation orders.

Dozens of thousands of Jews were guarded in their ghettos by a few
dozen police. Yet even vigorous young Jews made no attempt to
overpower these few guards and escape to nearby Rumania. No resistance
activities to the deportations were organized in these ghettos.

And the Jewish leaders did everything in their power to soothe the
Jews in the ghettos and to prevent such resistance activities.

The same Jews who spread in Kluj and Nodvarod the false rumor of
Kenyermeze, or confirmed it, the same public leaders who did not warn
their own people against the misleading statements, the same Jewish
leaders who did not organize any resistance or any sabotage of
deportations…these same leaders did not join the people of their
community in their ride to Auschwitz, but were all included in the
Rescue train.

The Nazi organizers of extermination and the perpetrators of
extermination permitted Rudolf Kastner and the members of the Jewish
Council in Budapest to save themselves, their relatives, and friends.
The Nazis did this as a means of making the local Jewish leaders, whom
they favoured, dependent on the Nazi regime, dependent on its good
will during the time of its fatal deportation schedule. In short, the
Nazis succeeded in bringing the Jewish leaders into collaboration with
the Nazis at the time of the catastrophe.

The Nazi chiefs knew that the Zionists were a most vital element in
Jewry and the most trusted by the Jews.

The personality of Rudolph Kastner made him a convenient catspaw for
Eichmann and his clique, to draw into collaboration and make their
task easier.

The question here is not, as stated by the Attorney General in his
summation, whether members of the Jewish Rescue Committee were or were
not capable of fulfilling their duty without the patronage of the S.S.
chiefs
.
It is obvious that without such S.S. Nazi patronage the Jewish Rescue
Committee could not have existed, and could have acted only as an
underground.

The question is, as put by the lawyer for the defense, why were the
Nazis interested in the existence of the Rescue Committee? Why did the
S.S. chiefs make every effort to encourage the existence of the Jewish
Rescue Committee? Did the exterminators turn into rescuers?

The same question rises concerning the rescue of prominent Jews by
these German killers of Jews. Was the rescue of such Jews a part of
the extermination plan of the killers ?

The support given by the extermination leaders to Kastner’s Rescue
Committee proves that indeed there was a place for Kastner and his
friends in their Final Solution for the Jews of Hungary – their total
annihilation.

The Nazi’s patronage of Kastner, and their agreement to let him save
six hundred prominent Jews, were part of the plan to exterminate the
Jews.

Kastner was given a chance to add a few more to that number. The bait
attracted him. The opportunity of rescuing prominent people appealed
to him greatly. He considered the rescue of the most important Jews as
a great personal success and a success for Zionism. It was a success
that would also justify his conduct – his political negotiation with
Nazis and the Nazi patronage of his committee.

When Kastner received this present from the Nazis, Kastner sold his
soul to the German Satan.

The sacrifice of the vital interests of the majority of the Jews, in
order to rescue the prominents, was the basic element in the agreement
between Kastner and the Nazis. This agreement fixed the division of
the nation into two unequal camps: a small fragment of prominents,
whom the Nazis promised Kastner to save, on the one hand, and the
great majority or Hungarian Jews whom the Nazis designated for death,
on the other hand.

An imperative condition for the rescue of the first camp by the Nazis
was that Kastner will not interfere in the action of the Nazis against
the other camp and will not hamper them in its extermination. Kastner
fulfilled this condition. He concentrated his efforts in the rescue of
the prominents and treated the camp of the doomed as if they had
already been wiped out from the book of the living.

One cannot estimate the damage caused by Kastner’s collaboration and
put down the number of victims which it cost Hungarian Jews. These are
not only the thousands of Jews in Nodvarod or any other community in
the border area, Jews who could escape through the border, had the
chief of their rescue committee fulfilled his duty toward them.

All of Kastner’s answers in his final testimony were a constant effort
to evade this truth.

Kastner has tried to escape through every crack he could find in the
wall of evidence. When one crack was sealed in his face, he darted
quickly to another. (Judgement of Judge Benjamin Halevi, Criminal Case
124/53; Attorney General v. Malchiel Greenwald, District Court,
Jerusalem, June 22,1955).

Judge Halevi reverts to the meeting of Kastner with the S.S. officers
Becher and Rudolf Hoess, commandant of Auschwitz at the time when the
‘new line’ of rescuing Jews was revealed by Hoess. He says:

>From this gathering in Budapest, it is obvious that the ‘new line’
stretched from Himmler to Hoess, from Jutner to Becher and Krumey.

According to Kastner, however, these Nazis were all active in rescuing
Jews.

This meeting of these important German guests in Budapest exposes the
‘rescue’ work of Becher in its true light. It reveals also the extent
of Kastner’s involvement in the inner circle of the chief German war
criminals.

Just as the Nazi war criminals knew they needed an alibi and hoped to
achieve it by the rescue of a few Jews at the eleventh hour, so
Kastner also needed an alibi for himself.

Collaboration between the Jewish Agency Rescue Committee and the
Exterminators of the Jews was solidified in Budapest and Vienna.
Kastner’s duties were part and parcel of the general duties of the
S.S.

In addition to its Extermination Department and Looting Department,
the Nazi S.S. opened a Rescue Department headed by Kastner.

All these extermination, robbery and rescue activities of the S.S.
were coordinated under the management of Heinrich Himmler”.

Judge Halevi continues:
Kastner perjured himself knowingly in his testimony before this court
when he denied he had interceded in Becher’s behalf. Moreover, he
concealed the important fact that he interceded for Becher in the name
of the Jewish Agency and the Jewish World Congress.

As to the contents of Kastner’s affidavit, it was enough for the
defense to provide Becher was a war criminal. It was up to the
prosecution to remove Becher from this status, if they wished to
negate the affidavit.

The Attorney General admitted in his summation that Becher was a war
criminal.

The lies in the contents of Kastner’s affidavit, the lies in his
testimony concerning the document, and Kastner’s knowing participation
in the activities of Nazi war criminals, and his participation in the
last minute fake rescue activities – all these combine to show one
overwhelming truth – that this affidavit was not given in good faith.

Kastner knew well, as he himself testified, that Becher had never
stood up against the stream of Jewish extermination, as Kastner has
declared in the affidavit.

The aims of Becher and his superior, Himmler, were not to save Jews
but to serve the Nazi regime with full compliance. These is not truth
and no good faith in Kastner’s testimony, ‘I never doubted for one
moment the good intention of good Becher’.

It is clear that the positive recommendation by Kastner, not only in
his own name but also in the name of the Jewish Agency and the Jewish
World Congress was of decisive importance for Becher. Kastner did not
exaggerate when he said that Becher was released by the Allies because
of his personal intervention. The lies in the affidavit of Kastner and
the contradictions and various pretexts, which were proven to be lies,
were sufficient to annul the value of his statements and to prove that
there was no good faith in his testimony in favor of this German war
criminal. Kastner’s affidavit in favor of Becher was a wilfully false
affidavit given in favor of a war
criminal to save him from trial and punishment in Nuremberg.

Therefore, the defendant, Malchiel Greenwald, was correct in his
accusations against Rudolf Kastner in the first, second and fourth of
his statements.”

Judge Halevi’s verdict found Malchiel Greenwald generally innocent of
libel against Kastner, but fined him one Israeli pound for the one
unproved accusation – that Kastner had actually collected money from
his Nazi
partners for his aide to their slaughter program. The judge also
ordered the Government of Israel to pay Greenwald two hundred Israeli
pounds as court costs.

If the story ended there, it would only prove conclusively that the
individual Kastner was a collaborator and the Israeli Government had
attempted to defend him, although facts brought out in the trial
pointed to much more than that.

But the story does not end there.

The Reaction
The Communist Party newspaper Kol Ha’am (Voice of the People) wrote:

All those whose relatives were butchered by the Germans in Hungary
know now clearly that Jewish hands helped the mass murder” (23 June
1955)

But public opinion was not quite unanimous. The problem with bringing
Kastner and his associates to trial was that his associates were the
Government of Israel.

As the evening paper *Yedi’ot Aharonot* said:

If Kastner is brought to trial the entire government faces a total
political and national collapse – as a result of what such a trial may
disclose.” (23 June 1955)

Accordingly, the Government of Israel did not put Kastner on trial,
instead it filed an appeal against the acquittal of Greenwald for
criminal libel.

At 11 P.M. the verdict was given. At 11 A.M. next morning the
government announces the defense of Kastner will be renewed – an
appeal filed.

What exemplary expediency! Since when does this government possess
such lawyer-genius who can weigh in one night the legal chances of an
appeal on a detailed, complex verdict of three hundred pages?

At the appeal hearings before the Supreme Court, the Attorney General
of Israel, Chaim Cohen, explained clearly why the Government of Israel
was defending Kastner so strongly:

The man Kastner does not stand here as a private individual. He was a
recognized representative, official or non-official of the Jewish
National Institutes in Palestine and of the Zionist Executive; and I
come here in this court to defend the representative of our national
institutions.”(Hecht, p. 268)

The truth of this statement cannot be denied. Kastner’s collaboration
was not that of an individual. It was the collaboration of the Zionist
leadership.

So far, it has only been established that the Government of Israel
continued to support a Nazi collaborator after the facts about his
collaboration had been conclusively established in an Israeli court.
But the story gets worse.

The Supreme Court of Israel unanimously found that Becher was indeed a
Nazi war criminal and that Kastner had without justification, and in
the name of the Jewish Agency, helped Becher to escape justice. On
this point Greenwald was acquitted of libel and Kastner was not
‘fully rehabilitated’.

The Supreme Court also accepted the facts established in the lower
court – that Kastner deliberately concealed the truth about Auschwitz
>from the majority of Hungarian Jews in exchange for Nazi permission to
take a thousand or so to Palestine. Again, Kastner was far from being
‘fully rehabilitated’.

But now comes the really nasty bit. After unanimously acknowledging
these facts, the Supreme Court of Israel, by a majority of three to
two, found that Kastner’s actions were morally justifiable and
convicted Greenwald of criminal libel for calling this
‘collaboration’.

Kastner’s actions only proved that he was a Nazi collaborator. It is
the defense of these actions by the Government and Courts of Israel
that prove conclusively that Zionism approves of Nazi collaboration.

The majority of the Supreme Court of Israel did not rehabilitate
Kastner. They joined him.

Let us read from the majority judgement of Supreme Court Judge Shlomo
Chesin:

….What point was there in telling the people boarding the trains in
Kluj, people struck by fate and persecuted, as to what awaits them at
the end of their journey…Kastner spoke in detail of the situation,
saying, ‘The Hungarian Jew was a branch which long ago dried up on the
tree’. This vivid description coincides with the testimony of another
witness about the Hungarian Jews, ‘This was a big Jewish community in
Hungary, without any ideological Jewish backbone’ (Moshe Shweiger, a
Kastner aide in Budapest, protocol 465).

I fully agree with my friend, Judge Agranot, when he states that, ‘The
Jews of Hungary, including those in the countryside, were not capable,
neither physically nor mentally, to carry out resistance operations
with force against the deportation scheme’…From this point of view
no rescue achievement could have resulted by disclosing the Auschwitz
news to the Jewish leaders there, and this is a consideration which on
can properly conclude that Kastner had in front of his eyes.

….And I take one more step. I am certain that the silence of Kastner
when he arrived in Kluj was premeditated and calculated and did not
result from his great despair because of the helplessness of the
Jewish community.

Even then, I say, this is still not considered wilful collaboration
and assistance in the extermination, because all the signs indicate
that Kastner’s efforts were aimed at rescue and rescue on a big
scale…And towards the end I take one last step. In doing so I go
very far and say that even if Kastner ordered himself to keep silent
knowingly, in submission to the strong will of the Nazis, in order to
save a few Jews from Hell – this is still no proof that he stained his
hands by collaborating with the enemies of his people and carrying out
their plan to exterminate most of the Jewish community in Hungary.

Even if, through these activities of his – or rather, his omission –
the extermination became easier. And as to the moral issue, the
question is not whether a man is allowed to kill many in order to save
a few, or vice-versa. The question is altogether in another sphere and
should be defined as follows: A man is aware that a whole community is
awaiting its doom. He is allowed to make efforts to save a few,
although part of his efforts involve concealment of truth from the
many or should he disclose
the truth to many though it is his best opinion that this way
everybody will perish. I think that the answer is clear. What good
will the blood of the few bring if everybody is to perish?…As I
said, I am not arguing with the basic factual findings of the learned
President of the Jewish District Court (Judge Halevi) but it seems to
me, with all due respect, that his findings do not, as of necessity,
demand the conclusion he has arrived at.

That is to say, collaboration on the part of Kastner in the
extermination of the Jews. And that they better coincide with bad
leadership both from a moral and public point of view…

In my opinion, one can say outright that if you find out that Kastner
collaborated with the enemy because he did not disclose to the people
who boarded the trains in Kluj that they were being led to
extermination, one has to put on trial today Danzig, Herman, Hanzi,
Brand, Revis and Marton, and many more leaders and half-leaders who
gagged themselves in an hour of crisis and did not inform others of
what was known to them and did not warn
and did not cry out of the coming danger….

Because of all this I cannot confirm the conclusion of the District
Court with regard to the accusation that Greenwald has thrown on
Kastner of collaboration with the Nazis in exterminating the Jewish
people in Hungary during the last war.” (Hecht, ibid., pp.270-2)

In other words, the Court approved of Kastner’s contempt for the
Hungarian Jews and could not allow him to be condemned for doing
exactly what many other Zionist leaders and half-leaders did –
concealing their knowledge of the Nazi extermination plans so that
Jews would board the trains to Auschwitz peacefully while their
Zionist ‘leaders’ boarded a different train for Palestine.

The most precise answer to this sickening judgement of Judge Chesin is
provided in the minority judgement of Supreme Court Judge Moshe
Silberg:
I do not say that he was the only man who possessed information among
the leaders. It is quite possible that somebody else as well does not
have a clear conscience with regards to this concealment. But we are
dealing here with the guilt of Kastner and we do not have to make
judgements on the guilt of others….

The declaration of the learned Attorney General therefore shrinks into
an opinion….’Kastner was convinced and believed that there was no
ray of hope for the Jews of Hungary, almost for none of them, and as
he, as a result of his personal despair, did not disclose the secret
of the extermination in order not to endanger or frustrate the rescue
of the few – therefore he acted in good faith and should not be
accused of collaborating with the Nazis in expediting the
extermination of the Jews, even though, in fact, he brought about its
result.’

I am compelled to state that it is very difficult for me to conceive
such an intention. Is this good faith? Can a single man, even in
cooperation with some of his friends, yield to despair on behalf and
without the knowledge of 800,000 other people? This is, in my opinion,
the decisive consideration in the problem facing us. The charge
emanating from the testimony of the witnesses against Kastner is that
had they known of the Auschwitz secret, then thousands or tens of
thousands would have been able
to save their lives by local, partial, specific or indirect rescue
operations like local revolts, resistance, escapes, hidings,
concealment of children with Gentiles, forging of documents, ransom
money, bribery,etc. – and when this is the case and when one deals
with many hundreds of thousands, how does a human being, a mortal,
reject with complete certainty and with an extreme ‘no’ the efficiency
of all the many and varied rescue ways? How can he examine the tens of
thousands of possibilities? Does he decide instead of God?
Indeed, he who can act with such a usurpation of the
last hope of hundreds of thousands is not entitled to claim good faith
as his defense. The penetrating question quo warrento is a good answer
to a claim of such good faith…

If the superintendent of a big hospital lets thousands of sick people
die so that he may devote himself to the sure rescue of one soul, he
will come out guilty, at least morally, even if it is proven that he
as an individual erroneously thought that there was no hope of saving
the other patients. He is a collaborator with the angel of death.

Either a complete atrophy of the soul or a blind involvement with
complete loss of senses and proportion in his small but personal
rescue operation could bring a man to such a gigantic, hazardous play.

And if all this is not enough to annul the claim of good faith which
was put before us on behalf of Kastner by the Attorney General, then
Kastner himself comes and annuls it altogether. Not only did he never
make this claim, but his own words prove the contrary. He writes in
his report to the Jewish Agency that the Committee sent emissaries to
many ghettos in the countryside and pleaded with them to organize
escapes and to refuse to board the trains. And though the story of
these pleadings is untrue, and the silence of Kastner in Kluj is
proven, the very uttering of these statements entirely contradicts the
claim that Kastner had concealed the
news about the fate of the ghetto inmates in good faith and only as a
result of his complete despairing of the chances of escaping or
resisting the Germans. You can not claim at the same time helplessness
and activity. Anyway, such a claim is not convincing…

We can sum up with three facts:

A. That the Nazis didn’t want to have a great revolt – nor small
revolts, and their passion was to have the extermination machine
working smoothly without resistance. This fact was known to Kastner
>from the best source – from Eichmann himself – And he had additional
proofs of that when he witnessed all the illusionary and misleading
tactics which were being taken by the Nazis from the first moment of
occupation.

B. That the most efficient means to paralyze the resistance with – or
the escape of a victim is to conceal from him the plot of the coming
murder. This fact is known to every man and one does not need any
proof of evidence for this.

C. That he, Kastner, in order to carry out the rescue plan for the few
prominents, fulfilled knowingly and without good faith the said desire
of the Nazis, thus expediting the work of exterminating the masses.

And also the rescue of Becher by Kastner…He who is capable of
rescuing this Becher from hanging proves that the atrocities of this
great war criminal were not so horrifying or despicable in his
eyes…I couldn’t base the main guilt of Kastner on this fact had it
been alone, but when it is attached even from afar to the whole scene
of events it throws retroactive
light on the whole affair and serves as a dozen proofs of our
conclusion.”(Supreme Court Judge, Moshe Silberg, 1957)

If that had been the majority judgement, one could say that whatever
their attitudes to the Arabs, and whatever their past behaviour might
have been under pressure, the Zionist leadership today did not
advocate collaboration with the Nazis.

But Judge Silberg’s judgement was that of a minority.

The Kastner case is therefore not an alleged episode in past history.

It is a continuing controversy in which the top Zionist leadership of
Israel stand indicted of continuing to publicly defend collaboration
with the Nazis in the extermination of Jews.

Despite the unanimous finding of the Supreme Court of Israel that Kurt
Becher was a major war criminal, the Jewish Agency (World Zionist
Organization) refused to withdraw the fraudulent certificate Kastner
gave on their behalf, which saved Becher from hanging, and allowed him
to remain a free man in West Germany, the head of several corporations
and with an estimated personal worth of $30 million.

Becher has even used his certification as a ‘good’ SS officer to give
evidence in support of his associates at other war crimes trials in
West Germany.

Since the prosecution, representing the Israeli Government agreed with
the Supreme Court that Becher was a major war criminal, one can only
pressure that the Israeli Government did not want him put on trial for
fear of what might come out.

Likewise, none of Kastner’s associates on the Zionist Relief and
Rescue Committee or his bosses in the Jewish Agency have ever been put
on trial .

Let alone the hundreds of ‘prominents’ who helped Kastner to reassure
the Hungarian Jews that they were going to Kenyermeze and not
Auschwitz, in exchange for tickets on the one train that took them
eventually to Palestine.

As for Kastner himself, he will cause no further embarrassment to the
Zionist leadership with his undisputed claims that everything he did
was approved by the Jewish Agency (World Zionist Organization)
leadership in Palestine. He is ‘now dead’. Or putting it less
delicately, on 3 March 1957 he was shot by Zeev Eckstein – immediately
after the appeal hearings were concluded, and before the judgement
‘rehabilitating’ him was delivered.

Eckstein was not a Hungarian avenger. He was a paid undercover agent
of the Israeli secret service. (Hecht, ibid., p.208). Another
‘fantastic allegation’ no doubt; but admitted in court during the
murder trial).

sven88

From [email protected] Thu Oct 15 19:40:09 EDT 1998
Article: 123175 of soc.culture.polish
Path: hub.org!hub.org!darla.visi.com!chippy.visi.com!news-out.visi.com!news-nyc.telia.net!newsfeed.cwix.com!206.172.150.11!news1.bellglobal.com!news.agtac.net!news.telusplanet.net!news
From: [email protected]
Newsgroups: soc.culture.palestine,alt.politics.nationalism.white,alt.revisionism,soc.culture.islam,soc.culture.malaysia,soc.culture.australian,soc.culture.polish
Subject: Re: Nazi — Jewish Zionist Collaboration
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 15:20:13 GMT
Organization: TELUS Communications Inc.
Lines: 661
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: edtntnt4-port-108.agt.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 1.5/32.451
Xref: hub.org soc.culture.palestine:53078 alt.politics.nationalism.white:175197 alt.revisionism:269916 soc.culture.islam:4187 soc.culture.malaysia:196096 soc.culture.australian:78557 soc.culture.polish:123175

On Tue, 13 Oct 1998 11:38:31, [email protected] wrote:
On Thu, 10 Sep 1998 22:56:46 GMT, [email protected] wrote:
trying to stimulate more interest in this topic,
On Sat, 15 Aug 1998 18:45:47 GMT, [email protected] wrote:
>On Fri, 03 Jul 1998 15:00:35 GMT, [email protected] wrote:
>>On 3 Jul 1998 06:38:05 GMT, wrote: