Grosvenor William, Telusplanet-com 4 – p3

From [email protected] Fri Oct 16 15:08:36 EDT 1998
Article: 123522 of soc.culture.polish
Path: hub.org!hub.org!news.gv.tsc.tdk.com!Supernews73!supernews.com!howland.erols.net!newshub.northeast.verio.net!cyclone.news.idirect.com!island.idirect.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 — Jew Zionist Collaboration
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 14:20:57 GMT
Organization: TELUS Communications Inc.
Lines: 819
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: edtnpx08-port-58.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:53131 alt.politics.nationalism.white:180686 alt.revisionism:275320 soc.culture.islam:4199 soc.culture.malaysia:196682 soc.culture.australian:78656 soc.culture.polish:123522

On Thu, 15 Oct 1998 10:12:53, [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:
>>
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 had 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] Fri Oct 16 15:08:39 EDT 1998
Article: 123526 of soc.culture.polish
Path: hub.org!hub.org!chippy.visi.com!news-out.visi.com!newshub.northeast.verio.net!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: aus.politics,aus.general,soc.culture.australian,soc.culture.palestine,soc.culture.polish,soc.culture.swiss,alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: JEW NAZIS! Backlash!!
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 14:25:43 GMT
Organization: TELUS Communications Inc.
Lines: 216
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: edtnpx08-port-58.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 aus.politics:191175 aus.general:36373 soc.culture.australian:78657 soc.culture.palestine:53132 soc.culture.polish:123526 soc.culture.swiss:27295 alt.revisionism:275321

On Fri, 16 Oct 1998 22:39:09, The Rottnest Quokka
wanted to write:

On Mon, 13 Jul 1998 12:59:56 GMT, [email protected] wrote:

>Since some of the undesirable Jews in Australia have published their
>Libelers List of people they consider undesirable, for supporting ON,
>perhaps ON should do similar??
>
>Surely the angry citizens of Australia can readily prepare their own
>list of undesirable Jews, including such Illuminati as the notorious
>Rappaport, and others of his ilk?? What about drug dealers, white
>collar criminals, and similar criminals?
>
>After all these thousands of years, why would the admittedly
>genetically inbred creatures (according to their own recent
>pronouncements regarding DNA proof for jewishness) want to so
>antagonise a generous host country like Australia?
>
>Is there not enough resentment against the people responsible for the
>murder of Christ?
>
>Did the more than 100 millions killed in the interests of Jew
>communism in this century alone, not create enough enemies, that they
>want to generate more?
>
>Surely their worldwide attempts at extortion of nations has caused
>more ill-will?? Even the Swiss, who had provided shelter, but required
>that the Jews WORK in the 1940’s are now having extortion demands!!!
>
>Or, is their wish to force the world into another conflagration, so
>that by the Year 2000, their New World Order can take over what
>remains of this world?? They are certainly spreading their tentacles
>in many countries, trying to take control…
>
>>>Mr Leibler: you have chosen to gratuitously & viciously persecute
>>>a defenceless minority of Australians – who are innocent of any
>>>wrong-doing – on purely political grounds; by publishing to the
>>>world, their names & residential suburbs in your magazine.
>
>>>In the interests of “balance”, would you now care to publish to the
>>>world, the names & residential suburbs of those Australian residents
>>>& citizens who are bankrolling the “Genocide” of the Palestinian
>>>Nation; with a higher financial contribution per capita, than any
>>>other members of your diaspora, on the Planet.
>
>>>You say you have a deep & abiding concern for “political
>>>transparency”: lets see you really put your publishing skills
>>>where your mouth is…
>
>>>cheers, PJ
>
>>Better yet, publish a list of all those businesses owned or/and
>>controlled by Jews, in Australia, USA, GB, Germany, France and Russia.
>
>>Let the world see who is really controlling world affairs, even before
>>the year 2000!!!
>
>
>
>
>On Sun, 12 Jul 1998 11:12:52 GMT, [email protected] (Harold
>Wood) wrote:
>
>>On Thu, 09 Jul 1998 13:02:46 GMT,
>>[email protected] (David S. Maddison)
>>wrote:
>>Thanks for clarifying where you’re coming from,
>>Harold.
>
>>Have you considered that your estimation here
>>might be incorrect? I estimate that my words
>>probably have given you a false impression
>>however. 🙂
>
>>Here is another angle on my ‘yike’.
>
>>The Australia-Israel Review in their attempting to
>>facilitate the vilification (and worse) of ON
>>members by others (a cowardly act) is in fact
>>attempting to protect the ‘nice little earner’
>>which the ethnic industry (a major part of their
>>consituency) has going in Australia. They
>>recognise that ON is a direct and immediate threat
>>to their continuing their enjoyment of the
>>proceeds of the tax heist perpetrated on pre ON
>>hapless political ‘pincer movement’ entrapped
>>middle income earning Australians by Tweedle
>>Dumb(LibNat) and Tweedle Dumber(LabRat)).
>
>>>Ummm… Was it “The Jews” ™ that published the list or was it a
>>>particular individual who happened to be an editor of a
>>>Jewish-interest magazine?
>
>>Some voices among ‘the Jews’ have now been
>>raised against that action of the Australia-Israel
>>Review. The action of those sensible people must
>>surely be generally appreciated by all. A very
>>wise move by those rightly concerned people
>>indeed.
>
>>>Why blame “The Jews” for the misguided actions of a single individual
>>>who I am fairly certain now realises that he made a mistake?
>
>>Consider my approach a ‘media technique’. One I
>>highly disapprove of but acknowledge the efficacy
>>of. (Yes that does mean I now temporarily
>>subscribe to the principle, ‘the end justifies the
>>means’.)
>
>>>With the widespread opposition to One Nation, I’d say it was equally
>>>likely that any other number of other publications might also have
>>>published it,
>
>>They haven’t.
>
>>> or someone may have posted it to the ‘Net.
>
>>Here of course mostly ‘anything goes’. That
>>theory proves nothing for your agument.
>
>>>It was certainly wrong to publish the list, if such information wasn’t
>>>already on the public record in the first place.
>
>>Yes, wrong but now a help to those who they
>>oppose. Quite stupid are they not! 🙂 I wonder
>>if an IQ test needs to be introduced for all
>>Australian voters?
>
>>> (Is membership of political parties on the public record?)
>
>>No, but you are certainly free to declare one if
>>you please. (I am not currently a member of any
>>party but have belonged in the past to a number.)
>
>>>David Maddison
>
>>Hope that helps. 🙂
>
>>Now, here is another aspect of my ‘yike’.
>
>>The arrogance displayed by Australia’s now
>>prolific ‘ursurper classes’ knows no bounds.
>
>>(In the context this time of the arrogance
>>displayed by the Australia-Israel Review.)
>
>> And nor should that come as any surprise to
>>anyone, that for the reason that the criminal
>>’politically correct screeching brigade’ has long
>>intimidated our good, polite, well meaning and
>>well mannered ‘Australian cultured’ citizens, thus
>>effectively preventing them from speaking out
>>loudly enough about their such gross maltreatment.
>
>>The Australia-Israel Review’s stupid move in
>>publishing those names was undoubtedly a
>>reflection of their verging hysterical panic
>>reaction to the realisation that their
>>constituency’s ‘game’ just might be about to be
>>up! Also it likely was a manifestation of their
>>failure to see that it is actually possible,
>>despite their getting away with it for years, for
>>their instinctual arrogance at some time to get
>>them into very deep and dangerous water indeed.
>
>>Harold.
>
>
>
>On Mon, 13 Jul 1998 17:07:13 +1000, [email protected]>not.awww….
>(Mr.Interesting) wrote:
>
>>In article <[email protected]>,
>>[email protected] (Harold Wood) wrote:
>>
>>> JEWISH NAZIS!
>>>
>>> How dare those cynical pernicious professional
>>> peddlers of guilt, those ‘oonga boonga’ mere
>>
>>
>>Shouldn’t that be “Oingo Boingo”?
>>
>>Doesn’t Hebraic tradition have a saying that goes along the lines of
>>”Be careful who you hate, because you’ll end up being just like them”.
>>
>>They’re behaving like Nazi’s in Palestine (let’s call it by it’s real name
>>shall we, that is unless you STILL believe that the bible isn’t one of the
>>most successful pieces of Politico-Religious Propagandistic Re-writes of
>>the Past AND the Future?…).
>>
>>Funny thing is, the ones who are causing all the troubles, ie the
>>Ultra-Orthodox Right wing and Likud parties, apart from being
>>DOLE-BLUDGERS in Israel, are also CONVENIENTLY EXEMPT from military
>>service, or from facing the bullets and bombs, that they demand their
>>fellow secular countrymen face(some of which, by the way, are planted by
>>Orthodox jews, killing ordinary jews, to stir up a bit more hatred).
>>
>>I find it quite strange that the majority of Israeli’s are secular and
>>want peace, but allow themselves to be kept in a state of terror, NOT by
>>Palestinians, but by OTHER JEWS!. WHO DON’T WORK. WHO DON’T HAVE TO DO
>>MILITARY SERVICE. WHO ASSASSINATED THE PRESIDENT who was going to deliver
>>peace.
>>
>>And while we’re here, Don’t the cries of the UNIONISTS in Ireland, that
>>they need protection from CATHOLIC TERRORISM start to sound a bit hollow
>>now? I think nearly every act of terrorism (inc. Murder) since the
>>referendum has been against Catholics.
>>
>>AAhhhhh…….. Religion, even when it’s the SAME GOD, there’s still
>>enough difference to go out and KKKIIILLLLLL SSOMEONE, and feel good about
>>it.
>>
>>The Pope wears Orange stockings and suspenders.

From [email protected] Fri Oct 16 15:08:41 EDT 1998
Article: 123528 of soc.culture.polish
Path: hub.org!hub.org!news.gv.tsc.tdk.com!Supernews73!supernews.com!howland.erols.net!newshub.northeast.verio.net!cyclone.news.idirect.com!island.idirect.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: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 14:33:15 GMT
Organization: TELUS Communications Inc.
Lines: 847
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: edtnpx08-port-58.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:53133 alt.politics.nationalism.white:180689 alt.revisionism:275323 soc.culture.islam:4200 soc.culture.malaysia:196687 soc.culture.australian:78658 soc.culture.polish:123528

On Thu, 15 Oct 1998 15:30:35, [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:
>>
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 had 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
>When Dachau fell into Western hands in 1945, it had to look
>the part, so, under the inspiration of Philip Auerbach, Under-
>Secretary of State in the provincial government of Bavaria,
>it was transformed into a showplace of horrors.
>
>Near the entrance stood a big fir tree with a horizontal
>bough. On the orders of American Captain Strauss,
>German prisoners of war worked the bough with ropes to
>damage the bark. Auerbach then proclaimed it the “Hanging
>Tree,” and said that 10,000 Jews had been hung on its bough.
>
>The workers received orders to dig a blood-pit with a drain
>pipe for draining off the blood, because it must be made to appear
>that here Jewish blood had been flowing in streams. The shower-
>baths, dressing rooms and reception halls had to be rebuilt so that they
>should appear like gas-chambers. For the sake of achieving this
>appearance, a special separate concrete structure was built
>with small porthole-like openings, and these contraptions are
>still on show today (1958-rb) purporting to demonstrate that the killing
>”death gas” was let in through these portholes.”
>
>…Jews converted this camp into a chamber of horrors……
>
>
>Comment: Sounds just like Hollywood, doesn’t it? The only
>thing missing is Jamie Lee…..
>

From [email protected] Fri Oct 16 15:08:45 EDT 1998
Article: 123529 of soc.culture.polish
Path: hub.org!hub.org!chippy.visi.com!news-out.visi.com!newshub.northeast.verio.net!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.ukrainian,soc.culture.australia,aus.general,soc.culture.german,soc.culture.europe
Subject: Re: jew jokes
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 14:24:31 GMT
Organization: TELUS Communications Inc.
Lines: 259
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: edtnpx08-port-58.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:123529 soc.culture.ukrainian:42108 soc.culture.australia:12372 aus.general:36374 soc.culture.german:89352 soc.culture.europe:131545

On Tue, 13 Oct 1998 01:09:47 +0200, “Rob” wrote:

>siedzialem na dembie i dlobalem w zebie
>a ludziska glopie
>myslaly ze ze w d…….
>
>kaczki tez
>
>kochajmy sie baranie

On 13 Oct 1998 03:36:24 GMT,(Kenneth McVay SOBC) wrote:

On Sun, 11 Oct 1998 19:00:36 -0400, wrote:
>Hey Warr,

>Get some new material. Fran Dresher you aint. Henny Youngman could do better
>sleepwalking.

On Sat, 10 Oct 1998 21:00:54 +0200, “Rob” wrote:

>You are right!!!

On 10 Oct 1998 18:46:42 GMT, (Kenneth McVay SOBC) wrote:

JEWISH JOKES

How was copper wiring invented?
Two Jews fighting over a penny!

How is Christmas celebrated in a Jewish home?
They put parking meters on the roof!

Why is money green?
Because Jews pick it before it’s ripe!

What candy did Hitler hate more then any other?
Jew Jew Beans… Although I heard he enjoyed them “roasted!”

If Tarzan and Jane were Jewish, what would Cheetah be?
A fur coat!

Why don’t Jews eat pork?
They may be a lot of things, but CANNIBALS they’re not!

Why aren’t Jews attacked by sharks?
Professional courtesy!

Do you know how to keep Jews out of a country club?
Let one in, and he’ll keep the rest out.

What’s the Jewish version of foreplay?
Half an hour of begging.

How can you tell the mother-in-law at a Jewish wedding?
She’s the one on her hands and knees picking up the rice!

Did you hear about the new tires, Firestein?
They not only stop on a dime, they also pick it up!

What’s the difference between a circumcision and crucifixion?
In a crucifixion, they throw the whole Jew out!

Why did the Jews wander in the desert for 40 years?
Someone dropped a quarter!

Why do Jews have such big noses?
Because air is free.

What did the Jewish mother ask her daughter when she learned she had
an
affair?
Who catered it?

What happens when a Jew with an erection walks into a wall?
He breaks his nose.

What’s a Jewish dilemma?
Free ham.

What’s the difference between a Jewish bitch and a barracuda?
Nail polish.

What’s the difference between an elephant and a Jew?
An elephant eventually forgets.

A nigger was walking down the street, kicking some rubbish out of his
way,
when he spotted something amid the trash that gleamed
strangely. It urned out to be an oddly shaped bottle, and when he
rubbed it, a
Jewish genie appeared. “I’ll give you two wishes,” quipped
the genie. “Far out,” said the black man. “First, I want to be white,
uptight,
and out of sight!” Second, I want to be surrounded by warm,
sweet pussy. So the genie turned him into a TAMPON! The moral of this
story:
You can’t get anything from a Jew without strings
attached!

How do you stop a Jewish girl from fucking you?
Marry her!

Why do jewish bitches only sleep with circumcised men?
They want 20% off everything!

What’s the difference between between karate and judo?
Karate is a form of self-defense, and judo is what bagels are made of.

Did you hear that the limbo was invented by the Jews?
Yeah, from sneaking into pay toilets.

What’s the definition of a queer Jew?
Someone that likes girls more then money.

What do you call ten Jewish bitches in a basement?
A WHINE cellar.

Why did the Jewish mother have herself entombed at Bloomingdales?
So her daughter would visit at least twice a week.

What’s the difference between a vulture and a Jew?
A vulture waits until you’re dead to eat your heart out!

—–== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion
==—–
http://www.dejanews.com/ Now offering spam-free web-based
newsreading

On Fri, 9 Oct 1998 17:06:02 -0700, “WaRR”
wrote:

>what do you get when you cross a jewish women and an arab women??
>oil of no lay!!

>=what is the difference between karate and judo?
>karate is the art of self-defense, and judo is what bagels are made of.

>=i knew a jewish woman once who thought the apostle’s creed was
>what fought rocky balboa.

>=what’s the difference between a jewish british princess and a toilet?
>a toilet doesn’t follow you around for 9 months after you use it.

>=did you hear that al italia and el al were merging to form a new airline?
>it’s called well i’ll tell ya.=what do you call a jewish woman’s waterbed?
>the dead sea. second prize: lake placid.

>=how was copper wire invented?
> by 2 jews fighting over a penny.

>=why are jewish men circumcised?
> because jewish women won’t buy anything unless it’s 20% off.

>=what do you call an uncircumcised jewish baby?
>a girl.

>=what do you get when you cross a jewish british princess & a computer?
>a computer that never goes down on you.
>=what’s a jewish british princess’ favorite wine?
> i wanna go to palmsprings.
>=how do you know a jewish british princess has an orgasm?
>she drops her nail file.

>=what do you have when you get 3 jewish british princesses together
>with 3 other women who have yeast infections?a whine and cheese party.
>=how many jewish british princesses does it take to screw in a lightbulb?
>two, one to get a diet coke and one to call daddy.

>=why do jewish girls like prostitution?
>because they can sell it again and again and again.

>=what’s the difference between a jewish british princess and jello?
>jello moves when you eat it.

>=how does a jewish british princess do it doggie style?
>she makes him beg for an hour.

>=what’s the difference between a jewish british princess and a catholic
>british princess?
>the catholic british princess has fake jewelry and real orgasms.

>=what’s the difference between jews and canoes?
>canoes tip. ( THIS ONE FREAKS ME OUT :)))))

>=what’s the difference between jews and pizzas?
>pizzas don’t scream when you put them in the oven.

>=what is a jewish dilemma?
>free ham.

>=what do you call a jewish piano?
>a cash register.

>=how many jews does it take to change a light bulb?
>none. they are used to sitting in the dark.

>=did you hear about the rabbi who did free circumcisions?
>he only took tips.

>=how many jews can you fit in a vw?
>two in the front, two in the back, and ten thousand in the ash tray.

>=a priest, a baptist minister, and a rabbi were asked how they would
>divide up some gold coins between themselves and god. the priest
>replied, “i’d draw a line down the middle of the room, throw the
>coins in the air, and whatever landed on one side goes to god,
>the other to me.” the minister replied, “i’d draw a circle in
>the middle of the room, and whatever lands inside is for god,
>outside for me.” the rabbi’s answer was, he wouldn’t draw any
>line, just throw the money in the air and whatever god caughthe could keep.

>=an italian, a jew, and a homosexual were walking down the street and
>were hit by the same bolt of lightning. next thing they know they’re
>in front of st. peter begging for a second chance. “ok,” he says,
>”but on one condition: you must give up that which you love the most.
>if you don’t, you go straight to hell.” after agreeing, they find
>themselves back on the street and they start walking again. a few
>blocks down they pass a pizza store. “i can’t help myself!” says the
>italian… he goes in, takes a bite of pizza, and poof!, he
>disappears. so the jew and the homosexual continue walking
>down the street. the jew sees a penny on the sidewalk. “i can’t
>help myself!” he says. he reaches for the penny and poof! the
>homosexual disappears.

>yours truly

>WaRR
-88-

From [email protected] Fri Oct 16 15:08:46 EDT 1998
Article: 123531 of soc.culture.polish
Path: hub.org!hub.org!news.gv.tsc.tdk.com!Supernews73!supernews.com!newsfeed.corridex.com!newsfeed.cwix.com!169.132.11.200!news.idt.net!newsfeed.nyu.edu!nntp.cadvision.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: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 14:34:29 GMT
Organization: TELUS Communications Inc.
Lines: 819
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: edtnpx08-port-58.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:53134 alt.politics.nationalism.white:180692 alt.revisionism:275324 soc.culture.islam:4201 soc.culture.malaysia:196691 soc.culture.australian:78659 soc.culture.polish:123531

On Thu, 15 Oct 1998 09:34:04, [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:
>>
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 had 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] Fri Oct 16 15:10:26 EDT 1998
Article: 196676 of soc.culture.malaysia
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 — Jew Zionist Collaboration
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 14:18:17 GMT
Organization: TELUS Communications Inc.
Lines: 819
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: edtnpx08-port-58.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!newsfeed.axxsys.net!news.idt.net!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:53129 alt.politics.nationalism.white:180684 alt.revisionism:275318 soc.culture.islam:4197 soc.culture.malaysia:196676 soc.culture.australian:78649 soc.culture.polish:123520

On Thu, 15 Oct 1998 15:30:35, [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:
>>
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 had 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] Fri Oct 16 15:10:31 EDT 1998
Article: 196678 of soc.culture.malaysia
Path: hub.org!hub.org!news.gv.tsc.tdk.com!news.cmc.net!spamkiller2.cwix.com!newsfeed.cwix.com!198.138.0.5!newshub.northeast.verio.net!cyclone.news.idirect.com!island.idirect.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: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 14:19:12 GMT
Organization: TELUS Communications Inc.
Lines: 830
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: edtnpx08-port-58.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:53130 alt.politics.nationalism.white:180685 alt.revisionism:275319 soc.culture.islam:4198 soc.culture.malaysia:196678 soc.culture.australian:78655 soc.culture.polish:123521

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 had 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

On Thu, 15 Oct 1998 12:39:09, [email protected] wrote:

>Readers are reminded that there is in fact no such
>organization as the “American Fascist Union”. All
>posts claiming to be from the “American Fascist Union”
>are in fact posted to Usenet by the same individual who
>was for some time using the name “Karl Zimmer”. This
>individual is most likely an operative of Nizkor.

From [email protected] Fri Oct 16 15:10:33 EDT 1998
Article: 196682 of soc.culture.malaysia
Path: hub.org!hub.org!news.gv.tsc.tdk.com!Supernews73!supernews.com!howland.erols.net!newshub.northeast.verio.net!cyclone.news.idirect.com!island.idirect.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 — Jew Zionist Collaboration
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 14:20:57 GMT
Organization: TELUS Communications Inc.
Lines: 819
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: edtnpx08-port-58.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:53131 alt.politics.nationalism.white:180686 alt.revisionism:275320 soc.culture.islam:4199 soc.culture.malaysia:196682 soc.culture.australian:78656 soc.culture.polish:123522

On Thu, 15 Oct 1998 10:12:53, [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:
>>
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 had 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] Fri Oct 16 15:10:37 EDT 1998
Article: 196687 of soc.culture.malaysia
Path: hub.org!hub.org!news.gv.tsc.tdk.com!Supernews73!supernews.com!howland.erols.net!newshub.northeast.verio.net!cyclone.news.idirect.com!island.idirect.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: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 14:33:15 GMT
Organization: TELUS Communications Inc.
Lines: 847
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: edtnpx08-port-58.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:53133 alt.politics.nationalism.white:180689 alt.revisionism:275323 soc.culture.islam:4200 soc.culture.malaysia:196687 soc.culture.australian:78658 soc.culture.polish:123528

On Thu, 15 Oct 1998 15:30:35, [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:
>>
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 had 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
>When Dachau fell into Western hands in 1945, it had to look
>the part, so, under the inspiration of Philip Auerbach, Under-
>Secretary of State in the provincial government of Bavaria,
>it was transformed into a showplace of horrors.
>
>Near the entrance stood a big fir tree with a horizontal
>bough. On the orders of American Captain Strauss,
>German prisoners of war worked the bough with ropes to
>damage the bark. Auerbach then proclaimed it the “Hanging
>Tree,” and said that 10,000 Jews had been hung on its bough.
>
>The workers received orders to dig a blood-pit with a drain
>pipe for draining off the blood, because it must be made to appear
>that here Jewish blood had been flowing in streams. The shower-
>baths, dressing rooms and reception halls had to be rebuilt so that they
>should appear like gas-chambers. For the sake of achieving this
>appearance, a special separate concrete structure was built
>with small porthole-like openings, and these contraptions are
>still on show today (1958-rb) purporting to demonstrate that the killing
>”death gas” was let in through these portholes.”
>
>…Jews converted this camp into a chamber of horrors……
>
>
>Comment: Sounds just like Hollywood, doesn’t it? The only
>thing missing is Jamie Lee…..
>

From [email protected] Fri Oct 16 15:10:39 EDT 1998
Article: 196691 of soc.culture.malaysia
Path: hub.org!hub.org!news.gv.tsc.tdk.com!Supernews73!supernews.com!newsfeed.corridex.com!newsfeed.cwix.com!169.132.11.200!news.idt.net!newsfeed.nyu.edu!nntp.cadvision.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: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 14:34:29 GMT
Organization: TELUS Communications Inc.
Lines: 819
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: edtnpx08-port-58.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:53134 alt.politics.nationalism.white:180692 alt.revisionism:275324 soc.culture.islam:4201 soc.culture.malaysia:196691 soc.culture.australian:78659 soc.culture.polish:123531

On Thu, 15 Oct 1998 09:34:04, [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:
>>
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 had 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] Sat Oct 17 05:46:26 EDT 1998
Article: 275747 of alt.revisionism
Path: hub.org!hub.org!newsfeed.axxsys.net!news.idt.net!newshub.northeast.verio.net!cyclone.news.idirect.com!island.idirect.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: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 20:12:41 GMT
Organization: TELUS Communications Inc.
Lines: 634
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: edtnpx02-port-2.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:53140 alt.politics.nationalism.white:181132 alt.revisionism:275747 soc.culture.islam:4202 soc.culture.malaysia:196819 soc.culture.australian:78665 soc.culture.polish:123572

On Fri, 16 Oct 1998 07:58:52, [email protected] wrote:

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:

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] Sat Oct 17 05:46:28 EDT 1998
Article: 275748 of alt.revisionism
Path: hub.org!hub.org!newsfeed.axxsys.net!newsfeed.cwix.com!198.138.0.5!newshub.northeast.verio.net!cyclone.news.idirect.com!island.idirect.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: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 20:13:00 GMT
Organization: TELUS Communications Inc.
Lines: 635
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: edtnpx02-port-2.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:53141 alt.politics.nationalism.white:181133 alt.revisionism:275748 soc.culture.islam:4203 soc.culture.malaysia:196821 soc.culture.australian:78666 soc.culture.polish:123573

On Fri, 16 Oct 1998 16:09:47, [email protected] wrote:

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:

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] Sat Oct 17 05:47:39 EDT 1998
Article: 157792 of soc.culture.cuba
Path: hub.org!hub.org!newsfeed.direct.ca!cyclone.news.idirect.com!island.idirect.com!nntp.cadvision.com!news.agtac.net!news.telusplanet.net!news
From: [email protected]
Newsgroups: soc.culture.cuba
Subject: CANADA POST STEAL LARGE SHIPMENT TO CUBA!!!
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 00:40:42 GMT
Organization: TELUS Communications Inc.
Lines: 49
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: edtntnt4-port-27.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.cuba:157792

On Tuesday 14 October 1998, a Court in Edmonton Canada confirmed that
Canada Post IS above the law, even above Magna Carta and the Canadian
Bill of Rights.

The Court confirmed, that THEY DO NOT HAVE TO PAY ONE CENT IN
COMPENSATION, even if their managers STEAL or lose a full sack of
mail, being a sack full of computer propgrams being sent to the
Government of Cuba!!

Further, that they are immune from any and all lawsuits!!!

No wonder so many people are having their mail, including registered,
STOLEN by managers at Canada Post!!!

Ask your government to consider an EMBARGO against Canada Post, until
they stop stealing mail!!!

>On Sat, 08 Aug 1998 14:03:13 GMT, [email protected] wrote:

>>Following all the recent news stories about thefts of mail by Canada
>>Post, today (7 August 1998) Canada Post is being sued, in two separate lawsuits!!!

>>The most damaging one relates to the disappearance of AN ENTIRE SACK
>>OF MAIL consisting of approximately 52 pounds of computer programs,
>>worth more than $4,000.– in a PO sealed sack, destined for a
>>foreign government department. The sackful was delivered and sealed on
>>10th June. According to written admissions from Canada Post, it
>>somehow “DISAPPEARED” the same day.Alberta Court Docket #P9890306082.

>>Mind you, the criminals running Canada Post did not bother to advise
>>the victim for one month, until 9th July!! It is now 2 months, Canada
>>Post say they have no idea how the full mail sack disappeared, and
>>they refuse to pay compensation for their thieves!!!

>>Since normal workers/staff can no longer steal because they are
>>constantly videotaped, one must assume that managers in canada Post
>>are somehow involved in the disappearance.

>>At the same time, another lawsuit was filed against Canada Post, in
>>connection with a “security registered” item, with $3000.– worth of
>>stamps sent to a representative of a European government, which
>>”disappeared” last year!!!Alberta Court Docket# p9890306081.

>>Victims are now getting together to organise a major international
>>campaign.

From [email protected] Sat Oct 17 05:47:41 EDT 1998
Article: 157972 of soc.culture.cuba
From: [email protected]
Newsgroups: soc.culture.cuba,soc.culture.usa,soc.culture.canada,can.general
Subject: CANADA LIKES TO SWINDLE CUBA!!!
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 19:58:12 GMT
Organization: TELUS Communications Inc.
Lines: 201
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: edtntnt4-port-160.agt.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 1.5/32.451
Path: hub.org!hub.org!news.gv.tsc.tdk.com!news.iac.net!netnews.com!news.maxwell.syr.edu!cyclone.news.idirect.com!island.idirect.com!news.oanet.com!news.agtac.net!news.telusplanet.net!news
Xref: hub.org soc.culture.cuba:157972 soc.culture.usa:265661 soc.culture.canada:162558 can.general:127981

Subject: Canada Post Managers Can STEAL MAIL!!!
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 17:46:38 GMT

On Tuesday 14 October 1998, a Court in Edmonton Canada confirmed that
Canada Post IS above the law, even above Magna Carta and the Canadian
Bill of Rights.

The Court confirmed, that THEY DO NOT HAVE TO PAY ONE CENT IN
COMPENSATION, even if their managers STEAL or lose a full sack of
mail, being a sack full of computer propgrams being sent to the
Education department of the Government of Cuba!!

Further, that they are immune from any and all lawsuits!!!

No wonder so many people are having their mail, including registered,
STOLEN by managers at Canada Post!!!

Ask your government to consider an EMBARGO against Canada Post, until
they stop stealing mail!!!

Surely the managers in Canada Post are not being paid by the CIA to
steal mail sent to Cuba??

>On Sat, 08 Aug 1998 14:03:13 GMT, [email protected] wrote:
>>Following all the recent news stories about thefts of mail by Canada
>>Post, today (7 August 1998) Canada Post is being sued, in two separate lawsuits!!!

>>The most damaging one relates to the disappearance of AN ENTIRE SACK
>>OF MAIL consisting of approximately 52 pounds of computer programs,
>>worth more than $4,000.– in a PO sealed sack, destined for a
>>foreign government department. (The Education department of the Government of Cuba)
>>The sackful was delivered and sealed on
>>10th June. According to written admissions from Canada Post, it
>>somehow “DISAPPEARED” the same day.Alberta Court Docket #P9890306082.

>> One must wonder whether the CIA have “arranged” to have items for Cuba
>>stolen by Canada Post managers???

>>Mind you, the criminals running Canada Post did not bother to advise
>>the victim for one month, until 9th July!! It is now 2 months, Canada
>>Post say they have no idea how the full mail sack disappeared, and
>>they refuse to pay compensation for their thieves!!!

>>Since normal workers/staff can no longer steal because they are
>>constantly videotaped, one must assume that managers in canada Post
>>are somehow involved in the disappearance.

>>At the same time, another lawsuit was filed against Canada Post, in
>>connection with a “security registered” item, with $3000.– worth of
>>stamps sent to a representative of a European government, which
>>”disappeared” last year!!!Alberta Court Docket# p9890306081.

>>Victims are now getting together to organise a major international
>>campaign.

>>If you have had mail “disappear”, whether ‘lost’ or stolen – SUE
>>THEM!!!

>>Some of the contact names and phone numbers of the big sh*ts
>>at Canada Post include:

>>Alfonso Galiano,MP – Minister for Canada Post – 819-997-5421
>> Jonathan Moser is his gofer – same number

>>Georges Clermont – President of Canada Post – phone 613-734-8440
>> Sebastian Barnard is his gofer – same number

>>Stewart Bacon – VP Canada Post – phone 613-734-8440

>>Also be sure to send copies of your charges to the Deputy Leader of
>>the Opposition in the Canadian Parliament, Deborah Grey, MP.

>>In addition to the foregoing, notify all media in your area to run
>>this story, together with your complaints.

>>Further, foreign postal administrations including USPS are also being
>>contacted. Perhaps they can be convinced, to again place an EMBARGO on
>>mail to and from Canada, until such time as Canada Post can ensure the
>>safety, and reliability of delivery of mail, without it disappearing!!!

On Thu, 09 Jul 1998 05:35:51 GMT, [email protected] wrote:
>Will the US now be able to use the payoff to the bankrupt Canadian
>insurance company, Confederation Life, as the legal precedent to make
>Sherritt pay for the theft of the assets of freeport-McMoran??

>>On Sun, 21 Jun 1998 23:27:39 GMT, [email protected] wrote:

>>>It seems that the payoff to the bankrupt Canuck insurance company, now
>>>sets a legal precedent for Freeport McMoran to collect both from
>>>Sherritt, and the Cuban government in the World Court.

>>>This should create some interesting situations vis a vis the
>>>Canadian/US relations, what???

>>>On Sat, 13 Jun 1998 12:40:12 GMT, [email protected] wrote:

>>>>Cubans, and Canadian taxpayers also, want to know why did Fidel Castro
>>>>give Jean Cretin the C$12 Million, as settlement for Confederation
>>>>Life Insurance??

>>>>Did Fidel not know that Confederation Life had been BANKRUPT FOR MANY
>>>>YEARS??

>>>>Who is actually getting the $12 million – crooks in Canada, or in
>>>>Cuba??

>>>>Do the people at Freeport-McMoran now know about this deal, which will
>>>>now help them when they go to the World Court to collect their
>>>>reparations??

>>>>After all, if there is a precedent for a Canadian firm, this can then
>>>>be used to collect by a US firm!!!!

>>>>It seems that the Cubans got swindled by some Canadian crooks????

>On 8 Jul 1998 14:46:25 GMT, [email protected] (Ricardoag) wrote:

>>Wednesday, July 8, 1998

>>Helms won’t let Sherritt off the hook

>>By PETER MORTON
>>Washington Bureau Chief The Financial Post
>> Sherritt International Corp. and other foreign companies now in Cuba are
>>playing a pivotal role in whether a U.S.-European Union deal on investment on
>>the island will be approved by Congress, industry and government sources say.
>> Senator Jesse Helms, chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, is
>>demanding Toronto-based Sherritt and other companies already swept up by the
>>Helms-Burton law continue to be punished, sources said yesterday.

>> “Sherritt is seen as the poster boy of Helms-Burton and Helms does not want to
>>see Sherritt off the hook,” said one industry source close to the U.S.-EU
>>negotiations.

>> Helms is worried the deal signed by the U.S. and the EU in May would
>>essentially “immunize” Sherritt and others operating on expropriated property
>>since any new penalties imposed by the U.S. would be only on investment in Cuba
>>since then, the source said.

>> “In fact, under the final text of the understanding, a current investor would
>>even retain the right to pass this property to another EU investor who, in
>>turn, could use this stolen property in perpetuity ­ all with the blessing of
>>the U.S. government,” Helms and Benjamin Gilman, chairman of the House
>>Committee on International Relations, said in a June 17 letter to Secretary of
>>State Madeline Albright.

>> Sherritt is the largest single foreign investor in property in Cuba
>>expropriated by President Fidel Castro in 1959. It is mining nickel on property
>>formerly owned by Freeport-McMoRan Inc. of New Orleans.

>> So far, Sherritt is the one of two foreign companies to be swept up in
>>Helms-Burton. Its executives, along with those from an Israeli fruit company,
>>have been barred from entering the U.S. under the Helms-Burton law. No European
>>companies have fallen under Helms-Burton.

>> EU Trade Commissioner Sir Leon Brittan said yesterday there is no chance the
>>deal would be re-negotiated to meet Helms’s concerns.
>> “We’re not agreeable to modifying the agreement,” he said.
>> The EU is waiting for the U.S. Congress to approve the pact, although Brittan
>>said he did not receive any indication on when legislation would even be
>>presented to Congress.

>> The proposed U.S.-EU deal would give President Bill Clinton the right to waive
>>that part of Helms-Burton, called Title III. He has already waived Title IV,
>>the section that would allow U.S. companies and citizens to sue foreign
>>companies for operating on what was once their property in Cuba. There are
>>5,911 U.S.-recognized claims and lawsuits could be expected to reach billions
>>of dollars.

>> The agreement would also enable European companies to invest in Iran and Libya
>>if the EU ensured the two countries’ terrorism campaigns were not being
>>supported.

>> So far, Ottawa has not signed on to the proposed deal, insisting it is still
>>looking into the complex agreement, said Leslie Swartman, a spokeswoman for
>>Trade Minister Sergio Marchi.

>> But Canadian government sources said what happens to Sherritt is a key
>>consideration in whether the federal government would go along with the U.S.-EU
>>agreement, try to negotiate a separate deal with the U.S. or simply stay away.
>> “There is no doubt Sherritt is one consideration,” an official said.
>> The EU agreed not only not to fund any private venture on confiscated property
>>in Cuba nor on confiscated property anywhere in the world, something Helms is
>>looking for, said Robert Muse, a Washington lawyer specializing in Cuba.
>> “Jesse Helms wants to see such an agreement reached,” he said.
>> ricardo a. gonzalez

From [email protected] Sat Oct 17 05:48:04 EDT 1998
Article: 123568 of soc.culture.polish
Path: hub.org!hub.org!fu-berlin.de!cyclone.news.idirect.com!island.idirect.com!news.agtac.net!news.telusplanet.net!news
From: [email protected]
Newsgroups: soc.culture.russian,soc.culture.ukrainian,soc.culture.polish,pl.regionalne.warszawa,soc.culture.baltics,soc.culture.europe
Subject: Jews in the white sex slave trade against Slavic women pt.1
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 20:19:03 GMT
Organization: TELUS Communications Inc.
Lines: 45
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: edtnpx02-port-2.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.russian:95255 soc.culture.ukrainian:42117 soc.culture.polish:123568 pl.regionalne.warszawa:10437 soc.culture.baltics:15663 soc.culture.europe:131587

On Sat, 09 May 1998 04:22:46 GMT, [email protected] (Lenny)
wrote:
>On Fri, 8 May 1998 18:51:08 -0400, Rostyslaw Lewyckyj
> wrote:
>>On Mon, 4 May 1998, irgun1943 wrote:
>
>>> Dear Sir,
>>> I sympathize with people being forced into prostitution.
>>> However, your intent is to promote hatred of israel and the Jewish
>>> people.
>>> No one wants your women. No one needs your women.
>>> They come illegally into Israel.
>>> Why not whore for the Germans? Ukrainians are good at that.
>>> irgun43

>> Despite your professed sympathies, the rest of your statements don’t
>> stand scrutiny. These women are imported illegaly into Israel because
>> there is obviously a demand, market, there for young slavic shikse.
>> There would not be the trafficking, if there were no demand.

>> “They come illegally …” Well it appears that many arrive quite legally
>> on promises/expectations of other work. Others are brought in, imported,
>> illegaly.

>> Israel is a country in which there are no laws prohibiting the buying
>> and selling of human beings as merchandise.
>> Also prostitution is legal in Israel, and although brothels are
>> illegal, this law seems to be more honoured in the breach.
>> The article did not single out Israel, however whereas in other countries
>> these things are at least illegal, that doesn’t appear to be the case
>> in Israel.
>> Your last sentence is definitely a statement intended to promote hatred.

> The jews have a long history in slave trading. They financed and
>promoted the slavery of the negroes, which is now resulting in the
>racial mess we now have in America. *( For info on the jewish
>involvement in the negro slave trade go to the following web site
>http://www.tiac.net/users/lhl/Jews_and_Slavery.html
> Now the jews are turning their hooked noses toward the white Eastern
>European women, it is no wonder , these parasites of humanity abused
>these people under communism now they abuse them sexually. It is the
>nature of these people to destroy, like a parasite destroys it’s host.
> May the white people of the world wake up before it’s too late!

From [email protected] Sat Oct 17 05:48:05 EDT 1998
Article: 123569 of soc.culture.polish
Path: hub.org!hub.org!fu-berlin.de!cyclone.news.idirect.com!island.idirect.com!news.agtac.net!news.telusplanet.net!news
From: [email protected]
Newsgroups: soc.culture.polish
Subject: Re: ZYCLON B SOLD BY JEWISH COMPANY TO NAZIS
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 20:15:14 GMT
Organization: TELUS Communications Inc.
Lines: 28
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: edtnpx02-port-2.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:123569

On Sun, 11 Oct 1998 15:12:58 GMT, [email protected] wrote:

>On 17 Aug 1998 13:13:38 GMT, [email protected] (Kaszubik) wrote:
>
>>>

Subject: ZYCLON B SOLD BY JEWISH COMPANY TO NAZIS
>>>From: [email protected] (Kaszubik)
>>>Date: Sun, Aug 9, 1998 11:51 EDT
>>>Message-id: <[email protected]>
>>>
>>>Hi,
>>>
>>>A little known fact is that a Jewish business in New York City produced
>>>Zyclon
>>>B and sold it to Germany where it sold as a commodity. What this means is
>>>that
>>>we have yet another example of MURDER FOR PROFIT (of their own people!). We
>>>already know who murdered Jesus Christ, that can not be disputed. Let me ask
>>>you: Why are so many Jewish doctors involved with partial-birth abortions?
>>>That
>>>is the new Holocaust on the rest of the world. I know the holocaust took
>>>place,
>>>I don’t doubt that. It is indeed a tragic period in history for us Poles. But
>>>we should ask ourselves: Did the Jews deserve what they got?
>>>
>>>
>>>

>>

From [email protected] Sat Oct 17 05:48:05 EDT 1998
Article: 123570 of soc.culture.polish
Path: hub.org!hub.org!fu-berlin.de!cyclone.news.idirect.com!island.idirect.com!news.agtac.net!news.telusplanet.net!news
From: [email protected]
Newsgroups: soc.culture.polish,soc.culture.ukrainian,soc.culture.baltics,pl.regionalne.warszawa,pl.regionalne.krakow,pl.regionalne.lodz,soc.culture.russian
Subject: If JEWS in Hitler Army – How Many Really Died?
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 20:16:59 GMT
Organization: TELUS Communications Inc.
Lines: 42
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: edtnpx02-port-2.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:123570 soc.culture.ukrainian:42118 soc.culture.baltics:15664 pl.regionalne.warszawa:10438 pl.regionalne.krakow:6608 pl.regionalne.lodz:1871 soc.culture.russian:95256

On Wed, 09 Sep 1998 19:09:41 GMT, [email protected] wrote:
>On Sun, 28 Sep 1997 14:28:22 -0400, PAWLIKOWSKI
> wrote:
>>jacob bekker wrote:
>>> [email protected] wrote:

>>> > One MUST question the alleged figure of the damn JEWS as to how many
>>> > allegedly died in WWII.

>>> Is there no wonder how the dumn Jews have so big influence in the world?

>>> J.B.

>>=================
>>Presence of Jews in Hitler’s army clearly rules out the story of
>>exterminatinon. Being in high places they would know that the story is
>>true and would alert the world through their relatives.

>>They have not done it … little chance that there was Jewish genocide.
>>Moreover, there are no bones of 4,000,000 Jews Nazi did not have the
>>chance to cremate.

>>Why Jews are smart and there is no doubt about it?

>>Jew are the oldest people on earth with practical alphabet. Being so
>>for they became the record keepers and accountants of the world. While
>>Slavic women looked at Slavic mens muscles in order to be sure that he
>>will have the strenght to plow and feed her family Jewish maiden looked
>>in Jewish boys for brains to sustain them.

>>Moreover Catholicizm caused that the smartest boys especially in peasant
>>families became priests and than the genes of smartnes did not
>>reproduced. In Rabbis families was just the opposite, the smartest boy
>>in the shtetle was gettin hand of the smart rabbis daughters.

>>But I do not worry about that. Mere forty years of education given to
>>the Slavs admixed with Jewish apparatus of terror and the Slavs managed
>>to launch Sputnik and man space station Mir.

>>Western Europeans were unable to do it.
>>Pawlikowski

From [email protected] Sat Oct 17 05:48:06 EDT 1998
Article: 123572 of soc.culture.polish
Path: hub.org!hub.org!newsfeed.axxsys.net!news.idt.net!newshub.northeast.verio.net!cyclone.news.idirect.com!island.idirect.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: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 20:12:41 GMT
Organization: TELUS Communications Inc.
Lines: 634
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: edtnpx02-port-2.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:53140 alt.politics.nationalism.white:181132 alt.revisionism:275747 soc.culture.islam:4202 soc.culture.malaysia:196819 soc.culture.australian:78665 soc.culture.polish:123572

On Fri, 16 Oct 1998 07:58:52, [email protected] wrote:

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:

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] Sat Oct 17 05:48:07 EDT 1998
Article: 123573 of soc.culture.polish
Path: hub.org!hub.org!newsfeed.axxsys.net!newsfeed.cwix.com!198.138.0.5!newshub.northeast.verio.net!cyclone.news.idirect.com!island.idirect.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: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 20:13:00 GMT
Organization: TELUS Communications Inc.
Lines: 635
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: edtnpx02-port-2.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:53141 alt.politics.nationalism.white:181133 alt.revisionism:275748 soc.culture.islam:4203 soc.culture.malaysia:196821 soc.culture.australian:78666 soc.culture.polish:123573

On Fri, 16 Oct 1998 16:09:47, [email protected] wrote:

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:

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] Sat Oct 17 05:49:23 EDT 1998
Article: 191175 of aus.politics
Path: hub.org!hub.org!chippy.visi.com!news-out.visi.com!newshub.northeast.verio.net!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: aus.politics,aus.general,soc.culture.australian,soc.culture.palestine,soc.culture.polish,soc.culture.swiss,alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: JEW NAZIS! Backlash!!
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 14:25:43 GMT
Organization: TELUS Communications Inc.
Lines: 216
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: edtnpx08-port-58.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 aus.politics:191175 aus.general:36373 soc.culture.australian:78657 soc.culture.palestine:53132 soc.culture.polish:123526 soc.culture.swiss:27295 alt.revisionism:275321

On Fri, 16 Oct 1998 22:39:09, The Rottnest Quokka
wanted to write:

On Mon, 13 Jul 1998 12:59:56 GMT, [email protected] wrote:

>Since some of the undesirable Jews in Australia have published their
>Libelers List of people they consider undesirable, for supporting ON,
>perhaps ON should do similar??
>
>Surely the angry citizens of Australia can readily prepare their own
>list of undesirable Jews, including such Illuminati as the notorious
>Rappaport, and others of his ilk?? What about drug dealers, white
>collar criminals, and similar criminals?
>
>After all these thousands of years, why would the admittedly
>genetically inbred creatures (according to their own recent
>pronouncements regarding DNA proof for jewishness) want to so
>antagonise a generous host country like Australia?
>
>Is there not enough resentment against the people responsible for the
>murder of Christ?
>
>Did the more than 100 millions killed in the interests of Jew
>communism in this century alone, not create enough enemies, that they
>want to generate more?
>
>Surely their worldwide attempts at extortion of nations has caused
>more ill-will?? Even the Swiss, who had provided shelter, but required
>that the Jews WORK in the 1940’s are now having extortion demands!!!
>
>Or, is their wish to force the world into another conflagration, so
>that by the Year 2000, their New World Order can take over what
>remains of this world?? They are certainly spreading their tentacles
>in many countries, trying to take control…
>
>>>Mr Leibler: you have chosen to gratuitously & viciously persecute
>>>a defenceless minority of Australians – who are innocent of any
>>>wrong-doing – on purely political grounds; by publishing to the
>>>world, their names & residential suburbs in your magazine.
>
>>>In the interests of “balance”, would you now care to publish to the
>>>world, the names & residential suburbs of those Australian residents
>>>& citizens who are bankrolling the “Genocide” of the Palestinian
>>>Nation; with a higher financial contribution per capita, than any
>>>other members of your diaspora, on the Planet.
>
>>>You say you have a deep & abiding concern for “political
>>>transparency”: lets see you really put your publishing skills
>>>where your mouth is…
>
>>>cheers, PJ
>
>>Better yet, publish a list of all those businesses owned or/and
>>controlled by Jews, in Australia, USA, GB, Germany, France and Russia.
>
>>Let the world see who is really controlling world affairs, even before
>>the year 2000!!!
>
>
>
>
>On Sun, 12 Jul 1998 11:12:52 GMT, [email protected] (Harold
>Wood) wrote:
>
>>On Thu, 09 Jul 1998 13:02:46 GMT,
>>[email protected] (David S. Maddison)
>>wrote:
>>Thanks for clarifying where you’re coming from,
>>Harold.
>
>>Have you considered that your estimation here
>>might be incorrect? I estimate that my words
>>probably have given you a false impression
>>however. 🙂
>
>>Here is another angle on my ‘yike’.
>
>>The Australia-Israel Review in their attempting to
>>facilitate the vilification (and worse) of ON
>>members by others (a cowardly act) is in fact
>>attempting to protect the ‘nice little earner’
>>which the ethnic industry (a major part of their
>>consituency) has going in Australia. They
>>recognise that ON is a direct and immediate threat
>>to their continuing their enjoyment of the
>>proceeds of the tax heist perpetrated on pre ON
>>hapless political ‘pincer movement’ entrapped
>>middle income earning Australians by Tweedle
>>Dumb(LibNat) and Tweedle Dumber(LabRat)).
>
>>>Ummm… Was it “The Jews” ™ that published the list or was it a
>>>particular individual who happened to be an editor of a
>>>Jewish-interest magazine?
>
>>Some voices among ‘the Jews’ have now been
>>raised against that action of the Australia-Israel
>>Review. The action of those sensible people must
>>surely be generally appreciated by all. A very
>>wise move by those rightly concerned people
>>indeed.
>
>>>Why blame “The Jews” for the misguided actions of a single individual
>>>who I am fairly certain now realises that he made a mistake?
>
>>Consider my approach a ‘media technique’. One I
>>highly disapprove of but acknowledge the efficacy
>>of. (Yes that does mean I now temporarily
>>subscribe to the principle, ‘the end justifies the
>>means’.)
>
>>>With the widespread opposition to One Nation, I’d say it was equally
>>>likely that any other number of other publications might also have
>>>published it,
>
>>They haven’t.
>
>>> or someone may have posted it to the ‘Net.
>
>>Here of course mostly ‘anything goes’. That
>>theory proves nothing for your agument.
>
>>>It was certainly wrong to publish the list, if such information wasn’t
>>>already on the public record in the first place.
>
>>Yes, wrong but now a help to those who they
>>oppose. Quite stupid are they not! 🙂 I wonder
>>if an IQ test needs to be introduced for all
>>Australian voters?
>
>>> (Is membership of political parties on the public record?)
>
>>No, but you are certainly free to declare one if
>>you please. (I am not currently a member of any
>>party but have belonged in the past to a number.)
>
>>>David Maddison
>
>>Hope that helps. 🙂
>
>>Now, here is another aspect of my ‘yike’.
>
>>The arrogance displayed by Australia’s now
>>prolific ‘ursurper classes’ knows no bounds.
>
>>(In the context this time of the arrogance
>>displayed by the Australia-Israel Review.)
>
>> And nor should that come as any surprise to
>>anyone, that for the reason that the criminal
>>’politically correct screeching brigade’ has long
>>intimidated our good, polite, well meaning and
>>well mannered ‘Australian cultured’ citizens, thus
>>effectively preventing them from speaking out
>>loudly enough about their such gross maltreatment.
>
>>The Australia-Israel Review’s stupid move in
>>publishing those names was undoubtedly a
>>reflection of their verging hysterical panic
>>reaction to the realisation that their
>>constituency’s ‘game’ just might be about to be
>>up! Also it likely was a manifestation of their
>>failure to see that it is actually possible,
>>despite their getting away with it for years, for
>>their instinctual arrogance at some time to get
>>them into very deep and dangerous water indeed.
>
>>Harold.
>
>
>
>On Mon, 13 Jul 1998 17:07:13 +1000, [email protected]>not.awww….
>(Mr.Interesting) wrote:
>
>>In article <[email protected]>,
>>[email protected] (Harold Wood) wrote:
>>
>>> JEWISH NAZIS!
>>>
>>> How dare those cynical pernicious professional
>>> peddlers of guilt, those ‘oonga boonga’ mere
>>
>>
>>Shouldn’t that be “Oingo Boingo”?
>>
>>Doesn’t Hebraic tradition have a saying that goes along the lines of
>>”Be careful who you hate, because you’ll end up being just like them”.
>>
>>They’re behaving like Nazi’s in Palestine (let’s call it by it’s real name
>>shall we, that is unless you STILL believe that the bible isn’t one of the
>>most successful pieces of Politico-Religious Propagandistic Re-writes of
>>the Past AND the Future?…).
>>
>>Funny thing is, the ones who are causing all the troubles, ie the
>>Ultra-Orthodox Right wing and Likud parties, apart from being
>>DOLE-BLUDGERS in Israel, are also CONVENIENTLY EXEMPT from military
>>service, or from facing the bullets and bombs, that they demand their
>>fellow secular countrymen face(some of which, by the way, are planted by
>>Orthodox jews, killing ordinary jews, to stir up a bit more hatred).
>>
>>I find it quite strange that the majority of Israeli’s are secular and
>>want peace, but allow themselves to be kept in a state of terror, NOT by
>>Palestinians, but by OTHER JEWS!. WHO DON’T WORK. WHO DON’T HAVE TO DO
>>MILITARY SERVICE. WHO ASSASSINATED THE PRESIDENT who was going to deliver
>>peace.
>>
>>And while we’re here, Don’t the cries of the UNIONISTS in Ireland, that
>>they need protection from CATHOLIC TERRORISM start to sound a bit hollow
>>now? I think nearly every act of terrorism (inc. Murder) since the
>>referendum has been against Catholics.
>>
>>AAhhhhh…….. Religion, even when it’s the SAME GOD, there’s still
>>enough difference to go out and KKKIIILLLLLL SSOMEONE, and feel good about
>>it.
>>
>>The Pope wears Orange stockings and suspenders.

From [email protected] Sat Oct 17 05:50:00 EDT 1998
Article: 196819 of soc.culture.malaysia
Path: hub.org!hub.org!newsfeed.axxsys.net!news.idt.net!newshub.northeast.verio.net!cyclone.news.idirect.com!island.idirect.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: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 20:12:41 GMT
Organization: TELUS Communications Inc.
Lines: 634
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: edtnpx02-port-2.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:53140 alt.politics.nationalism.white:181132 alt.revisionism:275747 soc.culture.islam:4202 soc.culture.malaysia:196819 soc.culture.australian:78665 soc.culture.polish:123572

On Fri, 16 Oct 1998 07:58:52, [email protected] wrote:

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:

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] Sat Oct 17 05:50:04 EDT 1998
Article: 196821 of soc.culture.malaysia
Path: hub.org!hub.org!newsfeed.axxsys.net!newsfeed.cwix.com!198.138.0.5!newshub.northeast.verio.net!cyclone.news.idirect.com!island.idirect.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: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 20:13:00 GMT
Organization: TELUS Communications Inc.
Lines: 635
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: edtnpx02-port-2.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:53141 alt.politics.nationalism.white:181133 alt.revisionism:275748 soc.culture.islam:4203 soc.culture.malaysia:196821 soc.culture.australian:78666 soc.culture.polish:123573

On Fri, 16 Oct 1998 16:09:47, [email protected] wrote:

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:

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] Sat Oct 17 05:56:41 EDT 1998
Article: 162558 of soc.culture.canada
From: [email protected]
Newsgroups: soc.culture.cuba,soc.culture.usa,soc.culture.canada,can.general
Subject: CANADA LIKES TO SWINDLE CUBA!!!
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 19:58:12 GMT
Organization: TELUS Communications Inc.
Lines: 201
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: edtntnt4-port-160.agt.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 1.5/32.451
Path: hub.org!hub.org!news.gv.tsc.tdk.com!news.iac.net!netnews.com!news.maxwell.syr.edu!cyclone.news.idirect.com!island.idirect.com!news.oanet.com!news.agtac.net!news.telusplanet.net!news
Xref: hub.org soc.culture.cuba:157972 soc.culture.usa:265661 soc.culture.canada:162558 can.general:127981

Subject: Canada Post Managers Can STEAL MAIL!!!
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 17:46:38 GMT

On Tuesday 14 October 1998, a Court in Edmonton Canada confirmed that
Canada Post IS above the law, even above Magna Carta and the Canadian
Bill of Rights.

The Court confirmed, that THEY DO NOT HAVE TO PAY ONE CENT IN
COMPENSATION, even if their managers STEAL or lose a full sack of
mail, being a sack full of computer propgrams being sent to the
Education department of the Government of Cuba!!

Further, that they are immune from any and all lawsuits!!!

No wonder so many people are having their mail, including registered,
STOLEN by managers at Canada Post!!!

Ask your government to consider an EMBARGO against Canada Post, until
they stop stealing mail!!!

Surely the managers in Canada Post are not being paid by the CIA to
steal mail sent to Cuba??

>On Sat, 08 Aug 1998 14:03:13 GMT, [email protected] wrote:
>>Following all the recent news stories about thefts of mail by Canada
>>Post, today (7 August 1998) Canada Post is being sued, in two separate lawsuits!!!

>>The most damaging one relates to the disappearance of AN ENTIRE SACK
>>OF MAIL consisting of approximately 52 pounds of computer programs,
>>worth more than $4,000.– in a PO sealed sack, destined for a
>>foreign government department. (The Education department of the Government of Cuba)
>>The sackful was delivered and sealed on
>>10th June. According to written admissions from Canada Post, it
>>somehow “DISAPPEARED” the same day.Alberta Court Docket #P9890306082.

>> One must wonder whether the CIA have “arranged” to have items for Cuba
>>stolen by Canada Post managers???

>>Mind you, the criminals running Canada Post did not bother to advise
>>the victim for one month, until 9th July!! It is now 2 months, Canada
>>Post say they have no idea how the full mail sack disappeared, and
>>they refuse to pay compensation for their thieves!!!

>>Since normal workers/staff can no longer steal because they are
>>constantly videotaped, one must assume that managers in canada Post
>>are somehow involved in the disappearance.

>>At the same time, another lawsuit was filed against Canada Post, in
>>connection with a “security registered” item, with $3000.– worth of
>>stamps sent to a representative of a European government, which
>>”disappeared” last year!!!Alberta Court Docket# p9890306081.

>>Victims are now getting together to organise a major international
>>campaign.

>>If you have had mail “disappear”, whether ‘lost’ or stolen – SUE
>>THEM!!!

>>Some of the contact names and phone numbers of the big sh*ts
>>at Canada Post include:

>>Alfonso Galiano,MP – Minister for Canada Post – 819-997-5421
>> Jonathan Moser is his gofer – same number

>>Georges Clermont – President of Canada Post – phone 613-734-8440
>> Sebastian Barnard is his gofer – same number

>>Stewart Bacon – VP Canada Post – phone 613-734-8440

>>Also be sure to send copies of your charges to the Deputy Leader of
>>the Opposition in the Canadian Parliament, Deborah Grey, MP.

>>In addition to the foregoing, notify all media in your area to run
>>this story, together with your complaints.

>>Further, foreign postal administrations including USPS are also being
>>contacted. Perhaps they can be convinced, to again place an EMBARGO on
>>mail to and from Canada, until such time as Canada Post can ensure the
>>safety, and reliability of delivery of mail, without it disappearing!!!

On Thu, 09 Jul 1998 05:35:51 GMT, [email protected] wrote:
>Will the US now be able to use the payoff to the bankrupt Canadian
>insurance company, Confederation Life, as the legal precedent to make
>Sherritt pay for the theft of the assets of freeport-McMoran??

>>On Sun, 21 Jun 1998 23:27:39 GMT, [email protected] wrote:

>>>It seems that the payoff to the bankrupt Canuck insurance company, now
>>>sets a legal precedent for Freeport McMoran to collect both from
>>>Sherritt, and the Cuban government in the World Court.

>>>This should create some interesting situations vis a vis the
>>>Canadian/US relations, what???

>>>On Sat, 13 Jun 1998 12:40:12 GMT, [email protected] wrote:

>>>>Cubans, and Canadian taxpayers also, want to know why did Fidel Castro
>>>>give Jean Cretin the C$12 Million, as settlement for Confederation
>>>>Life Insurance??

>>>>Did Fidel not know that Confederation Life had been BANKRUPT FOR MANY
>>>>YEARS??

>>>>Who is actually getting the $12 million – crooks in Canada, or in
>>>>Cuba??

>>>>Do the people at Freeport-McMoran now know about this deal, which will
>>>>now help them when they go to the World Court to collect their
>>>>reparations??

>>>>After all, if there is a precedent for a Canadian firm, this can then
>>>>be used to collect by a US firm!!!!

>>>>It seems that the Cubans got swindled by some Canadian crooks????

>On 8 Jul 1998 14:46:25 GMT, [email protected] (Ricardoag) wrote:

>>Wednesday, July 8, 1998

>>Helms won’t let Sherritt off the hook

>>By PETER MORTON
>>Washington Bureau Chief The Financial Post
>> Sherritt International Corp. and other foreign companies now in Cuba are
>>playing a pivotal role in whether a U.S.-European Union deal on investment on
>>the island will be approved by Congress, industry and government sources say.
>> Senator Jesse Helms, chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, is
>>demanding Toronto-based Sherritt and other companies already swept up by the
>>Helms-Burton law continue to be punished, sources said yesterday.

>> “Sherritt is seen as the poster boy of Helms-Burton and Helms does not want to
>>see Sherritt off the hook,” said one industry source close to the U.S.-EU
>>negotiations.

>> Helms is worried the deal signed by the U.S. and the EU in May would
>>essentially “immunize” Sherritt and others operating on expropriated property
>>since any new penalties imposed by the U.S. would be only on investment in Cuba
>>since then, the source said.

>> “In fact, under the final text of the understanding, a current investor would
>>even retain the right to pass this property to another EU investor who, in
>>turn, could use this stolen property in perpetuity ­ all with the blessing of
>>the U.S. government,” Helms and Benjamin Gilman, chairman of the House
>>Committee on International Relations, said in a June 17 letter to Secretary of
>>State Madeline Albright.

>> Sherritt is the largest single foreign investor in property in Cuba
>>expropriated by President Fidel Castro in 1959. It is mining nickel on property
>>formerly owned by Freeport-McMoRan Inc. of New Orleans.

>> So far, Sherritt is the one of two foreign companies to be swept up in
>>Helms-Burton. Its executives, along with those from an Israeli fruit company,
>>have been barred from entering the U.S. under the Helms-Burton law. No European
>>companies have fallen under Helms-Burton.

>> EU Trade Commissioner Sir Leon Brittan said yesterday there is no chance the
>>deal would be re-negotiated to meet Helms’s concerns.
>> “We’re not agreeable to modifying the agreement,” he said.
>> The EU is waiting for the U.S. Congress to approve the pact, although Brittan
>>said he did not receive any indication on when legislation would even be
>>presented to Congress.

>> The proposed U.S.-EU deal would give President Bill Clinton the right to waive
>>that part of Helms-Burton, called Title III. He has already waived Title IV,
>>the section that would allow U.S. companies and citizens to sue foreign
>>companies for operating on what was once their property in Cuba. There are
>>5,911 U.S.-recognized claims and lawsuits could be expected to reach billions
>>of dollars.

>> The agreement would also enable European companies to invest in Iran and Libya
>>if the EU ensured the two countries’ terrorism campaigns were not being
>>supported.

>> So far, Ottawa has not signed on to the proposed deal, insisting it is still
>>looking into the complex agreement, said Leslie Swartman, a spokeswoman for
>>Trade Minister Sergio Marchi.

>> But Canadian government sources said what happens to Sherritt is a key
>>consideration in whether the federal government would go along with the U.S.-EU
>>agreement, try to negotiate a separate deal with the U.S. or simply stay away.
>> “There is no doubt Sherritt is one consideration,” an official said.
>> The EU agreed not only not to fund any private venture on confiscated property
>>in Cuba nor on confiscated property anywhere in the world, something Helms is
>>looking for, said Robert Muse, a Washington lawyer specializing in Cuba.
>> “Jesse Helms wants to see such an agreement reached,” he said.
>> ricardo a. gonzalez

From [email protected] Sat Oct 17 05:58:26 EDT 1998
Article: 15663 of soc.culture.baltics
Path: hub.org!hub.org!fu-berlin.de!cyclone.news.idirect.com!island.idirect.com!news.agtac.net!news.telusplanet.net!news
From: [email protected]
Newsgroups: soc.culture.russian,soc.culture.ukrainian,soc.culture.polish,pl.regionalne.warszawa,soc.culture.baltics,soc.culture.europe
Subject: Jews in the white sex slave trade against Slavic women pt.1
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 20:19:03 GMT
Organization: TELUS Communications Inc.
Lines: 45
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: edtnpx02-port-2.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.russian:95255 soc.culture.ukrainian:42117 soc.culture.polish:123568 pl.regionalne.warszawa:10437 soc.culture.baltics:15663 soc.culture.europe:131587

On Sat, 09 May 1998 04:22:46 GMT, [email protected] (Lenny)
wrote:
>On Fri, 8 May 1998 18:51:08 -0400, Rostyslaw Lewyckyj
> wrote:
>>On Mon, 4 May 1998, irgun1943 wrote:
>
>>> Dear Sir,
>>> I sympathize with people being forced into prostitution.
>>> However, your intent is to promote hatred of israel and the Jewish
>>> people.
>>> No one wants your women. No one needs your women.
>>> They come illegally into Israel.
>>> Why not whore for the Germans? Ukrainians are good at that.
>>> irgun43

>> Despite your professed sympathies, the rest of your statements don’t
>> stand scrutiny. These women are imported illegaly into Israel because
>> there is obviously a demand, market, there for young slavic shikse.
>> There would not be the trafficking, if there were no demand.

>> “They come illegally …” Well it appears that many arrive quite legally
>> on promises/expectations of other work. Others are brought in, imported,
>> illegaly.

>> Israel is a country in which there are no laws prohibiting the buying
>> and selling of human beings as merchandise.
>> Also prostitution is legal in Israel, and although brothels are
>> illegal, this law seems to be more honoured in the breach.
>> The article did not single out Israel, however whereas in other countries
>> these things are at least illegal, that doesn’t appear to be the case
>> in Israel.
>> Your last sentence is definitely a statement intended to promote hatred.

> The jews have a long history in slave trading. They financed and
>promoted the slavery of the negroes, which is now resulting in the
>racial mess we now have in America. *( For info on the jewish
>involvement in the negro slave trade go to the following web site
>http://www.tiac.net/users/lhl/Jews_and_Slavery.html
> Now the jews are turning their hooked noses toward the white Eastern
>European women, it is no wonder , these parasites of humanity abused
>these people under communism now they abuse them sexually. It is the
>nature of these people to destroy, like a parasite destroys it’s host.
> May the white people of the world wake up before it’s too late!

From [email protected] Sat Oct 17 05:58:26 EDT 1998
Article: 15664 of soc.culture.baltics
Path: hub.org!hub.org!fu-berlin.de!cyclone.news.idirect.com!island.idirect.com!news.agtac.net!news.telusplanet.net!news
From: [email protected]
Newsgroups: soc.culture.polish,soc.culture.ukrainian,soc.culture.baltics,pl.regionalne.warszawa,pl.regionalne.krakow,pl.regionalne.lodz,soc.culture.russian
Subject: If JEWS in Hitler Army – How Many Really Died?
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 20:16:59 GMT
Organization: TELUS Communications Inc.
Lines: 42
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: edtnpx02-port-2.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:123570 soc.culture.ukrainian:42118 soc.culture.baltics:15664 pl.regionalne.warszawa:10438 pl.regionalne.krakow:6608 pl.regionalne.lodz:1871 soc.culture.russian:95256

On Wed, 09 Sep 1998 19:09:41 GMT, [email protected] wrote:
>On Sun, 28 Sep 1997 14:28:22 -0400, PAWLIKOWSKI
> wrote:
>>jacob bekker wrote:
>>> [email protected] wrote:

>>> > One MUST question the alleged figure of the damn JEWS as to how many
>>> > allegedly died in WWII.

>>> Is there no wonder how the dumn Jews have so big influence in the world?

>>> J.B.

>>=================
>>Presence of Jews in Hitler’s army clearly rules out the story of
>>exterminatinon. Being in high places they would know that the story is
>>true and would alert the world through their relatives.

>>They have not done it … little chance that there was Jewish genocide.
>>Moreover, there are no bones of 4,000,000 Jews Nazi did not have the
>>chance to cremate.

>>Why Jews are smart and there is no doubt about it?

>>Jew are the oldest people on earth with practical alphabet. Being so
>>for they became the record keepers and accountants of the world. While
>>Slavic women looked at Slavic mens muscles in order to be sure that he
>>will have the strenght to plow and feed her family Jewish maiden looked
>>in Jewish boys for brains to sustain them.

>>Moreover Catholicizm caused that the smartest boys especially in peasant
>>families became priests and than the genes of smartnes did not
>>reproduced. In Rabbis families was just the opposite, the smartest boy
>>in the shtetle was gettin hand of the smart rabbis daughters.

>>But I do not worry about that. Mere forty years of education given to
>>the Slavs admixed with Jewish apparatus of terror and the Slavs managed
>>to launch Sputnik and man space station Mir.

>>Western Europeans were unable to do it.
>>Pawlikowski

From [email protected] Sat Oct 17 06:02:48 EDT 1998
Article: 127981 of can.general
From: [email protected]
Newsgroups: soc.culture.cuba,soc.culture.usa,soc.culture.canada,can.general
Subject: CANADA LIKES TO SWINDLE CUBA!!!
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 19:58:12 GMT
Organization: TELUS Communications Inc.
Lines: 201
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: edtntnt4-port-160.agt.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 1.5/32.451
Path: hub.org!hub.org!news.gv.tsc.tdk.com!news.iac.net!netnews.com!news.maxwell.syr.edu!cyclone.news.idirect.com!island.idirect.com!news.oanet.com!news.agtac.net!news.telusplanet.net!news
Xref: hub.org soc.culture.cuba:157972 soc.culture.usa:265661 soc.culture.canada:162558 can.general:127981

Subject: Canada Post Managers Can STEAL MAIL!!!
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 17:46:38 GMT

On Tuesday 14 October 1998, a Court in Edmonton Canada confirmed that
Canada Post IS above the law, even above Magna Carta and the Canadian
Bill of Rights.

The Court confirmed, that THEY DO NOT HAVE TO PAY ONE CENT IN
COMPENSATION, even if their managers STEAL or lose a full sack of
mail, being a sack full of computer propgrams being sent to the
Education department of the Government of Cuba!!

Further, that they are immune from any and all lawsuits!!!

No wonder so many people are having their mail, including registered,
STOLEN by managers at Canada Post!!!

Ask your government to consider an EMBARGO against Canada Post, until
they stop stealing mail!!!

Surely the managers in Canada Post are not being paid by the CIA to
steal mail sent to Cuba??

>On Sat, 08 Aug 1998 14:03:13 GMT, [email protected] wrote:
>>Following all the recent news stories about thefts of mail by Canada
>>Post, today (7 August 1998) Canada Post is being sued, in two separate lawsuits!!!

>>The most damaging one relates to the disappearance of AN ENTIRE SACK
>>OF MAIL consisting of approximately 52 pounds of computer programs,
>>worth more than $4,000.– in a PO sealed sack, destined for a
>>foreign government department. (The Education department of the Government of Cuba)
>>The sackful was delivered and sealed on
>>10th June. According to written admissions from Canada Post, it
>>somehow “DISAPPEARED” the same day.Alberta Court Docket #P9890306082.

>> One must wonder whether the CIA have “arranged” to have items for Cuba
>>stolen by Canada Post managers???

>>Mind you, the criminals running Canada Post did not bother to advise
>>the victim for one month, until 9th July!! It is now 2 months, Canada
>>Post say they have no idea how the full mail sack disappeared, and
>>they refuse to pay compensation for their thieves!!!

>>Since normal workers/staff can no longer steal because they are
>>constantly videotaped, one must assume that managers in canada Post
>>are somehow involved in the disappearance.

>>At the same time, another lawsuit was filed against Canada Post, in
>>connection with a “security registered” item, with $3000.– worth of
>>stamps sent to a representative of a European government, which
>>”disappeared” last year!!!Alberta Court Docket# p9890306081.

>>Victims are now getting together to organise a major international
>>campaign.

>>If you have had mail “disappear”, whether ‘lost’ or stolen – SUE
>>THEM!!!

>>Some of the contact names and phone numbers of the big sh*ts
>>at Canada Post include:

>>Alfonso Galiano,MP – Minister for Canada Post – 819-997-5421
>> Jonathan Moser is his gofer – same number

>>Georges Clermont – President of Canada Post – phone 613-734-8440
>> Sebastian Barnard is his gofer – same number

>>Stewart Bacon – VP Canada Post – phone 613-734-8440

>>Also be sure to send copies of your charges to the Deputy Leader of
>>the Opposition in the Canadian Parliament, Deborah Grey, MP.

>>In addition to the foregoing, notify all media in your area to run
>>this story, together with your complaints.

>>Further, foreign postal administrations including USPS are also being
>>contacted. Perhaps they can be convinced, to again place an EMBARGO on
>>mail to and from Canada, until such time as Canada Post can ensure the
>>safety, and reliability of delivery of mail, without it disappearing!!!

On Thu, 09 Jul 1998 05:35:51 GMT, [email protected] wrote:
>Will the US now be able to use the payoff to the bankrupt Canadian
>insurance company, Confederation Life, as the legal precedent to make
>Sherritt pay for the theft of the assets of freeport-McMoran??

>>On Sun, 21 Jun 1998 23:27:39 GMT, [email protected] wrote:

>>>It seems that the payoff to the bankrupt Canuck insurance company, now
>>>sets a legal precedent for Freeport McMoran to collect both from
>>>Sherritt, and the Cuban government in the World Court.

>>>This should create some interesting situations vis a vis the
>>>Canadian/US relations, what???

>>>On Sat, 13 Jun 1998 12:40:12 GMT, [email protected] wrote:

>>>>Cubans, and Canadian taxpayers also, want to know why did Fidel Castro
>>>>give Jean Cretin the C$12 Million, as settlement for Confederation
>>>>Life Insurance??

>>>>Did Fidel not know that Confederation Life had been BANKRUPT FOR MANY
>>>>YEARS??

>>>>Who is actually getting the $12 million – crooks in Canada, or in
>>>>Cuba??

>>>>Do the people at Freeport-McMoran now know about this deal, which will
>>>>now help them when they go to the World Court to collect their
>>>>reparations??

>>>>After all, if there is a precedent for a Canadian firm, this can then
>>>>be used to collect by a US firm!!!!

>>>>It seems that the Cubans got swindled by some Canadian crooks????

>On 8 Jul 1998 14:46:25 GMT, [email protected] (Ricardoag) wrote:

>>Wednesday, July 8, 1998

>>Helms won’t let Sherritt off the hook

>>By PETER MORTON
>>Washington Bureau Chief The Financial Post
>> Sherritt International Corp. and other foreign companies now in Cuba are
>>playing a pivotal role in whether a U.S.-European Union deal on investment on
>>the island will be approved by Congress, industry and government sources say.
>> Senator Jesse Helms, chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, is
>>demanding Toronto-based Sherritt and other companies already swept up by the
>>Helms-Burton law continue to be punished, sources said yesterday.

>> “Sherritt is seen as the poster boy of Helms-Burton and Helms does not want to
>>see Sherritt off the hook,” said one industry source close to the U.S.-EU
>>negotiations.

>> Helms is worried the deal signed by the U.S. and the EU in May would
>>essentially “immunize” Sherritt and others operating on expropriated property
>>since any new penalties imposed by the U.S. would be only on investment in Cuba
>>since then, the source said.

>> “In fact, under the final text of the understanding, a current investor would
>>even retain the right to pass this property to another EU investor who, in
>>turn, could use this stolen property in perpetuity ­ all with the blessing of
>>the U.S. government,” Helms and Benjamin Gilman, chairman of the House
>>Committee on International Relations, said in a June 17 letter to Secretary of
>>State Madeline Albright.

>> Sherritt is the largest single foreign investor in property in Cuba
>>expropriated by President Fidel Castro in 1959. It is mining nickel on property
>>formerly owned by Freeport-McMoRan Inc. of New Orleans.

>> So far, Sherritt is the one of two foreign companies to be swept up in
>>Helms-Burton. Its executives, along with those from an Israeli fruit company,
>>have been barred from entering the U.S. under the Helms-Burton law. No European
>>companies have fallen under Helms-Burton.

>> EU Trade Commissioner Sir Leon Brittan said yesterday there is no chance the
>>deal would be re-negotiated to meet Helms’s concerns.
>> “We’re not agreeable to modifying the agreement,” he said.
>> The EU is waiting for the U.S. Congress to approve the pact, although Brittan
>>said he did not receive any indication on when legislation would even be
>>presented to Congress.

>> The proposed U.S.-EU deal would give President Bill Clinton the right to waive
>>that part of Helms-Burton, called Title III. He has already waived Title IV,
>>the section that would allow U.S. companies and citizens to sue foreign
>>companies for operating on what was once their property in Cuba. There are
>>5,911 U.S.-recognized claims and lawsuits could be expected to reach billions
>>of dollars.

>> The agreement would also enable European companies to invest in Iran and Libya
>>if the EU ensured the two countries’ terrorism campaigns were not being
>>supported.

>> So far, Ottawa has not signed on to the proposed deal, insisting it is still
>>looking into the complex agreement, said Leslie Swartman, a spokeswoman for
>>Trade Minister Sergio Marchi.

>> But Canadian government sources said what happens to Sherritt is a key
>>consideration in whether the federal government would go along with the U.S.-EU
>>agreement, try to negotiate a separate deal with the U.S. or simply stay away.
>> “There is no doubt Sherritt is one consideration,” an official said.
>> The EU agreed not only not to fund any private venture on confiscated property
>>in Cuba nor on confiscated property anywhere in the world, something Helms is
>>looking for, said Robert Muse, a Washington lawyer specializing in Cuba.
>> “Jesse Helms wants to see such an agreement reached,” he said.
>> ricardo a. gonzalez

From [email protected] Sat Oct 17 19:03:18 EDT 1998
Article: 279636 of alt.revisionism
Path: hub.org!hub.org!news-fra.maz.net!newsfeed.ecrc.net!cyclone.news.idirect.com!island.idirect.com!nntp.cadvision.com!news.agtac.net!news.telusplanet.net!news
From: [email protected]
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism,alt.politics.nationalism.white,alt.politics.white-power,alt.conspiracy
Subject: Re: Ken McVay’s Obvious Homosexual Apologia & Assaults Against Free Speech aka More questions that Poor Clueless Georg won’t understand
Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 14:02:24 GMT
Organization: TELUS Communications Inc.
Lines: 209
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: edtnpx06-port-62.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 alt.revisionism:279636 alt.politics.nationalism.white:185221 alt.politics.white-power:220010 alt.conspiracy:331661

On Wed, 30 Sep 1998 12:31:20 GMT, [email protected] (Perry
White) wrote:

>X-NO-ARCHIVE: YES
>In article ,
>[email protected] says…
>>
>>In article <[email protected]>, Scott “beat you to a
>>bloody pulp” Bradbury, hiding behind his “Billy Bob Throckmorton” sock
>>puppet, wrote:
>
>>>Gort McFee commented:
>>>>>>Gee, I don’t see Ken defending homosexuality there, Doc-Scott. He
>>>>>>seems to be defending tolerance. Is that what has your knickers in a
>>>>>>knot?
>
>>>What does the word “homophobe” make reference to then?
>
>>It makes reference to a person who fears homosexuals — you, for instance.
>>
>>Where in the passage cited, O Gutless One, does Ken McVay make any
>>reference to homosexual sex? And if he doesn’t refer to it, how, exactly,
>>can he be defending it? We’re _still_ waiting for the answers to those
>>questions…
>
>He does not have to mention homosexual sex in order to defend it. I
>never said that he mentioned homosexual sex. This is your ruse to
>divert attention that Gay McVay urges tolerance toward a “community”
>that engages in such practices. If you want tolerance for a group of
>people that practice such then you would also tolerate their acts
>would you not? If it weren’t for their practices then the subject of
>tolerance wouldn’t be an issue would it? What is so hard about this
>concept?
>It is about the same as people that say they are pro-choice; they
>avoid saying they are pro-abortion but they approve of the practice.
>You liberals are the ones that like to play tricks with meanings of
>words. I have no doubt in my mind that you, McVay and the rest of your
>ilk approve of the homosexual community and their activity! Care to
>deny this now?
>
>>> […deletia…]
>
>Quit deleting the original text if you wish to make argument.
>Here is McVay unedited:
>
>http://x12.dejanews.com/getdoc.xp?AN=365864512
>Subject: Dear Nizkor….
>From: [email protected] (Kenneth McVay OBC)
>Date: 1998/06/25
>Message-ID: <[email protected]>
>
>[Notice that the Nizkooks in their apologia for homosexual acts seek
>to make homos into heroes! Notice also they totally deleted Goldberg’s
>original questions as well.
>Here is the link to Goldberg’s post that all these homo-apologist seek
>to avoid: http://x9.dejanews.com/getdoc.xp?AN=365721680
>7/1/98 Tavish]
>
>In article <[email protected]>,
>Electric Zen wrote:
>
>[deranged bonehead displays homophobia, Ken Lewis responds]
>
>Notice how another ‘revisionist’, unable to support his arguments with
>facts, resorts to teenaged sexual comments. Were all of you maroons
>cloned from the same defective brain cell?
>
>That would certainly explain why they don’t have more than a single
>functioning neuron between them, would it not?
>
>This discussion reminds me – Saturday, June 28, is Pride Day. There
>will be a massive parade in Toronto and other cities. Folks who would
>like to stand up and be counted for tolerance should attend. Last
>year, about a million spectators lined the Toronto route.
>
>(The Phelps Clan should probably stay home – they don’t know the
>meaning of tolerance.)
>
>A sobering reminder: During the past ten years, one half of Canada’s
>arts community has died of AIDS. _Half_ – Dancers, actors, artists of
>all sorts. Such a loss cannot help but have a devastating impact upon
>our cultural life, and homophobic cheap shots don’t remove this very
>sad reality.
>
>”Revisionist” my Aunt Tildy. These twits wouldn’t know a revisionist
>if he bit them in their nether regions.
>
>The Nizkor Project———————–https://nizkor.org
>Ken McVay, Director. https://nizkor.org/~kmcvay
>
> ———-END———-
>
>>>>Where in the passage above, O Gutless One, does Ken McVay make any
>>>>reference to homosexual sex? (That _is_ the ‘what they do’ you’re
>>>>referring to, isn’t it?) And if he doesn’t refer to it, how, exactly, can
>>>>he be defending it?
>
>I answered the stupid questions above the requoting of Ken McVay’s
>obvious apologia for homosexuals and the acts that get them termed as
>homosexuals.
>
>>>How is AIDS spread and why did McVay use the word “homophobe?”
>
>>Notice that Poor Ol’ Gutless Scottie still hasn’t explained where in the
>>referenced passage Ken McVay refers to homosexual sex, nor how Mr. McVay
>>can be ‘defending’ something he didn’t mention.
>
>It has been explained repeatedly and the lurkers have gotten the
>point. It is you that seeks to do damage control and diversion. Won’t
>work!
>
>>> […deletia…]
>>
>>>Notice that half have died of AIDS and the word homophobic used?
>
>>Notice that Poor Ol’ Gutless Scottie still hasn’t explained where in the
>>referenced passage Ken McVay refers to homosexual sex, nor how Mr. McVay
>>can be ‘defending’ something he didn’t mention.
>
>Where was it ever claimed that Ken McVay mentioned homosexual sex? I
>made no such claim. It is you making the claim that I made the claim!
>I have maintained that he makes apologia for a “community” that
>obviously engages in such acts. They aren’t called homosexuals for any
>other reason Georg and you look extremely agenda concious and stupid
>to keep up this current ruse!
>
>>> […deletia…]
>>
>>>>>If Gay McVay
>>>>>believes so much in tolerance then why doesn’t he appreciate the right
>>>>>to free speech and stop showing intolerance toward others.
>>>>>Ernst Zundel for instance.
>
>>>>When and where, exactly, has Ken McVay stated that Ernst Zundel should
>>>>not have the right of free speech?
>
>>>His group snipes at Zundel and others like him all the time.
>
>>When and where, exactly, has Ken McVay stated that Ernst Zundel should not
>>have the right of free speech?
>
>Any attention paid to McVay’s activities and his allegiance to B’Nai
>B’rith will show how he aggresively seeks to silence the opposition
>using what he calls “hate speech” laws existent in Canada.
>
>Just use the following key words at DejaNews:
>ZUNDEL McVAY FREE SPEECH and you will see much!
>or do a search on GROSVENOR McVAY FREE SPEECH
>and you will find such gems as:
>
>
>http://x10.dejanews.com/getdoc.xp?AN=315519835
>Subject: Re: Free Speech
>From: [email protected] (Kenneth McVay OBC)
>Date: 1998/01/13
>
>In article <[email protected]>,
>Sheila Paterson wrote:
>
>[snip]
>
>>Everyone has the right to free speech no matter how obnoxious,
>>offensive, fascist or boring. What one doesn’t have is the right to
>>keep someone from speaking.
>
>Although many here would argue the point, the statements above are not
>correct for Canada, which does not have the protection of the American
>First Amendment.
>
>In short, in accordance with recent Supreme Court of Canada findings,
>there are acceptable abridgments to Canadian Charter rights to free
>speech.
>
><>
>
> —–END OF ARTICLE——
>
>http://x7.dejanews.com/getdoc.xp?AN=342508652
>
>http://x3.dejanews.com/getdoc.xp?AN=340569637
>Subject: Supreme Court upholds defamatory libel law
>From: [email protected] (Kenneth McVay OBC)
>
>>>You just don’t pay attention. They want Zundel in prison for mere words!
>
>>Note that Poor Ol’ Gutless Scottie is repeating his non-answer.
>>
>>When and where has Nizkor stated they ‘want Zundel in prison’, O Gutless >One?
>
>http://x4.dejanews.com/getdoc.xp?AN=157567242
>Subject: Ernst Zundel, threat to Canada’s national security?
>From: [email protected] (Ken McVay OBC)
>
>>McVay on CBC:
>>”I did at that time approve [of] Canadian actions against Zundel against
>>Keegstra, ah it was sort of a gut reaction because they offended me so
>>deeply I said good shut them up put them in jail do what ever it takes,
>>…no free speech.”
>
> ……………………………………………………
>
>Care to deny the above now Georg? DejaNews is filled with such!
>I’ll bet that you really approve of Socialist Canada’s “free speech”
>too.
>
> Billy Bob
>
>>JGB

From [email protected] Sat Oct 17 19:09:06 EDT 1998
Article: 162626 of soc.culture.canada
From: [email protected]
Newsgroups: soc.culture.australian,soc.culture,soc.culture.canada,soc.culture.usa,soc.culture.germany,soc.cultrue.france,soc.culture.english,soc.culture.polish,soc.culture.russian
Subject: Hitler’s Jewish Army
Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 14:02:41 GMT
Organization: TELUS Communications Inc.
Lines: 67
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: edtnpx06-port-62.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!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.australian:78745 soc.culture.canada:162626 soc.culture.usa:265882 soc.culture.polish:123715 soc.culture.russian:95359

On Sat, 19 Sep 1998 22:15:24 +1000, observor
wrote:

>Hitler’s Jewish Army
>
>”Not every victim was a Jew but every Jew was a victim.” –Elie Wiesel
>speaking of World War Two.
>
>”If there were Jews in (Hitler’s) armed forces…who served knowing what
>was going on and made no attempt to save (lives),
>well then that is unacceptable and dishonorable.” –Rabbi Marvin Hier,
>director of the Simon Wiesenthal Institute.
>
>Thousands of men of Jewish descent and hundreds of what the Nazis called
>’full Jews’ served in the German military with Adolf
>Hitler’s knowledge and approval.
>
>Cambridge University researcher Bryan Rigg has traced the Jewish
>ancestry of more than 1,200 of Hitler’s soldiers, including
>two field marshals and fifteen generals (two full generals, eight
>lieutenant generals, five major generals), “men commanding up to
>100,000 troops.”
>
>In approximately 20 cases, Jewish soldiers in the Nazi army were awarded
>Germany’s highest military honor, the Knight’s
>Cross.
>
>One of these Jewish veterans is today an 82 year old resident of
>northern Germany, an observant Jew who served as a captain
>and practiced his religion within the Wehrmacht throughout the war.
>
>One of the Jewish field marshals was Erhard Milch, deputy to Luftwaffe
>Chief Hermann Goering. Rumors of Milch’s Jewish
>identity circulated widely in Germany in the 1930s.
>
>In one of the famous anecdotes of the time, Goering falsified Milch’s
>birth record and when met with protests about having a
>Jew in the Nazi high command, Goering replied, “I decide who is a Jew
>and who is an Aryan.”
>
>Rigg’s research also shed light on stories surrounding the rescue by
>German soldiers of the Lubavitcher grand rabbi of that time,
>who was in Warsaw when the war broke out in 1939.
>
>Joseph Isaac Schneerson was spirited to safety after an appeal to
>Germany from the United States. Schneerson was assisted
>by a German officer Rigg has identified as the highly decorated Maj.
>Ernst Bloch, whose father was a Jew.
>
>Jews also served in the Nazi police and security forces as ghetto police
>(Ordnungdienst) and concentration camp guards
>(kapos).
>
>So what happens to the claim that Hitler sought to exterminate all Jews,
>when he allowed some of them to join in his struggle
>against Bolshevism and International finance capitalism?
>
>Sources:
>
>William D. Montalbano, “The Jews in Hitler’s Military,” Los Angeles
>Times, Dec. 24, 1996.
>
>Tom Tugend, “Grad student uncovers Jews who fought for Adolf Hitler,”
>Jewish Telegraph Agency, Dec. 26, 1996.
>
>Lenni Brenner, Zionism in the Age of the Dictators.

From [email protected] Sat Oct 17 19:11:36 EDT 1998
Article: 89352 of soc.culture.german
Path: hub.org!hub.org!chippy.visi.com!news-out.visi.com!newshub.northeast.verio.net!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.ukrainian,soc.culture.australia,aus.general,soc.culture.german,soc.culture.europe
Subject: Re: jew jokes
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 14:24:31 GMT
Organization: TELUS Communications Inc.
Lines: 259
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: edtnpx08-port-58.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:123529 soc.culture.ukrainian:42108 soc.culture.australia:12372 aus.general:36374 soc.culture.german:89352 soc.culture.europe:131545

On Tue, 13 Oct 1998 01:09:47 +0200, “Rob” wrote:

>siedzialem na dembie i dlobalem w zebie
>a ludziska glopie
>myslaly ze ze w d…….
>
>kaczki tez
>
>kochajmy sie baranie

On 13 Oct 1998 03:36:24 GMT,(Kenneth McVay SOBC) wrote:

On Sun, 11 Oct 1998 19:00:36 -0400, wrote:
>Hey Warr,

>Get some new material. Fran Dresher you aint. Henny Youngman could do better
>sleepwalking.

On Sat, 10 Oct 1998 21:00:54 +0200, “Rob” wrote:

>You are right!!!

On 10 Oct 1998 18:46:42 GMT, (Kenneth McVay SOBC) wrote:

JEWISH JOKES

How was copper wiring invented?
Two Jews fighting over a penny!

How is Christmas celebrated in a Jewish home?
They put parking meters on the roof!

Why is money green?
Because Jews pick it before it’s ripe!

What candy did Hitler hate more then any other?
Jew Jew Beans… Although I heard he enjoyed them “roasted!”

If Tarzan and Jane were Jewish, what would Cheetah be?
A fur coat!

Why don’t Jews eat pork?
They may be a lot of things, but CANNIBALS they’re not!

Why aren’t Jews attacked by sharks?
Professional courtesy!

Do you know how to keep Jews out of a country club?
Let one in, and he’ll keep the rest out.

What’s the Jewish version of foreplay?
Half an hour of begging.

How can you tell the mother-in-law at a Jewish wedding?
She’s the one on her hands and knees picking up the rice!

Did you hear about the new tires, Firestein?
They not only stop on a dime, they also pick it up!

What’s the difference between a circumcision and crucifixion?
In a crucifixion, they throw the whole Jew out!

Why did the Jews wander in the desert for 40 years?
Someone dropped a quarter!

Why do Jews have such big noses?
Because air is free.

What did the Jewish mother ask her daughter when she learned she had
an
affair?
Who catered it?

What happens when a Jew with an erection walks into a wall?
He breaks his nose.

What’s a Jewish dilemma?
Free ham.

What’s the difference between a Jewish bitch and a barracuda?
Nail polish.

What’s the difference between an elephant and a Jew?
An elephant eventually forgets.

A nigger was walking down the street, kicking some rubbish out of his
way,
when he spotted something amid the trash that gleamed
strangely. It urned out to be an oddly shaped bottle, and when he
rubbed it, a
Jewish genie appeared. “I’ll give you two wishes,” quipped
the genie. “Far out,” said the black man. “First, I want to be white,
uptight,
and out of sight!” Second, I want to be surrounded by warm,
sweet pussy. So the genie turned him into a TAMPON! The moral of this
story:
You can’t get anything from a Jew without strings
attached!

How do you stop a Jewish girl from fucking you?
Marry her!

Why do jewish bitches only sleep with circumcised men?
They want 20% off everything!

What’s the difference between between karate and judo?
Karate is a form of self-defense, and judo is what bagels are made of.

Did you hear that the limbo was invented by the Jews?
Yeah, from sneaking into pay toilets.

What’s the definition of a queer Jew?
Someone that likes girls more then money.

What do you call ten Jewish bitches in a basement?
A WHINE cellar.

Why did the Jewish mother have herself entombed at Bloomingdales?
So her daughter would visit at least twice a week.

What’s the difference between a vulture and a Jew?
A vulture waits until you’re dead to eat your heart out!

—–== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion
==—–
http://www.dejanews.com/ Now offering spam-free web-based
newsreading

On Fri, 9 Oct 1998 17:06:02 -0700, “WaRR”
wrote:

>what do you get when you cross a jewish women and an arab women??
>oil of no lay!!

>=what is the difference between karate and judo?
>karate is the art of self-defense, and judo is what bagels are made of.

>=i knew a jewish woman once who thought the apostle’s creed was
>what fought rocky balboa.

>=what’s the difference between a jewish british princess and a toilet?
>a toilet doesn’t follow you around for 9 months after you use it.

>=did you hear that al italia and el al were merging to form a new airline?
>it’s called well i’ll tell ya.=what do you call a jewish woman’s waterbed?
>the dead sea. second prize: lake placid.

>=how was copper wire invented?
> by 2 jews fighting over a penny.

>=why are jewish men circumcised?
> because jewish women won’t buy anything unless it’s 20% off.

>=what do you call an uncircumcised jewish baby?
>a girl.

>=what do you get when you cross a jewish british princess & a computer?
>a computer that never goes down on you.
>=what’s a jewish british princess’ favorite wine?
> i wanna go to palmsprings.
>=how do you know a jewish british princess has an orgasm?
>she drops her nail file.

>=what do you have when you get 3 jewish british princesses together
>with 3 other women who have yeast infections?a whine and cheese party.
>=how many jewish british princesses does it take to screw in a lightbulb?
>two, one to get a diet coke and one to call daddy.

>=why do jewish girls like prostitution?
>because they can sell it again and again and again.

>=what’s the difference between a jewish british princess and jello?
>jello moves when you eat it.

>=how does a jewish british princess do it doggie style?
>she makes him beg for an hour.

>=what’s the difference between a jewish british princess and a catholic
>british princess?
>the catholic british princess has fake jewelry and real orgasms.

>=what’s the difference between jews and canoes?
>canoes tip. ( THIS ONE FREAKS ME OUT :)))))

>=what’s the difference between jews and pizzas?
>pizzas don’t scream when you put them in the oven.

>=what is a jewish dilemma?
>free ham.

>=what do you call a jewish piano?
>a cash register.

>=how many jews does it take to change a light bulb?
>none. they are used to sitting in the dark.

>=did you hear about the rabbi who did free circumcisions?
>he only took tips.

>=how many jews can you fit in a vw?
>two in the front, two in the back, and ten thousand in the ash tray.

>=a priest, a baptist minister, and a rabbi were asked how they would
>divide up some gold coins between themselves and god. the priest
>replied, “i’d draw a line down the middle of the room, throw the
>coins in the air, and whatever landed on one side goes to god,
>the other to me.” the minister replied, “i’d draw a circle in
>the middle of the room, and whatever lands inside is for god,
>outside for me.” the rabbi’s answer was, he wouldn’t draw any
>line, just throw the money in the air and whatever god caughthe could keep.

>=an italian, a jew, and a homosexual were walking down the street and
>were hit by the same bolt of lightning. next thing they know they’re
>in front of st. peter begging for a second chance. “ok,” he says,
>”but on one condition: you must give up that which you love the most.
>if you don’t, you go straight to hell.” after agreeing, they find
>themselves back on the street and they start walking again. a few
>blocks down they pass a pizza store. “i can’t help myself!” says the
>italian… he goes in, takes a bite of pizza, and poof!, he
>disappears. so the jew and the homosexual continue walking
>down the street. the jew sees a penny on the sidewalk. “i can’t
>help myself!” he says. he reaches for the penny and poof! the
>homosexual disappears.

>yours truly

>WaRR
-88-

From [email protected] Sat Oct 17 19:12:51 EDT 1998
Article: 123711 of soc.culture.polish
Path: hub.org!hub.org!news.maxwell.syr.edu!cyclone.news.idirect.com!island.idirect.com!news.agtac.net!news.telusplanet.net!news
From: [email protected]
Newsgroups: soc.culture.malaysia,soc.culture.indonesia,soc.culture.palestine,soc.culture.arabic,soc.culture.polish,soc.culture.russian,soc.culture.swiss,pl.regionalne.warszawa
Subject: JEWS = NAZIS
Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 14:02:32 GMT
Organization: TELUS Communications Inc.
Lines: 187
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: edtnpx06-port-62.agt.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 1.5/32.451
Xref: hub.org soc.culture.malaysia:197208 soc.culture.indonesia:121566 soc.culture.palestine:53189 soc.culture.arabic:36492 soc.culture.polish:123711 soc.culture.russian:95357 soc.culture.swiss:27371 pl.regionalne.warszawa:10466

On Tue, 11 Aug 1998 02:24:52 GMT, [email protected] wrote:

>On 21 Apr 1998 14:33:08 GMT, “jjjjjjjjjj” wrote:
>
>>It is a well known fact that at the beginning there were many jewish groups
>>that supported the rise of the Nazis in Germany.
>
>In fact, many JEWS became senior officers in the German Military!!!
>
>
>>This was because the
>>Rabbinical authorities were afraid of Jews who were marrying with Germans
>>and thus diluting the ‘purity’ of the Jewish race. This is a fact that has
>>hardly been touched upon by most Jewish sympathisers and contemporary
>>historians,with the exception of a handful of Jewish intellectuals like
>>Noam Chomsky and Israel Shahak.
>>The sad fact is that Zionism shares much more in common with Nazism than
>>most people think:
>>Both Zionists and Nazis believe in the theory of racial/communal supremacy
>>Both are believers in racial/communal exclusivism
>>Both are exclusive ideologies that are intolerant of Others
>>Both are prepared to use violence to achieve their goals and both are
>>prepared to justify that use of violence
>>Both ideologies ultimately cater to the needs of their own specific and
>>exclusive constituencies- thus what happens to others is of little interest
>>to them.

>From [email protected] Sun Jan 25 17:14:46 1998

Based on previous post from DejaNews archives:

http://x1.dejanews.com/getdoc.xp?AN=315100303&CONTEXT=885769316.1533018197&hitnum=0

On 11 Jan 1998 04:22:13 GMT, [email protected] (BillBrtn) wrote:

>> Adolf Hitler had some Jews in his inner circle

http://www.viamall.com/ihf/653.html

This is the extraordinary story of Henry (Heinz) von Javorsky, a man
who has survived and thrived in many lands and under many regimes
because of his skill with a camera. In Nazi Germany he was able to
make a living–and live–despite having a Jewish grandmother, because
he was a specialist in aerial photography–

>>: Jews that had Iron Crosses and/or had proven their
>>loyalty to Germany were not harassed by the Gestapo, the SS or the SA.

You need to read about the Hindenburg exemption in Lucy Dawidowicz’s
book The War Against The Jews.

Lucy S. Dawidowicz’s book titled THE WAR AGAINST THE JEWS1933-1945 by
Bantam Books Incorporated [#13084-6, 1979 ed].

* April 7, 1933 Hitler’s letter to Hindenburg gave exemptions to
the “Jewish Problem.” “Officials who were already employed as civil
servants on or before August 1, 1914, or who during the World War,
fought at the front for Germany or her allies, or whose fathers or
sons were killed in action in the World War.” (pg 77)
* [“Starting May 4, 1942, the Jews from Germany, Luxembourg, Vienna,
and Prague would be deported, except for the employed among them
and the holders of the Iron Cross or other World War I decorations.
Hitherto, those Jews as a group had been exempt from the
deportations.”]

____________________________

Or how about this?

Hitler’s Jewish Army

“Not every victim was a Jew but every Jew was a victim.” –Elie Wiesel
speaking of World War Two.

“If there were Jews in (Hitler’s) armed forces…who served knowing
what was going on and made no attempt to save (lives), well then that
is unacceptable and dishonorable.” –Rabbi Marvin Hier, director of
the Simon Wiesenthal Institute.

Thousands of men of Jewish descent and hundreds of what the Nazis
called ‘full Jews’ served in the German military with Adolf Hitler’s
knowledge and approval.

Cambridge University researcher Bryan Rigg has traced the Jewish
ancestry of more than 1,200 of Hitler’s soldiers, including two field
marshals and fifteen generals (two full generals, eight lieutenant
generals, five major generals), “men commanding up to 100,000 troops.”

[ http://infoukes.com/lists/history/1997/08/0004.html ]

In approximately 20 cases, Jewish soldiers in the Nazi army were
awarded Germany’s highest military honor, the Knight’s Cross.

One of these Jewish veterans is today an 82 year old resident of
northern Germany, an observant Jew who served as a captain and
practiced his religion within the Wehrmacht throughout the war.

One of the Jewish field marshals was Erhard Milch, deputy to Luftwaffe
Chief Hermann Goering. Rumors of Milch’s Jewish identity circulated
widely in Germany in the 1930s.

In one of the famous anecdotes of the time, Goering falsified Milch’s
birth record and when met with protests about having a Jew in the Nazi
high command, Goering replied, “I decide who is a Jew and who is an
Aryan.”

Rigg’s research also shed light on stories surrounding the rescue by
German soldiers of the Lubavitcher grand rabbi of that time, who was
in Warsaw when the war broke out in 1939.

Joseph Isaac Schneerson was spirited to safety after an appeal to
Germany from the United States. Schneerson was assisted by a German
officer Rigg has identified as the highly decorated Maj. Ernst Bloch,
whose father was a Jew.

Jews also served in the Nazi police and security forces as ghetto
police (Ordnungdienst) and concentration camp guards (kapos).

So what happens to the claim that Hitler sought to exterminate all
Jews, when he allowed some of them to join in his struggle against
Bolshevism and International finance capitalism?

Sources:

William D. Montalbano, “The Jews in Hitler’s Military,” Los Angeles
Times, Dec. 24, 1996.

Tom Tugend, “Grad student uncovers Jews who fought for Adolf Hitler,”
Jewish Telegraph Agency, Dec. 26, 1996.

Lenni Brenner, Zionism in the Age of the Dictators.
http://www.abbc.com/aaargh/engl/zad/zad13.html

Article ” Hitler’s Jewish Army” from:
http://www.hoffman-info.com/jewishnazi.html

———————————-

http://www.seattletimes.com/extra/browse/html97/altnazi_040397.html

Copyright © 1997 The Seattle Times Company

Thursday, April 3, 1997

Hitler let `Aryanized’ Jews serve in Nazi armed forces

by Reuters

BONN – Adolf Hitler personally allowed at least 77 army officers of
Jewish descent, including 25 generals, to fight for the Nazi cause in
the German Wehrmacht during World War II, an American historian said
yesterday…… [Click the above link to see all of the story.]

See also:

http://www.seattletimes.com/extra/browse/html/holo_122696.html

Copyright © 1996 The Seattle Times Company

Dec. 26, 1996

An eerie part of Holocaust history: Researcher talks to Jews who
served in Nazi army

by William D. Montalbano
Los Angeles Times

LONDON – Sustained by scholarship, peanut butter and a sense of
mission, Bryan Rigg is exploring an eerie and uncharted no man’s land
of Holocaust history.

Rigg interviews former German soldiers of Jewish heritage, some of
them high-ranking officers, who fought for Nazi Germany in World War
II – during the Holocaust, when Germans killed 6 million Jews.

“Thousands of men of Jewish descent and hundreds of what the Nazis
called `full Jews’ served in the military with Adolf Hitler’s
knowledge. The Nazis allowed these men to serve but at the same time
exterminated their families,” Rigg said. [Click link above to read the
whole story.]

http://infoukes.com/lists/history/1997/08/0004.html
sven88

From [email protected] Sat Oct 17 19:12:51 EDT 1998
Article: 123712 of soc.culture.polish
Path: hub.org!hub.org!news.maxwell.syr.edu!cyclone.news.idirect.com!island.idirect.com!news.agtac.net!news.telusplanet.net!news
From: [email protected]
Newsgroups: soc.culture.polish,soc.culture.russian,soc.culture.malaysia,soc.culture.palestine,soc.culture.swiss,soc.culture.lebanon
Subject: INTERPOL wants Jew war criminal.
Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 14:02:22 GMT
Organization: TELUS Communications Inc.
Lines: 51
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: edtnpx06-port-62.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:123712 soc.culture.russian:95358 soc.culture.malaysia:197209 soc.culture.palestine:53190 soc.culture.swiss:27372 soc.culture.lebanon:60861

On Wed, 12 Aug 1998 16:13:12 GMT, [email protected] wrote:

>On 02 May 1998 16:44:09 GMT, [email protected] (Pan Janusz) wrote:
>
>>Translated from Polish:
>
>>Reprinted from “Polish Weekly” published in Australia.
>
>>Office of the Provincial Prosecutor in Katowice issued the extradition papers
>>for war criminal Samuel Morel. Polish authorities will ask authorities in
>>Israel to extradite Morel.
>>Morel is accused of “cruel treatment and tortures of prisoners and jeopardizing
>>their safety and health.” Using common language, between years 1945-1950 he was
>>beating prisoners, torturing and killing them.
>
>>Morel was born in 1919, from 1940 was a member of Jewish band which was
>>assaulting Polish villages in province of Kielce and robbing Polish farmers. In
>>December of 1942 during one of their assaults the band was destroyed by a
>>detachment of People’s Army ( communist guerillas in nazi occupied Poland).
>>Father and brother of Morel were executed, he alone became a member of the
>>People’s Army. He defected from the group when Red Army was inching toward
>>province of Kielce and became a member of Soviet guerillas.
>>Soon he became an officer of UB (communist Security Office in Soviet occupied
>>Poland).
>>In the beginning of 1945 he was sent to the region of Silesia and received the
>>nomination on the camp commandant for Germans in Swietochlowice.
>> About his crime committed in this camp wrote, among others, an American
>>journalist John Sack in his book “Eye for an eye” ( for this book John Sack who
>>is a Jew was decalred an antisemite).
>>In the end of December of 1945 Morel had been transferred and became a warden
>>of the UB prison in Opole. There he tortured Poles and Germans. He also
>>tortured minors in the labor camp in Jaworzno which he was a commandant between
>>1946-1950. He was fired from this post, for mortality among prisoners was too
>>big.
>
>>In 1991 he was interviewed by a prosecutor, panicked and fled to Israel.
>>After spending all his money, within few months he returned to Poland, but soon
>>he surfaced in Sweden where he demanded political asylum argumenting that he
>>was persecuted in Poland because he was a Jew. His plea was rejected and Morel
>>again came back to Poland.
>>On 10th of July Office of the Provincial Prosecutor in Katowice issued arrest
>>warrant. They were late. Morel again fled to Israel.
>>His retirement pention is being picked up by the wife of the criminal.
>>Since 1996 Morel is on the most wanted list of the INTERPOL.
>>According to international law he should be arrested by Israeli police and
>>charged by Israel with war crimes.
>>He should…..
>
>>Translated by Janusz Styber
>

From [email protected] Sat Oct 17 19:12:52 EDT 1998
Article: 123714 of soc.culture.polish
Path: hub.org!hub.org!newsfeed.axxsys.net!news-nyc.telia.net!newshub.northeast.verio.net!cyclone.news.idirect.com!island.idirect.com!news.agtac.net!news.telusplanet.net!news
From: [email protected]
Newsgroups: soc.culture.polish,soc.culture.russia,pl.regionalne.warszawa,soc.culture.ukrainian,soc.culture.islam,soc.culture.usa
Subject: Re: nazi collaborators – who ? JEWS of course
Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 14:02:27 GMT
Organization: TELUS Communications Inc.
Lines: 849
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: edtnpx06-port-62.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:123714 soc.culture.russia:1654 pl.regionalne.warszawa:10467 soc.culture.ukrainian:42144 soc.culture.islam:4230 soc.culture.usa:265880

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 had 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

On Wed, 07 Oct 1998 18:26:31 GMT, igal_pissmaker wrote:

>: In article <[email protected]>,
>: [email protected] (PONIECKA) wrote:
>:Exactly what is your definition of “collaborators” ?
>
>
>Good question. Despite it deserved a separate thread (maybe I will start
>one)let’s for know put it here: Nazi criminals – ones who directly killed,
>maimed,
>gave orders and oversaw the genocide. Collaborators – ones who helped nazi
>machine run smoothly (volunteers) – it maybe railway station managers, or
>auxilarry police who did not do the dirty work, armed vehicle repairmen and so
>on.
>
>Now the intereting question: How we will qualify women who volunteerly were
>slipping with enemy soldiers providing them comphort and moral support ( that
>kind was everywhere – in France, Belgium, Poland as well – how many of them
>find asylum across the ocean with american boys???), instead of giving them
>hard time willingly transmitting STD or something – to make life of occupants
>miserable. I do remember the roumors that one of resistant female fighters in
>belorussia manage to destroy fighting ability of roughly the batallion of
>enemies in that manner. She was considered to be awarded the order of Lenin
>for that, but unfortunately died of very same war struggle consequences.
>I=P
>
>
>———–== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==———-
>http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own

From [email protected] Sat Oct 17 19:12:53 EDT 1998
Article: 123715 of soc.culture.polish
From: [email protected]
Newsgroups: soc.culture.australian,soc.culture,soc.culture.canada,soc.culture.usa,soc.culture.germany,soc.cultrue.france,soc.culture.english,soc.culture.polish,soc.culture.russian
Subject: Hitler’s Jewish Army
Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 14:02:41 GMT
Organization: TELUS Communications Inc.
Lines: 67
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: edtnpx06-port-62.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!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.australian:78745 soc.culture.canada:162626 soc.culture.usa:265882 soc.culture.polish:123715 soc.culture.russian:95359

On Sat, 19 Sep 1998 22:15:24 +1000, observor
wrote:

>Hitler’s Jewish Army
>
>”Not every victim was a Jew but every Jew was a victim.” –Elie Wiesel
>speaking of World War Two.
>
>”If there were Jews in (Hitler’s) armed forces…who served knowing what
>was going on and made no attempt to save (lives),
>well then that is unacceptable and dishonorable.” –Rabbi Marvin Hier,
>director of the Simon Wiesenthal Institute.
>
>Thousands of men of Jewish descent and hundreds of what the Nazis called
>’full Jews’ served in the German military with Adolf
>Hitler’s knowledge and approval.
>
>Cambridge University researcher Bryan Rigg has traced the Jewish
>ancestry of more than 1,200 of Hitler’s soldiers, including
>two field marshals and fifteen generals (two full generals, eight
>lieutenant generals, five major generals), “men commanding up to
>100,000 troops.”
>
>In approximately 20 cases, Jewish soldiers in the Nazi army were awarded
>Germany’s highest military honor, the Knight’s
>Cross.
>
>One of these Jewish veterans is today an 82 year old resident of
>northern Germany, an observant Jew who served as a captain
>and practiced his religion within the Wehrmacht throughout the war.
>
>One of the Jewish field marshals was Erhard Milch, deputy to Luftwaffe
>Chief Hermann Goering. Rumors of Milch’s Jewish
>identity circulated widely in Germany in the 1930s.
>
>In one of the famous anecdotes of the time, Goering falsified Milch’s
>birth record and when met with protests about having a
>Jew in the Nazi high command, Goering replied, “I decide who is a Jew
>and who is an Aryan.”
>
>Rigg’s research also shed light on stories surrounding the rescue by
>German soldiers of the Lubavitcher grand rabbi of that time,
>who was in Warsaw when the war broke out in 1939.
>
>Joseph Isaac Schneerson was spirited to safety after an appeal to
>Germany from the United States. Schneerson was assisted
>by a German officer Rigg has identified as the highly decorated Maj.
>Ernst Bloch, whose father was a Jew.
>
>Jews also served in the Nazi police and security forces as ghetto police
>(Ordnungdienst) and concentration camp guards
>(kapos).
>
>So what happens to the claim that Hitler sought to exterminate all Jews,
>when he allowed some of them to join in his struggle
>against Bolshevism and International finance capitalism?
>
>Sources:
>
>William D. Montalbano, “The Jews in Hitler’s Military,” Los Angeles
>Times, Dec. 24, 1996.
>
>Tom Tugend, “Grad student uncovers Jews who fought for Adolf Hitler,”
>Jewish Telegraph Agency, Dec. 26, 1996.
>
>Lenni Brenner, Zionism in the Age of the Dictators.