End of WW II: Poland lowers official Auschwitz Death Toll

Israeli Holocaust historian Yehuda Bauer said in 1989 ‘that it is time to acknowledge that the four million figure (of Auschwitz) is a deliberate Allied myth’.

poland-lowers-official-auschwitz-death-toll

Now here comes the tricky part and I hope all you good folks can follow this seemingly complex jewish mathematical problem. I will break it down into two parts: The Aryan mind versus the jewish mind. Here goes and please try to follow along as best as you can.

The Aryan mind:

  • 6 million alleged dead jews.
  • 4 million alleged dead jews – Auschwitz.
  • 1 million alleged dead jews – Auschwitz (revised).
  • Thus, a discrepancy of 3 million alleged dead jews.
  • Therefore, the Aryan mind may conclude that no more than 1 million alleged jews died in Auschwitz labor camps and a grand total of no more than 3 million jews could have possibly died in German labor camps.

The jewish mind:

  • 6 million dead ‘chosen ones’.
  • 4 million dead ‘chosen ones’ – Auschwitz.
  • 1 million dead ‘chosen ones’ – Auschwitz (revised).
  • Thus, a discrepancy of 3 million dead ‘chosen ones’.
  • Therefore, the jewish mind will conclude that 4 million ‘chosen ones’ died in Auschwitz death camps, with a horrific total of 6 million ‘chosen ones’ dying in Nazis death camps.

The Truth Seeker

Before and after the “Holocaust”: Jewish population numbers in 1933 and 1948

By wmw_admin on November 30, 2013

Rebel of Oz — Nov 30, 2013

For over a century, the Jewish World Almanac has been widely regarded as the most authentic source for the world’s Jewish population numbers. Academics all over the world, including the editors of the Encyclopedia Britannica, used to rely on the accuracy of those numbers. Here is what the World Alamanacs of 1933 and 1948 had to say about the world population of Jews.

World Almanac 1933

World Almanac 1948

In other words, according to the World Almanac the world population of Jews increased (!) between 1933 and 1948 from 15,315,000 to 15,753,000. If the German government under Adolf Hitler had – as alleged – murdered six million Jews those losses should have been reflected in the Jewish population numbers quoted in the World Almanac.
The suspicions raised by above numbers concerning the veracity of the allegations made against the Hitler government are confirmed by the official three-volume report by the International Committee of the Red Cross, released 1948 in Geneva, according to which 272,000 concentration camp inmates died in German custody, about half of them Jews. The following article elaborates.

A Factual Appraisal Of The ‘Holocaust’ By The Red Cross

The Jews And The Concentration Camps: No Evidence Of Genocide

There is one survey of the Jewish question in Europe during World War Two and the conditions of Germany’s concentration camps which is almost unique in its honesty and objectivity, the three-volume Report of the International Committee of the Red Cross on its Activities during the Second World War, Geneva, 1948.
This comprehensive account from an entirely neutral source incorporated and expanded the findings of two previous works: Documents sur l’activité du CICR en faveur des civils détenus dans les camps de concentration en Allemagne 1939-1945 (Geneva, 1946), and Inter Arma Caritas: the Work of the ICRC during the Second World War (Geneva, 1947). The team of authors, headed by Frédéric Siordet, explained in the opening pages of the Report that their object, in the tradition of the Red Cross, had been strict political neutrality, and herein lies its great value.
The ICRC successfully applied the 1929 Geneva military convention in order to gain access to civilian internees held in Central and Western Europe by the Germany authorities. By contrast, the ICRC was unable to gain any access to the Soviet Union, which had failed to ratify the Convention. The millions of civilian and military internees held in the USSR, whose conditions were known to be by far the worst, were completely cut off from any international contact or supervision.
The Red Cross Report is of value in that it first clarifies the legitimate circumstances under which Jews were detained in concentration camps, i.e. as enemy aliens. In describing the two categories of civilian internees, the Report distinguishes the second type as “Civilians deported on administrative grounds (in German, “Schutzhäftlinge”), who were arrested for political or racial motives because their presence was considered a danger to the State or the occupation forces” (Vol. 111, p. 73). These persons, it continues, “were placed on the same footing as persons arrested or imprisoned under common law for security reasons.” (P.74).
The Report admits that the Germans were at first reluctant to permit supervision by the Red Cross of people detained on grounds relating to security, but by the latter part of 1942, the ICRC obtained important concessions from Germany. They were permitted to distribute food parcels to major concentration camps in Germany from August 1942, and “from February 1943 onwards this concession was extended to all other camps and prisons” (Vol. 111, p. 78). The ICRC soon established contact with camp commandants and launched a food relief programme which continued to function until the last months of 1945, letters of thanks for which came pouring in from Jewish internees.

Red Cross Recipients Were Jews

The Report states that “As many as 9,000 parcels were packed daily. >From the autumn of 1943 until May 1945, about 1,112,000 parcels with a total weight of 4,500 tons were sent off to the concentration camps” (Vol. III, p. 80). In addition to food, these contained clothing and pharmaceutical supplies. “Parcels were sent to Dachau, Buchenwald, Sangerhausen, Sachsenhausen, Oranienburg, Flossenburg, Landsberg-am-Lech, Flöha, Ravensbrück, Hamburg-Neuengamme, Mauthausen, Theresienstadt, Auschwitz, Bergen-Belsen, to camps near Vienna and in Central and Southern Germany. The principal recipients were Belgians, Dutch, French, Greeks, Italians, Norwegians, Poles and stateless Jews” (Vol. III, p. 83).
In the course of the war, “The Committee was in a position to transfer and distribute in the form of relief supplies over twenty million Swiss francs collected by Jewish welfare organisations throughout the world, in particular by the American Joint Distribution Committee of New York” (Vol. I, p. 644). This latter organisation was permitted by the German Government to maintain offices in Berlin until the American entry into the war. The ICRC complained that obstruction of their vast relief operation for Jewish internees came not from the Germans but from the tight Allied blockade of Europe. Most of their purchases of relief food were made in Rumania, Hungary and Slovakia.
The ICRC had special praise for the liberal conditions which prevailed at Theresienstadt up to the time of their last visits there in April 1945. This camp, “where there were about 40,000 Jews deported from various countries was a relatively privileged ghetto” (Vol. III, p. 75). According to the Report, “‘The Committee’s delegates were able to visit the camp at Theresienstadt (Terezin) which was used exclusively for Jews and was governed by special conditions. From information gathered by the Committee, this camp had been started as an experiment by certain leaders of the Reich … These men wished to give the Jews the means of setting up a communal life in a town under their own administration and possessing almost complete autonomy. . . two delegates were able to visit the camp on April 6th, 1945. They confirmed the favourable impression gained on the first visit” (Vol. I, p . 642).
The ICRC also had praise for the regime of Ion Antonescu of Fascist Rumania where the Committee was able to extend special relief to 183,000 Rumanian Jews until the time of the Soviet occupation. The aid then ceased, and the ICRC complained bitterly that it never succeeded “in sending anything whatsoever to Russia” (Vol. II, p. 62). The same situation applied to many of the German camps after their “liberation” by the Russians. The ICRC received a voluminous flow of mail from Auschwitz until the period of the Soviet occupation, when many of the internees were evacuated westward. But the efforts of the Red Cross to send relief to internees remaining at Auschwitz under Soviet control were futile. However, food parcels continued to be sent to former Auschwitz inmates transferred west to such camps as Buchenwald and Oranienburg.

No Evidence Of Genocide

One of the most important aspects of the Red Cross Report is that it clarifies the true cause of those deaths that undoubtedly occurred in the camps toward the end of the war. Says the Report: “In the chaotic condition of Germany after the invasion during the final months of the war, the camps received no food supplies at all and starvation claimed an increasing number of victims. Itself alarmed by this situation, the German Government at last informed the ICRC on February 1st, 1945 … In March 1945, discussions between the President of the ICRC and General of the S.S. Kaltenbrunner gave even more decisive results. Relief could henceforth be distributed by the ICRC, and one delegate was authorised to stay in each camp …” (Vol. III, p. 83).
Clearly, the German authorities were at pains to relieve the dire situation as far as they were able. The Red Cross are quite explicit in stating that food supplies ceased at this time due to the Allied bombing of German transportation, and in the interests of interned Jews they had protested on March 15th, 1944 against “the barbarous aerial warfare of the Allies” (Inter Arma Caritas, p. 78). By October 2nd, 1944, the ICRC warned the German Foreign Office of the impending collapse of the German transportation system, declaring that starvation conditions for people throughout Germany were becoming inevitable.
In dealing with this comprehensive, three-volume Report, it is important to stress that the delegates of the International Red Cross found no evidence whatever at the camps in Axis occupied Europe of a deliberate policy to exterminate the Jews. In all its 1,600 pages the Report does not even mention such a thing as a gas chamber. It admits that Jews, like many other wartime nationalities, suffered rigours and privations, but its complete silence on the subject of planned extermination is ample refutation of the Six Million legend. Like the Vatican representatives with whom they worked, the Red Cross found itself unable to indulge in the irresponsible charges of genocide which had become the order of the day. So far as the genuine mortality rate is concerned, the Report points out that most of the Jewish doctors from the camps were being used to combat typhus on the eastern front, so that they were unavailable when the typhus epidemics of 1945 broke out in the camps (Vol. I, p. 204 ff) – Incidentally, it is frequently claimed that mass executions were carried out in gas chambers cunningly disguised as shower facilities. Again the Report makes nonsense of this allegation. “Not only the washing places, but installations for baths, showers and laundry were inspected by the delegates. They had often to take action to have fixtures made less primitive, and to get them repaired or enlarged” (Vol. III, p. 594).

Not All Were Interned

Volume III of the Red Cross Report, Chapter 3 (I. Jewish Civilian Population) deals with the “aid given to the Jewish section of the free population,” and this chapter makes it quite plain that by no means all of the European Jews were placed in internment camps, but remained, subject to certain restrictions, as part of the free civilian population. This conflicts directly with the “thoroughness” of the supposed “extermination programme”, and with the claim in the forged Höss memoirs that Eichmann was obsessed with seizing “every single Jew he could lay his hands on.”
In Slovakia, for example, where Eichmann’s assistant Dieter Wisliceny was in charge, the Report states that “A large proportion of the Jewish minority had permission to stay in the country, and at certain periods Slovakia was looked upon as a comparative haven of refuge for Jews, especially for those coming from Poland. Those who remained in Slovakia seem to have been in comparative safety until the end of August 1944, when a rising against the German forces took place. While it is true that the law of May 15th, 1942 had brought about the internment of several thousand Jews, these people were held in camps where the conditions of food and lodging were tolerable, and where the internees were allowed to do paid work on terms almost equal to those of the free labour market” (Vol. I, p. 646).
Not only did large numbers of the three million or so European Jews avoid internment altogether, but the emigration of Jews continued throughout the war, generally by way of Hungary, Rumania and Turkey. Ironically, post-war Jewish emigration from German-occupied territories was also facilitated by the Reich, as in the case of the Polish Jews who had escaped to France before its occupation. “The Jews from Poland who, whilst in France, had obtained entrance permits to the United States were held to be American citizens by the German occupying authorities, who further agreed to recognize the validity of about three thousand passports issued to Jews by the consulates of South American countries” (Vol. I, p. 645).
As future U.S. citizens, these Jews were held at the Vittel camp in southern France for American aliens. The emigration of European Jews from Hungary in particular proceeded during the war unhindered by the German authorities. “Until March 1944,” says the. Red Cross Report, “Jews who had the privilege of visas for Palestine were free to leave Hungary” (Vol. I, p. 648). Even after the replacement of the Horthy Government in 1944 (following its attempted armistice with the Soviet Union) with a government more dependent on German authority, the emigration of Jews continued.
The Committee secured the pledges of both Britain and the United States “to give support by every means to the emigration of Jews from Hungary,” and from the U.S. Government the ICRC received a message stating that “The Government of the United States … now specifically repeats its assurance that arrangements will be made by it for the care of all Jews who in the present circumstances are allowed to leave” (Vol. I, p . 649).
Biedermann agreed that in the nineteen instances that “Did Six Million Really Die?” quoted from the Report of the International Committee of the Red Cross on its Activities during the Second World War and Inter Arma Caritas (this includes the above material), it did so accurately.
A quote from Charles Biedermann (a delegate of the International Committee of the Red Cross and Director of the Red Cross’ International Tracing Service) under oath at the Zündel Trial (February 9, 10, 11 and 12, 1988).

The above is chapter nine from the book “Did Six Million Really Die?”.

Source

Posted in Essential Reading, Hidden and Revisionist History, Israel, ‘Anti-Semitism’, Zionism and US-UK allies | 13 Responses


Jewry

By Mark Weber — April 2012 Institute for Historical Review

The passions and propaganda of wartime normally diminish with the passage of time. A striking exception is the Holocaust campaign, which seems to grow more pervasive and intense as the years go by. Certainly the most lucrative expression of this seemingly endless campaign has been West Germany’s massive and historically unparalleled reparations payoff to Israel and world Jewry for the alleged collective sins of the German people during the Hitler era. Between 1953 and 1992, the Federal Republic of (West) Germany paid out more than $35 billion in reparations to the Zionist state and to millions of individual “victims of National Socialism.”

How did this remarkable program get started? How lucrative has it been? What does it suggest about the “six million” figure? And what are its social and political implications?

Bowing to pressure

In September 1945, shortly after the end of the Second World War, Jewish leader Chaim Weizmann submitted a memorandum on behalf of the Zionist Jewish Agency to the governments of the United States, the Soviet Union, Britain and France “demanding” (in the words of the Encydopaedia Judaica) “reparations, restitution and indemnification due to the Jewish people from Germany” The western Allies lost no time in responding favorably to Weizmann’s demands. /1 The American government was particularly eager to have the Germans pay up. /2 As a result, the German government set up by the western Allies at Bonn in 1949 never had any real choice but to acknowledge the alleged collective guilt of the German people during the Hitler era and pay what was demanded.

Indeed, a major provision of the treaty of May 1952 by which the United States, Britain and France granted “sovereignty” to the Federal Republic of (West) Germany obligated the new state to make restitution. /3 West German Chancellor Konrad Adenauer laid the emotional and psychological groundwork for the reparations program when he solemnly declared to the Bundestag on September 27, 1951:

The Federal government and the great majority of the German people are deeply aware of the immeasurable suffering endured by the Jews of Germany and by the Jews of the occupied territories during the period of National Socialism … In our name, unspeakable crimes have been committed and they demand restitution, both moral and material, for the persons and properties of the Jews who have been so seriously harmed …

Adenauer went on to promise speedy conclusion of restitution and indemnity laws and announced that reparations negotiations would begin soon. Accordingly, delegations representing the Bonn government, the State of Israel and an ad hoc organization of Jewish groups began talks in the Netherlands in March 1952.

The representative of the Jewish organizations was the “Conference on Jewish Material Claims Against Germany, Inc.” or “Claims Conference,” a body formed for the sole purpose of demanding maximum reparations from the German people. The 20 member organizations represented Jews in the United States, Britain, Canada, France, Argentina, Australia and South Africa. Jews in the Soviet Union, eastern Europe and the Arab countries were not represented. /4

The West German government was under pressure to conclude quickly a reparations agreement satisfactory to the Jews. In his memoirs, Chancellor Adenauer wrote:

It was clear to me that, if the negotiations with the Jews failed, the negotiations at the London Debt Conference [which were going on at the same time] would also run aground, because Jewish banking circles would exert an influence upon the course of the London Debt Conference which should not be under-estimated. On the other hand it was self-evident that a failure of the London Debt Conference would bring about a failure of the negotiations with the Jews. If the German economy was to achieve a good credit standing and become strong again, the London Conference would have to be ended successfully. Only then would our economy develop in a way that would make the payments to Israel and the Jewish organizations possible. /5

Zionist leader Nahum Goldmann, President of the World Jewish Congress and chairman of the Claims Conference, warned of a worldwide campaign against Germany if the Bonn officials did not meet the Zionist demands: “The non-violent reaction of the whole world, supported by wide circles of non-Jews, who have deep sympathy with the martyrdom of the Jewish people during the Nazi period, would be irresistible and completely justified.”/6 The London Jewish Observer was more blunt: “The whole material weight of world Jewry will be mobilized for an economic war against Germany, if Bonn’s offer of reparations remains unsatisfactory.” /7

The talks culminated in the Luxembourg Agreement, which was signed on September 10, 1952 by West German Chancellor Konrad Adenauer, Israeli Foreign Minister Moshe Sharett and World Jewish Congress President Nahum Goldmann.

A Legal Novelty

This agreement between the West German government, on the one hand, and the Israeli state and the Claims Conference, on the other, was historically unprecedented and had no basis or counterpart in international law. For one thing, the State of Israel did not exist at the time of the actions for which restitution was paid. Moreover, the Claims Conference had no legal authority to negotiate and act on behalf of Jews who were citizens of sovereign countries. Jews were represented in an internationally recognized treaty with a foreign state not by the governments of the countries of which they were citizens, but rather by a supranational and sectarian Jewish organization.

It was as if the Catholic citizens of the United States had allowed themselves to be represented in a treaty with a foreign government not by the U. S. government, but rather by some ad hoc supranational Catholic organization or by the Vatican. The Luxembourg Agreement thus legally implied that Jews everywhere, regardless of their citizenship, constitute a distinct and separate national group and that world Jewry was a formal party to the Second World War. /8

Nahum Goldmann, a co-signer of the Agreement, was one of the most important Jewish figures of this century. From 1951 to 1978, he was president of the World Jewish Congress, and from 1956 to 1958, he was also president of the World Zionist Organization. In his autobiography, Goldmann recalled his role in the negotiations and the remarkable nature of the agreement:

My negotiations with German Chancellor Konrad Adenauer and his associates, which culminated in the Luxembourg Agreement of 1952, make up one of the most exciting and successful chapters of my political career.

There hardly was a precedent for persuading a state to assume moral responsibility and make large-scale compensation for crimes committed against an unorganized ethnic group lacking sovereign status. There was no basis in international law for the collective Jewish claims … /9

In a 1976 interview, Goldmann said that the agreement “constituted an extraordinary innovation in the matter of international rights” and he boasted that he had obtained 10 to 14 times more from the Bonn government than he had originally expected. /10

The Payoff for Israel

The agreement meant economic security for the new Zionist state, as Goldmann explained in his autobiography:

What the Luxembourg Agreement meant to Israel is for the historians of the young state to determine. That the goods Israel received from Germany were a decisive economic factor in its development is beyond doubt. I do not know what economic dangers might have threatened Israel at critical moments if it had not been for German supplies. Railways and telephones, dock installations and irrigation plants, whole areas of industry and agriculture, would not be where they are today without the reparations from Germany. And hundreds of thousands of Jewish victims of Nazism have received considerable sums under the law of restitution. /11

Goldman said in 1976:

Without the German reparations, the State of Israel would not have the half of its present infrastructure: every train in Israel is German, the ships are German, as well as the electricity, a large part of the industry … without mentioning the individual pensions paid to the survivors … In certain years, the amount of money received by Israel from Germany exceeds the total amount of money collected from international Jewry-two or three times as much. /12

As a result of the West German reparations program, wrote Jewish historian Walter Laqueur:

The ships laden with German capital goods began to call at Haifa regularly and unfailingly, becoming an important — ultimately a decisive — factor in the building up of the country. Today [1965] the Israeli fleet is almost entirely “made in Germany,” as are its modern railway equipment, the big steel foundry near Acre, and many other enterprises. During the 50’s and early 60’s about one-third of investment goods imported into Israel came from Germany … In addition to all this, many individual Israelis received restitution privately. /13

It is difficult to exaggerate the impact of the program: the five power plants built and installed by West Germany between 1953 and 1956 quadrupled Israel’s electric-power-generating capacity. West Germans laid 280 kilometers of giant pipelines (2.25 and 2.5 meters in diameter) for the irrigation of the Negev (which certainly helped to “make the desert bloom”). The Zionist state acquired 65 German- built ships, including four passenger vessels. /14

Payments to Individuals

West German reparations have been paid out through several different programs, including the Federal Indemnification (or Compensation) Law (BEG), the Federal Restitution Law (BReuG), the Israel Agreement, and special agreements with 12 foreign countries (including Austria). /15 By far the most important of these has been the BEG indemnification law, which was first enacted in 1953 and revised in 1956 and 1965. It was based on a compensation law promulgated earlier in the American zone of occupation.

In the words of a background article about the reparations program that appeared in a 1985 issue of Focus On, an official publication of the Bonn government, the BEG laws “compensate those persecuted for political, racial, religious or ideological reasons-people who suffered physical injury or loss of freedom, property, income, professional and financial advancement as a result of that persecution.” It also “guarantees assistance to the survivors of the deceased victims.” /16

The BEG compensation law defined “persecution” and “loss of freedom” very liberally. It stipulated payments for Jews who had simply been required to wear the yellow star, even in Croatia, where the measure was ordered by non-Germans. Payments were also ordered for any Jew who was ever in a concentration camp, including the one in Shanghai, China, which was never under German control. The BEG law authorized payments to any Jew who was ever arrested, no matter what the reason. This meant that even Jews who were taken into custody for criminal acts were entitled to German “compensation” for “loss of freedom.” /17

The 1965 revision of the BEG specified that Germany was to be held accountable for measures taken by Romania, Bulgaria and Hungary as early as April 1941, if these actions had deprived the victims of all their freedom. The fact that these countries acted against the Jews in 1941 independently of Germany did not matter. /18

Significantly, the many Jewish survivors living in the Soviet Union and the other Communist countries of eastern Europe were not covered by West Germany’s BEG compensation program. /19 And, of course, Jewish “Holocaust survivors” who died before the West German compensation law (BEG) was enacted in 1953 or before it really became effective in 1956 also never received BEG restitution money.

By the end of 1980, a German government agency reported, the number of successful claims was 4,344,378, with payments reaching 50.18 billion German marks. About 40 percent of the claimants lived in Israel, some 20 percent were living in West Germany, and 40 percent elsewhere. /20 The Focus On article cited above noted that between October 1953 and the end of December 1983, the West German government paid out 56.3 billion marks on a total of 4,390,049 claims from individuals under the BEG legislation. /21

Nevertheless, the Atlanta Journal and Constitution stated in 1985 that about half of the Jewish “survivors” in the world have never received reparations money. “An estimated 50 percent” of the Holocaust “survivors throughout the world are on West German pensions,” the newspaper reported. /22 In addition to survivors in Communist countries who are not entitled to West German compensation, the paper reported that many Jewish survivors living in the United States have never received reparations money. The paper found that 79 percent of the Jewish “Holocaust survivors” living in the Atlanta area had, at one time or another, asked the Bonn government for restitution. About 66 percent received something.

About 40 percent of those receiving BEG compensation money live in Israel, the Focus On article reported, while 20 percent live in West Germany and 40 percent live in other countries. /23 It would thus appear that about 80 percent, or 3.5 million, of the 4.39 million claims are from Jews.

Although the number of BEG compensation claims is larger than the number of individual claimants, it is nevertheless difficult to reconcile these figures with the legendary “six million” Jewish wartime dead, particularly since at least half of the world’s Jewish “survivors” never received German compensation.

Conclusion

The Luxembourg Agreement obligated the West German government to pay three billion German marks to the State of Israel and 450 million marks to various Jewish organizations. Accordingly, the West German Finance Minister announced in 1953 that he expected that the reparations payments would eventually total four billion marks. Time would prove this a ludicrous underestimate. /24

By 1963, the German people had already paid out 20 billion marks, and by 1984 the total had risen to 70 billion. /25 In late 1987 the West German parliament approved an additional 300 million marks in “restitution to the victims of National Socialist crimes.” The Bonn government announced at that time the 80 billion marks had already been paid out and estimated that by the year 2020 the payoff would total 100 billion marks which, at recent exchange rates, would be the equivalent of $50 billion. /26

Although the West German reparations program is accepted and often praised in the democratic West, it is also, at least implicitly, strikingly undemocratic in two fundamental respects:

First, it regards Jews not as equal and fully integrated citizens of whatever country they live in, but rather primarily as members of an alien and cosmopolitan national group.

Second, it is based on the premise that the German nation, including even the Germans who grew up since 1945, is collectively guilty of terrible crimes, contrary to the democratic notion of individual responsibility for crime.

West Germany’s lucrative and historically unparalleled payoff to Israel and world Jewry is a legacy and permanent reminder of Germany’s catastrophic defeat in 1945 and subsequent domination by foreign powers.

Notes

  1. “Reparations, German,” Encyclopaedia Judaica, Vol. 14, pp. 72-73.
  2. D. v. Westernhagen, “Wiedergutgemacht?,” Die Zeit, No. 41, Oct. 5, 1984, p. 33.
  3. “Restitution in Germany,” Focus On, May 1985, p. 2.
  4. K. Lewan, Journal of Palestine Studies, Summer 1975, pp. 48-49.
  5. Konrad Adenauer, Erinnerungen 1953-55 (Stuttgart 1966), pp. 140-142. Quoted in: K. Lewan, Journal of Palestine Studies, Summer 1975, pp. 53-54.
  6. Quoted in. K. Lewan, Journal of Palestine Studies, Summer 1975, p.54.
  7. J. Kreysler and K. Jungfer, Deutsche Israel-Politik (Munich 1965); p. 33. Quoted in: K. Lewan, Journal of Palestine Studies, Summer 1975, p. 54.
  8. L. Sebba, The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, Vol. 450, July 1980, p. 206.
  9. N. Goldmann, The Autobiography of Nahum Goldmann, p. 249.
  10. LeNouvel Observateur, Oct. 25, 1976, p. 120. See also interview with Robert Faurisson in The Journal of Historical Review Winter 1981 (Vol. 2, No. 4), pp. 350, 373.
  11. N. Goldmann, Autobiography, p. 276.
  12. Le Nouvel Observateur, 25 Oct. 25, 1976, p. 122.
  13. W. Laqueur, Commentary, May 1965, p. 29.
  14. Nicholas Balabkins, West German Reparations to Israel. Cited in K. Lewan, Journal of Palestine Studies, Summer 1975, p. 42.
  15. “Restitution in Germany,” Focus On, May 1985.
  16. “Restitution in Germany,” Focus On, May 1985, p. 3.
  17. R. Hilberg, The Destruction of the European Jews, Vol. 3, p. 1166.
  18. R. Hilberg, Destruction, Vol. 3, p. 1173.
  19. R. Hilberg, Destruction, p. 1170. The New York Times reported in 1983 that the clients of the New York office of the Conference on Material Claims Against Germany “are primarily newly arrived Russian Jewish] victims of the Nazi era” (D. Margolick “Soviet Emigre Lawyer …,” The New York Times, Thursday, March 10, 1983, p. B2.)
  20. Canadian Jewish News, Nov. 12, 1981, p. 4 (or, Dec. 11, 1981, p. 4), and Nov. 26, 1981, p. 6. Source cited: German Information Centre in New York.
  21. “Restitution in Germany,” Focus On, May 1985, p. 3.
  22. The Atlanta Journal and Constitution, March 31, 1985,14A,15A,17A.
  23. “Restitution in Germany,” Focus On, May 1985, p. 3.
  24. D. v. Westernhagen, Die Zeit, Oct. 5, 1984, p. 36.; “Restitution in Germany,” Focus On, May 1985.
  25. D. v. Westernhagen, Die Zeit, Oct. 5, 1984, p. 36.
  26. “Bundestag Approves Additional DM 300 Million for Victims of Nazis,” The Week in Germany (New York German Information Center), December 11, 1987. The dollar value of the German mark has fluctuated over the years. A recent exchange rate was 50 cents per mark.

 

Source

The Truth Seeker.

———————————————————————————————

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s