Haavara FAQs, NY Times: PANEL ON U.S. JEWS AND HOLOCAUST IS DISSOLVED, Jan. 4th, 1983

PR Editor's Notes: Very Important Context About This Historical Article

Click the image to view the full original article as single image

When this NY Times article came to our attention a few years ago, in early 2022, it became the primary driver behind researching the Facts About Haavara section. Single-handedly, what was disclosed, by pro-Zionist American Jews, in this report destroys much of the Zionists' narratives about the Holocaust, which often portrayed Zionists as the "protectors of Jewish honor" and who did everything possible to rescue Europe's Jews during WWII. As you read the article, please pay attention to what has been highlighted in black and red and to what was written between brackets in italics; we have inserted our notes for added context. In spite of defunding the investigation and nixing it mid-stream in early 1983, what was disclosed generated a big storm in the Jewish communities worldwide. Although very little was disclosed, a new commission had to be assembled quickly to water down the initial half-baked report (i.e., ironically, Palestine didn't even appear in the new report as it does in this draft). As you read this article, keep in mind this research paper by Berman Aaron (a renowned pro-Zionist Holocaust historian), Nahum Goldmann's autobiography, and this 1987 letter to the NY Times' editor are very relevant. To be fair to Zionists, we found two rebuttals for this investigation (from the Forward, which referenced a pro-Zionist Holocaust historian, Lucy S. Dawidowicz's rebuttal in June 1983). Still, both A) never addressed the main issue: why did American Jews FOCUS ONLY on Palestine as the haven for European Jews? B) why did American Jewry not demand opening America's doors to Europe's Jews? C) both rebuttals rarely addressed the cited facts and D) both primarily engaged in name-calling.

Hitler's Message To The West: If Jews are such noble citizens and you care about them, how come you're not letting them in?

That said, we strongly suspect that this investigation was initiated to settle political scores within the Zionist movement (in Israel and in the diaspora community). Around this period, the invasion of Lebanon was in full swing, the Jewish community was split, the massacres in the camps was fresh (Sabra and Shatila), and many dissenting views surfaced (way more than we have seen after the Oct. 7th Raid), but they were quickly smothered. Something similar occurred during the infamous Kastner trial in the early 1950s. Then, Menachem Begin (who was the Israeli PM when this report came out) exploited the trial to the teeth against David Ben-Gurion & Co. and managed to double his party's seats in the Knesset based on this scandal.

Why did Hayim Greenberg describe American Jewry as "morally bankrupt" in early 1943?

We strongly suspect that this investigation was nixed (and later, it was watered down and smothered from the press) either because all involved parties knew well it could bring the House of Zion down, or because some political deal was formulated behind the scenes, which is common in Israeli politics. In a nutshell, this investigation was like opening Pandora's Box; which explains why the Haavara Agreement and Zionists' collaboration with the Nazis has been a taboo subject for eight plus decades. For a Jew, touching this subject is extremely risky; at minimum, he or she will be canceled publicly, and what happened to Dr. Hannah Ardent was a great case in point. Ms. Arendt was chewed and canceled publicly in 1963 when she exposed the Kapo files. For completeness' sake, here is an old article at the Jewish Post which adds much critical information to why the commission was de-funded, here is another NY Times article, in 1981, that documents how and why the commission was set up. (PR's Editor)

Herzl Died Thinking Israel Would Have Been in Uganda, not in "empty" Palestine

Jan. 4th-1983 - A private commission of prominent American Jews, set up 15 months ago to examine the behavior of Jewish organizations in this country at the time of the Nazi campaign to annihilate European Jews, has split up in anger and dissension.

Arthur J. Goldberg, former Associate Justice of the Supreme Court, who was chairman of the commission, said the panel was dissolved because its key sponsor had failed to come up with all the funds promised to support research into the highly sensitive question of what established Jewish organizations did and did not do in the 1939-45 period when Hitler's Nazi regime systematically murdered six million Jews. Backer Explains Stand

But, in response to this charge, Jack Eisner, a wealthy businessman and concentration camp survivor who financially supported the commission, said he had concluded that it would ''take another 10 years, perhaps 15, before the American Jewish community will be courageous enough to objectively look at itself.''

''It became apparent that the vestiges of the old establishment were fighting to protect its name,'' said Mr. Eisner. ''And it became apparent to me that the motto expressed by Mr. Goldberg, 'to let the chips fall where they may,' would not be carried out.''

Mr. Goldberg, as well as Seymour M. Finger, a 67-year-old scholar who led the research of the commission, strongly deny Mr. Eisner's assertion that the former Justice bowed to pressures from established Jewish groups. Commission sources said that the groups had objected to the panel's examining such painful questions as whether thousands, or tens of thousands, of Jews could have been saved if American-Jewish organizations had acted forcefully and applied pressures on the Roosevelt Administration. 'Ready to Go Forward'

''That some of the organizations resented criticism is true,'' said Mr. Finger, who is a former deputy chief of the United States Mission to the United Nations, ''but that the project ended because organizations would not face the truth is false. We were ready to go forward. We stopped only because the promised money wasn't forthcoming.''

Fake Valor: Why Did Zionist Jews Hoist Nazis Flag on Their Ships in the 1930s?

In fact, Mr. Finger, a professor of political science at the Graduate School of the City University of New York, said he had basically agreed with the key themes of a draft introduction to the planned report of the panel. The privately circulated draft said:

''In retrospect, one incontrovertible fact stands out above all others: In the face of Hitler's total war of extermination against the Jews of Europe, the Jewish leadership in America at no stage decided to proclaim total mobilization for rescue.''

The draft added: ''Only on rare occasions and for short periods of time did it dawn on them that the Holocaust was the immediate and most urgent problem to be concerned with, and that it had to be tackled in a spirit of utter emergency and total dedication, without any ideological or political string attached.''

The draft also said that established Zionist organizations were ''riveted to postwar plans'' and the creation of a Jewish state, and that the ''energies of those American Jews who were profoundly concerned were dissipated, when the ground was burning under their feet.'' Among the groups most critical of the report, commission sources said, were the American Jewish Committee [who was neutral about Zionism, until WWII ended], the American Jewish Congress and the World Jewish Congress. [Note how the American Council on Judaism wasn't named which was one of the few vocal anti-Zionist organization in the US. Based on our research, even ACJ didn't demand for the US to open its gates for Jewish refugees, or to increase Jewish immigration quotas. On the other hand, ACJ demanded that the British must abolish the White Paper of 1939 and to open Palestine for Jewish refugees. In a nutshell, only a few in the American Jewish community (i.e., the Bergson Group and followers of Trotsky) who demand that the US should opens its gates for Jewish refugees. If you have the time, please contemplate reading Zionists' presentation to the US Committee on Foreign Affairs in early 1944 (yes, before the last million were murdered); nothing whatsoever was told about saving Jews anywhere EXCEPT for Palestine. Please pay attention how the session was chaired by an American Jew, Sol Bloom, who was the chairman of US Committee on Foreign Affairs during WWII. Wikipedia detailed how Mr. Bloom worked hand over fist to frustrate an rescue efforts of Europe's Jews EXCEPT for Palestine. It seems some group of people when out of their way to implement David Ben-Gurion's LEVER in the process of building the Jewish state! In a nutshell, Zionist leaders made sure that Europe's Jews were left with two options: either they make Aliyah to Palestine to join the the so-called yishuv, or go to Auschwitz; and lobbied like hell against any thirds alternative. Mazeltov American Jewry, give yourself a big hand!]

Kastner Saved Lives Too: How does justifying Haavara after the fact not resemble Rudolf Kastner's defense of what happened on his famous train but at a much larger scale? Kastner train passengers on their way to Switzerland, 1944

As the controversy sharpened in recent years over the American-Jewish response to the plight of European Jews, and what virtually all Jewish groups agree was the failure of the Roosevelt Administration to open the United States to those fleeing Hitler, supporters of several influential groups assert that concern about anti-Semitism in the United States at the time made it difficult to stir a public outcry. [Oddly, it was Professor Philip Khouri Hitti of Princeton University (YES, the Gentile Arab) who was one of a handful who dared to ask US lawmakers to open American gates to save Europe's Jews! What was even more tragic was that Zionists' agitation (starting from the 2nd half of 1943) was so reckless and dangerous to the war efforts to the point that it prompted the British and the Americans to contemplate walking away from Zionism by reversing the Balfour Declaration in July 1943 (see what Peter Grose wrote on this little known subject, p. 178-9)]

Beyond this, Israel Singer, executive director of the World Jewish Congress, in an interview today asserted: ''To apply 1983 standards to what happened in 1943 is unfair. It's Monday morning quarterbacking. The Jewish community was relatively powerless and used to powerlessness for 2,000 years.''

In May 1939, MS St. Louis in Havana was refused to unload its Jewish passengers in Cuba & US, and it was forced to go back to Antwerp. Jewish Agency refused to give any of its passengers immigration visas to Palestine. Over 250 of the passengers perished during the Holocaust.

But Professor Finger said he was now convinced that although Jewish organizations had relatively little power in the 1940's, ''perhaps they could have saved tens of thousands - they had an obligation to try.'' Professor Finger, a retired career State Department officer, said that a meeting of the commission in June was ''stormy'' and ''painful,'' and that he was the target of a scathing attack by several members of the commission who called him a ''pimp'' and a ''whore'' because he concurred with the report that criticized the actions of some established American Jewish groups in World War II. Talks With Publisher

Professor Finger said that he and Mr. Goldberg were now negotiating with a major New York publisher to publish an account of how leading American Jewish groups had reacted to the Holocaust. About one-third of the draft report had been completed at the time the commission dissolved, Professor Finger said.

The commission itself, made up of 26 prominent rabbis, jurists and political leaders, was set up in September 1981, ''to look at the mirror and learn from the past,'' according to Mr. Eisner, who fought as a teen-ager in the uprising against the Nazis by Jews in the Warsaw ghetto in 1943. Researchers, using the Freedom of Information Act and with access to Government archives from the 1940's, were scheduled to work at the Center for Jewish Studies at City University's Graduate School.

Fake Valor: When American Rabbis marched in DC in Oct. 1943 to lobby for rescuing Jews, you would think Zionists supported them?

A key researcher who helped write the opening draft was, Samuel Merlin [It seems that Mr. Merlin was active in the Irgun (who was actually on the Altalena when David Ben-Gurion bombed it in Tel Aviv -- June 1948) and the Bergson Group, here is a 1978 interview with of him and Peter Kook/Bergson. Pay attention how the Holocaust Museum only lately, started to publish about the Bergson Boys. Just in the recent past; it was a taboo subject to even mention their names, and what has been published about them has been extremely watered down. Anyhow, we have devoted a whole section on the Bergson Boys. It is worth the read if you have the time. We have also included archival video footage as well], the director of the Institute for Mediterranean Affairs in New York, which researches the Middle East and events of World War II, especially the Holocaust. Mr. Merlin is a 72-year-old co-founder of the Israel's Herut Party with Menachem Begin. In World War II, Mr. Merlin was in the United States and served as a key figure of a group aligned with the hard-line anti-British Irgun organization, led by Mr. Begin. Revisions of Initial Draft.

Professor Finger said that he had revised Mr. Merlin's initial draft after a review by an academic committee. Professor Finger said that he had ''improved the style'' of the draft, had deleted what he termed ''unsubstantiated statements'' but generally had adhered to the conclusions of the draft introduction. The draft itself says:

''What is certain is that the exclusive concentration on Palestine as a solution, coupled with its intrinsic pessimism as to other alternatives, distracted the Zionist movement as well as large segments of American Jews from giving serious attention to various rescue plans offered by the advocates of separating rescue from political or ideological considerations.''

When the Bergson Group organized pageants in major US cities during the Holocaust, why did Zionist leaders lobby to shut them down?

Professor Finger insisted that the project had been halted by Mr. Goldberg solely because Mr. Eisner had stopped contributing to it. Mr. Eisner was committed to spend $138,000 over two years, to be made in installments of $23,000 every four months starting in September 1981. By last September, Professor Finger said, Mr. Eisner was scheduled to have contributed $92,000, but instead had spent only $40,000. At that point, the commission was quietly disbanded without fanfare. Change in Atmosphere Cited

Mr. Eisner said that his early contacts with commission members were ''very encouraging,'' but that soon afterward ''it all dissipated.'' He attributed this to ''the insistence and determination of old-timers of established groups who, I'm convinced, were determined to hold back the truth.''

Mr. Eisner, who has written a book and a play about his experiences under the Germans, said that ''although Justice Goldberg started off with a very genuine desire to have an objective analysis, I believe that as it became more complicated, he gave in to pressure.''

At that point, Mr. Eisner said, he halted his contributions. Mr. Goldberg strongly denies this. ''What went wrong is simple and not very complicated,'' he said. ''A grant was promised and the amount of money was not made available.''

Professor Finger said: ''Mr. Eisner was substantially behind in his contributions even before there was any controversy in the commission. Moreover, we were fully committed to going forward with the project, regardless of any opposition from establishment groups that might be forthcoming.'' Highly Charged Debate

The debate stirred by the commission remains highly charged, and representatives of several Jewish organizations speak heatedly about it.

Fake Valor: Jewish-Brigade, Italy April - 1945: The Impostering Hero, see me while I bomb Nazis ONLY a few weeks before WWII ended. We wonder: were any similar selfies taken at the al-Alamein meat grinder?

Will Maslow, general counsel of the American Jewish Congress, said he had examined ''all the published writing'' about his group's activities in the war. ''I'm convinced that the congress and other Jewish organizations combined could not have been able to change the Administration's policy in terms of allowing much larger immigration,'' he said. ''It's just one of the sad things in history.''

Mr. Maslow said the members of the commission staff who wrote the draft ''came with preconceived notions,'' and that he had written a memorandum to Professor Finger describing the draft as ''atrocious.'' The draft singled out for criticism one of the dominant figures of the Jewish community in New York, Rabbi Stephen Wise, who was a founder of both the American Jewish Congress and the World Jewish Congress. Rabbi Wise died in 1949.

[As you contemplate reading the next paragraphs, please keep in mind that lobbying against rescuing Jews (unless the destination was Palestine) was done when the last two millions were alive. Actually, American Jewry voted on this during the American Jewish Conference in the Fall of 1943.]

At one point in 1943, the draft notes, Rabbi Wise told a Congressional panel that he opposed a resolution designed to set up a commission ''to effectuate the rescue of the Jewish people of Europe.'' He opposed the resolution, the draft said, because it failed to include any provision that the British change their policy and open up Palestine to Jews. Earlier Period Recalled

''Jewish organizations and their respective leaders were emotionally as well as ideologically so absorbed with their internecine struggles, rivalries and efforts to achieve hegemony in the Jewish community, that the perception of the urgency of rescue was, if not ignored, at least greatly diminished,'' said the draft.

Mr. Singer of the World Jewish Congress said he was ''condemnatory of the cynical remarks of the right-wingers, the hard-liners of the established Jewish community, the former Irgun types.'' He added: ''I think the criticisms are unfair despite the fact that I agree organized Jewry did not do enough during World War II.''

Adolf Eichmann & company coined a special Gold Medallion in honor of the Nazis' relationship with Zionists!

Milton Himmelfarb, director of information and research for the American Jewish Committee, said: ''My feeling is, yes, in hindsight you could say regretfully we should have pushed harder, we shouldn't have trusted official mendacity as much as we did, we shouldn't have been as confident in the goodwill and good intentions of Washington.''

''But it's intellectually unfair because it's anachronistic,'' he said. ''There were real constraints that Jews at the time perceived. There was serious anti-Semitism.''

Professor Finger responds: ''Some people feel that Jews should not be self-critical on this issue because it might tend to diminish the primary guilt of Adolf Hitler. I don't feel that way. I think that we should engage in this research in order to learn lessons for the future.''

Here is another example of how Zionists' treason is an open secret in Jewish communities around the world. If you read old books and news articles, you shall find so much stuff as the one below. Censorship has been on the increase since WWII ended;:

https://www.nytimes.com/1983/01/04/us/panel-on-us-jews-and-holocaust-is-dissolved.html