West Germany's Holocaust Payoff to Israel and World Jewry

[CrackSmokeRepublican]

West Germany's Holocaust Payoff to Israel and World Jewry
By Mark Weber

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.See 1. The American government was particularly eager to have the Germans pay up.See 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.See 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 negoffaffons 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.See 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.See 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."See 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."See 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 orgainzation 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.See 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 ...See 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.See 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.See 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.See 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.See 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.See 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).See 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."See 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."See 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.See 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.See 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.See 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.See 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.See 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.See 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.See 24.

By 1963, the German people had already paid out 20 billion marks, and by 1984 the total had risen to 70 billion.See 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.See 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

    "Reparations, German," Encyclopaedia Judaica, Vol. 14, pp. 72-73.
    D. v. Westernhagen, "Wiedergutgemacht?," Die Zeit, No. 41, Oct. 5, 1984, p. 33.
    "Restitution in Germany," Focus On, May 1985, p. 2.
    K. Lewan, Journal of Palestine Studies, Summer 1975, pp. 48-49.
    Konrad Adenauer, Erinnerungen 1953-55 (Stuttgart 1966), pp. 140-142. Quoted in: K. Lewan, Journal of Palestine Studies, Summer 1975, pp. 53-54.
    Quoted in. K. Lewan, Journal of Palestine Studies, Summer 1975, p.54.
    J. Kreysler and K. Jungfer, Deutsche Israel-Politik (Munich 1965); p. 33. Quoted in: K. Lewan, Journal of Palestine Studies, Summer 1975, p. 54.
    L. Sebba, The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, Vol. 450, July 1980, p. 206.
    N. Goldmann, The Autobiography of Nahum Goldmann, p. 249.
    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.
    N. Goldmann, Autobiography, p. 276.
    Le Nouvel Observateur, 25 Oct. 25, 1976, p. 122.
    W. Laqueur, Commentary, May 1965, p. 29.
    Nicholas Balabkins, West German Reparations to Israel. Cited in K. Lewan, Journal of Palestine Studies, Summer 1975, p. 42.
    "Restitution in Germany," Focus On, May 1985.
    "Restitution in Germany," Focus On, May 1985, p. 3.
    R. Hilberg, The Destruction of the European Jews, Vol. 3, p. 1166.
    R. Hilberg, Destruction, Vol. 3, p. 1173.
    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.)
    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.
    "Restitution in Germany," Focus On, May 1985, p. 3.
    The Atlanta Journal and Constitution, March 31, 1985,14A,15A,17A.
    "Restitution in Germany," Focus On, May 1985, p. 3.
    D. v. Westernhagen, Die Zeit, Oct. 5, 1984, p. 36.; "Restitution in Germany," Focus On, May 1985.
    D. v. Westernhagen, Die Zeit, Oct. 5, 1984, p. 36.
    "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.


From The Journal of Historical Review, Summer 1988 (Vol. 8, No. 2), pages 243-250. A few changes / corrections were made in April 2012.

http://www.ihr.org/jhr/v08/v08p243_Weber.html

[CrackSmokeRepublican]

This Communist "Anti-Zionist" Jew throws in some B.S. but has a few interesting points.  I see the tales of an orchestrated "Zionist-Nazi connection
 as largely warmed over WWII propaganda from Stalinist "allied" type Jews in the West.  

-------------

   An Interview With JOSEF GINSBURG by Eric Thomson

        Josef Ginsburg, who wrote under the pen name of "J.G. Burg", came to Toronto to assist Ernst Zündel's defence effort in The Great Holocaust Trial in 1988, at which time I was able to speak to this remarkable anti-Zionist jew and to make extensive notes after each conversation. "Mr. Burg", as he preferred to be addressed, was the author of several booklets on such favorite Zionist subjects as the so-called Holocaust, the founding of the bandit-state of Israel, the so-called "diary" of Anne Frank, German "guilt", etc. Unfortunately, none of his works are available in English, to my knowledge and most of them appear to be out of print. I am sure the Zionists are happy about that, for my own readings of his works answered any question I might have had as to why the "Bundeszog" or Zionist Occupation Government of Germany and their jewish masters were attempting to surround "J.G. Burg" with a wall of silence. Zionist thugs had even attacked him in a cemetery where he was visiting the grave of a lady friend who had perished in a fire which "Burg" insisted had been set by the Zionists. Josef Ginsburg, who no longer needs the threadbare cover of his pen name, now that he is dead, probably put up a good fight, despite his years. He was a short, tough, wiry, agile and keenly alert man, with penetrating gaze and hawk-like features. His sharp eyes and almost haughty demeanor seemed to challenge all whom he met, as if to say: "You, there! How do you serve or thwart my purpose?" Being a jew, he often involved himself in confusing circular and/or corkscrew reasoning of the sort exemplified by Franz Kafka's stories. When his guard was up, as it usually was, he would only answer a question with a question: "Is your name Josef Ginsburg?" "Why do you ask me that?"

        Certainly, I would have received nothing but questions in answer to my questions, had I told him that I was treating our conversations as an interview and that I was secretly making notes of his statements. For anyone who did interview him, with his knowledge, it was a struggle all the way. Whenever there were witnesses, cameras, microphones and/or tape recorders in evidence, he would become very cagey and evasive. He insisted that no one take any pictures of him and he actually made a videotaped interview in which only the face of the interviewer ever appeared on camera! After this "night and fog" appearance, he demanded and received the interviewer's promise that the interview would not be released or shown to anyone before his death. Although I did not tell him that I was taking notes, I respected Mr. Ginsburg's wishes also in this regard.

        Josef Ginsburg was exasperating, for he was an eyewitness to history, specifically the Zionist-National Socialist collaboration which Zionists have always exerted themselves so mightily to cover up. Yet, he would not reveal publicly how he had learned the truth about the Holohoax and the gas chamber lie. He would even quibble about his own identity and the political connections which caused him to be among the first Soviet inspectors of all the so-called death camps in Poland. Privately, he made no attempt to hide his Communist connections and sympathies. Yes, he had toured the concentration camps of Auschwitz, Birkenau, Maidanek, Treblinka, Sobibor and all the others in Poland, as a member of the official Soviet inspection team and he found no evidence whatsoever of any attempt on the part of the Germans to exterminate anyone and certainly not by means of lethal gas chambers! But by refusing to admit this in any public interview, his statements debunking the Holocaust legend were largely dismissed by journalists as 'unauthoritative opinion', which went unreported. That gave these prostitutes of the pen an 'easy out', for they were already being paid to believe in the Holohoax. If Ginsburg had been more open to them, he could have at least raised some doubts in their own minds, regardless of the rubbish their editors deemed 'fit to print'.

        I told him that he should tell them that he was a Communist and a member of the Soviet inspection team ("our gallant Soviet allies"), for in Soviet Canuckistan, alias Canada, that would be tantamount to sainthood. The word of a Communist jew "simply must be true" and the only rebuttal available to the Zionist Holocaustorians would be (a) to prove that he was not a Communist or (b) not a jew. But Josef Ginsburg would not go all out, as he saw it, to set the historical record straight. To this day it is a mystery to me why he wanted to 'pull his punches' or "hide his candle under a bushel", as the jew-book says. Perhaps he feared for his life, although he and his work were no secret whatsoever to the Zionists and their German Occupation Government stooges, for he lived in Germany and could be contacted through a small publishing firm there. Maybe he thought they could not locate him if he concealed his real name and background. He behaved as if he feared to compromise his 'security', no matter how illusory that security appeared to me and others.

        Josef Ginsburg's motive for attacking Zionism by stating historical truth was indeed very jewish: he feared that jews were endangering their survival by putting all their political eggs into the Zionist basket. He saw in Communism, as his fellow jews had seen in Christianity and Capitalism, a protective cloak of universalism in which the body of jewish tribalism would thrive, much like certain maggots thrive beneath the protective skin of a living host, as they feed off the host's blood, I opined, for the similarity was obvious. Ginsburg saw the Zionist drive to particularize jewish, as opposed to Gentile, interests as extremely dangerous. I certainly agreed with him on this point and I asked him why the Rothschilds, the International Zionists par excellence, had funded Theodor Herzl's Territorial Zionist efforts, which, if successful, would serve to identify, separate and isolate the jewish population from the rest of the world.

"The Rothschilds had to do it," said Ginsburg, "because it is so ordered in their family compact."

I asked him what he meant by that, thinking of A. Conan Doyle's "The Musgrave Ritual".

"Each heir to the Rothschild fortune must read the compact and agree to fulfil its provisions, to the best of his ability, during his lifetime," he said. "There is no argument with the terms of the compact, regardless of any perception of danger or undesirability on the part of the heir. The family compact has the force of law."

"But," I said, "the state of Israel is very much a danger to the interests of world Jewry."

"I agree with you," said Ginsburg. "The Rothschilds may also agree with you, but they must carry out the orders which have been in effect for many centuries. They have no recourse."

Although jews have not only survived, but thrived, prospered and conned their way to conquest via such fallacious 'universal creeds' as Christianity and Capitalism, Ginsburg was convinced that 'Communism was the only way to go'.

I mentioned Jabotinski's group, from which came the founders of Israel, as being a bunch of Communist-Zionists.

 "That is a contradiction in terms," he said, "for true Communism is internationalist and all-inclusive. It cannot be nationalist and therefore exclusive. That is why I call the Territorial Zionists who founded the state of Israel 'Zionazis' and that is why people like Ben Gurion, Levi Skolnick, alias Eshkol and Golda Meyersohn, alias Meir, got along so well with the German Nazis, especially after their little Kristallnacht show which they deemed necessary to scare their fellow jews out of Germany, hopefully to settle in Palestine."  

"You bring up this recurrent theme of German Nazi-Zionazi collaboration," I said. "This is a fairly new concept to me."

"And rightly so," he said, "for that is just the way the Zionazis who control the media want their collaboration to be: secret. Eichmann was one of their weak links. That's why they had to kidnap him from Argentina and murder him in Israel. They locked him in a glass box in the courtroom, supposedly for his protection, but really to keep him from hearing the real questions and giving real answers. Eichmann was a fool. He did not even know that he had a dangerous secret, for he had done nothing wrong. He should have kept his mouth shut and gone into hiding when he heard about the Zionazis' murder of his jewish counterpart, Joel Brandt, in Israel."

"So, innocence can be deadly," I said.

"Yes," he agreed, "the guilty know why they should cover their tracks and they know how to do it."

"So what was Eichmann's role in German Nazi-Zionazi collaboration?" I asked.

"He worked with Joel Brandt and others to smuggle jews out of Europe and into Palestine, against the wishes of the British who governed the territory under a mandate."

 "Would Eichmann have known about the Ha'arev or Transfer Agreement which allowed jews emigrating from Germany to take their wealth with them in the form of German-made goods?" I asked.

"Another reason for his judicial murder," said Ginsburg.

"You mentioned earlier that the Zionists and the Nazis collaborated on the drafting of the so-called Nuremberg Race Laws," I said.

"Yes," he said, "one of the Zionist collaborators was Rabbi Leo Baeck, who now lives in London, England."

"What did Baeck do?" I asked.

"He helped the Nazis define who was a jew and who was a German and he suggested the adoption of the yellow, six-pointed star as the symbol of the jewish nation."

"You mean that this symbol was not previously used to signify judaism?" I asked.

"Oh, it was a jewish symbol, just as it was a Babylonian symbol. The six-pointed star was used by many different people. The German Condor Legion used it as a badge of rank in Spain during the Fascist War from 1936 to 1939. Your American police often use the six-pointed star. But as late as the 1930s, "The Lion of Judah" was used to symbolize jewish nationality.

You may remember the British newspaper story which appeared in March, 1933, headlined "Judea Declares War on Germany."

"Yes," I said.

 "Well, the article carried a frieze-like strip of lions and swastikas across the front page which symbolized 'Germans versus jews'. No six-pointed stars!" he exclaimed.

"I remember the article," I said. "Samuel Untermeyer of the World Jewish Congress declared a boycott of all German goods. Did this mean that there was a conflict between the Territorial Zionists and the International Zionists?"

"No," he said. "The Zionists were only making sure that German foreign trade would remain under their control, as they had done with Germany in World War I. They made the blockade and broke it themselves. No one else was allowed to do that, so it was really a Zionist monopoly of German trade."

"What, in your opinion, was the reason for the Zionist 'declaration of war' on Germany in 1933, only a month after Hitler's election as Chancellor?" I asked.

 "The Zionists (and all other jews, I thought) never do anything for only one reason," he said. "Their declaration of war was given with at least a twofold purpose. One reason was their hatred of Hitler's economic program and his intention of nationalizing the Bank of Germany, which was owned by the Rothschilds, as are all so-called national banks today."

"So you agree that the Rothschilds and their bankster stooges control the creation of money for the entire world," I said.

"Yes," he smiled grimly. "Their 'tekla mekla' money is created out of nothing and they charge interest on it!"

"What would be another reason for the Zionists' declaration of war on Germany?" I asked.

"To conceal their collaboration with the Nazis," he said.

 "What were some major points of Nazi-Zionist collaboration?" I asked.

"First, was the creation of a Zionist state in German-controlled territory. Second, was the German Government's assistance for jews to leave Germany, preferably to enter Palestine illegally. Third, was Zionist assistance in supplying Germany with foreign exchange and goods, even during World War II." he said.

"But why would the Zionists support Germany, when they wanted the Allies to win?" I asked.

"The Zionists did not help Germany sufficiently to win the war, but only to make a profit and maintain their influence with the Germans," he said. "Zionazi Ben Gurion bragged that he was fighting London and Berlin."

"You said that the Germans helped the Zionists to build a state within German-controlled territory," I said.

"Yes," said Ginsburg. "Zionists were given such jurisdiction in transit/training camps like Theresienstadt and they also established autonomous zones in parts of occupied Poland and Russia, as well as ruling over the ghettos of Polish cities like Warsaw, Lublin and Crakow."

"Is it true," I asked, "that the Germans taught jews such trades as carpentry, bricklaying, machine tooling, plumbing, farming, animal husbandry, auto mechanics, etc.?"

"Yes," he said, "they did. The Germans also helped the Zionists to have their own money, banks, postage stamps, post offices and police, all of which were recognized by the German authorities."

"It is so different from the Hollywood version of German-jewish relations which the Zionists want us to believe," I said. "Was there, in your experience, sufficient jewish suffering during World War II to call it a 'holocaust'?" I asked.

"Oh, there was jewish suffering," he said, "but nothing to compare with German suffering!"

"Was jewish suffering due to German policies?" I asked.

 "Indirectly," he said. "The jews suffered most under the Zionists, especially in the ghettos and the autonomous areas. A jew could be thankful if he were in a German camp like Auschwitz, for at least he would be fed as long as supplies lasted and he would receive medical treatment."

"What was going on in the Zionist-ruled districts that caused jewish suffering?" I asked.

"It was a catastrophe!" he said. "The Zionist administration was so criminal and corrupt that essential supplies, such as food, clothing and medicines wound up in the hands of black marketeers and speculators. There were shocking scenes of jewish children begging and starving outside jewish restaurants, while fat jewish diners looked out at them with indifference and jewish policemen strolled by, unconcerned!"

 "What about the autonomous areas, where there was open land?" I asked.

"That was even worse!" he declared. "True, there was farmland and woodland, tools, implements and simple housing, wells and streams, but rich jews who had previously relied upon Gentile laborers and servants could not fend for themselves. Once again, jewish criminals stole the German food supplies, so even the rich jews suffered and died under Zionist misgovernment."

"In regard to hoarding, speculating and black marketeering, you had mentioned Simon Wiesenthal," I said.

 "Yes," he said. "The Gestapo had a department called the Stachel (barb), composed of jewish agents who spied on fellow jews who were hoarding and black marketeering. The agent received a reward in the form of a percentage of the value of any contraband he discovered. Wiesenthal was such an agent."

         JOSEF GINSBURG on how to make a jew tell the truth:

Jew-wise Gentiles know about the "jews' oath" or Kol Nidre prayer, which all devout jews say every year to absolve them from telling the truth in the year to come. But there is a way to make a religious jew tell the truth, according to Josef Ginsburg, who was himself the son of an orthodox rabbi.

"First, all Christian symbols must be cleared from the room. Then, a Hebrew bible and a rabbi must be present. The jew must don a skull cap and take a rabbinical oath which nullifies the Kol Nidre anti-oath oath." After this procedure, Josef Ginsburg claimed that "99.5% of all the sick holocaust stories would become truthful silence!" Jews are not otherwise bound to tell the truth, because their courtroom oath (as well as their pledge of allegiance) is deemed by them to be of no account, whatsoever!

http://www.faem.com/eric/2000/et004.htm

---------------

http://www.whale.to/b/josef_ginsburg.html

[CrackSmokeRepublican]

The Brand Hoax equals the Jew Holohoax --CSR

The most important point in this is the comment below reportedly by Moshe Sarret.  

Sharett wrote in his report of 27 June 1944: "I must have looked a little incredulous, for he said: 'Please believe me: they have killed six million Jews; there are only two million left alive'."  

Moshe Sharett, then head of the Jewish Agency's political department (later Israel's second prime minister), met Brand in Aleppo, after Brand's arrest by the British.

Looks like the 6 million figure was tossed around by British Intelligence and high level Jews in the British government.  Murdering 800,000 Jews from Hungary-Romania-SE Europe via "Gas Chambers" at Auschwitz and disposing of the bodies after June 1944 would have been logistically impossible -- and that was just before the Soviet invasions so in terms of utilizing resources it doesn't make sense -- there just wouldn't be enough time or German manpower to do it.  The Brits probably used this entire thing as a denial to a "peace settlement" that the Germans were extending to the "Western Allies" -- to pair up against the Soviet Union.  The Jews put themselves between a Nazi-Western Allied settlement with this British-Jew Intel story about Brand.  Some Jews may have been shipped from Hungary to Auschwitz (to work) but British-Jew Intel picked it up and concocted the entire "Holohoax" with it. This is before the "liberation of the camps".  

This is just an idea but the fact that the 6 million number was thrown around before the end of WWII by these high level Jews-British Intel --  this "Scam" could be used internally as a way to stop any future "alliance" between Nazi Germany and Western Allies against the Soviets.  The Germans were losing and sought a "settlement" with the British-Americans after D-Day. Brand's story "Blood for Goods" could be used to white-wash Brit refusal of peace negotiations with the Germans and lend credence to the whole Holohoax Propaganda.      

So British Intel-Jews already know that 6 million have been killed with nearly a year in WWII to go? This indicates to me that the entire "Zionist-Nazi" collaboration story is probably a British Intel Hoax like the Holohoax itself.  With the US invading and Soviets winning in the East, Brit-US Jews knew they eventually had Germany in the box. So, they built a War Propaganda "guilt campaign" against Germany with the "Holohoax" using Brand as a character in the story. There may have been some meetings, but the Brits saw the utility in using the Brand-6 million story for "Hoaxing" the Western Goyim fighting the war.   --CSR


------



 Joel Brand's "Blood for goods" mission

(17 May, 1944) Brand and Grosz leave for Istanbul

One of the few surviving photographs of Hungarian Jews arriving for "selection" at the ramp in Auschwitz-Birkenau. This photograph, from the Auschwitz Album, was taken at the end of May or beginning of June 1944, by Ernst Hofmann or Bernhard Walter of the SS.

The day after his last meeting with Eichmann, Brand secured a letter of recommendation from the Zentralrat der Ungarischen Juden (the main Hungarian Judenrat) and was told he had a travelling companion, Bandi Grosz (real name Andor Gross, also known as Andrea Gyorgy), a Hungarian-Jewish convert to Catholicism, alleged by various sources to have been a spy for the Germans, Hungarians, British, and Americans.[31] Grosz was travelling undercover as the director of a Hungarian transport company engaged in talks with the Turkish state transport corporation.[32] The men left Budapest on 17 May 1944 and were driven by the SS to Vienna, where they stayed the night in a hotel reserved for SS personnel.[33]

Historians now view Brand's trip as a cover for Grosz's mission. Grosz, who was low level enough to provide plausible deniability for the Germans in case anything went wrong, later testified that he had been told by Clages, on behalf of Heinrich Himmler, to arrange a meeting in a neutral country between two or three senior German security officers and American officers of equal rank – or British officers as a last resort – to negotiate a separate peace between the German Sicherheitsdienst (SD) (part of the SS) and the Western Allies, a peace deal that would exclude the Soviet Union.[33] Grosz later explained: "The Nazis know that they have lost the war. They know that peace cannot be reached with Hitler. Himmler wants to use all possible contacts to get down to negotiations with the Allies."[34]


(11 June) Meeting with Moshe Sharett and hunger strike

Brand testified that he was taken to an elegant Arab villa where some high-ranking British officers were staying, and on June 11 was introduced to Moshe Sharett with whom he spoke during two sessions of six hours each. Sharett wrote in his report of 27 June 1944: "I must have looked a little incredulous, for he said: 'Please believe me: they have killed six million Jews; there are only two million left alive'." After the second session, Sharett spoke to British officials and turned again to Brand, telling him: "Dear Joel, I have to tell you something bitter now." He told Brand he would have to go south, not back to Budapest, because the British had demanded it.[44] Brand reportedly started screaming:

    Do you know what you are doing? This is simply murder! That is mass murder. If I don't return our best people will be slaughtered! My wife! My mother! My children will be first! ... I have come here under a flag of truce. I have brought you a message. You can accept or reject, but you have no right to hold the messenger ...[44]  

photograph
Moshe Sharett, then head of the Jewish Agency's political department (later Israel's second prime minister), met Brand in Aleppo, after Brand's arrest by the British.

Despite his protests, Brand was taken to Cairo, where he was questioned by the British for days. On the 10th day, he went on hunger strike, writing in a letter to the Jewish Agency: "It is apparent to me now that an enemy of our people is holding me and does not intend to release me in the near future. I have decided to go on a hunger strike again and will do my utmost to break through the bayonets guarding me."[46] On the 17th day, he was handed a note from one of the Jewish Agency men with whom he had travelled to Aleppo, urging him not to be difficult.

Brand later testified that Lord Moyne, the British Minister Resident in the Middle East, and a close friend of Prime Minister Winston Churchill, was present during one of the interrogations and is alleged to have said: "What can I do with this million Jews? Where can I put them?"[46] Moyne was assassinated in Cairo a few months later, on 6 November 1944, by Eliyahu Bet-Zuri and Eliyahu Hakim of the Lehi (Stern Gang).[47] Ben Hecht writes that Ehud Avriel, the Jewish Agency official who had accompanied Brand to Aleppo and told him the British would not arrest him, insisted it was not Lord Moyne who had said this, and asked Brand not to repeat Moyne's name in Brand's autobiography, Advocate for the Dead, but Brand repeated the allegation under oath during Eichmann's trial.[46] During a meeting with Moshe Sharett on 6 July 1944, Anthony Eden expressed his sympathy regarding the decision to block the negotiations with Eichmann, but said he had to act in unison with the United States and Soviet Union.[48]

....

(19 July) Leak to the British media

British intelligence leaked details of the Brand mission to the media. On 19 July, BBC Radio broadcast a story that two emissaries of the Hungarian government had appeared in Turkey, proposing that all Jews in Hungary would be allowed to leave if England and America supplied pharmaceuticals and transport to the Germans, with a promise from the Germans that the equipment would not be used on the Western front. The proposal, which the BBC called "humanitarian blackmail," was reported as a crude attempt to set the Allies against each other. The report added that it was not clear whether the plan had the approval of the German and Hungarian authorities. The New York Herald Tribune carried the same report, and The Times of London called it one of the most loathsome stories of the war.[49] The Manchester Guardian wrote that "Two Nazi or Hungarian agents called on the Allies with a certain extortion proposal, which the Allies scorned with indignation." Davar, the Hebrew-language newspaper in Palestine, reprinted the Guardian's story.[50]

The leaks killed whatever might have remained of the initiative, although the mass deportations of Jews from Hungary had already been stopped by the Hungarian government on July 7. Following publication in June of parts of the Vrba-Wetzler report, which provided the first evidence (that the Allies accepted as credible) of the mass murder taking place inside Auschwitz, Hungarian government ministers feared they would be held personally responsible by the Allies after the war, and they ordered a halt to the deportations.[49]

(October) British release Brand

The British released Brand in October 1944 but, according to Ben Hecht, would not allow him to return to Hungary, compelling him instead to travel to Palestine. Bauer disputes this, arguing that the story of Brand being forced to go to Palestine was spread around Israel during the 1953 libel trial in Jerusalem of Malchiel Greenwald, a freelance writer who, in a self-published pamphlet, had accused Brand's colleague on the Aid and Rescue Committee, Rudolf Kastner (by then an Israeli government spokesman), of having collaborated with the Nazis. The Israeli government sued Greenwald on Kastner's behalf, and Brand offered testimony about his and Kastner's contacts with Eichmann, and the "blood for goods" proposal. The Israeli government lost the case, the judge alleging that Kastner had indeed "sold his soul to the devil" in his dealings with Eichmann, and although the decision was overturned on appeal, Kastner had already been assassinated.

In fact, writes Bauer, by the time the British released Brand, he was afraid to return to Budapest, convinced the Germans would murder him, so he chose instead to travel to Palestine. Once there, he tried to contact Chaim Weizmann, president of the World Zionist Organization. Weizmann responded by saying that his secretary would arrange an appointment for them to meet, an appointment that Brand said was never made.[5]

Himmler's involvement in the proposal

Bauer writes that we know the deal originated with Himmler because a cable from Edmund Veesenmayer of the SS to the German Foreign Office on 22 July 1944 stated that Brand and Grosz had been sent to Turkey on the orders of Himmler.[51] SS officer Kurt Becher also indicated that his orders came directly from Himmler: "So I came into contact with Joel Brand ... Trucks were a big problem. So trucks were discussed, 10,000 trucks that is. There were many discussions. Himmler said to me: 'Take whatever you can from the Jews. Promise them whatever you want. What we will keep is another matter'."[52]
photograph

Heinrich Himmler before the war. Bauer argues that Eichmann was Himmler's reluctant messenger during the meetings with Brand.

Eichmann himself later testified that the order came from Himmler, and a report from Kastner shows that Eichmann did not seem happy about having to deal with Brand. Kastner wrote that when Brand failed to return from Istanbul, Eichmann said: "Yes. I saw all of this in advance. I warned Becher countless times not to allow himself to be led by the nose. If I do not receive a positive answer within forty eight hours, I will have all this Jewish bag of filth from Budapest laid low." ("Werde ich das ganze juedische Dreckpack von Budapest umlegen lassen.")[30]

Bauer writes that the "clumsiness of the approach has been a wonderment to all observers."[51] He argues that it is obvious that Eichmann was Himmler's reluctant messenger, and that Eichmann's own inclination was to continue murdering Jews, not to sell them. On the day Brand left for Vienna and Istanbul, Eichmann travelled to Auschwitz to make sure Rudolf Hoess, the commander of the camp, would be ready to receive the first arrivals scheduled to leave Hungary on 14 May. Hoess told him there would be problems processing such large numbers, whereupon Eichmann ordered that there should be no selections but that all the new arrivals should be gassed immediately, which does not indicate that he was willing to delay the exterminations until Brand returned from Istanbul, as Brand seemed to believe.[53]

Bauer argues that the presence of Clages at the meetings signals that Himmler had changed the emphasis from "blood for goods" to secret talks aimed at peace. Bauer writes that there is no indication of what exactly Himmler wanted to achieve, because he did not commit his thoughts to paper, but Bauer points out that Brand and Grosz arrived in Istanbul just two months before the assassination attempt, on 20 July 1944, on Adolf Hitler, and that Himmler knew there was a plot, though did not know where and when it would be carried out. It is possible, Bauer argues, that Himmler wanted to open negotiations for peace in the event that Hitler did not survive, using two low-level agents, a Jew and a spy, in case he had to distance himself from their mission; and if Hitler did survive, Himmler could offer him the chance to conclude a separate peace deal with the West, excluding the Soviet Union.[54]

Brand himself eventually adopted such a theory. Two months before his death, he spoke of his belief at the trial in Germany of Eichmann's deputies Hermann Krumey and Otto Hunsche that the "blood for goods" proposal had originated with Himmler, in an effort to drive a wedge between the Allies. "I made a terrible mistake in passing this on to the British. ... It is now clear to me that Himmler sought to sow suspicion among the Allies as a preparation for his much desired Nazi-Western coalition against Moscow."[55]
Aftermath

In Budapest, the Vaada waited anxiously for Brand's return. On 27 May, Hansi Brand was arrested and beaten by the Hungarian Arrow Cross, though she testified at Eichmann's trial that she withstood it and gave them no information.[56] Hilberg writes that the Vaada did not expect the Allies would actually supply goods to Eichmann, but it hoped for a gesture that would allow protracted negotiations with the Nazis to begin while the Jews waited for the arrival of the Red Army.[57]
photograph and link to news report
Adolf Eichmann in the witness box during his trial in Jerusalem in 1961. Brand told the court his story.

Brand's failure to return to Budapest meant the Vaada was thrown back on its own resources, bitter about the lack of help from the outside world, and in particular from Jews living in safe countries. Bauer argues that their mistake was to adopt the almost anti-Semitic belief in unlimited Jewish power.[45] The committee believed that Jewish leaders could move freely during the war and could persuade the Allies to do whatever needed to be done to save the Jews of Hungary. They had similar trust in the goodwill and power of the Allies, but the latter were gearing up for the invasion of Normandy just as Brand set out on his mission, and "[a]t that crucial moment", writes Bauer, "to antagonize the Soviets because of some hare-brained Gestapo plan to ransom Jews was totally out of the question."[58]

Rudolf Kastner wrote that the Vaada had no choice but to believe in the possibility of rescue. Of Jewish communities living in countries unaffected by the Holocaust, he wrote: "They were outside, we were inside. They moralized, we feared death. They had sympathy for us and believed themselves to be powerless; we wanted to live and believed rescue had to be possible."[59]

Brand was a bitter man when he was finally released by the British. He joined the Lehi (Stern Gang), who were fighting to remove the British from Palestine prior to the establishment of the State of Israel in 1948. The situation created a rift between him and his wife, who for many years wondered what the truth was behind her husband's failure to return in time. Bauer concludes that, despite the failure of the mission, Brand was an extremely courageous man who had passionately wanted to help the Jewish people, yet whose life was thereafter plagued by the suspicions of family and friends.[2] Brand offered testimony in Israel and Germany about the "blood for goods" proposal during several trials, including that of Adolf Eichmann in Jerusalem in 1961, which saw Eichmann executed, and of Eichmann's assistant, Hermann Krumey, in Frankfurt in 1964. Ronald Florence writes that he seemed to live only to set the historical record straight.[60] He died in 1964 of liver disease brought on by alcoholism, reportedly a broken man.[2]
Notes

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joel_Brand

[CrackSmokeRepublican]

Muller describes once eating cheese and cake he found in the gas chamber after a gassing.[1]

 (Right... cheese and cake soaked with cyanide... still another J-Triber lie that damns many even today...maybe it was wrapped with 1944 Ghetto Plastic like "Holohoax Saran Wrap" Could be, right? That's what made it okay and propaganda "safe" --plastic wrap.   --CSR )

The Vrba-Wetzler Report
(used to create the Holohoax by Brit-Jew Intelligence. The report itself is full of B.S. if simple "daily logistical operations" are fully considered. --CSR)


The report is often referred to as the Auschwitz Protocols, although in fact the Protocols incorporated information from three reports, including the Vrba-Wetzler report.

The text of the Vrba-Wetzler report, under the title "German Extermination Camps—Auschwitz and Birkenau," was first published in full in English on 25 November 1944 by the Executive Office of the United States War Refugee Board.[2] The document combined the material from Vrba and Wetzler with two other reports, which came to be known jointly as the Auschwitz Protocols. They were submitted together in evidence at the Nuremberg Trials as document number 022-L.[1]

The Protocols included the seven-page report from Arnost Rosin and Czesław Mordowicz, who escaped from Auschwitz on 27 May 1944, and an earlier report, known as the "Polish Major's report," written by Jerzy Tabeau, who escaped on 19 November 1943 and compiled his report between December 1943 and January 1944.[3] This was presented in the Protocols as the 19-page "Transport (The Polish Major's Report)".[2] The full text of the English translation of the Protocols is in the archives of the War Refugee Board at the Franklin D. Roosevelt Presidential Library and Museum in New York.[4]

How it was written

The Vrba-Wetzler report was first written in Slovak by Vrba and Wetzler, beginning on 25 April 1944, and simultaneously translated into German by Oscar Krasniansky of the Slovakian Jewish Council. It was written and re-written several times. Wetzler wrote the first part, Vrba the third, and the two wrote the second part together. They then worked on the whole thing together.[5] Oscar Krasniansky, an engineer and stenographer, translated it from Slovak into German with the help of Gisela Steiner.[5] They produced a 40-page report in German, which was completed by Thursday, 27 April. Vrba wrote that the report was also translated into Hungarian.[6] The original Slovak version of the report was not preserved.[5]

The report contained a detailed description of the geography and management of the camps, and of how the prisoners lived and died. It listed the transports that had arrived at Auschwitz since 1942, their place of origin, and the numbers "selected" for work or the gas chambers.[7] Kárný writes that the report is an invaluable historical document because it provides details that were known only to prisoners, most of whom died, including, for example, that discharge forms were filled out for prisoners who were gassed, indicating that death rates in the camp were actively falsified.[8]


It also contained sketches and information about the layout of the gas chambers. In a deposition for the trial of Adolf Eichmann in 1961, and in his book I Cannot Forgive (1964), Vrba said that he and Wetzler obtained the information about the gas chambers and crematoria from the Sonderkommando Filip Müller and his colleagues, who worked there. Müller confirmed Vrba's story in his Eyewitness Auschwitz (1979).[9] The report offered the following description:

At present there are four crematoria in operation at BIRKENAU, two large ones, I and II, and two smaller ones, III and IV. Those of type I and II consist of 3 parts, i.e.,: (A) the furnace room; (B) the large halls; and (C) the gas chamber. A huge chimney rises from the furnace room around which are grouped nine furnaces, each having four openings. Each opening can take three normal corpses at once and after an hour and a half the bodies are completely burned. This corresponds to a daily capacity of about 2,000 bodies. Next to this is a large "reception hall" which is arranged so as to give the impression of the antechamber of a bathing establishment. It holds 2,000 people and apparently there is a similar waiting room of the floor below. From there a door and a few steps lead down into the very long and narrow gas chamber. The walls of this chamber are also camouflaged with simulated entries to shower rooms in order to mislead the victims. This roof is fitted with three traps which can be hermetically closed from the outside. A track leads from the gas chamber to the furnace room.

    The gassing takes place as follows: the unfortunate victims are brought into hall (B) where they are told to undress. To complete the fiction that they are going to bathe, each person receives a towel and a small piece of soap issued by two men clad in white coats. They are then crowded into the gas chamber (C) in such numbers there is, of course, only standing room. To compress this crowd into the narrow space, shots are often fired to induce those already at the far end to huddle still closer together.

    When everybody is inside, the heavy doors are closed. Then there is a short pause, presumably to allow the room temperature to rise to a certain level, after which SS men with gas masks climb on the roof, open the traps, and shake down a preparation in powder form out of tin cans labeled "CYKLON" "For use against vermin," which is manufactured by a Hamburg concern. It is presumed that this is a "CYANIDE" mixture of some sort which turns into gas at a certain temperature. After three minutes everyone in the chamber is dead. No one is known to have survived this ordeal, although it was not uncommon to discover signs of life after the primitive measures employed in the Birch Wood. The chamber is then opened, aired, and the "special squad" carts the bodies on flat trucks to the furnace rooms where the burning takes place. Crematoria III and IV work on nearly the same principle, but their capacity is only half as large. Thus the total capacity of the four cremating and gassing plants at BIRKENAU amounts to about 6,000 daily.[10]

  (Moving 2,000 to 6,000 Cyanide soaked bodies and then burning them all to nothing in a single day??? Logistically impossible given the inputs and outputs. It's Jew Brit Intel war propaganda.   -- CSR)  



Vrba-Wetzler report timeline

The dates on which the report was passed to certain individuals has become a matter of importance within Holocaust historiography. This is partly because of the issue of whether the Hungarian government was aware of the gas chambers in Auschwitz before it facilitated the mass deportations, which began on 15 May, and partly because Vrba alleged that the report was not distributed quickly enough by Jewish leaders, particularly Rudolf Kastner of the Budapest Aid and Rescue Committee, and that lives were lost as a result.[13]

Israeli historian Yehuda Bauer writes that Oscar Krasniansky of the Jewish Council, who translated it into German from Slovak as Vrba and Wetzler were writing and dictating it, made conflicting statements about the report after the war. In the first, he said he handed the report to Kastner on 26 April during the latter's visit to Bratislava, but Bauer writes that the report was not finished until 27 April. In another statement, he said he gave it to Kastner on 28 April in Bratislava, but Hansi Brand, Kastner's lover and the wife of Joel Brand, said that Kastner was not in Bratislava until August. Bauer writes that it is nevertheless clear from Kastner's post-war statements that he had early access to the report, though perhaps not in April.[14] Randolph L. Braham writes that Kastner had a copy by 3 May when he paid a visit to Kolozsvar (Cluj), his home town.[15]

Kastner's reasons for not making the document public are unknown, but Vrba believed until the end of his life that Kastner withheld it in order not to jeopardize negotiations between the Aid and Rescue Committee and Adolf Eichmann, the SS officer in charge of the transport of Jews out of Hungary. Shortly after Vrba arrived in Slovakia from Auschwitz in April 1944, Eichmann proposed a deal to Kastner and others in Budapest that the Nazis would trade up to one million Hungarian Jews in exchange for 10,000 trucks and other goods from the Western Allies (see Joel Brand). The proposal came to nothing, but Kastner did obtain safe passage to Switzerland for 1,684 Jews on what became known as the Kastner train. Vrba believed that his report was suppressed in order not to damage these negotiations.[16]

Bauer writes that Kastner seems to have given a copy of the report in German to Geza Soos, a Hungarian Foreign Ministry official who ran a resistance group. Soos gave it to Joszef Elias, head of the Good Shepherd Mission, and Elias's secretary, Maria Szekely, translated it into Hungarian and prepared six copies. These copies made their way to various Hungarian and particularly Christian church officials, including Miklos Horthy's daughter-in-law.[17] Braham writes that this distribution occurred before 15 May.[18] According to Bauer, Erno Peto, a member of the Budapest Jewish Council, said he gave copies to Horthy's son, the papal nuntius Angelo Rotta, and the finance minister Lajos Remenyi-Schneller.[17]

The Jewish Council in Budapest did hand the report out to individuals, but told at least one person not to discuss it widely. The Hungarian biologist, George Klein, as a teenager in Budapest, was working for the Jewish Council as a junior secretary at the time. One day in late May or early June, his boss, Dr Zoltan Kohn, gave him a carbon copy of the report, and told him that he should tell only his closest family and friends about it. He wrote that he told his uncle, a well-known physician, who "became so angry that he nearly hit me," and asked how he could believe such nonsense. It was the same with other relatives and friends. The older ones refused to believe it, while the younger ones believed it and wanted to act. When it came time for Klein to get on the train, he chose to run instead, and that saved his life.[19]  

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vrba-Wetzler_report