Current Events > Anne Frank's betrayer possibly named

(+) Yeah! (+)

https://news.sky.com/story/anne-frank-betrayal-suspect-named-by-researchers-after-new-investigation-12518235

This seems very uncomfortable.

There's no need to know this.

The findings of the new research will be published in a book by Canadian author Rosemary Sullivan, The Betrayal of Anne Frank, which is due to be released on Tuesday.

Sounds sensationalist.

DeadBankerDream posted...

There's no need to know this.

Why not?

Such an odd thing to focus on.

Once human beings find themselves in impossible situations like that, it's hard to really assign blame. Our whole responsibility is to avoid situations like this by bopping fascists and authoritarians on the head.

Doe posted...

Sounds sensationalist.

It was on 60 Minutes last night. They just said they think it was probably some dude who Otto was told in a letter in the 50s/60s betrayed them. So nothing really new or crazy.

Some real dubious claims. For one thing, the majority of the evidence relies on a copy of an anonymous note that was apparently given to Otto Frank. The original was never found, nor who wrote it. The note wasn't publicly known until 1964.

Health posted...

Why not?

It doesn't matter which victim of the holocaust cracked and gave up a name. What good will it serve other than the black mark their descendants? Blame will be moved from the Nazi perpetrators onto this person. History is better served not knowing.

DeadBankerDream posted...

Blame will be moved from the Nazi perpetrators onto this person. History is better served not knowing.

I mean, will it? In the 60 Minutes segment talking about this they even had a rabbi saying that no matter what happened the fault is still solely on the Nazis. No reasonable person is going to shift blame away here, and the ones who would already hate Jewish people anyways.

DeadBankerDream posted...

What good will it serve other than the black mark their descendants?

You can say that about every criminal then.

DeadBankerDream posted...

History is better served not knowing.

Theres no need to cover up the truth (if this is indeed true).

DeadBankerDream posted...

Blame will be moved from the Nazi perpetrators onto this person.

It was still the Nazis who killed her, thats a fact that cant be disputed.

I'm someone who values the truth when it comes to history so I see no reason to suppress this.

I'm not saying to suppress anything, I'm saying it was a mistake to research it in the first place.

It was wrong to care enough to find out.

DeadBankerDream posted...

I'm not saying to suppress anything, I'm saying it was a mistake to research it in the first place.

It was wrong to care enough to find out.

Ok but why?

That doesn't make any sense. It's information that's not known, why is it wrong to look into it?

DeadBankerDream posted...

I'm not saying to suppress anything, I'm saying it was a mistake to research it in the first place.

It was wrong to care enough to find out.

What secrets are your family hiding

DeadBankerDream posted...

I'm not saying to suppress anything, I'm saying it was a mistake to research it in the first place.

It was wrong to care enough to find out.

Who the fuck are you speaking to? What an odd thing to cling about.

Reaction from a Dutch historian who researched the Jewish Council:

'Paper thin,' Van der Boom calls this proof. 'After the war, the wildest rumors circulated about who betrayed whom. Van den Bergh had many enemies.' It disturbs the historian that the American cold case team claims to have worked with the most modern investigative techniques. "It's a lot of fuss about nothing."

According to Van der Boom, the accusation fits in with the many misconceptions that exist about the motivation and working method of the Jewish Council. 'You often read, for example, that the Council decided who had to be transported. That is completely untrue.'

He even goes as far as calling it "slanderous nonsense".

Source: https://www.historischnieuwsblad.nl/onderzoeker-joodse-raad-verraadtheorie-anne-frank-is-lasterlijke-onzin/

Also:

Ronald Leopold, general director of the Anne Frank Foundation, believes that 'further investigation is needed' into the theory that Anne Frank was betrayed by the Jewish notary Arnold van den Bergh. "You have to be very careful about sending someone down in history as a traitor to Anne Frank if you are not 100 or 200 percent sure about that."'

Source: https://www.rtlnieuws.nl/nieuws/nederland/artikel/5281574/anne-frank-stichting-reactie-verraad-notaris-verder-onderzoek

Hornezz posted...

Ronald Leopold, general director of the Anne Frank Foundation, believes that 'further investigation is needed' into the theory that Anne Frank was betrayed by the Jewish notary Arnold van den Bergh. "You have to be very careful about sending someone down in history as a traitor to Anne Frank if you are not 100 or 200 percent sure about that."'

This sums up my thoughts on the whole matter well. They've taken a bunch of circumstantial evidence to name their 'first suspect' while making a big stink on the media and preparing to launch and sell a whole book literally titled "The Betrayal of Anne Frank." The whole thing seems motivated primarily by financial gain rather than scholarship and attention to history.

DeadBankerDream posted...

It doesn't matter which victim of the holocaust cracked and gave up a name. What good will it serve other than the black mark their descendants? Blame will be moved from the Nazi perpetrators onto this person. History is better served not knowing.

I think this is the first time I have felt moral offense at something that didn't have any real impact. No, no, I want everyone to know everything.

But this being said, Leopold is very right about this. You have to be dead-on before making these calls.

Guide posted...

But this being said, Leopold is very right about this. You have to be dead-on before making these calls.

That I agree with. Know you're not barking up the wrong tree before making such a serious accusation.

Doe posted...

This sums up my thoughts on the whole matter well. They've taken a bunch of circumstantial evidence to name their 'first suspect' while making a big stink on the media and preparing to launch and sell a whole book literally titled "The Betrayal of Anne Frank." The whole thing seems motivated primarily by financial gain rather than scholarship and attention to history.

Because ultimately it doesn't matter the identity of the person that gave her up. The point being that everyone had to go through hardships, and I'm sorry but most likely the person was faced with either snitching on them or condemning himself/his family to imprisonment or worse.

Agree with a lot of people in this thread. Betray is such a loaded term too for a situation like this