Anne Frank's Diary - A Hoax?

Re: Anne Frank's Diary - A Hoax

Well I read but this is not clear for me. This is confusing. This is possible today my mind is not clear also...

I mean the link in my previous post is a quite old article and I do not know what to think about... (quote below) :
(because experts do not mean skillfulness)
On the other hand I understand the discussion about, with significant information.

Simply I would like to know the final status (if possible) : hoax > yes | no (delete as appropriate)

Mr. Barnouw, speaking from his office in Amsterdam, noted that the institute, a branch of the State Department of Education, had prepared the book, which appeared in a Dutch edition three years ago. To document its findings fully, the institute called upon the experts at the State Forensic Science Laboratory, a branch of the Dutch Ministry of Justice. A summary of its scientific report is included in the 719-page book. Handwriting Analyzed

Miss Frank's handwriting was closely analyzed by experts, as were specimens of her writing and those by 78 of her classmates. The experts took into account that sometimes Miss Frank used normal cursive lettering and sometimes a disconnected printing style. This is a common characteristic ''applicable to the writing of young people,'' the experts said. Samples of her writing are included in the book to support their conclusion that the diary was indeed written by Anne Frank alone.

The Forensic Science Laboratory report also points out that the paper, ink and glue in the diary and some of her accompanying loose sheets all existed in the early 1940's, before Miss Frank and her family were betrayed in their hiding place in Amsterdam and sent away to concentration camps.
 
Re: Anne Frank's Diary - A Hoax

mkrnhr,

mkrnhr said:
François, did you read the entire thread or just the title?

Please, in populating that way, this is insulting me, but feel free to do it...

Of course I read only the titles, are you serious?

Let me say I think this is a stupid remark/question?

So you can say that again, I will do again the same answer.
 

mkrnhr

SuperModerator
Moderator
FOTCM Member
Re: Anne Frank's Diary - A Hoax

François said:
Please, in populating that way, this is insulting me, but feel free to do it...

Of course I read only the titles, are you serious?

Please calm down :D The use of a smiley " :) " means there is no attack or whatsoever, just an indirect hint that the answer to your question is in the thread. You're the only one seeing insults. Take it easy and relax.

Let me say I think this is a stupid remark/question
It's your right :)
 
Re: Anne Frank's Diary - A Hoax

mkrnhr,

I am wondering if you have youself read the thread, because there is no definitive answer within the thread
mkrnhr said:
the answer to your question is in the thread
but serious doubts, argued (I took time to re-read again, and did my personal research).

Finally my conclusion is this way :

Laura said:
...considering what we have learned about how our CURRENT history is being manipulated, and knowing that human nature is pretty much the same across the centuries, not to mention psychopathic natures, one wonders just how much of ANY of our history is anywhere near close to the truth!!!

[Please do not say I am sycophantic towards Laura, this is factual that she is able to read big pile of books for getting knowledge - I am periodically too lazy for doing the same (cyclothymic ? > more severe :,bipolar disorder ?) ]
 

mkrnhr

SuperModerator
Moderator
FOTCM Member
Re: Anne Frank's Diary - A Hoax

Hello Francois,
That was my temporary "conclusion" too, not really a definitive one, but the elements "tend" to demonstrate that the diary is a forgery. The question is: how many other so-called historic documents are actually forgeries? Given that many of our personal traits (conscious or unconscious) are deeply influenced by such a literature, the question can lead further than any conclusion on a single case. That is not diminishing the importance of this particular case, which may be regarded as a significant clue to how education has been influencing mentalities in schools for instance.
 

Laura

Administrator
Administrator
Moderator
FOTCM Member
Re: Anne Frank's Diary - A Hoax

François said:
[Please do not say I am sycophantic towards Laura, this is factual that she is able to read big pile of books for getting knowledge - I am periodically too lazy for doing the same (cyclothymic ? > more severe :,bipolar disorder ?) ]

I actually think that the reaction going on here is one towards what is seen as a typical French tendency to want to argue and nitpick over small things, such as whether or not there is a question mark in the thread title.

Obviously, to be precise, there should be a question mark as you suggest, however, I didn't put one there because I was utilizing the title of a page where much of the research came from and the thread was about that research - that it was/is a hoax. Within the thread itself, I expressed myself as you have quoted and I think that's sufficient to emphasize a small question about the topic.
 
Re: Anne Frank's Diary - A Hoax

Scary (manipulation of history events), to be aware without paranoia? is not so easy...

I am wondering if we can modify past events (multiple time lines?...)


If I remember well there is some thing about in C's material...
 
Re: Anne Frank's Diary - A Hoax

Laura, don't remember me I am a typical French sick (already said)

[I will try self healing]
 

Laura

Administrator
Administrator
Moderator
FOTCM Member
Re: Anne Frank's Diary - A Hoax

François said:
Laura, don't remember me I am a typical French sick (already said)

Don't worry, I still love the French and know what they COULD be!
 

The Mechanic

Jedi Council Member
mkrnhr said:
Hello Francois,
That was my temporary "conclusion" too, not really a definitive one, but the elements "tend" to demonstrate that the diary is a forgery. The question is: how many other so-called historic documents are actually forgeries? Given that many of our personal traits (conscious or unconscious) are deeply influenced by such a literature, the question can lead further than any conclusion on a single case. That is not diminishing the importance of this particular case, which may be regarded as a significant clue to how education has been influencing mentalities in schools for instance.

I agree completely with you mkrnhr, that's my position on it too.

Laura said:
Obviously, to be precise, there should be a question mark as you suggest

Done :-)
 

herrnimrod

Padawan Learner
A hoax? Why not. From Hitler diaries to human skin lampshades - the holocaust is laden with hoaxes. Hers and most others accounts do have a propensity for the fantastical. All indicative of a highly questionable narrative.
 

Palinurus

The Living Force
Archiving the latest from SOTT (Mike Corder, Kansas City Star,Tue 15 May 2018 20:20 UTC):

Two previously unreadable pages of Anne Frank's diary deciphered, reveal dirty jokes -- Sott.net

Researchers using digital technology deciphered the writing on two pages of Anne Frank's diary that she had pasted over with brown masking paper, discovering four naughty jokes and a candid explanation of sex, contraception and prostitution.

"Anyone who reads the passages that have now been discovered will be unable to suppress a smile," said Frank van Vree, director of the Netherlands Institute for War, Holocaust and Genocide Studies. "The 'dirty' jokes are classics among growing children. They make it clear that Anne, with all her gifts, was above all also an ordinary girl."

Anne, age 13 at the time, wrote the two pages on Sept. 28, 1942, less than three months after she, her family and another Jewish family went into hiding from the Nazis in a secret annex behind a canal-side house in Amsterdam.

Later on, possibly fearing prying eyes or no longer liking what she had written, she covered them over with brown paper with an adhesive backing like a postage stamp, and their content remained a tantalizing mystery for decades.

It turns out the pages contained four jokes about sex that Anne herself described as "dirty" and an explanation of women's sexual development, sex, contraception and prostitution.

"They bring us even closer to the girl and the writer Anne Frank," Ronald Leopold, executive director of the Anne Frank House museum, said Tuesday.

Experts on Anne's multimillion-selling diary said the newly discovered text, when studied with the rest of her journal, reveals more about her development as a writer than it does about her interest in sex.

continued...
 

Palinurus

The Living Force
Source: New book claims to solve mystery of who betrayed Anne Frank - DutchNews.nl

New book claims to solve mystery of who betrayed Anne Frank

January 17, 2022

AnneFrankSchoolPhoto-e1481987598603-768x618.jpeg

Anne Frank at school in 1940 - Photo: Collection Anne Frank Stichting Amsterdam via Wikimedia Commons

The hiding place of Anne Frank and her family in Amsterdam during World War II was probably given to the Nazis by Jewish notary Arnold van den Bergh according to a new book which claims to solve the 77-year-old mystery.

The Betrayal of Anne Frank, by Canadian writer Rosemary Sullivan, is based on the work of a cold case team led by a former FBI agent who spent years trying to solve one of the most enduring mysteries of the war.

The teenage diarist and her family went into hiding on 6 July 1942 but they were found and deported in August 1944. Most died in Auschwitz, Anne and her sister Margot in Bergen-Belsen.

There have been many theories about who betrayed Anne Frank and the seven others in hiding and the name of Arnold van den Bergh appears on earlier lists of possible suspects.

Van den Bergh was a member of the Joodse Raad, or Jewish Council, which was set up in 1941 ostensibly as an organization for Jewish self government. In fact it was an instrument for the occupiers to facilitate the smooth selection and deportation of Jews.

The team looked at some 30 possible scenarios, including the one that the family was found by chance. ‘We can say that 27 or 28 of them are extremely unlikely or impossible,’ journalist Pieter van Twisk, one of the Dutch researchers, told the Volkskrant (in Dutch).

Letter

The theory is based on an anonymous letter that was delivered to Otto Frank after the war. The cold case team failed to trace the original but did find a copy of the text made by Otto in the family archives of a policeman involved in an earlier investigation.

The note says that the family’s hiding place was ‘given to the Jüdische Auswanderung by A. van den Bergh, who lived at the time near the Vondelpark… The JA had been given a whole list of hiding places by him.’

Van den Bergh, the book claims, probably told the Nazis about the Frank’s hiding place to keep himself and his own family safe.

Public

‘As a founding member of the Jewish Council, he would have been privy – to addresses – where Jews were hiding,’ former FBI officer Vince Pankoke told CBS. ‘When Van den Bergh lost all his series of protections exempting him from having to go to the camps, he had to provide something valuable to the Nazis that he’s had contact with to let him and his wife at that time stay safe.’

Otto only went public with the existence of the note in 1964, during a second investigation into the family’s betrayal. At the time the claim was dismissed as slanderous towards Van den Bergh, who had died in 1950.

Anti-Semitism

The book suggests that Otto did not press the issue out of respect for Van den Bergh’s children and because he did not want to do anything to stimulate anti-Semitism.

‘Perhaps he just felt that if I bring this up again, with Arnold van den Bergh being Jewish, it’ll only stoke the fires further,’ Pankoke said. ‘But we have to keep in mind that the fact that he was Jewish just meant that he was placed into a untenable position by the Nazis to do something to save his life.’

Emile Schrijver, director of the Jewish Historical Quarter organization in Amsterdam, told the Volkskrant the book had thinned out the number of theories about the betrayal considerably. ‘Of all the theories, you can say this one is the most likely,’ he said. ‘But the last word has not yet been spoken.’

Watch the CBS documentary on the cold case investigation.

The Anne Frank House organization in Amsterdam said on Monday in a statement that it was not involved in the cold case investigation, but it had shared its archives and museum with the team, as well as its own 2016 investigation into the arrest of the people in hiding.

‘At the Anne Frank House we aim to tell the life story of Anne Frank as fully as we can, so it’s important to also examine the arrest of Anne Frank and the seven other people in the secret annex in as much detail as possible,’ said director Ronald Leopold. ‘The cold case team’s investigation has generated important new information and a fascinating hypothesis that merits further research.’

The book, The Betrayal of Anne Frank, is published by Barnes and Noble and goes on global release on Monday.

Buy this book

Similar coverage:
Anne Frank may have been betrayed by Jewish notary
Investigating who betrayed Anne Frank and her family to the Nazis

Dutch coverage:
Het verraad van Anne Frank
Nieuw onderzoek met moderne technieken: Joodse notaris verraadde adres Anne Frank
Coldcaseteam wijst vermoedelijke verrader Anne Frank aan, historici reageren kritisch. ‘Dit is moreel niet zo wenselijk’

Experts kritisch over nieuwe theorie Anne Frank: 'Lasterlijke onzin'
NOS News - Domestic - today, 15:20 - Updated today, 16:33
Experts critical of new Anne Frank theory: "Slanderous nonsense"

Lambert Teuwissen and Stan Rombouts
- editors online and domestic

Experts react critically to a new theory on the betrayal of Anne Frank. There is admiration for the large amount of information that the team was able to uncover using modern methods, but the conclusion that a Jewish notary betrayed the Secret Annex is based too much on assumptions, according to experts.

Ronald Leopold, director of the Anne Frank House, is impressed by the amount of work done by the team. All the known theories, as well as a few new ones, were explored. "An admirable amount of work."

He calls the conclusion that Jewish notary Arnold van den Bergh was behind the betrayal "a new perspective," but he also has reservations. "I think you have to conclude that important pieces of the puzzle are still missing."

The researchers argue that as a prominent member of the Jewish Council, Van den Bergh had access to lists of addresses in hiding. When he himself was in danger of being deported, he passed them on to the Nazis in order to save his family, the team argues.

"Slanderous nonsense,'' Bart van der Boom reacts vehemently. The Leiden University lecturer is working on a book about the Jewish Council that will be published in April, entitled Politics of the Lesser Evil. "There is no serious corroboration for this story."

The team deduces the existence of the lists from post-war testimony by a German interpreter. Gibberish, Van der Boom characterizes that reasoning. "You're out of your mind if you think that the members of the Jewish Council, respected people, would betray 500 to 1,000 Jewish people who went into hiding."

" With big accusations, you also need big evidence. "

Johannes Houwink ten Cate, emeritus professor of Holocaust and Genocide Studies

Emeritus Professor of Holocaust and Genocide Studies Johannes Houwink ten Cate of the University of Amsterdam concurs. "There has been very harsh judgment about the Jewish Council after the war, not least in Jewish circles. If there had been any evidence that there had been lists of Jews in hiding, that would really have been brought up after the war."

Moreover, Houwink ten Cate continues, even if those lists existed, it would not have been proven that the Secret Annex was on them or that Van den Bergh had knowledge of them. "With big accusations, you also need big evidence."

-------------------------------------------------------------------
Van den Bergh's granddaughter, who spoke to the researchers about her family history, was told their findings last weekend. She does not want to respond, she tells NOS. "I want to limit it to my cooperation with the preliminary investigation into this war history," she says in a response.

Chief Investigator Pieter van Twist says that the woman was shocked when she heard about the accusations against her grandfather earlier in the investigation. She had never heard about it in the family. "She thought it was terrible. But on the other hand, if it allowed him to secure his own family, then of course it would be possible."
_____________________________________________________________________


The investigators admit that they have not been able to find a smoking gun. Former NIOD [Netherlands Institute for War Documentation] investigator David Barnouw thinks that is also an illusion after all these years, as he himself concluded in 2003 in an investigation of all suspects brought up to that point (including a short piece on Van den Bergh).

"I was very curious to see what came out of it," says Barnouw, who was asked to participate but declined. "The problem is always that people start from assumptions. I could make three more stories like that. It's a theory that fits in with the list of other suspects, but it's still speculation."

The reasoning that Van den Bergh, as a notary in the Goudstikker affair, had good relations with the Nazi leadership and might have been able to negotiate his fate, does not convince Barnouw either. "All the Jews who had any jobs at all were involved in collaboration. It was also difficult for him to refuse; that would have caused him more trouble."

He also considers it unlikely that passing on addresses Van den Bergh would have accomplished anything. "I don't believe the Germans would have been impressed if someone came to them and said 'Oh, I have some addresses here for you, would you please let me off the hook'."

Tunnel vision

Van der Boom also notes a lack of evidence that, if the betrayal had taken place at all, it would have benefited Van den Bergh. The research team argues that the notary was able to walk around freely in 1944 because there are no details known about a hiding. "That seems to me to be tunnel vision. They say: he wasn't in hiding, so he had to have bought his safety in some other way. But they just don't know where he was."

"It wasn't as if absconders just called up to say 'I'm now located there and there,'" Houwink ten Cate adds. Moreover, he continues, why would the raid on the Secret Annex only take place in August 1944, if Van den Bergh had already gotten into trouble at the beginning of that year? "There are a lot of loose ends in the story."

What remains is the accusatory piece of correspondence about Van den Bergh that was delivered to Otto Frank shortly after the war. Because Anne Frank was not yet world-famous at the time, the anonymous writer must have been telling the truth, the cold case team believes.

But Van der Boom sees this differently as well. "Perhaps someone wanted to blacken Van den Bergh. He had enemies and after the war there were thousands of stories about who had blood on their hands and butter on their heads. In that context, there are also an incredible number of nonsense stories being told."

That Van den Bergh, who died in 1950, has previously been described as having integrity weighs more heavily for Houwink ten Cate. "It is true that this is the only written piece of evidence in which a name is mentioned. But we also know that Van den Bergh was reinstated honorably as a notary publicly after the war without any problem. That only would have happened if he had a reputation for integrity as a notary."

"It's a pretty definitive interpretation of basically one piece of writing to which you then add a context," also warns Emile Schrijver, director of the Jewish Cultural Quarter in Amsterdam, which includes the Jewish Historical Museum. "You have to assume quite a few things to get this definitive, which I think is complicated.''

Still, he is pleased that the investigation exonerates many other suspects for good. "There's one scenario left and it's more likely than all the others," he thinks, despite all the question marks. He hopes that further investigation can clarify more details.

The research team itself admits that there are still holes in the theory. But Van Twisk hopes that these can be plugged precisely with the publication of these theories. "It may well be that if attention is paid to it now, people will come forward and say: I have also had such an anonymous letter."

Too much time elapsed

Still, FBI investigator Vince Pankoke, who cooperated with the investigation, thinks he has a strong circumstantial case against Van den Bergh. "Only this theory comes close to a solution and is the only one that is consistent with all the explanations, clues and the sometimes misleading behavior of Otto Frank, and Miep Gies who helped the family. And it is the first and only theory with physical evidence that points to a traitor."

"Would I have preferred irrefutable evidence? Of course. But for a smoking gun, too much time has passed."

Barnouw also remains concerned that the truth will never come out, even with new investigative methods. "There was some incredibly grand stuff about big data that they went off on with the computer," he says. However, one of the problems with this part of World War II is that there is so little data."

He continues to reckon that dumb luck led to the raid, as unsatisfactory as that is.


Translated with www.DeepL.com/Translator (free version)
 
Top Bottom