ÃÓËàã Ïàëåñòèíû
ModernLib.Net / Îòå÷åñòâåííàÿ ïðîçà / Ãóíèí Ëåâ / ÃÓËàã Ïàëåñòèíû - ×òåíèå
(ñòð. 60)
Àâòîð:
|
Ãóíèí Ëåâ |
Æàíð:
|
Îòå÷åñòâåííàÿ ïðîçà |
-
×èòàòü êíèãó ïîëíîñòüþ
(3,00 Ìá)
- Ñêà÷àòü â ôîðìàòå fb2
(995 Êá)
- Ñêà÷àòü â ôîðìàòå doc
(2,00 Ìá)
- Ñêà÷àòü â ôîðìàòå txt
(987 Êá)
- Ñêà÷àòü â ôîðìàòå html
(1000 Êá)
- Ñòðàíèöû:
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70, 71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80, 81, 82, 83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88, 89, 90, 91, 92, 93, 94
|
|
Appeal funds for the rescue of Jews in Europe, I said, 'NO!' and I say again, 'NO!' ... one should resist this wave which pushes the Zionist activities to secondary importance." In January, 1943, the leadership of the absorption and enlisting fund decided to bar all appeals on behalf of rescuing Jews. It is explicitly stated in the "Sefer Hamagbis" (Book of Appeals) that the reasons for this prohibition were because of other obligations in Eretz Yisroel. In the beginning of February, 1943, Yitzchak Greenbaum addressed a meeting in Tel Aviv on the subject, "the Diaspora and the Redemption," in which he stated: "For the rescue of the Jews in the Diaspora, we should consolidate our excess strength and the surplus of powers that we have. When they come to us with two plans - the rescue of the masses of Jews in Europe or the redemption of the land [in Palestine] - I vote, without a second thought, for the redemption of the land. The more said about the slaughter of our people, the greater the minimization of our efforts to strengthen and promote the Hebraization of the land. If there would be a possibility today of buying packages of food [for Jews in Nazi captivity] with the money of the "Keren Hayesod" (United Jewish Appeal) to send it through Lisbon, would we do such a thing? No! And once again No!" (Reb Moshe Shonfeld, The Holocaust Victims Accuse: Documents and Testimony on Jewish War Criminals, 1977, p. 26, emphasis added) Mr. Schwalb expressed the complete Zionist ideology and stated clearly and openly the politics of the Zionist leaders in the area of rescue: the shedding of Jewish blood in the Diaspora is necessary in order for us to demand the establishment of a "Jewish" state before a peace commission. Money will be sent to save a group of "chalutzim" (pioneers), while the remainder of Czech Jewry must resign itself to annihilation in the Auschwitz crematoria. (Reb Moshe Shonfeld, The Holocaust Victims Accuse: Documents and Testimony on Jewish War Criminals, 1977, p. 28, emphasis added) We have previously quoted the words of Yitzchak Greenbaum, chairman of the "rescue committee" of the Jewish Agency in Eretz Yosroel, who refused to allocate even one dollar of United Jewish Appeal funds for food to those who were fighting off the pangs of hunger. This approach was totally in consonance with his famous slogan, to the effect that, "one goat in Eretz Yisroel is more important than an entire community in the Diaspora." How could he thus withhold a package of straw from a Holy Land goat in order to send food to a starving infant? But if that is not enough, the Zionists acted like the fiend who declared that he not only would not give, but he also would not let others give (whom our Sages called a "rosho" - a wicked person). The Zionist leaders weren't satisfied merely with the crime of sitting idly by and doing nothing. They labored with all their might to forcefully prevent others from helping the sufferers in the ghetto. (Reb Moshe Shonfeld, The Holocaust Victims Accuse: Documents and Testimony on Jewish War Criminals, 1977, pp. 44-45) One cow in Palestine is worth more than all the Jews in Poland. (Yitzchak Greenbaum in Reb Moshe Shonfeld, The Holocaust Victims Accuse: Documents and Testimony on Jewish War Criminals, 1977, p. 116) The Antonescu Offer. Reb Moshe Shonfeld's book documents several instances of offers being made, sometimes by the Nazis, to release Jews for a fixed price, and of the offers being declined by Zionist leaders. The Romanian government, for example, offered 70,000 Jews at $50 apiece. These Jews could have been transported to Palestine via Turkey - a few days' ride by truck. The Romanian offer was confirmed by the U.S. State Department. The offer would become void once Romania was occupied by the Germans - an occupation that was imminent. Ben Hecht in his book Perfidy relates placing the following ad in New York newspapers: FOR SALE 70,000 JEWS AT $50 APIECE GUARANTEED HUMAN BEINGS Zionist leaders, however, denied the existence of such an offer and sabotaged fund-raising efforts. As a result, the 70,000 Romanian Jews perished. Ben Hecht's indignation is unrestrained: But in 1943, we, who called out the plight of the Romanian Jews to the world, were discredited by the Zionist unions, the established Zionist leadership and their associated philanthropies, as scandalmongers. Our attempt to get the Jews out of Romania before the Germans came was scotched. The 70,000 Jews who might have been saved were herded into barns by the Germanized Romanians under General Antonescu, hosed with gasoline, ignited, and shot down when they came blazing and screaming out of their cauldrons. Was it for this the conspirators of Silence had been holding their high-level meetings, fraternizing with presidents and prime ministers and keeping intact Weizmann's ... policy of an 'exclusive' ... Palestine? This Silence, this wretched business of Jewish leaders lying about the slaughter of Europe's Jewry - trying to hide it, soft-pedal it - for what? These organizations, these philanthropists, these timorous Jewish lodge members in Zion, in London and America - these Zionist leaders who let their six million kinsmen burn, choke, hang, without protest, with indifference, and even with a glint of anti-Semitic cunning in their political plannings - I sum up against them. These factotums, these policy-makers, the custodians of the Jewish future in Palestine ... these Zionist men and women - I haul into the prisoner's dock of this book. (Ben Hecht, Perfidy, in Reb Moshe Shonfeld, The Holocaust Victims Accuse: Documents and Testimony on Jewish War Criminals, 1977, p. 102) The Eichmann Offer. The war afforded more than one opportunity to save Jews. Here is another significant opportunity, the offer this time coming directly from Adolph Eichmann: So I am ready to sell you - a million Jews. ... What do you want to save? Virile men? Grown women? Old people? Children? Sit down - and talk. ... Now I am going to prove to you that I trust you more than you trust me. When you ... tell me that the offer has been accepted, I will [as an initial demonstration of good faith, even before you make any payment] dissolve Auschwitz and move 10 percent of the promised million to the border. You take over the 100,000 Jews and deliver for them afterwards one thousand trucks. And then the deal will proceed step by step. (Adolph Eichmann, quoted in Raul Hilberg, The Destruction of the European Jews, 1985, p. 1133-1134) Eichmann's initiative, according to his testimony in Jerusalem, had been influenced largely by the propensity of rival SS factions to negotiate with the Jews. He was going to confine the offer to freeing 100,000 Jews, but then thought that only a major gesture, involving a million, was going to have any impact. When Himmler approved the scheme, Eichmann was actually surprised. (Raul Hilberg, The Destruction of the European Jews, 1985, p. 1134) However, Joel Brand, attempting to negotiate this exchange, met with no support, either from representatives of the Allied nations, or from Jewish representatives. When he realized that the offer would not be accepted, he burst out with: Do you know what you are doing? That is simply murder! That is mass murder. ... [O]ur best people will be slaughtered! My wife! My mother! My children will be first! (Raul Hilberg, The Destruction of the European Jews, 1985, p. 1137) Among the objections was not that the deal would fail, but rather that it was undesirable that the deal succeed: "But Mr. Brand," the British host exclaimed, "what shall I do with those million Jews? Where shall I put them?" (Raul Hilberg, The Destruction of the European Jews, 1985, P. 1140) The plain fact was that there was no place on earth that would have been ready to accept the Jews, not even this one million. (Adolph Eichmann in Raul Hilberg, The Destruction of the European Jews, 1985, p. 1140) A similar comment was made with respect to the above-mentioned Antonescu Plan: The British Foreign Office ... was concerned with the "difficulties of disposing of any considerable number of Jews" in the event of their release from Axis Europe. ... [W]ithin the Foreign Office there was fear of large-scale success.... (Raul Hilberg, The Destruction of the European Jews, 1985, P. 1140) And a similar reaction with respect to discussions concerning the rescue of Bulgarian Jews: Hull raised the question of the 60 or 70 thousand Jews that are in Bulgaria and are threatened with extermination unless we could get them out and, very urgently, pressed Eden for an answer to the problem. Eden replied that the whole problem of the Jews in Europe is very difficult and that we should move very cautiously about offering to take all Jews out of a country like Bulgaria. If we do that, then the Jews of the world will be wanting us to make similar efforts in Poland and Germany. Hitler might well take us up on any such offer and there simply are not enough ships and means of transportation in the world to handle them. (Harry Hopkins in Raul Hilberg, The Destruction of the European Jews, 1985, P. 1122) The role played by Jews in the Allied indifference was, to repeat, one of support of inaction: There is considerable difference of opinion among the Jewish people as to the policies which should be pursued in rescuing and assisting these unfortunate people, and no one course of action would be agreeable to all persons interested in this problem. (American Secretary of State Hull in Raul Hilberg, The Destruction of the European Jews, 1985, p. 1125) The Rudolph Vrba Accusation. The reports above of American Jews and world Jews doing little to save their coreligionists under Nazi occupation, or of even obstructing efforts to save them, or reports of the Antonescu Offer, or of the Eichmann offer - these do not exhaust the accounts leading to the conclusion that the Jewish role in saving Jewish lives during World War II fell short of heroic, and perhaps was typically complicitous or collaborative, and sometimes even becoming criminally so. Rather, other such accounts can be found, among them the one offered by Dr. Rudolph Vrba in the Oshawa Times account below. Vrba's accusation standing by itself falls short of totally convincing, and would need to be bolstered by substantive detail before it was given full credit. Nevertheless, Vrba's accusation is reproduced below to demonstrate that the accusations of Jewish non-assistance focus on many events in many parts of the world, and because it heightens the probability that further investigation would credit some of these accusations: Jewish Council Blamed For Deaths of 400,000 FRANKFURT (AP) - A Canadian professor contends that 400,000 jews killed by the Nazis at the Auschwitz extermination camp could have been saved had the Budapest Jewish Council warned them in time instead of co-operating with the Nazis. Dr. Rudolph Vrba, 43, associate professor of pharmacology at the University of British Columbia, in an interview gave an account of his escape from Auschwitz and his efforts to warn the world of the fate threatening more than 1,000,000 Hungarian Jews. Vrba testified last Friday at the trial here of two former SS (Elite Corps) colonels charged with the mass murder of Hungarian jews during the war. Vrba, a native of Czechoslovakia and a Jew by birth, said he was deported to Maidanek concentration camp near Lublin, Poland, in June, 1942, and two weeks later transferred to Auschwitz. In the spring of 1944, he heard that 1,000,000 Hungarian Jews were to die at the notorious camp and decided to flee and tell the world about the crime that was going to be committed. Together with another prisoner, he hid in early April, 1944, underneath a pile of construction wood within the outer security zone of the camp which usually was not closely guarded. After spending three days in their hideout with hardly any food the two family [sic] made their getaway and eventually crossed the Slovak border. In Cadca, Slovakia, he informed the Jewish Council which in turn passed on the information to the Bratislava and Budapest Jewish councils, Vrba said. But, he said "The Budapest Jewish Council were co-operating with the Nazi authorities who promised them that they would allow some 2,000 select Jews to travel to Switzerland if they hid from the Jewish community the truth about what was in store for them at Auschwitz." Thus, he added, Hungarian Jews did not put up any resistance when they were taken to the Auschwitz death camp, believing that they were merely being "resettled." Vrba continued that only after Swiss newspapers June 22, 1944, published his story about the Hungarian Jews and copies of his report were sent to U.S. President Franklin D. Roosevelt and the Pope, protests from several governments, including the U.S., British and Swedish governments, forced the Hungarian head of government, Admiral Horthy, to stop the deporting of more Jews from the country. Vrba was born Walter Rosenberg but changed his name after escaping from Auschwitz. (Oshawa Times, December 30, 1968) Jewish help compared to Ukrainian help. And so here we are faced with the following incongruity. Ukrainians were dying at the hands of the Nazis, were dying fighting the Nazis, were dying saving Jews - and yet Morley Safer now brands Ukrainians as Nazis. In contrast, American Jews were not allowing the Jewish Holocaust to interfere with their lifestyles, were vetoing proposals to assist and rescue European Jews, and yet they are now privileged to accuse Ukrainians of being Nazis. People who did next to nothing to save the European Jews, people who obstructed the rescue of European Jews, people who acted while not under threat of death now turn around and judge those who while under threat of death did not live up to impossibly high moral standards. Appropriately did Reb Moshe Shonfeld place on the title page of his book The Holocaust Victims Accuse: Documents and Testimony on Jewish War Criminals the quotations "Our enemies will subjugate you" (Vayikra) - "Those enemies will be from within" (Chazal). Reading Reb Shonfeld's book invites the conclusion that Morley Safer's searching for Nazi collaborators in Ukraine was misplaced - perhaps it is the case that the largest repository of unprosecuted Nazi collaborators today is to be found in the state of Israel; and invites consideration of the further conclusion that Morley Safer's searching for enemies of Judaism in Ukraine is similarly misplaced - he might instead have looked for the truly dangerous enemies within - for Jews like Simon Wiesenthal, Rabbi Yaakov Dov Bleich, Elie Wiesel, Jerzy Kosinski, and - yes - Morley Safer himself. Their misstatements lower Jewish credibility; their hatred incites a reactionary anti-Semitism. In fact, Morley Safer's accusation of Ukrainian collaboration with the Nazis is not a cry for justice nor an advancement of historical truth, but is, rather, a weapon sometimes brandished under political motivation even when the facts do not justify its use, and at other times sheathed, also for political reasons, even when the facts cry out for its use. Thus, a Ukrainian may be prosecuted even though the evidence against him is patently fraudulent, as was the case in the trial of Ivan Demjanjuk (Yoram Sheftel, The Demjanjuk Affair: The Rise and Fall of a Show-Trial, 1994). A Jewish Zionist, in contrast, may go unprosecuted for very real collaboration with the Nazis, though he may be unable to avoid final justice imposed through individual action: Moldetsky, a leader of the Zionist Workers Party (Poalei Zion), who was appointed head of the council of elders in Bedzin, and who, over the course of years, chose thousands of Jews for forced labor and extermination, succeeded in remaining alive. For the mass deportations, Moldetsky published a decree which was completely fraudulent and deceiving, in which he said: "Jews, dress up in your holiday clothes and march joyfully to the gathering places mentioned above. No one is to remain at home. ..." The Jews, in their innocence, obeyed him. The result was that people with large families - as well as the elderly - a total of 8,000, were sent to Auschwitz. The babies were pushed into sacks by the Nazis. ... After the war, Moldetsky - by merit of Zionist activities - was understandably one of the first to receive an immigration certificate to Palestine. His collaboration in the murder of tens of thousands of Jews did not make him unfit in the eyes of the officials of the Jewish Agency, who were distributing the certificates. He went to Eretz Yisroel where, it has been reported, the revengeful hand of the Jews of Bedzin killed him while he was taking a trip in the mountains. (Reb Moshe Shonfeld, The Holocaust Victims Accuse: Documents and Testimony on Jewish War Criminals, 1977, pp. 122-123) A related demonstration of how the accusation of Nazi collaboration is not levelled impartially, but is used as a political weapon can be found in the case of Dr. Israel Kastner. Comparison 2: Ukrainian Cruelty on Behalf of the Nazis Compared to Jewish Cruelty on Behalf of the Nazis Morley Safer states, addressing himself to Simon Wiesenthal: "I get the impression from people that the actions of the Ukrainians, if anything, were worse than the Germans." What can Mr. Safer possibly mean by such a statement? Does he mean that he knows of a Ukrainian whose actions are worse than Hitler's, and another Ukrainian whose actions are worse than Himmler's, and another whose actions are worse than Eichmann's, and so on down the line? Surely, this is an impossibility, as Ukraine has never been accused either of starting the Second World War or of engineering the Final Solution. Surely all that Mr. Safer means is that some Ukrainians can be found who were worse than the average German, or the average Nazi, or even the average member of the SS. Agreed - undoubtedly such Ukrainians exist, but what of it? Similar deviants exist in all groups. Relevant here is that every faithful account of the Jewish Holocaust is peppered with statements such as the following: Question survivors of the ghettoes and camps. They all certify that the beatings they received at the hands of the Jewish 'golden youth' were filled with scorn. They fulfilled their tasks with a zeal and cruelty to a greater extent than that required by the German commanders. (Y. Efroiken, Sanctity and Valor of the Jews, in Reb Moshe Shonfeld, The Holocaust Victims Accuse: Documents and Testimony on Jewish War Criminals, 1977, p. 21) He [K. Tzetnik] depicts the figure of Eliezer Greenbaum, son of Yitzchak Greenbaum, who, thanks to his tactics of acting as informant and displaying cruelty - to an extent which amazed even the Germans - was elevated to the rank of the bloc commander. (Reb Moshe Shonfeld, The Holocaust Victims Accuse: Documents and Testimony on Jewish War Criminals, 1977, p. 21) Practically all of the kapo officers were academicians - persons with degrees who behaved like wild beasts and at times were more cruel than the Nazis. (Reb Moshe Shonfeld, The Holocaust Victims Accuse: Documents and Testimony on Jewish War Criminals, 1977, p. 121) Is it in the interests of historical truth to allude to the Ukrainian beasts without mentioning the Jewish beasts? Does the depiction of one without the other constitute information or disinformation, reporting or propaganda? Who commands such bias in the media? Who pays for it? These are issues worthy of address by a team of intrepid investigative reporters, should any be found. Comparison 3: Ukrainians Saving Jews Compared to Jews Saving Ukrainians Jews have had many opportunities to save Ukrainians. For example, Jews could have saved Ukrainians during the induced famine of 1932-33, during which Jews fared better than Ukrainians for several reasons: (1) Jews tended to be urban whereas the famine tended to be rural; (2) Jews were more affluent, and money buys food even during a famine; (3) Jews received support from other Jews in the West; (4) Jews occupied positions of authority, and in fact can be said to have administered the famine. Thus, Jews had ample opportunity to save Ukrainians simply by giving them food or by sabotaging the food-confiscation process. Or, in the mass deportations and executions, during which Jews again occupied positions of authority, there was again ample opportunity for Jews to subvert the process and hide or save Ukrainians. We have already seen above innumerable cases of Ukrainians saving Jews, but can we now locate a single case of a Jew saving a Ukrainian? Simon Wiesenthal, for example, had his life saved by the Ukrainian Bodnar, but did Simon Wiesenthal ever in his long life reciprocate by saving a Ukrainian? We saw above that an entire Ukrainian family was shot by the Nazis for hiding a Jewish woman, but can we find a single instance of an entire Jewish family being shot by the Bolsheviks for hiding a Ukrainian woman? We saw above that the Ukrainian mayor of a town was shot by the Nazis for helping Jews, but can we find a single instance of a Jewish mayor - and there were many Jewish mayors in Ukraine - being shot by the Bolsheviks for helping Ukrainians? We saw above Metropolitan Sheptytsky risking his life and the lives of other Ukrainians by hiding Jews on church property, but can we find a single instance of a rabbi risking his life and the lives of other Jews by hiding Ukrainians on synagogue property? We saw above Metropolitan Sheptytsky writing to Himmler protesting the shooting of Jews, but can we find any similar case of a rabbi writing to Lazar Kaganovich protesting the starvation of Ukrainians? One would like to see a statement from Morley Safer as to the justification for this double standard. When the most rudimentary and obvious comparisons indicate that Ukrainians have been disposed to Jews much more favorably than Jews have been disposed to Ukrainians, how can Morley Safer justify concluding the opposite? CONTENTS: Preface The Galicia Division Quality of Translation Ukrainian Homogeneity Were Ukrainians Nazis? Simon Wiesenthal What Happened in Lviv? Nazi Propaganda Film Collective Guilt Paralysis of the Comparative Function 60 Minutes' Cheap Shots Ukrainian Anti-Semitism Jewish Ukrainophobia Mailbag A Sense of Responsibility What 60 Minutes Should Do PostScript 60 Minutes' Cheap Shots 60 Minutes peppered its broadcast with distortions and misrepresentations. Here are nineteen miscellaneous instances: (1) Doctoring the sound track to bring out the evil of torchlight parades. The torchlight marchers are not a clear indication of anything, and without some enhancement, the scene would have fallen flat, and so 60 Minutes overlaid an exaggerated, rhythmic tramping sound which added an ominous militaristic flavor to the scene. In fact, given that it is dark and there is no band and the marchers are not singing, it is impossible for any but local groups of them to keep in step, and simple leather-soled or rubber-soled shoes could not have made such a sound - it would have taken cleated boots. The rhythmic tramping superimposed by 60 Minutes continues to be heard even when the paraders can be seen to be walking more than marching. One can see that the added sound effects are only imperfectly coordinated with the movements of the feet. (2) "Adolph Hitler Square". "The place they're marching in was once called Adolph Hitler Square," Mr. Safer tells us, but does not add that it was so called by the Germans and that it was not called that either before the Germans came or after they left. (3) Gratuitous accusation of mimicking. Mr. Safer informs us of the marchers that "Their chants and banners mimic another more fearsome time." But this is absolutely gratuitous - neither the chants nor the banners are mimicking anything. The marchers are not wearing swastika armbands and their banners do not contain Nazi symbols. They are not chanting "Death to the Jews!" but only "Slava natsiyi!" which means "Glory to the nation!" and is about as ominous in Ukrainian as "Vive la patrie!" is in French. Mr. Safer's syllogism here seems to be: The Nazis sometimes held torchlight parades. These Ukrainians are holding a torchlight parade. Therefore, all Ukrainians are Nazis. (4) If it sounds like "Nazi," then it must be "Nazi." 60 Minutes broadcast the above-mentioned "Slava natsiyi!" several times, but never provided a translation. But as "natsiyi" sounds like "Nazi," this invites the listener who does not know any Slavic languages to think that something is being said about Naziism, and the context supplied by Morley Safer suggests that this something is complimentary. (5) The menace of boy scouts and girl guides. Desperate for any images that to a gullible 60 Minutes audience might be suggestive of undying Naziism within Ukraine, Morley Safer presents film clips of Ukrainian boy scouts and girl guides. (6) Censorship through muted translation. When a Ukrainian in Lviv says "A Russian shot my brother!" 60 Minutes mutes the English translation to the point that it is almost inaudible. The critical viewer is left wondering whether the operating principle might not be that when a Ukrainian says something that might win sympathy for Ukrainians, omit it; in the case where the image has some overriding appeal (that was a pretty craggy Ukrainian, he was pretty excited, and the lighting was wonderful), then mute the translation to the point of inaudibility. Furthermore, in the 60 Minutes transcript of The Ugly Face of Freedom, the statement "A Russian shot my brother!" is entirely omitted, one might imagine following this same principle of avoiding attracting sympathy to Ukrainians. (7) Who welcomed the Germans? Mr. Safer says that "The same square greeted Hitler's troops fifty years ago as liberators," making this seem like another symptom of a Ukrainian addiction to Naziism. Of course we understand that it was not the square which greeted Hitler's troops at all, but rather people in the square, and it was smart on Mr. Safer's part not to draw attention to the people, because there might follow the natural question of "What people?" and the honest answer would have to be "All people - Ukrainians, Poles, and Jews." Jews welcomed Hitler's troops? Yes, so it would appear: The prevailing conviction [was] that bad things came from Russia and good things from Germany. The Jews were historically oriented away from Russia and toward Germany; not Russia but Germany had been their traditional place of refuge. During October and November, 1939, that conviction, among other things, drove thousands of Jews from Russian-occupied Poland to German-occupied Poland. The stream was not stopped until the Germans closed the border. Similarly, one year later, at the time of Soviet mass deportations in the newly occupied territories, [there was] widespread unrest among Ukrainians, Poles, and Jews alike. Almost everyone was waiting for the arrival of the German army. When the army finally arrived, in the summer of 1941, old Jews in particular remembered that in the First World War the Germans had come as quasi-liberators. These Jews did not expect that now the Germans would come as persecutors and killers. (Raul Hilberg, The Destruction of the European Jews,
Ñòðàíèöû: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70, 71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80, 81, 82, 83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88, 89, 90, 91, 92, 93, 94
|