fbpx

April 26, 2011

Letters to the Editor: Ryan vs. Obama, Bibi, Palestine and dancing rabbis

Paul Ryan vs. Barack Obama

It is very telling that in both of the articles criticizing Paul Ryan’s courageous budget proposal, many words (and much hand wringing) are expended defending existing entitlements that are bankrupting our nation but not one word addresses the unsustainable cost of these programs or how we will pay for their escalating costs (“Obama’s Way: Maintain Support for Social Programs” and “Threat to Food Stamps Lies Hidden in Ryan’s Plan,” April 22). These authors exhort our national leaders to craft policy with their “hearts” based on “compassion.” Much of the nation is realizing instead that it is necessary to make policy decisions with our heads based on logic, and taking into account basic financial arithmetic. The American dream is not one of dependency, but of striving, individual freedom and the satisfaction that comes from independence. Our collective future depends on returning to these values.

Eric Swanson
via e-mail


Arnold Steinberg’s paean to Congressman Paul Ryan and Ryan’s ill-conceived budget plan is filled with distortions and misinformation (“Ryan’s Way: Stop Government Excess,” April 22). More disturbing than the lack of factual accuracy, however, is the ill-mannered, nasty and pejorative nature of the essay. The piece is filled with derogatory remarks about — in no particular order — Democrats, liberals, people needing food stamps, the “dependent class,” Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, Henry Waxman, Medicare as a Ponzi scheme, government unions, unemployment insurance, etc. Perhaps Steinberg is dreaming of a career succeeding Rush Limbaugh or Michael Savage. It seems that they’re reading from the same playbook. I am appalled at the lack of civility in this polemic. It completely precludes any productive discussion of the issues and merely evokes anger and rejection.

Barbara H. Bergen
Los Angeles


Plan for Bibi

David Suissa, in his column of April 15 (“Bibi Needs a Plan, Fast”), wonders what Bibi should do regarding the impending U.N. recognition of Palestine. The answer is simple: He should publicly welcome it with open arms, and then invite the Palestinians to sit down and negotiate the details.

Adar Belinkoff
Claremont


David Suissa overlooks the opportunity presented by the U.N.’s anticipated recognition of a Palestinian state. He sees the issue narrowly as a public relations disaster, to which Israel should respond by presenting a peace plan. Rather, many countries in the world, as well as much of the U.S. Jewish community, realize that peace and normalcy will never be restored in the Middle East unless there is a solid boundary between the Jewish and Palestinian peoples, clarifying who has legal jurisdiction over their respective geographies. With an internationally recognized border, encroachments by either sovereignty will be obvious, and the citizens of both polities can get down to the serious business of state-building and economic development. This process took place in the 19th century between the U.S. and Mexico, and despite repeated military incursions and a nationalistic antagonism on both sides, disputes over the land and water boundary are now amicably resolved. There is no reason why Israel and Palestine cannot do the same.

Peter L. Reich
Professor of Law & Director,
Mexico City Program
Whittier Law School
Costa Mesa


Dancing Rabbis

In response to Dennis Prager (“Dancing With the Rabbis?” April 15), I state that my valued teachers, Rabbi Bradley Shavit Artson and Rabbi Elliot Dorff, and my fellow colleagues Rabbis Mark Borowitz, Nina Feinstein and Zoë Klein, beautifully preserve the dignity of the rabbinate on a daily basis. I credit them with their dedication to raise funds by participating in this event.

Prager equates preserving the dignity of the rabbinate with addressing rabbis by their titles. He references the beginning of the 1960s, when these “past values” were overthrown. However, in 1913, Conservative Judaism’s founder, Dr. Solomon Schechter, emphasized that Conservative Judaism would typify “a Jewry related to modern living.”

We rabbis dance in public, we wear bathing suits in public, and some even take ballet classes on our days off. And yet, when we teach, we are called “rabbi,” we lay tefillin during daily morning davening, and we study weekly. We earn the title “rabbi” through our personal relationships with Jews and our ability to balance being an authority figure and a human being.

Is it possible that we have a “liberal-conservative” divide here, as Mr. Prager claims? Perhaps he would prefer that we be “conservative” Conservative rabbis. But if this means I must leave post-modernity behind and abandon modeling a balanced rabbinic life, then I embrace striding the liberal-conservative divide. I am a real-life Conservative rabbi who thanks my colleagues for being real-life rabbis.

Rabbi Susan Leider, Associate Rabbi
Temple Beth Am
Los Angeles


CORRECTION

In “Search for Polish Past Inspires Film, Education” (April 22), the first caption should have read: Gertrude Bloom (daughter of Leah Tickotsky) with her husband, Hyman.

In “Etta Israel Expands Programs” (April 22), the $200,000 Cutting Edge grant Etta Israel received was awarded by the Jewish Community Foundation of Los Angeles.

Letters to the Editor: Ryan vs. Obama, Bibi, Palestine and dancing rabbis Read More »

‘My Brother’s Keeper’ keeps soldiers’ story alive

When Israel fought its War of Independence, there were no embedded TV cameramen, and even combat newsreel photographers were practically nonexistent. The newly created state had more important matters to worry about.

More surprisingly, there have been hardly any movies celebrating the near miraculous victories of 1948-49, and, later, of the Six-Day War in 1967.

Unlike Hollywood, which would have turned out dozens of macho movies showing Yossi Wayne-stein single-handedly wiping out five Arab armies, Israelis have just let the facts speak for themselves.

Hollywood made one try at plugging the cinematic hole with “Cast a Giant Shadow,” starring Kirk Douglas in the role of Col. David “Mickey” Marcus, an American World War II officer who went to Israel in early 1948 to aid the country in its struggle. Predictably, the picture was long on drama and short on reality.

Actually, though, there were some Americans and Canadians, mostly Jews, but also a fair number of Christians, who put their lives on the line to realize the dream of creating a Jewish state.

First came the crew members of Aliyah Bet, who manned the rust-bucket ships that ran the British blockade to bring some remnants of European Jewry to Palestine in 1947 and early 1948.

While the state was being established, about 1,500 Americans and Canadians, together with men and women from 43 other countries, made their way to the nascent Jewish state, mostly by illegal means, to fight alongside their Israeli brothers and sisters.

They were called Machal, the Hebrew acronym for “volunteers from outside Israel.” They fought in all branches of the service, but their greatest impact was in applying their World War II experiences to build up the Israeli air force and navy.

In doing so, the American Machalniks clearly broke U.S. laws and risked loss of their citizenship, but surprisingly little is known of their deeds in either their home country or Israel.

One of their number was Ira Feinberg, a 17-year-old New Yorker, who joined the elite troops of the Palmach.

Sixty years later, in 2008, Feinberg returned to Israel for a reunion of some of the remaining Machalniks. Realizing that this was likely to be the last gathering of the aging veterans, he brought along a camera crew to save their reminiscences for posterity.

The result is a 40-minute DVD, “My Brother’s Keeper,” which re-creates a real sense of those long-ago years and will screen at the Los Angeles Jewish Film Festival on May 10.

Nowadays, when Israeli military prowess is taken for granted, it beggars the imagination to hear the veterans talk of fighting, at the beginning, with World War I rifles and dropping hand grenades from open cockpits.

Feinberg enlivens the testimony with some historic newsreel footage and photos of bare-chested Machalniks posing fiercely with Browning Automatic Rifles, but, of necessity, the film is somewhat static.

The volunteers came to Israel for many and diverse reasons, but what shines through is their pride in having been part of a climactic moment in Jewish history.

Looking back, Canadian Joe Warner observed, “If we failed to have a state, being a Jew anywhere in the world wouldn’t be worth a nickel.”

Feinberg himself concluded, “No other experience in my life had such meaning as this period serving in the first army to fight for the Jewish people and for the independence of the State of Israel. This was the pinnacle of my life’s experiences. Nothing comes close to it.”

“My Brother’s Keeper” is produced by Cinema Angels and can be ordered by going to irafeinberg.com.

‘My Brother’s Keeper’ keeps soldiers’ story alive Read More »

Holocaust survivors win modest pensions

“Anything from Germany today?”

That’s the question Jeffrey Kobulnick, a senior associate in the Los Angeles legal office of Foley & Lardner, asks his assistant almost every day.

Kobulnick isn’t servicing the legal needs of some particularly demanding corporate client in Frankfurt. An intellectual property attorney, he’s asking whether there’s mail related to any one of the dozens of applications submitted on behalf of Holocaust survivors to the German social insurance agency office by his firm.

The letters Kobulnick, his colleagues and their clients are waiting for relate to a German national pension that began being awarded in 2009 to Jews for work they did in Nazi-controlled ghettoes during World War II. Kobulnick, 34, confessed to feeling a bit like a high school senior waiting for letters from colleges, always hoping for big envelopes.

“If I get a big, thick packet, that means it’s a 20-page detailed calculation award letter telling me how much the client’s getting,” Kobulnick said. “It calculates it very specifically, how much money they’re entitled to for each day they were in a ghetto. If you get a smaller letter, it says we need more information. So you want those big envelopes from Germany.”

Since 2009, scenes like this one have been playing out in law offices around Los Angeles and across the country, as attorneys participating in the Holocaust Survivors Justice Network (HSJN) have been successfully shepherding hundreds of applications for ZRBG “Ghetto Pensions” through German bureaucracies on behalf of Holocaust survivors.

The nationwide effort, led by two attorneys at Bet Tzedek, the Los Angeles-based nonprofit legal-aid agency, has involved 1,800 lawyers, law students and paralegals who have worked a combined 56,000 pro bono hours on these applications, making sure that each “t” is crossed and every umlaut is double-dotted. (Though most of the forms are bilingual, there are still occasional pieces of correspondence written only in German. More than one attorney said he’d gotten very good with the Google Translate Web application.)

Every Friday, Volker Schmidt, a Bet Tzedek attorney, holds a conference call that draws lawyers from all over the country to talk about — or simply hear about — the progress and problems facing their clients’ claims. “You feel like you’re part of this movement,” said Lauren Teukolsky, Bet Tzedek’s pro bono director and the other staff member coordinating the effort.

“Attorneys are really moved by it,” Schmidt said, in part because for many lawyers this is their first encounter with a Holocaust survivor. And further, this kind of pro bono work allows lawyers to engage in ways that they don’t get to on a day-to-day basis.

“You can work for a big company, and if you win, that’s great and there’s money. And if you lose, it’s a tax write-off,” the German-born-and-raised Schmidt said dryly, in his very lightly accented English. “But when you’re working with a Holocaust survivor, it’s a human being.”

Bet Tzedek estimates that the pro bono legal work done by attorneys and staff at top firms is worth about $16.8 million, a sum more than twice the $7.5 million annual budget of the 25-lawyer agency.

The actual cash amounts paid out to individual survivors have so far been modest. While Bet Tzedek estimates that, collectively, ZRBG pension payments to Holocaust survivors could amount to as much as $2 billion, a typical payment to a survivor who qualifies for a ZRBG pension will be between $150-$450 per month.

Some awards are even smaller. “We’ve seen some disconcerting awards out of Germany of just a few euros a month, which is, hopefully, an aberration,” said Aaron Spiwak, an associate at O’Melveny & Myers, who is one of two pro bono coordinators of HSJN.

And yet advocates say that even relatively small amounts of money can make big differences in the lives of aging Holocaust survivors. “Those are our clients,” said Susie Forer-Dehrey, chief operating officer of Jewish Family Service of Los Angeles (JFS). “If they can get money for the survivors, it’s very important. Anything that we can capture for them helps.”

The story of how the ZRBG pension came into its current form is circuitous and involves restrictive German agencies, an executive order from the German chancellor and a number of decisions by the country’s courts.

But the program is based on one simple underlying principle: The labor of Jews working in ghettos in countries occupied or annexed by the Nazis had monetary worth. Had they been paid, they would have also been paying into the German social security-type pension system. In 1997, a German court announced that, despite the fact that Jews working in ghettos were not paid for their work (and so did not pay into the pension fund), they are today entitled to receive the benefit.

Sixty-six years after the end of World War II, nobody can say exactly how many survivors live worldwide. Elan Steinberg of the American Gathering of Jewish Holocaust Survivors estimates that around 120,000 are living in the United States today, with the largest clusters of survivors located in and around New York, Miami and Los Angeles.

Forer-Dehrey said that JFS, which has been serving Holocaust survivors for 25 years, is now attracting a new batch of clients. “There’s a whole other group that we haven’t met, because they haven’t needed our services, that are now walking through our doors,” she said.

Though most survivors are learning about the ZRBG pensions from organizations like JFS, the word is spreading in other ways. Jerry Sheehan is an attorney in the New York office of Manatt, Phelps & Phillips who specializes in insurance regulation and has personally filed a large number — in the “high 20s” — of ZRBG applications. Like many of those involved in the project, he has also trained other lawyers how to do this work.

Sheehan said he once met a potential applicant who brought one of her friends, another survivor, with her to the meeting. The first client had brought it up during a card game, Sheehan said, and the second would-be client took note. “She said, ‘Well, gee, maybe I’ll show up at the same time, and they’ll take me.’ And we did, naturally,” Sheehan said.

Each ZRBG pension means something different to each survivor. “In some cases, it helps them not have to choose between buying food and filling their prescriptions,” Kobulnick said. “In other cases, it helps them provide a gift for a grandchild.”

The clients are understandably grateful. “I get very nice letters, phone calls and voicemail messages from clients quite regularly when they get these results,” Kobulnick said.

But the lawyers are appreciative as well. David Lash, who ran Bet Tzedek for nine years before moving to O’Melveny & Myers to run the firm’s national pro-bono program, said that the lawyers he speaks with — Jewish and non-Jewish — are just as enthusiastic about their experiences working with the Holocaust-survivor clients.

“The responses I have gotten from the lawyers who have taken on clients in this project have almost unanimously been to the effect that this is the most emotionally rewarding and compelling thing that they have done as lawyers,” Lash said.

Holocaust survivors win modest pensions Read More »

German city honors Jews who fled

David Meyerhof makes his living as a teacher, but when he travels to Heidelberg in mid-May, it will be as a student. Meyerhof, grandson of Nobel laureate Otto Meyerhof, is eager to learn all he can about his family’s history in the German university town.

“It’s a trip to honor my family,” he said.

Meyerhof, 60, will be there as a guest of Heidelberg, along with dozens of former Jewish residents who fled during the Holocaust.

Since 1996, the town has extended invitations to its former Jewish residents for a weeklong reunion. Held every five years, the reunions draw people from the United States, Israel, Brazil, France and Switzerland; the event often marks the first time survivors have returned to Heidelberg since World War II.

Heidelberg will host its fourth Jewish reunion May 17-23, and David Meyerhof will be there representing his grandfather and his father, Stanford physicist Walter Meyerhof.

Today, the town is home to a fledging Jewish community of more than 800 people, a synagogue, a community center and the College of Jewish Studies in Heidelberg — an important institution in German Jewish life that opened its doors in 1979 and moved to a new campus in 2009. Activities during the weeklong community reunion include a reception at Heidelberg’s city hall, tours of the community and a Shabbat celebration at the College of Jewish Studies.

In addition to the reunions, Heidelberg dedicated the Synagogenplatz in 2001, a memorial marking a synagogue destroyed during Kristallnacht, and helps maintain a memorial at the Gurs concentration camp in France, where nearly 300 of the town’s Jews were deported during the war.

University of Heidelberg, one of the first universities in Germany to accept Jews as students in the 18th century, became a center of anti-Semitic agitation in the early 20th century. In 1933, The Law for the Restoration of the Professional Civil Service was put into effect to remove Jewish civil servants, including academics. Among them was Otto Meyerhof, director of the Kaiser Wilhelm Institute for Medical Research at Heidelberg, who won the 1922 Nobel Prize in Medicine for discovering the relationship between the consumption of oxygen and the metabolism of lactic acid in the muscle.

Meyerhof and his family fled the Nazi regime for Paris in 1938. Two years later, when the Nazis invaded France, Varian Fry helped the Meyerhofs reach Spain and then the United States, where Otto Meyerhof joined the faculty at the University of Pennsylvania in Philadelphia.

Walter Meyerhof, Otto’s son, helped establish nuclear physics research at Stanford University and became a vocal critic of scientists who claimed to have achieved cold fusion in the late 1980s. After his retirement, Walter Meyerhof directed the Varian Fry Foundation and produced the 1997 Fry documentary “Assignment: Rescue.”

In April 2001, David Meyerhof accompanied his father, Walter, and other family members to the opening ceremony of the Otto Meyerhof Centre for Outpatient Care and Clinical Research in Heidelberg.

Otto Meyerhof was among the first scientists to re-establish contact with the University of Heidelberg after the Nazi era, and in 1949, two years before he died, the university reappointed him an honorary professor as a token of restitution.

During the 2001 center opening, university vice rector Jochen Tröger said that Otto Meyerhof’s outreach “was an important factor in putting Heidelberg University’s reputation back on a firm footing.”

David Meyerhof is still in awe that a German university would dedicate a medical center to a Jewish scientist.

“It’s profound that this university [made] amends for the hatred that was so prevalent in Germany,” said David, who teaches math and science to sixth-grade honor students at Florence Nightingale Middle School in Los Angeles.

Eager to add new stories and learn insights about his family, David Meyerhof says he is looking forward to the upcoming Jewish reunion.

“The last trip I didn’t have time to really see the personal sites,” he said.

In addition to the reunion itinerary, Meyerhof says his schedule is filling up with plans to visit his father’s childhood home, tour the university and labs where his grandfather worked and meet with scientists, including a chemistry professor who penned a biography about his grandfather.

And if time allows, David hopes to squeeze in a visit to another part of town named after his grandfather — a brief stroll along Meyerhof Street.

German city honors Jews who fled Read More »

Holocaust remembrance in the age of genocide

We have no way of knowing whether God spoke to the dead of the concentration camp of Bergen-Belsen in Germany during the winter and early spring of 1945, but I am fairly certain that He did not speak to either the living or those who were dying. What could He possibly have said to them? What words of comfort could He have given them in a place that one of the camp’s liberators compared to Dante’s inferno?

On April 17 I was at Bergen-Belsen, on the 66th anniversary of its liberation. Standing in the midst of mass graves, I realized that I am alive today because in early April of 1945, an SS officer named Kurt Becher persuaded the commandant of Bergen-Belsen to surrender the camp to the British.

By then, Bergen-Belsen, which was built to hold, at most, 8,000 inmates, was overcrowded with over 40,000 starved, emaciated inmates, the overwhelming majority of them Jews, who were suffering from typhus, tuberculosis, dysentery and a host of other virulent diseases, alongside some 10,000 unburied corpses in varying stages of decay. My mother, a not yet 33-year-old Jewish dentist from Poland who had arrived there from Auschwitz-Birkenau five months earlier, was among them. My father and 15,000 additional inmates were imprisoned in the nearby barracks of a German army base.

I doubt whether my parents and most of the other inmates of Bergen-Belsen would have survived if the British had not freed them when they did. As it is, the British soldiers who entered the camp on April 15, 1945, were confronted with a medical and humanitarian challenge of unprecedented proportions.

Shortly after the liberation, Brigadier H.L. Glyn Hughes, the deputy director of medical services of the British Army of the Rhine, appointed my mother to organize and head a group of doctors and nurses among the survivors to help care for the camp’s thousands upon thousands of critically ill inmates. For weeks on end, my mother and her team of 28 doctors and 620 other female and male volunteers, only a few of whom were trained nurses, worked round the clock alongside the military doctors under the command of Lt. Col. James Johnston to try to save as many of the survivors as possible. Despite their desperate efforts, the Holocaust claimed 13,944 additional victims during the two months following the liberation, and those who lived had to face a grim reality. “For the great part of the liberated Jews of Bergen-Belsen,” my mother later recalled, “there was no ecstasy, no joy at our liberation. We had lost our families, our homes. We had no place to go, nobody to hug, nobody who was waiting for us, anywhere. We had been liberated from death and from the fear of death, but we were not free from the fear of life.”

Tragically, the atrocities that were committed at Bergen-Belsen were by no means the last.

The Genocide Convention, adopted by the United Nations General Assembly on Dec. 9, 1948, was meant to put an end to systematic mass killings as a means of promoting megalomaniacal aspirations of ethnic or religious supremacy. Instead, the past half-century has seen devastating new genocides in Rwanda, the former Yugoslavia, Darfur and elsewhere. And Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, who repeatedly and unabashedly threatens the citizens of Israel with genocidal destruction, has yet to be declared a criminal under either the Genocide Convention or the standards applied by the International Military Tribunal at Nuremberg more than 65 years ago.

A young woman named Adisada Dudic was a student of mine this past fall in a seminar on World War II war crimes trials at Cornell Law School. She is also a survivor of the genocidal atrocities perpetrated against Bosnian Muslims by Serbian forces in the 1990s.

As a child, she spent three years in refugee camps with her mother and sisters. A “hurtful reality,” Adisada wrote, “reminds me that my home country is destroyed, my family members are scattered all over the world, thousands of Bosnian women and girls were raped and ravaged, thousands of Bosnian men and boys were tortured in concentration camps and buried in mass graves, and so many of my people were slaughtered by an enemy hand that was out to get every single person that self-identified as a Bosnian Muslim. … I am infuriated that we continue to have gross violations of human rights all over the world while we continue to find excuses for why we cannot interfere in other countries’ affairs.”

Holocaust remembrance cannot be allowed to devolve into an intellectual or spiritual abstraction. If we are to honor the memory of the victims of Bergen-Belsen, Auschwitz and all the other sites where Hitler’s “Final Solution of the Jewish Question” was implemented, the eradication of the scourge of genocide must be a priority for all of us, individually and collectively, as members of a supposedly civilized international community.

In accepting the Nobel Peace Prize, Elie Wiesel explained that he “swore never to be silent whenever and wherever human beings endure suffering and humiliation. … When human lives are endangered, when human dignity is in jeopardy, national borders and sensitivities become irrelevant. Wherever men or women are persecuted because of their race, religion, or political views, that place must — at that moment — become the center of the universe.” How can the rest of us do otherwise?

Menachem Z. Rosensaft is adjunct professor of law at Cornell Law School, distinguished visiting lecturer at Syracuse University College of Law, and vice president of the American Gathering of Jewish Holocaust Survivors and Their Descendants.

Holocaust remembrance in the age of genocide Read More »

Deceiving the audience and the self

“The Führer Gives the Jews a City” must rank as the oddest film fragment in cinematic history.

The 23 minutes of raw, unedited footage is all that has been found of a Nazi propaganda project to “prove” that the “model” Theresienstadt camp was a veritable paradise for its Jewish inmates.

Shot in early 1944, when the horrors of Hitler’s Final Solution finally trickled out to the West, the film was part of an effort to hoodwink a visiting International Red Cross delegation that Theresienstadt was all productive work and wholesome recreation, and by extension the other concentration camps, as well.

There, contented workers shod horses, made pottery and designed handbags; in the evenings well-dressed men and women attended concerts and lectures, and kids played soccer or gorged themselves on sandwiches.

All this to the incongruous background music from Offenbach’s “Gaite Parisienne” or a jazzy “Bei Mir Bist Du Schoen.”

The director of this curiosity was a mountainous Jewish inmate, Kurt Gerron, whose strange story of pride and self-deception is documented in a companion film, “Kurt Gerron’s Karussell [Carousel].”

A native Berliner born Kurt Gerson, Gerron was a larger-than-life figure, both in girth and as a leading impresario in the swinging Berlin cabaret scene of the 1920s.

He was also a successful actor, playing the nightclub owner in “The Blue Angel” opposite Marlene Dietrich, and was featured in the world premiere cast of “The Threepenny Opera.”

Though banned from the German stage in 1933, Gerron persisted in the self-delusion that his talent and charm would triumph in the end.

When Peter Lorre and other German expatriates in Hollywood arranged for Gerron to join them and even would have paid the travel expenses for the impresario and his family, Gerron refused on the grounds that the proffered ship accommodations weren’t first class.

He did establish a temporary second career in France and Holland, but the Nazis caught up with him and deported him to Theresienstadt.

When “The Führer Gives the Jews a City” project came along, Gerron saw a chance to resume his career and signed on as director. He also swallowed the “word of honor” of the German camp commandant that his life would be spared after he completed the film.

Instead, Gerron was sent to Auschwitz in October 1944, and he was killed one day before SS chief Heinrich Himmler gave the order to shut down the gas chambers for good.

“Karussell” director Ilona Ziok combines footage of Gerron’s halcyon days in Berlin with testimony of surviving Jewish camp prisoners to draw a picture of Gerron as a tragic, self-deluded figure, “a big, strong man with the mind of a child,” in the words of a fellow Theresienstadt prisoner.

“Kurt Gerron’s Karussell” is available as a DVD, but distribution of “The Führer Gives the Jews a City” has been sharply limited by the distributor.

A spokesman for Seventh Art Releasing said that the film fragment was available for free, but fearing misuse of the material, he stipulated that it be used only for educational and scholarly purposes by schools or religious institutions, and must be clearly labeled as Nazi propaganda.

For additional information on films, e-mail {encode=”edu@7thart.com” title=”edu@7thart.com”} or phone (323) 845-1455.

Deceiving the audience and the self Read More »

Rudolph Kastner gets a new trial

Leave it to the artists and attorneys at Temple Israel of Hollywood (TIOH) to mark Holocaust Remembrance Day by introducing — or reintroducing — a man once considered to have been a Jewish antihero of World War II.

On the afternoon of May 1, instead of hosting a speaker or screening a film or hosting any of the other programs that usually commemorate Yom HaShoah, Temple Israel’s newly established arts council has invited community members to join the jury at a mock trial that will reconsider the fate of Rudolph Kastner, a Hungarian who helped Jews escape the Nazis but was later accused of being a Nazi collaborator.

The trial will feature a cast of characters played by accomplished actors from television and film, all but one of whom are also members of the synagogue, as well as Los Angeles City Attorney Carmen Trutanich and attorney Bert H. Deixler. Congregant Leslie A. Swain, a judge from the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, will preside over the proceedings. Alan Rosenberg, the only non–synagogue member in the cast and a former president of the Screen Actors Guild, will play Kastner.

The synagogue expects a full house for the event, which is being held in a room that seats 450.

Though Kastner is little known today, in Israel in the 1950s he was the object of very public condemnation. In 1955, an Israeli judge declared that he had “sold his soul to the devil.” Two years later, Kastner was assassinated.

Stranger still, Kastner — who will stand accused of treason at TIOH — first became the object of scrutiny and criticism because of actions he took during World War II that might have been, under other circumstances, worthy of praise: Kastner helped a trainload of Jews escape from Nazi-occupied Hungary.

“Between April of 1944 and January of 1945, 480,000 Hungarian Jews were exterminated” by the Nazis and their Hungarian collaborators, said Danny Maseng, the cantor at Temple Israel and one of the driving forces behind “The People vs. Kastner.” Maseng described the Holocaust in Hungary as having been fundamentally different from the genocide of European Jewry in other countries — in no small measure due to the rapidity with which Hungarian Jews were deported to Auschwitz and other Nazi death camps.

In this context, on June 30, 1944, Kastner managed to get 1,685 Jews on a train heading in a different direction, bound for the neutral haven of Switzerland.

Although collectively, Kastner’s Jews outnumber even those saved by Oskar Schindler, because the passengers on the train were hand-picked by Kastner, because they included many members of his family, because he negotiated for their lives directly with Adolf Eichmann of the SS, and because he did not sound the alarm about the genocidal fate that the Jews of Hungary were then already meeting — for these and other reasons, Kastner was publicly vilified in Israel after the war.

To say that the story is complicated — morally as well as politically — would be an understatement. “I remember thinking to myself, ‘God, is Kastner a good guy or a bad guy?’ ” Doug Segal, the director of “The People vs. Kastner,” said. Like all but one of the people who came to be involved in the project, Segal, who has directed for TV and for the temple’s day school’s stage, had never heard of Kastner before the project was proposed.

The “good guy or bad guy” question that Segal faced is the very fundamental one first proposed by writer Jonathan Maseng — son of cantor Danny Maseng — who initially suggested that the Kastner case might make for an interesting mock trial. It is also the question that Jonathan Maseng hopes the show’s audience-cum-jury will struggle with.

“What we’re trying to get people to do is put themselves in his position,” Jonathan Maseng said.

An aspiring screenwriter, Jonathan Maseng, 26, works as a religious schoolteacher at Temple Israel and as a legal assistant, and regularly contributes articles to The Jewish Journal. He first came across the Kastner story by chance while reading about the early history of the State of Israel. When he mentioned it to his 60-year-old father, a native of Tel Aviv, Danny Maseng immediately remembered the case.

“I remember my parents telling me that it was a dark time in the history of our country,” Danny Maseng said, remembering the day Kastner was assassinated. He was 7 years old. Kastner was gunned down just four blocks from his grandparents’ home.

It was only recently that this controversial story began to attract attention in the United States outside academia. The acclaimed documentary “Killing Kasztner: The Jew Who Dealt With Nazis” had theatrical runs in Los Angeles and New York last year. NPR and Los Angeles Times film critic Kenneth Turan called the film one of the 10 best documentaries of 2010.

The film’s maker, Gaylen Ross, believes “Killing Kasztner” is part of a wider effort to explain the political context in Israel that led to Kastner’s condemnation and assassination. “It started to happen in Israel over decades, little by little,” Ross said. Two Kastner plays were produced in the early 1980s on Israeli stages, and an Israeli television series followed in the 1990s. All this is slowly rehabilitating Kastner’s reputation and is assuaging the guilt felt by those Jews he saved from certain death. In Israel, during the years immediately following the war, Ross said, Kastner’s Jews had been made to feel that their salvation had come at the cost of the lives of the rest of Hungarian Jewry.

For that reason, Ross said she is outraged at the idea of putting Kastner on trial again at the synagogue. “Using the political arguments from 1954 to retry a man who was a victim of a murder is insensitive at best and outrageous at worst,” she said in a recent interview.

Ross said she offered the synagogue the chance to screen her film on Yom HaShoah in lieu of the mock trial. It will be screened at the Jewish Community Center in Washington, D.C., this year and was shown on Holocaust Remembrance Day at Yad Vashem in 2009.

“People didn’t argue it,” Ross said of the 2009 screening in Jerusalem. “They didn’t have a trial. There was a new understanding in Israel; there was a new understanding of the scholarship in Israel — and this is happening in America.”

Danny Maseng believes it is important to teach people about Kastner, but that it is even more important to get people to care about his story in the first place. “The Holocaust has been relegated to a heavy region — or worse — for a younger generation,” he said. “It has become history in the worst sense of the word — something dry, something not immediate, something that doesn’t have any relevance to my life today.”

As for Ross, Danny Maseng said she was misinformed about what the event would entail. “She does not know what we’re doing nor does she know how we’re doing it, nor does she appreciate the fact that we’ve done months of preparation and research,” he said.

He also said he’d be happy to screen “Killing Kasztner” after the mock trial.

Ross, for her part, remains unconvinced. “It’s a kangaroo court,” she said, “and it’s very upsetting.”

Nevertheless, Ross is having an indirect impact on the TIOH project. At least one of the actors, Bob Odenkirk, who can be seen on the AMC television series “Breaking Bad,” said that he had seen “Killing Kasztner” and that it would help inform his performance.

At TIOH, Odenkirk will take the witness stand as Malchiel Gruenwald, the amateur journalist who, in 1953, set into motion the events that would result in Kastner’s assassination, when he published a pamphlet accusing Kastner of being a Nazi collaborator.

Because Kastner held a position as an Israeli government spokesman, the government, which was then led by David Ben-Gurion’s left-wing Mapai party, took up his defense and sued Gruenwald for libel. After a two-year trial, the judge not only acquitted Gruenwald, he effectively turned Kastner into the defendant and excoriated him for having dealt with Eichmann.

Today, with the benefit of distance and additional historical scholarship, Kastner no longer seems to Odenkirk and others like the man who “sold his soul to the devil.”

“From our point of view, and from a distance, it’s kind of easy to say he was a hero,” Odenkirk said. “He negotiated and saved 1,600 Jews, so what’s the fight? Why does anybody have anything against him?”

Odenkirk, whose two children attend Temple Israel’s day school and who was recruited to join “The People vs. Kastner” by one of the synagogue’s rabbis, said that looking closer at the materials that he was using to prepare for his role helped him to better understand where Gruenwald and others were coming from.

“For somebody like Gruenwald, whose family died, pretty much all of them,” Odenkirk said, Kastner “just looks like this guy who hung out with Nazis and saved not too many people — and mostly saved people he knew.”

Although all the actors have been given materials to keep their performances in “The People vs. Kastner” fact-based, the actual performance of the mock trial will be improvised. Odenkirk, who got his start in sketch comedy, has a great deal of experience with improv. “I’m not going to be making facts up,” he said. “What I have to do, and what everyone has to do, is present your character, what they care about, their emotional state and their argument.”

Ross’ documentary, Odenkirk said, “lets you into people’s very conflicted feelings about their own government at the time in Israel and Ben-Gurion, feeling that he was more of compromiser than they wanted him to be.”

But, in playing a witness, Odenkirk said his job was to make the jury’s decision as difficult as possible.

“I’m just worried about playing Gruenwald,” Odenkirk said of his character who, more than half a century ago, accused Kastner of having betrayed the Jews of Hungary.

“My goal is to have everyone who hears me agree with me when I’m done — or, at the very least, understand how I can feel that way.”

For more information, visit tioh.org; for reservations, e-mail {encode=”Natalie@tioh.org” title=”Natalie@tioh.org”}, or call (323) 876-8330 ext. 1007.

Rudolph Kastner gets a new trial Read More »

I object, I make waves

My mother saw to it that we escaped from Nazi Germany intact, while a dozen family members, those who refused to leave, perished. That fact has impacted my life in various ways, both large and small.

Having almost been killed at an early age, I appreciate being alive. Historic films of the Holocaust show young children, bundled up into multiple outfits, being pushed onto a train or huddled together in a public square, bewildered and frightened. This could have been me. I look at the faces. I almost see myself there. And then I realize once again that I was spared. Why?

Something, obviously, is expected — no, demanded — of me, for having survived. I do not feel guilt, as I explained to someone just a few days ago. Somehow the subject comes up nearly every day in some way. An article, a comment, even a song reminds me of the near miss, the miracle, that has brought me to this moment. No, I do not feel guilty for having survived, as it had nothing to do with any bargain of mine. But I do feel an obligation to use my talents to create things of value. To use my time and at least some of my resources to alleviate suffering. 

I’m aware now of a pattern that began when I was still a child. I remember the approach of Christmas when I was in third grade. My friends were talking about their Christmas trees and the presents they expected. They turned to me for comment. I replied, “We don’t keep Christmas. We’re Jewish.”

“What?  You killed our Lord!”

I remember we were sitting in a circle on the grass. “I didn’t kill anybody,” I said.

And I proceeded to explain about Chanukah, eight nights, eight candles, eight gifts. I recited the Hebrew blessing for bread. They were impressed and never again said anything about killing Jesus, at least not to me.

So chalk one up. Was that discussion of any real value? I’ll never know. But at least I know that I didn’t just slink quietly away.

Speaking out is one of my life patterns. I know from experience what happens when, as Simon Wiesenthal warned us, good people keep silent. When I go out and speak to schoolchildren, I tell them about myself at the age of 3, going to the park with my nanny in Berlin. The park was lovely, with a pond and willow trees and ducks. One day, when we arrived, a sign greeted us.  “NO DOGS OR JEWS ALLOWED.”

I ask my young audience, “What do you think might have happened if the good people of Berlin had spoken out? What if they had ripped out that sign and all the others? What if they had demanded justice?”

I make waves. When someone is being victimized, I object.

I object by telephoning the White House and logging in my complaint. I will approach the neighbor whose kid is being a bully. I’ll complain to the school when a suspicious character is lurking around. I can be a pain in the butt, a nasty old coot, whatever names you want to call me. But I won’t remain silent.

It is not attractive to be a whistle-blower.

It is less attractive to be an accomplice to injustice. 

This is something I learned from the Holocaust.

Small habits have their roots in my past. Before I go out on a road trip, even for just an hour, I toss a banana or a granola bar into my bag. Because you never know what could happen along the way. Life is uncertain: Take care of yourself.

My mother, who lived to the age of 96, would follow me to her door whenever we said goodbye. She’d press something upon me — a box of Kleenex, a soda — and she invariably asked, “Did you bring a sweater?”

Of course I brought a sweater. Summer in Los Angeles, it can be 90 degrees, but I’ll have a sweater in the back seat of my car. Because you just never know.

The same goes for a little money in some secret place in the house. Cash is always negotiable. What if we suddenly had to leave? Grab the cash, the passports, a few personal items. Be prepared.

My grandmother was certainly not prepared. She refused to leave Germany even though the Nazis were roaming the streets, vandalizing stores, roughing up people. She insisted that nobody would want a 75-year-old woman. She was right. Nobody wanted her. They pushed her onto a train and then gassed her at Auschwitz. 

I still try to avoid trains. The rattling sound of metal wheels on the tracks, the creaking, the relentless swaying, brings me a sort of primal terror. Images of those transports appear as if I, myself, had been there. 

My son, born in the USA, told me about attending a conference in Germany. He landed in Frankfurt and had to travel to a northern town. It happened to be Yom HaShoah. He and several other Jewish conferees met at the station. “It’s odd that we found each other and starting talking about how nervous we were to be in Germany, especially on this day. We were all thinking the same thing. It was much less expensive to take the train, but we all decided to fly.”

I didn’t consciously teach any of this to my children. But I notice that they, too, keep a good supply of food on hand. They take responsibility for their survival, to the extent that anybody can control what happens next. 

We Jews have been accused of paranoia. Perhaps we do have a dose of that. I call it street smarts. My mother had it in spades. Those who were passive and permissive didn’t live to tell the story.

Few ancient peoples are still around today. I’ve never met a Canaanite or an Assyrian. If they are still here, they have virtually lost their national identity and their influence. How do we account for our endurance as a people? According to our tradition, God guarantees our survival. What is expected of us is to do no harm to others and to remember. 

Remember.

Sonia Levitin is the author of many award-winning books for children and adults. She lives in Los Angeles.

I object, I make waves Read More »

Jews saving Jews

As I was finishing reading Andrew E. Stevens’ memoir, “Rebel With a Cause: The Amazing True Story of Urban Partisans in World War II,” in collaboration with Meir Doron (Allied Artists, $9.99), I received an e-mail from a former colleague reminding me of a promise I had made to write about Jews saving Jews during the Holocaust. She had long been contending that among the major untold stories of the Holocaust, and some of its most important unsung heroes, were those Jews who put their lives at even more acute risk to rescue other Jews.

Yad Vashem had set the standard, a high standard indeed, for Holocaust heroes. The government of Israel recognizes and honors those non-Jews who risked their lives to save Jews. The requirements are stringent. A committee, chaired by a former Supreme Court Justice, examines the evidence; the nominee must be a non-Jew, must have saved a Jew at the risk of his own life without receiving any form of compensation or any expectation of compensation. Diplomats are routinely not eligible because they enjoyed diplomatic immunity, so their lives were seldom at risk. Raoul Wallenberg was a rare exception.

Because Yad Vashem’s designation is so significant and the title so exalted — “Righteous Among the Nations” — many people, scholars and layman alike, overlook the important role that Jews played in saving their own.

Zionist histories exalt other Jews, those who resorted to arms — as if that was the only honorable option. They praise those who, despite impossible odds, fought for Jewish honor in the ghettos of Warsaw and Bialystok, and even in the death camps of Auschwitz, Treblinka and Sobibor. These Jews never expected their battle to result in victory, but their efforts represent a moral triumph, even if they resulted in the mass murder of other Jews. Yom HaShoah is formally designated in Israel as “Yom HaShoah V’hagevurah,” Holocaust and Heroism — or Resistance — Day, as if the two are comparable.

Historians of other nations recognize self-defense and people assisting one another as a form of resistance. Werner Rings, the Swiss historian, said that in every nation under German occupation, there were four stages to resistance. Symbolic and personal resistance: maintaining dignity, identity and continuity; polemical resistance: disseminating information regarding the German crimes; defensive resistance: protecting and aiding one’s own; and only later, much later, armed resistance.

For Jews acting out of the long experience of Jewish history, there were ways to deal with oppression and oppressors. Jews were more practiced in the art of symbolic and spiritual resistance. They initially attempted to thwart Nazi intentions by nonviolent means, stopping short of direct confrontation, in which Jews would inevitably be overpowered.

Jews were masters at polemical resistance — newspapers and diaries, pamphlets and even major historical enterprises of documentation were present in almost all of the ghettos. Artists documented the crimes through the tools of their profession, historians by writing history, poets by their poetry, artists through their artistry, rabbis through teaching Torah and writing responsa of Jewish law.

Not only professionals were committed to documentation. Children kept diaries. People with no professional training photographed what was happening and kept meticulous records. Leaders did their part. In Kovno, Lithuania, Avraham Tory kept a detailed diary of the daily events of the Jewish Council. Adam Czerniakow, the leader of the Warsaw Judenrat, kept a detailed diary and wrote in it until his final hour. Hirsch Kidushin took photographs in Kovno using a clandestine camera, as did other Jewish photographers in the ghettos.

Jews were well-schooled in the ways to assist one another. Ghettos had house committees, welfare drives, soup kitchens, all kinds of innovative efforts to help one another, even under the most desperate of conditions against the most determined of enemies.

Now, Andrew Stevens and Meir Doron have collaborated on an important book that retells the final months of World War II German-occupied Budapest Hungary through the eyes of a young Jew who worked as a forger producing the documents so essential to saving Jewish lives, and who then distributed these documents, despite the dangers that were his daily lot.

Anyone familiar with the Holocaust knows the basic outlines of Raoul Wallenberg’s story; still, permit me a brief reiteration. Hungary was an ally of Germany during World War II. Anti-Jewish legislation was promulgated, and anti-Semitism rose dramatically. Yet while the Jews of Poland and of other German-occupied territory were being annihilated, the Jews of Hungary were persecuted, but not killed.

All that changed on March 19, 1944, when Germany invaded Hungary. In April, the Hungarian Jews were ghettoized. Beginning on May 15, 437,402 Jews were sent to Nazi concentration camps, primarily to Auschwitz — 147 trains, 54 days. Four out of five were killed on arrival. The deportations were halted on July 8, the very day that Wallenberg arrived in Budapest, the last remaining Jewish community in the blood-soaked continent of German-occupied Europe.

And for the next six months, a daily struggle was fought to preserve these Jews. Wallenberg arrived with a mandate to save Jews. It does not diminish his exalted stature to recall that he arrived in Budapest seemingly as a Swedish diplomat, but actually as a representative of the War Refugee Board, the American governmental body established when the United States finally got serious about rescuing Jews. Sweden consented to his participation because it wanted to cleanse its wartime record of close trade relationships with Nazi Germany. Wallenberg volunteered for this mission. He did not initiate the process of using official-looking documents to save Jews, or even the idea of using safe houses flying the flags of neutral countries. But he did devote his entire being to saving Jews, putting his life at risk — Adolf Eichmann threatened him, “Even diplomats can meet with accidents.”

Still, he did not operate alone. Official documents were printed, but many more were unofficially forged. Official documents were given to those who made it to the Swedish embassy. Many more were distributed by the Zionist underground, which exploited the chaos of the Hungarian capital under siege to enlarge the scope of Wallenberg’s activities.

Posing as Endre Solyom, a non-Jew of pre-draft age, Stevens was one of those forgers, and one of ever-increasing skill. He was also a courier of ever increasing daring delivering these documents. Each document offered a chance for life. Without them, death was imminent.

Stevens was born Endre Steinberger in Budapest in 1923. His father was a tailor, his mother a housewife, secular Jews belonging to the Neolog movement, the Hungarian equivalent of Conservative Judaism. Survivor accounts are usually divided into three major chapters — Before, During and After — and, in this, Stevens’ memoir is not the exception. Yet the memoir pays scant attention to his life after. The charm of his depiction of the world before, the recollections of his grandparents’ villages and his large extended family is triggered in flashbacks when, after 87 years, he returns to the scenes of his prewar life, sees what is present and experiences what is absent.

Stevens’ postwar experience is mentioned but briefly in the book, his escape from Hungary to the West; his move to the United States and to Los Angeles; marriage, divorce, remarriage, success in business and the opportunity to contribute to the efforts led by Tony Curtis — born Bernard Schwartz — the attempt to restore elements of Hungarian Jewish life.

The heart and soul of the story here, however, is his Holocaust experience. At first he retains the perspective of a rebellious youth. Stevens is still angry at the failure of Hungarian Jewry to grasp the dangers that awaited them, and at their passivity in the face of increasing peril. This serves as a marked contrast with his own activities late in the war, after he escaped from a slave labor battalion and returned to Budapest. Like many survivors’ memoirs, Stevens’ narrates the history of the time in which he lived, not quite distinguishing between what he knew at the time and what he learned afterward.

For example, he writes: “The leaders of Hungarian Jewry knew all about the Final Solution. Still they cooperated with the Germans and their Hungarian helpers justifying their actions as if they were good for the community.” I teach my students to distinguish between knowledge and information and also to note when the rumors of impending death were confirmed and internalized and formed the basis on which to act. Yet Stevens’ passion is clear, and the history he presents essential to understand his deeds in context.

Escaping from a slave labor camp in the fall of 1944, he was recruited by an old acquaintance who was also posing as a non-Jew and introduced into the world of the Zionist underground. At first, he witnesses its primitive yet essential operations of copying and forging documents, which are then delivered to ever-more desperate Jews. Solyom gradually acquires the skills to forge his own documents, to scavenge for the ink and paper and then to distribute these documents. In the process, he encounters Wallenberg directly and gives ample testimony of Wallenberg’s personal courage, charisma and effectiveness. Solyom witnessed the drowning of Hungarian Jews in the Danube River in the center of Budapest. To save ammunition, Jews were chained together, and only one was shot — or only every other one — and the rest were dragged into the frozen river by the weight of the dead Jew.

Raoul Wallenberg died alone in the Soviet Gulag, but he did not work alone. His effectiveness depended on an underground army of men and women who prepared the forged official-looking documents and then distributed them to needy Jews at a time when the difference between life and death was a stamp on a document.

Stevens was certainly not the least of these young people. His story is their story and enables us to understand that Jews rescuing Jews is an essential and still under-told part of Holocaust history.

Michael Berenbaum is professor of Jewish studies and director of the Sigi Ziering Center for the Study of the Holocaust and Ethics at American Jewish University.

Jews saving Jews Read More »