On a cold winter morning in January 1948 a Jewish woman, Ans van Dijk, was executed in Fort Bijlmer near Amsterdam after being sentenced to death for collaboration with the German occupiers during World War II. The pivotal questions are why a Jewish woman was executed after the liberation and how she became involved in collaboration with the Germans during the war. Consulting the literature and sources on this topic reveal some astonishing facts which shed a different light on the fate of Dutch Jews in Holland in World War II.
Ans van Dijk
Anna (called “Ans”) van Dijk was born in 1905 to a Jewish family in Amsterdam. In 1927 she married to Bram Querido, and in 1940 her life took a dramatic turn when her father died in a mental hospital and she divorced her husband. Meanwhile the Germans had occupied Holland and she embarked on a lesbian relationship with the Miep Stodel. Stodel left her to flee to Switzerland and Van Dijk decided to go into hiding to evade deportation to Poland.
In 1943 Ans van Dijk was arrested by the German Sicherheitsdienst (Security Service—SD) and after she promised to work for the SD she was released. She posed as a member of the resistance who could provide hiding places and fake identity passes, but in reality she would report Jews in hiding to the SD. Van Dijk would not only evade deportation by her co-operation but was endowed with bounty money for everyone she turned in. She was the perfect agent because her Jewish appearance made her look trustworthy in the eyes of the resistance.
In the beginning she worked alone but after a while she surrounded herself with Jewish women who helped her. Meanwhile she picked up her life and started a lesbian relationship with Mies de Regt of Rotterdam, who knew about her work for the SD but kept silent. After the liberation the two women went into hiding in Rotterdam but were tracked down and arrested. Van Dijk was charged with the betrayal of around 700 persons.
How should we consider this number of 700 persons in the bigger picture of Jewish persecution? The most infamous ‘Jewhunter’ C.J. Kaptein, a gentile policeman, credited himself with rounding up 600 Jews when he stood trial after the war; like van Dijk, he was also sentenced to death. The case of Kaptein is widely published as a testimony that the Dutch police were complicit with the persecution of Jews during the war, while the case of Ans van Dijk almost descended into oblivion.
Anne Frank
It was not until 1994 that the case of Ans van Dijk was extensively described in a publication written by Koos Groen and titled “When Victims become Traitors.” Groen asks why Anne Frank is known worldwide as a victim but why the treason of Ans van Dijk has been erased from the collective memory. Besides the extent of her betrayal, the fact that she was the only woman who was executed after the war should be enough to attract attention.
The reason for the oblivion of Ans van Dijk should be sought in the fact that the historiography of Holland during World War II has largely been written by Jews. The Jewish journalist Loe de Jong was appointed as the director of the State Institute of War Documentation and wrote the official historical account of Holland during World War II. In this account of over 15,000 pages there is not one word about the treason of Ans van Dijk; nor is her treason mentioned in other publications that focus on the Jewish persecution and are consider standard works, like De ondergang (The Downfall) from the Jewish professor Jacques Presser.
In 2010 Sytze van der Zee published his book Vogelvrij (Outlawed) on the hunt for Jews in hiding, causing a considerable stir in the media. Based on his research on the files in the State Institute of War Documentation, Van der Zee found that there were more Jews involved in the rounding up of Jews in hiding than was known previously. This means that under the guidance of Mr. de Jong, who died in 2005, this knowledge was withheld from the public until his image of the war and the persecution of the Jews was firmly imprinted into the collective mind.
In his book and also on national television (25 January 2010) Van der Zee also tries to answer the unresolved question of who betrayed the most famous Jewess in hiding, Anne Frank. He is fascinated by the case of Ans van Dijk and says that the more he investigates her case the more he is convinced that Ans van Dijk is the most probable candidate for the betrayal of Anne Frank. He has no evidence from the available sources, but the fact that Van Dijk’s cover was the support of Jews in hiding and she was operating in the very neighbourhood (Prinsengracht, Keizersgracht) where the Frank family was hiding points in his view in that direction.
Conclusion
The power of the Jewish persecution narrative lies into the sharp distinction between Jewish victims and non-Jewish perpetrators, the last group preferably portrayed as male White Christian patriots. The weakness of the Jewish persecution narrative lies in the complex reality in which allegiances can shift and the roles of victims and perpetrators are reversed. Imagine what would be left of this narrative if historical records would show or even suggest that its icon, Anne Frank, was betrayed by a lesbian Jewess?
Minorities like the LGBT movement go at great lengths to mirror their suffering during the war with the fate of the Jews. In 2002 Germany apoligized to the gay community and the European Parliament adopted a resolution on the Holocaust which included homosexuals. The monument to commemorate the persecuted homosexuals during the war is located behind the Anne Frank House, an ironic fact in the light of Van der Zee’s theory.
Facing the Future as a Minority
Was the Immigration Act of 1924 Illiberal?
‘where the Frank family.’ ?
There are many stories that have disappeared. Try to find material on the GI’s disgust at the degeneration of DP’s (displaced persons), the role of capos (jewish guards) in the camps or even the horror expressed by Hannah Arendt at the behavior of Jewish leaders and their cooperation with NAZI’s. A vast hole in history. There are times when I am awed by the Jewish ability to control historiography. The question is why do they put so much effort into it if there is nothing to hide? Oh right, you must never blame the victim!
@Alice Teller:
Here is another story that disappeared down the memory hole: the New York Times cover up of the Holodomor while it was taking place — for which the NYTimes is completely unapologetic.
National Review article
It is held today as a given that gay men and lesbians were murdered by the beastly Nazi s in “gas chambers”. This lie belongs with the Jews were made into soap bars. When the fate of gay men was examined in Nazi occupied Holland it was found that in reality the authorities turned a blind eye and there were fewer prosecutions than pre war and only for gross flagrant behaviour ie with under age boys. Two well known gay venues in Amsterdam during the war years were completely undisturbed by the occupation authorities.
@peter:
Interesting. Years ago it was commonly said that all of the SS were homosexual. I assume this was dropped when it stopped being a slur?
@ Alice Teller
Why do you put “nazi” [sic] in all caps? I’ve seen this before but wondered why people did it.
@Jim:
Because it is an acronym. Like DAR for Daughters of the American Revolution. I have no German and I forget what it stands for. It was correct usage in my youth. Has this changed?
Here is yet another example of why this misbegotten tribe of devious swindlers and mass murderers MUST control all media outlets not to mention the historiography of events such as major conflicts. They know very well what would happen to them if the general population were to discover what these monsters among us routinely do.
This is the reason they have hoarded 200 plus Nukes and have German Submarines giving them the capacity to strike any Goy population centre on Earth. This is a problem for the entire World.
@Floda: You convinced me, Floda. Thank you.
If spying for a foreign country is considered “treason” in the West – then I am affraid most of European countries are full of traitors among both Jews and Zionist Christians.
American Jewish couple, Julius and Ethel Rosenberg were executed on June 19, 1953 for spying for Russia. Jonathan Pollard is lucky – even after passing one million American secrets to Israel – he is still alive and basking in Israel’s glory. Then we had Judith Socolov (aka Judith Coplon), an employee at US State Department in 1949 – was arrested for passing classified documents to a USSR agent Valetin Gubitchev, whom she claimed to be her lover. She was convicted but under pressure from the powerful Jewish groups – the case against her was dropped by US Justice Department in 1967 …..
http://rehmat1.wordpress.com/2011/03/10/itzik-my-mother-in-law-was-a-jewish-spy/
@ Alice Teller
“Nazi” is not an acronym. The party was called the NSDAP (National Socialist German (Deutsche) Workers (Arbeiter) Party. “Nazi” is a slurring of the German word “national” (nazional).
It would be the equivalent in English of calling Nationalists “Natties” or Pagans “Peggies.” Sorry to unload on you like that lol.
@Alice Teller:
If you read Rise and Fall of the Third Reich, the book is littered with homosexual slurs against the Nazis back when it was not ok to be gay. It’s funny how times change.
Shirer is also noticeably averse to Germans in general, basically alluding to a racial reason for the rise of Nazis. This was before we learned that the British are so heavily influenced by the German gene pool.
@Alice Teller: Dear Mrs. Teller: What Jim says about the derivation of Nazi is quite true as far as it goes. The word is the first two syllables (hence, a shorthand form) of a much longer word or phrase, just as movie originated as a shortened form of moving picture.
But Jim has omitted the crucial underlying linguistic basis for the word’s spelling. Just as movie is spelt thus, rather than in the odd and alien-looking form movi, for the sake of readability in accord with English-language norms, so too did Nationalsozialismus, where the first four syllables are pronounced nah-tsee-oh-NAHL (with the stress on the last syllable, it being a loan word rather than a native German word), get respelled Nazi in the short form. The reason is that only with that spelling would a German reader understand that it was to be pronounced NAH-tsee. A native speaker of German, in 1933 or now, who saw Nati would automatically pronounce it NAH-tee and might never catch on to what was being abbreviated.
Incidentally, I too recall seeing full caps used for NAZI in the mid and late fifties, when all I knew about it was that it was a term my elders used as a tag for some bad guys. Whether the full caps were the expression of routine journalistic ignorance or a conscious attempt to mislead, who can say? Heaven knows we have been exposed to enough of both to last several lifetimes.
@Pierre de Craon:
Just like the term Commie for Communists,the term Nazi was denigrating and never used by the National Socialists themselves.
Peter,
This is a great article. I know that most academic participants on this website are not supporters of the Revisionist movement. I am not a revisionist, because I do not write history, but I do believe and support much of the Revisionist narrative. Where this gets interesting, is naturally, when new subgroups are born from within ethno-identities and the conflict they can create. My belief is that gay and lesbian activists always have demonstrated high degrees of ethnocentric behaviors and one should always beware of their call that we all need to work together.
But further, while we say that homosexuals were persecuted in the Nazi regime, it is not absolutely true. Some homosexuals were persecuted, and it usually was those that were activists and demonstrated high degrees of ethnocentric behavior. They were many homosexuals in the ranks of the Nazi regime as among the industrialists and financiers that worked with the regime, in all of the professions also. What Hitler was afraid of, while no theory at that time could support his intuitions, were exactly these ethno-centric behaviors by subgroups. His description of the sociopolitical problems brought by the German Jewish population mostly had to do with those that presented high degrees of non-integration. And around this, other groups, not discussed in Main Kempf, also were eventually judged to have ethnocentric behaviors that were harmful to his goal. So without arguing so theoretically, Hitler was fighting Minoritism.
One must not forget that many Jews were close to and funded the Nazis and their regime until very late. And what reversed their support was not, as people claim, when they understood that the regime was brutal, but when the economic model of government dirigisme was not what they had hoped for.
I am sure that in the current example, homosexual activists will remember that Van Dijk was executed because she was a lesbian, not because of what she did, exactly as when on the night of the long knives, Ernst Rohm was executed by the Nazi regime. To those who know Rohm was homosexual, they cite him as persecuted because of his homosexuality, not because the Brown shirts he headed wanted to overthrow the regime. Rohm was very close to Hitler and Hitler always new of Rohm’s homosexuality. And what is cynic here, is that Hitler grew to be weary of the Brown shirts (SA) because they were so brutal. And it is often that case when people, with a high sense of ethno-centric identity, are punished, they interpret their faith as being the result of their primal identity, not their actions.
Thanks for the information, gentlemen.
@thm:
We have another perfect example of the big silence currently. The media has ignored the greatest threat to the constitution put forward in years. You can be sure we will be the first they come for.
http://www.businessinsider.com/the-medias-blackout-of-the-national-defense-authorization-act-is-shameful-2011-12
I hope the the editors will make much of this.
On the subject of the Holocaust, have any of the authors on this site seen The Last Days of the Big Lie? It’s a 2-hour documentary on Youtube that picks apart the Oscar-winning Spielberg documentary on some Holocaust survivors. I was skeptical about it at first but it’s a really good watch.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F7tHB8tD34s
@fender:
I have already seen that film and it really blows your mind.The sheer CHUTZPAH of these people to tell absurd lies! It is indeed what the title says: the last days of a Big Lie.
@Denys: I have also read the article but it does not seem revisionist to me. It is just clarifying how people acted in that time. War does not bring the best out of people, often quite on the contrary.
Am eagerly awaiting the next Hollywood holocaust blockbuster Inglorious Lesbians.
@Franklin Ryckaert: Indeed? I have not heard that claim advanced before, though I have no certain basis on which to dispute it. I will say, however, that I have definitely seen the term Nazi used in print in published German-language quotations dating from the thirties, albeit the source materials in which the quoted matter appeared was published here in the States or in England. Furthermore, I am familiar with at least one statement by the composer Hans Pfitzner (1869–1949)—an ardent German nationalist (though not, I grant, a party member) who never left or even considered leaving Germany—where he referred to his contacts with Goering and other “Nazis.” I’ll see if I can dig up the full quote and its source.
In the meantime I’ll take your word for the matter.
@Pierre de Craon: Make that “the source materials in which the quoted matter appeared were published here in the States . . .”
@Pierre de Craon:
You can find a confirmation at : “Nazi Party” (Wikipedia), see under: “Etymology”.
Here is a quote from that article:
@Franklin Ryckaert: Thank you very much, Mr. Ryckaert. I am reflexively loathe to believe anything sourced from the Pretend Encyclopedia that I can’t otherwise confirm, but since this material is what lawyers call an admission against interest (Wikipedia’s prime interest being the furtherance of Jewish dominance, not least in the fields of history and historiography), it is hardly likely to be inaccurate. In addition, it confirms that a very great many native speakers of German did use the term Nazi and hence in no way contradicts my own point, which was of course linguistic rather than political in import.
@Jim: ““Nazi” is a slurring of the German word “national” (nazional). ”
Close but not quite. The German spelling for National is the same and NAZI comes from the German “NAtionalsoZIalistische…”.
@Bob: Actually, I think Pierre de Craon has it right, uptopic.
As he points out, a German-speaker wouldn’t normally associate the sounding of Nah-tsee with Nazi.
Oh well, whatever.
@Dirk:
Dirk,
I was not saying that I thought the article was or pretended to be revionist; I was preparing the audience of my comment to understaand that I share revisionist views and that I do not share the perceive conventionnal propagandist interpretation of who was victim and on what basis.
Peter is absolutly not revisionist in this article and especially when he states that homosexuals where persecuted. I pretend that homosexuals where not necessarily persucated on the besis of their homosexuality.
In the same direction, I do not believe that all Jews were persecuted and in fact all through the war the Hitler government negociated with the Jewish World Congress. Hitler wanted most non-integrated Jews out of Germany, he did not want to exterminante them and he negotiated the out-passage of many of them out of Germany.
Is this clrearer.
@Pierre de Craon:
Correct Pierre, I’m still reasonably fluent in spoken German having been born there and attended primary school to the fourth grade. I can say with absolute certainty in our small German community around rural Victoria in Australia back in the 1950′s, the term NAZI was commonly used by my Father and the other Men of similar age, all of whom had survived Wehrmacht experiences.
I don’t recall them using the term in any derisive manner except when speaking of fanatics. Then they would usually add ‘verukter hund’ (mad dog)
@Denys Picard:
The persecution of homosexuals, gypsies and Jehovas Witnesses is a late addition to the “Holocaust” narrative. When the material and psychological success of Jewish victimology became evident, other groups tried to jump on the bandwagon.
Homosexuality was punishable in Germany and other countries until the 70ies (§175), it was not an invention of the Nazis, who put gays in jail only in severe cases, as some commenters already noted.
The reasons for putting gypsies in jail are evident, even recently the Sarkozy government in France was obliged to expel the Romanian Sinti&Roma due to their record of criminality.
The case of Jehovahs Witnesses is particularly interesting for its hipocrisy.
Jehovahs Witnesses were not jailed for their faith, as the try to convice us.
The Nazis didn’t care much about religion as long as the believers didn’t interfere in politics and Germany was traditionally much more tolerant to religions than most of her neighbors (the protestants from France took refuge in Prussia, for example, and the Jews came from Russia).
Jehovas Witnesses were jailed for refusing military service and/or proselytizing such refusal. This was, of course, an offense in any country where military service was compulsory, and these were all invoved in WWII.
Accordingly to the Jehovahs Witnesses own 1973 report, only 6019 Jehovah’s Witnesses were arrested in Germany during the 12 year Nazi period of 1933 through 1945. Only 2000 German JWs were ever sent to concentration camps. Only 203 were executed. Another 432 German JWs died while in custody in all German jails, prisons, and camps.
During this same 1933-1945 time period, there were more Jehovah’s Witnesses arrested and jailed in the United States than in Germany. In fact, just during 1941-1945, approximately 4500 American Jehovah’s Witnesses men “elected” to go to prison rather than serve in the U.S. Military.
Luckily, their prisons were not in a war area.
There is literature how “Uncle Joe” treated JWs refusing military sevice in the USSR, but it can be left to your fantasy.
On December 4, several Jewish groups and two GOP presidential candidates, Islamophobe Newt Gingrich, and Mitt Romney have demanded that Barack Obama axe, Howard Gutman, his Jewish ambassador to Belgium. Why? Because, Howard claims that Muslims don’t hate Jews for being Jewish and blames the Zionist regime for creating ‘anti-Semitism’ among Muslims and the Westerners……
http://rehmat1.wordpress.com/2011/12/06/lobby-axe-jewish-ambassador-to-belgium/
The trouble with Judaics of WW2 is only typical. Among (for) themselves they were a nation. For others, they expected to be both (many) ways. Germany had elevated them to the rank of nations, and treated them as such: alien, warring nation, ergo incarcerated during a war. This was bad of German government. Of course, the Judaics would have preferred to be treated as citizens of nations, among which they lived.
Obviously, every Judaic person was persecuted, even if the person was par excellence collaborator with German authorities with the duty of hunting fellow Judaics. This is portrayed as additional harm done to a Judaic person: not only the person was persecuted, but also was administered an additional torture of having to harm own tribe. This way, many Judaic persons describe how they threw their child/neighbour/own mother to the gas chamber/burning pit, etc. – a product of their sick imagination of mass murder or death in flames – the one and only Holoswindle.
The Judaic person described was one of a legion.
@Floda: Thanks for this anecdote, Floda. No army, alas, is without its share of mad dogs.
When I was in Oz in late 1968—December 6 was, if memory serves, my last day there—I was twenty-three and thought it the grandest place on earth. (Admittedly, I saw only Sydney and its environs; to my regret, I couldn’t get down to your part of the country.) The treasonous transformation that your country has suffered is hardly less egregious than what’s happened here in the States and in Europe. I hope that it’s not too late to be reversed.
@sylvie:
Interesting points on JWs.
In Berlin a similar network of Jews and Jewesses, ring-led by one Stella Goldschlag, & in return for exemption and per-head payments, betrayed large numbers of their co-racials. See Peter Wyden, STELLA (NY, 1992), and http://seductivejewess.wordpress.com/type-iv25-denise-sarah-lindheim-alias-dede-lind/.
@Denys Picard: I suspect the academics’ reticence is more a case of not wishing to be ensnared in the “denialist” net that covers much of Europe these days. As far as I know, David Duke has always studiously professed ignorance of the particulars of the holocaust, and yet was arrested in Germany on charges of Holocaust denial. I think it’s more of an expedient, but forgiveable, given the penal sanctions applicable in so many jurisdictions.
I have difficulty in buying the Anne Frank Diary story in toto.
From memory, in The Lies of Ulysses, Rassinier mentions homosexuals being made to wear a pink armband, but this “discrimination” was merely camp protocol. Jews, criminal internees, political prisoners – every group had some differentiating marker.
The Patron Saint of Holocaust swindlers, Shimon Wiesenthal made a very succesfull and lucrative career during those days: “The GESTAPO had a department called STACHEL, composed of Jewish agents, who spied on fellow Jews, who were hoardering and black-marketeering. The agent received a reward in the form of a percentage of the value of any contraband he discovered. Wiesenthal was such an agent.” ( from an interview with Josef Ginsburg(J.G.Burg) by Eric Thomson)
Have in mind also, that Otto Frank and his family were persecuted, because Otto swindeled German authorities, to whom he sold vast quantities of conserved food.
Websites like this make me grateful for internet free speech. It gloriously dilutes the strength of the govt. to control thought.
I don’t care if you’re a white nationalist or an anti-white raving lunatic, this is interesting stuff.
@Denys Picard:
Iran’s death penalty against Iranian woman Sakineh for committing adultery – was a brainchild of French Zionist Jew bigot Bernard-Henri Levy. His lies were backed-up by the French President Sarkozy and his half-naked-model wife. Sakineh was in fact condemned to death for being an accessory to commit murder of her husband with the help of her boyfriend. Something quite kosher in Israel if the husband happens to be an Arab Muslim……
http://rehmat1.wordpress.com/2011/09/11/us-report-iran-executes-gays-and-lesbians/
@Pierre de Craon:
I should like to commend you on your etymological tutorial of the term “Nazi” (NAZI?) but I must confess its labyrinthine nature was to too heavy a lift. LOL
@Ivan Groznij:
re: Simon Wiezenthal
Tere is a good bookby Gerd Honsik, available on-line, on the Szymon the Crook of Galicja: http://balder.org/judea/Gerd-Honsik-Fiend-And-Felon-Simon-Wiesenthal-Exposed.php
‘Jewhunter’ is as much a farce as the myth of ‘Six Million Died’. Many of the so-called ‘jewhunters’ were either Jewish or their collaborators Christian Zionists such as Adolf Eichmann.
http://rehmat1.wordpress.com/2011/03/16/hannah-arendt-and-eichmanns-show-trail/
@HarryO: Oh, well. Can’t win ‘em all, Harry. Sorry. I do tend to go on.
I guess for me the bottom line is that a misexplanation, even a well-meant one, is worse than none at all. Maybe I’m wrong.
Max Blumenthal has written a great article entitled ‘From Occupation to Occupy: Israelification of American Domestic Security’ – in which he exposes the Israeli agents training America’s internal security forces.
http://rehmat1.wordpress.com/2011/12/04/ows-and-israelification-of-american-domestic-security/
Much of Hitler’s rounding up of the Jews was based mostly on real fear that Jews, who had a bloody and violent record of communism during the Bolshevik revolution, would insinuate this deadly communism into not only Germany, but other parts of Europe: The worst mass murderer in history is Lazar Kaganovich, the Butcher of the Ukraine, During this period Jews, who Stalin got to manage 80% the gulags, had tortured and slaughtered 66 million Russian Christians, so one can understand Hitler not wanting to deal with the same problem. Jews had literally pulled the triggers to murder the Romanov Royal Family in cold blood..The Hungarian Revolution actually started out as an anti-Jewish movement based on what the Bolsheviks had done.Hitler wanted to round them up into camps to prevent them imposing their brand of violence on Germans. Between 1917 and 1991 when the Soviet Union collapsed, communist Jews had killed 60-135 MILLION innocent people using mostly depraved methods , forced labor, artificial famine and even gassings.You only find this expose now because of the internet and it is found no where in the history books, but Jewish control of current history is being eroded because of the internet.
Suddenly we learn Ann Frank’s diary was written by her father Otto in ball point pen (not in use during Ann’s lifetime). All the lies Elie Wiesel promulgated about the horrors of Auschwitz have been discredited completely because his famous concentration camp tattoo, always carefully hidden under a jacket, turned out to be non-existent when he forgot to wear the jacket one day and all the other fantastical lies he told have been thrown into the rubbish bin. The famous photo of corpses lying high in a cart shortly after the Dresden bombing (done infamously by the US) was tried to be passed off as in Auschwitz but was discredited some time later. And on and on. Coverups and whityewash haven’t changed since JFK’s assassination, and are really much worse. I’m very interested in seeing the documentary about Spielberg’s lies, because he also needs his wings clipped. What I find despicable is that “The holocaust:” has been captured by the Jews as THEIR”s. and Israel, the US and Donmeh Turkey still deny the Armenian Christian Holocaust, which was plotted entirely by Jews, and still deny that what they are doing to the Palestinians is not a holocaust, and they still deny that they got the US to commit another holocaust against 2 million Iraqis at their behest.. If history repeats itself Jews will manage the death camps at FEMA throghout America and repeat the gulag slaughters they perpetrated in Russia not so long ago, as a prelude to plundering the treasuries just like they did to Germany and Russia and now America. A leopard never changes its spots. Look at the lies and propaganda going on with all the Spring “revolutions” today.Wayne Madsen Report (WMR) is one of the few sources of truth in America today without the corporate fascist slant of Charlie Rose or any MSM all controlled by the same group.
@Franklin Ryckaert:
When a pre-teener in occupied the Netherlands, I never once heard or saw in print the word “nazi”. The occupiers were thruout referred to with their centuries old epithet “moffen” – I am sure in other occupied countries like Flemish Belgium, France or Italy they were also referred to as ” den duts”, le boche or “tedeschi”. Only when I lived in the USA I found that WWII Germans or Germany were invariably referred to as “nazi” – a convenient shorthand “handle”.
Same goes for Gestapo which is equivalent to FBI – the SD as correctly used in the article was the only SS entity known and referred to in Holland – equivalent to CIA as a counter-intelligence operation in occupied territories of course Gestapo sounds far more sinister than a plain SD.
I know nothing about this woman, but I understand that she was charged with betrayal. Betrayal to who? Is that a crime? I mean, where is the law that defines her actions as a crime. As for her collaboration with the enemy, where are such actvities defined? Would not selling some commodity or food to an occupying force that has assumed de facto control of the country a crime? Or, like in Nuremberg, were laws crafted after the fact in order to punish a “bad” person?
@Denys Picard: In a nutshell, you are describing the JEWs to a tee. They haven’t been persecuted for thousands of years b/c they are Jewish, but b/c they are vile creatures. This has been shown time, and time again. Thus the damage CONtrol( the poor hard done by little jews) the Jew-owned media has perpeTRAITed on the Goyim for eons.
The case of Ans van Dijk is mentioned in L. de Jong’s Het Koninkrijk der Nederlanden in de Tweede Wereldoorlog (The Kingdom of the Netherlands in the Second World War.)
Although J. Presser didn’t mention her by name he did include her case in Ondergang. (Ashes in the Wind)
I find it somewhat amusing that “Peter Stuyvesant”, who built his article around the insinuation that certain facts are deliberately omitted from the official Dutch historiography, failed to note that here. What could be the reason for “Peter Stuyvesant’s” observations about De Jong and Presser’s work?
What about the rest of you? Didn’t someone check? The Dutch editions of both works have been available online for some time. Presser’s work was translated years before “Stuyvesant’s” piece was uploaded here.
These are the Volume and Page numbers from the Register of “Koninkrijk” for entries about Dijk, A. van, 6: 366-368; 7: 444; 12: 582, 586,
617, 622; 13: II4; 14: 415, 431, 456, 960
Here is a quote from Presser’s Ondergang. I’ll leave it up to Stuyvesant to provide the translation. I’m sure he is eager to correct any misconceptions caused among his readers.
“Hier – en in zoveel van dergelijke gevallen – kan de historicus al nauwelijks meer lachen en dit lachen vergaat hem helemaal, wanneer hij het buitengewoon triestige verschijnsel moet signaleren van het verraad door Joden, in dienst van de Duitsers tegen de Joden werkend. Een aantal, gelukkig betrekkelijk gering, is na de oorlog nog berecht, met zelfs een enkel doodvonnis, voltrokken aan een vrouw, die bekende tientallen Joden aan de vijand te hebben verraden en haar rechters er niet van overtuigen kon, dat zij dat geheel en al tegen haar wil had gedaan, ofschoon zij wel onder druk van de vervolger tot dat ‘werk’, betaald werk, was gekomen. [...]“