Newspaper Page Text
The Southern
A Weekly Newspaper for Southern Jewry
0
O'S.'lO .9^ fv^jO 5 * "
• oO
XXXVI
ATLANTA, GEORGIA, FRIDAY, DECEMBER 15, 1961
No. M
Eichmann Adjudged “Guilty; ’’Sentence Expected
JERUSALEM, (JTA)—Israel's
three-man District Court here,
which tried Adolf Eichmann on
a 15-count Indictment, Monday
found the ex-Nazi guilty on all
counts. The vprdict was unani
mous.
Presiding Justice Moshe Lan
dau announced, when the court
reconvened at 9 am. in the
hushed chambers at the Beth
Haam, that the prosecution had
“established the entire bill of
indictment” against the defend
ant. Following that anounce-
ment, the court started reading
the judgment.
Elehnuum had been charged
specifically with crimes against
the Jewish people, crimes against
humanity, war crimes, and mem
bership in organisations declared
“criminal” by the International
Military Tribunal at Nuremberg
in 1946. Twelve of the 15 counts
in the indictment carry the
maximum penalty of death. The
court had taken exactly four
months, since the trial was con
cluded on August 11, to delib
erate the case and formulate its
judgment. The trial itself lasted
four months, having opened last
April 11.
The former Gestapo colonel,
now convicted of having direct
ed the annihilation of 6,000,000
European Jews during World
War II, stood ramrod straight in
his bullet-proof, glass-enclosed
booth in the courtroom, as Just
ice Landau opened the morn
ing session. He showed no emo
tion whatever as he heard the
verdict. After requesting him to
sit down. Justice Landau started
reading the 300-page judgment.
Later, that task was shared by
the two other jurists on the
court, Judge Yitzhak Raveh and
Judge Binyamin Halevi.
Judgment Stresses
Severe Charges
“The charges of unsurpassed
severity, ascribed to the ac
cused," stated the judgment, “re
fer to the period of Hitler’s re
gime in Germany, and para
graphs in the indictment encom
pass the catastrophe which be
fell the Jewish people during
that period—a story of blood
shed and suffering that will be
well remembered to the end of
time. The catastrophe has been
discussed in court proceedings,
dealt with extensively at the In
ternational Military Tribunal at
Nuremberg and elsewhere. But,
this time, it occupied the central
place in these court proceedings.
“There was a desire—under
standable in itself—to give a
comprehensive and precise his
torical description of events that
occurred during the catastrophe
and, in so doing, emphasize also
the unbelievable feats of hero
ism performed by ghetto fight
ers, those who mutinied in
camps, and by Jewish partisans.
‘There are also those who re
gard this trial as a platform for
clarification of questions of great
import, some of which arose
from the catastrophe while oth
ers, of long standing, have
emerged once again in more
acute form because of unprece
dented sufferings that were
visited upon the Jewish people
and upon the world as a whole
in the middle of the Twentieth
Century.”
Poses Pertinent
Questions in Verdict
Justice Landau then posed
some of these questions, asking:
“How could this happen in the
light of day, and why was it
just the German people from
which this great evil sprang?
Could the Nazis have carried
out their evil designs without
the help given them by other
peoples in whose midst the Jews
dwelt? Would it have been
possible to avert the catastro
phe, at least in part, if the Allies
had displayed greater will to
assist the persecuted Jews?
“Did the Jewish people In
lands of freedom do all In its
power to rally to the rescue of
its brethren and to sound the
alarm for help?” Justice Landau
continued. “What are the psy
chological and social causes of
the group hatred which Is known
as anti-Semitism? Can this an
cient disease be cured, and by
what means? What is the les
son which Jews and other na
tions must learn from all this in
regard to every man’s relation
ship to others?”
The court then cited its au
thority in this case, pointing to
the Israel law of 1955 authoriz
ing the trial and punishment,
upon conviction, of Nazis and
their collaborators. The defense
had, at the beginning of the trial
last April, questioned the court’s
jurisdiction. This point is fully
expected now to form the basis
for an appeal from the court’s
findings to Israel’s Supreme
Court.
Rejects Eichmann’s
... Claim on “Duty”
Judge Halevi, taking up the
reading of the judgment at this
point, stated that the 1955 law
had given “expression to the
historic change in the political
situation of the Jewish people
who, having the greatest and
gravest account against the
Nazis, had no political^ status for
trying Nazi criminals until the
establishment of the State of Is
rael.”
In regard to Israel’s “unequi
vocal” law, said Judge Halevi,
numerous legal authorities have
shown that “Israel is mindful to
accord with the principles of in
ternational law.” The crimes
charged in the trial, he held,
“are crimes not only under Is
rael law, but are, in essence,
against the law of the nations.”
Judge Halevi rejected defense
claims that the crimes by Eich
mann had been committed “in
the course of duty and are, thus,
acts of State” for which only the
German state is responsible. He
pointed out that this theory con
cerning “acts of State” was re
pudiated by the Nuremberg Tri
bunal, and that the Nuremberg
judgment was affirmed by the
United Nations in 1946.
“The State of Israel,” he said,
"is a sovereign State of Jewish
people which the Nazis wanted
to exterminate. Half of Israel’s
population came from the deci
mated European community in
the last decade. In the light of
the United Nations recognition
of the Jewish people and their
right to establish their State; in
the light of the recognition of
this State by the family of na
tions, Israel and the Jewish peo
ple constitute an integral part
of the law of nations.
Compares Nuremberg
IVilmnal Trial
“It was apparent,” the judg-
mented continued, “that, if the
Nuremberg Tribunal was a tri
umph of human justice over to
talitarian concepts, this trial in
Israel was all that as well as
historic justice. A small state,
restored after two thousand
National UJA Conference Votes
$95 Million for 1962 Needs
NEW YORK, (JTA) —Ameri
can Jews raised $60,000,0000 in
1961 for the United Jewish Ap
peal to aid Israel’s immigrants
and needy Jews overseas; they
were asked Sunday to contribute
$95,000,000 in 1962 in view of the
emergency situations which have
arisen for Jews in various coun
tries end the increased immigra
tion to Israel and other lands.
“Thousands of lives depend
upon oor raising $35,000,000 next
year over and above the $60,-
000,000 raised this year,” Joseph
Meyerhoff, UJA reneral chair
man, told 1,500 leaders of Jew
ish communities from all parts
of the country at the opening
session of the three-day Annual
National Conference of the
United Jewish Appeal. “The In
creased pace of Jewish Immigra
tion to Israel and other coun
tries, including the United States
makes this increased amount for
1962 imperative.”
The UJA genera] chairman
proposed that the additional
$35,000,000 be raised through a
“Special Fund,” to which contri
butors could make substantial
gifts in addition to their regular
contributions. “I am convinced,”
Mr Meyerhoff said, “that hun
dreds of thousands of our con
tributors are ready to make
these extra gifts because they
know we cannot tell people who
can emigrate today to wait till
tomorrow. Tomorrow may be
too late.”
‘Jews on
Move Again/
Parley Hears
Today’s session of the Confer
ence also heard Rabbi Herbert
A Friedman, UJA executive
vice-chairman, and other UJA
leaders tell how the $95,000,000
sought for 1962 would provide
desperately needed migration
aid, relief and rehabilitation for
600,000 Jewish men, women and
children in Israel, this country,
and 26 overseas lands.
“Jews are on the move again
in numbers that remind one of
the peak years of immigration
into Israel,” Rabbi Friedman told
the gathering. “The Increase In
movement, which applies to oth
er countries as well as Israel,
began last spring and has placed
a crashing financial burden on
UJA’s beneficiary bodies.”
Rabbi Friedman noted that of
the $95,000,000, if raised, an
amount of $68,200,000 would go
to Israel’s immigrant aid body,
the Jewish Agency for Israel,
through the United Israel Ap
peal, UJA’s principal benefici
ary. The Jewish Agency must
transport, receive, help to house
and absorb some 265,000 persons
next year.
The UJA executive vice-
chairman pointed out that the
Joint Distribution Committee,
a second major UJA beneficiary,
needed $22,000,000 from the Ap
peal in behalf of 325,000 in need,
in 27 overseas countries. Of
these, some 70,000 are immi
grants already in Israel, most of
them aged and handicapped per
sons. Lesser amounts would be
required by UJA’s two remain
ing beneficiaries, the New York
Association for New Americans
and the United Hias Service,
Rabbi Friedman noted. Together
the two agencies would serve
10,000 Jewish refugees already
in the United States, or expected
in 1962.
$40 Million for
Immigrants
The delegates today also heard
AryPh L. Pincus, treasurer of
the Jewish Agency for Israel,
declare that Israel’s people wel
come the new comers, and will
keep their gates open to them,
no matter what cost "But in all
fairness,” the Jewish Agency
leader added, "immigration rep
resents a responsibility which
rests equally upon the people of
Israel and the Jews of the free
world. In actual fact however,
it can be stated that Israel’s
people, through taxes and
through voluntary contributions
have furnished two dollars to
every dollar from outside sources
to make possible the entry of the
million immigrants who have
come to Israel since 1946.”
More than half of the proposed
$66,200,000 which would go to
the Jewish Agency from UJA in
1962, a sum of $39,200,000, would
be devoted to the transportation
and settling of new immigrants,
Mr. Pincus disclosed. The amount
would be spent for transporta
tion, initial absorption and hous
ing. At the same time, Mr. Pin
cus noted, a present lack of
transportation, initial absorption
and housing. At the same time,
Mr. Pincus noted, a present lack
of funds for initial absorption is
causing great hardship for cur
rent newcomers to Israel.
Moses A. Leavitt, executive
vice-chairman of the Joint Dis
tribution Committee, in present
ing the needs behind his organ
ization’s budget for 1962, de
clared that Jewish communities
in European countries are fac
ing “almost impossible” prob
lems in attempting to cope with
the flood of refugees. “In 1962,”
he said, “we must not be forced
to curtail services, as we had to
this year, when it became neces
sary to take a portion of the
funds from the less needy and
divide it among the neediest.”
Increased migration, both
within Europe and in Israel, Mr.
Leavitt indicated, has severely
strained the capacity of JDC
programs to cope with needs in
both areas.” “In Europe,” he
stated, “most of the refugees
are without means and have to
be given cash even for local
transportation. Housing is a par
ticularly crucial problem for
them. In some cases, they have
to be crowded into shabby little
(Ceutiaaed an mm t)
years, has rendered the judg
ment of its people against the
most hated enemy.”
“However,” Jadga Halevi de
clared, “the coart Itself eaaaot
bo enticed late »ravins ss which
are outside Ms sphere. It is the
purpose of every criminal case te
clarify whether the charges
against the aoeased are trae—
and, if the secured is oowvteted,
to mote out due punishment to
him. Only that which requires
clarification, la ardor that these
purposes auy be ■chtovud Met
be determined at the triaL Nat
only la any pntrnsisn te over-
stop these limits forbidden te tea
court—it would certainly and in
fail are.
“The court does not have at
its disposal the tools required
for investigation of the general
questions referred to above. For
example, in connection with the
description of the historical
background of the catastrophe,
a great amount of material was
brought before us In tile form of
documents and evidence, collect
ed most painstakingly, and cer
tainly in a genuine attempt to
delineate as complete a picture
as possible. Even so, all these
materials are but a tiny fraction
of all that is extant on the sub
ject”
Judge Halevi pointed out that
the court “by its very nature,”
cannot initiate inquiries or proof,
but must limit itself to such
proof as is adduced before it
Accordingly, "hg uSS. the court*!
ability “to aescriaa general
events is limited. “As to ques
tions of principle ” he contin
ued, “which are outside the
realm of law, no one has made
us judges of these. Therefore,
no greater weight is to be at
tached to our opinion on them
than to the opinion «f any other
person devoting study and
thought to these questions.”
Judgment Stresses
Educational Value
“These prefatory remarks,”
stated the judgment, “do not
mean that we are unaware of
the great educational value, im
plicit in the very holding of this
trial, for those who live in Zion
as well as for people beyond the
confines of this State. To the ex
tent that this result has been
achieved in the course of the
proceedings, it is to be wel
comed.
“Without doubt, the toutimewy
given at this trial by suivlvucs
of the catastrophe, who poured
out their hearts as they steed In
the witness box, win provide
valuable material for leesuruh
works and histeriaaa. But, aa
far as this court is eeweermed,
they are to bo regarded ae by
products of this triaL*
At the opening of the after
noon session, Judge Raveh went
on with the reading of the judg
ment. He started a count-by
count examination of the 18
clauses in the Eichmann indict
ment
Judge Raveh drew on the tes
timony and documents presented
during the summer trial to prove
Eichmann’s “personal responsi
bility” for anti-Jewish actions
before and during the war. He
cited facts to show that Kich-
minn’a acts, far from forming
a base for the protection of Jews
as he claimed, amounted only to
a base for robbery of Jewish
property and the enslavement of
the Jews.
In each instance, the court’s
judgment agreed with the argu
ments presented by tee prosecu
tion, placing personal responsi
bility for antWewiah depreda
tions on Etchmaim him—if