Below is the OCR text representation for this newspapers page.

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