Droog Magazine. Investigations

HOME

June 27, 2022

'The betrayal of Anne Frank'

Argos Medialogica, HUMAN

Documentary maker Erwin Otten reconstructed the course of events surrounding the Cold Case Anne Frank / The Betrayal of Anne Frank investigation in 'Het verraad van Anne Frank'. Droog Magazine transcribed and translated the 43-minute TV broadcast.

[this page is part of the Betrayal of Anne Frank. A 21^st Century Canard files]

Intro

00'22'' Voice-over: “In January 2022, a Dutch cold case team designates a Jewish notary as a likely traitor to Anne Frank. It becomes world news.”

00'31” CNN presenter: “A surprise suspect. A Jewish notary named Arnold van den Bergh.”

00'36'' Mirjam de Gorter (granddaughter Arnold van den Bergh): “A delusional story, a lie, is being brought out here. And you can't stop it.”

00'44'' Voice Over: “After criticism from experts, the book about the research is withdrawn from the market by the Dutch publisher.”

00'51'' Pieter van Twisk (cold case team leader): “At the moment you can just buy Mein Kampf in the store, our book is no longer available. Apparently people are not allowed to read that. It's really insane.”

Naar begin.

2017

00'58'' Voice-over: “Argos Medialogica – how the Dutch cold case team managed to sell a dubious accusation to the world.”

01'30'' Voice-over: “The Anne Frank House in Amsterdam attracts 1.3 million visitors every year. The most frequently asked question; 'Who betrayed Anne Frank?'”

01'41” Matthijs van Nieuwkerk, talk show host (fragment of talk show De Wereld Draait Door, NPO1, BNNVara, 02-10-2017): “Who betrayed Anne Frank? Now a new Anne Frank cold case team has been formed. At the table initiator Thijs Bayens, filmmaker.”

01'49'' Voice-over: “On October 2, 2017, Thijs Bayens will launch his ambitious project 'A Cold Case Diary' at De Wereld Draait Door .”

01'57'' Thijs Bayens (cold case team): “What exactly happened? Because that is already very unclear. And then you have to ask if you really want to look for the perpetrator, that's possible, because it went the way it went, but the truth has to come out.”

02'07'' Voice-over: “The journalist-philosopher Pieter van Twisk will become the research leader of the project, which is already making world news when it is launched.”

02'12'' Pieter van Twisk: “Because it was just really sexy, apparently. Anne Frank, FBI, Artificial Intelligence. Those three things were apparently very interesting to the media. They all caught on to that.”

02'27'' NBC Today Show, 02-10-2017: “The ultimate cold case, one a retired FBI agents wants to crack.”

02'32'' Voice-over: “Retired FBI agent Vincenrt Pankoke is appointed to conduct the cold case investigation. The team uses artificial intelligence to examine millions of documents.

02'45” Interviewer: “Why did you choose to look at it with a police view now?”

02'49'' Pieter van Twisk: “Because we now have many new investigative methods and techniques at our disposal. In the last sixty years, let's say, this story has only been looked at with a historical or a journalistic view.”

03'05'' Matthijs van Nieuwkerk ( De Wereld Draait Door ( DWDD ), 2017): “What do you think is the chance that you will then have one name?”

03'06''( DWDD , 2017): “Very great.”

03'07'' Mathijs van Nieuwkerk ( DWDD , 2017): “Very great?”

03'09'' Thijs Bayens ( DWDD , 2017): “Very great.”

03'09'' Voice-over: “The cold case team has particularly skilfully hitched a ride with the Anne Frank brand, says professor of Jewish history Bart Wallet.

03'16'' Bart Wallet: ““Anne Frank has simply become business. That is of course because for a lot of people, worldwide, the story of the Holocaust, the Shoah, has actually been reduced to the story of Anne Frank. That has become the iconic story. There are t-shirts with Anne Frank's image on them, as if it were Che [Guevara]. In any case, you have to say that the distance between the historic Anne Frank and the Anne Frank brand has become very large.”

To begin.

03'44'' Voice-over: “It is February 2017. Bayens and Van Twisk set up Proditione Media. Proditione means betrayal. Thijs Bayens will film the investigation to turn it into a multi-part international documentary series.”

04'01'' Pieter van Twisk: “There were two small companies. You had Proditione Media and Proditione Productions. The productions included, say, filming and the documentary. I didn't interfere much with that. That was more my partner, Thijs Bayens.”

04'17'': “But that could be Netflix, HBO...”

04'19'' Pieter van Twisk: “That could be, yes.”

04'21'' Voice-over: “Journalist Hella Rottenberg investigates the working method of the cold case team for the daily newspaper Trouw and the Historisch Nieuwsblad.

04'29” Interviewer: “Were Bayens, Van Twisk and Pankoke qualified people for this research?”

04'36'' Hella Rottenberg: “Not when you're talking about historical research. They are a filmmaker, a journalist and a detective.”

04'48'' Voice-over: “The cold case team also wants to have a book published about the research. Rottenberg receives the letter with which a literary agent sold the rights to the cold case team at the London Book Fair in 2017. The letter reads: "It is very likely that they will find out once and for all who is responsible for Anne Frank's betrayal."

05'13” Interviewer: “In that offer letter they actually sell a promise...”

05'17'' Hella Rottenberg: “Yes, they do. And based on that promise, I think it has also become a hit at the London Book Fair. At the end you will have to come up with the real culprit. Because that's what the whole formula is based on."

05'35'' Voice Over: “The worldwide book rights are bought by the American HarperCollins, one of the largest publishers in the world. It will publish the book in dozens of countries. Publisher Ambo Anthos, in Amsterdam, will acquire the Dutch translation rights.”

05'53” Interviewer: “You have received an advance from HarperCollins and from Ambo anthos?

05'55'' Pieter van Twisk: “Yes.”

05'56” Interviewer: “May I be so immodest as to ask how much?”

05'58'' Pieter van Twisk: “That is allowed, but we have agreed not to comment about that, no.”

06'02'' Hella Rottenberg: “I have received confirmation from two sources that it would be 400,000 euros for the world rights of HarperCollins and 100 or 150,000 from Ambo Anthos”

[It is rather strange that Rottenberg doesn't say that these amounts were uncovered by Henk Willem Smits and Rosanne Kropman, in the article (€) 'The damage of 'The betrayal of Anne Frank' ( Follow the Money, 04-02-2022)]

To begin.

06'19'' Voice-over: “Canadian Rosemary Sullivan becomes the writer. She has no knowledge of the Second World War in the Netherlands.

[She also has no knowledge of Dutch or German; the same goes for the FBI agent and the Australian former agent who was on the cold case team – Droog Magazine ]

06'26'' Bart Wallet: “If you read that book... it has actually become a kind of hero story for the cold case team. That book is structured like this... it's about, yes, a very smart cold case team that is going to solve a difficult, exciting case. And it manages to do right that.”

06'44'' Voice Over: “The cold case team is looking for a way to raise even more money and asks the municipality of Amsterdam for a subsidy. Journalist Hella Rottenberg also receives the subsidy application. In this application, Pieter van Twisk and Vince Pankoke state that their research team consists of a “select group” of prominent historians, including from the Anne Frank House and the Netherlands Institute for War Documentation NIOD.”

07'13'' Hella Rottenberg: “People have not teamed up with Vince Pankoke at all. In fact, they had no idea that they would be mentioned in this grant application.”

07'22'' Pieter van Twisk: “At that time I asked several people if they wanted to cooperate, if we could use their name as part of the investigation team. Well, we could. Those people have all given their consent.”

07'35” Interviewer: “They deny that, you know.”

07'37'' Pieter van Twisk: “Well that… they can deny that, but it really isn't… that's right.”

07'41'' Voice-over: “Ronald Leopold is director of the Anne Frank House.”

07'45” Interviewer: “Is what the cold case team says correct? Was there a collaboration?”

07'49'' Ronald Leopold: “That would not have been my formulation. We have given them access to our archives. They were able to ask our researchers questions if they saw any reason to do so and that's it.”

08'00” Interviewer: “Your researcher Gertjan Broek is listed on the website of the cold case team as a 'team member'. Was he?

08'05'' Ronald Leopold: “No, he wasn't. Not a team member, nor was he part of the project. That was incorrect information provided by the team.”

08'14” Interviewer: “There has been no collaboration...”

08'17'' Pieter van Twisk: “I just told you that we visited the Anne Frank House, that we were allowed to see everything, that we were allowed to view the documents... they simply gave us permission...”

08'26'' Ronald Leopold: “That is also part of the public function of the Anne Frank House. That's what we're here for. And I certainly think that we are sometimes used, if I may call that term, to open other doors.”

Naar begin.

08'39'' Voice Over: “Former NIOD employee David Barnouw is the Anne Frank expert in the Netherlands. He is also mentioned in the grant application as a member of the research team. To his utter surprise. Barnouw only had short contact with the cold case team from the very beginning.”

08'56'' David Barnouw: “Then I went to one big meeting, where I think about fifteen people or so were, and it struck me that no one asked me anything. While I thought, [ laughing] I'm the only one here who has a bit of an knowledge of this subject, well yeah.”

09'11” Interviewer: “Were there a lot of gray haired people, say, experienced historians, on that evening?”

09'15'' David Barnouw: "No. There were youngsters. And, that was very clear, the aim was to make documentaries. That was the main purpose. A book was not mentioned at all. And there I also saw that promo video they made to get, I think, financiers or American production companies nice. There was also talk of signing a nondisclosure agreement. So immediately I thought, hey, that's not good. I don't function well if I'm not allowed to talk about it with people."

09'53'' Voice-over: “After these experiences, Barnouw decides not to get involved in the cold case investigation and drops out.”

10'00” Interviewer: “And you appear in the subsidy application from the municipality of Amsterdam...”

10'04'' David Barnouw: “Yes, that's not kosher. They didn't ask me. But that they do that without permission is of course quite ridiculous.”

10'12'' Voice-over: “The NIOD also informed us that there was no collaboration with the cold case team.”

10'17'' Hella Rottenberg': “Yes, and then it's nothing but names dropping. And use people as signboards.”

10'25'' Interviewer: “It might make you more trustworthy.”

10'27'' Hella Rottenberg: “Exactly."

10'30'' Voice-over: “The name dropping is bearing fruit. The municipality of Amsterdam has granted the cold case team 100,000 euros in subsidy.”

10'37” Interviewer: “The fact is that hardly any historians were part of that cold case team.”

[The cold case team certainly included historians: Monique Koemans, Circe de Bruin, Amber Dekker, Anna Foulidis Anna Helfrich, Christine Hoste, Cerianne Slagmolen and Machteld van Voskuilen. See also the passage on public historians, in: 'Despite devastining report sale book continues'. Droog Magazine, 29-03-2022). As far as we know, none of them was however specialized in the Shoah - DM.]

10'42” Bart Wallet: “Yes, I'd say that's really a damn shame. That's exactly what goes wrong here. The moment you look at it with a historical view, with knowledge of the Second World War and the period after the Second World War, that you actually see, that entire historical context has not been taken into account. And, with retroactive effect, you can say, yes, it should never have started this way.”

To begin.

2018

11'08'' Voiceover: “2018. The cold case team is in the middle of investigating the traitor and approaches Mirjam de Gorter. She is the granddaughter of civil-law notary Arnold van den Bergh. Mirjam never knew her grandfather personally. He died before her birth, in 1950.”

11'26'' Mirjam de Gorter: “He became a civil-law notary at a very young age. At one point he had built up a large notary office in Amsterdam. As a child my mother told [me] that he was a very nice father, a lovely man and [ that he ] worked very hard, always.

11'54'' Voice-over: “Notary Van den Bergh was a member of the Jewish Council. That organization was set up by the Germans to pass on their orders to the Jewish community and its leaders.”

12'04'' Mirjam de Gorter: “The war was an integral part of our lives. We knew that my grandparents were in hiding in Laren. But we didn't know the address."

12'21'' Voice-over: “The first contact between the cold case team and Mirjam is by email. Thijs Bayens asks for her cooperation, but doesn't say that he is looking for Anne Frank's traitor. Bayens takes a completely different approach to the research. He writes about...”

12'38'' Mirjam de Gorter: “'The investigation of resistance and going into hiding in Laren', and in that context I approach you.' And because my family was in hiding in Laren, I thought they wanted to do a truthful investigation. They all came up with renowned names, they talked about the NIOD and historians.”

13'03'' Voice Over: “What Bayens also doesn't report to Mirjam is that the cold case team already found an anonymous note. In it, her grandfather Arnold van den Bergh is designated as the traitor to Anne Frank. This is a copy of the anonymous note, typed by father Otto Frank. According to the cold case team, the original note was delivered to him just after the war. “At the time, your hiding place in Amsterdam was reported to the Jüdische Auswanderung, Euterpestraat, by A. van den Bergh.”

13'36'' Mirjam de Gorter: “So he comes in here, he wants to know about resistance and going into hiding, while he himself assumes a betrayal situation. And not a word has been said about it. Why didn't he just come up with the truth he was dealing with?”

13'54'' Interviewer: “Why doesn't he tell the granddaughter about...”

13'57'' Pieter van Twisk: “Well, because at that moment we… look, a: no information is going out from the investigation, only information is going in. That's the way Vincent, the researcher, set it up. That's the way the FBI works."

To begin.

2019

14'09'' Voice-over “Mirjam still doesn't know about the note and decides to cooperate in the investigation. She hears nothing for a year. In 2019 she is suddenly invited to come to a studio. At that time, Mirjam also did not know about the film plans of the cold case team and still did not know the real approach of the investigation.

14'29'' Mirjam de Gorter: “It was not yet clear at all that there was a betrayal situation... that was never told to me at all,

14'38'' Voice-over: “There are cameras in a large hall. There is a smoke machine. And the meeting with FBI man Vince Pankoke is filmed excitingly.”

14'46'' Mirjam de Gorter: “But then he suddenly came with that note, and, well... I'll get it... you're just in shock. After that I could hardly think anymore.”

15'00'' Interviewer: “Unprepared, she is confronted with that note in front of a rotating camera and a smoke machine. Is that integer?”

15'11'' Pieter van Twisk: “Uhm... yes?”

15'16'' Voice-over: “After the confrontation with the note, Mirjam provides all kinds of exculpatory information about her grandfather. The cold case team assures Mirjam that many other scenarios are also being investigated. After that, she doesn't hear from the researchers again for a long time."

15'34'' Mirjam de Gorter: “We were reassured that this [ is ] a nonsense note.”

To begin.

2021

15'40'' Voice-over: “Late 2021. The cold case team has completed the investigation. Publisher Ambo Anthos offers the book to the media."

This is twice wrong: The acknowledgment in the book is dated April 1, 2021 by Rosemary Sullivan. That means that the investigation was already completed before that date. The media that signed the nondisclosure clause were not given the book, but only a 17-page summary, compiled by the publisher, stating the 85% caveat to the accusation — a caveat that does not appear in the book] .

To begin.

De Volkskrant, NRC and NOS have talks with the leaders of the cold case team. We interview the editors-in-chief of the three major media outlets. Pieter Klok, van de Volkskrant; Wilma Haan, of the NOS [the Dutch public broadcasting service]; and René Moerland of NRC.

16'07'' René Moerland, editor-in-chief NRC: “We knew it would have a big impact because of the simple fact that Anne Frank is big and because this was a pretense that was special and an investigation that looked serious.”

16'20'' Pieter Klok, editor-in-chief of Volkskrant: “You really had the feeling that this was a great event, I was told, 'we have something great'.”

16'26'' Wilma Haan, deputy editor-in-chief NOS News: “That is the tone, those are the words, that is the scope with which that research has been presented.”

16'33'' Pieter Klok: “A lot of researchers were consulted, the cold case team was large, they also had all kinds of advisors. It instilled confidence.”

16'41'' René Moerland: “We assumed the good faith of the researchers.”

16'44'' Pieter Klok: “They were convincing people, who could sell themselves well, yes. They put it very cleverly.

16'50'' Wilma Haan: "I think it's us, and I can't speak for the colleagues in the papers, but I dare to assume that it has played tricks on all of us."

16'58'' Pieter Klok: “What you hope is that there is a new research method that yields new insights. That was the hope. Finally we would know who had betrayed Anne Frank.”

Naar begin.

2022 - 60 Minutes

17'14'' Voice-over: “On January 16, that hope seems to have come true. Publisher HarperCollins awards the world first to the American television program 60 Minutes from CBS.”

17'26'' presentator 60 Minutes: “And now they believe they have an answer. One we'll share with you tonight, to a question that bedevils historians and haunted Holland: who is reponsible for the betrayal?”

17'38'' Voice-over: “According to the cold case investigation, civil-law notary Arnold van den Bergh is Anne Frank's traitor. The anonymous note is the foundation of that accusation.”

17'50'' 60 Minutes interviewer: “Does it feel like a smoking gun?”

17'51'' Vince Pankoke: “Not a smoking gun. But it feels like a warm gun. With the evidence, the bullets, sitting nearby.”

18'00'' Voice-over: “According to the cold case team, Arnold van den Bergh had lists of names and addresses of Jewish people in hiding via the Jewish Council. He would have given those lists to his good and high-ranking contacts among the Germans, in order to save the lives of his family and himself.”

18'19'' Vince Pankoke (in 60 Minutes): “Pieter was able to locate in the National Archive records that indicated that in fact somebody from the Jewish Council, of which Arnold van den Bergh was a member, was turning over lists of addresses where Jews were in hiding.”

18'35'' Voice-over: “With over 11 million viewers, the 60 Minutes broadcast is the most watched episode of the year in the United States. One day before the broadcast, granddaughter Mirjam was called by Vince Pankoke, who says…”

18'48'' Mirjam de Gorter: “'Your grandfather is, er, is mentioned as the main betrayer..., the traitor of Anne Frank.' And you just don't believe it! But it's just being told."

19'00'' Interviewer: “But why didn't you choose to inform her earlier instead of one day in front of an international television.”

19'07'' Pieter van Twisk: “Because during the research we didn't give any information away. Otherwise everybody would know it. There wouldn't be any publicity value."

19'23'' Mirjam de Gorter: “We were only informed on Friday evening that that book would be available and the next day, which was Saturday afternoon, we were finally able to download the PDF of the book... How is that possible? You just don't believe what you read."

19'43'' Interviewer: “Suddenly her grandfather is world news. As the Jewish traitor to Anne Frank...”

19'49'' Pieter van Twisk: “Yes, but there's nothing we can do about that, can we?”

19'53'' Mirjam de Gorter: “He is simply thrown into the media, into the ether, into the world as the traitor. No reservations, nothing. And that worldwide. As I always say, even in India and Calcutta.”

20'11'' mix of images from two foreign news broadcasts

20'20'' Hella Rottenberg: “If it had been the Dutch warehouse clerk, it wouldn't have been world news, it would have been just a small article in the newspaper. Now I believe it was in twelve hundred newspapers worldwide that same day, plus all the radio and television broadcasts tabout it. All with one message: it was the Jewish notary who betrayed Anne Frank. Well, apparently that's a very nice message. This is blaming the victim. You see, the Jews are always pointing the finger at others, but they aren't sweeties themselves either. Watch."

[This is not quite correct. Earlier reports about other 'traitors' of Anne Frank, Jewish and non-Jewish, also invariably became world news. As everything about Anne Frank becomes world news - DM ].

To begin.

Critical report (1)

20'59'' Voice-over: “Professor of Jewish history Bart Wallet, together with a number of other specialized historians, examines the main evidence of the cold case team against Arnold van den Bergh. His counter-investigation starts with the anonymous note.

21'15'': Bart Wallet: “It all started with a note. That's the big piece of evidence. That should prove everything.

21'29'' Voice-over: “The note was not new to Anne Frank expert David Barnouw. He already described it in this booklet [shot of Who betrayed Anne Frank ?], from 2003.”

21'37'' David Barnouw: “That note shouldn't be new either, because it has appeared several times, in an official report from after the war.”

21'44'' Bart Wallet: “The note was known. The police have investigated it, the employees of the NIOD have investigated it, Barnouw, David Barnouw, exactly, all kinds of other people have looked into it beforehand. And they have all said: "don't take it seriously." This is one of those post-war gossip stories like there were countless.”

22'05'' Interviewer: "It strikes me that there is really no one other than you and your team members who takes that note seriously."

22'11'' Pieter van Twisk: “Remarkable, huh? It's amazing no one ever took that note seriously."

22'18'' Voice-over: "According to the cold case team, Van den Bergh received lists of names and addresses of people in hiding, including the Secret Annex, via the Jewish Council."

22'28'' Interviewer: "Is it true that there were lists at the Jewish Council of Jewish people in hiding?"

22'34'' Bart Wallet: “No. There is no trace of it.”

22'38'' Hella Rottenberg: “It was also an absurd assumption. People who went into hiding didn't trust the Jewish Council. So they really wouldn't give their addresses to an organization they didn't trust. And you see that in that book, that one absurd assumption is piled on top of another and then comes to a conclusion.”

23'01'' Pieter van Twisk: “It's not that you always have to have direct evidence to be able to say something at a given moment. You can also, with a lot of circumstantial evidence… can also, um, make something believable, or make it plausible.”

23'11'' Interviewer: “If you say this, you will always get the question in the media: 'Would it hold up in court?'”

23'15'' Pieter van Twisk “No. I've always said it's in the book. No, it won't hold up in court.”

[That the claims made in the book would not stand up to a judge is NOT stated in the original English edition of the book – DM ]

23'23'' Voiceover: “The cold case team uses circumstantial evidence more often. For example, the team cannot find any indication that the Van den Bergh family was in a concentration camp.”

23'34'' Vince Pankoke (in 60 Minutes ): “We started the search and we couldn't find Arnold van den Bergh or any of his immediate family members in those camps.

'43'' 60 Minutes interviewer: “Why not?”

23'44'' Vince Pankoke (in 60 Minutes ): “Well, that was the question. If he wan't in the camps, where was he?”

23'48'' 60 Minutes voice-over : “It turned out he was living in open life, in the middle of Amsterdam, Vince Pankoke says.”

23'53'' Voice-over: “If you were a Jew and not in a concentration camp, that was suspicious for the cold case team.”

24'00'' Bart Wallet: “You actually criminalize every Jew who has not been in a camp, in this way. And it shows again: you don't understand the war at all!"

24'11'' Interviewer: “Did Arnold van den Bergh live an 'open life in Amsterdam'?”

24'14'' Bart Wallet: “No, of course not. He was Jew, there was an arrest warrant against him; he was 'free hunting game'. Arnold van den Bergh and his wife who were in hiding. Like many Jews. And where were they hiding? In this house [he points to the house in the background ], Leemkuil 11 in Laren.”

24'35'' Mirjam de Gorter: “We told them: he was in hiding. And they just wove it away.”

24'41'' Voice-over: “Mirjam pointed out two historical-scientific books to the cold case team, among other things.”

24'48'' Interviewer: “And the books by Petra van den Boomgaard and Raymund Schütz?”

[Those are these two books:
Petra van den Boomgaard. Not a Jew for the Nazis. How more than 2,500 Jews escaped deportations by evasion of racial rules. Verbum, [Hilversum], [2019].
Raymund Schutz. Chilly fog. The Notary Office and the Legacy of War. Boom, Amsterdam, [2016] – DM ].

24'51'' Pieter van Twisk: “It isn't stated in those books that he did, is it?”

24'55'' Mirjam de Gorter: “Raymund Schütz. Chilly fog: 'The Amsterdam notary Arnold van den Bergh survived the war with his family in hiding.' And that's in both books."

25'07'' Interviewer: "It says, and quite a bit of research has been done, that he was in hiding."

25'12'' Pieter van Twisk: “Yes, in Laren. And we looked into that and we couldn't find anything about it.

[In The Betrayal of Anne Frank nothing is mentioned about this so-called investigation by the cold case team into the possibility that the notary was in hiding in Laren. To make things even weirder, both books are mentioned in the bibliography. And both Petra van den Boomgaard (as “Petra Boomgaart”) and Raymund Schütz are thanked for their help.

25'16'' Bart Wallet: “I think that at a certain point, you have to say that the scenario that Arnold van den Bergh was hiding here, no longer fitted in with their tunnel vision and that is why it was ignored. At least out of tunnel vision, but… well, I'll stay polite.”

25'35'' Interviewer: "Why would you try to save yourself and your family if you are already in hiding?"

25'41'' Pieter van Twisk: “Because, for example, you are discovered. Because at some point a Jew hunter is at the door. And he says: 'I have you.'”

Naar begin.

De media

25'53'' Voice-over: “Back to January 17th. The day before publication of the book in the Netherlands. The NOS, de Volkskrant and NRC bring early in the morning big stories. The theories of the cold case team are given wide attention.”

26'10'' NOS News anchor man (17-01-2022): “Traitor Anne Frank was a Jewish notary.”

26'14'' Wilma Haan (NOS): “That first headline was just careless.”

26'17'' Interviewer: “Yes,

26'19'' Wilma Haan (NOS): “Well, the certainty. 'Jewish notary betrayed Anne Frank', and not a choice of words like 'new research shows' or 'new researchers point out', or 'new researchers come up with a new theory', that kind of word choice.”

26'32'' Gerri Eickhoff, NOS reporter (17-01-2022): "Arnold van den Bergh was a Jewish notary who is said to have betrayed addresses in hiding to save his own family."

26'39'' Mirjam de Gorter: ““A delusional history, in other words a lie, is being brought out here. And you can't stop it.”

26'48'' Hella Rottenberg: “I read articles with the idea 'oh, this is the advertising text of the publisher, which they printed'. They were presented with a sausage saying, 'You're getting a world scoop! Very fantastic! You can score'. And they've caught on to that. Without asking any critical question, without adding any critical note.”

27'13'' Pieter Klok Volkskrant ): “Yes, that is true. We went along with that. In their methodology. And we have also described their methodology. And the words that go with it.”

27'26'' René Moerland ( NRC ): “I don't see an uncritical copying in that article. The article is very descriptive.”

27'32'' Interviewer: “Your reporter's sentence: 'Never before has such a thorough investigation been conducted'”

27'37'' René Moerland: “Yes.”

27'38'' Interviewer: "What is the meaning of that sentence?"

27'40'' René Moerland: “Yes. That's a sentence that you wouldn't write down like that afterwards, I'll add, because, well, the investigation turned out not to be that thorough. But it was on a large scale.”

27'49'' Interviewer : “But large-scale and thorough are two different things.”

27'51'' René Moerland : “Absolutely.”

27'53'' Interviewer: “'They formed a team of about thirty researchers, mainly historians.' What is that statement based on? Or statement, or observation, what is it really? It's an important sentence."

28'11'' René Moerland : “Why?”

28'14'' Interviewer : “Because there were hardly any historians in that team.”

[This is bland and incorrect.
1. A whole battery of renowned historians are mentioned in the press kit and in the book, who are said to have participated in the research. That turned out to be a lie after the launch.
2. As shown earlier, there were indeed historians in the cold case team. Only: no specialists.

28'19'' René Moerland: [ remains silent ]

28'20'' Interviewer : “How did you experience the reporting on 17 January, especially by NOS, Volkskrant and NRC?”

28'27'' Bart Wallet: “Well, they tumbled over each other, didn't they? In fact, they were a megaphone for the cold case team. What the cold case team said they amplified.”

28'37'' Pieter Klok ( Volkskrant ): “We should have incorporated criticism much earlier. And then we would probably not have have brought is so big. Or no, let me say, we would have certainly have brought it smaller.”

28'49'' Voice Over: "Why were the NOS, NRC and de Volkskrant not critical?"

28'54'' Pieter Klok ( Volkskrant ): “Uh, in this case that wasn't possible. Because we had agreed with the publisher that we weren't allowed to let anyone read it."

29'04'' Voice-over : “What NRC , de Volkskrant and NOS did not mention in the first reporting is that they have this embargo [a letter appears on the screen] from publisher Ambo Anthos. It states that all information from the cold case team is 'strictly confidential'.”

29'20'' Interviewer : "That embargo prohibited anyone from submitting the research to independent experts before publication."

29'28'' Wilma Haan (NOS): “That's what it meant, yes.”

29'30'' Hella Rottenberg: “That's extremely unusual. And against all journalistic ethics.”

29'36'' Interviewer: “Because where does it affect journalistic ethics?”

29'40'' Hella Rottenberg: “That you are then no more than a conduit of an interested organization.”

29'48'' Voice-over: “Arnold van den Bergh is pointed out by the cold case team as the traitor to Anne Frank. Without that huge accusation being investigated by the journalists.”

29'59'' René Moerland ( NRC ): "We have decided to publish this on Monday."

30'02'' Interviewer: “Without..."

30'04'' René Moerland: “Without having talked about it with other historians at that time, indeed.”

30'09'' Pieter Klok: “We should have just said 'this is too sensitive, the embargo is unacceptable, we'll just call ourselves'.”

30'16'' Interviewer: "They shouldn't have signed it?"

30'18'' Hella Rottenberg: “They should never have signed it.”

To begin.

30'20'' Wilma Haan: “I agree that the embargo, that we have signed the embargo in this way, that we should not have signed this embargo. We've seen that too much, accidentally, unjustly, as a regular embargo on a book."

30'33'' Interviewer: “Yeah, but this isn't about tropical fish, huh, this is of course about the Jewish traitor to the World War II icon.”

30'40'' Wilma Haan: “That makes this embargo problematic. We realized and observed that afterwards, of course.”

30'46'' Interviewer: "Was it worth mentioning that you made that deal, in that embargo?"

30'50'' René Moerland: “Yes. That is also a conclusion we have drawn. If you make special embargo agreements, you must state that.”

30'58'' Interviewer: "And why didn't that happen?"

30'59'' René Moerland: “Well, this is a typical example of the things that happen.”

31'11'' Voice-over: “On 17 January, the criticism of the cold case investigation swells throughout the day. The NOS adds statements by authoritative, highly critical experts to the news.”

31'24'' Johannes Houwink ten Cate (Holocaust specialist, in the NOS News of 22(?)-01-2022): “I think that great accusations have to come with great evidence and that is absent.”

31'29'' Voice Over: "In the 8 o'clock news, the word 'traitor' is now in quotes, but at the same time new, serious allegations are added from the sleeve of the cold case team."

31'42'' Gerri Eickhof, NOS reporter: “Van den Bergh really worked with him, Hermann Goering. Van den Bergh was therefore on good terms with the Germans.”

31'48'' Bart Wallet: “Of course, that's, uh, unbelievable. Because go to the sources. I would say: please show me the sources from which that would appear.”

31'57'' Interviewer: “You accuse at that moment, because it's not even in 'the cold case team says it', no, Gerri Eickhof says it: 'Van den Bergh really worked with him'.”

32'08'' Wilma Haan: “Yes, of course, but of course he says that based on the research. We tried in that, in that part of the subject, to tell what the researchers told.

32'15'' Interviewer: “That image of Van den Bergh as a Goering and a Nazi friend, can that image still be tilted?”

32'20'' Bart Wallet: “That's damn difficult. You can see that, of course. The first blast strikes home. You only have to google a little and you see that everywhere the name of Arnold van den Bergh is linked to the concept of 'betrayer', 'traitor Anne Frank. That is the frame with which Van den Bergh will now go down in history.”

32'42'' Voice Over: “After a day full of criticism, the Youth News will bring the unfiltered story of the cold case team again that evening.”

32'50'' NOS 'Youth News' presenter: “The Frank family and the others have been betrayed. That much is clear. And now it is clear, or almost clear, who did that.”

32'58'' Wilma Haan: “We have also realized that the dynamics of that day, especially with the retrospective view, didn't end up in the Youth News sufficiently.”

33'06'' Interviewer: “The child of a colleague of mine approached my colleague, who said: 'Mom, Anne Frank was betrayed by a Jew.'”

33'13'' Wilma Haan: “Yes. I'm just sketching what story I want to tell [?] and I understand that that image will stick.”

33'21'' Interviewer: "That's exactly what you don't want."

33'23'' Wilma Haan: “That's right.”

33'26'' Voice-over: “When the evening of January 17 falls, it's time for the talk shows.”

33'21'' Co-presenter talk show Op1: “Anne Frank betrayed by a Jewish notary. Pieter van Twisk investigated...”

33'38'' Margriet van der Linden, talk show M: “A Jewish notary is seen as the suspected perpetrator.

33'40'' Voice-over: “Members of the cold case team sit at the table.

33'43'' Thijs Bayens (in Op1): “There will be a book in the shops tomorrow. You have it right there next to you. And there, I estimate, about a hundred pages from that book, describes very accurately, say, all the different pieces in the puzzle that fit together that this is a part of.”

34'00'' Co-presenter Op1: “Mr. Van Twisk, it went all over the world, you sigh...”

34'04'' Pieter van Twisk: “Yes, it really was a kind of media storm that we didn't quite expect. We would have thought there would be some... ”

34'01'' Co-presenter Op1: “Well, you orchestrated that yourself, right?”

34'12'' Pieter van Twisk : “Yes, but you never know what will happen.”

34'15'' Voice-over : "The presenters ask whether the cold case team has had contact with any family of Arnold van den Bergh."

34'23'' Pieter van Twisk: "There are two other relatives and I have talked to them."

34'26'' Co-presenter Op1: "And how do they think this is being prsented?"

34'28'' Pieter van Twisk : “Very painful, but [they] also said: 'You handled it with great integrity.'

34'32'' Interviewer: "Do you say she would think you handled it with integrity?"

34'38'' Pieter van Twisk: “Yes. We also just acted with integrity.”

34'42'' Interviewer: “Is 'integrity' the first word that comes to mind?”

34'45'' Mirjam de Gorter: “Well, the last one or not at all, to be honest. But I can only say it now, now I know how it was constructed. No, you cannot call this integrity.”

34'54'' Thijs Bayens (in talk show M): “In this case we are talking about grandchildren and they think it is very important that this story gets out into the world. Perhaps not so much for history as for the future. So that we can contribute to ensure that this does not happen again. And that's great. I have a deep respect for the inner civilization that goes into doing that.”

35'20'' Voice-over: “Thijs Bayens doesn't want to give us an interview. There is also strong criticism in the talk shows.”

35'27'' Bas Heijne (writer and essayist, in talk show M): “It is all circumstantial evidence. There is no direct evidence.”

35'30'' Thijs Bayens (in talk show M): “Yes.”

35'31'' Natascha van Weezel (journalist, in talk show M): “Suppose that 15% is incorrect! It's quite something!”

35'35'' Woman in talk show Op1: “Not to mention the translation of the title!”

35'39'' Voice Over: “But despite the criticism, the book sells extremely well in those first weeks.”

35'44'' Margriet van der Linden, talk show M: "The book The betrayal of Anne Frank will be in the shops from tomorrow."

35'48'' Co-presenter Op1: “In the sturdy and very readable book...”

To begin.

35'51'' Voice Over: “The Wallet team, which is conducting scientific counter research, discovers extremely selective source use by the cold case team, in which crucial exculpatory information about Arnold van den Bergh is omitted.”

36'05'' Bart Wallet: “Then I see that they have extracted exactly those things from those sources that fit into their theory. Then a completely different picture of Van den Bergh arises. If you take the book, on one side, and you go to the sources, and you're going to put it all together very carefully, yes, I'm meeting another man in that.”

36'22'' Presenter CBS 60 Minutes: “I suspect when this is revealed, people around the world will be uncomfortable with the idea that a Jew betrayed another Jew.”

36'29'' Thijs Bayens: “I hope so.”

36'30'' Presenter CBS 60 Minutes: “You hope they will be?”

36'31'' Thijs Bayens: “Yes, because it shows you how bizarre the Nazi regime really operated.”

36'36'' Mirjam de Gorter : “If we go to an episode of 60 Minutes and all the newspapers, then it says 'the Jewish notary', well... what more could you want? That is immediately an anti-Semitic headline to advertise, to sensationalism.”

36'56'': CNN presenter: “A Jewish notary named Arnold van den Bergh...”

36'59'': Newsreader, Belgian TV: “That the Frank family was betrayed by a Jewish notary...”

37 '03'' Mirjam de Gorter: “How do you think that is for other people? And I'm not just talking about family, but about Jewish society. Because you get old traumas again. People who have to live with this past, eh, the war, generations further, our generations, everyone was shocked, everyone was completely shocked again. And that is the social damage you cause.”

37'30'' Wilma Haan: “Yeah, I think I get that, uh, uh... without being, uh, uh... them. I think I also understand how painful it is. And no matter how painful the news can sometimes be for those involved and for family...”

37'43'' Interviewer: “Especially if it's not true.”

37'44'' Wilma Haan: “Of course. Naturally. Or is based on unsound facts.”

37'48'' Interviewer: “Yes.”

37'50'' Mirjam de Gorter: "Yes. What affects me is the insecurity. I grew up with that. And I'm not the only one. [ silent ]. And it's good if research [is done], but do it in the right way and not with commerce in your mind."

38'30'' Pieter van Twisk: “This is a purely anti-Semitic pamphlet”, well... phew... that's insane. What is it about? So apparently you are no longer allowed to write, you are no longer allowed to say what you think in the Netherlands. It's… just idiotic.”

38'45'': “A little over a month after the book's publication, the Dutch publisher Ambo Anthos decides to add an insert. It states, among other things: 'The conclusion of the investigation team, as if Arnold van den Bergh is very likely to be the traitor, is insufficiently supported by the available factual material'.

39'08'' Interviewer: “What does it actually say?”

39'10'' Pieter van Twisk: “Well, look, you can just say, it says 'it just isn't good at all'. People who read that think, well, why am I still going to read that book, because it doesn't make sense at all."

39'19'' Voice-over: “We tried several times to speak to Ambo Anthos.”

39'23'' Spokesperson Ambo Anthos: “Yes, we don't do that. Haha. We have not responded to anything. And we like it that way. The official comment is: 'No comment'.”

39'34'' Interviewer: “Is there anything to verify, or not?”

39'38'' Spokesperson Ambo Anthos: “No, no.”

To begin.

Critical Report (2)

39'40'' Voice-over: “On March 22 [2022], the team of historians led by Bart Wallet will present the conclusion of the counter-examination. Arnold van den Bergh has arguably been falsely accused and framed as a shrewd and crafty Jewish notary, with connections to high-ranking Nazis.”

40'00'' Pieter van Twisk: “In the counter-report, what they do is tricks, huh. It is said, 'Yes, it is a house of cards, so if you draw one card, it will collapse.' Yes, that's a nice picture, but the picture isn't right. It's not a house of cards. We've always said, "It's a puzzle." It's a puzzle with a lot of different pieces and slowly a picture starts to emerge of that puzzle and you think oh, it's going to be a tree or it's going to be a, er, airplane. And you can take one piece away, but that doesn't mean that the picture has disappeared from your head right away. So even if some things don't make sense here and there... [unintelligible], it still means you think this story is right.”

40'40'' Voice-over: “The publisher makes a far-reaching decision based on the counter report.”

40'45'' NOS News anchorman (NOS news, 22-03-2022): “Ambo Anthos publishers will no longer supply the book The betrayal of Anne Frank . Bookstores are requested to return the existing stock.”

40'54'' Pieter van Twisk: “I had to hear that from the press. I had to hear that from… from… er… news media who started calling me, 'Do you know the book is being taken off the bookstore?' It was totally unclear to me. At the moment you can just buy Mein Kampf in the store, not our book anymore. Apparently people are not allowed to read that. It's really insane.”

41'12'' Interviewer: “What is the possible comparison between your book and Mein Kampf ?”

41'15'' Pieter van Twisk: “Well, the story is, of course, that we would then, say, er, wrongly insult someone.”

41'21'' Voice-over: “The English version of the book is still sold worldwide. Wallet therefore sends the counter-investigation to the American publisher HarperCollins.”

41'32'' Mirjam de Gorter: “They took it for granted, but still believe in the work of the cold case team. What is impossible, just. Of course I want to do something about this. But yeah, that's not so easy.”

41'54'' Pieter van Twisk: “For us, Arnold van den Bergh is the main suspect. In this case, right now. And there's no reason for us to say, 'He's the prime suspect.'”

To begin.

TV-series?

42'03'' Voice-over: “Van Twisk tells us that the ambition of an international documentary series is still alive.”

42'10'' Pieter van Twisk: “We have an agency in America that deals with this. He said: 'well, we're going to put it on hold for a while; the aftermath is also very interesting, we want to see what we can do with it.'”

42'21'' Hella Rottenberg: “Because if that movie series is still being produced and released, this whole story will have even bigger implications than it already has.”

42'32'' Interviewer: "What do you mean by 'implications'?"

42'34'' Hella Rottenberg: “Well, that the message that Anne Frank was betrayed by the Jewish notary will stick.

42'42'' Mirjam de Gorter: “This is appropriating a reality that it is not. This is how you just pollute society, with slanderous nonsense.