February 19, 2022

The canard of

The Betrayal of Anne Frank (2)

The show must go on

Dutch publisher adds inlay sheet in copies. Badly timed April Fools joke? Cold case team plays victim role. Global criticism continues to mount. The show must go on: Japanese translation published. German version postponed. Statement Rosemary Sullivan.

By Bart FM Droog

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

---

Earlier this week, a statement appeared on the site of Ambo Anthos, the publisher of the Dutch translation of The Betrayal of Anne Frank, which once again raises more questions than answers:

Inlay sheet The betrayal of Anne Frank “In the book entitled Het verraad van Anne Frank [The Betrayal of Anne Frank], the impression is created that the Jewish notary Arnold van den Bergh is the traitor to Anne Frank, her family and the other people in hiding in the Secret Annex. Based on reactions by expert, we have realized that the conclusion of the investigation team, as if Arnold van den Bergh is very likely to be the traitor, does not find sufficient support in the available facts. We apologize to anyone who feels offended by this book. This applies especially to the next of kin and further family of Arnold van den Bergh." Source: website Ambo Anthos

April Fools joke?

It makes one think that the acknowledgment by Rosemary Sullivan, the writer of the trash, is dated "April 1, 2021". Is this whole investigation an April Fools' joke that got out of hand and was it accidentally presented on the wrong date? Or is that inlay sheet not seriously meant, but it it a witz too? We asked questions about that sheet and the further sale of the book to Ambo Anthons: no response.

Confusion all around

The leaders of the “cold case team” are also quite surprised about this inlay sheet. On the team's website, they write that they "conducted their research in close consultation with the publisher", that the manuscript was created "under the supervision of and in collaboration with Ambo|Anthos (with adaptations largely taken over by HarperCollins)", that the publisher has been given a great deal of freedom “and also used it to change and/or adapt things in the manuscript”. They also state that the publisher had the manuscript read internally by a historian. And: “The media criticism from outside experts has refuted the leadership of the research team with the approval of the publisher, leading them to resume publishing.” They conclude their statement with:

"To us the the text on the inlay sheet that Ambo|Anthos adds to the book is an unnecessary violation of the integrity of the book and the research. Even if the publisher chooses this statement, we support the research that was carried out professionally and with integrity, with the provision that it was never the intention to grievance anyone, in any way. In our view, the commotion in the press about the outcome of the investigation has nullified the nuances and reservations made in the book. We find this very regrettable, especially for all those involved and/or next of kin."

The criticism refuted?

Is this the truth? Has the the cold case team leadership actually refuted the storm of criticism? Not in the least: they play the victim role, state that the worldwide criticism only came from the Netherlands, and then partly from people who had not read the book (says the cold case team leader and former FBI agent Vincent Pankoke) and that the reactions were only so fierce, because the traitor they presented was a Jew. And that the accusation that they were doing this whole investigation just for the money was a very vicious accusation, because they had been very frugal in their spending. Sure– with 650,000 euros in subsidies and advances from the municipality of Amsterdam and publishers and a sponsor such as Hilton Hotels Amsterdam, frugality is self-evident (not).

Entrez the legal team…

This nuance will undoubtedly have been done on the advice of the battery of lawyers and legal advisers thanked in the book: Mr. Job Hengeveld van Hengeveld Advocaten , Philip van Wijnen, Bird & Bird (with 1400 lawyers and 30 offices worldwide), with their Dutch Zuidas (South Axis) lawyers Jeroen van der Lee, Jochem Apon and Olaf Trojan, as well as the “independent advisor” Prof. dr. Martin Senftleben of the University of Amsterdam.

Amsterdam Zuidas – South Axis

Amsterdam Zuidas is a office district in Amsterdam, where many law firms specialized in tax evasion are based.

The storm of criticism

Despite the wailing and denial of the cold case team, criticism of the book continues to swell (see: media articles on the scandal): “A book that shouldn't be there, headlined the Süddeutsche Zeitung, above an article by Jens-Christian Rabe : “Presenting the case as a true crime story is unscrupulous.” Yves Kugelmann of the Anne Frank Fonds in Basel, in an interview with Welt: “The book is an accumulation of hundreds of factual errors”. The Neue Zürcher Zeitung: “They were looking for a sensational story and they created a scandal.” Ronny Nataniel, outgoing chairman of the Dutch Central Jewish Consultation against AFP news agency: “The research results are extremely speculative and sensational.” Prof. dr. Dr Meron Mendel, of Bildungsstätte [educational institution] Anne Frank in Frankfurt: “The evidence that Mr Van den Bergh is the traitor is extremely unreliable or completely absent.” Guillaume Erner, Radio France: “You cannot desecrate Anne Frank's grave because she has no grave, but you can do it more coarsely by spreading the most terrible lies disguised as historical truths.”

The show must go on

Despite all the criticism, sales in the Netherlands continue as usual: the show must go on. That also seems to be the message from HarperCollins, the publishing group that paid 400,000 euros for the worldwide rights to the book. Cory Beatty of HarperCollins Canada told CBC News:

"At this time our publishing remains on track. While we recognize the strong reaction to the findings, the investiga-tion was done with respect and the utmost care for an extremely sensitive topic.”

In the United States and Canada, the book is at this moment listed in various Books Top 10s for non-fiction works. The Spanish translation has since been released, as have the Norwegian, Swedish, Finnish, Polish, Italian and French translations. The Japanese version was released on February 16, the Portuguese version is scheduled for March 1, the Danish version on March 31.

The German translation

On February 17, he added that the company is currently working on a corrected, supplemented and annotated German language edition. The planned publication date of March 22 is no longer valid: it is unknown when the German version will appear, or whether it will ultimately not appear.

The concept of the whole book is “unrescuable”

The German historian Gerhard Hirschfeld, who specializes in Dutch history and in that of the era of the world wars, says in Welt: “Initially I thought that the German edition could be rescued with a new preface. But after reading the American edition again intensively, I have to correct myself. A new preface will probably not suffice.” The concept of the whole book is “unrescuable”. For the book “swings between the exclusion of the previous suspects, the description of the Jewish suffering history and a forensic-criminological presentation of the evidence, but in the end does not do any justice to either of these approaches”.

Rosemary Sullivan, the writer

So far, Rosemary Sullivan, the Canadian bestselling author who, unimpeded by any knowledge of Dutch, Dutch history and Dutch topography, was hired by HarperCollins and Ambo Anthos to write the research report, has not responded to questions from the press. She also left our questions unanswered.

She did, however, publish this statement on the site of the cold case team on February 7:

"In my opinion, The Betrayal of Anne Frank offers a com-pelling portrait of life under the Nazis’ genocidal regime when individuals lived in fear and hunger, not knowing whom to trust, and were faced daily with what the historian Anne Applebaum called choiceless choices in their effort to save themselves and their families.”

From the writer who brought you...

This article was co-facilitated by Steunfonds Freelance Journalisten.
This article is a translation of 'De canard van 'Het verraad van Anne Frank: the show must go on. De Tweede Wereldoorlog als industrie (3-II)', Reporters Online, Haarlem, February 17, 2022.

---