New Arab Version of "Throw the Jews into the Sea"

Some people claim that the phrase "throw the Jews into the sea" was made up.

Well, there's a new artistic version at AlQuds:

Don't be fooled by Arab propaganda.

It's worse than you think.

A bonus:

another

^

The 1922 Arab Hasbara Failure

In 1922, there was an exchange of letters based on meetings held at that time, including the previous year, in London between a Palestine Arab Delegation and representatives of the British Government in an effort by the Arabs to suppress the Balfour Declaration and the establishment of a Jewish National Home.

A February 21st letter, signed by Moussa Kazim El Husseini, President.and Shibly Jamal, Secretary (on Shibly, see below), opened thus:

We would, therefore, submit the following observations:—

Whilst the position in Palestine is, as it stands to-day, with the British Government holding authority by an occupying force, and using that authority to impose upon the people against their wishes a great immigration of alien Jews, many of them of a Bolshevik revolutionary type, no constitution which would fall short of giving the People of Palestine full control of their own affairs could be acceptable.If the British Government would revise their present policy in Palestine, end the Zionist con-dominium, put a stop to all alien immigration and grant the People of Palestine — who by Right and Experience are the best judges of what is good and bad to their country — Executive and Legislative powers, the terms of a constitution could be discussed in a different atmosphere. If to-day the People of Palestine assented to any constitution which fell short of giving them full control of their own affairs they would be in the position of agreeing to an instrument of Government which might, and probably would, be used to smother their national life under a flood of alien immigration.

In the Colonial Office reply for Churchill, signed by J. E. Shuckburgh, Assistant Under Secretary of State, and sent on March 1, the Arabs were told off:

SIR,
I am directed by Mr. Secretary Churchill to acknowledge receipt of your letter of the 21st February on the subject of the draft Orders in Council providing for the Constitution of Palestine. Mr. Churchill has carefully considered this letter and has instructed me to offer the following observations upon it:

...3. Mr. Churchill regrets to observe that his personal explanations have apparently failed to convince your Delegation that His Majesty's Government have no intention "of repudiating the obligations into which they have entered towards the Jewish people. He has informed you on more than one occasion that he cannot discuss the future of Palestine upon any other basis than that of the letter addressed by the Right Honourable A. J. Balfour to Lord Rothschild on the 2nd November, 1917, commonly known as the "Balfour Declaration." You state in your letter that the people of Palestine cannot accept this Declaration as a basis for discussion. Mr. Churchill is unable for the reasons stated above to regard your Delegation as officially representing the People of Palestine. He presumes that your statement is not in any case intended to apply to the existing Jewish population of Palestine, which, so far as he is aware, your Delegation makes no claim to represent.

4. With regard to Article 22 of the Covenant of the League of Nations, I am to observe that this Article, in so far as it applies to territories severed from the Ottoman Empire, has been interpreted by the Principal Allied Powers in Articles 94 to 97 of the Treaty of Sevres, Syria and Iraq are explicitly referred to in Article 94 of that Treaty as having been provisionally recognised as Independent States, in accordance with the fourth paragraph of Article 22 of the Covenant of the League of Nations. Article 95, on the other hand, makes no such reference to Palestine. The reason for this is that, as stated in that Article, the Mandatory is to be responsible for putting into effect the Declaration originally made on the 2nd November, 1917, by the British Government, and adopted by the other Allied Powers, in favour of the establishment in Palestine of a National Home for the Jewish people, it being clearly understood that nothing should be done which might prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, and the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country. There is no question of treating the people of Palestine as less advanced than their neighbours in Iraq and Syria; the position is that His Majesty's Government are bound by a pledge which is antecedent to the Covenant of the League of Nations, and they cannot allow a constitutional position to develop in a country for which they have accepted responsibility to the Principal Allied Powers, which may make it impracticable to carry into effect a solemn undertaking given by themselves and their Allies.

...6. The references in your letter under reply to "a great immigration of alien Jews," "a flood of alien immigration," and "a flood of alien Jewish immigration," coupled with the request that the British Government should "put a stop to all alien immigration," and the reference to the Zionist Organisation in Clause 2 of paragraph (d) of your letter, indicate that your Delegation and the community which they represent, imperfectly apprehend the interpretation placed by His Majesty's Government upon the policy of the National Home for the Jewish people. This interpretation was publicly given in Palestine on the 3rd June, 1921, by the High Commissioner in the following words-

" These words (National Home) mean that the Jews, who are a people scattered throughout the world, but whose hearts are always turned to Palestine should be enabled to found here their home, and that some amongst them, within the limits fixed by numbers and the interests of the present population, should come to Palestine in order to help by their resources and efforts to develop the country to the advantage of all its inhabitants."

This interpretation was endorsed by the Secretary of State in his speech to the House of Commons on the 14th June, 1921. Mr. Churchill is reluctant to believe that your Delegation, or the people whom they represent, can entertain any objection in principle to the policy as thus interpreted.

__________
On Shibly:

P.S.

Churchill did attempt to placate the Arabs in his June 3, 1922 letter to the delegation which, in part reads:

His Majesty's Government...would draw attention to the fact that the terms of the Declaration referred to do not contemplate that Palestine as a whole should be converted into a Jewish National Home, but that such a Home should be founded in Palestine In this connection it has been observed with satisfaction that at the meeting of the Zionist Congress, the supreme governing body of the Zionist Organisation, held at Carlsbad in September, 1921, a resolution was passed expressing as the official statement of Zionist aims "the determination of the Jewish people to live with the Arab people on terms of unity and mutual respect, and together with them to make the common home into a flourishing community, the upbuilding of which may assure to each of the peoples an undisturbed national development."

But (a) the Arabs didn't believe him and refused to engage in compromise and (b) Churchill didn't understand that, given the Arab refusal, that 1921 Zionist Congress decision was not in any way contradictory to his policy statement.  In fact, the 1923 Zionist Congress, also held at Carlsbad, reputed his decision to sever the Eastern Land of Israel territories.

"Palestine as a whole", then, included Transjordan, i.e., today's Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan.




^

The Betar Members of Przytyk

At Przytyk occurred a murderous pogrom on March 9, 1936. Two Jews were beaten to death after Endek pogromists attacked Jews which developed into a riot including attacks on policemen.  A young 20-year old Jew, Shalom Lesko, whose house was being attacked, opened fire with a hunting rifle and killed a Pole. That caused an increase in the Polish violence and two elderly Jews, a man and his wife, Josef and Chaya Minkowski, were clubbed and beaten to death.

Recent Polish anti-Jewish historical revisers have sought to blame the whole affair on the Jews as here:

Przytyk became the scene of the Polish-Jewish riot on March 7–9, 1936, triggered by the killing of Polish farmer Stanisław Wieśniak by the young Jewish vigilante.

And here, in Polish.

There were also shots fired at the beginning in the marketplace in self-defence.

The academic article by Joshua Rothenberg of Brandeis University, The Przytyk Pogrom, published in the journal Soviet Jewish Affairs Volume 16, 1986 - Issue 2, ignores the identity of the Betar members as well the head of the local New Zionists-Revisionists Organization chairman in the self-defense efforts. 

He names them, Yitzchak Frydman and Jankel Kirszencwajg, as he had to: Jankel received six years imprisonment and Frydman five.  But they are somehow unaffiliated. Anonymous. In all, 14 Jews were accused of illegal use of arms and violence:

Four Poles were accused of murdering the Minkowski couple; both were killed  with an axe in their own house. After their death, the killer(s) beat up MinkowskiÕs children, who were hiding in another room. The suspects were all acquitted because of the lack of evidence. Two Jewish members of the self-defence organization were condemned to five and six years in prison for possession of illegal weapons. The court rejected the claim that the Jewish defendants had acted in self-defence and held them responsible for inciting a riot in the market by attacking peasants. The trials ended on June 26th, and the  Jews were charged with insulting the honour of the Polish nation

Moreover, 

Historian Emanuel Melzer noted that: 'the state showed no inclination at this time to control or condemn the radical Endek anti-Jewish propaganda that continued to be distributed. Newspapers began to agitate explicitly for Jewish blood to be spilled'.

 A shame that the organizational allegiance of the self-defence activists was ignored.

Or, for shame.

^

You Know April 9 Is "Deir Yassin Day"?

I have blogged previously and profusely on Deir Yassin, the Arab village near Givat Shaul, in today's Har Nof neighborhood and specifically, the grounds of the Kfar Shaul Mental Health Center.

Here. And here.

It was overrun by Irgun and Lechi forces, assisted by a Palmach unit who provided mortar fire and the Hagana command who supplied ammunition and medical services during the fighting, on Friday, April 9, 1948. This year it falls on a Monday.  There's now a film.  There's a commemorance site. Even a Facebook page.

And now, Shmuel Rosner has reviewed the new book that has appeared in Hebrew in his The Truth of Deir Yassin.

The author is Eliezer Tauber, an Israeli academic who specializes in the modern history of the Middle East. 

The book's cover:

I have met him.

As Rosner notes, Tauber has published

a book arguing that there was no massacre in Deir Yassin. A detailed account of a fateful day, minute by minute, hour by hour. A convincing account. 

What really happened in Deir Yassin? Tauber is not the first scholar to argue that the large-scale massacre story is a myth. Professor Yoav Gelber, in “Palestine 1948: War, Escape and the Emergence of the Palestinian Refugee Problem,” makes a similar claim. Still, Tauber was more thorough than all of his predecessors in looking into this specific day of carnage. The result is a gripping narrative. 

...He counts one clear case of unjustified shooting. An Arab family evacuated a house in surrender. An Irgun fighter opened fire while his commander was shouting at him, “What are you doing? Stop it!” This incident, Tauber believes, gave credence to later overblown stories of larger-scale massacre, rape, mutilation and barbarity.

And to the crux. As I have noted, the Arabs themselves created the myth.

...the myth was perpetrated not because of confusion. It was a deliberate attempt by the Palestinian leadership to force the Arab militaries of surrounding countries to intervene in the battle over Palestine. The leaders of the Palestinians sowed a wind and reaped a whirlwind. 

Rosner, though, makes this important point:

Professor Tauber believed that his story would be of great interest to American publishers. He contacted university presses in the United States, and their response left him stunned. A representative of an elite university wrote back: “While everyone agreed on the book’s many strengths, in the end the consensus was that the book would only inflame a debate where positions have hardened.” Another one wrote: “We could sell well to the right-wing community here but we would end up with a terrible reputation.” Apparently, a book questioning the Palestinian narrative is not a book that American universities feel comfortable publishing.

Amazingly, though, he has made it into the Wikipedia entry

Israeli researcher Eliezer Tauber writes that a total of 101 people were killed, 61 definitely in combat circumstances (including 24 armed fighters, with the remained being their family members who were with them); 18 for whom the cause of death could not be determined; about 10 whose deaths are in a "grey zone" whose charactization can be debated; and a further 11 being members of a single family who were gunned down by a single Irgun member.

More references:

Avi Woolf

Dr. Arnon Groiss

Shimon Cohen


__________________________

UPDATE

On the refusal of publishers at Legal Insurrection.

^

On Haim Hanegbi

I learned from Peggy Cidor that someone I knew has passed away.

Haim Hanegbi.

If you clicked on that link above, you are going to be asking yourself 'what has Medad and a Matzpen activist doing being friends?'

Well, it's a bit complicated.

Haim was much older. Already in 1962, for example, he was demonstrating on the Cuba missile issue - against the United States.  

My first demo was May 1, 1964, on behalf of the freedom of Soviet Jews in New York.

He was extremely pro-Arab Palestinian despite being a descendent of an esteemed Jewish Hebron family.  He even requested to be buried in Hebron's Muslim cemetery as an act of protest against the renewed Jewish community in the city.

I met Haim and saw him regularly three days a week for a few years in the Knesset. We worked both on the fifth floor where the factions' office rooms were. Me in Techiya as Geula Cohen's parliamentary aide; he the spokesperson for the Progressive List for Peace.

I remember him telling me that he finally realized that all his politics weren't worth more than the crap he had to dispose of after changing his son's diaper (he married quite late in his life).  I wasn't that amazed years later when he wrote he'd be voting for Ariel Sharon and Kadima. In his Marxist radicalism, the means always were serving the goals.

But if opposites attract, then that must be the explanation.

In middle age, the girls ran after him. His Hebrew was exquisite. His humor biting. He did not avoid me. We seriously discussed issues. I couldn't, however, stand the smell of cigarettes which enveloped him.

I learned of his death from Peggy Cidor but I have no details (so I don't know where he was buried).

In any case, he was a Jew from Eretz-Yisrael and as a Jew typically is, unique and quirksome in his own invigorating but irritable way.

^

Ahmad Tibi Misrepresentation

I have read that Ahmad Tibib, MK, has said this at a conference entitled "Jerusalem: Legalising the Occupation" held in London last week:

"Christians are praying in their church, Muslims in their mosque and Jews in synagogue.  But not inside the Mosque – the Al Aqsa Mosque! This is the most provocative thing for Palestinians and Muslims and even for Christians in Jerusalem! ….. Israel shot Palestinians in the Al Aqsa Mosque”

As Jonathan H. correctly points out, those Arabs shot included those who murdered two Israeli policemen, rioters who stoned police and fired roman candles at them as well as tossing stones over the wall into the Western Wall Plaza below endangering lives.

But more importantly, he is pushing a trick.

Is the whole compound a mosque?  Even those buildings and open-air gardens and orchards?

And let us not forget the other trick of the 2013 PA-Jordan Agreement, artificially extending the area of the holy site outside its boundaries:

C. Recalling the unique religious importance, to all Muslims, of Al Masjid Al-Aqsa with its 144 dunums, which include the Qibli Mosque of Al Aqsa, the Mosque of the Dome of the Rock and all its mosques, buildings, walls, courtyards, attached areas over and beneath the ground and the Waqf properties tied-up to Al Masjid Al Aqsa, to its environs or to its pilgrims (hereinafter referred to as "Al Haram Al Sharif");

Watch out for tricks.

^ 

He Could Have Said "Alternative Facts"

Why are some people who claim to be knowledgeable of history should nevertheless be viewed with suspicion?

Take the case of Robert Lacey.

He is the historical consultant to The Crown, the Netflix television period drama.  He is the author of many popular histories and biographies on subjects ranging from King Henry VIII to the American gangster Meyer Lansky.

As Caroline Hallerman has observed,

“For Lacey, there can be truth without fact.”

In other words, a lack of evidence is really not insurmountable. Pressed on the matter, he responded to the interviewer’s question saying

"People say 'is it true or is it false?' I say, 'I don’t like the word false.' I’d rather say is it true or is it invented? Is it true or is it imagined? Because, you see there is a difference between history and the past… Through empathy, through imagination, through the psychology of characters. I’ve come to see that is just as valid as the dry documentation.”

And to top it off, he further stated

"History is a truth, but there are other truths that are conveyed in the drama."

Why didn't he just use the phrase "alternative facts". 

^

Prince William Is To Visit

^

No, There Was Not a "Polish Holocaust". But...

No, there was not a "Polish Holocaust". 

But...

...it seems there was an initiative for Jewish Ghettos as well as criminalizing talk that could be construed as "insulting the Polish state - in 1937!

^

Rivka of Mishmar HaYarden

There is a new book out that you need to read.

Not too far east of Rosh Pinna in the Hula Valley, just past Kibbutz Gadot, is a memorial of the north side of the road.  Just over a year ago, my wife and I visited the site as part of a Menachem Begin Heritage Center long weekend/Shabbat.  I was the guide for the group of mainly religious Zionist people and that Friday we included for them a visit to Shlomo Ben-Yosef's grave at Rosh Pinna and that of Yosef Trumpeldor at Tel Hai as well. 

For most of them, it was the first real in-depth introduction to the legacy and deeds of those who were of the Revisionist Movement of Ze'ev Jabotinsky.

The memorial commemorates the heroic pioneer struggle of Mishmar HaYarden to resettle the Land of Israel, despite the, at times, hostility of the official Yishuv bodies as well as the area itself. First founded in 1884, it was reestablished in 1890 and overrun and destroyed by the invading Syrian forces in a battle in early June 1948.  In November 1939, 38 members of the Irun, 35 men and for women (all of them girls aged 17) who were undergoing arms training were arrested by the British.

Arieh Yitzchaki has written a book on the moshava

and now, my friend and tour guide, Gershon Portnoy has translated from Hebrew the slim book "Three Days in Sivan" authored by Aharon Even-Chen which appeared in 1987.

It tells the story of Rivka Grabovsky, her family and of Mishmar Hayarden.

Rivka was of indomitable spirit.  She had lost her husband and a son when Arabs ambushed them in the fields in 1938. 

The book concentrates on the story of the final years and days of the village before being captured by the Syrians who take into captivity those men and women who survived the final battle. It describes the many months they spent in a Damasus prison before being released.  And all through the book stands out the remarkable pioneer: a devoted wife and mother farmer, defender and proud Jew -- Rivka Grabovsky.

Get the book:

You can contact him through Facebook or directly at gap5719@gmail.com or 0585797367.

^

Jewish Humor Posters

^

Black. Settler. Shiloh. Discrimination.

Sometimes, Google Alert is just amazing:

Black.

Settler.

Shiloh.

Discrimination.

^

On the Polish Question

The Holocaust was a German campaign, planned and committed by Germans.

See important update at end

There were no "Polish concentration camps".

Poles did help, assist and hide Jews, thus saving them.

But that isn't the full picture.

If we want to understand Poland and its Jews, we need to know more which means reading more.

Below are selections I made from history volumes*, all dealing with the period between the World Wars.  Without this background, not the Jews nor the Poles can understand the situation today because the selections do not deal with the Holocaust. They describe the pre-Holocaust atmosphere in Poland, the actions of the Polish governments, the anti-Jewish campaigns - all of which facilitated any later anti-Jewish actions between 1939-1946.

P. S.   Another issue is the Polish underground resistance groups and their relationship with the Jews.  There's a book out and it points to several exacerbating points, foremost the negative stereotype of Judeo-Communism (Żydokomuna) which carried over from the pre-war period into the rivalry between the nationalist and communist groups that were operating (see this review).  The result was that "in northeastern Poland (Lublin, Białystok, Nowogródek, and Wilno), where fighting with Soviet partisans was much higher, the Home Army “increasingly identified local Jews as hostile, pro-Soviet elements” or “Bolshevik-Jewish bands.” It is in these areas that anti-Jewish actions can be traced to the district command. By contrast, cases examined in central Poland (Kielce, Radom) show that violence toward Jews, often tied to robbery, was initiated by local command without approval on the district level." 

He notes on the positive side "two failed attempts, led by Capt. Józef Pszenny – one of the first armed actions of the Home Army – to blow up a section of the ghetto wall, which would allow Jews to flee, followed by seven documented “solidarity actions” by other units against German and Ukrainian auxiliary forces guarding the ghetto walls."  And there was, for example, "a Jewish platoon under the command of Lt. Kazimierz Wojtowicz in the village of Hanaczów (Lwów district), that protected some 250 Jews."

He also points to the "hostility toward Jews under Gen. Komorowski, a sympathizer of the antisemitic National Party" in the period after the summer of 1943.

The reviewer notes:

The underground resistance movement that produced noble figures such as Jadwiga Deneko of the Children’s Section of Żegota, but also coexisted with armed units that killed Jews like that of Marian Sołtysiak “Barabasz,” has puzzled historians for decades. Zimmerman’s framing offers the first comprehensive attempt at synthesizing these seemingly contradictory phenomena.

----------
*
The books:

Legacy of Polish Jewry

Anti-Semitism and its Opponents in Modern Poland

Social and Political History of the Jews in Poland 1919-1939 

Fear I could not find in time.

_________________________

UPDATE:

From Yehuda Bauer's: My Brother's Keeper: A History of the American Jewish Joint Distribution Committee 1929-1939, The Jewish Publication Society of America, Philadelphia 1974
Transcription with subtitles by Michael Palomino (2007) 



Chapter 5. Prelude of the Holocaust 
[A. Destruction of the Jewish existence in Poland 1929-1939]
[5.2. Discrimination and murderous pogroms in anti-Semitic Poland 1935-1939]

(End note 3: Jewish Chronicle, 3/22/35 [22 March 1935], p.22)

[Years 1935-1937: Discrimination of Jewish students from universities enforced]
Late in 1935 the long-standing Endek demand to separate Jewish university students from their non-Jewish colleagues was put into operation in Lwów; the Warsaw Polytechnic followed suit in October 1937, as did the universities of Vilna, Cracow, and Poznan. 

[Since early 1935: Boycotts and pogroms against Jews with stones, fire and many murders]

Starting in early 1935, boycotts of Jews spread all through the Polish countryside. These were followed by pogroms: window-smashing, the overturning of Jewish market stalls, beatings, arson, and finally murder. The details of these brutalities are repetitive and terrible. 

In 1935 pogroms took place at Radomsko in April, at Radosc (near Warsaw) and Grochow in May, at Grodno in May. In December [1935] these isolated occurrences began to harden into a campaign: disturbances in Klwow, Lodz, Katowice, Kielce, and Hrubieszow were followed in January 1936 by attacks on Jews in Cracow and Warsaw, among other places.

On March 9, 1936, a terrible pogrom occurred at Przytyk, where two Jews were killed and many houses burned: Bombs were thrown in those same months in 13 more towns, including Minsk Mazowiecki; there a second pogrom occurred in early June and, after four Jews had been killed, most of the Jewish population left for Warsaw. 

During 1936 and early 1937 the pogroms became a daily occurrence in Poland, and clearly indicated increasingly better oganization. In Czestochowa riots started in June 1937 (p.183)
with a fight between two porters; a well-organized boycott movement against the Jews prolonged the unrest there for months. 
Kahn discerned "carefully planned activities of anti-Semitic elements, in which high government officials participated." In the course of the Czestochowa pogrom, the Endek paper Ganiec Czestochowski gave lists of streets on which Jews had not as yet been robbed. 

75 Jews were wounded in this particular outbreak. 

In May 1937 another outbreak occurred at Brest Litovsk, where a number of Jews were killed and some 200 wounded.

Between May 1935 and January 1937, 118 Jews were killed and 1,350 wounded; 137 Jewish stores were destroyed. A total of 348 separate violent mass assaults on Jews were counted during the period, and the compilation was termed both "unofficial" and "incomplete". Another compilation showed that between the end of 1935 and March 1939, 350 Jews had been killed and 500 wounded.

(End note 7: -- New York Times, 2/7/37 [7 Feb 1937]; 

The wave of pogroms did not abate throughout 1937 and 1938. In August 1937 five severe outbreaks occurred in central Poland, and anti-Jewish demonstrations occurred in seven towns, including the capital.

One result of these events was an increased movement of the Jews from smaller places, where they felt themselves exposed, to the larger towns, where  they thought they would be safer. 
But in early 1938 the riots spread to Warsaw, and from then on attacks on Jews in the larger cities became a normal occurrence. 

Several times the Jews reacted by demonstrations and general strikes (March 1936, May and June 1937). In Warsaw and Lodz the Bund tried to create Jewish self-defense units. These were supported by PPS as well, but police intervention in favor of the pogromists neutralized Jewish opposition.

In 1938 and 1939 the anti-Jewish boycott movement became more and more effective. Again, it was mainly the small Jewish communities that were hit, and in this a parallel to the experience in Germany can clearly be discerned. These boycott actions were usually organized by the Endeks, but by early 1939 the government OZN group also supported them. 

In February 1939 an OZN-inspired boycott in the Lublin area caused Jewish economic life to be "practically ruined".

(End note 11: R61, February 1939)

The number of Jewish stores in town after town decreased, while the Polish stores grew in number, despite the continued economic crisis.

(End note 12: 
-- JDC, 45-publicity, Warszawski Dziennik Narodowy, 4/14/38; 
-- R28-Fortnightly Digest, no. 14 (5/1/38 [1 May 1938], et seq.)

[Early 1939: Poland: Deportations of Jews from the frontier towns]

In early 1939 Jews were forced to leave certain frontier towns because they were considered to be unreliable elements

[1939: Anti-Semitism also in Western and Northwestern Poland]
Riots, pogroms, and boycotts now spread to areas in western and northwestern Poland, where the number of Jews was very small; up till then these areas had been spared from excesses.

(End note 14: 45-publicity, bulletin, 3/10/30 [10 March 1930]; thus a bloody pogrom in Dobrzyn caused "many Jews to be wounded", etc.; at the same time the pogroms did not cease elsewhere).

[April 1936: Poland: Law against ritual slaughter]
Jews, especially observant Jews, who formed the majority of Polish Jewry, were hard hit by Polish laws against ritual slaughter (shehita) enacted in April 1936 and, in a final and drastic form, in March 1939. Not only was religious freedom sharply diminished, but a large number of Jewish butchers and supervisors of ritual slaughter were threatened with economic ruin...

Here.
Here too.

Newspaper clippings:

____________

All of the above was avoided now by Poland's Deputy FM.

____________

UPDATE

1946 report basically confirms all of the above.

As noted:

since the early nineteenth century, life for the Polish Jewish community — the largest in Western Europe — was made difficult by anti-Semitism.
“Religious and economic in its origins, Polish anti-Semitism was preached by political parties and church heads and practiced by officials high and low,” according to the report. By 1939, on the eve of the Nazi occupation of Poland, “it was one of the distinguishing factors of the country’s political, social and economic life.”
“Because anti-Semitism had already become so ingrained in Polish thought, it is not altogether surprising that it still manifests itself in post-war Poland, although common suffering at the hand of the Germans might have been expected to bring the Poles and the Jews closer together.”

^