Secretary of State John Kerry referenced the voyage of the refugee ship St. Louis in discussions with the Senate about intervening in Syria. The St. Louis carried over 900 Jewish refugees from Germany in 1939 who were denied entry to Cuba and the United States, forcing the ship to return to Europe where many passengers later perished in the Holocaust. Kerry's mention of the St. Louis highlighted how America's reluctance to act and provide refuge contributed to Jewish suffering during the Holocaust, and suggested this history should influence discussions around responding to the Syrian civil war and Assad's treatment of civilians. The document then provides historical details about the St. Louis voyage and the Roosevelt administration's decision not to offer the refugees entry to the U.S. despite
Blum demonstrates how US policy, under the banners of freedom and human rights, has led to barbarous criminal acts, how the world's force for peace has acted in the most belicose form. An eye-opener for students of national security policy. -- Saul Landau, Fellow, Institute for Policy Studies, Washington, DC
Bravo Blum! A vivid, well-aimed critique of the evils of US global interventionism, a superb antidote to officialdom's lies and propaganda. -- Michael Parenti, author of History as Mystery and To Kill a Nation: The Attack on Yugoslavia
Critics will call this a one-sided book. But it is an invaluable corrective to the establishment portrait of America as the world's greatest force for peace. Even confirmed opponents of U.S. interventionism can find much in this important book that will both educate and shock them. -- Peter Dale Scott, former Professor at UC Berkeley, poet, and author, Deep Politics and The Death of JFK
Rogue State forcibly reminds us of Vice President Agnews immortal line: The United States, for all its faults, is still the greatest nation in the country. -- Gore Vidal, author of The Decline and Fall of the American Empire
To what extent does the historical film and literature realistically depict g...Megan Kedzlie
A historical investigation that analyzes the extent to which film and literature realistically depicted the warfare that the US Troops experienced under General Westermoreland's "Search and Destroy" tactics.
Iran and the Bomb – Summary, Panel Discussion – Nov 18, 2013 – Rick Richmancjhs
Richman is a graduate of Harvard College and NYU Law School. He edits "Jewish Current Issues." His articles and posts have appeared in American Thinker, Commentary Magazine, Contentions, The Jewish Journal, The Jewish Press, The New York Sun, and PJMedia. Norman Podhoretz described him as a "highly regarded blogger."
Iran and the Bomb - Strategic Considerations in the MIddle East - J.E. (Jenn...cjhs
Iran and the Bomb
Iran is very close to the point of achieving “breakout”: enriching uranium to weapons-grade purity, and demonstrating the capability to detonate a nuclear warhead.
In each of the elements of a nuclear weapon – fissile material, warhead, and delivery system – Iran has made substantial progress in the last decade. That progress has accelerated since the first UN sanctions were imposed in 2007.
Today, we have reached the critical point at which Iran’s next decision will be the decision to “break out”: begin enriching uranium to the highest, weapons-grade purity. By some calculations, Iran has enough uranium already enriched to a lower level for at least one bomb, and possibly two. Iran is almost ready, as well, to start up her 40-megawatt plutonium reactor at Arak, which would be a source of 1-2 bombs’ worth of plutonium per year. She is pursuing both the uranium and plutonium paths to a nuclear weapon.
Iran performed warhead-related experiments as far back as 2002-2003. She has also improved her missile capability, and today can reach Southeastern Europe and Israel with nuclear-capable missiles. There are strong indications that Iran is developing ICBMs; U.S. intelligence believes Iran will be able to test an ICBM by 2015. Beyond that, Iran is constructing a missile silo complex in the northwestern tip of Venezuela, from which her currently available, nuclear-capable missiles could reach Florida and part of Georgia.
Meanwhile, the likelihood that Iran will continue to engage in deception, in order to play for time, has only grown with the inauguration of Hassan Rouhani as the new president. Rouhani has boasted of the successful deceptions he perpetrated on the IAEA and European nations in the mid-2000s, when he was Iran’s chief nuclear negotiator.
Assuming there will be no military attack by the United States, what events might require Israel to mount a preemptive attack? Three to consider are an impending warhead test in Iran, the impending start-up of the plutonium reactor at Arak, and the impending operational deployment of the Russian S-300PMU2 air defense system, which would significantly change the anti-air threat posed by Iran.
The geopolitical consequences of a nuclear-armed Iran cannot be overstated. Other nations in the region (like Saudi Arabia, and possibly Egypt and Turkey) will want to acquire nuclear weapons for deterrence. Nuclear material and the requisite weapons technology are now widely available. But a nuclear Iran would also be able to wage proxy wars – e.g., through Hezbollah, Hamas, and other terrorist organizations supported by Tehran – with even more immunity than Iran has today.
Moreover, disarray in the NATO approach to missile defense, caused in large part by the Obama administration’s cancellation of missile-defense plans, will be exacerbated by the growing Iranian threat.
Blum demonstrates how US policy, under the banners of freedom and human rights, has led to barbarous criminal acts, how the world's force for peace has acted in the most belicose form. An eye-opener for students of national security policy. -- Saul Landau, Fellow, Institute for Policy Studies, Washington, DC
Bravo Blum! A vivid, well-aimed critique of the evils of US global interventionism, a superb antidote to officialdom's lies and propaganda. -- Michael Parenti, author of History as Mystery and To Kill a Nation: The Attack on Yugoslavia
Critics will call this a one-sided book. But it is an invaluable corrective to the establishment portrait of America as the world's greatest force for peace. Even confirmed opponents of U.S. interventionism can find much in this important book that will both educate and shock them. -- Peter Dale Scott, former Professor at UC Berkeley, poet, and author, Deep Politics and The Death of JFK
Rogue State forcibly reminds us of Vice President Agnews immortal line: The United States, for all its faults, is still the greatest nation in the country. -- Gore Vidal, author of The Decline and Fall of the American Empire
To what extent does the historical film and literature realistically depict g...Megan Kedzlie
A historical investigation that analyzes the extent to which film and literature realistically depicted the warfare that the US Troops experienced under General Westermoreland's "Search and Destroy" tactics.
Iran and the Bomb – Summary, Panel Discussion – Nov 18, 2013 – Rick Richmancjhs
Richman is a graduate of Harvard College and NYU Law School. He edits "Jewish Current Issues." His articles and posts have appeared in American Thinker, Commentary Magazine, Contentions, The Jewish Journal, The Jewish Press, The New York Sun, and PJMedia. Norman Podhoretz described him as a "highly regarded blogger."
Iran and the Bomb - Strategic Considerations in the MIddle East - J.E. (Jenn...cjhs
Iran and the Bomb
Iran is very close to the point of achieving “breakout”: enriching uranium to weapons-grade purity, and demonstrating the capability to detonate a nuclear warhead.
In each of the elements of a nuclear weapon – fissile material, warhead, and delivery system – Iran has made substantial progress in the last decade. That progress has accelerated since the first UN sanctions were imposed in 2007.
Today, we have reached the critical point at which Iran’s next decision will be the decision to “break out”: begin enriching uranium to the highest, weapons-grade purity. By some calculations, Iran has enough uranium already enriched to a lower level for at least one bomb, and possibly two. Iran is almost ready, as well, to start up her 40-megawatt plutonium reactor at Arak, which would be a source of 1-2 bombs’ worth of plutonium per year. She is pursuing both the uranium and plutonium paths to a nuclear weapon.
Iran performed warhead-related experiments as far back as 2002-2003. She has also improved her missile capability, and today can reach Southeastern Europe and Israel with nuclear-capable missiles. There are strong indications that Iran is developing ICBMs; U.S. intelligence believes Iran will be able to test an ICBM by 2015. Beyond that, Iran is constructing a missile silo complex in the northwestern tip of Venezuela, from which her currently available, nuclear-capable missiles could reach Florida and part of Georgia.
Meanwhile, the likelihood that Iran will continue to engage in deception, in order to play for time, has only grown with the inauguration of Hassan Rouhani as the new president. Rouhani has boasted of the successful deceptions he perpetrated on the IAEA and European nations in the mid-2000s, when he was Iran’s chief nuclear negotiator.
Assuming there will be no military attack by the United States, what events might require Israel to mount a preemptive attack? Three to consider are an impending warhead test in Iran, the impending start-up of the plutonium reactor at Arak, and the impending operational deployment of the Russian S-300PMU2 air defense system, which would significantly change the anti-air threat posed by Iran.
The geopolitical consequences of a nuclear-armed Iran cannot be overstated. Other nations in the region (like Saudi Arabia, and possibly Egypt and Turkey) will want to acquire nuclear weapons for deterrence. Nuclear material and the requisite weapons technology are now widely available. But a nuclear Iran would also be able to wage proxy wars – e.g., through Hezbollah, Hamas, and other terrorist organizations supported by Tehran – with even more immunity than Iran has today.
Moreover, disarray in the NATO approach to missile defense, caused in large part by the Obama administration’s cancellation of missile-defense plans, will be exacerbated by the growing Iranian threat.
Armed resistance-to-the-holocaust by David B. Kopelcjhs
Contrary to myth of Jewish passivity, many Jews did fight back during the Holocaust. They shut down the extermination camp at Sobibor, rose up in the Warsaw Ghetto, and fought in the woods and swamps all over Eastern Europe. Indeed, Jews resisted at a higher rate than did any other population under Nazi rule. The experience of the Holocaust shows why Jews, and all people of good will, should support the right of potential genocide victims to possess defensive arms, and refutes the notion that violence is necessarily immoral.
David B. Kopel is Research Director of the Independence Institute, in Golden, Colorado, and a member of the International Association of Genocide Scholars.
SOVEREIGNTY: The Zionist Alternative (English version)cjhs
In this 2nd issue of Sovereignty politicians, academicians and people in the field explain the disaster inherent in dividing the Land and present the Zionist alternative from the Right and is released as the international community is applying pressure on the government of Israel to divide the Land.
Iran and the Bomb – Summary, Panel Discussion – Nov 18, 2013 – Elan Journocjhs
Journo is a fellow and director of policy research at the Ayn Rand Institute. His book, Winning the Unwinnable War: America's Self-Crippled Response to Islamic Totalitarianism, analyzes post-9/11 U.S. foreign policy from the perspective of Rand's philosophy. His work has appeared in Foreign Policy, the Journal of International Security Affairs, and the Whitehead Journal of Diplomacy and International Relations, and in popular media outlets, including FoxNews.com, the Los Angeles Times, Chicago Sun-Times, and Canada's Globe and Mail. Mr. Journo has briefed Congressional staffers and spoken at numerous campuses, including Stanford, Berkeley, UCLA, USC, New York University, George Mason University, and the U.S. Naval Academy.
Shariah Compliant Finance and Jihad with Money with Christopher Holton, Cente...cjhs
HANDOUT TO ACCOMPANY VIDEO
Christopher Holton of the Center for Security Policy explained what Shariah-compliant finance is, how it was originated and the specific threats that it poses to Western civilization. He explained the overriding mission of Shariah-compliant finance and examined the system of zakat, which is integral to Shariah-compliant finance and by which numerous Islamic charities have been found to fund jihad. Mr. Holton also examined how Shariah-compliant finance is not held to the same standards of disclosure that the rest of the financial world must adhere to and the role of Shariah scholars in Shariah-compliant finance and looked closely at two prominent Shariah scholars in particular as prime examples of the problems that Shariah-compliant finance presents. It did come as a surprise to many people in our audience who are otherwise very informed about the danger of Islam and Shariah to the West to learn of the nations that have already come to dominate Shariah-compliant finance and to the extent that it has infiltrated America.
This event took place in Los Angeles, California on December 19, 2013.
Christopher Holton is Vice-President of Outreach at the Center for Security Policy. He directs the Center's Divest Terror Initiative and Shariah Risk Due Diligence Program. He has been involved in legislation in twenty states to divest taxpayer supported pension systems from foreign companies that do business with the Islamic Republic of Iran, the Islamic Republic of Sudan, and the Syrian Arab Republic. Since 2008, Chris has been the editor-in-chief of the Shariah Finance Watch Blog. In 2005, he was a co-author of War Footing, published by the US Naval Institute Press. Holton's work has also been published by National Review, Human Events, The American Thinker, Family Security Matters, Big Peace, World Tribune, World Net Daily, NewsMax, and thehayride.com. Before joining the Center, Chris was President of Blanchard and Company, a two hundred million dollar per year investment firm, and editor-in-chief of the Blanchard Economic Research Unit. Christopher blogs at TerrorTrendsBulletin.com.
ST LOUIS EVENT U.S. Department of State Washington D.C.Pascale REARTE
Commemoration MS St. Louis
Washington, DC
September 21, 2012
Special Envoy to Monitor and Combat Anti-Semitism Hannah Rosenthal and Special Envoy for Holocaust Issues Douglas Davidson will honor surviving passengers of the MS St. Louis on Monday, September 24, at 11 a.m. in the George C. Marshall Conference Center Auditorium at the U.S. Department of State.
Deputy Secretary of State William Burns will deliver remarks. Survivors of the St. Louis will attend this event and will present to the Department of State Archives a signed copy of Senate Resolution 111, which recognized June 6, 2009 as the 70th anniversary of when the MS St. Louis returned to Europe after its passengers were refused admittance to the United States. They will also present a “Proclamation of Gratitude” to the Ambassadors of Belgium, Britain, France, and the Netherlands. A special theatrical presentation, The Trial of FDR, will be performed, allowing the audience to reflect on the difficult decisions leaders faced at the time. Following the presentation, a panel of survivors will answer questions about their experiences.
The German steamer MS St. Louis set sail in 1939 carrying 937 German Jewish refugees bound for Cuba. They were denied entry to Cuba, as well as to the United States and Canada. Forced to return to Europe, nearly one third of the passengers ultimately died in Auschwitz.
The remarks will be open to the press.
Final access time for press: 10:15 a.m. from the 21st Street entrance.
Media representatives may attend this event upon presentation of one of the following:
(1) A U.S. Government-issued identification card (Department of State, White House, Congress, Department of Defense, or Foreign Press Center),
QC101: An Introductory Course to Quizzing, was held from 22nd March 2021 to 26th March 2021.
Blitzkrieg: A Quiz on WWII & Cold War was set by Rishabh. It was hosted on D2C on 25th March.
The Ugly American by William J. LedererAuthor Biog.docxssusera34210
The Ugly American by William J. Lederer
Author Biography
Nationality 1: American
Birthdate: 1912
Nationality 1: American
Birthdate: 1918
Deathdate: 1965
William J. Lederer was born on March 31, 1912, in New York City, the son of William Julius and Paula (Franken) Lederer. He attended the United States Naval Academy, from which he graduated with a bachelor of science degree in 1936. Lederer's main career was in the U.S. Navy, from 1930 to 1958. He retired as captain. During wartime he served in Asia and with the Atlantic Fleet. From 1950 to 1958 he was special assistant to the commander-in-chief, Pacific.
After Lederer retired from the navy, he went into journalism, becoming Far East correspondent for Reader's Digest, from 1958 to 1963. He was author-in-residence at Harvard University, 1966-1967.
Lederer has written many books, including novels, short stories, and nonfiction on a variety of topics, during his long career. His best known work is The Ugly American (1958; with Burdick). His other novels include Sarkhan (1965; with Burdick) and I, Giorghos (1984). Ensign O'Toole and Me (1957) is a humorous look at life in the navy; A Nation of Sheep (1961) discusses how the United States could be more successful in its foreign aid projects. The Mirages of Marriage (1968; with Don D. Jackson) is an analysis of marriage in the United States. Other works include The Last Cruise (1950), All the Ships at Sea (1950), Timothy's Song (1965), The Story of Pink Jade (1966), Our Own Worst Enemy (1968; published in England in 1969 as The Anguished American), and A Happy Book of Christmas Stories (1981).
Lederer married Ethel Victoria Hackett in 1940. They were divorced in 1965. In the same year, Lederer married Corinne Edwards Lewis. They divorced in 1976. Lederer has three sons.
Eugene (Leonard) Burdick was born in Sheldon, Iowa, on December 12, 1918. He was the son of Jack Dale, a painter, and Marie (Ellerbroek) Burdick.
Burdick gained a bachelor of arts degree from Stanford University in 1942. During World War II, he served in the U.S. Navy and became lieutenant commander. He was awarded the Navy/Marine Corps Cross. After the war he studied in England and received a Ph.D. from Magdalen College, Oxford University, in 1950.
Burdick became assistant professor and then professor of political theory at the University of California, Berkeley, from 1950 to 1965. In addition to his scholarly writings, which included a book on voting behavior, Burdick wrote novels. His first was The Ninth Wave (1956), about a California politician who exploits fear and hatred. This work was followed in 1958 by The Ugly American, which he co-wrote with William J. Lederer. The book became a bestseller. Burdick wrote several more novels: Fail-Safe (1962; with Harvey Wheeler) is about the accidental triggering of a nuclear war; The 480, about the selection of a Republican presidential candidate, followed in 1964. In 1965, Burdick collaborated again with Lederer on anoth ...
The Arab-Israeli Conflict
Avoiding Damaging Words in the Battle of Narratives:
Guide for Making Intelligent Choices
8th Edition
By Michael Perloff
Author’s Comments and Assumptions
The goal of this Guide is to reduce the use of counterproductive terminology that distorts and obscures the issues in this battle of narratives.
Using accurate terms is a key weapon in countering the propaganda and lies being used against Israel. Original source material, including testimonies and official documents, has been used whenever possible.
No consideration has been given to government policy, political correctness, or conventional wisdom. Nor was there a concern that this document could be interpreted as representing either a left wing or right wing perspective. Only evidence matters.
A main assumption is that mainstream Arab leaders mean what they say, write and teach their children about Israel and Jews regarding their objective to ultimately replace Israel with another Arab state.
A second assumption is that Israel’s vision as expressed in the Declaration of Independence is still valid today. That it speaks of cooperation, peace, and reconciliation with their Arab neighbors remains a very real objective.
A third assumption is that most people who accept the Palestinian Arab narrative do so out of ignorance, misinformation and misconceptions about this conflict.
Another assumption is that criticism of Israel is not a symptom of anti-Semitism unless special standards or definitions are applied to the world’s only Jewish state.
Lastly, assuming that this Terminology Guide will be used by people who are already knowledgeable and pro-Israel, it contains minimal supporting documentation.
The Fabrication of the Palestinian People - How we swallowed the Bluffcjhs
On March 31, 1977 in the Dutch newspaper Trouw, in an interview with PLO executive committee member, Zahir Muhsein said:
“The Palestinian people does not exist. The creation of a Palestinian state is only a means for continuing our struggle against the state of Israel for our Arab unity. In reality today there is no difference between Jordanians, ‘Palestinians’, Syrians and Lebanese. Only for tactical reasons do we speak today about the existence of a Palestinian people, since Arab national interests demand that we posit the existence of a distinct ‘Palestinian people’ to oppose Zionism.”
Acetabularia Information For Class 9 .docxvaibhavrinwa19
Acetabularia acetabulum is a single-celled green alga that in its vegetative state is morphologically differentiated into a basal rhizoid and an axially elongated stalk, which bears whorls of branching hairs. The single diploid nucleus resides in the rhizoid.
2024.06.01 Introducing a competency framework for languag learning materials ...Sandy Millin
http://sandymillin.wordpress.com/iateflwebinar2024
Published classroom materials form the basis of syllabuses, drive teacher professional development, and have a potentially huge influence on learners, teachers and education systems. All teachers also create their own materials, whether a few sentences on a blackboard, a highly-structured fully-realised online course, or anything in between. Despite this, the knowledge and skills needed to create effective language learning materials are rarely part of teacher training, and are mostly learnt by trial and error.
Knowledge and skills frameworks, generally called competency frameworks, for ELT teachers, trainers and managers have existed for a few years now. However, until I created one for my MA dissertation, there wasn’t one drawing together what we need to know and do to be able to effectively produce language learning materials.
This webinar will introduce you to my framework, highlighting the key competencies I identified from my research. It will also show how anybody involved in language teaching (any language, not just English!), teacher training, managing schools or developing language learning materials can benefit from using the framework.
Embracing GenAI - A Strategic ImperativePeter Windle
Artificial Intelligence (AI) technologies such as Generative AI, Image Generators and Large Language Models have had a dramatic impact on teaching, learning and assessment over the past 18 months. The most immediate threat AI posed was to Academic Integrity with Higher Education Institutes (HEIs) focusing their efforts on combating the use of GenAI in assessment. Guidelines were developed for staff and students, policies put in place too. Innovative educators have forged paths in the use of Generative AI for teaching, learning and assessments leading to pockets of transformation springing up across HEIs, often with little or no top-down guidance, support or direction.
This Gasta posits a strategic approach to integrating AI into HEIs to prepare staff, students and the curriculum for an evolving world and workplace. We will highlight the advantages of working with these technologies beyond the realm of teaching, learning and assessment by considering prompt engineering skills, industry impact, curriculum changes, and the need for staff upskilling. In contrast, not engaging strategically with Generative AI poses risks, including falling behind peers, missed opportunities and failing to ensure our graduates remain employable. The rapid evolution of AI technologies necessitates a proactive and strategic approach if we are to remain relevant.
June 3, 2024 Anti-Semitism Letter Sent to MIT President Kornbluth and MIT Cor...Levi Shapiro
Letter from the Congress of the United States regarding Anti-Semitism sent June 3rd to MIT President Sally Kornbluth, MIT Corp Chair, Mark Gorenberg
Dear Dr. Kornbluth and Mr. Gorenberg,
The US House of Representatives is deeply concerned by ongoing and pervasive acts of antisemitic
harassment and intimidation at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT). Failing to act decisively to ensure a safe learning environment for all students would be a grave dereliction of your responsibilities as President of MIT and Chair of the MIT Corporation.
This Congress will not stand idly by and allow an environment hostile to Jewish students to persist. The House believes that your institution is in violation of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act, and the inability or
unwillingness to rectify this violation through action requires accountability.
Postsecondary education is a unique opportunity for students to learn and have their ideas and beliefs challenged. However, universities receiving hundreds of millions of federal funds annually have denied
students that opportunity and have been hijacked to become venues for the promotion of terrorism, antisemitic harassment and intimidation, unlawful encampments, and in some cases, assaults and riots.
The House of Representatives will not countenance the use of federal funds to indoctrinate students into hateful, antisemitic, anti-American supporters of terrorism. Investigations into campus antisemitism by the Committee on Education and the Workforce and the Committee on Ways and Means have been expanded into a Congress-wide probe across all relevant jurisdictions to address this national crisis. The undersigned Committees will conduct oversight into the use of federal funds at MIT and its learning environment under authorities granted to each Committee.
• The Committee on Education and the Workforce has been investigating your institution since December 7, 2023. The Committee has broad jurisdiction over postsecondary education, including its compliance with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act, campus safety concerns over disruptions to the learning environment, and the awarding of federal student aid under the Higher Education Act.
• The Committee on Oversight and Accountability is investigating the sources of funding and other support flowing to groups espousing pro-Hamas propaganda and engaged in antisemitic harassment and intimidation of students. The Committee on Oversight and Accountability is the principal oversight committee of the US House of Representatives and has broad authority to investigate “any matter” at “any time” under House Rule X.
• The Committee on Ways and Means has been investigating several universities since November 15, 2023, when the Committee held a hearing entitled From Ivory Towers to Dark Corners: Investigating the Nexus Between Antisemitism, Tax-Exempt Universities, and Terror Financing. The Committee followed the hearing with letters to those institutions on January 10, 202
A Strategic Approach: GenAI in EducationPeter Windle
Artificial Intelligence (AI) technologies such as Generative AI, Image Generators and Large Language Models have had a dramatic impact on teaching, learning and assessment over the past 18 months. The most immediate threat AI posed was to Academic Integrity with Higher Education Institutes (HEIs) focusing their efforts on combating the use of GenAI in assessment. Guidelines were developed for staff and students, policies put in place too. Innovative educators have forged paths in the use of Generative AI for teaching, learning and assessments leading to pockets of transformation springing up across HEIs, often with little or no top-down guidance, support or direction.
This Gasta posits a strategic approach to integrating AI into HEIs to prepare staff, students and the curriculum for an evolving world and workplace. We will highlight the advantages of working with these technologies beyond the realm of teaching, learning and assessment by considering prompt engineering skills, industry impact, curriculum changes, and the need for staff upskilling. In contrast, not engaging strategically with Generative AI poses risks, including falling behind peers, missed opportunities and failing to ensure our graduates remain employable. The rapid evolution of AI technologies necessitates a proactive and strategic approach if we are to remain relevant.
Macroeconomics- Movie Location
This will be used as part of your Personal Professional Portfolio once graded.
Objective:
Prepare a presentation or a paper using research, basic comparative analysis, data organization and application of economic information. You will make an informed assessment of an economic climate outside of the United States to accomplish an entertainment industry objective.
Instructions for Submissions thorugh G- Classroom.pptxJheel Barad
This presentation provides a briefing on how to upload submissions and documents in Google Classroom. It was prepared as part of an orientation for new Sainik School in-service teacher trainees. As a training officer, my goal is to ensure that you are comfortable and proficient with this essential tool for managing assignments and fostering student engagement.
Revisiting the Voyage of the Damned by Rafael Medoff | Prism
1. S P R I N G 2 0 1 4 • V O L U M E 6 6 3
Are you going to be comfortable if Assad, as a result
of the United States not doing anything, then gasses
his people yet again and they—and the world says,
why didn’t the United States act? History is full of
. . . moments where someone didn’t stand up and act
when it made a difference.
And whether you go back to World War II or you
look at a ship that was turned away from the coast
of Florida and everybody on it lost their lives sub-
sequently to German gas, those are the things that
make a difference.1
And that’s what’s at stake here.
—Secretary of State John Kerry to members of the Senate
Foreign Relations Committee at a September 3, 2013,
hearing on whether the US should intervene in Syria
(Source: Washington Post)
S
ecretary Kerry’s reference to the ill-fated voyage of
the refugee ship St. Louis was significant for several
reasons. First, it indicated that the Obama adminis-
tration believes the record of America’s response to the
Holocaust should play some role in the formulation of for-
eign policy today. Second, the decision to raise the issue
before the Senate, and the fact that none of the senators
present challenged it, suggested that not just in the White
House but on Capitol Hill, too, the experience of the St.
Louis is considered relevant. Finally, that Kerry would
mention the episode without naming the ship, evidently
assuming his listeners and the public would recognize the
story, points to the widespread familiarity with at least
the main elements of that tragic episode. In addition to
countless history books and high school textbooks, the St.
Louis has been referenced in numerous novels and plays,
was the subject of a US Senate resolution (in 2009) and a
State Department apology (in 2012), and has even been
mentioned in the comic strip Doonesbury. Just as the story
of Anne Frank and the iconic photo of the child in the
Warsaw Ghetto with his arms raised in surrender have
come to symbolize the Nazis’ war against the Jews, the
voyage of the St. Louis has become the best-known symbol
of America’s tepid response to the Holocaust.
“THE SADDEST SHIP AFLOAT”
For one agonizing week in the spring of 1939, the plight of
the St. Louis was front-page news in America’s major daily
newspapers. Then, the “saddest ship afloat,” as The New
York Times called it, having been rebuffed by both Cuba and
the United States, was forced to return to Europe, and the
story of the tragic voyage vanished from the headlines—
and from public consciousness—not to become a subject of
substantial interest again until the late 1960s [Fig. 1].
The St. Louis did, however, garner a bit of attention
during and shortly after World War II, thanks to Dutch
novelist Jan de Hartog, who used the story as the basis for
“Just as the story of Anne Frank and the iconic photo of the child in the Warsaw Ghetto with his arms raised in surrender have come to
symbolize the Nazis’ war against the Jews,” notes Rafael Medoff, “the voyage of the St. Louis has become the best-known symbol of
America’s tepid response to the Holocaust.” Read this narrative in conjunction with Baumel-Schwartz’s essay (pp. 38–43), on the 1,000
refugee children who did find haven, to prompt an essential discussion about America’s indifference to the plight of European Jews.
Rafael Medoff
Revisiting the Voyage of the Damned
FIG. 1: The SS St. Louis. Courtesy of The David S. Wyman Institute
for Holocaust Studies.
2. P R I S M : A N I N T E R D I S C I P L I N A R Y J O U R N A L F O R H O L O C A U S T E D U C A T O R S6 4
his play Schipper Naast God, or Skipper Next to God. (In de
Hartog’s version, the skipper beaches the ship in the middle
of a Long Island yachting competition and the yachtsmen
rescue the passengers.) The Dutch underground performed
the play in the hope of inspiring fishermen to hide Jewish
children from the Nazis. After the war, Skipper made it
briefly to Broadway (1948) and was made into a movie in
1953, although neither production occasioned much fanfare.
The story of the St. Louis gained wide postwar public
attention only with the publication in 1968 of While Six
Million Died: A Chronicle of American Apathy, by the inves-
tigative journalist Arthur Morse [Fig. 2]. It was the first
book to examine the Roosevelt administration’s policies
concerning European Jewry. Prior to the book’s publication,
Morse’s chapter on the St. Louis had appeared in the popu-
lar US news magazine Look, giving the story especially
wide circulation.
Morse (1967) began:
On May 13, 1939, the Hamburg–American Line’s luxu-
rious St. Louis sailed from Germany with 936 passen-
gers—930 of them Jewish refugees, among the last to
escape from the Nazis’ narrowing vise. Inscribed on
each passport was a red “J,” and in each mind, the
memory of six years of ever-increasing terror. (p. 59)
All but 22 passengers held tourist visas issued by the Cuban
Director-General of Immigration, which they had pur-
chased for $161 each. In addition, 734 of the passengers
had already applied for visas to America and received quota
numbers and had then been placed on the long waiting list
to enter the United States.
The ship set sail with the encouragement of the Nazi
regime, which at that point was energetically promoting
the emigration of Jews from Germany. In fact, some of the
passengers had been released from the Dachau concentra-
tion camp (in which they had been imprisoned during the
mass arrests of Kristallnacht) only upon pledging to leave
Germany by a specified date.
The reason they could not be admitted to the US
immediately was that in 1939, for the first time during
President Roosevelt’s years in office, the annual quota for
immigrants from Germany was filled. In fact, it would be
the only year during the Roosevelt presidency that the
German quota was filled; during most years in the FDR
era, less than 25% of the German quota places were used.
This was because the administration piled on extra
requirements to discourage and disqualify would-be im-
migrants. In the immediate aftermath of Kristallnacht,
however, the president permitted the quota to be filled for
the coming year. The passengers on the St. Louis thus con-
sidered it their good fortune to have qualified for entry to
Cuba in the meantime.
Even before the St. Louis reached Havana, the govern-
ment of Laredo Bru, wracked by internal disputes and
sensitive to rising domestic antisemitism and nativism,
invalidated the refugees’ tourist visas. When the ship
reached Cuba, the only passengers permitted to disem-
bark were those 22 who had paid an extra $500 fee for an
immigration visa, in case the tourist document proved
insufficient. The others were turned away.
Two American Jewish envoys, Lawrence Berenson of
the American Jewish Distribution Committee (JDC) and
Cecilia Razovsky of the National Coordinating Committee
for Aid to Refugees, flew to Cuba on May 30 to negotiate
with President Bru. Berenson was confronted with con-
flicting and steadily escalating monetary demands by Bru
and other Cuban officials.
The JDC representative
also feared that the
terms would establish a
precedent the Joint
would be unable to un-
derwrite in the future.
Because of these factors,
Berenson waited too
long to give his final as-
sent to Bru’s terms. The
Cuban leader called off
the talks. The captain of
the St. Louis, Gustav
Schroeder (who subse-
quently was recognized
by Yad Vashem as one of
FIG 2:
Book cover.
Courtesy of
The David S.
Wyman Institute
for Holocaust
Studies.
FIG 3: Gustav Schroeder, captain
of the St. Louis. Courtesy of The
David S. Wyman Institute for
Holocaust Studies.
3. S P R I N G 2 0 1 4 • V O L U M E 6 6 5
the Righteous Among the Nations) [Fig. 3], still hoped for a
last-minute agreement to spare the passengers a return to
Germany, so instead of immediately sailing for Europe, on
June 1 he steered a course north towards the coast of Florida.
THE UNANSWERED TELEGRAM
So close to the shore that they could see the lights of Miami,
a committee representing the passengers sent a telegram
to the White House, begging President Franklin Roosevelt,
“Help them, Mr. President, the 900 passengers, of which
more than 400 are women and children” [Fig. 4]. They re-
ceived no reply.
An unpublished memoir by Razovsky (1967), recently
discovered by the Israeli scholar Bat-Ami Zucker, sheds
some light on the administration’s position. Describing
the negotiations, Razovsky wrote: “We again at that time
tried to get permission from Secretary of State Hull to take
them but our State Department was unsympathetic and
Franklin Delano was apathetic, although Eleanor did
everything in her power to change their attitude” (p. 112).
Roosevelt administration officials instructed US diplo-
mats in Cuba to keep their distance from the controversy.
The president feared being seen as taking the lead in help-
ing foreign refugees because of widespread isolationism
and anti-immigration sentiment among the American
public. The American Consul General in Havana, Coert du
Bois, reported to Secretary of State Cordell Hull that Avra
Warren, chief of the State Department’s Visa Division, had
told him “that under no circumstances” would Warren “or
the Secretary of State or the President give me or the
American Ambassador in Habana any instructions to in-
tervene in the matter of the landing of the Saint Louis nor,
presumably, any other European refugees” (p. 3). Du Bois
(1939) wrote that Warren
said he wanted to make the position of the Department
perfectly clear in this matter and repeated these
instructions twice, and corroborated me when I
repeated them back to him. . . . He said he had had
several interviews with Secretary Hull and that word
had come from the White House, all to this effect.
Additional evidence of the Roosevelt administration’s
attitude may be found in a 1971 essay by Irwin Gellman in
the American Jewish Historical Quarterly, which was the
first scholarly treatment of the St. Louis episode. He quoted
Assistant Secretary of State George Messersmith rebuffing
an appeal from US Senator James Mead (Democrat of New
York); Messermith said the US should not intervene “in a
matter of this kind which was one purely outside of our
sphere and entirely an internal matter in Cuba” (p. 149).
Gellman noted that when the JDC’s Berenson asked
US Ambassador J. Butler Wright and Consul-General du
Bois to accompany him to a meeting with the influential
Cuban military chief Fulgencio Batista, “they refused to
become involved in a situation which affected Cuban sov-
ereignty and Laredo Bru’s personal prestige” (p. 152).
State Department officials did briefly canvas some
South American governments to see whether they would
be of assistance. The Roosevelt administration did not shy
away from asking other governments to do for refugees
what it declined to do itself. Henry Feingold (1995) has
noted that “Roosevelt’s enthusiasm [for refugee resettle-
ment schemes] appeared to grow the further away such
projects were from the Western hemisphere” (p. 107). But
State found no takers among its South American contacts,
and refrained from exercising pressure on those regimes
to admit the refugees. With the crisis escalating and
attracting widespread news media attention, Assistant
Secretary of State Sumner Welles eventually authorized
Ambassador Wright to say something to Bru in support of
the St. Louis. By then, though, the ship was well on its way
back to Europe; it was too little and too late. US officials
subsequently blamed the Jewish negotiators for the fiasco.
Du Bois wrote to his colleagues that Berenson “and his
co-religionists in New York” (the JDC leadership) were
guilty of “horse-trading” (pp. 149–154) instead of seeking to
save lives. Although the wisdom of Berenson’s negotiating
tactics may be debated, du Bois’s remark, especially with
the gratuitous reference to Berenson’s “co-religionists,”
contains perhaps a passing nod to certain classic stereo-
types about Jews.
FIG 4: Seven-year-old twin sisters, Ines and Renate Spanier, aboard
the SS St. Louis. Courtesy of The David S. Wyman Institute for
Holocaust Studies.
4. P R I S M : A N I N T E R D I S C I P L I N A R Y J O U R N A L F O R H O L O C A U S T E D U C A T O R S6 6
THE VIRGIN ISLANDS SOLUTION
In the midst of the crisis, Treasury Secretary Henry
Morgenthau, Jr., discussed with Secretary Hull a possible
solution involving the Virgin Islands: Because the islands
were a US territory and therefore not governed by the im-
migration quota system, the passengers might be admit-
ted there, temporarily, as tourists. The Virgin Islands
were just a few hours away from Florida; moreover, in the
wake of Kristallnacht, the governor and legislative assem-
bly of the islands had publicly offered to open their doors
to German Jewish refugees.
Hull shot down the idea on the grounds that the St.
Louis passengers did not have valid return addresses, a
prerequisite for a tourist visa. However, the Roosevelt ad-
ministration actually had more leeway on the tourist visa
issue than it acknowledged. For example, since the pas-
sengers had been required to pay a return fare of $81 in
advance (in case they were turned away from Cuba), the
administration could have chosen to consider that fact to be
evidence they had somewhere to which they could return.
Alternatively, the president could have taken action along
the same lines as his post-Kristallnacht decision to extend
the visas of 15,000 German Jews then in the United States
as tourists, on the grounds that it was unsafe for them to
return to Nazi Germany. Aiding the St. Louis, however,
meant risking criticism from anti-immigration forces, and
President Roosevelt was not willing to take that risk.
As the St. Louis slowly sailed back to Europe, JDC offi-
cials there successfully lobbied the governments of England,
France, Belgium, and the Netherlands to each admit a por-
tion of the passengers. A few US diplomats, such as Robert
Pell of the Intergovernmental Committee on Refugees,
played a minor supporting role in this effort, but the JDC
deserves the lion’s share of the credit for finding havens.
The passengers of the St. Louis understandably re-
joiced when they learned they were not returning to Ger-
many. Even the detention facilities in which some of the
passengers were placed in Belgium and Holland were far
preferable to life under Hitler. Citing the passengers’ ini-
tial expressions of relief, some contemporary Roosevelt
supporters have argued that the refugees were, in effect,
rescued from the Nazis. Yet the findings of Sarah A.
Ogilvie and Scott Miller (2006) of the United States Holo-
caust Memorial Museum suggest otherwise. They inter-
viewed every living survivor of the ship for their book
Refuge Denied and discovered that upon disembarking in
continental Europe, many of the passengers quickly
looked for ways to flee again.
Thus, for example, after Clark Blatteis and his parents
reached Belgium, “Clark’s mother wasted no time in ap-
plying for American visas” (p. 10). Michael Fink and his
parents were sent to Holland, where his father immedi-
ately tried to scrape together enough money to buy per-
mits for them to become construction workers in Chile. A
passenger named Bela (no last name provided) who was
sent to France quickly departed for Hungary because, as
he later explained, “After all, people knew the Nazis could
invade France at any time” (p. 67). Warren and Charlotte
Meyerhoff, taken to Holland, smuggled themselves out of
the Westerbork detention facility and made their way back
to Cuba. The St. Louis exhibit at the Museum of Jewish
Heritage in New York City includes additional anecdotes
of this nature.
How many of the passengers of the St. Louis perished
during the subsequent German occupation of their lands
of refuge? Arthur Morse (1968) did not know—nobody at
that early stage knew—and he did not pretend otherwise.
He wrote, correctly, that
The only St. Louis passengers protected from the Nazi
terror were those who had found sanctuary in Britain.
Many—it is impossible to know how many—died in
the German gas chambers following the Nazi invasion
of Belgium, Holland, and France. (p. 299)
In 1974, journalist Gordon Thomas and television pro-
ducer Max Morgan Witts published what has become the
best-known book about the St. Louis, Voyage of the Damned.
A 1976 film based on the book, costarring Faye Dunaway,
played an important role in acquainting the public with
the fate of the St. Louis and establishing it as the central
symbol of America’s response to the Holocaust. Highlight-
ing the human dimension, Thomas and Witts reconstructed
the story through personal vignettes gleaned from inter-
views with surviving passengers and crew members.
Although their narrative was more fast-paced and dramatic
than Morse’s, they got the basic story right.2
They noted
that if the survival rate of the St. Louis passengers was
similar to that of other Jews in Europe during the Holo-
caust, then nearly all of those who went to England would
have survived, as would have most of those who went to
France and Belgium, and about one-third of those who dis-
embarked in Holland.3
By and large, mainstream historians have been ap-
propriately cautious about the number of fatalities. Classic
works in the field, such as David Wyman’s Paper Walls
(1968), Henry Feingold’s The Politics of Rescue (1970), and
Ronald Sanders’s Shores of Refuge (1988), made no claims
as to the death toll. The matter was finally resolved in the
aforementioned study by Ogilvie and Miller. They found
that of the 620 passengers who went to France, Belgium,
or Holland, 87 emigrated shortly afterwards. Of the 533
who were still in those countries when the Germans in-
vaded in 1940, 254, or about 48%, were murdered (pp. 174–
175). The other passengers, who went to England, sur-
vived.
5. S P R I N G 2 0 1 4 • V O L U M E 6 6 7
A NEW CONTROVERSY
In recent years, several authors have promoted a version
of the St. Louis story much more favorable to President
Roosevelt and his administration as part of a broader effort
to reshape the public’s view of FDR’s response to the Holo-
caust. The most notable of these accounts appears in the
2013 book FDR and the Jews, by Richard Breitman and Al-
lan Lichtman. They make the surprising claim that “there
is no truth to the notion, found in some literature, that
American officials ordered the coast guard to prevent any
passengers from reaching American shores” (pp. 137–138).
The question of the Coast Guard is of some signifi-
cance. Because neither President Roosevelt nor Secretary
of State Hull made any public statement about the St. Lou-
is during the crisis, the action of the Coast Guard consti-
tuted the only visible response by the United States gov-
ernment to the presence of the St. Louis in US waters. As
Deborah Lipstadt (1986) has written: “The only action
taken by the American government was the dispatch of a
Coast Guard cutter when the ship was close to the shore of
Miami” (p. 118). Likewise, Ogilvie and Miller note: “Sev-
eral US Coast Guard cutters surrounded the vessel to
make sure that none of the would-be émigrés attempted to
swim for shore” (p. 3).
In March 2013, four St. Louis survivors issued a public
statement challenging the Breitman–Lichtman claim:
We saw the Coast Guard planes that flew around the
ship to follow its movements. We saw the Coast Guard
cutter that trailed us and made sure the St. Louis did
not come close to the Florida coast. We heard the cut-
ter blaring its warning to the St. Louis to stay away.
Since the Coast Guard was carrying out its job of
guarding the coast against anyone who tried to come
close without permission, the Coast Guard planes and
cutter had clearly been ordered to intercept the St.
Louis and prevent any unauthorized landings of pas-
sengers. (SS St. Louis Legacy Project press release,
March 17, 2013)
Further confirmation of the Coast Guard’s role comes
from the transcripts of Secretary Morgenthau’s conversa-
tions with Secretary Hull about the St. Louis. In those dis-
cussions, Morgenthau made reference to his awareness
that the Coast Guard was already trailing the St. Louis.
THE FORGOTTEN MAN
Unlike other aspects of America’s response to the Holo-
caust, very little new information of significance about
the St. Louis has emerged over the years.
At first glance, Breitman and Lichtman did appear to
have uncovered a bombshell when they published their
suggestion that the initial voyage of the St. Louis was part
of a secret deal in which President Roosevelt had convinced
Cuba to admit Jewish refugees; in exchange, he was to reduce
tariffs on Havana’s sugar exports to America. Breitman
and Lichtman’s source for this claim, however, turned out
to be a celebrity gossip columnist, and more than a dozen
leading scholars of US–Cuban relations and Cuban Jewry
contacted by this author replied that they had never seen
any evidence of a sugar-for-Jews deal.
As for the aforementioned Ogilvie–Miller study, it did
flesh out some missing details, but the basic facts of the
tragic voyage, the muddled negotiations, and the chilly US
response, as first chronicled by Morse 45 years ago, have
stood the test of time. The story of the St. Louis remains a
powerful and instructive symbol of missed opportunities
for rescue and reveals much about the president who pre-
sented himself as the champion of “the forgotten man”
and yet seldom answered when desperate refugees
knocked on America’s door [Fig. 5].
The circumstances surrounding the St. Louis episode
constitute almost a textbook case of the Roosevelt admin-
istration’s prewar response to the plight of Europe’s Jews.
There was no doubt as to the danger the passengers faced
if they were turned away; Kristallnacht had already dem-
onstrated that. The refugees posed no danger to America’s
well-being; indeed, the vast majority had already qualified
for eventual admission to the United States, meaning that
even if they could not find jobs, friends or relatives had
guaranteed they would not become dependent upon gov-
ernment assistance. Although the regular quota for Ger-
man nationals was full in the spring of 1939, there was an
FIG 5: Political Cartoon. 1939. Courtesy of The David S. Wyman
Institute for Holocaust Studies.
6. P R I S M : A N I N T E R D I S C I P L I N A R Y J O U R N A L F O R H O L O C A U S T E D U C A T O R S6 8
obvious solution at hand in the Virgin Islands, whose lead-
ers had set an impressive moral example by unilaterally
offering to open their doors to Jewish refugees. There also
was considerable public sympathy for the passengers, as
the many positive newspaper editorials at the time and
the heartfelt letters of appeal in the files of the State
Department attest [Fig. 6]. That is not to suggest there was
sufficient sympathy to make possible liberalization of the
immigration quotas, but there might have been enough—
with some presidential leadership—to enable their tempo-
rary admission to a US territory out in the Caribbean.
The facts that lay before the Roosevelt administration
during the St. Louis crisis offered the president a stark
choice between, on the one hand, a policy of unnecessary
stinginess and, on the other hand, a policy of minimal
generosity, within the limits of the existing laws, that
would have saved lives at no substantial political risk. In
the case of the St. Louis passengers, the question of whether
they had a safe return address was not black and white.
The president, and his policy advisers, could have opted
to go either way. The return address problem had not
stood in the way when Roosevelt was considering the fate
of 15,000 German Jews who were in the United States in
late 1938 on tourist visas. The president unilaterally ex-
tended their tourist status not because they needed more
time to visit the Grand Canyon but because he recognized
that in the wake of Kristallnacht, their return addresses
were at least temporarily unsafe. He could have acted in
the same spirit to enable the passengers of the St. Louis to
land in the Virgin Islands even though they were not gen-
uine tourists. All that was required in Washington was a
little human desire to help and some creative thinking
along the lines of the post-Kristallnacht “tourists.” Instead,
the return address issue became the administration’s con-
venient device for blocking the admission of refugees
even to those tiny, distant island specks.
The significant number of innocent lives lost when
they could have been saved reminds us of the real-life
consequences when government officials search for rea-
sons to avoid extending a helping hand rather than aspire
to the noble principles for which America has always
stood that are inscribed on the Statue of Liberty. The voy-
age of the St. Louis remains, as former president Bill Clin-
ton (2005) has put it, “one of the darkest chapters in Unit-
ed States history” (Eshman, p. 10).
REFERENCES
Breitman, R., & Lichtman, A. (2013). FDR and the Jews. Boston:
Harvard University Press.
De Hartog, J. (1987). The writer in violent times: The Dutch
underground theatre. Weber Studies, 4 (spring).
Du Bois, C. (1939, June 7). National Archives (Records of the
State Department, 837.55J/39), Washington, DC.
Eshman, R. (2005, February 25). First Steve, Then Bill.
Los Angeles Jewish Journal, p. 10.
Feingold, H. L. (1970). The politics of rescue: The Roosevelt
administration and the Holocaust, 1938–1945. New Brunswick,
NJ: Rutgers University Press.
Feingold, H. L. (1995). Bearing witness: How America and its
Jews responded to the Holocaust. Syracuse, NY: Syracuse
University Press.
Gellman, I. F. (1971). The St. Louis tragedy. American Jewish
Historical Quarterly LXI, pp. 149–154.
Kerry, J. (September 3, 2013). Retrieved from
http://newsdiffs.org/diff/308248/308267/www.washingtonpost.
com/politics/2013/09/03/35ae1048-14ca-11e3-b182-1b3b-
b2eb474c_story.html.
FIG 6: Letter to Eleanor Roosevelt asking her to let the St. Louis
passengers land in America. Courtesy of The David S. Wyman
Institute for Holocaust Studies.
7. S P R I N G 2 0 1 4 • V O L U M E 6 6 9
Lipstadt, D. (1986). Beyond belief: The American press and the
coming of the Holocaust, 1933–1945. New York: Free Press.
Morse, A. D. (1967, November 28). Voyage to doom. Look,
pp. 59–70.
Morse, A. D. (1968). While six million died: A chronicle of American
apathy. New York: Random House.
Ogilvie, S. A., & Miller, S. (2006). Refuge denied: The St. Louis
passengers and the Holocaust. Madison: University of Wisconsin
Press and United States Holocaust Memorial Museum.
Sanders, R. (1988). Shores of refuge: A hundred years of Jewish
emigration. New York: Schocken.
Thomas, G., & Witts, M. M. (1974). Voyage of the damned.
New York: Stein and Day.
Wyman, D. S. (1968). Paper walls: America and the refugee crisis,
1938–1941. Amherst: University of Massachusetts Press.
Zucker, B. (2008). Cecilia Razovsky and the American Jewish
women’s rescue operations in the Second World War. London:
Vallentine Mitchell.
[1] Although many of the St. Louis passengers did ultimately die
in Nazi gas chambers, many survived the Holocaust; the numbers
are clarified in the text.
[2] The film likewise remained largely faithful to the historical
record, despite its invention of a doomed romance between a
Jewish passenger and a German crewman and its erroneous
suggestion, in a note at its conclusion, that most of the passengers
died in the Holocaust.
[3] Ironically, the statistics provided by popularizers Thomas and
Witts were more accurate than those of some well-known
historians who referred to the St. Louis in the years to follow.
Howard M. Sachar (1992), for example, wrote that of the 621
passengers who went to France, Belgium, or Holland, “all but four
perished.” Michael Berenbaum (1993) wrote that aside from those
who were admitted to England, “only a few survived the Holocaust.”
See A History of the Jews in America, by Sachar, 1992, New York:
Knopf, p. 493; and The World Must Know: The History of the
Holocaust as Told in the United States Holocaust Memorial
Museum, by Berenbaum, 1993, Boston: Little, Brown, p. 58.