Uncategorized
‘My Friend Anne Frank’ tells the incredible story of how Anne’s best friend survived the Holocaust
(JTA) — One spring morning in 1934, two little girls followed their mothers to a corner grocery store in Amsterdam. The mothers, hearing each other speak German to their daughters, discovered they were both Jewish refugees who had recently fled Nazi Germany. The two girls peeked shyly at each other from behind their mothers’ skirts, one of them slight with dark, glossy hair, the other taller and fairer.
Those two girls were Anne Frank and Hannah Pick-Goslar. One was to become the most famous victim of the Holocaust, whose diary documented two years in hiding before the Nazis found her family and she perished at the Bergen-Belsen concentration camp at age 15. The other narrowly survived and made her way to pre-state Israel, eventually enjoying a new life that grew to include three children, 11 grandchildren and 33 great-grandchildren.
The day after their grocery store encounter, the girls recognized each other at the Sixth Montessori School in Amsterdam and became instant best friends. They could not predict that their final encounter would come 11 years later, against all odds, at Bergen-Belsen.
Pick-Goslar spent decades telling her story through interviews and lectures, but her recollections have only just been published for the first time in a memoir, “My Friend Anne Frank,” written with the help of journalist Dina Kraft. She did not live to see its publication on June 6: Pick-Goslar died in October, six months into writing the book and two weeks short of her 94th birthday, leaving Kraft to finish her account.
Kraft spoke with the Jewish Telegraphic Agency about the life of Pick-Goslar, who lived out the future stolen from her dear friend.
The conversation with Kraft, a onetime JTA reporter, has been lightly edited for length and clarity.
JTA: What was it like to tell Pick-Goslar’s story together with her?
Kraft: It was a remarkable experience being able to work with her. We had these very intense interviews where I was asking her to really dig back into her memory. A lot of Holocaust survivors, a lot of survivors of trauma, tend to tell their story — not on autopilot, exactly — but they have a script. It’s perfectly understandable, it’s a tool of self-preservation.
So I was asking her to dive deeper and look more intensely within, and that was not always easy. There were times we would finish the interview after a couple of hours and she would say, “I’m just exhausted, I need to lie down.” And I would say, “Me too,” because it was just exhausting — we were recounting very hard moments.
It got to the point where she would come in the morning and say, “I’m having bad dreams again,” and I would say, “Yeah, me too, I’m having bad dreams also.” Because it was so much of trying to step into her shoes and step into her mindset, and also reading very intensely — it was very much a research project too.
How did Pick-Goslar remember her childhood and friendship with Frank before the war?
She remembers life before the war as incredibly warm and loving. They were wrapped up in a supportive familial environment. Although both she and Anne were refugees from Germany, they came over very young — Anne was 4 and Hannah was 5.
Their parents had a hard time adapting, especially the mothers. Hannah’s mother was born and bred in Berlin, very much a creature of German culture. Her father was a high-ranking official in the Weimar government, so they lived very close to the Reichstag. On top of being horrified that they had just been kicked out of this country they viewed as home, Hannah’s family went back 1,000 years in Germany. So they were heartbroken about their country taking this terrible turn into darkness.
But for Hannah and Anne, it was a very nice life.
What kind of person was Frank, according to her friend?
She was very spunky. She had lots to say and she exhausted the adults around her. She was always challenging them, asking difficult questions, prodding, restless and impatient. The girls loved to play Monopoly, but Anne would get restless and walk off, which is frustrating for a friend! They would push back furniture in the house and do gymnastics together. Later on, when the Germans invaded and they only had other Jewish girlfriends to play with, they formed a club to play ping pong and go for ice cream.
Anne was such a know-it-all that Hannah’s mother had a phrase about her. She said, “God knows all, but Anne Frank knows better!”
But Hannah really saw her as a regular kid — she was just her friend, Anne Frank. She was not an icon of any kind, and she seemed more ordinary than she seemed extraordinary.
In July 1942, Pick-Goslar found her friend’s apartment empty. Like everyone else, she was told that the Franks escaped to Switzerland — not knowing they had actually gone into hiding nearby. What happened to Pick-Goslar while Frank went into hiding?
Hannah was deported a year after Anne went into hiding. In that year, she went back to school. The anti-Jewish laws meant that you couldn’t sit on benches, go to swimming pools, be on a tram, ride your bicycle — and you couldn’t go to school with non-Jewish children.
So Hannah and Anne were both fortunate to be accepted to the Jewish Lyceum, considered one of the more prestigious Jewish schools in Amsterdam under German occupation. But in the fall of 1942, the deportations had already begun. So every day there was a different student and friend missing from class, and different teachers and administrators missing. They never knew whether it was because somebody went into hiding or because they had been deported.
Another thing happened at this time. In October, when Hannah was 14 years old, her mother Ruth was pregnant. She was determined not to go to a hospital because there were rumors of people being deported directly from hospitals, so she gave birth at home with a Jewish doctor and Jewish midwife. The baby ended up being stillborn and Hannah’s mother died the next day.
As more and more Jews were deported, Hannah was protected for a while. Her family secured a pair of South American passports, and they were also on the so-called “Palestine list.” The idea was that eventually they would be part of a prisoner swap between the British and the Germans — German soldiers for “exchange Jews” who would be sent to Palestine, which was under the British mandate.
Pick-Goslar survived to have three children, 11 grandchildren and 33 great-grandchildren. (Eric Sultan/The Lonka Project)
So for a while, Pick-Goslar’s family believed they might be spared. How did she end up at the Bergen-Belsen concentration camp in northern Germany?
By the end, the Germans rounded up all the remaining Jews from Amsterdam, including those who had special stamps in their passports. By June 1943, Hannah’s family was in one of the final roundups of Jews in Amsterdam.
First they went to Westerbork, a transit camp in Holland on the border with Germany. It was basically a holding purgatory, and from there people were deported either to Auschwitz or Sobibor — in which they were almost certainly killed — or if they were luckier, to Theresienstadt or Bergen-Belsen, which were concentration camps but not death camps. Eventually, after several months in Westerbork, Hannah’s family was deported to Bergen-Belsen.
It was bearable in the first few months and they were still fed, though not much. But by February of 1945, the Russians were approaching in the east and the Germans were trying to move people from outer concentration camps into Germany. So Bergen-Belsen swelled to many times its size and became incredibly overcrowded. There was less and less food and water, and typhus started raging through the camp.
How did Pick-Goslar and Frank find each other again at Bergen-Belsen?
Around this time, a tent camp was erected across from Hannah’s part of the camp. People saw other women speaking different languages — Hungarian, Polish, Greek, and eventually Dutch as well. They were emaciated and skeletal.
The Germans forbade going out to talk at the fence and filled it with straw, so that people wouldn’t see each other anymore. But the women found a way to communicate, and word got to Hannah that Anne Frank was on the other side of the fence. Of course, she didn’t believe it, because the Frank family had left the impression that they were in Switzerland. But she decided to go find out for herself, even though it was extremely dangerous — you’d be shot if you went to the fence.
She crept up quietly and said, “Hallo, anybody there?” Then she heard a voice from across the fence, and by chance it was Auguste van Pels, one of the people who was in hiding with Anne’s family. She said almost casually, “Oh, you must be here for Anne,” and she brought Anne from the tent.
What were their last memories together?
Anne was coming from Auschwitz, so she was a broken shadow of her former self. She was freezing, starving and wailing that she was all alone in the world. She assumed that both of her parents were dead at this point. She didn’t know that just a week or two before, her father had been liberated from Auschwitz.
Imagine two girls on opposite sides of this fence — two very loved, coddled girls, who did not know deprivation, but now were completely in the throes of the worst days of the war, completely dehumanized and mistreated. There they were on opposite sides of this fence, best friends, sobbing.
Anne begged Hannah to bring her some food and Hannah said yes immediately, without knowing how she would get it. She said that she would come back in a couple of nights. And there was this amazing moment of female solidarity: The women in her barrack were so moved by the story of this reunion, they wanted to help — so from under a pillow here, hidden in a suitcase there, they gathered the little they had to give and put everything into a sock.
Out went Hannah again, a night or two later, to the fence. When she threw the sock over, she suddenly heard footsteps and then a scream — Anne had just lost the package to a fellow prisoner who took it out of her hands. She was distraught and couldn’t stop crying, but Hannah said, “Just stop crying, I’ll come back again with food.”
So she went back a few days later again with more food collected from her barrack. This time they triangulated better and Anne caught the package. That turned out to be the last time they ever met.
How did Hannah remember the end of the war?
At the very end of the war, the Germans forced everybody who could still walk at Bergen-Belsen onto a couple of different trains. These trains were meant to go to Theresienstadt, where they would be killed.
Hannah was put on a train with her little sister Gabi, whom she was trying to keep alive. It was a harrowing 13-day ride throughout the eastern German countryside. The people were very sick and starving, with no food or water for the journey. There was one especially awful moment when the man next to Hannah tried to spill his bowl of diarrhea outside the door of the train, but instead it splashed all over her.
She was so ill with typhus that she eventually passed out around day 13. When she woke up, people were already off the train. She asked what was going on, and someone said, “Don’t you know? We were liberated by the Russians.”
What did Pick-Goslar make of the tremendous legacy left by Frank’s diary? Did she feel that her friend was correctly understood?
For her, reading the diary was a revelation. She felt like she was sort of reunited with this old friend, which was a very powerful feeling, but also very sad. She saw a girl developing into a young woman whom she would still like to know. She was very grateful that Anne’s diary had been recovered, that so many people got to know her story, and that her diary became a gateway to learning more about the Holocaust.
I think she was a little upset by the sanitized version of Anne Frank. She spoke often about the famous passage in her diary, which is repeated and painted on walls and put on postcards: “In spite of everything, I still believe that people are really good at heart.” Hannah said that if Anne had survived the hell of Auschwitz and Bergen-Belsen, she did not think she would stand by that statement anymore. I think she was concerned about some level of oversimplification.
She was very gratified that Anne’s voice never died and still lives on through her words, but she also wanted people to have a richer and more contextual understanding of the slaughter of millions of people that was the Holocaust.
—
The post ‘My Friend Anne Frank’ tells the incredible story of how Anne’s best friend survived the Holocaust appeared first on Jewish Telegraphic Agency.
Uncategorized
Hungarian Filmmaker Says ‘Orgy of Antisemitism Overtaking the West,’ Feels ‘Ostracized’ by Film Industry
Hungarian film director László Nemes attends the photocall of “Moulin” at the 79th Cannes Film Festival in Cannes, France. Photo: Marco Barada / SOPA Images via Reuters Connect
Hungarian Jewish filmmaker László Nemes talked about antisemitism, the “politicization of cinema” regarding Jewish subject matters, and what he believes is an unhealthy “obsession with Jews” in a new interview with The Guardian published on Monday.
Nemes’s latest film, “Moulin,” which is about French resistance leader Jean Moulin, debuted at the Cannes Film Festival on Sunday.
His 2025 film “Orphan” is about a teenage Jewish boy who survived the Holocaust by being hidden in an orphanage. While he searches for his missing father, he discovers the truth about how his mother survived the Holocaust. The film has so far not secured a US distribution deal, and Nemes believes it is because of the film’s Jewish subject matter at a time when tensions are high around the world.
“You should be able to talk about these things without being ostracized,” the filmmaker told The Guardian, adding that he feels “a little bit” ostracized by the industry.
“Even some response [to ‘Orphan’] from the media smells of an ideological standpoint,” he noted, explaining that he thinks the film was “ignored” at last year’s Venice Film Festival.
“There’s an orgy of antisemitism, an absolute, shameless orgy of antisemitism, overtaking the West,” added the director, whose grandmother is a Holocaust survivor. He also described a “race obsession” and a “puritan, moralizing, self-righteousness” ideology that he believes has taken over the cultural world and online.
Nemes won an Oscar in 2016 for his debut feature film “Son of Saul,” which follows a day and a half in the life of an Auschwitz concentration camp prisoner who is forced to clear out the corpses of fellow Jews from the gas chambers and place the bodies in ovens to be incinerated. The film won an array of awards, including the Oscar for best foreign language film. When asked how he thinks “Son of Saul” would be accepted if it was released today, Nemes told The Guardian: “I don’t even think it would make the [Oscar] shortlist today. Because of the politicization of cinema, because anything that’s Jewish is now considered … Nobody would touch it with a 10-feet pole.”
He also said he thinks boycotting Israeli film institutions, which thousands of Hollywood figures have pledged to do, is “anti-humanist regression.”
“And because it’s not identified as this, I think it’s very effective at spreading,” the filmmaker said. “And one of its very potent vectors has been antisemitism … The Jew has always been [cast as] the sort of internal enemy, and I think now [the idea of] the Jew as the internal enemy of the West has reached the dimensions of European antisemitism before the takeover by the National Socialist [Nazi] party.”
He further criticized the thousands of film industry professionals who support cultural boycotts of Israel or protest Israel’s military actions in the Gaza Strip, which target Hamas terrorists in the enclave who orchestrated the massacre in Israel on Oct. 7, 2023.
“Obviously, they prefer to attach themselves to an ideology that’s been around for a long time and that pretends to be humanitarian, but it’s actually not what it purports to be,” Nemes said. “Had they really cared about the people in this region, they would have revolted against these people being ruled by a totalitarian death cult that’s actually killing its own population and at unprecedented levels.”
He believes there is an “obsession with Jews,” and when referring to the difficulty in finding a US distributor for “Orphan,” he said: “People [would] ask me about Gaza, instead of, you know, asking about the movie. [They ask] if I signed this or that petition.”
“It’s tiring to hear the overclass of Hollywood lecture us morally,” Nemes added. “Not only in Hollywood, but in the world. There’s definitely an overclass of people cut from reality, and they are eager to preach to us … Sometimes I think it’s better if actors don’t, you know, speak up that much, because I don’t think they’re very much qualified to talk about anything. They should try to be actors, the best they can, and not become activists. It’s not really their role.”
While speaking to The Guardian, the Hungarian director also criticized fellow Jewish filmmaker Jonathan Glazer for the speech he made at the 2024 Academy Awards. When the British director went on stage to accept his Oscar for the Holocaust-focused historical drama “The Zone of Interest,” Glazer said he and the film’s producer James Wilson “stand here as men who refute their Jewishness and the Holocaust being hijacked by an occupation which has led to conflict for so many innocent people, whether the victims of Oct. 7 in Israel or the ongoing attack on Gaza.”
Nemes told The Guardian that making a film about the Holocaust “imposes on its maker a need for responsibility.”
“I didn’t feel that he was responsible at all,” Nemes said, referring to the Glazer. “I thought he wanted to please that overclass of Hollywood with the line of good, righteous thought … I don’t believe that he understands anything about the reality of the region, yet he feels the need to do it. And I think it’s very presumptuous, very condescending.”
Nemes is a graduate of the Sam Spiegel International Film Lab, which is part of the Jerusalem Sam Spiegel Film & Television School.
Uncategorized
UN Special Rapporteur Francesca Albanese Urges Germany to Get Over Holocaust Guilt in Antisemitic Tirade
Francesa Albanese, the United Nations special rapporteur on the situation of human rights in the Palestinian territories, speaks at a conference, “A Cartography of Genocide: Israel’s Conduct in Gaza,” at the Roma Tre University, in Rome, Italy, Oct. 6, 2025. Photo: REUTERS/Remo Casilli
Francesca Albanese, the United Nations’ special rapporteur on the human rights situation in the Palestinian territories, has published a bizarre social media post mixing antisemitic rhetoric with Holocaust revisionism, appearing to urge Germany to move beyond its historical guilt while casting Jews as arrogant and viewing themselves as morally superior to Europeans.
In a Facebook post published on Sunday, Albanese — who has an extensive history of using her role to denigrate Israel and seemingly rationalize the Palestinian terrorist group Hamas’s attacks against the Jewish state — called on Germans to absolve themselves of responsibility for the Nazi regime’s crimes and the historical burden of guilt tied to them.
The anti-Israel UN official argued that modern Germany’s efforts to come to terms with its past through strong support for the Jewish state do not reflect genuine remorse.
Instead, she claimed this stance reflects a “historical superiority syndrome” that has never been addressed and serves as a “convenient mask” for Germany’s return to the international community.
“The Western club accepted them because they proved themselves capable of tolerating certain members of the group that were previously ‘undesirable,’ and so they accepted the Jews, but not all of them,” Albanese wrote. “They learned that to survive in this world they must be superior. No longer a fragile minority. No longer a people in exile. No longer the people of the book. But the chosen people. ‘Chosen to rule?’ One might wonder when looking at what Israel has become.”
She then went on to claim that Germany does not respect Jews unless they are Zionist and behaves like a “socially deranged” state that enacts discriminatory laws, while calling on its citizens to free themselves from what she described as an obligation to Israel.
“I know Germans can do better,” Albanese concluded. “I have seen them. But they are called upon emancipating themselves. This is their chance.”
This latest controversy is far from the first involving Albanese, who has a mandate from the UN to advise the international body on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. In her position, which she has held since 2022, Albanese has faced consistent criticism over a pattern of incendiary anti-Israel remarks, with officials accusing her of inciting violence and hatred.
Earlier this year, top diplomats from Austria, Germany, Italy, the Czech Republic, and France called for Albanese’s resignation after she delivered yet another inflammatory tirade against Israel.
During an Al Jazeera forum in Doha, Albanese described the state of Israel as “the common enemy of humanity” and accused the country of “planning and carrying out a genocide” during its defensive war against Hamas.
“It’s also true that never before has the global community seen the challenges that we all face, we who do not control large amounts of financial, algorithms, and weapons,” Albanese said at the time, appearing to invoke a long-standing antisemitic conspiracy that Jews control wealth and technology.
She also accused Western nations of being complicit in the so-called “genocide” by supplying arms and financing Israel, while claiming that Western media helps defend the Jewish state by “amplifying the pro-apartheid, genocidal narrative.”
Albanese has previously referred to a “Jewish lobby” controlling the US and Europe, compared Israel to Nazi Germany, and stated that Hamas’s violence against Israelis — including rape, murder, and kidnapping — needs to be “put in context.”
Despite her history of antisemitic statements, the UN has consistently refused to fire Albanese, citing her status as one of its “independent experts.”
Since taking on her UN role, Albanese has been at the center of controversy due to what critics, including US and European lawmakers, have described as antisemitic and anti-Israel public remarks.
Last year, the UN Human Rights Council (UNHRC) faced intense pressure to block Albanese’s reappointment for another three-year term, with several countries and NGOs urging UN members to oppose the move due to her controversial remarks and alleged pro-Hamas stance.
Despite significant pressure and opposition, her mandate was confirmed to extend until 2028.
Last year, the UN launched a probe into Albanese for allegedly accepting a trip to Australia funded by pro-Hamas organizations.
In the past, she has also celebrated the anti-Israel protesters rampaging across US college campuses during the 2023-2024 academic year, saying they represent a “revolution” and give her “hope.”
Uncategorized
Kuwaiti Jiu-Jitsu Gold Medalist Refuses Handshake With Israeli Athlete: ‘We Do Not Respect Them At All’
An aerial view shows Kuwait City, Kuwait, March 16, 2020. Photo: Reuters / Stephanie McGehee.
Kuwaiti jiu-jitsu gold medalist Jassim Alhatem refused to shake hands with Israeli bronze medalist Yoav Manor at the Abu Dhabi Grand Slam Jiu-Jitsu World Tour on Friday, saying later in a video posted on social media that he has no respect for an athlete from Israel.
Alhatem won all four of his bouts in the men’s blue belt amateur under-77-kilogram category at the competition and took home the gold, while Manor earned the bronze for winning three of his four matches. At the medal ceremony, Alhatem refused to shake Manor’s hand and also declined to pose with him for the traditional photo of all the winners.
Alhatem later defended his actions in an Arabic-language video posted on Instagram. He described Israel as a “Zionist entity” and claimed he told Manor before the award ceremony, “I don’t want to know you and I don’t want to greet you. Stay on your side and I on my side, so no problem happens,” according to an English translation of the video. He further claimed that “as a Muslim,” he will not respect athletes from Israel and does not believe in separating politics from sports.
“These types we do not respect,” Alhatem said. “As Kuwaitis, we do not respect them at all … as a Muslim man, [you] must have principle. It is not right for me to play with them or respect them. It is not right. You as a Muslim must have a principle, even if you told me sport is separate from politics. No, no. There is no [separation]. If that were true, Russia wouldn’t be banned right now from participating in the Olympics.”
The International Olympic Committee has allowed eligible Russian athletes to compete as neutrals and not under the Russian flag.
The Israeli delegation at the Abu Dhabi Grand Slam Jiu-Jitsu World Tour said in a statement to the Israeli publication Ynet that “despite the tension, the organizers and Emirati hosts tried to calm the situation and persuade the Kuwaiti competitor to take part in the medal ceremony, but he chose to leave the podium area. Manor, for his part, remained focused on the sporting achievement: a bronze medal at a prestigious international competition, after an impressive day of bouts against opponents from around the world.”
Members of the Israeli delegation added that Alhatem said to Manor, “You Israelis kill children,” and “If you had reached the final, I would not have competed against you.”
Amir Boaron, the coach of Israel’s national jiu-jitsu team, also told Ynet that Alhatem called Manor a “child murderer.”
“Yoav continued trying to shake his hand and behave like an athlete. It is important for me to stress that the Emirati hosts welcomed us wonderfully and even apologized for the incident,” Boaron added.
The Abu Dhabi Grand Slam Jiu-Jitsu World Tour is organized by the United Arab Emirates, which normalized diplomatic relations with Israel when it signed the 2020 Abraham Accords, while Kuwait does not have diplomatic ties with Israel. Senior Kuwaiti officials have said the country “will be the last to normalize ties” with the Jewish state.