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
Janet Mills Drops Out of Maine Senate Democratic Primary, Clearing Path for Anti-Israel Candidate Graham Platner
Democratic US Senate candidate Graham Platner speaks at a campaign town hall meeting in Ogunquit, Maine, US, Oct. 22, 2025. Photo: REUTERS/Brian Snyder
Maine Gov. Janet Mills on Thursday announced that she is ending her campaign in the Democratic primary for US Senate, a move that effectively clears the path for progressive challenger Graham Platner to secure the nomination in a high-stakes race against incumbent Republican Sen. Susan Collins.
In a statement, Mills cited the financial demands of a competitive statewide campaign, acknowledging she lacked the resources to continue. Her withdrawal came after weeks of trailing Platner in grassroots fundraising and momentum, despite support from establishment Democrats.
“While I have the drive and passion, commitment and experience, and above all else — the fight — to continue on, I very simply do not have the one thing that political campaigns unfortunately require today: the financial resources,” Mills said.
“That is why today I have made the incredibly difficult decision to suspend my campaign for the United States Senate,” she continued.
The development represents a sharp ideological shift in the Democratic field. Mills, a two-term governor, had been viewed by party leaders as a pragmatic candidate with broad appeal and a traditionally strong stance on US alliances, including support for Israel. Mills’s candidacy failed to gain traction in the state, with observers pointing to a Democratic primary electorate that is both incensed and deeply desirous for a shakeup from the status quo.
Platner, in contrast to Mills, has built his campaign on an anti-establishment message and drawn increasing scrutiny in part for his rhetoric on the Middle East. Some of his past statements criticizing Israel have alarmed more centrist Democrats and foreign policy observers, who argue his framing downplays Israel’s security concerns and risks alienating key constituencies in a general election.
Platner has repeatedly accused Israel of “genocide” in Gaza and vowed to vote against further military assistance to the Jewish state. Earlier this month, Platner accused Israel of “exterminating” people in Gaza and refused to clarify his stance on whether Israel should remain a Jewish state. Most of his criticisms of Israel’s military conduct in Gaza omit any mention of the Hamas terrorist organization, framing Israel as an aggressor with intent of wiping out the Palestinian population.
Further, Platner came under scrutiny last year after it was revealed that the Democratic insurgent possesses a tattoo of a Totemkopf — a symbol historically used by Nazi military units. Though Platner has emphatically denied any knowledge of the tattoo’s connections to Nazism, skeptics have pointed out that the oyster farmer identifies as a military historian, raising serious doubts about his claims.
Concerns about Platner’s conduct and Totemkompf tattoo are already emerging as a potential liability in a race Democrats had hoped to make competitive. Collins, a moderate Republican with a long record of electoral success in Maine, has historically attracted independents and crossover voters, groups that could be wary of candidates perceived as ideologically extreme.
Mills’s exit also highlights a broader dynamic within the Democratic Party, as insurgent candidates in several primaries continue to gain traction over more traditional figures. While that energy has reshaped races across the country, it has also raised questions about general election viability in closely divided states.
Many observers have argued that Platner’s ascendance in the Democratic Party serves as another signal that the party is shifting further away from Israel and becoming more tolerant of antisemitism. Across the country, support for Israel has emerged as a litmus test within Democratic primary competitions, with candidates vowing to curtail support for Israel and being pressured to condemn the Jewish state as a perpetrator of “genocide.”
Despite Platner’s vulnerabilities and personal baggage, he has racked up a bevy of endorsements from Democratic power-players such as Rep. Ro Khanna (CA) and Sen. Elizabeth Warren (MA). On Thursday, the Democratic Party officially endorsed Platner as the nominee to take on Collins.
As of now, polling indicates a close race in the Maine general election, with several polls showing Platner with a narrow lead over Collins. However, the Republican National Committee (RNC) has not yet aired ads against Platner, and the Republicans are expected to weaponize Platner’s history of controversial commentary in the lead-up to Election Day in November.
Uncategorized
Analysis: As Democrats unite behind Platner, Schumer’s future as leader faces tests
National Democrats on Thursday moved swiftly to unite behind Graham Platner — a progressive candidate whose past Nazi-linked tattoo and sharp criticism of Israel have alarmed some Jewish groups — after he became the presumptive nominee for Maine’s Senate seat.
The move made political sense. Platner, a Marine veteran and oyster farmer, had already been leading in polls against Gov. Janet Mills, who dropped out of the race on Thursday, citing fundraising struggles. Once Platner became the de facto Democratic nominee against incumbent Republican Sen.Susan Collins, party unity was all but automatic.
But that unity comes with serious risks.
Joel Rubin, a Democratic commentator and foreign policy expert, called Platner’s candidacy for a much-desired seat a “nightmare scenario” for the party.
“For Jewish Democrats, wanting to defeat Collins, to have a candidate who makes them very uncomfortable on Jewish issues could potentially dampen support for him,” Rubin said in an interview. “Typically, Jewish Democrats are the most enthusiastic of democratic constituencies for Democratic candidates.”
Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer, who had recruited Mills to run, is focused on winning back the majority, and Maine is a must-win in the pursuit to flip at least four Republican seats. “After years of allowing Trump’s abuses of power, Senator Collins has never been more vulnerable and we will work with the presumptive Democratic nominee Graham Platner to defeat her,” Schumer said in a joint statement with Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand of New York, who heads the Democratic campaign arm.
Schumer navigates new tensions
Schumer could play a pivotal role in mobilizing national donors, including Jewish donors, to support the Platner campaign.
Nonetheless, Schumer, who has seen his popularity decline since he supported a Republican spending bill to avert a shutdown last year, may be helping build a majority that won’t back him, as his longtime support for Israel increasingly becomes a liability in a party where many voters object to the United States providing funds to the Jewish state.
Platner has aligned himself with a new guard of candidates who could emerge from competitive primaries ready to challenge Democratic leadership — as well as the longstanding Democratic consensus in support of Israel.
Abdul El-Sayed, a U.S. Senate candidate from Michigan rising in the polls, and Zach Wahls, a progressive candidate from Iowa, have both said they oppose Schumer as leader.
These insurgents could also alienate moderate and pro-Israel Jewish voters in closely contested races in the fall. Figures like Platner and El-Sayed have adopted language and positions that would have been politically risky — if not disqualifying — in earlier cycles. Now, those stances are survivable.
And even if they win their races in the general election and Schumer stays on as leader, his role is getting harder to maintain as the party’s base has shifted, especially amid the wars in Gaza and Iran.
For years, Schumer has cast himself as an institutional anchor on issues important to the Jewish community, including support for Israel. In a speech for Jewish audiences, he bragged about preserving Democratic unity on Israel aid. In 2024, he told the Forward that “having a majority leader who’s committed to Israel is vital for Israel’s relationship with the U.S.”
But shifting dynamics suggest the balance may be slipping.
Earlier this month, 40 Senate Democrats voted to block $295 million for the transfer of bulldozers — used by the Israeli military to demolish homes in the West Bank and Gaza — and 36 of them also supported a measure to block the sale of 1,000-pound bombs to the Jewish state. Those counts shattered a previous high of 27 Democrats who backed a similar pair of resolutions last year.
Schumer was in the minority of his party on both votes.
If a future roster of Democratic senators includes more legislators elected on platforms critical of Israel and skeptical of party leadership, Schumer’s ability to manage internal divisions could be tested in ways it hasn’t been before. Schumer came under fire from progressives in February after telling a Jewish group that he will keep “fighting” for military assistance to Israel.
In a recent interview with Politico, Sanders asserted he has now become the leader for Senate Democrats on Israel policy. “I mean, we got 40 votes, and Schumer got seven,” he said. “We have more support for our position than Chuck has for his.”
What Jewish Democrats are watching
For many Jewish voters, Platner’s rise and the party’s embrace of him are another signal of changes many are finding hard to swallow.
Platner faced backlash last year after acknowledging that a black skull-and-crossbones tattoo on his chest resembled a Nazi symbol. He has since covered it up. In past Reddit posts, Platner made incendiary comments, including in defending a man with a Nazi SS lightning bolt tattoo who impersonated a federal officer at a Black Lives Matter protest in Las Vegas in 2020.
Last month, Platner accused Israel of committing genocide in Gaza and suggested the U.S. should cut off all aid to Israel.
Platner has done some outreach to the Jewish community across Maine. Recently, his campaign hosted a Passover Seder in Bath, Maine with some 50 community members, during which he discussed rising antisemitism. It was co-hosted with Steven Koltai, the state chair of the progressive Jewish political fundraising group J Street, who is a key Platner supporter.
For now, Democrats have little choice but to unite behind the presumptive nominee. But if candidates like Platner help deliver a majority, the real test will be holding it together.
The post Analysis: As Democrats unite behind Platner, Schumer’s future as leader faces tests appeared first on The Forward.
Uncategorized
Hamas Exploits Gaza Ceasefire to Tighten Civilian Control, Rebuild Military Power as Second Phase Talks Stall
Palestinians displaced during the two-year Israel-Hamas war shelter at a tent camp in Khan Younis in the southern Gaza Strip, Feb. 10, 2026. Photo: REUTERS/Ramadan Abed
As the second phase of the Gaza ceasefire agreement remains stalled, Israeli officials warn that the Palestinian terrorist group Hamas is quietly exploiting the pause in fighting to tighten its control over civilian life while simultaneously rebuilding its military capabilities behind the scenes.
Under the leadership of military wing commander and de facto Gaza ruler Izz ad-Din al-Haddad, Hamas is reinforcing its authority across the enclave, further undermining already fragile efforts to advance the truce.
Al-Haddad is said to be operating three parallel systems intended to secure the terrorist group’s survival and restore its military capabilities, according to a report by the Israeli news outlet Walla, which cited security sources.
The first line of effort seems to focus on reestablishing Hamas’s civilian governance and restoring its authority across the war-torn enclave, with its presence still visibly entrenched through checkpoints, strict regulation of goods, and the takeover of key civilian institutions, including hospitals.
Under the ceasefire, the Israeli military currently controls 53 percent of Gaza, while Hamas remains entrenched in the nearly half of Gazan territory it still controls, where the vast majority of the population lives.
The Palestinian terrorist group has also been reactivating internal security mechanisms to enforce day-to-day order while carrying out extensive intelligence operations aimed at identifying alleged collaborators with Israel and any opposition.
Hamas’s second line of effort has been focused on a violent internal campaign against armed militias and local gangs, particularly in southern Gaza, as the group seeks to reassert control and shore up its weakened position by targeting Palestinians it labels as “lawbreakers and collaborators with Israel.”
With its security control tightening, Hamas’s brutal crackdown has escalated, sparking widespread clashes and violence as the group seeks to seize weapons and eliminate any opposition.
A third line of effort reportedly centers on rebuilding military capabilities, including recruiting new operatives, conducting training both in the field and at command sites, restoring intelligence and surveillance systems, and rebuilding underground infrastructure and weapons stockpiles.
Israeli officials estimate that Hamas’s military wing, the al-Qassam Brigades, is rebuilding its forces, with its ranks now totaling roughly 27,000 members.
Despite Israeli intelligence assessments that Hamas’s smuggling capabilities have been significantly degraded, the group is reportedly seeking to rebuild its arsenal through local means by recovering Israeli Air Force munitions remnants and converting them into improvised explosive devices.
The Islamist group is also attempting to revive rocket and mortar production using makeshift materials, while reorganizing stockpiles buried under rubble or left largely intact.
Israeli officials have repeatedly warned that Hamas’s ongoing rebuilding efforts are allowing the group to retain control over much of the war-torn enclave and steadily sustain its influence despite over two years of military conflict.
According to a report by the Arabic newspaper Asharq Al-Awsat, a new draft proposal has been presented to Israel and Hamas, with talks potentially beginning this week on moving forward with the second phase of US President Donald Trump’s Gaza peace plan.
Earlier this year, the US-backed plan to end the war in Gaza hit major roadblocks after proposals surfaced that would allow Hamas to retain some small arms.
Israel has previously warned that the Islamist group must fully disarm for the second phase of the ceasefire to move forward, pointing to tens of thousands of rifles and an active network of underground tunnels still under the terrorist group’s control.
If Hamas does not give up its weapons, Israeli officials have vowed not to withdraw troops from Gaza any further or approve any rebuilding efforts, effectively stalling the ceasefire agreement.
The new draft allegedly proposes creating an “Implementation Verification Committee,” to be formed under Nickolay Mladenov, the high representative for Gaza on Trump’s Board of Peace, bringing together guarantor states, the International Stabilization Force, and a Peace Council to ensure compliance by all parties.
Under this proposed draft, the Peace Council would be granted authority over Gaza’s governance, reconstruction, and development until a reformed Palestinian Authority is able to resume its responsibilities.
The document also reportedly states that Hamas and other extremist Palestinian factions would have no role in governing the Gaza Strip, and that governance would be based on “one authority, one law, and one weapon,” as all armed groups would cease military activity and a phased disarmament process would transfer weapons to the incoming body.
By this framework, Israel’s withdrawal would take place in stages under an agreed timetable, contingent on verifiable progress in the process of disarmament.