Scrapbookpages Blog

January 21, 2011

let me tell you about the Jewish settlement in Nisko, Poland

Filed under: Holocaust, World War II — Tags: , — furtherglory @ 7:36 am

When did Hitler decide on the genocide of the Jews in Europe?  Nobody knows because he didn’t put it in writing.  One thing we do know is that, in the 1930s, there were proposals, by other European leaders, to resettle the Jews in Uganda, Madagascar or Biro Bidjan in Siberia.  In other words, any place besides Palestine.

After the conquest of Poland in 1939, Germany got in on it, with a settlement for the Jews in Nisko, a little town in Poland.   The settlement quickly failed because of poor prior planning.   

Before World War II, the Polish Nationalists had asked the French right-wing parties to back the idea of a mass emigration of the Polish Jews for a settlement on the island of Madagascar. At the same time, in the Soviet Union, Stalin had launched the project of the Jewish Republic of Biro Bidjan, located in Siberia.

This information is from an article, written by Dr. Wolf Murmelstein; here is a quote from the article:

The Arab Group in Palestine started a campaign of armed attacks against the Jewish settlements there. From 1933 on, the Fascist government of Italy – being hostile to the socialist-wing majority in the Jewish Agency – had granted the necessary arms supplies. The Mufti, El Husseyni, obviously considered that, while Mussolini could grant material help, Hitler had the possibility to address Jewish emigration, from Germany and Eastern Europe, to destinations far away from Palestine.

Indeed the Nazi Foreign Organization called attention to a possible alliance with Arab Nationalist Parties – which were ideologically alike – so in Palestine as in other countries. As the official Foreign Office could not be directly involved, contacts had to be taken care of by the SD, the SS security service, led by the terrible Reinhard von Heydrich, who sent, in November 1937, Adolf Eichmann, already a “specialist for Zionist affairs,” to Palestine and Egypt for talks, whose results can only be conjectured.

The very moment to show the Arab friends how Nazi Germany could address Jewish emigration to a destination far away from Palestine came in October 1939 after Poland had been overrun. On October 6th, Hitler, in his speech before the Reichstag, offering in this manner peace talks to the Western Allies, spoke about the new assessment of Poland and mentioned vaguely the idea of a Jewish Settlement Area there.

In the same days of October, a transport of Jewish men of working age from Vienna and Bohemia-Moravia had to be set up, and some leading Community Officials – Murmelstein from Vienna and Edelstein from Prague – with other staff members – had to join. On October 19, 1939, this first transport reached the station of Nisko, a little town in the Lublin area, near the border between the German and the Soviet zones of Poland. After a long march, the group reached a meadow, their destination. The following day, Eichmann gave a speech about building shanties, setting up a health service, an organization to start, etc. as “otherwise it should mean to die.”

In a personal talk, Murmelstein asked about the means available, realizing that there was nothing, as Eichmann advised only: “kick the Polish peasant out and settle in his house.” This seemed to be madness, but a Jewish official, within this mess and ignoring, of course, the political background, could not appreciate the method there was in it.

In those days, other transports arrived; people had been led by armed SS men for some miles and then ordered to disperse: colonization by dispersion of people. A group had been directed right into the marsh; wounded persons lying around had been picked up by the peasants; some brave man had been able to cross the border line towards the Soviet zone.

Murmelstein, after some days, obtained an authorization to leave the camp to look for accommodation opportunities; clearly the very intent was to reach Lublin, asking the Community there for help. In order to have official evidence of efforts performed to find out accommodation opportunities, Murmelstein asked the area prefect for a hearing in order to ask for assent to use some abandoned building as accommodation. As the prefect stated he had no information about things going on, it appeared possible to let local authorities stop the Eichmann action. Murmelstein therefore referred to the October 6th Hitler speech and then to the advice to “kick the Polish peasant out and settle.” The Eichmann march order did not allow putting Murmelstein and his group under arrest, so the prefect ordered them to go to Lublin without any further delay and wait there for instructions.

The Lublin Community leaders were surprised, learning about things going on nearby. Important is that Area Commander SS Colonel Strauch, did not know anything about the Eichmann action. After ten days, Strauch ordered Murmelstein and his colleagues: Return to Nisko for instructions.

Eichmann, at Nisko, sent the leading Jewish officials home in order to catch every possible further emigration opportunity. From Vienna, Prague and Berlin, some thousand persons, until March 1941, could still emigrate during increasing difficulties. No further transports were scheduled to arrive in Nisko any more. The 450 workers returned home after six months. The camp had been set up for the transit of Germans returning from Eastern European countries to the Reich.

Dr. Wolf Murmelstein was a child in the Theresienstadt ghetto; he is the son of Dr. Benjamin Murmelstein, the last Elder of the Theresienstadt ghetto.  He wrote five essays which he sent to me several years ago for publication on my web site; you can read all five of the essays here.

I was very surprised to learn about the early plans to settle the Jews in Nisko, Poland because this proves that the genocide of the Jews was not planned until some time after October 1939.

The house where the Wannsee conference took place

On January 20, 1942 a conference was held at a mansion in the Berlin suburb of Wannsee.  The subject of this Conference was The Final Solution to the Jewish Question, which the Nazis claimed to be the “transportation to the east” or “evacuation to the east” (nach dem Osten abgeshoben) of the Jews in Europe.

In the minutes of the meeting, nothing was written about killing the Jews, but the innocuous words used in this document are now regarded by Holocaust historians as euphemisms for the extermination, or genocide, of the European Jews. When the Presiding Judge at Eichmann’s trial in Israel asked him what the men at the conference had talked about, Eichmann answered, “The discussion covered killing, elimination, and annihilation.”

On the basis of Eichmann’s testimony, it is now accepted that the minutes of the Wannsee conference were written with euphemisms, instead of the actual words used at the conference.

By January 1942, when the Wannsee conference was held, Hitler was in a position to implement his  goal of the extermination (Ausrottung) of all the Jews in Europe, the plan that was code named The Final Solution to the Jewish Question.  By late 1941, the Nazi empire extended from the Arctic Circle to the Sahara Desert and from the Pyrenees mountain range to the Ural mountain range. The Germans controlled most of Western Europe and in Eastern Europe, they had conquered all of Poland, the Ukraine, White Russia, and the three Baltic states: Latvia, Estonia, and Lithuania. Most importantly, they were in control of territory a thousand kilometers into Russia and they were on the verge of defeating the Soviet Union.

Germany was then called the Greater German Reich.  It began with the annexation of Austria and the Sudetenland in what is now the Czech Republic in 1938, Silesia in Poland in 1939, and Luxembourg, along with the provinces of Alsace and Lorraine in France, in 1940. Ethnic Germans from Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania had been relocated to the area in western Poland which had been annexed into the Greater German Reich.

Hitler’s ultimate goal was to unite all the ethnic Germans into one country, and to unite Europe against the threat of Communism. Considering that the Nazis had many allies, including Italy, Slovakia, Hungary and Romania, his plan was entirely feasible in January 1942.

Lt. Col. Adolf Eichmann had been concerned with the Jewish Question ever since his youth; he had spent time living in Palestine in order to learn more about Zionism and the developing Jewish State. He had studied the traditions and customs of the Orthodox Jews and had even learned to speak and write in the Hebrew language. At the time of the conference, he was Director of the Jewish Department of the Reich Security Main Office in Berlin (RSHA), the second man to hold this office.

Most of the Jews in Germany were assimilated and did not want to leave their country, but Eichmann had worked with the Zionists to help as many Jews as possible to emigrate to Palestine before 1938. Palestine was a protectorate of the British, and immigration was restricted, but the Nazis aided the Zionists in illegal immigration. Hitler established farms and workshops where young German Jews could be trained in agriculture and blue-collar jobs, which would qualify them for legal immigration to Palestine.

The rear of the Wannsee conference house

You can read the official history of the Wannsee Conference here.


  1. Eichmann could not even appart hebrew letters from simple scribbles; this about the tale about his knowledge of Jewish culture.
    Indeed in 1935/36 he had been in charge of following the activities of Zionist Union in Germany and in 1936 wrote a guide line of contollling zionist organizations.
    He visited Palestine in November 1937 but had to leave two days after arrival with SS Officer Hagen; the met then leading Arab nationalists in Cairo for talks about …

    Comment by Wolf MURMELSTEIN — May 22, 2012 @ 1:31 pm

  2. I would like to know where the blogger obtained the information re Eichmann, that he was in Palestine, encouraged Jewish migration there, and learned to speak Hebrew. Please cite your sources.

    Comment by SM Isac — April 3, 2011 @ 9:56 am

    • I learned this so long ago that I have forgotten what book it was in. Here is an online biography that you can read at

      Here is a quote from the above source:

      Begin quote:
      During World War II Eichmann was an SS-Obersturmbannfuhrer (Lieutenant Colonel) in the Gestapo Department of Jewish Religion. In 1942 he was selected by Reinhard Heydrich as “Chief of Transportation for the Final Solution”, which put him in charge of all the trains that carried Jews to Nazi death camps in Poland.


      After being put in charge of the extermination of Europe’s Jewish population, Eichmann first took it upon himself to learn as much about Judaism as possible; he frequently traveled to Palestine, and even learned to speak some Hebrew and some Yiddish.
      End Quote

      The book “The Seventh Million” by Tom Segev mentions on page 30, that Eichmann went to Palestine for the first time in 1937. The book “Transfer Agreement” by Edwin Black tells about how Jews were sneaked into Palestine; Eichmann was in charge of this. There are many other books that mention Eichmann and his role in getting Jews into Palestine.

      Comment by furtherglory — April 3, 2011 @ 12:29 pm

  3. Wahrheit!
    Just six days ago, President of Russia recognized Palestinian State with it’s capital in East Jerusalem. And today, the bombs exploded at the Moscow Airport, killing 35 people. Would you mind to share your ideas, who could’ve done this? Could it be done by the descendants of the holocaust survivors?
    Thirty five innocent lives were taken, Wahrheit! Do you understand how dearly someone will be paying for this?

    Comment by Gasan — January 24, 2011 @ 3:58 pm

  4. It is funny, that “Wahrheit” called the article, I have posted, as ridiculous. Maybe “Wahrheit” has better knowledge of German language than Oberleutenant zur See and Commander of U-Boot 739 Johannes Peter Ney. He was just 22 years old when he was promoted to the commander of U-Boot (born June 16, 1922).
    That means, he was trusted by his crew and his superiors to be in command of a submarine. How cool is that for a 22 years old? How intelligent that person would become, as he grows? His analysis of the document in question cannot even disputed in the German speaking communities, since the document is an obvious forgery.

    Comment by Gasan — January 23, 2011 @ 9:36 pm

  5. Seems like I am dealing with several trolls here.

    Let us the read the whole paragraph from the Wansee protocol:

    Neben diesen Altersklassen – von den am 31.10.1941 sich im Altreich und der Ostmark BEFINDLICHEN etwa 280.000 Juden sind etwa 30 % über 65 Jahre alt – finden in den jüdischen Altersghettos weiterhin die schwerkriegsbeschädigten Juden und Juden mit Kriegsauszeichnungen (EK I) Aufnahme.

    Maybe “Königsberg”, who claims that German is his “mother TONG” would kindly explain to “Wahrheit” about the mistakes in this paragraph.

    Königsberg, or is it Kaliningrad?
    The English word “TONG(ue)” translates into German as “die Zunge” not “Sprache”. The German expression is Die Muttersprache (native language). You don’t have to add the letter “h” to German word “Das Wort” and you have probably forgotten to add letter “n” to the phrase “Entschuldige(n)” Sie mir Bitte”.
    But your command of German appears to me quite satisfactory and I would like to delegate to you the translation of following explanations for “Wahrheit” et al.

    “Neben diesen Altersklassen …” (S. 8) Zuvor ist nur von einer Altersklasse Rede, von den Juden über 65 Jahren.
    “… von den … sich im Altreich … befindlichen etwa 280.000 Juden …” (S. 8)
    Deutsch ist eine schwere Sprache, sogar für Gebildete. Anstatt “befindlichen” müßte es “befindenden” heißen. Und noch besser wäre : “von den etwa 280.000 Juden, die sich im Altreich … befinden …”

    Comment by Gasan — January 23, 2011 @ 8:31 pm

  6. Many years ago, I have found an interesting article written by former Kriegsmarine officer Johannes Peter Ney. Here it is:

    Of course, some passages clearly revealed that the person, who wrote this fabrication made several stylistic mistakes, which Adolf Eichmann could not possibly make.

    “The Wannsee Conference Protocol is a treasure-trove of stylistic howlers which indicate that the authors of this paper were strongly influenced by the Anglo-Saxon i.e. British English language. In the following we will identify only the most glaring of these blunders; many of them have been pointed out by all the authors consulted, so that a specific reference frequently does not apply.”
    The phrase;
    “der allfällig endlich verbliebene Restbestand […]” (“the possible final remnant”)

    may perhaps appear in a prose text, but certainly not in the minutes of a conference. The text is interspersed with empty phrases such as;

    “Im Hinblick auf die Parallelisierung der Linienführung” (“in order to bring general activities into line”) (Tiedemann(11)) and nonsensical claims such as;

    “Die evakuierten Juden werden Zug um Zug in […] Durchgangsghettos gebracht […]” (“The evacuated Jews will first be sent, group by group, into […] transit-ghettos […]”).

    Since the evacuation of the Jews was not then ongoing, but rather was planned for the future, this would have to have read:

    “Die zu evakuierenden Juden […]” (“The Jews to be evacuated […]”).


    “Bezüglich der Behandlung der Endlösung” (“Regarding the handling of the final solution”)

    How does one handle a solution? (Walendy(8))

    “Wurden die jüdischen Finanzinstitutionen des Auslands […] verhalten (retained)

    Does the author mean “angehalten” (stopped)? This word would make more sense in the protocol which is supporting holocaust story.

    “Italien einschließlich Sardinien” (“Italy incl. Sardinia”)

    Why the need to specify? In Europe people knew very well what all was part of Italy.

    “Die berufsständische Aufgliederung der […] Juden: […] städtische Arbeiter 14,8%” (“The breakdown of Jews […] according to trades […]: […] communal workers 14.8%” [i.e. “municipal” workers; -trans.]

    Were all of these people common laborers? (Ney(10)) “Salaried employees” is probably what the author meant here. “[…] als Staatsarbeiter angestellt” (the Nuremberg Translation renders this as “employed by the state”, which glosses over the difference between “Arbeiter”, i.e. blue-collar workers, and “angestellt”, i.e. the condition of employment enjoyed by salaried and public employees; -trans.): so what were they, laborers or government employees? Did the author mean civil servants? (Ney, ibid.)

    “In den privaten Berufen – Heilkunde, Presse, Theater, usw.” (“in private occupations such as medical profession, newspapers, theater, etc.”).

    In German these are called “freie Berufe”, not “private Berufe”. Such persons are known as doctors, journalists, and artists. “usw.” is never preceded by a comma in German, whereas the English “etc.” almost always is.

    “Die sich im Altreich befindlichen […]” What’s that? Well, German is a difficult language.

    “Die berufsständische Aufgliederung der im europäischen Gebiet der UdSSR ansässigen Juden war etwa folgende […]” (“The breakdown of Jews residing in the European part of the USSR, according to trades, was approximately as follows […]”

    This clearly gives away the forger, at work years after the conference; at the time of the Wannsee Conference one would not have written “was”, but “is”.

    After reading this, I started to believe that the person who wrote the minutes was not a German, though, he might have a brilliant knowledge of the language. I started to search for this person over internet and, in less than one hour, I found who he was.

    Let me share with you what I was looking for specifically: A person who was connected to the British intelligence or black propaganda operations. Who, also lived and worked in Germany for extended periods of time. Here is the name:

    Denis Sefton Delmer (b.24 May 1904, Berlin, Germany – 4 September 1979, Lamarsh, Essex) was a British journalist and propagandist for the British government. Fluent in German, he became friendly with Ernst Röhm who arranged for him to interview Adolf Hitler in the 1930s. During the Second World War he led a black propaganda campaign against Hitler by radio from England.

    He was even born in Germany and lived there until the age 13. Even though he spoke excellent German, after several years of not being actually in Germany, he made a few mistakes in the text. I think we all know the answer to Wansee Conference question. I am not sure that the conference even had taken place, but if it have, the protocol is still a forgery. Adolf Eichmann would not make those mistakes.

    My favorite part is: “Italien einschließlich Sardinien” (“Italy incl. Sardinia”). Sefton Delmer was a fool, who also was showing off.

    Comment by Gasan — January 21, 2011 @ 3:49 pm

    • You are right about the grammar, geography and semantic drivel. But how can you be certain about Sefton Delmer? There where many people in Allied ploy that may have vast academic knowledge, but few practice of German.

      Comment by Andreas Meyer — July 14, 2014 @ 4:37 am

  7. 1)I don’t know why you were so surprised, as most modern scholars on the Holocaust put the timing of the order to actually physically liquidat the Jews sometime in 1941-1942, depending on their own thoughts and conclusions of the evidence. The consensus that has now formed is between October-December 1941, with other progressions and radicalizations later on.

    However, the Nisko and larger Lublin deportation plans would certainly entail a huge amount of death upon the Jewish people who were deported. See the work of Longerich on this.

    2) You say about Wannsee that “nothing was written about killing the Jews.” This is simply incorrect. The minutes state:

    “Under proper guidance, in the course of the final solution the Jews are to be allocated for appropriate labor in the East. Able-bodied Jews, separated according to sex, will be taken in large work columns to these areas for work on roads, in the course of which action doubtless a large portion will be eliminated by natural causes.
    The possible final remnant will, since it will undoubtedly consist of the most resistant portion, have to be treated accordingly, because it is the product of natural selection and would, if released, act as a the seed of a new Jewish revival (see the experience of history.)”

    The death and murder of Jews able to work is thus clear. There is no other way one can read into the text. The fate of Jews unable to work is never specified, but why should we expect it to have been any better than those selected for work?

    Comment by Wahrheit — January 21, 2011 @ 11:50 am

    • You quoted from the minutes of the meeting to show that I was incorrect in saying that there was nothing about “killing” the Jews. Where is the word “kill” in the minutes? The phrase “doubtless a large portion will be eliminated by natural causes” does not mean murder. The entire document of the minutes is written in euphemisms if, in fact, this is the actual minutes.

      Comment by furtherglory — January 21, 2011 @ 2:15 pm

      • I don’t know how else one can actually read the conclusion that any survivors “have to be treated accordingly” in order to prevent a rebirth of a new Jewish revival besides murder. If you want to dispute whether working people to death is murder (as opposed to just killed), you can, but it cannot be taken seriously.

        “If, in fact, this is the actual minutes”

        I’ll leave you and Gasan to believe that the minutes are forged (w/o evidence of course). Nevermind that no leading revisionist nowadays accepts such a position (not Faurisson, not Mattogno, Graf, Kues, Crowell, etc…). Irving also never disputed them when he was a revisionist, and you seem to be a fan of his.

        Comment by Wahrheit — January 22, 2011 @ 3:56 pm

        • Wahrheit,
          Why is German moniker, which means “truth”? It seems that you are submit yourself to the authorities too much. You quote books written by historians instead to look at documents yourself. Tell me how was is possible for Adolf Eichman to create a new German word “befindlichen”? Do you know that people in Europe would never say “Italy, including Sardinia” or “France, including Corsica”. However, the official name of the country, where forger came from, is what? You are right! United Kingdom of Great Britain AND Northern Ireland. Didn’t I mention before that Sefton Delmer was an idiot, despite his knowledge of German?
          You have absolutely no arguments to disprove the that it is a forgery. Please don’t refer us to Irving’s books, or any other “books” of your likening.
          I have my own eyes and the protocol is right in front of me, along with 260,000 words German dictionary. Okay? The word “befindlichen” is nowhere to be found. The protocol was not written by a German. What other evidence do I need?

          Comment by Gasan — January 22, 2011 @ 4:20 pm

          • Entschuldige Sie mir Bitte, aber ’befindlich’ IST wirklich ein ganz normales Deutsches Worth!
            I’m sorry, but the word ‚’befindlich’ is a common German word, really!
            (You have to believe me — my mother tong is German)

            Comment by Königsberg — January 23, 2011 @ 7:06 am

        • The Allies did a thorough search for documents to be used against the Germans at the IMT, but they failed to find any copies of the minutes or protocols of the Wannsee conference. The copy that was finally found in 1947 was undated and unsigned; it had no stamp of any Bureau.

          Comment by furtherglory — January 22, 2011 @ 5:50 pm

          • Gasan:

            With clearly bogus arguments like that, I have to conclude that you are a sockpuppet, with someone trying to disguise themself as a denier. Thanks for the laughs!

            In case I am mistaken, a few words: it’s funny that you tell me to check the original documents (I have, and quoted from them) when your argument only stems from a ridiculous article. I advise you to search for “sich befindlichen” on the web to see how bogus your claims are. Also, get some better dictionaries. lol

            FG: I don’t understand your point about failing to find the minutes. Less than two years after the end of the war, and in their research for Nuremberg trials, the minutes were found in a Foreign Office folder. Was every document supposed to be found immediately? Hardly.

            The stamp it had was the Geheime Reichssache marker, with the listed number of copies made and distributed. The lack of signature doesn’t seem too important, as no one listed on the document denied their presence at the meeting, nor did the author of the minutes (Eichmann). There are also related Nazi documents which support the minutes’ authenticity. Check Wannsee’s website.

            It is still very odd that you are pushing for forgery (never openly declaring it, just toying with the idea when it suits you) when your earlier point was that it doesn’t say anything bad (“where is the word “kill” in the minutes?). So it’s a forgery, but a pointless forgery?

            Geez oh man…

            Comment by Wahrheit — January 22, 2011 @ 6:32 pm

            • You are correct that I never said that the Wannsee Conference minutes were a forgery. The minutes of the Conference tend to disprove the claim that the purpose of the Conference was to plan the genocide of the Jews. The fact that the minutes were not “found” until 1947 is suspicious, especially since every man at the Conference got a copy and the Conference was not a secret.

              Comment by furtherglory — January 22, 2011 @ 6:43 pm

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.

%d bloggers like this: