Amazing Video of Anne Frank

This is the only known video of Anne Frank that was just made available. While short, it adds an even more chilling aspect to her writings.

200px-Anne_FrankThe 20-second footage from July 21, 1941 showing the 13-year-old Anne leaning out of a second-floor window to get a better look at a bride and groom who lived at No 37 Merwedeplein, next door to the Franks at No 39. It was less than a year before the family went into hiding. Anne would die of typhus in the Bergen-Belsen concentration camp only days after the death of her sister, Margot Frank. Only her father would survive. The family of the couple gave the film to Otto Frank, Anne’s father, in the 1950s.

The most haunting aspect of the film is the sense of quiet and tranquility before the storm. Frank is just one more little girl who wants to see the bride and groom. She also has the happy disposition that rarely left her in her diary.

The film fits perfectly with Anne’s observation in her diary:

The best remedy for those who are afraid, lonely or unhappy is to go outside, somewhere where they can be quiet, alone with the heavens, nature and God. Because only then does one feel that all is as it should be.

For the full story, click here.

31 thoughts on “Amazing Video of Anne Frank”

  1. Mike,

    You expect people that filled with hate to be rational?

    Their reasoning is simple: if Jewish people claim something, it must be false.

  2. Mr. Spindell,

    You ask a question I am loathe to answer, yet I fear if I don’t no one else will. I will answer it out of my respect for you, and afterwards leave this place for good. It brings to the fore so much sadness within myself.

    In the Shoah, Christians see the fruition of their ugliest nature. We struggle with it because in our scripture, Jewish people called it upon themselves (let his blood be upon us and our children). The struggle comes from believing that the suffering is self-induced, and then realizing (haltingly, for we try to bury it in our subconscious just as quickly as the thought arises) that it is we ourselves doing the punishing and our own inhumanity that it reveals.

    Round and round it goes. Easier for us just not to explore that aspect of ourselves at all. But no, no one is proud or happy that the Shoah took place. Just torn.

    The genuine deniers (as opposed to those speaking simply out of hate and spite) I don’t think are Christian or European or North American. They’re probably of the Muslim persuasion who have known the suffering of the Arabic people in Israel/Palestine and never felt the Shoah to be an adequate defense for their people’s pain. As far as they might be concerned, the whole thing could just as well have been made up to justify the “occupation”.

    This is my perspective. Their may be follow-up posts denouncing my message as completely false. This is simply how I understand it.

    P.S. The people that truly love Jews have somehow managed to climb out of the cesspool of their own nature. I emphasize true love.

  3. Vince,
    Thank you, as usual.

    Everyone Else,
    I’ve got a question that I’ve pondered for a while though, admittedly as a Jew, but which I can’t seem to fathom perhaps because I am a Jew.

    It would seem to me that people who hate Jews should be proud of the Shoah, not trying to claim it never happened. If one believes, as did the NAZI’s that Jews are evil sub-humans who don’t deserve to live, why then don’t they celebrate the Shoah for all it accomplished? Why instead do they deny it ever happened? Is it simply because such behavior is recognized even by them as reprehensible and they don’t want to be associated with it? Perhaps it is the desire to deny Jews a feeling of having been wronged. I ask this truly because it is a puzzle to me and with no irony intended. I don’t get it.

  4. Of course that should read “… who lived about 2000 years ago…”.

    Otherwise we’d have quite a historical revision going on here, even more than the one TBK is trying to foist on the uninformed.

  5. TBK,

    I don’t want to put too fine a point on it, but anyone who makes the statements you’ve made in this thread is both a liar and an idiot.

    I don’t deny Christ. I think he was a normal, Jewish man who lived about 200 years ago and had an amazing effect on the ethical and religious nature of western civilization.

    I also don’t deny the Nakba. It’s still not the Holocaust, and no amount of foot stomping and screaming will change that fact.

  6. I don’t really want to engage in a heated tit-for-tat on this, but did want to make a couple of points on the above comments:

    >”You people are a bunch of Christ Deniers. That is a crime to me.
    >Why are you not in prison?”

    Personally, I love Christ very much and believe He loves all people, regardless of their worldly religion and beliefs.

    >You people deny the Nakba. That should be worthy of a prison

    I don’t deny “al-Nakba.” How could I? It happened…just like the Holocaust before it. Facts are facts.

  7. So what!!!

    You people are a bunch of Christ Deniers. That is a crime to me. Why are you not in prison?
    You people deny the Nakba. That should be worthy of a prison sentence.

  8. TruthBeKnown has just posted a common myth circulated by holocaust deniers. The posting is false.

    From wiki, QUOTE ON

    Denials and legal action

    After the diary became widely known in the late 1950s, various allegations against the diary were published, with the earliest published criticisms occurring in Sweden and Norway. Among the accusations was a claim that the diary had been written by Meyer Levin,[65] and that Anne Frank had not really existed.

    In 1958, Simon Wiesenthal was challenged by a group of protesters at a performance of The Diary of Anne Frank in Vienna who asserted that Anne Frank had never existed, and who challenged Wiesenthal to prove her existence by finding the man who had arrested her. He began searching for Karl Silberbauer and found him in 1963. When interviewed, Silberbauer readily admitted his role, and identified Anne Frank from a photograph as one of the people arrested. He provided a full account of events and recalled emptying a briefcase full of papers onto the floor. His statement corroborated the version of events that had previously been presented by witnesses such as Otto Frank.[66]

    Opponents of the diary continued to express the view that it was not written by a child, but had been created as pro-Jewish propaganda, with Otto Frank accused of fraud. In 1959, Frank took legal action in Lübeck against Lothar Stielau, a school teacher and former Hitler Youth member who published a school paper that described the diary as a forgery. The complaint was extended to include Heinrich Buddegerg, who wrote a letter in support of Stielau, which was published in a Lübeck newspaper. The court examined the diary, and, in 1960, authenticated the handwriting as matching that in letters known to have been written by Anne Frank, and declared the diary to be genuine. Stielau recanted his earlier statement, and Otto Frank did not pursue the case any further.[65]

    In 1976, Otto Frank took action against Heinz Roth of Frankfurt, who published pamphlets stating that the diary was a forgery. The judge ruled that if he published further statements he would be subjected to a fine of 500,000 German marks and a six-month jail sentence. Roth appealed against the court’s decision and died in 1978, a year before his appeal was rejected.[65]

    Otto Frank mounted a further lawsuit in 1976 against Ernst Römer who distributed a pamphlet titled “The Diary of Anne Frank, Bestseller, A Lie”. When another man named Edgar Geiss distributed the same pamphlet in the courtroom, he too was prosecuted. Römer was fined 1,500 Deutschmarks,[65] and Geiss was sentenced to six months imprisonment. On appeal the sentence was reduced, but the case against him was dropped following a subsequent appeal because the statutory limitation for libel had expired.[67]

    With Otto Frank’s death in 1980, the original diary, including letters and loose sheets, were willed to the Dutch Institute for War Documentation,[68] who commissioned a forensic study of the diary through the Netherlands Ministry of Justice in 1986. They examined the handwriting against known examples and found that they matched, and determined that the paper, glue and ink were readily available during the time the diary was said to have been written. Their final determination was that the diary is authentic, and their findings were published in what has become known as the “Critical Edition” of the diary. On 23 March 1990, the Hamburg Regional Court confirmed its authenticity.[52]

    In 1991, Holocaust deniers Robert Faurisson and Siegfried Verbeke produced a booklet titled The Diary of Anne Frank: A Critical Approach. They claimed that Otto Frank wrote the diary, based on assertions that the diary contained several contradictions, that hiding in the Achterhuis would have been impossible, and that the prose style and handwriting of Anne Frank were not those of a teenager.[69]

    The Anne Frank House in Amsterdam and the Anne Frank Funds in Basel instigated a civil law suit in December 1993, to prohibit the further distribution of The Diary of Anne Frank: A Critical Approach in the Netherlands. On 9 December 1998, the Amsterdam District Court ruled in favour of the claimants, forbade any further denial of the authenticity of the diary and unsolicited distribution of publications to that effect, and imposed a penalty of 25,000 guilders per infringement.[70]


    The “ballpoint pen” story is also false:

    This poster will find that false and bigoted holocaust denial stories have a bleak future at the Turley blog. The truth will be known at Res Ipsa Loquitor.

  9. I found it interesting that Atto Frank was a Nazi colloborator. I also read that the famous diary was written with a ballpoint pen. Ballpoint pens were not yet invented.

    That diary has been debunked by many people.

  10. One last comparison: the pregnancy rate among teenagers in the United States is nine times what it is in the Netherlands, with the lowest rate in the world.

  11. puzzling and CCD,

    It *is* amazing what can happen when a society stops denying human nature and starts accepting it. 😉

  12. CCD,

    You’re right. And if you compare total incarceration rates, the United States is #1 in the world with 760 prisoners per 100,000 people. The Netherlands is #132, with 100 per 100,000.

    Put another way, the incarceration rate in the United States is more than seven times what it is in The Netherlands.

  13. Puzzling:

    In the Netherlands with a population of 16,600,000, that’s 72 people per 100,000 incarcerated.

    In Cook County Illinois (Chicago metropolitan area), population 5,300,000, it’s 189 people per 100,000 in Cook County jail tonight.

  14. George,

    I visited the Anne Frank House on my first visit to Amsterdam and strongly agree with your recommendation. It was a very powerful and humbling experience.

    I also left The Netherlands with a very favorable impression of the decency, frugality, and realism of their society. As an American one looks on with wonder at a country that is miles ahead of us in drug policy, sexuality, euthanasia, language education, and a host of other issues. When will we ever have problems like this in the United States?

  15. The clip has been around for a while. I believe I saw it in a video named “Remembering Anne Frank”. Regardless, it still has the power to move me to tears.

  16. This little girl’s legacy has had a profound effect on my life.

    I am sorry beyond words.

  17. It was not until I got out of myself that I was truly able to appreciate the beauty that surrounds me where ever I am. For that I am responsible.

    This was a great clip.

  18. Wonderful video, Professor. Thanks for posting.

    If you are ever in Amsterdam, a trip to the Anne Frank House will really change your perspective on this little girl, and the understanding and compassion that emanated from her writings.

    Here’s a link to the museum that operates the Anne Frank House. There is a lot of great information there about Anne and the house:

Comments are closed.