Direct Deposit Sign-Up Form (Poland) - State: Fill & Download for Free

There are three main ways to make money using Clickbank. The first way is to create your own products and list them. The second way is to skip the product creation step and list other people's products while taking a commission from each sale. Vendors can select a commission rate between 1% to 75%.You might've heard great things about it from some marketers.But you've also probably heard people say it's a scam, a rip-off, a waste of time, etc.I've even heard a popular speaker say it's a database of crappy products no one wants to buy.He's right.But he's also wrong.So what exactly is ClickBank, and is it still a viable affiliate platform for marketers like you?That's what this guide is all about.Even if you're a total newbie, don't worry.I'll tell you precisely what ClickBank is, how to make it work for you, and generate a consistent stream of affiliate commissions from it.What is ClickBank? - A Beginner's Intro to Understanding The Top Affiliate Network for Digital MarketersClickBank is among the leading affiliate networks for digital products like eBooks, video tutorials, and software. It has been around since 1998, has more than 200 million customers around the globe, and claims to have created more than 1000 millionaires through its platform.How To Make Money With ClickBank Affiliate MarketingIf you're wondering how to make money with ClickBank affiliate marketing, this detailed guide has all the answers for you.ClickBank has been around for more than two decades in the Affiliate marketingBut it still divides popular opinion like few other affiliate programs.You might've heard great things about it from some marketers.But you've also probably heard people say it's a scam, a rip-off, a waste of time, etc.I've even heard a popular speaker say it's a database of crappy products no one wants to buy.He's right.But he's also wrong.So what exactly is ClickBank, and is it still a viable affiliate platform for marketers like you?That's what this guide is all about.Even if you're a total newbie, don't worry.I'll tell you precisely what ClickBank is, how to make it work for you, and generate a consistent stream of affiliate commissions from it.Sounds interesting?What is ClickBank? - A Beginner's Intro to Understanding The Top Affiliate Network for Digital MarketersClickBank is among the leading affiliate networks for digital products like eBooks, video tutorials, and software. It has been around since 1998, has more than 200 million customers around the globe, and claims to have created more than 1000 millionaires through its platform.In easier words, ClickBank connects digital product creators with affiliate marketers.ClickBank doesn't own the products listed on its marketplace. It only provides a platform for thousands of product owners to connect with affiliate marketers who wish to promote their products.Why product creators use it?To gain access to thousands of influential affiliate marketers who have their dedicated subscribers and followers. It's an easy and quick way to market your product to hundreds of thousands of people even if you have no following of your own.Why do affiliates use ClickBank?To find high-quality products, promote them to their website visitors and subscribers, and earn a commission for every sale.It's classic affiliate marketing just like any other Affiliate program. But unlike Amazon Associates, ClickBank is a platform for digital products only.Can you make money with ClickBank in 2021? Definitely yes!The online education industry (most digital products fall into this category) is booming and is worth well over $100 billion across the globe since people are consuming more digital info content on their smartphones than ever before.Plus, the affiliate marketing industry is also growing steadily. In the U.S alone, affiliate marketing spending will exceed $8 billion by 2022.The Major Pros and Cons of ClickBank for Affiliate MarketersAs I've already mentioned, ClickBank has its share of supporters and haters.It does offer you some significant advantages over other affiliate networks, but it also has several weaknesses that you should know about.Let's quickly look at the major pros and cons of ClickBank.A Reliable Affiliate NetworkClickBank is not a new name in the affiliate marketing space. It has been around for more than two decades and is a proven platform when it comes to connecting product creators with affiliates.As an affiliate marketer on ClickBank, you'll consistently come across high-quality products that you can promote, knowing that you'll get paid for every sale you make.A Wide Range of Products in Every NicheNo matter what niche you're in or what hobbies you have, you'll find relevant products to promote on ClickBank.Just look at the number of product categories they have on their affiliate marketplace.Arts & EntertainmentBusiness/InvestingComputers/InternetCooking & FoodE-BusinessEmploymentFictionGamesHealth & FitnessHome & GardenSoftware & ServicesSelf-Help.......and many other categories with dozens of products.To get an idea of the product variety, let's explore the category "Parenting & Families" and see what's on sale.This isn't the most popular category in the digital product space, but it still has 57 products that you can promote as an affiliate right now.The more popular categories like E-Business, Health & Fitness, Self-Help, etc. have hundreds of products at any given time.All this means you'll never be short of products to promote as a ClickBank affiliate.Attractive Commission Structure for AffiliatesMost ClickBank products offer generous commission rates ranging from 50% to 75% and even 100% in some cases.To make it even better, there are tons of recurring commission programs on offer as well, which means you sell them once but keep earning monthly commissions as long as your referral is an active customer.As the screenshot shows, you can find recurring commission programs using the search filter on the affiliate marketplace page.Although recurring commissions sound more attractive, one-time commission programs are also worth exploring if they offer a healthy commission rate.Easy To Get StartedGetting started on ClickBank as an affiliate is pretty simple.There's no complex documentation or upfront fee required. You need to be from an eligible country, have cookies enabled in your browser, and have a valid tax id if you're in the U.S.Here's the list of countries from where ClickBank accepts affiliates.The United States of AmericaCanadaBritainAustraliaFranceGermanySpainMexicoAlbaniaAndorraAnguillaAntarcticaAntigua & BarbudaArgentinaArmeniaArubaAustraliaAustriaBahamasBahrainBarbadosBelgiumBelizeBermudaBhutanBoliviaBotswanaBrazilBruneiBulgariaCambodiaCanadaCape VerdeCayman IslandsChileChinaColombiaComorosCosta RicaCroatiaCyprusCzech RepublicDenmarkDiego GarciaDominicaEgyptEl SalvadorEstoniaFijiFinlandFranceFrench GuianaFrench PolynesiaFrench Southern TerrThe GambiaGeorgian RepublicGermanyGhanaGibraltarGreeceGreenlandGrenadaGuadeloupeGuamGuatemalaHaitiHondurasHong KongHungaryIcelandIndiaIndonesiaIrelandIsle Of ManIsraelItalyJamaicaJapanJordanKiribatiKorea, SouthKuwaitKyrgyzstanLatviaLesothoLiechtensteinLithuaniaLuxembourgMacaoMacedoniaMalaysiaMaldivesMaliMaltaMartiniqueMauritiusMayotteMexicoMicronesiaMonacoMontenegroMontserratMoroccoNamibiaNauruNetherlandsNetherlands AntillesNew CaledoniaNew ZealandNicaraguaNiueNorwayOmanPakistanPalauPanamaParaguayPeruPhilippinesPitcairn IsPolandPortugalPuerto RicoQatarReunion IslandsRomaniaRussian FederationSamoa, EastSamoa, WestSan MarinoSao Tome & PrincipeSaudi ArabiaSeychellesSingaporeSlovak RepublicSloveniaSouth AfricaSpainSri LankaSt HelenaSt Kitts & NevisSt LuciaSt Pierre & MiquelonSt Vincent & GrenadinesSurinameSwazilandSwedenSwitzerlandTaiwanThailandTokelauTongaTrinidad & TobagoTunisiaTurkeyTuvaluUkraineUnited Arab EmiratesUnited KingdomUnited StatesUruguayUzbekistanVanuatuVaticanVenezuelaVietnamWestern SaharaYemenSteps To Sign-Up As A ClickBank AffiliateClickBank has recently changed its account creation process and made it much simpler and faster.Click on the "Create Account" link on the top of your screen to go to the sign-up page.There's nothing fancy on this page, just a simple sign-up form that you can fill in less than a minute.Before you can submit the form, you also need to accept the terms and conditions agreement.Next up, ClickBank will ask you if you're interested in their training content.This is a pitch for their paid ClickBank University program. You can watch the free videos if you want, but I don't recommend spending on the paid program just yet.This completes the basic account setup.But before you get started, you need to complete your profile and payment information.Again, you'll be taken to a basic information form where you need to submit your full address, payee name, etc.Ways To Get Paid on ClickBankClickBank supports four different payment modes.Check: ClickBank mails a paper check to your mailing address to the payee name you've entered in your account.Direct Deposit: ClickBank deposits the payment directly to your bank account (not available for all countries)Wire Transfer: For countries where payment via direct deposit isn't available, ClickBank offers wire transfer payments.Payoneer: Payoneer is an international payment service that gives you a virtual US or EU bank account where you can receive ACH transfer payments. You can also directly link your Payoneer account with ClickBank to receive funds. You can configure your payment settings in the Account Settings tab on your main dashboard page.To set up payment by direct deposit, wire transfer, or Payoneer, you need to enter your bank account details.Check, as I've already mentioned, are delivered to the mailing address you entered at the time of sign up.ClickBank Affiliate Program - How Does It Work?Once you sign up as an affiliate on ClickBank, you can immediately start promoting products to your audience.But to identify the right products, you need to understand the different terminologies used on the platform.Let me start with some basic terminologies.Initial/Front-End Offer: This is the product offer that you originally promote to a customer. It is usually a low priced product designed to turn a stranger into a customer so that more products can be pitched to them.Upsell: This is the higher-priced product that is pitched after a customer purchases your front-end offer.One-Time Commission: This is a commission tye in which the affiliate is paid only once when the initial sale is made.Recurring/Rebilling: This is a commission type in which an affiliate keeps getting monthly or quarterly commissions for selling a membership product.Pretty simple, right?Let's move to the product listings now.For example, here's an affiliate product from the ClickBank marketplace.Different sections within this listing will help you determine the potential of this offer.Let me quickly describe them to you.Initial $/sale: This is the average commission amount an affiliate earns for selling a ClickBank product. This also includes payments for any upsells that result from the initial sale. But it does NOT include recurring commission amount.Avg Rebill Total: This is the average amount an affiliate makes from recurring commissions of a product. In the ClickBank affiliate marketplace, this amount is only displayed for subscription products.Avg $/sale: This is the average amount of commission an affiliate earns for promoting a ClickBank product (initial+recurring commissions).Avg %/sale: This is the average commission percentage an affiliate earns for a product, including initial and recurring commissions, plus any upsells.Avg %/Rebill: This is the average recurring commission earned only on rebills.Grav: This particular stat is essential. Grav is the short form of Gravity, which is a unique ClickBank score that shows you the sales potential of a product by taking into account the number of affiliates who've earned a commission in the last 12 weeks promoting a product. A high Gravity score means the product is selling well, but it also means lots of affiliates are promoting it.Cat: This is the industry category of a product on ClickBankAffiliate Page: This is the URL of the affiliate page of the product, where you'll find the affiliate recruitment details plus promotional material for the product.Affiliate Support Contact: The email to contact the product ownerThat's a lot to digest and can be a bit confusing, I know.The two main things to look in a product are it's Ave $/sale and Grav score, plus if it offers one-time or recurring commissions.My favorite free traffic Platform is Pinterest

I will quote the historians Stephen Zaloga and Victor Madej, who put it most succinctly:“The roots of the Polish defeat are not particularly difficult to trace, though they have often been distorted. The outcome of the campaign was a foregone conclusion before it began—so long as France and Britain had no serious intention of directly intervening on the Western Front. Without Allied military intervention, the Wehrmacht could take the risk of committing the vast bulk of its strength against its much smaller Polish adversary. Although Western historians have been especially critical of Polish strategic deployment, the fact remains that the Polish Army could not have resisted the Wehrmacht single-handedly even under the most favorable circumstances. The task was even more hopeless after the intervention of the Red Army on 17 September. Correcting the shortcomings in Polish command decisions, troop dispositions, and tactical doctrine might have caused higher German casualties or prolonged the fighting by a few days or weeks, but it could not have substantially altered the outcome.”(Zaloga, Steven and Madej, Victor, The Polish Campaign, 1939. New York: Hippocrene Books, Inc., 1991; Pg. 157)At the end of the 2nd week of the campaign, Poland desperately waited for France, which was under treaty obligations to aid Poland in the event of an invasion, to invade western Germany to draw forces away from Poland. But the leading French general, General Maurice Gamelin, repeatedly lied to the Poles, claiming he was preparing for his attack on Germany, when in reality he was doing nothing. Based on his assurances that a French invasion was imminent, the Poles launched a series of counter-attacks at the end of that second week along the Bzura River (west of Warsaw) to slow the German advance. Initially successful, it quickly turned around into a bloodbath and slaughter of Polish forces. As Zaloga and Madej make clear above, the Poles alone had no hope of stopping the Germans, but the mass destruction of Polish forces in this counter-offensive helped hasten the end.This destruction also convinced Hitler’s ally at the time, Stalin, to invade Poland from the east, on September 17. Hitler had been goading Stalin into invading but Stalin was hesitant, afraid to completely alienate the West, but with the main Polish defenses around Warsaw crushed he decided to move lest German forces overrun the previously-agreed Soviet-Nazi demarcation line. When Soviet forces did cross the Polish border, they lied to locals that they were coming to help the Poles against the Germans, only making their intentions clear when they encountered Polish military forces. Polish-American historian Jan T. Gross went into some detail about the Soviet invasion in his 1988 book:Gross, Jan T., Revolution from Abroad, The Soviet Conquest of Poland’s Western Ukraine and Western Belorussia. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1988Further notes: Adrian Garcia-Landa posted this question in the form of an edit: “can you give a document to prove this point? Not that i font believe you. On the contrary, im part french and i am shocked by the mental weakness and cowardice of Gamelin. He could have shortened WW2 had he been a real warrior ]” I can’t read French (which puts Gamelin’s memoirs out of my reach) so I must rely on sources in English, Polish, Russian or Hungarian. A couple secondary sources (in English) that cover Gamelin’s behavior during the 1939 Polish campaign are 1. William L. Shirer’s The Collapse of the Third Republic: An Inquiry into the Fall of France in 1940 (New York, Simon & Schuster, 1969) which goes into detail about Gamelin’s communications with Warsaw; 2. Martin S. Alexander’s The Republic in Danger: General Maurice Gamelin and the Politics of French Defence, 1933-1940 (Cambridge, UK; Cambridge University press, 1992) which details the Polish-French military relationship in the 20 years before 1939 and touches in less detail the 1939 campaign itself; and 3. a paper by Anna M. Cienciala, “Poland in British and French Policy in 1939: Determination to Fight—or Avoid War?” (The Polish Review, Vol. 34, No. 3 (1989), pp. 199-226 (28 pages), which addresses Gamelin’s deceit.The shorter answer about your question though, aside from Gamelin’s own personality and shortcomings, is that both Britain and France signed the treaties with Poland in 1939 not to save Poland, but to create a tripwire that would hopefully intimidate Hitler from starting World War II. In other words, neither Paris nor London were too terribly concerned about Poland. After all, Chamberlain had made it clear during the 1938 Sudetenland Crisis that Britain had no intention of fighting a war for some far-away Eastern Europeans that neither he nor most British had ever heard of. The issue with the Polish crisis of August, 1939 was that it finally dawned on Britain and France that Hitler wasn’t going to stop, that he wanted a European-wide empire and the only question for Paris and London was whether they were willing to live with a Continental Nazi empire. So both signed the treaty guaranteeing Poland’s security in an effort to scare Hitler into stopping — and it worked, for a few days. Hitler’s original invasion date for Poland was August 26, but Britain had signed and announced its mutual defense treaty with Poland the night before on August 25, causing Hitler to hesitate and call off the invasion. (Read about Lt. Hans-Albrecht Herzner, who had orders to infiltrate Poland from the Slovak Tatry Mountains and seize a strategic bridge on August 26, and carried out his orders — only to learn after beating a hasty retreat in the face of determined Polish resistance that the August 26 invasion had been postponed. Other German units also failed to receive the postponement orders, and attacked their targets on August 26. Berlin claimed rogue elements in a diplomatic explanation to both Warsaw and the Western Allies.) But obviously Hitler was only shaken a bit by the British alliance, and moved ahead with the Polish invasion days later on September 1. When the invasion began, Poland moved (in Paris’ and London’s eyes) from being a tripwire to a delaying party whose job it was to keep the Nazis occupied for as long as possible, allowing Britain and France — whose forces were unprepared for major war operations yet — to build up their strength. The expectation was that Poland would be defeated, but would likely hold out for several months before defeat. This deposits us at the point of the original question, about how shocked everybody (again, including Hitler) was how quickly Poland was defeated, begging the question why….Addendum: Per some comments below, I’ll address some important issues. Both the British and French were under treaty obligation to aid Poland militarily in 1939, but neither fulfilled those obligations. The French shelled a couple abandoned German villages on the border and occupied them for a couple days, then withdrew. The German military didn’t even bother responding. The British sent bombers over Germany — carrying not bombs, but leaflets, begging Germans not to obey their Führer. As I responded to comments below, a key part of the story for Poland in September, 1939 was that the authorities in Warsaw (and, to be fair, in most of Europe) seriously overestimated Britain’s and France’s war preparedness and capabilities in 1939, thinking that they — global empires at the time, after all — would easily be able to handle the revived but ultimately smaller German war machine, led by its crazed former corporal (Hitler).But that leads to another important dimension in this story, which is that of Blitzkrieg: the Germans in 1939 had developed a doctrine based on their experiences at the end of World War I which emphasized the concentration of force and by-passing strong points of resistance, instead of the more traditional advance of the (front) line. The British had also begun to develop similar strategies in World War I and British military officers such as Captain Liddell Hart advocated something similar to Blitzkrieg, and he designed war games involving tanks on Salisbury Plain in the 1930s to showcase his ideas — but the conservative British military establishment ultimately rejected his ideas. But so did the post-war Prussian-dominated German military establishment; it was Hitler’s sponsorship of Heinz Guderian — Hart’s German counterpart — which overcame German military resistance to change. France was also resistant to new ideas, and Poland in the 1920s and 30s was most closely aligned with French military doctrine. So while most in Europe expected the Poles to lose, and badly, nobody (including the Germans) expected Poland to be defeated as quickly as it was, from September 1 to October 5: in 35 days. The story of the Battles of the Bzura River, the Polish counter-offensive mentioned above, began with German surprise and humiliating defeats for the first several days — but Blitzkrieg had introduced an unprecedented level of operational flexibility into the Wehrmacht that allowed the Germans to quickly redistribute and redeploy resources, so that by the end of the first week they had turned an embarrassing reversal into a huge advantage, and laid waste to the extended and exposed Polish attackers.Europe had never seen anything like this before, and quite frankly missed the lesson. Polish politicians and military personnel able to escape to the West in 1939 were chastised by the British and French for their monumental failure and weak fighting capabilities. That the lessons of Blitzkrieg had been missed and misunderstood became apparent the following spring as German forces barrelled into the Netherlands, Belgium and France, fighting these armies and Britain’s, and defeating them decisively in just 46 days — only 11 days more than the Polish campaign, which was fought against a much smaller foe and with aid from the Soviets. Blitzkrieg has by now become a buzzword used to describe any fast-moving process or plan, but in 1939 (and 1940) it was shockingly new. The French army, for instance, had superior tanks to Germany’s in 1940, the Renault Char-B1 and 2 series heavy tanks which had superior armor and gunnery to Germany’s Panzer IIIs. But Germany used their tank forces more effectively as concentrated “spear heads” to break French lines, while the French diluted their advantage in numbers — yes, they had more tanks than the Germans in 1940 too — by dispersing their tanks among the infantry as support. The point here isn’t to trash France, but rather to show that Europe’s leading military powers in 1939 — Britain and France — were wholly unprepared for the new and more effective Blitzkrieg doctrine, and could not mount any counter to stop it. What chance did a mid-level and economically under-developed military power like Poland have? This is a key lesson of World War II still often missed today, and going back to the original quote above from Zaloga and Madej, one that frustrates Poles who are asked time and again to re-explain why they were defeated so quickly.Addendum II: Sorry — sometimes it takes a few days for these things to twist and turn in your head. So Poland had its own intrinsic issues which contributed to the defeat of 1939 as well. From 1795 (some territories as early as 1772) until 1918, Poland had been divided and ruled by three different empires: the Russian, Prussian (after 1870, German) Empire, and the Habsburg (after 1806 - Austrian Empire, after 1867 Austro-Hungarian Dual-Monarchy). Each empire had its own laws, currencies, economic organization, and policies towards the Poles they ruled. Russian Poland (which included Warsaw) had experienced strong industrialization in the late 19th and early 20th century, Prussian-German Poland had also experienced some though not as strongly, while Austrian-ruled Poland (including Kraków) remained almost frozen in the 18th century socially and economically. This meant that the new country from 1918 had to try to stitch together a single country out of a jumble of regions with very different legal, social and economic structures and traditions. Each region had their local elites who insisted on doing things their own way. There was a lot of frustration with Warsaw in outer regions. And cutting ties with the three empires in 1918 also meant losing markets and economic access that had developed over 120+ years’ time, as well as having to redesign local pricing and cost structures around an unstable, untested new currency (while losing access to Russian Rubles, German Reichsmarks, and Austrian Kronen). Poland in 1939 was still something of a Frankenstein creature, barely held together by new national institutions, laws and a currency few trusted, despite the strength of Polish national identity. From March until September, 1939 for instance, Poland failed miserably to mobilize and deploy its full military potential, finally getting something like only about a quarter of its total troop strength in the field by the time the Germans invaded.(Poland was nowhere near the class of the British or French militaries, but outside Germany’s and the Soviet Union’s, was considered the largest and most potent military in Eastern Europe, certainly the one most likely to be able to resist — or at least stall — a German or Soviet invasion, compared to the other Eastern European states. Poland had, after all, successfully defeated and driven out a nascent Soviet invasion in 1920 in the see-saw Polish-Soviet War. This is another factor in the shock many expressed across Europe at Poland’s rapid defeat in 1939.)Another important factor I alluded above but didn’t go into was that while in November, 1918 an independent Poland was declared, soon to be recognized by the Paris Peace Conference in 1919, its borders were not at all yet determined. This was the case across Eastern Europe with the sudden emergence of new states and the collapse of the Russian, Austro-Hungarian, German and Ottoman empires. There simply was no way to make ethnic boundaries match political ones, and immediately in 1918 — as Churchill famously quipped — the armies of the “pygmies” (meaning the smaller states) began to march. Eastern Europe dissolved into a huge land-grab as each new country tried to grab as much strategic, ethnic and historical territory its people had ever set foot in as possible. Poland was no exception, and fought a series of wars with the Soviets, Czechs, Ukrainians, Lithuanians and Germans over 1918–1922. This antagonized relations with these countries (and vice-versa), dooming any cooperation between states in the region despite Allied attempts — especially France — to create an anti-German, anti-Soviet alliance through the Little Entente (La Petit Entente). Especially after the West abandoned Eastern Europe in 1925 with the Treaty of Locarno, this refusal by most of the Eastern European states to cooperate in any meaningful way left the region very vulnerable to German, Italian and Soviet manipulation.Finally, Poland in 1918 was struggling with its own identity. What did it mean to be “Polish?” The later medieval Polish state had been highly ethnically mixed so there were those in 1918 who wanted to recreate that state, a sort of mega-state kind of like the Habsburg empire, comprised of many peoples but serving as a(n admittedly unequal) political vehicle for each. So historical people like Adam Mickiewicz or Copernicus are argued over constantly today by different nationalities trying to claim them as their own, but they called themselves Polish — albeit with a very different meaning of “Polish.” Meanwhile, over the 19th century a new Polish ethnic nationalism had risen, and there were those who wanted an ethnically “pure” (whatever that means) Polish state. Group A won this argument, which meant that by the end of 1922 about one-third of Poland’s population was non-Polish (mostly Ukrainians, Belarussians, Lithuanians, Jews and Germans). Initially Warsaw tried to placate and provide reasonable accommodations for these minorities in the 1920s, helping with schools, newspapers, etc., but by the 1930s — especially after 1935 — Warsaw behaved increasingly nationalistically and alienated many of these minorities. During the actual 1939 campaign, for instance, as the panicked Polish government retreated towards Romania, it debated feverishly whether to provide arms to Ukrainian civilians, not knowing whether they would use them to resist the German invasion or turn them on their Polish neighbors. (Gross’ book, mentioned above, goes into some detail about this.) So having this large portion of the population that was not trusted by Warsaw also impacted Poland’s defense capabilities somewhat — though again, returning to Zaloga and Madej’s point, ultimately, a better-coordinated military organization coupled with better minority relations would have improved Polish performance in 1939, but still, could not have changed the outcome.I promise, no more addendums, though they ultimately point towards the answer: “There were really a lot of complicated factors that led to the stunning Polish defeat of 1939.”

A2AThis article provides a fairly concise summary as to where the stolen assets went:Holocaust-Era Assets Records, Research, and Restitution- page on archives.govFrom the end of World War II until five years ago the Holocaust was primarily viewed as the greatest murder in history. And indeed it was. But since the spring of 1996 it has become ever more apparent that the Holocaust was also the greatest robbery in history. The Nazi-era witnessed the direct and indirect theft of well over $150 billion of tangible assets of victims of Nazi persecution.This evening I will be discussing this robbery, efforts to right the wrongs of the past, and the importance of archival research to the restitution and compensation process.The process of taking assets began with Aryanization of Jewish property in the 1930s; followed by the looting of real, personal, intellectual, and cultural property throughout the war; and the looting of gold from the central banks of occupied countries. The process even involved the taking the gold filings, rings, and other valuables of those murdered in the Final Solution.Art was a favorite target of the Nazis and the Nazis looted some 600,000 pieces. Many items were subsequently sold to raise funds to support the Nazi war machine.There was also the indirect loss of wealth by victims of Nazi persecution. To protect their assets many European Jews during the 1930s sent funds to one or more of the over 400 Swiss Banks. Many of the depositors who were victims of Nazi persecution did not survive the war and often neither did their heirs. Thus the Swiss banks, which never close an account, kept the deposits, estimated today as being worth over $1 billion. Additionally, survivors and heirs found it difficult, if not impossible, to withdraw funds for lack of a secret bank account number or the lack of a death certificate; something that the Nazis did not create at the death camps.Many Jews in the 1930s bought property and death insurance policies assuming that insurance would provide them or their heirs with financial protection. During the war, German authorities systematically confiscated the insurance policies of Holocaust victims, as well as cashing in policies once the insured person was murdered. Survivors and heirs after the war found it difficult, if not impossible, to have insurance companies honor policies. Often lack of a death certificate or lack of a copy of an insurance policy precluded payments.Another form of indirect loss of monies was the Nazi uses of forced and slave labor. Some 12 million people, many from Poland and Russia, were forced into labor on behalf of the Third Reich. Some were minimally compensated. Most were not.The Allies were well aware of the thefts taking place in Nazi Europe and did take action during and after the war to identify, locate, and recover Nazi looted assets. This was done to keep the Nazi war machine from using the looted assets to acquire items it needed to continue the war and to provide restitution to those who had lost property. During the course of tracking, recovering, and restituting the looted assets some 30 agencies of the US Government created well over 30 million pages of records. These records had an importance then for administrative, fiscal, and legal purposes. These same records certainly have an importance today.A most important concern of the Allies was the Nazi theft of some $6 billion dollars (in today's dollars) of central bank gold. The discovery of hidden gold in Germany in the last days of the war and subsequent negotiations with neutral countries that had acquired the looted gold, resulted in the Allies being able to recover about two-thirds of the stolen gold. Some of this gold was non-monetary gold, some of which had been re-smelted and merged with monetary gold and some was gold watches and wedding bands, as well as victim dental gold.After the war the Allies provided that the non-monetary gold be restituted to individuals through the auspices of an international refugee organization. The monetary gold was turned over to a Tripartite Commission for the Restitution of Monetary Gold (TGC) that would decide how much gold would be returned to each country that had its central bank gold looted. The TGC, composed of American, British, and French representatives, restituted to claimant countries most of the gold in the 1950s.The advent of the Cold War, the restitution of most of the monetary gold, and other factors, resulted in diminishing interest in all the questions surrounding Nazi looted assets. It should be noted that immediately after the war, survivors were primarily concerned with putting their lives back together and did not have the energy or means to regain what was lost. And many Jews were reluctant to pursue what was rightfully theirs, mostly out of fear that their efforts would fuel anti-Semitism and because they did not want to relive the horrors of the Holocaust-era. Also, many initial claims were meet with resistance and obstruction from the holders of the assets, and thus subsequent efforts to regain property were never pursued. Few countries, companies, and banks, unfortunately, made any concerted efforts, if any at all, to find the heirs of victims.Some restitution and recovery of assets, however, was forthcoming. Many assets, such as cultural property and works of art, were recovered and restituted by the US Army occupiers in Germany, Austria, and Italy. The government of the Federal Republic of Germany began making substantial reparation payments to Holocaust survivors, heirs, and to the state of Israel and signed bilateral agreements with more than a dozen countries set up pensions and annuities for victims in western Europe. But, during the Cold War, the communist regimes in Central and Eastern Europe prevented Holocaust survivors and heirs from receiving such payments. There was some Jewish interest in dormant and closed bank accounts in Switzerland and some Swiss banks, pushed by Israel and others in the early 1960s, undertook a relatively inadequate attempt to ascertain how much they held and to return it. Identified and returned to depositors or their heirs, beginning in 1964, was about $2.5 million.Questions periodically arose about the restitution of assets, but not enough to cause a groundswell of international action. For all intents and purposes the issues surrounding looted assets exited from center stage. For 40 years there was not much interest in Nazi looted assets and almost no research.That all changed in early 1996 when Edgar Bronfman, head of the World Jewish Congress, asked Senator Alfonse D'Amato, the head of the Senate Banking Committee, to investigate the supposedly large quantities of dormant Jewish bank accounts in Swiss banks. Bronfman believed that there were billions of dollars in accounts and that the Swiss banks were making it difficult, if not impossible, for survivors of the Holocaust and heirs of victims of Nazi persecution to retrieve.When the senator agreed to look into the matter, it touched off a renewed interest in Holocaust-Era Assets. For the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) the interest first truly manifested itself in March 1996, when D'Amato sent a researcher to Archives II to look for information about Jewish dormant bank accounts in Swiss banks. Very early in her research the researcher located records that contained detailed information about Jewish deposits in a Swiss bank. Within a month of her discovery D'Amato's Senate Banking Committee held hearings on Nazi looted assets and the Swiss bank accounts and shortly thereafter began a major, worldwide research effort into Holocaust-Era assets.This research effort, along with diplomatic, political, legal, moral, and economic pressures, have prompted countries, organizations, and companies to come to gripes with the past and to agree to help in the process of righting the wrongs of the past. During the past several years progress has been accomplished in various aspects of Holocaust-Era assets.Early in October 1996 class action lawsuits were filed in the U.S. District Court in Brooklyn against the two largest Swiss Banks alleging that they had blocked the survivors' efforts to reclaim money that was directly deposited in the banks or that the Nazis had looted and stored in the banks. The plaintiffs sought $20 billion in compensation.Responding to the negative publicity, the Swiss in December 1996, created an independent commission of experts to spend five years studying the Swiss role in World War II. Early in 1997, the Swiss established a $200 million fund for Holocaust survivors. This fund would grow to over $400 million by 1999. Responding to economic and legal pressures, the Swiss Bankers Association and the Swiss government persuaded Paul Volcker, former head of the Federal Reserve Board, to head up an international committee to oversee the auditing of dormant bank accounts to ascertain how much of these accounts belonged to the Holocaust survivors and heirs. To assist Volcker the Swiss Government lifted, for five years, Swiss Bank Secrecy Laws. During the latter half of 1997 the Swiss began to publish names of Holocaust-Era dormant accounts. Eventually, in August of 1998, the Swiss Banks agreed to a $1.25 billion out of court settlement. Although the settlement had been reached, it still remained for the court to work out the details as to who would receive compensation. Those details were finalized last year. At the time the lawsuit had extended its original reach. In addition to Nazi victims with Swiss accounts, the settlement ultimately identified four other groups of potential beneficiaries, including those whose looted assets had found their way into Switzerland, slave laborers, and refugees who were turned away by Switzerland. Four Swiss insurers are adding $50 million to the settlement and over 35 Swiss companies, including food giant Nestle, whose wartime subsidiaries used slave labor are making financial contributions to the settlement fund, in the expectation it would cover any possible claims against them.During the summer of 1996 some prominent members of the British Parliament began taking an active interest in looted Nazi gold and they tasked the Foreign and Commonwealth Office with preparing a report on the Nazi looted gold. The report was quickly published and immediately it raised internationally questions about the gold, and indirectly, about the actions of Switzerland during the war. The British report would set in motion the U.S. Government getting involved, and providing political clout to the process of seeking the truth about the past and putting that information to work in the process of providing compensation to victims of Nazi persecution.During the late summer of 1996 Edgar Bronfman explained the Holocaust restitution issue to the President. Clinton agreed to help with the issue and to work with D'Amato. In early September 1996, the Clinton tasked Stuart E. Eizenstat, then Under Secretary of Commerce for International Trade, as well as Special Envoy of the Department of State on Property Restitution in Central and Eastern Europe, to prepare a report that would describe U.S. and Allied efforts to recover and restore gold the Nazis had looted from the central banks of occupied Europe, as well as gold taken from individual victims of Nazi persecution, and other assets stolen by Nazi Germany. To accomplish this task Eizenstat established in October an 11-agency Interagency Group on Nazi Assets. I was my agency's representative. Dr. William Z. Slany, the Department of State's Chief Historian, had the responsibility for drafting the group's report. He in turn asked me to prepare a finding aid to relevant records. Slany formed his research team, consisting of researchers from the Departments of Defense, Treasury, Justice, and State, the U.S. Holocaust Museum, the Central Intelligence Agency, and the Federal Reserve Board. They soon made the National Archives their home.In May 1997 the Interagency Group issued its report, with my 300-page finding aid serving as an appendix. The report, based primarily on NARA's holdings, focused on what U.S. officials knew about Nazi looting of gold and other assets and how the United States attempted to trace the movement of looted gold and other assets into neutral and non-belligerent nations, and to recover the assets from these nations as well as from occupied Europe. The report was quite critical of the Swiss and the other World War II neutrals.Within days of issuing its first report, the Inter Agency Group on Nazi Assets was asked to prepare another report dealing with the neutrals and their financial and economic dealings with the Axis. Thus, in the summer of 1997, its researchers from three federal agencies began to do their research again with NARA's assistance. As research was getting underway news stories, based on NARA's holdings, about the Vatican's Holocaust-Era assets involvement, particularly the assets stolen by the Croatian Utashi and sent to the Vatican, prompted President Clinton to direct Eizenstat, who at the time was the Under Secretary of State, to also study the fate of the assets seized by the Croatians.In late 1996, the TGC was in the process of deciding how to allocate the remaining $60 million worth of gold. The United States asked it to delay the final distribution until the non-monetary gold issue could be further studied, primarily to determine the degree which the monetary gold was tainted with non-monetary. At the London Gold Conference in December 1997, attended by representatives of 41 nations, countries that were entitled to the remaining TGC gold were asked not to take their final payment but instead donate it to a Nazi Persecutee Relief Fund. They were asked to do so because research at the National Archives and elsewhere had proven that some of the monetary gold was tainted with non-monetary gold, and thus should go to people rather than countries. Nazi victims who lived in the former Soviet Union, who are often referred to as "double victims," were the first to get aid from the fund because in many cases they did not get compensation that was paid to Holocaust survivors who lived in Western Europe. To get this fund established Eizenstat committed our Government to contribute $5 million even though the United States was not a TGC claimant. By the summer of 1998 some dozen countries had contributed their TGC share in the amount of over $50 million.The second Eizenstat report was issued in June 1998. The report provided a detailed analysis of the economic roles played by the neutral countries and the factors that shaped those roles. Prominent in the report was a focus on those countries' trading links with the Axis, as well as on their handling of looted assets, especially gold. Also addressed in the report was the fate of the Croatian Ustashi treasury and the Vatican's role during and immediately after the war. Also noted in the report was that the postwar negotiations that the Allies conducted with the wartime neutrals was protracted and failed to meet fully their original goals: restitution of the looted gold and the liquidation of German external assets to fund the reconstruction of postwar occupied Europe and to provide relief for Jews and other non-repatriable refugees. This resulted from the intransigence of the neutrals after the war, dissension within Allied ranks, and competing priorities stemming from the onset of the Cold War.Early 1997 witnessed a renewed interest in looted art, especially after Museums were being identified as possibly having and indeed having looted art. This interest prompted some museums, auction houses, and art dealers to undertake provenance research on their holdings. By the end of 1998, the search for looted art, according to two British authors, "had become the greatest treasure hunt in history." This may be an exaggeration but the search for looted art certainly became an important aspect of the art world. And several countries, including France, established commissions to look into the possibilities of looted art in their countries.In this country Congress during the spring of 1998 held hearings on the subject and in June the American Association of Museum Directors adopted guidelines calling for a review of their members' collections to identify works of art of dubious provenance. The international aspects of looted art and cultural property began in December 1998 with the four-day Washington Conference on Holocaust-Era Assets that was held at the Department of State. Attending the conference were over 400 representatives from 43 countries and a dozen non-governmental organizations. A dozen principals dealing with looted art and cultural property were adopted at the conference. To determine how well countries were following the principals the Council of Europe sponsored another conference. This conference was held last October at Vilnius, Lithuania, at which representatives of 37 nations and 17 non-governmental organizations met to discuss looted cultural property. The Forum adopted a declaration that had six sections dealing with the restitution of looted cultural property.Since 1997 looted art has been clearly identified in numerous countries including the United States and various settlements regarding the looted art have been made.In October 1998 an International Commission on Holocaust-Era Insurance Claims was established by Italian, German, French, and Swiss insurers, U.S. regulators and Jewish groups, to settle unpaid insurance policies. Former Secretary of State Lawrence Eagleburger heads the commission. To show their goodwill two of the major insurance companies Italy's Generali and Allianz of Germany set up a $150 million fund to cover claims. The Commission is working closely with the companies, and some progress has been made, such as last summer when Generali agreed to pay all valid claims from Holocaust survivors and heirs; to give the Commission access to its archives; and to post on its website names of the firm's policy holders.A lawsuit was initiated in March 1998 against Ford Motor Company for allegedly operating a slave labor operation at its Cologne plant during the war. During the course of 1998 and 1999 some 50 lawsuits were filed against more than 100 of German and Austrian companies for their slave labor practices. The plaintiffs in the suits asked for $20 billion in damages.The Swiss bank settlement prompted several top German firms to come forward and say they would set up a restitution fund and during 1999 the German government agreed to compensate Holocaust survivors in the former Soviet bloc, thereby reversing their Cold War policy against such compensation. To settle the various lawsuits, in July 2000 an agreement was signed by representatives from Germany, the United States, eastern Europe and Israel, and U.S. attorneys to provide former forced and slave laborers $4.8 billion, half from the German government and half from over 3,000 German companies. As a way of encouraging additional contributions the U.S. government agreed to give $10 million to the new slave labor fund.Between January 2000 and this past January France, Austria, Belgium, and the Netherlands agreed to pay some $1.5 billion dollars for compensation of various types, including seized property, forced labor, unpaid insurance policies, and seized bank accounts.Up to now I have spoken about the past and current efforts to right the wrongs of the past. The political, diplomatic, moral, economic, and legal pressures that have contributed to paying the victims of Nazi persecution and their heirs did not just happen in a vacuum. Without records and research, and NARA's assistance the progress that has been made to date and will continue to be made would not have happened.Since March 1996 the National Archives and Records Administration's Archives II Building in College Park, Maryland has been visited and/or contacted by well over one thousand researchers interested in records relating to Holocaust-Era assets. Many of those researchers have spent weeks, months, and even years at Archives II going through millions of documents. The high water point of Holocaust-Era assets researchers came on September 1, 1998, when there were 47 of them. Many of these researchers represented law firms engaged in litigation and many were foreigners. Foreign researchers and representatives of a dozen foreign commissions looking into their countries' handling of victim assets found NARA an important resource to supplement the information available in the archival records in their own countries. Representatives of foreign banks, governments, archives, and corporations have also come to do research.It started in 1996 with gold and Jewish bank accounts. In 1997 art works and insurance, and non-monetary gold [that is, victims' gold from the death camps, such as dental gold], and the role of the Vatican were added; in 1998 slave labor, alleged American and foreign bank misdeeds; looted archives and libraries; and Jewish communal and religious property were being studied. At the end of 1998 Lord Janner, who heads the London-based Holocaust Educational Trust, stated the "hunt for Nazi loot has turned into the greatest treasure hunt in history. We don't know where it will end." Since he made those remarks the research has broadened to encompass looted diamonds and securities, as well as the role of American corporations in their dealings with the Nazis.To assist researchers I began early in 1996 to prepare special finding aids to relevant records; first 3 pages; then 10 pages; then 125; and for the First Eizenstat Report in May 1997 a 300-page guide to the records. During the summer 1997 as the research widened to more countries and more subjects, there was a great desire for an expanded finding aid to relevant records. I produced a 300-page supplemental finding aid in the fall of 1997. It was placed on the Department of State's website in November 1997. During the winter of 1997-1998 I prepared a revised and enlarged finding aid. This finding aid, some 750-pages, was placed on the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum's website in March 1998. In March 1999, NARA published my 1,100 page guide to some 15 million pages of records created or received by over 30 Federal agencies.To further assist researchers I was urged by the Department of State to have NARA hold a records and research-oriented conference the day after the Washington Conference on Holocaust-Era Assets ended. This one-day event, Symposium on Holocaust-Era Assets Records and Research, was held at Archives II on December 4, 1998. Over 400 people, including representatives of numerous foreign governments attended. Eizenstat gave the keynote address. He stated "It is truly remarkable to reflect on the sheer amount of research that is being conducted and the new archival sources that has been unearthed in just the past few years." Furthermore, he added "I am particularly proud to say that our country was a leader in this effort to advance the process of archival research…The National Archives…has become a focal point of research, scholarship, and remembrance into the issues surrounding Holocaust-era assets." He concluded his remarks by stating "The National Archives can be proud of the positive role it has played both in bringing justice, however belated, to the survivors and memory to the deceased." During the course of the day NARA launched it assets website.Growing out of the desire to declassify still-classified Government records Congress in October 1998 enacted the Nazi War Crimes Records Disclosure Act of 1998. This law required Federal agencies, including NARA, to review and recommend for declassification records relating to Nazi war crimes, Nazi war criminals, Nazi persecution, and Nazi looted assets. By the end of March over 3 million pages have been declassified and it is expected another 7 million pages will be declassified under the Act.By the summer of 1998, there were upwards of 20 national commissions looking at what had happened to assets in their respective countries. Many of those involved in the assets issue believed that the United States should have its own commission to look at Holocaust-Era assets that came into the control and/or custody of the United States Government. Congress reacted to this desire by enacting a law in July establishing the Presidential Advisory Commission on Holocaust-Era Assets in the United States and in October President Clinton appointed Edgar Bronfman to chair the group. Also serving as members of the Commission were Eizenstat and eight members of Congress. The Commission's research staff, numbering over 20 individuals spent considerable time at the National Archives between the spring of 1999 and the last fall doing research. The Commission presented its report and recommendations to President Clinton in mid-January of this year.Early on the importance of records and getting to the truth was recognized. The records NARA held and its staff assistance was, and has continually been appreciated. This began in May 1997 in the first Eizenstat report. The author, Dr. Slany, in his preface wrote "All of the research depended directly upon the unfailing support, assistance, and encouragement of the…National Archives and Records Administration. Our work simply could not have been carried out without this assistance…" Senator D'Amato, on the floor of the Senate in June expressed his appreciation, stating "The National Archives at College Park has been nothing less than amazing… Their help was indispensable in establishing, continuing and expanding the research of the Committee."Eizenstat in December 1998 speaking about archival openness took the opportunity to thank NARA for its work in helping his interagency group and the foreign commissions. "NARA archivists," he said, "continue to provide extraordinary assistance and information to the many governmental and private researchers who have traveled to the Archives to consult documents available nowhere else in the world." Later in his talk he stated "I cannot fail to mention the truly remarkable measures taken by my own government: making available and fully accessible to researchers by May 1997 at the National Archives more than 15 million pages of documents-….And the work has gone forward without pause at the National Archives with new and important files being found, described, and made available for research."By the end of 1998, the importance of archives as a result of Holocaust-Era Assets research had been clearly demonstrated. Reporter John Marks in the December 14, 1998, issue of the U.S. News & World Report wrote, "since 1996, when the Holocaust restitution effort gained new momentum" archival institutions "have become drivers of world events. Their contents have forced apologies from governments, opened long-dormant bank accounts, unlocked the secrets of art museums, and compelled corporations to defend their reputations."During the past five much has been accomplished towards bringing justice and compensation to victims of Nazi persecution. But those working so hard to achieve the financial settlements know that no amount of money could ever compensate for the atrocities of World War II. And they also know that much still needs to be done, and done quickly as the number of Holocaust survivors decreases every year. Many issues, both old and new, are still unresolved. Thus, undoubtedly, interest in Holocaust-Era assets issues will continue for years, if not decades. And just as certainly, archival research throughout the world will accompany the interest in the various asset-related issues.Archival research at NARA coupled with research undertaken elsewhere, have contributed immeasurably to countries, corporations, banks, and other institutions, being more capable of addressing their pasts and accepting their current responsibilities. Archives have the past five years and will in the future serve as important resources in the search for truth and justice, and as Stuart Eizenstat frequently says, turning history into justice.There's also a good deal more information written inUnholy Trinity: The Vatican, The Nazis, and The Swiss Banks: Mark Aarons, John Loftus: 9780312181994: Amazon.com: BooksLoftus traces some of the funds. It is especially damning to all parties involved.