The conclusion is tentative
Even “likely” is a huge distortion. The 60 Minutes feature was really an exercise in click-bait. The only “evidence” they have is non-evidence: van den Bergh [as well as tens of thousand others] was not taken away by the Gestapo in the main haul. There are many, many things of value he could have provided, that do not involve turning over the hiding place of the Frank family. Then, they again make non-evidence into evidence: Otto Frank’s silence after 1947 is somehow dispositive of Jewish complicity (perhaps he was just emotionally exhausted with an investigation that seemed unresolvable).
Ok, and the anonymous note to Otto Frank that accused van den Bergh-- but that almost raises more questions than it answers. The anonymous source knows a lot about the internals of the Gestapo. If he was doing such a good deed, why did he seek to remain anonymous? What if he sent the note to throw the scent off his own collaboration?
Yup, we just pitched all these WW2-era docs into the ole AI bin and the AI knew what to do!
It was like when they uttered “AI”, we were supposed to all nod reverently and come back with: “Oh, well, AI… Then your methods are unimpeachable.”
