First, notice the word I used here was "merit" not "deserved", simply meaning: they did not meet criteria established by US law for admission.
Second, your claim is that I said: "that the Jews deserved to be denied a port of refuge by Roosevelt and sent back to Europe."
Word usage of "deserved": you "merit" or "deserve" admission, but you don't "deserve" or "merit" a denial.
For analogy, think of college -- you may "merit" admission, but if you are not admitted, it's not because you "deserve" denial, you may have been well qualified, but not selected for some other reason.
Denial says nothing about how much you "deserve", only that for some reason, or no particular reason, you were not selected.
But, FRiend, you've asked this question, and then restated my answers in such a way as to make it look as if I said Jews "deserved" or "merited" rejection, which is simply not accurate.
By prior contract, they deserved entry to Cuba, or could have gone to the Dominican Republic which had offered sanctuary.
Since President Roosevelt did not offer them sanctuary, they deserved safe haven in free European countries, which is what they got.
But neither in 1939, nor today does every refugee in every part of the world deserve entry to the US.
That doesn't mean they "deserve" to be rejected, only that by whatever criteria we use at the time, they didn't meet it.
Surely that explanation is clear enough to get you to stop playing dumb on me, FRiend?
You have continually argued that these Jewish refugees deserved to be denied a port of refuge by Roosevelt, and returned to Europe. Own your words, which are evident from the start (post 24). In post 34 you wrote " Just so we're clear about this: there were no Nazi death camps in 1939, none."