HOME  DISINFORMATION  CHRC  PEOPLE  ABELLA  COTLER  FARBER  MARTIN  MORGAN  RAMBAM  RONEN
UKAR reply to the CJC complaint of anti-Semitism
Lubomyr Prytulak to Mary M Gusella   06-May-2004

Mary M Gusella, Chief Commissioner
Mary M Gusella
Chief Commissioner
"Even when a pregnant Palestinian woman is stopped at an Israeli check-point and gives birth in open field, the only lesson to be learnt is that Ha'aretz journalist Gideon Levy — who reported two such cases in the past two weeks, one in which the baby died — is an anti-semite." — Ran HaCohen


  06-May-2004


Mary M Gusella, Chief Commissioner
Canadian Human Rights Commission (CHRC)
344 Slater Street
Ottawa, ON    K1A 1E1

Re: UKAR reply to the CJC complaint of anti-Semitism

Dear Ms Gusella:

I.    The CHRC Must Protect Participants From Abuse And Threats

The Canadian Jewish Congress (CJC)
complaint dated 27-Nov-2003 uses the words "antisemitic" or "antisemitism" six times, which Lubomyr Prytulak will refer to collectively as the CJC complaint of Ukrainian Archive (UKAR) anti-Semitism.

Lubomyr Prytulak rejects this CJC accusation of UKAR anti-Semitism, and requests that the Canadian Human Rights Commission (CHRC or the Commission) direct the CJC to withdraw the accusation, on grounds which are most succinctly outlined by the table of contents of the instant letter:

  1. The CHRC Must Protect Participants From Abuse And Threats   @
  2. The CJC Accusation of Anti-Semitism   @
    1. The Canadian Jewish Congress accusation of anti-Semitism is a MUZZLE   @
    2. The Canadian Jewish Congress accusation of anti-Semitism is a PSYCHIATRIC DIAGNOSIS   @
    3. The Canadian Jewish Congress accusation of anti-Semitism is a THREAT   @
  3. The UKAR Accusation of CJC Anti-Semitism and of Psychopathy   @
    1. The Canadian Jewish Congress Leadership is ANTI-SEMITIC   @
    2. The Canadian Jewish Congress Leadership is PSYCHOPATHIC   @
  4. Recommendations Toward an Improved CHRC   @
II.    The CJC Accusation of Anti-Semitism

The Canadian Jewish Congress accusation of anti-Semitism is three things: (1) a muzzle, (2) a psychiatric diagnosis, and (3) a threat.

  1. The Canadian Jewish Congress accusation of anti-Semitism is a
    MUZZLE


    Nine out of ten instances of the accusation of "anti-Semitism" denote little about the accused, but rather indicate about the accuser that he is faring badly in debate, and prefers to have the voice of his opponent suppressed.  We have reached a time, in other words, when the accusation of "anti-Semitism" discredits the accuser rather than the accused, a conclusion echoed by countless observers, of which the following thirteen are illustrative:

    Ali ABUNIMAH

    [I]f you can't win the debate, the best thing to do is to try to stop it.  And the best way to try to stop it is to try to make people too scared to indulge in it.  And the way to do that is to tar any discussion of the topic with the specter of anti-Semitism [...].
    Ali Abunimah and others, Panel: Is criticism of Israel anti-Semitism?, The Electronic Intifada, 16-Dec-2002 electronicintifada.net/v2/article975.shtml

    Uri AVNER

    Sharon's propaganda agents are pouring oil on the flames.  Accusing all critics of his policy of being anti-Semites, they brand large communities with this mark.  Many good people, who feel no hatred at all towards the Jews, but who detest the persecution of the Palestinians, are now called anti-Semites.  Thus the sting is taken out of this word, giving it something approaching respectability.
    Uri AVNER, Manufacturing Anti-Semites, CounterPunch, 02-Oct-2002  www.counterpunch.org/avnery1002.htm

    Linda BELANGER

    As usual in this type of discussion one is made to feel that Jews are more victimized than other groups or that anti-Semitism is somehow more abhorrent than other forms of racism.  [...]  Policies that include 24 hour curfews for months, home demolitions, destruction of ancient olive groves, roadblocks that prevent access to education, jobs and healthcare and total disregard for over 65 United Nations Resolutions.  The rank hypocrisy of talking about offensive WORDS, no-matter how stupid, racist and ignorant, in regards to Jews and the Holocaust while ignoring what is actually HAPPENING to Palestinians right NOW must surely be offensive to any intelligent listener.  [...]  There can be no discussion regarding growing anti-Semitism without consideration of the Israeli apartheid system imposed on Palestinians.  [...]  What of the children of people of Arab descent?  Both Canada and the U.S. have a substantial Arab and Muslim populations whose sympathies clearly lie with Palestinians.  How is the testosterone charged teenager of Arab descent going to react to news that 8 year old children of a group he identifies with, are being shot for throwing rocks at tanks or sometimes just shot in the back?  What is this kid going to do when he hears lengthy discussions about anti-Semitism on radio and television and nothing about the crimes committed against his own kind?  I can bet it will not be to write.  Talk of anti-Semitism without looking at the context may be a way to fill air time without generating the ire of B'nai B'rith but in no way contributes to reducing anti-Semitism.  Real solutions come as a result of discussion by an informed public.  There is no winning through suppression of information and discussion.  You can only keep the lid on the pressure cooker for so long before it blows up.  [...]  By giving air time to the whining Zionists with their preposterous precepts and not to the "left-wing" Jews who oppose the policies of the war criminal Ariel Sharon and his ilk, the media is contributing to anti-Semitism AND condoning the racist Zionist policies which are completely irreconcilable with our values of freedom and equality.
    Linda BELANGER, Words Hurt, But Tanks Kill: Putting Accusations of Anti-Semitism in Context, CounterPunch, 28-Dec-2002  www.counterpunch.org/belanger1228.html

    Pat BUCHANAN

    The neocons have also begun to injure their reputations and isolate themselves with the nastiness and irrationality of their attacks.  French cannon once bore the inscription ultima ratio regum, the last argument of kings.  The toxic charge of "Anti-Semite!" has become the last argument of the neocons.  But they have wheeled out that cannon too many times.  People are less intimidated now.  They have seen men look into its muzzle and walk away.
    Pat BUCHANAN, No End to War: The Frum-Perle prescription would ensnare America in endless conflict, The American Conservative, 01-Mar-2004  amconmag.com/3_1_04/cover.html

    Noam CHOMSKY

    By now Jews in the US are the most privileged and influential part of the population.  You find occasional instances of anti-Semitism but they are marginal.  There’s plenty of racism, but it’s directed against Blacks, Latinos, Arabs are targets of enormous racism, and those problems are real.  Anti-Semitism is no longer a problem, fortunately.  It’s raised, but it’s raised because privileged people want to make sure they have total control, not just 98% control.  That’s why anti-Semitism is becoming an issue.  Not because of the threat of anti-Semitism; they want to make sure there’s no critical look at the policies the US (and they themselves) support in the Middle East.
    Noam CHOMSKY, Anti-Semitism, Zionism, and the Palestinians, FromOccupiedPalestine, 11-Oct-2002  www.fromoccupiedpalestine.org/node.php?id=116&PHPSESSID=9c35e3147896d6707671c9c86a1a6ebb

    Alexander COCKBURN

    Over the past 20 years I’ve learned there’s a quick way of figuring out just how badly Israel is behaving.  You see a brisk uptick in the number of articles here accusing the left of anti-Semitism.  [...]  The other day I even got accused of anti-Semitism for mentioning that the Jews founded Hollywood, which they most certainly did, as Neil Gabler recently recounted in a very funny, pro-Semitic book.  [...]  Being called an anti-Semite these days isn’t what it once was.  The term has been relentlessly cheapened.  [...]  But nowadays people don’t flourish the charge of anti-Semitism because they’ve heard someone quoting the Protocols or saying that the Jews kill Christian babies.  "Anti-Semitism" has become like a flit gun to squirt at every inconvenient fly on the window pane.
    Alexander Cockburn, My Life as an "Anti-Semite", CounterPunch Newsletter, 1-15-September-2003  student.cs.ucc.ie/cs1064/jabowen/IPSC/articles/article0004256.html

    Robert FISK

    The all-purpose slander of "anti-Semitism" is now used with ever-increasing promiscuity against anyone — people who condemn the wickedness of Palestinian suicide bombings every bit as much as they do the cruelty of Israel's repeated killing of children — in an attempt to shut them up.
    Robert FISK, How to Shut Up Your Critics, CounterPunch, 23-Oct-2002  www.counterpunch.org/fisk1023.html

    Webster's Third New International Dictionary defines "anti-Semitism" as "opposition to Zionism: sympathy with opponents of the state of Israel".

    Come again? If you or I suggest [...] that the Palestinians are getting a raw deal under Israeli occupation, then we are "anti-Semitic".  It is only fair, of course, to quote the pitiful response of the Webster's official publicist, Mr Arthur Bicknell, who was asked to account for this grotesque definition.

    "Our job," he responded, "is to accurately reflect English as it is actually being used. We don't make judgement calls; we're not political."
    Robert Fisk, A warning to those who dare to criticise Israel in the land of free speech, The Independent Friday, 23-Apr-2004, reproduced at CounterPunch  www.counterpunch.org/fisk04242004.html

    Indeed, inferring anti-Semitism from anti-Zionism leads to quandaries that might prove difficult to resolve:


    American Orthodox-Jews led by Rabbi Moshe Ber Beck in a miniature demonstration at Central Park, New York.  The demonstration took place whilst many Jews were unfortunately celebrating a day which they call Yom Ha'atzma'ut — that sad day in the Jewish calendar when Jews accepted Palestine and took jurisdiction over it.
    Photo and caption originally, but no longer, on the Naturei Karta web site at www.geocities.com/Pentagon/Bunker/5750/orthodox.html

    Ran HACOHEN

    Jews may believe in God or not, eat pork or not, live in Israel or not, but they are all united by their unlimited belief in anti-semitism.

    When a Palestinian kills innocent Israeli civilians, it's anti-semitism.  When Palestinians attack soldiers of Israel's occupation army in their own village, it's anti-semitism.  When the UN General Assembly votes 133 to 4 condemning Israel's decision to murder the elected Palestinian leader, it means that except for the US, Micronesia and Marshal Islands, all other countries on the globe are anti-semitic.  Even when a pregnant Palestinian woman is stopped at an Israeli check-point and gives birth in open field, the only lesson to be learnt is that Ha'aretz journalist Gideon Levy — who reported two such cases in the past two weeks, one in which the baby died — is an anti-semite.
    Ran HaCohen, Abusing "Anti-Semitism", Letter From Israel, 29-Sep-2003  www.antiwar.com/hacohen/h092903.html

    Rabbi Daniel LAPIN

    Apparently, frightening wealthy widows in Florida about anti-Semitic thugs prowling the streets of America causes them to open their pocketbooks and refill the coffers of groups with little other raison d'être.
    Rabbi Daniel LAPIN, Why Mel Owes One To The Jews, Toward Tradition, 12-Feb-2004  www.towardtradition.org/article_Passion_Feb_2004.htm

    Neil MACDONALD:

    In the five years I covered the Middle East, I always found the anti-Semitism card to be the refuge of the intellectually weak.
    Neil MacDonald quoted by Scott Edmonds, CBC correspondent rips Asper, 01-Oct-2003  cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/MediaNews/2003/10/01/214557-cp.html

    Michael NEUMANN

    Inflating the meaning of 'antisemitism' to include anything politically damaging to Israel is a double-edged sword.  It may be handy for smiting your enemies, but the problem is that definitional inflation, like any inflation, cheapens the currency.  The more things get to count as antisemitic, the less awful antisemitism is going to sound.  [...]  We must add that, since we are obliged to oppose the settlements, we are obliged to be antisemitic.  Through definitional inflation, some form of 'antisemitism' has become morally obligatory.  [...]  The more antisemitism expands to include opposition to Israeli policies, the better it looks.  Given the crimes to be laid at the feet of Zionism, there is another simple syllogism: anti-Zionism is a moral obligation, so, if anti-Zionism is antisemitism, antisemitism is a moral obligation.
    Michael NEUMANN, What is Antisemitism?, 04-Jun-2002  www.ukar.org/neuman/neuman01.html

    Israel SHAMIR

    In the movie based on the mammoth tale by Jean Auel, Clan of Cave Bear, there is a glimpse of the sex life of the Palaeolithic people who roamed the earth some 35,000 years ago.  Apparently, whenever a Neanderthal wished to have fun, he didn’t need to bring flowers or arrange dinner for two.  He would make a certain sign with his hand, and the chosen girl would immediately comply with his desire, without further ado.

    The sign to submit is still with us.  Whenever people discuss the things done in the name of Jews by, say, Sharon or Abe Foxman, the moment the discussion starts to get out of hand, one of the leaders of the community chants the magic word 'anti-Semitism,' and, as if under a spell, we immediately bend over.
    Israel SHAMIR, The Third Dove, 09-Apr-2001  www.ukar.org/shamir07.html

    Joe SOBRAN

    This is altogether typical of Zionist polemics: while the Israelis kill women and children, destroy homes, and drive people out of their native land, they want the subject of discussion to be the dark motives of their critics.  The worse Israel gets, the more they squeal about anti-Semitism.

    The Zionist polemical strategy is always to treat the critic as the defendant.  His merely verbal "offenses" must be regarded as more serious than the innocent blood — real blood — that stains Israel.  [...]

    The elastic concept of anti-Semitism really means that in every conflict, Jews must be considered innocent victims.  It’s reminiscent of the similar concept of "McCarthyism," which allowed Communists to pose as victims while Communism was still murdering and oppressing untold millions.  McCarthyism was in fact a bloodless, if bungling, attempt to get Soviet agents out of government jobs.  Yet we still hear about the piteous "victims of McCarthyism."

    Joe McCarthy was ruined because he couldn’t back up all his charges of Communist affiliation.  But nobody pays any penalty for making false charges of anti-Semitism.  Of course if you define it broadly enough, practically everyone becomes a potential anti-Semite.  In the realm of thought crimes, as Stalin realized, precise definitions are an annoying inconvenience.  When you hear anti-Semitism, think anti-Soviet activities.  Why talk about Israel’s deeds, when you can talk about its critics’ motives?
    Joe Sobran, Lansky's Complaint, Sobran's The Real News of the Month, 28-Oct-2003  www.sobran.com/columns/2003/031028.shtml

    In view of resort to the accusation of anti-Semitism being applied almost exclusively by Jews faring badly in debate (which is to say in an attempt to muzzle or gag), and in view of the frequency and recklessness with which the muzzling is attempted, and in view of the widespread indignation and ridicule that the accusation of anti-Semitism elicits, and in view of the Canadian Jewish Congress complaint failing to adhere to any definition of "anti-Semitism" which might demonstrate that the CJC application is reasonable and disciplined — in view of all these considerations, invocation of the term "anti-Semitism" has no place in the instant proceedings.

    The next stage in the argument reveals that the effectiveness of the accusation of anti-Semitism depends on its two chief properties — that it is both a psychiatric diagnosis and a threat, as discussed in turn below.

  2. The Canadian Jewish Congress accusation of anti-Semitism is a
    PSYCHIATRIC DIAGNOSIS


    "Anti-Semitism" is understood to be an irrational hatred of Jews, but where the hatred has ready access to reserves of intensity which make it capable of triggering not only violence but genocide:

    We know, and we must never forget, that every path leads somewhere.  The path of segregation leads to lynching.  The path of anti-Semitism leads to Auschwitz.  The path of cults leads to Jonestown.  We ignore this fact at our peril.
    Rabbi Maurice Davis, as cited at Cult Info Books cultinfobooks.com/detail.asp?product_id=DON-AMT and at Cultic Studies www.csj.org/infoserv_freeinfo/cso_free%20converted/resistingcults.htm

    Anti-Semitism leads to the holocaust.
    Bible Doctrine News www.biblenews1.com/history3/20030531.htm

    Racism and anti-Semitism leads to genocide which feeds heterosexism in racial, cultural and ethnic minority communities.
    The Touchstone www.rtis.com/reg/bcs/pol/touchstone/summer97/robinson.htm

    Anti-Semitism leads to ghettos, concentration camps, torched synagogues and eventually to torched people.
    Questia www.questia.com/PM.qst?a=o&d=5001301860

    The accusation of "anti-Semitism," then, is the accusation of a concealed motive to see all Jews dead, possession of which motive easily qualifies the holder as suffering from a psychiatric malady, and which therefore makes the accusation of anti-Semitism a psychiatric diagnosis.

    The reason that anti-Semitism is not catalogued in the American Psychiatric Association Diagnostic and Statistical Manual is that such formal recognition would discipline its use and entrust its application to mental-health professionals of every nationality and religion, whereas what is wanted by Jewish debaters is a psychiatric diagnosis whose application is entrusted to Jews who mostly lack mental health expertise, and whose freedom from discipline and constraint permits them to wield the diagnosis as a weapon in any debate in which their poor performance places them in need of a muzzle.

    By way of demonstrating that anti-Semitism is regarded as a psychiatric diagnosis can be noted the language of mental illness with which it is discussed:

    At this moment in world history anti-Semitism is not manifesting itself with the full and violent destructiveness of which we know it to be capable.  Even a social disease has its periods of quiescence during which the social scientists, like the biologist or the physician, can study it in the search for more effective ways to prevent or reduce the virulence of the next outbreak.  [p. v]
    What tissues in the life of our modern society remain cancerous, and despite our assumed enlightenment show the incongruous atavism of ancient peoples?  And what within the individual organism responds to certain stimuli in our culture with attitudes and acts of destructive aggression?  [p. v]
    In the history of civilization there have been not a few instances when mass delusions were healed not by focused propaganda but, in the final analysis, because scholars, with their unobtrusive yet insistent work habits, studied what lay at the root of the delusion.  [p. ix]
    This categorical, self-contradictory rejection of an entire group is, however, more than a matter of faulty logic.  Viewed psychologically, these results suggest a deep-lying irrational hostility directed against a stereotyped image to which individual Jews correspond only partially if at all.  [pp. 75-76]
    One major characteristic of anti-Semites is a relatively blind hostility which is reflected in the stereotypy, self-contradiction, and destructiveness of their thinking about Jews.  [p. 76]
    Why is it so important for anti-Semites to reject Jews on any and all grounds?  Are the contradictions and oversimplifications primarily surface signs of a deeper-lying anxiety and hostility?  [p. 95]
    T. W. Adorno, Else Frenkel-Brunswik, Daniel J. Levinson, and R. Nevitt Sanford, The Authoritarian Personality, Part One, John Wiley & Sons, New York, 1964.  Copyright 1950 by the American Jewish Committee.

    Being a psychiatric condition, "anti-Semitism" is viewed as in part created by Freudian mechanisms such as reaction formation, whereby the Freudian supposes that any emotion may be a manifestation of its opposite.  Thus, if his patient claims to love his wife, the Freudian can take that as a symptom that the patient really hates his wife.  If his patient says he hates homosexuals, the Freudian can take that as a symptom that the patient is really a latent homosexual.  And so to the explanation that the anti-Semite fears Jewish power, the Freudian is able to apply his tool of reaction formation to transform even this into its opposite — that what the anti-Semite really fears is Jewish weakness:

    Why is the Jewish group, which is actually small and relatively weak, regarded as so threatening, while the really powerful and dominating groups in the status quo are supported rather than feared?  Is it actually the weakness of the Jews which is most disturbing to the anti-Semite?  If the concern with power and the fear of weakness in the high scorers [anti-Semites] represent deeper personality trends, these trends should be revealed by the clinical techniques and they should be expressed in the other ideological areas.  [p. 96]
    T. W. Adorno, Else Frenkel-Brunswik, Daniel J. Levinson, and R. Nevitt Sanford, The Authoritarian Personality, Part One, John Wiley & Sons, New York, 1964.  Copyright 1950 by the American Jewish Committee.

    The Adorno statement above is offered not because it is insightful or true (rather, it seems gratuitous and implausible), but only to demonstrate that anti-Semitism is taken to be governed by irrational Freudian mechanisms, like reaction formation, because it is assumed to be a psychiatric disorder.

    Returning to the Canadian Jewish Congress accusation of "anti-Semitism" in the instant CJC v UKAR proceedings, it should be readily apparent that the resort to psychiatric diagnosis as an ad hominem debating tactic constitutes personal abuse which has no place in any judicial or quasi-judicial proceeding, and which the CHRC should demand a retraction of whenever it occurs.  In the alternative, if the CHRC prefers to indulge gratuitous, ad hominem psychiatric diagnoses by one party, it must in the interests of justice simultaneously allow reciprocal psychiatric diagnoses to be lodged by the opposite party.  Permitting one side to parade its psychiatric diagnoses but not the other would demonstrate bias to the discredit the CHRC and to the disrepute of the administration of justice.

    In case the CHRC elects to not interfere with the respective parties obtruding mutual psychiatric diagnoses into CHRC proceedings, the UKAR psychiatric diagnosis of CJC leadership will be presented in section III below.

  3. The Canadian Jewish Congress accusation of anti-Semitism is a
    THREAT


    In searching for a weapon to parallel the Jewish bludgeon of "anti-Semitism," Ukrainians sometimes draw from its sheath and smite oppressors with their own diagnosis of "Ukrainophobia."  However, the Ukrainian diagnosis lacks clout.  It is more likely to elicit laughter than to muzzle.  The reason is that behind the Ukrainian diagnosis, there is no threat.  The accusation of Ukrainophobia gets no one fired, deprives no one of his livelihood, blocks no one's career advancement; whereas these things do happen to people diagnosed as suffering from anti-Semitism.  Ukrainophobe, then, is a psychiatric diagnosis backed by no credible threat; anti-Semite is a psychiatric diagnosis signalling that something like getting fired looms on one's horizon.

    A prominent example of what everybody knows happens, and fears happening to himself, can be seen in the case of Judge Gilbert Merritt, who never minced words in his indignation at having been duped by Jewish leaders into injuring a Ukrainian:

    "Today we know," says Merritt, "that they — the OSI, the prosecution in the case and the State Department — lied through their teeth.  Even then they knew without a doubt that Demjanjuk was not Ivan the Terrible, but they hid the information from us.  I am sorry that I did not have the information at the time.  If I did, we would never have ruled in favor of his extradition to Israel."  Merritt claims that what happened in his courtroom was "nothing short of a witch hunt.  In retrospect, it reminds me of the witch trials in Salem, Massachusetts 300 years ago.  The prosecution, counseled by the OSI, presented documents and witnesses whose testimony was based on emotions and hysteria, but not hard evidence.  To my regret, we believed them.  This instance is a prime example of how justice can be distorted."
    Yossi Melman, Who Lied About Demjanjuk? Ha'aretz, 14-Nov-1997, presently at www.ukar.org/merrit01.htm

    The effect of Judge Merritt's condemnation of Jewish leaders' corruption of American justice was to elicit foul abuse, as for example coming from Neal Sher — formerly America's top Nazi Hunter, collaborator with like-minded Irving Abella, and (upon the recommendation of the Canadian Jewish Congress), advisor to Canada's Justice Minister, Anne McLellan — but today finding himself disbarred for being unable to keep his hands out of the Jewish-holocaust-restitution till:

    I've never been to Judge Merritt's chambers.  Do you think it's possible that right there, next to his copy of the Constitution, sits a collector's edition of the Protocols of the Elders of Zion?
    Neal Sher, Judge Gilbert Merritt's Obsession With Jews, 05-Apr-1998, formerly, but no longer, at www.jewishworldreview.com/0498/sher040598.html, presently also cited in the 09-Feb-2001 Lubomyr Prytulak letter to Neal Sher Aren't animated images beneath you? at www.ukar.org/sher11.html

    And the effect of Jewish-leadership abuse such as the above was to block Judge Merritt's deserved career advancement:

    His expression of regret and critical remarks ended up costing Merritt the highest position that an American jurist can hope to reach.

    Before Demjanjuk, Merritt's star had shone bright.  He had extensive experience and a sterling reputation, and was a Democrat with a liberal world view.  Yet, despite being a leading candidate to fill a vacancy on the U.S. Supreme Court, and his prodigious judicial and civic skills, Merritt was never offered the sought-after appointment.  His friends, including Judge George Paine of the Federal Bankruptcy Court in Nashville, explain that Jewish organizations, and primarily B'nai Birth, the Anti-Defamation League, the World Jewish Congress and the Simon Wiesenthal Center, carried out a lobbying campaign in Congress and the White House against his elevation.  They hinted that Merritt was anti-Semitic and was not suited to the position of Supreme Court justice.  President Bill Clinton buckled under the pressure of the Jewish lobby and opted to appoint Ruth Ginsburg to the post four years ago.
    Yossi Melman, Who Lied About Demjanjuk?, Ha'aretz, 14-Nov-1997, presently at www.ukar.org/merrit01.htm

    The above is a demonstration of how the accusation of anti-Semitism is not just a psychiatric diagnosis, it is a signal that vengeance is being planned.  It is of utmost importance to notice that Judge Merritt was not exposed for corruption or discredited for defective legal reasoning or proven to have been in any way biased or wrong — rather, he was subjected to the gratuitous abuse of being diagnosed as suffering from the malady of anti-Semitism.  And what Judge Gilbert Merritt's case illustrates is that the United States is a country in which Jewish leaders can lie to get a Ukrainian extradited to Israel, and where a Judge who expresses indignation at having been lied to may be blocked by a diagnosis of anti-Semitism from advancing to the higher office that the nation would benefit from his occupying.

    The second reason that the CHRC should disallow the CJC obtruding its psychiatric diagnosis of "anti-Semitism," then, is that the diagnosis is at the same time a threat, and the CHRC must disallow threats in its proceedings.

    On the question of threats, I do not request equality or reciprocity, because I do not wish to acquire the power to get someone fired merely as a result of my slapping the label Ukrainophobe on him, and in any case it is beyond CHRC ability to bestow that power.
III.    The UKAR Accusation of CJC Anti-Semitism and of Psychopathy

The Ukrainian Archive (UKAR) accuses the Canadian Jewish Congress of (1) anti-Semitism and of (2) criminal psychopathy.

  1. The Canadian Jewish Congress Leadership is
    ANTI-SEMITIC


    The claim (made in the Prytulak
    20-Feb-2004 letter to Mary M Gusella, Ukrainian Archive Philo-Semitism Encounters a Snarling Rottweiler) that UKAR is philo-Semitic was not flippant or tongue in cheek — it was serious and defensible, although in the continuing discussion of the question below, "pro-Semitic" will be preferred to "philo-Semitic" because it is more nearly the opposite of "anti-Semitic."  The question posed in the present section, then, is how should the two expressions "anti-Semitic" and "pro-Semitic" be assigned?

    To begin answering this question, it is important to recognize that every position taken by UKAR is one that is taken also by some Jews, such that UKAR cannot be understood to be adopting a position for or against Jews collectively, but must be understood to be adopting a position in alliance with one Jewish faction and against another.  If the UKAR position occasionally seems antagonistic or condemnatory, this is only the incidental consequence of the relevant Jewish factions being so polarized as to be antagonistic or condemnatory of each other, and even to involve mutual fear and loathing, as is most clearly illustrated in the polarization of secular and fundamentalist factions, with the passage below expressing secular consternation at how great a suppression of Western culture is demanded by fundamentalists whose power within Israel grows:

    They genuinely and sincerely believe there is no place in our culture for Darwin, Freud, Einstein.  They want to uproot Chagall, Beethoven, and Hemingway from our culture.  They are afraid of Shakespeare, the Beatles, jeans and cable TV.  They consider themselves God's messengers and, like all fanatics, will never stop.  They will take bite after bite from our view of the world.  Their list is long and everybody is in it.  They won't rest in their mission as long as Kafka, Michelangelo, Alterman and Mick Jagger exist in our culture.  We are at war, but only one side is fighting.
    An Israeli "popular daily" in Akiva Orr, Israel: Politics, Myths and Identity Crises, Pluto Press, London and Boulder Colorado, 1994, p. 45.

    Our firm belief is that a fundamentalist Jewish regime, if it came to power in Israel, would treat Israeli Jews who did not accept its tenets worse than it would treat Palestinians.
    Israel Shahak and Norton Mezvinsky, Jewish Fundamentalism in Israel, Pluto Press, London and Sterling Virginia, 1999, p. 149.

    The moral to be extracted from the above is that siding with one Jewish faction against another cannot by itself be construed as being either pro-Semitic or anti-Semitic.  To justify such labelling, some criterion other than the Jewishness of the side defended or the side opposed must be consulted, and that other criterion would have to be the degree to which each side promotes the well-being of Jews collectively, their adaptation to the modern world, their success, their happiness, their security, their prosperity, their standing and prestige, their capacity for growth and self-actualization, their freedom from coercion and harsh punishment, their intellectual development.  Taking the side of secular Jews against powerful or even dominant fundamentalist Jews, then, cannot be understood to be anti-Semitic, and can be defended as being pro-Semitic because it conduces to greater Jewish well-being.

    Furthermore, this point of view defines pro-Semitism and anti-Semitism not according to underlying emotion or motivation, because these are difficult to gauge and easy to pretend, and even if they could be measured would be of little interest because they are incapable of producing good or harm unless expressed in action.  Rather, pro-Semitism and anti-Semitism should be defined according to whether observed behavior benefits or injures the Jewish people.  Indicia based on behavior are not subject to the same easy misinterpretation and misrepresentation as indicia based on emotions hidden in the human heart or motivations hidden in the human head.  Thus, with Prytulak's underlying emotions and motivation being considered obscure and irrelevant, and his actions assuming overriding importance, it can be seen that these actions help Jews unburden themselves of error, and help them rebuild weakened mechanisms of self-correction, which is the basis of the UKAR claim to pro-Semitism.  The further UKAR accusation that the Canadian Jewish Congress is anti-Semitic is similarly based not on CJC underlying emotion and motivation, which Prytulak has no evidence of and avoids guessing and judges uninteresting, but is based rather on a weighing of benefits conferred and of injuries inflicted on the Jewish people by Canadian Jewish Congress actions.  That is, whatever warm emotions employees of the CJC may insist that they feel toward Jews, and whatever profound motives to help Jews that they may insist govern their conduct, in fact their actions can be seen to harm Jews, which justifies the conclusion that the CJC is anti-Semitic.

    The Ukrainian Archive, then, finds itself today among the institutions playing the historic role of the "outside force" which is resented and opposed by the dominant Jewish leadership, but which can be considered pro-Semitic in that it works to liberate the Jewish people from evil leadership, a phenomenon noted by Israel Shahak under the heading Liberation from Outside:

    In the countries of east Europe as well as in the Arab world, the Jews were liberated from the tyranny of their own religion and of their own communities by outside forces, too late and in circumstances too unfavourable for genuine internalised social change.
    Israel Shahak, Jewish History, Jewish Religion: The Weight of Three Thousand Years, Pluto Press, London and Boulder Colorado, 1994, p. 17.  Italics are in the original.

    To put it more accurately, though, the "Liberation from Outside" was never an imposition on all Jews of a liberation that none of them sought, or that all of them resisted — but was rather a reinforcement from outside of tendencies already arising spontaneously among enlightened Jews against their own authoritarian leadership.  "Liberation from Outside," then, must be understood to mean only a nurturing of what already grows inside, and thus synonymous with "Support from Outside" or "Help for the Liberal-Democratic Faction from Outside."

    The following half-dozen historical episodes serve to demonstrate that the concept of "Liberation from Outside" is not an empty abstraction, but rather that the labor of outsiders (and who may be motivated not by love of Jews in particular, or by a desire to uplift Jews in particular, but rather by a desire to uphold general laws or to satisfy universal principles which benefit Jews and non-Jews equally, and which incidentally serves to reinforce liberal-democratic Jewish factions) — that the labor of such outsiders can indeed serve to strengthen the Jewish people's struggle for emancipation from the evil leadership which enmeshes or oppresses them.

    In each of the six illustrations below, then, the decision that needs to be made is how best to distribute the two labels "pro-Semitic" and "anti-Semitic" to the persons or institutions marked (a) and (b).

    1. Choose Between (a) Nicholas I of Russia and (b) a Holy Rabbi (Tzadik)

      Nicholas I of Russia was a notorious antisemite and issued many laws against the Jews of his state.  But he also strengthened the forces of "law and order" in Russia — not only the secret police but also the regular police and the gendarmerie — with the consequence that it became difficult to murder Jews on the order of their rabbis, whereas in pre-1795 Poland it had been quite easy.  "Official" Jewish history condemns him on both counts.  For example, in the late 1830s a "Holy Rabbi" (Tzadik) in a small Jewish town in the Ukraine ordered the murder of a heretic by throwing him into the boiling water of the town baths, and contemporary Jewish sources note with astonishment and horror that bribery was "no longer effective" and that not only the actual perpetrators but also the Holy Man were severely punished.
      Israel Shahak, Jewish History, Jewish Religion: The Weight of Three Thousand Years, Pluto Press, London and Boulder Colorado, 1994, p. 16.

      From the point of view of the heretic thrown into boiling water, and perhaps from that of his friends and relatives, and perhaps from that of other heretics of like mind, and probably from the point of view of most secular Jews today — that with respect to the question of whether rabbis should have the power to throw heretics into boiling water, the murderous Tzadik acted against the interests of the Jewish community, and so played the role of anti-Semite, and Nicholas I acted in the interests of the Jewish community, and so played the role of pro-Semite.

    2. Choose Between (a) the Metternich Regime of Austria and (b) Rabbi Hertz Berenstein

      The Metternich regime of pre-1848 Austria was notoriously reactionary and quite unfriendly to Jews, but it did not allow people, even liberal Jewish rabbis, to be poisoned.  During 1848, when the regime's power was temporarily weakened, the first thing the leaders of the Jewish community in the Galician city of Lemberg (now Lvov) did with their newly regained freedom was to poison the liberal rabbi of the city, whom the tiny non-Orthodox Jewish group in the city had imported from Germany.  One of his greatest heresies, by the way, was the advocacy and actual performance of the Bar Mitzvah ceremony, which had recently been invented.
      Israel Shahak, Jewish History, Jewish Religion: The Weight of Three Thousand Years, Pluto Press, London and Boulder Colorado, 1994, p. 17.

      The poisoned "liberal rabbi of the city" was Rabbi Avraham Cohen, and poisoned along with him had been his whole family, with his young daughter dying as well, and the reason for the poisoning was probably less Rabbi Cohen's introduction of the Bar Mitzvah ceremony or his educational reforms than his contribution toward the abolition of an Austrian kosher tax from which five rich Jews had been profitting:

      Cohen's most important initiative, according to Eshkoli, was his attempt to abolish the taxes on kosher meat and sabbath candles, which Lemberg Jews paid to [Austrian] authorities.  These taxes were burdensome for poor Jews but were sources of income for many Orthodox notables.  The method [of taxation] was as follows:  A rich Jew for a certain lump sum obtained from the authorities the right to impose the tax on the Jews, from whom he took a much greater sum supposedly for his efforts.  Five tax gatherers, all very pious, headed the opposition to Cohen.  Their leader was Rabbi Hertz Berenstein, who came from a noted rabbinical family; the second was Rabbi Tzvi Orenstein, the son of the former Orthodox rabbi of Lemberg.  [...]  On September 6, 1848 [...] Avraham Bar-Pilpel, a Jewish assassin, successfully entered the rabbi's home unseen, went to the kitchen and put arsenic poison in the pot of soup that was cooking.  Shortly thereafter, Rabbi Cohen and his family ate the soup; Rabbi Cohen and his little daughter died.  The Hassids and their leaders did not attend the funeral; they celebrated.  No Orthodox rabbi, moreover, uttered one word of condemnation, neither of murderous incitement before the murder nor of the murder itself.
      Israel Shahak and Norton Mezvinsky, Jewish Fundamentalism in Israel, Pluto Press, London and Sterling Virginia, 1999, pp. 135-136.  Non-red bracketed material was in the original.

      From the point of view of Rabbi Avraham Cohen and his little daughter and his whole family and the enlightened Jews in his congregation, then, and as well from the point of view of the majority of secular Jews today, the Metternich regime's prohibition of poisoning was pro-Semitic, and Rabbi Hertz Berenstein's practice of poisoning was anti-Semitic, even though Berenstein was the more influential leader of the day, longer-established and with a larger following than the poisoned Rabbi Cohen.

    3. Choose Between (a) Russian General Bibikov and (b) the Rabbinical Courts

      Was the murder of Rabbi Avraham Cohen an exceptional case?  In December, 1838, the governor of southwestern Russia, General Dimitri Gabrielovitch Bibikov, issued a circular to district governors under his authority.  He asked them to look carefully into what was happening in the synagogues and in Jewish houses of study.  "In those places," he wrote, "Very often something happens that leaves dead Jews in its wake.  Such crimes are especially grave since they occur in places dedicated to prayer and study of religious principles.  They also are characteristic of autonomous judgment by the rabbinical courts, executed by their false views about extermination of 'informers' who reveal crimes of their co-religionists.  The rabbis often succeed in obscuring the [official] investigation to such an extent that not only the identity of the assassins but even the identity of the victim remain unclear."
      Israel Shahak and Norton Mezvinsky, Jewish Fundamentalism in Israel, Pluto Press, London and Sterling Virginia, 1999, p. 137.  Bracketed material was in the original.

      Surely there will be wide agreement that General Bibikov, applying the law of the land to all groups, was simultaneously and incidentally acting in the interests of the Jewish community, and his desire to see no string of dead Jews must be considered pro-Semitic; whereas the rabbinical courts that left dead Jews in their wake acted against the interests of the Jewish community, and thus must be considered anti-Semitic.

    4. Choose Between (a) Russian Authorities and (b) Rabbi Israel Friedman of Rozin

      The new Israeli historians have presented evidence showing that until the 1880s the killings of Jewish informers by Jews in the Tsarist Empire were numerous.  [...] [D]uring the nineteenth century hundreds of Jewish informers were drowned in the Dnieper, the largest river flowing in the "Pale."  These informers were charged and convicted under the law of the informers simply because they were suspected of informing the authorities about something.  Rosen wrote: "Like Avraham Cohen, some of them acted because of ideological reasons such as the wish to bring the Jewish community to a modern way of life."  Dr David Asaf researched some of those affairs and said: "Some of the informers were professionals who gave the authorities information about tax concealment, but even in such cases, judging them by what amounts to rabbinical martial courts and their execution by what amounts to lynching help us to understand the conflict between the enlightened Jews and the Orthodox, particularly the Hassids."  As previously shown, a Jewish informer was condemned to death in secret without being able to say anything in his own defense.  This mode of execution was employed for hundreds of years until the recent time.  Rosen asked Asaf if the Jewish community regarded those informers as traitors.  Asaf responded:

      They were not so regarded by the enlightened Jews.  More than this, the enlightened Jews wanted the Jews to be citizens of the state.  This included in their view paying taxes and serving in the army.  Giving information to authorities was in many cases a necessary thing in their view.  [...]
      To show what was involved, Asaf recounted an affair he had researched involving a famous Hassidic rabbi from the town of Rozin, Israel Friedman, who was known as the "holy man of Rozin."  Friedman as a major Hassidic personage was important, because the Hassidic movement played a major role in those assassinations.  Asaf related, as reported by Rosen:

      Friedman was one of the greatest Hassidic leaders.  In Jewish history books he is represented as a person of small scholarly knowledge but also a man of power who enjoyed the delights of life.  He was instrumental in the issuing of the law of the pursuer against some informers from the town of Oshitz in the Podolia district of the Ukraine.  In February, 1836, a corpse of one of the persons, Yitzhak Oxman, was found beneath blocks of ice on the frozen river.  The corpse was so mutilated, apparently as a result of torture, that it was difficult to identify.  Only some time thereafter, when the corpse was taken out of its grave, were new witnesses able to identify it.  The corpse of the other murdered person, Shmuel Schwatzman, disappeared.  We now know that he was strangled while praying in the synagogue.  His corpse was cut into pieces and burned in the oven that heated the community bath.  Following a police investigation, in which even Tsar Nicholoi I was interested, it was established that the Jews of the community where the murder was committed, including relatives of the murdered persons, knew perfectly well what had taken place and how it was carried out.  Everyone stayed silent either because of strong discipline or because of fear.  This case was one of the few in which a secret rabbinical court, which issues unwritten verdicts of the law of the pursuer and death punishments, was discovered.  Yosef Perl, one of the chiefs of the enlightened Jews of Galicia, secretly supplied information to the Russian authorities in order to bring about the conviction of Rabbi Yisrael of Rozin.
      Asaf, who also described other Hassidic murders, said that Perl, who hated the Hassids, acted for reasons that he believed to be ideological.
      Israel Shahak and Norton Mezvinsky, Jewish Fundamentalism in Israel, Pluto Press, London and Sterling Virginia, 1999, pp. 147-148.

      The case can be made that the Russian authorities' alliance with Yosef Perl against rabbinical murder should be considered pro-Semitic because it served the interests of the Jewish people, and that Rabbi Israel Friedman of Rozin should be considered anti-Semitic because even though he was a prominent Jewish leader, his policy of torturing and killing liberal Jews, and throwing them into the Dnipro River (as he did to Yitzhak Oxman) or strangling them in the synagogue and incinerating their bodies in the ovens of the community baths (as he did to Shmuel Schwatzman) was contrary to the interests of the Jewish people.

    5. Choose Between (a) the Pope and (b) the Pyromaniacal Rabbi Baruch from Greece

      The wish of many eighteenth-century Jews to persecute was seemingly greater than their actual ability to do so.  An incident in the history of the Frankist heresy, which erupted in Poland in 1756 and continued for some years thereafter, provides a good example.  When leaders of the autonomous Jewish community in Poland learned of this heresy, one of them, Rabbi Baruch from Greece, [...] wrote that the committee [...] decided "to bring the matter before the great Lord who rules over their [the Christian] faith, the Pope in Rome" and to struggle against the heresy.  Rabbi Baruch wrote further that the committee asked "the help of [Polish] bishops so that the cursed ones would be condemned to be burned at the stake."  Meir Balaban, the distinguished historian of Polish Jewry, remarked that the wish to see hundreds of "the cursed ones" burned at the stake by the Christian authorities, who at that very time were persecuting Polish Jews, indicated the depth of the hatred of the heretics felt by the Jewish leadership.  The committee's attempt failed.  [...]  The result was that the Jewish leaders could not, as they wanted to, pursue the persecution.
      Israel Shahak and Norton Mezvinsky, Jewish Fundamentalism in Israel, Pluto Press, London and Sterling Virginia, 1999, p. 131.  Bracketed material was in the original.

      Surely history judges that in refusing to cooperate in the burning of hundreds of Jews, the Pope acted in the interests of the Jewish people (the Pope was the pro-Semite), and surely history judges that in recommending hundreds of Jews to be burned, Rabbi Baruch acted contrary to the interests of the Jewish people (the rabbi was the anti-Semite).

    6. Choose Between (a) the Authors of a Hebrew Geography and (b) a "Very Many Great Rabbis"

      The Jews of Europe ... were dominated, before about 1780, by a supreme contempt and hate for all learning (excluding the Talmud and Jewish mysticism).  [...]  Study of all languages was strictly forbidden, as was the study of mathematics and science.  Geography, history — even Jewish history — were completely unknown.  The critical sense, which is supposedly so characteristic of Jews, was totally absent, and nothing was so forbidden, feared and therefore persecuted as the most modest innovation or the most innocent criticism.

      It was a world sunk in the most abject superstition, fanaticism and ignorance, a world in which the preface to the first work on geography in Hebrew (published in 1803 in Russia) could complain that very many great rabbis were denying the existence of the American continent and saying that it is "impossible."
      Israel Shahak, Jewish History, Jewish Religion: The Weight of Three Thousand Years, Pluto Press, London and Boulder Colorado, 1994, pp. 18-19.

      A strong case can be made that the authors of the Hebrew Geography were pro-Semitic because they wanted to provide Jews with objective information, even though they were opposed by a "very many great rabbis" who in turn must be considered to be anti-Semitic because they wanted to bind Jews in a state of ignorance and superstition.  Perhaps this example differs from the others in that the force (the authors of the Geography) opposing Jewish leadership was probably itself Jewish; nevertheless, the example is included to further illustrate how Jewish leadership may occasionally be well worth opposing, and also on the probability that the Jewish authors were guided in their thinking by non-Jewish geographers.

    With the above six examples amply setting the precedent that non-Jewish opposition to Jewish leadership can legitimately be viewed as pro-Semitic, and the Jewish leadership itself as anti-Semitic, we are free to address the question of whether Prytulak opposition to Jewish leadership might similarly be considered pro-Semitic, and the Jewish leadership itself anti-Semitic.

    The answer is decidedly in the affirmative.  Lubomyr Prytulak allies with some 45 Jewish intellectuals (as can be read in his letter to Mary M Gusella Ukrainian Archive Philo-Semitism Encounters a Snarling Rottweiler of 20-Feb-2004) in an effort to expose and correct the errors of Jewish leaders, and in an effort to strengthen presently-enfeebled mechanisms of Jewish self-correction, while the Canadian Jewish Congress expends its energies augmenting its income and its power by frightening the Jewish people, adding to the pile of errors and hoaxes that need to be corrected, lowering Jewish credibility, and inciting anti-Jewish hostility, as for example in the instances outlined immediately below.

  2. The Canadian Jewish Congress Leadership is
    PSYCHOPATHIC


    The hallmark of the psychopath is lack of conscience.  Where the normal person caught in a lie will experience guilt or shame, and which salutary emotions will push him toward apology or retraction and will serve as deterrents to his lying again, the psychopath is repeatedly caught in lies, but experiences neither remorse nor impulse to change.  He utters whatever statements seem serviceable at the moment, oblivious to the injury he causes others, and oblivious to the probability that he will, sooner or later, be detected and discredited, and indifferent when he is detected and discredited.  One variety of "psychopath," then, is the "inveterate liar." 
    It is understood that the psychopathic liar may at times say things that he is fully aware are false, and at other times offer as true things that may or may not be true — the two cases being subsumable under the single rule that the psychopathic liar offers statements of fact with insufficient regard to their evidentiary support.

    It is in this sense that Canadian Jewish Congress leadership can be said to be psychopathic.  The CJC leadership can be seen to be responsible for a string of injurious deceptions and hoaxes, none of which it has ever retracted, and even while being discredited and humiliated for some past deception, it is already happily manufacturing a new one.  Reckless disregard for truth is the Canadian Jewish Congress modus operandi, and inveterate and incorrigible disreagard for truth is a variety of mental illness.

    Among the lies, big and small, that can be credited to Canadian Jewish Congress leaders can be found the following thirteen:

    1. Executive Director of the CJC, Bernie Farber, participates in the Martin Luther King was a Zionist Hoax.  Bernie Farber plays the game of putting words into people's mouths to which they cannot object because they are dead, by claiming that Martin Luther King said such things as "anti-Zionism is anti-Semitism," or "hatred of Israel is inseparable from hatred of Jews".   www.ukar.org/morgan/morgan01.html

    2. Bernie Farber's two fibs.  Bernie Farber appears to have told Max Silverman two fibs: (1) that he couldn't continue talking to Max Silverman because he was on the phone with Bob Milne, and (2) that the screening of Jenin, Jenin — at some school whose name he knew but didn't tell anyone else — had sparked racial violence.   www.ukar.org/farber04.html

    3. Irving Abella SS-Tattoo Hoax.  While War Crimes Chair of the Canadian Jewish Congress, Irving Abella pretended not to know the difference between the SS and the Waffen-SS, and claimed that Canada was at one time so pro-Nazi that it guaranteed admittance to anybody sporting an SS blood-type tattoo.   www.ukar.org/abella08.html

    4. The Rambam-Abella Fifty-Confessions Hoax.  Irving Abella was the Canadian Jewish Congress's chief publicist for Steven Rambam's claim to have tape-recorded fifty confessions of Nazi war crimes from Canadians.   www.ukar.org/martin/martin05.html#fifty

    5. The Sol Littman Mengele Hoax.  The lie was Sol Littman's claim that Dr Mengele had tried to get into Canada.  Canadian Jewish Congress support for the lie can be see in CJC Counsel Irwin Cotler confronting Government Counsel Ivan Whitehall for having too bluntly exposed Sol Littman's lie.   www.ukar.org/martin/martin07.html#whitehall

    6. Canada is a Sanctuary for Nazi War Criminals Hoax.  Thousands of Nazi war criminals was what the Deschenes Commission hoped to discover, but not a single one of the 883 who were denounced and investigated was ever convicted of a war crime.  All of this was supported by Irwin Cotler who contributed 209 denunciations on behalf of the Canadian Jewish Congress, among these being Case No. 561, denounced for responsibility in the deaths of "hundreds of Jews," when in fact the denounced had been only four years old at the end of the war.   www.ukar.org/martin/martin07.html#young

    7. The Soviets Supply Trustworthy Evidence Hoax.  Then Canadian Jewish Congress Counsel, Irwin Cotler, was a leading defender of the plan which would ally irresponsible Jewish leaders demanding Nazi war crimes prosecutions with totalitarian police states in the production of evidence for use in Canadian courts.   www.ukar.org/martin/martin07.html#soviet

    8. The Deschenes Commission was not a tool of vengeance hoax.  Irwin Cotler pretended blindness to the most egregious demonstration of government-sponsored ethnic-national-religious discrimination in recent memory — namely the Deschenes Commission's persecution by Jews of non-Jews for crimes against Jews of which Jews themselves were granted de facto immunity from prosecution.   www.ukar.org/martin/martin07.html#equality

    9. Galicia Division soldiers were war criminals Hoax.  All Jewish representatives who participated in the Deschenes Commission backed the vilification of the Galicia Division despite its history of repeated exculpation.   www.ukar.org/martin/martin07.html#galicia

    10. John Demjanjuk was Ivan the Terrible of Treblinka Hoax.  The title "Ivan the Terrible of Treblinka" was invented in the 1970s, the five eyewitnesses who testified against John Demjanjuk in Jerusalem lied, and the idea that he was ever at Treblinka, which for a decade or so was insisted upon by Demjanjuk persecutors, has now been abandoned by everybody.   www.ukar.org/demlinks.html

      On the question of John Demjanjuk, Irwin Cotler relied on his usual tactic of ignoring the law, and demanding whatever would promote Jewish-holocaust publicity.  More specifically, Cotler recommended overlooking Israel's extradition-treaty obligation to the United States to release John Demjanjuk upon his acquittal, and recommended trying Demjanjuk on alternative charges because that would be better public relations for the Jewish holocaust:

      Irwin Cotler, a leading human rights lawyer from Montreal, argued that the Supreme Court's own findings in acquitting Demjanjuk of the Treblinka charges effectively required Israel to try him on the Sobibor charges.

      "Israel is obligated by international law to put all Nazi criminals on trial," Cotler told the court; otherwise, it would be weakening the use of international law against others suspected of war crimes, he said.
      Evelyn Gordon and Sue Fishkoff, High Court to hear petitions against Demjanjuk, Jerusalem Post, 10-Aug-1993.

      By late yesterday the court had not specified when it would issue its ruling on the petitions, including one from the Montreal-based InterAmicus Human Rights Group, headed by McGill University law professor Irwin Cotler.  He is concerned that freeing Mr. Demjanjuk will discourage prosecution of other suspected Nazi war criminals.
      Spectator Wire Services, Demjanjuk trial ruling put off: Petitioners want new charges for acquitted man, Hamilton Spectator, 12-Aug-1993.

    11. Commemorating the Deschenes Commission Hoax.  Whereas the Deschenes Commission should occasion Jewish shame and repentance, the CJC War Crimes Committee — relying on the bulk of Canadians never having read the Commission report — represents it as a Jewish victory to be commemorated.   www.ukar.org/abella04.html

    12. Neal Sher Will Show Us How Hoax.  Having established a reputation as America's leading Nazi hunter by means of the twin artifices of relying on Soviet evidence and suppressing exculpatory evidence, Neal Sher got the Canadian Jewish Congress to recommend him as advisor to Canada's Justice Minister Anne McLellan, on the dubious expectation that he could teach Canadians a thing or two about prosecuting Nazis.  In the seven years since Neal Sher went on Anne McLellan's payroll, Canada has still to convict its first Nazi under its war crimes legislation, and Neal Sher has shown the world the stuff of which he is made by getting himself disbarred for stealing from Jewish-holocaust restitution funds.  Anne McLellan's disclosing to the Canadian taxpayer exactly what advice Neal Sher dispensed that was worth his fee would be a step toward redeeming herself from the appearance of yet again playing the role of passive pawn in a Canadian Jewish Congress public-relations project.  www.ukar.org/abella07.html

    13. Len Rudner's The Israelis Did Not Suppress Evidence Hoax.  Canadian Jewish Congress Community Relations Director, Len Rudner, gave the impression in his 06-Mar-2004 letter to the editor of the Globe and Mail that neither the American nor the Israeli governments suppressed exculpatory evidence during their prosecution of John Demjanjuk, when in fact both governments suppressed exculpatory evidence wholesale, a prominent instance being the Israeli suppression of the German BKA forensic laboratory judging the Trawniki identification card to be an amateur forgery.  www.ukar.org/martin/martin07.html#bka

IV.    Recommendations Toward an Improved CHRC

The CHRC must recognize that the CJC complaint of anti-Semitism is a muzzle, a psychiatric diagnosis, and a threat whose purpose is an ad hominem disparagement and an intimidation into silence.  As abuse and threats have no place in CHRC proceedings, it is the obligation of the CHRC to demand that the complaint of anti-Semitism be withdrawn.

In the alternative, if the CHRC prefers to permit the CJC to intrude psychiatric diagnoses into the CHRC proceedings, then Prytulak must be accorded the same latitude, and his diagnoses of CJC anti-Semitism and psychopathy must be given equal recognition and weight.

It may further be questioned whether the concept of "anti-Semitism" can ever be recognized in any judicial or quasi-judicial proceeding without violating the Canadian Charter § 15(1) guarantee of equality before the law, as it is observed that no ethnic or national or religious group other than the Jewish relies on any analogous or parallel concept in the course of defending its interests.  Many groups have suffered, and have been the objects of hate propaganda and of mass killing — as for example Armenians, Australian Aborigines, Cherokees, Germans, Jews, Kurds, Lithuanians, Palestinians, Tibetans, Ukrainians, and so on — and yet none but Jews rely on a label which serves as both a psychiatric diagnosis and a threat, and so for Jews to be permitted to deploy such an expression in support of their cause elicits a reasonable apprehension of bias.

Whenever the Canadian Jewish Congress complains of "anti-Semitism," the Canadian Human Rights Commission would do well to keep in mind that hidden motivation and manipulative intent may be operative, as is illustrated by Mordechai Richler:

All the same, Irv was euphoric.  "But there are bound to be more anti-Semitic incidents any day now.  I feel it in my bones.  Terrific!"
Mordecai Richler, Barney's Version, Alfred A. Knopf Canada, 1997, p. 164.

I volunteered to work as a fund-raiser for United Jewish Appeal [...].

[...]

"Shit.  We've got a problem this year.  There's been a decline in the number of anti-Semitic outrages."

"Yeah.  Isn't that a shame," I said.

"Don't get me wrong.  I'm against anti-Semitism.  But every time some asshole daubs a swastika on a synagogue wall or knocks over a stone in one of our cemeteries, our guys get so nervous they phone me with pledges.  So, things being how they are this year, what you've got to do is slam-dunk your target about the Holocaust.  Shove Auschwitz at him.  Buchenwald.  War criminals thriving in Canada to this day.  Tell him, 'Can you be sure it won't happen again, even here, and then where will you go?'  Israel is your insurance policy, you say."
Mordecai Richler, Barney's Version, Alfred A. Knopf Canada, 1997, pp. 188-189.





Lubomyr Prytulak

cc:

Irving
ABELLA, National Honourary President, CJC, Department of History, York University, 4700 Keele Street, Toronto, ON  M3J 1P3
Bernie FARBER, Executive Director, CJC, 4600 Bathurst Street, Toronto, ON  M2R 3V2
Ed MORGAN, Chair, CJC, Faculty of Law, University of Toronto, 84 Queen's Park, Toronto, ON  M5S 2C5
Moshe RONEN, Chair Board of Governors, CJC, 4600 Bathurst Street, Toronto, ON  M2R 3V2
Len RUDNER, Director of Community Relations, CJC, 4600 Bathurst Street, Toronto, ON  M2R 3V2



HOME  DISINFORMATION  CHRC  PEOPLE  ABELLA  COTLER  FARBER  MARTIN  MORGAN  RAMBAM  RONEN