HOME  DISINFORMATION  KOSHER TAX  CHRC  PEOPLE  ABELLA  COTLER  FARBER  MARTIN  MORGAN  RONEN 
Three Globe and Mail Letters to the Editor
Lubomyr Prytulak to Ed Morgan    Letter 13    02-Dec-2005


The Honorable Gilbert S. Merritt, born 1936, graduated Harvard Law School 1962, served as chief judge to the U.S. Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit in Nashville until 1998.

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." Ha'aretz writer Yossi Melman quoting U.S. Court of Appeals Judge Gilbert S. Merritt

02 December 2005

Ed Morgan
National President, Canadian Jewish Congress
Faculty of Law, University of Toronto
84 Queen's Park
Toronto ON  M5S 2C5

Ed Morgan:

The Canadian Jewish Congress (CJC) web site reproduces a Globe and Mail letter to the editor written by R. Burstyn which names Lubomyr Prytulak.  However, the Burstyn letter was in response to two earlier Globe letters which the CJC web site fails to reproduce, the first by Len Rudner and the second by Lubomyr Prytulak.  The left column below shows these three letters in chronological order from top to bottom: Rudner-Prytulak-Burstyn.  The right column below shows the Prytulak letter as it was submitted to the Globe, with two passages deleted by the Globe presented in bold:

FIRST LETTER

 


The Demjanjuk trial

Re Nazi Trial Keeps a Sense Of Humour (March 5):  It is not usual for history even the Holocaust to be presented in a variety of artistic formats.  In such a way, new audiences can come to understand events in a manner that may not be accessible via straight-forward narration.

That said, playwrights still have an obligation to tell the truth.  In Ray Conlogue's review of The Trials of John Demjanjuk, he says that Mr. Demjanjuk's lawyers discovered that the Israeli and U.S. governments had "hidden crucial information proving he was not Ivan [the Terrible]."

This is incorrect.  In fact, it was the Israelis who discovered the evidence that eventually led to Mr. Demjanjuk's acquittal.  This is borne out in the transcript of the United States Court of Appeal for the Sixth Circuit, filed on Nov. 17, 1993: "But for the actions of the Israeli prosecutors, the death sentence against Demjanjuk probably would have been carried out by now....  The Israeli prosecutors did not learn of the exculpatory evidence from Russia until after the accused was found guilty and sentenced to death in the Israeli trial court....  The prosecutors travelled to Russia to investigate the matter thoroughly."

Back in Israel, "in the face of extremely strong popular feelings against the accused, [they] publicly turned it over to the Supreme Court of Israel."

LEN RUDNER, director, community relations, Canadian Jewish Congress, Toronto

Globe and Mail, 06-Mar-2004, p. A18.


 

SECOND LETTER
SECOND LETTER AS SUBMITTED

Demjanjuk 'evidence'

Len Rudner (The Demjanjuk Trial letter, March 6) misinforms readers on both his points.

First, there was massive cover-up of exculpatory evidence.  Here is what U.S. judge Gilbert Merritt told Ha'aretz: "Today we know 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 favour of his extradition to Israel."

Second, the Israelis never discovered any evidence that exculpated John Demjanjuk.  What they did do was to respond to overwhelming pressure from many directions to release an obviously innocent Mr. Demjanjuk, and their "discovery" was one that saved them embarrassment.

That is, they "discovered" that Ivan the Terrible of Treblinka was really some other Ukrainian, Ivan Marchenko, who, being dead, was in no position to object.

LUBOMYR PRYTULAK, Ukrainian Archive, Vancouver


Globe and Mail, 08-Mar-2004, p. A12.


 

In his letter to the editor of 06-Mar-2004, Len Rudner misinforms Globe readers on both his points.

First, there was a massive cover-up of exculpatory evidence.  Here is what U.S. Judge Gilbert Merritt told Ha'aretz:

"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]

Second, the Israelis never discovered any evidence that exculpated John Demjanjuk.  What they did do was to respond to overwhelming pressure from many directions to release an obviously-innocent John Demjanjuk, and their "discovery" was one that saved them from embarrassment.  That is, they "discovered" that Ivan the Terrible of Treblinka was really some other Ukrainian, Ivan Marchenko, who being dead was in no position to object.  This expedient spared the Israelis the embarrassment of having to admit that the expression "Ivan the Terrible," with corresponding deeds, were invented in the 1970's, and had been unheard of prior to that time.

Lubomyr Prytulak, Ph.D.
Ukrainian Archive at www.ukar.org, Vancouver

Letter to the editor submitted by email 06-Mar-2004

THIRD LETTER

 


Not misinformed

I read with some concern the letter from Lubomyr Prytulak (March 8) taking Len Rudner of Canadian Jewish Congress to task for allegedly misinforming readers about the issue of suspected Nazi war criminal John Demjanjuk.

What strikes me as strange, however, is that, try as I might, I could find no attempt by Mr. Rudner to misinform (The Demjanjuk Trial letter, March 6).  Indeed, Mr. Rudner's only point was that Israel did not hide evidence that eventually led to Mr. Demjanjuk's acquittal by the Israeli Supreme Court.  In doing so, Mr. Rudner quoted directly from a decision of the Sixth Circuit United States Court of Appeal to buttress his point.

If Mr. Prytulak wants to take issue with anything, it should be the U.S. Sixth District Court of Appeal.  That he would point a wrongful, accusing finger at the Canadian Jewish Congress is curious indeed.

R. BURSTYN, Thornhill, Ont.

Globe and Mail, 10-Mar-2004, p. A18.

 




Among the conclusions that the above letters invite are the following:

  1. THE GLOBE AND MAIL SUPPRESSES THE UKRAINIAN PERSPECTIVE

    The first Globe and Mail deletion marked in bold font above reveals Judge Merritt finding an adequate counterpart to Demjanjuk only by casting back three centuries to the Salem witch trials.  The Globe and Mail, however, refuses to publish a description of a Ukrainian suffering a wrong of historic proportions at the hands of Jewish leadership even when that description is recommended by a distinguished American Judge and is quoted by a Jewish writer and is published in an Israeli newspaper.

    And the second Globe and Mail deletion marked in bold font above to the effect that "Ivan the Terrible of Treblinka" is a fiction created more than three decades after the end of WW II for the special purpose of persecuting John Demjanjuk is also news that is not fit to print on the pages of the Globe and Mail.  However, to this day, the "Ivan the Terrible of Treblinka" that was imagined in the series of John Demjanjuk show trials continues to be systematically excluded from scholarly accounts of the Jewish holocaust, as is documented in my letter to Neal Sher at

    The "Ivan the Terrible of Treblinka" story is disbelieved not only by all scholars, but also by the vast majority of Treblinka survivors, and can be depended upon to be believed mainly by Jewish leadership, who began believing it only in the 1970s, and who rest their belief on nothing better than a mere handful of "witnesses whose testimony was based on emotions and hysteria."

  2. THE RUDNER-BURSTYN DEFENSE OF ISRAELI JUSTICE IS MERITLESS

    Any comment that the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit made concerning the quality of Israeli justice expressed an opinion on a question that the court had not been asked to decide, and concerning which it sought no evidence or argument, and that the Court made without full deliberation.  The comment, in other words, was obiter dictum a casual, off-the-cuff, by-the-way, not-highly-relevant, incidental impression that carries small weight:

    A remark made, or opinion expressed, by a judge, in his decision upon a cause, "by the way," that is, incidentally or collaterally, and not directly upon the question before him, or upon a point not necessarily involved in the determination of the cause, or introduced by way of illustration, or analogy or argument.


    Excerpt from "obiter dictum" in Black's Law Dictionary, Revised Fourth Edition, West Publishing Company, St. Paul, Minnesota, 1968, p. 1222.

    Obiter dictum is often abbreviated to dictum, under which heading can be found the further elaboration:

    Dicta are opinions of a judge which do not embody the resolution or determination of the court, and made without argument, or full consideration of the point, are not the professed deliberate determinations of the judge himself.  Obiter dicta are such opinions uttered by the way, not upon the point or question pending, as if turning aside for the time from the main topic of the case to collateral subjects.


    Excerpt from "dictum" in Black's Law Dictionary, Revised Fourth Edition, West Publishing Company, St. Paul, Minnesota, 1968, p. 541.

    We know that the Court's rosy view of Israeli justice was obiter dictum from its unambiguously declaring that the only question before it concerned a single instance of American injustice, and what its finding on the question of this single instance of American injustice was:

    The question before the court is whether attorneys in the Office of Special Investigations (OSI), a unit within the Criminal Division of the Department of Justice, engaged in prosecutorial misconduct by failing to disclose to the courts and to the petitioner exculpatory information in their possession during litigation culminating in extradition proceedings, which led to the petitioner's forced departure from the United States and trial on capital charges in the State of Israel.  For the reasons stated herein we conclude that 0SI did so engage in prosecutorial misconduct that seriously misled the court.


    John Demjanjuk v Joseph Petrovsky, United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, 17-Nov-1993, pp. 1-2  www.ukar.org/sixthc00.htm

    In case anyone didn't hear it the first time, the Court repeats what was its sole concern, wherein is not to be found any intention to evaluate Israeli justice, or to hear evidence or argument concerning the quality of Israeli justice:

    Our sole concern in these proceedings, which began with entry of our order of June 5, 1992, has been to determine whether any acts or omissions of Department of Justice attorneys resulted in the district court and this court improvidently approving extradition of Demjanjuk to Israel in this habeas corpus action.


    John Demjanjuk v Joseph Petrovsky, United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, 17-Nov-1993, p. 40  www.ukar.org/sixthc00.htm

    And the Court repeats what was its sole conclusion, wherein is not to be found any exculpation of Israeli justice:

    For the reasons set out herein we vacate the judgment of the district court and the judgment of this court in the extradition proceedings on the ground that the judgments were wrongly procured as a result of prosecutorial misconduct that constituted fraud on the court.


    John Demjanjuk v Joseph Petrovsky, United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, 17-Nov-1993, p. 40  www.ukar.org/sixthc00.htm

    The obiter dictum of the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals is insufficient to exculpate Israeli justice for the reason that anyone who reviews the quality of Israeli justice in Demjanjuk proceedings which it must not be forgotten the Court did not do discovers that Israeli corruption was massive and egregious and undeniable.  For example, the very witnesses whose American testimony Judge Merritt describes above as "based on emotions and hysteria" were the witnesses that provided the backbone of the prosecution case in Israel, where their emotions and hysteria scaled new heights.  As the hypothesis that Demjanjuk had ever set foot in Treblinka has today been totally abandoned, these witnesses stand revealed as false witnesses who came within a hair's-breadth of getting John Demjanjuk hanged.  Fully aware of the unreliability of these emotional and hysterical witnesses, the Israelis refused to allow the Demjanjuk defense to cross-examine them.

    Generally, the Israelis did not build their own case against John Demjanjuk, they only attempted to flesh out the American case that Judge Merritt debunks.  Thus, every instance of OSI spoliation (suppression or destruction) of evidence was gratefully inherited by the Israelis, who may be faulted not only for enjoying the fruits of the OSI spoliation during the course of the Israeli trial, but also over the years of the trial never once having discovered and publicly protested any spoliation that had been conducted on the part of their OSI brethren, and for the many years following the trial, never once having expressed disapproval of any spoliation discovered by anybody anywhere.

    Take, for example, the Pilichowski Letter also commonly referred to as the Polish Main Commission Letter whose evaluation starts with the premise that if over an interval of thirteen months John Demjanjuk had indeed been guilty of murdering six and a half times the number of people killed at Hiroshima and Nagasaki combined, then he would have appeared on German and Soviet and Polish lists of Treblinka guards and of Nazi war criminals.  The Poles are particularly pertinent, as having been among the leading victims of the Nazis, they were strongly motivated to hunt down Nazi war criminals, and Treblinka being on their soil, they had particularly good access to Treblinka evidence.  Therefore, Professor Dr Czeslaw Pilichowski of the Polish Main Commission reporting that John Demjanjuk could not be found on any Polish lists constitutes persuasive evidence that John Demjanjuk did not kill 870,000 people at Treblinka or anywhere, and that if he served in any capacity at all, it must have been at such a subordinate or informal level, and in so innocuous and inconspicuous a role, as to have entirely escaped notice.  The Pilichowski letter, however, was withheld from the defense, as is explained in the three documents below by, respectively, Congressman James Traficant, by the Ukrainian American Bar Association, and by former OSI chief Martin Mendelsohn on pp. 118-122 of his testimony:

    It was the American OSI that spoliated the Pilichowski letter, but if the Israelis were not complicit in that spoliation, then they can at least be faulted for having benefitted from it, and for never having discovered and protested it themselves, and for never having publicly rebuked the OSI for it after it had been discovered by others.

    But on top of reaping the fruits of OSI fraud, the Israelis piled on fraud of their own, of which it would be a needless digression to cite more than two examples.

    The first of the two examples of Israeli suppression of exculpatory evidence that will suffice relates to the only documentary evidence which placed John Demjanjuk in German uniform the Kremlin-supplied Trawniki ID card www.ukar.org/idcard.html.  The Kremlin was so fearful of being called upon to vouch for the Trawniki ID card's authenticity, and to disclose its chain of custody, that it refused to hand the card over to the Israelis directly, but only allowed it to be transported to Israel by American citizen Armand Hammer who came with the advantage of presenting the appearance of lacking Kremlin membership, and of presenting the appearance of lacking qualification to comment on the card's authenticity, as would befit a disinterested party performing no more than the work of a courier.  On top of participating in this cover-up of the Trawniki ID card's chain of custody, Israel can be faulted for its suppression of the BKA opinion, as explained below.  That is, Israeli Police Superintendent Amnon Bezaleli, having received the Trawniki ID Card from Armand Hammer, transported it to the world's leading forensic laboratory for authenticating Third-Reich documents the Bundeskriminalamt (BKA), or Federal Criminal Police Office, in Wiesbaden, Germany.  Upon the BKA informing Bezaleli that the card appeared to be an amateur forgery, Bezaleli demanded that the BKA terminate its analysis and return the card to him, and the Israelis proceeded to convict John Demjanjuk and sentence him to death relying heavily on the authenticity of the card without informing the defense of the BKA opinion.  An account of the BKA matter can be found in my letter to Alan Dershowitz in the section titled Where Were the Experts? at

    It is a measure of the relentless mendacity of Jewish leadership that it continues to this very day to rely on the Trawniki ID card in its persecution of John Demjanjuk, while also continuing to this very day to keep that card from being handed over to the BKA for a definitive analysis, as has been protested to Russian President Vladimir Putin, who houses the card within Kremlin walls, at

    The second of the two examples of Israeli suppression of exculpatory evidence that will suffice was Israeli prosecutors extracting from Richard Glazar his promise not to testify at the Demjanjuk trial even though Glazar was believed to have been at Treblinka ten months, and even though he was at the time of the Demjanjuk trial writing a book on his Treblinka experiences:

    Len Rudner claiming that "it was the Israelis who discovered the evidence that eventually led to Mr. Demjanjuk's acquittal" is Israeli spin on the reality that when they found themselves unable to pin the title of "Ivan the Terrible of Treblinka" on John Demjanjuk, they turned around and pinned it on another Ukrainian, Ivan Marchenko, whose acquiescence was guaranteed by his being dead.  The Israelis were forced to acquit John Demjanjuk on the strength of the evidence and the arguments presented by the Demjanjuk defense, all of which the Israelis had long been privy to.  The Israeli "discovery" of Marchenko served the purpose of continuing to defame the Ukrainian people by perpetuating the myth of a Ukrainian "Ivan the Terrible of Treblinka," and which fresh fabrication being even flimsier than the one against Demjanjuk, would be incapable of exculpating Demjanjuk in any court adhering to Western standards of justice.

  3. THE CANADIAN JEWISH CONGRESS STRANGLES THE FLOW OF INFORMATION

    As neither you, the National President of the Canadian Jewish Congress, nor any other CJC representative, is elected, none of you is able to lay claim to representing the Jewish people, as you have already seen documented at

    What the CJC web site publishing only the last of the three Globe and Mail letters above adds to the picture of unelected CJC leadership is the detail that the unelected CJC leadership suppresses dissenting views, which is fully compatible with spoliation having been the chief tactic relied upon by CJC wunderkind Steven Rambam (former collaborator with Irwin Cotler in the 60 Confessions Hoax, and particularly beloved of Irving Abella) in his recent failed attempt to shut down UKAR using the venue of the Los Angeles Superior Court.  The CJC modus operandi of suppression of information is evident as well in the wholesale spoliation of Prytulak documents in the ongoing Canadian Human Rights Commission (CHRC) case of CJC v Prytulak, as is manifested most clearly in the CHRC confession of Mary M Gusella having withheld the 29-Jul-2005 Prytulak Comment from Disposition Committee member Aimable Ndejuru for the purpose of obtaining his anti-Prytulak vote fraudulently.

    The CJC intolerance of dissent contrasts startlingly with the Prytulak practice of publishing alongside his own views all CJC documents, as for example the original CJC complaint which is available for all the world to examine at www.ukar.org/chrc/cjc01.html.  Reciprocity would require the CJC publishing on its web site not only its own submissions to the CHRC, but Prytulak submissions as well, which reciprocity is unlikely to be realized given that over the two years of CHRC proceedings to date, the CJC hasn't so much as mentioned the existence of CJC v Prytulak proceedings on its web site, or in fact in any public forum.

    Another instance of the CJC suppression of information, then, is the CJC going so far as to deny its web-site visitors not merely Prytulak submissions, but all information relating to CJC v Prytulak.  Such total silence is compatible with the interpretation that CJC leadership is aware that its persecution of Prytulak is meritless and vexatious, and aware that its misconduct in the persecution is reprehensible, and that it is afraid to disclose any of it even before the very community that it claims to represent and that may be expected to receive the information with the greatest sympathy.  CJC absolute silence on the matter of CJC v Prytulak is indicative of consciousness of a wrongdoing that the CJC is anxious to hide not only from Canadians generally, but even from the Jewish community.

It does not escape notice that in the persecution of both John Demjanjuk and Lubomyr Prytulak, Jewish leadership proceeds not by relying on law, but by discovering pockets of corruption, which can be relied upon to subvert the law, hidden within otherwise reputable justice systems.  Steven Rambam had been able for a time to vex Prytulak only by relying on the pocket of corruption which he found in Los Angeles Judge James R. Dunn's courtroom.  The Canadian Jewish Congress has been able to vex Prytulak for a time only by relying on the pocket of corruption which it has found in Mary M Gusella's Canadian Human Rights Commission.  The method used against Lubomyr Prytulak in these two cases has been the same unsubtle method used against John Demjanjuk the spoliation (suppression or destruction) of documents.

These three instances of Jewish-leadership corruption of justice, as well as others, cannot be blamed on Jews collectively, as Jews collectively did not implement them and did not support them, and in fact were as little aware of them as were non-Jews.  These instances of corruption of justice can only be blamed on a Jewish leadership which is unrepresentative of the Jewish people and which acts contrary to their interests, and which fears the Jewish people discovering the wrongdoing that their unelected leadership practices, and fears above all else the Jewish people replacing its unelected and lawless leadership with democratic leadership that sets as its first task the elimination of the integrity deficit which cripples and disgraces such organizations as the Canadian Jewish Congress.




Lubomyr Prytulak

cc:
Irving ABELLA, National Honourary President, CJC, Department of History, York University, 4700 Keele Street, Toronto ON  M3J 1P3
Hon. Irwin COTLER, Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada, 284 Wellington Street, Ottawa ON  K1A 0H8
Phillip CRAWLEY, Publisher and CEO, The Globe and Mail, 444 Front Street West, Toronto ON  M5V 2S9
Mark J FREIMAN, CJC lawyer, McCarthy Tetrault, Suite 4700, Toronto Dominion Tower, Toronto ON  M5K 1E6
Mary M GUSELLA, Chief Commissioner, CHRC, 344 Slater Street, Ottawa ON  K1A 1E1
Rt. Hon. Paul MARTIN, Prime Minister, Office of the Prime Minister, 80 Wellington Street, Ottawa ON  K1A 0A2
J. Grant SINCLAIR, Chairperson CHRT, Suite A100, Floor 11, 160 Elgin Street, Ottawa ON  K1A 1J4
Giacomo VIGNA, CHRC lawyer, 344 Slater Street, Ottawa ON  K1A 1E1


HOME  DISINFORMATION  KOSHER TAX  CHRC  PEOPLE  ABELLA  COTLER  FARBER  MARTIN  MORGAN  RONEN