Ed Morgan   Letter 02   28-Jan-2004   Canadian Jewish Congress Fanaticism Infects the University of Toronto
Justitia (Roman) or Themis (Greek) Goddess of Justice, not only peeking, but deprived of one pan of her scales of justice
"There is no more retrograde, ignorant, and benighted thing that someone might say than that there exists a single truth, and that any who deviate from that single truth should be jailed.  This is the talk of fanatics that universities are dedicated to debunk.  This is the ideology of the repressive regimes that the West struggles to supplant.  This is the talk of tyrants under whose strangleholds much of the earth chokes." — Lubomyr Prytulak


Chair, Canadian Jewish Congress
Faculty of Law
University of Toronto
84 Queen's Park
Toronto, ON      M5S 2C5

Ed Morgan:

The Canadian Jewish Congress (CJC)
Theocratic View of War Stories

Moshe Ronen, currently Chair Board of Governors of the Canadian Jewish Congress (CJC), recently proposed that Canadian Criminal Law should recognize the notion that our understanding of certain WW II war stories must conform to "one truth" and that deviations from that "one truth" should be subject to criminal prosecution:

OTTAWA, NOVEMBER 26, 1998 — Canadian Jewish Congress (CJC) has commended federal Justice Minister Anne McLellan and her provincial counterparts for the announced package of Criminal Code amendments aimed at combating the promotion of hate and the dissemination of hate propaganda.  [...]

While the specifics of the proposals will be spelled out in future legislation, the announced changes appear positive in their orientation.  [...]

CJC welcomes the contemplated change to prevent persons indicted for promoting hate from claiming a defence of truth based on a denial of the Holocaust or any other historically recognized act of genocide.  "Holocaust denial is a vicious obscenity and the leading edge of contemporary anti-Semitism," observed Mr. Ronen.  "The thousands of Holocaust survivors living in Canada who know only too well that there is only one truth about the Holocaust will particularly applaud this change.  Identifying the Holocaust as 'an historically recognized act of genocide' in law will send a critical message that Holocaust denial is unacceptable in Canada."

The announced package of reforms includes making it a crime to possess hate propaganda for the purposes of distributing it to others.  [...]

The package also includes recommendations [...] to permit police to seize computer hard drives containing hate propaganda.
Canadian Jewish Congress press release, 26-Nov-1998 originally, but no longer, at www.cjc.ca/Press-Releases/pr981126.htm

Rather than recoiling from the above advocacy of basing criminal law upon the theocratic notion that certain individuals are gifted with possession of "one truth" and any who oppose them are to be considered as criminals, you endorse and enlarge it by adding that you consider "scholarly debate" and "legitimate discourse" cannot justify deviation from a single ordained truth:

Ed Morgan, a law professor at the University of Toronto and chair of Congress' Ontario region, said the Tribunal's clear acceptance of Holocaust denial as a form of hate propaganda could have significant implications internationally.

"A judicial finding of this nature will have an educative effect worldwide, as Holocaust denial can no longer hide under the cloak of scholarly debate or legitimate discourse," he said.

Morgan also asserted that the Tribunal's cease-and-desist order against Zundel will be "a strong deterrent against anyone who aspires to set up a hate site in" Canada.

"The Tribunal has in effect declared that Canada will not be a base for the transmission of hate via the Internet," Morgan said.
Bill Gladstone, In "historic" step, tribunal rules Shoah denier can't run Web site, Jewish Telegraph Agency, 22-Jan-2001 at jta.org/page_view_story.asp?intarticleid=10817&intcategoryid=2

And from the current Canadian Jewish Congress complaint against me to the Canadian Human Rights Commission that comes with your name prominently attached can be seen that "Jewish-holocaust denial" is not restricted to meaning what it seems to mean — it may also be applied to a mere questioning of some detail or some characteristic of the Jewish holocaust:

Holocaust Denial

Prytulak states that he does not deny the Jewish Holocaust, as it is a historical fact that the Nazis killed the Jews.  But stating this is in no way an affirmation of the historical veracity of the Holocaust, which was the deliberate, state-sponsored attempt by the Nazis to exterminate the Jewish people.  All Holocaust deniers concede that the Nazis hated the Jews and that some Jews died, though the numbers they will concede are generally reduced by a significant magnitude, and the centrality of the genocide to Nazi policy is ignored.  In this "tradition", Prytulak denies the scope of the murder, both in numerical and geographical terms.  As he puts it:

"my experience pushes me toward the conclusion that the real and tragic history of the Jewish Holocaust has been hijacked by Holocaust fabulists who have perverted it beyond recognition."

The role that you propose for the Canadian Jewish Congress, then, is that of an Inquisition, and for yourself and the leadership of the Canadian Jewish Congress, the role of special judges on matters of faith, or in other words, the role of Inquisitors:

(Lat. inquirere, to look to).
By this term is usually meant a special ecclesiastical institution for combating or suppressing heresy.  Its characteristic mark seems to be the bestowal on special judges of judicial powers in matters of faith, and this by supreme ecclesiastical authority, not temporal or for individual cases, but as a universal and permanent office.
Catholic Encyclopedia at www.newadvent.org/cathen/08026a.htm

The Western Civilization
Secular View of War Stories

Nayirah Sabah
"I saw the Iraqi soldiers come into the hospital with guns."
Premature-Baby Murders

A secular view of war stories is that the first casualty of war is truth, and that the nursing of truth back to health is a normal everyday occurrence, and is in the public interest.  A recent example is the story of Iraqi soldiers killing 312 premature babies during their 1990 invasion of Kuwait (as I read it in Bill Gallagher, Baby-Killing Hoax Led to First War in Iraq, Now Comes the Rematch, Niagara Falls Reporter, 24-Sep-2002 www.niagarafallsreporter.com/gallagher83.html).

Specifically, first came the eyewitness — beautiful, fifteen-year-old "Nayirah," Kuwaiti Citizen — tears streaming down her face, testifying before the Congressional Human Rights Caucus on 10-Oct-1990: "I saw the Iraqi soldiers come into the hospital with guns.  They took the babies out of the incubators, took the incubators and left the children to die on the cold floor.  It was horrifying."  Dr. Issah Ibraham testified that "The hardest thing was burying the babies.  Under my supervision, 120 newborn babies were buried in the second week of the invasion.  I myself buried 40 newborn babies that had been taken from their incubators by soldiers."  Vice President Dan Quayle said "These are pictures Saddam doesn't want us to see.  Pictures of premature babies that were tossed out of their incubators and left to die."  Amnesty International said, "Babies in the premature unit of one hospital had been removed from their incubators so that these, too, could be carried off."  Six US Senators recounted the story in their speeches.  President George Bush Senior recounted the story six times in a little over a month.

With such unimpeachable documentation as the above that the Premature-Baby Murders had taken place, we might imagine the United States being tempted to follow Canadian Jewish Congress thinking by enacting legislation enshrining the Premature-Baby Murders as a "historically-recognized atrocity" and forbidding its discussion on penalty of criminal prosecution.

It turned out, however, that "Nayirah" was Nayirah Sabah, daughter of the Kuwaiti ambassador to the US, and that neither she nor Dr Issah Ibraham had been in Kuwait at the time of the invasion, and that there were no photographs of murdered babies, and in fact no murdered babies, not even one, and that the story was concocted by public-relations firm Hill & Knowlton which was run by George-Bush-Senior intimate Craig L. Fuller.

The Gulf of Tonkin Attack

Similarly, President Lyndon Baines Johnson cited unprovoked attacks 02/04-Aug-1964 on American warships in the Gulf of Tonkin to justify retaliatory strikes on North Vietnam and an escalation of the war, but later admitted "For all I know, our Navy was shooting at whales out there."  Had the American government followed the Canadian Jewish Congress example here, it would have legislated the original Lyndon Baines Johnson version as the ordained truth, and would have jailed any who dared dissent.

The Black Hole of Calcutta

The long-cherished story of 123 out of 146 Brits suffocating in the Black Hole of Calcutta in 1756, which I myself happened to have believed for the past four decades, turns out to have been based on the writing of a single man who claimed to be a survivor — John Zephaniah Holwell — and the event may never have happened: "Though for the British it became an article of faith to accept the veracity of the episode in its most extravagant and sordid form, all accounts relied, without stating so, upon the sole authority of the contemporary narrative of Holwell.  As Edward Said, following Foucault, has suggested in Orientalism (1978), once something is said often enough, it becomes true" www.sscnet.ucla.edu/southasia/History/British/Blackh.html.  One can imagine the Canadian Jewish Congress elaborating Edward Said's statement with the Stalinist "once enough people are jailed for denying something, it becomes true."


British military intelligence planted the story in The Times of 16-Apr-1917 of a German Corpse Factory (Kadaververwertungsanstalt) boiling down German cadavers in support of the war effort:

We pass through Everingcourt.  There is a dull smell in the air as if lime were being burnt.  We are passing the great Corpse Exploitation Establishment (Kadaververwertungsanstalt) of this Army Group.  The fat that is won here is turned into lubricating oils, and everything else is ground down in the bone mill into a powder which is used for mixing with pig's food and as manure — nothing can be permitted to go to waste.
The Times, 16-Apr-1917

"We are passing the great Corpse Exploitation Establishment (Kadaververwertungsanstalt) of this Army Group."
Although the Germans protested the story, the British did not retract it officially until 02-Dec-1925.  The French, in turn, picked up a 1914 British story of Germans chopping the arms off a Belgian baby clinging to its mother's skirts, and later elaborated it to the Germans eating the arms.  The Germans, in turn, published accounts of German prisoners of war having their eyes gouged out, and of a boy having seen "a whole bucketful of soldiers' eyes."  (Phillip Knightly, The First Casualty, Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, New York and London, 1975, pp. 104-107).

Had WW I participants been seized by the Canadian Jewish Congress view of the sanctity of historically-recognized atrocities, then the stories would never have been retracted, and our courts today would be clogged with the prosecution of apostates who desacrated sacred memory by denying the existence of any Kadaververwertungsanstalt, by doubting that Germans had ever cut off and eaten a baby's arms, and by questioning whether German prisoners had ever had their eyes gouged out.

The Katyn Forest Massacre

Of the more than 21,000 Poles executed by the NKVD during WW II, approximately 4,000 were buried in Katyn Forest near Smolensk, and were there discovered by occupying German forces who blamed their murder on the Soviets, with the Soviets turning around and blaming the Germans right back, the Soviet accusation being supported by the Allies over the course of the war.

Whereas the typical outcome is for the creator of war propaganda to retract it not long after the end of hostilities — not so the Soviets who in post-war 1946 were testifying at Nuremberg (
www.ukar.org/littma20.html) that the Katyn bodies had been buried at the time of German occupation in the autumn of 1941 (and not at the time of Soviet occupation in 1940), and who extracted confessions for the Katyn Massacre from nine German officers, and publicly hanged them in Leningrad on 30-Jan-1946 (see statement of Volodymyr Katelnytsky at www.ukar.org/kateln01.html#hanged), an event not often alluded to in the course of the CJC urging the Canadian government to rely on Soviet evidence in its prosecution of Canadians for alleged Nazi war crimes.  Although Russian President Mikhail Gorbachev did eventually acknowledge Soviet responsibility for Katyn, this was not until 1990, half a century after the event, and Gorbachev low-balled the figures, and he made it seem like a rogue action of the NKVD rather than the carrying out of a Kremlin edict.  Despite this official acknowledgment of responsibility, Russian attempts to blame the Germans continue — in 1996 the book The Katyn Crime Fiction blaming the Germans circulated in the Russian Duma and was sold in the Duma bookstore; and in 1998 a Russian souvenir program at an exhibit of WW II photographs in Washington DC repeated the accusation of German guilt (www.cia.gov/csi/studies/winter99-00/art6.html).  [See also www.ukar.org/karavans.htm for reason to believe that Israeli prosecutors backed the Kremlin version of the Katyn story in exchange for Kremlin cooperation in framing John Demjanjuk.  The Katyn Forest Massacre is further discussed at www.ukar.org/littma20.html#Katyn.]

Belief in German guilt by the Allies over the course of the war, followed by Soviet expert testimony at Nuremberg that the Katyn bodies had been buried at the time of German occupation in the autumn of 1941, could have sufficed for one-truth advocates to have German guilt for Katyn "historically recognized," and could have been sufficient to imprison a dozen protesting Germans each year from 1946 until 2004 for nonconformity to single truth.

It is sometimes a question of magnitude and interpretation

And when there is no question that an event took place or who the perpetrators were, there still remain the questions of the event's magnitude and its interpretation.  For example, even though it is generally agreed that the World Trade Center was attacked and destroyed by Arabs on 9/11, initial estimates of the number killed exceeded eight thousand, and that number has shrunk steadily over time and today is inching toward two thousand seven hundred; and explanation of the attackers' motivation continues to range from their hating democracy to their hating American-funded Israelis butchering Arabs to steal Arab land.

Had the American government followed Canadian Jewish Congress thinking, it would have carved into stone the eight thousand figure to represent magnitude, and Arab hatred of democracy to represent motivation, and would have filled concentration camps with the deviates who ventured to question this single truth, concentration camps applauded by the thousands of 9/11 survivors who knew only too well that there was only one truth about 9/11.

In the same way, controversy swirls around the magnitude and the interpretation of all of history's butcheries, as for example the Jewish slaughter of Christian Palestinians at Mamilla Pool in 614; the Ukrainian slaughter of Poles and Jews during the Ukrainian War of Independence of 1648-1654; the Turkish slaughter of Armenians in 1915-16; the Russian starvation of Ukrainians in the Holodomor of 1932-33; the Japanese slaughter of Chinese during their Rape of Nanking in 1937-38; the Armenian ethnic cleansing of Azeris of 1988-1992; and of course controversy necessarily and inevitably swirls also around the Jewish holocaust.  If the Canadian Jewish Congress gets its way, civil servants with the newly-created rank of Inquisitors are going to have to pronounce in each of these cases which position is to be afforded protection as "historically recognized," and police are going to have to cart off to prison all those who stubbornly cling to the contrary position, with the Canadian Jewish Congress promising that when Canadians are coerced to think alike on hot issues, ethnic-national-religious conflict will be banished.

Where's the hatred?

The above handful of examples, out of the vast number of similar ones that can be readily discovered, suggest the generalization that in time of war, hate propaganda pours out from all participants, and with the exception of totalitarian lands, tends to be retracted not long after hostilities cease, and is certainly not legislated into a "single truth" whose questioning will trigger criminal prosecution.  Generally, democratic and open societies welcome debate and revision as integral to the quest for historical understanding.

The most important principle that emerges, though, has to do with what incites hatred and what does not.  The hate propaganda itself, clearly, was calculated to incite hatred.  Its purpose was to transform civilians who felt a twinge of guilt upon stepping on an ant into soldiers plunging their bayonets into the enemy with murderous rage in their hearts, and its contribution toward this end was substantial.  Iraqis Murdering Babies, the attack on American warships in the Gulf of Tonkin, the Black Hole of Calcutta, Germans hacking off and eating the arms of a baby, Allies gouging out German eyeballs — all this hate propaganda did incite hatred of an entire people, as it was designed to do.

The purpose of hate-propaganda retraction, in contrast, is not to incite hatred, it is to promote truth, and retracting or denying or moderating or questioning hate propaganda cannot even be imagined to incite any hatred in any of the cases cited above.

Thus, although blame for fabricating the Premature-Baby-Murders story rests on individual Americans and Kuwaitis, retraction of the story did not result in Americans collectively being blamed, and certainly not in their being hated, because the American people were just as much fooled by the hoax as were every other people, and in fact Americans were the chief victims of the deception, the story being aimed particularly at them so as to rouse them to war fever.  And neither were Kuwaitis collectively hated or even blamed, for they too had been victims of the same hoax as much as Americans or anyone else.  And in fact, no ethnic or national or religious group was either hated or blamed — not Christians or Muslims, for example, even though the chief perpetrators can be viewed not as Americans and Kuwaitis, but as Christians and Muslims.  Even the individuals perceived as being chiefly responsible — say the American President and the Kuwaiti Ambassador — would not have been personally hated, because they would have been seen as doing what needed to be done to beef up morale for a just war, which is how Operation Desert Storm tended to be viewed.  The worst imaginable personal consequence of the historical revision is that the handful of people responsible for concocting the story suffered some loss of trust, a loss which has nothing to do with hate, and a loss which it is not the business of any but totalitarian governments to try to mitigate through legislation.

Similarly, when the Gulf of Tonkin story was retracted, Americans were not hated (they were as much the victims of the story as other people), and even Lyndon Baines Johnson was not hated (at most, he suffered some loss of trust, though perhaps not much, as the degree to which he himself had been fooled by ambiguous data was unclear).

Again, casting doubt on the Black Hole of Calcutta story does not incite hatred toward the British (they are readily understood to have been as much the victims of Holwell's story as anyone else), and Holwell himself (now long deceased) suffers a loss of credibility among any who doubt his story, but is not the target of hatred.

The British people were not hated when the WW I Kadaververwertungsanstalt story was revealed to be fraudulent (the British people had been fooled too), and the French people were not hated when their story of Germans hacking the arms off a baby was revealed to be a lie (the French were as much taken in by the lie as anyone else), and the German people were not hated when the story of a bucket-full of German eyeballs was revealed to be nothing better than war propaganda (the German people had been the chief victims of that war propaganda).

In short, examination of one case after another points to the conclusion that hate propaganda incites hatred, and that the retraction of hate propaganda removes a cause of hatred.  Deserving emphasis is that war-propaganda denial is only the give and take of discovering truth, and produces only mild and narrowly-directed emotions which only a Stalinist state attempts to control, but which the Canadian Jewish Congress invites the Canadian government to suppress by representing the mild and focussed feeling of diminished respect as intense and unfocussed hatred.  In prosecuting what it calls Jewish-holocaust denial, then, the Canadian Jewish Congress is not fighting hatred, it is fighting to retain its right to continue disseminating half-century old WW II Soviet propaganda which does incite hatred.  In Canadian society, it follows, there is no group more guilty of "hate messaging" than the Canadian Jewish Congress.

It may be incidentally observed that the Canadian Jewish Congress attempting to suppress free speech — even when that speech is true — has a good chance of awakening negative emotions which will be described as "moral outrage" by defenders of free speech, and as "hatred" and "anti-Semitism" by the CJC.

The UKAR secular reaction toward the critiquing of
Ukrainian Atrocity Stories

In his 13-Dec-1986 letter to the editor of the Globe and Mail, Douglas Tottle complained that six photographs attributed to the 1932-33 Holodomor (Ukrainian Induced Famine) were in fact of a 1922 Russian famine, and from which he went on to conclude that Robert Conquest's book on the Holodomor, Harvest of Sorrow, was not meticulously researched as claimed.  Tottle even cast oblique doubt on the Holodomor being an act of genocide by referring only to "genocide interpretations" of the Holodomor, and himself placing "genocide" in quotation marks, implying that he did not agree that the word found application to the 1932-33 famine.

If Ukrainians followed the Canadian Jewish Congress example, they would have decried the Tottle letter as an instance of Ukrainian-holocaust denial, would have accused Mr. Tottle of being actuated by the psychiatric disorder of Ukrainophobia, would have worked to deprive him of his income, and would have demanded that the Canadian government or Canadian courts punish Mr. Tottle and suppress his writing.  However, Ukrainians did none of these things.  My own response was to express gratitude, as evidenced by the following words on UKAR's Holodomor Index Page which were written years ago with Tottle's letter in mind:

In selecting documents for inclusion in the Famine Archive, I have adhered to the general Ukrainian Archive policy of allowing room for opposing points of view.  In order for an accurate picture of the Famine to emerge, it is essential that opposing arguments be recognized and either confirmed or disconfirmed; and if, upon occasion, descriptions of the Ukrainian famine have been inaccurate, then having this pointed out by critics constitutes a valuable contribution toward arriving at a true account.

To fear and to inhibit opposing arguments, or the correction of errors, might seem necessary only to those who worry that the Ukrainian Terror Famine has never occurred, or who fear that permitting corrections will cast the entire story into doubt.  But such worries and fears are groundless.  Errors, contradictions, exaggerations — all of these enter in to cloud our perception of every historical event, and to expect otherwise with respect to the Ukrainian Terror Famine would be unrealistic.

Therefore, where criticism of certain Famine accounts is warranted, the criticism must be greeted as providing a useful guide as to how to improve the quality of future accounts.  Where any inaccuracies have been introduced by the press, then this might be taken as an indication that the press needs to be both monitored and educated.  Where inaccuracies have been introduced by writers contracted primarily because of their fame, then this might be taken as a warning that buying fame is not the same as buying historical fidelity.

Finally, in the case where facts are simply created out of thin air by Soviet or Russian representatives, then a sampling of even this too is not inappropriate — or else the reader would be left with no awareness that any dispute is possible, and so would go out into the world less prepared for the disinformation that he is certain to meet there.
From Holodomor Index Page on the Ukrainian Archive at www.ukar.org/famine.html

The CJC theocratic reaction toward the critiquing of
Jewish Atrocity Stories

In contrast to the UKAR secular welcoming of historical revision documented above, the CJC theocratic reaction is to suppress the revision and to punish the reviser.  Whereas most ethnic or national or religious characteristics exhibit overlap between groups, on the characteristic of reaction to historical challenge, I have discovered no overlap between Ukrainians and Jews, which is to say that I have never seen any Ukrainian demand criminal punishment for a challenge to the Holodomor — such as for Tottle's challenge of photographic evidence offered in documentation of the Holodomor — and I have never seen any Jew express gratitude for a challenge to the Shoah — such as for my own challenge to the photographic evidence offered in documentation of the Shoah that is contained in the following four letters to United States Holocaust Memorial Council chair, Irving Greenberg:

www.ukar.org/waitin01.html   04-Sep-2000   What is the meaning of the Waiting in Line photograph?
www.ukar.org/waitin02.html   29-Jan-2001   Further misuse of the Waiting in Line photograph
www.ukar.org/greenb03.html   15-Feb-2001   Forged in a hurry
www.ukar.org/greenb04.html   11-Mar-2001   Tkachuk fails to recognize Marchenko

The CJC statement quoted at the top of the instant letter to the effect that the CJC seeks protection from secular analysis not only for the Jewish holocaust, but for some other genocides — ("CJC welcomes the contemplated change to prevent persons indicted for promoting hate from claiming a defence of truth based on a denial of the Holocaust or any other historically recognized act of genocide" italics added) — is empty and disingenuous, as is evidenced by the CJC failing to identify which genocides, other than the Jewish, it feels are worthy of being "historically recognized," and because it is implausible that any credible authority will ever be persuaded to certify which genocides should receive protection from secular scrutiny, and doubtful that any group other than Jews will ever seek government protection of its genocide from secular scrutiny.  The CJC projecting the image of offering to extend equivalence of suffering to other groups is also revealed as insincere by the consistent Jewish refusal to permit such recognition, a recent instance of which is the following:


Proposed German law causes controversy

Germany’s main Jewish group opposes a proposed law that equates suffering at Nazi hands to suffering at Communist hands.  The Central Council of Jews in Germany was joined by directors of Holocaust memorials and several Jewish and gypsy organizations in announcing Monday their withdrawal from a memorial foundation in the former East German state of Saxony in protest against what they called the relativization of history.  The State Ministry of Research issued a statement saying it regretted the decision of the Central Council.  Remembrance of the victims of both dictatorships is a "part of the democratic culture of remembrance," the statement said.
Jewish Telegraph Agency, 26-Jan-2004 www.jta.org

For my own part, I see no benefit, and in fact see great harm, in Ukrainians attempting to shelter the Holodomor under the same government umbrella that the Canadian Jewish Congress wants to shelter its Shoah.  Ukrainians want to know the truth about the Holodomor, which truth they understand can be gained only through secular investigation, and the discovery of this truth would be not just slowed, but altogether drowned under the flood of first exaggeration, then hyperbole, and finally fantasy that inevitably follow protection from criticism and impunity for fabrication.  Ukrainians also have no desire to broadcast hate propaganda concerning the Holodomor.

Problems arise in attempting to discover
The Canadian Jewish Congress Single Truth

Any attempt to punish deviation from a single truth must explain its methodology for determining which of several clashing stories is to win certification as the single truth, as is exemplified in three cases below — Soap Made from Jewish Cadavers, Electrocutions at Belzec, and the Lviv Massacre.

Soap Made From Jewish Cadavers

Soap being made from Jewish cadavers would have to qualify as "historically recognized" by virtue of its being testified to in Nuremberg:

The fat of the human bodies was collected by Borkner and Reichert.  I boiled the soap from the bodies of women and men.  The process of boiling alone took from three to seven days.  During two manufacturing processes, in which I directly participated, more than 25 kilograms of soap were produced.  The amount of human fat necessary for these two processes was 70 to 80 kilograms, collected from some forty bodies.  The finished soap then went to Professor Spanner, who kept it personally.

The work for the production of soap from human bodies has, as far as I know, also interested Hitler's Government.  The Anatomical Institute was visited by the Minister of Education, Rust; the Minister for Health, Doctor Cort; the Gauleiter of Danzig, Albert Forster; as well as professors from other medical institutes.

I took 4 kilograms of this soap for my personal needs, for toilet and for laundering.
The trial of German major war criminals: Proceedings of the International Military Tribunal sitting at Nuremberg Germany, His Majesty's Stationery Office, Part 4, 11-Jan-1946, p. 207.

The Soviets even supplied samples:

I submit some semi-finished and some finished soap as exhibit USSR 393.  Here you can see a small piece of finished soap, which on the outside, after lying about for a few months, reminds you of ordinary household soap.  I hand it to the Tribunal.  In addition I now submit to the Tribunal the samples of semi-tanned human skin (exhibit USSR 394).  These samples of soap prove that the process of manufacture was already completely worked out by the Danzig Institute; as to the skin, it still looks like a semi-finished product.  The skin which resembles most the leather used in manufacture is the one you see on top at the left.
The trial of German major war criminals: Proceedings of the International Military Tribunal sitting at Nuremberg Germany, His Majesty's Stationery Office, Part 7, 19-Feb-1946, p. 135.

Today, however, historians do not credit the soap story, from which we may draw the inference that they view the above testimony was perjured and the human-soap samples as faked.  Thus, in Raul Hilberg's index, there is no entry under "soap" but only under "soap rumor," and on p. 955 Hilberg admits:

The use of human fat for soap cannot be established as a fact from available documentary evidence and eyewitness reports.
Raul Hilberg, The Destruction of the European Jews, Revised and Definitive Edition, Holmes & Meier, New York and London, 1985, p. 955.

Raul Hilberg, then, is either unaware of the Nuremberg testimony — which is implausible — or he doesn't believe it.  The same goes for Deborah Lipstadt:

It is also accurate that scholars have long written that despite wartime rumors to the contrary, the Nazis apparently did not use Jewish cadavers for soap.
Deborah Lipstadt, Denying the Holocaust: The growing assault on truth and memory, Plume, New York, 1993, p. 188.

But if some time between 1946 and 1985 the Canadian Jewish Congress had succeeded in getting the human-soap story certified as single truth, then it would follow that Raul Hilberg and Deborah Lipstadt would — at least in theory — be viewed as anti-Semitic Jewish-holocaust deniers guilty of a "vicious obscenity," and that if they ever ventured into Canadian jurisdiction, would be subject to criminal prosecution

The immediate problem that I pose for the Canadian Jewish Congress is that there appear to be two authoritative, and yet contradictory, descriptions of the Jewish-soap story, one that affirms it and one that denies it, and so the CJC needs to propose some methodology for choosing between them.  If the CJC fails to propose any methodology, then it might be supposed that the existing methodology of secular analysis will have to be called in — by which I mean the methodology that mainstream historians use today — but which clashes with the CJC view that the Jewish holocaust is already known "only too well" by "the thousands of Holocaust survivors living in Canada," and so must be granted government protection from secular investigation.

Electrocutions at Belzec

Two authoritative "black books" — abbreviated below as the BBPJ and the BB — testify to electrocution as the method of mass execution at Belzec, whereas the authoritative testimony of Yitzhak Arad points to carbon monoxide poisoning:

  1. BBPJ  The Black Book of Polish Jewry: An Account of the Martyrdom of Polish Jewry Under the Nazi Occupation, United States, 1943

    Anything that the BBPJ says must be taken as carrying considerable weight because of the high prestige of its sponsors, among whom can be found one first lady (ELEANOR ROOSEVELT), one Nobel Laureate whose name has become synonymous with genius (PROFESSOR ALBERT EINSTEIN), three U.S. Congressmen (HON. SOL. BLOOM, HON. EMANUEL CELLER, HON. A. J. SABATH), one U.S. Senator (HON. ROBERT H. WAGNER), one mayor of New York City (HON. FIORELLO H. LAGUARDIA), one Secretary of the Interior (HON. HAROLD L. ICKES), one Columbia University Professor (PROFESSOR SALO W. BARON), and other notables.  Did ever Jewish-holocaust documentation come more highly recommended than the BBPJ, and so was ever the weight of authority greater than for the BBPJ's allegation of electrocution barracks?

    An electrocution station is installed at Belzec camp.  [...]  The victims are ordered to strip naked ostensibly to have a bath and are then led to a barracks with a metal plate for floor.  The door is then locked, electric current passes through the victims and their death is almost instantaneous.  The bodies are loaded on the wagons and taken to a mass grave some distance from the camp.
    American Federation for Polish Jews, Black Book of Polish Jewry: An Account of the Martyrdom of Polish Jewry Under the Nazi Occupation, 1943, p. 131 at www.ukar.org/blackb01.html#Schwarzbart131

  2. BB  The Black Book: The Nazi Crime Against the Jewish People, New York, 1946

    The Jewish Black Book Committee which takes credit for the BB is not quite as dazzling as the sponsors of the BBPJ above, but is nevertheless impressive:

    VAAD LEUMI (Jewish National Council of Palestine), Jerusalem

    Jewish Black Book Committee, The Black Book: The Nazi Crime Against the Jewish People, Duell, Sloan and Pearce, New York, 1946

    And the description of the Belzec electrocutions is more detailed, and serves nicely to explain why no graves or bodies were ever discovered at Belzec:

    The Belzec camp is built underground.  It is an electric crematorium.  There are two halls in the underground buildings.  People were taken out of the railway cars into the first hall.  Then they were led naked to the second hall.  Here the floor resembled an enormous plate.  When the crowd of men stood on it, the floor sank deep into a pool of water.  The moment the men sank up to their necks, a powerful electric current of millions of volts was passed through, killing them at once.  The floor rose again, and a second electric current was passed through the bodies, burning them until nothing was left of the victims save a few ashes.
    Jewish Black Book Committee, The Black Book: The Nazi Crime Against the Jewish People, Duell, Sloan and Pearce, New York, 1946, p. 313

  3. Yitzhak Arad  Yitzhak Arad, Belzec, Sobibor, Treblinka: The Operation Reinhard Death Camps, Indiana University Press, Bloomington and Indianapolis, 1987

    We may take Yitzhak Arad to be a leading, or perhaps even the pre-eminent, Jewish-holocaust authority for the following reasons:

    • Arad was himself a Jewish-holocaust survivor.
    • Arad was the prosecution's leading expert witness on the Jewish holocaust and on the Treblinka camp in the 1987 Jerusalem trial of John Demjanjuk for the crime of having been "Ivan the Terrible of Treblinka."
    • At the time of trial, Arad had served as head of Israel's Yad Vashem, or Holocaust Remembrance Museum, for the previous fifteen years — that is, from 1972 to 1987.
    • At the time of the trial, Arad had just finished writing his book cited above: Belzec, Sobibor, Treblinka.

    And in his book, Yitzhak Arad leaves no doubt that the method of execution at Belzec was carbon monoxide gassing:

    When these experimental killings were carried out, the system that would supply the gas was not yet ready.  Therefore, the gas used for these killings was bottled carbon monoxide.  Shortly afterwards, however, a self-contained monoxide gas system was developed, and an armored car engine of 250 horsepower was installed in a shed outside the gas chamber.  From it, a pipe channeled the gas inside.
    Yitzhak Arad, Belzec, Sobibor, Treblinka: The Operation Reinhard Death Camps, Indiana University Press, Bloomington and Indianapolis, 1987, p. 26.

So, then, not only are the two electrocution versions so radically different from each other that they may be said to be contradictory, and to undermine rather than reinforce each other, but Yitzhak Arad's more recent gassing version contradicts both.  (One could make the further observation that both electrocution versions violate principles of elementary physics, but discussing this further incongruity is not needed to make my point.)

And what does the Canadian Jewish Congress propose here?  Which of the three versions is the single truth that is "historically recognized," and which remaining two versions are the "vicious obscenities" that are to be suppressed by means of criminal prosecution?  Which of these three stories is the one that "thousands of Holocaust survivors living in Canada ... know only too well" to be the single truth, and which remaining two stories are the Jewish-holocaust denials of anti-Semites?  If secular evaluation is to be relied upon to pick the winner, doesn't this exclude the CJC-recommended reliance on theocratic single-truth?

Extrication from the quandary of not knowing how to identify truth finds no solution in consulting "the thousands of Holocaust survivors living in Canada who know only too well that there is only one truth about the Holocaust," because the testimony of individual survivors tends to be out of touch with reality, as exemplified in the following answer to the question of how victims gassed at Treblinka were transported to burial pits, this particular answer being the highly original one that the victims didn't need to be transported because they simply walked:

This building is fenced off with barbed wire.  They enter it in groups of 300-500 people.  Each group is immediately closed hermetically inside, and gassed.  The gas does not affect them immediately, because the Jews still have to continue on to the pits that are a few dozen meters away, and whose depth is 30 meters.  There they fall unconscious, and a digger covers them with a thin layer of earth.  Then another group arrives....  Soon we will relay an authentic testimony of a Jew who succeeded in escaping from Treblinka....
Yitzhak Arad, Belzec, Sobibor, Treblinka: The Operation Reinhard Death Camps, Indiana University Press, Bloomington and Indianapolis, 1987, p. 354.

Of course secular historical analysis would not limit itself to picking the best story of the three above.  Among the still other options might be to deny all three, an option encouraged by expert prosecution witness Yitzhak Arad testifying at the John Demjanjuk trial in Jerusalem in 1987 that Belzec, Sobibor, and Treblinka did not host the expected scene of a liberating army discovering emaciated prisoners behind barbed wire, fetid barracks, burial pits with stacks of unburied bodies, and so on.  What the liberating Red Army did find at the three sites, according to Arad, was a tranquil farm, indistinguishable from any other farm in the area, and arousing no suspicion.  No barracks, no barbed wire, no prisoners, no bodies, no burial pits, no photographs of the camp, no documentary evidence of the camps' existence or of the murders committed there, not the least shred of forensic evidence of any kind — that is what Yitzhak Arad testified (
www.ukar.org/arad02.html), and that testimony alone might be enough to raise in the mind of the secular historian the possibility that all three of the above stories are simply war propaganda that has been kept on life support for half a century even though brain dead.

Lviv Massacre

The Wiesenthal-Safer Lviv Massacre story shares with the examples above the characteristic of being highly authoritative — it was broadcast on 23-Oct-1994 to 30 million television viewers by Morley Safer of 60 Minutes — one of television's most respected investigative journalists appearing on television's most prestigious investigative-journalism show — and it relied on the testimony of the world's leading Nazi hunter, Simon Wiesenthal, and with neither Morley Safer nor the CBS nor Simon Wiesenthal over the ensuing nine years retracting, or in any way qualifying, their claim that in three days in July 1941, following the evacuation of Soviet forces and before the arrival of German troops, Ukrainian police killed between five and six thousand Jews in the Western-Ukraine city of Lviv (Lvov in Russian):

SAFER:  He [Simon Wiesenthal] remembers that even before the Germans arrived, Ukrainian police went on a 3-day killing spree.

WIESENTHAL:  And in this 3 days in Lvov alone between 5 and 6 thousand Jews was killed.


SAFER:  But even before the Germans entered Lvov, the Ukrainian militia, the police, killed 3,000 people in 2 days here.

Overlooking — for the sake of brevity — the lesser difficulty that even the one 60-Minutes statement quoted above contains two discrepant accounts, my own further research brought to light the greater difficulty that both 60-MInutes versions were contradicted by the historical record, as is encapsulated in the words of Raul Hilberg who summarizes Ukrainian anti-Jewish action as following German occupation, as being incited by the Einsatzgruppen, and as being reluctant and small-scale:

From the Ukraine Einsatzkommando 6 of Einsatzgruppe C reported as follows:
Almost nowhere can the population be persuaded to take active steps against the Jews.  This may be explained by the fear of many people that the Red Army may return.  Again and again this anxiety has been pointed out to us.  Older people have remarked that they had already experienced in 1918 the sudden retreat of the Germans.  In order to meet the fear psychosis, and in order to destroy the myth ... which, in the eyes of many Ukrainians, places the Jew in the position of the wielder of political power, Einsatzkommando 6 on several occasions marched Jews before their execution through the city.  Also, care was taken to have Ukrainian militiamen watch the shooting of Jews.
This "deflation" of the Jews in the public eye did not have the desired effect.  After a few weeks, Einsatzgruppe C complained once more that the inhabitants did not betray the movements of hidden Jews.  The Ukrainians were passive, benumbed by the "Bolshevist terror."  Only the ethnic Germans in the area were busily working for the Einsatzgruppe.
Raul Hilberg, The Destruction of the European Jews, 1961, p. 202.

The Slavic population stood estranged and even aghast before the unfolding spectacle of the "final solution."  There was on the whole no impelling desire to cooperate in a process of such utter ruthlessness.  The fact that the Soviet regime, fighting off the Germans a few hundred miles to the east, was still threatening to return, undoubtedly acted as a powerful restraint upon many a potential collaborator.
Raul Hilberg, The Destruction of the European Jews, 1985, p. 308.

First, truly spontaneous pogroms, free from Einsatzgruppen influence, did not take place; all outbreaks were either organized or inspired by the Einsatzgruppen.  Second, all pogroms were implemented within a short time after the arrival of the killing units.  They were not self-perpetuating, nor could new ones be started after things had settled down.
Raul Hilberg, The Destruction of the European Jews, 1985, p. 312.

But more importantly, my own research brought to light that in the interval prior to German occupation, it was not Ukrainians who killed Jews, but rather it was the
Jewish-dominated NKVD that killed Ukrainians, a widespread killing of which the Lviv Massacre was only one part, as is supported by substantial documentation, from which the following are two representative excerpts:

Location: Zviahel (Novograd-Volynski)


Before leaving, the Bolsheviks, together with the Jews, murdered several Ukrainians; as an excuse, they used the attempted Ukrainian uprising of June 25, 1941, which tried to free their prisoners.

According to reliable information, about 20,000 Ukrainians have disappeared from Lvov, 80% of them belonging to the intelligentsia.

The prisons in Lvov were crammed with the bodies of murdered Ukrainians.  According to a moderate estimate, in Lvov alone 3-4,000 persons were either killed or deported.

In Dobromil, 82 dead bodies were found, 4 of them Jews.  The latter were former Bolsheviki informers who had been killed because of their complicity in this act.  Near Dobromil an obsolete salt mine pit was discovered.  It was completely filled with dead bodies.  In the immediate neighborhood, there is a 6X15m mass grave.  The number of those murdered in the Dobromil area is estimated to be approximately several hundred.

In Sambor on June 26, 1941, about 400 Ukrainians were shot by the Bolsheviks.  An additional 120 persons were murdered on June 27, 1941.  The remaining 80 prisoners succeeded in overpowering the Soviet guards, and fled.  [...]

As early as 1939, a larger number of Ukrainians was shot, and 1,500 Ukrainians as well as 500 Poles were deported to the east.

Russians and Jews committed these murders in very cruel ways.  Bestial mutilations were daily occurrences.  Breasts of women and genitals of men were cut off.  Jews have also nailed children to the wall and then murdered them.  Killing was carried out by shots in the back of the neck.  Hand grenades were frequently used for these murders.

In Dobromil, women and men were killed with blows by a hammer used to stun cattle before slaughter.

In many cases, the prisoners must have been tortured cruelly: bones were broken, etc.  In Sambor, the prisoners were gagged and thus prevented from screaming during torture and murder.  The Jews, some of whom also held official positions, in addition to their economic supremacy, and who served in the entire Bolshevik police, were always partners in these atrocities.

Finally, it was established that seven [German] pilots who had been captured were murdered.  Three of them were found in a Russian military hospital where they had been murdered in bed by shots in the abdomen.  [...]

[...]  Prior to their withdrawal, the Bolsheviks shot 2,800 out of 4,000 Ukrainians imprisoned in the Lutsk prison.  According to the statement of 19 Ukrainians who survived the slaughter with more or less serious injuries, the Jews again played a decisive part in the arrests and shooting.  [...]

The investigations at Zlochev proved that the Russians, prior to their withdrawal, arrested and murdered indiscriminately a total of 700 Ukrainians, but, nevertheless, included the entire [local] Ukrainian intelligentsia.
Operational Situation Report USSR No. 24, July 16, 1941, in Yitzhak Arad, Shmuel Krakowski, and Shmuel Spector, The Einsatzgruppen Reports: Selections from the Dispatches of the Nazi Death Squads' Campaign Against the Jews July 1941-January 1943, Holocaust Library, New York, 1989, p. 29-33.

Location: Pleskau [Pskov]  [...]

The population is in general convinced that it is mostly the Jews who should be held responsible for the atrocities that are committed everywhere.  [...]

As it was learned that the Russians before they left have either deported the Ukrainian intelligentsia, or executed them, that is, murdered them, it is assumed that in the last days before the retreat of the Russians, about 100 influential Ukrainians were murdered [in Pleskau].  So far the bodies have not been found — a search has been initiated.

About 100-150 Ukrainians were murdered by the Russians in Kremenets.  Some of these Ukrainians are said to have been thrown into cauldrons of boiling water.  This has been deduced from the fact that the bodies were found without skin when they were exhumed.  [...]

[...]  Before leaving Dubno, the Russians, as they had done in Lvov, committed extensive mass-murder.

[...]  Before their flight [from Tarnopol], as in Lvov and Dubno, the Russians went on a rampage there.  Disinterments revealed 10 bodies of German soldiers.  Almost all of them had their hands tied behind their backs with wire.  The bodies revealed traces of extremely cruel mutilations such as gouged eyes, severed tongues and limbs.

The number of Ukrainians who were murdered by the Russians, among them women and children, is set finally at 600.  Jews and Poles were spared by the Russians.  The Ukrainians estimate the total number of [Tarnopol] victims since the occupation of the Ukraine by the Russians at about 2,000.  The planned deportation of the Ukrainians already started in 1939.  There is hardly a family in Tarnopol from which one or several members have not disappeared.  [...]  The entire Ukrainian intelligentsia is destroyed.  Since the beginning of the war, 160 members of the Ukrainian intelligentsia were either murdered or deported.  Inhabitants of the town had observed a column of about 1,000 civilians driven out of town by police and army early in the morning of July 1, 1941.

As in Lvov, torture chambers were discovered in the cellars of the Court of Justice.  Apparently, hot and cold showers were also used here (as in Lemberg [Lviv]) for torture, as several bodies were found, totally naked, their skin burst and torn in many places.  A grate was found in another room, made of wire and set above the ground about 1m in height, traces of ashes were found underneath.  A Ukrainian engineer, who was also to be murdered but saved his life by smearing the blood of a dead victim over his face, reports that one could also hear screams of pain from women and girls.
Operational Situation Report USSR No. 28, July 20, 1941, in Yitzhak Arad, Shmuel Krakowski, and Shmuel Spector, The Einsatzgruppen Reports: Selections from the Dispatches of the Nazi Death Squads' Campaign Against the Jews July 1941-January 1943, Holocaust Library, New York, 1989, p.38-40.

A more complete view of the evidence that the pre-German interval was typified not by Ukrainians killing Jews, but by Jews killing Ukrainians, is available at:

www.ukar.org/zayas01.html    1979    De Zayas: The Lviv Massacre
www.ukar.org/60minart.html#Lviv        The Ugly Face of 60 Minutes: What Happened in Lviv?
www.ukar.org/hilber02.html   15-Dec-1997   Raul Hilberg: Lviv Massacre implicitly denied
www.ukar.org/shapov01.html   25-May-1998   Lubomyr Prytulak: Jewish conquest of the Slavs
www.ukar.org/safer13.html   04-Jul-1999   Morley Safer: The Wiesenthal-Safer Calumny
www.ukar.org/safer17.html   28-Oct-1999   Morley Safer: CBS must produce its evidence

It may incidentally be noted that the weighty evidence of the NKVD slaughter of Ukrainians works also to undermine the 60 Minutes Wiesenthal-Safer story of Ukrainian police or militia killing Jews.  First, there was no such thing as Ukrainian police or militia units in existence at the time — the controlling authority was Soviet, intent on wiping out the Ukrainian language and culture, and resting power as much as possible in non-Ukrainian hands.  Second, a Jewish-controlled NKVD and Red Army killing Ukrainians would not have tolerated the simultaneous operation of Ukrainian units killing Jews.  It is inconceivable that two such mutually-exclusive actions could have been carried out shoulder-to-shoulder.  If one took place, the other did not.

Searching for the missing following the NKVD Lviv Massacre
The new twist that the story of the Lviv Massacre brings to our attention is that it is not merely the case that sometimes one Jewish-holocaust story clashes with another, but it is also at other times the case that a Jewish-holocaust story may clash with a Ukrainian-holocaust story.  Thus, if there were theocratic Inquisitors on the Jewish side publishing their mandatory single truths, and also theocratic Inquisitors on the Ukrainian side publishing their mandatory single truths, then the Jewish and Ukrainian truths would sometimes clash, foreseeing the inevitability of which necessitates that the Canadian Jewish Congress propose a method of resolution.  Anybody with a modicum of common sense can see that secular analysis is what is needed, not only to resolve conflicts between respective parties, but in fact to replace all theocratic certification of historical unithink — but I am asking here not what is evident to everybody but the leadership of the CJC, I am asking what solution the CJC leadership itself proposes, as secular analysis is at odds with the CJC desire to certify single truths as "historically recognized" and to subject blasphemy to criminal prosecution.

Has the Canadian Jewish Congress Created
A Cancer for Jews?

War propagandists typically retract their hate propaganda not long after the end of a war.  On the other hand, a closed society like the former Soviet Union may enter an interval of cold war following a shooting war, and so may find its hate propaganda useful for the next half century.  The case of some Jewish leaders stands out from both of these — not only have Jewish leaders retained and defended some Soviet WW II hate propaganda, but half a century after the end of the war are energetically publishing fresh hate propaganda concerning that long-ended war, fresh hate propaganda fully as bizarre and hysterical as the original.  The invention of an "Ivan the Terrible of Treblinka" for purposes of persecuting John Demjanjuk and trying him in Jerusalem in 1987 is one example of newly-minted WW II hate propaganda, and the invention in 1994 of the Wiesenthal-Safer Lviv Pogrom is another example.  Boaz Evron calls the resulting predicament the second-greatest calamity to befall the Jewish people during the 20th century.  That is, the greatest calamity was the Jewish holocaust, and the second-greatest calamity was the proliferation of obviously-false and easily-refuted stories that have grown up around the Jewish holocaust, and which today Evron considers a cancer for the Jewish people:

Two terrible things happened to the Jewish people during this century: [First, t]he Holocaust and the lessons drawn from it.  [Second, t]he non-historical and easily refutable commentaries on the Holocaust made either deliberately or through simple ignorance and their use for propaganda purposes among non-Jews or Jews both in Israel and the diaspora constitute a cancer for Jews and for the State of Israel.
Boaz Evron, Holocaust, a Danger for the Jewish People, published in the Hebrew journal Yiton 77, May-June 1980

In addition to my usual asking whether in payment for his above statement Boaz Evron should be considered an anti-Semitic Jewish-holocaust denier and should be prosecuted under the criminal code of whatever jurisdiction he happens to be arrested in, I also ask the question of whether the unusual duration over which some Jewish leaders have capitalized on WW II hate propaganda, and the vicious causes which they made that hate propaganda serve, may lead to an exception to the principle inferred above that the retraction or refutation of hate propaganda fails to incite hatred?

My answer is that in the case of Evron's "non-historical and easily refutable commentaries on the Holocaust," retraction or refutation will lead to some heated emotion — but not toward the Jewish people collectively, because the Jewish people collectively are not the authors of the vast hoax, they are the victims.  That is, every Jew that I have ever addressed on the subject of the Jewish holocaust or WW II war crimes has demonstrated an ignorance of being duped as profound as that enjoyed by all other people.  It is clear that Jews collectively have been both the targets and the victims of the deception, and that they have suffered profoundly from being deceived.  The emotion that I envision, then, will be in the nature not of hatred but of righteous indignation on the part of the Jewish people against the leaders that have duped them.  I offer for your consideration the very viable hypothesis that Canadian Jewish Congress leaders are right to anticipate that a continuation of what they call "holocaust denial" (and what others recognize as the objective and scholarly study of history) will lead to an eruption, but they are disingenuous in disclosing who it is they expect will erupt, and against whom they expect that eruption will be aimed.  What the Jewish leaders pretend to expect is an eruption of Nazis against Jews, but what they truly expect and truly fear is an eruption of Jews against their own leadership, the effect of which eruption will be to sweep the hate propagandists among them from office, and will be to install a new generation of Jewish leaders.

The answer to the question of whether the Canadian Jewish Congress has created a cancer for Jews, then, is — No, it has not!  The Canadian Jewish Congress, and similar organizations in Canada and world-wide, have created a cancer for some Jewish leaders.  The Jewish people are the surgeons who will extirpate this cancer under the new leadership of such cancer surgeons as the following (to limit myself to the first dozen that come to mind):  Noam CHOMSKY, Boaz EVRON, Barbara Strauss FEUERLICHT, Norman G FINKELSTEIN, Robert I FRIEDMAN, Michael NEUMANN, Philip ROTH, John SACK, Israel SHAHAK, Israel SHAMIR, Max SILVERMAN, and William WOLF.

What can be expected from the new generation of Jewish leaders is a renunciation of the sort of hoaxes for which the Canadian Jewish Congress has become notorious, an embrace of secular historical analysis, an abandonment of the struggle to strangle free speech, and expressions of gratitude to those who contribute toward ridding Jewish history of error (in the same way that I express gratitude toward Douglas Tottle for his helping rid Ukrainian history of error).  The new Jewish leadership will begin to attribute anti-Semitism to those who weaken and harm the Jewish people, as for example the current Canadian Jewish Congress leadership, and will withdraw the label from those who fortify and help the Jewish people, as for example those who help cleanse Jewish history of error.  The new Jewish leadership will abandon the foolish project of legislating protection from secular analysis for exactly one out of the million episodes that constitute human history.  Once such a new generation of Jewish leaders takes control, the Jewish people will find themselves daily more secure instead of daily more harried.

The University of Toronto has become infected with
Canadian Jewish Congress Fanaticism

I have spent many years studying, and sometimes teaching, at four universities — the University of Toronto, Stanford University, the University of Western Ontario, and the University of British Columbia — and in all of these, irrespective of faculty or department, I have found that there is no more retrograde, ignorant, and benighted thing that someone might say than that there exists a single truth, and that any who deviate from that single truth should be jailed.  This is the talk of fanatics that universities are dedicated to debunk.  This is the ideology of the repressive regimes that the West struggles to supplant.  This is the talk of tyrants under whose strangleholds much of the earth chokes.  This is the babble of the maniacs that students sometimes invite on campus for the purpose of laughing at their backwardness and jeering at their arrogance.  This may be normal talk from the leadership of the Canadian Jewish Congress, but it is incongruous from a faculty member at a Canadian university.

What moderation, what restraint, what submission to evidence or reason can be expected from those who would strike so mortal a blow at the very heart of Western justice?
And, more particularly, what must the Faculty of Law which employs you think of your stance?  If one were to express the single most fundamental of all principles which underlies Western justice, would it not be, Audi alteram partem — Hear the other side; hear both sides; no man should be condemned unheard?  Justitia blindfolded conveys Hear both sides impartially, which is a qualification and a reinforcement of the more fundamental Hear both sides.  That Justitia should abstain from peeking at her balance from underneath her blindfold presupposes her more fundamental holding of a balance that can be peeked at, and that balance necessarily has two pans.  But for those who proclaim that there is only one truth, there remains no other side to be heard.  What you and your Canadian Jewish Congress propose, then, is much worse than allowing Justitia to corruptly peek, it is taking away one of the pans of her balance.  What moderation, what restraint, what submission to evidence or reason can be expected from those who would strike so mortal a blow at the very heart of Western justice?  I think none.  With the weighing of truth banished from the courtroom, what safeguard would remain to attenuate the power of fear and favor?  I think none.  Yours is either the primitive doctrine of children who know nothing of the world, or it is the alien and subversive doctrine of authoritarians hoping to seize power and totalitarians hoping to control thought.

And so I stand alarmed at how things have changed at the University of Toronto since I last saw it.  From your example, I fear that what in my day was rejected as bankrupt absolutism, has today won a following.  I can only hope that your finding employment at the law school does not signal the University of Toronto's embrace of fanaticism, but only fanaticism's having stuck its foot in the door, with the University still having strength to slam it shut.

Lubomyr Prytulak


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
Mary M GUSELLA, Chief Commissioner, CHRC, 344 Slater Street, Ottawa, ON  K1A 1E1
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