PR guru Howard Rubenstein, who is a vice-president of New York's Jewish
      Community Relations Council (and who also flacks for radio station WLIB, known
      for the anti-Semitic invective it regularly airs), worked pro bono on the
      Apollo event and continues to plug the documentary, despite having heard that
      it is misleading.
      "I have no reason to distrust Nina [Rosenblum]," he says. "She seemed very
      able and honest. I hope and pray it's accurate."
      Peggy Tishman, a former president of the JCRC and a co-host of the evening
      at the Apollo, is sticking by the documentary too. Ms. Tishman says the
      documentary is "good for the Holocaust."
      "Why would anybody want to exploit the idea that this is a fraud?" she
      says. "What we're trying to do is make New York a better place for you and me
      to live."
      She claims that the accuracy of the film is not the issue. What is
      important is the way it can bring Jews and blacks into "dialogue." There are a
      lot of truths that are very necessary," she says. "This is not a truth that's
      necessary."
      Jeffrey Goldberg is New York bureau chief for The Forward.
      The above Jeffrey Goldberg article was accompanied by two photographs, the
      captions of which were:
      U.S. soldiers, both high-ranking officers and
      enlisted men, view a scene of horror at a death
      camp. Concentration-camp prisoners were murdered
      as a last act by departing German guards.
      A black U.S. soldier guards German prisoners in
      France during the last weeks of the war.
      Comments on the above
      Jeffrey Goldberg article
      Where's the harm? The Liberators incident is relevant to several of the
      topics discussed in the Ukrainian Archive. The Liberators has been somewhat
      arbitrarily placed with 60 Minutes documents because it demonstrates the power
      of the media to fabricate history. In the case of the 23 Oct 1994 60 Minutes
      broadcast The Ugly Face of Freedom, the disinformation served to calumniate
      Ukrainians; in the case of the PBS documentary, the Liberators, the
      disinformation appears to be oriented toward improving relations between Jews
      and blacks. Thus, whereas the 60 Minutes disinformation will readily be viewed
      as destructive by all who learn of it, the Liberators disinformation may be
      viewed by some as innocuous or even benevolent.
      However, there are reasons for not viewing the Liberators disinformation
      leniently or indulgently:
      (1) Black grievances against Jews may be founded on genuine exploitation of
      Blacks by Jews, and the Liberators may be an attempt to quiet opposition to
      that exploitation and so allow it to continue.
      (2) Setting the precedent of conniving at disinformation such as that offered
      in the Liberators offers disseminators of disinformation the prospect of
      impunity for manipulating public opinion to their own ends, and these ends vary
      on the benevolence-malevolence continuum. Whereas inducing people who had
      never been at Buchenwald to simulate returning to Buchenwald for PBS cameras
      may seem harmless, the buildup of tolerance for such chicanery makes it easier
      to similarly induce people to falsely testify in war crimes proceedings
      concerning Holocaust events, with the result that the lives of innocent accused
      are disrupted, shattered, and even lost.
      "Capturing" and "liberating"? Referring to Allied forces "capturing" or
      "liberating" the camps is inflating what really happened - which is that Allied
      soldiers peacefully walked into camps that German forces had abandoned days
      previously. In the words of Philip Latimer, president of the 761st veterans'
      organization, "It's no great accomplishment to liberate a concentration camp."
      In other words, the Liberators film leaves the impression of Jews attempting to
      get black fighting units to falsely take credit for non-accomplishments.
      Unreliability of eye-witness testimony. We have already had occasion to notice on
      the Ukrainian Archive the unreliability of eye-witness testimony, as in the
      cases of falsely accused Frank Walus and John Demjanjuk. The Liberators film
      reminds us once again how easy it is to get some old men to say whatever you
      want them to. Thus, we find that "two of the company's soldiers assert in the
      film that they liberated Dachau," when we know that this could not have been
      the case, and we find that "several Holocaust survivors are quoted in the film
      and in the companion book published by Harcourt Brace Jovanovich as saying they
      were liberated by blacks of these units," again when this is an impossibility.
      Of course upon less biased questioning, some of these old men will recant: "But
      Christopher Ruddy, a New York writer who has conducted extensive research on
      the film, says two of the survivors featured in the Liberators told him they
      were no longer sure when they first saw black soldiers."
      Responsible Jews and non-Jews oppose irresponsible Jews. It cannot escape
      our attention that foremost among those challenging the disinformation in the
      Liberators are the apparently-Jewish writer Jeffrey Goldberg, and
      possibly-Jewish historians at the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum. This
      reinforces a point introduced earlier in the Ukrainian Archive during the
      discussion of Warsaw's 1905 Alphonsenpogrom, to the effect that what may be
      taken at first glance to be an expression of antagonism toward Jews may in
      reality be an expression of opposition by responsible Jews and non-Jews alike
      against irresponsible elements among Jews, and that it is the responsible Jews
      themselves who may be in the vanguard of the attack against irresponsible Jews.
      We have seen this to be the case repeatedly, not only during Warsaw's
      Alphonsenpogrom, but in many prominent incidents - for example, Israeli defense
      attorney Yoram Sheftel must be given a large share of the credit for exposing
      the duplicity and incompetence of the Israeli justice system, and thereby
      saving the life of John Demjanjuk, a case in which other Jews such as Phoenix
      attorney William J. Wolf also played leading and heroic roles. The prominent
      role played by responsible Jews in opposing irresponsible Jews should not be
      surprising - the irresponsible Jews injure all Jews because their
      irresponsibility attaches in popular thinking to Jews generally, and thus
      serves to smear the good name of all Jews.
      Important to note in the Liberators case, then, is that the friction does not
      divide cleanly along ethnic lines. The Liberators, and the many other cases
      before us, do not illustrate Jews clashing with anti-Semites - rather, they
      illustrate the irresponsible clashing with the responsible, the disseminators
      of disinformation clashing with the upholders of truth.
      Zero repercussions. And so for having told the lies that are told on the
      Liberators, have any of the makers of that film suffered any repercussions?
      Have any of them been fired? Been demoted? Been censured? Have any of them
      suffered a loss of face? Do any of them find that their later work is rejected
      because of their earlier loss of credibility? The answer to all these
      questions - in all probability - is No!
      In American and Canadian society, there is one category of behavior that is
      uniquely protected from the repercussions of falsehood - and that is the
      category of Jews recounting stories of the Jewish Holocaust. Charges of
      falsehood may indeed be levelled, but these are not picked up by the media, and
      so make no impact. We have already examined many such cases on the Ukrainian
      Archive - the cases of Morley Safer, Neal Sher, Elie Wiesel, and Simon
      Wiesenthal standing out - egregious, bald-faced liars all of them, but never
      called to task for their lies, honored and even revered despite their lies.
      Psychiatric diagnosis of the film's critics. Co-producer of the film, Nina
      Rosenblum, accuses critics of the film of being "Holocaust revisionists" and
      "racists." But why stop there - why not follow up the two left jabs with the
      right-hand haymaker, "anti-Semites"? The answer perhaps is that it may appear
      more credible to smear all critics of the film with the same brush, and the
      accusation of anti-Semitism does not stick to those critics who happen to be
      Jewish. The deployment of terms suggestive of psychological disorder, such as
      "revisionist," "racist," or "anti-Semite" exemplifies the stock Jewish ploy of
      attempting to silence opposition by dispensing psychiatric diagnoses.
      Creating collaborators in disinformation. Jews who lie not only discredit Jews
      generally, but also discredit any whom they lure into sharing their lies.
      Thus, had the 761st Tank Battalion been seduced into accepting whatever
      momentary glory attaches to wrongly claiming to have liberated Buchenwald, then
      the 761st would have ultimately suffered a loss of credibility. The 761st does
      have genuine achievements, and foresaw only discredit in fabricating any. In
      the words of Philip Latimer, president of the 761st veterans' organization,
      "The unit has a lot to be proud of ... and I don't want to see it blamed for
      this documentary. I don't want the unit to be hurt."
      Attempts have been made to seduce Ukrainians, and others, into a similar
      complicity in Jewish disinformation, and in the case of Ukrainians, these
      attempts have been largely successful. The Ukrainians' reward has been to
      receive a Righteous Gentile Award for their efforts in saving Jews during the
      Second World War. In accepting such an award, however, such Ukrainians
      implicitly acquiesce and lend support to a Jewish history of the war, which is
      crammed with disinformation, much of it harmful to Ukrainian interests. Among
      the items of disinformation in this false history is that Ukrainians were eager
      collaborators of the Nazis (when in reality Ukrainians overwhelmingly served as
      opponents), that Ukrainian efforts to save Jews were rare (when in reality
      large numbers of Ukrainians took grave risks and even gave their lives to save
      Jews), that any anti-Jewish feeling on the part of Ukrainians that did exist
      was gratuitous and pathological (when in reality it was founded on a memory of
      the recent Jewish domination of the destruction of Ukraine under Communism).
      Thus, any Ukrainians who were offered a Righteous Gentile Award should have
      declined it for the same reason that the 761st declined to be honored in the
      Liberators. Any Ukrainians who have accepted such an award should renounce it.
      Ukrainians should consider withdrawing their support from the Public Broadcasting
      Service (PBS). The PBS is portrayed by Goldberg as supportive of the
      Liberators even after the film had been discredited. Ukrainians may recall,
      furthermore, that the PBS broadcast a severely flawed anti-Demjanjuk
      documentary despite prior notice on the part of Ukrainian representatives
      specifying the nature of these flaws. Observations such as these invite the
      conclusion that the PBS acts in sympathy with Jewish disinformation, and in
      opposition to Ukrainian interests. For this reason, Ukrainians should consider
      withdrawing their support from the PBS.
      Ukrainians should consider cancelling their subscriptions to TIME magazine. The
      Apollo Theater showing of the Liberators was sponsored by "Time Warner and a
      host of rich and influential New Yorkers." Readers of the Ukrainian Archive
      will be reminded that TIME magazine was responsible for the calumniation of
      Ukraine in the Wallowing Photograph incident. From these two indications, we
      may wonder whether Time Warner, and TIME magazine, are not sympathetic toward
      Holocaust disinformation and hostile toward Ukrainian interests. After having
      been a more than three-decades-long reader of TIME, I recently cancelled my
      subscription.
      Proven fraud does little to lessen propaganda value. As the Liberators film has
      been discredited, it appears to stand little chance of being accepted as
      history. However, this does not make the film a failure. The film continues
      to be valuable as a tool for shaping public opinion, particularly for molding
      the minds of the young. At the time of the writing of the Goldberg article
      above, the film was about to be distributed to "all New York City junior and
      senior high schools." We may expect, then, that hundreds of thousands of
      impressionable students will view the Liberators and will believe it, and that
      the refutations of Jeffrey Goldberg, and the soldiers of the 761st Tank
      Battalion, and others will reach the ears of only a few. The film may never
      succeed as history, but it has a good chance of succeeding as popular history,
      and it is popular history that influences elections and that directs the
      allocation of government resources.
      Choosing between useful lies and harmful truths. One of the weapons within the
      armamentarium of the totalitarian controller of information - that a useful lie
      is better than a harmful truth - is explicitly wielded by at least one
      supporter of the Liberators film:
      She [Peggy Tishman] claims that the accuracy of
      the film is not the issue. What is important is the
      way it can bring Jews and blacks into "dialogue."
      There are a lot of truths that are very necessary,"
      she says. "This [that the 761st did not liberate
      Buchenwald or Dachau] is not a truth that's
      necessary."
      However, wielding the weapon of the useful lie will succeed only in a context
      in which the flow of contrary information can be choked off. In a society that
      permits the free flow of information, there is no useful lie, because all lies
      stand in danger of being exposed and thus discrediting the liar and his cause.
      Thus, we may expect that an ancillary goal of the distributors of
      disinformation will be to strangle the free flow of information - and more
      specifically, we might expect that those backing efforts such as the Liberators
      film will simultaneously back efforts to suppress web sites such as the
      Ukrainian Archive. In a totalitarian society, the Liberators film constitutes
      a useful day's work for the manipulators of mass opinion; in a free society,
      the Liberators film constitutes a self-defeating miscalculation.
      Furthermore, such an open avowal of the utility of lying as Peggy Tishman's
      above brings to mind the question raised during the discussion of journalistic
      fraud Stephen Glass of whether there may exist subcultures which by means of
      their tolerance of, or support for, lying produce a disproportionate number of
      great liars.
      Consorting with Hasidim. In Goldberg's Liberators story above, Hasidic rabbi
      Leib Glanz embraces Rev. Jesse Jackson on the stage of the Apollo Theater.
      However, "the next night Rabbi Glanz was nearly chased out of synagogue by
      angry Hasidim for the transgression of consorting with Mr. Jackson." This
      brief description is puzzling, and from it alone we would be unable to arrive
      at any strong conclusion, were it not for our having read some of the
      characteristics of Hasidism in the writings of Israel Shahak.
      With Shahak's description in mind, we are tempted to interpret Rabbi Glanz
      being nearly chased out of synagogue by angry Hasidim as a further
      demonstration that Hasidic Jews generally are hostile to the idea of any
      rapprochement with any non-Jews. That is, Israel Shahak depicts Hasidic Jews
      as constituting a debasement of Jewish mysticism, of being superstitious,
      fanatical, mysogynistic, given to overindulgence in alcohol, and most
      importantly, of being committed to the hatred of all non-Jews. I do not
      venture such a description on my own initiative, as I have no personal
      knowledge of Hasidism - but I do pass the description along as the opinion of a
      reputable authority, Israel Shahak.
      The incident of Rabbi Glanz being almost chased out of synagogue can only
      remind us of the possibility that it may be one of Ukraine's many misfortunes
      that the branch of Judaism which appears to have taken deepest root in Ukraine
      is Hasidism. We see this in Hasidic Rabbi Yaakov Dov Bleich's prominence, as
      witnessed in his frequent appearance on the pages of the Ukrainian Weekly, and
      we see it as well in the central role he played - in undermining Ukraine, as it
      happens - during the 23 October 1994 60 Minutes broadcast, The Ugly Face of
      Freedom.
      The second-greatest calamity. And so, the second-greatest calamity to befall
      the Jewish people during this century - which, after the Holocaust itself, is
      Jewish misrepresentation of the Holocaust - deepens and broadens as a result of
      the Liberators film. Another blow is struck at Jewish credibility. Another
      burden is placed on the backs of Jews - the burden of being remembered for
      their leading role during the 20th century as stranglers of information,
      manipulators of truth, disseminators of disinformation, and corruptors of
      history. The consequence of numbers of Jews lying about the history of their
      people must be that whenever any Jew discourses upon history, he may expect to
      be greeted with heightened skepticism - such is the penalty that all Jews must
      pay for the sin of harboring fabulists in their midst.
      HOME DISINFORMATION 60 MINUTES 849 hits since 15-May-2000
      Mark Steyn National Post 15-May-2000 CBS fabricates news
      "But yet again those old Soviet hardliners can only marvel:
      They spent decades smashing presses and jamming
      transmitters in an effort to shut down the flow of information.
      Americans achieved that happy state just by leaving it to ABC,
      CBS and NBC." - Mark Steyn
      Mark Steyn in the National Post (Toronto) of 15-May-2000 takes the position that
      Donna Dees-Thomases Million Mom March had its projected attendance downgraded to
      100,000, though how many actually showed up is the object of varied speculation;
      and more importantly that contrary to the attempt to portray Donna Dees-Thomases
      as a suburban mother who had never organized anything larger than a car pool
      before, she was in reality a CBS employee. In comparison to the massive
      distortions of Morley Safer's Ugly Face of Freedom of 23-Oct-1994, the Million Mom
      March media stunt seems like a peccadillo, but does contribute to the view of the
      mass media as ready to deceive and manipulate, with the CBS perhaps playing a
      leading role.
      Two excerpts from the longer article:
      But, speaking of Casts of Idiots, what about CBS? By now, you may
      be curious about that "part-time job," as NBC coyly referred to
      it. A couple of waitressing shifts? A little secretarial work
      for the school district? No, Donna is a part-time publicist for
      David Letterman's Late Show. Before that, she was a full-time
      publicist for CBS news anchor Dan Rather. CBS This Morning was
      one of the first news shows to report the Million Mom March
      movement last September, when Hattie Kauffman interviewed Donna.
      "What," asked Hattie, "turns a mild-mannered suburban mom into an
      anti-gun activist?"
      The correct answer is: "A leave of absence from my employer, CBS,
      which, by remarkable coincidence, is also your employer, Hattie."
      But that's not what Donna said. Only in the last week has CBS
      News begun disclosing that she's one of theirs.
      Mark Steyn, Made to Measure for the Media, National Post,
      15-May-2000, p. A14.
      Heigh-ho. The non-March is over now, and the non-Millions are
      relaunching themselves today as a political lobby group. Good
      luck to them. But yet again those old Soviet hardliners can only
      marvel: They spent decades smashing presses and jamming
      transmitters in an effort to shut down the flow of information.
      Americans achieved that happy state just by leaving it to ABC, CBS
      and NBC.
      Mark Steyn, Made to Measure for the Media, National Post,
      15-May-2000, p. A14.
      HOME DISINFORMATION PEOPLE HILBERG Hilberg > 889 hits since 31May99
      Hilberg Letter 1 15Sep97 Invitation to deny Lviv pogrom
      September 15, 1997
      Raul Hilberg
      Department of History
      University of Vermont
      Burlington, VT
      USA 05401-3596
      Dear Professor Hilberg:
      On October 23, 1994, Morley Safer together with Simon Wiesenthal in the 60 Minutes
      story The Ugly Face of Freedom drew attention to an event which I will refer to as the
      "Lviv pogrom":
      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.
      For the moment, let us overlook that the interviewer - Morley Safer is not
      citing the evidence of his own professional witness - Simon Wiesenthal - but is instead
      offering an unattributed lower estimate within a smaller time interval. And let us
      overlook as well that in another place, Simon Wiesenthal places what seems to be this
      same Lviv pogrom after the arrival of the Germans:
      Thousands of detainees were shot dead in their cells by the retreating
      Soviets. This gave rise to one of the craziest accusations of that
      period: among the strongly anti-Semitic population the rumour was
      spread by the Ukrainian nationalists that all Jews were Bolsheviks and
      all Bolsheviks were Jews. Hence it was the Jews who were really to
      blame for the atrocities committed by the Soviets.
      All the Germans needed to do was to exploit this climate of
      opinion. It is said that after their arrival they gave the Ukrainians
      free rein, for three days, to 'deal' with the Jews. (Simon Wiesenthal,
      Justice Not Vengeance, 1989, p. 36, emphasis added)
      What does primarily interest me here is that when I attempted to find more
      information on this Lviv pogrom - which I took to be either the biggest single pogrom
      of the War, or else at least among the biggest - in your The Destruction of the
      European Jews, I was unable to locate anything at all resembling such an event, and in
      fact, I encountered statements suggesting that such an event did not occur.
      Specifically, the following two passages strike me as incompatible with the massive
      Lviv pogrom described by Messrs Safer and Wiesenthal:
      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)
      And most particularly, your summary of pogrom activity in Ukraine seemed to flatly rule
      out the possibility that such a massive, pre-German, Lviv pogrom had ever taken place:
      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)
      Examining another work which I also happen to have in my library - Leni Yahil's
      The Holocaust: The Fate of European Jewry, Oxford, New York, 1990 - for information on
      the Lviv pogrom, I again found nothing. In Yahil's book too I thought that I had in my
      hands a thoroughly researched work which could not have overlooked a massive,
      pre-German, Lviv pogrom, if one had ever occurred:
      When The Holocaust first appeared in Israel in 1987, it was hailed as
      the finest, most authoritative history of Hitler's war on the Jews ever
      published. Representing twenty years of research and reflection, Leni
      Yahil's book won the Shazar prize, one of Israel's highest awards for
      historical work. (From the dust jacket)
      And so, I would very much appreciate your opinion on this discrepancy. What
      appears to be the case to myself and to others in the Ukrainian community is that the
      Lviv pogrom, as described by Safer and Wiesenthal, did not take place, and we have been
      attempting, with no success whatever, to get 60 Minutes to issue a retraction. If you
      were to join your voice to ours in however simple and brief a statement, I think that a
      retraction might be forthcoming in short order.
      I should explain by way of background that my attitude to this sort of
      misstatement is that it is disrespectful to the memory of the Holocaust dead. I do not
      believe that the Holocaust dead authorized Messrs Safer and Wiesenthal to replace the
      real Holocaust with a grander one which would do more to advance their respective
      careers. I believe that by means of their fabrications, Messrs Safer and Wiesenthal do
      a great disservice to the perception of Jewish credibility, provide ammunition for
      Holocaust deniers, and at the same time harm Ukrainian-Jewish relations.
      Thus, if it were true that the Lviv pogrom in question did not take place, and if
      you were to release a statement to that effect (if only in a letter to me which I could
      quote), I think you would be performing an invaluable service toward enhancing the
      perception of Jewish credibility, toward disarming Holocaust deniers, and as well
      toward improving Ukrainian-Jewish relations.
      Sincerely yours,
      Lubomyr Prytulak
      HOME DISINFORMATION PEOPLE HILBERG 806 hits since 31May99
      Hilberg reply to Letter 1 15Dec97 Lviv pogrom implicitly denied
      Raul Hilberg
      236 Prospect Parkway
      Burlington, VT 05401
      802-863 4653
      December 15, 1997
      Mr. Lubomyr Prytulak
      [...]
      Dear Mr. Prytulak,
      I have had to delay a reply to your letter of September 15, because I had an almost
      impossible deadline for a manuscript, plus two trips, one to Europe and one to
      Alberta. Now I have had a chance to reexamine some sources with respect to actions in
      Lviv and a few other places within eastern Galicia during the early phase of the
      occupation.
      Here then are a few more details to complement the sections you have taken from the
      1961 edition of my book, The Destruction of the European Jews. The historian Philip
      Friedman writes on pages 246-47 of his Roads to Extinction, New York 1980:
      By inciteful proclamations, pamphlets, and oral propaganda, the Germans
      stirred up mass hatred of the Jews. Persecution and pogroms began