"Vēsturnieks jau ir arī cilvēku piemiņas sargātājs. Mēs zinām Herberta Cukura vārdu. Šis lidotājs ir nogalināts bez tiesas, ar teroristiskām metodēm. Sodīts ar nāvi par noziegumiem, kurus viņš patiesībā nekad nav izdarījis. Tas parādās Hamburgas tiesas materiālos. Lidotājam bija mīļākā ebrejiete, Arāja šofera Lutriņa meita. Bet Arājam vēl izdevās viņu no nāves izglābt gandrīz bedres priekšā. "
Indulis Ronis : “Bet Otrais pasaules karš turpinās.”
Autors: Vita Krauja
Publicēšanas datums: Sestdiena, 2002. gada 1. jūnijs.
Rubrika: Intervija (7. lpp.)
Ar akadēmiķi, profesoru, habilitēto vēstures zinātņu doktoru INDULI RONI, nupat arī Valērija Belokoņa izdevniecības "Latvijas enciklopēdija" vēstures nozares vadītāju sarunājas žurnālisti VOLDEMĀRS KRUSTIŅŠ un VITA KRAUJA.
— Ko pēdējo gadu laikā jūs kā akadēmiķis, vēsturnieks esat uzracis?
Indulis Ronis: — 9. maijā pirms 57 gadiem — kad Vācija kā valsts jau bija kapitulējusi — paši niknākie nacionālsociālisma atbalstītāji un galvenie kara noziedznieki no abvēra un valsts slepenpolicijas gestapo gatavojās pretoties pagrīdes teroristu armijas "Vilkači" ("WerwĻlfe") rindās. Gatavojās pretoties arī vairākas armijas grupas Alpu cietoksnī, Prāga bija lemta uzspridzināšanai. To izglāba čehu pretestības kustības cīnītāji, kas Prāgā sāka aizsardzības sacelšanos un pa radio lūdza palīdzību sabiedrotajiem. Sarkanās armijas tanku grupas ierašanās pasargāja čehus un austriešus no turpmākās bezjēdzīgās asinsizliešanas. Tāpēc arī PSRS kā Uzvaras dienu atzīmēja nevis 8. maiju — kā PSRS Rietumu sabiedrotie, bet gan 9. maiju. Taču man pēc 2001. gada 11. septembra notikumiem Amerikā personiski nav pieņemams neviens no šiem datumiem. Domāju, ka Otrais pasaules karš turpinās.
Padomju vēsturnieku mēģinājumi izskaidrot nacionālsociālistu nākšanu pie varas tikai kā Vācijas iekšpolitisku fenomenu nav pareizi.
Kā atklājās M. Gorbačova atklātuma gados, padomju Krievijas un Pirmā pasaules karā sakautās Vācijas noslēgtā Rapallo līguma ietvaros "melno reihsvēru" jeb saglabāto vācu armiju lielā mērā praktiski apbruņoja padomju Krievija. Kara beigās hitlerieši radīja diversiju un terora organizāciju "WerwĻlfe". "Vilkaču" vadītājs SS grupenfīrers un ieroču SS ģenerālis Hanss Ādolfs Pricmans, "speciālās aizsardzības ģenerālinspektors pie SS reihsfīrera", bija pirmais augstākais policijas izveidotājs un pavēlnieks Ostlandē un mitinājās pašreizējā Saeimas namā Rīgā. Pricmans šajā amatā palika līdz 1941. gada oktobrim, kad viņu nomainīja F. Jekelns. Tātad tieši uz Pricmanu gulstas galvenā atbildība par civiliedzīvotāju iznīcināšanu Biķernieku mežā, Rīgas un citu pilsētu geto izveidi. Īpaši pārsteidz, ka Pricmana vārds tikpat kā neparādījās padomju propagandas literatūrā par notikumiem "Hitleriešu okupētajā Padomju Latvijā", lai gan Pricmana vārds atrodams Rīgas arhīvu dokumentos.
Pricmana tālākā biogrāfija ir ne mazāk iespaidīga — augstākais SS un policijas vadītājs Ukrainā, pēc tam Krievijas dienvidos, tad Vācijas pilnvarotais Horvātijā.
Ziņas par pagrīdes "Vilkaču" izveidotāja beigu cēloni ir apbrīnojami skopas — izdarījis pašnāvību, pārkožot indes ampulu. Tomēr nav nekādu dokumentu, kas to apstiprinātu.
Tāpat nav arī nekādu dokumentālu pierādījumu tam, ka bojā gājis Latvijas gestapo priekšnieks briesmīgais Dr. Rūdolfs Lange, kas tieši komandēja Rīgas geto ieslodzīto ebreju nošaušanu Rumbulā. Tāpēc esmu pārliecināts, ka "Vilkači" turpina darboties piepūstiem vaigiem. Vai tikai viņi nav vainojami arī atentātā pret ASV 11. septembrī. Un, pat ja tāds Pricmans un Lange ir devušies pie senčiem, tad kādā pilī ar baldahīniem atstājuši savā vietā sava netīrā darba turpinātājus. Nu neko nevaru padarīt — man tā kopaina izskatās tāda, ka viņi atkal ir "nošāvuši buku", sākot trešo pasaules karu atkal divās frontēs. Nevajag aizmirst pēckara memuāru plūdus Vācijā, kur var izlasīt, ka bijis sagatavots lēciens uz Austrumiem, dažādu teroristu un diversantu tīklu izveidošana tur un tamlīdzīgi. Arī Krievijā iznākošos memuāros tiek atkārtots kā tēvreize — pie visa vainīga valsts politiskā vadība. Ja pie varas būtu bijuši Kanariss, Himlers, Krjučkovs vai Zukulis, tad nu gan būtu bijis labi.
Jā, šis vīrs Hansis Pricmans zināja par notikumiem Latvijā daudz vairāk nekā Rīgas Uzvaras laukumā pakārtais Fridrihs Jekelns — izbijis skolotājs, kas patiesi bija noticējis, ka nacionālsociālisti nodarbojas Vācijas valsts un vācu tautas interesēs. Viņš pie Oderas izveidoja "Jekelna korpusu", vairākkārt tika ievainots un krita padomju gūstā. Tad arī vienojās Jekelnu padarīt par galveno grēkāzi, pakarot viņu kopā ar pēc starptautiskajām tiesībām pilnīgi nevainīgiem vācu armijas ģenerāļiem.
Esmu uzvedināts uz kādu ļoti sensacionālu atklājumu. Par to, ko, starp citu, raksta vai visa pasaules prese. Kas noticis ar "holokausta zeltu"? Tas ir pazudis. No Reihsbankas tas it kā aizvests, it kā ne… No Vācijas avīzēm uzzināju, ka šīs valsts arhīvi iztīrīti septiņdesmitajos gados, kas hronoloģiski sakrīt ar Viktora Arāja prāvu Hamburgā. Ir tāds Boriss Kinstlers, Arāja palīgs, kuru ASV OSI kādreizējais darbinieks Hermanis Redins uzskatīja par vienu no holokausta zelta kurjeriem. Šis "pazudušais zelts" var atgriezties mūsu ekonomikā visdažādākajās nozarēs un pilnīgi negaidīti.
Vēsturnieks jau ir arī cilvēku piemiņas sargātājs. Mēs zinām Herberta Cukura vārdu. Šis lidotājs ir nogalināts bez tiesas, ar teroristiskām metodēm. Sodīts ar nāvi par noziegumiem, kurus viņš patiesībā nekad nav izdarījis. Tas parādās Hamburgas tiesas materiālos. Lidotājam bija mīļākā ebrejiete, Arāja šofera Lutriņa meita. Bet Arājam vēl izdevās viņu no nāves izglābt gandrīz bedres priekšā.
Otra mana tēma šobrīd ir Rainis. Kā esam atklājuši kopā ar manu dzīvesbiedri kultūrvēsturnieci Baibu Roni, dzejnieks krita par upuri zālēm, ko viņam bija piegādājis paša draugs ārsts Livšics. Lieta tā, ka Rainis vēlējās pārāk ilgi būt jauns, bet… Pēc tam sākās nāves cēloņu slēpšana. Patiesība ir tāda, ka Rainis miris dienu pirms datuma, kad mēs atzīmējam viņa nāves dienu. Ārsta B. Livšica minēto Raiņa nāves cēloni "embolija, asinsvadu sakalšana" apstrīdēja tādi redzami Latvijas medicīnas spīdekļi kā Dr. Pētersons, Dr. Alksnis, kas Raiņa nāvi saistīja ar sirdskaiti. Taču pavisam sensacionāli ir tas, ka savu diagnozi apstrīdēja pats Livšics, pie tam darīja to galvenajā dokumentā par Raiņa nāvi. Viņa parakstītajā dokumentā par Raiņa nāves cēloni norādīts, ka tam par pamatu ir smadzeņu satricinājums. Ja nu kas patiesi var dziļi pārsteigt, tad tā ir pašu mediķu, tajā skaitā arī B. Livšica, pilnīga miršanas apliecības ignorēšana. Kāpēc mediķi tik zemu vērtēja šo dokumentu, ka ar to neiepazinās pat Veselības departamenta direktors? Uzskatu, ka precīza Raiņa pēdējā dzīves gada hronoloģiska izpēte ir nozīmīga dzejnieka daiļrades nodomu noskaidrošanai. Līdz pat 1940. gadam Aspaziju vajāja sakarā ar Raiņa mantojumu — kredītsabiedrības "Daile un darbs" bankrotu. Bija jau pieņemts pat lēmums konfiscēt Aspazijas mantu. Taču patiesībā "Daili un darbu" izlaupīja čekists Pauls Betlers, pēc kara kļūdams par lielu cilvēku.
Manā uztverē Kārlis Ulmanis klasiskā veidā aizstāvēja tautas labklājības kapitālismu, kura pamatlicēji ir Gustavs Šmollers un dzelzs kanclers Otto Bismarks. Viņi iestājās par tirgus brīvību, taču valstij to stingri kontrolējot un attīstot stipru sociālās aizsardzības sistēmu. Ulmanis bija pret anarhistisko, marksistisko — pilnīgu rīcības brīvības atdošanu kapitālismam. Dabiski, ka Marksam bija taisnība — ja kapitālists dabū 60 — 70 procentus peļņas sev, viņš var visu zemeslodi uzspert gaisā! Šī tautas labklājības kapitālisma teorijas īstenošana dzīvē arī ir Ulmaņa lielais grēks. Par to viņam gāzās virsū visi lielkapitāla ideologi, no kuriem šodien redzamākais ir Nikolajs Balabkins. Ļoti interesanta personība 20. gadsimta vēsturē. Daugavpils krievu desinieka atvase, kas caur ieroču SS aizkarojies līdz tautsaimniecības profesoram Betlēmē, ne nu gluži viņa sapņu zemē, bet tikai Pensilvānijas štatā. Viņš arī bija dikti sašutis, kad Ivars Godmanis negribēja lielākos uzņēmumus privatizēt. Tāpēc jau latviešu ekonomiskās emigrācijas līderi pārspietoja no LTF uz "LC", vēlāk uz Tautas partiju. Viņiem tikai to mūsu nektāru vien gribas sūkt — mēs jau paši esot par prastu, ne tās šlipses nēsājam, ne tās valodās runājam un ne tās dziesmas dziedam. Tagad nu mēs visu savu mantu esam atdāvinājuši sertifikatoriem un gaidām Balabkina sludināto labklājības valsti Latvijā. Bet šī kā nenāk, tā nenāks. Kā vēsturnieks es autoritatīvi paziņoju, ka mūsu mantu nav ieguvuši biznesmeņi, bet gan tikai rapallistu mafijas locekļi, kuri sāka ar Krievijas mākslas vērtību izlaupīšanu pēc 1917. gada boļševiku puča, turpināja ar holokausta zeltu un briljantiem, kā arī PSKP, KGB un VDK miljardiem. Tāpēc uzskatu, ka holokausta un citu terora aktu piemiņas vārdā nedrīkst tālāk ciest kapitāla anonimitāti — nevienu akciju, nevienu īpašumu neviens nedrīkst ne pirkt, ne pārdot anonīmi. Visām finansēm jābūt pilnīgi caurspīdīgām: holokausta upuru asins cena ir svarīgāka par komercnoslēpumu.
Ne vien kā vēsturnieks, bet arī kā pilsonis esmu pārliecinājies par to, ka mūsu politiķi ne vien neciena likumus, viņi pat nelasa tos!
sexta-feira, 28 de novembro de 2008
INDULIS RONIS-KANCELEJA SASKANOTAIS SKUPSTS.
"Dr. Indulis Ronis ir šī raksta autors, kurš publicējis patieso F. Jekelna liecību. Bet tajā par ebreju nošaušanu Rumbulā ir teikts: "Ebrejus šāva 10 vai 12 vācu karavīri no SD, viņu uzvārdus es nezinu. " ("Tautību naida kurinātāji Latvijā". "Daugavas Vanagu Mēnešraksts", 1995, 1.nr.) Šo izšķirošo liecību savā grāmatā A. Ezergailis noklusē, ar meliem un puspatiesībām cenšoties radīt iespaidu, ka latvieši tomēr šaušanā piedalījušies. Nepiedalījās! Neviens latvietis nenošāva nevienu ebreju Rumbulas akciju laikā 1941.gada 30.novembrī un 8.decembrī. Tāda ir dokumentos, nevis NKVD aģentu apzinātās viltus liecībās balstīta patiesība par šiem patiesi traģiskajiem Latvijas vēstures notikumiem."
Indulis Ronis
Kas bija un ar ko nodarbojās Latvijas komiteja kultūras sakariem ar tautiešiem ārzemēs, ko Stokholmas universitātes vēstures doktors Uldis Ģērmanis savulaik nodēvēja par Kultkomu? Šoreiz vairāk par to, kāda nozīme Kultkomam bija Latvijas vēstures falsificēšanā.
Arī man ir bijis savs sakariņš ar Kultkomu, ne nu tik "intīms" kā Jānim Stradiņam, Zigmundam Skujiņam vai Jānim Peteram, bet tomēr. Tiesa gan, tikai perestroikas laikā, kad tika cerēts īstenot PSRS humanizāciju, reizes desmit samazinot KGB štata un daudzkārt vairāk – ārštata darbinieku skaitu, attīrot no tiem arī Kultkomu. Tolaik biju LPSR Zinātņu akadēmijas Vēstures institūta direktora vietnieks zinātniskajā darbā un "Dzimtenes Balss" redkolēģijā nomainīju savu padoto, Vēstures institūta vecāko zinātnisko līdzstrādnieku un no LPSR VDK padzīto virsnieku Jāni Dzintaru. 1991.gada pavasarī pēc barikāžu nedēļām devos zinātniskā komandējumā uz Stokholmu un mēnesi nodzīvoju Baltijas institūta telpās Solnas rajonā kur bieži vakarēju ar kompetentāko Kultkoma historiogrāfu Rietumos Dr. Uldi Ģērmani (viņa dzīvokli turpat Solnā, pēc Ģērmaņa vārdiem, stacionāri novēroja KGB, bet Baltijas institūtu – tikai zviedri). Abi pasmaidījām par padomju līderu it kā "visās trubās ārdēto" politisko naivismu, kuru Uldis definēja apmēram šādi: "Lieta jauka ir un cēla, tikai stunda pārāk vēla! "
Par Kultkomu mums divu domu nebija – draudzēties taču vienmēr ir labāk bez trešā liekā, kurš sveci rokās tur. Nešaubījāmies arī, ka tautiskos ziķerzeļļus spēs iztaisnot tikai kaps. Tā arī bija, jo visas manas pūles pierunāt kultkomiešus pašiem pastāstīt par saviem pagājības nedarbiem, sekojot Imanta Lešinska paraugam, nevainagojās panākumiem. Tiku vēsi uzklausīts un aizkulisēs nodēvēts par nenopietnu cilvēku (labākajā gadījumā). Kad sabruka padomju impērija, sabruka arī Kultkoma organizatoriskā struktūra. Kultkoma štata darbinieks Paulis Ducmanis centās to reanimēt, izdodot "Tēvzemes Avīzi ", kurā vairs netiku aicināts līdzdarboties. Avīze pēc dažiem numuriem apstājās lasītāju trūkuma dēļ.
Kultkoma vizītkarte
Kas tad bija un ko darīja latviešu vēsturnieka un Stokholmas universitātes vēstures doktora Ulda Ģērmaņa par Kultkomu nokristītā Latvijas komiteja kultūras sakariem ar tautiešiem ārzemēs? Pēc Pētera Jērāna Padomju Latvijas enciklopēdijas 5.1.sējuma ziņām, Kultkoms bija 1964.gadā dibināta sabiedriska organizācija, kurai 1983.gadā "bija 123 komitejas darbu veicinātājas org-jas", sabiedriska nodaļa Ventspilī un septiņas sabiedriskas sekcijas: literatūras, mākslas, mūzikas, zinātnes, teātra mākslas, kinomākslas, fotomākslas, kā arī jaunatnes sekcija ar aptuveni 500 attiecīgo nozaru speciālistiem.
Trimdas latviešu saietā Vašingtonā 1984.gada 30.martā Imants Lešinskis, cilvēks, kurš astoņus gadus bija bijis "Dzimtenes Balss" galvenais redaktors un sešus gadus Kultkoma priekšsēdis, apgalvoja: "Kungi un dāmas, nekādas Latvijas komitejas kultūras sakariem ar tautiešiem ārzemēs kā sabiedriskas organizācijas nav! Toties ir cita organizācija. Tā ir Valsts drošības komiteja pie Latvijas PSR Ministru padomes, saukta arī krievu saīsinājumā KGB. Sauksim vienkārši saīsinājumā par čeku /../. Šī ir vienīgā iestāde Latvijā – čeka –, kas vispār spļauj virsū gan uz partijas Centrālo komiteju, gan Ministru padomi. Šī iestāde pakļauta vienīgi savai centrālajai iestādei Maskavā. Savukārt šī centrāle pakļaujas PSRS partijas vadībai. Šī čeka jeb Latvijas KGB ir vienīgais uzdevumu devējs Latvijas kultūras sakaru komitejai /../. Jāsaka, ka sākumā gandrīz visi, kas tur strādāja, bija čekas informatori, aģenti. Gan komitejā, gan "Dzimtenes Balss" redakcijā
Atšķirsim Ulda Ģērmaņa grāmatu "Zināšanai". "Raksti par mūsu un padomju lietām" (3.iespiedums. "Ziemeļzvaigzne". Stokholma, 1986), kurā raksta autora kolēģis un ilggadējais vēstuļu draugs rakstīja: "Mums jāapzinās, ka visu, ko mēs darām, rakstām un sakām, padomju modrības un izziņas darbinieki izvērtē no padomju taktikas un mērķu viedokļa un cenšas to attiecīgi izmantot. " Tajā pašā laikā viņš karsti iestājās par kontaktiem ar dzimteni, izmantojot jebkuras, arī Kultkoma, sniegtās iespējas: "/../ trimdas latviešiem ar laiku draud atsvešināšanās no tautas dzimtenē. Personiski kontakti tāpēc bija svarīgi. Dzimtenes apmeklējumi deva arī tiešāku ieskatu dzīves apstākļos, ļaužu noskaņojumā un varēja aizpildīt vienu otru robu mūsu zināšanās par dažādiem kulturāliem, sociāliem un politiskiem jautājumiem /../ pozitīvais efekts pārsniedza negatīvo, jo padomju propagandas ieguvumi lielā mērā bija tikai šķietami. Tāpēc arī par dažu tūristu "padomju mesliem" Rīgā nebūtu jāuztraucas. Bez tam ciemošanos karsti vēlējās un to aizstāvēja latvieši dzimtenē. "
Tāda nu bija neostaļiniskās Brežņeva impērijas ikdiena, kur godīgos intelektuāļus, kuri iestājās par sabiedrības interešu un tiesību respektēšanu, ieslodzīja "psihuškās", bet kultūras un mākslas darbinieki par nacionālās kultūras attīstības lietām visbrīvāk un visplašāk varēja runāt tikai Kultkoma saietos. Tas arī maksimāli tika izmantots, un sabiedrība to pozitīvi novērtēja – Kultkoma izdevumi bija vieni no visvairāk lasītajiem. Taču nekas šai saulē netiek dots par velti – par to pašu bezmaksas sieru slazdā pelīte maksā bargu cenu. (..)
Mūžības skartie
Kultkoms it kā būtu miris, taču tā idejiskais mantojums zeļ un plaukst. Kultkoma vakardienas pravieši, ievilkuši savai sarkanajai mantijai pa vidu baltu strīpu, atkal uzdevušies par tautas labākajiem draugiem un turpina šķelt un kompromitēt latviešus. Nu jau visoficiālākajā līmenī latviešiem ir uzkrauti 20. gadsimta abu sociālistisko totalitārismu nāves grēki. Ar apmelojumiem pret mūsu valstsvīriem, ka tie nodevuši paši savu valsti, ir notikusi boļševistisko krievu okupantu šķīstīšanās uz latviešu ādas – kā par Latvijas militāro okupāciju 1940. gadā, tā par tās pilsoņu masveidīgu represēšanu. Īpaši nežēlīgs latviešu briesmoņu tēls tiek radīts nacionālsociālistiskās vācu okupācijas vēstures falsificēšanai. Latviešiem bez jebkāda pamata tiek uzkrauti visi vācu SD ("der Sicherheitsdienst – vācu nacionālsociālistiskās strādnieku partijas apsardzības vienības vīru kara noziegumi un noziegumi pret cilvēcību Latvijas teritorijā.
Šī galējā absurda ideoloģijas uzvara Latvijas skolas bērnu mācību grāmatās un biezākos un plānākos oficiozajos Latvijas vēstures kursos kļuva iespējama visai prozaiska iemesla dēļ – "Fraternitas Kultkomiensis" izdevās infiltrēt savus lobistus gandrīz visās garīgās un sabiedriskās dzīves sfērās. Piemēram, Kultkoma priekšsēdis Ivars Ķezbers kļuva par faktisko Latvijas Tautas frontes organizētāju un vēlāk Saeimas deputātu, priekšpēdējais Kultkoma priekšsēdis Alberts Liepa Jāņa Jurkāna ministrēšanas laikā kļuva par atbildīgu Ārlietu ministrijas darbinieku, pēdējais Kultkoma priekšsēdis Dainis Goldberģis ilgus gadus bija valdības oficioza "Latvijas Vēstnesis" galvenā redaktora vietnieks... Īpaši prominentus amatus ar dziļu ietekmi sabiedriskās domas veidošanā ieņēma abi Kultkoma zinātnes un tehnikas sekcijas locekļi – akadēmiķis Jānis Stradiņš ilgus gadus bija Latvijas Zinātņu akadēmijas prezidents, bet akadēmiķis Ivars Knēts joprojām ir Rīgas Tehniskās universitātes rektors.
Savā grāmatā "Jaunie laiki un pagātnes ēnas. Fakti un vērtējumi. 1991–1995" ("Memento–Zinātne", Stokholma–Rīga, 1995) Uldis Ģērmanis raksta: "Andrievs Ezergailis, kā jau zinātnieks un pētnieks, zina, cik grūti klājas tautai, kurai sarežģītos posmos un momentos nav savu varoņu. Tāpēc viņš "Jaunajā Gaitā" (184.nr.) nāk ar aicinājumu "sastādīt atjaunotās LR varoņu listi" par spirdzinājumu un pamudinājumu latviešu tautas dēliem un meitām. Kā divus galvenos kandidātus varoņu kārtai jeb ģildei Andrievs proponē Jāni Peteru un Mavriku Vulfsonu, kas turklāt esot arī politiski ģēniji. Savu priekšlikumu Andrievs motivē, aprādīdams, ka "Peters perestroikas piedāvāto brīvību pārvērta revolūcijā", bet "Vulfsons ar Hitlera–Staļina pakta noziedzīgumu iedzina Krieviju stūrī". To darīdami, abi "pat savas dzīvības lika uz spēles".
Neapšaubot Andrieva visnotaļ labestīgos nolūkus, tomēr jāvaicā, vai viņš pārāk nesabiezina krāsas? Vai tad tiešām tik traki bija? Peters vēl nesen rakstos izskaidroja, ka t. s. atmodas sākumā viņš nav bijis drošsirdīgākais un principiālākais politdarbinieks, bet savu rīcību saskaņojis (1988.gadā) ar kompartijas vadību ("Literatūra un Māksla", 1991, 37.nr.). Tāpat nekas neliecina, ka politspēlē piesardzīgais un apsviedīgais Mavriks Vulfsons būtu rīkojies kā hazardists. Nevar apiet arī daudz pieredzējušā Pētera Zirnīša kompetento aizrādījumu: "Šis skūpsts bij’ iepriekš saskaņots/ ar visaugstāko kanceleju".
/../ Pret dzimtenes kultstrādniekiem, politdarbiniekiem un arī pret "patriotiskajiem orgāniem" Andrievs allaž izturējies ar iejūtību un dāsnu labestību, kas tur arī pozitīvi novērtēta. Pret trimdas sabiedrības lielāko daļu un tās organizācijām viņš turpretī ir bijis visai nežēlīgs un bargs. Nocietinājis savu sirdi pret "aizklīdušajiem", viņš dažkārt atrod vainas, kur tādu nav. "
Tā vēl būtu pusnelaime, ka skolas bērniem jāmācās ar kājām gaisā sagriezta Atmodas laiku vēsture par partijas nobučotajiem "tautas varoņiem", jo bija tajā partijā arī godīgi cilvēki. Daudz traģiskāk, ka tiek falsificēta Otrā pasaules kara vēsture, īpaši par 20. gadsimta abu totalitāro režīmu noziegumiem pret Eiropas tautām. Arī šajā falsifikāciju laukā celmlauzis bija Kultkoms. Par tā pienesumu, gan noklusējot Kultkoma starpnieka lomu, Andrievs Ezergailis grāmatā "Holokausts vācu okupētajā Latvijā" raksta šādi: "Otrs jaunās vēstures avots saistās ar VDK pamfletu sēriju, kas sarakstīti 60. gadu sākumā, starp kuriem nozīmīgākais ir "Kas ir Daugavas Vanagi". Pārsteidzošs un negaidīts rezultāts bija tas, ka šie pamfleti, sevišķi "Daugavas Vanagi. Who are they?" iegāja Rietumu zinātniskajā apritē, un vairāki autori tos pieņēma kā dokumentus. /../ Brošūra kļuva par sava veida rokasgrāmatu izmeklēšanas iestādēm Rietumvācijā, ASV, Lielbritānijā, Kanādā un Austrālijā. Šīs brošūras spēks bija situāciju aprakstos ar norādēm, ka tie tikuši balstīti uz arhīvu un aculiecinieku liecībām; brošūra deva sarakstus ar vairākiem simtiem latviešu vārdu, kas bija piedalījušies iznīcināšanās. Lai atšķetinātu visus brošūras "Kas ir Daugavas Vanagi" melus, puspatiesības un pārspīlējumus, būtu vajadzīga īpaša grāmata. Pietiktu norādīt – lai gan 10% no faktiem ir patiesi, pārējais ir viltojums. Cik lielā mērā brošūrā sniegtie fakti, attēli un situācijas ir nepatiesas, var noteikt, pārbaudot apgalvojumu detaļas. Rietumu zinātniekiem un žurnālistiem trūka pacietības un vēstures zināšanu, lai iedziļinātos šajā padomju krāpšanā.
Visinteresantākais brošūras aspekts ir tas, ka lielākā daļa sacerējuma loģikas un izteiktās kolektīvās apsūdzības pret latviešiem ir balstītas pārsvarā uz trim apgalvojumiem, kurus ģenerālis Fridrihs Jekelns ir izteicis savā 1946.gada tiesas prāvā Rīgā. "Patiesība nr.1" ir apgalvojums, ka latvieši nogalināja lielu, nenosakāmu skaitu ebreju vēl pirms vāciešu ierašanās Latvijā. Otra ir tas, ka latvieši bija labāki šāvēji nekā vācieši. Un trešā – ka Rietumu ebreji tikuši vesti uz Latviju, "jo latvieši bija radījuši tam pienācīgus apstākļus". /../ Pašlaik Rietumos ir pieejams ievērojams daudzums F. Jekelna nopratināšanas protokolu, un Dr. Indulis Ronis visu lietu redzēja Maskavā. /../ Nevienā no savām liecībām F. Jekelns nepieskārās jautājumam par latviešu atbildību ebreju nogalināšanā."
Diemžēl arī paša Ezergaiļa apgalvojumu ticamības koeficients svārstās starp 6–10%. Trīs Jekelnam pierakstītās bēdīgi slavenās melīgās izteikas Rietumu literatūrā un, kas ir īpaši dramatiski, tiesu praksē ievazāja daudz agrāk un daudz lielāka kalibra NKVD (saīsinājums no Iekšlietu tautas komisariāta nosaukuma krievu valodā) slepenie aģenti Rietumos, nekā to izdarīja pamfleta "Kas ir Daugavas Vanagi" sacerētājs Paulis Ducmanis. Ezergaiļa minētais Dr. Indulis Ronis ir šī raksta autors, kurš publicējis patieso F. Jekelna liecību. Bet tajā par ebreju nošaušanu Rumbulā ir teikts: "Ebrejus šāva 10 vai 12 vācu karavīri no SD, viņu uzvārdus es nezinu. " ("Tautību naida kurinātāji Latvijā". "Daugavas Vanagu Mēnešraksts", 1995, 1.nr.) Šo izšķirošo liecību savā grāmatā A. Ezergailis noklusē, ar meliem un puspatiesībām cenšoties radīt iespaidu, ka latvieši tomēr šaušanā piedalījušies. Nepiedalījās! Neviens latvietis nenošāva nevienu ebreju Rumbulas akciju laikā 1941.gada 30.novembrī un 8.decembrī. Tāda ir dokumentos, nevis NKVD aģentu apzinātās viltus liecībās balstīta patiesība par šiem patiesi traģiskajiem Latvijas vēstures notikumiem.
Indulis Ronis
Kas bija un ar ko nodarbojās Latvijas komiteja kultūras sakariem ar tautiešiem ārzemēs, ko Stokholmas universitātes vēstures doktors Uldis Ģērmanis savulaik nodēvēja par Kultkomu? Šoreiz vairāk par to, kāda nozīme Kultkomam bija Latvijas vēstures falsificēšanā.
Arī man ir bijis savs sakariņš ar Kultkomu, ne nu tik "intīms" kā Jānim Stradiņam, Zigmundam Skujiņam vai Jānim Peteram, bet tomēr. Tiesa gan, tikai perestroikas laikā, kad tika cerēts īstenot PSRS humanizāciju, reizes desmit samazinot KGB štata un daudzkārt vairāk – ārštata darbinieku skaitu, attīrot no tiem arī Kultkomu. Tolaik biju LPSR Zinātņu akadēmijas Vēstures institūta direktora vietnieks zinātniskajā darbā un "Dzimtenes Balss" redkolēģijā nomainīju savu padoto, Vēstures institūta vecāko zinātnisko līdzstrādnieku un no LPSR VDK padzīto virsnieku Jāni Dzintaru. 1991.gada pavasarī pēc barikāžu nedēļām devos zinātniskā komandējumā uz Stokholmu un mēnesi nodzīvoju Baltijas institūta telpās Solnas rajonā kur bieži vakarēju ar kompetentāko Kultkoma historiogrāfu Rietumos Dr. Uldi Ģērmani (viņa dzīvokli turpat Solnā, pēc Ģērmaņa vārdiem, stacionāri novēroja KGB, bet Baltijas institūtu – tikai zviedri). Abi pasmaidījām par padomju līderu it kā "visās trubās ārdēto" politisko naivismu, kuru Uldis definēja apmēram šādi: "Lieta jauka ir un cēla, tikai stunda pārāk vēla! "
Par Kultkomu mums divu domu nebija – draudzēties taču vienmēr ir labāk bez trešā liekā, kurš sveci rokās tur. Nešaubījāmies arī, ka tautiskos ziķerzeļļus spēs iztaisnot tikai kaps. Tā arī bija, jo visas manas pūles pierunāt kultkomiešus pašiem pastāstīt par saviem pagājības nedarbiem, sekojot Imanta Lešinska paraugam, nevainagojās panākumiem. Tiku vēsi uzklausīts un aizkulisēs nodēvēts par nenopietnu cilvēku (labākajā gadījumā). Kad sabruka padomju impērija, sabruka arī Kultkoma organizatoriskā struktūra. Kultkoma štata darbinieks Paulis Ducmanis centās to reanimēt, izdodot "Tēvzemes Avīzi ", kurā vairs netiku aicināts līdzdarboties. Avīze pēc dažiem numuriem apstājās lasītāju trūkuma dēļ.
Kultkoma vizītkarte
Kas tad bija un ko darīja latviešu vēsturnieka un Stokholmas universitātes vēstures doktora Ulda Ģērmaņa par Kultkomu nokristītā Latvijas komiteja kultūras sakariem ar tautiešiem ārzemēs? Pēc Pētera Jērāna Padomju Latvijas enciklopēdijas 5.1.sējuma ziņām, Kultkoms bija 1964.gadā dibināta sabiedriska organizācija, kurai 1983.gadā "bija 123 komitejas darbu veicinātājas org-jas", sabiedriska nodaļa Ventspilī un septiņas sabiedriskas sekcijas: literatūras, mākslas, mūzikas, zinātnes, teātra mākslas, kinomākslas, fotomākslas, kā arī jaunatnes sekcija ar aptuveni 500 attiecīgo nozaru speciālistiem.
Trimdas latviešu saietā Vašingtonā 1984.gada 30.martā Imants Lešinskis, cilvēks, kurš astoņus gadus bija bijis "Dzimtenes Balss" galvenais redaktors un sešus gadus Kultkoma priekšsēdis, apgalvoja: "Kungi un dāmas, nekādas Latvijas komitejas kultūras sakariem ar tautiešiem ārzemēs kā sabiedriskas organizācijas nav! Toties ir cita organizācija. Tā ir Valsts drošības komiteja pie Latvijas PSR Ministru padomes, saukta arī krievu saīsinājumā KGB. Sauksim vienkārši saīsinājumā par čeku /../. Šī ir vienīgā iestāde Latvijā – čeka –, kas vispār spļauj virsū gan uz partijas Centrālo komiteju, gan Ministru padomi. Šī iestāde pakļauta vienīgi savai centrālajai iestādei Maskavā. Savukārt šī centrāle pakļaujas PSRS partijas vadībai. Šī čeka jeb Latvijas KGB ir vienīgais uzdevumu devējs Latvijas kultūras sakaru komitejai /../. Jāsaka, ka sākumā gandrīz visi, kas tur strādāja, bija čekas informatori, aģenti. Gan komitejā, gan "Dzimtenes Balss" redakcijā
Atšķirsim Ulda Ģērmaņa grāmatu "Zināšanai". "Raksti par mūsu un padomju lietām" (3.iespiedums. "Ziemeļzvaigzne". Stokholma, 1986), kurā raksta autora kolēģis un ilggadējais vēstuļu draugs rakstīja: "Mums jāapzinās, ka visu, ko mēs darām, rakstām un sakām, padomju modrības un izziņas darbinieki izvērtē no padomju taktikas un mērķu viedokļa un cenšas to attiecīgi izmantot. " Tajā pašā laikā viņš karsti iestājās par kontaktiem ar dzimteni, izmantojot jebkuras, arī Kultkoma, sniegtās iespējas: "/../ trimdas latviešiem ar laiku draud atsvešināšanās no tautas dzimtenē. Personiski kontakti tāpēc bija svarīgi. Dzimtenes apmeklējumi deva arī tiešāku ieskatu dzīves apstākļos, ļaužu noskaņojumā un varēja aizpildīt vienu otru robu mūsu zināšanās par dažādiem kulturāliem, sociāliem un politiskiem jautājumiem /../ pozitīvais efekts pārsniedza negatīvo, jo padomju propagandas ieguvumi lielā mērā bija tikai šķietami. Tāpēc arī par dažu tūristu "padomju mesliem" Rīgā nebūtu jāuztraucas. Bez tam ciemošanos karsti vēlējās un to aizstāvēja latvieši dzimtenē. "
Tāda nu bija neostaļiniskās Brežņeva impērijas ikdiena, kur godīgos intelektuāļus, kuri iestājās par sabiedrības interešu un tiesību respektēšanu, ieslodzīja "psihuškās", bet kultūras un mākslas darbinieki par nacionālās kultūras attīstības lietām visbrīvāk un visplašāk varēja runāt tikai Kultkoma saietos. Tas arī maksimāli tika izmantots, un sabiedrība to pozitīvi novērtēja – Kultkoma izdevumi bija vieni no visvairāk lasītajiem. Taču nekas šai saulē netiek dots par velti – par to pašu bezmaksas sieru slazdā pelīte maksā bargu cenu. (..)
Mūžības skartie
Kultkoms it kā būtu miris, taču tā idejiskais mantojums zeļ un plaukst. Kultkoma vakardienas pravieši, ievilkuši savai sarkanajai mantijai pa vidu baltu strīpu, atkal uzdevušies par tautas labākajiem draugiem un turpina šķelt un kompromitēt latviešus. Nu jau visoficiālākajā līmenī latviešiem ir uzkrauti 20. gadsimta abu sociālistisko totalitārismu nāves grēki. Ar apmelojumiem pret mūsu valstsvīriem, ka tie nodevuši paši savu valsti, ir notikusi boļševistisko krievu okupantu šķīstīšanās uz latviešu ādas – kā par Latvijas militāro okupāciju 1940. gadā, tā par tās pilsoņu masveidīgu represēšanu. Īpaši nežēlīgs latviešu briesmoņu tēls tiek radīts nacionālsociālistiskās vācu okupācijas vēstures falsificēšanai. Latviešiem bez jebkāda pamata tiek uzkrauti visi vācu SD ("der Sicherheitsdienst – vācu nacionālsociālistiskās strādnieku partijas apsardzības vienības vīru kara noziegumi un noziegumi pret cilvēcību Latvijas teritorijā.
Šī galējā absurda ideoloģijas uzvara Latvijas skolas bērnu mācību grāmatās un biezākos un plānākos oficiozajos Latvijas vēstures kursos kļuva iespējama visai prozaiska iemesla dēļ – "Fraternitas Kultkomiensis" izdevās infiltrēt savus lobistus gandrīz visās garīgās un sabiedriskās dzīves sfērās. Piemēram, Kultkoma priekšsēdis Ivars Ķezbers kļuva par faktisko Latvijas Tautas frontes organizētāju un vēlāk Saeimas deputātu, priekšpēdējais Kultkoma priekšsēdis Alberts Liepa Jāņa Jurkāna ministrēšanas laikā kļuva par atbildīgu Ārlietu ministrijas darbinieku, pēdējais Kultkoma priekšsēdis Dainis Goldberģis ilgus gadus bija valdības oficioza "Latvijas Vēstnesis" galvenā redaktora vietnieks... Īpaši prominentus amatus ar dziļu ietekmi sabiedriskās domas veidošanā ieņēma abi Kultkoma zinātnes un tehnikas sekcijas locekļi – akadēmiķis Jānis Stradiņš ilgus gadus bija Latvijas Zinātņu akadēmijas prezidents, bet akadēmiķis Ivars Knēts joprojām ir Rīgas Tehniskās universitātes rektors.
Savā grāmatā "Jaunie laiki un pagātnes ēnas. Fakti un vērtējumi. 1991–1995" ("Memento–Zinātne", Stokholma–Rīga, 1995) Uldis Ģērmanis raksta: "Andrievs Ezergailis, kā jau zinātnieks un pētnieks, zina, cik grūti klājas tautai, kurai sarežģītos posmos un momentos nav savu varoņu. Tāpēc viņš "Jaunajā Gaitā" (184.nr.) nāk ar aicinājumu "sastādīt atjaunotās LR varoņu listi" par spirdzinājumu un pamudinājumu latviešu tautas dēliem un meitām. Kā divus galvenos kandidātus varoņu kārtai jeb ģildei Andrievs proponē Jāni Peteru un Mavriku Vulfsonu, kas turklāt esot arī politiski ģēniji. Savu priekšlikumu Andrievs motivē, aprādīdams, ka "Peters perestroikas piedāvāto brīvību pārvērta revolūcijā", bet "Vulfsons ar Hitlera–Staļina pakta noziedzīgumu iedzina Krieviju stūrī". To darīdami, abi "pat savas dzīvības lika uz spēles".
Neapšaubot Andrieva visnotaļ labestīgos nolūkus, tomēr jāvaicā, vai viņš pārāk nesabiezina krāsas? Vai tad tiešām tik traki bija? Peters vēl nesen rakstos izskaidroja, ka t. s. atmodas sākumā viņš nav bijis drošsirdīgākais un principiālākais politdarbinieks, bet savu rīcību saskaņojis (1988.gadā) ar kompartijas vadību ("Literatūra un Māksla", 1991, 37.nr.). Tāpat nekas neliecina, ka politspēlē piesardzīgais un apsviedīgais Mavriks Vulfsons būtu rīkojies kā hazardists. Nevar apiet arī daudz pieredzējušā Pētera Zirnīša kompetento aizrādījumu: "Šis skūpsts bij’ iepriekš saskaņots/ ar visaugstāko kanceleju".
/../ Pret dzimtenes kultstrādniekiem, politdarbiniekiem un arī pret "patriotiskajiem orgāniem" Andrievs allaž izturējies ar iejūtību un dāsnu labestību, kas tur arī pozitīvi novērtēta. Pret trimdas sabiedrības lielāko daļu un tās organizācijām viņš turpretī ir bijis visai nežēlīgs un bargs. Nocietinājis savu sirdi pret "aizklīdušajiem", viņš dažkārt atrod vainas, kur tādu nav. "
Tā vēl būtu pusnelaime, ka skolas bērniem jāmācās ar kājām gaisā sagriezta Atmodas laiku vēsture par partijas nobučotajiem "tautas varoņiem", jo bija tajā partijā arī godīgi cilvēki. Daudz traģiskāk, ka tiek falsificēta Otrā pasaules kara vēsture, īpaši par 20. gadsimta abu totalitāro režīmu noziegumiem pret Eiropas tautām. Arī šajā falsifikāciju laukā celmlauzis bija Kultkoms. Par tā pienesumu, gan noklusējot Kultkoma starpnieka lomu, Andrievs Ezergailis grāmatā "Holokausts vācu okupētajā Latvijā" raksta šādi: "Otrs jaunās vēstures avots saistās ar VDK pamfletu sēriju, kas sarakstīti 60. gadu sākumā, starp kuriem nozīmīgākais ir "Kas ir Daugavas Vanagi". Pārsteidzošs un negaidīts rezultāts bija tas, ka šie pamfleti, sevišķi "Daugavas Vanagi. Who are they?" iegāja Rietumu zinātniskajā apritē, un vairāki autori tos pieņēma kā dokumentus. /../ Brošūra kļuva par sava veida rokasgrāmatu izmeklēšanas iestādēm Rietumvācijā, ASV, Lielbritānijā, Kanādā un Austrālijā. Šīs brošūras spēks bija situāciju aprakstos ar norādēm, ka tie tikuši balstīti uz arhīvu un aculiecinieku liecībām; brošūra deva sarakstus ar vairākiem simtiem latviešu vārdu, kas bija piedalījušies iznīcināšanās. Lai atšķetinātu visus brošūras "Kas ir Daugavas Vanagi" melus, puspatiesības un pārspīlējumus, būtu vajadzīga īpaša grāmata. Pietiktu norādīt – lai gan 10% no faktiem ir patiesi, pārējais ir viltojums. Cik lielā mērā brošūrā sniegtie fakti, attēli un situācijas ir nepatiesas, var noteikt, pārbaudot apgalvojumu detaļas. Rietumu zinātniekiem un žurnālistiem trūka pacietības un vēstures zināšanu, lai iedziļinātos šajā padomju krāpšanā.
Visinteresantākais brošūras aspekts ir tas, ka lielākā daļa sacerējuma loģikas un izteiktās kolektīvās apsūdzības pret latviešiem ir balstītas pārsvarā uz trim apgalvojumiem, kurus ģenerālis Fridrihs Jekelns ir izteicis savā 1946.gada tiesas prāvā Rīgā. "Patiesība nr.1" ir apgalvojums, ka latvieši nogalināja lielu, nenosakāmu skaitu ebreju vēl pirms vāciešu ierašanās Latvijā. Otra ir tas, ka latvieši bija labāki šāvēji nekā vācieši. Un trešā – ka Rietumu ebreji tikuši vesti uz Latviju, "jo latvieši bija radījuši tam pienācīgus apstākļus". /../ Pašlaik Rietumos ir pieejams ievērojams daudzums F. Jekelna nopratināšanas protokolu, un Dr. Indulis Ronis visu lietu redzēja Maskavā. /../ Nevienā no savām liecībām F. Jekelns nepieskārās jautājumam par latviešu atbildību ebreju nogalināšanā."
Diemžēl arī paša Ezergaiļa apgalvojumu ticamības koeficients svārstās starp 6–10%. Trīs Jekelnam pierakstītās bēdīgi slavenās melīgās izteikas Rietumu literatūrā un, kas ir īpaši dramatiski, tiesu praksē ievazāja daudz agrāk un daudz lielāka kalibra NKVD (saīsinājums no Iekšlietu tautas komisariāta nosaukuma krievu valodā) slepenie aģenti Rietumos, nekā to izdarīja pamfleta "Kas ir Daugavas Vanagi" sacerētājs Paulis Ducmanis. Ezergaiļa minētais Dr. Indulis Ronis ir šī raksta autors, kurš publicējis patieso F. Jekelna liecību. Bet tajā par ebreju nošaušanu Rumbulā ir teikts: "Ebrejus šāva 10 vai 12 vācu karavīri no SD, viņu uzvārdus es nezinu. " ("Tautību naida kurinātāji Latvijā". "Daugavas Vanagu Mēnešraksts", 1995, 1.nr.) Šo izšķirošo liecību savā grāmatā A. Ezergailis noklusē, ar meliem un puspatiesībām cenšoties radīt iespaidu, ka latvieši tomēr šaušanā piedalījušies. Nepiedalījās! Neviens latvietis nenošāva nevienu ebreju Rumbulas akciju laikā 1941.gada 30.novembrī un 8.decembrī. Tāda ir dokumentos, nevis NKVD aģentu apzinātās viltus liecībās balstīta patiesība par šiem patiesi traģiskajiem Latvijas vēstures notikumiem.
LIKUMS PAR TIESU VARU.
LIKUMS PAR TIESU VARU.
23.PANTS.NEVAINUGUMA PREZUMPCIJA.
(1) NEVIENU NEVAR ATZIT PAR VAINIGU NOZIEGUMA
IZDARISANA UN SODIT,KAMER VINA VAINA NAV
PIERADITA LIKUMA NOTEIKTAJA KARTIBA UN ATZITA
AR LIKUMIGA SPEKA STAJUSOS TIESAS SPRIEDUMU.
(2) TIESAJAMAM NAV JAPIERADA SAVS NEVAINIGUMS.
(3) VISAS SAUBAS PAR TIESAJAMA VAINU TIESAI
JAVERTE PAR LABU TIESAJAMAJAM.
quinta-feira, 27 de novembro de 2008
ILMARS LATKOVSKIS: HERBERTA CUKURA LIETA JAIZMEKLE.
Ilmārs Latkovskis, "HansaMedia", HansaMedia
12. marts 2006
Cukura lieta nav nekāda saldā. Ar Herberta Cukura vārdu dažs labs grib turpināt Otro pasaules karu latviešu un ebreju, Latvijas un Izraēlas attiecībās. Cukurs kļuvis par sāļu pārbaudījumu demokrātijai, tiesiskumam un vārda brīvībai.
Herberts Cukurs ir izcils Latvijas pirmskara laika lidotājs. Viņa slava pēc kara ir nomākta ar apsūdzībām par cietsirdīgām ebreju masveida slepkavībām. Nav šaubu, ka Cukura biogrāfijā ir tumšākas lappuses, kas saistās ar Arāja komandu un Rīgas ebreju geto. Taču tiesa viņa vainu nekad nav pierādījusi. Pēc kara viņš gadu pavada Francijā, tad pārceļas uz Brazīliju, kur dzīvo atklātu veiksmīga uzņēmēja dzīvi. Līdz 1965. gadā it kā biznesa darījumā viņš tiek aizmānīts uz Urugvaju, kur viņu sadistiski nogalina Izraēlas specdienesta MOSSAD aģenti. Viens no aģentiem ar Antona Kincles pseidonīmu Cukura noslepkavošanas operāciju diezgan naturāli ir aprakstījis grāmatā “Rīgas bendes nāve”.
Uzmanīgākam lasītājam šī grāmata tomēr atstāj dīvainu un provokatīvu iespaidu. Grāmatas latviešu izdevumā ir vēsturnieka komentāri, kas norāda uz vairākām faktu aplamībām. Šķietami sīkumi, taču visi ir tendenciozi par sliktu Cukuram. Vai, lai noslepkavotu Cukuru, viņu vajadzēja tik ilgstoši lenkt, vairākkārtīgi izvilināt uz ārzemēm, un slepkavību izpildīt pieciem aģentiem? Tas mudina uz domu par citas versijas iespējamību: operācijas patiesais nolūks bija Cukura sagūstīšana, lai viņu tiesātu. Pie dīvainībām pieder arī naturālisms, ar kādu autors apraksta pašu slepkavības gaitu un līķa “kāju saīsināšanu”, lai to iedabūtu šim notikumam īpaši sarūpētā kastē. Tas viss provocē teikt: pag, pag, tajā visā lietā ir kaut kas dīvains.
Domāju, ka gan kopš kara gadiem, gan kopš Cukura slepkavības ir pagājis pietiekami daudz laika, lai Herberta Cukura lietu izvērtētu bez histērijas un aizvainojumiem. Lai to izdarītu, vajadzētu tikt pāri banalizētām uzskatu galējībām.
Viena galējība. Latviešiem kā nācijai jāuzņemas vaina par kara gados pret ebrejiem pastrādātajiem noziegumiem. Tā vietā latvieši ne tikai noliedzot vai attaisnojot savus noziegumus, bet pašus noziedzniekus pat mēģinot iztēloties par varoņiem.
Otra galējība. Ebreji paši ar saviem noziegumiem pret latviešiem Baigajā gadā izprovocējuši taisnīgu atriebību, kas patiesībā nemaz nav bijusi tik liela, kā to tagad mēģinot iztēloties “holokausta biznesmeņi”.
Vai mēs vienreiz varam pārkāpt šim banalitātes slieksnim?
Apelējot pie goda prāta un veselā saprāta, ceru, ka varam vienoties par dažām būtiskām lietām, kuras likt kā pamatu turpmākajai jautājuma skatīšanai.
Pirmkārt. Nav ne mazāko šaubu, ka pret ebrejiem Otrā pasaules kara laikā pastrādāti šausmīgi noziegumi. Nav ne mazāko šaubu, ka tas noticis arī Latvijas teritorijā, un latvieši bijuši saistīti ar šiem notikumiem. Tāpat pret latviešiem vērstajos totalitārajos principos ir bijuši iesaistīti ebreji. Taču ir pilnīga bezjēdzība mēģināt izskaitļot, cik kurš kuram nodarījis pāri un kurš pirmais sāka. Nevar būt runa par latviešu vai ebreju kopatbildību par pastrādātajiem noziegumiem.
Otrkārt. Herberta Cukura lieta, lai abstrahētos no kaislībām, vispār nav aplūkojama latviešu un ebreju attiecību kontekstā. Jautājums ir par tiesas ceļā iegūtiem vainu apstiprinošiem pierādījumiem (vai attaisnojumu) par noziegumiem pret cilvēci (holokaustu).
Treškārt. Aicinājumi Cukura lietu izskatīt tiesiski un dažādu versiju izvirzīšana nekādā gadījumā nav saistāmi ar apvainojumiem antisemītismā.
Nesenās vizītes laikā Izraēlā Latvijas Valsts prezidente Vaira Vīķe – Freiberga skaidri norādīja, ka Latvija turpinās holokausta noziegumu izmeklēšanu. To atzinīgi novērtēja gan Izraēlā, gan visā pasaulē. Tieši uz to pašu mudina arī Herberta Cukura tuvinieki un aizstāvji. Vispusīga un tiesiska izmeklēšana, kas beidzas ar konkrētiem vainas pierādījumiem vai reabilitāciju.
Raits Valters un Roberts Kļimovičs ir sākuši Herberta Cukura lietas žurnālistisku izmeklēšanu. Brazīlijā viņi tikušies ar Herberta Cukura bērniem, bet Urugvajā ar cilvēku, kurš sešdesmitajos gados nodarbojās ar Cukura slepkavības lietas izmeklēšanu. Raits un Roberts apgalvo, ka tagad viņu rīcībā ir pārliecinoši materiāli, kas liek uz Cukura lietu paskatīties pavisam savādāk. Viņu mērķis ir izveidot filmu un atjaunot Herberta Cukura vārda labo slavu.
Pagaidām Herberta Cukura lietā sabiedrībā dominē intuitīvi pieņēmumi. Trūkst publiski pieejamu faktu. Atklātāks un daudzpusīgāks skatījums uz šo lietu tikai mazinātu neveselīgas kaislības.
Interviju ar Raitu Valteru un Robertu Kļimoviču skatieties raidījumā "Viss Notiek", pirmdien, plkst. 21.55, LTV1 vai http://www.tv.lv/
12. marts 2006
Cukura lieta nav nekāda saldā. Ar Herberta Cukura vārdu dažs labs grib turpināt Otro pasaules karu latviešu un ebreju, Latvijas un Izraēlas attiecībās. Cukurs kļuvis par sāļu pārbaudījumu demokrātijai, tiesiskumam un vārda brīvībai.
Herberts Cukurs ir izcils Latvijas pirmskara laika lidotājs. Viņa slava pēc kara ir nomākta ar apsūdzībām par cietsirdīgām ebreju masveida slepkavībām. Nav šaubu, ka Cukura biogrāfijā ir tumšākas lappuses, kas saistās ar Arāja komandu un Rīgas ebreju geto. Taču tiesa viņa vainu nekad nav pierādījusi. Pēc kara viņš gadu pavada Francijā, tad pārceļas uz Brazīliju, kur dzīvo atklātu veiksmīga uzņēmēja dzīvi. Līdz 1965. gadā it kā biznesa darījumā viņš tiek aizmānīts uz Urugvaju, kur viņu sadistiski nogalina Izraēlas specdienesta MOSSAD aģenti. Viens no aģentiem ar Antona Kincles pseidonīmu Cukura noslepkavošanas operāciju diezgan naturāli ir aprakstījis grāmatā “Rīgas bendes nāve”.
Uzmanīgākam lasītājam šī grāmata tomēr atstāj dīvainu un provokatīvu iespaidu. Grāmatas latviešu izdevumā ir vēsturnieka komentāri, kas norāda uz vairākām faktu aplamībām. Šķietami sīkumi, taču visi ir tendenciozi par sliktu Cukuram. Vai, lai noslepkavotu Cukuru, viņu vajadzēja tik ilgstoši lenkt, vairākkārtīgi izvilināt uz ārzemēm, un slepkavību izpildīt pieciem aģentiem? Tas mudina uz domu par citas versijas iespējamību: operācijas patiesais nolūks bija Cukura sagūstīšana, lai viņu tiesātu. Pie dīvainībām pieder arī naturālisms, ar kādu autors apraksta pašu slepkavības gaitu un līķa “kāju saīsināšanu”, lai to iedabūtu šim notikumam īpaši sarūpētā kastē. Tas viss provocē teikt: pag, pag, tajā visā lietā ir kaut kas dīvains.
Domāju, ka gan kopš kara gadiem, gan kopš Cukura slepkavības ir pagājis pietiekami daudz laika, lai Herberta Cukura lietu izvērtētu bez histērijas un aizvainojumiem. Lai to izdarītu, vajadzētu tikt pāri banalizētām uzskatu galējībām.
Viena galējība. Latviešiem kā nācijai jāuzņemas vaina par kara gados pret ebrejiem pastrādātajiem noziegumiem. Tā vietā latvieši ne tikai noliedzot vai attaisnojot savus noziegumus, bet pašus noziedzniekus pat mēģinot iztēloties par varoņiem.
Otra galējība. Ebreji paši ar saviem noziegumiem pret latviešiem Baigajā gadā izprovocējuši taisnīgu atriebību, kas patiesībā nemaz nav bijusi tik liela, kā to tagad mēģinot iztēloties “holokausta biznesmeņi”.
Vai mēs vienreiz varam pārkāpt šim banalitātes slieksnim?
Apelējot pie goda prāta un veselā saprāta, ceru, ka varam vienoties par dažām būtiskām lietām, kuras likt kā pamatu turpmākajai jautājuma skatīšanai.
Pirmkārt. Nav ne mazāko šaubu, ka pret ebrejiem Otrā pasaules kara laikā pastrādāti šausmīgi noziegumi. Nav ne mazāko šaubu, ka tas noticis arī Latvijas teritorijā, un latvieši bijuši saistīti ar šiem notikumiem. Tāpat pret latviešiem vērstajos totalitārajos principos ir bijuši iesaistīti ebreji. Taču ir pilnīga bezjēdzība mēģināt izskaitļot, cik kurš kuram nodarījis pāri un kurš pirmais sāka. Nevar būt runa par latviešu vai ebreju kopatbildību par pastrādātajiem noziegumiem.
Otrkārt. Herberta Cukura lieta, lai abstrahētos no kaislībām, vispār nav aplūkojama latviešu un ebreju attiecību kontekstā. Jautājums ir par tiesas ceļā iegūtiem vainu apstiprinošiem pierādījumiem (vai attaisnojumu) par noziegumiem pret cilvēci (holokaustu).
Treškārt. Aicinājumi Cukura lietu izskatīt tiesiski un dažādu versiju izvirzīšana nekādā gadījumā nav saistāmi ar apvainojumiem antisemītismā.
Nesenās vizītes laikā Izraēlā Latvijas Valsts prezidente Vaira Vīķe – Freiberga skaidri norādīja, ka Latvija turpinās holokausta noziegumu izmeklēšanu. To atzinīgi novērtēja gan Izraēlā, gan visā pasaulē. Tieši uz to pašu mudina arī Herberta Cukura tuvinieki un aizstāvji. Vispusīga un tiesiska izmeklēšana, kas beidzas ar konkrētiem vainas pierādījumiem vai reabilitāciju.
Raits Valters un Roberts Kļimovičs ir sākuši Herberta Cukura lietas žurnālistisku izmeklēšanu. Brazīlijā viņi tikušies ar Herberta Cukura bērniem, bet Urugvajā ar cilvēku, kurš sešdesmitajos gados nodarbojās ar Cukura slepkavības lietas izmeklēšanu. Raits un Roberts apgalvo, ka tagad viņu rīcībā ir pārliecinoši materiāli, kas liek uz Cukura lietu paskatīties pavisam savādāk. Viņu mērķis ir izveidot filmu un atjaunot Herberta Cukura vārda labo slavu.
Pagaidām Herberta Cukura lietā sabiedrībā dominē intuitīvi pieņēmumi. Trūkst publiski pieejamu faktu. Atklātāks un daudzpusīgāks skatījums uz šo lietu tikai mazinātu neveselīgas kaislības.
Interviju ar Raitu Valteru un Robertu Kļimoviču skatieties raidījumā "Viss Notiek", pirmdien, plkst. 21.55, LTV1 vai http://www.tv.lv/
ILMARS LATKOVSKIS:TURPINAJUMS SARUNAI PAR HERBERTU CUKURU.
Ilmārs Latkovskis hansamedia.
19. marts 2006
Negribu pārliecināt muļķus un aprēķinātājus. Pēc pirmās sarunas par Herbertu Cukuru (Delfi, 12.03.2006) netrūkst galēju viedokļu izkliedzēju. Vieni sauc: tāda ir žīdu daba. Citi atkal izmanto saukļus par antisemītisma tendencēm un holokausta upuru piemiņas zaimošanu, ja par Herbertu Cukuru nerunā tikai sliktu vien.
Atgādinu, ka visas šīs kaislības izsauc mēģinājumi apšaubīt līdz šim vienīgās versijas nekļūdīgumu. Šī versija aprakstīta H. Cukura slepkavas A. Kincles (pseidonīms) grāmatā “Rīgas bendes nāve”. Cukuru nogalina 1965. gadā Montevideo “tie, kas neaizmirst”. Nāve ir it kā ir taisnīgs sods par desmitiem tūkstošu ebreju noslepkavošanu. Taču vēsturnieki šajā grāmatā ir atraduši vairākas faktu kļūdas.
Cukura līdzdalība bēdīgi slavenajā Arāja komandā un klātbūtne Rīgas ebreju geto, protams, ir nopietns pamats ļoti nepatīkamām aizdomām par Cukura tiešu saistību ar noziegumiem. Taču te jāpiesauc līdzība ar piedalīšanos VDK darbos. VDK ir pastrādājusi noziegumus pret cilvēci. Bet, vai tas mums dod tiesības bez tiesas slepkavot katru VDK virsnieku, cietumsargu, ziņotāju? Es būtu priecīgs, ja Herberts Cukurs izrādītos bez vainas ebreju slepkavošanā. Taču es arī negribu vēlamo uzdot par esošo, jo pagaidām man nav drošas pārliecības, ka Cukurs ir pilnīgi bez vainas. Šķiet, aptuveni tā domā vairums latviešu, kuri mēģina iedziļināties šajā lietā.
Panākt tiesisku Cukura vainas pierādījumu vai noliegumu nav vienīgais iemesls, kāpēc jāturpina daudzpusīgi runāt par Cukura lietu. Neatkarīgi no Cukura vainas pierādījumiem, ir ne mazums citu būtisku jautājumu, kas prasās pēc iztirzājuma.
Kādas bija Herberta Cukura, latviešu nacionālā varoņa, attiecības ar padomju varu tās pirmās okupācijas gadā? Kas viņam lika iesaistīties Arāja komandā? Kāda ir personas iekšējo pretrunu cīņa? Vieni piesauc faktus par ebreju spīdzināšanu un nogalēšanu, citi tos noraida un min ebreju glābšanas faktus. Vai tas var sadzīvot vienā cilvēkā? Vieni saka – viņš slēpās Brazīlijā, citi – viņš dzīvoja ar savu vārdu, atklāti un pat skaļi. Tāpat Cukura nāves soda operācija kā to apraksta A. Kincle, arī izraisa daudzus jautājumus.
Maigākie pārmetumi, ko izpelnās nepievienošanās līdz šim valdošajai Kincles grāmatā izklāstītajai versijai, ir pārmetumi, ka netiek proporcionāli vienādi aplūkoti pretēji viedokļi. Taču līdz šim ir bijusi pilnīga disproporcija, tāpēc arī pilnīgi saprotama šķiet pretreakcija pret Kincles absolūto pareizumu.
Pirms kāda laika ievērību izpelnījās Herbertam Cukuram veltītā filma un izstāde “Nevainības prezumpcija”, kuras autors Kalle Bjoršmarks ir stipri patālu no latviešu nacionālisma pozīcijām. “Nevainības prezumpcijas” galvenā ideja – nevar sodīt cilvēku, kura vaina nav pierādīta.
Roberta Kļimoviča un Raita Valtera pieejā šim jautājumam ir daudz emociju un intuīcijas, kas radušās Brazīlijā, tiekoties ar Herberta Cukura bērniem. Taču viņu rīcībā ir arī daudz faktu, kas neiekļaujas Kincles scenārijā. Tās ir Cukura draudzīgās attiecības ar ebrejiem ne tikai pirms un pēc kara, bet atsevišķās epizodēs arī kara laikā. Pretstatā Kincles aprakstītajam, Cukuram Brazīlijā ir ļoti veiksmīgs bizness, ko apliecina publikācijas presē. Interesants ir arī kāds biznesa konflikts, kur, iespējams, pret Cukuru tiek izspēlēta holokausta kārts. Cukurs pats pieprasa, lai par viņu tiek spriesta likumīga un taisna tiesa. Roberts Kļimovičs atsaucas uz kādu vēstuli, kas liek apšaubīt paša Kincles pārliecinātību par Cukura vainu. Visbeidzot, tas, kā Kincle apraksta Cukura noslepkavošanu, liek izvirzīt papildus jautājumus gan par pašu Kincli, gan par Cukuru, gan par izlūkdienestu darba metodēm.
Intervijas ar Raitu Valteru un Robertu Kļimoviču 2. daļu skatieties raidījumā "Viss Notiek" LTV1 pirmdien, plkst. 21.55 vai tv.lv.
19. marts 2006
Negribu pārliecināt muļķus un aprēķinātājus. Pēc pirmās sarunas par Herbertu Cukuru (Delfi, 12.03.2006) netrūkst galēju viedokļu izkliedzēju. Vieni sauc: tāda ir žīdu daba. Citi atkal izmanto saukļus par antisemītisma tendencēm un holokausta upuru piemiņas zaimošanu, ja par Herbertu Cukuru nerunā tikai sliktu vien.
Atgādinu, ka visas šīs kaislības izsauc mēģinājumi apšaubīt līdz šim vienīgās versijas nekļūdīgumu. Šī versija aprakstīta H. Cukura slepkavas A. Kincles (pseidonīms) grāmatā “Rīgas bendes nāve”. Cukuru nogalina 1965. gadā Montevideo “tie, kas neaizmirst”. Nāve ir it kā ir taisnīgs sods par desmitiem tūkstošu ebreju noslepkavošanu. Taču vēsturnieki šajā grāmatā ir atraduši vairākas faktu kļūdas.
Cukura līdzdalība bēdīgi slavenajā Arāja komandā un klātbūtne Rīgas ebreju geto, protams, ir nopietns pamats ļoti nepatīkamām aizdomām par Cukura tiešu saistību ar noziegumiem. Taču te jāpiesauc līdzība ar piedalīšanos VDK darbos. VDK ir pastrādājusi noziegumus pret cilvēci. Bet, vai tas mums dod tiesības bez tiesas slepkavot katru VDK virsnieku, cietumsargu, ziņotāju? Es būtu priecīgs, ja Herberts Cukurs izrādītos bez vainas ebreju slepkavošanā. Taču es arī negribu vēlamo uzdot par esošo, jo pagaidām man nav drošas pārliecības, ka Cukurs ir pilnīgi bez vainas. Šķiet, aptuveni tā domā vairums latviešu, kuri mēģina iedziļināties šajā lietā.
Panākt tiesisku Cukura vainas pierādījumu vai noliegumu nav vienīgais iemesls, kāpēc jāturpina daudzpusīgi runāt par Cukura lietu. Neatkarīgi no Cukura vainas pierādījumiem, ir ne mazums citu būtisku jautājumu, kas prasās pēc iztirzājuma.
Kādas bija Herberta Cukura, latviešu nacionālā varoņa, attiecības ar padomju varu tās pirmās okupācijas gadā? Kas viņam lika iesaistīties Arāja komandā? Kāda ir personas iekšējo pretrunu cīņa? Vieni piesauc faktus par ebreju spīdzināšanu un nogalēšanu, citi tos noraida un min ebreju glābšanas faktus. Vai tas var sadzīvot vienā cilvēkā? Vieni saka – viņš slēpās Brazīlijā, citi – viņš dzīvoja ar savu vārdu, atklāti un pat skaļi. Tāpat Cukura nāves soda operācija kā to apraksta A. Kincle, arī izraisa daudzus jautājumus.
Maigākie pārmetumi, ko izpelnās nepievienošanās līdz šim valdošajai Kincles grāmatā izklāstītajai versijai, ir pārmetumi, ka netiek proporcionāli vienādi aplūkoti pretēji viedokļi. Taču līdz šim ir bijusi pilnīga disproporcija, tāpēc arī pilnīgi saprotama šķiet pretreakcija pret Kincles absolūto pareizumu.
Pirms kāda laika ievērību izpelnījās Herbertam Cukuram veltītā filma un izstāde “Nevainības prezumpcija”, kuras autors Kalle Bjoršmarks ir stipri patālu no latviešu nacionālisma pozīcijām. “Nevainības prezumpcijas” galvenā ideja – nevar sodīt cilvēku, kura vaina nav pierādīta.
Roberta Kļimoviča un Raita Valtera pieejā šim jautājumam ir daudz emociju un intuīcijas, kas radušās Brazīlijā, tiekoties ar Herberta Cukura bērniem. Taču viņu rīcībā ir arī daudz faktu, kas neiekļaujas Kincles scenārijā. Tās ir Cukura draudzīgās attiecības ar ebrejiem ne tikai pirms un pēc kara, bet atsevišķās epizodēs arī kara laikā. Pretstatā Kincles aprakstītajam, Cukuram Brazīlijā ir ļoti veiksmīgs bizness, ko apliecina publikācijas presē. Interesants ir arī kāds biznesa konflikts, kur, iespējams, pret Cukuru tiek izspēlēta holokausta kārts. Cukurs pats pieprasa, lai par viņu tiek spriesta likumīga un taisna tiesa. Roberts Kļimovičs atsaucas uz kādu vēstuli, kas liek apšaubīt paša Kincles pārliecinātību par Cukura vainu. Visbeidzot, tas, kā Kincle apraksta Cukura noslepkavošanu, liek izvirzīt papildus jautājumus gan par pašu Kincli, gan par Cukuru, gan par izlūkdienestu darba metodēm.
Intervijas ar Raitu Valteru un Robertu Kļimoviču 2. daļu skatieties raidījumā "Viss Notiek" LTV1 pirmdien, plkst. 21.55 vai tv.lv.
terça-feira, 25 de novembro de 2008
DESINFORMATION FROM THE MOSSAD OFFICE.
"It is very strange, Vestermanis says that not in the Soviet
archives nor in the Latvians archives, are there any incriminating
records against Cukurs. "
"The jews who killed Cukurs claimed, that with this action, they wanted to
influence the debate of the statutes of limitation of Nazi crimes
on-going within the German Bundestag. Neither the German government
nor the parliament have protested against this blackmailing of
their democratic institutions by an other state. Journalists and
historians then accepted, without any checks, the description from
the Mossad."
"In the Jewish museum in Riga, nevertheless, no-one is championing
that book. "It is really shaming", says Margers Vestermanis, the
curator," that of the Mossad works so badly, so primitively, about
(the factual) concerns of the book; The Execution of the Hangman of
Riga ".
"Margers Vestermanis leads the Jewish museum in Riga. He himself was
a slave worker of the Nazis during World War II. The book
"Execution of the Hangman of Riga" is " a complete nonsense ", he
says. Indeed, Cukurs has been a member in the murder group of
Viktor Arajs, but Herbert Cukurs was not responsible for
assassination of 30,000 Jews. "Neither Viktor Arajs nor Cukurs were
a member in the Perkonkrust whose history is well known."
"Cukurs became a media event, a national hero, and the Latvian air
force hired him as a captain. He was not known as an anti-
Semite,says Vestermanis."
By Gaby Weber.
http://www.gabyweber.com/dwnld/artikel/mossad/disinformation_Cukurs_en.pdf
Disinformation from the Mossad office
Historical forgery about a mysterious homicide case in Montevideo
On March 6th, 1965, Uruguayan police officer Alejandro Otero was
informed that the Bonn office of the Reuters news agency had
received an anonymous letter from a group calling themselves,"Who
can never forget ". It said that in Shangrilá, Uruguay, the Latvian
war criminal Herbert Cukurs had been executed for his murders of
some 30,000 Jews during World War II.
When the policeman went to the indicated address, he found that the
doors and windows were closed. Otero remembers: "What I could see
from outside, was frightening: The whole room was covered with
blood”.
Found inside, and placed beside the corpse was an extract from the
pleading of a British accuser in the Nuremberg trials process. The
next day, newspapers around the world proclaimed that these were
the proofs against the executed alleged Jew's mass murderer. This
was five years after the arrest of Adolf Eichmann, and the press
speculated that the Israeli Secret Service, Mossad, had been at
work. The government in Tel Aviv wrapped itself in silence.
Twenty years later, at the Auschwitz tribunal in Jerusalem, the
then head of Mossad, Isser Harel, who himself came from Latvia,
declared that the execution of Cukurs has been the last action of
his Secret Service in the matter of Nazi criminals in South
America. This was in 1985. And other twelve years passed, until the
Israeli Keter publishing company published a book with the title "
the Execution of the hangman of Riga " in which the execution of
Cukurs' is described in detail.
with this
The authors claimed, that with this action, they wanted to
influence the debate of the statutes of limitation of Nazi crimes
on-going within the German Bundestag. Neither the German government
nor the parliament have protested against this blackmailing of
their democratic institutions by an other state. Journalists and
historians then accepted, without any checks, the description from
the Mossad. „The Execution of the Hangman of Riga " was then
translated in German, and in Latvian and praised worldwide as an
"important historical document ".
Four years ago, the book appeared in English, with a preface by
general Meir Amit, the Mossad Chief at that time. He writes in it:
"The state of Israel had decided to eliminate the leading nazi war
criminals. This was a specific, selective and efficient
elimination. One of the most prominent ones was Herbert Cukurs who
had committed disastrous crimes against Latvian Jews and had
escaped the persecution of the allies."
These words may well be doubted. The Cukurs operation was probably
one of the most dilettante operations of the Israeli Secret Service
and the book "The Execution of the Hangman of Riga " a product of
their department of "dis-information".
The author of the book is called "Anton Künzle". He has carried out
the execution of the dis-information. "Künzle" is a pseudonym. He
was in 1919 born in Germany and later migrated to Palestine, so it
says in the book cover flap text. There he served in the ranks of
the Hagana, the precursor of the Israeli army, and later the
Mossad. The journalist Gad Shimron, who himself was active for ten
years with the Mossad, had helped him with the writing:
“When one day my grandchildren ask me “Grandpa”, of everything
you´ve ever done, what are you most proud of? I will tell them
about my role in this difficult and complicated operation of
settling the account with the Hangman of Riga”, reads one qoute
from the book.
In the Jewish museum in Riga, nevertheless, no-one is championing
that book. "It is really shaming", says Margers Vestermanis, the
curator," that of the Mossad works so badly, so primitively, about
(the factual) concerns of the book; The Execution of the Hangman of
Riga ".
Alejandro Otero was the police officer in charge in Uruguay. Today,
he is retired, however, he still remembers every detail. At the
scene it stank unbearably, the corpse had lain there two weeks in
summer temperatures. The dead body lay in chest and beside the
chest lay the extract of the British accuser in the Nuremberg
process. That sheet is in the police records on the case. In that
extract is described the “special action groups" of Nazi leader
Himmler. It is not referring to Cukurs or Latvia.
The Federal Police in Germany sent to Otero the letter of the
anonymous group, the so-called "death sentence". It described
Cukurs as a leader of a Latvian fascist's troop called Perkonkrust
(Thundercross): "Because of his demonstrable personal
responsibility for the death of 30,000 men, women and children, we
have decided to issue to Herbert Cukurs the death sentence ".
Police officer Otero got in contact with the family of the dead
person. From São Paulo came his son, Gunnars, who had already
missed his father. His father had lived legally in Brazil since
1946 and in the beginning of the fifties the Jewish community had
raised reproaches against him, Gunnars said. Nothing within any of
these reproaches was proven to be true and after a certain time the
campaign lay dormant. That is until "Anton Künzle" appeared in São
Paulo and presented a commercial proposition to his father. He
invited him to Uruguay and left 160 dollars for the flight from São
Paulo to Montevideo. It was evidently a trap.
Otero found out that Künzle had spoken German fluently and Spanish
with an Argentine accent, as had his accomplices,. And they
probably had initially planned only for kidnapping Cukurs. However,
they were not professionals. At least five young men, neighbours
had observed, had stayed in the house in Shangrilá, a suburb of
Montevideo. Otero theorizes that, "They didn´t want to execute him.
Then they could simply have shot him before in Brazil. They had
lured him under a pretext to Uruguay to take him away to another
place. Cukurs was a very strong man in spite of his age. He
preferred to die than to be caught. The fight ended with his
death."
The fact that five young men could not defeat a 64-year-old,
contradicts the image of the extraordinary efficiency that Mossad
claimed.
"The corpse laid in a gigantic chest ", according to Otero, "and
the chest had several air holes in front and on the side. There
were robust metal buckles and thick belts which lay beside the
chest." These belts would presumably prevent the chest from being
opened from the inside. Several neighbours, according to his
inquiries, had observed that during the proported time of that
action a big ship had anchored in the bay of Shangrilá. It waited
there 48 hours. However, in the national registers Otero did not
find the ship.
The policeman supposed that the ship would have taken aboard the
kidnapped man to be stolen away. Otero checked border crossings and
airports. And he travelled to São Paulo, to speak with the Cukurs
family. He found that the man who was called Anton Künzle and had
lured Herbert Cukurs to Uruguay where he had rented a car. He
needed an international driving licence and applied for it with the
Brazilian Automobile Association. From there, Otero received the
second photo of the licence, the photo of the murderer. "I wanted
the help of Interpol in the international search, but Interpol
officially informed me that it concerns the murder of Cukurs as a
political criminal case, and in such cases Interpol does not become
active". So thus, the inquiries had run into the sand.
Otero was very busy at that time. In Uruguay, it was the time when
the guerrilla group Tupamarosbecame active and Otero was charged
with persueing them. One of their founders was Tabaré Rivero,
living today in Montevideo. He remembers the Cukurs case well and,
above all, he remembers a certain Amodio Pérez, one of the most
reckless comrades who had made a quick career inside the guerrilla
apparatus.
Rivero said: "I found out that Amodio participated in the Cukurs
action, he has driving the car of the operation. He used false
documents which had probably been handed over to him by the Mossad.
He also knew the house in Shangrilá. The Israelis had organized the
operation with very few people, among them was also the first wife
of Amodio."
Amodio Perez is a Jew. And at that time, the Uruguayan left
maintained close contacts with the Jews in Montevideo. One had a
common enemy. The local Nazis attacked left offices at that time
with bombs. The fact that Perez had taken part in the Mossad
action, however, had not occurred by order of his organization,
Rivero said. He had gotten to know of his participation only later.
In 1972, Perez was arrested and told everything that he knew. In
his army uniform he was led on the streets to identify his comrades-
in-arms. Even then the rumour circulated that he was a spy inside
the Tupamaros. After the military coup, he left without processing
out of the country.
Only once did he appeared since then. He was involved in the middle
of the eighties in the attempt to kill Nicaragua Contra leader Eden
Pastora. Pastora, called also "Comandante Zero", wanted to speak in
a press conference about the pressure which the CIA exercised on
him. However, there was a bomb explosion, and eleven people were
killed, and Pastora was injured. Journalists later showed police
officer Otero a video about the press conference and he identified
Perez clearly.
Margers Vestermanis leads the Jewish museum in Riga. He himself was
a slave worker of the Nazis during World War II. The book
"Execution of the Hangman of Riga" is " a complete nonsense ", he
says. Indeed, Cukurs has been a member in the murder group of
Viktor Arajs, but Herbert Cukurs was not responsible for
assassination of 30,000 Jews. "Neither Viktor Arajs nor Cukurs were
a member in the Perkonkrust whose history is well known."
The Perkonkrust was a nationalistic, paramilitary troop, born
during the first Latvian republic under Kalis Ulmanis, an
authoritarian ruler. At that time about 80,000 Jews lived in
Latvia, five percent of the population. Under Ulmanis, they lived
quiet well, in comparison to the era before it, as Latvia had been
under Russian administration, where they could choose their
professions and acquire land.
Perkonkrust did the agitation against these people with his 6,000
members. They saluted"Kampf Heil", with the fascist's greeting and
were against all foreigners. Their slogan was "Hit the Jews and the
Germans"! In 1940, the Red Army annexed the Baltic States. And this
was the first time for contacts and physical connections between
the Perkonkrust and the German Abwehr - against the common enemy,
the Communists.
But Cukurs never was a member of the resistance, says Vestermanis,
but a daredevil and adventurer who loved the risk, enjoyed
travelling, pleasures and a good life. On the flea market he bought
an old Citroen motor and inserted it in a scrapped airplane with
which he flew to Gambia. The newspapers of Latvia financed his
adventure and from all stations he cabled reports to Riga. Then he
became a special correspondent in the war of Abessynia and in
Japan.
Cukurs became a media event, a national hero, and the Latvian air
force hired him as a captain. He was not known as an anti-
Semite,says Vestermanis. He rather tried to take advantage of all
situations for himself. Even later, under the Soviet occupation of
Latvia, he presented himself as a convinced anti-communist, but he
still made an arrangement with the Russians. On the 9th April 41 he
went to Moscow and offered his collaboration, probably to do
personal business with the Soviet air force. With which authorities
he had contact in the Soviet Union, never became known.
On the 16th of April 1941 he went back on his farm in Latvia where
he was at the time of the invasion of the German armed forces. Many
suspected him as a Russian spy because of his Moscow trip, and the
situation had become dangerous for him, speculates Vestermanis.
Probably to prove his loyalty to the new rulers, Cukurs enlisted
into the special command of Victor Arajs.
The mass murder of the Latvian Jews happened in several great
actions. The first homicide action began a few days after the
invasion of the Germans by Latvian fascist's groups. With the
second, at the end of 1941, the Germans killed 25,000 ghetto
inhabitants in the forest. Germany later announced the transport of
Jews to Riga as there was a claim to need space in the ghetto.
Herbert Cukurs membership within the Arajs command is proven. He
was his chauffeur and his right hand man. The fact that those
troops committed heavy crimes - shootings, tortures, synagogues
burned - is likewise recorded. Whether and how Cukurs was involved
in these actions personally, cannot be proven today. With
certainty, he carries a joint responsibility for his membership in
this terrorist group, but whether he carries a penal
responsibility, is not clear.
Margers Vestermanis knows well the documents, both for, and against
him. For him, two Jewish women have spoken out. Ella Medalje (born
Ella Guttmann), was aided in escaping her being shot because she
had presented herself as an "Aryan". Cukurs had driven her to the
Waldemar Street nazi headquarter s building and he did not betrayed
her, although he knew that she was a Jew. And later, Miriam
Keitzner gave testimony in Brazil saying that Cukurs had hidden her
on his farm.
However, during the executions in November, 1941, Cukurs had been
present, says Vestermanis, under direct orders, he fired blindly in
the mass of prisonars. These massacres were ordered and organisedthe by the German SS. Primarily, three persons were responsible: SS-
group leader Friedrich Jeckeln who had come from the Ukraine where
he had been very active in the murder of the Jews of Kiev. SS-
leader and commander of the Riga ghetto, Eduard Roschmann who
became known as the "butcher of Riga ". And Viktor Arajs, the
Latvian boss of a special murder group.
Herbert Cukurs was often at the nazi headquarter at number 19
Waldemar Street. It was an expropriated building of a former Jewish
banker, where the Arajs group had their offices. There was the
garage of their cars for which Cukurs was responsible. In the
basement, there were torture cells for prisoners, Jews and
partisans.
On the third floor of that building, were the rooms of the
Perkonkrust. However, after only one month of German occupation,
these Latvian fascists got into trouble with the Germans and were
forbidden to remain within the building.
The book " The Execution of the Hangman of Riga " quotes eight
witness's statements of surviving prisoners of Waldemar Street.
They have been filed before Jewish organisations. The originals are
in the archive of the memorial Yad Vashem in Jerusalem, copies in
the Jewish museum in Riga.
The fact that these witnesses were victims of the worst
humiliations, is excepted without any question. However, something
in these statements is inexact, something even wrong, means
Vestermanis. The fact that in it Cukurs is named as a member of the
Perkonkrust, proves nothing. The witnesses have been tormented and
been traumatised and would have hardly differentiated anyone on the
other side according to their party affiliation.
It is very strange, Vestermanis says that not in the Soviet
archives nor in the Latvians archives, are there any incriminating
records against Cukurs. After the war, the Soviet Union wanted to
exert a big war crimes trial because of the nazi massacres in the
Baltic States and, therefore, interrogated thousands. "After the
war, 365 members of these fascist commands were condemned. The
astonishing thing is that in the all the testimonies, there are no
criminal incriminations against Cukurs".
The book about the supposed "Hangman of Riga "mentions a request
for extradition by the Soviet Union to the Brazilian government.
However, such a request has never existed. The Brazilian embassy in
Buenos Aires informed me that‚‘‘Neither the Soviet Union, nor
Israel, ever applied for the extradition of Cukur‘‘. On a list,
published in 1960 in Israel, with the names of nazi war criminals,
the name of Herbert Cukurs did not appear.
Today Gunnars Cukurs is 77 years old and lives in the south on SãoPaulo where he had done handicrafts with his father making model
airplanes and boats. He cannot remember the Jew's pursecution in
Latvia. With the invasion of the Germans he was ten years old. He
does not believe that his father had played any active role in
these crimes. The fact that he was a chauffeur and right hand of
Viktor Arajs, the head of the execution command, he does not deny.
He answers to my question whether his father had in this position
theoretically the possibility not to take part in the crimes: "It
was wartime". The fact that the Jews, women and children, were not
war-leading parties, he knew, of course.‘‘
Towards the end of 1943, his father sent his wife and children to
Germany for their safety and security. He himself stayed behind in
Riga.
It was in August 1944 when the red army had encircled Riga. The
ones who were able to, fled by sea to Sweden and took their
property with them. Cukurs was also present during those last war
days with such transports. He admits this in a letter to the US-
American consul in Brazil which is in the Uruguayan criminal
record. The skilled pilot probably crossed the Baltic Sea by
airplane. Whom and, above all what, he may have taken with himself
and delivered into Sweden there can only be speculations.
After the war, those refugees that fled to Sweden were delivered
back to the Soviet Union. But what has happened with the things of
value which they had taken on their escape, never became known.
At the end of August, 1944, remembers Gunnars, his father returned
home to the family, which had landed in Szczecin. With him was
Miriam Keitzner, a young Jew that he had hidden in Riga on his
farm. From there, they fled, before the red army, to the west. Near
Kassel they got taken into US captivity. The young Jewish lady made
some miracles happen, and after three days the family could go on.
Through Marseilles, they emigrated to Brazil.
In 1956 Herbert Cukurs moved from Rio de Janeiro to São Paulo. His
youngest son, Richard, had just been born, and therefore, his stay
in Brazil was protected. He worked in the south of the metropolis
with his sons in making new tools, for example, a small submarine
for civil and military purposes which he offered of the US-Navy.
However, the Navy answered that the project was too expensive.
Where were the motives behind his planned hijacking? Was the plan
to get information from him? Maybe information about what had
happened during the last war days in Latvia, before the red army
closed the circle around Riga? Was he involved in transporting of
funds? The funds of the Ostbank, brought by airplane to Sweden and
deposited there in the Wallenberg bank? Was Herbert Cukurs involved
at that time as the pilot?The fact is that the Nazis had enough time to save their pillage
before the coming of the red army. In August, 1944 the German
defeat was foreseeable. Many Nazis fled across the Baltic Sea to
Gothenburg, and Cukurs had taken part in these escape movements as
he told to his children later.
To the US consul in Rio de Janeiro he confirmed that he supplied,
up to the last minute, "the German forces with weapons" and - thus
literally – in Danzig he saved whole "units”. This letter lies in
the criminal records of the Uruguayan police.
The "Ostbank" was created after the German occupation of the Baltic
States, unifying the central banks of Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia
and Weissruthenia. Into the Ostbank were paid all the taxes from
the occupied areas as well as the income from the sales of "Jewish
and partisan property". The so-called "Jew's property" formed a
"considerable part of the economic property of the former Baltic
states", this can be read in a letter of Gauleiter Hinrich Lohse to
the Führer Adolf Hitler. With this money the Nazis financed their
machinery of war. On the 18th of February 1944, say documents in
the National Archives of Berlin, the bank accounts of the Ostbank
still contained more than 84 million Reichsmark. What has happened
with this fortune - as well as the foreign exchange reserves and
gold reserves-, is not noted in the records.
On September 8th, 1944 the German minister sent a telex to the nazi
commissioner in Riga: "In the process of saving the economic goods,
the Gauleiter and the General Commissioner must report to me
immediately about the realisation of the measures, signed by
(Alfred) Rosenberg."
The saving of the Nazi gold from the Baltic States was in the hands
of Nazi minister Rosenberg himself. These assets had to be brought
to a neutral country. Switzerland was too far away. Sweden was
officially neutral. However, they maintained only narrow contacts
with the Nazis.
Several Swedish commissions wanted to clear up the dark chapter of
the collaboration with the Third Reich. Also the companies of the
Wallenberg family were investigated. The family is known, above
all, by Raoul Wallenberg: the diplomat who saved thousands of Jews
before the deportation in Nazi occupied Budapest. But other members
of the family co-operated with the Nazis and supplied them with
armament goods.
Their Enskilda bank had taken part in the monetary laundry for the
Nazis, and the Swedish central bank bought gold from Germany which
presumably came from Holocaust victims. Number accounts did not
exist at the Wallenberg bank, so, there were some confidential
letter accounts. The Swedish commissions had no access to these
accounts. So it is unclear whether on the name of Rosenberg, oranother Nazi leader, a letter account was maintained. And‘‘ no
comment“ was what I received from the Wallenberg family.
After the end of the war, the Swedish government delivered many of
the fled SS officers to the Soviet Union. Is not known whether it
has also returned loot and whether Israel got a share of it.
Only few persons were convicted for the massacres of the Latvian
Jews: The Soviets condemned the SS-group leader Jeckeln as a war
criminal and hung him in Riga. But the former SS commander of the
Riga ghetto, Eduard Roschmann, moved to Argentina and moved there
openly. Viktor Arajs, the leader of the shooting command, fell into
British captivity. The military government soon allowed him freedom
of movement within the country, sent his records to the German
justice department, and then hired Arajs as a driver. The British
let him go to London where he received a faked passport from the
Latvian exile government. Arajs was arrested in 1975 in Frankfurt
and was condemned to lifelong custody by the district court of
Hamburg for of murder of at least 13,000 people.
The murder of Herbert Cukurs is considered, still to this day, as a
Mossad action, which claimed as it’s purpose, to punish a mass
murderer. This version tookpresence even in the Encyclopaedia
Britannica. The family of the victim protested and asked them for
omission. They wanted to present documents, remembers the son
Gunnars. "But the Britannica did not want to see the documents. And
we had no money for a court procedure."
The Israeli Intelligence Service Mossad is keeping silence on the
Cukurs case. However, the publishing company which has published
the German issue of the book "The Execution of the Hangman of Riga"
answered to my inquiry. They informed me by email: "We have no
closer information about the pseudonym Anton Künzle. According to
our information the author is protected by the Verfassungsschutz
(internal German intelligence service)". They say that they made no
contract with him and paid no author's fees. Whether the publishing
company has received money for the publication and whether the
contract was concluded with the Israeli government or a Secret
Service, they refused to answer. They also refused to respond to
whether and how the publishing company can protect itself against
being accused participating in historical forgery.
Anyway, the rights for the book have been sold to the German
Psychosozialverlag and they answered: "The questions whether, how
and between whom contracts were concluded concern Internal things
which we do not give out. We ask for this for understanding".
Künzles co-author, the long-standing Mossad agent Gad Shimron, gave
a bit more information. He has, in the meantime, developed a career
with the Israeli newspaper Maariv and maintains, he wrote me in an
email, "no more contact to the Mossad". "For many years I knowmister Kuenzle. And I trust every word in his report (about the
operation)".
He refused to put me in contact with Künzle. He, Shimron, is from
the "old school" and might not disclose Kunzles true identity. He
did not answer why he has not done research in Latvian, German,
Soviet and US American archives. To the point of fact that Israel
has never filed a request for extradition to Brazil, he explained
with the supposition that the state had to solve "more urgent"
problems. Only sporadically has the state tried "to track down"
Nazi criminals like Cukurs.
How he dared to call Cukurs as a member of the fascistic
"Perkonkrust" and responsibel for 30,000 murders - the journalist
passed on this question. But he pointed out the‘‘fact‘‘ that
"certain circles in Riga" celebrate the man again as a nationalist
and have given him something like a general "denazification
certificate".
This is right. There was in Riga an exhibition about the 'national
hero' Herbert Cukurs in which his work was shown in the Arajs
command as harmless. And a known Latvian lawyer recently published
a book with the title "Schaffott". He calls the procedure against
SS- group leader Jeckeln a "show process" and shows him as a victim
of the Soviet justice.
However, historical falsification is no answer to historical
falsification.
archives nor in the Latvians archives, are there any incriminating
records against Cukurs. "
"The jews who killed Cukurs claimed, that with this action, they wanted to
influence the debate of the statutes of limitation of Nazi crimes
on-going within the German Bundestag. Neither the German government
nor the parliament have protested against this blackmailing of
their democratic institutions by an other state. Journalists and
historians then accepted, without any checks, the description from
the Mossad."
"In the Jewish museum in Riga, nevertheless, no-one is championing
that book. "It is really shaming", says Margers Vestermanis, the
curator," that of the Mossad works so badly, so primitively, about
(the factual) concerns of the book; The Execution of the Hangman of
Riga ".
"Margers Vestermanis leads the Jewish museum in Riga. He himself was
a slave worker of the Nazis during World War II. The book
"Execution of the Hangman of Riga" is " a complete nonsense ", he
says. Indeed, Cukurs has been a member in the murder group of
Viktor Arajs, but Herbert Cukurs was not responsible for
assassination of 30,000 Jews. "Neither Viktor Arajs nor Cukurs were
a member in the Perkonkrust whose history is well known."
"Cukurs became a media event, a national hero, and the Latvian air
force hired him as a captain. He was not known as an anti-
Semite,says Vestermanis."
By Gaby Weber.
http://www.gabyweber.com/dwnld/artikel/mossad/disinformation_Cukurs_en.pdf
Disinformation from the Mossad office
Historical forgery about a mysterious homicide case in Montevideo
On March 6th, 1965, Uruguayan police officer Alejandro Otero was
informed that the Bonn office of the Reuters news agency had
received an anonymous letter from a group calling themselves,"Who
can never forget ". It said that in Shangrilá, Uruguay, the Latvian
war criminal Herbert Cukurs had been executed for his murders of
some 30,000 Jews during World War II.
When the policeman went to the indicated address, he found that the
doors and windows were closed. Otero remembers: "What I could see
from outside, was frightening: The whole room was covered with
blood”.
Found inside, and placed beside the corpse was an extract from the
pleading of a British accuser in the Nuremberg trials process. The
next day, newspapers around the world proclaimed that these were
the proofs against the executed alleged Jew's mass murderer. This
was five years after the arrest of Adolf Eichmann, and the press
speculated that the Israeli Secret Service, Mossad, had been at
work. The government in Tel Aviv wrapped itself in silence.
Twenty years later, at the Auschwitz tribunal in Jerusalem, the
then head of Mossad, Isser Harel, who himself came from Latvia,
declared that the execution of Cukurs has been the last action of
his Secret Service in the matter of Nazi criminals in South
America. This was in 1985. And other twelve years passed, until the
Israeli Keter publishing company published a book with the title "
the Execution of the hangman of Riga " in which the execution of
Cukurs' is described in detail.
with this
The authors claimed, that with this action, they wanted to
influence the debate of the statutes of limitation of Nazi crimes
on-going within the German Bundestag. Neither the German government
nor the parliament have protested against this blackmailing of
their democratic institutions by an other state. Journalists and
historians then accepted, without any checks, the description from
the Mossad. „The Execution of the Hangman of Riga " was then
translated in German, and in Latvian and praised worldwide as an
"important historical document ".
Four years ago, the book appeared in English, with a preface by
general Meir Amit, the Mossad Chief at that time. He writes in it:
"The state of Israel had decided to eliminate the leading nazi war
criminals. This was a specific, selective and efficient
elimination. One of the most prominent ones was Herbert Cukurs who
had committed disastrous crimes against Latvian Jews and had
escaped the persecution of the allies."
These words may well be doubted. The Cukurs operation was probably
one of the most dilettante operations of the Israeli Secret Service
and the book "The Execution of the Hangman of Riga " a product of
their department of "dis-information".
The author of the book is called "Anton Künzle". He has carried out
the execution of the dis-information. "Künzle" is a pseudonym. He
was in 1919 born in Germany and later migrated to Palestine, so it
says in the book cover flap text. There he served in the ranks of
the Hagana, the precursor of the Israeli army, and later the
Mossad. The journalist Gad Shimron, who himself was active for ten
years with the Mossad, had helped him with the writing:
“When one day my grandchildren ask me “Grandpa”, of everything
you´ve ever done, what are you most proud of? I will tell them
about my role in this difficult and complicated operation of
settling the account with the Hangman of Riga”, reads one qoute
from the book.
In the Jewish museum in Riga, nevertheless, no-one is championing
that book. "It is really shaming", says Margers Vestermanis, the
curator," that of the Mossad works so badly, so primitively, about
(the factual) concerns of the book; The Execution of the Hangman of
Riga ".
Alejandro Otero was the police officer in charge in Uruguay. Today,
he is retired, however, he still remembers every detail. At the
scene it stank unbearably, the corpse had lain there two weeks in
summer temperatures. The dead body lay in chest and beside the
chest lay the extract of the British accuser in the Nuremberg
process. That sheet is in the police records on the case. In that
extract is described the “special action groups" of Nazi leader
Himmler. It is not referring to Cukurs or Latvia.
The Federal Police in Germany sent to Otero the letter of the
anonymous group, the so-called "death sentence". It described
Cukurs as a leader of a Latvian fascist's troop called Perkonkrust
(Thundercross): "Because of his demonstrable personal
responsibility for the death of 30,000 men, women and children, we
have decided to issue to Herbert Cukurs the death sentence ".
Police officer Otero got in contact with the family of the dead
person. From São Paulo came his son, Gunnars, who had already
missed his father. His father had lived legally in Brazil since
1946 and in the beginning of the fifties the Jewish community had
raised reproaches against him, Gunnars said. Nothing within any of
these reproaches was proven to be true and after a certain time the
campaign lay dormant. That is until "Anton Künzle" appeared in São
Paulo and presented a commercial proposition to his father. He
invited him to Uruguay and left 160 dollars for the flight from São
Paulo to Montevideo. It was evidently a trap.
Otero found out that Künzle had spoken German fluently and Spanish
with an Argentine accent, as had his accomplices,. And they
probably had initially planned only for kidnapping Cukurs. However,
they were not professionals. At least five young men, neighbours
had observed, had stayed in the house in Shangrilá, a suburb of
Montevideo. Otero theorizes that, "They didn´t want to execute him.
Then they could simply have shot him before in Brazil. They had
lured him under a pretext to Uruguay to take him away to another
place. Cukurs was a very strong man in spite of his age. He
preferred to die than to be caught. The fight ended with his
death."
The fact that five young men could not defeat a 64-year-old,
contradicts the image of the extraordinary efficiency that Mossad
claimed.
"The corpse laid in a gigantic chest ", according to Otero, "and
the chest had several air holes in front and on the side. There
were robust metal buckles and thick belts which lay beside the
chest." These belts would presumably prevent the chest from being
opened from the inside. Several neighbours, according to his
inquiries, had observed that during the proported time of that
action a big ship had anchored in the bay of Shangrilá. It waited
there 48 hours. However, in the national registers Otero did not
find the ship.
The policeman supposed that the ship would have taken aboard the
kidnapped man to be stolen away. Otero checked border crossings and
airports. And he travelled to São Paulo, to speak with the Cukurs
family. He found that the man who was called Anton Künzle and had
lured Herbert Cukurs to Uruguay where he had rented a car. He
needed an international driving licence and applied for it with the
Brazilian Automobile Association. From there, Otero received the
second photo of the licence, the photo of the murderer. "I wanted
the help of Interpol in the international search, but Interpol
officially informed me that it concerns the murder of Cukurs as a
political criminal case, and in such cases Interpol does not become
active". So thus, the inquiries had run into the sand.
Otero was very busy at that time. In Uruguay, it was the time when
the guerrilla group Tupamarosbecame active and Otero was charged
with persueing them. One of their founders was Tabaré Rivero,
living today in Montevideo. He remembers the Cukurs case well and,
above all, he remembers a certain Amodio Pérez, one of the most
reckless comrades who had made a quick career inside the guerrilla
apparatus.
Rivero said: "I found out that Amodio participated in the Cukurs
action, he has driving the car of the operation. He used false
documents which had probably been handed over to him by the Mossad.
He also knew the house in Shangrilá. The Israelis had organized the
operation with very few people, among them was also the first wife
of Amodio."
Amodio Perez is a Jew. And at that time, the Uruguayan left
maintained close contacts with the Jews in Montevideo. One had a
common enemy. The local Nazis attacked left offices at that time
with bombs. The fact that Perez had taken part in the Mossad
action, however, had not occurred by order of his organization,
Rivero said. He had gotten to know of his participation only later.
In 1972, Perez was arrested and told everything that he knew. In
his army uniform he was led on the streets to identify his comrades-
in-arms. Even then the rumour circulated that he was a spy inside
the Tupamaros. After the military coup, he left without processing
out of the country.
Only once did he appeared since then. He was involved in the middle
of the eighties in the attempt to kill Nicaragua Contra leader Eden
Pastora. Pastora, called also "Comandante Zero", wanted to speak in
a press conference about the pressure which the CIA exercised on
him. However, there was a bomb explosion, and eleven people were
killed, and Pastora was injured. Journalists later showed police
officer Otero a video about the press conference and he identified
Perez clearly.
Margers Vestermanis leads the Jewish museum in Riga. He himself was
a slave worker of the Nazis during World War II. The book
"Execution of the Hangman of Riga" is " a complete nonsense ", he
says. Indeed, Cukurs has been a member in the murder group of
Viktor Arajs, but Herbert Cukurs was not responsible for
assassination of 30,000 Jews. "Neither Viktor Arajs nor Cukurs were
a member in the Perkonkrust whose history is well known."
The Perkonkrust was a nationalistic, paramilitary troop, born
during the first Latvian republic under Kalis Ulmanis, an
authoritarian ruler. At that time about 80,000 Jews lived in
Latvia, five percent of the population. Under Ulmanis, they lived
quiet well, in comparison to the era before it, as Latvia had been
under Russian administration, where they could choose their
professions and acquire land.
Perkonkrust did the agitation against these people with his 6,000
members. They saluted"Kampf Heil", with the fascist's greeting and
were against all foreigners. Their slogan was "Hit the Jews and the
Germans"! In 1940, the Red Army annexed the Baltic States. And this
was the first time for contacts and physical connections between
the Perkonkrust and the German Abwehr - against the common enemy,
the Communists.
But Cukurs never was a member of the resistance, says Vestermanis,
but a daredevil and adventurer who loved the risk, enjoyed
travelling, pleasures and a good life. On the flea market he bought
an old Citroen motor and inserted it in a scrapped airplane with
which he flew to Gambia. The newspapers of Latvia financed his
adventure and from all stations he cabled reports to Riga. Then he
became a special correspondent in the war of Abessynia and in
Japan.
Cukurs became a media event, a national hero, and the Latvian air
force hired him as a captain. He was not known as an anti-
Semite,says Vestermanis. He rather tried to take advantage of all
situations for himself. Even later, under the Soviet occupation of
Latvia, he presented himself as a convinced anti-communist, but he
still made an arrangement with the Russians. On the 9th April 41 he
went to Moscow and offered his collaboration, probably to do
personal business with the Soviet air force. With which authorities
he had contact in the Soviet Union, never became known.
On the 16th of April 1941 he went back on his farm in Latvia where
he was at the time of the invasion of the German armed forces. Many
suspected him as a Russian spy because of his Moscow trip, and the
situation had become dangerous for him, speculates Vestermanis.
Probably to prove his loyalty to the new rulers, Cukurs enlisted
into the special command of Victor Arajs.
The mass murder of the Latvian Jews happened in several great
actions. The first homicide action began a few days after the
invasion of the Germans by Latvian fascist's groups. With the
second, at the end of 1941, the Germans killed 25,000 ghetto
inhabitants in the forest. Germany later announced the transport of
Jews to Riga as there was a claim to need space in the ghetto.
Herbert Cukurs membership within the Arajs command is proven. He
was his chauffeur and his right hand man. The fact that those
troops committed heavy crimes - shootings, tortures, synagogues
burned - is likewise recorded. Whether and how Cukurs was involved
in these actions personally, cannot be proven today. With
certainty, he carries a joint responsibility for his membership in
this terrorist group, but whether he carries a penal
responsibility, is not clear.
Margers Vestermanis knows well the documents, both for, and against
him. For him, two Jewish women have spoken out. Ella Medalje (born
Ella Guttmann), was aided in escaping her being shot because she
had presented herself as an "Aryan". Cukurs had driven her to the
Waldemar Street nazi headquarter s building and he did not betrayed
her, although he knew that she was a Jew. And later, Miriam
Keitzner gave testimony in Brazil saying that Cukurs had hidden her
on his farm.
However, during the executions in November, 1941, Cukurs had been
present, says Vestermanis, under direct orders, he fired blindly in
the mass of prisonars. These massacres were ordered and organisedthe by the German SS. Primarily, three persons were responsible: SS-
group leader Friedrich Jeckeln who had come from the Ukraine where
he had been very active in the murder of the Jews of Kiev. SS-
leader and commander of the Riga ghetto, Eduard Roschmann who
became known as the "butcher of Riga ". And Viktor Arajs, the
Latvian boss of a special murder group.
Herbert Cukurs was often at the nazi headquarter at number 19
Waldemar Street. It was an expropriated building of a former Jewish
banker, where the Arajs group had their offices. There was the
garage of their cars for which Cukurs was responsible. In the
basement, there were torture cells for prisoners, Jews and
partisans.
On the third floor of that building, were the rooms of the
Perkonkrust. However, after only one month of German occupation,
these Latvian fascists got into trouble with the Germans and were
forbidden to remain within the building.
The book " The Execution of the Hangman of Riga " quotes eight
witness's statements of surviving prisoners of Waldemar Street.
They have been filed before Jewish organisations. The originals are
in the archive of the memorial Yad Vashem in Jerusalem, copies in
the Jewish museum in Riga.
The fact that these witnesses were victims of the worst
humiliations, is excepted without any question. However, something
in these statements is inexact, something even wrong, means
Vestermanis. The fact that in it Cukurs is named as a member of the
Perkonkrust, proves nothing. The witnesses have been tormented and
been traumatised and would have hardly differentiated anyone on the
other side according to their party affiliation.
It is very strange, Vestermanis says that not in the Soviet
archives nor in the Latvians archives, are there any incriminating
records against Cukurs. After the war, the Soviet Union wanted to
exert a big war crimes trial because of the nazi massacres in the
Baltic States and, therefore, interrogated thousands. "After the
war, 365 members of these fascist commands were condemned. The
astonishing thing is that in the all the testimonies, there are no
criminal incriminations against Cukurs".
The book about the supposed "Hangman of Riga "mentions a request
for extradition by the Soviet Union to the Brazilian government.
However, such a request has never existed. The Brazilian embassy in
Buenos Aires informed me that‚‘‘Neither the Soviet Union, nor
Israel, ever applied for the extradition of Cukur‘‘. On a list,
published in 1960 in Israel, with the names of nazi war criminals,
the name of Herbert Cukurs did not appear.
Today Gunnars Cukurs is 77 years old and lives in the south on SãoPaulo where he had done handicrafts with his father making model
airplanes and boats. He cannot remember the Jew's pursecution in
Latvia. With the invasion of the Germans he was ten years old. He
does not believe that his father had played any active role in
these crimes. The fact that he was a chauffeur and right hand of
Viktor Arajs, the head of the execution command, he does not deny.
He answers to my question whether his father had in this position
theoretically the possibility not to take part in the crimes: "It
was wartime". The fact that the Jews, women and children, were not
war-leading parties, he knew, of course.‘‘
Towards the end of 1943, his father sent his wife and children to
Germany for their safety and security. He himself stayed behind in
Riga.
It was in August 1944 when the red army had encircled Riga. The
ones who were able to, fled by sea to Sweden and took their
property with them. Cukurs was also present during those last war
days with such transports. He admits this in a letter to the US-
American consul in Brazil which is in the Uruguayan criminal
record. The skilled pilot probably crossed the Baltic Sea by
airplane. Whom and, above all what, he may have taken with himself
and delivered into Sweden there can only be speculations.
After the war, those refugees that fled to Sweden were delivered
back to the Soviet Union. But what has happened with the things of
value which they had taken on their escape, never became known.
At the end of August, 1944, remembers Gunnars, his father returned
home to the family, which had landed in Szczecin. With him was
Miriam Keitzner, a young Jew that he had hidden in Riga on his
farm. From there, they fled, before the red army, to the west. Near
Kassel they got taken into US captivity. The young Jewish lady made
some miracles happen, and after three days the family could go on.
Through Marseilles, they emigrated to Brazil.
In 1956 Herbert Cukurs moved from Rio de Janeiro to São Paulo. His
youngest son, Richard, had just been born, and therefore, his stay
in Brazil was protected. He worked in the south of the metropolis
with his sons in making new tools, for example, a small submarine
for civil and military purposes which he offered of the US-Navy.
However, the Navy answered that the project was too expensive.
Where were the motives behind his planned hijacking? Was the plan
to get information from him? Maybe information about what had
happened during the last war days in Latvia, before the red army
closed the circle around Riga? Was he involved in transporting of
funds? The funds of the Ostbank, brought by airplane to Sweden and
deposited there in the Wallenberg bank? Was Herbert Cukurs involved
at that time as the pilot?The fact is that the Nazis had enough time to save their pillage
before the coming of the red army. In August, 1944 the German
defeat was foreseeable. Many Nazis fled across the Baltic Sea to
Gothenburg, and Cukurs had taken part in these escape movements as
he told to his children later.
To the US consul in Rio de Janeiro he confirmed that he supplied,
up to the last minute, "the German forces with weapons" and - thus
literally – in Danzig he saved whole "units”. This letter lies in
the criminal records of the Uruguayan police.
The "Ostbank" was created after the German occupation of the Baltic
States, unifying the central banks of Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia
and Weissruthenia. Into the Ostbank were paid all the taxes from
the occupied areas as well as the income from the sales of "Jewish
and partisan property". The so-called "Jew's property" formed a
"considerable part of the economic property of the former Baltic
states", this can be read in a letter of Gauleiter Hinrich Lohse to
the Führer Adolf Hitler. With this money the Nazis financed their
machinery of war. On the 18th of February 1944, say documents in
the National Archives of Berlin, the bank accounts of the Ostbank
still contained more than 84 million Reichsmark. What has happened
with this fortune - as well as the foreign exchange reserves and
gold reserves-, is not noted in the records.
On September 8th, 1944 the German minister sent a telex to the nazi
commissioner in Riga: "In the process of saving the economic goods,
the Gauleiter and the General Commissioner must report to me
immediately about the realisation of the measures, signed by
(Alfred) Rosenberg."
The saving of the Nazi gold from the Baltic States was in the hands
of Nazi minister Rosenberg himself. These assets had to be brought
to a neutral country. Switzerland was too far away. Sweden was
officially neutral. However, they maintained only narrow contacts
with the Nazis.
Several Swedish commissions wanted to clear up the dark chapter of
the collaboration with the Third Reich. Also the companies of the
Wallenberg family were investigated. The family is known, above
all, by Raoul Wallenberg: the diplomat who saved thousands of Jews
before the deportation in Nazi occupied Budapest. But other members
of the family co-operated with the Nazis and supplied them with
armament goods.
Their Enskilda bank had taken part in the monetary laundry for the
Nazis, and the Swedish central bank bought gold from Germany which
presumably came from Holocaust victims. Number accounts did not
exist at the Wallenberg bank, so, there were some confidential
letter accounts. The Swedish commissions had no access to these
accounts. So it is unclear whether on the name of Rosenberg, oranother Nazi leader, a letter account was maintained. And‘‘ no
comment“ was what I received from the Wallenberg family.
After the end of the war, the Swedish government delivered many of
the fled SS officers to the Soviet Union. Is not known whether it
has also returned loot and whether Israel got a share of it.
Only few persons were convicted for the massacres of the Latvian
Jews: The Soviets condemned the SS-group leader Jeckeln as a war
criminal and hung him in Riga. But the former SS commander of the
Riga ghetto, Eduard Roschmann, moved to Argentina and moved there
openly. Viktor Arajs, the leader of the shooting command, fell into
British captivity. The military government soon allowed him freedom
of movement within the country, sent his records to the German
justice department, and then hired Arajs as a driver. The British
let him go to London where he received a faked passport from the
Latvian exile government. Arajs was arrested in 1975 in Frankfurt
and was condemned to lifelong custody by the district court of
Hamburg for of murder of at least 13,000 people.
The murder of Herbert Cukurs is considered, still to this day, as a
Mossad action, which claimed as it’s purpose, to punish a mass
murderer. This version tookpresence even in the Encyclopaedia
Britannica. The family of the victim protested and asked them for
omission. They wanted to present documents, remembers the son
Gunnars. "But the Britannica did not want to see the documents. And
we had no money for a court procedure."
The Israeli Intelligence Service Mossad is keeping silence on the
Cukurs case. However, the publishing company which has published
the German issue of the book "The Execution of the Hangman of Riga"
answered to my inquiry. They informed me by email: "We have no
closer information about the pseudonym Anton Künzle. According to
our information the author is protected by the Verfassungsschutz
(internal German intelligence service)". They say that they made no
contract with him and paid no author's fees. Whether the publishing
company has received money for the publication and whether the
contract was concluded with the Israeli government or a Secret
Service, they refused to answer. They also refused to respond to
whether and how the publishing company can protect itself against
being accused participating in historical forgery.
Anyway, the rights for the book have been sold to the German
Psychosozialverlag and they answered: "The questions whether, how
and between whom contracts were concluded concern Internal things
which we do not give out. We ask for this for understanding".
Künzles co-author, the long-standing Mossad agent Gad Shimron, gave
a bit more information. He has, in the meantime, developed a career
with the Israeli newspaper Maariv and maintains, he wrote me in an
email, "no more contact to the Mossad". "For many years I knowmister Kuenzle. And I trust every word in his report (about the
operation)".
He refused to put me in contact with Künzle. He, Shimron, is from
the "old school" and might not disclose Kunzles true identity. He
did not answer why he has not done research in Latvian, German,
Soviet and US American archives. To the point of fact that Israel
has never filed a request for extradition to Brazil, he explained
with the supposition that the state had to solve "more urgent"
problems. Only sporadically has the state tried "to track down"
Nazi criminals like Cukurs.
How he dared to call Cukurs as a member of the fascistic
"Perkonkrust" and responsibel for 30,000 murders - the journalist
passed on this question. But he pointed out the‘‘fact‘‘ that
"certain circles in Riga" celebrate the man again as a nationalist
and have given him something like a general "denazification
certificate".
This is right. There was in Riga an exhibition about the 'national
hero' Herbert Cukurs in which his work was shown in the Arajs
command as harmless. And a known Latvian lawyer recently published
a book with the title "Schaffott". He calls the procedure against
SS- group leader Jeckeln a "show process" and shows him as a victim
of the Soviet justice.
However, historical falsification is no answer to historical
falsification.
SIMON WIESENTHAL:FRAUDULENT NAZI HUNTER.
http://www.ihr.org/leaflets/wiesenthal.shtml
Simon Wiesenthal: Fraudulent 'Nazi Hunter'
By Mark Weber
For more than 40 years, Simon Wiesenthal has been tracking hundreds of "Nazi criminals" from his "Jewish Documentation Center" in Vienna. For his work as the world's most prominent "Nazi hunter," he has been awarded several honorary degrees and numerous medals, including Germany's highest decoration. In a formal White House ceremony in August 1980, a teary-eyed President Carter presented him with a special gold medal awarded by the US Congress. President Reagan praised him in November 1988 as one of the "true heroes" of this century.
This living legend was portrayed in flattering terms by the late Laurence Oliver in the 1978 film fantasy "The Boys From Brazil," and by Ben Kingsley in the 1989 HBO made-for-television movie "Murderers Among Us: The Simon Wiesenthal Story." One of world's most prominent Holocaust organizations bears his name: the Simon Wiesenthal Center of Los Angeles.
Wiesenthal's reputation as a moral authority is undeserved. The man whom The Washington Post has called the "Holocaust's Avenging Angel" [1] has a little known but well-documented record of reckless disregard for truth. He has lied about his own wartime experiences, misrepresented his postwar "Nazi-hunting" achievements, and has spread vile falsehoods about alleged German atrocities.
Different Stories
Szymon (Simon) Wiesenthal was born on December 31, 1908, in Buczacz, a town in the province of Galicia (now Buchach in Ukraine) in what was then the eastern fringe of the Austro-Hungarian empire. His father was a prosperous wholesale sugar merchant.
In spite of all that has been written about him, just what Wiesenthal did during the war years under German occupation remains unclear. He has given conflicting stories in three separate accounts of his wartime activities. The first was given under oath during a two day interrogation session in May 1948 conducted by an official of the US Nuremberg war crimes commission. [2] The second is a summary of his life provided by Wiesenthal as part of a January 1949 "Application for Assistance" to the International Refugee Committee. [3] And the third account is given in his autobiography, The Murderers Among Us, first published in 1967. [4]
Soviet Engineer or Factory Mechanic?
In his 1948 interrogation, Wiesenthal declared that "between 1939 and 1941" he was a "Soviet chief engineer working in Lvov and Odessa." [5] Consistent with that, he stated in his 1949 declaration that from December 1939 to April 1940 he worked as an architect in the Black Sea port of Odessa. But according to his autobiography, he spent the period between mid-September 1939 and June 1941 in Soviet-ruled Lvov, where he worked "as a mechanic in a factory that produced bedsprings." [6]
Relative Freedom
After the Germans took control of Galicia province in June 1941, Wiesenthal was interned for a time in the Janowska concentration camp near Lvov, from where he was transferred a few months later to a camp affiliated with the repair works (OAW) in Lvov of the Ostbahn ("Eastern Railroad") of German-ruled Poland. Wiesenthal reported in his autobiography that he worked there "as a technician and draftsman," that he was rather well treated, and that his immediate superior, who was "secretly anti-Nazi," even permitted him to own two pistols. He had his own office in a "small wooden hut," and enjoyed "relative freedom and was permitted to walk all over the yards." [7]
Partisan Fighter?
The next segment of Wiesenthal's life -- from October 1943 to June 1944 -- is the most obscure, and his accounts of this period are contradictory. During his 1948 interrogation, Wiesenthal said that he fled from the Janowska camp in Lvov and joined a "partisan group which operated in the Tarnopol-Kamenopodolsk area." [8] He said that "I was a partisan from October 6, 1943, until the middle of February 1944," and declared that his unit fought against Ukrainian forces, both of the SS "Galicia" division and of the independent UPA partisan force. [9]
Wiesenthal said that he held the rank of lieutenant and then major, and was responsible for building bunkers and fortification lines. Although he was not explicit, he suggested that this (supposed) partisan unit was part of the Armia Ludowa ("Peoples Army"), the Polish Communist military force established and controlled by the Soviets. [10]
He said that he and other partisans slipped into Lvov in February 1944, where they were "hidden by friends of the A.L. ['People's Army'] group." On June 13, 1944, his group was captured by the German Secret Field Police. (Although Jewish partisans caught in hiding were often shot, Wiesenthal reports that he was somehow spared.) Wiesenthal told much the same story in his 1949 statement. He said that he fled from internment in early October 1943 and then "fought against the Germans as a partisan in the forest" for eight months -- from October 2, 1943, to March 1944. After that, he was "in hiding" in Lvov from March to June 1944.
Wiesenthal tells a totally different story in his 1967 autobiography. He reports there that after escaping from the Ostbahn Repair Works on Oct. 2, 1943, he lived in hiding in the houses of various friends until June 13, 1944, when he was discovered by Polish and German police and returned to a concentration camp. He makes no mention of any partisan membership or activity. [11]
According to both his 1948 interrogation and his 1967 autobiography, he tried to commit suicide on June 15, 1944, by cutting his wrists. Remarkably, though, he was saved from death by German SS doctors and recovered in an SS hospital. [12] He remained in the Lvov concentration camp "with double rations" for a time, and then, he reports in his autobiography, he was transferred to various work camps. He spent the remaining chaotic months, until the end of the war, in different camps until he was liberated from Mauthausen (in Austria) by American forces on May 5, 1945. [13]
Did Wiesenthal invent a past as a heroic wartime partisan? Or did he later try to suppress his record as a Communist fighter? Or is the true story altogether different -- and too shameful to admit?
Nazi Agent?
Did Wiesenthal voluntarily work for his wartime oppressors? That's the accusation leveled by Austrian Chancellor Bruno Kreisky, himself of Jewish ancestry and leader for many years of his country's Socialist Party. During an interview with foreign journalists in 1975, Kreisky charged Wiesenthal with using "Mafia methods," rejected his pretense of "moral authority," and suggested that he was an agent for the German authorities. Some of his more pertinent remarks, which appeared in Austria's leading news magazine Profil, include: [14]
I really know Mr. Wiesenthal only from secret reports, and they are bad, very nasty. I say this as Federal Chancellor ... And I say that Mr. Wiesenthal had a different relationship with the Gestapo than I did. Yes, and this can be proven. I can't say more [now]. Everything else, I'll say in court.
My relationship with the Gestapo is unambiguous. I was their prisoner, their inmate, and I was interrogated. His relationship was a different one, I can say, and this will come out clearly. It's bad enough what I've already said here. But he can't clear himself by charging me with defaming his honor in the press, as he might wish. It's not that simple, because that would mean a big court case ... A man like this doesn't have the right to pretend to be a moral authority. That's what I say. He doesn't have the right ...
Whether a man who, in my view, is an agent, yes, that's right, and who uses Mafia methods ... Such a man has to go ...
He is no gentleman, and I would say, to make this clear, so that he won't become a moral authority, because he is not ... He shouldn't pretend to be a moral authority ...
I say that Mr. Wiesenthal lived in that time in the Nazi sphere of influence without being persecuted. Right? And he lived openly without being persecuted, right? Is that clear? And you perhaps know, if you know what was going on, that no one could risk that.
He wasn't a "submarine" ... that is, submerged and in hiding, but instead, he was completely in the open without having to, well, ever risk persecution. I think that's enough. There were so many opportunities to be an agent. He didn't have to be a Gestapo agent. There were many other services.
In response to these damning words, Wiesenthal began efforts to bring a lawsuit against the Chancellor. Eventually, though, both Wiesenthal and Kreisky backed away from a major legal clash.
Mauthausen Myths
Before he became famous as a "Nazi hunter," he made a name for himself as a propagandist. In 1946 Wiesenthal published KZ Mauthausen, an 85-page work that consists mainly of his own amateurish sketches purporting to represent the horrors of the Mauthausen concentration camp. One drawing depicts three inmates who had been bound to posts and brutally put to death by the Germans. [15]
The sketch is completely phony. It was copied -- with some minor alterations -- from photographs that appeared in Life magazine in 1945, which graphically record the firing-squad execution in December 1944 of three German soldiers who had been caught operating as spies behind the lines during the "Battle of the Bulge." [16] The source of the Wiesenthal drawing is instantly obvious to anyone who compares it with the Life photos. [17]
The irresponsible character of this book is also shown by Wiesenthal's extensive citation therein of the supposed "death bed confession" of Mauthausen Commandant Franz Ziereis, according to which four million were gassed to death with carbon monoxide at the nearby Hartheim satellite camp. [18] This claim is totally absurd, and no serious Holocaust historian still accepts it. [19] Also according to the Ziereis "confession" cited by Wiesenthal, the Germans supposedly killed another ten million people in Poland, Lithuania and Latvia. [20] In fact, this fraudulent "confession" was obtained by torture. [21]
Years later, Wiesenthal was still lying about Mauthausen. In a 1983 interview with the daily newspaper USA Today, he said of his experience in Mauthausen: "I was one of 34 prisoners alive out of 150,000 who had been put there." [22] This is a blatant falsehood. The years have apparently not been kind to Wiesenthal's memory, because in his own autobiography he wrote that "almost 3,000 prisoners died in Mauthausen after the Americans liberated us on May 5, 1945." [23] Another former inmate, Evelyn Le Chene, reported in her standard work about Mauthausen that there were 64,000 inmates in the camp when it was liberated in May 1945. [24] And according to the Encyclopaedia Judaica, at least 212,000 inmates survived internment in the Mauthausen camp complex. [25]
After the war Wiesenthal worked for the US Office of Strategic Services (the forerunner of the CIA) and the US Army's Counter-Intelligence Corps (CIC). He was also vice chairman of the Jewish Central Committee in the US occupation zone of Austria. [26]
'Human Soap'
Wiesenthal has given circulation and credence to one of the most scurrilous Holocaust stories, the charge that the Germans manufactured soap from the corpses of murdered Jews. According to this tale, the letters "RIF" in bars of German-made soap allegedly stood for "Pure Jewish Fat" ("Rein judisches Fett"). In reality, the initials stood for "National Center for Industrial Fat Provisioning" ("Reichstelle fur industrielle Fettversorgung"). [27]
Wiesenthal promoted the "human soap" legend in articles published in 1946 in the Austrian Jewish community paper Der Neue Weg ("The New Path"). In an article entitled "RIF," he wrote: "The terrible words 'transport for soap' were first heard at the end of 1942. It was in the [Polish] General Government, and the factory was in Galicia, in Belzec. From April 1942 until May 1943, 900,000 Jews were used as raw material in this factory." After the corpses were turned into various raw materials, Wiesenthal wrote, "The rest, the residual fat stuff, was used for soap production."
He continued: "After 1942 people in the General Government knew quite well what the RIF soap meant. The civilized world may not believe the joy with which the Nazis and their women in the General Government thought of this soap. In each piece of soap they saw a Jew who had been magically put there, and had thus been prevented from growing into a second Freud, Ehrlich or Einstein." [28]
In another imaginative article published in 1946 entitled "Belzec Soap Factory," Wiesenthal alleged that masses of Jews were exterminated in electrocution showers: [29]
The people, pressed together and driven on by the SS, Latvians and Ukrainians, go through the open door into the "bath." Five hundred persons could fit at a time. The floor of the "bath chamber" was made of metal and shower heads hung from the ceiling. When the room was full, the SS turned on the 5,000 volts of electric current in the metal plate. At the same time water poured from the shower heads. A short scream and the execution was over. An SS chief physician named Schmidt determined through a peep hole that the victims were dead. The second door was opened and the "corpse commando" came in and quickly removed the dead. It was ready for the next 500.
Today no serious historian accepts the stories that Jewish corpses were manufactured into bars of soap or that Jews were electrocuted to death at Belzec (or anywhere).
Wiesenthal's imaginative view of history is not limited to the twentieth century. In his 1973 book Sails of Hope, he argued that Christopher Columbus was a secret Jew, and that his famous voyage to the western hemisphere in 1492 was actually a search for a new homeland for Europe's Jews. [30]
Wiesenthal is not always wrong, of course. In 1975 and again in 1993 he publicly acknowledged that "there were no extermination camps on German soil." [31] He thus implicitly conceded that the claims made at the postwar Nuremberg Tribunal and elsewhere that Buchenwald, Dachau and other camps in Germany proper were "extermination camps" are not true.
'Fabrications' About Eichmann
In more than 40 years of "Nazi hunting," Wiesenthal's role in locating and capturing Adolf Eichmann is often considered his greatest achievement. [32] (Eichmann headed the wartime SS Jewish affairs department. He was kidnapped by Israeli agents in Argentina in May 1960 and hanged in Jerusalem after a trial that received worldwide media attention.)
But Isser Harel, the Israeli official who headed the team that seized Eichmann, has declared unequivocally that Wiesenthal had "absolutely nothing" to do with the capture. (Harel is a former head of both the Mossad and Shin Bet, Israel's foreign and domestic security agencies.) [33]
Wiesenthal not only "had no role whatsoever" in the apprehension, said Harel, but in fact he endangered the entire Eichmann operation. In a 278-page manuscript, Harel carefully refuted every claim by Wiesenthal about his supposed role in identifying and capturing Eichmann. Claims by Wiesenthal and his many friends about his supposedly crucial role in capturing the former SS officer, said Harel, have no foundation in fact. Many specific assertions and incidents described in two books by Wiesenthal, said the Israeli official, are "complete fabrications." [34]
"Wiesenthal's reports and statements at that period prove beyond any doubt that he had no notion of Eichmann's whereabouts," said Harel. [35] (For example, just before Eichmann's capture in Argentina, Wiesenthal was placing him in Japan and Saudi Arabia.) [36]
Characterizing Wiesenthal as a rank opportunist, Harel summed up: "All the information supplied by Wiesenthal before and in anticipation of the [Eichmann] operation was utterly worthless, and sometimes even misleading and of negative value." [37]
Reckless Charges in Walus Case
One of Wiesenthal's most spectacular cases involved a Polish-born Chicago man named Frank Walus. In a letter dated December 10, 1974, he charged that Walus "delivered Jews to the Gestapo" in Czestochowa and Kielce in Poland during the war. This letter prompted a US government investigation and legal action. [38] The Washington Post dealt with the case in a 1981 article entitled "The Nazi Who Never Was: How a witch hunt by judge, press and investigators branded an innocent man a war criminal." The lengthy piece, which was copyrighted by the American Bar Association, reported: [39]
In January 1977, the United States government accused a Chicagoan named Frank Walus of having committed atrocities in Poland during World War II.
In the following years, this retired factory worker went into debt in order to raise more than $60,000 to defend himself. He sat in a courtroom while eleven Jewish survivors of the Nazi occupation of Poland testified that they saw him murder children, an old woman, a young woman, a hunchback and others ...
Overwhelming evidence shows that Walus was not a Nazi War criminal, that he was not even in Poland during World War II.
... In an atmosphere of hatred and loathing verging on hysteria, the government persecuted an innocent man. In 1974, Simon Wiesenthal, the famous "Nazi hunter" of Vienna, denounced Walus as "a Pole in Chicago who performed duties with the Gestapo in the ghettos of Czestochowa and Kielce and handed over a number of Jews to the Gestapo."
The Chicago weekly newspaper Reader also reported on the case in a detailed 1981 article headlined: "The Persecution of Frank Walus: To Catch a Nazi: The U.S. government wanted a war criminal. So, with the help of Simon Wiesenthal, the Israeli police, the local press and Judge Julius Hoffman, they invented one." [40] The article stated:
... It is logical to assume that the "reports received by Wiesenthal [against Walus] actually were rumors... In other words, Simon Wiesenthal had no evidence against Walus. He denounced him anyway.
While [Judge] Hoffman had the Walus case under advisement, Holocaust aired on television. During the same period, in April 1978, Simon Wiesenthal came to Chicago, where he gave interviews taking credit for the Walus case. "How Nazi-Hunter Helped Find Walus," was the Sun-Times headline on a story by Bob Olmstead. Wiesenthal told Sun-Times Abe Peck that he "has never had a case of mistaken identity." "I know there are thousands of people who wait for my mistake," he said.
It was only after an exhausting legal battle that the man who was vilified and physically attacked as "the butcher of Kielce" was finally able to prove that he had spent the war years as a peaceful farm laborer in Germany. Frank Walus died in August 1994, a broken and bitterly disappointed man.
Wiesenthal's recklessness in the Walus case should have been enough to permanently discredit him as a reliable investigator. But his Teflon reputation survived even this.
Wrong about Mengele
Much of the Wiesenthal myth is based on his hunt for Joseph Mengele, the wartime physician at Auschwitz known as the "Angel of Death." Time and time again, Wiesenthal claimed to be close on Mengele's heels. Wiesenthal reported that his informants had "seen" or "just missed" the elusive physician in Peru, Chile, Brazil, Spain, Greece, and half a dozen locations in Paraguay. [41]
One of the closest shaves came in the summer of 1960. Wiesenthal reported that Mengele had been hiding out on a small Greek island, from where he escaped by just a few hours. Wiesenthal continued to peddle this story, complete with precise details, even after a reporter whom he had hired to check it out informed him that the tale was false from beginning to end. [42]
According to another Wiesenthal report, Mengele arranged for the murder in 1960 of one of his former victims, a woman he had supposedly sterilized in Auschwitz. After spotting her, and her distinctive camp tattoo, at a hotel in Argentina where he was staying, Mengele allegedly arranged to have her killed because he feared that she would expose him. It turned out that the woman was never in a concentration camp, had no tattoo, had never met Mengele, and her death was a simple mountaineering accident. [43]
Mengele regularly dined at the finest restaurants in Asuncion, the Paraguayan capital, Wiesenthal said in 1977, and supposedly drove around the city with a bevy of armed guards in his black Mercedes Benz. [44]
Wiesenthal announced in 1985 that he was "100 percent sure" that Mengele had been hiding out in Paraguay until at least June 1984, and charged that the Mengele family in Germany knew exactly where. As it turned out, Wiesenthal was completely wrong. It was later definitively established that Mengele had died in 1979 in Brazil, where he had been living for years in anonymous poverty. [45]
Israel's ambassador to Paraguay from 1968 to 1972, Benjamin (Benno) Varon, remarked in 1983 on the Mengele campaign: "Wiesenthal makes periodic statements that he is about to catch him, perhaps since Wiesenthal must raise funds for his activities and the name Mengele is always good for a plug." Wiesenthal "failed miserably" in the Mengele case, the diplomat said on another occasion. [46] In the Mengele case, former Mossad chief Harel remarked, "Wiesenthal's folly borders on the criminal." [47]
In truth, the bulging Mengele file in Wiesenthal's Vienna "Documentation Center" was such a jumble of useless information that, in the words of the London Times, it "only sustained his self-confirmatory myths and gave scant satisfaction to those who apparently needed a definitive answer to Mengele's fate." [48]
In the considered view of Gerald Posner and John Ware, coauthors of Mengele: The Complete Story, Wiesenthal spent years assiduously cultivating a mythical "self-image of a tireless, dogged sleuth, pitted against the omnipotent and sinister might of Mengele and a vast Nazi network." Because of his "knack of playing to the gallery," Posner and Ware concluded, Wiesenthal "ultimately compromised his credibility." [49]
'Incompetence and Arrogance'
Eli Rosenbaum, an official with the US government's "Nazi hunting" Office of Special Investigations and an investigator for the World Jewish Congress, took aim at Wiesenthal's carefully cultivated "Nazi hunter" reputation in a detailed 1993 book, Betrayal. [50] For example, Rosenbaum mentioned, Wiesenthal "had all these reports placing Mengele in almost every country in Latin America except the one he was in -- namely, Brazil." [51]
Wiesenthal, wrote Rosenbaum, has been a "pathetically ineffective" investigator who had "gone far beyond the buffoonery and false boasts in prior years." Much of his illustrious career, Rosenbaum said, has been characterized by "incompetence and arrogance." [52]
Bruno Kreisky once summed up his attitude towards the "Nazi hunter" in these words: [53]
The engineer Wiesenthal, or whatever else his title is, hates me because he knows that I despise his activity. The Wiesenthal group is a quasi-political Mafia that works against Austria with disgraceful methods. Wiesenthal is known as someone who isn't very careful about the truth, who is not very selective about his methods and who uses tricks. He pretends to be the "Eichmann hunter," even though everyone knows that this was the work of a secret service, and that Wiesenthal only takes credit for that.
'Commercializing' the Holocaust
The Los Angeles Wiesenthal Center pays the Vienna "Nazi Hunter" $75,000 a year for the use of his name, the director of Israel's Yad Vashem Holocaust center said in 1988.
Both the Center and Wiesenthal "commercialize" and "trivialize" the Holocaust, the director added.
Wiesenthal "threw out" the figure of "11 million who were murdered in the Holocaust -- six million Jews and five million non-Jews," said the Yad Vashem official. When asked why he gave these figures, Wiesenthal replied: "The gentiles will not pay attention if we do not mention their victims, too." Wiesenthal "chose 'five million (gentiles)' because he wanted a 'diplomatic' number, one that told of a large number of gentile victims but in no way was larger than that of Jews ..." [54]
"What Wiesenthal and the Los Angeles Center that bears his name do is to trivialize the Holocaust," commented The Jewish Press, a weekly that claims to be the largest-circulation English-language Jewish community paper in America.
In recent years Wiesenthal has been concerned about the growing impact of Holocaust revisionism. In "A Message from Simon Wiesenthal" published by the Center that bears his name, he said: "Today, when I see the rise of antisemitism here in Europe ... the popularity of Le Pen, of David Duke, of the Holocaust revisionists, then I am convinced more than ever about the need for our new [Wiesenthal Center] Beit Hashoah-Museum of Tolerance" in Los Angeles. [55]
Wiesenthal is often asked why he does not forgive those who persecuted Jews half a century ago. His stock answer is that although he has the right to forgive for himself, he does not have the right to forgive on behalf of others. [56] On the basis of this sophistical logic, though, neither does he have the right to accuse and track down anyone in the name of others. Wiesenthal has never confined his "hunt" to those who victimized him personally.
'Driven by Hatred'
It is difficult to say just what drives this remarkable man. Is it a craving for fame and praise? Or is he trying to live down a shameful episode from his past?
Wiesenthal clearly enjoys the praise he receives. "He is a man of considerable ego, proud of testimonials and honorary degrees," the Los Angeles Times has reported. [57] Bruno Kreisky has given a simpler explanation. He said that Wiesenthal is "driven by hatred." [58]
In light of his well-documented record of deceit, lies and incompetence, the extravagant praise heaped upon this contemptible man is a sorry reflection of the venal corruptibility and unprincipled self-deception of our age.
Notes
Quoted in: M. Weber, "'Nazi Hunter' Caught Lying," The Spotlight (Washington, DC), Oct. 26, 1981, p. 9.
Interrogation of S. Wiesenthal on May 27 and 28, 1948, conducted by Curt Ponger of the Interrogation Branch of the Evidence Division of the Office (U.S.) Chief of Counsel for War Crimes. Interrogation No. 2820. On file at the National Archives (Washington, DC), "Records of the U.S. Nürnberg War Crimes Trials Interrogations, 1946-49," Record Group 238, microfilm M-1019, roll 79, frames 460-469 and 470-476. Also cited in: "New Documents Raise New Doubts About Simon Wiesenthal's War Years," The Journal of Historical Review, Winter 1988-89 (Vol. 8, No. 4), pp. 489-503.
PCIRO (International Refugee Organization, Austria) "Application for Assistance" filled out and signed by Wiesenthal. Dated Jan. 16,1949. (This was a trial exhibit in the Walus court case. Photocopy in author's possession.)
Simon Wiesenthal, The Murderers Among Us: The Simon Wiesenthal Memoirs. Edited by Joseph Wechsberg. (New York: McGraw Hill, 1967)
Interrogation of S. Wiesenthal, May 27, 1948, pp. 1-2.
The Murderers Among Us, p. 27.
The Murderers Among Us, pp. 29-35. This account is not inconsistent with his 1948 and 1949 statements; See also: Simon Wiesenthal, Justice Not Vengeance (New York: Grove Weidenfeld: 1989), pp. 7-9.
Interrogation of May 27, 1948, p. 2. In a signed 1945 statement, Wiesenthal wrote:
"... I escaped on October 18, 1943, from the Lemberg [Lvov] hard labor camp where I was kept as a prisoner during my two years of labor at the railroad works... and went into hiding until joining Jewish partisans on November 21, 1943, who operated there. It was while fighting in the partisan ranks against the Nazis that we managed to collect and bury for safekeeping considerable amount of evidence... When the partisans were dispersed by the Germans I fled to Lemberg on February 10, 1944, and again went into hiding. On June 13, 1944, I was found during a house to house search and was immediately sent to the famous Lacki camp, near that city ..." Source: "Curriculum Vitae of Ing. Wiesenthal, Szymon." SHAEF, Subject: War Crimes, July 6, 1945. Records of USAEUR, War Crimes Branch, National Archives (Suitland, Maryland), Records Group 338, Box 534, Folder 000-50-59. Wiesenthal's alleged partisans activities are also recounted in Alan Levy, The Wiesenthal File (Grand Rapids, Mich.: Eerdmans, 1994), pp. 50-53.
Interrogation of May 28, 1948, pp. 1-2.
Interrogation of May 28, 1948, p. 5.
The Murderers Among Us, pp. 35-37.
The Murderers Among Us, pp. 37-38; Interrogation, May 27, 1948, p. 2, and May 28, 1948, p. 5; A. Levy, The Wiesenthal File (1994), p. 54.
The Murderers Among Us, pp. 39-44; Interrogation, May 27, 1948, pp. 2-3.
Interview with foreign journalists in Vienna, Nov. 10, 1975. Text published in: "War Wiesenthal ein Gestapo-Kollaborateur?," Profil (Vienna), No. 47, Nov. 18, 1975, pp. 16, 22-23; Reprinted in: Robert H. Drechsler, Simon Wiesenthal: Dokumentation (Vienna: 1982), pp. 215-218, 222-223; Quoted in part in A. Levy, The Wiesenthal File (1994), p. 349, and in, S. Wiesenthal, Justice Not Vengeance (New York: 1989), pp. 7, 299. Kreisky was not alone in charging that Wiesenthal had collaborated with the German Gestapo. Wim Van Leer, columnist for the English-language daily Jerusalem Post, stated in May 1986 that a high-level police official in Vienna, citing confidential police records, had told him during the early 1960s that these and other charges against Wiesenthal were true. Source: J. Bushinsky, "Nazi hunter sues over charges of links to Gestapo," Chicago Sun-Times, Jan. 31, 1987.
Simon Wiesenthal, KZ Mauthausen (Linz and Vienna: Ibis-Verlag, 1946). Facsimile reprint in: Robert H. Drechsler, Simon Wiesenthal: Dokumentation (Vienna: 1982), p. 64.
"Firing Squad," Life magazine, US edition, June 11, 1945, p. 50.
M. Weber and K. Stimely, "The Sleight-of-Hand of Simon Wiesenthal," The Journal of Historical Review, Spring 1984 (Vol. 5, No. 1), pp. 120-122; D. National-Zeitung (Munich), May 21, 1993, p. 3.
S. Wiesenthal, KZ Mauthausen (1946). See also facsimile reprint in: Robert H. Drechsler, Simon Wiesenthal: Dokumentation (Vienna: 1982), pp. 42, 46. This "confession" is a somewhat altered version of Nuremberg document NO-1973; A new edition of Wiesenthal's 1946 book has been published under the title Denn sie Wussten, was sie tun: Zeichnungen und Aufzeichnungen aus dem KZ Mauthausen (Vienna: F. Deuticke, 1995). I am grateful to Robert Faurisson for bringing this to my attention. He points out in a July 1995 essay that Wiesenthal has deleted from this new edition both the "death bed confession" of Ziereis as well as his drawing of the three Mauthausen inmates.
According to the Encyclopaedia Judaica ("Mauthausen,", Vol. 11, p. 1138), a grand total of 206,000 persons were inmates of Mauthausen and its satellite camps (including Hartheim) at one time or another.
S. Wiesenthal, KZ Mauthausen (1946). Facsimile reprint in: R. Drechsler, Simon Wiesenthal: Dokumentation, p. 47.
R. Faurisson, "The Gas Chambers: Truth or Lie?," The Journal of Historical Review, Winter 1981, pp. 330, 361. See also: Hans Fritzsche, The Sword in the Scales (London: 1953), p. 185; Gerald Reitlinger, The Final Solution (London: Sphere, pb., 1971), p. 515; M. Weber, "The Nuremberg Trials and the Holocaust," The Journal of Historical Review, Summer 1992 (Vol. 12, No. 2), p. 182.
USA Today, April 21, 1983, p. 9A.
The Murderers Among Us, p. 44.
Evelyn Le Chene, Mauthausen: The History of a Death Camp (London: 1971), pp. 166-168 and 190-191.
"Mauthausen", Encyclopaedia Judaica (New York and Jerusalem: 1971), vol. 11, p. 1138.
C. Moritz, ed., Current Biography 1975 (New York: H.W. Wilson, 1975), p. 442; Wiesenthal interrogation of May 27, 1948, p. 3.
Mark Weber, "Jewish Soap," The Journal of Historical Review, Summer 1991 (Vol. 11, No. 2), pp. 217-227; See also: Robert Faurisson, "La savon juif," Annales d'Histoire Revisionniste (Paris), No. 1, Printemps 1987, pp. 153-159.
Der Neue Weg (Vienna), No. 17/18, 1946, pp. 4-5. Article entitled "RIF" by "Ing. Wiesenth." (Simon Wiesenthal).
Der Neue Weg (Vienna), Nr. 19/20, 1946, pp. 14-15. Article entitled "Seifenfabrik Belsetz" ("Belzec Soap Factory"), by "Ing. S.Wiesenth."
S. Wiesenthal, Sails of Hope (Macmillan, 1973).
Letters by Wiesenthal in Books and Bookmen (London), April 1975, p. 5, and in Stars and Stripes (European edition), Jan. 24, 1993, p. 14. Facsimile of Stars and Stripes letter in The Journal of Historical Review, May-June 1993, p. 10; In 1986 Wiesenthal lied about his 1975 statement. In a letter dated May 12, 1986, to Prof. John George of Central State University in Edmond, Oklahoma (copy in author's possession), Wiesenthal wrote: "I have never stated that 'there were no extermination camps on German soil.' This quote is false, I could never have said such a thing."
For example, in a letter (dated Sept. 13, 1993), published in The New York Times, Sept. 29, 1993, Wiesenthal boasted: "I succeeded in putting a number of Nazis on trial who had perpetrated horrendous crimes in the Nazi era, including Adolf Eichmann, Franz Stangl, Gustav Wagner,..."
S. Birnbaum, "Wiesenthal's Claim on Eichmann Disputed by Former Mossad Head," Jewish Telegraphic Agency Daily News Bulletin (New York), April 4, 1989. (Dispatch dated April 3).
J. Schachter, "Wiesenthal had no role in Eichmann capture," The Jerusalem Post, May 18, 1991. Facsimile reprint in Christian News, May 27, 1991, p. 19. See also: Ruth Sinai, "Wiesenthal's role in Eichmann's capture disputed," Associated Press, The Orange County Register, Feb. 25, 1990, p. A 26; L. Lagnado, "How Simon Wiesenthal Helped a Secret Nazi," Forward (New York), Sept. 24, 1993, pp. 1, 3.
J. Schachter, The Jerusalem Post, May 18, 1991 (cited above). Facsimile in Christian News, May 27, 1991, p. 19.
Arnold Forster, Square One (New York: 1988), pp. 187-189. (Forster was general counsel of the Anti-Defamation League, a major Zionist organization.)
J. Goldberg, "Top Spy Says Wiesenthal Lied About His Exploits," Forward (New York), Nov. 12, 1993, pp. 1, 4; R. Sinai, "Wiesenthal's role...," The Orange County Register, Feb. 25, 1990 (cited above).
Michael Arndt, "The Wrong Man," The Chicago Tribune Magazine, Dec. 2, 1984, pp. 15-35, esp. p. 23; Charles Ashman and Robert J. Wagman, The Nazi Hunters (New York: Pharos Books, 1988), pp. 193-195.
"The Nazi Who Never Was," The Washington Post, May 10, 1981, pp. B5, B8.
"The Persecution of Frank Walus," Reader (Chicago), Jan. 23, 1981, pp. 19, 30. After Wiesenthal was ultimately proven wrong in a similar case in Canada, the Toronto Sun newspaper commented in an editorial: "It seems that material provided by professional Nazi hunter Simon Wiesenthal is wrong, but repeated anyway [in the media]." (Quoted by M. Weber in The Journal of Historical Review, Spring 1984, pp. 120-122.)
Gerald L. Posner and John Ware, Mengele: The Complete Story (New York: Dell, 1987), pp. 220-221; Gerald Astor, The 'Last' Nazi: The Life and Times of Dr. Joseph Mengele (Toronto: Paperjacks, 1986), p. 202.
G. Posner and J. Ware, Mengele: The Complete Story (cited above), p. 220.
G. Posner and J. Ware, Mengele (cited above), pp. 179-180; G. Astor, The 'Last' Nazi (cited above), pp. 178-180.
Time magazine, Sept. 26, 1977, pp. 36-38. Cited in: G. Posner and J. Ware, Mengele (cited above), p. 219.
"Hunting the 'Angel of Death'," Newsweek, May 20, 1985, pp. 36-38. See also: M. Weber, "Lessons of the Mengele Affair," Journal of Historical Review, Fall 1985 (Vol. 6, No. 3), p. 382. On Wiesenthal's distortion of truth in the Mermelstein-IHR case, see: M. Weber, "Declaration," Journal of Historical Review, Spring 1982 (Vol. 3, No. 1), pp. 42-43; M. Weber, "Albert Speer and the 'Holocaust,"' Journal of Historical Review, Winter 1984 (Vol. 5, Nos. 2-4), p. 439.
Midstream, Dec. 1983, p. 24. Quoted in: G. Posner and J. Ware, Mengele (cited above), p. 219; Los Angeles Times, Nov. 15, 1985, p. 2.
J. Schachter, "Wiesenthal had no role in Eichmann capture," The Jerusalem Post, May 18, 1991. Facsimile reprint in Christian News, May 27, 1991, p. 19.
Tom Bower in The Times (London), June 14, 1985, p. 14. Quoted in: G. Posner and J. Ware, Mengele (cited above), pp. 222-223.
G. Posner and J. Ware, Mengele (cited above), pp. 222-223.
Betrayal, by Eli M. Rosenbaum, with William Hoffer. Published in 1993 by St. Martin's Press (New York). Reviewed by Jacob Heilbrunn in The New York Times Book Review, Oct. 10, 1993, p. 9.
Quoted in L. Lagnado, "How Simon Wiesenthal...," Forward (New York), Sept. 24, 1993, p. 3.
The New York Times Book Review, Oct. 10, 1993, p. 9; Forward (New York), Sept. 24, 1993, p. 3.
"Was hat Wiesenthal zu verbergen?," D. National-Zeitung (Munich), Nov. 11, 1988, p. 4.
David Sinai, "News We Doubt You've Seen," The Jewish Press (Brooklyn, NY), Dec. 23, 1988. Based on report in the Israeli newspaper Ha'aretz, Dec. 16, 1988.
"A Message from Simon Wiesenthal," Response: The Wiesenthal Center World Report, Winter 1992, p. 11.
Charles Ashman and Robert J. Wagman, The Nazi Hunters (New York: Pharos Books, 1988), p. 286; A. Popkin, "Nazi-Hunter Simon Wiesenthal: 'Information is Our Best Defense'," Washington Jewish Week, Oct. 29, 1987, p. 2.
Quoted in: M. Weber, The Spotlight, Oct. 26, 1981, p. 9.
Quoted in D. National-Zeitung (Munich), July 8, 1988, p. 7, and in, R. Drechsler, Simon Wiesenthal: Dokumentation (Vienna: 1982), p. 199.
#2009
From The Journal of Historical Review, July-August 1995 (Vol. 15, No. 4), pages 8-16. This is a revised and updated version of an article that first appeared in the Winter 1989-90 issue of The Journal of Historical Review.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
About the author
Mark Weber is director of the Institute for Historical Review. He studied history at the University of Illinois (Chicago), the University of Munich, Portland State University and Indiana University (M.A., 1977). For nine years he served as editor of the IHR's Journal of Historical Review.
Assinar:
Comentários (Atom)
