want them to. Thus, we find that "two of the company's soldiers assert in the
film that they liberated Dachau," when we know that this could not have been
the case, and we find that "several Holocaust survivors are quoted in the film
and in the companion book published by Harcourt Brace Jovanovich as saying they
were liberated by blacks of these units," again when this is an impossibility.
Of course upon less biased questioning, some of these old men will recant: "But
Christopher Ruddy, a New York writer who has conducted extensive research on
the film, says two of the survivors featured in the Liberators told him they
were no longer sure when they first saw black soldiers."
Responsible Jews and non-Jews oppose irresponsible Jews. It cannot escape
our attention that foremost among those challenging the disinformation in the
Liberators are the apparently-Jewish writer Jeffrey Goldberg, and
possibly-Jewish historians at the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum. This
reinforces a point introduced earlier in the Ukrainian Archive during the
discussion of Warsaw's 1905 Alphonsenpogrom, to the effect that what may be
taken at first glance to be an expression of antagonism toward Jews may in
reality be an expression of opposition by responsible Jews and non-Jews alike
against irresponsible elements among Jews, and that it is the responsible Jews
themselves who may be in the vanguard of the attack against irresponsible Jews.
We have seen this to be the case repeatedly, not only during Warsaw's
Alphonsenpogrom, but in many prominent incidents - for example, Israeli defense
attorney Yoram Sheftel must be given a large share of the credit for exposing
the duplicity and incompetence of the Israeli justice system, and thereby
saving the life of John Demjanjuk, a case in which other Jews such as Phoenix
attorney William J. Wolf also played leading and heroic roles. The prominent
role played by responsible Jews in opposing irresponsible Jews should not be
surprising - the irresponsible Jews injure all Jews because their
irresponsibility attaches in popular thinking to Jews generally, and thus
serves to smear the good name of all Jews.
Important to note in the Liberators case, then, is that the friction does not
divide cleanly along ethnic lines. The Liberators, and the many other cases
before us, do not illustrate Jews clashing with anti-Semites - rather, they
illustrate the irresponsible clashing with the responsible, the disseminators
of disinformation clashing with the upholders of truth.
Zero repercussions. And so for having told the lies that are told on the
Liberators, have any of the makers of that film suffered any repercussions?
Have any of them been fired? Been demoted? Been censured? Have any of them
suffered a loss of face? Do any of them find that their later work is rejected
because of their earlier loss of credibility? The answer to all these
questions - in all probability - is No!
In American and Canadian society, there is one category of behavior that is
uniquely protected from the repercussions of falsehood - and that is the
category of Jews recounting stories of the Jewish Holocaust. Charges of
falsehood may indeed be levelled, but these are not picked up by the media, and
so make no impact. We have already examined many such cases on the Ukrainian
Archive - the cases of Morley Safer, Neal Sher, Elie Wiesel, and Simon
Wiesenthal standing out - egregious, bald-faced liars all of them, but never
called to task for their lies, honored and even revered despite their lies.
Psychiatric diagnosis of the film's critics. Co-producer of the film, Nina