In April 1988, the Jerusalem Court passed the death sentence expected by all, but it was not carried out. Already by that time all too many embarrassing mishaps had occurred, and defense counsel Sheftel (who had acid sprayed in his face by a criminal at the end of 1988, after a second attorney of Demjanjuk, Dov Eitan, had been thrown from a high-rise a few days before and had passed away during this tragic accident) thoroughly exploited these mishaps in his appeal. Lastly, Sheftel pointed to an Ivan Marchenko – missing without a trace – as the actual Ivan the Terrible.
I did a google search and holocaustcontroversies and Eitan turn up no results. I guess his convenient suicide as well as the contradictions outlined in Neumaier's article quoted earlier are an embarrassment. Like this.
The chief witness for the prosecution in the Jerusalem Trial, Eliahu Rosenberg, had stated in Vienna on December 24, 1947, in a "fact report" whose twelve pages he had each initialed personally, that the Ukrainian Ivan had been clubbed to death in his sleep. When Demjanjuk's defense attorney Dov Eitan pointed out to Rosenberg during the Jerusalem Trial that John Demjanjuk, present there in the courtroom, could not be Ivan the Terrible, since according to his - Rosenberg's - own testimony Ivan was already dead since 1943, Rosenberg said that this had been a misunderstanding on the part of the secretary recording his report at the time, and that he had had only third-hand knowledge of the death of Ivan the Terrible. The secretary in question, T. Friedman, refused to testify on this issue, since Jewish sources had threatened him with death in the event that he were to confirm that Rosenberg had really reported the death of Ivan the Terrible as his own personal experience at the time in question. Clearly, therefore, Rosenberg had really affirmed Ivan's death under oath.
So had Ivan the Terrible been resurrected?
I simply find it astounding that the HC team could still defend the thesis that Demjanjuk was Ivan the terrible as also shown to be absurd in another way, earlier in this topic.
Drew J @ The John Demjanjuk chronicles (starting from May2009)
Contradictions don't seem to bother the HC team. Therefore, is it any wonder, that no revisonist on here sees fit to dignify their so called refutations of denierbud's video on Auschwitz?
Holocaus Controversies "debunk" Denierbud Documentary
They have shown they have no logic (just explained why), or morals (attacks on revisionists and the ARC websites). Well of course their source for claims made here
http://holocaustcontroversies.blogspot. ... art-i.html
is given as this
http://news.findlaw.com/hdocs/docs/demj ... 102jud.pdf
But we must remember that Jim Trafficant found out even American agents were willing to help suborn perjury to convict an innocent man for political purposes. And thanks to Neumaier and Traficant, we know Demjanjuk was saddled with phony ID cards. Occam's Razor dictates that only liars need to engage in lies.
Traficant states that he was framed by Israeli interests, after they could not bring about his electoral defeat, because he had exposed the framing of John Demjanjuk in 1983. A Jewish member of the Justice Department, he says, suborned perjury in the Demjanjuk case.
Although Traficant concedes, at the interviewer's frantic prompting, that the Israeli Supreme Court set Demjanjuk free because they are fine fellows, this concession comes only after Traficant has suggested otherwise. The Israeli Supreme Court let Demjanjuk go because exculpatory evidence published by Trafficant could not be refuted, and because Congressman Traficant was threatening that the State of Israel would lose its $15 billion in annual U.S. aid if Demjanjuk were convicted and executed on what was demonstrably a false charge.
Pulling no punches in his interview with Fox, Traficant charged the Justice Department and the OSI of having suborned perjury in its efforts to destroy Demjanjuk. But, as Traficant pointed out, the OSI continued to pursue Demjanjuk and just a few months ago he was deported to Germany where he now faces another war crimes trial.
“If someone doesn’t look into this,” Traficant told Fox News, “the American people should be ashamed of themselves. When you allow one American to be violated, you threaten the freedoms of every American.”
But the rabbit hole gets deeper folks.
All-new revelations of corruption by the Justice Department’s “Nazi-hunting” Office of Special Investigations (OSI) in the effort to falsely implicate a 90-year old Ukraine-born Cleveland man, John Demjanjuk, as a Nazi war criminal are no surprise to anyone familiar with the record of the OSI’s longtime director, Neal Sher, who led the conspiracy against Demjanjuk, a malicious campaign that goes back some 30 years.
In AFP’s April 25 edition, former Rep. JimTraficant (D-Ohio) noted in his column that a recently declassified long-secret FBI report from 1985 revealed the FBI had concluded the so-called proof that Demjanjuk was a WWII guard at the German-run Sobibor* work camp in Poland — what was purported to be an official German-issued identification card — had been, in the FBI’s judgment, “quite likely fabricated” by the Soviet Union.
Although Sher and the OSI knew the FBI considered the document a forgery, they withheld this from Demjanjuk’s defense at the time Demjanjuk was first being accused of being a war criminal and sent to Israel where he was tried and convicted on war crimes charges and sentenced to hang.
Had it not been for the singular efforts of Traficant, then in Congress, Demjanjuk would have died on the gallows.
However, Traficant stepped forward — the lone member of Congress to do so — and launched an honest, unbiased investigation. He brought forth evidence that a key OSI witness had committed perjury with the knowledge of the OSI in claiming Demjanjuk was a guard at the Treblinka work camp in Poland and proved that it was another individual altogether.
As a consequence, the Israeli Supreme Court reversed Demjanjuk’s conviction, allowing Traficant to bring Demjanjuk home to freedom.
More recently, however, the OSI — refusing to accept defeat — again went after Demjanjuk, now claiming he had been a guard at Sobibor. Demjanjuk was again deported and has been on trial in Germany on the basis of the Soviet fraud placing him as a guard at Sobibor.
Amazingly, however, the German court rejected appeals by Demjanjuk’s attorney that the trial be suspended until further investigation of the OSI’s culpability in fabricating evidence against his client.
In light of all of this, the record of Sher, the OSI director who masterminded the persecution of Demjanjuk is revealing.
In the summer of 2002, Sher was forced out as chief of staff in the D.C. office of the International Commission on Holocaust Era Insurance Claims (ICHEIC). Sher was caught taking “unauthorized reimbursements” on his extravagant worldwide travel expenses for the ICHEIC. In other words, he was an embezzler.
A longtime hero of the Jewish community and a widely promoted “media star,” Sher was effectively stealing from self-described “Holocaust survivors” and their heirs.
A leading force in what has been called “the Holocaust industry,” the ICHEIC was established jointly by a variety of European insurance companies, Holocaust survivor groups, top Jewish organizations and the Israeli government to sort out claims by Holocaust survivors who alleged that insurance companies refused to pay their families’ insurance policies.
Although Sher’s resignation was announced on June 20, 2002, it was not known until late in the year that he had been the subject of a secretive corruption investigation carried out at the direction of former Secretary of State Lawrence Eagleburger, the well-paid ICHEIC chairman.
The Sher scandal was considered so “sensitive” to Jewish public relations concerns that Eagleburger asked William Webster, former director of the FBI and the CIA, to convene a high-level review of the secret internal investigation that led to Sher’s forced resignation.
Because of his ties to the Justice department and his long-standing services to the Jewish community, Sher did not face charges and go to prison, despite having confessed to misappropriating ICHEIC funds.
Now apparently the OSI has had to admit Trafficant was right. And yet America still offered Demjanjuk up to Germany. And people actually have the nerve to wonder why we question certain aspects about the six million/gas chamber stories and other horsecrap? Amazing.
Canadians Must Recognize Denaturalization and Deportation for what it is
by Eugene Harasymiw, Ll.B
WHILE many of us were out celebrating Canada Day with our families by taking in the numerous events across the nation, intended to instill in us pride of citizenship, it would have been helpful to pause to consider that some Canadians are having their citizenship arbitrarily withdrawn. This should have led us to consider whether all those wonderful things about Canada that the politicians were telling us are true. It would have also been a good time to ask ourselves whether those fine democratic principles the politicians were referring to were actually working as intended, or whether they were being manipulated and were thus eroding before our eyes.
The current Justice Minister has compounded matters by hiring the former director of the Office of Special Investigations, the agency that spent 17 years deliberately framing John Demjanjuk as being the so-called "Ivan the Terrible". This same Neal Sher is currently under criminal investigation for perjury in the United States; this same OSI is now saying Demjanjuk was not "Ivan the Terrible" after all, but was in locations other than where they had spent two decades claiming he was.
Can we, as Canadians, allow this debasement of civil liberties and this perversion of due process to go on? Considering that all 3 suspects who have lost their cases are of Ukrainian descent, I suggest to you it is time we collectively oppose the d & d policy. We can do this effectively by concerted political action, as is our democratic right. There are dozens of ways to help.
- Eugene Harasymiw, Ukrainian Voice, July 19, 1999
So first John Demjanjuk was at Treblinka. Then he was at Sobibor. Then he was at some unnamed camp in Flossenburg, Germany. Then he was apparently also at Majdanek. Once again from Graf/Mattogno (first edition).
The Israeli justice administration now had to grit its teeth and concede that Demjanjuk, despite all oaths of the five eyewitnesses, had not been ‘Ivan the Terrible’, but at first undertook yet another weak attempt to charge him with
crimes in Sobibór and Flossenbürg. But there were no witnesses for such crimes, and according to the Israeli-American extradition treaty Demjanjuk was not permitted to be brought to account for any kind of actions in these two
camps, since his extradition had been predicated solely on his alleged atrocities in Treblinka. Thus he was finally able to return to the USA in September of 1993. Up to the present day, this innocent man had not received a single dollar of compensation for the shameful injustice done to him. On the contrary: his persecution began anew in February 2002, this time because he allegedly served in the camps Sobibór, Majdanek, and Flossenbürg.504 As do so many legends, that of ‘Ivan the Terrible’ may contain a kernel of truth: presumably there was in Treblinka a brutal Ukrainian guard feared by the prisoners, who was called Ivan or the like. All else is pure fantasy. The Demjanjuk trial, in which all five Jewish ‘eyewitnesses’ proved to be perjured liars and swindlers, dealt a frightful blow to the credibility of such witnesses. In fact, since then no more ‘gas chamber witnesses’ have dared to appear in court.
And since Neal Sher was caught hoarding money that allegedly was supposed to go into the hands of genuine survivors of the third reich, where were the cries from the nazi hunters that he give that money back? Yes, he got in trouble for it, but I see nothing in the holocaustcontroversies blogosphere about this man's lack of credibility and deceit. Nowhere an admission that he was wrong to railroad Demjanjuk and basically engage in suborning perjury and fiddling with evidence.
And revisonists are ones without credibility?