 |
Jewish Studies Crimes against Humanity |
|
Jewish Studies Crimes against Humanity |
McLellan Letter 7 Feb 20/98 Jewish war crimes
John Sack, whose book An Eye For An Eye is relied on extensively below in the section on Jewish Crimes Following WW II has a web site at http://www.johnsack.com/ which can be consulted for additional information on this subject.
February 20, 1998 The Honourable Anne McLellan, P.C., M.P. In my letter to you of February 6, 1998, I pointed out the lack of proportion between the people who had committed the great war crimes of World War II, and the people who your Department of Justice was singling out for action. In that letter, I focused on the example of Japanese war crimes, and promised that I would provide further examples in subsequent letters. In the present letter, I pursue that same theme — that as the great war crimes falling within living memory were not committed by Ukrainians, your current prosecution of Ukrainians demonstrates a lack of proportion. In the present letter, furthermore, I will address the question of Jewish war crimes, a question which is particularly relevant as the impetus for your current prosecutions seems to come from Jewish groups. I will present my evidence in four parts; namely, Jewish war crimes and crimes against humanity committed: (1) under Communism, (2) under German occupation during World War II, (3) immediately following World War II, and (4) today in the Middle East. In every case, I ask you to notice that all my evidence comes from always reputable — and, in fact, usually distinguished — sources, and almost all of it also happens to come from Jewish sources. And as you scrutinize the evidence below, I ask you also continually to compare the magnitude of the crimes being described with the magnitude of the crimes which the Nazi-hunting arm of your Justice Department is alleging against individual Ukrainian Canadians in your current rash of prosecutions. In presenting the evidence below, I found myself in the uncomfortable position of venturing far into realms of political incorrectness. For this reason, I have judged it necessary to present the evidence in considerable detail. With any briefer presentation, the reader would have found it possible to conclude that because the evidence was scant, no strong conclusions were warranted. It is only by demonstrating how abundant and how unanimous the evidence is that there can be any hope of convincing.
The above material taken together points to at least the following three conclusions: First, if one attempts to understand either history or contemporary events by relying on the mass media, one will be given an incomplete and distorted picture. The media are dominated by considerations of political correctness, and can be relied upon only conditionally and guardedly. Second, the war crimes committed by Jews under Communism, during the Second World War, immediately after the Second World War, and today in the Middle East dwarf any crimes that can be ascribed to Ukrainians during these same intervals. Therefore, in electing to target Ukrainians in your current war crimes prosecutions, your Department of Justice demonstrates that it is not in fact motivated by a desire to punish the guilty, but is rather carrying out a political agenda. Third, the above materials suggest a motive for this political agenda — namely, that one reason that Jewish interests want to keep the issue of East European war crimes in general, and Ukrainian war crimes in particular, alive before the public eye is to mask the much greater war crimes that were committed by Jews in those same years, and — more importantly — that are being committed by Jews today.
|