Capitalism or Communism, Psikhushka is Psikhushka
Yesterday, March 17, 2012, John Demjanjuk died in a retirement home in southern Germany. On May 12, 2011, he had been found guilty by a German court in Munich of helping to murder around twenty-eight thousand Jews at Sobibor in World War II. The court sentenced him to five years in jail but then decided to release him, pending an appeal, due to his advanced age. Looking at the facts of the case, it is difficult not to conclude that this was a case of political torture aimed at advancing Israel’s political agenda.
Strangely, last year’s conviction was the third time the man was on trial for the same alleged crimes. This is against a legal principle known as Double Jeopardy that prohibits a defendant from being tried again on the same (or similar) charges following a legitimate acquittal or conviction.
In the 1980s, an Israeli court identified him as “Ivan the Terrible,” a sadistic guard at Treblinka, and sentenced him to death. In 1993, his conviction was overturned after new evidence showed that another Ukrainian—Ivan Marchenko—was probably the one responsible.
Then, in 2002 his American citizenship was revoked after a district court judge ruled that there was sufficient reliable evidence to prove that he had been a concentration camp guard, if not at Treblinka.
Later, in November 2008, state prosecutors in Munich announced they had enough evidence to prove his involvement in the murders of Jews at Sobibor. In 2011, he was finally convicted there; otherwise, Israel would probably have extradited him to Zambia and tried the courts there.
Who knows! Somebody wanted him convicted somewhere, of any possible crime, regardless how many trials he would have need to endure for the same events. To bypass the Double Jeopardy principle, he was passed from country to country, each time beginning the process afresh.
Books Burning | Germany, 1933
Israel’s Illegitimate Law
The Israeli part of the saga was especially interesting since it was the second instance a special law, Nazis and Nazi Collaborators Punishment Law (Hok Le’Asiat Din BaNatzim) from August 1, 1950, enabling the execution of Nazis, had been applied. Between 1950 and 1961, this law was used to prosecute 29 Jewish Holocaust survivors alleged to have been Nazi collaborators.
The first and only time it was used to execute a person, was in the Adolf Eichmann case. He was illegally kidnapped by Mossad from Argentina in 1960 and two years later was hanged. What makes this a special event from a legal point of view is that this law is a retroactive and extraterritorial law, since the State of Israel didn’t exist during WWII. Moreover, the alleged crimes were neither committed in Israel nor against Israeli citizens.
An ex post facto law (Latin for “after the fact”), or retroactive law, is a law that retroactively changes the legal consequences of actions committed prior to the enactment of the law. Ex post facto laws are expressly forbidden by the United States Constitution, though some countries accept them. These laws cannot be accepted as fair practice, regardless of the justifications used for their approval.
Simply, how can one protect himself against a law that has not been legislated? Imagine the USA legislating in 2012 a new law declaring all bubble-gum chewing performed before 2012 a crime. Then the government would declare all citizens guilty unless proven otherwise, and fine them $1.00 automatically.
States applying this horror assume people have the power of precognition (Israel did that again recently, see Minority Report: IDF arrests Palestinian prisoner released in Shalit swap). Thus, the Nazis and Nazi Collaborators Punishment Law cannot be accepted as a legitimate law, especially due to its geopolitical consequences. If we accept this, we will be forced also to accept a Laotian law sentencing Americans chewing bubble-gum in Honduras to death (no offense intended to any of the abovementioned nations).
Germany’s Odd Judge
In the German trial, prosecutors argued Demjanjuk was recruited by the Germans as an SS camp guard and that by working at a death camp he was a participant in the killings. No evidence was produced that he committed a specific crime. This was the first time such a legal argument was made in a German court. This is critical.
For the first time a German court recognized a person has personal responsibility for actions requested by the state. This is good. If your commander in the army orders you to kill a granny, or a mother and her children, you should refuse; Israeli soldiers recently miserably failed this test. This is also bad. Because the German law system applied this virtuous behavior only against alleged Nazis collaborators.
When East Germany collapsed, I was thrilled. I could imagine the trials of the Stasi network: informants being finally accused by their victims and facing justice. The Western media had bombarded Western denizens for decades with scary stories about the abusive Soviet regimes and their bestial servants: Stasi, KGB et al.
Yet, nothing happened. The extensive archives of the Stasi were shown to the public—from far away—and then no additional word was ever heard about the informants. Apparently they were absorbed by the unified German security services. Stasi 2 was born, a predecessor to what now is known as Stasi 2.0, the obsessive and illegal communications surveillance performed by modern Western governments (see MI5, CAZAB and Israel).
Judge Alt—you who had found Demjanjuk guilty based upon a noble principle of law—can you stand in front of the People and explain why—in sharp contrast—the Stasi state-criminals are walking free while probably enjoying state pensions? Is the difference that you could accuse Demjanjuk of killing Jews, while there were no Jews in East Germany?
Can you explain the discrimination please? Or—as with the War on Terror—this would stay another unsolved riddle of the wrongly called “Western Democracies?” Was the automatic absolution of the Stasi-informants the result of West Germany having a similar network of criminal informants? Were the Eastern ones just absorbed by the new spy-masters? Judge Alt, you had just begun the German Law’s Holocaust.
Demjanjuk immigrated to the United States in 1952 and was granted citizenship in 1958. In 1986, he was deported to Israel to stand trial for war crimes, after being identified by Israeli Holocaust survivors as “Ivan the Terrible,” a notorious prisoner/guard (KAPO) at the Treblinka and Sobibor extermination camps.
He was accused of committing murder and acts of extraordinarily savage violence against camp prisoners during 1942–43. He was convicted for crimes against humanity and sentenced to death in 1988, but this verdict was overturned by the Israeli Supreme Court in 1993 due to reasonable evidence showing that this was a case of mistaken identity. After the trial, in September 1993, he returned to his home in Ohio.
In the same year, the American Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that Demjanjuk was a victim of fraud by the court, as United States federal government trial lawyers with the Office of Special Investigations had recklessly failed to disclose evidence, and the extradition order previously granted was annulled.
In a report submitted to the Sixth Circuit prior to the Israeli acquittal, federal judge Thomas Anderton Wiseman Jr concluded that American federal officials had erred in asserting that Demjanjuk was Ivan the Terrible, but that evidence instead pointed to Demjanjuk being a lesser SS agent. After the Court of Appeals remanded the matter to Judge Wiseman, Judge Wiseman dismissed the denaturalization petition proceedings in 1998, effectively restoring Demjanjuk’s citizenship.
In other words, an American citizen had been deported to Israel on allegations of crimes committed elsewhere, while American officers were aware that the charges were a lie. America openly supported the Zionist agenda to prove the Holocaust, also at the cost of the life of an American citizen. Why didn’t these American officers stand to trial? What would have happened had they behaved similarly towards a Haredi Jew?
Two of the members of our research groups in the Weizmann Institute of Science were Russians, the lab worker serving the group was also Russian; listening to this soft language while working was inevitable. In the aftermath of Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin’s assassination, one word frequently uttered by them caught my attention: “Psikhushka.” It was a derogatory term for “psychiatry.”
Much before Israelis awakened and understood that the Shin Beth had manipulated a citizen to commit a crime on their behalf, these shrewd Russians had already recognized the undeniable pattern of state crime.
In the USSR, systematic political abuse of psychiatry took place. Soviet psychiatric hospitals were used by the authorities as prisons in order to isolate hundreds or thousands of political prisoners from the rest of society, discredit their ideas, and break them physically and mentally. This was also used against religious prisoners and against well-educated atheists who adopted a religion.
In such cases their religious faith was determined to be a form of mental illness that needed to be cured. Former highly classified documents from the “Special Files” of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, published after the dissolution of the USSR, demonstrate that the soviet authorities consciously used psychiatry as a tool to suppress dissent.
Following the fall of the Soviet Union, it was often reported that some opposition activists and journalists were detained in Russian psychiatric institutions in order to intimidate and isolate them from society. In modern Russia, human rights activists also face the threat of psychiatric diagnosis as a means of political repression.
In other words, it has been proven that states—which can issue “official papers” at will—will issue fake papers in order to force their political agenda also at the cost of the lives of their own citizens.
A basic and universal principle of the legal system is equality among men. Nobody would accept a discriminating court as fair. All murderers should get the same punishment regardless of their religion and ethnic group differences.
All of them should get the same punishment regardless of whom they killed. Assassinating an old man is a no less terrible event than killing a baby. Northern Atlantic states often pride themselves on their legal system. In the UK it even replaces a formal constitution.
Moreover, the same countries often criticize other countries on account of their different legal practices; Myanmar is often criticized by Western officials, who apparently sanction worse crimes committed by their own countries. Northern Atlantic states have systematically imposed their judicial and political system on their former colonies; i.e. on most of the world.
No questions are accepted by them on their holy system; in their eyes, tribal systems are automatically bad, while Westphalian states are always good. Everything related to the Northern Atlantic states looks bright in the Western mainstream media.
You look at news reports from a Western court (does Guantanamo count?) and you almost want to drop a few thankful tears for these precious institutions of Justice. Then—a tear dangerously hanging from a handy eyelash—you put together two apparently unrelated news items and the tear is pulled back into the eye faster than the speed of light.
Israel is not after Justice. It just wants to prove and enforce its version of the Holocaust upon all other people. In The Nastiest Nazi I showed that with several examples of proven criminals acting during the Nazi regime who were not prosecuted by Israel because they were Jewish. This refers to what is known as “revenge killings” by Jews, especially the Salomon Morel case.
Israel discriminates in the application of law as per its political agenda. This is exactly what the USSR did when it applied “Psikhushka.” This is exactly what the USA did when it knowingly extradited Demjanjuk to Israel on false accusations. This is what Germany did when it spared the Stasi criminals, but convicted Demjanjuk. “The end justifies the means” is Israel favorite tactic.
Yet, Hebrew schools depict this as an immoral Nazi tactic. Here, Israel openly tortured a man—including isolation in jail —for the sake of its political goals.
What type of justice is this? The life of John Demjanjuk was worth no less than the life of Anne Frank (see Anne Frank’s Cult Backfires). Beyond the Western demagogic discourse on freedom, the USA and its allies have proven—time and again—to be nothing else but USSR-clones. Paint it red or blue, make it Western or Eastern, Psikhushka is Psikhushka and crimes are crimes, even if committed by government agents.