ГУЛаг Палестины

account of the absence of any authority that could stop the plundering.

For, what authority could exist during the panic of retreat before

Trotsky's army? ... Under such conditions a favorable atmosphere was

created for the rapacious instincts of the demoralized segments of the

army, as well as for the development of the ideological barbarity of

Semesenko and for the provocateurs from the Russian Black-Hundred camp,

who were pogrommongers by conviction and wished at the same time to

discredit the Ukrainian movement by branding it as being guilty of

pogroms.

All this, of course, is not justification, but only one of many

explanations of the origin of pogroms during the period of the

Directorate.

Quite a different picture is displayed by the comparison of this period

of pogroms with the pogroms by Denikin's army. Here is no question of

retreat and of chaos that is co

the more successful the advance, the more organized and stronger is the

propaganda from above and the more according to plan the pogroms are

developed. If the begi

was at its tail, by Denikin's army the poison of demoralization came from

the head. As we have seen already, the Denikin officers openly declared

that they were fighting not against the Bolsheviks, but against the Jews.

To be sure, there were also in Denikin's army many persons of a purely

rapacious type. But the most horrible thing was the deeply rooted

anti-Semitism of the chiefs that surrounded Denikin, and their sadistic

hate of Jews. I, personally, am not inclined to assume that Denikin

himself wanted pogroms. Even to Denikin, in spite of his anti-Semitism,

it was impossible not to see the fatal results of pogroms for his army.

But he, too, was powerless on the question of pogroms, nor had he any

inclination to come forward in defense of the Jews.

The second characteristic feature which distinguishes the very course of

the pogroms in one area from the other consists in the fact that in

Petlura's army, we surely find cases when some individual persons or

groups succeeded in preventing or stopping pogroms. Two such cases are

cited by Temkin in his report, the other two cases are given in the

report of the Relief Committee for the Victims of Pogroms. Red Army

soldiers arranged an anti-Jewish pogrom in the city of Korosten in March

13, 1919. When the soldiers of Petlura's army which was at that time

advancing, reached the city, they stopped the pogroms. In Bila Tserkva

the Ukrainian army - having expelled in August the Denikin troops of Gen.

Shkuro and then the Red troops, who one after another plundered and

massacred the population - behaved in full dignity until in turn they

were substituted by Zeleny's bands that immediately arranged a pogrom.

Later the unfortunate town was attacked by Sokolov's bands, after which

the Ukrainian troops again succeeded in restoring order for a short time.

Lubny escaped a pogrom thanks to the fact that a hundred men were found

in the Ukrainian ranks, who with their arms stood in the way of the

pogrommakers. Fourteen of the defenders fell in the fight but the town

was saved. While reading the story about Lubny in this part of the

report, I recalled the year 1905 when a City Committee of Defense was

organized in Lubny, which also saved the city from a pogrom.

Such facts were unknown in Denikin's army. Here the "guilty" of such

patronage and defense of Jews were punished with dismissal from their

posts.

The third feature, a very disadvantageous one for Denikin's army and

government, appears as a result of the comparison of the declarations by

the Ukrainian government on the Jewish question, of laws concerning

personal-national autonomy and Jewish Communities on the one hand, with

the clauses restricting the number of Jews in educational institutions as

well as in civil and military services in Denikin's empire - on the other

hand. Here, on the part of the Ukrainian government, an effort to draw

on representatives of Jews in all levels of government posts, and over

there - in Denikin's camp - removal of Jewish officers from the army, and

of Jewish officials from district and city offices. And this - in spite

of the fact that so many Jews joined voluntarily at the very begi

Koltchak's and Denikin's armies. And how many Jews having been brought

up with a Russian culture died for Russia that had been always a

stepmother to them? On the other hand, how small a group of us, Jews,

joined the Ukrainian movement at the begi

Of course, there was nothing strange in it. Wilson's points had been

declared but recently, and the realization of the right of

self-determination by the Ukrainian people wa such a new and fresh event

that not only the average Jewish citizen, but also the intellectuals,

with few exceptions, did not digest or understand all that had happened.

But the fact remains, Jews were represented by a very considerable number

in the ranks both of the Bolsheviks and, at the begi

army. The Ukrainian movement was joined only by a few Jews.

The representatives of Russian and Jewish capital and heavy industry were

marching hand-in-hand with the Volunteer Armies of Denikin, Yudenitch,

and Koltchak. And even after all those pogroms committed by Denikin's

army, the Jewish capitalists and industrialists followed the call of his

successor Wrangel, and joined him

Finally, one more feature out of many others that distinguish the

Ukrainian Movement from that of Denikin: An anti-Jewish pogrom was openly

carried on in Kiev in the presence of Denikin's generals, Drahomirov and

Bredov. Never did happen anything like that, wherever the Directorate

set up headquarters, neither in Kiev, nor in Vy

Kamanets-Pololsk. The Kiev population knows from bitter experience the

difference between those two regimes.

Nevertheless, in spite of all these quite essential differences, here

abroad the pogroms of the followers of Petlura are much more known than

those perpetrated by Denikin's army, although the latter numerically and

qualitatively surpassed considerably the former. This is to be explained

not only by the propaganda of the Russian groups which have old

co

incontestable fact that the first series of pogroms attracted the

greatest attention and brought forth the strongest expression of

dissatisfaction on the part of the public.

(In F. Pigido (ed.), Material Concerning Ukrainian-Jewish Relations

during the Years of the Revolution (1917-1921): Collection of Documents

and Testimonies by Prominent Jewish Political Workers, The Ukrainian

Information Bureau, Munich, 1956, pp. 48-51)

HOME DISINFORMATION 60 MINUTES 989 hits since 12Aug98

Ginsburg U.S. Court of Appeals 11Aug98 Serafyn vs. Federal Communications Commission

Serafyn also submitted evidence that "60 Minutes" had no policy against

news distortion and indeed that management considered some distortion

acceptable. For example, according to the Washington Post, Mike

Wallace, a longtime reporter for "60 Minutes," told an interviewer: "You

don't like to baldly lie, but I have."

An introduction to the United States Court of Appeals decision below can