ГУЛаг Палестины

Ukrainians as too weak to force CBS to suffer any loss of face.

As time passes with no response from 60 Minutes, Ukrainians are increasingly pulled toward the third of these as

the correct explanation.

Yours truly,

Lubomyr Prytulak

HOME DISINFORMATION PEOPLE SAFER 669 hits since 24May98

Morely Safer Letter 2 19Mar96 Contempt for the viewer

March 19, 1996

Morley Safer

60 Minutes, CBS Television

51 W 52nd Street

New York, NY

USA 10019

Dear Mr. Safer:

I have been resisting occasional impulses to expand and amplify "The Ugly Face of 60 Minutes," which as you know

is my December 1994 critique of 60 Minutes broadcast "The Ugly Face of Freedom" - as it presently stands, this

critique covers the main points adequately, and I do not have time to polish it. Occasionally, however, some defect

or other of the 60 Minutes broadcast presents itself from a new angle, and I find myself wondering if adding a

description of this freshly-viewed defect to my critique would not strengthen it. For example, just now I thought of

adding:

Mr. Safer tells us of the Lviv reunion of Galicia Division veterans that "Nowhere, not even

in Germany, are the SS so openly celebrated," and yet does not pause to explain how it can be

that in this most open of all celebrations of the SS, not a single portrait of Hitler can be

seen, not a single hand is raised in a Heil Hitler salute, no Nazi marching songs are being sung

or played, no Nazi speeches are recorded, not a single swastika is anywhere on display - not even

a single "SS" can be discovered anywhere among the many medals and insignia worn by the

veterans. So devoid is this reunion of any of the signs that one might expect in any open

celebration of the SS that one wonders what led Mr. Safer to the conclusion that that is what it

was. Perhaps it is the case that Mr. Safer was so carried away by his enthusiasm for the

feelings that he was sharing with 60 Minutes viewers that he quite overlooked the absence of

corroborative evidence. But if so, then is it not the case that he was taking another step

toward turning a broadcast that purported to be one of investigative journalism into an Oprah

Winfrey-style I-bare-my-secret-emotions-to-all-fest, with the secret emotions bared being those

of the correspondent himself?

What do you think?
– Would this paragraph be worth adding or not? Perhaps it is too strong, and would only

weaken the critique? On the other hand, how else to get CBS to retract and to winnow its staff of offending personnel

than by stating the defects of "The Ugly Face of Freedom" boldly?

Yours truly,

Lubomyr Prytulak

cc: Ed Bradley, Steve Kroft, Michael Jordan, Lesley Stahl, Mike Wallace.

Morley Safer Letter 3 24May98 Your name inevitably comes up

If you cannot find instances of unfairness or inaccuracy in the many accusations that

have been leveled against The Ugly Face of Freedom, then I wonder whether your

refusing to retract and apologize satisfies standards of journalistic ethics.

May 24, 1998

Morley Safer

60 Minutes, CBS Television

51 W 52nd Street

New York, NY

USA 10019

Dear Mr. Safer:

I am enclosing a copy of my letter to Rabbi Yaakov Dov Bleich dated 23May98

asking him to corroborate or to retract certain of his statements broadcast on the 60

Minutes story The Ugly Face of Freedom of 23Oct94. The subject of that letter leads

to further questions that I would like to put to you.

As your broadcast The Ugly Face of Freedom was devoid of evidence supporting the

extreme conclusions that you were offering, and as the documentation of the two

attacks on Jews that Rabbi Bleich describes would have begun to provide some such

missing evidence, why did you not get in touch with the two sets of victims, as well

as with law enforcement officials, and interview them for the 60 Minutes broadcast?

In the case of the knife attack on two elderly Jews, Rabbi Bleich describes the

victims as having been left "for dead." Thus, the severity of this attack possibly

resulted in the taking of police and medical photographs, and possibly resulted in

newspaper coverage, and these photographs and newspaper stories, together with any

on-camera testimony of the victims and police officials would have begun to add

substantiation to your broadcast. In fact, if the perpetrators of any of the attacks

had been apprehended, you might have been able to interview them as well. Any of

these steps would have done much to enhance the quality of your work and yet you

seem to have failed to take any of these elementary and obvious steps. I wonder if

you could explain why.

The suspicion that you would be attempting to refute in your answer is that you

did indeed take the obvious steps of attempting to interview the victims and

attempting to confirm the stories with law enforcement officials, discovered that the

stories did not pan out, but finding yourself thin on material, broadcast Rabbi

Bleich's allusions to them anyway.

You will see that in my letter to Rabbi Bleich, I request particulars concerning

the two or more attacks that he refers to. I now put the same request to you: if you

are able to provide confirmatory details, please do so - at a minimum, the names of

the victims, and the locations and dates of the attacks; copies of newspaper

clippings or other documentation if you have it. If you are unable to document Rabbi