CASE NO. 156. This individual was brought to the attention of the Commission
by Mr. Sol Littman. Mr. Littman alleged only that the subject had been a
"propagandist for the party." When contacted by the Commission, Mr. Littman
indicated that he had no further evidence or information. ... On the basis of
the foregoing [itemized investigation], no evidence of participation in or
knowledge of specific war crimes is available.
CASE NO. 158. This individual was brought to the attention of the Commission
by a private citizen. The only allegation initially made was that the subject
was a war criminal because he was so wealthy and of German background. ...
The Commission was advised [by several German sources] that it had a record of
the subject which indicated his membership in the Luftwaffe (air force).
CASE NO. 171. This individual was brought to the attention of the Commission
by ... the Jewish Documentation Centre in Vienna. ... According to the year
of birth, this person would have been only five or six years old at the end of
World War II.
CASE NO. 179. This individual was brought to the attention of the Commission
by an anonymous letter. The allegation initially made was that the subject was
the owner of a shop who behaved curiously regarding the sources of the store's
goods. ... The subject is the spouse of the individual who is reported in
Case No. 180. Both were denounced in the same anonymous letter. ... The
Commission checked the shop itself and concluded that the complaint is entirely
spurious and unfounded.
CASE NO. 180. This individual was brought to the attention of the Commission
by an anonymous letter. The only allegation initially made was that the
subject was the owner of a shop who behaved curiously regarding the sources of
the store's goods. ... The Commission also checked the shop itself and
concluded that the complaint is entirely spurious and unfounded.
CASE NO. 190. This family's surname was brought to the attention of the
Commission by Mr. David Matas [chairman of the Jewish National Legal
Committee], whose source of information was an anonymous letter claiming the
family came from a foreign country and deserved investigation because they were
"recluses." There was no specific allegation of involvement in war crimes made
against this family.
CASE NO. 202. This individual was brought to the attention of the Commission
by the Canadian Jewish Congress, whose source of information was a private
citizen. There was no specific allegation of involvement in war crimes made
against this individual, and the information received was irrational. ... The
Commission contacted the wife of the subject, who stated that she did not know
the citizen (who made the allegation) and that her husband never had any
business dealings with a person by that name. The Commission also tried to
locate the complainant but to no avail.
CASE NO. 247. This individual was brought to the attention of the Commission
by the Canadian Jewish Congress, whose source of information was a private
citizen. There was no specific allegation of involvement in war crimes made
against the individual. ... The Commission was advised by the German Military
Service Office ... that it had a record of a person with the same name as the
subject, which indicated that he was a pilot in the Allied Air Force and had
been taken prisoner by the Germans.
CASE NO. 269. This individual was brought to the attention of the Commission
by the Canadian Jewish Congress, whose source of information was a private
citizen. It was alleged that this individual is a physician whose physical
description resembles that of the notorious war criminal Dr. Mengele. ...
Personal data of the subject taken from various documentation reveal the
following in comparison with the information contained in the Commission file
with respect to Dr. Mengele:
Year of Birth
Height
Weight
Eyes
Face
Chin
Subject
1913
6'3"+
195-215 lbs
Blue
Oval (from Photo)
Dr. Mengele
1911
5'8"+
Medium build
Brown
Round
Round
In addition, the picture of the subject appearing in the various documents
received, does not suggest that he resembles Dr. Mengele. All other search
responses were negative.
CASE NO. 431. This individual was brought to the attention of the Commission
by the RCMP, whose source of information was Mr. Sol Littman. Mr. Littman had
forwarded a letter to the RCMP from a private individual. It was alleged in
the letter that the subject under investigation had been in charge of an
unnamed camp and was believed to have shot civilians. ... The Commission
interviewed the individual who submitted the subject's name to Mr. Littman and
was advised that this individual had subsequently determined that the subject
under investigation had been a prisoner of war and further that the complaint
was unfounded.
CASE NO. 433. This individual was brought to the attention of the Commission
by the RCMP, whose source of information was an anonymous informant. The only
allegation made was that the subject was "a possible German involved in war
crimes". No specific allegation or evidence against the subject was provided.
... The Commission reviewed material available from the RCMP and CSIS, which
determined that the subject was born in 1933, and for that reason could not
have been involved in the commission of war crimes between 1939 and 1945.
CASE NO. 526. This individual was brought to the attention of the Commission
by the Canadian Jewish Congress, whose source of information was a private
individual. It was alleged that the subject under investigation might be Dr.
Josef Mengele. ... The Department of External Affairs reported that it had a
record in respect of the individual, but that the individual had been born in
1928 in Canada.... ... Furthermore, the subject's name is not one of the
aliases used from time to time by Josef Mengele.
CASE NO. 561. This individual was brought to the attention of the Commission
by the RCMP, whose source of information was the Canadian Jewish Congress. It
was alleged that the subject was responsible for the deaths of "hundreds of
Jews." No specific evidence of the alleged war crimes was provided. ...
Records of the Department of Employment and Immigration ... indicate that the
subject was born in 1941....
CASE NO. 588.1. This individual was brought to the attention of the Commission
by the RCMP, who were investigating the suspicions of the Department of
Employment and Immigration officials that the individual might be older than he
claims and might be hiding a questionable past, which may have involved the
Nazi Party. ... It was verified [through various investigations] that the
subject is indeed who he claims to be and that he was indeed born in 1929. He
was barely 10 years old at the start of the war.
Sol Littman's Mengele Scare
As another piece of evidence that we are in the midst of a witch hunt a witch hunt in which
Simon Wiesenthal plays the role of chief inquisitor - consider Sol Littman's Mengele Scare. On
December 20, 1984, Mr. Littman - Canadian representative of the Simon Wiesenthal Center - wrote
to the Prime Minister of Canada unequivocally affirming that
Mengele, employing the alias of Dr. Joseph Menke, applied to the Canadian
embassy in Buenos Aires for admission to Canada as a landed immigrant in late
May or early June, 1962. (In Jules Deschenes, Commission of Inquiry on War
Criminals, 1986, p. 67)
Then on January 23, 1985, Ralph Blumenthal wrote an article in the New York Times captioned
"Records indicate Mengele sought Canadian visa":
Other records indicate that Mengele applied to the Canadian Embassy in Buenos
Aires for a Canadian visa in 1962 under a pseudonym and that the Canadians
informed American intelligence officials of this attempt.
This information was widely reprinted and broadcast. Subsequently, both Mr. Blumenthal and Mr.
Littman affirmed that the information in this article concerning Josef Mengele came solely from
Mr. Littman. However, following its thorough investigation, the Commission concluded:
There is no documentary evidence whatsoever of an attempt by Dr. Joseph
Mengele to seek admission to Canada from Buenos Aires in 1962.
The affirmation has come from Mr. Sol Littman, and from him alone. ...
The advice which Littman solicited [in the course of his own research] ...
did not support his assumptions, but put him on notice about their fragility.
As stated at the outset, all that Littman could rely on was "speculation,
impression, possibility, hypothesis". Yet he chose to transmute them into
statements of facts which he publicized....
This is a case where not a shred of evidence has been tendered to support
Mr. Littman's statement to the Prime Minister of Canada on 20 December 1984, or
Mr. Ralph Blumenthal's article in the New York Times on 23 January 1985.
(Jules Deschenes, Commission of Inquiry on War Criminals, 1986, p. 70)
In view of Sol Littman's irresponsibility in engineering the Mengele Scare, it is not a little
ironic to note that it was this very scare which was the prime cause of the Canadian government
constituting the Jules Deschenes Commission of Inquiry on War Criminals. We see this
demonstrated when the reasons for the Commission being constituted are laid out, and Sol
Littman's Mengele disinformation - at the time accepted as information - appears at the top of
the list:
WHEREAS concern has been expressed about the possibility that Joseph Mengele,
an alleged Nazi war criminal, may have entered or attempted to enter
Canada.... (Jules Deschenes, Commission of Inquiry on War Criminals, 1986, p.
17)
What we see in Sol Littman, then, is a case somewhat paralleling that of Morley Safer - a single
Jew creates a story out of thin air, and gets it disseminated to tens of millions of people
through a Jewish-controlled media which conveniently neglects to verify it prior to
publication. In Littman's case, he goes well beyond dissemination - he further succeeds in
pressuring the Canadian government to waste taxpayer money (always in short supply for education