Vilis Arveds HāznersDocument Archive

We have collected declassified CIA files and diplomatic cables and have also submitted a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request in our research of the Hāzners case and the role of propaganda in U.S. authorities' mistaken pursuit of Hāzners as a war criminal.

Our research would have been impossible without the Internet. The "web" we collectively weave, however, is a two-edged sword. The case of Vilis Hāzners proves the winning narrative is the one which is repeated the most, not necessarily the one that is factual. When even someone who attended Hāzners' hearings, such as Rabbi Paul Silton, makes the accusation Hāzners got off on a technicality knowing full well that the evidence against Hāzners was ultimately not credible—including witnesses:

  • claiming to have seen Hāzners when he was proven to be elsewhere,
  • being mistaken in his appearance at the time[1],
  • being mistaken in his rank at the time as indicated on his uniform,


  • the INS introducing not one word of Hāzners' military files in their possession—we can only conclude because his documented record would have only served to exonerate him,

how and where does one even start to set the record straight?

[1]There was no meaningful correlation by the prosecution of photographical or witness portrayals to Hāzners' physical appearance at the time of his alleged crimes beyond suppositions of what uniform he might have been wearing.

Updated: October, 2016

Site contents Copyright © 2020, All Rights Reserved. Wikipedia™, external site and Google Translate™ links are provided for convenience and do not constitute endorsement of, affiliation with, or responsibility for such content. Reproduction and use herein of external content for the purpose of reporting, commentary, and analysis is protected under U.S. Title 17 Chapter 1 § 107 without prejudice to the rights of authors as to the original work. Works of the U.S. Government are reproduced in accordance with U.S. Title 17 Chapter 1 § 105. This web site is additionally protected as a derivative work under Latvian Copyright Law Chapter 2 Section 5 § 1.2.