Obama, Israel’s houseboy, names Elie Wiesel to U.S. Holocaust Council

Written on December 6, 2011 at 12:03 pm, by Carolyn

by Carolyn Yeager

Why do we have a United States Holocaust Memorial Council, anyway?

This story may seem “old news”  as I didn’t get around to posting it when I first saw it. The appointments by the White House took place on Oct. 29. It is still important news, though, as a way of explaining just what is the US Holocaust Memorial Council.  I did not know, and knowing what it is helps us to realize just how big an investment the U.S. Government has made in keeping “the Holocaust” alive and kicking in the minds of Americans and foreign visitors to Washington, DC. So here goes …

The United States Holocaust Memorial Council is the governing body of the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum. Did you know that the USHMM, as it’s known, is a project of the U.S. Government? That’s important to know. The Council alone consists of 55 presidential appointees, in addition to ten Congressional representatives and three ex-officio members from the Departments of Education, Interior, and State. That adds up to 68 high-level persons who all get paid by the taxpayers, in one way or another, for “serving” on this Council.

Of the five new Council members, four are Jews. Not only Jews, but they are very active in “holocaust” promotion and other causes solely for Jews. The first is Wiesel, who I think has been a member from the beginning, as he was its Founding Chairman in 1980, appointed by Democrat Jimmy Carter. At that time, Wiesel attempted to sell the idea by writing to Carter that Holocaust activists aim to use the commission (set up to create  the museum) to “reach and transform as many human beings as possible. We hope to share our conviction that when war and genocide unleash hatred against any one people or peoples, all are ultimately engulfed in the fire.” Of course, this is never applied to Israel, or even the U.S., which proves the hypocrisy of the “remembrance” campaigns of the Jews. The other appointees are:

Joseph D. Gutman, who is on the executive committee of Birthright Israel and has held leadership roles with the Jewish Federation of Metropolitan Chicago and the Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC).

Roman R. Kent, born in Lodz, Poland (so we know his name is not really Kent) and serves as Chairman of the American Gathering of Jewish Holocaust Survivors and Their Descendants, is President of the Jewish Foundation for the Righteous and of the International Auschwitz Committee,  and is Treasurer of the Conference on Jewish Material Claims Against Germany.

Howard D. Unger, an investment banker, the son of a Holocaust survivor,  a member of the Committee on Conscience — the Museum’s genocide prevention initiative, and serves on the board of the Holocaust and Human Rights Education Center.

Clemantine Wamariya, a friend of Elie Wiesel, who “survived” the 1994 genocide in Rwanda and now lives in Kenilworth, IL (a very upscale suburb of Chicago).  She began speaking about her experiences on the Oprah Winfrey Show in 2005 and has shared her story at Museum events around the country. Currently an undergraduate at Yale University, she is involved in the Yale Refugee Project, which works closely with New Haven’s Integrated Refugee and Immigrant Services.

It’s apparent  that each of these persons has a personal investment in keeping holocaust propaganda in the news and appearing  timely.  They are not objective and don’t balance each other out. However, President Obama said of his appointments:  “These fine public servants bring both a depth of experience and tremendous dedication to their new roles […] Our nation will be well-served by these men and women, and I look forward to working with them in the months and years to come.”

U.S. Holocaust Museum and Memorial Council are overwhelmingly Jewish operations

Some of the other newer members of the Council, appointed in June, are Nancy B. Gilbert (Jewish activist), Deborah E. Lipstadt (Jewish activist & author) and Marc R. Stanley (Jewish activist). Members of Congress who serve on the Council are Gabriele Gifford (Jewish, AZ), Patrick Grimm (RC, NY and Brooklyn-born),  Nan Hayworth (NY), Pat Meehan (RC, PA), Henry Waxman (Jewish, CA). From the Senate: Richard Durbin (RC, IL); Orrin Hatch (Mormon, UT); Frank R. Lautenberg (NJ) and Bernard Sanders (VT),  both Jewish. I’m sure they all get stipends for this “service,” or at the very least “expenses” with no questions asked.

To see a list of the current members of the Council, which appears to be entirely Jewish (though I suppose a few are not), go here: http://www.ushmm.org/museum/council/

In addition to this is the large staff of the Holocaust Memorial Museum itself, for which the Federal government donated the land and the U.S. Congress voted unanimously to establish in 1980 after concerted lobbying by American Jews with Israeli backing.  Jewish groups came up with a large amount of original funding for the museum, but now American taxpayers provide the bulk of the Holocaust Museum’s annual budget – in 2003 to the tune of $38.4 million which was 67% at the time. Its government funding for fiscal year 2004 was increased to $39,997,000.  It is currently in the area of $50 million a year. (By comparison, in 2003, the John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts received less than $34 million in federal funding. That figure was cut to $32,560,000 for fiscal year 2004.)1

Moreover, in the year 2000, President Bill Clinton, a Democrat, signed legislation granting the museum permanent status as a federal agency, in effect locking in federal support. As a museum press release explained at the time, “Permanent status permits Congress to provide funding without having to review the federal role. Every U.S. government entity requires congressional authority before funds can be allocated; but not every federal institution is given permanent status.”

According to the USHMM website, the museum’s function is to be a “living memorial to the Holocaust.” The U.S. taxpayers were not asked whether they thought their tax money should go to providing in perpetuity a living memorial to “The Holocaust” on American soil, but their Congressmen-and-women answered the demand of the Jews to do it in their name.

Constant media propaganda deceives many an American into thinking this expensive memorial is helping world peace or global humanitarianism. According to an ADL (Anti-Defamation League) press release, the program “brings law enforcement officers to the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum in Washington, D.C.  for an intensive program that challenges them to examine their relationship with the public and to explore issues of personal responsiblity and ethical conduct.”2  If the museum helps foot the bill for these junkets, that would explain where some of the yearly $50 million goes. In what way, however,  does it help U.S. law enforcement officers do a better job enforcing U.S. law, except to “profile” certain groups as likely victims and others as likely perpetrators? It appears to be nothing more than indoctrination. The same is done with school children who are also brought to the museum to be indoctrinated into who are the victims and who the perpetrators.

Who is taking advantage of whom?

This is just one piece of the morality tale of how our government gets stolen out from under us by clever, well-organized Jews and elected representatives of the people who, instead of serving the majority interests, serve Jewish interests.  Elie Wiesel has been a ‘friend’ of every U.S. President since he became a U.S. citizen in 1963 … why? There are other ‘holocaust  survivors’ among the U.S. population, some with far better stories than Wiesel’s. Many have even written books. Why aren’t they feted by Presidents and put in charge of multi-million dollar budgets and taxpayer-funded museums? Why is it always Wiesel?

One thing we can say is that a large part of the USHMM’s mission is to facilitate and secure a glorious legacy for Elie Wiesel. He is the chosen one to represent, as much as is possible in the person of one man, the horror and meaning and continuation of the Jewish Shoah for all time. Thus, the USHMM devotes a lot of attention to Wiesel now, and after he is dead … well, you ain’t seen nuthin’ yet.  Here, as an example, is what was said upon bestowing on Wiesel the  museum’s highest honor in May of this year, which they even named after him:

In honor of Wiesel’s extraordinary vision and moral stature, which not only created the Museum but inspired a worldwide movement of Holocaust remembrance and education, the award henceforth will be named the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum Elie Wiesel Award.

As a speaker at this event, Clemantine Wamariya (mentioned above as one of the October appointees to the Holocaust Council), said of the impact Wiesel’s book Night had on her as an 8th grade student, “It was as if my mouth opened and I’ve never been quiet since. It spoke to me directly and told me I must not be silent.”

Above: “Saint Elie of Wiesel”

Elie Wiesel the public personage cannot be separated from the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum in Washington D.C. It is as responsible for him as he is responsible for it. What that means will continue to be explored on this website.

Endnotes

Buchenwald Memorial Archivist Cannot ID Elie Wiesel as an Inmate

Written on November 26, 2011 at 6:25 pm, by Carolyn

by Carolyn Yeager
copyright 2011 carolyn yeager

Accepts Yad Vashem propaganda book as good enough to go by.

According to a letter (see below) received by a German reader of this website from Sabine Stein of the Gedenkstatte Buchenwald (Wiemar, Germany), the  Buchenwald Memorial’s acceptance that Elie Wiesel is one of the men in the famous Buchenwald Liberation photograph is based on the reliability of Yizhak Arad’s The Pictorial History of the Holocaust. This book was published several years after the New York Times announced to the world that Elie Wiesel was in the picture, and the U.S. Holocaust Museum went along with it. There has never been any real, or convincing, verification that the man in the picture is Elie Wiesel.

Originally published in 1990,  The Pictorial History of the Holocaust was edited by Yizhak Arad; designed by Hava Mordohovich, published by the Yad Vashem Holocaust Martyrs’ and Heroes’ Remembrance Authority in Jerusalem. It says on the copyright page: The publication of this album was made possible through the initiative and generosity of Miriam and Haim Schaechter. The Editorial Board is composed of Yizhak Arad, Reuven Dafni, Gideon Greif and Yehudit Levin. Maps drawn by Alissa Gold. The book is a 100% Jewish-Israeli production (note the Star of David on the cover) and is partisan propaganda.

But the Buchenwald Memorial outside of Weimar has nothing better to point to as why we should believe that Elie Wiesel was one of their famous “guests.” This book captions the picture in question as:  “Elie Wiesel, Nobel Peace Prize winner 1986, is the farthest right on the second tier from below.” Interesting that they add Nobel Peace Prize winner, isn’t it? That was the whole purpose of claiming Elie to be in the picture to begin with.

Sabine also admits that Simon Toncman (standing, who never identified himself in the picture) was identified by his internee number, while all others who are supposedly known to be in the picture recognized, i.e. identified, themselves. That means Elie Wiesel is self-identified, as is Myklos Grüner.

To put a better face on this, Ms. Stein tells the letter-writer about the questionnaire of 22 April 1945. But as we know, this questionnaire was filled out for Lázár Wiesel with a birthdate of Oct. 4, 1928, not Sept. 30 which is Elie’s birthdate, and the hand-written signature on the questionnaire doesn’t match Elie’s later known signature. The Buchenwald ID number given to this Lázár Wiesel is 123165, which had formerly belonged to a Pavel Kun who died on 8th March ’45 (one month earlier!) That means it could not have been given to Elie Wiesel when he arrived and was registered at the end of January ’45.  Why would young Elie Wiesel be given, in April,  a new ID number that had belonged to a recently deceased inmate? And at the same time be given a new birthdate?  With all these problems, this questionnaire is still used, along with the photograph, to “prove” Wiesel was detained in Buchenwald. I conclude that the Memorial Museum is only going along with these weak pieces of “evidence” because it is itself part of the “holocaust” business. We must remember that the Buchenwald Memorial was the creation of ex-inmates, mostly communists, who had. and still have, a vested interest in promoting the worst possible view of the National Socialist Germans. No exaggeration or lie was too great for them to enshrine as truth. The organization these ex-inmates formed still runs the Buchenwald Memorial site today.

All deceased internees names not known

Ms. Stein further tells our reader that her department cannot determine the names of all deceased internees of the KZ Buchenwald because at the beginning of 1945 arrivals died before their personal datas could be registered. However, the day and location of death was registered as “unknown deaths.” (We know that Shlomo Wiesel could not be one of these “unknown deaths” because his death, according to son Elie’s books,  took place over a week after arrival. In addition, others in the transport Elie and Shlomo are said to have been on were registered.) According to Stein, there were a total 1265 of these deaths between Jan. 1 and April 11, 1945 and just who they are will be determined at a future time when the Bad Arolson archives are made available to them. (Can it be that the Arolson archives are open to Ken Waltzer of Michigan State University Jewish Studies Dept. but not to the Archive Dept. of the Buchenwald Memorial Museum? Strange stuff.)

Therefore, Sabine Stein says a complete list of the names of the liberated internees of the KZ Buchenwald, who were present at Buchenwald on April 16, 1945, is not available from her. In other words, she cannot clear up the mystery of Elie Wiesel, she can just go along with the narrative as it is and not make waves.

******

The letter from Sabine Stein to our reader, with personal information removed,  is translated below into English.

07 09 11

Dear  Mr. ______,

Please find the enclosed answer of your questions as per our previous notice.
Permit me some remarks concerning the general position of the memorial regarding its archive and documents.
The Archive of the memorial does not posses the original registration of the KZ Buchenwald, nor the original documents of the closing of the camp after its liberation in April 1945. Those documents are stored at the International Search Service of the Red Cross at Bad Arolsen (www.its-arolsen.org). The basis of our research is a biographical collection of individual persons and comprehensive reports for our archive. We started in 1971; for historical reasons it is therefore forced to be incomplete. In order to arrive at dependable results, additional relevant collections and archives have to be gained, specifically in regard to internees who were transferred to different national socialist concentration or destruction camps.

1) Photo 020-46007
With exception of Simon Toncman  who was identified  by his internees number, all  other named persons recognized  themselves. Elie Wiesel’s identification was based on the publication of Yizhak Arad’s The Pictorial History of the Holocaust, Maxwell Macmillan International 1992. On page 403 is the photo and on page 404 the following text appears: Buchenwald, after the liberation, survivors in their barracks. Elie Wiesel, Nobel Peace Prize winner 1986, is the farthest right on the second tier from below.

2) Regarding the liberated person Elie Wiesel, there exists a  questionnaire on microfilm for inmates of the concentration camp 22nd of April 1945, (BwA 51-11-842).  The original is at the aforementioned ITS (International Tracing Service) Arolsen.

When counting the dead internees based on the camp statistics, you made an error.  According to documents of the camp office, official death is registered for the time span 1.1.1945 to 31.3 1945. (Jan. 1 to March 31—3 months -cy) During that time 13.910 internees died.

From 1.4.1945 until 11.4.1945, 913 internees died. (April 1 to April 11—10 or 11 days)  This amounts (from 1.1 to 11.4 1945), to a total of 13,966 and not 13,969. (These figures don’t add up, but I double-checked them and this is what the original letter in German said.)

Throughout years of research we tried our best to determine the names of all deceased internees of the KZ Buchenwald. Yet at the beginning of 1945 arrivals died before their personal datas could be registered, in that case the statistics of the camp register them as “unknown” death. All those not-named deaths are registered at the data bank as “unknown death,” by day of death and location of death. For the time of January till April 1945 a total of 1265. Because the archive of the international search institute at Bad Arolsen unfortunately remained closed for us, the files available there are not yet worked into our memorial book.  This will be done in the near future. A complete list with the names of the liberated internees of the KZ Buchenwald or the persons present at Buchenwald on 16.4.1945 is unfortunately not available. Further information might be found at the National Archive at Washington.

Of the 5 Buchenwald internees numbers, I can only name the one of Miklos Gruener (Michael Nikolas Gruener), 120762. The one of Wiesel, 123165, you know already. The other numbers I could not find because the number card is not handed down (or complete).  Only ITS Arolsen can also help here.

Friendly Greetings
Sabine Stein/Archive

Letters of the Week

Written on November 24, 2011 at 11:40 am, by Carolyn

In January, I featured a “Letter of the Week” and said when we got another letter as good as Hailey’s, or almost as good, I would feature it in the same way. Well, Elie Wiesel Cons The World  recently received two comments, spaced 2 days apart, that are almost as good as the letter from haileylovespink.

I’m replying to both of them here. On Nov. 20 Shelby commented on my article Gigantic Fraud Carried out for Wiesel Nobel Prize.  She wrote:

Really people so what he lied about a picture he was still there. Leave him alone. He has been through more in his life than you can ever imagine. So leave it be. Don’t ruin the rest of a mans life cause you are unsatisfied with yours.

This wording has a familiar ring to it, but I won’t speculate about who it might be and just accept it as is. Shelby, you  seem to be admitting Wiesel lied about being in the picture (famous Buchenwald liberation photograph), yet you are still sure he was there.  Are you fantasizing?  Without evidence, you cannot say for sure he was there just because its been assumed all these years.

You also call lying about being in the picture a “so what.”  Shelby, it’s not “so what.” This is not just any picture. It happens to be the only “proof” that he was there. Further, it reveals a serious moral failure. Elie Wiesel knows whether he’s in that picture or not; he himself cannot be fooled about it. So you are right, he lied. He lied in order to get a Nobel Prize.

As to what Wiesel “has been through” in his life, he was, according to him,  in German custody for one year, from May 1944 to April 1945 … after that, he had everything good done for him.  One bad year out of 83 years in all …  I’m sure many people would be happy to trade that with him. So your sympathy for someone you don’t know (or do you?), and don’t really know anything about, is wasted and even foolish. As to me being dissatisfied with my own life … well, you don’t know that, do you? I’m happy to report to you that is not the case.

On Nov. 22, Sarah wrote a longer comment about my article New Evidence on Elie Wiesel at Buchenwald. She writes:

this website is truly disgusting, so what if Elie isn’t documented properly within the records, you do realize Nazi’s didn’t bother documenting EVERY SINGLE PERSON to go through each camp, they could care less. Not all records will be accurate, and regardless if Elie did live in Buchenwald or not makes no difference, but why a man who has suffered and endured so much, lie about where he’s been, for every historian or writer who thinks any holocaust survivor is lying about their experinces cannot speak on their behalf because they have not been in same position.

Sarah, you also say “so what” … so what if Wiesel isn’t documented, makes no difference to you. In fact, it even makes no difference whether Elie ever lived in Buchenwald.  But if Elie didn’t live in Buchenwald, his entire story is false, Sarah. Can’t you understand that? You are a real believer.

What does make a difference to you appears to be that those who are not holocaust survivors have not been in the same position … therefore we cannot accuse the survivors of lying. Sarah, just like Elie, you fall back on the position that “holocaust survivors” are beyond the understanding, and therefore the criticism, of we ordinary mortals. That is holocaustianity–a belief–not history or science.  The doctrine of holocaustianity is:  Don’t ask questions; those who ask questions are disgusting unbelievers.

I invite Shelby and Sarah to write again; they are always welcome here. In the meantime, here is an idea for them to consider:  Get Mr. Wiesel to show all of us his tattoo that he claims to have on his arm and that will go a long way toward shutting us up.

Update: replies from Sarah and Carolyn

On November 24, 2011 Sarah replied to the above:

On November 25, 2011 Carolyn replied to Sarah:

Grüner False Identity Lawsuit Against Elie Wiesel Set For January 24 in Budapest

Written on November 18, 2011 at 10:53 pm, by Carolyn

by Carolyn Yeager

Myklos Grüner will finally get his day in court!

This writer spoke on the telephone with Grüner in Sweden in September 2010, at which time he assured her he would challenge Wiesel’s identity in a court in Budapest the following January. We know how court dates can be postponed, and even cancelled, but Grüner has proved himself to be a persevering man, and though a year late, it now seems he will indeed present his evidence in court.  However, the defendant will not be the highly protected Elie Wiesel himself, but Hungarian rabbi Slomó Köves, who invited  Wiesel to Hungary in 2009 while “knowing that (he) is not a genuine Holocaust survivor” but “stole the identity of an inmate,” according to Grüner.

It’s possible this could deteriorate into a circus, but one hopes not. Grüner views the court case in Budapest as a giant leap in a long, painful, personal journey, according to the BosNewsLife story.  As a 15-year-old boy in Auschwitz whose father had died, he “befriended Lázár Wiesel, who was among those protecting him. In January 1945, as the Russian army was coming, the inmates were transferred from a satellite camp of Auschwitz-Birkenau to Buchenwald in Germany.”  The satellite camp was Monowitz, or Auschwitz III, for workers at the IG Farben plant.

Grüner exaggerates the length of time it took the Auschwitz inmates to get to Buchenwald, but he indeed was on that march. (The march itself was only one day, after that they went by train.) Grüner, as well as Lazar and Abram Wiesel, were registered at Buchenwald, but the man we know as Elie Wiesel never was. This is proved by the documents held at Buchenwald. Grüner states in the Bos article that Abram Wiesel, Lazar’s older brother, died on the way, but this is not as he described it in his book Stolen Identity, nor according to Buchenwald records which record Abram Wiesel’s death on Feb. 2, 1945 in Barracks 57.

Miklos Grüner, like most holocaust survivors, has memory problems and embellishes his facts … however, he was there and he is in the famous photograph (far left, lower bunk) while Elie Wiesel is not the man at the far right (upper bunk) that he claims is himself. This has been proven on this website Elie Wiesel Cons The World, most recently and thoroughly here.

According to Bos, Grüner still says that when he was invited to meet Nobel Prize winner Wiesel in 1986, he thought he would be meeting his old friend. Instead it was a man who Grüner claims he never saw before. “Wiesel refused to show me his tattoo. It was a very short meeting.” Grüner said he “doesn’t mind that Wiesel earns 25,000 dollars” for a 45 minute speech.” But I don’t want him to make money on the deaths of my family members and the millions of others who perished in the Holocaust,” he said, his voice trembling. “I want to leave this world knowing that I have told the next generation the truth…I even want a dialogue with Anti-Semites and the Catholic Church, for I later painted as an artist.”

 Swedish newspaper article from 1986 of Grüner-Wiesel meeting.  Grüner, on left, greets Wiesel, right,  in a friendly fashion but is inwardly wondering who he is!

It is our hope that Mr. Grüner succeeds in having his day in court and that he will be able to make his case. It appears that at least the BozNewsLife news service will cover it, and that is good news for us. We know what he is up against, but still we hope.

 

Is Elie Wiesel “the world’s most famous hypocrite”

Written on October 25, 2011 at 10:11 pm, by Carolyn

By Carolyn Yeager

…instead of the world’s most famous Holocaust survivor?

Just one year ago, Elie Wiesel gave a speech in Connecticut, while a jury was in session just miles away, calling for the death penalty to NOT be given to two men who had committed an appalling crime against a family of four. Wrapping himself in self-righteousness, he intoned “Death is not the answer” to the man, William Petit, who had lost his wife and two beautiful young daughters to a couple of amoral monsters, and to Petit’s supporters.

The crime committed was so brutal and horrible, and senseless too,  that for this writer the death penalty is too good for these perpetrators. You can read about it here and here.

Did Elie Wiesel have the right to barge into this family’s tragedy as some sort of “spiritual advisor”,  for which he was not asked? Of course not. Did he have any right to bring his “holocaust experience” into their personal grief as some kind of Jewish lesson in humanity? No,  and it’s in the worst of taste but he is used to flaunting his imaginary suffering to audiences who have been indoctrinated and conditioned to respond like Pavlov’s dogs to his trite phrases.

The murderers of this family should not be given the death penalty, says Elie Wiesel.

Left, Haley, 17 and Michaela, 11 with their 48 year-old mother Jennifer Petit–all torture-murdered. Sole survivor William Petit on right.

 

 

 

 

Wiesel tells them, “I know your pain … believe me, I know.” Does he? He is oblivious to this man’s pain when he tells him he should not desire the death penalty for those who committed such savage acts upon his loved ones.  We know exactly what happened to these three women with horrifying exactitude. We do NOT know what happened to Wiesel’s mother, father and sister. With the Petits we have the bodies, and the manner of death and the culprits are forensically determined; not so with Wiesel’s family and so many others–no bodies and no forensic evidence at all. Their deaths, especially in the manner assumed, remain conjecture.

It seems Wiesel wants to prevent Gentiles from getting  justice for evil done to them, while justice for Jews has always required full punishment … an eye for an eye. He recently called for bringing Mamoud Ahmadinejad to trial as a war criminal at the Hague simply because he has said he doesn’t believe in the mythical Holocaust. Wiesel wants to make holocaust denial a crime in the U.S. and put “deniers” in prison. Yet he also wants these child rapists and souless murderers to remain in prison for life, being fed, clothed and given health care, side by side with holocaust deniers!

Is Elie Wiesel an evil force in the world or just a fool?

Iran has the death penalty. We need the death penalty to deter human trash like these two murderers. Wiesel’s campaign to abolish the death penalty in the U.S. is part of the attempt to further destroy our society and beautiful, gifted white people.

“Death is not the answer” for men who tie girls to their beds, rape them, douse them with gasoline and set them on fire, says Elie Wiesel.

Haley’s bed on which she was tied to be burned to death. The same was done to her younger sister.

What we know happened in Cheshire, Connecticut has no relation to what happened to Elie Wiesel’s family in 1944 in Hungary and Poland. I believe it is the fire–the torching of the live bodies and of the house itself–that drew Wiesel’s attention to this case. The religio/historical accounts written by Jews, such as in the Talmud, are suffused with stories of being burned (destroyed) by fire. Elie Wiesel himself coined the term “holocaust” to describe the expulsion, deportation and incarceration (not incineration) of Jews in concentration camps that took place in 1942-45. Even though many deaths did occur, none were by fire or burning. However, Jewish mythology demands fiery deaths.

Left: The Petit family home set ablaze by the murderers to conceal their DNA.

 

In addition to his offensiveness to Petit and his sister and mother who attended the trial with him, Elie Wiesel is a hypocrite because he never said “Death is not the answer” when Germans were being put to death by the hundreds as “Nazis” and nazi collaborators. He never said “Death is not the answer” when Adolf Eichmann was sentenced to die by an all-Jewish court proceeding in Israel. He never said “Death is not the answer” as Israelis murdered Palestinians in secret prisons. But once he decided to make a reputation for himself as a humanitarian, he has taken up opposition to the death penalty.

Why the death penalty? Well, to prevent justice for families like the Petits, who are white and blonde. Their sufferings should never be taken as seriously as the ‘holocaust of the Jews.’ Wiesel has likened the death of a Jewish child as equivalent to, or greater in significance than, the death of Jesus Christ. The burning death of 11 year-old Michaela can never be allowed to compete with a Jewish child.~

Addendum (added Wed. Oct. 26)

Both of the murderers have been found guilty and one, Steven Hayes, has been given the death penalty. The younger man, Joshua Komisarjevsky is currently back in court for the penalty phase which began yesterday.  His attorneys plan to highlight Komisarjevsky’s “troubled” childhood, and that he didn’t get the “help” he needed.

Well, of course, people who do things like Hayes and Komisarjevsky did have “troubled childhoods;”  there is something wrong with them from birth. But all those who experience difficult childhoods don’t do what they did. We cannot allow offenders to weasel out of paying an appropriate price for their destruction of other’s lives and property; if we do, no one can be held responsible for anything … which is pretty much what has happened to our society.

Even if this sick person also receives the death penalty, which I hope he does, it will be years before either one of them faces what the jury recommended for them. In the meantime, Elie Wiesel will be doing all he can to help them weasel out of it.