|The President, The Holocaust, And The Redemption Of Elie Wiesel|
by Gerald A. HonigmanMy good friend, Charlie, alerted me to a recent article in the American Thinker dealing with President Obama's Holocaust Day tribute http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2012/04/obamas_come-uppance_from_elie_wiesel_during_self-serving_visit_to_holocaust_museum.html.
Rather than my reinventing the wheel, let's begin by reviewing some excerpts from Leo Rennert's essay…
During the last three years, President Obama did not visit the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum. But today, he did; and promptly gave a self-serving campaign speech for Jewish votes.
The president had with him as escort and introducer Elie Wiesel and lavishly praised the Nobel Laureate and Holocaust survivor for his unrelenting campaign to keep the memory of the Holocaust front and center…
But Wiesel did not reciprocate. Instead, determined to tell truth to power, he admonished Obama for not doing nearly enough to confront Assad's atrocities in Syria and Iranian President Ahmadinejad's development of nuclear weapons and threats to wipe Israel off the map.
In introducing Obama, Wiesel asked why 'world leaders,' presumably including Obama, have not 'learned anything' from the Holocaust.
Directly addressing Obama, Wiesel declared: 'Mr. President, we are here in this place of memory. Israel cannot not remember. And because it remembers, it must be strong, just to defend its own survival and its own destiny.'
Clearly, Wiesel was not exactly encouraged by Obama's remarks.
Since the Holocaust Museum is a national undertaking, it is fitting for a U.S. president to pay an occasional visit and call its lessons to public attention. But by waiting until 2012, an election year, and in the substance of his speech, Obama turned his visit into a political event, just as the presidential-election campaigns move into high gear. It leaves a stain on the museum and the Holocaust to exploit it for political purposes."
Mr. Rennert stated what had to be said nicely. It reminded me of one of the President's earlier staged Passover Seders for his resident Jew Boys (conducted soon after his public arm-twisting of Israel for not prostrating itself to Arab and his own expectations low enough) at which he could not even cover his head with a kipa (yarmulke) or such to show respect for G_d. He has no such problem taking his shoes off when entering a mosque for similar reasons.
All of this brought back memories, however, from the not-so-distant past which had been very disturbing. Furthermore, after sharing what comes next with you, there's no doubt that I'm going to "catch it"--from at least some circles.
So, what else is new?
Here goes anyway…
Back in 2007, I was sent an article from the May 18th Jewish Daily Forward, Foxman, Wiesel Upbraid Israel For Pace of Peace Effort.
Elie Wiesel had co-hosted the third annual Petra Conference ("for improving the world") of Nobel Laureates and others in Jordan. Around the same time, the Anti-Defamation League's Abraham Foxman participated in a panel discussion at Bar-Ilan University in Israel. Besides Moses in the bulrushes and Jesus on the cross, Wiesel has become the Gentiles' favorite Jewish victim.
Wiesel's writings have no doubt served an important purpose; and perhaps, in the Eternal Plan, he was spared for this. Both he and Foxman have sired much good in a post-Auschwitz world.
But, human both are.
Please bear with me for a moment as I sidetrack a bit…
Oprah Winfrey has been listed as one of Time Magazine's 100 Most Influential People in the World. On both her April 25, 2005 widely-viewed television show and in her almost three million readers a month June 2005 edition of O Magazine, Oprah showcased alleged Arab victimization at the hands of Israelis. Both were blatantly one-sided depictions of reality.
In case you haven't heard yet from the Arabs and their assorted derriere kissers, the Jews have become the new Nazis and Arabs the new Jews. A favorite theme--victims, now victimizers.
That someone as influential as Oprah lends support to this nauseating lie is tragic. But it gets worse…
To preemptively shut the Jews up afterwards, she soon dragged out guess who?
The world's third most famous Jew victim!
On her May 24th and 25th 2006 widely-watched television shows, she strolled arm-in-arm with Wiesel to Auschwitz.
So, the Jews were victimized too. Oprah says so…How 'bout that !
Some things need to be spelled out very clearly. The differences between what happened to stateless Jews for millennia and what is happening to Arabs in their attempt to create their 22nd state on the ashes of--not alongside--the Jews' sole, resurrected nation were definitely not.
So-called Arab moderates themselves have repeatedly stated that their moderation was/is simply a Trojan Horse designed to extract additional one-sided, suicidal concessions from the Jews in the court of world opinion.
The State Department and the West's darling, Mahmoud Abbas, is simply Arafat in a suit. He ran on a platform for Israel's destruction--but by more acceptable means. As I like to point out, blown buses bring bad press. He still holds to this--no matter what his assorted whitewashers say.
Despite the periodic infighting and struggle to control the billions of dollars coming in, largely courtesy of the dhimmi purse, the difference between Fatah and Hamas, when it comes to a Jewish Israel, is tactical, not strategic. Any real Arab moderates on this issue go the way of Isam Sartawi--they're dispatched from this world. Others, like Wiesel's conference colleague, Yasser Abed Rabbo, or Sari Nusseibeh--whether serious or not--are temporarily tolerated for the assorted mileage they achieve in Western eyes. For such strategic sweet talk, the Jews are expected to bare the necks of their kids and give away the store.
Withdraw, Jew, from the (disputed) territories and the conflict will end. Agree to return to your pre-'67 nine-mile wide armistice line (not border) existence as a sub-rump state, and the Arabs will grant you peace (of the grave).
Yeh...Like in Gaza.
And I'm Santa Claus--with Obama's above missing yarmulkeh.
Keep in mind that Wiesel knowingly played right into all of this.
At the Petra Conference, he even made Israeli Prime Minister, Ehud Olmert (arguably one of the Arabs' best buddies), the brunt of mockery and laughter. The latter may have deserved this--but not for the reasons Wiesel & Co. charge.
Think about it…
While placing blame for the lack of real progress towards peace on the Jews themselves for not caving in to all that Arabs demand, elsewhere both he and Oprah speak of Darfur and the Sudan and never manage to mention the word Arab. I guess Martians are responsible.
Had those allegedly oppressive Jews used Arab techniques against black Africans in the Sudan, against Kurds (and even fellow Arabs) in Iraq and Syria, Copts in Egypt, Berbers in North Africa, and so forth, their Arab headache could have largely been resolved long ago. Millions of black Africans have been killed, maimed, raped, enslaved, murdered, and so forth on behalf of the Arabs' purely Arab patrimony schemes. This is still going on as I write this essay today.
Okay, before I wander too far astray, let's return to Wiesel's virtual anti-Israel pandering and, to a lesser extent, Foxman's more vague statements about Israel's seriousness.
While there's always room for improvement, and mistakes are surely made by both sides in any conflict, surely both men--one of whom I know personally, worked with for years, and so forth--understand the real facts of life here.
Given real and not-so-real peace partners, Israel has repeatedly bent over backwards, sideways, and forwards to reach honorable compromise and accommodation--certainly far more than Arabs have ever done with their own ethno-nationalist competitors. So, indulging in such things as pointing the finger at Israel during a conference like that in Petra (undoubtedly filled with duplicitous Israel bashers) was/is nothing short of self-serving and cowardly.
Both Foxman and Wiesel know that the root cause of this conflict has always been an Arab refusal to accept that anyone but themselves be granted political rights in "their" region. Again, scores of millions of non-Arab peoples have been murdered, gassed, subjugated, enslaved, turned into refugees, and so forth for daring to disagree.
The conflict Israel was criticized for at Petra and many times since could have been solved long ago had Arabs been willing to grant Jews a mere microscopic slice of the very rights they demand for themselves. And, again, both men knew and know this very well.
So, given such an enemy, it is hard to conceive of what both were thinking when they willingly participated in shifting the spotlight onto Israel.
Will either men take up residence in Israel's Sderot, frequently blasted by Arab mortars, missiles, and rockets and adjacent to Arab-controlled (and now Judenrein) Gaza, or in Israel's narrow waist (where most of its population is located) after it's forced to return to its '49 Auschwitz/armistice lines and next agrees to accept millions of allegedly returning jihadi Arab refugees? The latter are the main provisions of the alleged Saudi Peace Plan--which Obama has repeatedly stated Israel would be crazy to not accept.
But if the answer to my question just happens--by some small chance--to be in the negative, then perhaps it's time to put the period of perpetual Jewish victimization behind us…despite what these twofamous Holocaust survivors asserted.
Their approach would, no doubt, only perpetuate this cult of victimization only further. At the time, I cynically thought that afterwards perhaps at least Wiesel believed that he could then get the world to weep for yet millions of more dead Jews. Disturbing…but, who knows?
And while this may be good for the Jewish victimization business, it's certainly not good for Jews.
I'll demand empathy over sympathy any time. And Israel better do likewise.
It was thus a blessing, for many reasons, to hear of Elie Wiezel's recent refusal to play along with the President's re-election performance and that's indeed what it was) at the Holocaust Memorial Museum in Washington.
For me at least, he has at somewhat redeemed himself. And I am glad.