I see John Demjanjuk is back in the news again, on trial in Germany for what he allegedly did in Sobibor 66 years ago. This time around, though, his accusers have held off saddling him with a World Wrestling Federation-like moniker. It was "Ivan the Terrible" during his 1987-88 trial in Jerusalem. Now? So far nothing . . . Perhaps they sense that any such garish embellishments will only add to the farcical dimension already present in the latest chapter of the John Demjanjuk saga?
A person close to the family told me many people did not buy into the demonization of John Demjajuk back then. During the 7 years John spent on Death Row in Ayalon Prison in Ramle, Israel, between 1986 and 1993 he received a million pieces of mail, he said, the great bulk of the it being friendly and supportive.
New York Times scribe (and Zionist shill) Thomas Friedman tells the story (in From Beirut to Jerusalem) of a young Palestinian whom he befriended and spent time with, trying hard to tutor regarding the evil that John Demjanjuk supposedly embodied. The youth, according to Tom, was having none of it. That Demjanjuk had allegedly killed a lot of Jews, he seemed to feel, did not necessarily qualify him as an evil person.
That happened in Jerusalem, 20-odd years ago. About this same time, Elie Wiesel was beginning to notice that, surprisingly, the authors of "hate mail" sent his way were unabashed about signing their real names, and even including their actual home address and telephone phone number. Such was their degree of confidence! If grassroots confidence was growing back then, it must be stratospheric by now, comparatively speaking.
Jump, cut to the present . . .
Last fall, Corus Radio talk show host Charles Adler put on the table discussion of a quarter-billion-dollar funding for a human rights museum in Winnipeg. Virtually all the callers were disinterested in spending money for such a project in these difficult times. Some went further. One groused that, "You know that it'll be yet another Holocaust museum in all but name." Another said that given the hardship of the times, it was a waste of taxpayer money and better spent on bread-and-butter issues. One said that if we had to have one, then "locate it in Toronto" for the sake of higher cost-benefit. Conspicuous by their absent was the usual range of emotions elicited when the talk turns to Man's Inhumanity to Man: sorrow, pity, outrage, contrition. "Compassion fatigue?" Chuck seemed unimpressed by how that segment of his show went down.
As for Mark Weber's January essay downplaying the significance of Holocaust revisionism, its appearance, as Robert Faurisson was quick to point out, was immediately followed by the Bishop Williamson Affair, rocking the Vatican and leaving hairline cracks in its marble flooring, with YouTube viewings of the controversial infamous TV interview the bishop gave running into the hundreds of thousands. Back in his cell in Mannheim Prison, the stoical Ernst Zundel must have been amused to watch the epic cast of characters joining in on this latest Holocaust soap opera.
In fact, even the revisionist-friendly voices burbling in Tehran were drowned in the noise surrounding the papal fracas.