[Continued]

While this is not a court, Keneally based his book on eyewitness interviews. Courts have always accepted eyewitness testimony as evidence. If Wikoff wishes to play defense attorney, after the prosecution presents multiple eyewitnesses, he would need to produce some sort of rebuttal evidence to persuade the jury that the eyewitness testimony was unreliable.

Ball tried to do it by bringing out a map and aerial photos. However, the quote from the book showed that his map and photos did not serve as effective rebuttal because they ignored a key point about *which* villa the shootings were alleged to have occurred from. Wikoff tries to whitewash their failure.

Another example of Spielberg's distortion is the scene where the little boy drops into a latrine full of excrement and urine. ^[15]

Having been caught using a dishonest argument about the shooting, the denier first throws up a smokescreen and now tries to distract attention from the issue by bringing up something else. But let's examine this anyway. If Wikoff is telling the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth below, then he is entitled to criticize Spielberg on this point if this scene was not in the book, or Keneally if he put this incident in the book and it never happened.

The "Schindler Jew", who allegedly experienced this humiliation is Zev Kedem, 66, a real estate developer in Cameron Park, California.

In an article in the "Jewish Bulletin of Northern California" for April 1, 1994, Mr. Kedem claims that he was the boy depicted in the latrine scene. Nevertheless, Kedem is quoted in the "Jewish Bulletin" as saying: "my fame comes from jumping into the latrine, into a vat of s---. But the truth is that I hid in a hospital, not in the latrine."

So here we have yet another self-admitted example of a "holocaust survivor" lying to make his story more dramatic and appealing to the tender heartstrings of the gullible Goyim. ^[16]

While the quote is accurate, the news story is not clear as to how Kedem is identified with the boy. The article does not say Kedem admits lying about anything. Wikoff glosses over all this. Unfortunately so far attempts to contact Mr. Kedem for clarification have failed.

In spite of Kedem's admission that this story is false, we will undoubtedly soon see scores of "survivors" claiming that they too jumped in vats of s--- to escape the Nazis. They will undoubtedly form an organization named "Children of the Latrines" and hold annual gatherings in Miami Beach and Tel Aviv and trade "holocaust" stories. The Yad Vashem museum will undoubtedly plant a grove of trees to honor the "Children of the Latrines" and another "holocaust" legend will have been canonized.^[17]

Now Wikoff wanders completely from the realm of factual discussion and starts speculating about how Jews will "undoubtedly" start engaging in dishonest behavior. The above paragraph tells us all we need to know about whether Wikoff is interested in strict factual accuracy, or something less savory.

Belgian Holocaust denier Carlos Porter launched an attack on the book itself. Unfortunately he refers to a French edition of the book, which makes it tough to find out whether he's distorting or not. Notice that he paraphrases, never quotes. Notice that for all his claims, he only gives very few and cryptic references. These too are traces of the Holocaust denier.

It might be noted that the book SCHINDLER'S LIST (an admitted work of fiction)^[18]

Like Wikoff, Porter tries to make much of the fact that Keneally used novelistic techniques to tell a true story. The text below, from Keneally's "Author's Note," describes in what way it is a work of fiction.

"To use the texture and devices of a novel to tell a true story is a course that has frequently been followed in modern writing. It is the one I chose to follow here - both because the novelist's craft is the only one I can lay claim to, and because the novel's techniques seem suited for a character of such ambiguity and magnitude as Oskar.

I have attempted, however, to avoid all fiction, since fiction would debase the record, and to distinguish between reality and the myths which are likely to attach themselves to a man of Oskar's stature. It has sometimes been necessary to make reasonable constructs of conversations of which Oskar and others have left only the briefest record.

But most exchanges and conversations, and all events, are based on the detailed recollections of the Schindlerjuden (Schindler Jews), of Schindler himself, and of other witnesses to Oskar's acts of outrageous rescue."^[19]

[See Appendix for Porter's report & additional commentary.]

[ Previous | Index | Next ]

Home ·  Site Map ·  What's New? ·  Search Nizkor