Why do we have to have this weasel telling such huge lies in the mainstream media? What a gigantic liar this Elie Wiesel is! Iranian President Ahmadinejad never threatened to use violence to destroy the "Jewish state," let alone used nuclear weapons to do it. President Ahmadinejad has been consistent in saying that Iran doesn't seek nuclear weapons and that Iran is not out to destroy Israel militarily but does want to see all the people of Palestine/Israel vote for the kind of government they want. He said that Iran would abide by the decision of the whole people. He appears to be in favor of the one-state solution.
Read what the weasel said though.
In exploiting the Holocaust to justify a buildup to a war against Iran that could well lead to millions more deaths, Obama was merely echoing Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who last week delivered a speech on Israel's Holocaust Remembrance Day declaring Iran an "existential threat" to nuclear-armed Israel and equating Iran's nuclear power program to the Holocaust.
At the time, Elie Wiesel, who has made a career as Washington's semi-official Holocaust spokesman, criticized Netanyahu's remarks on Iran. "Iran is a threat, but can we say that it will make a second Auschwitz?" Wiesel remarked. "I don't compare anything to the Holocaust ... Only Auschwitz was Auschwitz."
By the time of his appearance Monday, introducing Obama at the museum, Wiesel had gotten his line in sync with the war propaganda needs of Israel and Washington. "Have we learned anything?" he declared in reference to the Holocaust. "If so, how is it that Assad is still in power? How is it that the Holocaust's No. 1 denier, Ahmadinejad, is still the president, he who threatens to use nuclear weapons ... to destroy the Jewish state."
What's a holocaust denier? Is it someone who knows that the "estimate" of exterminations at Auschwitz has dropped from some 4-3 million down to 1.5 million and falling? If that 3 to 4 million had been part of the so-called 6 million, then that 6 million has fallen no less than 1.5 million down to 4.5 million. If it could drop that much concerning just one concentration camp, how exaggerated have the figures been for every camp or at least others in addition to Auschwitz? Where are the human ashes from 1.5 million bodies cremated at Auschwitz? Well, maybe the Germans didn't start incinerating people until after several hundred thousand were killed. That would still leave the cremains of what, at least a million. Where are they?
Modern technology can see where the Earth has been disturbed, as in digging pits for the cremains of a million people, even if in different pits about Auschwitz. Where's the evidence?
We know that the rooms for the "gassing" were altered after the war. The holes in the ceilings to supposedly drop the gas pellets were added after the war was over. That's a fact. Even the Jewish curator of Auschwitz admitted that fact in a video that is freely available on the Internet and that the Zionists have never disputed but rather sought solely to censor.
Really, if Elie Wiesel and Benjamin Netanyahu (who was caught on video bragging about how he had lied to the US to get the US to go along with him in a bad deal for the Palestinians) can lie about Iran this way, what makes you think their relatives from the "holocaust" didn't lie? Liars have been caught boldface fibbing about the "death camps." They made up preposterous stories that bear no resemblance to what was at all feasible. Some of their stories were so ridiculous that the Jewish courts shut them up before they could go on to get to the more impossible parts of the stories. One fellow upon whose testimony the courts "relied" in convicting Nazis claimed that the death-camp "gassing chambers" were located over train tracks where train cars would pull under and the gas-chamber floors would open like bomb-bay doors to let the dead bodies fall into the rail cars like coal into open coal cars. He wasn't allowed to continue telling his story to get to that whopper on the record in court but was dismissed from the witness box by the judge before that. Nevertheless, his story was published and repeated during his life with his name attached and without any retractions from him.
The people of the whole world need to wake up and stop putting up with these blatant liars! Obama should tell Elie Wiesel and Benjamin Netanyahu to repent or get lost. Of course, Barack Obama needs to stop being two-faced as well, sucking up to the Zionists for money!
The following should appear at the end of every post:
According to the IRS, "Know the law: Avoid political campaign intervention":
Tax-exempt section 501(c)(3) organizations like churches, universities, and hospitals must follow the law regarding political campaigns. Unfortunately, some don't know the law.
Under the Internal Revenue Code, all section 501(c)(3) organizations are prohibited from participating in any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for elective public office. The prohibition applies to campaigns at the federal, state and local level.
Violation of this prohibition may result in denial or revocation of tax-exempt status and the imposition of certain excise taxes. Section 501(c)(3) private foundations are subject to additional restrictions.
Political Campaign Intervention
Political campaign intervention includes any activities that favor or oppose one or more candidates for public office. The prohibition extends beyond candidate endorsements.
Contributions to political campaign funds, public statements of support or opposition (verbal or written) made by or on behalf of an organization, and the distribution of materials prepared by others that support or oppose any candidate for public office all violate the prohibition on political campaign intervention.
Factors in determining whether a communication results in political campaign intervention include the following:
- Whether the statement identifies one or more candidates for a given public office
- Whether the statement expresses approval or disapproval of one or more candidates' positions and/or actions
- Whether the statement is delivered close in time to the election
- Whether the statement makes reference to voting or an election
- Whether the issue addressed distinguishes candidates for a given office
Many religious organizations believe, as we do, that the above constitutes a violation of the First Amendment of the US Constitution.
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
That said, we make the following absolutely clear here:
- The Real Liberal Christian Church and Christian Commons Project not only do not endorse any candidate for any secular office, we say that Christianity forbids voting in such elections.
- Furthermore, when we discuss any public-office holder's position, policy, action or inaction, we definitely are not encouraging anyone to vote for that office holder's position.
- We are not trying to influence secular elections but rather want people to come out from that entire fallen system.
- When we analyze or discuss what is termed "public policy," we do it entirely from a theological standpoint with an eye to educating professing Christians and those to whom we are openly always proselytizing to convert to authentic Christianity.
- It is impossible for us to fully evangelize and proselytize without directly discussing the pros and cons of public policy and the positions of secular-office holders, hence the unconstitutionality of the IRS code on the matter.
- We are not rich and wouldn't be looking for a fight regardless. What we cannot do is compromise our faith (which seeks to harm nobody, quite the contrary).
- We render unto Caesar what is Caesar's. We render unto God what is God's.
- When Caesar says to us that unless we shut up about the unrighteousness of Caesar's policies and practices, we will lose the ability of people who donate to us to declare their donations as deductions on their federal and state income-tax returns, we say to Caesar that we cannot shut up while exercising our religion in a very reasonable way.
- We consider the IRS code on this matter as deliberate economic duress (a form of coercion) and a direct attempt by the federal government to censor dissenting, free political and religious speech.
- It's not freedom of religion if they tax it.
And when they were come to Capernaum, they that received tribute money came to Peter, and said, Doth not your master pay tribute? He saith, Yes. And when he was come into the house, Jesus prevented him, saying, What thinkest thou, Simon? of whom do the kings of the earth take custom or tribute? of their own children, or of strangers? Peter saith unto him, Of strangers. Jesus saith unto him, Then are the children free. (Matthew 17:24-26)