Made Up Memoirs That No One Thought Sounded Suspicious

6-year-old Misha is rescued at school in 1941 when her parents are arrested and deported. She is spirited away to the De Wael family and given a new name, Monique. Unhappy with her host family, she runs away in hopes of finding her parents. Over the next four years she wanders alone across Germany, Poland, Ukraine, Romania, Yugoslavia, across the Adriatic Sea by boat to Italy, then through Italy across the Alps to France and back to Belgium. Along the way, she is sheltered by packs of wolves, kills a German soldier, witnesses an eastbound freight train full of Jews, wanders into the Warsaw Ghetto, and escapes.

This is the description of the best-selling holocaust memoir by Misha Defonseca. Living with packs of wolves? Killing German soldiers? Sneaking into the Warsaw ghetto? All at age 7? Doesn't this strain credulity?

Turns out that it does. Misha's real name is Monique De Wael, and not only is the whole story a lie, she's not even Jewish.

Finally caught in her lie, Defonesca was unapologetic:

I always felt different. It's true that, since forever, I felt Jewish and later in life could come to terms with myself by being welcomed by part of this community.

Misha... I mean Monique is not alone however, in fooling stupid book publishers. Take, for example, the book, "Love and Consequences":

In the vividly told book, Ms. Seltzer wrote about her African-American foster brothers, Terrell and Taye, who joined the Bloods gang when they were 11 and 13. She chronicled her experiences making drug deliveries for gang leaders at age 13 and how she was given her first gun as a birthday present when she was 14. Ms. Seltzer told The Times last week, “One of the first things I did once I started making drug money was to buy a burial plot.”

Sarah McGrath, the editor at Riverhead who worked with Ms. Seltzer for three years on the book, said she was stunned to discover that the author had lied.

They say truth is stranger than fiction, but sometimes, when a white girl from Sherman Oaks pitches you a story about her gang childhood, some red flags should be raised.

Doesn't anybody fact-check anything anymore? Do we just take any Tom, Dick, Stephen Glass, James Frey and Nasdijj at his word?

“I’m not saying like I did it right,” Ms. Seltzer said. “I did not do it right. I thought I had an opportunity to make people understand the conditions that people live in and the reasons people make the choices from the choices they don’t have.” Ms. McGrath said that she had numerous conversations with Ms. Seltzer about being truthful. “She seems to be very, very naive,” Ms. McGrath said. “There was a way to do this book honestly and have it be just as compelling.”

If Seltzer and Defonesca have taught us anything, its that book publishers will pretty much publish any bullshit story you pitch to them, as long as it has to do with the holocaust, minorities, or addiction.

With that in mind, I think it's time to share my absolutely true story with all of you loyal readers, as well as with any book publishers which may come across this:

"Hitler and Me, A Memoir"

The year was 1945, and I was living in an attic of a Berlin church, hiding from the Nazi death squads with a gypsy named Melina, a black man named Trevor, and a pack of wild wolves, named Snippy, Wolfy, and Janet. We all knew that the war was drawing to a close; Father Bretzger kept us informed from the reports he'd hear from travelling priests. Any day the Americans or the Russians would cross the German borders and liberate us from Hitler's tyranny. But I found it hard to be hopeful. In the three years Father Bretzger had kept me sheltered in his church, I'd become hopelessly addicted to the ceremonial wine he stored in the attic. The lush purple poison had infected my soul; I could think of nothing else.

Sweet, sweet Melina. She had a soft spot for me, and even though I was only seven years old, we had fallen deeply in love. But the alcohol, time and time again, came between us. One day I hit her while in a drunken stupor. Things weren't the same after that.

It was Trevor who confronted me. Told me I had to change my ways or risk throwing away the very thing that the Nazis wanted to take from me: my life. I vowed to go to rehab, but this being 1945 Germany, the options were few and far between.

I left the attic, disguised as a young altar boy, and went out into the streets of Berlin, which were still smoking from the previous night's bombardment by Allied bombers. I searched desperately for a free clinic that could help me cure my disease, but as the day wore on, I began to search desperately for something else-- that vile, intoxicating liquid that makes fools of men and makes sex-tape-whores of heirs to hotel fortunes.

I went down a flight of stairs, thinking it led to a dive bar, but instead, I was confronted by a heavy steel door. When I opened it, I could see a long hallway, barely lit by unadorned light bulbs. Following the hall, I emerged into what appeared to be a large bomb shelter. There, sitting on a bed, was a man and a woman. I recognized the man immediately.

"Well, hello," said Hitler. "What's an altar boy like you doing in a place like this?"

I knew what I had to do. Using the magic amulet I received from Melina, I hypnotized Hitler and his girlfriend and made them both drink cyanide. Within seconds, the monster was dead. I turned around and left the way I'd came, careful to avoid the evil eyes of the German SS patrols.

Emerging into the sunshine, I spied an open bar across the street. Through the windows I could see people happily imbibing, erasing the memories of the war by sucking down the strongest stuff they could find. The bouncer saw me staring, and sauntered over to me.

"Would you care for a drink, lad?"

In the distance, I could almost hear the distant tanks, the rhythmic stomping of boots, the buzzing of fighter planes-- the sound of liberty approaching. I looked up at the bouncer with a newfound confidence in my heart.

"A few minutes ago I would have said yes, my good sir," I replied. "But now I know I've still got some living to do, and I plan on living it."

With a smile, I pulled off my altar boy costume to reveal myself as I was, a Jew, wearing, with pride, a golden star of David on my sleeve.

"A Jew!" he cried out. "Seize him!" The Nazi guards approached, their eyes wild with hate.

Suddenly, the wolves jumped out from the shadows. Stunned, the Nazis could do nothing but allow themselves to be eaten. The bouncer tried to run into the bar, but he was gunned down by Trevor. "That's how we do it in South Central," he said, reloading his modified tek-9. "Bloods forever!"

I heard a soft voice behind me. "I always knew there was a hero inside of you."

I turned around. There was Melina, dressed in little more than the scarf Lindsay Lohan wore in that New York Magazine photo shoot to try and recreate those photos of Marilyn Monroe, but failed to because her freckles were distracting and ultimately Monroe had a certain fragility and elegance to her that Lindsay couldn't really match. Lindsay Lohan is such a whore.

Melina reached out to kiss me, but I pulled away. "I'm sorry Melina," I said. "But you'll always be a gypsy. And I'll always be a Jew. And I need to marry Jewish."

I turned towards Janet, who was wolfing down the remains of the SS soldier's testicles. She peered up at me with her sky blue eyes.

"Janet Rabinowitz," I said, "will you marry me?"

They could hear her howl of affirmation from Leningrad.

The End.

I'm available to do interviews, but please, don't ask me about the details. I think the story speaks for itself. Oh and book publishers? I expect a six figure advance.

Newsworthy??

Two "pretty" girls get forcibly removed from plane.

This commenter may have summed up my reaction best.

Apparently CNN's new motto is:

CNN: Giving Self-Righteous Teenage Girls Airtime Since 2008.

UPDATE: MSNBC doesn't buy the girls' story either.

Pay This Man

A blogger named David Horvitz came up with a fun idea. Internet users can pay him to do things.

Of course, a lot of those things are things I'd like to do myself.

Daniel Day Lewis Can Rock The Moustache

Daniel Day Lewis won the award for Best Actor at the Oscars last night, for his role in There Will Be Blood. I haven't seen There Will Be Blood, although, I've heard from trusted sources that it features lots of yelling and blood. Which to my mind, makes it similar to Gangs of New York, which also featured Day Lewis. In fact, his characters, as my friend Seth pointed out, look remarkably similar:


Gangs


Blood

The similarity, of course, lies in the so-bushy-you-can-hear-it-barking moustaches, and the hat. And the yelling. "I've Abandoned my BOY!!!" "I will find youuu!!!" (actually, that second one's from his role in Last of the Mohicans). To me, it's become obvious that Daniel Day Lewis is growing quite fond of playing these facially-haired, mad-hatted characters. So Seth and I came up with some other roles that Daniel Day Lewis may want to sink his teeth into:









The Academy has showed Daniel Day love for his last two moustached roles... now if only he can land these ones.. he just may continue his streak.

New MSN Article - Online Mobs



After the article was already published, I received an email from Sarah Wells, whom I had contacted for the story (I didn't hear back before the deadline). She offered her insight into the issue of online mobs, particularly in the case of Lori Drew:

I apologise for not responding sooner; though your message was overlooked, I appreciate your attempt to contact me.

I looked for articles with your name this morning, and the MSN piece popped right up.

I have my opinions about Solove's arguments, and would take issue with him on several points, including some of the liberties he has taken with facts surrounding the anecdotes he uses to support his theses. I don't know if he was your source for the following text from your article, but it is not a minor point, and ought to be
corrected. Solove himself is aware of this and I would hope he would be kind enough to have corrected this point already:

"One by one, they found out where she worked, and called her boss and her clients. Soon, death threats came over the phone and in e-mail. Then a brick sailed through a window of the Drews' house. Someone shot at their sun room with a paintball gun."

The brick sailed through the window about a YEAR BEFORE the Pokin-authored story hit the Suburban Journals, and before the internet reaction to that article. Likewise the paintball shooting. The Drew's installed a security system because of acts of vandalism well before the Pokin story appeared or Lori Drew's name was
circulated on the internet.

I have not been inclined to engage in a dry intellectual discussion of the Meier case with Solove or anyone else, though Solove did generously attempt to solicit my own opinons when I wrote him to correct a point regarding myself. But I find his arguments have significant weaknesses. They do not allow for the private and public good that results that otherwise might not without public pressure and publicity of bad acts. They do not comprehend that there are natural checks on the relentless mob, as well. ( But I am sure you have little interest in what I would have to say on the subject.)

My decision to name Drew before the press (a day or two away at most) was based on knowlege that charges pending against Ron Meier might be dropped or nolle prossed as a result of exposure and public pressure.

In fact, this has happened, and I am convinced that their exposure has something to do with this. I would expect that their attorney pressed them to petition the prosecutor to drop charges, to reduce factors that would tend to cause public outrage to persist, and act in a way that could help lead to a more favorable outcome in any civil action taken against them.

FWIW, My husband corresponded with "cell-phone guy", one of Soloves cautionary cybervigilatne tales, and there was some distortion by Solove in that case, much resented by the subject. To me it seems the truth should be enough...and that setting facts straight matters.

To that I only add I do not think Drew a "murderer". I see her as a foolish person who caused enormous harm with am agmitted plan to "mess with" an unstable 13 yo for self-serving, and probably malicious intention; probably guilty of a civil tort whether a lawsuit is ever filed against her or not. She did not deserve the cloak of anonymity, and it is no small point that she dragged the matter into the public sphere herself by calling police when the Meier's would not speak to her, the thanksgiving weeked following Megan's death.

In response I wrote the following:

Thank you for getting back to me, Sarah. I wish I had heard back from you sooner, because I certainly would have liked to add your viewpoint to the article. I cited the Lori Drew case and your blog's involvement because it is the most recent example of this phenomenon. I will post your comments on my blog, which is linked to from the MSN article.

Personally, I agree with you that in many cases, public outrage is a good thing in that it motivates authorities to action. My article wasn't trying to refute this. The article's point was that the anonymity of the web, and a "group-think" mentality can often lead to online mobs that seek revenge and retribution instead of justice. Urging the authorities to do something is one thing... harassing a suspect's family is another. Should Lori's husband and daughter to be subjected to the crazy threats of anonymous people? Should they no longer be able to live their lives without fear? We do not live in a society where outraged individuals can decide appropriate punishment-- that is what the law is for.

Yes, sadly, no law existed to punish Lori Drew. But does that mean the punishment should be left up to the internet masses? Will they act in a responsible way? The death threats, the drive bys, the deliberate campaign to destroy the Drew's family business seems to indicate that they won't. There is little doubt that the internet has signifigantly contributed to the ongoing harrassment the Drews face. When people's addresses, phone numbers, and other personal info makes it to the web, it's fair game for any vigilante anywhere in the world... a frightening prospect.

I would greatly appreciate learning your thoughts, even though MSN might not be interested in running a follow-up article.

Personally, I don't think you can hold Lori responsible for Megan's suicide. Lori, by all accounts, had nothing to do with the mean messages that were sent on that tragic day. They were sent by kids. Mean kids, of course, but kids who were too immature to realize the harm they could be causing. A bullied, teased kid with low self esteem finally reached the point where she couldn't take it anymore. Could Lori Drew have anticipated that kids would use the fake MySpace page to engage in harassment? Perhaps. But to imply that she used her knowledge of Megan's fragile state to create a sinister plan encouraging the girl to commit suicide is to imply something that lies outside the realm of believability.

Lori's creation of the MySpace page was a mistake. I'm not defending that. And she compounded her mistake by her attitude of self-preservation afterward. But by no means does her action-- the creation of a fake MySpace page-- make her a monster, worthy of violent threats and ongoing harassment from the internet masses.