Scrapbookpages Blog

October 3, 2011

if you insist on answers to your questions, you could be “morally ill”

Filed under: Buchenwald, Holocaust — Tags: , , , — furtherglory @ 10:34 am

According to the world’s most famous Holocaust survivor, there is a difference between being mentally ill and “morally ill.”  In 2007, Elie Wiesel stepped into an elevator at the Hotel Argent in San Francisco where he was scheduled to speak at a peace conference. A young man named Eric Hunt got into the elevator with Wiesel.  Eric Hunt wanted answers to some questions about the Holocaust. Elie Wiesel told a reporter recently that he does not think that Eric Hunt’s problem is mental illness.  No — Eric Hunt is morally ill, according to Elie Wiesel, because he questions the Holocaust.

This quote is from a recent news article in the Tallahassee Democrat which mentions the incident in the elevator:

“He wanted to drag me off to his room and convince me that the Holocaust never happened and videotape me saying it was all made up, which is completely ridiculous,” Wiesel, who turned 83 this week, said.

Wiesel, who will speak Tuesday night at Florida State University, eluded the erstwhile kidnapper and alerted police. The culprit was arrested, put on trial and convicted.

“He was a college graduate. Only 22. His career is finished. And for that? I had to attend his trial. He apologized to me,” Wiesel said. “Personally, I felt nothing. I felt sorry for his mother, but not him. I felt nothing. There are some people who are mentally ill. There are other people who are not mentally ill but morally ill.”

Elie Wiesel prefers to ask questions, rather than answer them.  Here is another quote from the news article in the Tallahassee Democrat:

When asked what he will speak about next week during his return to FSU for The Golden Tribe Lecture Series, Wiesel quickly reversed the question, “I don’t know. What do you think I should talk about?”

“Wiesel also exhibits what I think to be a wonderful attitude to life which is driven by the desire to question — the existence of God, why he survived, etc.,” [FSU religion professor Martin] Kavka said. “My favorite quote from him is from an interview he gave to Oprah Winfrey over a decade ago: ‘I have no answer for anything, really. I have shelves and shelves of books in my apartment, but none of them has answers — only questions. I teach my students how to ask questions. In the word ‘question,’ there is a beautiful word ‘quest.’ I love that word. We are all partners in a quest.'”

When Elie Wiesel speaks at FSU tomorrow night, hopefully there will not be some “morally ill” student in the audience, who will dare to ask him any embarrassing questions like “Where’s your Auschwitz tattoo?” or “Where’s your Buchenwald registration card?” or “What was your identification number at Buchenwald?”

In his famous book Night, Elie wrote that he became sick three days after the Buchenwald camp was liberated on April 11, 1945 and was in the hospital for two weeks. Yet he also claims that he is in the photo below, which was taken inside Buchenwald Barrack #56 by Private H. Miller of the Civil Affairs Branch of the U.S. Army Signal Corps on April 16, 1945.

Famous photo taken at Buchenwald on April 16, 1945

Close-up of the famous photo in Barrack 56 at Buchenwald

The face of the man to the left of post on the lower bunk is allegedly the face of Elie Wiesel who was 16 years old at the time that this photo was taken.

Eric Hunt, the “morally ill” young man who confronted Elie Wiesel years ago in a San Francisco elevator is still around.  He has his own web site here.

9 Comments

  1. Questions are fine. Hopefully no lost souls exhibit mental illness and try to commit felonies against the man!

    Comment by Ray — October 4, 2011 @ 4:10 pm

    • I visited your blog at http://www.holocaustdenialischutzpah.blogspot.com and read this: “Once the deniers claim that it was not the intention of Hitler to have the Jews exterminated, they are forced to explain what, then, actually happened to the Jews who were deported to the East.”

      The Jews who were “deported to the East” from the three Reinhard camps (Treblinka, Belzec, and Sobibor) were sent into the area of Poland that had been given to the Soviet Union in 1939 after the joint conquest of Poland by the Germans and the Soviets. The Germans had conquered this area after their invasion of the Soviet Union in 1941. When Germany started losing the war and the Soviets took back this area, the Jews were on their own with no one to take care of them. They had no money, no jobs, no homes, no way of supporting themselves, no hospitals for the sick, etc. etc. etc. It is not surprising that they did not survive. If any did manage to survive, they did not write books about it because they were officially dead, according to Holocaust history. However, I have read about several survivors who said they were sent to Treblinka and survived. One of them was Norman Finkelstein’s mother, who was transferred from Treblinka to Majdanek. She did not get reparations from the Germans because she was officially dead, killed at Treblinka, which was a “death camp.” Finkelstein’s father got $100,000 in payments from the Germans before he died.

      Why wasn’t Finkelstein’s mother sent directly to Majdanek, instead of being sent first to Treblinka and transferred? Because Treblinka was only about 60 miles from the Warsaw ghetto and a railroad line went directly to Treblinka from Warsaw. The railroad line stopped at the border into the territory formerly held by the Russians because the train tracks were different on the other side. That’s why transit camps were set up near the Bug river, which was the former border between the Russian part of Poland and the Prussian and Austrian parts of Poland, back in the 19th century.

      Your blog is great. There are several readers of my blog who would be very interested in what you have to say.

      Comment by furtherglory — October 5, 2011 @ 8:23 am

      • Could you please write an article proving that Finklestein was indeed transferred from Treblinka to Majdanek?

        I’ve read rumors, many on this site, but this is the first time I am seeing your evidence which proves she was indeed sent to Treblinka.

        I believe a very large amount of Jews were transferred from Treblinka to Majdanek. Possibly even all of them.

        We know that at one time at Majdanek / Lublin, thousands of Jews were forced East across the border, no longer a problem for the Germans, but had to fend for themselves.

        These Treblinka / Majdanek transitees have definitely been swept up the rug. I’ve found many Shoah Testimonies of Jews who were transferred from Treblinka to Majdanek.

        Thanks

        Comment by Eric Hunt — October 5, 2011 @ 5:46 pm

        • Norman Finkelstein’s book, “The Holocaust Industry” was published in 2000, so it has been 11 years since I read it. My memory of it was not quite correct. I got out the book today and read on page 85 that his mother got $3,500 in reparations from the Germans. This is a quote from page 85 of the book: “A survivor of the Warsaw Ghetto, Majdanek concentration camp and slave labor camps at Czestochowa and Skarszkyko-Kamiena, she received only $3,500 in compensation from the German government.”

          The Jews in the Warsaw Ghetto were sent to Treblinka, so Finkelstein implied that his mother was sent to Treblinka, then transferred to Majdanek, and later transferred to two different labor camps. In these transfers to other camps, she was obviously not sent alone, but on a train with 3,000 people. So there were obviously many Jews who were sent first to Treblinka and then transferred to Majdanek, which was the headquarters of Operation Reinhard.

          On page 7 of his book, Finkelstein wrote this: “One of my father’s life long friends was a former inmate with him in Auschwitz….” Elsewhere in the book, Finkelstein mentions that his father was a survivor of the Warsaw ghetto. He doesn’t say whether his father was sent directly to Auschwitz, or if he was first sent to Treblinka.

          The Belzec camp, which was one of the 3 Operation Reinhard camps, was very close to Majdanek, which was a “death camp.” It is very curious that Jews living in the vicinity of Lublin, where Majdanek is located, were sent to Belzec instead of being sent to Majdanek, where there were gas chambers using Zyklon-B. Belzec had only gas chambers using carbon monoxide from engines. The clothes worn by the Jews to the Operation Reinhard camps were sent to Majdanek to be disinfected in gas chambers identical to the homicidal gas chambers. The Germans are famous for being efficient, but Operation Reinhard was a very inefficient use of the camps and gas chambers. The belief that the Operation Reinhard camps were transit camps, as the Germans claimed, makes more sense.

          Comment by furtherglory — October 6, 2011 @ 7:10 am

  2. HI ERIC , I AM LOVING THIS POST …I HAVE PUT IT ON FACEBOOK , PLEASE PLEASE GIVE US SOME MORE!!!!

    Comment by Robert Schmidt — October 3, 2011 @ 10:13 pm

  3. Here is my response to Mark Hinton –

    I’ve been aware of your recent libel against me, calling me an “erstwhile kidnapper.”

    The district attorneys themselves dropped the bogus, trumped up kidnapping charges and I was acquitted of attempted kidnapping.

    You say I was “convicted.” I was not convicted of kidnapping, and Wiesel did not “elude me.”

    I am an investigative journalist. At the age of 22, it was nearly impossible for me to come to terms with being lied to all of my life, and I certainly didn’t handle it correctly.

    I simply grabbed Wiesel by the sleeve, pulled him a few feet, let his sleeve go and said “I want to interview you” twice. He said no, so I walked back to my room.

    Which, apparently, you got to do.

    But you didn’t dare ask him to simply see his alleged tattoo. No image apparently exists of any such tattoo. Holocaust survivor Nicholas Gruner, who appears in the famous Buchenwald barracks image, wrote to me in jail and sent me his book “Stolen Identity” which claims Wiesel has no such tattoo.

    http://www.eliewieseltattoo.com/the-evidence/the-tattoo/where-is-elies-tattoo

    There exists no image of the world’s most famous Holocaust survivor’s tattoo. It would be a world exclusive if you got such an image, but you’re just a pathetic excuse for a journalist.

    My questions about “The Holocaust” are completely outlined in my video The Last Days of the Big Lie, which debunks Steve Spielberg’s Oscar winning film The Last Days – Which features Irene Zisblatt, a Wieselian pathological liar who tells tales of repeatedly swallowing and defecating diamonds for a year while in Auschwitz, having her tattoo removed by Mengele, escaping from inside a gas chamber, being selected to become a lampshade, and bringing General Patton to tears. All these liars are thoroughly debunked in my film.

    Another star of The Last Days is a black guy who claims to have liberated Dachau when the Boston Globe exposed he was never there.

    I even debunk a few lies from Wiesel (about being liberated from Buchenwald by black liberators).

    Watch all nine parts, you can learn something about true investigative journalism –

    Regarding Wiesel –

    At the age of 22, it was near impossible for me to come to terms with being lied to all of my life by cowards like you, and I certainly didn’t handle it correctly.

    It’s because of phony journalists such as yourself fawning over the liar Wiesel that I dared to approach him and attempt to ask him real questions about the various lies he brainwashes generations of children with.

    – Eric Hunt

    HolocaustDenier.com

    Comment by Eric Hunt — October 3, 2011 @ 4:29 pm

    • The reporter’s name is Mark Hinson. Note that he didn’t mention your name in his news article, but it is clear that he was writing about you. Maybe he left out your name because he feared a libel suit. It was wrong for him to leave out the name because readers who don’t know the full story do not have a chance to look up the details. I included your name and a link to your website so that people can read up on the whole story.

      I don’t approve of the way he wrote his news article about Elie Wiesel’s talk. He started his article by writing about something that happened four years ago, which has nothing to do with the fact that Elie Wiesel will be giving a talk to students tonight.

      Comment by furtherglory — October 4, 2011 @ 6:29 am

      • He’s just a lazy excuse for a journalist.

        It’s clear he brought me up simply because his preparation involved looking up Wiesel’s page on Wikipedia, where I am apparently mentioned.

        Comment by Eric Hunt — October 4, 2011 @ 9:03 pm

        • You are assuming that he did some “preparation” before writing his article. It is easy for reporters these days to look up the facts before writing an article because all they have to do is to go on the Internet, where Wikipedia usually comes up first on every search. I don’t think that he did any preparation because if he had, he would not have gotten the facts wrong. I think that he relied on his own memory and in his memory of Elie Wiesel, the first thing that came to his mind was what happened four years ago. By the way, the Wikipedia article is good, but it should mention that there is a great deal of controversy about Elie Wiesel today. A good reporter would have mentioned the current controversy instead of dredging up old news from four years ago. But I can understand why a mainstream journalist would not tell both sides of the story. That’s why blogs exist — so both sides of any controversy can be heard.

          Comment by furtherglory — October 5, 2011 @ 8:47 am


RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.

%d bloggers like this: