Wiesenthal Center

ojewriej · 10-07-2008 10:20am #1

This news got me thinking.

The Simon Wiesenthal Center has strong evidence that a former SS member known as "Dr. Death" is in southern Chile or Argentina, a top Nazi hunter for the human rights organization said Tuesday.

Heim, who would be 94, tops the center's list of most-wanted Nazi war criminals. A reward of €315,000 (US$495,000) is being offered jointly by the center and the German and Austrian governments for information leading to his capture.

His crimes are fully documented by himself, because he kept a log of the operations that he carried out," Zuroff said. "He tortured many inmates before he killed them at Mauthausen, and he used body parts of the people he killed as decorations."

So the man is a war criminal, no doubt about it. He is also an old man, unlikely to survive a trial and serve his sentence.

Wiesenthal centre is still very actively pursuing Nazis. They are pretty ruthless, and chase not only high profile criminals. For example, at the moment they are going quite hard after four concentration camp guards - you can read about it here.

They were also accused of breaking laws all over the world, and cooperating with Mossad, having people they can't prosecute assasinated.

So what do you think? Are they a bit over the top - the war ended over 60 years ago. Or are they completely within their rights, and fair play to them?

I tend to think fair play to them, although if it's true that they break laws and have people killed, I find it a bit unsettling.

ejmaztec · 10-07-2008 12:18pm

I think that we are so politically correct, these days, that we firstly assume that we have to be nice to the old folk. We're supposed to feel sorry for these poor old devils despite what they got up to when they were in their prime. People like Pinochet got away with it, playing the same card.

I see on the linked report that Heim was in the hands of the Americans for two years after the war, when he was released without any trial having taken place. Surely, there were enough witnesses and other people around at that time to question this release. I'd like to know why they let him go.

If he were extracted and taken to Israel for trial, he would no doubt tell everyone the reason for the American's releasing him all those years ago. He might also explain how he managed to leave Germany so easily in 1962 when an indictment was in the offing.

I think that if he does manage to end up in court, there should be a few more people in the dock with him.

Morlar · 10-07-2008 12:20pm

They seem overly eager to sling accusations around the place - slandering good people then dragging their heels on making retraction. The level of arrogance is staggering in my view. Not sure if you are aware of the Hunt family ?

http://www.rte.ie/news/2008/0122/mcaleesem.html

Its my view that 90+ year old veterans should be left in peace.

Unless there are exceptional levels of proof (not random accusation by 90+yr old accusers) that they are guilty of serious warcrimes then they should be allowed to live their final days in peace.

Rather than being used as a political football for point scoring by a multi - million dollar organisation seeking (in my view) to boost their publicity profile and fund-raising capabilities. That would be my take on i t. If there was a time for them to pursure people that time is past.

Flame on ! !

Heisenberg. · 10-07-2008 1:27pm

This post has been deleted.

ojewriej · 10-07-2008 1:28pm

ejmaztec wrote: »

I think that we are so politically correct, these days, that we firstly assume that we have to be nice to the old folk. We're supposed to feel sorry for these poor old devils despite what they got up to when they were in their prime. People like Pinochet got away with it, playing the same card.

I quite agree with that, but only when it comes to the major criminals.

I don't know if there is any point in chasing concentration camp guards and the likes though. Most likely they were teenagers during the war, completely messed up by propaganda and by the carnage they've seen, and probably very often it was killed or be killed for them. I know it doesn't sound like much of an escuse now, but those were different days. A lot of people did terrible things in order to survive, or simply because they didn't know any better.

ejmaztec wrote: »

I see on the linked report that Heim was in the hands of the Americans for two years after the war, when he was released without any trial having taken place. Surely, there were enough witnesses and other people around at that time to question this release. I'd like to know why they let him go.

If he were extracted and taken to Israel for trial, he would no doubt tell everyone the reason for the American's releasing him all those years ago. He might also explain how he managed to leave Germany so easily in 1962 when an indictment was in the offing.

I was wondering myself. One explanation might be that after the war there was so much stuff to take care of, that he would be pretty low on the priority list. Especially that it would probably take a while to sort out the evidence against him - Germans didn't manage to do it until the 60s.

Another thing is, that we often forget that it took a while for the world to realise the extent of attrocities committed by Germans. Even though there were numerous reports from the underground all over Europe about the things going on in the concentration camps, Allies didn't believe in them until they saw it themselves.

Morlar wrote: »

They seem overly eager to sling accusations around the place - slandering good people then dragging their heels on making retraction. The level of arrogance is staggering in my view. Not sure if you are aware of the Hunt family ?

That's a very good point, makes me feel very iffy about the Center as well.

They are also very quick to accuse people of Anti-semitism.

Morlar wrote: »

Rather than being used as a political football for point scoring by a multi - million dollar organisation seeking (in my view) to boost their publicity profile and fund-raising capabilities.

Another thing I tend to agree with.

Morlar wrote: »

If there was a time for them to pursure people that time is past.

I'm not sure about that. Some crimes deserve to be punished, no matter how long ago they were committed.

Also, it's Israel's m.o. to pursue anyone acting against it's people until they get a result. Black September terrorists would be a prime example.

ejmaztec · 10-07-2008 1:33pm

I saw a TV programme a few weeks ago and didn't realise until then that many holocaust victims are living in poverty. Various funds and self-elected organisations set up to help them are a bit picky when it comes to helping these people. A lot of them are victims twice.

If I can remember what the programme was called, I'll let you know, unless someone else can remember it.

It's ironic that the money-spinning worldwide holocaust machine makes certain that no-one forgets, but that same machine seems to ignore those impoverished survivors.

Perhaps the Wiesenthal organisation should slip 'em a few quid.

FiSe · 10-07-2008 1:57pm

He was a "bad guy" so hang that bastard. End of story. He'll be 100 shortly, well he never asked his victims about their age, or did he? Oh well, maybe he did, so he could carry on with his "scientific" research.

My point is:
There is a difference between common soldier , be it Wehrmacht or SS or Luftwaffe, who fought, who killed and who have been killed on someone else's order.
It's very hard to judge someone who took part in excecution of the Jewish, Polish, French, ... population in the field /not in the concentration camps/, but this man is a big fish, always fully responsible for his own actions. As are couple of others "researches" or "only soldiers" still alive. Those people should feel justice even after those 65odd years.

Hunt family museum, as that article says, it's still not clear where this collection came from. It could have been well connected to the Third Reich times, so what? Half of Europian museums do exhibit items plundered from another country during any given war.
If that's the truth and Hunt collection has its origin somwhere there, then, I think, it would be good to know. Without any silly emotions and fairytales about "good people of Ireland". Hope you know what I'm trying to say here :rolleyes:

FiSe · 10-07-2008 2:04pm

BTW I might be wrong here, but I think that Wiesenthal Centre is charity based and I doubt that this is a multi million dollar organisation, but as I said I could be wrong...

ojewriej · 10-07-2008 2:10pm

FiSe wrote: »

BTW I might be wrong here, but I think that Wiesenthal Centre is charity based and I doubt that this is a multi million dollar organisation, but as I said I could be wrong...

Their Net assets as of 30th of June 2007 were worth $66.193.619.

Thats an increas of over 3 million USD compared to the last year.

Breakdown - see here

Morlar · 10-07-2008 2:15pm

I hate using wiki - but sometimes its too convenient

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hunt_Museum

In December 2003, the Simon Wiesenthal Center alleged in a letter to President Mary McAleese that the museum's collection contained items looted by the Nazis during the Second World War, although the letter did not refer to any specific items in the collection. The museum has denied the claims.

-- from what I recall despite repeated requests to say which items were looted from where ? The Wiesenthal centre repeatedly refused to do so. They refused to make a direct allegation which would be easier to defend yourself against - but insisted in the blanket 'some items' which is extremely difficult to defend yourself against. Also their wording often seemed more directed at an american market with a .01 milimetre deep attention span.

An inquiry led by former Supreme Court judge Donal Barrington was set up by the museum, but its members resigned in February 2005, saying that the museum's funding made an independent inquiry impossible, and requesting a more appropriate inquiry be created.

--Again from what I recall (open to correction here) the inquiry's independence was brought into question by the wiesenthal centre.

So not only did they make the blanket allegation they refused to accept that if the museum funded an extensive and independent investigation which cleared them that the Wiesenthal centre would possibly not accept it and reject the findings based on the museum having had to invest millions to clear its own name. Thats pretty manipulative behavior and compeltely insidious in my view.

The Department of Arts then provided €150,000 in funding for a second inquiry led by former civil servant Seán Cromien, under the auspices of the Royal Irish Academy. The second inquiry was due to submit an interim report to the Royal Irish Academy in November 2005. This was submitted in February 2006. In October 2005, the museum published a catalogue of its exhibits on the internet, providing full details of all the items in its collection. In June 2006, the inquiry submitted the final report, which was published on the Academy's website.

Also in June 2006, a one-day conference took place on the theme of Contested Cultural Property and Museums: The Case of the Hunt Museum. At this conference, a message was conveyed from Shimon Samuels, who had sent the original letter to Mary McAleese questioning why he had not been invited to the seminar.

- Again mindblowing arrogance in my view to sling unfounded general allegations around the place and then question why the subsequent chain of events are not tailored for your inclusion/ your satisfaction.

Later, the terms of reference of the Hunt Museum Evaluation Group were questioned, the Simon Wiesenthal Center believing that more emphasis should have been placed on investigating the purported Nazi links of the Hunt family

-- this is a shift from items which were looted to 'family links'- moving the goalposts rather than admit the blanket allegations were unfounded.

and the Hunt Museum Evaluation Group believing that this lay beyond their terms of reference, which were to do with provenance research. The Royal Irish Academy issued a press release responding to the statement of the Simon Wiesenthal Center.

-- There was a seperate investigation which also cleared them by
http://www.rte.ie/news/2008/0122/mcaleesem.html

'Following an investigation, US expert Dr Lynn Nicholas said last year that there was no proof that these allegations were true, a verdict welcomed by the museum.'

The Wiesenthal defence of their blanket allegations is not to accept the evidence outlining where they were wrong, but, instead to say they will do their 'own investigation'.

Kind of makes you wonder why they didnt do that to begin with - ie before slinging the mud. They could well have charity status for tax purposes - I dont see the charitable endeavour in making unfounded allegations and then despite all reasonable responses (even from the president of Ireland) continuing to have the arrogance to refuse to acknowledge their mistake.

ojewriej · 10-07-2008 2:29pm

Morlar wrote: »

I
Kind of makes you wonder why they didnt do that to begin with - ie before slinging the mud. They could well have charity status for tax purposes - I dont see the charitable endeavour in making unfounded allegations and then despite all reasonable responses (even from the president of Ireland) continuing to have the arrogance to refuse to acknowledge their mistake.

You are dead right, very dirty tactics.

On the other hand, a lot of people would get away with what they did, if it wasn't for the Center. That's why I can't make up my mind about it.

Off topic:

I was reading up in Simon Wiesenthal himself, and found this:

1943 - On 20 April Wiesenthal is among 20 inmates selected to be shot as part of the celebration of Hitler's 54th birthday. He is spared, however, when an SS corporal has him released so he can paint a banner with a swastika for the occasion.

It never ceases to amaze me, how random it was. Whether you live or die, I mean.

Morlar · 10-07-2008 2:59pm

'20 inmates selected to be shot as part of the celebration of Hitler's 54th birthday'

ojewriej wrote: »

It never ceases to amaze me, how random it was. Whether you live or die, I mean.

I 100% agree that survival throughout that was was utterly random for all involved. Just out of curiosity - could I ask what is the evidence or what is the source to confirm that that above incident occurred as described ?

My point is that wiesenthal personally was prone to exaggeration. Wasnt there also an Irish journalist who interviewed Wiesenthal who said that he made outright outrageous claims about (among other things) having been personally responsible/assisted in the eichmann investigation ? I seem to recall a mossad operative later saying he was no help to them whatsoever and in fact hindered their investigation despite he claiming that he all but cracked the case himself.

ojewriej · 10-07-2008 3:23pm

Morlar wrote: »

I 100% agree that survival throughout that was was utterly random for all involved. Just out of curiosity - could I ask what is the evidence or what is the source to confirm that that above incident occurred as described ?

No proof, but the source is here

I don't really care if that particular incident really happen though. I've read enough books about stuff that went on in the camps to know that this sort of thing happened all the time.

Morlar wrote: »

My point is that wiesenthal personally was prone to exaggeration. Wasnt there also an Irish journalist who interviewed Wiesenthal who said that he made outright outrageous claims about (among other things) having been personally responsible/assisted in the eichmann investigation ? I seem to recall a mossad operative later saying he was no help to them whatsoever and in fact hindered their investigation despite he claiming that he all but cracked the case himself.

This is mentioned on the same website:

However, Wiesenthal's contribution is later disputed by Isser Harel, the head of Mossad at the time of Eichmann's capture. Speaking in 1991, Harel says that Wiesenthal had "had no role whatsoever" in the capture of Eichmann. "All the information supplied by Wiesenthal, and in anticipation of the operation, was utterly worthless, and sometimes even misleading or of negative value," he says.

Harel also implies that inaccurate information provided by Wiesenthal had obstructed attempts to locate Josef Mengele.

Thing is, the quote comes form the unpublished memoir of the agent. I've never seen anyone else denying Wiesenthal's involvement in Eichman's capture, I actually thought it's an undeniable common knowledge.

In fact, this is what convinced some money people to give Wiesenthal money to re-open the Jewish Documentations Centre, closed earliel due to the lack of funds. So he must have had some proof.

And to be honest, I would suspect Mossad agents of tendency to exaggerate too.

Another thing is, even if he ddidn't have anything to do with catching Eichman, he and his people cought a lot of others. Also, they've gathered a lot of evidence used in the Nurenburg trials.

Morlar · 10-07-2008 3:42pm

That is exactly the quote I was thinking of though I coudlnt actually find it - cheers. My point is he claimed to have played a significant role in the capture of Eichmann, this increased his profile and funding and so was in his interests to promote loudly and often.

He also claimed that he was spared death miraculously on several occassions (including the allegation that he was about to be executed to celebrate hitlers birthday). This also increased his funding, profile, public sympathy and was also in his interests to promote.

Re point 1 it was refuted by a central source who broke the normal official silence in order to clear the air (if you accept the mossad agents word above Wiesenthal). From what I have read this was after years of frustration at Wiesenthal publicly claiming credit.

So despite the fact that the mossad agent directly involved said '"All the information supplied by Wiesenthal, and in anticipation of the operation, was utterly worthless, and sometimes even misleading or of negative value," Wiesenthal continued to claim a sizeable portion of credit.

This makes him prone to exaggeration in my view. On a massive scale in a very public large scale manner he manipulated the media to portray himself in a heroic favourable light. That combined with the lack of corroboration would make his other claims largely suspect in my view.

Though it goes without saying (or should) that I am not saying people werent often killed out of hand either in the field or in detention.

ojewriej · 10-07-2008 4:12pm

I just had a quick look and found his obituary from The Independent.

Simon Wiesenthal, meanwhile, wrote a book entitled I Hunted Eichmann. It came out even before the Nazi was executed. Its boastful title " which the contents did little to substantiate " made its author, after years of obscure detective work, an overnight celebrity. Because of the cloak of secrecy which Mossad had cast over its kidnapping operation there was no-one to offer an alternative view.

Wiesenthal took full advantage of the publicity to press his cause and was able to return to full-time Nazi-hunting on the back of the Eichmann case. He reopened the Jewish Documentation Centre, this time in Vienna, and established a web of informants, including veterans of various intelligence services. They found not only the war criminals but also the witnesses whose testimony, the Simon Wiesenthal Centre in Vienna now says, has helped bring 1,100 former Nazis to trial over the past 50 years.

Wiesenthal's career has not been without controversy. He was accused of egocentricity by those who claimed he took more than his fair share of credit for the arrest of Eichmann.

In 1991 the Jerusalem Post disclosed that the former Mossad chief Isser Harel had written an unpublished manuscript which claimed that Wiesenthal not only 'had no role whatsoever' in Eichmann's apprehension, but in fact 'had endangered the entire Eichmann operation and aborted the planned capture of the evil Auschwitz doctor Josef Mengele'. Harel claimed that he wrote the manuscript out of frustration at the amount of credit Wiesenthal was claiming for the capture of Eichmann and declined to publish it only because that might give succour to anti-semites.

That was not all. Neal Sher, head of the US government's Office of Special Investigations which investigates war crimes, received a demand from Wiesenthal that the OSI investigate suspected war criminals living in the United States.

Sher replied: 'Few of your allegations have resulted in active ongoing investigations ... the bottom line is that ... no allegation which originated from your office has resulted in a court filing by the OSI.' And Sher's successor Eli Rosenbaum, wrote: 'In sum, Wiesenthal's roles in the biggest Nazi cases of all " Mengele, Bormann, and in all likelihood, Eichmann as well " were studies in ineptitude, exaggeration, and self-glorification.'

And there is few more points against him there. And there is also this:

But in one sense all that is irrelevant. Many of the Nazis he brought to trial were beyond dispute, such as Franz Stangl, the commandant of the Treblinka and Sobibor death camps in Poland, who liked to dress in white riding clothes, and was responsible for the extermination of nearly one million people.

Then there was Hermine Ryan who supervised the killings of hundreds of children at Majdanek concentration camp near Lublin in Poland. The doggedness with which Simon Wiesenthal hunted down such individuals has assumed a legendary status.

'When the Holocaust ended in 1945 and the whole world went home to forget, he alone remained behind to remember,' Rabbi Marvin Hier, his successor at the centre, said yesterday. 'He did not forget. He became the permanent representative of the victims, determined to bring the perpetrators of history's greatest crime to justice.'

Simon Wiesenthal spent the past 50 years not just hunting war criminals. He spoke out against racism everywhere, and held out the Jewish experience as a lesson for humanity. To many his name has become a symbol of human conscience. Whatever the facts, in the end it is for this that he will be remembered.

And that's my point. Whether he did catch Eichman or not, he kept the pressure on the Nazis, they knew that they can't rest.

Morlar · 10-07-2008 4:37pm

ojewriej wrote: »

And that's my point. Whether he did catch Eichman or not, he kept the pressure on the Nazis, they knew that they can't rest.

My point would be if you go around publicly telling large scale lies and exaggerations when it suits your interests then that undermines any level of integrity you might have othewise laid claim to.

Also calls into question the legitimacy / truth of later (particularly the more outrageous) claims you may make.

My overall point would be that that spirit of 'say anything for the attention/sympathy/profile/funding' - its ultimately for a good cause' continues to this day in the context of the organisation which now bears his name.

If you ask a colletor today to catalogue their entire multi-thousand piece collection in order to account for not just its whereabouts, but also any possible terms or circumstances of its acquisition which may have taken place during the years 1933-1945 (or if it did not change hands during those years - prove it) it seems to me that that would be extremely easy to allege that a collection contains such pieces, generating the publicity and attention and sympathy and so on.

This fact will not be unknown to the wiesenthal people who threw the allegations around to begin with.

Considering (in the case of the Hunt family) it was a collection which contained several thousand pieces it was then extremely difficult for them to defend themselves against such arrogant attention seeking claims.

FiSe · 10-07-2008 4:49pm

I'm sorry lads, completly loosing the plot here...

Morlar · 10-07-2008 5:04pm

FiSe wrote: »

I'm sorry lads, completly loosing the plot here...

In what way ?

Its a discussion about the wiesenthal centre - which has covered - both the Wiesenthal centre and Simon Wiesenthal (who it was named after and whose work it is supposed to be continuing). If the discussion covers the behaviour & activities of the centre and the character & integrity (or otherwise) of the man how is that losing the plot or irrelevant to the discussion?

In the context of Ireland - the hunt situation is highly relevant. In the context of the centre globally its also one of the more glaring examples of shady practice and completely relevant to the discussion (in my view). Your welcome to disagree or make whatever point you prefer instead.

FiSe · 10-07-2008 6:06pm

That's all very well, but this discussion is also about well known Nazi criminals, well one anyway and their handover to justice, in which Wiesenthal Centre plays a big part...

Hunt museum, is really unimportant if you looking at the situation from this point of view.
There were an inquiries, one of them led by "former civil servant", sorry couldn't resist, which proved SWC wrong. The End. Dot.
There was one day conference on this topic as well, so why not invite that angry fella, which name I forgot, from the Centre and get him nailed there and then?
Of course, if you bought any historical or fine art artefact during 1939-45 it stinks. And always will, right or wrong. Am not accusing, am just commenting on what I have said before. Every war brings movement of such items, if there's an offer and you are lucky enough and living in neutral country and your valet is big enough, you gonna go and buy. Natural. And if that's the only connection with Nazi Germany, then I can't see anything wrong with that. And even if there’s some of Hunt family who was in NSDAP or otherwise connected with the Nazi regime, so what? Was he a war criminal? If yes judge him, if not, well, tens of thousands like him were around back in those times...

I believe that there are, at least, some workers in SWC, who are trying really hard to do their best to uncover real war criminals, those who are still alive, or those who died under false names all over the world.
My granddad will be 90 shortly, he would be one of those witnesses you are talking about and which credibility you have questioned, or that was the impression I got, if he would have been in the lager. He wasn't, he told me some stories from the war, his dates are mixed, but if it's something terrible, he knows exactly how it happened, where it was he remembers every detail including people who were around.

Am not saying that SWC is the only right institution and I don't know what age are yous, but it's very hard to judge people who went through something which we will never know. Wiesenthal may put some bling on his live and make him self bigger than he was, but it doesn't make him a layer or it doesn’t make the Centre worthless organization. Or does it?

Morlar · 10-07-2008 6:21pm

FiSe wrote: »

Wiesenthal may put some bling on his live and make him self bigger than he was, but it doesn't make him a layer or it doesn’t make the Centre worthless organization. Or does it?

If by 'bling' you mean lies and by 'layer' you mean liar then sorry to sound like a smartarse but that would make him a liar.

Re the Wiesenthal centre - (not the guy) the hunt situation is 100% relevant.

There arent that many real life actual nazis with reasonable ground for suspicion of warcrimes still alive today to keep an organisation that size busy on a day by day basis. Going forward they need to diversify a bit which is where the hunt collection scenario comes in as thats the sort of area where the wiesenthal centre are heading once the last of the 90+ yrolds pass on.

The hunt story shows them up for the kind of people they are. They are so desperate for publicity and through that more funding that they will throw allegations around with no verification or proof. Putting families under the strain of having to defend themselves against a non specific allegation. Then to top it off - the wiesenthal centre dont accept their defence on the basis that if they (the Hunt family) funded the investigation out of their own pocket well then that's not impartial enough.

Then when a seperate independent body sets up to investigate the hunt people (following the wiesenthal initial groundless allegation) they disagree that they didnt agree in advance to the terms of reference - the arrogance is literally mindblowing. They then complain that they werent invited to a conference where the issue is discussed.. Who exactly they think they are to insinuate themselves like that is a good question - they have no mandate whatsoever let alone the right to assume the mantle of an officially involved party. In the case of the hunt family the wiesenthal centre have displayed the morals of a snake - to say that that somehow is simply not a relevant example in a discussion about the wiesenthal centre is something I wouldnt agree with.

FiSe · 10-07-2008 7:36pm

Morlar wrote: »

If by 'bling' you mean lies and by 'layer' you mean liar then sorry to sound like a smartarse but that would make him a liar.

"liar" oops, that one escaped, in and out from the spraybooth where am spraying layer after layer :rolleyes:

Bling means bling, or is it blink? Everybody puts bling on their life stories...

Morlar · 10-07-2008 7:56pm

FiSe wrote: »

"liar" oops, that one escaped, in and out from the spraybooth where am spraying layer after layer :rolleyes:

Bling means bling, everybody puts bling on their life stories...

Theres something about that combination of being a liar/prone to exaggeration while being responsible for making life and death accusations against people that doesnt go well together.

I was reading a little more on him and there was one telling quote that I would be in full agreement with (bling or no blingless). From here http://www.moreorless.au.com/heroes/wiesenthal.html

2003 - Wiesenthal announces that his Nazi-hunting work is complete and retires from the Jewish Documentation Centre.

"I found the mass murderers I was looking for, and I have outlived them all," he tells the Austrian magazine 'Format' in April. "If there are a few I didn't look for, they are now too old and fragile to stand trial. My work is done."

ojewriej · 10-07-2008 8:36pm

Morlar wrote: »

If by 'bling' you mean lies and by 'layer' you mean liar then sorry to sound like a smartarse but that would make him a liar.

You are making an awful jump here. I mean, a minute ago we just knew of some people questioning his story about Eichman - or rather one person really, and few people saying that he was an egomaniac and liked to exaggerate things. Are you sure that's enough to call him a liar and question everything he acchieved?

Your man Harel didn't publish these accusations in his biography - I wonder why is that?

What I'm getting at is that Wiesenthals role in catching Eichman is explained in quite a detail - i.e. the postcard he received informing him about eichman wherebaout - , and I find this kind of detail quite convincing. Especially that all we have against it is one person's accusations which are not supported by any kind of proof. As far as I can see, anyway.

Morlar wrote: »

The hunt story shows them up for the kind of people they are. They are so desperate for publicity and through that more funding that they will throw allegations around with no verification or proof.

Hunt's case was handled pretty badly, i agree. Very badly even. But I don't agree it shows "what kind of people they are" and that they are "desperate for publicity". In the line of work they are, it's inevitable that they will step on some toes and sometimes things will go wrong. To be honest, after reading up on their work over the years, I'm quite surprised that similar controversies only happened a handfull of times.

Morlar wrote: »

I was reading a little more on him and there was one telling quote that I would be in full agreement with (bling or no blingless). From here http://www.moreorless.au.com/heroes/wiesenthal.html

2003 - Wiesenthal announces that his Nazi-hunting work is complete and retires from the Jewish Documentation Centre.

"I found the mass murderers I was looking for, and I have outlived them all," he tells the Austrian magazine 'Format' in April. "If there are a few I didn't look for, they are now too old and fragile to stand trial. My work is done."

The truth is, Wiesenthal was never actually involved in institute's work. He did say it was his legacy, but actual Nazi hunting was done by other people. And I think they are right to do it. I mean, look at the guy from my OP,

"He tortured many inmates before he killed them at Mauthausen, and he used body parts of the people he killed as decorations."

I think he deserves anything they can throw at him, no matter how old and fragile he is. I really hope they'll find and punish him.

kowloon · 14-07-2008 6:41pm

Morlar wrote: »

They seem overly eager to sling accusations around the place - slandering good people then dragging their heels on making retraction. The level of arrogance is staggering in my view. Not sure if you are aware of the Hunt family ?

http://www.rte.ie/news/2008/0122/mcaleesem.html

First thing that sprung to mind when I saw the title. What are they all going to do when the work runs out? Witches anyone?

marcsignal · 14-07-2008 7:08pm

ejmaztec wrote: »

I saw a TV programme a few weeks ago and didn't realise until then that many holocaust victims are living in poverty. Various funds and self-elected organisations set up to help them are a bit picky when it comes to helping these people. A lot of them are victims twice.

If I can remember what the programme was called, I'll let you know, unless someone else can remember it.

It's ironic that the money-spinning worldwide holocaust machine makes certain that no-one forgets, but that same machine seems to ignore those impoverished survivors.

Perhaps the Wiesenthal organisation should slip 'em a few quid.

I think I saw that documentary a few years ago, it was called 'Battle for the Holocaust' http://www.channel4.com/history/microsites/B/battle/page3.html and featured interviews with victims as well as Professor Norman Finkelstein. He wrote a good book about the subject called 'The Holocaust Industry' http://books.google.ie/books?id=VrqK5VdO2i0C&dq=Norman+Finkelstein+%2BHolocaust+industry&pg=PP1&ots=52wy_lDXms&sig=SV_-8Ge1swI9SkQC4t6-_sPhrk0&hl=en&sa=X&oi=book_result&resnum=1&ct=result
Finkelsteins' parents survived the concentration camps and he put in a claim for compensation money for them from the World Jewish Congress who were pressuring the Swiss and German Banks for money. His parents were given something in the region of $1240 each for their trouble, and meanwhile, these organisations were raking in billions.

Morlar · 14-07-2008 7:27pm

ojewriej wrote: »

You are making an awful jump here. I mean, a minute ago we just knew of some people questioning his story about Eichman - or rather one person really,

Not quite - going from the quotes you yourself provided in this thread ;

Neal Sher, head of the US government's Office of Special Investigations

'Few of your allegations have resulted in active ongoing investigations ... the bottom line is that ... no allegation which originated from your office has resulted in a court filing by the OSI.'

Sher's successor Eli Rosenbaum, wrote:

'In sum, Wiesenthal's roles in the biggest Nazi cases of all " Mengele, Bormann, and in all likelihood, Eichmann as well " were studies in ineptitude, exaggeration, and self-glorification.'

Isser Harel, the head of Mossad at the time of Eichmann's capture

"All the information supplied by Wiesenthal, and in anticipation of the operation, was utterly worthless, and sometimes even misleading or of negative value,"

And those are just the ones you yourself provided.

ojewriej wrote: »

and few people saying that he was an egomaniac and liked to exaggerate things. Are you sure that's enough to call him a liar and question everything he acchieved?

Wiesentahl didnt just mention this in passing - its not 'bling' or some minor point he bragged about in the heat of the moment like say . . . his golfing ability (the reason I use this example is not to lessen the subject but to point out that others trivialising his lies are not entirely accurate).

He wrote a book in which this was the central claim then that book in ways became the basis of his career (eg it led to him being a movie consultant on the boys from brazil for example) and it generally increased his profile.

If he was capable of lying consistently on that scale - (ie to the entire world while knowing that certain people bound by official oaths knew the truth), repeatedly over that many years then in my view he is 100% unreliable.

ojewriej wrote: »

Hunt's case was handled pretty badly, i agree. Very badly even. But I don't agree it shows "what kind of people they are" and that they are "desperate for publicity".

Considering they also tried to ban the sale of militaria on ebay (as one other example) publicity seeking with regard to the wiesentahl centre is not an isolated episode in my view. Besides re the Hunt saga - reproaching the head of state of Ireland . . . . I dont believe that that would happen without senior wiesentahl people planning that one out in advance. Organisations dont take on (even symbolic) heads of state without agreeing fully in advance. They chose this route at the highest levels of the organisation rather than correct a mistake they chose to continue their belligerence to bluster the opposition aside. They have had years to correct their approach and consistently failed to do so. Its not an isolated blip on their record - its at highest levels and consistently over years.

ojewriej wrote: »

The truth is, Wiesenthal was never actually involved in institute's work.

Technically, no, but the institute carries his name and is supposedly based on his lifes work so I am not sure how relevant your point here is.

ojewriej wrote: »

Quote:
"He tortured many inmates before he killed them at Mauthausen, and he used body parts of the people he killed as decorations."

I think he deserves anything they can throw at him, no matter how old and fragile he is. I really hope they'll find and punish him.

'body parts . . . as decorations' I take it you mean legs and arms and so on ? Can I ask what is the evidence a German officer used body parts for decoration ?

I know skulls are often used on the battlefield as they can be commonplace at times but in the context of a camp situation what evidence is there that arms and legs were used as decoration ?

The reason I ask is that I still remember when the stories about bars of soap made out of body fat, shrunken heads, lampshades made out of human skin (and I believe also drums) and so on were commonplace in relation to that subject. Those more 'out-there' claims seem to be less repeated thesedays but still you get ones like the above which seem to go unchallenged as a matter of course. I think this is due to the climate of fear surrounding any non 100% agreement in discussions of any aspect of that entire topic. Now I am not saying that a german officer in the entirety of that 6 year war with 20 million german combatants never used body parts as decorations but i am just curious as to what the actual evidence is (aside from the fact that the allegation has been made).

Morlar · 14-07-2008 7:29pm

marcsignal wrote: »

I think I saw that documentary a few years ago, it was called 'Battle for the Holocaust' http://www.channel4.com/history/microsites/B/battle/page3.html and featured interviews with victims as well as Professor Norman Finkelstein. He wrote a good book about the subject called 'The Holocaust Industry' http://books.google.ie/books?id=VrqK5VdO2i0C&dq=Norman+Finkelstein+%2BHolocaust+industry&pg=PP1&ots=52wy_lDXms&sig=SV_-8Ge1swI9SkQC4t6-_sPhrk0&hl=en&sa=X&oi=book_result&resnum=1&ct=result
Finkelsteins' parents survived the concentration camps and he put in a claim for compensation money for them from the World Jewish Congress who were pressuring the Swiss and German Banks for money. His parents were given something in the region of $1240 each for their trouble, and meanwhile, these organisations were raking in billions.

And he was recently barred from Israel for his troubles. I have read that finkelstein book 'the holocaust industry' and it is completely stomach churning what has happened to the likes of his parents. They recieved next to nothing while countless billions were siphoned off to legal interests and political organisations.

marcsignal · 14-07-2008 9:05pm

Morlar wrote: »

And he was recently barred from Israel for his troubles. I have read that finkelstein book 'the holocaust industry' and it is completely stomach churning what has happened to the likes of his parents. They recieved next to nothing while countless billions were siphoned off to legal interests and political organisations.

Yeah he certainly raised a lot of, what I personally believe are, valid questions about the integrity of these organisations. If what he says is true, (and I can't see any point in him making it up), it is truly shameful.

Slightly off topic, but the Dachau camp is very close to where I live, and the German Government has recently spent millions renovating the place and building a new visitors centre.

There was also a lot of grumbling in Germany recently about the renovation of another lesser known camp called 'Flossenbürg' near 'Grafenwohr' in Bavaria. From what I understand, in the 60's and 70's local people built houses on the site of the camp which was largely abandoned. Recently the German Government decided to re-open it as a Holocaust memorial. A compulsory purchase order was sent to all those living on the site and the people concerned were consequently forced to move. You can see it here on Google Earth 49°44'9.63"N 12°21'22.98"E The surrounding houses are really close to, and on the original site.
Link here to renovation, but all in German http://www.gedenkstaette-flossenbuerg.de/ausstellung/index.php

Another embarrassing one that happened a while ago, was over the Holocaust memorial in Berlin. In order to avoid Anti-Semetic graffiti appearing on the site, the stonework was treated with a kind of 'anti stick' varnish to prevent spray paint from drying on the surface. However the company that made this product were found to have some connection with the company that made the Zyklon-B Gas from the Camps.

FiSe · 14-07-2008 9:29pm

Morlar wrote: »

'body parts . . . as decorations' I take it you mean legs and arms and so on ? Can I ask what is the evidence a German officer used body parts for decoration ?

Don't want to start again, so only quick one, I believe, that this is taken from a newspaper article or web article which was put together by journalist who knows feck all about the topic he/she writes abot. Very common practice unfortunately nowadays and the "human decoration" thing seemed to be a good punchline to get a point across.

But apart from all this talk about The Centre, Wiesenthal, multimillion dollar holocaust industry, which, OK, is not as rose as it looks, The Hunts, Mossad and god only knows what else, I'm still trying to understand what are you saying about "that" particular German officer who is a known war criminal.

And, just one more thing, I thought, that Simon Wiesenthal died shortly after that Wiena interview, you have mentioned above, so he can't be chasing any other Nazi criminals. So in all fairness, he's right in that one after all.

LostinBlanch · 14-07-2008 11:28pm

marcsignal wrote: »

I think I saw that documentary a few years ago, it was called 'Battle for the Holocaust' http://www.channel4.com/history/microsites/B/battle/page3.html and featured interviews with victims as well as Professor Norman Finkelstein. He wrote a good book about the subject called 'The Holocaust Industry' http://books.google.ie/books?id=VrqK5VdO2i0C&dq=Norman+Finkelstein+%2BHolocaust+industry&pg=PP1&ots=52wy_lDXms&sig=SV_-8Ge1swI9SkQC4t6-_sPhrk0&hl=en&sa=X&oi=book_result&resnum=1&ct=result
Finkelsteins' parents survived the concentration camps and he put in a claim for compensation money for them from the World Jewish Congress who were pressuring the Swiss and German Banks for money. His parents were given something in the region of $1240 each for their trouble, and meanwhile, these organisations were raking in billions.

Yes, that is really sickening. It's the victims who get practically nothing, while organisations get (and keep) the lions share.

marcsignal · 14-07-2008 11:54pm

LostinBlanch wrote: »

Yes, that is really sickening. It's the victims who get practically nothing, while organisations get (and keep) the lions share.

He speaks about it here on YouTube (in 6 parts)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ja4WfP7Be78

Wiesenthal Center

Comments