The head Nazi-hunter’s trail of lies

Simon Wiesenthal, famed for his pursuit of justice, caught fewer war criminals than he claimed and fabricated much of his own Holocaust story

The head Nazi-hunter’s trail of lies - Times Online

 

Hello lrusso216,

short run on Wiki, brings up this:

After working at The Times from 1992 to 2000, he became a novelist. His first book, The Traitor, was published in 2002, and concerns the British Free Corps, a British unit of the Waffen-SS. The Leader (2003) is set in a Britain ruled by Oswald Mosley as a Fascist dictator. The Occupation (2004) takes place during the German Occupation of the Channel Islands. The Colditz Legacy (2005) is set in Colditz Castle during the war and the 1970s. With James Owen, he edited The Voice of War in 2004, a collection of Second World War memoirs. In 2006 he published Berlin Games, a history of the 1936 Berlin Olympics, which was shortlisted for the 2006 William Hill Sports Book of the Year and the 2007 Outstanding Book of the Year by the North American Society for the Sociology of Sport.
Walters is represented by Tif Loehnis at Janklow & Nesbit (UK) Ltd.

In October 2007, as part of his research for his book Hunting Evil, Walters visited the alleged Nazi war criminal Erna Wallisch at her flat in Vienna, Austria. Wallisch, a former concentration camp guard at Ravensbrück and Majdanek, was the seventh most wanted person on the Simon Wiesenthal Center's list of suspected war criminals from the Second World War period. Although Wallisch refused to talk to Walters, the news of his encounter was widley reported.

He has his own website:

GUY WALTERS


Interview with The Jewish Chronicle

Thursday 23rd July 2009

Two weeks ago I was interviewed about Hunting Evil by Simon Round of The Jewish Chronicle. Over coffee at the Soho Hotel, our conversation centred on Simon Wiesenthal and my radical reassessment of his career. Ever since I discovered that Wiesenthal had not been entirely truthful about his achievements, I’ve been concerned about how to present my findings without angering some members of the Jewish community. In the past, those who have accused Wiesenthal of mendacity have all but been labelled as Holocaust deniers or anti-Semites. (These two categories are invariably mutually inclusive.) As I stressed in the serialisation in The Sunday Times, I fall into neither of those camps, and the interview in the JC was a valuable opportunity to make this clear.
As I said to Mr Round, “Sometimes the truth is inconvenient. This does not mean you should ignore it. I hate the fact that fake historians like David Irving have hijacked the term ‘revisionist’. Proper historians should be constantly looking to revise an accepted view of history, based on new evidence.”
So far, my revelations have caused less of a stink than I had predicted. I am glad of this, although I’m aware that my book has only just reached the shelves. I do know that members of the Simon Wiesenthal Center have been disingenuously presenting themselves as members of the media in order to secure review copies, but to my publisher’s credit, their requests have been refused. Let me stress, I have no truck with the SWC reading my book - in fact, I positively encourage them to, which is why my publisher supplied them with my email address and told them to email me directly if they wanted a copy.
As of yet, I have heard nothing.

Regards
Kruska

 

Indeed. I think it should be taken with a grain -or a few thousand- of salt. But I mean hey, with headlines on that site like: "The secret Royals; Illegitimate children of the British Monarchs" and Confessions of a cross-dressing boy", how can you go wrong, right?!? Let's wait and see if the National Enquirer or Hustler picks it up, then maybe my doubt will be put to rest.

The vast majority of his work is fiction, and while that certainly doesnt mean he could never write a concise book of history, it gives me reason to pause and think when it comes to his credibility. I love how he's also accusing the Holy See of aiding and abetting the escape of Josef Mengele and Klaus Barbie.

Seriously though, even if it was true, does it really matter? Does it mean the holocaust never happened? Does it mean Weisenthall never did any good in this world in tracking down Nazis? Of course it doesn't, and it sounds suspiciously to me like Walters is a Holocaust denier lurking in the shadows like a cockroach.

 

Hello Keystone Two-Eight,

I don't really think that Guy Walters is into fiction in regards to his "investigation" towards Simon Wiesenthal. And it certainly has nothing to do with a holocaust denial.

Simon Wiesenthal is a person about whom there are doubts for reasons, some of his personal accounts in regards to his KZ history do not match - which is known - but IMO doesn't reflect onto his job-performance as a Nazi-hunter.

For an author, (Nazi topics) usually always pay of well - and when a famous person such asSimon Wiesenthal is involved the $$ return is almost guaranteed. - so Guy Walters forwards a topic that is already known (questions on behalf of S.W. past) in order to make his actual book and content more attractive to the buyers.

That he, Guy Walters might even hope to uncover S.W. "real" past (persons critical to S.W. suspect for reasons that he might have worked for the Nazis towards the end) would offcourse cash in $$ like hell.

Regards
Kruska

 

Personally I see very little reason to dig up info on a person who has dedicated his life to nazi-hunting. Unless he was an SS officer then it´d be a different matter, but even being a kapo would not make me want to know more about it as those people did not have much choice to survive in the camps. If anyone has done work to getting all the nazi criminals to court the SW center has.

Just my two cents....

 

So what if true!

I'm sure that there is a host of undocumented sins that Mother Theresa has committed in her lifetime. Were these to somehow become documented, would it mean that she is now "burning in hell"?

Bob Guercio

 

Wow!! imagine the heap of $$$ one could make if he could actually come up with proofe in regards to Mother Theresa's sins.

That is what all authers are about - making $$$, it is up to the reader/consumer to make up his mind of purchasing and believing the content. Other authors can make many $$$ too, by selling counterviews.

So what is the problem?? - just because it is about a Jew?

Nobody would care or has ever had scruples by making $$$ out of Nazi stuff or publishing books making use of Nazi topics and prominent Nazi characters. Collecting and selling Nazi stuff is okay - after all it's history!! - investigating into SW past is a tabu, an outrage, a sin?
After all he also is part of history - so what's the whole fuzz??

What ever one might find out about SW doesn't change anything in regards to the holocaust, neither it's causes, its victims, nor the culprits.

Regards
Kruska

 

It's not a problem but it certainly makes for a juicier story!

The news media doesn't report on what we need to read but reports on what we want to read and the profit motive demands this. And, logical or not, juiciness is a prime factor for what we want to read.

Bob Guercio

 

Hello Bob Guercio,

yes a juicier factor, or real humane intensions?, and this goes vis - versa doesn't it?

Does the international movie industry (formost Hollywood) want to produce a movie about a jewish man who has to suffer hell in a KZ,

or about a German communist who has to suffer hell in a KZ, so it isn't quite about the KZ that stimulates the masses, that brings in the cash, but the combination between the juicier and the KZ.

So how much money from their profits has Hollywood or e.g. Spielberg, etc. contributed to the victims of the Nazis, for thanking them to making big $$ out of their missery? I can only wish and hope for a full 100%.

It's $$$ that rule the world and provide whatever justification is needed.

Regards
Kruska

 

Apparently he is a journalist. Apologies.

It appears, however, that his article has brought out some deniers.Look at the comments section. Loons talking about "truth". One thinks the Dairy of Anne Frank" is a piece of fiction.

How deluded these idiots are. They take SW's lies and attempt to use them as proof that the Holocaust is either a myth or not as bad as portrayed. Mr. Walters wished to avoid this, but unfortunately his article is chum for the anti-Semitic sharks out there.

 

Hello GrandsonofAMarine

Well in defense for the accused (Guy Walters) let me say:

He pointed out several issues in regards to claims made by SW in regards to his KZ past - that these pointed out issues are indeed worth a ? is okay to me.

What I do not know at this stage is:

Did SW actually forward these occurences as described by Walter?

So if one want's to verdict about Walter, one maybe has to read/check the cited passages in SW documented memories and his written accounts first.

Regards
Kruska

 

I came across this thread through my disgustingly vain habit of self-googling, and as posters appear significantly more intelligent than one gets on many wwii forums, I thought you all deserved to hear my response.

1. For the record, I'm no Holocaust denier, antisemite, neo-Nazi, member of Combat-88, fan of David Duke etc.
2. When I started the book, I thought that Wiesenthal was the secular saint that he is commonly regarded as. I sold the book to about 10 publishers worldwide with a book proposal that reflected this, so my reasons for questioning Wiesenthal's record were made after I got my $$$. However, when I started researching Wiesenthal, I found just so many inconsistencies and contradictions and, well, lies, that I felt I couldn't ignore what was in front of me.
3. I'm aware that for some, criticising an important Jewish figure who did much to tell the world about the Holocaust is akin to Holocaust denial, but I think that's unfair. I don't like any debate to be polarised, and I was well aware when writing the book that my critique of SW would be picked up by deniers and their ilk. In a way, that's too bad, but I think it's important to wrestle criticism away from those who wish to use the inconsistencies in SW's life to promote their own nefarious political agenda.
4. Yes, the book is heavily footnoted. When you all buy the book you'll be able to check my sources and attributions, and I can also email jpegs of documents I photographed in the US and the UK.
5. I can be contacted via Guy Walters
6. Best wishes to all of you!

Guy

 

Thanx for your answer here,Guy!

It´s good to hear from authors about how their book was created, especially in this case. And where you stand on the matter of Holocaust.

I would be though interested if you have any premade plans in case the deniers start to use your book for their cause? As seen they can use the " liar in one thing, liar in everything" mentality on SW by using your work. " He was a liar- and a bad one at that" from your own article?!

 

If Holocaust deniers wish to use my work to further their own ends, then there's little I can do about that. However, if they do so, then I shall simply maintain that questioning the record of Simon Wiesenthal is distinct from questioning the Holocaust. Besides, no matter how unreliable Wiesenthal, the question of the extent of the Holocaust is not dependent on him. He is far from being the sole transmitter of our knowledge of that period.

best wishes

Guy

 

The literal mountain of evidence supports that. Honestly, I have no idea how anyone can deny something that the perpetrators have so well documented. If for some reason a person does not want to believe survivors(why anyone would want to make that up is beyond me) than look at the evidence the Nazis' left behind.

Your input is very much appreciated, Mr. Walters.Hopefully, you can prevent those with an racist agenda from warping the perception of your book. I think that maybe your biggest challenge.

 

Thank you for replying Mr. Walters, and I agree with others who have mentioned that keeping the "deniers" from warping the meaning of your work is bound to be your largest challenge. They will grasp at any straw which smacks of a "lie" in order to purport that a single mis-truth makes the entire "holohoax" a tissue of lies.

I find them a dispicable lot, and have no use for them in the least.

 

This post does not pertain to anybody in this thread! Let me repeat! This post does not pertain to anybody in this thread!

That clarified, there is no point in trying to convince a holocaust denier that he is wrong. He knows the truth but professes to believe otherwise because he is rebidly anti-semitic!

These people should not be given the respect and dignity of a forum for their sick ideas. They should be totally ignored!

Bob