How did they get to Eric Hunt?

[Hannover]

Now that we're seeing discussion about Eric Hunt's forced denial of his previous work, and BTW that work is quite impressive and must be reviewed when assessing his current 'holocau$t Industry' position, the question remains, 'How did they get to him?'

In a few threads there has been some mention of this*, but I would like to see that discussion in a single thread, please.

ex. EtienneSC touches upon it a bit at:
'Eric Hunt recants, 2017 - Timeline'
viewtopic.php?f=2&t=10963

Thanks, Hannover

“it is necessary to recognize that the lack of traces involves the inability to directly establish the reality of the existence of homicidal gas chambers.” - French exterminationist historian Jacques Baynac, Le Nouveau Quotidien (Lausanne, Switzerland), Sept. 3, 1996, p. 14.

[Hannover]

Related discussion here:

Eric Hunt's own work has him trapped, hence he ignores it, resorts to childish desperation
http://forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=10975

H.

[hermod]

Wasn't Eric Hunt travelling in Eastern Europe for the 2nd part of his documentary "Why we believed" when he finally saw the exterminationist light ? IMO, he was arrested and threatened with imprisonment in a country where Holocaust revisionism is illegal. That's what happened to David Irving in Austria. In 2008, Hunt also recanted. At that time, he was released from jail earlier than expected after asking for forgiveness from Elie Wiesel, saying that "he had been sucked into anti-Semitic conspiracy theories on the Internet but that he does not deny the Holocaust" (http://www.haaretz.com/news/man-convict ... r-1.252078). I think that the prospect of going back to prison was enough to make him say or do almost anything, more than enough for a second recantation.

[k0nsl]

Do you also recall the threat he received by 'holocaust' scholar Andy Mathis?

He told Eric Hunt:

For fuck’s sake, Eric, did two years in prison and another four on parole not do anything for you? Speaking of which, your parole was up in, when? August 2012? Did I hear something about your being barred from your “political” activities while that parole was still on? But you were interviewed by Carolyn Yeager in 2011. Hmmmm.
I’d advise you to be very, very nice to me, Eric.

https://k0nsl.org/blog/andrew-e-mathis-get-fucking-program/


Best wishes,
-k0nsl

Wasn't Eric Hunt travelling in Eastern Europe for the 2nd part of his documentary "Why we believed" when he finally saw the exterminationist light ? IMO, he was arrested and threatened with imprisonment in a country where Holocaust revisionism is illegal. That's what happened to David Irving in Austria. In 2008, Hunt also recanted. At that time, he was released from jail earlier than expected after asking for forgiveness from Elie Wiesel, saying that "he had been sucked into anti-Semitic conspiracy theories on the Internet but that he does not deny the Holocaust" (http://www.haaretz.com/news/man-convict ... r-1.252078). I think that the prospect of going back to prison was enough to make him say or do almost anything, more than enough for a second recantation.

[hermod]

Do you also recall the threat he received by 'holocaust' scholar Andy Mathis?

He told Eric Hunt:

For fuck’s sake, Eric, did two years in prison and another four on parole not do anything for you? Speaking of which, your parole was up in, when? August 2012? Did I hear something about your being barred from your “political” activities while that parole was still on? But you were interviewed by Carolyn Yeager in 2011. Hmmmm.
I’d advise you to be very, very nice to me, Eric.

https://k0nsl.org/blog/andrew-e-mathis-get-fucking-program/


I didn't know that. Hardly a surprise. So typical of Holo-bullies' behavior...

[ChronoMachete]

Nobody is forcing Eric Hunt to do anything, though part of the reason why he's changed sides is because M1 is apparently selectively quoting his posts and censoring the ones that bring up a good point.

[hermod]

part of the reason why he's changed sides is because M1 is apparently selectively quoting his posts and censoring the ones that bring up a good point.

So according to your theory, Eric Hunt has become a Holocaust believer partly because of a mere narcissistic injury?!? Very noble and sensible...

[ChronoMachete]

part of the reason why he's changed sides is because M1 is apparently selectively quoting his posts and censoring the ones that bring up a good point.

So according to your theory, Eric Hunt has become a Holocaust believer partly because of a mere narcissistic injury?!? Very noble and sensible...

He went into it further on the first post he made when he changed sides. Personally, I disagree with Eric's logic on the situation. The Reinhard Camps have been covered quite well in the threads here, and it's just laughable that all he's doing is parroting the points that David Cole & Irving brought up. Perhaps he'd be more willing to talk here if the debate was honest, though.

[Moderator]

Nobody is forcing Eric Hunt to do anything, though part of the reason why he's changed sides is because M1 is apparently selectively quoting his posts and censoring the ones that bring up a good point.

A complete fabrication, a lie.
No posts by Eric Hunt have been censored. He is free to post here anytime he wishes.
M1

[Pia Kahn]

None of the evidence, which Eric posted on his "questioning the holocaust" site, is new and original. All of the photographs are well known and have been shown endlessly, in particular his photos of Auschwitz. Most of them can be seen by studying the wikipedia article on Auschwitz.

Eric claims that these pictures made him change his mind, in particular a picture of a woman being held by three men. How can this prove the existence of homicidal gas chambers?

Eric has been studying this topic for over 10 years and must have known of these pictures for a long long time. Therefore, "they" didn't get him by showing him these photographs. Something else must have happened that we may not know anything about.

[Raikiri]

Nobody is forcing Eric Hunt to do anything, though part of the reason why he's changed sides is because M1 is apparently selectively quoting his posts and censoring the ones that bring up a good point.

Let me get this straight, he has excellent arguments and/or information that can give a credible challenge to the revisionist position, but he doesn't include ANY of this revelatory information in his new manifesto? The sole purpose of which was ostensibly to justify his decision to renounce his affiliation with revisionism? Ya right. Yawn..............

His little essay isn't even worth responding to because all of those topics that he addresses have been dealt with extensively in many places by various sources. One simply needs to search.

Why didn't he make any of these "good points" during his "debate" with Berg?

Are these "good points" a "secret"?

Since he has his own website, he can post what he wants at will. Why doesn't he create posts on his own website that contain information to counter the revisionist position? If what Eric says is true, that the Mods delete his posts with "good points" that pose unwelcome challenges, I want to see those posts on his own website so that we may start threads to address them here.

I can already tell you that it isn't going to happen. He has thrown his best punches and they landed about as hard as a fluffy pillow.

[MrRizoli]

Before Eric and Fritz Berg debated I was going to interview Eric so he could have his say...but he refused.
I would of liked Eric to have responded to the text below but he didn't.
In my response to Eric Hunt I thought I brought up some good points about the killing methods that were quoted by several HoloHuxsters in their testimony about the Holohoax.
Here is what I sent Eric to mull over and hopefully get a reply....but sadly NO reply, which shows me that Eric is a one direction "revisionist" and he refuses to answer questions that might make him look bad, and make the extermination nonsense look bad.

My reply to Eric....
I appreciate your response but you still haven't proven anything ... you sound like you're coming from the Skeptics (forum) crowd who continue to uphold the Holohoax theories 100℅, where not only do they just emote on certain points, but they ridicule and punish counter arguments by censorship. I'm not saying that the National Socialist Germans were angels. I don't maintain that - it was wartime - but had they wanted to exterminate ANYONE, you KNOW they'd have come up with extremely MORE EFFICIENT means than drafty/questionable facilities using a less than effective agent -- Zyklon B. or whatever silly method they say. (By the way, your using the term 'gassing' for the means of extermination suggests you've bailed on scientific proof.) Have you even considered the other ridiculous methods that were said to have been used? Have you heard about these? Eric do you really believe this below? Have you even read revisionist literature?

Killing methods

Holocaust or Hoax book Jurgen Graf. 55
If we trace the evolution of the Holocaust yarn over the years since 1942, we stumble across one surprise after the other. In particular, innumerable methods of mass killing of which there is not the slightest mention in the later literature, are described in the most graphic detail, particularly:
a) Pneumatic hammers
This method is described as follows in a report of the Polish resistance movement on Auschwitz (23):
"When the Kommandos went to work, they led them into the courtyard in the penal company where the executions took place by means of a 'pneumatic hammer'. They bound the prisoners' hands together behind their backs and brought them in, one after the other, naked, into the courtyard. They placed them in front of the barrel of an air gun, which was discharged without a sound. The hammer crushed the skull, and the compressed air destroyed the entire brain."

b) Electric baths
As reported by the Polish resistance movement, the following method was also commonly used in Auschwitz (24):
"According to the report of an SS officer, the number of victims in the electrical chambers amounted, unofficially, to 2,500 per night. The executions took place in electrical baths..."

c) Electrical assembly line killing
Another variant was described by Pravda on 2 February, five days after the liberation of Auschwitz:
"They (the Germans) opened up the so-called 'old graves' in the eastern part of the camp, removed the bodies, and wiped out the trace of the assembly linekilling installation where hundreds of people were killed simultaneously with electrical current."

d) Atomic bombs
At the Nuremberg Trial, US prosecutor Robert Jackson made the following accusation (25):
"A village, a small village was provisionally erected, with temporary structures, and in it approximately 20,000 Jews were put. By means of this newly invented weapon of destruction, these 20,000 people were eradicated almost instantaneously, and in such a way that there was no trace left of them; the explosive used developing temperatures of from four to five hundred degrees Centigrade."

e) Burning alive
Elie Wiesel, honored with the Nobel Peace Prize in 1986, was interned at Auschwitz from the spring of 1944 until January 1945. In his memoirs of the camp, La Nuit, published in 1958, he never mentions the gas chambers -- not once, not with one single word -- even though 400,000 Hungarian Jews, among others, are said to have been gassed during his period of internment. (In the German translation, which appeared under the title of Die Nacht zu begraben, Elischa, the gas chambers nevertheless make a miraculous appearance, for the simple reason that, whenever the word "crématoire" appears in the original, the translator has mistranslated it as "Gaskammer"). According to Wiesel, the Jews were exterminated in the following manner (26):
"Not far from us blazed flames from a pit, gigantic flames. They were burning something. A lorry drove up to the pit and dumped its load into the pit. They were small children. Babies! Yes, I had seen it, with my own eyes...Children in the flames (is it any wonder, that sleep shuns my eyes since that time?). We went there, too. Somewhat further along, was another, bigger pit, for adults. 'Father', I said, 'if that is so, I wish to wait no longer. I shall throw myself against the electrified barbed wire fence. That is better than lying around in the flames for hours'."
How little Elie survived lying around in the flames for hours, by some miracle, will be revealed below.

f) Steam chambers
In December 1945, at the Nuremberg Trial the following accusation was made regarding the mass killings at Treblinka (27):
"All victims had to strip off their clothes and shoes, which were collected afterwards, whereupon all victims, women and children first, were driven into the death chambers... After being filled to capacity, the chambers were hermetically closed and steam was let in. In a few minutes all was over... From reports received may be assumed that several hundred thousands of Jews have been exterminated in Treblinka."

g) Suffocation by pumping all the air out of the death chambers
This method was described by the Soviet-Jewish writer Vassily Grossman at Treblinka.

h) Quicklime trains
At Belzec the Jews were killed according to eyewitness Jan Karski as follows (29):
"The floors of the car had been covered with a thick, white powder. It was quicklime. Quicklime is simply unslaked lime or calcium oxide that has been dehydrated. Anyone who has seen cement being mixed knows what occurs when water is poured on lime. The mixture bubbles and steams as the powder combines with the water, generating a large amount of heat. Here the lime served a double purpose in the Nazi economy of brutality. The moist flesh coming in contact with the lime is rapidly dehydrated and burned. The occupants of the cars would be literally burned to death before long, the flesh eaten from their bones. Thus, the Jews would "die in agony"", fulfilling the promise Himmler had issued "in accord with the will of the Fuehrer", in Warsaw, in 1942. Secondly, the lime would prevent decomposing bodies from spreading disease. It was efficient and inexpensive - a perfectly chosen agent for their purposes.

It took three hours to fill up the entire train by repetitions of this procedure. It was twilight when the forty six (I counted them) cars were packed. From one end to the other, the train, with its quivering cargo of flesh, seemed to throb, vibrate, rock, and jump as if bewitched. There would be a strangely uniform momentary lull and then, again, the train would begin to moan and sob, wail, and how. Inside the camp a few score dead bodies remained and a few in the final throes of death. German policemen walked around at leisure with smoking guns, pumping bullets into anything that by single motion betrayed an excess of vitality. Soon, not a single one was left alive. In the now quiet camp the only sounds were the inhuman screams that were echoes from the moving train. Then these, too, ceased. All that was now left was the stench of excrement and rotting straw and a queer, sickening, acidulous odour which, I thought, may have come from the quantities of blood that had been let, and with which the ground was stained. As I listened to the dwindling outcries from the train, I thought of the destination toward which it was speeding. My informants had minutes described the entire journey. The train would travel about eighty miles and finally come to a halt in an empty, barren field. Then nothing at all would happen. The train would stand stock-still, patiently waiting until death had penetrated into every corner of its interior. This would take from two to four days."
This Jan Karski was, by the way, appointed to chair a committee for "Scientific Research on the Holocaust" along with Elie Wiesel.

i) Chambers with submergible, electrified flooring. Stefan Szende, a Doctor of Philosophy, describes the extermination of the Jews at Belzec quite differently:
"The death factory comprises an area approximately 7 km in diameter... The trains filled with Jews entered a tunnel into the underground rooms of the execution factory... The naked Jews were brought into gigantic halls. Several thousand people at one time could fit into these halls. The halls had no floor. The floor was of metal and was submergible. The floors of these halls, with their thousands of Jews, sank into a basin of water which lay beneath -- but only far enough so that the people on the metal plate were not entirely under water. When all the Jews on the metal plate were in the water up to over their hips, electrical current was sent through the water. After a few moments, all the Jews, thousands at once, were dead. Then they raised the metal plate out of the water. On it lay the corpses of the murder victims. Another shock of electrical current was sent through, and the metal plate became a crematory oven, white hot, until all the bodies were burnt to ashes... Each individual train brought three to five thousand, sometimes more, Jews. There were days on which the lines to Belzec supplied twenty or more trains. Modern technology triumphed in the Nazi system. The problem of how to execute millions of people, was solved."

j) Blood poisoning
This method, described on 7 February 1943 in the New York Times ("... gas chambers and blood poisoning stations which were erected in the rural regions..."), appears to have gone into oblivion as soon as it was invented.

k) Drowning
According to the Israeli Holocaust specialist Yehuda Bauer, the Rumanians in Odessa murdered 144,000 Soviet Jews, mostly by drowning (31). The same method of extermination was testified to by the underground press agent for the Warsaw ghetto, as well as for Babi Yar (32):
"Not a single Jew remains in Kiev, since the Germans have thrown the entire Jewish population of Kiev into the Dnieper."
l) Chlorine gas, assembly-line shootings, boiling water, acids
Mass murders with chlorine gas, as well as assembly line shootings were reported for Treblinka (33). Reports of massacres with acids and boiling water round make a complete assortment of killing methods (34).
The exterminationists no longer wish to be reminded of all these stories today. At that time, however, they were considered to be "proven fact" -- "proven" by the testimonies of "eyewitnesses" -- just like the gas chambers, which have been placed a under legal protection order in several "free democracies".

I hope all that was educational for you for future discussions....
-
Lets get back to the gassings...

FRED LEUCHTER: Not withstanding the evidence that Irving and Weber, have relative to "Limited Gassings", The fact remains that Mass Gas Executions are impossible from a hardware standpoint. The evidence cited by both Weber and Irving is circumstantial. I have great respect for circumstantial evidence. It indicates an need for further investigation. This evidence will convince some and not others, and I can respect everyone's opinion. However, the fact that is impossible from an engineering standpoint to effect Mass Executions with gas is not circumstantial. It is Scientific/Engineering Fact. This should override any doubts created in anyone's mind about the matter. If anyone is willing to believe "Leuchter" and "Rudolf" some of the time, they should believe all the time. There is not middle ground in Science (Rudolf) and Leuchter (Engineering) .... I have left no room for doubt nor has Germar. (Fred Leuchter)

In complete agreement, the claimed mass extermination could NOT have occurred in ANY venue - because the facts for such are just not there like the solid facts of mass killings in the Rheinhardt camps like Treblinka. (On this topic, Both Jim and Diane on separate occasions asked Mark Weber, "How did they do it, how were the killings done in the Rheinhardt camps?" To which he responded, "I don't know." We learned that David Irving was asked the same thing and he answered, "I don't know and I don't care!") THAT'S A PROBLEM! What kind of answer is "I don't know?" How about results are pending...LOL

Even some Jews admit there are some issues here....
“Most of the memoirs and reports of Holocaust survivors are full of preposterous verbosity, graphomanic exaggeration, dramatic effects, overestimated self-inflation, dilettante philosophizing, would-be lyricism, unchecked rumors, bias, partisan attacks…” –Samuel Gringauz, “Jewish Social Studies” (New York), January 1950, Vol. 12, p6.
Now, I'm all for open debate but honestly, the stupidity or believing things that are just totally impossible to have occurred, which you seem to now believe .... !!!! You're a smart guy. But sadly You seem to just parrot the mainstream, PC-driven, mind-numbing, brain dead drivel who make statements without any facts to back up the claims: Saying "it" happened because (all hinging on the trumped-up question) "Where did these people go?" Really now we have to prove that to make our points valid? We don't have to prove ANYTHING...we just have to show that the official narrative is wrong which I think I've done with above comments.

What this is really about.....

The Holohoax narrative is operated and controlled by a high-powered CULT, one that wants to USE the Holohoax narrative to control and suppress ALL thought and expression. THEY will decide what WE are to think and express. THEY will determine the parameters of what is acceptable to speak about - their game, their terms - typical CULT behavior and if you question ANY of their tenets, YOU will be dealt with as an apostate, as you have been, as Germar has, Leuchter, Deckart, Faurisson, Toben, Zundel have, to name a few of the many high-profile targets of this cult, not to mention the low-profile 'deviants' (in their mind) like ourselves. So if you think you're going to get on the fast tract and be welcome again by these people that hate you and what you believe, you better think again.

You think that by taking on this new PC-version of truth, you're going to be accepted in the Holohoax community? That by ingratiating yourself to THEIR narrative (at least partially) that they will welcome you with open arms or leave you alone? Do you really honestly think that the Holohucksters are going to appreciate you in your back pedaling when you don't subscribe 100% to THEIR version of the narrative, that you don't believe in the Six Million!!!??? They still will look at you as holocaust denier and because you know that 6 million did NOT die (even with those deaths you claim at Treblinka).
Sorry Eric - ain't going to happen. You're a marked man now just like David Cole, Mark Weber and David Irving? You have joined THEIR dishonorable and even cowardly ranks? The only problem now is people are going to look at you as a sell-out - someone who couldn't "take the heat," who sold his soul to the PC devil, if you will. The only good news is your videos have been state of the art and MOST desired and respected and largely, THAT's how you will be remembered. It's easy to give in. It's difficult to HANG TOUGH, which you have done for two decades. Know this, though, that by caving, whatever you do from now on will be tainted. We draw the line on your work up to this date, as we have with Weber, Cole and Irving. Are you now going to recant what you have already done and call it wrong, misguided, and not in harmony with the facts?

I just think you've been sold a bill of goods and cannot accept the truth that the entire narrative of the holohoax is a farse because it has cost you these past two decades to maintain that stance. Why would you capitulate after so many years of 'hanging tough'!!!! They wear you down? You waved the WHITE FLAG OF SURRENDER. You didn't have to. You now have the option to hang tough or place yourself as a place mat where the HoloHoax Cultmasters can wipe their feet on and claim victory.....Is that what you want, because that is exactly what you will get from them.


Jim Rizoli

[hermod]

He went into it further on the first post he made when he changed sides.

That sounded as unconvincing as possible. What else could he say? No witness bullied by the mafia ever said: "I won't testify in this court because I've been bullied and threatened by the 'friends' of the defendant." Any such witnesses just say: "I saw nothing. I can' testify to that." Nevertheless nobody can claim that mafia threats don't exist during mafia trials. Witness protection wasn't established for nothing.

Personally, I disagree with Eric's logic on the situation. The Reinhard Camps have been covered quite well in the threads here, and it's just laughable that all he's doing is parroting the points that David Cole & Irving brought up.

Cole and Irving, 2 men also persecuted & threatened into Holo-exterminationism and who also justified their new position with BS explanations. Same causes, same consequences?

Perhaps he'd be more willing to talk here if the debate was honest, though.

I wouldn't call legitimate concerns about his identity after such a sudden & radical turnaround "dishonesty." Now that his identity has been confirmed by the debate with Fritz Berg, perhaps he could be allowed to use his new account(s) on this forum. The choice of moderators...

[diaz52]

This shocking about face by Hunt reminds me not only of Cole's and Irving's change to defending the exterminationist view, but also the story of Whittaker Chambers and what he said when he converted from communist spy to outspoken anti communist: Chambers glumly confessed that he was "leaving the winning side for the losing side". In this case Hunt is clearly joining the side with all the media, all the money and all the power, etc. If Hunt was gotten to, and I believe he was, then the 'carrot and stick' approach was probably applied here. The establishment has unlimited funds, and can offer someone with talent and experience working with film a lot of exciting opportunities that are otherwise forever closed to him due to his revisionist activities.

The idea that he wasn't 'gotten to' strains credulity. First of all, with a topic this immense as the big H, no one is going to suddenly change their mind after years of research without some huge new piece of evidence that changes everything. I mean, we're supposed to believe after years of Hunt making excellent Holocaust revisionist videos and even providing a solid reply to the points raised by David Cole, that Hunt would make a sudden about face and become a believer in the establishment exterminationist view and provide in his long explanation no new 'game changer' that we can point to as to why he changed his mind?? That makes no sense. It wasn't that long ago that Hunt made that reply to Cole's points and now he holds to essentially the same points as to why he's making this about face?

No, call me a conspiracy theorist but I think he saw an opportunity to 'get on the winning team' and took it. Being a Holocaust revisionist or denier in a world dominated by Jews is a good way to find yourself not just unemployed but unemployable, especially if you want to work with film. Now whether the stick was applied as well of course I do not know.

I always liked Eric and his work. I hope if he did take a sweet offer that it has a lot of zeros.

It's also interesting that Whittaker Chambers of course turned out to be wrong in his assessment as to which side would win or lose.

[hermod]

This shocking about face by Hunt reminds me not only of Cole's and Irving's change to defending the exterminationist view, but also the story of Whittaker Chambers and what he said when he converted from communist spy to outspoken anti communist: Chambers glumly confessed that he was "leaving the winning side for the losing side". In this case Hunt is clearly joining the side with all the media, all the money and all the power, etc. If Hunt was gotten to, and I believe he was, then the 'carrot and stick' approach was probably applied here. The establishment has unlimited funds, and can offer someone with talent and experience working with film a lot of exciting opportunities that are otherwise forever closed to him due to his revisionist activities.

The idea that he wasn't 'gotten to' strains credulity. First of all, with a topic this immense as the big H, no one is going to suddenly change their mind after years of research without some huge new piece of evidence that changes everything. I mean, we're supposed to believe after years of Hunt making excellent Holocaust revisionist videos and even providing a solid reply to the points raised by David Cole, that Hunt would make a sudden about face and become a believer in the establishment exterminationist view and provide in his long explanation no new 'game changer' that we can point to as to why he changed his mind?? That makes no sense. It wasn't that long ago that Hunt made that reply to Cole's points and now he holds to essentially the same points as to why he's making this about face?

No, call me a conspiracy theorist but I think he saw an opportunity to 'get on the winning team' and took it. Being a Holocaust revisionist or denier in a world dominated by Jews is a good way to find yourself not just unemployed but unemployable, especially if you want to work with film. Now whether the stick was applied as well of course I do not know.

I always liked Eric and his work. I hope if he did take a sweet offer that it has a lot of zeros.

It's also interesting that Whittaker Chambers of course turned out to be wrong in his assessment as to which side would win or lose.

I couldn't have said it better. Very true, even if I'm more into the bullying thing. Perhaps just because I prefer fear-induced submission to greed-motivated corruption and I like Eric Hunt's documentaries. Partiality on my part detected?

For the best rebuttal of Eric Hunt's exterminationist arguments, see Eric Hunt's rebuttal of David Cole/Stein's exterminationist arguments.