Scumbag on the Loose

[Ralph]

Suspect named in attack on Nobel laureate
l

SAN FRANCISCO, California (AP) -- Police issued an arrest warrant Friday for a New Jersey man suspected of roughing up Nobel laureate and Holocaust scholar Elie Wiesel at a San Francisco hotel earlier this month.

The warrant for Eric Hunt, 22, of Sussex County, New Jersey, includes charges of attempted kidnapping, false imprisonment, elder abuse, stalking, battery and committing a hate crime, police said.

Wiesel was a featured speaker at a February 1 peace forum at the Argent Hotel. He was approached in the lobby by a man in his 20s who asked for an interview, authorities said.

When Wiesel consented to talk in the hotel's lobby, the man insisted it be done in a hotel room and dragged the 78-year-old off the elevator on the sixth floor, police said.

Wiesel began screaming, and the man fled. Wiesel, who was not injured, reported the attack to police.

Police have said they were aware that a man claimed responsibility for the attack in a posting on an anti-Semitic Web site registered in Australia. Police did not comment further on the case Friday.

Wiesel couldn't immediately be reached for comment at Boston University, where he teaches, or through his institute in New York.

There was no telephone number listed for an Eric Hunt in Sussex County, N.J. Police said they did not know whether Hunt had an attorney.

Wiesel, who survived the Nazi death camps at Auschwitz and Buchenwald during World War II, has worked for human rights in many parts of the world and was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 1986.



Find this article at:
http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/02/16/wiesel ... index.html

[lmpower]

I'm as disgusted as Ralph by this story. I just thought the term screwball was more accurately descriptive of this character.

[Ralph]

Screwballs can be great people - I've had that moniker applied to me with affection. I'll stick with "scumbag" for this creep.

[living_stradivarius]

I wonder if this will change Mr. Wiesel's walking habits. He strolled casually in my area earlier this year and I thought he looked familiar...

[Corlyss_D]

So, Ralph, when he's apprehended are you defending him pro bono?

[Ralph]

So, Ralph, when he's apprehended are you defending him pro bono?

*****

A ridiculous question. I defend people whose constitutional rights are threatened, whatever their politics or values. This is a common criminal with hatred as a motive. There is no civil liberties issue here anymore than there is with most other terrorism cases.

[jbuck919]

What surprised me, and I realize it only shows my ignorance, is that Wiesel is "only" 78. My father is a young 78 and his experience of WW II is that he couldn't wait to graduate from high school and enlist--in the Navy. This was May 1945, which makes my father by a technicality a WW II veteran. It is hard to think of his exact contemporary being, by experience if not by spirit or chronology, so much "older."

(My musical message to my father on his 76th birthday--"If you don't make it to the number of cornets, at least you made it to the number of trombones.")

[burnitdown]

"Every Jew, somewhere in his being, should set apart a zone of hate—healthy virile hate—for what the German personifies and for what persists in the German.” (Legends of Our Time, “Appointment With Hate,” NY, Avon, 1968, pp. 177-178.)

Wiesel's a scumbag, too.

[Ralph]

"Every Jew, somewhere in his being, should set apart a zone of hate—healthy virile hate—for what the German personifies and for what persists in the German.” (Legends of Our Time, “Appointment With Hate,” NY, Avon, 1968, pp. 177-178.)

Wiesel's a scumbag, too.

*****There should be a "Sick Post of th Day Award." You'd win it hands down. Try reading Wiesel's books. Start with "Night."

[Ricordanza]

This particular scumbag is no longer on the loose. As reported in today's Philadelphia Inquirer, he's been apprehended back in his home state of New Jersey (another piece of evidence that there's a New Jersey connection to every story):

Suspect held in Wiesel assault

He was arrested in a New Jersey treatment center. The Holocaust scholar was attacked in California.

By Jason Dearen
Associated Press

SAN FRANCISCO - A New Jersey man accused of assaulting Nobel laureate and Holocaust scholar Elie Wiesel at a San Francisco hotel this month was arrested in New Jersey yesterday, authorities said.

Montgomery Township police arrested Eric Hunt, 22, of Sussex County, at 1:30 p.m. at the Carrier Clinic, a psychiatric and addiction treatment center, Sgt. Guy Fillebrown said.

San Francisco prosecutors charged Hunt yesterday with attempted kidnapping, false imprisonment, elder abuse, stalking, battery, and the commission of a hate crime. He was being held without bail in the Somerset County Jail in New Jersey, awaiting extradition to San Francisco.

"This was a brutal assault on a man who's dedicated his life to peace," District Attorney Kamala Harris said. "He was viciously attacked for who he is, and we won't stand for that."

Neither San Francisco nor New Jersey authorities knew whether Hunt had an attorney yet.

Wiesel, 78, was a featured speaker at a Feb. 1 peace forum at the Argent Hotel in San Francisco when he was approached in the lobby by a white man in his 20s who asked for an interview, police said.

Wiesel agreed to talk in the lobby, but the man insisted the interview be conducted in a hotel room, and got into the elevator with Wiesel. Once on the sixth floor, the suspect dragged Wiesel from the elevator. Wiesel began yelling, and the suspect ran away, police said.

Police said Hunt claimed responsibility for the attack in a posting on an anti-Semitic Web site registered in Australia.

San Francisco police Lt. Dan Mahoney said that he did not believe Hunt belonged to a larger organization, and that the recent college graduate paid for his trip to San Francisco himself.

"He is a lone wolf and not part of an organization or group," Mahoney said.

Wiesel, who survived the Nazi death camps at Auschwitz and Buchenwald during World War II, has worked for human rights in many parts of the world and was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 1986.

Wiesel could not immediately be reached for comment yesterday at Boston University, where he teaches, or through his institute in New York.

But on Monday, Wiesel told an Italian newspaper that during the assault, he feared for his life for the first time since World War II. He urged countries to take a harsher stance against those who argue that millions of Jews did not die at the hands of the Nazis.

"My incident shows a global trend," Wiesel told the Milan, Italy, daily Corriere della Sera. "If society doesn't act immediately against these individuals, it will end up encouraging others to do the same."

[Fugu]

"Every Jew, somewhere in his being, should set apart a zone of hate—healthy virile hate—for what the German personifies and for what persists in the German.” (Legends of Our Time, “Appointment With Hate,” NY, Avon, 1968, pp. 177-178.)

Wiesel's a scumbag, too.

Are you a Holocaust denier as well? Second Ralph's "sick post of the day" award.

[burnitdown]

"Every Jew, somewhere in his being, should set apart a zone of hate—healthy virile hate—for what the German personifies and for what persists in the German.” (Legends of Our Time, “Appointment With Hate,” NY, Avon, 1968, pp. 177-178.)

Wiesel's a scumbag, too.

*****There should be a "Sick Post of th Day Award." You'd win it hands down. Try reading Wiesel's books. Start with "Night."

No, I prefer not to read propaganda. I don't trust the big three religions, and history backs me up.

What do you have backing yourself up?

And do you belong, ethnically or religiously, to any of those three religions?

Own up to your special interests.

[pizza]

Only a person of pathological insensitivity would call Elie Wiesel a "scumbag". Have you no sense of shame?

[Ralph]

"Every Jew, somewhere in his being, should set apart a zone of hate—healthy virile hate—for what the German personifies and for what persists in the German.” (Legends of Our Time, “Appointment With Hate,” NY, Avon, 1968, pp. 177-178.)

Wiesel's a scumbag, too.

*****There should be a "Sick Post of th Day Award." You'd win it hands down. Try reading Wiesel's books. Start with "Night."

No, I prefer not to read propaganda. I don't trust the big three religions, and history backs me up.

What do you have backing yourself up?

And do you belong, ethnically or religiously, to any of those three religions?

Own up to your special interests.

*****

No, I don't belong to any of the Big Three. My deity is Dittersdorf as most here know.

[Donald Isler]

Being a bigot can be a special interest, too.

[Corlyss_D]

Own up to your special interests.

You'll have to enlighten us. What exactly have the Nihilists done for civilization lately?

[Corlyss_D]

I defend people whose constitutional rights are threatened, whatever their politics or values.

So I've noticed. You really ought to be more careful about whose rights you are defending. Rights don't exist in a vacuum. They depend on the good will of the majority. Before you break the system, you should ask whether you can fix it when you discover you need it. If you can't fix it, you have no right to break it in the name of some misguided devotion to "constitutional rights." The Constitution is not a suicide pact.

[Ralph]

I defend people whose constitutional rights are threatened, whatever their politics or values.

So I've noticed. You really ought to be more careful about whose rights you are defending. Rights don't exist in a vacuum. They depend on the good will of the majority. Before you break the system, you should ask whether you can fix it when you discover you need it. If you can't fix it, you have no right to break it in the name of some misguided devotion to "constitutional rights." The Constitution is not a suicide pact.

*****

Your comment makes little if any sense. The majority has never supported the rights of minorities unless and until general acceptance follows the Rule of Law. Which it doesn't always do. And lawyers who represent those who are truly despised or feared can't expect hosannas from people, even some with law degrees, who don't respect the basic concept that the courts, not the populace, decide whether a claim to a fundamental right is valid.

There are bad cases and losing cases. There is no such thing as a "misguided devotion to 'constitutional rights.'"

[pizza]

I defend people whose constitutional rights are threatened, whatever their politics or values.

So I've noticed. You really ought to be more careful about whose rights you are defending. Rights don't exist in a vacuum. They depend on the good will of the majority. Before you break the system, you should ask whether you can fix it when you discover you need it. If you can't fix it, you have no right to break it in the name of some misguided devotion to "constitutional rights." The Constitution is not a suicide pact.

*****

Your comment makes little if any sense. The majority has never supported the rights of minorities unless and until general acceptance follows the Rule of Law. Which it doesn't always do. And lawyers who represent those who are truly despised or feared can't expect hosannas from people, even some with law degrees, who don't respect the basic concept that the courts, not the populace, decide whether a claim to a fundamental right is valid.

There are bad cases and losing cases. There is no such thing as a "misguided devotion to 'constitutional rights.'"

There are, however, misguided decisions to represent some who would happily destroy us. Let them advance their rights themselves as best they can. There is no constitutional right to talented representation.

[Ralph]

I defend people whose constitutional rights are threatened, whatever their politics or values.

So I've noticed. You really ought to be more careful about whose rights you are defending. Rights don't exist in a vacuum. They depend on the good will of the majority. Before you break the system, you should ask whether you can fix it when you discover you need it. If you can't fix it, you have no right to break it in the name of some misguided devotion to "constitutional rights." The Constitution is not a suicide pact.

*****

Your comment makes little if any sense. The majority has never supported the rights of minorities unless and until general acceptance follows the Rule of Law. Which it doesn't always do. And lawyers who represent those who are truly despised or feared can't expect hosannas from people, even some with law degrees, who don't respect the basic concept that the courts, not the populace, decide whether a claim to a fundamental right is valid.

There are bad cases and losing cases. There is no such thing as a "misguided devotion to 'constitutional rights.'"

There are, however, misguided decisions to represent some who would happily destroy us. Let them advance their rights themselves as best they can. There is no constitutional right to talented representation.

*****

Really? I thought everyone should be represented by "competent" counsel. "Talented" is, of course, a very subjective word. Of course there is no constitutional right to representation for plaintiffs in civil litigation. That's where "super-talented" lawyers like me come in.

[burnitdown]

Only a person of pathological insensitivity would call Elie Wiesel a "scumbag". Have you no sense of shame?

Sensitivity is a false emotion.

Realism is important.

Are you delusional?

[pizza]

Only a person of pathological insensitivity would call Elie Wiesel a "scumbag". Have you no sense of shame?

Sensitivity is a false emotion.

Realism is important.

Are you delusional?

Sensitivity isn't an emotion. It's an attitude people of good will show toward those who are less fortunate than themselves, such as Holocaust survivors. There's a Yiddish word for it: Menchlichkeit.

Sociopaths eschew it in the name of "realism".

[pizza]

I defend people whose constitutional rights are threatened, whatever their politics or values.

So I've noticed. You really ought to be more careful about whose rights you are defending. Rights don't exist in a vacuum. They depend on the good will of the majority. Before you break the system, you should ask whether you can fix it when you discover you need it. If you can't fix it, you have no right to break it in the name of some misguided devotion to "constitutional rights." The Constitution is not a suicide pact.

*****

Your comment makes little if any sense. The majority has never supported the rights of minorities unless and until general acceptance follows the Rule of Law. Which it doesn't always do. And lawyers who represent those who are truly despised or feared can't expect hosannas from people, even some with law degrees, who don't respect the basic concept that the courts, not the populace, decide whether a claim to a fundamental right is valid.

There are bad cases and losing cases. There is no such thing as a "misguided devotion to 'constitutional rights.'"

There are, however, misguided decisions to represent some who would happily destroy us. Let them advance their rights themselves as best they can. There is no constitutional right to talented representation.

*****

Really? I thought everyone should be represented by "competent" counsel. "Talented" is, of course, a very subjective word. Of course there is no constitutional right to representation for plaintiffs in civil litigation. That's where "super-talented" lawyers like me come in.

That's where talented liberals miss the point of it all.

[burnitdown]

[quote="Corlyss_D"What exactly have the Nihilists done for civilization lately?[/quote]

I believe they're trying to save it from itself, as it's on a path to doom.