II. Shooting Aimlessly at Our Message on Solly Ganor's Lack of Credibility and Deceit

 

The synopsis of Mr. Tilove's article reads as follow:

"Kafkaesque Dilemma

Solly Ganor survived the Holocaust and the death camp at Dachau. But at 79, he doesn't know if he will survive what an odd Holocaust Web site, run by a Jewish refugee in Massachusetts, has done to his reputation -- suggesting that aspects of his well-received 1995 memoir are lies."

Well, as we shall see from the analysis provided below, there is no real dilemma of any sort in here except the one that is being imagined, implanted, or fabricated by Mr. Tilove for unknown reason(s) to us.

After introducing to his readers Solly Ganor as a Dachau Holocaust survivor and the author of the "well-received memoir in 1995 -- "Light One Candle: A Survivor's Tale," Mr. Tilove begins his article with being appalled by the Google high page ranking of our critical study on Solly Ganor. What is interesting, if not bewildering, is that Mr. Tilove was not appalled (apparently at all) by the massive evidence accumulated that we were able to present in our two separate studies (Study-1 and Study-2) supporting overwhelmingly our bottom line conclusion on Solly Ganor that was encapsulated perfectly by Mr. Tilove in his May 16, 2006 email addressed to us when he noted:

"The clear implication of your postings is that he [Mr. Ganor] is a fraud,
that he is not the Holocaust survivor he purpots to be."

As astonishing as it is, nothing but absolutely nothing, Mr. Tilove was able to find and put his hands on, from our posted studies, that he could refute or take issue with.

So what is then the trust of Mr. Tilove's article?

Well, let us follow the trail of Mr. Tilove's article to see if we can make any sense of it.

Mr. Tilove begins his investigative reporting by noting:

"At Ganor's appearances, students began asking whether he was,
as a Google search suggested, a fraud."

Who are those real or imaginary students that Mr. Tilove was referring to? Are they mentally retarded? Why Mr. Tilove believes that students, by reading our two posted studies on Solly Ganor, are not able to make up their own mind with respect to the credibility and veracity of Solly Ganor's story?

Why in God's name none of the issues that we have presented with respect to the credibility of Solly Ganor were being discussed by Mr. Tilove in his exploratory article? Why nothing, but absolutely nothing, from the evidence and argument presented in the Solly Ganor case are being rebutted by Mr. Tilove if he was truly so concerned that our study was so off mark and so deceptive?

Instead of dealing with any of the numerous issues challenging the credibility of Mr. Ganor, Mr. Tilove --ignoring them all-- is diverting his attention to the "new geography" of the Internet [sic!], to Google's page ranking, etc. --in short to anything under the sun except the concrete issues challenging Mr. Ganor's credibility.

In an astonishing fashion, Mr. Tilove is trivializing our voluminous study on Solly Ganor reducing it to these four marginal questions:

Why did Ganor change his name? What's his real age? How could he know so many languages? How could he have kept a diary in the Kovno, Lithuania, ghetto?

that, when taken out of context, are in fact quite meaningless if not preposterous.

It is difficult to conceive how a "good and careful reporter" as Mr. Tilove told us that he is, in his June 22, 2006 email, would not even mention our PBS study on Solly Ganor where another important dimension to Solly Ganor's monumental deceit is being provided.

 

 
.