An e-mailer assures me that Mattogno did reproduce a second document which independently connects the number A7713 with the birthdate 1913 . Such a document would of course be fatal to Elie’s claim to the number A7713.http://www.revblog.codoh.com/.../the-r ... ie-wiesel/
An A7713 Wiesel born 1913 does appear on transport lists of prisoners delivered to Buchenwald on 26 January 1945. And this indeed “confirmed” by a numerical file card and a detainee registration card filled out on the same day. But the basic information on one would have been simply copied from one to the others. It would not result from an independent source.
I am doing my best for Elie here, because I think that Gruner’s fishy tale would generate more puzzles than it would solve. Neither of our two Pinnochios merits anything but suspicion. The odds against any male survivor at Buchenwald appearing in the world’s most famous group photo, as taken by Private Miller on 16 April 1945, must be nearly a thousand to one. Yet each claims that it was his destiny to appear in it, and moreover on a date when each is said to have been ill.
Speaking as Elie’s advocate, I put the case that someone in an orderly room has set down the 1913 birthdate on Elie’s transport paperwork, a single mistake which has been automatically replicated on arrival in Buchenwald on 26 January. Later statements in letters from the Buchenwald Memorial and from the Auschwitz Museum, may all be based on these interdependent documents. It would not be surprising if there were locksmith’s shop at Monowitz. It is a bit surprising that any sort of apprentice should be thirty-one years old.
As to the American questionnaire for Lázár with the 4 October 1928 birthday, it is true that Eliezer Wiesel signed it and, as Mattogno rightly says, when someone writes down his own birthday there is no room for error. But all the Fragebogen exhibited by Mattogno seem to have had their answers set down in English by a military clerk/interpreter for the benefit of the American colonel who had to countersign them. It was a polyglot factory process. There is plenty of room for error. A fifteen-year old Lázár would have been present when the form was filled, so the mistake would only concern the month and the day. There need be only one Lazar/Lázár Wiesel/Vizel in Buchenwald, born at Sighet in 1928. But if you rule out clerical errors and linguistic variations, which abounded, then you have to swallow that there were three distinct sound-alike sons of Sighhet in Buchenwald, to say nothing of the Nobel Prizewinner who later (somehow) impersonated one of them. It has to be a choice of the lesser absurdity.
That is the best I can do. But my client would have made my task easier if he had not also claimed for his father Shlomo the number 7712. Shlomo Wiesel 7712 is supposed to have been transported from Auschwitz along with his son and to have died at Buchenwald. Records show that Abram Viesel 7712 did get transported from Auschwitz and did die at Buchenwald. Unless Gruner has suppressed it, nobody has yet found any record for Shlomo. It was enough of a strain arguing that a Lazar was accidentally assigned the wrong birthdate and that a Lázár, the same person, was accidentally assigned the wrong birthday. Now I have to argue either that an Abram was accidentally assigned the wrong Auschwitz number, or that a Shlomo was accidentally assigned the wrong forename. A jury may not buy so many clerical errors. Speaking as Elie’s press officer, I would advise him to preserve a lofty silence.
If Wiesel really is a cunning imposter, he will not have neglected to acquire a tattoo for his inner arm. This would be the least of his sins. Is Wiesel a holocaust denier? Very probably. It is certainly true that he refused to denounce the genocide of the Armenians. This was not because of any misgivings about the evidence. It was because Wiesel - like the grovelling servant of power that he is - did not want to offend Israel’s regional ally at that time, the Turkish government. Does he deny the Gypsy holocaust? Very probably. But what he chiefly denies is that a Gypsy holocaust should count for anything. There should be no riff-raff in the Memorial Museum. Wiesel has demanded apology from the Poles for massacres of Jews in 1946. But he knows very well that that on April 9, 1948, Arab non-combatants were coldly murdered in the village of Deir Yassin by commandos led by the Jewish terrorist and prime minister Menachim Begin. I have never seen it denied that young Wiesel was then a supporter of Irgun, though not in any role that required valour. The beam is in his own eye. Deir Yassin was of course not the last martyrdom of the Palestinians to have been too insignificant to deserve his concern. To this holocaust humbug the only suffering that matters is Jewish suffering.