No, the title of this blog post does not refer to a new TV reality show. This is about the ongoing controversy regarding two men named Wiesel: Elie Wiesel and Lázár Wiesel. Elie Wiesel is the author of the famous book, Night, that is currently assigned reading for virtually every school kid in America. Lázár Wiesel is the name of a young man from Elie Wiesel’s home town in Hungary, who was a prisoner in the Buchenwald concentration camp, the same place where Elie Wiesel claims to have been a prisoner in 1945.
Elie’s full name is Eliezer Wiesel and there has been some speculation that he and Lázár Wiesel might be the same person. Both were born around the same time in 1928 and both were allegedly liberated from the Buchenwald concentration camp on April 11, 1945.
There are documents which prove that Lázár Wiesel was one of the 904 “orphans” at Buchenwald and that he was sent to France in July 1945. Elie Wiesel was living in France after World War II and he also claims to have been on that list of “orphans,” although there are no documents to prove his claim. There are no documents to prove that Elie was registered in Buchenwald, nor even that he was registered in Auschwitz.
Now a researcher has proved that Eliezer Wiesel and Lázár Wiesel are definitely not the same person because their signatures are not the same. Some people might say “So what?” Others are outraged. Elie Wiesel is an icon; he has made millions off his books and speeches about the Holocaust, and has been awarded prizes for his stories. But is he a fraud?
I believe that Elie Wiesel wrote the book Night, but there is no proof that he wrote the original book, that Night was based on. You can read the three part essay entitled Shadowy Origins of “Night” here.
In 1948, America changed the laws which had previously limited the number of immigrants from Germany coming to America, and thousands of Holocaust survivors came here, while thousands of others emigrated to Israel. Almost none of these survivors wrote books about their experience in the Nazi death camps in the 50s and 60s, probably because they did not want to be confronted with the obvious question: “How did you manage to survive when 6 million Jews were killed?” Many people thought that the obvious answer to that question was that the survivors had co-operated with the Nazis.
In 1954, at a time when there was no market for Holocaust survivor books, Elie Wiesel allegedly wrote an 862 page book called Un di Velt Hot Gesvign (And the World Remained Silent). This 862 page book became the basis for the book Night. Elie claims that he typed up this book, which was written in Yiddish, while he was on an ocean voyage to Brazil in the Spring of 1954. Yiddish is a dialect of German, but it is written with Hebrew letters.
The researcher, who questions whether Elie Wiesel wrote the original book, brings up the question of where the author got enough typewriter ribbons to type up a 862 page book while he was in the middle of the ocean.
Elie Wiesel worked for a Yiddish newspaper in 1954, so that’s why he had a Yiddish typewriter. There is a photo of a Yiddish typewriter included in part III of the article about the Shadowy Origins of Night.
Scrapbookpages Blog 
I found this part in Prof. Waltzer’s comment amusing:
“his [EW’s] account of his experience at Buchenwald in Night fits closely with the documented facts”
Well, how about the many grave problems with his account of Auschwitz? Can we expect Prof. Waltzer to tackle Carlo Mattogno’s detailed critique of it http://www.revblog.codoh.com/2010/02/elie-wiesel-the-most-authoritative-living-witness-of-the-shoah/
Comment by Thomas Kues — October 5, 2010 @ 10:34 am
Do you have a better link that goes right to the article?
The biggest problem with Elie’s account of Auschwitz in Night is that he doesn’t mention the gas chambers. He got off the train in the middle of the camp and walked down a road; he wrote that he turned left on this road into the Gypsy camp. That would have been the road that went north and south through the center of the Birkenau camp, so he would not have seen Krema II and Krema III, which were at the end of the railroad tracks. The burning pits would have been near Krema V, a long way from the point on the north-south road where the Gypsy camp was located.
Most of the survivors of Birkenau who are still alive today say that they were saved from the gas chamber because the workers who met the incoming trains told them to lie about their age. Elie was 15 and 1/2 so he barely survived the selection when he arrived on a train.
Comment by furtherglory — October 5, 2010 @ 11:45 am
The problem with the link is the parentheses and question mark at the end –)? — which got included in the link. Remove those and it works fine.
Now let me add this to your question concerning lying about their age: Did these people come to Birkenau with no papers, no records … just a bunch of rabble? The camp authorities accepted whatever they were told by them?
The camp recorded them by name, birth date, where they came from, their occupation, etc. But these survivors say that when they got there, they told the “selectors” whatever they wanted to? And they were believed? In that case, most would not have given their real name, or real anything. So where do the records come from, that are in fact accurate, on the camp inmates that people like Kenneth Waltzer put so much faith in?
I don’t believe they could get away with lying about their age so easily. Something is wrong with this whole picture of their arrival given by the survivors. What is your answer to this? I would like to hear comments from Kenneth Waltzer and Thomas Kues on this matter too, if they would.
Comment by Skeptic — October 6, 2010 @ 5:59 pm
Thanks for telling me the problem with the link. I edited the comment so now a person can click on the link and go directly to the article.
Regarding the records at Birkenau: Many survivors claim that they lied about their age during the selection. Those who were gassed, after the selection, were never registered. That’s why the names and even the number of those who were gassed is unknown. Those not selected to be gassed were registered and they were probably carrying papers with all the vital information about themselves. Some who were under the age of 15 were not selected to be gassed and were registered instead. I am preparing a post about a boy of 14 who was not gassed at Birkenau. Allegedly, Dr. Mengele couldn’t tell the difference between a boy of 14 and a boy aged 18.
Comment by furtherglory — October 6, 2010 @ 7:39 pm
All the prattle about Elie Wiesel not being at Auschwitz or Buna or at Buchenwald are false. Miklos Gruner’s claims that Lazar Wiesel was an older man, born 1913, not 1928, are false. A colleague and I have proved beyong a doubt that Elie Wiesel is indeed the Lazar Wiesel in the records at Buchenwald and in the ITS at Bad Arolsen, and that his account of his experience at Buchenwald in Night fits closely with the documented facts. Stay tuned.
FOr those interested, I’m still working on the book on rescue of children and youths at Buchenwald.
Comment by Kenneth Waltzer — October 4, 2010 @ 3:54 pm
Prattle? Is it necessary to insult Further Glory and the commenters here who are exercising their right to discuss, question and speculate?
You are promising a lot, but your track record in the past has not been that good. Every revisionist in the world knew that Herman Rosenblatt was a fraud before you finally “discovered” it. There are frauds galore, but you try to uphold most of them. It will be interesting to see what you come up with about Wiesel’s orphan status.
You are admitting that these records Gruner came up with have thrown you a curve, and you’ve had to put forward your publication date in order to deal with all the new information that’s been made public. You were happy to just sweep it under the rug, but now you have to deal with it. Your book was originally scheduled to have been published already, isn’t that so?
You have the right to look at everything at Arolson, and also Buchenwald and Auschwitz-Birkenau archives, while the rest of us are excluded. That should be remembered when you use words like “prattle.”
Comment by Skeptic — October 4, 2010 @ 8:48 pm
What do you say to the people who have put up a web site with the title “Elie Wiesel cons the world”?
It is at this URL:
http://www.eliewieseltattoo.com/
The latest post on this website shows three photos of Elie Wiesel and compares them. In one of the photos, Elie Wiesel was identified by you. I always thought the tall boy wearing a beret in this photo was Elie Wiesel. I would like to know how you made this identification because I need to change the caption of the photo on my web site if your identification is correct.
Comment by furtherglory — October 5, 2010 @ 8:59 am
I am curious as to why Elie changed his first name from Lazar to Eliezer, so that the name on his records doesn’t match his current name. What about his identification tattoo from Auschwitz? Elie said, under oath in a court of law, that he has an Auschwitz tattoo, but he won’t show it to anyone; recent photographs show his bare arms with no tattoo. Your new book is sure to become very popular because many people are waiting to see the “documented facts” that you found at Buchenwald and at Bad Arolsen.
Comment by furtherglory — October 7, 2010 @ 2:30 pm
As I’ve read over the articles on the website you link to here, I see two documents involved in the “proof” that Lázár Wiesel was one of the 904 Buchenwald orphans sent to France in July 1945.
The first is a kind of “liberation” questionaire form for Lázár Wiesel, with his birth date given as Oct. 4, 1928, and which he signed. This is where the signature came from.
The second is the name Lazar Wiesel, with the same birth date, on the official transport list of children being sent to France. No accents over the “a’s” this time because they probably didn’t have it on their typewriters in Germany.
This is pretty persuasive. Especially since there is no other Lazar or Eliezer Wiesel on that list; he is the only one. So how did Elie Wiesel get to France as an “orphan?” And who is Lázár, and what happened to him? It doesn’t seem to me that this is all the result of bureaucratic mistakes — getting names and birth dates mixed up like this. What it projects is a very cloudy record that none of Mr. Wiesel’s biographers or reviewers want to look into — they instead gloss over it.
I’m among those who are outraged by it, especially when we’re confronted with films like “Oprah and Elie visit Auschwitz.” Kudos to this “Elie Wiesel Cons The World” website for pursuing the truth about this fraud, since he is a Nobel Peace Prize recipient! That should not protect him from closer scrutiny. I hope you will keep publicizing it, FG.
Comment by Sceptic — September 14, 2010 @ 9:01 am
I did a little searching on the orphans at Buchenwald and the first web site that came up mentioned that Ken Waltzer is doing a book about the orphans.
http://www.harpers.org/archive/2008/12/hbc-90004103
Here is a quote from an interview with Ken Waltzer from this web site:
“Among the older boys was Eliezer Wiesel from Sighet, Rumania, who was protected in block 66 with hundreds of others. He later became a Nobel Peace Prize winner.
“This story is largely unknown. I hope to tell it honestly, and with attention to detail, drawing on the voices and memories of many of these Buchenwald boys who today are men in their late seventies as well as the documentary evidence now available from the Red Cross International Tracing Service archive and other sources.”
Apparently there is some “documentary evidence” about the orphans at the International Tracing Service. These documents have now been put online by the US Holocaust Memorial Museum.
Herman Rosenblat’s memoir “An Angel at the Fence,” was recently revealed to be a work of fiction. According to the web site, cited above, “The discovery and exposure of that deceit comes thanks to the work of Ken Waltzer, a professor and director of Jewish Studies at Michigan State University.”
Is Ken Waltzer still working on his book about the orphans, now that there is some doubt about Elie Wiesel being one of the orphans?
Comment by furtherglory — September 14, 2010 @ 9:45 am
I think you’re mistaken about ITS documents put online at USHMM. If you can find something, I’d be interested in knowing. Waltzer may just be referring to finding information on more of the individuals who were sent to France.
Ken Waltzer is being pretty quiet about his book now. Maybe he’s worried. LOL.
Comment by Sceptic — September 14, 2010 @ 7:52 pm
There was a plan to put the documents online, but maybe the project is not yet finished. I think that a person must go the USHMM and use their computers to access the documents. I agree that Walzer is being quiet about his book now.
Comment by furtherglory — September 14, 2010 @ 10:15 pm
I had already gone there and tried with no results, and that’s why I said you were mistaken. You are probably better at researching on USHMM than I am. Can you find anything out?
Are you talking about documents about the welfare agency, the orphans themselves, or just searching for names from the orphan’s list in the mass of information at ITS?
Comment by Skeptic — September 15, 2010 @ 2:45 pm
The names of the orphans would be in the ITS documents, as would the names of prisoners at Buchenwald. I don’t think you can search the ITS documents on the USHMM web site; you have to go to the USHMM in person and go up to the top floor where you can search on their computers. When I went to the Museum, I went to the top floor, but they wanted me to leave my camera bag at the desk and I didn’t want to part with it, so I didn’t get to do any research there.
Comment by furtherglory — September 15, 2010 @ 4:25 pm
No one can keep up with Weasels-the-Rodents. They just maintain their lies no matter what.
Comment by Gasan — September 13, 2010 @ 9:56 pm
It happened to me for a second time today, that the name of Lt. Col. Rosenfeld came to my attention. I have been reading a book written about eight years ago by a Russian patriot, and he has mentioned the names of Lt. Col. Rosenfeld, as well as Lt. Perl as torturers at the Dachau Trials. Were they Jews? Were they driven by tribal survivor instincts, but not justice. Were they really Americans with “Justice for All” beliefs, or, Old Testament/Talmud driven, bloodthirsty psychos?
“Another witness, court reporter James J. Bailey, testified that he had seen Jewish interrogator Lt. William Perl strike the German prisoners. Kurt Teil, an interpreter for the army, testified that both Perl and another Jewish interrogator, Harry Thon, had spoken approvingly to him about violent methods of interrogation, and claimed that Thon showed him one of the SS men who was lying motionless in his cell with a hood still over his head after he had been interrogated.”
The writer of the book “The Rat-People” is Orey Volot. The patriots of Russia still remember the names of all perpetrators against Germans, Russians and other people of Europe. They still remember the holocaust of Russian and all other Nations of former USSR made by Rosenfelds and Perls, working for NKVD/KGB.
Did I answer your question, tampalam?
Comment by Gasan — September 13, 2010 @ 9:44 pm
I think getting a Hebrew character typewriter (to write Yiddish) is the least problematic point.
There is definitely something fishy going on though.
Comment by Budham — September 13, 2010 @ 8:09 pm