Tattoo Criminals — Elie Wiesel Should Be Investigated for Holocaust Fraud
IN A BERLIN COURT, a German man is convicted for having a tattoo resembling a concentration camp entrance on his body. (ILLUSTRATION: Elie Wiesel’s left arm in bright sunlight, taken from his video “Elie Wiesel Goes Home”)
Why then is Elie Wiesel not convicted in Germany for not having a concentration camp tattoo on his body, but saying he does?
Wiesel was in Germany at least three times impersonating a “nazi” concentration camp survivor. His first visit was in June 1986 when he spoke in Loccum, West Germany as the author of the book Night, which he claims to be a record of his own experience. In Night, the main character is tattooed with the number A7713 on his left forearm, which Elie claimed under oath in California is still there on his arm. Apparently, no one in Loccum asked to see it.
He returned the next year in November 1987 and spoke in a modern conference center inside the shell of the destroyed Reichstag. The title of his talk was “Reflections of a Survivor” in which he, as in the prior year, couldn’t keep from speaking words of blame toward the German people.
On June 5, 2009 he was at the Buchenwald Memorial outside of Weimar, accompanying the President of the United States and the Chancellor of Germany in the guise of a former resident of the camp. I know this for sure because I was in Dresden on this very day and watched it on German television.
Elie Wiesel’s main authentication for being interned at both Auschwitz/Birkenau/Monowitz and at Buchenwald is the tattoo A7713 which matches records for a Lazar Wiesel from Sighet. Elie says he has it on his arm but he has never allowed the public to see it! He does not confirm his claim by showing his forearm, as do so many survivors — the very survivors he claims to be one with.
Yet on some occasions he’s been photographed with short sleeves and there is no tattoo visible on either of his arms. This is absolutely incredible, right? That the world’s most famous holocaust survivor is in truth “the emperor wearing no clothes” … the “elephant in the living room.” The world media say nothing because they can’t … they pretend not to notice and hope you do the same.
To Get to the Point
But why is Marcel Zech, a 27-year old town council member representing the National Democratic Party (NPD) dragged into court and convicted of sedition and inciting hatred because of a tattoo on his lower back that no one would normally see anyway … while Elie Wiesel comes to Germany at age 57, 58 and 81, and with great publicity misrepresents himself as an Auschwitz and Buchenwald concentration camp survivor with the tattoo A7713 on his arm that he doesn’t have, and the German Justice system doesn’t even notice.
I demand that German prosecutors investigate Wiesel’s claim to have a tattoo, and bring charges against him when they find he doesn’t have one, never did have one — charges of defrauding the public and of inciting hatred against Germans as a people!
Let’s take a look at the “crime” of Marcel Zech. According to the photo taken at a pool party, Zech’s tattoo (see image above) is the likeness of a structure that resembles the entrance to the former Birkenau Camp in Poland but there is no name identifying it as such. Under the image are the words Jedem das Seine in large gothic-style letters. Jedem das Seine translates as “To each his own” and was on the gate of the Buchenwald camp entrance, not at Auschwitz or Birkenau. So what is the connection, what is the message?
I would say there is no message since the image and the phrase don’t go together in the “holocaustian” sense. Is it illegal in Germany to use the words Jedem das Seine? Can’t be. (1) Is it illegal in Germany to post or publish an image of the entrance to Birkenau? No, because it’s done all the time, especially by Jews. So what is the problem with Marcel’s tattoo?
The problem is that he is an office-holding member of the NPD, which the federal government in Germany is currently trying to ban. Yes, ban it as a political party. It has been a German political party since 1964!
On the other hand, Elie Wiesel is a Jew, and Jews are never investigated for anything in Germany, let alone found guilty of something. Have you ever heard of it? I did an internet search and came up with nothing.
State prosecutors had demanded that the accused [Zech] be sentenced to 10 months in jail without parole because, according to DW, he seemed to be “a politically motivated criminal, who had trampled on the core values of the German constitution.” What are the “core values” of the German constitution?
Consulting the German Basic Law (constitutional law), I come up with a few:
Art. 3: No person shall be favored or disfavored because of […] political opinions.
Art. 4: … freedom to profess a religious or philosophical creed, shall be inviolable.
Art. 5: Every person shall have the right freely to express and disseminate his opinions in speech, writing, and pictures.
But then there is also Article 139 [Continuing validity of denazification provisions]:
The legal provisions enacted for the “Liberation of the German People from National Socialism and Militarism” shall not be affected by the provisions of this Basic Law.
Get that? — The German people were liberated. At least we know that Germany is still functioning under the 1945 Military Control Council of Supreme Commander Dwight Eisenhower. Not much progress there.
But back to Elie Wiesel: What is the law against impersonating a concentration camp survivor? It appears there is none. While it’s a crime to minimize the “Holocaust”, it’s perfectly okay to maximize it. Lying about the Holocaust by adding to the narrative is fine; just don’t take anything away from it. Not when you’re in Germany.
[By the way, the Deutsche Welle story repeated a falsehood from a previous story when it said that Buchenwald was “the Nazi regime’s largest death camp.” Buchenwald is not considered to be a “death camp” even by holocaustian historians. Martin Schultz was using the occasion of a 70th anniversary to advise that because of Buchenwald, German’s were obligated to welcome refugees.]
1. From Dictionary.com: One has a right to one’s personal preferences, as in I’d never pick that color, but to each his own. Versions of this maxim appeared in the late 1500s but the modern wording was first recorded in 1713.
* * *
Source: Elie Wiesel Cons The World