Our next ‘Holocaust Survivor’ narrative is provided by the recent obituary of the so-called ‘Holocaust Survivor’ Elizabeth Bleiman in ‘The Philadelphia Inquirer’. It is also surprisingly honest since we read how:
‘Elizabeth Bleiman, 104, of Philadelphia, homemaker, wife, mother, grandmother, immigrant, volunteer, and one of the region’s oldest Holocaust survivors, died Monday, May 4, of age-associated decline at her home in the Northeast.
Born in Ófehértó, Hungary, Mrs. Bleiman came to the United States in 1949 after enduring separation, physical abuse, starvation, and other atrocities during the Holocaust in Hungary and Poland. In 1944 and 1945, at 23, she was separated from her father, stepmother, older brother, and younger sister, and brutalized in the Auschwitz, Stutthof, and Praust Nazi concentration camps in Poland.
She was forced on a two-month march to another location in Poland as liberators moved closer, and she battled black typhus for weeks after being freed by Russian soldiers in 1945. Her father and stepmother were killed at Auschwitz, and her brother and sister survived in Hungary and Poland.’ (1)
This is refreshingly honest as far as ‘Holocaust Survivor’ accounts go as we read nothing of ‘Schindler’s List’ style brutality nor of Josef Mengele nor of the so-called ‘gas chambers’ despite Bleiman’s having been in two camps that were a central part of the so-called ‘mass extermination of the jews’: Auschwitz and Stutthof.
We know Bleiman’s basic narrative is accurate, because she is the right age (her age both checks out and makes sense in the context of German forced labour policies), states she was deported in the right general time period (the mass deportation of jews from Hungary which began in late April 1944 and kicked into high gear in May 1944) and her transition through the German concentration camp system also jives with the historical record.
This is because – for example – we have the evidence of Helen Katz’s (better-known as Helen Lewis) testimony who was a jewess from Prague who was transferred from Auschwitz Birkenau’s Family Camp in August 1944 to the Kochstadt sub-camp of Stutthof (aka Praust after the nearby Prussian town which is how Bleiman refers to it) where there were already circa 500 – primarily jewish – women working to expand the nearby airfield for the Luftwaffe.
It is thus likely that Bleiman followed a similar path and was one of the original 500 women at the Kochstadt labour camp or alternatively came with Katz in the additional shipment of female forced labourers from Auschwitz Birkenau in August 1944. Bleiman also gets right the fact that the evacuation of Stutthof – whose primary purpose was as an aircraft production facility – was a rather haphazard and deadly affair with prisoners (jewish and non-jewish alike) being marched westwards (due to the lack of availability of trains and carriages at this point in the war) and then further evacuated – often by sea as well as rather bizarrely in one known instance in the evacuation from Stutthof to neutral Sweden (if the Germans were trying to ‘exterminate the jews’ then why did they evacuate them to Sweden on at least two occasions?) – to Neuengamme concentration camp outside of the western German city of Hamburg.
Clearly Bleiman was not one of those evacuated by sea to the West (this in turn may have in fact saved her life) and the clue as to why is provided by her reference to ‘battling black typhus for weeks’ around the time she was ‘liberated by the Red Army’ somewhere in Poland in 1945. Thus, suggesting that Bleiman was infected with typhus and so was abandoned by the retreating Germans in early 1945 since typhus was often fatal at this point in the war not to mention highly infectious (so it was a case of the ‘good of the majority overriding the plight of the minority’).
Thus, we can see that a lot of Bleiman’s story is actually very likely to be true and unusually makes good sense in terms of the revisionist understanding of ‘Holocaust’ history with Bleiman’s claim that her father and stepmother were ‘killed in Auschwitz’ being almost certainly overstatement and just a vapid equivolation of ‘died in Auschwitz’ (likely from the typhus that almost killed Bleiman herself or from accidents/natural causes) with ‘murdered in Auschwitz’. When there is no evidence – if there was such evidence then we would have heard about it and seen it widely reproduced decades ago – that they were ‘murdered in Auschwitz’ at all, but rather – as is usual in these cases – it is simply assumes via the false equation of ‘died in Auschwitz’ with ‘murdered in Auschwitz’ which then is used to imply ‘gas chambers’ were used.
All in all, Bleiman’s ‘Holocaust Survivor’ testimony is refreshingly honest and relatively accurate with known history.
Makes a change: doesn’t it?
References
(1) https://www.inquirer.com/obituaries/elizabeth-bleiman-obituary-holocaust-philadelphia-hungary-20260514.html
Karl’s SubstackRead More
T1
