Fake Holocaust Survivors: Magda Bresnitz
As part of my work documenting the ludicrous claims of so-called ‘Holocaust Survivors’ I have not infrequently come across suggestive examples of what revisionist historians have identified as the likely origin of the ‘Holocaust’ legend. The case of Magda Bresnitz is one such example.
We read how she declares that:
‘In early September 1944, my mother developed an infection while in Auschwitz and was examined by the notorious ”Angel of Death” camp doctor, Josef Mengele. He advised her that she needed a “rest,” a euphemism for sending prisoners to the gas chamber. Here, she had some luck: A group of prisoners, including my mother and her two older sisters, were transported by truck the next day to a satellite slave labor camp that did not have gas chambers.’
Looking at this statement we can see three key things:
She claims that Dr. Mengele – apparently there weren’t any other SS physicians at Auschwitz if we are to believe so-called ‘Survivors’ – examined her mother after she developed an infection in early September 1944.
She claims Dr. Mengele advised her mother that ‘rest’ was required in order to allow her to recover.
That ‘rest’ was really a euphemism for being sent to one of the alleged gas chambers of Auschwitz.
She then declares without apparently seeing the contradiction that her mother was transported to an Auschwitz sub-camp the next day that didn’t have gas chambers and thus her life was spared.
Bresnitz like so many ‘Holocaust Survivors’ simply doesn’t connect the obvious dots, because she believes in the myth of the ‘Holocaust’ which her testimony has to ‘fit’ inside of. So instead of making the connection that the SS physician – who could have been Dr. Mengele but probably wasn’t – ordered the transfer of her mother to an Auschwitz sub-camp for health reasons based on his diagnosis – thus taking the concept of ‘rest’ at face value rather than assuming it is a code word for ‘being sent to the gas chambers’.
Hence, we often see claims of parents and/or siblings disappearing after they were sent to the ‘showers’ by camp personnel with the assumption made that ‘showers’ were synonymous with ‘gas chambers’ and then they later find out that one or more of their relatives was alive and just sent somewhere else (i.e., the showers were what they were described as not a euphemism for ‘gas chambers’).
The unusual element of Bresnitz’s story is the fact that she knew at the time that her mother had been sent elsewhere in the large constellation of sub-camps attached to Auschwitz rather than being in the dark – or having forgotten – that she was transferred and we can see the rationalization to the ‘Holocaust’ narrative in her account as if it were just ‘luck’ rather than the German administration of the camps looking out for the health of their inmates and work force. This is partly why I insist that ‘Holocaust’ belief is characterised not by reason or evidence but rather by assumptions based on an existing story line which leads to magical thinking and belief in blind chance.