Scrapbookpages Blog

January 25, 2014

Were former concentration camp prisoners forced to live in the camps after they were liberated?

Filed under: Holocaust — furtherglory @ 1:01 pm

Today, I found a comment on the Reddit website, which you can read at http://www.reddit.com/r/pics/comments/18s90e/so_i_was_in_auschwitz_last_weekend/

The comment is quoted below:

[–]4ecohgie 1115 points 11 months ago

All 4 of my grandparents were sent to Auschwitz (among a number of other camps, through which they were transferred). What is particularly chilling for me is that, after the war, this is where most CC prisoners/refugees had to live for a number of years. I can’t imagine having to continue to reside in the same place that your entire family was murdered for years after liberation.

Adding to this. Not only did people live in the concentration camps after the war (until immigrating), but they also married and had children there. Both sets of grandparents married at the camps in 45 and 46, and my two uncles were born at Bergen-Belsen, if I remember correctly. So strange. Especially because each grandparent entered the camp with a different spouse (and some with young children), and left with a wholly different family.

I don’t know how they didn’t go completely insane.

It would have indeed been horrible if Jewish survivors in the Auschwitz camp had been forced to live there after Auschwitz was liberated by the Soviet Union on January 27, 1945. Most of the survivors of Auschwitz were marched out of the camp, BEFORE THE CAMP WAS LIBERATED, and taken to camps in Germany, including Bergen-Belsen.

Survivors at Bergen-Belsen were NOT forced to live for 5 years (1945 to 1950) in the barracks of the Bergen-Belsen camp.  This would not have been possible, because the lice-infested barracks were burned to the ground by the British, after the camp was voluntarily turned over to them.

Barracks at Bergen-Belsen were burned to the ground by the British

Barracks at Bergen-Belsen were burned to the ground by the British

According to Wikipedia, the survivors of Bergen-Belsen were moved to the SS training camp that was right next door to the Bergen-Belsen camp.

Over the next days the surviving prisoners [at Bergen-Belsen] were deloused and moved to a nearby German Panzer army camp, which became the Bergen-Belsen DP (displaced persons) camp. Over a period of four weeks, almost 29,000 of the survivors were moved there. Before the handover, the SS had managed to destroy the camp’s administrative files, thereby eradicating most written evidence.[12] The remaining SS personnel were now forced by armed Allied troops to bury the bodies in pits.[12]

A photo of the SS garrison, where the Bergen-Belsen survivors lived for 5 years, after the camp was turned over to the British on April 15, 1945, is shown below.

German Army garrison where Bergen-Belsen survivors lived for 5 years

German Army garrison where Bergen-Belsen survivors lived for 5 years

So why were the Bergen-Belsen survivors forced to live in an Army garrison for 5 years?

The survivors were NOT FORCED to live there.  They stayed at the German Army garrison for 5 years, while they waited to go to Palestine. For years, the British refused to allow the Jews to enter Palestine because they anticipated the trouble that is still going on in the Middle East.

Here is another quote from Wikipedia:

The survivors of the [Bergen-Belsen] concentration camp became the first residents of the future DP camp, which was around 2 kilometres from the main concentration camp area, in a former German Army barracks.[1][2]:60 Initially, the British medical staff used buildings in the former Panzertruppenschule (school for Panzer troops) as an emergency hospital to treat the former inmates away from the disastrous conditions of the concentration camp.[3] On April 21 the first patients were moved to the new location, disinfected and issued with new clothing.[3] This movement of people was completed by May 18 and at that point the former barracks had around 12,000 hospital beds.[3]

There are also claims that Holocaust survivors were forced to live in the former Dachau camp for 17 years. Actually, it was the Germans who were expelled from what is now the Czech Republic, who lived in the former barracks at Dachau for 17 years.

5 Comments

  1. The marxists also justified violent revolution but this goes unmentioned. The communist manifesto advocates “the forcible overthrow of all social conditions.” Trans by Samuel Moore 1888 Chapter four. Since the Marxists advocated violence then their movement had to be suppressed.

    Comment by der-wulf — March 12, 2014 @ 9:06 pm

  2. The ultimate proof that 6 Million Jews have been murdered has just been published.

    Comment by Eager For Answers — January 26, 2014 @ 4:41 pm

  3. Hello and Happy Holocaust day…it is a Jewish religious festival isn’t it ?
    One of the puzzles to be still resolved by the political elite is whether the German people are condemned for eternity by sin and to be shunned for ever. You might enjoy this travelogue by the BBC team on Namibia where to this day cling a small German minority facing harassment by the SWAPO marxist s who recently demolished with Chinese labourers the Reiterdenkmal in Windhoek. Of course these evil Germans are responsible for the first genocide of the 20th century on the Herero…a sort of pre runner to the big H. Like the big H this is also a myth but what the hell when you are riding a bandwagon what has the truth got to do with it .

    Comment by peter — January 26, 2014 @ 2:21 pm

    • Oh I forgot to add that mercifully it is still legal to challenge the myth of the ” Kaiser’s genocide” although it is frowned upon in academic and establishment circles and would be disadvantageous to any career you have in such circles..

      Comment by peter — January 27, 2014 @ 3:13 am

    • There was no Herero genocide.

      http://www.stormfront.org/forum/t963256/
      http://www.adelaideinstitute.org/Dissenters1/nordbruch_brisbane-goldcoast1.htm

      The common point between the Herero genocide and the Holocaust is British atrocity propaganda.

      1904: The British leaders wanted the rich are of Katanga (Congo) for themselves. So they claimed the Belgian King Leopold II was a brutal ruler who had killed 10 million Congolese people (even if the first population census in Congo was made in 20 years later, in 1924). Their only ‘evidence’? A report of ‘eyewitness testimonies’, the Casement report. But the maneuver failed and Congo was transfered from King Leopold II to the Belgian governement.

      1914-1918: The British leaders wanted the German colonies in Africa for themselves. So they claimed the Germans were brutal rulers who had exterminated the Herero tribe in Namibia. In 1915 South African forces under British command invade German-controlled Namibia. After defeating the German army, the colony was governed under a South African military administration. In order to ‘prove’ the Germans were brutal rulers unable to administer negro populations and only British people can do that, the invaders produced a report, the Blue Book or “ReportontheNativesofSouthWestAfricaandTheirTreatmentbyGermany” (“an English piece of war propaganda with no credibility whatsoever” according to the historian Brigitte Lau), claiming the Germans had exterminated the Herero tribe. Ironically one of the arguments in the Blue Book was the Germans had built concentration camps for the Herero rebels between 1904 and 1907 (‘forgetting’ to mention the British had built concentration camps for the Boer rebels a few years before). After WW2 Namibia ended in British hands as planned and the other German colonies were shared between the winners of WW1 (mainly Great Britain and Belgium). Their own ally U.S. President Woodrow Wilson was so shocked by the behavior of the British leaders that he called them “rapacious Conquerors”. A few years after WW2, when the German colonies were in British hands, the BritishForeignOffice reluctantlyagreedtoreleasethe1918Report,buttoldtheMinistryofInformationthat”thereportshouldnotbeusedforpublicitypurposes. Itwascomposedintheheatofthelastwar anditishistoricallysomewhatsuspect”. Seeing the billions extorted from Germany by Jews for their “Holocaust”, a few Namibian Hereros decided to recycle the “historically suspect” British Blue Book and request reparations from Germany.

      1914-1918: The British propagandists didn’t only attacked Germany about Namibia and the Hereros. During WW1, British atrocity propaganda accused the Germans of many things as making human soaps, gassing Serbian civilians in churches and crucifying Canadian soldiers. A big part of that atrocity propaganda was focused on Belgium (“the Rape of Belgium)). Among other things, it was claimed Belgian babies were bayoneted, Belgian children’s hands were cut off and Belgian women’s breasts were cut off by the cruel Huns. Once again the British propagandists produced a report, the Bryce Report (published in 1915), to ‘prove’ their crazy allegations. And once again that report was a pack of lies from the beginning to the end. Ironically one of the lies of the Bryce report was recycled from the Casement report – the lie of the hands cut off. Anti-Belgian propaganda suddenly becoming pro-Belgian propaganda.

      1939-1945: The British propagandists didn’t drop their long history of atrocity propaganda against their enemy and the result of that campaign is today known as “the Holocaust”. In summer 1944, when Majdanek camp was captured by the Soviets, Press Chief Otto Dietrich showed Hitler an English newspaper reporting a claim by Moscow that 1,500,000 people had been liquidated in that concentration camp. Hitler answered: “That’s the hacked-off hands again – pure enemy propaganda!”

      Comment by hermie — January 28, 2014 @ 7:24 am


RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.

%d bloggers like this: