https://holocaustcontroversies.blogspot ... erman.html
In one of these letters by Kurt Blome to Arthur Greiser, this is said:
Now to me, it clearly looks like "special treatment" means killing here, since it is presenting "special treatment" along with other options like isolating them. However, in Himmler's final letter, he decides not to opt for the special treatment option in regards to the severely ill TB Poles.Therefore, something basic must be done soon. One must decide the most efficient way in which this can be done. There are three ways to be taken into consideration:
1. Special treatment (Soncerbehandlung) of the seriously ill persons.
2. Most rigorous isolation of the seriously ill persons.
3. Creation of a reservation for all TB patients.
This reference to "special treatment" to mean killing is then used to interpret an earlier letter from Arthur Greiser to Heinrich Himmler which says:
This is then used to argue that since "special treatment" was used to mean killing in another letter, that must then mean that this letter is referring to the killing of 100,000 Jews.The special treatment of about 100,000 Jews in the territory of my district (Gau), approved by you in agreement with the Chief of the Reich-Main-Security Office, SS Obergruppenfuehrer Heydrich, can be completed within the next 2-3 months.
However, there is a problem with this line of argument. Firstly, revisionists have already conceded that "special treatment" can include bad things up to and including killing. So this letter with the TB Poles really adds nothing new here. In the ways in which "special treatment" can have both positive and negative meanings, see this:
https://holocaustencyclopedia.com/conce ... tment/847/
The page also says that the term "special treatment" was used for Jews because they were to be treated differently than other inmates. So all in all, these series of letters are a big nothing burger and tell us nothing one way or the other about the accuracy of the orthodox narrative.