Majdanek this and that

[Fred Ziffel]

1. this room was neither a gas chamber or a delousing closet

2. the other side of the wall and even the corner was in the open air so no possibility of diffusion like we find from "A" Chamber to B2 Chamber.

3. Emptied open cans of Zyklon B were found in this room. I speculate that after emptying the can in "A" chamber, the worker put the empty can in this room. Fumes from the empty cans turned these walls blue? Therefor gives an idea of just how easy these walls turned blue?

4. More blue staining here in this room than in B1 Chamber

5, Same building materials, Same time period built: Aug 1942 to Sept 1942, and arguable same people built the building

Majdanek Museum needs to give it up

[Fred Ziffel]

Yesterday I was having a conversation with Grok about Chamber "A" at Majdanek
I posted this photo and asked where the ceiling holes or even traces from past ceiling holes are?
Grok's reply?: "The traces in concrete eroded over time and you can no longer see them"
I pointed out "What about the traces you can see at the Auschwitz Crem 1 on floor and walls from former toilet stalls and separation walls built in 1944
Also
I asked Grok. ID the doorway symbol in the red rectangle on this April 1942 drawing
I had to ask Grok to ID the doorway two more times but Grok gave me information on the doors at Crem 2 and 3, Grok simply would not reply to Crem 1 doorway symbol. See drawing, I used to ask
If anyone ask Grok this, let me know the reply

[Wetzelrad]

Mattogno claims that B41 and B42 were "mirror images" of each other. This seems to be true when comparing their floorplans, with the only major exception being that B42 had a clothing delousing section where B41 had a larger shower and hallway. I find this difference odd. Why not build both barracks the same? Do you have any idea about this?

Mattogno doesn't explain it. In describing an older plan for an H-shaped delousing facility, he says the side which corresponded to B41 was "intended for inmates". To me it seems apparent that both buildings were intended for inmates. If anything B41 was the one better suited for disinfecting property as part of Operation Reinhardt. B42 was the one with a room specifically labelled for clothing to be returned to washed inmates.

In their separate universe, the Majdanek Museum claims that B41 was the men's bathhouse and B42 was the women's bathhouse, with this supposed distinction being part of the selection process. This is truly illogical, because it would mean women's clothing was deloused and returned to them while it was the men that were gassed. Reversing their assignments would make more sense, since if the extermination theory is true women should be more likely to be gassed.

I'm looking for any evidence that this building gender assignment actually existed. It would make sense, if incoming inmates were first brought to the delousing facility, to separate inmates one gender to each building, but currently I am unsuccessful in finding any evidence for it.

Actually Mattogno points out that the women's section of the camp had or was planned to have a similar facility, described in documents as "two delousing barracks" for "delousing the newly arrived inmates and for keeping articles of clothing clean". This was called Building IX. Since this facility was intended for the women's section it could not have had the gender assignments of B41 and 42. In fact it could eliminate the need to delouse women at B41 and 42, leaving both for men. That two barracks were planned could be taken to suggest that one was meant for inmates (like B42) and the other moreso for clothing (like B41?).