Majdanek this and that

A revisionist safe space
W
Wetzelrad
Posts: 11
Joined: Wed Feb 26, 2025 6:35 am

Re: Majdanek this and that

Post by Wetzelrad »

Whoever he is, Mrozik calls Krzysztof his colleague and he has made other public appearances for the museum.

I posted it on Twitter so hopefully Rudolf will take notice.

B
Booze
Posts: 19
Joined: Tue Mar 18, 2025 11:35 pm

Re: Majdanek this and that

Post by Booze »

Fred Ziffel wrote: Thu Apr 03, 2025 4:18 am You stated: I don't have a strong basis to assume this was a chamber that used Zyklon.
I have no doubt Zyklon was used in the room that you are showing.

But I do not believe that the estimate for the work or the bill for the completed work refers to the structures in this room that that you are showing.

In the book, no mention of blue stains are made in regard to the room where this work was done, which is why I said I cannot definitively state that Zyklon was used in that "gas chamber" described in the work order. (I strongly believe the work order refers to work done in a location other than B41)

I want to call attention to the fact that in the book it is stated that there are two holes that still exist in the ceiling, those two holes are noticeably different in size (as described in the book).
Although the estimate for the project and the bill differ somewhat in description, they both make reference to brickwork.
Also, in the bill it states..."connecting the draft pipes from two sides to the chimney".
We are not seeing flues running from two locations in the ceiling to a chimney in B41, we see shafts, of wood construction, going straight up and out the roof.

I would be interested in seeing again the translation of the work estimate or bill you had in your report.
Because if I recall correctly it said something to the effect of 'the building up of the chimney'.
F
Fred Ziffel
Posts: 71
Joined: Sun Dec 01, 2024 11:02 am

Re: Majdanek this and that

Post by Fred Ziffel »

Booze
I guess we are going to have to agree to disagree. Regardless, the main reason for this issue being in the presentation is because I was emphasizing that Polish building contractors were doing jobs for the Germans and getting paid for it.

Wetzelrad
Thanks so much for your help
however, to be precise, it should read "lack of stains in one (smaller) gas chamber" B1 only. Germar will be aware of this and know what you are talking about.
the "A" chamber is the larger gas chamber and has the blue staining and no ceiling holes
The issue is we have a GC with blue staining and no ceiling holes and a gas chamber with a hole and no blue staining which does not make sense. Credit for this observation goes to David Cole.
I do not believe anything one is not allowed to question
B
Booze
Posts: 19
Joined: Tue Mar 18, 2025 11:35 pm

Re: Majdanek this and that

Post by Booze »

Fred Ziffel wrote: Thu Apr 03, 2025 11:02 pm Booze
I guess we are going to have to agree to disagree. Regardless, the main reason for this issue being in the presentation is because I was emphasizing that Polish building contractors were doing jobs for the Germans and getting paid for it.
The other purpose it can serve is to demonstrate that documents that used the term "gas chamber" cannot haphazardly be equated with a homicidal gas chamber.

This image gives a visual of what I believe this work order describes- a flue running to a chimney. And I'll leave it at that.
https://www.rockfordchimneysupply.com/c ... 1690395010
W
Wetzelrad
Posts: 11
Joined: Wed Feb 26, 2025 6:35 am

Re: Majdanek this and that

Post by Wetzelrad »

Booze wrote: Thu Apr 03, 2025 7:43 pmWe are not seeing flues running from two locations in the ceiling to a chimney in B41, we see shafts, of wood construction, going straight up and out the roof.
Personally I can't see enough in the photos to say that. On page 149 Mattogno describes them like this:
Today, the two openings in the room’s ceiling measure approximately 60 cm × 60 cm (eastern opening) and 40 cm × 40 cm (western opening). Both hatches open into a wooden shaft in which a small chimney of wooden slats is installed; it is closed off with a lid, also of wood, on the barrack roof. Measured from the room’s ceiling, the two chimneys are approximately 1.15 m tall.
Here he says both chimney and chimneys. I take him to mean that the two shafts do actually connect before exiting the roof as a singular shaft. This would also solve the issue of the work orders referring to both a chimney and two chimneys. But it's confusing enough to read that I could be wrong. Is there a photo of the chimney from outside?
Fred Ziffel wrote: Thu Apr 03, 2025 11:02 pmhowever, to be precise, it should read "lack of stains in one (smaller) gas chamber" B1 only.
Really? In the video he said "there are no traces of Zyklon-B" in chamber B2 (II). In the context that he said it, I took that to mean no stains. I guess it's a little more complicated.
F
Fred Ziffel
Posts: 71
Joined: Sun Dec 01, 2024 11:02 am

Re: Majdanek this and that

Post by Fred Ziffel »

OK I see your point
Yes, He did mention that in the video for sure. B2 at Majdanek has been off the Majdanek State Museum List of Gas Chambers since 2005 and even earlier for Pressac. B1 on the other hand, was and still is on the Majdanek Museum List of Gas Chambers. Zyklon GC is now gone, but CO GC still remains. I kind of envy you. I have been kicked off X twice for discussing the technical issues of the Holobunga, be careful

Actually, B2 has stains that diffused through the 20cm wall from "A" Chamber. see attached
Attachments
great Maj B2 photo.JPG
great Maj B2 photo.JPG (99.5 KiB) Viewed 30 times
B2 blue staining.JPG
B2 blue staining.JPG (75.11 KiB) Viewed 30 times
Last edited by Fred Ziffel on Fri Apr 04, 2025 5:08 am, edited 3 times in total.
I do not believe anything one is not allowed to question
F
Fred Ziffel
Posts: 71
Joined: Sun Dec 01, 2024 11:02 am

Re: Majdanek this and that

Post by Fred Ziffel »

I feel the two ceiling holes connected in the rafters where not visible
I do not believe anything one is not allowed to question
Post Reply