The Bischoff letter from October 13 1942

Discuss the alleged Nazi genocide or other wartime atrocities without fear of censorship. No bullying of fellow posters is allowed at RODOH. If you can't be civil, please address the argument and not the participants. Do not use disparaging alterations of the user-names of other RODOH posters or their family members. Failure to heed warnings from Moderators will result in a 24 hour ban (or longer if necessary).
Post Reply
Werd
Posts: 8655
Joined: Fri Oct 10, 2014 6:38 am
Contact:

The Bischoff letter from October 13 1942

Post by Werd » Tue Aug 21, 2018 3:29 pm

This was one of the documents Nessie found on a list by holocaustcontroversies.
Nessie wrote:
Tue Aug 21, 2018 4:53 am
Letter of 14 July 1941 from the Topf engineer Paul Erdmann to the construction office Mauthausen on a cremation rate of 33 to 40 min per corpse “without overloading” the two-muffle oven [Mattogno, IFCDA, p. 406]

Report of 30 October 1941 from the construction office Auschwitz on "60 men can be cremated" in the Topf five three muffle ovens within one hour [Mattogno, IFCDA, p. 353]

Letter of construction office Auschwitz to construction office Stuthof on "an incineration takes about ½ hour according to the Topf company” in the three-muffle oven [Mattogno, IFCDA, p. 424]

Report from Fritz Sanders of 14 September 1942 on "stuffing the individual muffles with several corpses" [Schüle, Industrie und Holocaust, p. 443]

Letter from Karl Bischoff to SS-WVHA of 13 October 1942 on “due to the situation created by the special actions, the construction of the crematorium had to be begun immediately just this past July” [Mattogno, STIA, p. 62]

Patent draft from Fritz Sanders of 26 October 1942 on “continuously operating corpse cremation oven for mass use” [Schüle, Industrie und Holocaust, p. 450]

Explanationary report from Karl Bischoff of 16 December 1942 on “the individual crematoriums and other special facilities” [Mattogno, STIA, p. 61]

Letter from Karl Bischoff to Rudolf Höß of 12 February 1943 on the “sixth crematorium…an open incineration chamber with the dimension 48.75 x 3.76 m” [Schüle, Industrie und Holocaust, p. 450]

All that work is so that the kremas at Birkenau can cremate multiple bodies as fast as possible.
Nessie tries to use it as proof of Auschwitz super ovens and some alleged gas chamber holocaust. This is just another example of fake historians on the internet taking things out of context and fooling amateurs like Nessie who is too lazy to do any research of his own. So let's examine chapter 11 of Special Treatment in Auschwitz. The page 62 footnote is from the first edition of Mattogno's book. Page 62 is the start of chapter 11. It's page 65 in the updated edition. So let's see chapter 11. Actually, let's kill two birds with one stone and examine chapter 10 and 11...

Werd
Posts: 8655
Joined: Fri Oct 10, 2014 6:38 am
Contact:

Re: The Bischoff letter from October 13 1942

Post by Werd » Tue Aug 21, 2018 3:36 pm

Footnotes not reproduced. Find them here.
http://vho.org/dl/ENG/st.pdf

10. “Special Action” and the Erection of Sanitary Facilities

The term ‘special action,’ in connection with the prisoner of war camp of Auschwitz, is also to be viewed in the context of the construction of sanitary facilities. This is clear from a letter by Bischoff to the SS WVHA dated May 14, 1943, the subject of which is the “Carrying out of the special action– pro-curement of material.” The letter begins:

“On the basis of a joint inspection of the construction depot in Krakow with SS Obersturmführer Grosch, it is requested that the following materials be shipped in accordance with the list presented by the Krakow construction inspectorate to the Central Construction Office on May 12, 1943, for the purpose of carrying out of the special action ordered and for the realization of the major increase in housing facilities.”

A list of the materials involved, which are mainly various types of pipes, follows. The same letter contains an order for 100 tons of iron rods “for the construction of the sewage plant and facility for the extraction of methane gas.” This proves that the ‘special action’ referred to the purification of waste water. At the end of the letter the recipients are listed, among them also “1 Registry (special action POW camp).” 172
There was therefore a registry where all documents having a connection to the ‘special action’ were kept. As we have seen in Chapter 8, the “special action ordered” was the special program for the improvement of the hygienic installations in the Birkenau camp, which Kammler had ordered a few days after his visit to Auschwitz on May 7, 1943.

The water supply of the camp fell within the scope of the “carrying out of the special treatment” as well, which once again shows that ‘special action’ and ‘special treatment’ were one and the same. On December 16, 1942, Bischoff wrote, in his instructions on the subject “Prisoner of war camp Auschwitz/Carrying out of the special treatment”: 173

As experience has taught, where large numbers of people are crowded together, the danger of infectious diseases from the consumption of impure water or as a result of inadequate hygiene due to shortage of water is very great. Therefore, in calculating of the number of wells, the size of the pump aggregates and the pipe bores etc., a water requirement of 150 liters for each member of the troops and 40 liters for each prisoner is to be assumed. This amounts to a daily water requirement of 5,900 m³. Moreover, the installation of a chlorination plant for a quantity of water up to 500 m³ per hour is planned. The facility has 2 air/vacuum pumps with an output of 360 l/m each, for suctioning the siphoning lines, as well as an air compressor with output of 450 l/min and 6 atmospheres of operating pressure for the pressurized air chambers. In order to supply the individual crematoriums and other special facilities, approx. 15,900 running meters of pressure pipes of 50–500 mm diameter with about 73 water valves and 73 under-ground hydrants are to be laid.”

Of course, the term ‘special action’ could, in addition to the general meaning described so far, also denote something more specific, as we shall see in the following.

Werd
Posts: 8655
Joined: Fri Oct 10, 2014 6:38 am
Contact:

Re: The Bischoff letter from October 13 1942

Post by Werd » Tue Aug 21, 2018 3:38 pm

Chapters 11 and 12 are coming. Nessie and holocaustcontroveries are NOT going to be happy! :D Special actions turn out to be hygienic, not homicidal.



User avatar
Nessie
Posts: 25853
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2014 5:00 pm
Contact:

Re: The Bischoff letter from October 13 1942

Post by Nessie » Tue Aug 21, 2018 5:39 pm

Werd wrote:
Tue Aug 21, 2018 3:29 pm
This was one of the documents Nessie found on a list by holocaustcontroversies.
Nessie wrote:
Tue Aug 21, 2018 4:53 am
Letter of 14 July 1941 from the Topf engineer Paul Erdmann to the construction office Mauthausen on a cremation rate of 33 to 40 min per corpse “without overloading” the two-muffle oven [Mattogno, IFCDA, p. 406]

Report of 30 October 1941 from the construction office Auschwitz on "60 men can be cremated" in the Topf five three muffle ovens within one hour [Mattogno, IFCDA, p. 353]

Letter of construction office Auschwitz to construction office Stuthof on "an incineration takes about ½ hour according to the Topf company” in the three-muffle oven [Mattogno, IFCDA, p. 424]

Report from Fritz Sanders of 14 September 1942 on "stuffing the individual muffles with several corpses" [Schüle, Industrie und Holocaust, p. 443]

Letter from Karl Bischoff to SS-WVHA of 13 October 1942 on “due to the situation created by the special actions, the construction of the crematorium had to be begun immediately just this past July” [Mattogno, STIA, p. 62]

Patent draft from Fritz Sanders of 26 October 1942 on “continuously operating corpse cremation oven for mass use” [Schüle, Industrie und Holocaust, p. 450]

Explanationary report from Karl Bischoff of 16 December 1942 on “the individual crematoriums and other special facilities” [Mattogno, STIA, p. 61]

Letter from Karl Bischoff to Rudolf Höß of 12 February 1943 on the “sixth crematorium…an open incineration chamber with the dimension 48.75 x 3.76 m” [Schüle, Industrie und Holocaust, p. 450]

All that work is so that the kremas at Birkenau can cremate multiple bodies as fast as possible.
Nessie tries to use it as proof of Auschwitz super ovens and some alleged gas chamber holocaust.
Not proof, part of the evidence towards the proof. There is a difference between evidence and proof.
This is just another example of fake historians on the internet taking things out of context and fooling amateurs like Nessie who is too lazy to do any research of his own.
I am not in a position to got and examine the original documents. Neither are you. What you do is rely entirely on one source, Mattogno and nothing else. You are the lazy amateur.
So let's examine chapter 11 of Special Treatment in Auschwitz. The page 62 footnote is from the first edition of Mattogno's book. Page 62 is the start of chapter 11. It's page 65 in the updated edition. So let's see chapter 11. Actually, let's kill two birds with one stone and examine chapter 10 and 11...
Mattogno's opinion is not evidence.
Consistency and standards in evidencing viewtopic.php?f=13&t=2721#p87772
My actual argument viewtopic.php?f=13&t=2834

Scott - On a side note, this forum is turning into a joke with the vicious attacks--and completely unnecessary vitriol--that everybody is making upon each other.

User avatar
Nessie
Posts: 25853
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2014 5:00 pm
Contact:

Re: The Bischoff letter from October 13 1942

Post by Nessie » Tue Aug 21, 2018 5:44 pm

Werd wrote:
Tue Aug 21, 2018 3:38 pm
Chapters 11 and 12 are coming. Nessie and holocaustcontroveries are NOT going to be happy! :D Special actions turn out to be hygienic, not homicidal.
Yet there is no evidence of that happening. Only Mattogno's opinion. Which you worship.

Apparently the Nazis converted all the crematoriums into showers (during a supposed epidemic when the claim is also the crematorium was needed to deal with all the dead) and sent those not selected to work to be showered and then sent them to other camps. Why convert mortuaries into showers when the space was needed for all those bodies?

Were those not selected to work taken for showers in the same place dead bodies from a typhus epidemic were being taken direct to the ovens? How did this multiple purpose facility of washing and cremation actually work?

Why is there is no witness, no document, nothing to support that claim?
Consistency and standards in evidencing viewtopic.php?f=13&t=2721#p87772
My actual argument viewtopic.php?f=13&t=2834

Scott - On a side note, this forum is turning into a joke with the vicious attacks--and completely unnecessary vitriol--that everybody is making upon each other.

Werd
Posts: 8655
Joined: Fri Oct 10, 2014 6:38 am
Contact:

Re: The Bischoff letter from October 13 1942

Post by Werd » Wed Aug 22, 2018 1:04 am

Not proof, part of the evidence towards the proof. There is a difference between evidence and proof.
I told you dear readers Nessie would be upset. How else do you explain him dodging the historical context of a desperate need to deal with mass mortality and growing unhygienic conditions. So much so the camp had to be shut down. Oh, Nessie. Ever one to ignore proper context of documents and what phraseology like "special action" or "special treatment" really means. :lol:
I am not in a position to got and examine the original documents. Neither are you. What you do is rely entirely on one source, Mattogno and nothing else.
So Mattogno makes up footnotes in one of the following ways.

1. Real RGVA citations from the Russian archive that has the entire collection of the documents from the Auschwitz Zentralbauleitung, but NOT the contents in the document pages Mattogno says there are.

2. Fake RGVA citations for numbers to pages that don't exist, and thus the content is also fake.

3. Fake or mixed up RGVA page citations that don't match actual words on pages Mattogno found.

Or some combination of both.

Nessie is free to engage in his conspiracy theory any way he wants and pretend Mattogno doesn't know how to do archival research with Jurgen Graf. That's on him. In the meantime, we'll let the interested reader ponder the fact that Mattogno is the ONLY ONE to have EVER WRITTEN A HISTORY about the formation, duties and powers of the Central Construction Office of Auschwitz.

Nessie's hypocrisy is truly amazing. Any time any holocaust scholar writes a book affirming the holocaust, no skepticism is thrown against them regarding the accuracy of their citations/footnotes. Only revisionists. It's just a baseless smear tactic.

Werd
Posts: 8655
Joined: Fri Oct 10, 2014 6:38 am
Contact:

Re: The Bischoff letter from October 13 1942

Post by Werd » Wed Aug 22, 2018 1:27 am

In the meantime, I suggest people read Mattogno's book to see if he really knows what he's doing when it comes to discussing this office and their paper archives as kept in Moscow. :roll:

http://holocausthandbooks.com/dl/13-tcco.pdf

Preface


After the Moscow archives were opened to historians, the Central Construction Office of the Waffen-SS and Police Auschwitz –Zentralbauleitung der Waffen-SS und Polizei Auschwitz–began to attract the attention of scholars, thanks above all to Jean-Claude Pressac.1

The Central Construction Office is commonly mentioned by historians and journalists, butwe still know practically nothing about this extremely important
agency, which was responsible for the planning and construction of the Auschwitz-Birkenau complex. Apart from the scanty information supplied by French historians,2 very little is known.The importance of a specific study on the Central Construction Office of the Waffen-SS and Police Auschwitz lies not only in the clarification of an aspect of the history of the camp, which is still wrapped in obscurity for the most part, but also in understanding the
standard operating procedures of the organization and of the tasks of the Central Construction Office of Auschwitz. This enables a more profound understanding of documents. This in turn provides protection against facile interpretive errors of such documents, a frequent occurrence among Auschwitz historians.

This study is based primarily on unpublished Moscow documents. It consttutes the first attempt to reconstruct the history of the
Central Construction Officeof Auschwitz. Although it is far from perfect, due precisely to its pioneering nature, it does delineate the structure, tasks, and essential activities of this office in an essential manner.

On January 27, 1945, Soviet soldiers of the 60th Army of the 1st Ukrainian Front entered Auschwitz. The various commissions of inquiry, which carried on their activities in February and March of 1945, confiscated an enormous quantity of documents abandoned by the SS. Among the documents was also the archive of the Central Construction Office. The greater part of these documents was then taken to Moscow, while the remainder was left at Auschwitz at the disposition of the Polish examining magistrate, Jan Sehn, who began his activities in April 1945.

The archive of the Central Construction Office is conserved at Moscow in the Rossiiskii Gosudarstvennii Vojennii Archiv (Russian State War Museum), formerly known as the Tsentr Chranenija Istoriko-documental’nich Kollektsii(Center for the Conservation of the Historical-Documentary Collection) on Viborgskaja Street. The catalogue system is organized by the following: fond (fund), opis (list), and delo3 (file). A fond consists of several opisi, one opis of several dela. The documents of the Central Construction Office form part of the fond Number 502 and are contained in
4 opisi, indicated by the Arabic numbers 1, 2, 4 and 5; opis 1 contains 452 dela, consecutively numbered from 1 to 450 (2 files are double: 23a and 59a)
and approximately 62,800 pages of documents; opis 2 contains 164 dela consecutively numbered from 1 to 154 (10 files are double or triple or quadruple: 1a, 1be, 1ve; 34a; 60a, 60be, 60ve, 60ghe; 84a and 124a) and consists of approximately 22,800 pages of documents; opis 4, which contained the original Auschwitz death books (Sterbebücher), subsequently ceded to the State Museum of Oswiecim-Brzezinka (Auschwitz), presently consists of 52 dela progressively numbered from 1 to 52, containing approximately 67,500 pages, of which nearly 300 pages are documents of the Central Construction Office, while the rest are photocopies of the death books; opis 5 contains 23 dela, progressively numbered from 1 to 23, and consists of approximately 2,300 pages. In total, the archive on Viborskaja Street contains approximately 88,200 pages of documents from the Central Construction Office. For every opis, there is a search register in which the individual dela are catalogued with a brief description of the content, the number of the pages of the file, and possibly the year to which the documents contained in it refer. The opisi do not have a precise logical order and contain dela on various topics; the dela, in the register of the opis, are by contrast grouped by topic (for example, invoices, electrotechnical installations, sewer pipes, administration, offices, disinfestation and disinfection, etc.); this system of cataloguing nevertheless only reflects to a small degree the archiving organization of the Central Construction Office. Many documents exhibit a double numbering: the older one probably corresponds to the first cataloguing done by the Soviets, the present one, existing in the registers of the opisi, dates back to the 1950s.

In the citations contained in this study I have indicated the Moscow archives with the abbreviation RGVA, consisting of the initials of its name in transliterated Russian, followed by the numbers of the fond, then the opis, and finally the delo and the page number(s), with which the document is catalogued there (including the rare cases, in which this number is not legible on the photocopies in my possession), for example, RGVA, 502-1-11, pp. 55-57. Many documents are also written on the reverse of the sheet. This bears the same cataloguing number as the front page, but is identified by the letters “ob”(= obratnaja storona: rear part). I have indicated this with the letter “a”. For greater clarity I have also mentioned the type of document and its heading.

Carlo Mattogno

User avatar
Nessie
Posts: 25853
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2014 5:00 pm
Contact:

Re: The Bischoff letter from October 13 1942

Post by Nessie » Wed Aug 22, 2018 4:38 am

Werd wrote:
Wed Aug 22, 2018 1:04 am
Not proof, part of the evidence towards the proof. There is a difference between evidence and proof.
I told you dear readers Nessie would be upset. How else do you explain him dodging the historical context of a desperate need to deal with mass mortality and growing unhygienic conditions. So much so the camp had to be shut down. Oh, Nessie. Ever one to ignore proper context of documents and what phraseology like "special action" or "special treatment" really means. :lol:
They mean gassing. There is no alternative for which there is evidence.
I am not in a position to got and examine the original documents. Neither are you. What you do is rely entirely on one source, Mattogno and nothing else.
So Mattogno makes up footnotes in one of the following ways.

1. Real RGVA citations from the Russian archive that has the entire collection of the documents from the Auschwitz Zentralbauleitung, but NOT the contents in the document pages Mattogno says there are.

2. Fake RGVA citations for numbers to pages that don't exist, and thus the content is also fake.

3. Fake or mixed up RGVA page citations that don't match actual words on pages Mattogno found.

Or some combination of both.

Nessie is free to engage in his conspiracy theory any way he wants and pretend Mattogno doesn't know how to do archival research with Jurgen Graf.
I have never made that accusation. It is yet another of your made up claims.
That's on him. In the meantime, we'll let the interested reader ponder the fact that Mattogno is the ONLY ONE to have EVER WRITTEN A HISTORY about the formation, duties and powers of the Central Construction Office of Auschwitz.

Nessie's hypocrisy is truly amazing. Any time any holocaust scholar writes a book affirming the holocaust, no skepticism is thrown against them regarding the accuracy of their citations/footnotes. Only revisionists. It's just a baseless smear tactic.
Mattogno takes the evidence and he tries to dismiss what does not suit him and he ignores what he cannot evidence as he tries to claim gas tight doors for a gassing cellar made to look like a shower, which witnesses all agree was a gas chamber, was infact something else.
Consistency and standards in evidencing viewtopic.php?f=13&t=2721#p87772
My actual argument viewtopic.php?f=13&t=2834

Scott - On a side note, this forum is turning into a joke with the vicious attacks--and completely unnecessary vitriol--that everybody is making upon each other.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 12 guests