Treblinka Work Camp Delousing Chamber

[SanityCheck]

I pulled a Bombsaway and asked ChatGPT to parse the statement:

The phrase "Für den Ausbau des Arbeitslagers" translates to "For the expansion of the labor camp" in English. The term "Ausbau" generally refers to expansion, development, or improvement, as opposed to "construction" (which would be "Bau" in German).

Thus, in this context, it most likely refers to the expansion of an already existing labor camp.

So we have multiple documents of Eberl referring to the construction of the Jewish camp as an EXPANSION of Abreitslager Treblinka, and we have budgetary reference to an EXPANSION of Arbeitslager Treblinka which includes sanitary and economic facilities which would have been relevant to Operation Reinhardt.

But whatever I don't speak German so SanityCheck can correct this if he wants!

Expansion of an existing site rather than building a new site somewhere else.

[SanityCheck]

I didn't 'admit' that the Treblinka extermination camp was constructed under ZBL Warschau. I pointed to testimonies identifying Richard Thomalla as supervising the construction of both Sobibor and Treblinka, and to denials by veterans of ZBL Warschau that they had anything to do with the construction of the Treblinka extermination camp.

Oh look, there's the walk-back, not surprising. Here is what you said:

Construction tasks to build the two camps seem to have devolved to the Zentralbauleitung Warschau

So said construction tasks to build both camps devolved to ZBL Warsaw, in documents pertaining to budgetary concerns for construction in Warsaw District we see budget for expansion of Arbeitslager Treblinka in 1942 and 1943, and in 1942 we see multiple documents referring to a major construction project in Arbeitslager Treblinka. But you are arguing none of this is related, and you are walking back your acknowledgement that construction tasks fell to ZBL Warsaw. Maybe you should pick a consistent position?

Sanity Check relies so heavily on "oh this is a one-off, that's a one-off" when all he's doing is pointing to letterhead and saying that was the name of a location rather than the name of a personnel unit.

Here's another letter from Eberl regarding Arbeitslager Treblinka Fur den Ausbau des Arbeitlsagers Trebliinka. In the other document Mattogno translates this as "Construction of" but wouldn't "Expansion of" be a more likely translation? I'll let someone else weigh in. If "Expansion" is the better translation then that only aligns more closely these documents with the expansion of Arbeitslager Treblinka described in the budget documents.



In any case "one-off", nope that is refuted.

It's clear why SanityCheck has such holdups over admitting "Arbeitslager Treblinka" denoted both the forced labor camp and the Jewish camp that Eberl built. But at Auschwitz, we had Auschwitz I and Auschwitz II, with Auschwitz II pertaining to Operation Reinhardt.

And likewise at Treblinka, "Arbeitslager Treblinka" encompassed both Zwangsarbeitslager Treblinka I and the Jewish camp constructed by Eberl which he denotes directly multiple times as referring to the expansion of Arbeitslager Treblinka.



SanityCheck trying to say the "Maetzig's letter is also so far a one-off, from a whole year later" (as if emphasizing 'whole year' is doing any sort of work here!) is an acknowledgment that it is evidence SS-Sonderkommando Treblinka was involved in the operation of the Zwangsarbeitslager Treblinka I, meaning that term could not refer to a location of a totally different camp than "Arbeitlsager Treblinka."

Eberl's letter, to reiterate, is a one-off predating the beginning of operations of SS-Sonderkommando Treblinka. He himself clarified to his wife that mail needed to go to him c/o SS-Sonderkommando Treblinka shortly after the camp began operating (July 22) which is also after the documented train schedule for Warsaw-Treblinka transports kicked in, and all the other evidence showing transports not going to the previously existing Treblinka I labour camp, or to the wholly imaginary and entirely undocumented Malkinia transit camp of your recent fantasies.

Those transport documents prove the transports actually stopped in Malkinia, unlike your claim that they ultimately stopped at a location that is not documented or referred to in the train schedules.

1. Quoting me from earlier before I refreshed my memory is not going to make ZBL Warschau any more involved in the construction of what became known as SS-Sonderkommando Treblinka, once I reminded myself about Thomalla's role and the denials by ZBL Warschau veterans. This is just an internet forum with me recalling my knowledge then as needed refreshing it. Sitting down to address the full range of evidence would have led me back to the interrogations whose summaries I consulted from my notes.

2. Still a pre-22 July 1942 document, so you have two now, w00t! Going by a list of notes on documents about Treblinka, I think there might even be a third - also likely from before the camp started operating. On the other side of the branch line from Treblinka I, still.

3. No, the Fahrplananordungen mention Treblinka, so cut it out with the Malkinia bollocks.


I honestly don't see where you're going with any of this. It's as if it never occurred to you that SS-Arbeitslager Treblinka might have been investigated in its own right. You can look up the Swidersky judgement on Justiz und NS-Verbrechen (Lfd Nr 761, in Band XXXVI, now online and browser-translatable). There was also the Leopold Lanz case in Vienna which I copied some years back, why? Because the camp and its guards plus surviving inmates do form part of the evidence for the other Treblinka, as they could report on what they observed at a not unreasonable distance, e.g. regarding mass cremations, and their general knowledge, e.g. of incoming deportations. The same goes for witnesses in Malkinia. The flipside of this is that everyone concerned was pretty clear they weren't working under the same umbrella as SS-Sonderkommando Treblinka.

Acting as if you can just ignore every source other than a handful of German documents is frankly rather cognitively challenged.

[PrudentRegret]

1. Quoting me from earlier before I refreshed my memory is not going to make ZBL Warschau any more involved in the construction of what became known as SS-Sonderkommando Treblinka, once I reminded myself about Thomalla's role and the denials by ZBL Warschau veterans.

Haha, no try again. You mentioned Thomalla and the denials by ZBL Warsaw in your initial post - you even acknowledged "of course they'd deny it" but now you're just backtracking and trying to pass it off as "refreshing your memory." What actually happened is you are obviously losing the argument, so you are pivoting on this point because you now know that admitting to ZBL Warsaw's involvement in the Treblinka expansion is untentable for the argument you are trying to make.

But no matter, we can drive the point home that you had this right the first time.

The most they conceded was helping sort out contacts with firms in Warsaw itself, there are other testimonies from the Treblinka II side about going into Warsaw to pick up materials, in addition to the German and Polish witnesses describing the construction process in Treblinka II (like Puchala).

Yeah Puchala is a relevant witness here, and Puchala was enlisted from T-I along with other works and guards. Very strange for this top-secret extermination camp with no administrative relation to "T-I" would use laborers from T-I directly and then let them live to tell the tale. More revealing still is a ZBL Warsaw induction/work permit approval dated either 1.6.1942 or 15.6.1942, for Puchala himself:



And look, it's ZBL Warsaw involved in the construction of T-II, right there in the document.

The prosecutor's summary of the 1980s case on the construction of T-II is quite revealing:

4) Results of the investigation and assessment of the evidence:

a) The Düsseldorf public prosecutor's office cited the construction of Camp T II on p. 121 of its indictment in the so-called. Treblinka proceedings - file no. 8 Js 10904/59 - stated the following, among other things:

Construction of the camp had begun in the spring of 1942 under the direction of the SS Central Construction Office of the SSPF Warsaw. Based on previous tenders, the companies SCHÖNBRUNN from Liegnitz and SCHMIDT & MÜNSTERMANN from Warsaw had been awarded the contract.

To prove these statements, the indictment merely refers to the testimony of the witness LEYH (+) of August 16, 1960, who at that time belonged to the Central Construction Office of the Waffen-SS and Police in Warsaw - the correct name of the office (II/234 ff).

However, the above-mentioned findings find no reliable support in this testimony.

(l) It is true that the witness stated that “the Treblinka camp was built” around 1942 or 1943. The Central Construction Office had arranged the tenders (II/238). He himself had had the task of having some barracks erected (II/239). He had only been in the camp twice during the construction work (II/238).
After some time it had leaked out that the camp was to become a concentration camp. Only after the war did he learn that it had been an extermination camp (II/238 ff.).

However, it is clear from the interrogation transcript that the witness and the interrogator did not distinguish between the T I and T II camps.

The transcript is written as if there had only been one camp at Treblinka, which later became an extermination camp.


(2) From the further testimony of the witness LEYH of November 9, 1960 (II 243 ff), which the Düsseldorf Public Prosecutor's Office did not take into account, it can be safely concluded that the witness's statements refer to the T I labor camp. The last name of the camp commandant is said to have begun with the syllable “van” (II/248). However, this applies to the commandant of labor camp T I, who was called van Eupen, while in extermination camp T II successively DR. EBERL, STANGL and FRANZ were commandants of extermination camp T II.

(3) In addition, as was established in the original proceedings, labor camp T I was actually expanded in the winter and spring of 1942 under the supervision of the Central Construction Office of the Waffen SS and Warsaw Police.

To summarize, it can be stated that
a) The statements in the indictment in the so-called Treblinka proceedings are too general and do not distinguish sufficiently between the T I and T II camps.

b) Only the following documents speak for an involvement of the Warsaw SSPF office in the construction of Camp T II, namely the material orders which the later first commandant of the camp, DR. EBERL, placed on June 19, June 26, and July 7, 1942 under the office name “SSPF Warsaw” (I/215 ff).

The fact that two of these letters refer to the “Treblinka labor camp” was obviously intended to camouflage and conceal the fact that DR. EBERL had nothing to do with the actual labor camp.

c) It cannot be established that DR. EBERL was ever subordinate to the SSPF Warsaw.

Before his deployment in Treblinka, he was active in the Euthanasia Action (T 4) and was thus - like many others - “assigned by the Chancellery of the Führer” to the REINHARDT ACTION (cf. I/130 ff; 31 f; 41 f; 52 f. et al.).

d) The investigations have only revealed with sufficient certainty that the office of the SSPF Warsaw and the Central Construction Office, which was - initially - subordinate to it, were involved in the construction of Camp T II in the early days.

Thus, workers and guards were seconded from Camp T I (cf. PUCHALA I/209 f., 218; SULKOWSKI I/196, 198; BRZESCIANSKI I/205; LÜBECK I/189 f. ; LEY II/238 f., 247 f).

It does not follow from the available statements that at this time it was known or recognizable - at least to the persons carrying out the work - that the new camp in the vicinity of the labor camp was to become an extermination camp.

Rather, it can be assumed that the facilities which indicated the purpose of the camp, in particular the gas chambers, were first and exclusively built by a construction team under the leadership of SSHStf RICHARD THOMALLA. He was a building contractor by civilian profession and was listed in the staff of the Lublin SSPF as a “consultant in the building department” (I/110) and “clerk in the Reinhardt special action” (I/67).

These statements correspond first of all to the general knowledge of contemporary history that the SSPF Lublin (GLOBOCNIK) had been commissioned by Himmler with the construction and operation of the extermination camps in the Generalgouvernement, and are furthermore supported by several statements (cf. LAMBERT I/52 ff., STADIE I/61 f., MATTHES I/68, MICHALSEN I/18 ff., LÜBECK I/189 f).

5) No living members of the aforementioned construction staff could be identified (cf. sheets 69, 74, 100, 193; regarding THOMALLA cf. the file card in the present proceedings against the staff of the SSPF Lublin).
Otherwise, they were prosecuted in the so-called Treblinka proceedings.

II. the proceedings against the accused WIGAND have been terminated by his death.

So basically:

• Both the interrogator and ZBL Warsaw Witness LEYH in the 1960s interview from the Treblinka Proceedings made no distinction between T-I and T-II- they both treated "Treblinka" as referring to a singular camp. This is frustrating to the prosecutor but it points to "T-II" being the actual T-I Expansion they admit participation in, not some entirely different camp constructed by a ghost ZBL.
• The prosecutor tries to explain away Eberl's reference to Arbeitslager Treblinka as "obviously intended to camouflage and conceal the fact that DR. EBERL had nothing to do with the actual labor camp." So the prosecutor doesn't even take your "what's in a name?" gambit in dismissing Eberl's repeated identification of his project as an EXPANSION of Arbeitslager Treblinka. That's really great camouflage, Eberl repeatedly used the exact same name "Expansion of Arbeitslager Treblinka" as used by ZBL Warsaw and as denoted in the budget documents! Just a coincidence the "camouflage" aligns with so much corroborating reference to an "Expansion of Arbeitslager Treblinka."
• The prosecutor admits ZBL Warsaw constructed T-II in the "early days"- whatever that means!
• In particular, the only structure the prosecution cites as not falling under construction of ZBL Warsaw is the gas chamber, citing FIRST "general knowledge of contemporary history that SSPF Lublin had been commissioned... with the construction of the extermination camps." Of course the other gas chamber was constructed by Master Carpenter Turned Bestselling Author, Wiernik.

The case falls apart because the ZBL witness in the Treblinka Proceedings treated everything as belonging to "Treblinka", pointing to a unity between those camps.

But SanityCheck, now that he has pivoted from admitting construction for T-II fell to ZBL Warsaw, is now saying it was actually built by muh secret second ZBL from a faraway land, plus part-ZBL-free construction because Thomalla is some sort of guru erecting buildings with the power of his mind.

All of this pivoting to deny the obvious fact that the extension of Arbeitslager Treblinka with "Treblinka II" would be budgeted by ZBL Warsaw, and there's unexplained budgeting for an extension in 1942/1943, and they're provably involved in its construction. Sanity Check is beyond desparate.

Burckhardt's (ZBL Warsaw) testimony is particularly revealing:

From 1.12.1941 to 7.3.1944 I belonged to the central construction management of the Waffen SS and police in Warsaw. My area of responsibility was the administrative construction management (V-Bauleitung), i.e. the construction supervision of all Waffen SS and police accommodation in the Warsaw district.

When I am asked about the construction and expansion of the Treblinka concentration camp, I have to reply that it was mainly the head of the Central Construction Office - Lübeck - and SS-Gruppenführer Kammler, from the Economic Administration Main Office, who should be able to provide information about this. According to my recollection, Kammler was in Warsaw two or three times for inspections and at the Central Construction Office. I assume that he also spoke with Lübeck about the expansion of the Treblinka camp.

...

Question:
“Can you give more details about the conversations you mentioned in the interrogation held against you ?”

Answer:
“I can't think of any more details now. I assume that Leyh and perhaps Schulte also said that Jews were to be sent to the Treblinka camp. I come to this assumption because I had the impression at the time that Leyh was responsible for Jewish affairs at the Central Construction Office, because I know that he was often in the ghetto and that he was responsible for the deployment of Jewish labor detachments.”

Question:
“Did you have the impression at the time that a large camp was to be set up in Treblinka?”

Answer:
“I was of the opinion at the time that a larger camp was to be set up in Treblinka. I concluded this again from my observations, according to which not only Leyh alone, but also Schulte as the local construction foreman, had been entrusted with the expansion of the Treblinka camp.

To avoid any misunderstandings, I would like to clarify here: I do not know for sure whether Leyh was actually involved in the expansion of the Treblinka camp. But I assume he was, because - apart from being the boss - he was responsible for the deployment of Jewish workers.”

...

Question:
“According to your previous statements, you only ever speak of the, i.e., a Treblinka camp. Are you now making a distinction between a Treblinka labor camp and a Treblinka extermination camp?”


Answer:
“According to my memory today, despite the discussions, I still only have in mind that in Treblinka only a new camp was to be set up or an already existing small camp was to be expanded. I am even sure that I did not know or assume anything more at the time.”


Note:


The available knowledge concerning the expansion of the Treblinka labor camp and the construction of the Treblinka extermination camp was discussed with the witness.


The witness then stated:


“The Treblinka camp is still one concept for me. Concrete facts that go beyond my previous statements have not come to my memory despite the discussions. For example, I do not remember hearing anything about the fact that the extermination camp was possibly set up under the direction of a commando from Lublin and with the involvement of Jewish labor commandos and guard commandos from the Treblinka labor camp.


I cannot say more with the best will in the world.”

Burckhardt testifies to knowledge of the expansion of Arbeitslager Treblinka, but explicitly states, even after being pressed by the interrogator "The Treblinka Camp is still one concept for me."

We have budget documents from ZBL Warsaw, witnesses from ZBL Warsaw, GG and ZBL Warsaw Budgets that all refer to an expansion of Arbeitslager Treblinka in 1942. And we have Eberl in multiple documents refer to the construction of that camp as an expansion of Arbeitslager Treblinka.

One of the problems with these court cases is that the "Treblinka Extermination Camp" as such did not exist. So it makes perfect sense you get witnesses like Burckhardt who basically says "yeah I'm aware of the expansion of the Treblinka camp but I don't know anything about the construction of any extermination camp." Of course they will deny building something that never existed. What they do though is corroborate the existence of an expansion of Arbeitslager Treblinka in 1942.