borjastick wrote:Does what I have underlined strike you as probable? Exterminationists may claim that the death rate is too high to be accounted for by disease alone.
This does not raise any problem since these deaths are attributed to typhus epidemic even by orthodox historians and no intelligent person would claim that the Germans in August 1942 produced death certificates for a few thousands of their allegedly gassed victims. IIRC, according to Höss, records and statistics of gassed people were forbidden.
Secondly, some 8,600 deaths in August is not at all one third as Kingfisher said, there were some 40,000 inmates, you must count also women camp.
I see no problem.
If I may try and clarify the issue of 30% mortality at Auschwitz in August 1942.
The 30% mortality rate is a quote from page 8 of the Bletchely Park analyst's periodic report OS2 dated 27 September 1942, when they are discussing the August death rate as follows:http://www.whatreallyhappened.info/decr ... .9.42.html
ZIP/OS 2/27.9.42 (Page: 8 )
III. CONCENTRATION CAMPS
For the first time returns are given for deaths of
prisoners (223b/14,24,43,50): the figures for August are:
NIEDERHAGEN 21, AUSCHWITZ 6829 (or 6889) men, 1525 women;
BUCHENWALD 74; FLOSSENBÜRG 88. The AUSCHWITZ figure represents
about 30% of the total given in the GPCC figures (see below);
the cause is likely to be typhus, as typhus was rife in June ...
The statement "6829 (or 6889) men, 1525 women;" is from a separate message decode as indicated by the message references given (223b/14,24,43,50) in this case for Auschwitz, message ref: (223b/24) and is not from daily HORHUG decodes.
The GPCC or HORHUG inmate returns in August 1942 at Auschwitz, did not include separate figures for deaths, let alone deaths broken down by men and women.
As we only have one inmate table for August 1942, it is clear that the 30% referred to is for that inmate table.
We can further deduce this, from the maths and from the appearance of the 2nd inmate table, beginning on 1st September 42 and denoted with the (as yet unresolved) VPA sub-heading. This 2nd table is referred to as the "women's camp" by the BP analysts.
This new VPA table implies that HORHUG type returns for women were either, not being transmitted or not being decoded in August. The timing of the new 2nd table and it's designation as "the women's camp" by the BP analysts, "near Auschwitz", ties up with the relocation of the women's camp to Birkenau in August.
If that analysis is correct, then the 30% mortality quote can only relate to men at Auschwitz in August 42.
This is because the new HORHUG returns for the VPA "women's camp", beging with a total of 16,649 (women) and the only part of "6829 (or 6889) men, 1525 women" that constitues 30% of anything is "6829 (or 6889) men" as a percentage of the August table to which the analysts refer and which, by the appearance of the new VPA women's figures in September, we can deduce, has to be men only.
This then reconciles the BP analyst's assertion of 30% mortality as a proportion of the GPCC (HORHUG) figures, that is, 6,829 is 30.6% of the closing August inmate total of 22,549 or 29.7% of the August average 22,965.
This is written up in the Decrypts Introduction arcticle here: http://www.whatreallyhappened.info/decr ... rypts.html
The Auschwitz, August 1942 single page inmate table is here: http://www.whatreallyhappened.info/decr ... t_1942.JPG
Auschwitz, September 1942 is here: http://www.whatreallyhappened.info/decr ... r_1942.JPG
Auschwitz, September 1942 "VPA" is here: http://www.whatreallyhappened.info/decr ... r_1942.JPG
There is of course, one other possibility that the opening inmate total of 16,649 is a subset of the August population of, say the average of 22,965. This scenario would only leave 6,316 men in the camp and so is considered unlikely.
If anyone else can discern an alternative attribution of the 30% then please post it.