Good point Sid. Kevin in Deva
| Printable Version of Topic
Click here to view this topic in its original format |
| WorldWar2.ro Forum > Romanian Army at War > 90% of Romanian Jews killed during WW2? |
| Posted by: sid guttridge October 30, 2006 02:21 pm |
| [split from http://www.worldwar2.ro/forum/index.php?showtopic=3639] Hi Imp, I ask you questions in normal font size and still don't get an answer! For just one instance, who are these "Western authors" who claim Romania exterminated 90% of its Jewish population? Cheers, Sid. |
| Posted by: Imperialist October 30, 2006 02:33 pm | ||
http://www.worldwar2.ro/forum/index.php?showtopic=1981&view=findpost&p=29356 |
| Posted by: sid guttridge October 30, 2006 02:48 pm |
| Hi Imp, Now that wasn't very helpful, was it? The link you just gave as if in answer to my question mentions no Western authors who claim that Romania exterminated 90% of its Jewish population. Indeed, it makes clear that this was NOT the case. Try again. Cheers, Sid. |
| Posted by: Imperialist October 30, 2006 03:17 pm | ||
Why should I bother answering your questions in the first place when you do anything but answer questions, and most of the time answer back with smart questions: http://www.worldwar2.ro/forum/index.php?showtopic=3639&view=findpost&p=55550 The link I gave cites western author P. Johnson saying 750,000 jews were eterminated in Romania and author M. Carp saying the 1940 jewish population in Romania was 760,000. So that means these authors led me to believe more than 90% were exterminated. [edited by admin] |
| Posted by: sid guttridge October 30, 2006 03:45 pm |
| Imp, No, Johnson and Carp didn't lead you to believe anything of the sort. Your own failure to read your own sources properly led to your wildly inaccurate proposition that Romania exterminated 90% of its Jewish population. 1) Yes, Johnson does say that there were some 750,000 Romanan Jews. 2) But according to your own link Carp says "Approximately 260,000 of them (Jewish deaths) can be put down to the account of the Romanian government....." How on earth does this lead you to blame Johnson and Carp for your own error? Can you accept responsibility for nothing? 'I think the situation is pretty serious as we are dealing with human deaths, so this kind of "error" on such a scale or lack of proper investigation is unacceptable', don't you? Cheers, Sid. [edited by admin] |
| Posted by: Imperialist October 30, 2006 04:04 pm | ||
Johnson doesnt state there were 750,000 jews in Romania. He clearly says 750,000 jews in Romania were.... exterminated. Carp says there were 760,000 jews in 1940 Romania. Hence more than 90% of romanian jews were exterminated according to western author P. Johnson. Can you deny this conclusion? If you want to use Carp's lower figure of 400,000 jews killed and argue that the amount of extermination blamed on the Romanian Government was not 90%, then you have to at least give a wider statistic as to the total number of jews under romanian government jurisdiction, so as to see that the 260,000 jews killed by the Rom. gov. according to Carp do not amount to 90% of the jewish population under Rom. gov. jurisdiction. So I am waiting for your facts. p.s. and thus you have managed to drag the discussion into off-topic. Congratulations, you always do that. take care [edited by admin] |
| Posted by: sid guttridge October 30, 2006 04:55 pm |
| Hi Imp, Will you never read your own posts and sources? Johnson says absolutely nothing in your link about Romanians killing 750,000 Jews. He lays this figure (inaccurately, I may add) at Hitler's door. Unless, of course, you think Hitler was Romanian? Where does Carp say that Romanians killed 90% of their Jewish population? Nowhere. Where do his figures give this impression? Nowhere! If this particular discussion is off topic it is entirely your fault. You put up the erroneous figures in the first place and are now putting up bogus arguments to defend them. God alone knows why! Stop squirming and please show a little integrity. You made a mistake. Admit it and then we can get on with the subject you so clearly wish to return to. Cheers, Sid. |
| Posted by: Imperialist October 30, 2006 05:06 pm | ||
Johnson clearly says 750,000 jews in Romania were.... exterminated. Carp says there were 760,000 jews in 1940 Romania. Hence more than 90% of romanian jews were exterminated according to western author P. Johnson. Can you deny this conclusion? If you want to use Carp's lower figure of 400,000 jews killed and argue that the amount of extermination blamed on the Romanian Government was not 90%, then you have to at least give a wider statistic as to the total number of jews under romanian government jurisdiction, so as to see that the 260,000 jews killed by the Rom. gov. according to Carp do not amount to 90% of the jewish population under Rom. gov. jurisdiction. So I am waiting for your facts. |
| Posted by: sid guttridge October 31, 2006 10:47 am |
| Hi Imp, You stated that (1) Romanians exterminated 90% of their Jewish population and (2) that you were led to believe this by some "Western authors". Neither is true, even using your own links! According to your own post Johnson (who, incidenally, is a journalist, not a historian) does say (inaccurately) 750,000 Romanian Jews were exterminated. However, he does not attribute them to Romanians. He attributes them to Hitler. So we can safely discount Johnson altogether on the grounds of inaccuracy and not mentioning the Romanians as culprits at all. On the other hand Carp, in your post, states quite clearly "From among the Jewish inhabitants of Romania, which in 1940 was estimated to be 760,000, approx. 400,000 were killied. Approximately 260,000 of these (Jewish deaths) can be put down on the Romanian government's account............" Nothing in your quotes from either Johnson or Carp would lead anyone with the slightest logic to believe that the Romanians exterminated 90% of their Jewish population. You don't need any additional facts from me. Your own figures don't support your ridiculous proposition. I would go further. Your continued stupidity in this matter is making you look ridiculous too! You made a simple but rather defamatory mistake against Romanians all by yourself. Just get over it, admit that both the original figures used by Johnson are wrong and your interpretation of his and Carp's figures was also wrong. Cheers, Sid. |
| Posted by: New Connaught Ranger October 31, 2006 12:32 pm |
| Hear, Hear Good point Sid. Kevin in Deva |
| Posted by: Imperialist October 31, 2006 03:24 pm | ||
And you are so naive as to not understand the context? In that quote Johnson does indeed blame Hitler for the whole Holocaust (as its main political and ideological source) but in case you are unaware, Romania as a state and its leaders at the time are blamed for the Holocaust in this country, not exonerated by blaming Hitler. So the point stands that Johnson claims 750,000. Like I said, Johnson clearly says 750,000 jews in Romania were.... exterminated. Carp says there were 760,000 jews in 1940 Romania. Hence more than 90% of romanian jews were exterminated according to western author P. Johnson. Can you deny this conclusion? If you want to hang on to what Carp says about only 260,000 being attributed to Romania, please provide a wider statistic to see if the 260,000 are not even near to represent 90% of the jewish population under romanian gov. jurisdiction. I will then withdraw my 90% claim. |
| Posted by: sid guttridge October 31, 2006 04:50 pm |
| Hi Imperialist, Nope. According to your own reference to him, Johnson is both wrong and makes no mention of Romanian culpability. And I am not hanging onto Carp's figures. They are YOURS, not mine. But even they give no reason to believe that Romanians exterminated 90% of their Jewish population. I am under no obligation to do your research for you. Stop being idle. You posted this nonsense. You justify it or you withdraw it. There is no middle way. Well? Cheers, Sid. |
| Posted by: Imperialist October 31, 2006 05:38 pm | ||
That's your standard answer. And yet you constantly attack my posts, put pressure on me to justify simple facts, to provide off-topic wider context statistics, etc. When I ask you to do the same you refuse. Your attitude is arrogant and superior. I wont waste my time speaking with you anymore. |
| Posted by: Imperialist October 31, 2006 05:47 pm | ||
He doesnt do it directly, but it is obvious that Romania's government gets the blame for exterminating 750,000 jews, though in this particular quote Johnson chooses to assign the general blame to Hitler. |
| Posted by: sid guttridge November 01, 2006 11:59 am |
| Hi Imp, So, Johnston (wrongly) states that the deaths 750,000 Romanian Jews were attributable to Hitler, but you nevertheless decide unilaterally that it is somehow "obvious" that the Romanian Government is responsible? What on earth is the point of putting up a (wrong) source yourself and then not simply willfully ignoring its content but instead inventing something completely different that it clearly does not say and is not in any case accurate? That is so unbelievably irrational and stupid that I am completely lost for words........... which presumably means that as you, by your own account, won't waste time speaking to me any more this thread is now finished. Hooray! Cheers, Sid. |
| Posted by: Imperialist November 01, 2006 12:22 pm | ||||||
Dude, Johnson says:
Now any sane person realises in this quote Johnson assigns the general blame for the Holocaust to Hitler. But any other sane person understands that the jews in Romania and Hungary were not under his direct control, but under these countries' governments control. That is why Romania is presently accused of taking part in the Holocaust and denying that blame and assigning it to other country/political leader is considered denial of the holocaust in Romania! Even if Johnson is unclear in this quote about the blame, he does give a clear number of 750,000 jews killed in Romania. The main point in me giving this quote was this number, but you want to avoid it! Now if you argue he was wrong about that number, fine. But remember how this discussion started. I clearly said some western authors lead me to believe Romania killed 90% of its jewish population. Whether they were right or wrong is besides the point, I clearly showed you that they did lead me to believe that:
Now if you want to show they were wrong: 1) do so - provide other statistics 2) dont blame me, blame them, I only said they lead me to believe that 90% figure IS IT CLEARER NOW MR. SID??? take care |
| Posted by: mabadesc November 01, 2006 06:45 pm |
| Just curious, since there are massive amounts of documentation on the subject, how was the 6 million figure arrived at? How was it calculated, and by whom? Sincerely curious, Mabadesc |
| Posted by: Suparatu November 02, 2006 10:53 am | ||
Hossbaach Memorandum. and then some... |
| Posted by: New Connaught Ranger November 02, 2006 12:40 pm | ||
The Nazis also kept quite good records of their acheivments as well. All of which were documented and noted by the Allies at the end of the War. Kevin in Deva. |
| Posted by: sid guttridge November 02, 2006 12:55 pm |
| Hi Imp, You are missing some fundamental points here. I don't have to disprove your points. You, like the rest of us, first have to justify them yourself if challenged. Just because you post something doesn't mean that it is gospel and unchallengeable. That shows an ego massively out of control. You may style yourself "Imperialist" but your posts don't have the unchallengeable authority of an Imperial Edict! Back to the specific issues: You said that Western authors led you to believe that Romanians exterminated 90% of their Jewish population and you quote just two, Johnson and Carp. In your own quote Johnson attributes 750,000 Jewish deaths in Romania to Hitler. He says nothing about Romanian culpability. NOTHING! You therefore cannot blame Johnson for something he did not write. On top of this mindbogglingly obvious and easily verifiable point, there is the fact that Johnson is wildly wrong. Johnson is a bad source being misrepresented by you. You could hardly have shakier foundations! You bet I want to avoid the 750,000 figure. It is totally inaccurate! On those grounds you should want to avoid it too! What led you to believe this ridiculous 90% figure is not either Johnson or Carp. It is your own complete inability to sift through their quotes in a rational manner. Even now that this has been pointed out to you, you are still making inaccurate assumptions about their quotes that are not based on their contents. We have a real problem here. It is both obvious that your original proposition that Romanians exterminated 90% of their Jewish population is an enormous exaggeration and that the sources you blame for this error on your part did not in fact state this either explicitly or implicitly in the first place. You must make up your mind. Which is more important? The facts or your ego? The only thing standing between the rest of us and the facts is your ego. You were wrong and it was your own fault. Admit it, get over it and let's move on. Cheers, Sid. |
| Posted by: Imperialist November 02, 2006 03:12 pm | ||||||
I see, so my posts dont have unchallengeable authority, but yours do! Here you go saying how Johnson was wrong, the 750,000 figure is wrong. OK, prove it. Provide other statistics, that is what I've said, but you refused, allegedly because you dont want to do my research.  So you're basically aggressively attacking and denying my posts any valability (not to say authority!) while inflating yours with no backing. Nice, but that's trolling.
Are you serious?!! He doesnt say anything outright in this quote about Romanian culpability, but it's something called INFERENCE, for crying out loud!!! And something obvious since Romania IS blamed for taking part in the Holocaust.Besides, the guy wrote a book. I am sure there is a quote there CLEARLY blaming Romania! Demanding me to go look for it is uncalled for, since you are hanging on an excuse that you dont understand the real meaning of this one. I wont go again chasing quotes so as to satisfy your never satisfied appetite and provide you with excuses.
You still havent addressed the facts, and the facts are that Johnson and Carp give 750,000 killed out of a 760,000 population. |
| Posted by: sid guttridge November 02, 2006 04:53 pm |
| Hi Imp, You can try to change the subject all you want, but these facts remain. 1) The Romanians did NOT exterminate 90% of their Jewish population and 2) The sources that you say led you to this mistaken belief did NOT actually say so at all. The 90% figure is entirely your concoction! Johnson didn't say it and Carp didn't say it. All you have done is pluck two unrelated statistics from two different sources and put them together wrongly and inaccurately. I have not put up any figures at all. I am simply challenging you to justify yours, as I am not simply entitled to do, but as is imperative when such a major historical error is made. Exactly. "Inference" is what you are engaged in, and you "inferred" wrongly! Er, did I read that right? "I am sure there is a quote there clearly blaming Romania" but "Demanding me to go look for it is uncalled for......"! Uncalled for? It is very much called for given the complete failure of your last two quotes to say what you claimed they said. You are so far on this thread wildly unreliable. You bet I am going to ask you to "go look for it". Or is this another case where you expect us to blindly accept your infallible Imperial Edict despite your less than impressive record for accuracy? You don't owe anything to me that requires you to produce sources when questioned. You owe it to historical accuracy and everyone who might otherwise be misled! Ignore me if you wish, but do it for them. No. No. No. Johnson (inaccurately) according to your own quote said 750,000 Romanian Jews deaths are attribuutable to Hitler. Quite separately Carp said in your other quote that the total population of Romanian Jews was about 760,000 in early 1940. However, you conveniently ignore that he gives much lower death rate figures in favour of what Johnson doesn't actually say! It is you who put them together inappropriately. Nobody else. Why you chose to invent such an extreme figure as 90% is a mystery to me. And "invent" is precisely the right word. Have you got it in for Romanians that you not only peddle, but seek to defend against even your own evidence, this ridiculous figure? Cheers, Sid. |
| Posted by: Imperialist November 02, 2006 09:31 pm |
| Johnson says 750,000 jews were killed in Romania. Can you admit this simple fact or are you going to beat around the bush like you usually do? Why you are so desperate to spin this simple fact is beyond me. Whether he blames Hitler, Antonescu, Pol Pot or Saddam for their death is irrelevant, since he clearly puts 750,000 jews killed in Romania. And this number was the point of the thread, not who Johnson blames! However, if your highness is unaware, Romania does get the blame for killing its jews during WWII, NOT Hitler. You are deliberately using Johnson's quote in which he assigns the general blame for the whole Holocaust to the originator of the Final Solution and its main driving force in order to spin out this thread. Focus on the 750,000 please, and explain how this number forwarded by the respectable author Paul Johnson in a book of history shouldnt have lead me to the conclusion that 90% of the jewish population in Romania was exterminated. Can you also do that without doing what you always do - attacking me? Thank you. take care |
| Posted by: dragos November 03, 2006 07:36 am | ||
According to your logic, from the excerpt from Johnson, the Poles are guilty for the Jews killed in Poland, and Russians for theirs  |
| Posted by: Imperialist November 03, 2006 07:43 am | ||
Poland and Russia were in completely different situations in relation to Germany than Romania and Hungary were. The latter were ALLIES. The latter had national governments. Their (or parts of) territory was not administered by occupation troops from Germany. If you want to imply that Romania was not guilty for the jews killed IN Romania, you run contrary to the commission on the Holocaust, and I can accuse you of denial and antisemitism. |
| Posted by: dragos November 03, 2006 07:57 am | ||||
Well, where in the excerpt of Johnston does he say that? You started to claim something erroneous based on the interpretation of several propositions you quoted from Johnston, nothing else. Both his claim and yours are inaccurate, and I gave an example of what conclusion you can reach by using the narrow approach of yours. |
| Posted by: Imperialist November 03, 2006 08:10 am | ||
Johnson clearly says 750,000 jews were exterminated in Romania. Apart from the 400,000 killed in Hungary! So he clearly discerns between the 2. Romania at the time was 1) Germany's Ally; 2) not occupied; 3) had its own national government; 4) its territory and policies were not administered by any Nazi Governor-General. Johnson doesnt explicitly blame Romania in the excerpt, but using these premises can we logically deduce that guilt, or are we going to hide behind our fingers and deny it because in that specific quote Johnson doesnt say it. Add to those premises the fact that Romania is accused for the Holocaust, officially. I did not say Johnson was right. I said judging by the number he puts out, at least 90% of the jewish population in Romania was exterminated. Do you agree with this simple fact or are you going to change the argument from the number he puts out to the way he assigns guilt in the quote? Is this thread about "was Romania guilty of the Holocaust or Hitler?" or "90% of Romanian Jews killed during WW2 according to some sources" !!!! take care |
| Posted by: sid guttridge November 03, 2006 01:53 pm |
| Hi Imp, Your dishonesty in the face of contradiction by sources quoted by yourself is truly shameless. The facts are now what they have always been: 1) You stated that Romanians exterminated 90% of their Jewish population. Not true. Yet you still haven't withdrawn this ridiculous exaggeration. 2) When challenged you blamed Johnson and Carp for misleading you. Not so. Neither of their quotes you put up yourself mentions a 90% figure. Johnson doesn't even attribute the deaths to Romanians, but to Hitler, and Carp's statistics imply a death rate far below 90%. Yet you still pretend your own mistake is theirs! You chose the 90% figure, not them. What I don't understand is why you have decided unilaterally to construct such a high figure, when Carp's figures, which are far more comprehensive than Johnson's, already give a specific figure for deaths of up to 340,000 - or something rather less that 50%? This 90% figure is entirely your invention and entirely your choice. What makes it worse is that you have made no effort whatsoever to double check your ridiculous percentages. I have left you squirming for long enough. As a starter to putting you on the road to accuracy try the following link: http://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&q=Israel+Romanian+Jews&btnG=Search&meta= Cheers, Sid. |
| Posted by: sid guttridge November 03, 2006 02:06 pm |
| P.S. On second thoughts, your impetus to do proper research being so limited, let's go straight to the following link, which took me all of two minutes to find: http://www.eurojewcong.org/ejc/news.php?id_article=110 Cheers, Sid. |
| Posted by: Imperialist November 03, 2006 02:27 pm | ||||
You continue to repeat that same thing over and over again, ignoring anything else and avoiding any discussion about it. I already posted this: http://www.worldwar2.ro/forum/index.php?showtopic=3652&view=findpost&p=55846
http://www.moreorless.au.com/killers/antonescu.html I know it is hard to reason with you, and you are too proud to answer my question while you assault me with your questions and demands, but do you realise that the Antonescu regime gets the blame for the jews killed in Romania, YES OR NO? Do you admit that Johnson says 750,000 jews were killed in Romania, YES OR NO? These are simple question but you continue to avoid them. |
| Posted by: sid guttridge November 03, 2006 05:31 pm |
| Hi Imp, No problem. YES, Johnson, according to you, does say that 750,000 Jews were killed in Romania. However, as I have pointed out several times before, 1) Johnson is demonstrably wrong and 2) Johnson, according to you, says that Hitler did it, not that the Romanians did it, which was your original claim in blaming Johnson for your error. You therefore cannot use Johnson in defence of your ridiculous 90% figure for those two reasons. He was wrong and didn't state what you originally claimed he stated. You drew false inferences of your own from a demonstrably flawed source. The fault is 100% yours. YES, the Antonescu regime does carry the blame for the great majority of Jews that died in Romania (Einsatzgruppe D being responsible for the rest). Has anyone here claimed otherwise? No! However, 3) The Antonescu regime most definitely did NOT exterminate 90% of the country's Jewish population. No source, Western or otherwise, claims that. ONLY YOU! You deliberately, for reasons I cannot understand, chose to put almost the worst possible spin on Jewish deaths in Romanian hands despite having much lower and more accurate figures available from Carp. This was YOUR choice. Nobody else's. But what makes your selection of the ridiculous 90% figure even more poisonous is that even after I gave you a source of the sort you earlier asked for that gives more accurate figures, you have again chosen to ignore it completely. That being so, I can only assume that you are on some sort of slanderous personal campaign against Romanians in which the facts are of no importance. Why? If you do not come clean soon about your culpable error I am going to ask for you to be banned for falsifying the historical record. This reality-defying performance of yours is possibly the most despicable I have yet enountered on the internet. Cheers, Sid. |
| Posted by: Imperialist November 03, 2006 06:51 pm | ||||||||||||
Finally you admit the obvious! And what is that figure out of the whole jewish population in Romania, in percentages?
Why do you hang to this. The quote clearly doesnt go into details of blame by country, but lists the jewish deaths by country and assigns the general blame for the Holocaust to Hitler. It's obvious. That doesnt stop us from connecting the dots. You know, the obvious dots - 750,000 in Romania - Antonescu regime - sovereign ally etc. About Einsatz D, it had a free hand to operate because Antonescu was Hitler's ally. It operated with Antonescu's knowledge and consent.
http://www.magazinistoric.itcnet.ro/?module=displaystory&story_id=760&edition_id=22&format=html
Johnson doesnt claim 90%. But it isnt hard to compare his 750,000 figure with the jewish population in Romania, IS IT? He could be wrong, he most definitely exaggerates, but he wrote that in his book. And lead me to use the 90% figure. Now you attack me and try to clean Johnson. Because you have an agenda against me.
You assume a lot. You were the one who asked me what western authors lead me to post the 90% figure, I answered.
Indeed, that is the goal of your whole effort. Your personal experiences on the net are not my problem, tone down your aggressivenes. Since this whole thing started you took personal shots at me. Asking me to be banned for "falsifying the historical record" (get a grip man, the one who has falsified the record is Johnson, not me, I'm not falsifying anything, I'm merely talking with a hard-headed brit) is hilarious. take care |
| Posted by: Victor November 04, 2006 08:14 am | ||||||
| Stubborness can be a virtue, when put to good use, but when one decides to continue in error when even one knows one is wrong, stubborness is a sign of something else. Now to adress the issues raised by you.
First of all "some" means more than one. The only one that could have done that is Johnson. Second, it is very important if he is right or wrong, because when you claim that he led you to believe this figure, then you must have thought he was right.
1. You yourself provided other statistics: Matatias Carp, the report of the Wiesel Commission and Dennis Deletant's article in Magazin Istoric, none of which support Johnson's numbers. 2. Johnson is indeed wrong, but you can't put the blame on him because you yourself came to a conclusion that does not belong to him. You had knowledge of other sources with other figures and which directly blamed the Romanian government, unlike Johnson. It was your choice. The natural thing would be to admit you were wrong, but that's probably never going to happen.
No, you are wrong. The facts are: Johnson says that Hitler killed 750,000 Jews in Romania and Carp says that Romanians were responsible for the death of 400,000 Jews (in Romania and the Ukraine). This is the kind of "falsifying the historical record" that Sid is reffering to. You simply cannot twist the sources to say something they do not say. Historical study is based on sources (written or archaelogical). This subject is a very serious one, because so many people were killed either directly or put into conditions in which they could not survive, so it should be treated accordingly. |
| Posted by: Imperialist November 04, 2006 11:43 am | ||
The issue has 2 aspects: 1) he puts out the 750,000 number. You and Sid argue he is wrong. Very well. But reading Johnson would one be lead to believe (more than) 90% of the jewish population was exterminated in Romania? YES. You still havent disputed the fact that Johnson's claim has that effect. I remind you the thread is "90% of Romanian Jews killed during WW2? According to some sources". Until now you attacked me for pointing out that this source claims just that. 2) your stubborness in admitting that sticking a number of jewish deaths to Romania in that historical context means, even if in the opinion of some indirectly, blaming the regime in Romania for them. You not only want to blame me for pointing out Johnson's 750,000 claim, but you want to "take my head" for making this obvious connection between the number he sticks to Romania and the historical situation of the regime in Romania in relation to Germany plus the conclusion that it was guilty for the Holocaust in Romania. Sticking that number to a country blamed for actively taking part in the Holocaust means putting the blame on it, even if you point Hitler as the ultimate guilty party. As long as you dont want to admit this obvious conclusion, I continue to think this thread is more about taking shots at me than discussing this source. If you want me to admit that the source was wrong I will do it (since I already had doubts from the thread where I first posted the contradictory Johnson-Carp figures), but only as long as you also stop pretending you dont understand the implications of claiming X number of jews were killed in Romania in WW2 and try to blame Hitler for it. |
| Posted by: sid guttridge November 04, 2006 12:19 pm |
| Hi Imp, This is arguably the single most sensitive subject in Romanian history. It is therefore absolutely vital that accurate facts be presented on it. Furthermore, this is a Romanian historical web site, not a personal blog. It is absolutely essential to its credibility that it carries accurate information properly arrived at. At the moment you are obstructing both the facts and the reputation of a good web site. There come times when we must all put our ego aside in favour of greater truths. For you this time has now come. Please do what is right. What is needed is clear and unequivocal public recognition by you that Romanians did not exterminate 90% of their Jewish population and that no source anywhere else claims this either. Those are the facts. It is not as if you are being asked to lie. Cheers, Sid. |
| Posted by: Imperialist November 04, 2006 12:41 pm | ||||||||||
Maybe you should tell that to Johnson.
It is a forum. Where members post things. Information is debated, opinions are debated. You are too stressed out and uptight and this creates tension.
Like I said, this is a forum. I am not obstructing anything. Can you debate something without levying pompous accusations on persons you dont like?
Your over inflated ego has started all this, now you want to play the ego-less guy. What a joke.
Why are you so desperate for me to recognise this? Maybe so you can then demand my banning for what was it "falsifying the historical record"? Yes, Romanians did not kill 90% of the jews. But a source does (wrongly) pin on Romania a number of jews killed that goes even beyond 90%!!! As long as you want this obvious fact to be ignored and you want me to forcibly admit no source does that, I can safely say your agenda has nothing to do with truth and everything to do with your ego and aversion towards me. |
| Posted by: Imperialist November 04, 2006 01:26 pm | ||
http://www.ushmm.org/research/center/presentations/features/details/2005-03-10/pdf/romanian/chapter_13.pdf Now you can understand why hanging on to arguing the 750,000 are attributable to Hitler and not to the Romanian regime at the time is untenable. By saying 750,000 jews were exterminated in Romania Johnson logically puts the blame on the Romanian regime at the time, though he doesnt do it in this quote where he uses the enumeration to amplify Hitler's general guilt for the Final Solution. |
| Posted by: Victor November 04, 2006 01:46 pm | ||||||
Reread this topic. That was my first post in it, thus I fail to see whow was possible to keep attacking you before. It is irrelevant what John Doe might understand from reading this Johnson, but what you claim you understood. You had access to many more sources on the subject than just this Johnson. You are an intelligent person. One would presume you can use that intelligence and it is unbelievable for me that you would choose to ignore other sources in favor of what you inferred.
Historical works are not "indirect" or "suggestive", because they are not art. Thus, if the author does not state something directly, one should try to search "secret meanings".
Calm down. You think yourself much more important than you are and you start sounding a little paranoid. The topic was started because you made a preposterous claim and were asked to back it up. If you don't believe the claim you initially made, why on Earth would you make it in the first place and then act stubbornly about it? I fail to see any reason in such a behavior. |
| Posted by: Imperialist November 04, 2006 02:49 pm | ||||
He made a statement - 750,000 jews killed in Romania. That statement has clear implications whether or not he followed those implication in the given quote. This is what I am stubborn about, that's all, because otherwise I admitted his number is exaggerated and most likely wrong. I hereby say my claim that 90% jews were killed in Romania is based on a wrong source.
Yes, and I backed it up showing how an author puts up that preposterous number. Was he wrong? You showed he is. I have no problem with that, and I reconsidered my statement. My problem is that Sid uses far too many personal shots and accusations in his posts and hence makes any decent debate heated and any admiting of error or wrong sources a personal deafeat, a fall in disgrace, a glitch in "the record". I also think his point that the number of jews Johnson places as exterminated in Romania is not attributable to the regime of the time but to Hitler is wrong. By doing this he wants to show not that the source I used is wrong, but that I was inept in understanding the implication of the source's claim. take care |
| Posted by: sid guttridge November 06, 2006 10:37 am |
| Hi Imp, Good. We are half way there. We now seem agreed that 90% is a greatly exaggerated figure. Now all we have to do is clear up the mistaken proposition that there are Western authors who claim this. Why is this important? Because unless challenged, this inaccurate proposition might give the uninformed lay reader the idea that there is a body of opinion that holds that Romanians exterminated 90% of their Jewish population and thereby give this mistaken figure some respectability. There is no such body of opinion. Neither of your sources say this. Johnson blames Hitler, not Romanians, and Carp gives a much lower figure. Do you know of any Western source that states that Romanians killed 90% of their Jewish population? Cheers, Sid. |
| Posted by: Imperialist November 06, 2006 01:06 pm | ||
Can you explain the purpose of you posting this AGAIN?! I have already posted several messages that clearly address this, and yet you post this on and on and on without bringing any arguments and ignoring my arguments. Do you want a monologue or a dialogue? Go ahead and talk by yourself, I really have nothing to add because 1) I already did it and 2) you would ignore it anyway. |
| Posted by: mabadesc November 06, 2006 03:03 pm |
| May I suggest that all the energy expended by both Sid and Imp could have been diverted to better use if you had joined to disprove Johnson's statements and write to him in order to have him recant his erroneous claims? You both seem to disagree with the veracity of Johnson's statements. Just a suggestion... |
| Posted by: sid guttridge November 07, 2006 11:21 am |
| Hi mabadesc, One can only deal with issues when and where one comes to them. I have never encountered Johnson's book and so am currently working on the assumption that Imp quotes him accurately. I would have to read the book first before contacting Johnson. None of my time on this thread has been wasted. We have corrected two serious errors here which, if left unchallenged, might have given any number of previously uninformed lay readers a false impression as regards the proportion of Romanian Jews who died at Romanian hands and the opinion of Western authors on this subject. The facts are that Romanians killed nothing like 90% of their Jewish population and no Western authors claim that they did. Surely this is a message well worth establishing clearly? As I think Imp now agrees that both these propositions are correct I think this thread has just about run its course. Cheers, Sid. |
| Posted by: Imperialist November 07, 2006 12:06 pm | ||
Not only do you AGAIN repeat that, but now you claim I agree with both propositions!  I dont know why you play this game. |
| Posted by: sid guttridge November 07, 2006 01:25 pm |
| Hi Imp, So, let us get this right, do you still believe the following or not: 1) Romanians killed 90% of their Jewish population, and 2) Western authors propound this idea. If you do believe the above, please present at least a little evidence to support these propositions. So far you have presented nothing in support but something in contradiction (Carp). Cheers, A mystified Sid |
| Posted by: Imperialist November 07, 2006 01:37 pm | ||
Are there 2 different persons using your account here or did you have a hard week-end and forgot everything posted here? No offence but I am baffled as to why you start this all over again! I already addressed the number 2) issue in several posts of mine on this thread. You ignored them. Went on repeating again and again your idea, then said I agree with the point and the "thread run its course" when I did no such thing. Now you start all over again adding that I presented nothing in support of my claim, when in fact I did bring arguments in the posts you chose to ignore. You act trollish.... How many posts do you want us to make chasing our tails? Is this about the number of posts, you want to post a lot? If you want to add something, address the posts where I bring arguments for number 2). Review the thread. take care, a mystified Imperialist |
| Posted by: sid guttridge November 08, 2006 01:19 pm |
| Hi imp, If concocting convoluted pseudo-justifications as a smoke screen count, then yes, you have addressed these questions. The problem is that you haven't actually answered them. So let's try again, one at a time: My impression is that you now accept that Romanians did not exterminate 90% of their Jewsh population and that this is a much exaggerated statistic. Is my impression correct? Cheers, Sid. |
| Posted by: sid guttridge November 08, 2006 01:32 pm |
| Hi Moderators, Might I suggest that the subtitle of this thread ".....according to some sources" be altered. It is apparent that there are no such sources. A question mark (?) might be added. Or the text might be changed to "according to no sources". Or the title as a whole might be changed to "Did Romanians really exterminate 90% of their Jews according to some Western sources?" Cheers, Sid. |
| Posted by: Imperialist November 08, 2006 11:26 pm | ||||
You call my arguments "convoluted pseudo-justifications". Since when is this a counter-argument? This is an insult, and I expect the moderators to give you a warning.
Says you. You still havent brought any logical counter-arguments to what I've said, you only kept saying Johnson doesnt literarly say "the Romanians killed...". That is obvious for any one that can read, my point was that for any logical person that knows the historical context (Antonescu, Romania sovereign ally and axis member etc.) and the contemporary one (Romania blamed for active participation in the Holocaust), saying 750,000 jews were killed IN Romania means putting that number on romanian's account. And you have no way to argue with this since it's pretty obvious. But you want to play games and you're not satisfied with us meeting half way through this issue (no 90% killed, Johnson wrong admitted by me), you want the 100% "game set and match". |
| Posted by: sid guttridge November 08, 2006 11:59 pm |
| Hi Imp, Very true. Johnson didn't literally say the Romanians did it. How do we know? Because he literally said Hitler did it. Now unless Hitler was a Romanian, this means that Johnson offered no opinion on Romanian guilt at all, let alone 90%. Why, if you are demonstrably wrong on both the original statistic and the supposed Western sources, should I meet you half way? You were 100% wrong. Not 50% wrong. Anyone reading your propostion would initially have thought that (1) Romanians exterminated 90% of their Jews, (which we now agree was a considerable exaggeration), and (2) that a body of Western authors believe the 90% figure to be true. This second is completely untrue. I know of no Western author who says this and you have produced nobody who says so either. What I don't understand is why, if you agree that the 90% figure is a considerable exaggeration, you seem to want it to live on in the public mind associated with mythical Western authors? Cheers, Sid. |
| Posted by: Imperialist November 09, 2006 12:16 am | ||||
I see, so you blame the Holocaust in Romania on Hitler?! And romanians have no guilt? Interesting claims. Maybe you are unaware you are officially denying the Holocaust in Romania: http://www.worldwar2.ro/forum/index.php?showtopic=3652&view=findpost&p=55911 I demand you to be banned because you're falsifying the historical record. 
Stop morphing your opinions and arguments into established well known demonstrated facts. You havent demonstrated me being wrong on the second issue. In fact you are wrong on the second issue. And that is demonstrably undeniably absolutely true, to use the Sid tactic of intimidating others with big words. take care |
| Posted by: sid guttridge November 10, 2006 09:48 am |
| Hi Imp, Nope. I didn't say any of that or imply any of that. You are now doing with my posts exactly what you did with your own quote from Johnston. Inventing things that simply aren't there. This is deeply dishonest. Your wrong proposition that there are ""estern authors" who state that Romanians exterminated 90% of their Jewish population is much more damaging than simply you stating this incorrectly as fact. It implies that there is a considerable body of opinion of far more authority than you yourself that actually believes that Romanians did exterminate 90% of their Jewish population. It is simply not true. You musty stop putting your personal ego ahead of wider historical truth. Because you are too weak to admit your error, you are prepared to saddle the Romanians with an accusation that is simply untrue. Worse than that, as the truth has been pointed out to you repeatedly and you still persist in denying it, you are now engaged in an outright lie. Please lift this slur on Romanian history and Western scholarship. Cheers, Sid. |
| Posted by: Imperialist November 10, 2006 10:15 am | ||||
You did say:
You continue to avoid admitting the implications of Johnson's claim that 750,000 jews were exterminated in Romania. You first hanged on to the fact that he blames Hitler. It was intellectually dishonest for you to do so. You only needlessly prolongued the discussion. Faced with the historical context of the time and the fact that blaming Hitler for the general Holocaust does not erase Romania's guilt for the Holocaust, you backed down. Now you claim Johnson doesnt offer an opinion on Romanian guilt at all!!! By saying 750,000 jews were exterminated in Romania, he does blame Romania, and it is obvious for any person that knows something about that historical period and is able to draw logical implications from a statement. Again, it is intellectually dishonest for you to do this, and given these 2 cases I have no intention to be lectured by you. take care |
| Posted by: sid guttridge November 10, 2006 10:31 am |
| Hi Imp, I have changed on nothing. I contradicted you on two points at the start and I still do: 1) The Romanians did not exterminate 90% of their Jewish population. This is correct and you now admit this. 2) Neither of the two Western authors you quoted contend that they did. One blames someone else and the other gives different figures which you chose to ignore. Again I am right but on this you still argue, regardless of the fact that you can offer not a single example, your own sources contradict you and it is damaging both to Romania's national reputation and the reputation of honest history. What you are asking everyone to believe is that their eyesight is wrong and that when they read your Johnston quote as saying "Hitler" did something we should actually see the word "Romanians" in its place. Johnston was both wrong and did not write what you claim. It is there in black and white. According to you, he wrote "Hitler", not "Romanians". I have seldom seen such a truly astounding display of pig headed stupidity and outright dishonesty in my life! Cheers, Sid. |
| Posted by: Imperialist November 10, 2006 10:46 am | ||
Do you have a brain or only eye-sight? I never said Johnson didnt write Hitler, but I did say it is a quote in which he obvioulsy assigns the blame for the whole Holocaust to Hitler, listing the numbers of all exterminated jews by territory. I also said Romania was a sovereign country, not an occupied territory, and it is officially blamed for the Holocaust IN IT. Hence, for any intellectually honest person, by saying 750,000 jews were killed IN Romania Johnson puts the blame, even if indirectly in this quote, on the Romanian regime. 750,000 means at least 90% of the jewish population IN Romania. "Pig headed stupidity"? This is a second insult, after ""convoluted pseudo-justifications". Is this the way you know to debate an issue? Are these your arguments? I hope the moderators will take some measure with you at least this time. take care |
| Posted by: sid guttridge November 10, 2006 01:37 pm |
| Hi Imp, Progress, I think. So, I take it from your last post that you agree that there are no "Western authors" who contend that Romanians exterminated 90% of their Jews. That is only your interpretation of what one of them wrote incorrectly? Cheers, Sid. |
| Posted by: Imperialist November 10, 2006 02:36 pm | ||
Stop talking with me. I'm pig headed, remember. Go talk with someone that would put up with your BS. |
| Posted by: sid guttridge November 10, 2006 04:32 pm |
| Hi Imp, This is not about you. It is about something rather more important. Accuracy. It is about a mistaken impression you have been perpetuating that there are some Western authors who contend that Romanians killed 90% of their Jews. There aren't and they didn't. Cheers, Sid. |
| Posted by: Imperialist November 10, 2006 06:49 pm | ||
I already understood this opinion of yours and I disagree with it. I already presented my reasons, over and over again. I understand you disagree with them. Fine, we agree to disagree. Now if this isnt about me and your ego you should leave the issue be, and allow others to make their own minds. We obviously will not convince eachother. Besides, I really think you went over the board with your insults. take care |
| Posted by: Victor November 11, 2006 08:22 am | ||
You base your argument on the fact since Romania was not an occupied country during WW2, P. Johnson implies indirectly that Romnians are responsible for the killing of 750,000 Jews, which in the quoted paragraph he says were killed by Hitler. It may come as a surprise to you, but the fact that Romania was not an occupied country (like Poland, the Czech Republic, Belgium, France etc.) is not basic knowledge. P. Johnson wrote a book on the general history of the world in the 20th century, not on the Holocaust or even on WW2. If we are to infer based on that paragraph, we could easily come to the conclusion that he didn't really have any idea on the status of the countries he listed in relation with the Third Reich. It really depends on the conclusion you want to draw. Thus, before one goes as far as to pin indirect insinuations on him or lack of knowledge regarding this part of Europe during WW2, one would better read his book and then decide which one is it. My advice is to concentrate on more serious authors, who have studied this particular subject, not general history books. |
| Posted by: Imperialist November 11, 2006 10:34 am | ||
From what I remember Johnson knew that Romania was a sovereign ally. I will try to get the book back from another apartment and will post something as soon as I do. p.s. I reported a post on this thread. |
| Posted by: sid guttridge November 11, 2006 12:09 pm |
| Hi Imp, Our opinions on this question are not equally valid, so it is not simply a matter of your opinion and mine differing with equal validity and splitting the difference down the middle. You are simply wrong on arguably the single most sensitive matter in modern Romanian history. This is too important to let slide. You made two propositions, neither of which is correct. Romanians did not exterminate 90% of their Jews and you have produced no Western authors who say that they did. The second error is particularly serious because you are passing off your own mistake as that of a body of scholarship in the West that says that the Romanians did exterminate 90% of their Jews. There is no such body of opinion in the West and you have produced not a shred of evidence that there is. This being so, the only honourable course is to withdraw both the propositions. I can see how you arrived through erroneous inference at your mistaken opinion, but the fact remains that the error is yours, not that of some Western authors. We all make such errors from time time, so that of itself is no big issue. What is not so easily overlooked is your repeated denial of not just the facts but your own evidence in a matter of fundamental historical importance. There is simply no body of Western authors who claim that Romanians exterminated 90% of their Jews. None. Cheers, Sid. |
| Posted by: Imperialist November 12, 2006 09:54 pm | ||
"I have seldom seen such a truly astounding display of pig headed stupidity." take care |
| Posted by: sid guttridge November 13, 2006 01:12 pm |
| Hi Guys, As a footnote to this thread I would point out that Romania's record with its Jews was mixed. Quite apart from the awful events in Transnistria, for which Romania was responsible, within its pre-1918 borders Romania also preserved the largest community of Jews in Axis Europe to survive largely intact. This second, more redeeming point would have been completely lost had the mistaken proposition that some Western authors claimed that Romanians exterminated 90% of their Jews gone unchallenged. That is why I have made such a big issue out of this. This issue is now, I hope, ressolved. No Western authors claim that Romanians exterminated 90% of their Jews. Cheers, Sid. |
| Posted by: Imperialist November 16, 2006 08:01 am | ||
Ressolved? How? By repeating over and over and over and over and over again your opinion? Interesting way to "resolve" a discussion. Sounds more like the way an issue is "resolved" in a mental institution. Like I already said, I understand your opinion, I disagree with it and I put forward mine. What I dont understand is your pig headed stupidity in saying the issue is resolved on your terms. |
| Posted by: sid guttridge November 16, 2006 01:45 pm |
| Hi Imp, Yes, resolved. If you had ever brought a shred of evidence to support your proposition, then we might have a genuine disputation here. But you didn't and we haven't. If you actually do come across a Western author who claims that Romanians exterminated 90% of their Jews then we might, indeed, have to reopen this subject. But until then this is resolved through lack of any evidence to support your proposition. There are simply no Western authors who claim that Romanians exterminated 90% of their Jews, as you wrongly claim. If you knew of any you would have brought it up by now. This is a history forum, not a fantasy forum. Let's try to keep it that way. OK? Cheers, Sid. |
| Posted by: Imperialist November 16, 2006 02:47 pm | ||
Yes, that's your opinion. I dont understand why you want to make this opinion of yours the final and absolute judgement of the thread. The facts are clear: 1. Johnson claims 750,000 jews were killed in Romania. 2. He inserts this statement in a descriptive quote that lists the number of jews killed in each country/territory and blames Hitler for this Holocaust. 3. Romania was sovereign, allied, member of the Axis, unoccupied. 4. The regime of the time is officially blamed for the Holocaust in Romania. 5. By saying 750,000 jews were killed in Romania, Johnson makes a clear statement on the jewish victims of the Holocaust in Romania. 6. Denying the blame of the romanian regime at the time and putting it on Hitler's shoulders is considered denial of the Holocaust. As long as you ignore these facts, dont want to make logical connections between them and dishonestly deny the implications of Johnson's statement, you are not in the position to declare the issue "resolved" just because you are very good at repeating over and over again your opinion on it. There are two explanations for your stubborness in not admitting the logical implications of his statement: either you deny the Holocaust in Romania by denying the role of the regime in it, either you accuse Johnson of doing it, there is no other way to interpret your stubborness in saying Hitler is the perpetrator of the Holocaust in Romania and one cannot connect the dots between J's figure and Romania's blame. So which is it? p.s. your stubborness is even more astonishing since we already agreed J's figure is inflated and most likely wrong, so why are you holding back from admitting the obvious conclusions from J's quote? Admitting them is no harm for Romania or historical accuracy, since the figures are wrong. So? My impression is that you make an ego issue out of it and dont want to cede anything. Making an unrivaled show of intellectual dishonesty, trying to block others from drawing logical implications of a historian's statements. take care |
| Posted by: sid guttridge November 16, 2006 03:09 pm |
| Hi Imp, Your concluson based on Johnson is YOUR interpretation. It is not what YOU quoted him as saying. Yes, you "joined the dots", but you joined them wrongly! The only "clear statement" Johnson appears to make in YOUR quote is that Hitler was responsible for 750,000 Jewish deaths in Romania and in this he is demonstrably wrong on two counts. Until you actually bring forward a Western author who actually does say that Romanians exterminated 90% of their Jews, there is no case to answer. Yes, I can see where you made your mistake, but it remains both a mistake and YOURS! This matter is therefore resolved, if only because you appear never to have had a case in the first place! Cheers, Sid. P.S. It may well be illegal to deny the Romanian role in the so-called Holocaust. Fortunately this I have not done. But what about those who exaggerate and misrepresent the Romanian role in the so-called Holocaust, as you have done? I suppose that is OK in your mind because it isn't actually illegal? Sorry, but a lie is a lie, whether it is illegal or not. |
| Posted by: Imperialist November 16, 2006 03:34 pm | ||
I see, so what interpretation would you give to his statement, having in mind the 6 facts I listed? I know. NO interpretation. Because what you want to do is ignore the implications of his claim, focus on the way he blames Hitler for the general Holocaust and avoid thinking, using only eye-sight no "brain-sight". What you want is intellectually dishonest and I dont understand why you hang on to it. But I accepted it as your opinion, and agreed to disagree. However, you were not satisfied with an agreement to disagree, you wanted to "resolve" the issue on your terms, ignoring my and repeating over and over again yours in final judgement form. No, the issue is not resolved. Johnson exaggerates (750,000) and misrepresents the Holocaust in Romania (blaming Hitler for it). Not me. take care |
| Posted by: sid guttridge November 17, 2006 12:03 pm |
| Hi Imp, Why interpret? Johnson makes a bald statement that is demonstrably wrong. He says, according to you, Hitler was responsible for the deaths of 750,000 Jews in Romania. This is simply wrong. There is nothing more that needs to be said. Why then, do YOU unilaterally decide that he states that Romanians exterminated 90% of their Jews? Johnson doesn't say that, even according to your own quote. Nor has any other source said that. This entire thing is your invention. There is no debate here, because there is nothing of substance to debate. You simply have no case and no evidence. You can lie, bluster, bluff, squirm, twist and turn all you want, but the fact is you have tried to perpetuate a slander against Romanian history and blamed it on others. It is a deeply gutless, dishonest performance and I shall be happy to go on point this out to you as long as is necessary. The Romanians did not exterminate 90% of their Jews and no Western authors say that they did. Only you do. Cheers, Sid. |
| Posted by: Florin November 18, 2006 05:06 am |
| Maybe with evil intention, maybe from less professionalism, some authors count the Jewish population from Romania before this country had to abandon a half of Transylvania to Hungary, then count the Jews rounded by the Hungarian government of June 1944 for the German death camps, and consider these Jews as the responsibility of the Romanian government. |
| Posted by: sid guttridge November 18, 2006 09:04 am |
| Hi Florin, I think you need not worry about evil intention. Romanian history is the concern of few in the West and most of those are detached academics. However, you are right, there is sloppiness in some Western sources because they do exactly what you suggest: they simply calculate the number of Romanian Jews based on estimates drawn from the early 1930s Romanian census and compare them with the number of Jews surviving in 1945 and assume that the shortfall is entirely the responsibility of the Romanian Government, without taking into account that Northern Transylvania, from where at least 100,000 Jews died, was not under Romanian jurisdiction at the time. However, that is a different issue from this one. Imperialist claimed two things: 1) That Romanians exterminated 90% of their Jews. This is a great exaggeration and he now admits this. 2) That Western authors (plural) say that Romanians exterminated 90% of their Jews. In fact none do, but he will not admit this, even though his one source (single) contradicts him by specifically blaming Hitler and his other quoted source gives much lower figures that he chooses to ignore. This is particularly serious because Imperialist is passing off his own mistake as that of a significant body of Western authors. This gives the proposition much more credibility than Imperialist's mistaken opinion on its own. It leads to the "no smoke without fire syndrome", when there is, in fact, no fire. It leads to posts on the internet saying "I seem to remember seeing somewhere on a Romanian historical website that Romanians exterminated 90% of their Jews......", which, through Chinese whispers becomes "Romanians exterminated 90% of their Jews!". It leads to this forum being devalued as a source of accurate historical information on Romania. Even the heading of this thread with the sub-title "......according to some sources" gives this falsehood credibility, when there are no such sources. And it leaves an exaggerated smear on Romanian national reputation. It also leads to posts like yours trying to find a rational middle way between right and wrong. On this occasion there is no middle way. Romanians did not exterminate 90% of their Jews and no Western authors claim that they did. Imperialist is simply wrong on both counts. What you are witnessing is the process whereby a fiction in the real world becomes an alternative internet "fact". It extends the range of discussion of Jewish deaths in Romanian hands from a reasonable range of "up to 43%" to a completely unreasonable range of "up to 90%", despite the fact that nobody except Imperialist makes this claim and his claim is based on two sources that state complely different and contradictory things! No right thinking rational person wants that. Imperialist invented this whole damaging fiction but his ego is more important to him than correcting fictions that falsify the historical record and that reflect unjustifiably badly on Romania's national reputation. There is no middle way on this. Sloppy as some Western authors are, none claim that Romania exterminated 90% of its Jews, as Imperialist claims. What was initially a mistake on his part has now become a blatant lie. He should put it right. Cheers, Sid. |
| Posted by: Imperialist November 18, 2006 09:07 am | ||||
I think you confuse me, I did not bluff, squirm, twist or turn. I clearly and openly put out the facts: 1. Johnson claims 750,000 jews were killed in Romania. 2. He inserts this statement in a descriptive quote that lists the number of jews killed in each country/territory and blames Hitler for this Holocaust. 3. Romania was sovereign, allied, member of the Axis, unoccupied. 4. The regime of the time is officially blamed for the Holocaust in Romania. 5. By saying 750,000 jews were killed in Romania, Johnson makes a clear statement on the jewish victims of the Holocaust in Romania. 6. Denying the blame of the romanian regime at the time and putting it on Hitler's shoulders is considered denial of the Holocaust. Now do you want me to post these facts over and over and over again in your mental-institution style or do you agree to disagree with me and respect my point of view, without your egotistical efforts to impose yours? I see you continue to attack me and not these facts. I already reported your "pig headed" insult to the forum administrators 1 week ago. They ignored my report, so I guess it's ok for you to insult me. It's not my problem if you dont want to use your brain in understanding the implications of a statement. I already accepted your attitude in denying the intellectual function of the brain and embracing solely the function of the eyes. I said I disagree with it. Your continued insults and attacks on me and the cowardice of the moderators in restraining your attitude is not acceptable to me, so tone it down already, take your medication. |
| Posted by: Imperialist November 18, 2006 09:12 am | ||
Let me ask you this: Johnson claims Hitler exterminated 750,000 jews in Romania. What percentage of the jewish population would that be? |
| Posted by: Victor November 18, 2006 02:27 pm | ||
From what I know, "pigheaded" means something like "unnecessary stubborness". This is not an insult, especially since you really are stubborn beyond reason. It is not the first time you displayed your stuborness and probably not the last one. From my point of view, all this is senseless, since you will not bow to reason if it will mean admitting you were wrong. You will twist the situation and words to fit your needs. Under these circumstances, talking about "facts" is superfluous, especially since they are only your interpretations, not actual facts. P. Johnson does not write that Romanians killed 750,000 Jews. Ofcourse you will bring forth the "brain-sight" argument, but since you haven't actually read the book, how can you know what Johnson insinuated or if he even insinuated anything at all? I have become increasingly busy lately and my time on the forum is limited. Consequently, there will probably be some changes soon. |
| Posted by: Imperialist November 18, 2006 06:50 pm | ||||||||
Victor, he said "pigheaded stupidity". In my book that is an insult. Now if in your opinion that is not an insult and you chose to ignore the report..... it's very informative, good to know what one can say around here.
Sorry, what? I did read the book.
But you dont want reason. you want to point out that Johnson doesnt blame the romanians, he only says Hitler exterminated 750,000 jews in Romania. It's all so quiet and nice. Case closed. No debate, no implications of his claim, no analysis. Let's just hang on to eye-sight and blame it on Imperialist. It's so easy. I have no problem admitting I am wrong, when being wrong is beyond any doubt. On this issue you guys are right when looking at Johnson's statement at face value (Hitler exterminated 750k jews in Romania. End of quote. nice and clear.), but I am right when pointing out the implications of his statement.
I see. So I dont have facts, and even if I had them, they would be superfluous. Nice way of dismissing "reason" outright. Are these facts or interpretations:
|
| Posted by: Florin November 18, 2006 08:35 pm | ||
Hi Sid, Thank you for spending your time to answer. I made bold the last sentence from what I quote because it is much worse than being "particularly serious". It creates a very bad image regarding Romania and the Romanian nation. Which it would be accepted if it would be deserved, but in this particular case, it is also not true (as you are trying to explain, by the way). |
| Posted by: Imperialist November 19, 2006 11:56 am | ||
Hi Florin, the bottomline is that I have an opinion on the way J's statements can be interpreted, and Sid a different opinion. This doesnt give him the right to ask for me to be banned, label my opinion "pigheaded stupidity", or demand that I bow down and embrace his point of view. We already expressed our points of view and arguments pages ago. The discussion continues because Sid is not satisfied with expressing his p.o.v., he wants me to renounce mine and "convert" to his, and he makes ecery bullying effort to achieve that. Now I wont do that and I expected the moderators to put some limits to his attitude, that's all. As for Romania's image I think it is more likely to be hurt by J's book circulating with its erroneous figure of 750k than by me pointing out the effects and implications of his statement. And I also said even if Victor and Sid were to concede that I hava a fair point in regard to the implications of J's claims, that would in no way damage Romania, since J's figure is wrong, and I already admitted that. that's the way I view the current situation on this thread take care |
| Posted by: sid guttridge November 27, 2006 05:23 am |
| Hi Imp, This is neither about opinion nor interpretation. It is simply the case that you are 100% wrong on arguably the most sensitive matter in modern Romanian history. Romanians did not exterminate 90% of their Jews and no Western authors claim that they did. Only you claim that they do. I don't want you to convert to my point of view. I want you to tell the TRUTH. In view of the fact that you obviously have some problem identifying the truth I will help you a little. What is the truth? The truth is that no Western authors claim that Romanians exterminated 90% of their Jews. For you to pretend otherwise is a simple lie. And, I would suggest that if you are prepared to repeatedly distort the truth so blatantly on such an important subject that affects the credibility of history generally, Romanian history in particular and this forum specifically you should be banned. On this subject you are a serial liar. No more serious charge can be made on a historical forum. You know you are telling an untruth. You know it damages the study of history, Romania and this forum and yet you still cannot bring yourself to tell the simple truth that no Western authors claim that Romanians exterminated 90% of their Jews. See? It's not that difficult. I have told the same truth three times in this single post. Go on. Give it a go. The truth can't hurt. Cheers, Sid. P.S. Please give us another laugh. Put up the famous Johnson quote again where Hitler, now apparently a Romanian according to you, is held responsible for the deaths of 750,000 Jews in Romania! In your last post you were strangely reluctant to show Florin what Johnson really says on the subject....... |
| Posted by: Imperialist November 27, 2006 08:06 am | ||
I find it weird that a person that claims to be an intellectual is so persistent in calling another member to be banned because he holds a different view on the interpretation of a statement. Given the fact that you are also given a free hand in insulting me without receiving the sleightest of warnings, I see foul play. I also find it weird that you ask for me to be banned, but when I defend my position you accuse me that I have ego issues. Interesting, so you go after my existence on this forum and you want me to sit idle and let you spew your demands without opposition. As for the rest of your message you did nothing but repeat your arguments and emphatically or should I say loudly proclaimed them TRUTH. Impressive. p.s. Maybe you should review the Origins of the Romanian Language thread. there, not only were you adamant in maintaining your opinion, but you never said you're sorry or admit you were wrong. Maybe I should ask for you to be banned. |
| Posted by: sid guttridge November 28, 2006 12:13 pm |
| Hi Imp, Naughty, naughty. When have I ever claimed to be an intellectual? Untruth No.1. Tsk, Tsk. I haven't asked for you to be banned because your interpretation differs from mine. I think you should be banned for inventing untruths and refusing to withdraw them. Untruth No.2. I rather think that the reason why I haven't been warned for giving you a hard time here is that I am stating a rather obvious, demonstrable and valuable truth in this case. Nope. I don't want to see you or anyone else banned, but there are bigger issues here than what I may or may not want. You are blatantly trying to falsify the historical record by making damaging claims that are not simply untrue, but which you know to be untrue and/or cannot substantiate. You are undermining the credibility of Feldgrau, general standards of historical research and debate and Romania's national reputation. For the sake of these wider issues I do think you should be banned if you won't retract your false suggestions. However, you have the same simple way out now as you have always had. Tell the truth. The truth is simply this: There are no Western authors who claim that Romanians exterminated 90% of their Jews. I am more than happy to withdraw any suggestion you should be banned if you would simply confirm that you know of no Western authors who claim that Romanians exterminated 90% of their Jews. Alternatively, I would be more than happy to withdraw any suggestion you should be banned if you could come up with a couple of Western authors who do claim that Romanians exterminated 90% of their Jews. What is not acceptable is for you to make this damaging claim in the absence of any supporting evidence and then refuse to withdraw it. Cheers, Sid. |
| Posted by: Imperialist November 28, 2006 12:36 pm | ||||||
This erroneous claim of yours can easily be disproved by reposting one of my many messages here in which I provide arguments for my claims. You ignore these arguments, but constantly attack me, demand my banning and do all other weird stuff.
Ok, let's continue:
What is Feldgrau and what does it have to do with this? I am damaging Romania's national reputation? Wow, lock me up and throw away the key. No wait, shoot me. I think you go way over-board with these accusations. I already pointed out there is no damage to Romanian reputation. You go real low in your ambition to ban me. Does it itch that bad? take care |
| Posted by: Imperialist November 28, 2006 01:19 pm | ||
I did not call for you to be warned for giving me "hard time". I also dont ask you to be banned because I disagree with your opinions. I asked you to be warned for calling my opinions "pigheaded stupidity". From what I know the moderators are here to keep the discussions civil, not to decide matters of true or false and allow insults from the ones they consider right on an issue. |
| Posted by: Zayets November 28, 2006 02:21 pm | ||
In this case , you probably should be banned too for the truths in the "origin of the Romanian language" thread,is it? You did not demonstarte anything (new) and you still believe that you hold the truth by its legs. So,what gives? Honestly, I thought (and actually I still believe that) that everyone here express their "truth",right? What's wrong with that? I mean since when somebody has to be banned for its opinions expressed in a civilized manner. This is just getting ridiculous. |
| Posted by: sid guttridge November 28, 2006 05:32 pm |
| Hi Imp, Let's look at that again, shall we, using your own words: "1) Johnson claims 750,000 Jews were killed in Romania. 2) He....... blames Hitler for this Holocaust". I think that puts Johnson firmly off the list of Western authors you claim state that Romanians exterminated 90% of their Jews, don't you? And you offer no other sources except Carp, who contradicts you directly. The fact is that you are inventing an entirely fictitious stance by entirely fictitious "Western authors". This may have been an honest mistake initially, but it has now turned into a dishonest lie to maintain it without any evidence whatsoever. And is not perpetuating a dishonest lie in public long after it has been exposed by your own words a prime example of "pigheaded stupidity"? If you want to undermine the proposition that you are engaged in pigheaded stupidity, just tell the TRUTH that you know of no Western authors who claim Romanians exterminated 90% of their Jews or produce some actual evidence that they (plural, remember) do. I would then be delighted to withdraw any suggestion that you are engaged in pigheaded stupidity or telling lies because they would no longer be true. It's entirely up to you, as it has always been. Cheers, Sid. |
| Posted by: sid guttridge November 28, 2006 06:20 pm |
| Hi Zayets, Yup. Everyone is entitled to express their own opinion. However, every opinion cannot be equally valid. Therefore not all are the "Truth". If this was simply Imp's private blog, it wouldn't matter what he posted. But it is not. This claims to be an independent Romanian military historical website. This means it maintains certain basic standards of evidence. I would suggest that Imp is willfully ignoring all reasonable standards of evidence when he maintains that some Western authors claim that Romanians exterminated 90% of their Jews. Not only is this figure statistically very exaggerated, as Imp now admits, but there are no Western authors who claim this, which he will not yet admit. This second matters a great deal, because he is trying to pass off his own initially honest and not very influential mistake as the opinion of a more respectable body of Western authors. This is dishonest. There are no such authors. After six pages of this he is still reliant on his two original sources - Carp, who contradicts him directly by giving much lower figures, and Johnson, who blames Hitler (see my last post or, indeed, any by Imp himself!). There can hardly be a more sensitive subject in modern Romanian history. You may be content to see the historical record distorted but I am not. Romanians did not exterminate 90% of their Jews and no Western authors state that they did. This is a pure invention by Imp. This lie has to be stopped at source. If it is not it may become another internet "fact" that gains respectability by repetition. "I seem to remember a Romanian historical website where it was claimed that Romanians exterminated 90% of their Jews" soon becomes abbreviated through a process akin to Chinese whispers to "A Romanian historical website states that Romanians exterminated 90% of their Jews" and finally to "Romanians exterminated 90% of their Jews". Already the subtitle of this very thread - "according to some sources" - contains this lie. If you value this forum's reputation for maintaining standards of evidence, and/or value maintaining the accuracy of the historical record generally and/or value Romania's national reputation, I hope you will urge Imp to withdraw the proposition that some Western authors claim that Romanians exterminated 90% of their Jews. Ff he does so, all question of banning, pigheaded stupidity and lies disappears. Within its pre-1918 borders, Romania contained the largest Jewish population inside Axis Europe to survive WWII largely intact. This important redeeming fact in a sorry story will be lost if the proposition that some Western authors claim Romanians exterminated 90% of their Jews gains currency. I hope you now see why I am making a particular issue of this. It is important on several different levels. Cheers, Sid. |
| Posted by: Imperialist November 28, 2006 07:06 pm | ||||||||
Sid, this isnt the first time you bring someone to exasperation by forcing them to repeat again and again their arguments, because you never agreed to disagree:
http://www.worldwar2.ro/forum/index.php?showtopic=2059&view=findpost&p=51480 Eventually you got Chutzpah banned because he snapped and said:
http://www.worldwar2.ro/forum/index.php?showtopic=2059&view=findpost&p=51441 Apparently the mods were more sensitive when you were the taget of personal remarks:
http://www.worldwar2.ro/forum/index.php?showtopic=2059&view=findpost&p=51462
http://www.worldwar2.ro/forum/index.php?showtopic=459&view=findpost&p=51494 Now on this thread the mods turn a blind eye to your personal remarks and attitude. Not only that, but they seem to agree with it, taking into consideration Victor's last post here. Your audacity has grown so much that you demand then suggest for me to be banned. Apparently I also have to adopt your point of view in order to undermine your previous insult! With this in mind, I hereby (to use your very official language) withdraw from this thread. I leave you do demand my assassination, imprisonment and whatever you like. I also no longer have a problem if you consider me pigheadedly stupid. My amazement was only that you were allowed to insult another member without even drawing a warning. take care |
| Posted by: Victor November 28, 2006 08:02 pm |
| I am actually growing tired of this "victim routine". I already replied you regarding what you perceived as an insult and I am not going to repeat myself. You obviously did not get it. Neither Dragos, not I, are moderators, but administrators. I have have also grown tired explaining the difference. You know very well why Chandernagore was banned and it wasn't just because he attacked Sid. You are trying to draw away attention from the original discussion and your incapability to admit you were wrong. Frankly I don't like this kind of "diversionary tactics". And probably the thing I am most tired of saying is that if you don't like it here, just go. |
| Posted by: Imperialist November 28, 2006 08:16 pm | ||||
You replied saying "pigheaded" is not an insult. However, Sid did not say I am pigheaded, he said something about my pigheaded stupidity http://www.worldwar2.ro/forum/index.php?showtopic=3652&view=findpost&p=56141 Which is a totally different thing, and an insult. Now you say you are tired of my "victim routine". I wouldnt have had no victim routine if you would have taken notice of my non-public use of the "report" feature on that specific post. You chose to ignore it, and hence I had to complain about that insult publicly. I am not trying to draw away the attention from the discussion. Because there is no longer a discussion going on. I presented my arguments, now it's a Sid monologue.
Where on this thread did I say I dont like it here? You mean if I dont like your moderating style, just go. OK, good to know this. I will keep it in mind. take care |
| Posted by: sid guttridge November 30, 2006 02:02 pm |
| Hi Imp, I know of no Western authors who claim that Romanians exterminated 90% of their Jews. You have produced no Western authors who claim that Romanians exterminated 90% of their Jews. Nobody else has produced any Western authors who claim that Romanians exterminated 90% of their Jews. This all being so, why not just simply withdraw the damaging suggestion that there are such Western authors who claim Romanians exterminated 90% of their Jews? Surely the truth should come first, especially in such a highly sensitive subject area with implications for the credibility of this as a historical forum, the study of history on an evidential basis and Romania's national reputation? Cheers, Sid. |
| Posted by: Imperialist November 30, 2006 02:24 pm | ||
1. I admitted that Johnson's figure is incorrect earlier on this thread. 2. I admit there are no western authors (plural) who claim that, there is only Johnson (singular). When I initially said "western authors led me to believe" it was on another thread and I referred to the numbers offered by Johnson regarding exterminated jews in the context of the general jewish population in Romania (numbers offered by the other author). I meant that these 2 numbers put side by side lead to that conlusion. I didnt know you were so picky and I should have said only "author", for in fact only Johnson's statement has that implication, the other author providing only the demography. So I admit my mistake in using the plural there. My head bows and I throw ash on it. As for your request to change my view on the implications of Johnson's statement, I will not do that because I have good arguments for having that view. Like I said, I will not accept to be threatened into changing my point of view when I have good arguments for it. If I do mistakes I will admit them. So the ball is now in your court. Will you withdraw your "pigheaded stupidity" and demand for banning? take care |
| Posted by: RHaught November 30, 2006 09:18 pm |
| Holy Crap! Can you two knock it off? There is no reason to be going back and forth. Apparently neither one of you is going to admit to being wrong if you were (not saying you aren't or you are). Do agree that if you post something make sure you have more than one author to research the information on. This way there is more than one source to fall back on. This is getting to be a battle of words between two people. Maybe it wasn't 90% but we all know that Romania did participate in the execution/transportaion of Jews for the Nazi regime. Mayabe not to the extent of other countries but they did! If you are going to discuss such a topic be prepared for anything and everything from both sides of the story. |
| Posted by: Imperialist November 30, 2006 10:15 pm | ||
Hello RHaught. Thank you for letting us know how you feel about this. Hopefully this thing is drawing to a close. I agree with you about knocking this off. I held the same opinion 21 days ago: http://www.worldwar2.ro/forum/index.php?showtopic=3652&view=findpost&p=56167 Holly molly, 21 days!  take care |
| Posted by: sid guttridge December 01, 2006 03:03 pm |
| Hi RHaught, This is a rather more substantive issue than "a battle of words between two people." There are issues of standards of evidence on what purports to be a historical website. We cannot just invent things or, having invented them, refuse to withdraw them when unable to substantiate them, especially on matters as sensitive as this. We all recognise that Romanians had a hand in the deaths of many of their Jews. However, Romania was also the country where the largest Jewish population in Axis Europe (that within the country's pre-1918 borders) survived almost intact. If the 90% figure is left unchallenged it precludes this significant redeeming feature being recognised. And if the multiple Western authors proposition is not challenged the 90% figure gains a credibility it does not merit. Nor is it simply a matter of "having more than one author to research the information on". Here we have a case where there is no author who the information is based on. This entire proposition is a fiction! This is, I think, well worth pointing out, if necessarily repeatedly, if it is not withdrawn by its author. I appreciate that this is tedious for others such as yourself, but there are important wider issues here that bear on the credibility of this forum, the standards of historical evidence and Romania's national reputation. It is not my business, as a foreigner, to defend Romania's national reputation, but on this occasion to do so coincides with the other two. Cheers, Sid. |
| Posted by: sid guttridge December 01, 2006 03:31 pm |
| Hi Imp, You have now redressed the two most serious issues, for which I thank you. Both the 90% figure and the proposition that there is a body of Western authors who claim it are now dead. I therefore gladly withdraw any suggestion that you should be banned over this issue. I can see how you made your original error. However, I remain mystified as to why you still cling to Johnson who quite clearly blames Hitler, not Romanians. The inherent contradiction between Johnson and historical reality in this area is so obvious that he is effectively discredited on this subject. I also withdraw "pig headed" as being "unparliamentary" language. However, I still believe you are unreasonably obstinate, which is what the phrase means. But heck, none of us is perfect, not least myself! Cheers, Sid. |
| Posted by: Imperialist April 18, 2007 06:21 pm | ||
http://users.erols.com/mwhite28/ww2stats.htm Another person reading Johnson and coming up with 750k in Romania. Coincidence? |
| Posted by: New Connaught Ranger April 18, 2007 07:52 pm |
No! they probably made the same mistake as you  Kev in Deva |
| Posted by: Imperialist April 18, 2007 08:13 pm | ||
I think your cheerfulness is out of place considering the issue harrowingly debated on this thread and the energies involved in it. But I guess you're free to mock. take care |
| Posted by: New Connaught Ranger April 19, 2007 05:58 am |
| Hallo Imp Again you make a statement without knowing the facts, I am not mocking anybody, simply stateing that YOU who obviously pride yourself on the accuracy of FACTs, Were found to be incorrect in your intial posting. So what is to stop lesser mortals making the same mistake Try not to burn up to much energy reading this. Kevin in Deva |
| Posted by: Imperialist April 19, 2007 07:15 am | ||
Listen, I posted the link to show Johnson's claim that 750k jews were killed in Romania is not a figment of my imagination or erroneous reading on my part, and he does write that. I don't want to enter a debate with you because I don't see what's there to debate and your attitude is already laced with aggressivity. Your opinion that I'm wrong? Feel free to hold it. |
| Posted by: New Connaught Ranger April 19, 2007 08:56 am |
| Bit touchy this morning are we not. My reference with regard "knowing the facts" was to your suppostion about my cheerfulness and the statement you made saying I was mocking. But yet again you manage to get the cart before the horse. Try to accept that every reply / post that does not agree with you is not some form of personal attack, otherwise you might get accuesed of being paranoid. Have a nice day, Kevin in Deva P.S. "aggressivity" = does such a word as this really exsist in the English language?? |
| Posted by: Imperialist April 19, 2007 09:19 am | ||
Yes, I understood that the reference regarding "knowing the facts" was to my suppostion about your cheerfulness. But you talked about my initial posting too. And yes, I accept that you don't agree with me, like I said feel free not to. But let's not drag this into personals. If you want to discuss further, we can do it by PM. What I didn't get was what are your arguments regarding the mistake done by that person that also read Johnson's book. |
| Posted by: New Connaught Ranger April 19, 2007 11:14 am |
| Quite simple old chap, I believe more than one person reading / using the same book, item, statistics, web-site etc..etc... can draw the same (mistaken) conclusion. Kevin in Deva |
| Posted by: Imperialist April 19, 2007 11:37 am | ||
What conclusion? There is no conlusion drawn, just raw data noted: Romania - 750,000 jews killed - source: Johnson. I see no conclusion, only data. If you're saying we made a mistake and that is not the data put forth by Johnson, on what do you base your claim? take care |
| Posted by: New Connaught Ranger April 19, 2007 03:29 pm |
| Imp Sid pointed out where you made your original error, now you are saying there was no error in quoting Johnson?ß Kevin in Deva  |
| Posted by: Imperialist April 19, 2007 03:47 pm | ||
I think there is a big disconnect in our dialogue. I said: Another person reading Johnson and coming up with 750k in Romania. Coincidence? To which you said: No! they probably made the same mistake as you Now I'm asking you what mistake did they and I do. You, not Sid. Or if you so will, link to what Sid said. You're avoiding a straight answer. |
| Posted by: New Connaught Ranger April 19, 2007 05:53 pm |
| Hallo Imperial, feel free to correct me but did you not post this figure: 750k (as quoted by Johnson) originaly. Which Sid contested. Then you posted somebody else had read the same source (Johnson) and come up with the same figure 750k. To me, that seems like you were trying to justify your original post and figure. I was saying fairly simply, to my mind that was it not possible for two people to read the same source, same (mis) information, and come up with the same conclusion. Hopefully you understand where I am coming from, it is not my intention to start or contribute to an argument, Only searching for clarity. Kevin in Deva. |
| Posted by: Imperialist April 19, 2007 06:40 pm | ||
Hi. OK, I understand you. And I have nothing against your opinion about the possibility for 2 people to come up with the same figure/data after reading the same source. My reaction was towards your conviction that the figure/data is mistaken. 2 people coming with the same figure/data may not be proof of being right, neither is of being wrong. But it does draw attention to have a more careful look at what the source claims. For example, did you read Johnson's book? take care |
| Posted by: Victor April 20, 2007 07:27 am |
| Off topic posts deleted. There is no need for personal attacks. Stick to the topic. |
| Posted by: New Connaught Ranger April 20, 2007 12:29 pm |
| Hallo Imp, sorry for the delay in getting back to you, with regards Johnsons book no, I havent got access to it here in Transylvania where I live, the local library is very short on anything in English. OFF Topic I am not using this as an excuse, I try to find out as much as I can online but its getting to be frustrating when the information you search for keeps on reffering you to Wikepedia  not the most accurate of things.I would appreciate any links you can give, also I have to say I never got as far in schooling as many of the young people do today, before I was 17, (hence the bad spelling  ) due to family circumstances, I joined the Irish army and I am self-educated mainly by reading as many books as I can get my hands on.I have spent the last 5 years writing up the history of the many British Regiments that passed through the town of Castlebar, Co. Mayo, (now the Republic of Ireland) from 1730 to 1922, which envolved reading hundreds of copies of local and national newspapers on microfise, information that has never been before researched. I am now in the process of trying to find a Publisher willing to print it all,  Kevin in Deva. |
| Posted by: New Connaught Ranger April 20, 2007 06:47 pm | ||
Well Lucky for you I didnt use the Irish term: Micro FISH Kevin in Deva |
| Posted by: Victor April 22, 2007 06:47 pm |
| Off topic posts delete, again. Discuss the subject or don't discuss at all. Remember that we don't have to like each other here, but we have to try at least to behave civilized. Thank you. |