Daily Kos

Nazi Archives to be released electronically (for the first time)

Wed May 16, 2007 at 04:11:25 AM PDT

On December 17th, I wrote a diary about the opening of the Nazi concentration camp archives:

For the first time, secrets of the Nazi Holocaust that have been hidden away for more than 60 years are finally being made available to the public. We’re not talking about a missing filing cabinet - we’re talking about thousands of filing cabinets, holding 50 million pages. It's Hitler’s secret archive.

   [video]
   [transcript]

Which led to this agreement yesterday:

Electronic copies of documents from a closely guarded Nazi archive will start flowing to several countries for the first time since World War II, following an agreement announced Tuesday by the 11 countries that govern the archive in central Germany.

More below the fold...

The agreement between the eleven countries that control the Bad Arelson archive will give digitized access of over 50 million documents that tell the story of the 17.5 million people who passed through the Nazi concentration camps (those survived or not) in irrefutable (un-revisable) terms.

What's in the 50 million records?

The file of "Frank, Annaliese Marie," better known as Anne Frank. It’s her paper trail from Amsterdam to Bergen-Belsen, where she died at the age of 15.

They also have the actual Schindler's list...

A good day for the truth, despite the difficult subject, as academics and those who seek to deny the deniers will now be able to back up their truths with exact proof.  

That's not to say this hasn't been a difficult negotiation:

France, Italy, Luxembourg and Greece have not yet ratified the treaty. Luxembourg has indicated that ratification is imminent, while the other three nations have not raised any fresh hurdles, according to people who attended the two-day meeting.

The seven countries that have ratified the amended treaty are the United States, Germany, Israel, Belgium, Poland, Britain and the Netherlands. The United States had pushed aggressively to open the archive, clashing with Germany, which long resisted because of concerns about privacy.

The agreement, once the amended treaty is ratified by all signatories, will give electronic access to the International Red Cross's tracing service, organizations such as the Holocaust Museum in Washington, DC and to scholars worldwide.  

In anticipation of the agreement, a spokesman for the Holocaust Museum confirms that "virtually all the files relating to concentration camps have already been scanned."

As I said in my first diary about this, the release of these documents is a direct repudiation of deniers. There's a certain weight in the truth and the archives' truth, 50 million pages thick, outweighs any lies.

Here's the link to the NY Times story.

And to my prior diary, which has the link to the video and transcript of the 60 minutes episode.

Original tags: Holocaust, Revisionism, History, Adolf Hitler, Nazis

[Update]  This diary was hijacked in a direct violation of the following rule:

This was a thread hijack (4+ / 0-)

that got even worse.

If it happens again, we'll have to act.

I don't know how many people are going to see this, but this is a general announcment to the combatants in this subthread. The time and energy that these fights are taking for admins is getting to be far too much.

We have two choices, ban the lot of you, which will happen if these hijackings and fights spill into other, non-I/P diaries, or stay hands off and let you beat each other up in the threads.

There are really no innocent parties in these fights, so there isn't a "side" to take when everyone is behaving badly. We don't want to have mass bannings, so you're going to have to figure out how to handle this without running to the admins every time.

But if it gets out of the I/P threads, we will have to ban.

by mcjoan on Wed Feb 21, 2007 at 02:24:29 PM PDT

This is a non-I/P diary.  The above rule has been violated.

I ask everyone who is posting (relentlessly) in support of the hijacked threads to stop.

Tags: Holocaust, Revisionism, History, Adolf Hitler, Nazis (all tags) :: Previous Tag Versions

Permalink | 326 comments

  •  Anne Frank R.I.P. ;-{> n/t (8+ / 0-)

    "We're right in the middle of a fucking reptile zoo! And somebody's giving booze to these goddamn things!"-Hunter S. Thompson ;-)>

    by rogerdaddy on Wed May 16, 2007 at 04:17:38 AM PDT

  •  I wish I could say that this would stop (7+ / 0-)

    the Holocaust deniers, but you and I both know that's not going to happen.  This is mainly a good thing for the survivors and the relatives.

    •  I think for the scholars, as well (4+ / 0-)

      they'll have access to the documents.  I agree it won't stop the next "conference," but it will make it easier and quicker to counter their lies.

      But I agree.  The deniers won't stop because they don't care about the truth anyway.

      Have you read about the Kurds and the Zoroastrians yet?

      by jhritz on Wed May 16, 2007 at 04:32:45 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  yes, it is a good thing for the survivors and (6+ / 0-)

      relatives.

      My Aunt Sara managed to escape 3 TIMES from the camps (she was moved several times).  When they caught her the last time they punished her by steralizing her.  The war was over shortly after the steralization and she was finally free.
      Her neighbors hid her during her escapes but they were caught and later killed in the camps too.

      I don't know how anyone can say these things didn't happen.  There were 6 million jewish people and 3.5 million other people of different countries killed too all held in ghettos and camps.

      It is so sickening that with all the proof available anyone can deny this happened.

      It is horrifying that we have to fight our own government to save the environment. Ansel Adams -6.5 -6.75

      by Statusquomustgo on Wed May 16, 2007 at 08:23:23 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  I hope that one day... (6+ / 0-)

    the Holocaust Museum and those that will have direct access to the files will put together educational programs with public speakers.

    Thanks for this crucial diary, and I hope it makes the Rec list. Recommended.

    She nourishes us; that which we put into the ground she returns to us. Big Thunder

    by Winter Rabbit on Wed May 16, 2007 at 04:35:34 AM PDT

  •  I assume (4+ / 0-)

    Recommended by:
    Spathiphyllum, GoldnI, jhritz

    that this is the Bad Arolsen archive? If so, good news; it's amazing to me that such a thing as Holocaust denial is even intellectually possible, and the Arolsen documents conclusively protray the reality of the Holocaust.

    My guess would be that this is prompted by Ahmadinejad and his unfortunate habit of holding conferences.

    "There is a Providence that protects idiots, drunkards, children and the United States of America." - Otto Prince Bismarck

    by MBNYC on Wed May 16, 2007 at 04:38:36 AM PDT

  •  Please put this over at... (4+ / 0-)

    Recommended by:
    Spathiphyllum, MBNYC, GoldnI, jhritz

    Progressive Historians.
    I have to go soon, but I can promote it this afteroon if someone doesn't do so before I do. WR.

    She nourishes us; that which we put into the ground she returns to us. Big Thunder

    by Winter Rabbit on Wed May 16, 2007 at 04:46:09 AM PDT

  •  For those interested in the topic (2+ / 0-)

    Recommended by:
    MBNYC, jhritz

    I strongly recommend the Steven Spielberg project, through USC.  

    Here's the link.

  •  May Raul Wallenberg (3+ / 0-)

    Recommended by:
    Spathiphyllum, MBNYC, jhritz

    rest a little quieter.  I just wanted to mention his name.

    "I cherished my hate like a badge of moral superiority." - Mark Rudd

    by Bob Love on Wed May 16, 2007 at 05:01:17 AM PDT

  •  Bad repoting and not too good analysis (6+ / 9-)

    The CBS report has some very stupid turns of phrase, including one you quote of "Hitler's secret archive". That suggests that it was assembled within the Nazi regime and for Adolf himself. Yet from what we do know of the highest levels surrounding him, there was a sort of "plausible deniability" constructed by means of euphamisms and delegation. (Another case in the CBS report is the "Hitler's birthday present" killing described but without giving evidence that his was a motive of the numbers.)

    Only by delving deeper do we get to the real nature of the archive and it is quickly passed over. The first is how the archive was assembled in the first place:

    This Holocaust history was discovered by the Allies in dozens of concentration camps, as Germany fell in the spring of 1945.

    and the second, much later in the report, is the indication of what happened to this paperwork after the war::

    And those records make up the largest Holocaust archive anywhere. Run by the Red Cross, the International Tracing Service was set up after the war to trace lost family members. Survivors could write for information, but there was a backlog of 400,000 unanswered letters. And neither survivors nor scholars got past the lobby.

    So it seems, though it is not stated, that the documents were given to the ICRC by the powers that occupied Germany. We do not however know from the report whether this included any documents captured by the Russians (or the extent of their disclose) as they had their own reasons for not wanting the exact truth about all the deaths in, for example, Poland, to be made public.

    Neither of course do we know the extent of the material which did not reach the archives purely because if was burned by the retreating Nazis. 50 million documents may seem a lot but we do not know the nature of them either. If they are complete lists of all the executions, then your optimism may be justified but the report would tend to indicate that they also contain numbers of documents relating to just one individual or to a small group like the signing in sheets.

    I would suggest that all these factors will mean that still only a broad spread of estimated deaths will be possible. The archive may limit the range but there will never be a definitive number. (Look at the problems of getting one for those killed in New York on 9/11.) Only popcorn journalists and motivated historians will give an unqualified figure. Anything that does not contain a phrase like "estimates vary between x and y" or "anything up to z million" should be examined for the agenda it is promoting.

    "That's an entirely valid point" - MBNYC

    by londonbear on Wed May 16, 2007 at 05:12:52 AM PDT

    •  Are you suggesting Hitler (5+ / 0-)

      was unaware of the Holocaust?

      How did I live without him?

      by Pumpkinlove on Wed May 16, 2007 at 05:16:31 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  No (5+ / 9-)

        I am suggesting what I wrote, a shell of "plausible deniability" was constructed to protect the senior members of the regime. In a similar way that knowledge of Watergate was "kept" from Nixon. Is there any document that has Hitler actually ordering the exterminations? My criticism was in any case directed at the use of "Hitler's secret archive".

        Points made as I wrote the above make it clear that the Russian captures are not included as presumably they also would have had to agree to the release. Again that is a sloppy and inaccurate usage of "Allies". Which reinforces my point about this archive NOT having the evidence for a definitive number. Without those, the Russian will seek to attribute the killing of the Polish intellectuals by the Red Army to the Nazis.  

        I did not say that many millions did not die which is the libel against me that I am denying the Holocaust. All I am asserting is that this will not, as the author of the diary suggests, provide a final figure. The archive appears not to be complete as its characterisation in the report suggests. It may well provide better and more accurate figures for some of the camps but without the records for those in the East, where most of the deaths occured, the data needed is incomplete.

        Yes ESTIMATES can be infered and these can be made more accurate as more of the remaining records become available. I'll give you one example of possible exaggeration or diminution of numbers. Take this extract from the Wikipedia article on the Roma:

        Some Eastern European Roma are known to have arrived in Israel in the late 1940s and early 1950s, having intermarried with Jews in the post-WWII Displaced Persons camps or, in some cases, having pretended to be Jews when Zionist representatives arrived in those camps.

        Now the latter would have been counted as Jewish Holocaust survivors rather than "Roma/Sinti". Estimates of deaths in the camps constructed by comparing the numbers in populations before and after the war would be skewed by this. The estimated number of Roma/Sinti killed would increase and the numbers of Jewish deaths reduce, albeit to a minor extent in the overall picture.

        Similar problems in methodology have been encountered in Iraq. Despite the mid point of a range of estimates of additional deaths after the invasion being often quoted, the surveys do not indicate a definite figure. There is a higher and lower limit to the range.

        This is not denial of deaths, it is pointing out that any statistical analysis is dependant on the data available. In the case of the camps a lot of highly detailed information is available. Some evidence exists of the numbers of deaths in some camps over certain periods of time. From the information we have the records do not include the whole period or all the camps.

        "That's an entirely valid point" - MBNYC

        by londonbear on Wed May 16, 2007 at 06:11:10 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  TR'ed (9+ / 2-)

          because now you just bore me.

        •  The diarist (4+ / 0-)

          Recommended by:
          Geekesque, GoldnI, Shane Hensinger, jhritz

          makes no such claim, nor does anyone else here. You, by contrast, assert in your original comment that one needs to be wary of an agenda in connection with such an unmade claim, which leaves ample room for speculation, which in turn is, I suggest, the cause of some consternation.

          "There is a Providence that protects idiots, drunkards, children and the United States of America." - Otto Prince Bismarck

          by MBNYC on Wed May 16, 2007 at 06:16:45 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  t/r for channelling David Irving (5+ / 0-)

          After the embarrassment of the discovery of the T-4 euthanasia program, the Nazi leadership was very concerned about "plausible deniability." So you are correct to say that there was no signed order from Hitler. But that is certainly much different that saying that there was no order from Hitler (unless you want to channel David Irving.)

          Similarly, to say that Hitler was somehow protected from knowing what was happening is a David Irving meme rather than reality. He received verbal reports directly from the only person authorized to tally the total dead, Heinrich Himmler.

          Read Christopher Browning's book The Unwritten Order: Hitler's Role in the Final Solution for details. Browning was an expert witness in the Irving trial, and this book is based on his research for the case. Irving's claims -- i.e. your claims -- that Hitler was somehow out of the loop were examined in detail in the Irving/Lipstadt trial, and Irving's case dissolved like facial tissue in the rain.

          From the Irving judgment:

          13.67 My conclusion on this issue is that the evidence discloses substantial, even if not wholly irrefutable, reasons for concluding not only that Hitler was aware of the gassing in the Reinhard Camps but also that he was consulted and approved the extermination. My reasons for arriving at this conclusion are, firstly, that if (as Irving accepts) Hitler knew and approved the programme of shooting Jews, it is reasonable to suppose that he would have been consulted about and approved a policy to exterminate them by another means, namely by the use of gas. I consider that there are a number of documents which suggest that Hitler knew and approved the implementation of the new policy: for example the protocol of the Wannsee conference, at which the extermination programme was discussed, records Heydrich in his opening remarks that he was speaking with the authority of Hitler. But the main reason for my conclusion is that it appears to me to be unreal to suppose that Himmler would not have obtained the authority of Hitler for the gassing programme (and even more unlikely that he would have concealed it from his Fuhrer). Himmler's Dienstkalendar provides clear evidence of the regularity of the meetings between Hitler and Himmler and of their having discussed the Jewish question at the time when Himmler was actively supervising the setting up and operation of the gas chambers in the Reinhard Camps. I therefore accept the evidence of Longerich and Browning which I have summarised at paragraph 6.105 above.

          And I have to say I find it very, very troubling to see you channel David Irving's historical errors twice in the same post, which is why I've t/r'd you.

          You are doing very badly on some very critical terrain, Londonbear.

          If Venus is made of ketchup and lions play pinochle, why doesn't the framistan frizzmaz the flomaton?

          by zemblan on Wed May 16, 2007 at 06:40:19 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  David Irvine (1+ / 1-)

            Recommended by:
            hypersphere01
            Hidden by:
            jhritz

            You accuse me of chanelling David Irvine when my comments are critical of his use of statistics. He takes the line of looking at only the lowest figures in the range. I will reproduce what I wrote at the end about the failure to quote a range resulting from a statistical calculation:

               I would suggest that all these factors will mean that still only a broad spread of estimated deaths will be possible. The archive may limit the range but there will never be a definitive number. (Look at the problems of getting one for those killed in New York on 9/11.) Only popcorn journalists and motivated historians will give an unqualified figure. Anything that does not contain a phrase like "estimates vary between x and y" or "anything up to z million" should be examined for the agenda it is promoting.

            Now which motivated historian do you think I was thinking of in this criticism? I have given other examples like the numbers dead in Iraq where sloppy reporting leads to one figure in a range being taken as a precise one.

            My post was intended as a caution against the optimism ingendered by the CBS report. The diarist wrote:

            As I said in my first diary about this, the release of these documents is a direct repudiation of deniers. There's a certain weight in the truth and the archives' truth, 50 million pages thick, outweighs any lies.

            Unfortunately the archive does nothing of the sort as the contents appear to be an incomplete record. The sheer volume of paper is not an indication of the statistical usefulness of the data in it. We have it appears, some very detailed information about some people, an unknown number of records of killings which are almost certainly incomplete and other papers like the Schindler's list which are valuable and fascinating historical documents but which would provide no data about numbers killed.

            I should also have cautioned that scanning pages into an electronic form does not make them readily available for analysis. A lot of transcription etc would still have to be done "manually". Analysis of them is likely to therefore be a continuing and long process.  

            "That's an entirely valid point" - MBNYC

            by londonbear on Wed May 16, 2007 at 09:06:38 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

        •  Uprated because the donuts are (4+ / 0-)

          unwarranted, even though the points could have be stated in a less hostile manner.

          •  stop it (5+ / 0-)

            you're supporting a hijack and trolling of a diary.  

            shame on you.

            Have you read about the Kurds and the Zoroastrians yet?

            by jhritz on Wed May 16, 2007 at 06:50:30 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Well, then, report him. n/t (2+ / 0-)

              Recommended by:
              mattes, hypersphere01
            •  Respectfully and most reluctantly, (2+ / 0-)

              Recommended by:
              hypersphere01, Statusquomustgo

              I disagree.

              If the diary had not called the archive "Hitler's secret archive," then I would be more accepting of the notion that the comment attempts to hijack the diary.

              Frankly, I'm uncomfortable with the commenter's use of the word "agenda." But I just don't think that comment  ought to be troll-rated.

              •  It is a quote from (2+ / 0-)

                Recommended by:
                VolvoDrivingLiberal, MBNYC

                a report and accurate in that Hitler was the head of the government that produced the documents.

                But that's not even the issue.  The diary is being hijacked and you're enabling it, which is AGAINST THE RULES.  

                In addition, see above where a poster points out the hijacker is channeling David Irving and below, this comment that calls you out for breaking the rules.

                Just stop already.  You're hijacking this as much as the hijacker.

                Have you read about the Kurds and the Zoroastrians yet?

                by jhritz on Wed May 16, 2007 at 07:00:00 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  How can one be hijacking a diary by (3+ / 0-)

                  • explaining the reason for an uprating (or for a troll-rating); and then

                  • responding to criticisms of that uprating or troll-rating?
                •  Hunter on when to use (4+ / 0-)

                  troll ratings.

                  When you Troll Rate something, as a trusted user, you are stating that the comment should be made invisible to all site users. You're saying that the comment is so bad -- so disruptive or damaging to the community -- that it isn't worth even a debate, but should be deleted from the discussion as being simply inflammatory, simply off-topic, or simply a lie.

                  . . . Conversely, there is one particular reason troll ratings should never be used: to express disagreement with a poster's opinion.

                  This is the standard I try to meet.

                  Also, if the original comment had not been troll-rated, I strongly suspect that the thread would not have grown.

                  •  You're wrong (1+ / 0-)

                    Recommended by:
                    VolvoDrivingLiberal

                    The thread grew before the tr.  The tr's are what stopped it, until you came along and dragged its sorry ass out of hc.

                    Here's a comment that you need to read immediately.

                    I'm losing all respect for you, aA.

                    You really need to stop this.

                    Have you read about the Kurds and the Zoroastrians yet?

                    by jhritz on Wed May 16, 2007 at 07:16:50 AM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  FYI (2+ / 0-)

                      Recommended by:
                      VolvoDrivingLiberal, jhritz

                      ...all of londonbear's related comments in this diary are in HC. aA is seemingly alone in his opinions on this; no value judgment in that, but worth observing.

                      "There is a Providence that protects idiots, drunkards, children and the United States of America." - Otto Prince Bismarck

                      by MBNYC on Wed May 16, 2007 at 07:23:46 AM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  Thanks (0+ / 0-)

                        I'd love to see this entire thread just disappear en mass (even from hc).  

                        Have you read about the Kurds and the Zoroastrians yet?

                        by jhritz on Wed May 16, 2007 at 07:26:42 AM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

                      •  Spoke too soon (1+ / 0-)

                        Recommended by:
                        MBNYC

                        Check it out:
                        http://www.dailykos.com/...

                        sheesh

                        Have you read about the Kurds and the Zoroastrians yet?

                        by jhritz on Wed May 16, 2007 at 07:27:30 AM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

                      •  You may be right. And I'm uncomfortable (4+ / 0-)

                        with the uprating company I'm in. But what can I do? It's what I believe.

                        •  Consider that you (1+ / 0-)

                          Recommended by:
                          MBNYC

                          may just be wrong and err on the side of caution.

                          Right now, the company you're keeping is the only one who agrees with you:

                          Bad repoting and not too good analysis (2+ / 4-)

                          Recommended by:
                             Carl Nyberg, another American

                          Have you read about the Kurds and the Zoroastrians yet?

                          by jhritz on Wed May 16, 2007 at 07:33:31 AM PDT

                          [ Parent ]

                        •  aA, (2+ / 0-)

                          Recommended by:
                          MBNYC, jhritz

                          I defended you downthread, but do you really want to be associated with CN here?  No one's asking you to TR, but you REALLY might want to consider removing your uprates.  Think about it.

                        •  Dude... (2+ / 0-)

                          Recommended by:
                          GoldnI, jhritz

                          ...I have an enormous amount of respect for you, but now you're on one side with Carl. That is food for thought. I really hate saying this, but I think you've wrong about your evaluation - and note I didn't TR it either, initially - of what londonbear is doing here. He's going on and on about the precise number of victims, and asserting that the establishment of that number is at issue as a way of, perhaps, discrediting these archives. However, nobody has made that claim, which makes it a diary hijack and a really odious one to boot.

                          I understand, I think, where you're coming from, but I respectfully disagree with your conclusions.

                          "There is a Providence that protects idiots, drunkards, children and the United States of America." - Otto Prince Bismarck

                          by MBNYC on Wed May 16, 2007 at 07:38:44 AM PDT

                          [ Parent ]

                        •  do what you think is right... (3+ / 0-)

                          Recommended by:
                          MBNYC, GoldnI, jhritz

                          ... but you're uncomfortable for a damned good reason.

                          If Venus is made of ketchup and lions play pinochle, why doesn't the framistan frizzmaz the flomaton?

                          by zemblan on Wed May 16, 2007 at 07:56:07 AM PDT

                          [ Parent ]

                        •  So you believe that (1+ / 0-)

                          Recommended by:
                          GoldnI

                          I misrepresented the archives because I have an agenda?

                          That's what the comment you uprated (along with Carl Nyberg and Mattes...) is saying.

                          So, thanks for the insult, aA.

                          I'll never forget it.

                          Have you read about the Kurds and the Zoroastrians yet?

                          by jhritz on Wed May 16, 2007 at 07:58:17 AM PDT

                          [ Parent ]

                          •  I hoped it was clear that my uprating does NOT (5+ / 0-)

                            signify agreement with londonbear. If not, I'm saying that now. Also, I've already disassociated myself from londonbear's "agenda" statement.

                            Let try to restate my thinking:

                            • I do not think you misrepresented anything.

                            • But I do think that your diary included a phrase -- "Hitler's secret archive" -- that quite reasonably can be understood as saying that the archive was Hitler's and that it was something he kept secret.

                            • londonbear thus had a legitimate basis for his (or her) original comment.

                            • londonbear's first reply also, IMHO, had a legitimate basis, although in the absence of troll-ratings I would not have recommended it.

                            • Maybe I'm wrong in my understanding. But I would have hoped that I'd earned sufficient credit for people to understand that sympathy for holocaust denial never entered my mind and that my sole motivation is to try to apply neutral standards of rating in a consistent manner.

                            • Finally, I sincerely regret any discomfort or upset my uprating and comments may have caused you. But I can't help the fact that, respectfully, I disagree with you on this point. If you can't forget, I hope you'll forgive.
                            •  I won't (0+ / 0-)

                              forgive or forget.  You've got it wrong and, imo, your pride is what's stopping you from admitting it, not any parsing you try to do of data.  The phrase you're latching onto is a blockquote from the 60 minutes story.  It's not my text and its representative of the story they presented.

                              It doesn't now (or SHOULD NOT) negate the importantance of the archive and is ACCURATE anyway, because HITLER was the HEAD of the government that PRODUCED the SECRET documents in the FIRST PLACE.

                              GET IT?????????

                              You have insulted me and you have supported a holocaust denier.

                              Whether you want to believe that or now.

                              You owe me and everyone else who wanted to discuss the archive, not the agenda of this foul hijacker, an apology.

                              Have you read about the Kurds and the Zoroastrians yet?

                              by jhritz on Wed May 16, 2007 at 08:14:48 AM PDT

                              [ Parent ]

                              •  I'm sorry, but I find your reaction to... (7+ / 0-)

                                ...another American in this thread bizarre. Are you not aware that he is one of the most passionate and articulate supporters of Israel on Daily Kos, and that he takes this subject so seriously that he clearly spends hours writing and researching his diaries on it? I have no idea whether or not he is Jewish, but he is clearly one of the last people whom one could reasonably suspect of antisemitism. Surely you can give him the benefit of the doubt that he uprated LondonBear's diary, not because he supports holocaust denial, but because of the reasons he states? Don't you think he's earned that benefit of the doubt? And, even if you disagree with him, don't you think you owe it to him to be a little less shrill, hostile and rude in your disagreement?

                                Frankly, you owe another American an apology.

                                "Well, yeah, the Constitution is worth it if you can succeed." Nancy Pelosi

                                by StupidAsshole on Wed May 16, 2007 at 02:58:37 PM PDT

                                [ Parent ]

                                •  wha? (0+ / 0-)

                                  I doubt you're in a position to be pushing uprates of trs right now.

                                  Or to invest yourself in my dealings with others.

                                  But, then, every woman loves to be called shrill by a stupid asshole.

                                  Have you read about the Kurds and the Zoroastrians yet?

                                  by jhritz on Wed May 16, 2007 at 03:21:53 PM PDT

                                  [ Parent ]

                                  •  You do yourself absolutely no favors... (5+ / 0-)

                                    ...by reacting to another American in this way. Has it occurred to you that the fact that you are no longer just attacking and smearing people on the "other side" of the I/P debate from yourself, but are now cannibalizing your own side suggests that you might consider taking a few days' vacation from this topic and get some sense of perspective and of what kind of  behavior is appropriate in these discussions?

                                    Of all the people on Daily Kos you could have accused of supporting Holocaust denial, another American is the last person who deserves to be smeared in this way.

                                    "Well, yeah, the Constitution is worth it if you can succeed." Nancy Pelosi

                                    by StupidAsshole on Wed May 16, 2007 at 03:35:25 PM PDT

                                    [ Parent ]

                                    •  I'm not (0+ / 0-)

                                      smearing him and you're just using this flame war to try to start a flame war with me, so stop it.

                                      He's responsible for pulling out a comment thread that had died in hidden comments and reactivating it.

                                      From there, it was the p-side posters who went to town, which is exactly what I was trying to avoid -- yet another hijack on a non-i/p diary like the one on my Elie Wiesel dairy.

                                      Which turned this diary into a FUCKING TRAIN WRECK.

                                      Now you're here trying to prove your stupid uprate argument, which has NOTHING to do with me.

                                      So cool it.

                                      Just stop.

                                      Have you read about the Kurds and the Zoroastrians yet?

                                      by jhritz on Wed May 16, 2007 at 03:58:50 PM PDT

                                      [ Parent ]

                                      •  Your bizarre behavior in this thread stands... (6+ / 0-)

                                        ...as its own indictment. The only thing that's turning this diary into a train wreck is your inexplicable insistence on accusing one of Daily Kos's most able defenders of Israel of supporting Holocaust denial.

                                        "Well, yeah, the Constitution is worth it if you can succeed." Nancy Pelosi

                                        by StupidAsshole on Wed May 16, 2007 at 04:04:33 PM PDT

                                        [ Parent ]

                                        •  You know (0+ / 0-)

                                          there were plenty of other people on this diary that told him he was wrong:

                                          aA--the implication from londonbear that this whole diary is inaccurate and misleading and that the diarist is lying because we won't EVER know the real numbers sounds very David Irving-esque, and as has been noted, londonbear DEFINITELY has an agenda.  That's why you should remove your uprate.

                                          by GoldnI on Wed May 16, 2007 at 07:12:45 AM PDT

                                          Because, as someone above pointed out (4+ / 0-)

                                          this is the classic David Irving-type argument, "I'm not saying the holocaust didn't occur, I'm just talking about the numbers."  No.  Sorry.  Any opposition, as far as I'm concerned, about the holocaust (and certainly the language about "an agenda" qualifies) is holocaust denial.

                                          I don't want to over-simplify this, or to be glib, but really, when Carl is the only one who agrees with you, you should re-think this.

                                          Noone is saying you have to TR the comments, but they are most definitely not rec'able.

                                          by dfb1968 on Wed May 16, 2007 at 08:26:33 AM PDT

                                          aA, even I tr'ed this (1+ / 0-)

                                          I've used more TR's in this diary than in my history.  I don't think it needs to say it specifically in the FAQ.  Any form of holocaust denial is TR-worthy.  Hell, in some countries, it's a felony.

                                          by dfb1968 on Wed May 16, 2007 at 07:55:55 AM PDT

                                          It's indirect (4+ / 0-)

                                          What he is doing, however, is using a classic technique of holocaust deniers, which is obscuring the clear fact of it by the essentially technical argument over how many people were murdered. He also asserts, falsely and trollishly in my view, that the purpose of this release is the establishment of such an exact figure, and he speculates that an unnamed agenda is at play. This, in turn, is not supported by either the diary or the larger circumstances. Hence, he's trolling this diary; classical Holocaust denial is not required in this context.

                                          by MBNYC on Wed May 16, 2007 at 08:24:51 AM PDT

                                          Reason for my TR: (5+ / 0-)

                                          I would suggest that all these factors will mean that still only a broad spread of estimated deaths will be possible. The archive may limit the range but there will never be a definitive number. (Look at the problems of getting one for those killed in New York on 9/11.) Only popcorn journalists and motivated historians will give an unqualified figure. Anything that does not contain a phrase like "estimates vary between x and y" or "anything up to z million" should be examined for the agenda it is promoting.

                                          It's one thing to argue and discuss methodology and statistics.  I agree with you that Hitler and his cronies spent an inordinate amount of time creating "plausible deniability" by using euphemistic language to promote the death camps and killing.

                                          But I fail to see what your point is, as no one is claiming we are going to see an absolute number out of this archive.  And your notion of an "agenda" is extremely disturbing seeing as you do not explain this, nor do you explain why you are taking such an inordinate amount of time and space in your statistically unfounded analysis of the information reported by this diary.  What exactly are you trying to say here -- and why is what you are saying important for us to know in processing this further information about the Holocaust?

                                          by Nightprowlkitty on Wed May 16, 2007 at 08:05:20 AM PDT

                                          There are many more, but that is enough to disprove your disengenous attempt to lay it all on me.

                                          This was a hijack that was hidden until aA unhid it and then it was hijacked again by pro-P posters who couldn't resist bringing their I/P flame wars to a non-I/P diary.  

                                          Whatever aA's reason for doing it, he incurred plenty of questions about it from many more people than me, most of them pro-I side.  

                                          Your attempt to hijack this issue and make it about me doesn't change that, nor does it help your history of uprates of a recently banned user.

                                          Which, of course, is why you're trying to make an issue out of this.

                                          I don't have time for your manufactured issues or your need to make things all about you.

                                          End of thread.

                                          Have you read about the Kurds and the Zoroastrians yet?

                                          by jhritz on Wed May 16, 2007 at 06:02:26 PM PDT

                                          [ Parent ]

                                          •  Aren't you the person who threatened... (3+ / 0-)

                                            ...NPBeachFun in Czech, using an online translation program, and who then, when s/he called you on this with overwhelming evidence (from an Oxford University professor, no less) that you had done this, came up with some cock-and-bull story about having posted in some dialect that had subsequently been wiped out because it was indigenous to a region that was wiped out in the Holocaust? You apparently have no shame at all.

                                            Anyone who thinks jhritz is anything other than a troll, should check out the following diary for clear evidence of her dishonest, disruptive, and frankly disgusting (in that she appears to have no problem exploiting the Holocaust to cover up her trollishness) behavior: http://www.dailykos.com/...

                                            "Well, yeah, the Constitution is worth it if you can succeed." Nancy Pelosi

                                            by StupidAsshole on Wed May 16, 2007 at 06:41:20 PM PDT

                                            [ Parent ]

                                            •  Nope (0+ / 0-)

                                              and picking up his bizarre accusation has earned you a report to the admins.  What you call overwhelming evidence what one of the TWO personas on npbeachfun's ID disregarding my post that said it was an obscure dialect, which s/he did not inform the Oxford professor and, therefore, it was mistranslated.

                                              Calling me a troll and then posting his bizarre paranoid callout diary is the final straw.

                                              Reported.

                                              Now stop trolling my diary.

                                              Have you read about the Kurds and the Zoroastrians yet?

                                              by jhritz on Wed May 16, 2007 at 06:55:48 PM PDT

                                              [ Parent ]

                                              •  Anyone who reads the diary in the link... (3+ / 0-)

                                                ...that I provided will see you for what you are. The fact that you still persist in repeating such a shameful lie and in demeaning the memory of the Holocaust in an attempt to cover up your bizarre, disruptive and trollish behavior speaks for itself.

                                                "Well, yeah, the Constitution is worth it if you can succeed." Nancy Pelosi

                                                by StupidAsshole on Wed May 16, 2007 at 07:01:31 PM PDT

                                                [ Parent ]

                                                •  Why should they see (0+ / 0-)

                                                  who I am when it was written by someone else -- one of two users who share the same ID, materially misrepresents who they are and are known for some of the most bizarre behavior on this site?

                                                  I go back to my earlier assertion.  You are trolling here, trying to start a flame war over the uprates that took the hijacking on this diary out of hidden comments, in an attempt to make your earlier uprates of a newly banned user look justified.

                                                  This has been reported.  Let's leave it to the admins.

                                                  End of thread.

                                                  Have you read about the Kurds and the Zoroastrians yet?

                                                  by jhritz on Wed May 16, 2007 at 07:07:40 PM PDT

                                                  [ Parent ]

                  •  No. (5+ / 0-)

                    Recommended by:
                    Vico, Nightprowlkitty, MBNYC, GoldnI, jhritz

                    This is the standard I try to meet.

                    In this case you're trying to impose your standards on others.  You can decide on what grounds you'll troll rate a comment, and it sounds like your grounds agree with what Hunter laid out (and, coincidentally, with what I think is the appropriate use of troll ratings).

                    But it's also true that the proper use a Recommend, as stated in the rules, is to agree with a comment.

                    Obviously, with such a large community, you'll always be able to find enough people (in a one to four ratio) to unhide troll rated comments.  Therefore, if people feel free to uprate comments not because they agree with the comment but simply to negate the troll ratings of others, it destroys the entire troll rating system.

                    John McCain, you are _not_ my friend.

                    by LarryInNYC on Wed May 16, 2007 at 07:48:07 AM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

    •  ? (6+ / 0-)

      Anything that does not contain a phrase like "estimates vary between x and y" or "anything up to z million" should be examined for the agenda it is promoting.

      I'm sorry, which agenda exactly are you referring to?

      "There is a Providence that protects idiots, drunkards, children and the United States of America." - Otto Prince Bismarck

      by MBNYC on Wed May 16, 2007 at 05:19:34 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]