|
|
Post by been_there on Oct 10, 2022 16:51:35 GMT
Every prisoner world wide has their property removed and replaced with prison garb. I should imagine most of this stuff from the Jews would have been burned. Those with walking sticks would have been aktioned. Which makes been-there's attempt to equate Germans interred by the British with Jews imprisoned by the Nazis even more of a failure. What a dishonest ignoramus you are. I never โattempted to equateโ anything. I tried to get YOU to put your cultish, cherished holyhoax belief system into its proper historical and social context. But I definitely failed in that. You couldnโt even understand the question/challenge put you, let alone understand why it is relevant. ๐๐คช Plus, as YOU are the only person who is denying anything here, this makes you the genuine โdenierโ. |
|
Nessie
๐ฆ
๐๐๐ง๐๐ซ๐๐๐ข๐ฅ๐ข๐ฌ ๐ฎ๐ฑ๐ท๐๐ฑ๐ถ๐ฐ๐ฎ๐๐ผ๐ฟ (Nessies forum)
Posts: 4,828
|
Post by Nessie on Oct 10, 2022 18:42:47 GMT
Which makes been-there's attempt to equate Germans interred by the British with Jews imprisoned by the Nazis even more of a failure. What a dishonest ignoramus you are. I never โattempted to equateโ anything. I tried to get YOU to put your cultish, cherished holyhoax belief system into its proper historical and social context. But I definitely failed in that. When you said "I wonder if there is someone here who can instead of looking for and interpreting (misinterpreting?) ANY โevidenceโ to fit a cherished, pre-concieved, cultish belief-system can do research and find out what happened to the possessions of all or any of the people arrested, transported and then incarcerated in British and American concentration camps." you were expecting/hoping that evidence would appear that the British had been stealing off those they interred. It has clearly really annoyed you that the evidence is they treated the internees with respect and did not steal anything. You flipped between property and possessions. I explained that property includes everything from clothes to homes and businesses, whereas possessions would apply more to personal items. I evidence that internees kept their possessions, and you cherry picked some photos of Jews who still had their possessions. I needed to explain, yet again, that had used a fallacy and there are many more photos of Jews in prison uniform with no possessions. What am I denying that makes me a denier? Does denying the British stole internee possessions make me a denier? You have yet again dodged discussing the process on arrival at a Nazi camp. It is obviously too much for you to discuss what thieves the Nazis were and the context of that thievery. The British did not steal from the internees, because they had no intentions of killing them. The Nazis stole from the Jews, because they knew many were going to die. |
|
nazgul
๐ต๏ธ
๐ฐ๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐ ๐๐๐ ๐ฒ๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐
Posts: 1,190 
|
Post by nazgul on Oct 11, 2022 1:37:39 GMT
It has clearly really annoyed you that the evidence is they treated the internees with respect and did not steal anything. The British did not steal from the internees, because they had no intentions of killing them. The Nazis stole from the Jews, because they knew many were going to die. Lets do a few quotes to put aside your unfailing nonsense. From the same link: Camp residents lost some $400 million in property during their incarceration. Congress provided $38 million in reparations in 1948. and finally for now. |
|
Nessie
๐ฆ
๐๐๐ง๐๐ซ๐๐๐ข๐ฅ๐ข๐ฌ ๐ฎ๐ฑ๐ท๐๐ฑ๐ถ๐ฐ๐ฎ๐๐ผ๐ฟ (Nessies forum)
Posts: 4,828
|
Post by Nessie on Oct 11, 2022 8:30:01 GMT
It has clearly really annoyed you that the evidence is they treated the internees with respect and did not steal anything. The British did not steal from the internees, because they had no intentions of killing them. The Nazis stole from the Jews, because they knew many were going to die. Lets do a few quotes to put aside your unfailing nonsense. From the same link: Camp residents lost some $400 million in property during their incarceration. Congress provided $38 million in reparations in 1948. and finally for now. OK, you have shown me to be likely wrong. The Americans did seize interred Japanese owned property and they largely did not get it back, or compensation for it. In WWI, the Canadian government did the same to Ukrainians living in Canada. The article about the British is behind a paywall. |
|
nazgul
๐ต๏ธ
๐ฐ๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐ ๐๐๐ ๐ฒ๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐
Posts: 1,190
|
Post by nazgul on Oct 11, 2022 8:34:06 GMT
OK, you have shown me to be likely wrong. The Americans did seize interred Japanese owned property and they largely did not get it back, or compensation for it. In WWI, the Canadian government did the same to Ukrainians living in Canada. The article about the British is behind a paywall. The article about the British is just internet, not sure why you cannot get it. Thank you for your acknowledgement of error. Lets move on.  |
|
Nessie
๐ฆ
๐๐๐ง๐๐ซ๐๐๐ข๐ฅ๐ข๐ฌ ๐ฎ๐ฑ๐ท๐๐ฑ๐ถ๐ฐ๐ฎ๐๐ผ๐ฟ (Nessies forum)
Posts: 4,828
|
Post by Nessie on Oct 11, 2022 9:51:41 GMT
OK, you have shown me to be likely wrong. The Americans did seize interred Japanese owned property and they largely did not get it back, or compensation for it. In WWI, the Canadian government did the same to Ukrainians living in Canada. The article about the British is behind a paywall. The article about the British is just internet, not sure why you cannot get it. Thank you for your acknowledgement of error. Lets move on.
The NYT will not let me read any more articles until I pay for a full year's subscription. Regarding the claim "Britain published a list today of 25,000 foreigners and businesses whose assets it confiscated in World War II.", that is just a proportion of those classified as enemy aliens;
"By February 1940 nearly all the tribunals had completed their work assessing some 73,000 cases."
By May 1940, the majority had been interred, even the "class C" low risk people. Were they the people whose businesses and assets were confiscated? Or was it, as the quote suggests, foreigners and their assests, so it would be German owned businesses that operated in the UK.
|
|
nazgul
๐ต๏ธ
๐ฐ๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐ ๐๐๐ ๐ฒ๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐
Posts: 1,190
|
Post by nazgul on Oct 11, 2022 10:03:32 GMT
. Were they the people whose businesses and assets were confiscated? Or was it, as the quote suggests, foreigners and their assests, so it would be German owned businesses that operated in the UK. In Great Britain in the Second World War, all male 'enemy aliens' over the age of sixteen were interned. Enemy aliens by definition means they are classed as foreigners. This included everyone including businesses. The internment camps were konzentrationslager by a different name. |
|
Nessie
๐ฆ
๐๐๐ง๐๐ซ๐๐๐ข๐ฅ๐ข๐ฌ ๐ฎ๐ฑ๐ท๐๐ฑ๐ถ๐ฐ๐ฎ๐๐ผ๐ฟ (Nessies forum)
Posts: 4,828
|
Post by Nessie on Oct 11, 2022 10:26:19 GMT
. Were they the people whose businesses and assets were confiscated? Or was it, as the quote suggests, foreigners and their assests, so it would be German owned businesses that operated in the UK. In Great Britain in the Second World War, all male 'enemy aliens' over the age of sixteen were interned. Enemy aliens by definition means they are classed as foreigners. This included everyone including businesses. The internment camps were konzentrationslager by a different name. You are dodging the question. Was the property the British confiscated foreign owned, as the article you quote suggests, or was it property owned by those who were interred?
An enemy alien is not necessarily a foreigner, as a German wife of a British person would be registered as an alien. It is people like that, which explains why the vast majority of people the British interred had been released by 1942.
Furthermore, you are dodging that is very different to how the Nazis treated the Jews. They had everything stolen from them, they were expected to work as slaves, few, if any got released and allowed to return home and at the end of the war, many were missing and they never returned home. That fits with the evidence of mass murder by the Nazis.
|
|
nazgul
๐ต๏ธ
๐ฐ๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐ ๐๐๐ ๐ฒ๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐
Posts: 1,190
|
Post by nazgul on Oct 11, 2022 10:37:47 GMT
An enemy alien is not necessarily a foreigner, as a German wife of a British person would be registered as an alien. It is people like that, which explains why the vast majority of people the British interred had been released by 1942. Furthermore, you are dodging that is very different to how the Nazis treated the Jews. They had everything stolen from them, they were expected to work as slaves, few, if any got released and allowed to return home and at the end of the war, many were missing and they never returned home. That fits with the evidence of mass murder by the Nazis. No one dodge a question that was never asked or inferred. Facts were given, face them head on. The Jewish Labourers were paid; this has been discussed previously and yet you bring it up again as a new thought. There is a reason why many interned were released. |
|
Nessie
๐ฆ
๐๐๐ง๐๐ซ๐๐๐ข๐ฅ๐ข๐ฌ ๐ฎ๐ฑ๐ท๐๐ฑ๐ถ๐ฐ๐ฎ๐๐ผ๐ฟ (Nessies forum)
Posts: 4,828
|
Post by Nessie on Oct 11, 2022 15:46:28 GMT
An enemy alien is not necessarily a foreigner, as a German wife of a British person would be registered as an alien. It is people like that, which explains why the vast majority of people the British interred had been released by 1942. Furthermore, you are dodging that is very different to how the Nazis treated the Jews. They had everything stolen from them, they were expected to work as slaves, few, if any got released and allowed to return home and at the end of the war, many were missing and they never returned home. That fits with the evidence of mass murder by the Nazis. No one dodge a question that was never asked or inferred. Describe the process when Jews arrived at a camp. How many were paid? What were they paid? How many Jews were released by the Nazis? |
|
Nessie
๐ฆ
๐๐๐ง๐๐ซ๐๐๐ข๐ฅ๐ข๐ฌ ๐ฎ๐ฑ๐ท๐๐ฑ๐ถ๐ฐ๐ฎ๐๐ผ๐ฟ (Nessies forum)
Posts: 4,828
|
Post by Nessie on Oct 11, 2022 15:53:39 GMT
Nazgul, regarding this
"Britain published a list today of 25,000 foreigners and businesses whose assets it confiscated in World War II. Although most people on the list were said to be Nazi sympathizers, an unknown number were victims."
What does the article say about the "foreigners and businesses", who were they? Regarding most of them being Nazi sympathisers, it is hardly surprising that the British would confiscate their property, in the same way the Nazis confiscated Jewish property, as they were seen as an enemy.
The difference is that the British were not confiscating underwear and gold from teeth, which the Nazis were.
|
|
nazgul
๐ต๏ธ
๐ฐ๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐ ๐๐๐ ๐ฒ๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐
Posts: 1,190
|
Post by nazgul on Oct 11, 2022 19:29:43 GMT
The difference is that the British were not confiscating underwear and gold from teeth, which the Nazis were. Emotional clap trap. Of course the gold was recycled like it is today from mobile phones. |
|
|
|
Post by been_there on Oct 12, 2022 3:25:07 GMT
OK, you have shown me to be likely wrong... Thank you for your acknowledgement of error. Lets move on. No, I suggest letโs not move on. ๐ This person was making bold but false statements and deriding others based on wilful ignorance. She/he was invited/challenged to research something and she/he refused but insisted she/he knew the answer anyway. Now that you have conclusively proved her/his dishonesty on one aspect of the question this genuine โfilthy liarโ concedes only that she/he might be wrong. Again proving this is NOT a person interested in a genuine, fair, honest dialogue/discussion/debate about the Jooish experience during WW2. This discussion started with her/his racist abuse of all adult Germans alive in the 30s-40s based on the deceitful cult-belief called โthe holocaustโ. She/he then doubled-down and asserted ridiculously illogical conclusions based on the preposterous idea that underpants and goldteeth are indispensable for human survival. The whole point on getting him/her to investigate what happened to victims of the exact same policy in USA and Britain of potential 5th-columnists was to get her/him to discover for herself. That being because she/he will not accept correction from anyone other than a fellow true-believer. If this were a genuine discussion of โtheft of propertyโ during WW2, then this dishonest person would have looked for the type of info that you have provided. That this person refuses to do that, and only admits possible error when she is caught lying, demonstrates that belief in the holyhoax requires an attitude of stubborn, dishonest self-delusion + denial of factual and historical reality |
|
nazgul
๐ต๏ธ
๐ฐ๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐ ๐๐๐ ๐ฒ๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐
Posts: 1,190
|
Post by nazgul on Oct 12, 2022 4:36:52 GMT
Suggestions the British were stealing the property of those who they interred, have failed due to a lack of evidence. The difference is that the British were not confiscating underwear and gold from teeth, which the Nazis were. Those Nazi sympathizers were interned for the most part. MI5 wanted to intern Baronet Moseley; it was only his title that saved him. Extraction of minerals from the dead is done today. If this process is moral now, it was moral back then. BT is correct, you do not research before mouthing off. Yet you claim to be trained as a historian. |
|
Nessie
๐ฆ
๐๐๐ง๐๐ซ๐๐๐ข๐ฅ๐ข๐ฌ ๐ฎ๐ฑ๐ท๐๐ฑ๐ถ๐ฐ๐ฎ๐๐ผ๐ฟ (Nessies forum)
Posts: 4,828
|
Post by Nessie on Oct 12, 2022 7:18:08 GMT
The difference is that the British were not confiscating underwear and gold from teeth, which the Nazis were. Emotional clap trap. Of course the gold was recycled like it is today from mobile phones. The Frank document corroborates witness claims of the dead having their gold teeth removed. |
|
