What do you see?

Announcements Photo Research
#121

That’s the heart of it.

But the supposed context usually comes from captions or news reports associated with a picture.

So, for example, we could have (an imaginary in this case) picture of a mass grave being excavated somewhere in Aceh in Indonesia which has the caption that it’s Christians or Muslims who are victims of the other lot during their long war. It’ll get a lot of publicity by the side which thinks it’s the victims.

But it could just be a mass grave of victims of the 2004 tsunami.

Or it could be something else.

Unless the photo is clearly about what it appears to depict, such as Japanese bayoneting bound prisoners in China, then we always need the context explained by a witness.

#122

I didn’t say I didn’t read them, I said that they were largely irrelevant…

And you used the term “responsibility” in the earlier post as if I had written them…

Yes, we do have photografs of the victims of RKKA. What is your point with this?
You are just like Panzercknacker - you are fighting with the ghosts of your own imagination.

The “ghosts of my imagination?” Like Panzerknacker? Moi?

Um, I’m actually just reacting to your frenzied attack. Most of my responses were the Chevran, not you specifically…

Yet, you seem to be abiding his strawman arguments…

So what? 70% is 70%. Basta. In the Litvonian caption it says “70-80%”.
The site author expressed his opinino clearly.

Do you?

The author, though a bit amateurish and emotional, would have good basis for saying so.

The quote is from Anthony Beevor’s book BTW…

http://books.guardian.co.uk/news/articles/0,,707928,00.html

They suck. They are just as much true as saying that “all Wehrmacht soldiers were baby killers”.

Um, no. That’s not what the caption said. Actually, saying “every Red Army soldier was a baby killer” would be the exact translation…

I have already answered on this. But I will repeat just for you:

“Wholesale”? Is it like on a large scale without careful discrimination or “sweeping: ignoring distinctions;”?
But that would be IMHO - “nearly 70% of German woman” and “They raped every German female from eight to 80”.
NO, I do not believe that.
I do believe that raping and looting by Soviet soldiers were a significant problem in WW2, though.

Yes but, the “sweeping distinctions” in this case come from historical resources. So the author in fact has something to back his statements up…

What “questions”?
I answered one in my post #102, see the quote above.
Do you have more questions for me?

Yes. What percentage of German women in the occupied zone do you think were raped?

#123

More info on the “eight to 80” quote courtesy of The Guardian:

Several German women recorded how Soviet servicewomen watched and laughed when they were raped. But some women were deeply shaken by what they witnessed in Germany. Natalya Gesse, a close friend of the scientist Andrei Sakharov, had observed the Red Army in action in 1945 as a Soviet war correspondent. “The Russian soldiers were raping every German female from eight to eighty,” she recounted later. “It was an army of rapists.”

#124

Agree…
But…
You have to realise that claming Irving as the excellent historians you couldn’t call his lates works just as the Conspiracy teories, right?

David Irving was a very good historian before he got into the Holocaust denial stuff. He might still be, and it might be that later generations of historians will decide that he was correct in some or all of his interpretations. I don’t think he is, but I haven’t done any of the research he has and my knowledge, like almost everybody else’s, comes entirely from secondary sources.

Actually he was one of the best expert in Third Reich history ( in one lewel as famouse british Trevor-Ruper). But he defenitelly was the superior expert in studiing of life of NAzy leaders.
One of his famouse book has been devoted to the leaders of Third reich ( i’ve forgot one of which)

If you were going to question App’s objectivity, I think you can find enough in his paper and his position in 1946 in a Catholic university. There is a lot of reliance on Catholic sources in his paper, without anything to back up the hearsay from his sources. He is clearly anti-Communist. But none of that necessarily undermines his account of Soviet and other Allied rapes. What would undermine it is showing that the sources he used are wrong or that the events he mentions didn’t occur.

That’s what i mean.
He is not lier, but he is …softly say …biased.
The biased peoples just make its own version of the matter.
I do not say they lie, but they …write not full of true.
For instance you know that some people in Japane consider their country as victim of unfair allies terror.The firebombing and a-bombing killed a lot of “innocent” peoples.
But ,… at the same time they speak nothink about Japane terror in China and Korea.
So does it meant that they speak the UNTRUE, not.
They right from their side.
But they are biased:)
So we can’t take their point as objective, right?

#125

Oh it so sad fact that b…h has not been imprisoned to the Auswitz
There she would watch the Army of rarpists :rolleyes:

#126

:smiley:
The one more reason why i dislike the western revisionists : they all just are the sick rusophobians;)
The App definitely one of them:)
But just look for that

…As early as 1933, before Hitler had harmed a single Jew, an International Jewish Boycott Conference, presided over by Samuel Untermeyer, the same who had paid Wilson $40,000 to appoint Brandeis Supreme Court justice in 1916, declared a crippling boycott on the Third Reich, while it was still in the throes of the inhuman reparations imposed at Versailles

look nice is it not?:smiley:
Nick should like it:)

#127

There is not second Holocaust- it was just a SINGLE Nick.
the holocaust of 30+ mln of peoples of Europe during the WW2.
And to separate from Peoples Holocaust - the “special” jewish Holocaust - this is act of racism and simply idiotism ( this make harm firstly for the jews)

#128

Yes …again.
The first man in the word was a Jew ( according Bible at least)
So the mankind has started its life from a Jew …again and again.:slight_smile:
BTW I.Erenburg NEVER wrote about GErmans soldiers in his famouse “Kill the Germans”, he wrote about any Germans at all :rolleyes:
So you are wrong here. Western Revisionist very like to post his verse as the “proof” of Evil’s aims of Soviet army:)
And about those peoples who had inspired them…of one sertain Ethnic group:)

You’re grasping at straws here and taking this way off topic with your “evil Western Allies” crap, again…

But you still have not been tired by your obsessive idea of “Evil Red Army soldiers”, right?
So why we should not compare the things?eh

I warn you…

Oh terrible and mighty Nickdfresh:)

#129

Um, actually they’re mostly Holocaust deniers of the Irving and Faurisson vein…

#130

True enough, but it is second only in mass killings of prisoners…

#131

Meh, are you finished with your Russophobian victim persecution rant yet? :frowning:

#132

So tipical…when one dont agree with you both is colaborating with Doktor Goebbels.

Yes, we do have photografs of the victims of RKKA. What is your point with this?
You are just like Panzercknacker - you are fighting with the ghosts of your own imagination.

Nick or me does not matter, the fact is that everybody is aware of your intentions you stalinist snake.

You want to do a really serious contribution to our forum?
Then please leave, we dont need that kind of revisionist gargabe, leave and dont forget to take your scumbag nazi jewish hater southern russian friend with you !!

#133

That was a most informative and helpful contribution to the discussion. :rolleyes:

#134

I doubt that this senseless combination of words even could look like an “informative post”.
the “stalinist snake…nazy jewish hater”:slight_smile:
The tupical retired Latinos intenet-dictator :rolleyes:

#135

I naturaly can not speak about “everybody”, but specificly “your psychoanalytic skill sucks, my friend”. That we know for sure.

you stalinist snake.

Falkland war argentinian crimes denier… :wink:

You want to do a really serious contribution to our forum?

Yes! Yes! Tell me what to do, my glorious master! Please! Teach me!

Then please leave, we dont need that kind of revisionist gargabe, leave and dont forget to take your scumbag nazi jewish hater southern russian friend with you !!

Arrhhh… Revisionism - the last escape in absens of arguments. Well done!

Yet I refuse to dislike you. Panzeknacker, listen to me: There is nothing you can say to make me dislike you!!!

#136

We need to stay away from personal insults in this discussion…

#137

Getting back to the debate about the reliability of photographs and their captions as historical evidence, here is conclusive proof that revisionists use them shamelessly to ‘prove’ events that never happened, such as the Irish Potato Famine. :smiley:

This photograph is labelled on the website Interpreting The Irish Famine, 1846-1850, as “A family evicted by their landlords” (Source: Lawrence Collection, National Library of Ireland). However, when you look at it, how can you really tell that that’s what’s happening? They could be just out for a walk. Or perhaps the police are there to arrest them for a perfectly legitimate criminal offence. Or it could have been staged - doesn’t it look like they’re posing? And if it was really an eviction, then why would it have been photographed? This picture obviously cannot serve as proof that the alleged famine happened. Mislabelling of photographs such as this one is a central tenet of the Potato Hoax.
http://www.revisionism.nl/Potato/The-Mad-Revisionist.htm

#138

On my question: “The site where this images are located says: … Do You agree with these statements?”
You replied: “Statements? I was just looking at the photos…”

I got the impression that you either did not read them or did not want to discuss them. But since I did not beleive you would link a photograph without proper chek on what is actually depicted I assumed you did not want to talk about them (statements = captions = photo descriptions).

The “ghosts of my imagination?” Like Panzerknacker? Moi?

Toi, toi, mon amie!
Toi et les fantôme de ton imagination débridée. :slight_smile:

Um, I’m actually just reacting to your frenzied attack. Most of my responses were the Chevran, not you specifically…

I really do not understand what kind of “frenzied attack” of mine you are talking about.
I opened the thread. I mostly talked to Rising Sun, you to Chevan. Then you and I exchanged a couple of post (#64, #65, #68) about child pornography (really relevant topic in this thread!).
Then in the post #70 you linked to the known victim photografs. I went to see them and looked on the site where they are located to see more about the context (Hello Rising Sun!). SO you know what I read there. And I have seen similar statements before many times.
So since you linked to the photos I thought it would be reasonable to ask about your opinion on their presentation on the mentioned site (post #76). You replied in post #80: “Statements? …”. I explained what statements in post #88 and asked “What do you think about them?”.
In post #98 you said “The statements are poorly worded”. In the same post you asked me: “Egorka, do you believe that the whole sale rape of much of the German female population by the Red Army was a significant problem in WWII? Or do you not?”.
I replied to you in the post #102. First I said it was rediculous to imply poor wording because the intended message was carried perfectly to the reader. The site author do in fact mean 70% raped (or in Litvonian lag. - 70-80%). And the I answered to your second question about my personal beleive on this matter.
And so our conversation continued…

What “frenziet attack”?

Yet, you seem to be abiding his strawman arguments…

I will tell you a secret… schhhh… I am not really following your conversation with Chevan. I simply do not have time to read all of the posts.

The author, though a bit amateurish and emotional, would have good basis for saying so.

Maybe, but most people do not think like you do.
In fact, this “70-80%”, “all women” and “gang of rapists” is becoming main stream. Among others thanks to sites like that.

The quote is from Anthony Beevor’s book BTW…
http://books.guardian.co.uk/news/articles/0,,707928,00.html

I know, Il inked to that article in the post #14.

Um, no. That’s not what the caption said. Actually, saying “every Red Army soldier was a baby killer” would be the exact translation…

Umm. Ok. What about these options:
[ul]
[li]German Wehrmacht lead by nazists have raped nearly 70% of Soviet woman. Girls who resisted where killed. No one was sentenced or suited for this crimes.[/li][li]German Wehrmacht lead by nazists have killed nearly 70% of Soviet men. No one was sentenced or suited for this crimes.[/li][li]German Wehrmacht lead by nazists have killed nearly 70% of Soviet babies. No ne was sentenced or suited for this crimes.[/li][li]Nazist encouraged Wehrmacht soldiers to rape women. All girls who resisted have been shot.[/li][li]Nazist encouraged Wehrmacht soldiers to kill babies.[/li][/ul]

Yes but, the “sweeping distinctions” in this case come from historical resources. So the author in fact has something to back his statements up…

Yes. Back the facts and photodocuments. Not the statements about “70-80%”.

Yes. What percentage of German women in the occupied zone do you think were raped?

Well, as you can imagine I do not know the number. I can only speculate. There can be a couple different approaches to this. Lets try… very rougly.

First approach:
85 million - the total german population in Germany by april 1939.
43,35 million - Lets say women of all the ages constitute 51% of population.
17,34 million - women of all the ages in Soviet occupation zone, i.t. 40% of total (as the Germans tend to escape to the western sector).
13,872 million women - German women in Soviet zone aged 15-60 y.o., i.e. 80%(?) of prior number.

So 70% raped women whould be app. 9,7 million. Right?
So we already have a discrepancy woth Beevor’s statement. A rather big discrepancy.
What do you think on this?

Second approach:
How many rapists there were in RKKA? What is the rapists penetration ratio in the troops?
Lets try to look at it. I estimate there were stationed 5 million Soviet troops in Europe (I am not 100% sure about the number though right now).
1% - 50.000 rape cases
5% - 250.000 rape cases
10% - 500.000 rape cases
15% - 750.000 rape cases

You could argue “once a rapist - multiple rapist”.
If we take in average a rapist would comit 3 assults against women:
1% - 150.000 rape cases
5% - 750.000 rape cases
10% - 1.500.000 rape cases
15% - 2.250.000 rape cases

My opinion is that the rapist penetration would be arount 1%-4%. Which leads us in the worst case (4%, avg. 3 times) to 650.000 rape cases.
That could be considered as upper bound of my estimate.
Really hardly “70%-80%”.

#139

What’s wrong with these estimates, from the Guardan article in Nick’s post at #123?

Estimates of rape victims from the city’s two main hospitals ranged from 95,000 to 130,000. One doctor deduced that out of approximately 100,000 women raped in the city, some 10,000 died as a result, mostly from suicide. The death rate was thought to have been much higher among the 1.4 million estimated victims in East Prussia, Pomerania and Silesia. Altogether at least two million German women are thought to have been raped, and a substantial minority, if not a majority, appear to have suffered multiple rape.
http://books.guardian.co.uk/news/articles/0,,707928,00.html

IIRC Berlin’s female population in 1945 was about 2,000,000, which gives about 5% as victims treated in hospitals. Western figures for many decades indicate that perhaps 1 in 10 rapes are reported in Western societies, which if applied to Berlin, even without the abnormal and lawless aspects applying there, would mean a number of rapes equivalent to about half of the female population in Berlin. Given the lack of action on many reports of rape in Berlin, the figures and percentages were probably rather higher.

#140

Having spent the past hour watching a documentary about the rape of Nanking, with nauseating recollections from aged former Japanese soldiers calmly and even laughingly recounting raping and killing Chinese with less feeling than I’d have for hitting a fly with fly spray, I don’t think that abstract discussions about exactly how many or what percentage of women were raped in Germany or anywhere else really matter, any more than it matters whether six or five or three of ten million Jews or any other group were exterminated by the Nazis or anyone else.

Once it’s established that there was a policy or an attitude which allowed such things on a large scale, then the people who did it and the nation which allowed it deserve condemnation for allowing it.

And nations which still can’t admit the past deserve even more condemnation.