sealadaigh
Rookie
- Banned
- #41
Since you asked, Seal: I have NEVER once seen 'Holocaust revision' stop with the perfectly legitimate questioning of an actual 'exact' number.
i did not ask about "holocaust revision", nor did i mention it, nor am i even sure what it is.
i said the numbers didn't matter to me. i do not visit "holocaust revisionist" sites. they do not interest me. i am quite capable of thinking for myself, thank you.
i resent the implication of "since you asked" and followed by your long tirade that somehow i may have been or am now a proponent of such sites. i for the most part agree with your assessment of them.
Seal, you're resenting something I did not intend to suggest in any way. The 'implication' of 'since you asked' was simply and ONLY that you had asked very nicely - as opposed to some instances where people have demanded someone reply.
Why don't you try just simply asking me 'What did you mean by that?' next time, Seal? And I'll do the same for you?
To quote probably the finest human being who's ever crossed my path "There's always time to get angry, later".... An estimated 85% of 'issues' are due to simple misunderstandings. And the written word alone counts for only 7% of the content that a 'face-to-face' conversation would have.
then apparently i misunderstood, and i have no doubt most people would. i am also beginning to suspect your questionable editing of the posts in your responses.
her is my first post...
http://www.usmessageboard.com/5770003-post22.html
it is merely a responde to roudy and irose questioning their "meticulous" sources, which really aren't so meticulous at all or whatever, i say nothing at nall about holocaust revision or enial or aanything at all of that nature. i acknowledge , in fact, the tragedy of the holocaust.
your response...the "since you asked" response is below,,,
http://www.usmessageboard.com/5770184-post24.html
it is a long lecture almost exclusively on holocaust denial or revision and i think any resonable person would conclude that there is a clear implication there.
so, what did you mean by that, and what did you mean by that quote?
and what do you think of roudy's and iroses's contention that the meticulous records prove the 6,000,000, which seems contrary to "the holocaust project" site you link to and even contrary to your own words on the subject it seems. also, i should add, to you and hoss, that children are, at least when my son was in school and my nieces, and as far back to when i was in school, that 6,000,000 did die in the camps, as well by other people, mainly jewish people, in a similar forum, as little as two years ago. perhaps this new trend of balancing the books on the figures is a new type of revisionist history, don't you?
at any rate, i still do not think the numbers are important...and i feel a little dirty talking about the dead in such a way.