Politics & Stuff

[Stingray 9,441]

[Stingray 9,441]

Its funny you say that. It never seemed right, the soldier looking down the sight, to shoot something a few feet away. Fake is it ?

It is a fake, a very famous one ......

[Clevemayer 764]

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/aug/11/yazidis-tormented-fears-for-women-girls-kidnapped-sinjar-isis-slaves

[iseah100 5,612]

Ferguson, Missouri.

http://wapo.st/1sXk4Sj

The Civil Rights Act is 50 years old. These two pictures were taken 50 years apart. Behold our progress.

Mam throwing tear back at Police.

American journalists arrested in McDonald’s while covering protests against killing of unarmed teen: http://cnn.it/1uvjZHz

http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/A00685n

Wtf.

[TorontoChelsea 4,064]

Its funny you say that. It never seemed right, the soldier looking down the sight, to shoot something a few feet away. Fake is it ?

Nope. It's very real and there is zero historical doubt about that whatsoever (in fact, the picture is taken from a Nazi report from Stroop to Himmler-have a look at the pictures here.-http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Stroop_Report#Photographs_from_the_Stroop_Report

I have never even heard anyone pretend it's fake because it's so well historically documented. This is some disgusting shit which shows the exact opposite of what you are trying to prove. How propaganda spread by racists on the internet turns into conspiracy theories which people believe despite the complete absence of any proof, Also, the photo in Ukraine above shows a soldier shooting a bunch of Jewish civilians. Making the photo bigger does nothing at all just changes the composition of the photo. The Jews in front were murdered and now the soldier is about to shoot the mother and child. How does that change the context at all? Trying to pretend there is some lie here is fucking disgusting.

[Fulham Broadway 17,299]

Nope. It's very real and there is zero historical doubt about that whatsoever (in fact, the picture is taken from a Nazi report from Stroop to Himmler-have a look at the pictures here.-http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Stroop_Report#Photographs_from_the_Stroop_Report

I have never even heard anyone pretend it's fake because it's so well historically documented. This is some disgusting shit which shows the exact opposite of what you are trying to prove. How propaganda spread by racists on the internet turns into conspiracy theories which people believe despite the complete absence of any proof, Also, the photo in Ukraine above shows a soldier shooting a bunch of Jewish civilians. Making the photo bigger does nothing at all just changes the composition of the photo. The Jews in front were murdered and now the soldier is about to shoot the mother and child. How does that change the context at all? Trying to pretend there is some lie here is fucking disgusting.

Now I dont know what to believe. Stingray said its a renowned fake.

[TorontoChelsea 4,064]

Now I dont know what to believe. Stingray said its a renowned fake.

Stingray is an idiot who has no idea what he's talking about at all and just collects little bits from websites he likes and tries to pretend that out of context quotes and conspiracy theories make you an expert in a field. (A problem of the internet. Lots of access to information is great but lots of access to misinformation is bad.) I am an actual historian who studied history in a top university. Anyway, it doesn't matter, you don't have to be a historian, just google Stroop report and you will see any single historically reliable source will have it as real and lots of details.

Here it is in the Auschwitz website-

http://www.auschwitz.dk/Stroop.htm

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Stroop_Report

Look at a the references at the bottom. Now, try to find a single legit source that questions the authenticity. I looked up the fake claims because I couldn't imagine they existed (although racism knows no ends) The people who claim it is a fake, are the Stormfront crowd (KKK)

[Fulham Broadway 17,299]

Stingray is an idiot who has no idea what he's talking about at all and just collects little bits from websites he likes and tries to pretend that out of context quotes and conspiracy theories make you an expert in a field. (A problem of the internet. Lots of access to information is great but lots of access to misinformation is bad.) I am an actual historian who studied history in a top university. Anyway, it doesn't matter, you don't have to be a historian, just google Stroop report and you will see any single historically reliable source will have it as real and lots of details.

Here it is in the Auschwitz website-

http://www.auschwitz.dk/Stroop.htm

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Stroop_Report

Look at a the references at the bottom. Now, try to find a single legit source that questions the authenticity. I looked up the fake claims because I couldn't imagine they existed (although racism knows no ends) The people who claim it is a fake, are the Stormfront crowd (KKK)

Stormfront are neo nazi fuckwits. Mind yiu that auschwitz site you post a link for is hardly a bastion of academic research is it ? Any site that has pop ups about making "easy money" is dodgy in terms of historical reference, especially when the subject is Auschwitz.

OK. Well lets not get personal towards Stingray, and stick to the facts. Pretty sure he said his folks were in the camps, so I doubt vety much hes racist

[Stingray 9,441]

Stingray is an idiot who has no idea what he's talking about at all and just collects little bits from websites he likes and tries to pretend that out of context quotes and conspiracy theories make you an expert in a field. (A problem of the internet. Lots of access to information is great but lots of access to misinformation is bad.) I am an actual historian who studied history in a top university. Anyway, it doesn't matter, you don't have to be a historian, just google Stroop report and you will see any single historically reliable source will have it as real and lots of details.

Here it is in the Auschwitz website-

http://www.auschwitz.dk/Stroop.htm

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Stroop_Report

Look at a the references at the bottom. Now, try to find a single legit source that questions the authenticity. I looked up the fake claims because I couldn't imagine they existed (although racism knows no ends) The people who claim it is a fake, are the Stormfront crowd (KKK)

Excuse me .... This info comes from belgian historian on the holocaust prof. Gie Vandenberghe. It is a pic taken completely out of context. It has appeared in a book 'The exploitation of the Holocaust'. The Central thesis was that the manipulation of these stills actually gave holocaust deniers weapons. Completely unnecessary considering the reality of the Shoah is bad enough without manipulating material.

Also fuck you for calling me an idiot. Ill send you my phd.

[TorontoChelsea 4,064]

Excuse me .... This info comes from belgian foremost historian on the holocaust prof. Gie Vandenbergh. It is a pic taken completely out of context. It has appeltje in a book 'The exploitation of the Holocaust'.

Also fuck you for calling me an idiot. Ill send you my phd.

lol.Maybe you have a PHD but you are still an idiot or maybe just completely dishonest. Gie Van den Berghe is a very minor writer and I have never heard of him (nor is his Wiki page translated into any language) in the world of Holocaust studies, he is an ant. This is exactly what is wrong with people like you pretending to be historians. There are literally thousands of holocaust historians and what percentage believes that these photographs are not legit? 1 out of thousands? 2? Why would you believe a tiny minority of thinkers unless you wanted to. It's because people like you aren't interested in the truth, you are interested in justifying your worldview so you find one minor writer who backs you up and then pretend like it's the truth. You're like a climate change denier-instead of believing the 97%+ of scientists, finding the handful that agree with what you already believe. And anyway, if he's even a historian, show me the passage where he calls the Stroop Report fake because if he says that like you said he's not even a minor historian, he's a flat-out liar. ((you said "well known fake" which is even a bigger lie,)

[Stingray 9,441]

lol.Maybe you have a PHD but you are still an idiot or maybe just completely dishonest. Gie Van den Berghe is a very minor writer and I have never heard of him (nor is his Wiki page translated into any language) in the world of Holocaust studies, he is an ant. This is exactly what is wrong with people like you pretending to be historians. There are literally thousands of holocaust historians and what percentage believes that these photographs are not legit? 1 out of thousands? 2? Why would you believe a tiny minority of thinkers unless you wanted to. It's because people like you aren't interested in the truth, you are interested in justifying your worldview so you find one minor writer who backs you up and then pretend like it's the truth. You're like a climate change denier-instead of believing the 97%+ of scientists, finding the handful that agree with what you already believe. And anyway, if he's even a historian, show me the passage where he calls the Stroop Report fake because if he says that like you said he's not even a minor historian, he's a flat-out liar. ((you said "well known fake" which is even a bigger lie,)

Again the insults. Second time. Reread my argument. I said nothing about the Stroop report. I meant those pics are taking out of context and were manipulated/cropped to change their meaning. Nothing more.

So get off of your high horse and lose the superior tone. Also, nice going on the authority argument. I guess thats how you do your 'science'.

[Rmpr 8,977]

Hey guys, please try to discuss your opinions without insulting other member's point of view. This is for everyone!

Thanks,

Rmpr

[TorontoChelsea 4,064]

Again the insults. Second time. Reread my argument. I said nothing about the Stroop report. I said those pics are taking out of context and were manipulated/cropped to change their meaning. Nothing more.

So get off of your high horse and lose the superior tone.

"It is a fake, a very famous one ...... "

That's what you said. That is not even close to, "those pics were taken out of context" even though that is also a lie or at least an exaggeration They are pictures of persecution of Jews taken during the Holocaust. That's pretty much bang on the nose context-wise. Every photo, is by definition taken out of context because you can't see the context. It's a still image. Every picture is a half-truth but these photos do convey overall truth and are certainly not faked like you offensively and ridiculously claimed.

[BlueLion. 21,491]

Have I been sent off yet? Not realistic enough if I haven't had at least three red cards already.

[Stingray 9,441]

Ok,, let's think this through. Fake may have been a too strong wording (im not a native speaker), lets bring it to fake use (we call it 'oneigenlijk gebruik' which really doesn't translate in English. fake use would come closest, so i used the word fake). My main source for this is Susan Sontag, 'On Photography', in Silvers, Robert (ed.) The First Anthology. 30 Years of The New York Review of Books, New York, 1993 But then again you make a very similar sin when starting like this:

Stingray is an idiot who has no idea what he's talking about at all and just collects little bits from websites he likes and tries to pretend that out of context quotes and conspiracy theories make you an expert in a field. (A problem of the internet. Lots of access to information is great but lots of access to misinformation is bad.) I am an actual historian who studied history in a top university. Anyway, it doesn't matter, you don't have to be a historian, just google Stroop report and you will see any single historically reliable source will have it as real and lots of details.

Here it is in the Auschwitz website-

http://www.auschwitz.dk/Stroop.htm

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Stroop_Report

Look at a the references at the bottom. Now, try to find a single legit source that questions the authenticity. I looked up the fake claims because I couldn't imagine they existed (although racism knows no ends) The people who claim it is a fake, are the Stormfront crowd (KKK)

After my next posts you ditch that argument and you minimize my sources

Gie Van den Berghe is a very minor writer and I have never heard of him (nor is his Wiki page translated into any language) in the world of Holocaust studies, he is an ant. This is exactly what is wrong with people like you pretending to be historians.

Then you ease it up a little more

Every picture is a half-truth but these photos do convey overall truth and are certainly not faked like you offensively and ridiculously claimed.

So don't attack me and call me an idiot who only looks for internet scraps, because that is simply a lie. Anyway, how can you know that. I guess using too strong wording is NOT only my sin, right? Let's take it from the beginning, because just like with Choulo and the end of the Israel debate, where you - again - jumped on the wagon very soon with very firm accusations, I believe you did with mine.

1. The use of your sources yourself: you revert to websites without any acclaim yourself to 'debunk' my thesis. While I at least had an academic (albeit Belgian source) while I recall the same stipulation about the use of 'changed' photo material In Saul Friedländer.

2. My thesis was that those pics are indeed pics of actual events (in Warschau and the other in Ivangorod) but they are changed to better fit a narrative - the narrative that better explained the Holocaust: that every german is a willing killing machine, even for children. You might think I am being moronic again, but alas I am not.

E.g. In the museum for deportation and resistance in Mechelen, here in Belgium that explicitly uses that HALF pic as its main image during the exposition. When asked why by historians, the answer is that the image in close up is much stronger and better represents the german min set at the time (own correspondence of G. Vandenberghe with the museum).

E.G. 2: Even in Goldhagens 'willing executioners' book, the pic is cropped - de facto turning into a individualistic zoom picture focussing on a child being protected by a mother while adding the subscript 'In front of a photographer a German soldier takes aim...'(is it a mother? can you actually tell that?) Goldhagen was criticized on this point but deliberately left it unchanged in other editions. You would not suspect this from a historian. Why did he do this if 'historical correctness' is his main concern? To make sure very one is even more convinced of the atrocities of the holocaust?

Alas, these practices had the opposite effect - and this was my entire point. Holocaust deniers have very willingly used these altered pictures to make a case AGAINST the holocaust. An example:

By the 'oneigenlijke gebruik' of the photo it made people like Faurisson the Holocaust denier it is actually a picture from 1941 and there are polish people on it, not jews. He also adds that the germans are not trying to shoot the people but instead are protecting them. I'll see in advance, before you jump on you high horse, that I resent these tactics. That is exactly why I feel it utterly unnecessary to use these pics in the WRONG way because they look more dramatically/iconic altered, because it gives the holocaust deniers exactly what they need.

The other picture, the boy in Warschau, was also zoomed in. Suddenly you when you unzoom you see it in the context of people being deported away to Treblinka (they even have their backs with them - so they must have believed there was still hope). That iconic crop however had an even funnier effect, people started to recognize that boy and claimed he was still alive - a clear hoax:

Here it was a london business man that thought he was the boy, other more recent examples are Zvi Nussbaum, who also claimed to be the boy even though he never was in the getto. Again the holocaust deniers used this and other photo manipulations to make a case against the number of gassings in Treblinka and thus minimizing the Holocaust.

Why would a deliberate 'dramatization' of an already dramatic and horrible event be needed, especially if you give arguments to those of bad intent....

I could go on and on, but i Will not.

I take very much offense with the fact you do not even TRY to get my point and just start with degrading insults - idiot, racist, ridiculous .... I says a lot about a man's true face. I think have seen yours.