With genuine reluctance, I find myself obliged to ban Larry from St Louis from commenting on this blog.
I am extremely happy for people to comment on this blog who disagree with my views. It makes it much more interesting for everybody. I wish more people who disagree would comment.
But Larry has a different agenda. His technique is continually to accuse me of holding opinions which I do not in fact hold, and which he thinks will call my judgement into doubt.
Take this comment posted by Larry at 9.35 am today:
I’ve re-read your post on the Russian spies, and once again you’ve proven to be a complete dumbass.
I predicted Russia claiming (in some minor way) those idiots. You didn’t. You thought it was a conspiracy.
You’ve once again self-indicted.
In fact my view on the Russian spies was the exact opposite of what Larry claims it was. As I posted:
I don’t have any difficulty in believing that the FBI really have discovered a colony of Russian sleeper spies in the United States.
https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2010/06/those_russian_s.html#comments
This is not Larry being mistaken – remember he claimed he had just re-read my posting. It is rather indicative of a very deliberate technique he has used scores of times, that of claiming I hold an opinion which he believes will devalue my other arguments in the mind of other readers, when I do not in fact hold that opinion.
He most often – indeed daily – does this with reference to 9/11. He tries to divert almost every thread on to the topic of 9/11 and to insinuate that I am among those who believe that 9/11 was “an inside job”. In fact, I am not of that opinion and never have been.
I have put up with this now for months, but Larry’s activities have become so frenetic and are so counter-productive to informed debate, I am not prepared to put up with it any more. I am also deeply sucpicious of the fact that he is able to spend more time on this blog than me, and to post right around the clock (often as with this one at 9.35am – think about it – what time is that in the US?).
Anyway, sorry Larry, your derailing days are over.
.
I am a tosser with too much free time. Sorry about that!
Interesting thread on the partition of India at independence. The fault for the disaster (and the hundred’s of thousands of deaths) was Britain’s, because Britain was in charge. It is as simple as this ?” Power and responsibility go hand in hand. It was Attlee who appointed Mountbatten, and it is Attlee who must bear the ultimate responsibility for what happened. He would have done better to have stayed with Wavell.
Re: Indian partition
“The fault for the disaster (and the hundred’s of thousands of deaths) was Britain’s, because Britain was in charge. It is as simple as this ?” Power and responsibility go hand in hand.”
Most of the violence occurred after August 15, so what you must mean is that India was mainly responsible.
But would it be hopelessly old-fashioned to suggest that responsibility for the violence rested at least in some slight way with those who actually committed acts of wanton violence or engaged the ethnic/religious cleansing of communities?
Re: Indian partition
Responsibility for protecting the innocent lay with the Imperial power; just as we would rightly expect responsibility for enforcing Rule of Law in the UK and Canada today to lie with our own governments. The RAJ had responsibility for planning security not just before independence but for its immediate aftermath as well.
Is it a bit old fashioned of me to expect that governments should take responsibility for putting a stop to mob violence, ethnic/religious cleansing and other known breaches of Rule of law that occur in their jurisdictions? Did not Stanley Baldwin say that ?” power without responsibility is the prerogative of the harlot? Do governments not have some responsibility for enforcing rule of law, or is it just about hiring civil servants and paying indexed pensions?
The Mountbatten’s and Attlee’s may not have accepted that Power and responsibility go hand in hand, but most former members of the ICS would never have doubted it for a minute. The RAJ had many fine moments during its long history, but handling the Partition of India was not one of them.
Alfred: You’re right, and I only made my distinction about the indigenous population further on in that post.
But we were talking about population densities, and I still maintain that it varies wildly across Europe, even when the capacity of the land is more or less equal. France cannot to be said to have a hugely different load capacity, yet has half the population density just about. As it’s our nearest comparison, I think my point actually stands. Divergence of 100% between us and our closest neighbour make the whole thing look rather not approximate at all.
*
I’m not at all sure that it’s “liberal thought” which has got our society in the state it is in. It wouldn’t do to have peasants starving in the street, that would lead to too much uprising.
Rather than too many children being the result of an over-generous welfare system, as you seem to suggest, too many children have always been the product of an impoverished society, and/or one in which women had little say in their reproductive capacity.
No welfare? Then you need loads of kids so that (a) some might survive the hardships of war/hard labour that the poor are almost exclusively predisposed for; (b) some might survive the diminished health services left for them, and (c) welfare in old age by handouts from grand-children.
Too much welfare? Then you’ll have loads of kids to get more money for them.
Just enough welfare? You’ll have the same number of kids as anyone else, possibly more if you don’t understand contraception, even more if you don’t care about a career, and cared nothing for an education.
So unfortunately, Alfred, the poor, uneducated and stupid – who are not the same set of people by any means despite Conservative conventional wisdom – will always tend towards larger and more successful reproduction. Nothing temporary about it, it’s been happening since children were understood to be pension schemes, thousands of years ago.
Technicolour – ”jaded’: you complain of being ‘attacked’ and yet the only thing I’ve remotely accused you of is being a ‘friend of apostate’. The rest were questions. You can, of course, to chose to call me ‘ill in the head’ and accuse me of being a Zionist agent as a result, but then earlier you were accusing me of being BNP.
So you are the Jaded who wrote this: (my emphasis)
The *question* of planned total extermination is a pertinent one though. They were certainly used as a source of labour in *some* camps.
Admittedly, every Jew that died from malnutrition, illness etc. may as well have been murdered. Furthermore, the Nazis *may well have tested gas* on the Jews. If the Nazis had won *maybe their fate would have been genocidal*, I don’t know”.
You are not questioning whether precisely 6 million Jewish people were murdered. You are questioning whether there was a ‘Final Solution’ at all. You are suggesting that Jewish people were merely used as labour in *some* camps. You insinuate that instead of gassing Jewish people the Nazis *may have tested gas* on Jewish people. Finally you suggest that there was no genocide.
So I think you’ve answered my questions, thanks. Otherwise, if you know of any Zionist agents, or, for that matter, BNP stooges, who had friends on the convoy to Gaza and who defend the Palestinian people at any opportunity, do let me know. In the meantime, I guess we can wait for the IP addresses when Craig gets back, can’t we.
In the meantime zillions of apologies if you’re just a really nice bloke whose history is utterly confused and whose random insults are just the product of an over enthusiastic defence of Craig, rather than a concerted attempt to scare people off the board. Of course.’
Technicolour – ‘that was me (above). oh, and i know you did not directly accuse me of being a Zionist agent. ‘jaded’; that’s not your style. Insinuate, I should have said. Strange, because I thought you read this board.
where did i misquote you, by the way?’
Well, I gave you a few days to cool off and stop being a prat, but more of the same bile is spewing from your mouth it seems. You accused me of being anti-semitic for starters. Then you state ‘I only accused you of being a friend of’ etc.. You are certainly ill in the head. Now you just carry on with your deluded misinterpretation, as the one thing you can’t do is eat humble pie.
I *am* questioning whether 6 million Jews were directly murdered, executed to be clear. I *am not* questioning whether elements of the Nazi regime wanted all the Jews dead. I *fully acknowledge* that they did. I *certainly am* suggesting that Jews were used as a source of labour in some camps. You then make a deranged comment about ‘gassing instead of gassing’? What the hell. I *am questioning* how many Jews were gassed. I *don’t suggest* that *substantial numbers of Jews* weren’t directly murdered, executed, and elements of the Nazi regime wanted them all dead. I *am accusing* the Zionists of exaggerating what happened. Yet again you try to twist everything into a black and white debate. That is a very common and feeble trick that the Zionists employ.
You have answered all your own questions and answered them *incorrectly* because you are a buffoon. As it goes, i’m sure there are many Zionist agents that pretend to be what they are not. That’s the way the game works. Are you really so stupid? For God’s sake, even Tony Blair pretends to be a Palestinian friend!!! As for IP addresses, that proves absolutely nothing whatsoever. You think that Zionist agents, if in Israel, work with Israeli IP addresses showing? Ha ha ha. I am a nice bloke and my history isn’t confused at all. My insults are certainly not random and not designed to ‘scare off’. Are you some sort of baby? Anyhow, I hope that there are enough well placed asterisks to help your challenged brain comprehend some simple text. It seems very disorientated to me. Moreover, you definitely don’t strike me as a nice chap.
As for questions, you mysteriously didn’t answer all my questions. Combined with your previous posts I do find your behaviour suspicious. Let me ask you one simple question Mr. Technicolour and we shall see. I was taught in school that 6 million Jews (human beings) were deported and executed in an industrial fashion. I disagree with that narrative. Disagreeing with that narrative *doesn’t mean* you think that *substantial numbers* of Jews were deported and executed. Moreover, as I have said before, the intimidation of any human being is unacceptable in my view, let alone deportation and execution! Do you agree or disagree with the 6 million deportation and execution narrative or not Mr. Technicolour?
That’s ‘weren’t deported and executed’ 3 lines up from the bottom in case you try and play the fool.
The posting at 12:56am on 17th July 2010 was not me. Someone posted using my name but it was not me. Just so everyone knows.
Jaded,
once a conflict is begun, how does one go about ending it? It seems a shame that in the few days that you gave Technicolour to cool off, you did not do so yourself, and have reopened the dialogue with insults.
Please look at Technicolour’s previous comments on many threads. If you can find any that look like the work of a Zionist shill (apart from the argument with yourself, of course) please point them out for my benefit; I think you will find many that contradict that theory. If your accusations are correct, then I have formed completely the wrong impression of this contributor.
Jaded, a person can believe the mainstream account of the Holocaust without being a Zionist shill; do you agree? I think Technicolour was mistaken in associating you with Apostate (please correct me if I’m wrong about this), and I think that you have misjudged Technicolour. Now, we need an ‘exit strategy’ for this argument that started months ago. Refraining from name-calling and sticking to the facts could help.
—–“The Mountbatten’s and Attlee’s may not have accepted that Power and responsibility go hand in hand,”——
The problem was that the government was only a few hours old. Thus it had the power but didn’t know what to do. Remember most of the new Indian leaders didn’t have a great deal of governing experience because they’d spent a large number of the preceding years in jail.
On the other hand the old regime had no power; it had just handed it over.
——-“Nothing temporary about it, it’s been happening since children were understood to be pension schemes, thousands of years ago.”——–
Quite the opposite. It’s an entirely new phenomenon. Until the beginnning of the 20th century the richest tended to have the largest families. This is still true in most parts of the world.
—–“I was taught in school that 6 million Jews (human beings) were deported and executed in an industrial fashion.”——–
‘In an industrial fashion’ is somewhat of a bizarre phrase but you were taught quite correctly at school. That you now choose to ignore it for no other reason than that you feel like it is your business.
The reasons we can be fairly sure of the numbers is that the Germans kept very meticulous records.
Suhayl – “Just so everyone knows”
Annybody who reads you knew it already, of course, you’d be a difficult voice to forge convincingly. (There’s a bit more of it upstream, too).
Regarding intercommunal bloodshed, whether it’s in the Balkans, Rwanda or India, it has to be faced that (some) ordinary people pick the machetes off the walls and kill other ordinary people – this is a part of the human condition that isn’t nice or pretty, but has to be faced, as Alfred suggests, I think. Same with the Germans, French, Eastern Europeans in relation to the Jews, over many centuries and esp. in the mid-C20th. Of course, many ordinary people do not do these things and help protect neighbours, etc. and there are countless stories of those acts of heroism. There were even people in the SS who protected Jews – there’s a famous story of one man who acted like Schindler and helped spirit away Jewish children.
However, Roderick also has made a good point – that governments have responsibility.
I think, in the case of India 1947, the leaders of the UK and the leaders of India lost control of events – this happens, as Tolstoy well knew – they got embroiled in constitutional arguments, etc. and failed to take account of the effects of their actions and of other, more sinister bodies, extremists on all sides who wanted a sectarian bloodbath for their own purposes.
So in fact, Stephen, too is correct.
My point is that these points are all valid and are not mutually exclusive. We can argue about relative weight, but it remains a complex event, or series of events and no one narrative can fully delineate it.
Jaded, please do be mellow. You’re entitled to put your point-of-view, as are we all, but there’s no reason to attack technicolour; you can agree to disagree. How about that?
Thanks, Richard, good to know I can’t be forged! But where are the other comments of similar ilk? As far as I can tell, all the rest are genuinely mine! The one yesterday evening about the typing being bad was mine. Anyway, thanks again. Glad you have emerged from the voluminous cloak of Mr De Q.
Suhayl – “where are the other comments of similar ilk?”
Bottom of the very-white-shirt-photo ‘Quick Post’, 11:29 AM
Thomas de Q seems to have caused more confusion than I intended, I thought the transition was clear … never mind. I’m tempted to feign an opium hangover, but there are things I should be doing (also, I don’t actually know what one would be like, it’s something I’ve kept away from). I just had a fit of curiosity & looked him up in Wikipedia, it seems that however much the school – or the subset of teachers I met there – might have liked to claim him, he really wasn’t there very long. Curiouser and curiouser.
But. Must get some shopping in, hoover the floor, debug some code … see you later.
Thanks, Richard. Yes, I think this is them changing tactic again – see Ruth’s link. They’ve realise we’re onto them and will ignore them, so now they’ve decided to try and undermine our discourses in other ways. It won’t work, it’s puerile and just very silly. A reflection, I think, partly of envy. Anyway, if we have to, we have Thomas De Quincey up our sleeves – and of course, the Dalek, who has been undergoing a service recently but who, I feel confident, would be willing to return on request (for a price) in order to to exterminate trolls.
The problems of misrepresentation, irritation, confusion and defamation due to people posting under other people’s names or in multiple names can be largely eliminated by requiring user registration.
Registration would have prevented the multiple Larry phenomenon, unless the Larry’s shared pass words, in which case they might reasonably have been banned for misrepresentation.
Against registration, it might said that some people will not bother to comment at all. I tend to forget passwords, think “oh heck” and go on to do something more useful. However, I seem to manage to access sites that I think really matter, so I don’t see this as a real problem.
Glenn,
Re: “But we were talking about population densities, and I still maintain that it varies wildly across Europe, even when the capacity of the land is more or less equal. France cannot to be said to have a hugely different load capacity, yet has half the population density just about.”
The paradox is resolved if you take into account what land relates to what population. Globally, food production equals food consumption.
The discrepancy in population density between France and Britain is probably explained by differences in agricultural policy. Britain imports 42% of its food, according to this source, for which I cannot vouch:
http://uk.answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20090118103316AABwS6o
In France, however, activist farmers, of whom there are many, are prone to drive flocks of sheep down the Champs Elysees, or dump manure on the doorstep of the Presidential Palace if their demands for protection are not met. As a consequence, I should think that France is much more self-sufficient in food than Britain.
” … Rather than too many children being the result of an over-generous welfare system, as you seem to suggest, too many children have always been the product of an impoverished society, and/or one in which women had little say in their reproductive capacity.”
But the thing is, Glenn, if you’re really impoverished your children don’t have the best prospects of living to reproductive age, assuming that you have lived long enough to have any children. At the end of the 19th century, British cities consumed people. Country folk went to London to seek their fortune and generally lived very poorly, became sick and died young. Their reproductive rate was well below the replacement rate. I don’t have the stats to hand, but Jack London describes the process vividly in “The People of the Abyss”.
Today, whole nations consume people in the same way, although without reducing them to apparent poverty. The poverty today, some would say, is spiritual. Thus the irrevocable commitment to immigration. We live in a culture so toxic that we are unable to reproduce ourselves (I’m talking generally here, not about individuals. There have always been people who for whatever reason did not have children though they led valuable lives and contributed to the welfare and the perpetuation of their society.). The fertility rate in Italy is now 1.1 per female. Germany manages 1.4 and Britain 1.6, all well below the replacement rate of 2.1.
So yes, if the culture of the West were adopted worldwide, then your contention that female choice dictates reproductive rates would be correct. However, at present global population growth or replacement is overwhelmingly determined by people outside the Western cultural system.
“So unfortunately, Alfred, the poor, uneducated and stupid – who are not the same set of people by any means despite Conservative conventional wisdom – will always tend towards larger and more successful reproduction.”
Blessed are the meek for they shall inherit the Earth! The Bell Curve and all that depends on the social system. If you have a relatively rigid class structure, then all social class will likely be similar in human potential. If you have a meritocracy, then those at the bottom of the heap will by definition be dumb or in some way handicapped. I think that is the way society has tended over the last half century. Therefore, the high reproductive rate of welfare mothers is a cause for concern, especially if as has been asserted, many girls with few prospects become pregnant because that assures welfare, a place of their own to live, etc.
“The reasons we can be fairly sure of the numbers is that the Germans kept very meticulous records.”
Are there German records showing the number of concentration camp inmates gassed? If not, what are we to conclude? That the records were not meticulous, that the records have been destroyed or that there were no concentration camp gassings?
But if these questions are illegal under EU law, then naturally I withdraw them.
The Zionists will not prevail. There is clear evidence of high level backing for their tactics in trying to subvert Craig’s blog. I wouldn’t put it past some of these people to sabotage the mango crop, but that’s another story and one which I can say little about at the moment.
“I think, in the case of India 1947, the leaders of the UK and the leaders of India lost control of events – this happens, as Tolstoy well knew – they got embroiled in constitutional arguments, etc. and failed to take account of the effects of their actions and of other, more sinister bodies, extremists on all sides who wanted a sectarian bloodbath for their own purposes.”
Well put, Suhayl. Situations can arise that are beyond the wit of man to control. It has been argued that the violence of partition stemmed from the Indian Councils Act of 1892, which introduced the principle of representation by community in the government of India: the effect being to polarize and divide according to religion or ethnicity, etc. If this was the effect, it was certainly not the intent. But it may just have lit a fuse that caused the explosion 54 years later.
—–“Are there German records showing the number of concentration camp inmates gassed? “——–
Gassing as a method of execution came about quite late on. They started by using trucks, locking people in the back and then feeding the exhaust pipe in.
There are vast amounts of documentation on the number of people in the camps. Dozens of books written on it. Remember the camp authorities had to claim food supplies based on the number in the camps.
To give you an idea of how meticulous the documentation was when Montserrat Roig wrote ‘Catalans in the Nazi Concentration Camps’ she was able to list every single Catalan who died in the camp with their names (2,002 of them I believe; the names are in an Appendix to the book).
“There are vast amounts of documentation on the number of people in the camps. Dozens of books written on it. ”
Yes and those records showed cause of death. So how many in the camps died of gassing — according to “meticulous” records?
Having posted on the need to be honest about our identities, I should add that the recent post about the Indian Councils Act was mine, which for some reason came out as anonymous.
The post at 0726pm on July 17th 2010 was not me.
If any posts supposedly from ‘me’ appear during the UK’s night tonight, please disregard them. Thanks.
“If any posts supposedly from ‘me’ appear during the UK’s night”
Sleep well.
—-“Yes and those records showed cause of death. So how many in the camps died of gassing — according to “meticulous” records?”——
The death certificates for Auschwitz apparently were only for a small subsection of the prisoners, and according to Hoess’s testimony at Nuremberg doctors were told to put any cause of death they wanted on the death certificates.
I’m sure you have a conspiracy theory to explain why the Allies arranged for the witnesses at Nuremberg to exaggerate the number of deaths in their testimony, but I’m not interested in hearing it.
Stephen said:
“The death certificates for Auschwitz apparently were only for a small subsection of the prisoners, and according to Hoess’s testimony at Nuremberg doctors were told to put any cause of death they wanted on the death certificates.”
So much for those meticulous German records you were talking of.