Read more!
It is therefore instructive that, when a user named Reviso began this thread on the topic, the moderator (Jonnie 'Hannover' Hargis) did not ask him for a source for the quote. His 'show me' rhetoric was notably absent from his reply. Instead, he gave this bogus reasoning:
My reason for "supposedly" is that it is quoted frequently but I have never seen the text of the speech in any traditional publication, that doesn't mean it does not exist. A local newpaper where the speech was given may have carried the text. I haven't spend much time on it as I do not find the contents particularly unique.So, in direct contradiction of his approach towards any Holocaust documentation, Hargis's approach to the bogus statements attributed to Shawcross is to state that:
Usually the meaning and implications of such quotes is what people want to debate. And as I have stated, finding support for it's content is easy. IOW, it follows that someone like Shawcross would eventually make such statements.
1. Pro-Nazi evidence may still be genuine even if it cannot be produced!
2. Even if Shawcross did not make pro-Nazi statements, and we can't produce a quote by anyone else with his background saying them, we can still assume that "it follows that someone like Shawcross would eventually make such statements."
Hence we have proof that Hargis has no real interest in 'evidence' as such, and his 'show me' calls were always a sham.
Furthermore, a CODOH user called Lamprecht currently has the false quote as his signature, without any action being taken by the 'moderator'.
It might be interesting to learn whether Shawcross was one of those very rare people who had the wherewithal to admit the truth about the war. However judging from the present weekly obituaries of so many of the bomber crew who still continue go to their old age deaths still wishing to have their air force pictures in the paper, I would say that many of them still think they did the right thing; and small wonder must think so.
ReplyDeleteDo to the terrible personal losses and the unthinkable crimes that they themselves committed by bombing civilians in their beds, it is no doubt far beyond the ability of most old soldiers to admit to themselves, let alone to the public, that the two world wars were the stupidest two events in history, that the bombing of cities initiated by Churchill was a terrible war crime and that any war that killed 50 million, left half of Europe under Stalin, caused China to go communists and for America to totally lose its soul and go on a rampage of Imperialism that continues to this day, to say nothing of the sins of Britain t, was a horrible mistake.
No and no again; most old soldiers would rather preserve their sanity and pretend they did the right thing. It is good that they continue to think so and we probably should let them continue to do so. However, for the continuation of humanity it is probably time that we consider other ways to solve the problems of the world other than trying to kill the women, children and young men of our enemies.