OK, \”B\” you need to stop. Everytime I read one of your posts I laugh. You come up with the BEST rebuttals which Ellie ATTEMPTS to answer. I love how she hardly ever responds to my actual questions.
Ellie already said once, now twice, that she will not be responding to any more posts \”until the issues I have asked for help in understanding are addressed.\” But, yet she refuses to understand. Oh, the irony.
I love how Ellie keeps bringing up the death certificate angle. ***HOW WERE THEY SUPPOSED TO GET DEATH CERTIFICATES?*** (maybe this way she will see my question- I wish I could make the letters red!) Why don\’t you answer that for us Ellie? Oh yeah, you\’re not posting because you\’re mad that we have made valid points that you can\’t break down.
They kept excellent records? Then why did the death toll on the plaque at the Auschwitz camp change c. 1990 from saying that 4.2 million people were killed there, to saying that 1.1 million were killed there? On what records were either figure based? Does it make me a \”holocaust denier\” to mention this fact and wonder about it? I think that it is germaine, and illustrates the kind of problems inherent in the very unusual case at hand.
Also, no one has seriously addressed my point that Jews emmigrated from Europe to the US, UK, Canada, Australia, Russia and so on. Many who were supposed to have been killed were in fact just lost to the chaos of war. If there is no record of a death, we can forgive the insurers for being wary of paying a claim. That\’s all I am saying. I guess for this I will get more ridicule.
Is everyone missing the point? What right do the insurers have to name themselves the benificiaries and keep the money? Has the tort of conversion been removed from the equasion?
If a bank has unclaimed funds they are segregated and transferred to the state to be held in trust. If there are unclaimed tax refunds, are not those funds segrgated as well and held in trust.
The Nazi\’s kept detailed records of those they murdered in the camps and the insurers had detailed records that could identify their policy holders and be matched up with the Nazi records. The insureres chose to keep the money and make theselves the benificiaries by stonewalling the world for sixty years. Even with the settlment, the only thing they are giving up is a small fraction of the earning on the principal.
If an agent converted clients funds they would be put out of business, If an insurer here intentionally converted clients funds they would have their charter pulled and people would go to jail.Why are things differnent for the European Insurers(Big Money Talks?)?
Ger·maine [jer-meyn; Fr. zher-men]
a female given name.
first/full cousin
a son or daughter of one\’s uncle or aunt
So, not sure what you\’re trying to say about someone\’s relative. Ha ha
Also, you still have not answered my question on what YOU would do if you were not given a death certificate for the death of YOUR loved one. Maybe that is why you are being \”ridiculed\”.
\”If there is no record of a death, we can forgive the insurers for being wary of paying a claim.\” It\’s understandable for them to be wary. But now, let\’s put on our thinking caps. Anyone old enough to have bought insurance WAY back then is MOST likely deceased now. ***And remember, the Nazis weren\’t passing out death certificates.*** How many times do I have to remind you of that Ellie? So, now that most everyone is deceased, can we please pay up?
Yes, the Nazi\’s did in fact keep excellent records. That\’s just simply a fact of history whether or not you choose to believe it.
As for you being a holocaust denier.
\”Deniers often use the \’Four Million Variant\’ as a stepping stone to leap from an apparent contradiction to the idea that the Holocaust was a hoax, again perpetrated by a conspiracy. They hope to discredit historians by making them seem inconsistent. If they can\’t keep their numbers straight, their reasoning goes, how can we say that their evidence for the Holocaust is credible? One must wonder which historians they speak of, as most have been remarkably consistent in their estimates of a million or so dead. In short, all of the denier\’s blustering about the \’Four Million Variant\’ is a specious attempt to envelope the reader into their web of deceit, and it can be discarded after the most rudimentary examination of published histories.\”
I keep hearing that the Nazis kept excellent records, and that they kept no records. If you want to go by the Auschwitz records, there were only 70,000+ that died there, all from disease or natural causes!
What would I do without a death certificate if my loved one disappeared and I couldn\’t prove a death? I would rely on whatever provisions exist for such cases. I have no idea what the insurance laws were in Begium or whatever in 1939.
One thing we can be sure of though is that all of the insureds are dead now, or in their mid-100\’s, so the companies involved should just pay the benefits.
Wasn\’t that the whole point of this article Ellie? (to pay the claims?) Yet, you argued against it this whole time. Is this even Ellie?
Oh yeah, I already posted that the insureds are most likely dead (although I am sure some are still alive if they were in their teens during WWII) but you might not have read that before you posted.
If you are Ellie, thanks for finally answering my questions regarding the death certificates. And, I am sure the heirs of those killed also relied on whatever provisions existed for this \”case\”.
However, now I am not sure what your point was this whole time. Since, you just did a 180.
You are referring to the original Auschwitz camp which served as the administrative center for the whole complex. Yes, it is true that in that camp they recorded about 70,000 deaths.
However, the other Auschwitz camp in Birkenau was the extermination camp where millions died.
There was also a third Auschwitz camp in Monowitz which was used as a labor camp.
So you see, you are attempting to be misleading by your posts by saying only 70,000 people died at Auschwitz.
If you want people to take you seriously and not ridiclue you then you need to put all of the facts in there, not just the ones that back up your argument. Or maybe you were just ignorant of the facts. In that case I suggest you brush up on your reading.
Rudolph Hoss who was the camp commandent testified at Nuremburg that approx 3 million people had died there. Quite a strange thing to say when they\’re all on trial. Why in the world would he lie and say 3 million when the number (as you keep insisting) was only 70,000?
\”I keep hearing that the Nazis kept excellent records, and that they kept no records. If you want to go by the Auschwitz records, there were only 70,000+ that died there, all from disease or natural causes!\” – posted by Ellie
Yes, in searching for Auschwitz that is what I found. I also found mention of Auschwitz II. Oh and don\’t forget Dachau, where Ellie\’s grandfather fell from a guard tower! There wasn\’t just one (or two or three) concentration camps.
\”Auschwitz I, the original concentration camp which served as the administrative center for the whole complex, and was the site of the deaths of roughly 70,000 people, mostly Poles and Soviet prisoners of war.
Auschwitz II (Birkenau), an extermination camp, where at least 1.1 million Jews, 75,000 Polish people, and some 19,000 Roma (Gypsies) were killed.\” – from Wikipedia.org
We have updated our privacy policy to be more clear and meet the new requirements of the GDPR. By continuing to use our site, you accept our revised Privacy Policy.
Fascinating posts. I\’m glad to see that this has sparked a good discussion on the topic.
May we never forget so that it never happens again.
Kevin Rasmussen
OK, \”B\” you need to stop. Everytime I read one of your posts I laugh. You come up with the BEST rebuttals which Ellie ATTEMPTS to answer. I love how she hardly ever responds to my actual questions.
Ellie already said once, now twice, that she will not be responding to any more posts \”until the issues I have asked for help in understanding are addressed.\” But, yet she refuses to understand. Oh, the irony.
I love how Ellie keeps bringing up the death certificate angle. ***HOW WERE THEY SUPPOSED TO GET DEATH CERTIFICATES?*** (maybe this way she will see my question- I wish I could make the letters red!) Why don\’t you answer that for us Ellie? Oh yeah, you\’re not posting because you\’re mad that we have made valid points that you can\’t break down.
Ouch!
They kept excellent records? Then why did the death toll on the plaque at the Auschwitz camp change c. 1990 from saying that 4.2 million people were killed there, to saying that 1.1 million were killed there? On what records were either figure based? Does it make me a \”holocaust denier\” to mention this fact and wonder about it? I think that it is germaine, and illustrates the kind of problems inherent in the very unusual case at hand.
Also, no one has seriously addressed my point that Jews emmigrated from Europe to the US, UK, Canada, Australia, Russia and so on. Many who were supposed to have been killed were in fact just lost to the chaos of war. If there is no record of a death, we can forgive the insurers for being wary of paying a claim. That\’s all I am saying. I guess for this I will get more ridicule.
Is everyone missing the point? What right do the insurers have to name themselves the benificiaries and keep the money? Has the tort of conversion been removed from the equasion?
If a bank has unclaimed funds they are segregated and transferred to the state to be held in trust. If there are unclaimed tax refunds, are not those funds segrgated as well and held in trust.
The Nazi\’s kept detailed records of those they murdered in the camps and the insurers had detailed records that could identify their policy holders and be matched up with the Nazi records. The insureres chose to keep the money and make theselves the benificiaries by stonewalling the world for sixty years. Even with the settlment, the only thing they are giving up is a small fraction of the earning on the principal.
If an agent converted clients funds they would be put out of business, If an insurer here intentionally converted clients funds they would have their charter pulled and people would go to jail.Why are things differnent for the European Insurers(Big Money Talks?)?
\”I think that it is germaine.\”
Ger·maine [jer-meyn; Fr. zher-men]
a female given name.
first/full cousin
a son or daughter of one\’s uncle or aunt
So, not sure what you\’re trying to say about someone\’s relative. Ha ha
Also, you still have not answered my question on what YOU would do if you were not given a death certificate for the death of YOUR loved one. Maybe that is why you are being \”ridiculed\”.
\”If there is no record of a death, we can forgive the insurers for being wary of paying a claim.\” It\’s understandable for them to be wary. But now, let\’s put on our thinking caps. Anyone old enough to have bought insurance WAY back then is MOST likely deceased now. ***And remember, the Nazis weren\’t passing out death certificates.*** How many times do I have to remind you of that Ellie? So, now that most everyone is deceased, can we please pay up?
Hey. You peeked.
Yes, the Nazi\’s did in fact keep excellent records. That\’s just simply a fact of history whether or not you choose to believe it.
As for you being a holocaust denier.
\”Deniers often use the \’Four Million Variant\’ as a stepping stone to leap from an apparent contradiction to the idea that the Holocaust was a hoax, again perpetrated by a conspiracy. They hope to discredit historians by making them seem inconsistent. If they can\’t keep their numbers straight, their reasoning goes, how can we say that their evidence for the Holocaust is credible? One must wonder which historians they speak of, as most have been remarkably consistent in their estimates of a million or so dead. In short, all of the denier\’s blustering about the \’Four Million Variant\’ is a specious attempt to envelope the reader into their web of deceit, and it can be discarded after the most rudimentary examination of published histories.\”
I don\’t know. Are you?
I keep hearing that the Nazis kept excellent records, and that they kept no records. If you want to go by the Auschwitz records, there were only 70,000+ that died there, all from disease or natural causes!
What would I do without a death certificate if my loved one disappeared and I couldn\’t prove a death? I would rely on whatever provisions exist for such cases. I have no idea what the insurance laws were in Begium or whatever in 1939.
One thing we can be sure of though is that all of the insureds are dead now, or in their mid-100\’s, so the companies involved should just pay the benefits.
Wasn\’t that the whole point of this article Ellie? (to pay the claims?) Yet, you argued against it this whole time. Is this even Ellie?
Oh yeah, I already posted that the insureds are most likely dead (although I am sure some are still alive if they were in their teens during WWII) but you might not have read that before you posted.
If you are Ellie, thanks for finally answering my questions regarding the death certificates. And, I am sure the heirs of those killed also relied on whatever provisions existed for this \”case\”.
However, now I am not sure what your point was this whole time. Since, you just did a 180.
You are referring to the original Auschwitz camp which served as the administrative center for the whole complex. Yes, it is true that in that camp they recorded about 70,000 deaths.
However, the other Auschwitz camp in Birkenau was the extermination camp where millions died.
There was also a third Auschwitz camp in Monowitz which was used as a labor camp.
So you see, you are attempting to be misleading by your posts by saying only 70,000 people died at Auschwitz.
If you want people to take you seriously and not ridiclue you then you need to put all of the facts in there, not just the ones that back up your argument. Or maybe you were just ignorant of the facts. In that case I suggest you brush up on your reading.
Rudolph Hoss who was the camp commandent testified at Nuremburg that approx 3 million people had died there. Quite a strange thing to say when they\’re all on trial. Why in the world would he lie and say 3 million when the number (as you keep insisting) was only 70,000?
Again, to being a holocaust denier.
If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck…….
\”I keep hearing that the Nazis kept excellent records, and that they kept no records. If you want to go by the Auschwitz records, there were only 70,000+ that died there, all from disease or natural causes!\” – posted by Ellie
Yes, in searching for Auschwitz that is what I found. I also found mention of Auschwitz II. Oh and don\’t forget Dachau, where Ellie\’s grandfather fell from a guard tower! There wasn\’t just one (or two or three) concentration camps.
\”Auschwitz I, the original concentration camp which served as the administrative center for the whole complex, and was the site of the deaths of roughly 70,000 people, mostly Poles and Soviet prisoners of war.
Auschwitz II (Birkenau), an extermination camp, where at least 1.1 million Jews, 75,000 Polish people, and some 19,000 Roma (Gypsies) were killed.\” – from Wikipedia.org
Time to leave work! Have a great evening!