I’m sorry but they are just not saying what you thought they were. Thousands of extradited people yes, thousands of Jews no. If you have quotes to share or something then please do, because now it just seems like there’s been a mistake on your part.
It can be hard to admit to having been wrong, even when it’s an understandable mistake like this, but literally no one else read the books you mentioned and came away with thinking it was thousands of Jews. First book clearly says (citing the second) it was “approximately 100”. Thousands would be at least ten times that.
You are trying to convince me that these books have a ten times bigger number than what everyone else seems to think they said (including the author of the first book), but you can’t give any quotations, you can’t give anything concrete other than “it’s there trust me bro”.
I doubt anyone is buying what you are selling. Now would be a good time to either admit to the mistake or put money where your mouth is and actually cite the works like I have.
I did cite works. You have decided that your guessing based on Googling is better than reading the books cited. I cannot fix your laziness. You asked for things to read and I provided them. I cannot, unfortunately, make you read them instead of bullshitting.
Sana estimated 500 from a single deportation, by the way.
I don’t think I’m better than the books you cited. I trust those books. You mentioned two books who both directly contradict you by saying the number was “approximately 100”. Sana says out of the around 3000 people, “at least 74 were Jews”. You mistook the total number of handed over POWs for the number of handed over Jews.
If you think it gives a different number, one that nobody else seems to think is included in those books, please be so kind as to show where in either book.
Sana estimated 500 from a single deportation, by the way.
She did, but they are not talking about Jews specifically but all the people handed over. Like I’ve tried to explain to you many times, the larger numbers you are citing are for all the people handed over to Germans. Out of those people, Sana estimated that at least 74 were Jews, but since it’s uncertain, it’s said that it’s “approximately 100”.
I think you’ve been under the false assumption that all deportations or even significant percentage were Jews, even though both books say that they constituted “approximately 100” out of the around 3000 people handed over. Most weren’t Jews but handed over for other reasons.
I don’t think I’m better than the books you cited.
You obviously prize your guesswork and imagination over the historical work you were provided. You are repeatedly announcing, with certainty, how correct you are based on a screenshot of a review of several books, in contradiction of what the book I cited will tell you.
Like I said, I can’t force you to read. You are welcome for the book recommendations.
These are numbers from the actual books. The screenshot is the first work you cited, contradicting you. The numbers in the above comment comment come from Sana’s book. As I’ve explained many times, you misunderstood what you read and thought all those deported were Jews, but neither makes that claim. Most were deported for other reasons.
You obviously prize your guesswork and imagination over the historical work you were provided
I don’t, that’s why I was hoping you’d show me where in those books these claims are. Since from reading them, they thoroughly contradict your numbers. You say you can’t force me to read but I’m constantly asking you to show where in the books these claims are so I could read it and see what part you are citing. Because the parts I’ve posted here, again, directly contradict your numbers. Clearly there’s something wrong so just telling where in the books these numbers are you are basing your claim would be very helpful.
You are repeatedly announcing, with certainty, how correct you are based on a screenshot of a review of several books, in contradiction of what the book I cited will tell you.
The screenshot is from the first book you cited. I literally have it right here in front of me. You are telling me one thing and the book you say you are basing your numbers on says another. It’s a funny situation. It’s like when people claim something based on the Bible but when asked to show where it says so, they’re suddenly unable to come up with any pages or actual quotations, it’s just “it’s in there”. I bet it is friend, I bet it is.
already told you that Sana esrimated 500 from a single deportation.
She said 500 people were deported (in that single instance), not that 500 Jews were deported… You are misremembering or misunderstood what she said, I’m sorry to say.
I will not be replying further
I was about to ask if you have the book right in front of you and could perhaps check that what you remember reading is actually what it said. That way we could both double check that you got it right. But I somehow doubt that would happen anyway. If you have the book right now it wouldn’t hurt to double check.
Another thing I was thinking of was that in what language did you read it? If you read it in Finnish, are you a native speaker or fluent? Because a misunderstanding could be down to that.
I’m honestly just trying my hardest to find out what part you are citing and why you’d come up with such a wildly different number from everyone else. I know you said you wouldn’t reply anymore but it would be very helpful in figuring out this mystery.
I’m sorry but they are just not saying what you thought they were. Thousands of extradited people yes, thousands of Jews no. If you have quotes to share or something then please do, because now it just seems like there’s been a mistake on your part.
Instead of guessing incorrectly, you could read the materials I offered. I don’t know why you believe your lazy guesswork is better than my reading.
I will give you one hint but to be honest at this point it is being too nice: POWs.
It can be hard to admit to having been wrong, even when it’s an understandable mistake like this, but literally no one else read the books you mentioned and came away with thinking it was thousands of Jews. First book clearly says (citing the second) it was “approximately 100”. Thousands would be at least ten times that.
You are trying to convince me that these books have a ten times bigger number than what everyone else seems to think they said (including the author of the first book), but you can’t give any quotations, you can’t give anything concrete other than “it’s there trust me bro”.
I doubt anyone is buying what you are selling. Now would be a good time to either admit to the mistake or put money where your mouth is and actually cite the works like I have.
I did cite works. You have decided that your guessing based on Googling is better than reading the books cited. I cannot fix your laziness. You asked for things to read and I provided them. I cannot, unfortunately, make you read them instead of bullshitting.
Sana estimated 500 from a single deportation, by the way.
I don’t think I’m better than the books you cited. I trust those books. You mentioned two books who both directly contradict you by saying the number was “approximately 100”. Sana says out of the around 3000 people, “at least 74 were Jews”. You mistook the total number of handed over POWs for the number of handed over Jews.
If you think it gives a different number, one that nobody else seems to think is included in those books, please be so kind as to show where in either book.
She did, but they are not talking about Jews specifically but all the people handed over. Like I’ve tried to explain to you many times, the larger numbers you are citing are for all the people handed over to Germans. Out of those people, Sana estimated that at least 74 were Jews, but since it’s uncertain, it’s said that it’s “approximately 100”.
I think you’ve been under the false assumption that all deportations or even significant percentage were Jews, even though both books say that they constituted “approximately 100” out of the around 3000 people handed over. Most weren’t Jews but handed over for other reasons.
You obviously prize your guesswork and imagination over the historical work you were provided. You are repeatedly announcing, with certainty, how correct you are based on a screenshot of a review of several books, in contradiction of what the book I cited will tell you.
Like I said, I can’t force you to read. You are welcome for the book recommendations.
These are numbers from the actual books. The screenshot is the first work you cited, contradicting you. The numbers in the above comment comment come from Sana’s book. As I’ve explained many times, you misunderstood what you read and thought all those deported were Jews, but neither makes that claim. Most were deported for other reasons.
I don’t, that’s why I was hoping you’d show me where in those books these claims are. Since from reading them, they thoroughly contradict your numbers. You say you can’t force me to read but I’m constantly asking you to show where in the books these claims are so I could read it and see what part you are citing. Because the parts I’ve posted here, again, directly contradict your numbers. Clearly there’s something wrong so just telling where in the books these numbers are you are basing your claim would be very helpful.
The screenshot is from the first book you cited. I literally have it right here in front of me. You are telling me one thing and the book you say you are basing your numbers on says another. It’s a funny situation. It’s like when people claim something based on the Bible but when asked to show where it says so, they’re suddenly unable to come up with any pages or actual quotations, it’s just “it’s in there”. I bet it is friend, I bet it is.
I already told you that Sana esrimated 500 from a single deportation. You have not read Sana’s works.
I will not be replying further. You are welcome for the book recommendations. I wonder if you will read them.
She said 500 people were deported (in that single instance), not that 500 Jews were deported… You are misremembering or misunderstood what she said, I’m sorry to say.
I was about to ask if you have the book right in front of you and could perhaps check that what you remember reading is actually what it said. That way we could both double check that you got it right. But I somehow doubt that would happen anyway. If you have the book right now it wouldn’t hurt to double check.
Another thing I was thinking of was that in what language did you read it? If you read it in Finnish, are you a native speaker or fluent? Because a misunderstanding could be down to that.
I’m honestly just trying my hardest to find out what part you are citing and why you’d come up with such a wildly different number from everyone else. I know you said you wouldn’t reply anymore but it would be very helpful in figuring out this mystery.