Saggy,
Let’s cut to the chase on this:
In 2011 you pulled the
same stunt and, as subsequent posts show, couldn’t answer at that time the request for a citation.
So you try again, six years later. Now, I happen to own two copies, different editions, of Grossman & Ehrenburg’s Black Book of Russian Jewry. I’ve never found the quotation on quicklime in either. One of the editions is searchable online and this is what we get searching for “quicklime”:
[qimg]http://i.imgur.com/xfVe88E.png?1[/qimg]
If you can’t read this on account of size, I can help: it’s not your dodgy quotation but refers to a “cemetery covered with quicklime.” Your quotation isn't in the book you've claimed it's in. Simple.
On the interwebs, OTOH, one can find various sources for your claim about Grossman & Ehrenburg:
(1) Carlos Porter’s “SELECTED LIES FROM THE “BLACK BOOK” which says it comes from a book published in 1946 by the Jewish Black Book Committee. Porter shows a page facsimile, with underlining, and quotes and comment on it as follows:
There are a number of Black Books, most well known are Grossman & Ehrenburg's book and The Black Book of Polish Jewry, which was published in 1943 (see below) and was edited by Joseph Apenszlak, copyrighted by the American Federation for Polish Jews. This work relates to Polish Jews, as Grossman & Ehrenburg’s Black Book is about Soviet Jews - but not of course to French Jews.
No doubt Porter referred to
this book, not Grossman & Ehrenburg’s book, as you claimed, and not the well-known Black Book of Polish Jewry. Here is a search result for quicklime in the 1946 Black Book:
[qimg]http://i.imgur.com/b0xk8Wa.png[/qimg]
The
YIVO Encyclopedia explains about Grossman & Ehrenburg’s book:
So you’re wrong about Grossman & Ehrenburg, but on account of your refusal to reply to queries about the reference I got to track down and sort out the various Black Books, about which you’re clueless, despite making claims about them.
(2) A second web strand attributes the quicklime passage to The Black Book of Polish Jewry, 1946 pp 379-380. Thus, according to
the so-called Holocaust Historiography Project:
There are two glaring problems with this claimed sourcing: first, a search of the title (it’s online) turns up only one result for quicklime (“The
trucks were then locked and scaled. The Jews were suffocating for lack of air”) and no result for Furmanski - and The Black Book of Polish Jewry, published in 1943, not 1946, didn't contain pp 379-380, where the quotation is allegedly found, as it had only 342 pages.
(3) Another common source for this quotation is Exposing the Holocaust. Their use of the quotation is unique, as they seem to identify the source of the quicklime passage as being yet another book:
here they quote supposed excerpts from “The Black Book” but to illustrate the source show the cover of a different Black Book to those discussed above,
The Unknown Black Book: The Holocaust in the German-Occupied Soviet Territories. This book is kind of “outtakes” from Grossman & Ehrenburg’s testimonies. There’s a single reference to quicklime in this title and, alas, it’s not the one which Exposing the Holocaust suggests has the quicklime passage they (and you) quote:
[qimg]http://i.imgur.com/X2nVj0M.png?1[/qimg]
Why are deniers so confused about this little quotation?
And which of the various sources - Porter or “Holocaust Historiography” or Exposing the Holocaust - your post ultimately traces to, I do not know. Only you can tell us. I am pretty sure that
your immediate source, which you like citing and which your post apparently, judging from the citation to NY Times, plagiarized, garbled Porter relying on something already garbled on the webs. In any event, the revisionist uses of this quotation are sloppy and confusing, mixing up as they do 4 very different works.
To say I’m not impressed with your research is putting it mildly. You don’t know what you’re talking about - and are posting random “stuff I found on the Internet!”
Sorry to go on so long on this - but once again you're busted - and your methods exposed. You don't even know the revisionist sources: if you did, you'd have quoted Porter and gotten the source of your quotation right. But you didn't: you copy-pasted from Holohoax 101 - and I had to tell you where your quotation came from, not Grossman & Ehrenburg but a 1946 publication cited by Porter.
So is it a degenerate lie, or regular lie, to pick up something on the interwebs, unaware of its context or reliability, then refuse to provide a citation for it, having posted it with a claim that it comes from a work from which it doesn’t come? I’m curious.
