michael mills wrote:The nub of the issue is that Mme Vaillant-Couturier, in her evidence-in-chief, gave a grossly inflated figure of 700,000 as the number of Hungarian Jews that arrived in Auschwitz.
When challenged on the accuracy of that figure in cross-examination, she gave a devious answer, implying falsely that she had obtained it through her contacts in the camp secretariat.
It is impossible that anyone in the camp secretariat with access to official camp records could have communicated that figure to Mme Vaillant-Couturier, since the maximum figure that could have been recorded in the official camp records would have been in the order of 400,000. Therefore her implied claim that she received the 700,000 figure from the camp secretariat was a falsehood.
An honest answer to Dr Marx's questioning of the accuracy of the 700,000 figure given by her would have been to admit that she was not sure of it, and that it was not a figure derived from the official camp records, but one that she had heard somewhere or made up. But being a Communist politician with a political agenda, she was not prepared to give that honest answer.
Side-stepping the issue with speculation about whether Dr Marx was confusing Wisliceny with Eichmann, or whether the figure he quoted should have been 450,000, is simply classic pilpul. It does not alter Mme Vaillant-Couturier's dishonesty in making a false implied claim about the source of the inflated figure given by her, in an attempt to back up her expertise.
Speculation: You need an education on what that word means when you speculate as to what documents or reports were available to a defense attorneys at the IMT. Try and address the post rather than to submerge it in bullshit. In case you hadn't noticed, I'd already said that it was a distinct possibility that the witness was lying. Some of us would rather err on the side of truth rather than a fixed agenda. If the figure does turn out to be the lower number, so be it. I don't care. You've made it clear that you have no interest in the truth, you have no interest examining the historical record, and you have no interrest in anything other than advancing your own personal reputation vis a vis this subject. You, sir, are an arrogant ass and your pomposity is only matched by the breadth of your know.ledge. You insult yourself.