You know, Jim, when you use sarcasm in your posts, it really reveals the weakness of your discourse. You have obviously never evaluated your product under a microscope, nor do you understand that said iron particulate matter is only visible using molecular evaluation, something I am sure you have not done. You are also not a silver-smith. Until you wish to perform your own scientific testing to back up your statements, or wish to write your own book, I suggest you reserve your sarcasm for the pub. As I said, the majority of critiques of my theory usually come in the form of, "You're an idiot if you believe . . . " Thank you, Jim, for proving my point for me.
-
-
"It is not until 1936, if memory serves correctly, that any regulations of consequence were set down that essentially formalized the ring into an award."
The Ehrenring was an award from the very first day already due to it´s design.
Or do you think that it was meant to decorate the recipient´s Yule tree?Comment
-
"So I tend to disbelieve the notion that Himmler planned on awarding 1,000,000 rings, and called up Gahr to start preparing for such a huge order by retraining their staff and buying all sorts of new equipment."
Well, is that filled with sarcasm or sarcasm?!
Nobody including me talked about a million of rings, I talked about 900.000 Waffen-SS soldiers and it´s quite obvious that there was no plan to give each man a ring on hand.Comment
-
"Furthermore, it is well known that as early as 1936-1937, that officers were having trouble sourcing chained SS daggers."
As you said: it´s about daggers - not rings.
Don´t mix up bananas with potatoes.Comment
-
Thorsten:Originally posted by Thorsten B. View Post
People with common sense like you and I , Gaspare etc. will be greeted with insults by Gottlieb since he has no way of disputing what we post.
I will ask the membership here to carefully consider the following:
Would someone arguing so vehemently about a subject so obscure and of such minor importance as the specific method used to construct TK rings perhaps have an unstated/hidden agenda in wanting his method accepted?
I for one am done reading or responding to the gibberish in Gottliebs posts. I can have more sensible discussions with my 2 year old grandson.
JimComment
-
Rings
And the 2 year old agrees they were die-struck.
Comment
-
Well, I am not done yet.
"Himmler made it happen that - although Oswald Pohl mentioned already in 1939 that silver will be harder to receive - the Ehrenring was produced during nearly the whole wartime."
That is what I wrote in comment 198 within this thread.Comment
-
And that´s what Craig wrote about the same source (Gahr book from Meyer/Schildt):
"By 1939, when the war began in earnest for the Germans, non-crucial war resources did become quite scarce. General Pohl even had trouble sourcing silver for rings and sword hilts (a fact documented in a letter he wrote), and there was constant squabbling over where the gold and other valuables looted from the Jews was to go (the SS had to turn it into the Reichsbank so it could transfer the wealth to Switzerland where it eventually paid for scarce natural resources the Reich didn't have)."
So whose now really backing up his theory by taking this historical source (letter) into account?
And what does that actually has to do with looting any kind of goods/metal from Jews?
The letter - that is what Craig stated by himself as well - has been written in 1939, to be fully correct on the 3rd of November.
By that time there was no Holocaust yet going on coming along with looting stuff from Jews and problems with gold and such-
That smells (stinks) like the tactic when having no real argument on hand I play the Holocaust card.
Sorry - it just doesn´t match here.
It shows just a serious lack of well-based argument.Comment
-
I'm sorry, but if you are going to imply that I have no common sense, then again, you prove my point that the only form of argument available to you are ad hominem attacks (look it up). I have provided a ready and thorough defense of my position, and you have provided little more than ridicule and personal invective. As to the Pohl letter, that it is in 1939, only further supports my point that material shortages were already at play, even on the eve of the "transitional" period of ring production. It was not until the invasion of Poland that the Reich recovered from the brink of bankruptcy, albeit only temporarily. Let's just agree to disagree, but the one thing that is intellectually intolerable is the outright dismissal by the vocal few here, of my theory. Even if my evidence does not persuade the remaining few, so be it. Just don't color the debate with the notion that the debate is settled. It's not.Comment
-
Actually you missed to whom you are refering.Comment
-
"I have provided a ready and thorough defense of my position, and you have provided little more than ridicule and personal invective."
Well, at least cannot be me to whom you refer.Comment
-
"As to the Pohl letter, that it is in 1939, only further supports my point that material shortages were already at play, even on the eve of the "transitional" period of ring production. "
Craig, you are invited to read the whole page 23 of the Gahr book you would see that the historical documents including the letter from Pohl to Himmler actually supports MY point, not yours.
Why?
Because as a result of Pohl´s letter from the 3rd of November 1939 Himmler´s answer via Brandt (his adjutant and secretary) from the 16th of December 1939 is that the production of the Zivilabzeichen (mentioned by Pohl as well as the Ehrenring and Ehrendegen-Beschläge means silver parts of the sword) indeed has to be stopped
BUT:
that the award of rings (and so the production of them) will continue as usual and that:
"in order to get the necessary silver one has to get in contact with SS-Brigadeführer Greifelt".Comment
-
"Even if my evidence does not persuade the remaining few, so be it."
Craig, evidence for what?Comment
-
You are correct, Thorsten. I do not refer to you. Your comments are thought-provoking and informative, and I mean that.Comment
-
Originally posted by Thorsten B. View Post
My mother alway told me if you're going to tell a lie make it a whopper.
We have now ventered into the twilight Zone were the "remaining few" is actually the overall majority who don't subscribe to Gottliebs " rubber mold theory".
It too bad I didn't keep the email I received from Rob Wells after Gottiebs book came out. I lost it when I converted over to Windows 7 and would not have been able to post it here verbatum due to the rather "salty" contents. Rob,as some of you may remember, wrote the foreword to Gottliebs TK book. He told me if he had actually seen the contents of the book prior to his penning the foreword it would have been a cold day in Hell before he ever attached his name and reputation to it.
JimComment
Comment