I have the book here in front of me and I think this is the part your'e thinking. From first book, talking about your second source:
Finland’s Holocaust: Silences of History, page 151.
Challenging the official figure of eight Jewish refugees handed over to the German authorities, Sana claimed that during the German–Finnish alliance, the Continuation War (1941–44), Finland extradited almost 3,000 civilians and POWs, among them approximately 100 Jews.
How you could turn that to thousands of handed over Jews, I don't know. If some other part brings it up tenfold then I didn't see it with a quick glance. I think you might've misread or misremembered that part since nowadays that doesn't challenge what I said with "I’m not sure how you’ve counted it but the number for Jews who were given to the Germans was eight refugees and “some tens” of (Soviet) PoWs." Some upper estimates got "up to a hundred" based on just the last names, but usually the number I've seen is below that since just the names can be very uncertain in Russian context.
Still horrible, no question about that, but I originally came to correct was this:
they were good people that didn’t send thousands of Jews to their deaths
- You've gotta read both books
  
  I am looking at both but I honestly think you just made a mistake and thought the total number of extraditions was all Jews when the claim is just that "approximately 100" were.
  If there's part on either that goes against the quote shown, that jumps up the number tenfold (or more), I'd be happy to see it. But neither book nor any public discourse or (academic) reviews of the books seem to talk about anything but what I've quoted here. If the claim was thousands of Jewish victims and not "approximately 100", from what I could find, everyone but you have read it differently or missed that part. And that would be really significant with how big of a disconnect there has been.
  I think you've just misread or misremembered that part...
  
  Like I said, read both books
  
  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.
  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.

53 comments