Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Arnold Meri - continuation

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    Originally posted by Shamil View Post
    I guess good respones are given in the Estonian folklore:
    There are a lot of such data about ROA under the command of Vlasov.

    In these documentaries Russian soldiers of ROA dressed in Viermacht uniform smile and look ready to fight against Red Army.

    So what? Does the existence of such documentaries proves that the most of the Soviet people didn't serve in Red Army but served in ROA?

    Comment


    • #32
      Originally posted by pp(est) View Post
      So what should my response be? Why should I care what some Russian book has to say about that? You've already provided other Russian sources with different versions.
      Those were YOU who declared that Meri had not been mentioned in the book I quoted.

      I visited a library and what I saw? I saw that your words are complete lie and Meri DID was mentioned in the book you had mentioned!!!!

      Is it understandable? Or you prefer play a fool?

      So we now have the fourth or fifth version of the same event which still doesn't match with the recollections of other people who were there except Meri - and it doesn't even match with Meri's later retellings. BTW this looks kind of close to the Meri self-promoting minibio I took the trouble of translating in some thread.
      The version described in the book completely follows the version that was told by Meri.

      No one difference.

      So I don't understand which 4th or 5th version you mean.

      Small differences in details can be but the common things are that he was there and did organised the defence and did fought bravely being wounded a few times.

      Andrey, if you want to believe this version of the events and that at least soviet officers Loog, Isotamm and Sepaste were liars, be my guest. If you want to believe some other version told by Meri, do that. I won't. And I am not about to spend more of my valuable time to research so meaningless an issue.
      Maybe, they are liars.

      But I didn't talk to them. Somebody talked to them and then talked to the others what they had said.

      Maybe, those persons who talked the stories of those officers were liars. Or distorted their words.

      We know what is their opinion only from pp(est)'s declarations. Where are any proves they did spoke the things that pp(est) declared they had said?

      Comment


      • #33
        Originally posted by Andrey View Post
        Those were YOU who declared that Meri had not been mentioned in the book I quoted.
        I've never referred to this book of yours. I referred to an Estonian book which has a similar name when translated to English. Since I don't read Russian I've no idea what this book of yours contains. Clearly the passage you provided differs from the one in the book I referred to.

        Originally posted by Andrey View Post
        The version described in the book completely follows the version that was told by Meri.
        Huh, I think you better check your own posts on the topic. I don't have the time or inclination to dig those out for you. Meri has told some four or five versions of the story which differ on what he did, how many men were involved, how hard the fighting was, who were the opponents, whether he had to coerce men to fight at gunpoint or not, whether he was shot by his own men or not and how long it all took. Those are just the obvious major differences and there's a whole bunch of details different too.

        While obviously without being there it is difficult to know what exactly happened and I don't claim to know the absolute truth, there are things we do know like:

        1. Meri has told several versions of the story which differ significantly.

        2. I've seen nobody corroborating Meri's version of events. Instead we have several officers who have denied his version of events. Some of them in writing, others presumably in interviews. This denial didn't happen recently but in the sixties and seventies and was apparently convincing to some Soviet historians. The same is true for the Hiiumaa events. He had his version, with nobody corroborating and apparently the police had 80 witnesses gathered whom I presume would have offered some other version of events.

        3. There is no evidence from German side that there was any major fight in that location at that time. 30 dead in a whole day of fighting as claimed in one version of Meri would show up in German records. AFAIK there are no such records. Other survivors - who had more combat experience - tell it was a minor chance skirmish and not a deliberate assault as described by Meri.

        4. Meri was a political officer who spent most of the war in the rear and was clearly politically very active as indicated by his political career during and after the war. His actions after the war and even in recent years show him to have been unscrupulous and vain, jumping in front of every camera he sees.

        5. Meri's decoration happened as a convenient example after exceedingly embarassing performance of his corps where significant number of his fellow troops defected. Even the loyal surviving officers have been extremely critical about the lack of competence on the part of corps command in those actions.

        Originally posted by Andrey View Post
        Maybe, they are liars.
        Maybe, but maybe it is Meri? Since Meri has told several versions, at least some of them contain lies.

        Originally posted by Andrey View Post
        But I didn't talk to them. Somebody talked to them and then talked to the
        others what they had said.
        I very much doubt you've talked with Meri. I am not denying that maybe the officers were liars. Frankly given they were loyal soviet officers and it was sixties and seventies, I'd assume they were lying at least about some things.

        Originally posted by Andrey View Post
        We know what is their opinion only from pp(est)'s declarations. Where are any proves they did spoke the things that pp(est) declared they had said?
        We know that the passage out of that book was a passage out of that book only from your declaration - not that it matters. If you really want to see what those men told for yourself, I suggest you to learn Estonian and do some googling or come visit a library here.

        This matter has been beaten to death and I see little point in continuing discussing it.

        Comment


        • #34
          A comment: Googling can go to hell, as Kunikov said:Scholarly research extends to beyond the bounds of 'google it.'
          “For there is nothing more serious than a lunatic when he comes to the central point of his lunacy.”

          Max Sterner

          Comment


          • #35
            google is a fine tool. This is an internet forum and we're definitely not engaging in some scholarly research here. An actual scholarly study in this matter would start with a visit to german and soviet archives (if the latter are even open for this topic/unit), not quoting popular science books from the seventies. And an actual scholarly study would be tested by peer review - not random anonymous commenters.

            Comment


            • #36
              Originally posted by pp(est) View Post
              google is a fine tool. This is an internet forum and we're definitely not engaging in some scholarly research here. An actual scholarly study in this matter would start with a visit to german and soviet archives (if the latter are even open for this topic/unit), not quoting popular science books from the seventies. And an actual scholarly study would be tested by peer review - not random anonymous commenters.
              google is very good thing for liars.

              it is possible to place in Internet any liar (for example, that Stalin and Hitler were brothers) and then to give links on this through google...
              Last edited by Andrey; 09 May 09, 05:44.

              Comment


              • #37
                Originally posted by pp(est) View Post
                I've never referred to this book of yours. I referred to an Estonian book which has a similar name when translated to English. Since I don't read Russian I've no idea what this book of yours contains. Clearly the passage you provided differs from the one in the book I referred to.
                I can provide the scans of the text. And anyone who understands Russian will confirm that my texts are correct.

                Do you seriously believe that the versions of the same book which were printed in the capital of the Soviet Estonia in 70th in Russian and Estonian could differ so significantly that the Russian version conteined Meri's story bt Estonian - not?????

                I think it is a matter of direct lie fro your side (or from the side of the people who translated that book to English from Estonian).

                To the point, neither Isotamm not Loog nor Sepaste are mentioned more in the Russian version in the description of that battle.

                Huh, I think you better check your own posts on the topic. I don't have the time or inclination to dig those out for you. Meri has told some four or five versions of the story which differ on what he did, how many men were involved, how hard the fighting was, who were the opponents, whether he had to coerce men to fight at gunpoint or not, whether he was shot by his own men or not and how long it all took. Those are just the obvious major differences and there's a whole bunch of details different too.
                Meri? Those were people who talked with Meri who them told about it. maybe they could distort some small details. so what?

                I know a woman who herself talked with Meri. She speaks Meri's version is absolutely equal to the description I have provided.

                While obviously without being there it is difficult to know what exactly happened and I don't claim to know the absolute truth, there are things we do know like:

                1. Meri has told several versions of the story which differ significantly.
                Incorrect

                2. I've seen nobody corroborating Meri's version of events. Instead we have several officers who have denied his version of events. Some of them in writing, others presumably in interviews. This denial didn't happen recently but in the sixties and seventies and was apparently convincing to some Soviet historians. The same is true for the Hiiumaa events. He had his version, with nobody corroborating and apparently the police had 80 witnesses gathered whom I presume would have offered some other version of events.
                I haven't heard the words of those officers.

                When I see the proves that those officers did spoke that I'll will think about it.

                Now we have got only your declarations without anny proves.

                3. There is no evidence from German side that there was any major fight in that location at that time. 30 dead in a whole day of fighting as claimed in one version of Meri would show up in German records. AFAIK there are no such records. Other survivors - who had more combat experience - tell it was a minor chance skirmish and not a deliberate assault as described by Meri.
                As I understand your position you spoke it was Loog who made the deeds for which Meri was awarded later. So the actions happened anmd the question is who did that feat - Loog or Meri.

                But now you write about doubts in the fact of the Germasn attack!!!!

                4. Meri was a political officer who spent most of the war in the rear and was clearly politically very active as indicated by his political career during and after the war. His actions after the war and even in recent years show him to have been unscrupulous and vain, jumping in front of every camera he sees.
                Meri was awarded for one concrete feat-of-arms. In any case, what he did after that is not related to the topic of his feat.

                5. Meri's decoration happened as a convenient example after exceedingly embarassing performance of his corps where significant number of his fellow troops defected. Even the loyal surviving officers have been extremely critical about the lack of competence on the part of corps command in those actions.
                So what? Even if all the corps commanders were full idiots - how is it related to Meri's feat-of-arms?

                I very much doubt you've talked with Meri. I am not denying that maybe the officers were liars. Frankly given they were loyal soviet officers and it was sixties and seventies, I'd assume they were lying at least about some things.
                I know a woman who talked to Meri.

                We know that the passage out of that book was a passage out of that book only from your declaration - not that it matters. If you really want to see what those men told for yourself, I suggest you to learn Estonian and do some googling or come visit a library here.
                I can provide the scans from the book. Can you do it?

                This matter has been beaten to death and I see little point in continuing discussing it.
                wow. You are running away.

                Do prove your position. right now it looks like clear slunder about Meri.
                Last edited by Andrey; 09 May 09, 05:49.

                Comment


                • #38
                  Originally posted by Andrey View Post
                  I can provide the scans of the text.
                  I don't really care, so don't bother. What would it change? Similarly what good it would do if I scanned you some Estonian language text? Would you change your mind? Of course not. And rightly so, because what is written in that book doesn't actually mean that it happened like it is written there. In fact I think it is very unlikely it happened the way written there. I'll be the first to acknowledge that a Soviet history book isn't worth the paper it is written on as evidence. The only reason I ever brought it up, was because I found the fact that even during the occupation the story couldn't be kept straight.


                  Originally posted by Andrey View Post
                  Do you seriously believe that the versions of the same book which were printed in the capital of the Soviet Estonia in 70th in Russian and Estonian could differ so significantly that the Russian version conteined Meri's story bt Estonian - not?????
                  The same book? Why is it a same book just because it has similar sounding name? I am sure there is a number of books and various editions of those books published during the occupation. A quick search from the local used books store found me three different books with similar sounding names from the occupation era. Besides maybe Meri had more pull with the censor of the Russian language version.

                  Finally given that there are several versions of Arnold Meri's yarn in Estonian in various Estonian books from the occupation era it is not so difficult to imagine there would be different versions in the Russian language. I find that extremely likely.

                  Originally posted by Andrey View Post
                  I know a woman who herself talked with Meri. She speaks Meri's version is absolutely equal to the description I have provided.
                  Which version? You've provided several. You're really fond of calling people liars. I leave it up to you to decide whom you want call liar in this. The woman, Meri or yourself.

                  I know lots of people who've spoken to Arnold Meri. Oddly enough none of them have claimed Meri describing them an obscure event in detail while taking notes.


                  Originally posted by Andrey View Post
                  As I understand your position you spoke it was Loog who made the deeds for which Meri was awarded later. So the actions happened anmd the question is who did that feat - Loog or Meri.
                  That's not my position at all, but I am not about to rewrite my position.

                  Originally posted by Andrey View Post
                  So what? Even if all the corps commanders were full idiots - how is it related to Meri's feat-of-arms?
                  The dismal performance relates to why somebody had to come up with something positive to distract from the mess. After all keeping up the morale was what the political officers were for...

                  Originally posted by Andrey View Post
                  Do prove your position. right now it looks like clear slunder about Meri.
                  You prove your position if you want do. I've no reason to prove to you that I think Arnold Meri was an unscrupulous little nazi (whose story was as fake as could be and I am sorry he managed to escape justice to hell.

                  If you want to prove something else, youäre welcome to do it. As minimum proof, I expect at least some corroborating witness depositions and evidence from the German side that this battle with 30 dead in this location on that date ever even happened (instead of a short skirmish as described by others). This should be easy enough to obtain.

                  In the meanwhile I chanced on yet another version of the same incident in Wikipedia. This one tries to bring different versions together by claiming that Loog and others were defending at different sector and might therefore not seen Meri's actions. But this version too, describes the affair as low key pointing out that while there were wounded nobody from 415. got killed that afternoon.

                  BTW as a curious sidenote how hobbies such as this have an influence on real life. I had an embarassing moment recently when interjecting into a coversation of people discussing Meri I assumed them to be talking about Arnold and was puzzled. They were quite surprised I would bring him up. I'd forgotten that then people are talking about Meri the person (not sea) they almost always mean Lennart.
                  Last edited by pp(est); 09 May 09, 07:07.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Originally posted by Andrey View Post
                    There are a lot of such data about ROA under the command of Vlasov.

                    In these documentaries Russian soldiers of ROA dressed in Viermacht uniform smile and look ready to fight against Red Army.

                    So what? Does the existence of such documentaries proves that the most of the Soviet people didn't serve in Red Army but served in ROA?
                    Most of Estonians participating in WWII did fight against the USSR. Or you gonna claim the opposite?

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Originally posted by Shamil View Post
                      Most of Estonians participating in WWII did fight against the USSR. Or you gonna claim the opposite?
                      yes i gonna

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Originally posted by Andrey View Post
                        yes i gonna
                        So you evidentally gonna claim that present-day Estonians do not have historic memory as they do not celebrate your victory day and elect fascist anti-Russian governments that are supported by present-day fascists from the NATO, EU and US with Nazi Obama?
                        Last edited by Shamil; 09 May 09, 15:06.

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Originally posted by pp(est) View Post
                          I don't really care, so don't bother. What would it change?
                          Similarly what good it would do if I scanned you some Estonian language text?
                          Do scan the text in Estonian language.

                          Scan the description of the events and the previous and following pages (it is because you can "accidently" miss the info about Meri.)

                          And the title of the book.

                          And I'll find how to translate it.

                          Would you change your mind? Of course not. And rightly so, because what is written in that book doesn't actually mean that it happened like it is written there. In fact I think it is very unlikely it happened the way written there. I'll be the first to acknowledge that a Soviet history book isn't worth the paper it is written on as evidence. The only reason I ever brought it up, was because I found the fact that even during the occupation the story couldn't be kept straight.
                          At first provide us by the text from the book.

                          The same book? Why is it a same book just because it has similar sounding name?
                          It is not a question of similar sounding name.

                          The books had ABSOLUTELY the same name, they were preinted in the same place (Tallin) and it looks like they were done by the same authors.

                          The difference is in language (Estonian and Russian) and in date (1971 and 1973).

                          I am sure there is a number of books and various editions of those books published during the occupation. A quick search from the local used books store found me three different books with similar sounding names from the occupation era. Besides maybe Meri had more pull with the censor of the Russian language version.

                          Finally given that there are several versions of Arnold Meri's yarn in Estonian in various Estonian books from the occupation era it is not so difficult to imagine there would be different versions in the Russian language. I find that extremely likely.
                          Different versions usually differ in a little info that began to be known after the previous edition.

                          Which version? You've provided several. You're really fond of calling people liars. I leave it up to you to decide whom you want call liar in this. The woman, Meri or yourself.

                          I know lots of people who've spoken to Arnold Meri. Oddly enough none of them have claimed Meri describing them an obscure event in detail while taking notes.
                          Your and my version differ in the significant cases -

                          I state Meri was there, organised defence, fought being wounded a few times and the Germans didn't break thouth his men's position.

                          You state Meri was not there and it was Loog who did all those things and Meri was awarded for the deeds that he hadn't done.

                          The dismal performance relates to why somebody had to come up with something positive to distract from the mess. After all keeping up the morale was what the political officers were for...
                          Oh. It looks like now you are speaking - It was Meri's job to do that so his actions were not so heroic. Am I right?

                          So now you don't deny the fact he did what he spoke?

                          You prove your position if you want do. I've no reason to prove to you that I think Arnold Meri was an unscrupulous little nazi (whose story was as fake as could be and I am sorry he managed to escape justice to hell.
                          Now the facts are clear - it looks like you are a LIAR.

                          It's not my opinion - the facts speak it.

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Originally posted by Andrey View Post
                            Different versions usually differ in a little info that began to be known after the previous edition.
                            Like a different version of this particular incident which was not very important. Its not like I think the other stories in the book are true...

                            Originally posted by Andrey View Post
                            I state Meri was there, organised defence, fought being wounded a few times and the Germans didn't break thouth his men's position.

                            You state Meri was not there and it was Loog who did all those things and Meri was awarded for the deeds that he hadn't done.
                            I know that neither you nor I was there and thus it doesn't matter what I or you state.

                            I think you need to read again what I've been writing. I've not written that Meri was not there and I've not claimed anybody did the things Meri claimed he did. I've relayed the claims of other officers who think Loog and maybe some others were the one's who should be credited for stopping the advance and that it was only a little skirmish and thus it is very questionable if anybody really deserved any medal for the action.

                            Originally posted by Andrey View Post
                            Oh. It looks like now you are speaking - It was Meri's job to do that so his actions were not so heroic. Am I right?
                            Huh? I think it was Meri's job to put some spin on an otherwise bitter pill. Inventing a nice story about heroic defence with himself as the hero. Sounds like a perfect career move, a move he immediatily capitalized by making sure he never had to see the front again.

                            Originally posted by Andrey View Post
                            So now you don't deny the fact he did what he spoke?
                            It is possible that one of the numerous versions he has told is true. But they cannot all be true and honestly I think it most likely that none of them are completely true.

                            Originally posted by Andrey View Post
                            Now the facts are clear - it looks like you are a LIAR.
                            I think the facts are clear only in that you are easily excitable and you're obsessed with something as unimportant as this. It is also a fact that I think A.M was an unscrupulous little nazi.

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              pp(est), at first reread your own posts in the previous thread about Meri.

                              Now it looks like you are trying to soften those of your statements.

                              Comment

                              Latest Topics

                              Collapse

                              Working...
                              X