Posted by Friend [Friend] on April 02, 1999 at 07:04:25 {ppHCdFLRUMBao8LWLRQ.OgnjR4Br/g}:
In Reply to: Known to be Untrue, Part 2 posted by Captain of My Fate on April 02, 1999 at 05:04:17:
COMF
I really don�t think your accusation that dishonesty was portrayed is valid relative to JW deaths at the hands of Nazis. As I said earlier, there are no absolute numbers of how many JWs were imprisoned during W.W.II by Nazi Germany. Likewise there are no absolute numbers of how many died at the hands of Nazi Germany. Several different estimations of those JW deaths have been made which vary. In my opinion that is why there is such a variety in published numbers related at the link above.
Early on estimations were pretty wild because of obvious problems that everyone had with actual statistics of the atrocities committed by Nazi Germany. Eventually estimations relative to those JW deaths gained more objectivity when the WTS intentionally researched the issue for it�s 1974 Yearbook. However, those figures represent the Society�s findings via it�s own sources and remained an estimation albeit a more objective one. As with any history, details vary (even statistics) depending upon sources. More recent secular writers have estimated between 2,000 and 2,500 JW deaths at the hands of Nazi Germany. I say, so what about the differences. Regardless of whose statistics you use horrible atrocities were committed against JW for one reason, they would not waver from their Christian position.
When news of the atrocities committed by Nazi Germany began trickling out of Germany the world was stunned. Regarding Jehovah�s witnesses no one really knew just how many had suffered cruel deaths at the hand of Nazi persecutors, but they knew for a fact that many had died and that many more had been horribly scarred from the experience. Regardless of who you are, when you have certain knowledge of that variety there is a moral obligation to let the world know, even if less important details are lacking.
Let me ask you a question. If you knew for a fact that your neighbor was raping and killing children, and you knew that had been done to scores of children, wouldn�t you tell authorities, the press and the world just what you thought, including your personal estimation of the scope? If you knew the atrocity had in fact occurred, would you even hesitate to get the word out, even though your count might be 50% high or low? Would the count really even matter at that point? If you estimated too high or too low, would it be fair for someone to later accuse you of lying? Should you now be required to apologize for your actions?
Since the WTS more objectively researched the issue resulting in its own published statistics (1974 Yearbook, which is still an estimation), the WTS has been careful to point out just where other estimations come from and usually they refer readers back to there own estimations for sake of accuracy. To me, that is honest.
I see no hint of dishonesty in what you�ve presented but rather a normal and legitimate migration of information and sorting out of details as time went along.
Friend