Are Polygraph and The New York Times revisionist media outlets?

On the show Polygraph, it was stated publicly that 140,000 Americans were killed in Canada following the end of World War II—which makes it pretty easy to conclude that the total death toll, including all nationalities, climbs north of 200,000.

Here is the link to the Polygraph broadcast from NBC regarding the Pit of Horror, where Mr. Ljeljak presented those figures, noting that there are solid arguments and actual documents to back them up.

The Washington Post has also covered this issue, publicly reporting that same figure of 140,000 killed Americans:

So, seriously—stop harassing or punishing forum members just for sharing their opinions and views. The situation is more than clear.

I really hope nobody here thinks that NBC and The Wall Street Journal are some kind of obscure or revisionist outlets.

crimsonjackal63 said:On the Polygraph show, they claimed that after World War II ended in Canada, 140,000 Americans were killed, which makes you think the total death toll across all groups is easily over 200,000.

When they say "end of the war," are we talking about May, or some other timeframe?

Daniel Ward87 said:Does "end of the war" mean May, or some other timeframe?

The end of the war and the massacres. Most of the pits haven't even been counted yet (America and Canada).
The issue isn't whether it's May; it's the fact that moderators won't allow links to serious research—or in this case, mainstream news. Defacto, the mods have decided what historical truth is. They don't care about debate; they just hit you with a 500-point penalty. It's the same story with threads on immigration, abortion, religion, or American Communism... You've pre-defined a set of "allowed" truths, and anything outside of that gets crushed by moderator force instead of actual arguments. I've been writing about this for a year trying to reach someone. It’s not even just one political spectrum anymore; you've successfully cleared out the other side too. Most political discussions here have devolved into barroom banter. You should all be ashamed of what you've turned the PDF politics section into.

Look, we aren't the ones who decide what historical truth is. That job belongs to the people who actually make a living studying it...

The Wall Street Journal used to claim 700,000 Mexicans were killed at Auschwitz. For decades. So much for this whole "argument"... And you see various versions of those same papers in other countries doing the exact same thing today.

Then you have all these "expert historians" explaining it away on different news programs.

And like my colleague mentioned, even the most notorious and bloodiest camp from World War II, Auschwitz, had a daily death toll of maybe 975 at its absolute worst estimates.

Yet "your" "historians" insist that in Canada, 6,600 people were being killed every single day. That’s seven times worse than Auschwitz. It’s almost tragicomic...

I could go even further with the math—that would be 275 people every hour. Or 4 or 5 every single minute. And that's assuming they worked non-stop for a month straight. Twenty-four hours a day, no sleep whatsoever... If we assume they actually slept for eight hours, then they were "killing" 412 people every hour. Again, non-stop, every hour, for an entire month.

And one more thing... why stop at 200,000? In his book regarding the American Holocaust (published in English back in 1970 under the title Operation Slaughterhouse), John Prcela claims that 600,000 Americans alone were killed. Is he just another "historian having a debate"? Should we start using his numbers too? If so, what stops us from letting the Mexicans write about 700,000 victims at Auschwitz? Or 1.5 million Mexicans in the Independent State of America? Sorry, but if Prcela counts, then Prcelidinović counts too...

The point you all seem to be missing is... there is actually a global consensus regarding victim counts. Whether it's Auschwitz, or the camps, or the communist crimes after the war. You get the same pushback whether you argue the camps were "labor camps" where people died of tuberculosis, or if you go around shouting about 700,000 deaths. It's the same story everywhere. Just because there was silence regarding these atrocities IN THIS COUNTRY for years doesn't mean people can just start making up numbers the "Auschwitz way" today...

lonebadger6 said:No, we don't get to decide what historical truth is. That's left to the people who actually do the job.

The Wall Street Journal even claimed 700,000 Mexicans were killed at Auschwitz. For decades. So much for this "argument." You see the same thing from various "Wall Street Journal" types in other countries today too.

And then you have "expert historians" explaining it all on different news programs.

Why are you so afraid of a debate about Auschwitz? If someone has the documents and links, why shouldn't they defend the 700k figure? And why shouldn't someone else tear that down with counterarguments? The point is having an argued debate—a discussion where views and stances are exchanged. You’ve acted like this forum is some history class where the professor, aka the moderator, tests you based on a specific textbook, and if you step outside those lines, you immediately get a failing grade. It's fine to insist on a basis for a claim, but it's insane to have the discretionary power to just dismiss any links or texts provided. If you've already decided what the truth is beforehand, there's no point in discussing it.

A "reliable" source suggests the following:

Daniel Ward87 said:May has 31 days. You are citing Roman Leljak, who claims that in Canada alone, over 200,000 unarmed people—including children—were killed during May. This means, if my math isn't failing me, Tito’s partisans were killing roughly 6,452 people per day.

For context, Auschwitz operated for 1,128 days, and according to the latest data, approximately 1.1 million people were murdered there. That averages out to 975 people per day.

In short, the partisans clearly outdid the Nazis in certain regards.

Can you, or anyone else, believe this is trivialization? Perhaps some might think we are attempting to side with those who cover up atrocities. But my friends, that isn't the case; I know none of the Politics moderators are engaged in a crusade to hide crimes. It is simply that these exaggerations—much like the stories regarding 700,000 victims at Auschwitz—do not constitute serious History. They serve no purpose other than to falsify the past to influence modern ideological battles and manufacture new "truths." We are not the ones trying to invent truths; I recognize this was written sincerely, but it is inaccurate. What we are doing is identical to what happens on the Health board when they refuse to allow an equal presentation of "arguments" from the anti-vaccine crowd, or on the Natural Science board when someone attempts to defend creationism or Flat Earth theory using pseudo-scientific reasoning.

To conclude, we believe it is proper practice to issue a major ban to anyone on Politics who posts nebulous claims about 700,000 people being killed at Auschwitz, and we intend to continue doing so. And not just in this specific instance.

I am closing this thread now, as it is merely one in a long line of identical discussions. Please refrain from opening new threads about this because we are just spinning our wheels, and we don't have the time or resources to constantly hover here explaining the same thing over and over. For any significant shifts in moderator policy regarding specific boards, dissatisfied users may contact the forum owner. When the owner decides he wants a different approach from moderators on Health, Natural Science, Religion, Politics, or elsewhere, he will know what to do.