Coffin Ships The skeletons on the memorial were to honor the dead. “To honour the memory of all who died, suffered and emigrated due to the Great Famine of 1845 – 1850, and the victims of all famines.” reads the marker in stone for the memorial
They were called “coffin ships,” because so many poor souls had been dying on them as of late, leaving behind widows and orphans and broken families. Typically untrustworthy vessels, these ships were purchased literally from salvage yards (where they awaiting dismantling) by unscrupulous owners who had no intention of repairing them. Sailors who agreed to serve on board these floating wrecks typically knew nothing of the dangers until they were well out at sea, vagabonds, and those desperate for work (of which there were plenty) quickly volunteered.
Concerned only with profits, these same ship owners heavily overburdened the ships then insured them against expected losses of cargo. They were quite literally worth more at the bottom of the sea than upon it.
Britist ships were only required to supply 7 lbs. of food per week per passenger. Most passengers, it was assumed, would bring along their own food for the journey. But most of the poor Irish boarded ships with no food, depending entirely on the pound-a-day handout which amounted to starvation rations.
Belowdecks, hundreds of men, women and children huddled together in the dark on bare wooden floors with no ventilation, breathing a stench of vomit and the effects of diarrhea amid no sanitary facilities. On ships that actually had sleeping berths, there were no mattresses and the berths were never cleaned. Many sick persons remained in bare wooden bunks lying in their own filth for the entire voyage, too ill to get up.
Water was the final nail in the proverbial coffin. The water was often stored in leaky old wooden casks, or in casks that previously stored wine, vinegar or chemicals which contaminated the water and caused dysentery. Many ships ran out of water long before reaching British North America, creating dehydration and desperation. Some unscrupulous captains profited by selling large amounts of alcohol to the passenger, instead of water, pushing them to the brink, and sometimes over, of death.
The Statistics for July 1847 grant the simplest indication of the horrors that were being endured. Ten vessels arrived in that month alone and of the 4,427 Irish immigrants that had started their journeys 804 had died on the passage while 847 were sick on arrival.
Re: The peoples voice.
Posted: Wed Dec 18, 2013 11:05 am
by seemslikeadream
AD
I'll see YOUR holocaust denial and RAISE YOU 10 fold....no doubt!
HEY!
don't come around here no more
GIVE IT UP!
I don't feel you any more you darken my door Whatever you're looking for Hey! don't come around here no more
Re: The peoples voice.
Posted: Wed Dec 18, 2013 11:36 am
by seemslikeadream
AD get back to me in 175 years when someone is still denying YOUR holocaust and then we can compare holocaust denying on an equal footing....
slimmouse » Tue Dec 17, 2013 2:42 pm wrote:Heres a truly priceless interview by Ritchie Allen with Nick Kollerstrom, informing people of how the official storry of 7/7 is actually what most riggies recognise any official story to be. Namely a crock of deceptively fabricated crap. I hope Byrne, or some other informed people on the 7/7 deception can comment on Kollerstroms accuracy. He sure sounds pretty damn close, to me at least.
Kollerstroms greatest hits:
In "The Auschwitz 'Gas Chamber' Illusion," first published on the CODOH website in June 2007, Kollerstrom wrote that there were no "lethal gas chambers" in the Nazi's concentration camps, that cyanide gas chambers operated in Auschwitz only for the purpose of hygiene and disinfection, and that "the only intentional mass extermination program in the concentration camps of World War Two was targeted at Germans" in French and American-run concentration camps.
In "School trips to Auschwitz," he wrote:
Let us hope the schoolchildren visitors are properly taught about the elegant swimming-pool at Auschwitz, built by the inmates, who would sunbathe there on Saturday and Sunday afternoons while watching the water-polo matches; and shown the paintings from its art class, which still exist; and told about the camp library which had some forty-five thousand volumes for inmates to choose from, plus a range of periodicals; and the six camp orchestras at Auschwitz/Birkenau, its theatrical performances, including a children's opera, the weekly camp cinema, and even the special brothel established there. Let's hope they are shown postcards written from Auschwitz, some of which still exist, where the postman would collect the mail twice-weekly. Thus the past may not always be quite, as we were told."
Thank you for that Solace. I'm sure it was exhausting having to click your mouse a few times and read a wikipedia article. You'll have to forgive them. It's easy to see how how Icke and his team might have missed Kollerstrom's anti-semitic holocaust revisionism.
wikipedia wrote:UCL announced on 22 April 2008 that it had removed Kollerstrom's honorary fellowship after articles of his were published on Holocaust denial websites. The college wrote that he had expressed views "diametrically opposed to the aims, objectives and ethos of UCL, such that we wish to have absolutely no association with them or with their originator."[3]
Anyone here wish to deny the Indian or Armenian holocaust. How about the native American, or aboriginal, or Irish?
I mean its clearly important to humanity, if not to some on this board.
How about ethnic cleansing around the world as it currently exists?
Which are the hotspots you might highlight when it comes to brutality and inyerface racism that is beyond the standards of any honourable human being?
My two cents: I'd say the Nazi holocaust is arguably the worst. It was carefully planned and then industrialized. They literally built extermination factories. No disrespect to victims of other genocides, but "Let's build factories to make the extermination of unwanted people more efficient" is worse (relatively speaking) than "Let's starve the bastards to death".
Anyone here wish to deny the Indian or Armenian holocaust. How about the native American, or aboriginal, or Irish?
I mean its clearly important to humanity, if not to some on this board.
How about ethnic cleansing around the world as it currently exists?
Which are the hotspots you might highlight when it comes to brutality and inyerface racism that is beyond the standards of any honourable human being?
Two wrongs never make a right- nor do they serve to minimize the monstrous wrongness of it all. Dr. Evil is making a very important point just above. That said, see also: Economic Aspects of "Love"- there's 163 pages there and it barely scratches the surface...
Re: The peoples voice.
Posted: Wed Dec 18, 2013 2:23 pm
by coffin_dodger
Just as a curiosity, can anyone cite another example of an event from the history of the human species that is unable to be revised, regardless of any new evidence coming to light? In fact, any other event in human history which cannot be scrutinised full-stop, for fear of discrimination, ostracization, contempt and in some cases, penal sentences?
Re: The peoples voice.
Posted: Wed Dec 18, 2013 2:27 pm
by American Dream
coffin_dodger » Wed Dec 18, 2013 1:23 pm wrote:Just as a curiosity, can anyone cite another example of an event from the history of the human species that is unable to be revised, regardless of any new evidence coming to light? In fact, any other event in human history which cannot be scrutinised full-stop, for fear of discrimination, ostracization, contempt and in some cases, penal sentences?
That's ridiculous! The Nazi Holocaust certainly has been critiqued and revised by non-racists, non-reactionaries, as for example by Norman Finkelstein...
Re: The peoples voice.
Posted: Wed Dec 18, 2013 2:34 pm
by slimmouse
American Dream wrote:
coffin_dodger » Wed Dec 18, 2013 1:23 pm wrote:Just as a curiosity, can anyone cite another example of an event from the history of the human species that is unable to be revised, regardless of any new evidence coming to light? In fact, any other event in human history which cannot be scrutinised full-stop, for fear of discrimination, ostracization, contempt and in some cases, penal sentences?
That's ridiculous! The Nazi Holocaust certainly has been critiqued and revised by non-racists, non-reactionaries, as for example by Norman Finkelstein...
Why exactly does the truth need a law to defend it?
coffin_dodger » Wed Dec 18, 2013 1:23 pm wrote:Just as a curiosity, can anyone cite another example of an event from the history of the human species that is unable to be revised, regardless of any new evidence coming to light? In fact, any other event in human history which cannot be scrutinised full-stop, for fear of discrimination, ostracization, contempt and in some cases, penal sentences?
That's ridiculous! The Nazi Holocaust certainly has been critiqued and revised by non-racists, non-reactionaries, as for example by Norman Finkelstein...
Why exactly does the truth need a law to defend it?
It doesn't, but for historical reasons Nazi propaganda and hate crimes are criminalized in many European countries. Wearing a swastika in public is illegal in Norway for instance.
