katzenplatz
Member
How do the DougB/Hicks apologists explain away the statement about "plenty of period photographic evidence" that C-SS decals existed?
DougB exposes "Champagne Rune" SS Decal Fraud and Adds a Coffin Nail to XRFacts
- Thread starter Hambone
- Start date
tjg79
Senior Member
I don't think anyone is defending Doug B and Kelly Hicks. This thread is about Doug B's revelation that the C-SS lid insignia isn't a decal. It's a spray job fake. Doug B was initially wrong on XRF lid testing and the C-SS lid, but he eventually rejected those bogus opinions based on evidence. I think it's remarkable, because it's very clear that many lid collectors don't follow that type of logic. They defy evidence, facts and common sense.
I think it's safe to assume that Doug B defended the C-SS lid when he thought they were legit. As for the "plenty of period photographic evidence" comment, that's clearly bogus, but we don't know if Doug B and Kelly Hicks actually thought they saw period photos with C-SS lids. If it's one thing I've noticed about lid discussions, it's that there's a lot of bogus comments. Did anyone ever call Doug B out to produce the period photographic evidence? Did anyone ever start a thread asking for period photographic evidence to be posted?
I fully understand the concern about that "plenty of period photographic evidence" comment, because it's obviously a bogus comment based on what we know today. It's a false statement. Everyone should be offended by false statements.
But slandering Doug B now with false statements and theories, statements and theories based on speculation and no supporting evidence, is just as bad, if not worse, than making knowingly false statements about period photographic evidence or unknowingly false statements and refusing to produce the proof.
M45
Well-known member
but we don't know if Doug B and Kelly Hicks actually thought they saw period photos with C-SS lids.
When there is loads of $$$ to be made, it becomes clear why people think they see things that aren't there, like clear period pulver and base construction.
Did anyone ever call Doug B out to produce the period photographic evidence? Did anyone ever start a thread asking for period photographic evidence to be posted?
Nobody ever really called DougB out on anything who wasn't censored, harassed, buried under a massive heap of B. S. or banned in short order. He was a King inside of his Kingdom, and you just don't talk that way to a King. Even after he is gone, the order on GHW2 is that we SHALL honor the memory of DougB. Sounds like a decree from a succeeding King, does it not ?
I fully understand the concern about that "plenty of period photographic evidence" comment, because it's obviously a bogus comment based on what we know today. It's a false statement. Everyone should be offended by false statements.
Very good tjg, you have moved up from it being merely a "flaky" statement to being more of what it really is, a "false statement". Yes I agree that we should all be offended by false statements, but also that the more of them that are made the darker the cloud of suspicion becomes.
But slandering Doug B now with false statements and theories, statements and theories based on speculation and no supporting evidence, is just as bad, if not worse, than making knowingly false statements about period photographic evidence or unknowingly false statements and refusing to produce the proof.
I am essentially putting DougB and Kelly on trial, and as the "prosecuting attorney" I'm am making my case before the "jury" (collecting community) and am being challenged by the "defense attorneys" (tjg and others). Something like this would NEVER be permitted on the 3 helmet forums.
When there is loads of $$$ to be made, it becomes clear why people think they see things that aren't there, like clear period pulver and base construction.
Did anyone ever call Doug B out to produce the period photographic evidence? Did anyone ever start a thread asking for period photographic evidence to be posted?
Nobody ever really called DougB out on anything who wasn't censored, harassed, buried under a massive heap of B. S. or banned in short order. He was a King inside of his Kingdom, and you just don't talk that way to a King. Even after he is gone, the order on GHW2 is that we SHALL honor the memory of DougB. Sounds like a decree from a succeeding King, does it not ?
I fully understand the concern about that "plenty of period photographic evidence" comment, because it's obviously a bogus comment based on what we know today. It's a false statement. Everyone should be offended by false statements.
Very good tjg, you have moved up from it being merely a "flaky" statement to being more of what it really is, a "false statement". Yes I agree that we should all be offended by false statements, but also that the more of them that are made the darker the cloud of suspicion becomes.
But slandering Doug B now with false statements and theories, statements and theories based on speculation and no supporting evidence, is just as bad, if not worse, than making knowingly false statements about period photographic evidence or unknowingly false statements and refusing to produce the proof.
I am essentially putting DougB and Kelly on trial, and as the "prosecuting attorney" I'm am making my case before the "jury" (collecting community) and am being challenged by the "defense attorneys" (tjg and others). Something like this would NEVER be permitted on the 3 helmet forums.
Last edited:
tjg79
Senior Member
I haven't seen the alleged "plenty of period photographs" post by Doug B. Can you post a quote from the forum? I know his GHW2 forum posts are gone, but he's got over 5K WAF posts. And, it might exist on the WR forum. Find it and prove he actually posted this alleged comment.
tjg79
Senior Member
I don't know why you can't see photos. Perhaps you don't have enough posts yet.
A good place to ask that type of question is in the Forum Help sub-forum.
Welcome to the K98k Forum Spoof.
M45
Well-known member
Attachments
Last edited:
tjg79
Senior Member
Well, forum posts in general are not always carefully typed. If you want to keelhaul him, I think you need a good quote where he specifically says there's "plenty of period photographs of the C-SS lid." He doesn't specifically state that in your screen shot. It's important to post the link as well so we can see the entire context in which he's talking.
If this is the only example, then I think your allegation is weak. That's just my opinion.
M45
Well-known member
If I had been contemplating the purchase of a C-SS helmet on this date and was wanting to know if period photographic evidence existed to prove C-SS and read DougB's post, I would have concluded that champagne SS was included as SS helmets having plenty of period photographic evidence. I think the 'reasonable man' would have made the same conclusion as he mentioned C-SS in a positive light while discussing period photographic evidence.
And while you personally may not agree, how about if were hear from C-SS victims who depended on DougB ?
And while you personally may not agree, how about if were hear from C-SS victims who depended on DougB ?
tjg79
Senior Member
If you were contemplating the purchase of a C-SS lid on that date and wanted to know if there was period photographs of the C-SS lid, you should have asked that specific question. Also, you could buy a Kelly Hicks COA and buy his lid picture book and see a C-SS lid prominently published. So, I don't think Doug B is the guy you should blame. Doug B was just a student of Kelly Hicks, but the student eventually surpassed his teacher.
I think I'm reasonable and I don't get that impression from the Doug B screen shot on WRF. The issue is ambiguous based on that quote and I would've asked a specific question. The connection between the "period photographs" and Champagne is weak in that screen shot.
tjg79
Senior Member
Hey katzenplatz, are you quoting a forum post or hearsay?
If you're quoting a forum post, post a screen shot and the link that proves Doug B made the "plenty of period photographic evidence" that C-SS decals existed.
If you're quoting hearsay, I think you need to check your facts.
M45
Well-known member
http://www.warrelics.eu/forum/ss-helmet-forum/question-about-m42-ss-lid-30088/?highli
http://www.warrelics.eu/forum/ss-helmet-forum/question-about-m42-ss-lid-30088/?highlight=champagne
As Ty has stated there are many M42 SS decaled helmets, and plenty of period photographic evidence to support this. M42 models EF, ET/ckl and hkp were the most common found with SS decals. EF had their own unique decal and is quite a striking decal, while ET used their decal along with the probable private contract Champagne decal which is also common on hkp M42 helmets as well. Occasionally you will find CA Pocher decals in a reverse application on former M42 police helmets where the CA Pocher will cover the police decal, or be added to the left side of an EF decal which is pretty cool to have an EF and CA Pocher decaled SS helmet. These CA Pocher decals were field applied, and probably to foreign volunteers or as said, former Polezei units. The no decal order came down in November 1943 but there is no proof to show the execution of the order was immediate in all factories.
If you want to keelhaul him, I think you need a good quote where he specifically says there's "plenty of period photographs of the C-SS lid."
The paragraph above is complete, while the one below has been edited to remove the 'non-essential' material to arrive at the more direct quote you are looking for. This is done all of the time in newspaper and magazine articles.
As Ty has stated there are many M42 SS decaled helmets, and plenty of period photographic evidence to support this. M42 models....with the probable private contract Champagne decal which is also common on hkp M42 helmets as well.
http://www.warrelics.eu/forum/ss-helmet-forum/question-about-m42-ss-lid-30088/?highlight=champagne
As Ty has stated there are many M42 SS decaled helmets, and plenty of period photographic evidence to support this. M42 models EF, ET/ckl and hkp were the most common found with SS decals. EF had their own unique decal and is quite a striking decal, while ET used their decal along with the probable private contract Champagne decal which is also common on hkp M42 helmets as well. Occasionally you will find CA Pocher decals in a reverse application on former M42 police helmets where the CA Pocher will cover the police decal, or be added to the left side of an EF decal which is pretty cool to have an EF and CA Pocher decaled SS helmet. These CA Pocher decals were field applied, and probably to foreign volunteers or as said, former Polezei units. The no decal order came down in November 1943 but there is no proof to show the execution of the order was immediate in all factories.
If you want to keelhaul him, I think you need a good quote where he specifically says there's "plenty of period photographs of the C-SS lid."
The paragraph above is complete, while the one below has been edited to remove the 'non-essential' material to arrive at the more direct quote you are looking for. This is done all of the time in newspaper and magazine articles.
As Ty has stated there are many M42 SS decaled helmets, and plenty of period photographic evidence to support this. M42 models....with the probable private contract Champagne decal which is also common on hkp M42 helmets as well.
tjg79
Senior Member
You need to work on your reading skills. If that quote is the source of the myth that Doug B believed in plenty of period photographic evidence of the C-SS lid, then the myth is now busted. Your statements that Doug B said that there was "plenty of period photographic evidence of the C-SS lid" is a FALSE STATEMENT.
tjg79
Senior Member
Actually, I think it's more like slinging mud that doesn't stick. M45 needs to add some factual water to his mud.
It seems to me, from what I'm seeing, the issue of DougB's "advocacy" for period pics of the "Champagne Rune" existing is resolved; DougB did not say that from where I sit. While I see him at one point believing in the "Champagne Rune" earlier on in his collecting, he relied upon Kelly Hicks and his authority and books, the same guy that " Nutmeg " proklaimed a "god" while insulting and ridiculing ZAM, the man who got it right at WAF. " Nutmeg " is also the WAF regular who smeared anyone for questioning XRFacts.
My opinion is simple from what I see: DougB believed in XRFacts and the "Champagne Rune" because the WAF exspurts strongly advocated those positions and censored anything to the contrary. Once DougB did his own investigation, based upon complete information, his positions changed and he stated as much. I believe this shows substantial integrity.
My opinion is simple from what I see: DougB believed in XRFacts and the "Champagne Rune" because the WAF exspurts strongly advocated those positions and censored anything to the contrary. Once DougB did his own investigation, based upon complete information, his positions changed and he stated as much. I believe this shows substantial integrity.
