Is there a reason that this is posted in this Forum? Your thread was NOT deleted from Jan's site - in fact - I replied to it yesterday, when I first noticed it (after Jerry posted a reply - along with numerous other folks, including Jan).
You may not like reading the replies, but I'm not ashamed of my post which appears there (and copied below).
++ Originally posted yesterday on Jan's site, copied to this Forum today ++
I wrote this earlier today â?? and it was much longer in length â?? and was, shall we say â??somewhat terserâ??. Below is the â??kinder & gentlerâ?, albeit condensedâ? version of that earlier postâ?¦..
---
Nietzsche posts: â?¦.As are one or two remarks on the Kreighoffs, but thatâ??s another matterâ?¦.
I am somewhat mystified by that comment? Frankly, I applaud Mr. Still for an excellent presentation of Krieghoff manufactured Lugers in THIRD REICH LUGERS. Further, I also believe I am correct that the HK section was done in conjunction and cooperation with other noted Krieghoff collectors. Personally, while the HK section is abbreviated - I found the information presented by Mr. Still well researched, concise and â??updatedâ? in several regards as compared to even Mr. Gibsonâ??s presentation contained within his excellent efforts (to which Mr. Still often defers in his book).
(Edit/delete of some good stuff hereâ?¦) I take a contemptuous view of a public post such as yours. In short, it appears as a veiled attempt to disgrace and discredit a noted researcher and author â?? and frankly, based on such trite issues as whether Stukaâ??s had bombs in itâ??s racks, or â??ROWEâ? scratching his name in his personal war souvenir (I believe he was entitled to do so, as he put his life on the line each day to acquire it.), or the count of motorcycles versus horses, as well as other trite and trivial â??inconsistenciesâ? to which you refer.
Exactly what do any of those â??inconsistenciesâ? you noted have to do with the huge tome of factual Luger information and research presented within THIRD REICH LUGERS? Or perhaps you could share with us as to why we should even care whether there were propaganda photos used in the publication?
(More edit/deletions of some more good stuff here, tooâ?¦) I would think, should you have had a question regarding E/135 stamps or out-of-sequence production or Japanese Lugers (out of your entire diatribe, I believe those were the only relevant questions pertaining to the actual reference subject?), perhaps a question to the Forum would have served the purpose better â?? rather then a â??Book Reviewâ? focusing on trite and inconsequential trivia which has no bearing on the primary book topic?
(HUGE DELETION of some â??commentsâ? here, too.â?¦)
To Mr. Still:
I have never met you. We have never spoken in person. For that, understand how much we appreciate your efforts, your work and your research. And while Iâ??m at it â?? and appreciate this Forum which you provide. Yes, I use three volumes of your books on a regular basis and find them to be excellent and accurate references. While my copies are less abused then Pancho's â?? I find them equally as valuable albeit slightly less battered and tattered then Panchoâ??s copies.
John
BTW: My only self-serving suggestion would be â?? would you consider moving the Krieghoff section to the front of the book, please (insert smiley here)? You see â?? in getting to that last section in your book â?? Iâ??m often diverted by the other Luger variations I see when flipping to the HK areaâ?¦..
++ End Copied Post ++
|