Search Results
7/5/2025, 8:23:15 PM
>>17816965
>That said there have been investigations. WE have mass graves and testimony from both victims and perpetrators.
I thought they said all the bodies (including all of the bones of millions of people) were burned to ash with their magical inexhaustible supply of fuel, and that's why they couldn't find the mass graves correlating to the claims of the amount killed.
>and testimony from both victims and perpetrators.
Yes, there is plenty of testimony recorded. But the parts of the story where they all disagreed about what happened, is what we call "inconsistent testimony." This inconvenient reality is where the official "historians" came in, to try to present a "clean" narrative. The problem is they had to keep changing it over the years. The fact is that the whole official narrative is artificial. If you go to the testimony level, you final instantly there are tons of contradictions, except about the details that actually happened.
>>17816979
>There's no concrete part about the holocaust
The only part of the narrative that is concrete is the part that's not even controversial. But these people try to essentially say through some roundabout way, that because there were camps, that means virtually every claim of what happened in the camps is true. Even when these people are known to have a serious problem with honesty (due to their moral code, if you can call it that) and we find inconsistencies everywhere. Their official "historians" try to clean it up, but they keep changing their story too.
>That said there have been investigations. WE have mass graves and testimony from both victims and perpetrators.
I thought they said all the bodies (including all of the bones of millions of people) were burned to ash with their magical inexhaustible supply of fuel, and that's why they couldn't find the mass graves correlating to the claims of the amount killed.
>and testimony from both victims and perpetrators.
Yes, there is plenty of testimony recorded. But the parts of the story where they all disagreed about what happened, is what we call "inconsistent testimony." This inconvenient reality is where the official "historians" came in, to try to present a "clean" narrative. The problem is they had to keep changing it over the years. The fact is that the whole official narrative is artificial. If you go to the testimony level, you final instantly there are tons of contradictions, except about the details that actually happened.
>>17816979
>There's no concrete part about the holocaust
The only part of the narrative that is concrete is the part that's not even controversial. But these people try to essentially say through some roundabout way, that because there were camps, that means virtually every claim of what happened in the camps is true. Even when these people are known to have a serious problem with honesty (due to their moral code, if you can call it that) and we find inconsistencies everywhere. Their official "historians" try to clean it up, but they keep changing their story too.
Page 1