>>520202506
>killing jews, but they didn't kill THAT many
>because they didn't want to take responsibility for killing jews, even if they didn't kill THAT many
>because nobody would believe them or care if they did and also because they did it
>price of tea in china?
>for the sake of maintaining a sociopolitical narrative, not financial gain
>they meant murder, but they didn't kill THAT many
>they cut it off of the jews they brought in to be worked to death
>how can we verify that it was 97,000 gassed to death in the trucks and not 9,700? 970? why do we trust nazis to tell the truth?
>because they were starved to death
>why are we trusting nazis to tell the truth on how many people they killed? on internal documentation in a regime where failure to deliver could mean getting SENT to one of those camps?
>ask the USSR, who probably sent a not-insignificant number of forcibly relocated jews to camps or farms, or else facilitated them starting a new life somewhere on the oblast
>because they hated jews and wanted them all to die
>to gas people, duh
>some were probably transferred away to be somebody's private servant or psychosexual plaything on top of simply being murdered
>probably not, assuming the letter is genuine
>extremely plausible considering the stakes involved, the fact that they were the rulers of the world and still are 70+ years on, and the insane things that those governments have done to manipulate their OWN people on their OWN soil.
>price of tea in china?
>probably not, but he didn't come as close to realizing the extermination of all jewry as the modern west really really wants you to believe
>price of tea in china?
>obviously they were executed whether or not they actually had typhus
>why would the nazis want to flaunt that they were just shuffling jews around into what they said was all german land to begin with, instead of exterminating them and all the other untermensch to deliver that land to the german people?