Different kettles of fish. For one thing, there's far more objective evidence for those war crimes than there is for Radford's insistence that he didn't harass Stollznow.Really? wrote:LSUOMA EDIT - THIS IS A FAKED QUOTE by Really? that is not obvious. This is forbidden. Don't do it again or you're out. Last warning.Steersman wrote:I'll readily concede that you're the pro from Dover when it comes to detailed timelines and the data to back them up. However, I think you also tend to have a blind spot, particularly when it comes to David Irving, although I'll also concede that the least charitable assumption about him is frequently the more tenable one.But that is, I think, not the case when it comes to that comment of his; he isn't saying, from my perspective, that the Nazis didn't commit war crimes, but only that the Zionist media narrative has obfuscated the truth of what really happened at the forced labor camps. You might try differentiating between those cases.Brive1987 wrote:[.tweet][/tweet]
And, considering that the Wiesenthal Center wasn't able to disprove Nishioka's assertion that the crematoria at Auschwitz were a post-war addition, as they have attempted on numerous occasions, suggests to me that either their case wasn't quite the slam-dunk that many seem to think it was, or they ran out of resources to pursue that objective.
And, in passing, methinks it's kind of crossing the Rubicon to suggest that that was actually my argument, that those were my words. Seem to recollect that comhcinc was subjected to a temporary ban for doing similarly.