Sobibor / Roberto Muehlenkamp's duplicity exposed

Read and post various viewpoints or search our large archives.

Moderator: Moderator

Forum rules
Be sure to read the Rules/guidelines before you post!
User avatar
Hannover
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 10233
Joined: Sun Nov 24, 2002 7:53 pm

Re: Sobibor / Roberto Muehlenkamp's duplicity exposed

Postby Hannover » 9 years 7 months ago (Sun Jun 05, 2011 10:44 pm)

Boring.
IMO, Muehlenkamp has no response to Kues which warrants any further response and Werd is caught up in unecessarily rebutting Muehlenkamp's typical lies and silly obfuscations posted at another site. Imagine, the supposed 'most documented event in world history' and Muehlenkamp & his ilk have to fall back on 'code words'. Typical act of desperation when no proof is available.

For anyone to believe in the 'holocaust' as alleged, they must want to believe in the 'holocaust' as alleged. Let's not confuse them with facts.

- Hannover
If it can't happen as alleged, then it didn't.

Atigun
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 501
Joined: Thu Nov 16, 2006 6:13 am

Re: Sobibor / Roberto Muehlenkamp's duplicity exposed

Postby Atigun » 9 years 7 months ago (Mon Jun 06, 2011 10:44 pm)

I can't understand why Muehlenkamp or any exterminationist for that matter, have any credibility left whatsoever considering how many of their forgeries, lies and physically impossible fantasies have been exposed. Hannover's avatar showing smoke coming from a wooden pole is just one example. Stories of mass grave earthquakes and blood geysers such as at Babi Yar is another. Wiernik's claim that the little excavator shown in his book, 'A Year In Treblinka' could lift 3000 cadavers, a minimum weight in excess of 100,000 pounds is yet another in the list of forgeries, lies and impossibilities. Yet despite their history of chicanery and outright lies exterminationists are still being treated as honest brokers, truth seekers trying to determine the facts of WWII history.

Is there a list, a compilation of exterminationist's proven lies and forgeries? Many of the fantasies such as the blood geysers and the Jew color coded smoke from the chimneys of Auschwitz are well known but is there a site where they have all been consolidated? I'm sure that it would make an informative and entertaining read.

Werd
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 1137
Joined: Sat May 28, 2011 2:23 am

Re: Sobibor / Roberto Muehlenkamp's duplicity exposed

Postby Werd » 9 years 7 months ago (Tue Jun 07, 2011 12:33 am)

Roberto is claiming my last post was censored/deleted. He is correct. But he doesn't explain why. Because that would cut the legs out from his argument that codoh is censor trigger happy. In response to a question blogbuster asked me, I re-answered and basically copied and pasted stuff from an older post that was already there. I could have simply said check my last post for your answers. I was repeating myself. Now that I reflect on it, my last post was indeed superfluous.

He is complaining also again about Lisciotto again on rodoh as well. However, Roberto being the hypocrit that he is feels he can challenge codoh guys to come to rodoh but he doesn't have to answer challanges from the hateblogwatch/HEART crew. He says, "if they have evidence me and my crew were phonies and engaging in criminal behavior years ago to try and take over that website, they'd publish it." That's a nice spin. If Roberto is innocent, then he'd attend that phone conference and fly out to disprove them and make them look stupid. He can even do it ON THEIR DOLLAR as they offered.

http://hateblogwatch.yuku.com/topic/286 ... GE-GERMANY
http://hateblogwatch.yuku.com/topic/291 ... -challenge

Are we really expected to believe it's logically consistent for a man like Roberto to spend his own time and money to go to places like Sobibor to try and prove his case, but he won't spend someone else's time and someone else's money to once again try and prove his own arguments whatever they are at the time? Roberto poses as someone unafraid of challenges, and yet he cowers when this one is offered to him and ignores it. As I said, it's not logically consistent. Double standards don't usually breed logical consistency. Which means something is likely up and that the hateblogwatch crew are not lying. If Roberto wants to remove all doubt, he will attend that conference FREE OF CHARGE TO HIM and shut them up and embarrass them and us who think HBW are truthful, once and for all. And he can't pull his line, "What will you accept as evidence?" He shouldn't ask us since we're supposed to be more stupid then him. He's supposed to just shove it in our face and sit back and watch us squirm. Why won't he do that with the ARC challenge? The answer is obvious. He has double standards as shown earlier. And that means he's got something to hide.

As a closer, even the holocaust exterminationists on HBW admitted Roberto got his butt kicked by nafcash. WOW! If I can find that link again, I will edit this post and put it in here.

User avatar
Moderator3
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 296
Joined: Sun Apr 18, 2004 4:01 am

Re: Sobibor / Roberto Muehlenkamp's duplicity exposed

Postby Moderator3 » 9 years 7 months ago (Tue Jun 07, 2011 2:24 pm)

Try using our search function nafcash muehlenkamp.
M3

User avatar
Blogbuster
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 184
Joined: Tue May 18, 2010 5:35 pm

Re: Sobibor / Roberto Muehlenkamp's duplicity exposed

Postby Blogbuster » 9 years 7 months ago (Thu Jun 09, 2011 7:34 am)

Werd wrote:He is complaining also again about Lisciotto again on rodoh as well. However, Roberto being the hypocrit that he is feels he can challenge codoh guys to come to rodoh but he doesn't have to answer challanges from the hateblogwatch/HEART crew. He says, "if they have evidence me and my crew were phonies and engaging in criminal behavior years ago to try and take over that website, they'd publish it." That's a nice spin. If Roberto is innocent, then he'd attend that phone conference and fly out to disprove them and make them look stupid. He can even do it ON THEIR DOLLAR as they offered.

http://hateblogwatch.yuku.com/topic/286 ... GE-GERMANY
http://hateblogwatch.yuku.com/topic/291 ... -challenge


As a closer, even the holocaust exterminationists on HBW admitted Roberto got his butt kicked by nafcash. WOW! If I can find that link again, I will edit this post and put it in here.



Over on HBW they've posted a response to Muehlenkamps verbal justification and pseudo-acceptance of their challenge.

Here is the link to it: http://hateblogwatch.yuku.com/topic/295 ... HEART-team

I read the original Muehlenkamp duplicity defense over on RODOH quite carefully, I found a few points of interest:

1.) His responses never actually deal with the issue at hand, each and everyone of them is constant attack.
2.) Muehlenkamp tries to be clever in choosing to ignore the free teleconference challenge that the HBW people put forward, and instead focuses on the "meet in Germany" aspect, which he tries to belittle by attaching on ridiculous financial requirements.
3.) HBW was/is quite clear in the terms and available options of the Teleconference, they stated the schedule can be flexible, that they would assume all costs, and that it would be open to CODOH/RODOH/HC/ARC/HEART and/or anyone else that would be interested in hearing the facts.
4.) Muehlenkamp avoids dealing with specifics and chooses to attack one individual "Lisciotto" of HEART, yet offers no evidence other than anecdotal aspersions of some connection. I would ask if anyone here has ever had contact with this Lisciotto guy? Has anyone here seen, interacted, corresponded or had any connection with the man?

5.) Other than saying this Lisciotto hates him, Muehlenkamp offers no alternative motive as to why Lisciotto would even be remotely interested or concerned in him? Since Muehlenkamp has been booted from ARC for several years now, the ARC site is still owned by Chris Webb, the HEART website has thoroughly demolished the HC blog in the Internet rankings, what logical reason would Lisciotto have to hate, or even be bothered with Muehlenamp? Isn't it Muehlenkamp who really hates Lisciotto?

Think about it?
-Muehlenkamp, Terry, and the HC crowd infiltrate and attack ARC, they are caught and expelled
-HC publishes a series of attacks on Webb
-shortly after, the ARC website is then vandalized and knocked offline
-a counterfeit version of ARC supported (publicly) by HC appears the next day
-Lisciotto is brought in by Webb to save the original ARC, he does so
-the original ARC is then back online within 30 days and its announced as an Archive
-HC then starts attacking HEART which was founded by Webb, with Lisciotto
-HC spawns a series of unprovoked attacks on the HEART group and website for the next several years
-The attacks on HEART draw no response from HEART
-HC then creates fake blogs attacking themselves and blames HEART but offers ZERO evidence to prove it
-Meanwhile, Chris Webb the legal owner of ARC has his attorneys contact Google, Yahoo, Microsoft, Wikipedia, Ask.com, and Bing, as well as other major search engines and force them to legally ban the bogus counterfeit version of ARC - they do so! Why? Because Webb is the legal owner.
-More attacks on HEART continue
-HBW appears online, and the activities of HC are exposed in detail with links, documents and humor, and although Muehlenkamp pretends to ignore HBW his shame is clear.
-Nick Terry and Sergey Romanov disappear from the Internet
-RODOH closes shop as a truly active forum

So with these set of facts, it's clear whom hates whom, and the duplicity of Roberto Muehlenkamp is made even clearer.
Blog Buster!

User avatar
Moderator3
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 296
Joined: Sun Apr 18, 2004 4:01 am

Re: Sobibor / Roberto Muehlenkamp's duplicity exposed

Postby Moderator3 » 9 years 7 months ago (Fri Jun 10, 2011 3:46 pm)

Remember, Sobibor and Muehlenkamp's attempted spin concerning it is the topic of this thread. Taking down Muehlenkamp concerning Sobibor is fine. Just going after Muehlenkamp in areas not specific to Sobibor is not.

Also, it is interesting that we do not see any of our registered Exterminationists coming to help Muehlenkamp.
M3

Goethe
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 385
Joined: Tue Dec 02, 2003 3:41 am

Re: Sobibor / Roberto Muehlenkamp's duplicity exposed

Postby Goethe » 9 years 7 months ago (Fri Jun 10, 2011 10:20 pm)

Moderator3 wrote:Also, it is interesting that we do not see any of our registered Exterminationists coming to help Muehlenkamp.M3

With all due respect, who could that possibly be? I mean come on, anyone who reviews this forum can see that those who have tried pushing their dirty "Holocaust" stories have been repeatedly made fools of. I mean there's nothing wrong with being wrong and brainwashed like we all were once, but the insistence of arguing in favor of the preposterous gas chambers and unsustainable six million after being shown ironclad common sense rebuttals leaves little room for sympathy.
"The coward threatens when he is safe".
- Johann Wolfgang von Goethe

User avatar
Blogbuster
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 184
Joined: Tue May 18, 2010 5:35 pm

Re: Sobibor / Roberto Muehlenkamp's duplicity exposed

Postby Blogbuster » 9 years 7 months ago (Sat Jun 11, 2011 2:39 pm)

Hello Moderator 3

My apologies if I appeared to go off topic. One of the reasons I posted so much detail regarding the events of ARC and Muehlenkamps involvement, is purely because the Benda document refers too, and subseqently reposted by Muehlenkamp on RODOH, is directly taken from the ARC website. So I felt there was a specific correlation.

You do however, make a very interesting point regarding how very few, in any, ever seem to champion the cause of Roberto Muehlenkamp.
By the way, he's ranted against you, Werd, and myself, as well as those on HBW, HEART, ARC etc.

It appears that according to him, we are all connected in some way. I find that interesting as well.

BB
Blog Buster!

Werd
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 1137
Joined: Sat May 28, 2011 2:23 am

Re: Sobibor / Roberto Muehlenkamp's duplicity exposed

Postby Werd » 9 years 6 months ago (Sat Jun 18, 2011 3:05 pm)

Roberto is crying censorship again.

But the HBW crew aren't buying it.
http://hateblogwatch.yuku.com/topic/299 ... -CODOH-HBW
The much despised Holocaust hate blogger Roberto Muehlenkamp is crying that the setup post from Michael Peters (aka HANS) was deleted from CODOH. Peters (also known as the molester of Alfstedt) has been investigated for improper actions with underage school girls, (nice friends Roberto), then jumped into the fray to backup Muehlenkamp when the revisionists made the amusing point that no one was assisting the hate blogger in the debate.

Shortly after (like clock work) Michael Peters/HANS arrives at CODOH touting the virtues of Muehlenkamp, loaded with spam links to the HC hate blog.

Muehlenkamp fully expected the post to be deleted, so he print-screened it ahead of time, so he could shout censorship at CODOH.

Then the old Nazi from Lisbon, ( http://muehlenkamp-watch.blogspot.com/) goes on to attack the HEART people (yet again) .... he just can't seem to move on from that can he?

A lot of hubbabalooo about everyone else being chicken, yet we all know the ARC challenge has been outstanding for over six months and the Brave Sir Roberto, has yet to show the fortitude he claims everyone else lacks, and accept the teleconference challenge.



And here is why they arne't buying it. Because the Hans post Roberto is complaining about had just links and no discussion and no opinion of Hans, either. Hans didn't do an exegesis on Roberto's work and take say one or two examples of him showing WHY he was correct and then ADDING his own explanations of WHY it was correct and WHY Kues would never be able to philosophically respond. You can't just post links with no discussion and leave. That's against the forum rules. Roberto knows that and even the extermination theorists at hbw know that which is why they aren't buying it. Here is an example.


http://holocaustcontroversies.blogspot. ... -lies.html
Sunday, June 05, 2011
Kues Lies About Segregation of Sobibor Workers

Kues states:

"The Jewish work commando(s) employed in Lager III were likewise kept separated from the rest of the prisoner population and never entered the other Lagers."

However, on page 80 footnote 171 of Sobibór: Holocaust Propaganda and Reality, Kues relies on Engel's testimony that prisoners from Camp III "came sometimes over to our Lager to bring clothes and things like that." Furthermore, the previous page quotes Freiberg's testimony showing how prisoners gained knowledge of extermination from "Prisoners in the forest" who heard "voices of people burying the corpses". Kues is therefore simply making statements against better knowledge (from testimonies he himself has relied upon) regarding the prisoners' access to sensory information. Such information was obviously incomplete regarding detail (how could it be otherwise?) but sufficient to be sure people were being killed.


Let's see the footnote on page 80.
Image

Now Kues says if this witness is telling the truth, then there are only two possibilities and his lists them both. In that part of the book MGK are going over the testimonies of inmates WHO THEMSELVES claimed that people in camp III had contact with people in the other Lagers. Merely quoting someone on an isolated page doesn't mean you agree with them Jonathan. Nice try. If you keep going, you find that MGK are pointing out absurdities and contradictions between witnesses and so calles survivors. And THESE SURVIVORS are the ones saying that people from camp III had contact with others in the other Lagers. NOT KUES.

Either Jonathan knows this mistake he made and is trying to pull one over on us, or he made an honest mistake. This is very reminiscent of the time the holocaust controversies blog accused Germar Rudolf of quote mining. As with MGK here, he misunderstands what Rudolf was trying to do years ago.
http://holocaustcontroversies.blogspot. ... urces.html

Rudolf wasn't quoting Mayer to flip his statements around and make him sound like a revisionist, but just to show one of the few admissions there are by Jews in saying that there are scientific problems with gas chamber stories. Even in the part that Rudolf left out, Mayer admitted many contradictions. So thus, Jonathan shouldn't be getting his knickers in a knot. Rudolf wasn't interested in looking for 'backup', but rather showing how IT HAS BEEN ADMITTED BY PEOPLE by implication that the work Rudolf is doing is correct and overall sound.

Hans
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 178
Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 2:44 am

Re: Sobibor / Roberto Muehlenkamp's duplicity exposed

Postby Hans » 9 years 6 months ago (Sun Jun 19, 2011 4:50 am)

Werd wrote:And here is why they arne't buying it. Because the Hans post Roberto is complaining about had just links and no discussion and no opinion of Hans, either. Hans didn't do an exegesis on Roberto's work and take say one or two examples of him showing WHY he was correct and then ADDING his own explanations of WHY it was correct and WHY Kues would never be able to philosophically respond. You can't just post links with no discussion and leave. That's against the forum rules.


This is nonsense, since the first posting of this thread by Hannover (Wed May 25, 2011 3:18 pm) and another posting by Hannover (Tue May 31, 2011 1:49 pm ) do nothing else than linking to Kues' articles and other threads without discussion. The "excerpts" are certainly no discussion. Neither saying "this is too easy". So why is it not allowed to link to Roberto's replies then? It's a joke, that one is permitted, but not the other. That's what is called censorship where I come from, by the way. Okay,it's a Revisionist forum, and some are more equal than others. But just don't call this open debate then.

User avatar
Blogbuster
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 184
Joined: Tue May 18, 2010 5:35 pm

Re: Sobibor / Roberto Muehlenkamp's duplicity exposed

Postby Blogbuster » 9 years 6 months ago (Sun Jun 19, 2011 2:46 pm)

Hans wrote:
Werd wrote:And here is why they arne't buying it. Because the Hans post Roberto is complaining about had just links and no discussion and no opinion of Hans, either. Hans didn't do an exegesis on Roberto's work and take say one or two examples of him showing WHY he was correct and then ADDING his own explanations of WHY it was correct and WHY Kues would never be able to philosophically respond. You can't just post links with no discussion and leave. That's against the forum rules.


This is nonsense, since the first posting of this thread by Hannover (Wed May 25, 2011 3:18 pm) and another posting by Hannover (Tue May 31, 2011 1:49 pm ) do nothing else than linking to Kues' articles and other threads without discussion. The "excerpts" are certainly no discussion. Neither saying "this is too easy". So why is it not allowed to link to Roberto's replies then? It's a joke, that one is permitted, but not the other. That's what is called censorship where I come from, by the way. Okay,it's a Revisionist forum, and some are more equal than others. But just don't call this open debate then.



Hans,
I think the difference is, in one case Hannover is posting links that desgined to kick start the preliminary discussion, and in your case, it's pretty obvious and spot on as the HBW people described it, in the text that Werd reposted above.

At least that is how it appears to me.

The topic is Muehlenkamps duplicty in the Sobibor discussion, at least some part of your post should be either about the stated duplicity, or how it impacts the Sobibor discussion.

If you linked to Roberto's rants on rodoh and then actually discussed them, that might be different.

Just a humble opinion from a guy who isn't whom Muehlenkamp wishes I were.

BB
Blog Buster!

User avatar
Hannover
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 10233
Joined: Sun Nov 24, 2002 7:53 pm

Re: Sobibor / Roberto Muehlenkamp's duplicity exposed

Postby Hannover » 9 years 6 months ago (Sun Jun 19, 2011 8:03 pm)

Exactly, Blogbuster, I hoped to, and did start discussion about Sobibor. I presented new work from a CODOH published Revisionist (hello Hans, we are part of CODOH) about the glaring holes in Muehlenkamp's desperate arguments concerning Sobibor. And I certainly did not see Hans attempt to buttress Muehlenkamp's desperation.
I did not post links from another forum to this forum and claim them as proof of a claim like Hans tries.
I did make introductory comments with the posts, minimal, agreed.

Hans merely wishes to change the subject, a typical tactic when in retreat mode.

- Hannover
If it can't happen as alleged, then it didn't.

Werd
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 1137
Joined: Sat May 28, 2011 2:23 am

Re: Sobibor / Roberto Muehlenkamp's duplicity exposed

Postby Werd » 9 years 6 months ago (Tue Jun 21, 2011 4:31 pm)

Roberto is at it again on page 14.
Oh, the "HBW crew". Is Werd really such a cretin as to believe there is such a thing as an "HBW crew"? If he had just a little brain inside his skull, he would long have realized that the "HBW crew" is nothing but various sock-puppets of the mentally unstable inveterate liar Carmelo "Blogbuster" Lisciotto, who expects people to accept a phony and moreover anonymous "challenge" but doesn’t have the guts to respond to my simple and reasonable challenge that he a) put a name behind that cowardly "challenge" of his and b) show up as himself on the RODOH forum. Instead of being a man for once in his miserable life.

His latest conspiracy theory is that the exterminationists at HBW are all puppets with no free will of their own, or alter egos of one man. Absurd. Notice again his hypocrisy. He can issue challenges while ignoring ones issued to him. He's a one trick pony. He is also pretending there has never been a clear cut issue of any challenge. He asks, "where is the name behind this challenge?" It's called the ARC challenge.

Lisciotto reacted just as I had predicted he would, by spinning further "hateblogwatch" smear monologues among his aliases.

There we go. Lisciotto has a bunch of handles on the HBW board. It's all one man. All those different names are him. Quite the conspiracy theory, there.

The "extermination theorists at hbw", he writes. What an gullible clown (or what a dumb liar). Everything at hbw smacks of the single deranged mind that harbors a pathological hatred against certain former members of the ARC research group in connection with events narrated in Sergey Romanov’s blogs, but Werd continues believing, or trying to make believe, that a bunch of anonymous "extermination theorists" came along out of nowhere and dedicated themselves to nothing other than bitching about Sergey Romanov, Nick Terry, myself and perhaps also other former ARC members (Michael Peters, who Lisciotto’s paranoia deems identical with Hans, seems to be another subject of Lisciotto’s obsessive hatred and pathological smear).

Say where are those guys? We haven't heard much of a peep from them. Must be running scared from the ARC challenge from the HBW boys. What about Dimitry? Oh nevermind. That's Nick Terry as well. How come his alias is okay but alleged ones from Lisciotto is not, Roberto?

Unless he’s a filthy liar like Lisciotto, this Werd creature must be a soul so trusting that he will buy into any baloney if only it fits what he would like to believe. No wonder he’s attracted to "Revisionist" manure

As in contrast with exterminationist manure such as the so called authentic confession of Hoess that was never obtained under torture? You exterminationist idiots will cling to entries in a diary that has not been proven to have been authentic from Goebbels and confessions from a man who was admittedly tortured by one of the Jews who was responsible for it. His name was Bernard Clarke.
http://www.zundelsite.org/basic_article ... h1012.html

I bring this up because Roberto's buddy Hans quotes this same problematic, so called, "authentic confession." You exterminationists have to do better than that.

Werd should really refrain from trying to discuss blogs like these, for he’s obviously too dumb to even understand the argument that is being made. The argument is that Kues on the one hand argues that witnesses outside Camp III could know nothing about what was going in Camp III because they had no contact with the inmates from Camp III, while on the other hand accepting the possibility that there was such contact and trying to provide a faith-conform explanation for evidence to such contact, which he doesn’t dismiss as necessarily unreliable. Get a brain, Werd.

Roberto is saying, as is Jonathan, that Kues makes one argument in a book and one argument in his blog and thus contradicts himself. I almost believed that too. But the argument that Jonathan accused him of making, he is not making. Those pages has him quoting witnesses whose testimonies he finds problematic. So why would he argue something he criticizes in his book? There is nothing logically inconsistent about saying, "This is what they said happened" in place A and then saying "This is what I say happened" in place B.

Secondly, in light of how you and Hans love that Hoess confession, I'd not be so quck as to accuse others of conforming to faith. There is no good reason for gas chamber theorists to hold on to that.

Werd
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 1137
Joined: Sat May 28, 2011 2:23 am

Re: Sobibor / Roberto Muehlenkamp's duplicity exposed

Postby Werd » 9 years 6 months ago (Thu Jun 23, 2011 2:43 am)

I have read hateblogwatch a lot in their EndHolocaustControversies section. I know they are exterminationists and gas chamber believers, but that doesn't mean they aren't right in exposing the HC crew in trying to infiltrate and take over HEART and the ARC groups. That these guys have evidence that HC had a ringer plant fakes on their site so they could debunk them and get Chris Webb thrown out so they could take over is important and shows what kind of people the HC really are like. If this is about Roberto's duplicity, then I see no reason why their exposures of the HC crew should not be mentioned. Especially their challenge to Roberto et all, which Roberto dodges and then hyopcritically issues challenges right back at them.

Roberto got pissy because Rudolf left out something from a gas chamber believer to make this believer look like a doubter. So says Roberto. Roberto says, "here is what was missed." What Rudolf did not quote was this same guy saying, "Even though there are apparent problems and discrepancies, that is no reason to doubt the holocaust story." Which to me is absolute lunacy. So Roberto thinks that by focusing on the rest of the quote it indicts revisionism, when it in fact pretty much justifies the doubts of the revionists.

User avatar
Cloud
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 271
Joined: Wed Jan 13, 2010 7:27 pm
Location: The Land of Political Correctness

Re: Sobibor / Roberto Muehlenkamp's duplicity exposed

Postby Cloud » 9 years 6 months ago (Thu Jun 23, 2011 9:00 am)

Is there any reason why both sides get all post on the same forum? This back and forth thing is a bit silly.


Return to “'Holocaust' Debate / Controversies / Comments / News”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests