tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24597325.post115119751828423066..comments2024-03-17T20:28:40.281+00:00Comments on Holocaust Controversies: Why the "diesel issue" is irrelevantNicholas Terryhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14852758011968360596noreply@blogger.comBlogger46125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24597325.post-1299473267299451872016-11-27T05:08:34.257+00:002016-11-27T05:08:34.257+00:00https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18643868
Dies...https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18643868<br /><br />Diesel fumes do kill: a case of fatal carbon monoxide poisoning directly attributed to diesel fuel exhaust with a 10-year retrospective case and literature review*.<br /><br />"Lastly, an extensive literature review produced no scientifically reported cases of fatal CO poisoning attributed to diesel fuel exhaust."<br /><br />Great article and interesting discussion. <br /><br />johnhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07849019799579636739noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24597325.post-69331949344627166032012-04-21T13:07:54.316+01:002012-04-21T13:07:54.316+01:00So what?So what?Roberto Muehlenkamphttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03608133715777146924noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24597325.post-86633244035086959272012-04-21T06:05:12.181+01:002012-04-21T06:05:12.181+01:00The Israelis also said diesels at the Demjanjuk tr...The Israelis also said diesels at the Demjanjuk trial.<br /><a href="http://www.secondhandvans.com.au" rel="nofollow">Second Hand Vans</a>roberthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07169436182248815744noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24597325.post-8955350773830914632011-11-04T09:40:06.347+00:002011-11-04T09:40:06.347+00:00The Black Rabbit of Inlé wrote:
"Nick checked...The Black Rabbit of Inlé wrote:<br />"Nick checked out the published English translations of trial transcripts (The People's Verdict), and found only one place where a witness mentions specifically diesel engine (p. 17, interrogation of accused Tishchenko)"<br /><br />Well, Nick's either lying or he's not very thorough.<br /><br />Diesel engines are also mentioned on pages 9 & 49."<br /><br />-------<br /><br />LOL, you moron freak. Can't you read? These two other quotes are not quotes from witnesses' statements.Sergey Romanovhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04063444062099331337noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24597325.post-48792158747303134472011-06-10T11:48:59.976+01:002011-06-10T11:48:59.976+01:00So what?So what?Roberto Muehlenkamphttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03608133715777146924noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24597325.post-15026228132221228952011-06-10T04:46:12.274+01:002011-06-10T04:46:12.274+01:00Oh, look, another journalist misquoted Blatt about...Oh, look, another journalist misquoted Blatt about the submarine engine as well.<br />http://news.scotsman.com/world/True-hell-of-life-inside.5968715.jp<br /><br />What's the chances?<br /><br />And Simon Wiesenthal wrote about submarine engine gassings back in 1967<br />http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=_ANnAAAAMAAJ&q=%22gases+of+submarine+engines+for+extermination%22&dq=%22gases+of+submarine+engines+for+extermination%22&hl=en&ei=T5PxTc37F8ao8QPA55mjBA&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CDEQ6AEwAAThe Black Rabbit of Inléhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12083144769375557650noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24597325.post-23041116625886802492010-11-28T07:07:38.417+00:002010-11-28T07:07:38.417+00:00The engine used in Hitler's bunker was a subma...The engine used in Hitler's bunker was a submarine engine, according to "History's mysteries" on the History Channel. So even if they didn't use a submarine engine in the camps, they did put this one to good use.SenorPhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00838100938662916922noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24597325.post-71865907009941061152010-11-19T18:47:44.073+00:002010-11-19T18:47:44.073+00:00That testimony was not from a gassing engine opera...That testimony was not from a gassing engine operator or anyone else closely familiar with the gassing engine, but from someone who never set foot in Sobibór Camp III and knew about the engine only from hearsay. You should have read the article with more attention. <br /><br />Besides, Sobibor survivor Thomas Blatt has <a href="http://holocaustcontroversies.blogspot.com/2010/01/sobibor-survivor-thomas-blatt-sets.html" rel="nofollow">clarified the matter</a>.Roberto Muehlenkamphttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03608133715777146924noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24597325.post-57410054886426212942010-11-19T11:14:48.683+00:002010-11-19T11:14:48.683+00:00The Independent on Sunday
17th Jan 2010:
Sobibor ...The Independent on Sunday<br />17th Jan 2010:<br /><br />Sobibor survivor: Thomas Blatt<br /><br />"We heard the whine of the generator that started the submarine engine which made the gas that killed them."<br /><br />There you go, recent testimony from a survivor, that a submarine engine was used at Sobibor to gas Jews.<br /><br />http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/sobibor-survivor-i-polished-ss-boots-as-dying-people-screamed-1870221.htmlThe Black Rabbit of Inléhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12083144769375557650noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24597325.post-73443317339200179892010-09-26T23:14:10.139+01:002010-09-26T23:14:10.139+01:00"Those "relatively small drifts of smoke...<i>"Those "relatively small drifts of smoke" was probably from clothes or trash burning."</i> <br /><br />There's no evidence to "clothes or trash burning" at the time and place in question but significant evidence to the burning of people, so what Mr. Ball considers "probable" is actually rather improbable. A corpse fire in its beginnings or close to finish is more probable.Roberto Muehlenkamphttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03608133715777146924noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24597325.post-86291239551195929762010-09-26T23:09:32.248+01:002010-09-26T23:09:32.248+01:00"Particularly from May to August 1944, during...<i>"Particularly from May to August 1944, during the time of the alleged destruction of the Hungarian Jews and the Jews from the Lodz ghetto, fires are said to have been burning in the fire pits day and night.[33] But the air photo of May 31, 1944, is the only one to show even relatively small drifts of smoke rising behind crematorium V.[34]"</i> <br /><br />"Day and night" is likely to be the subjective perception of eyewitnesses, like when combat soldiers talk about incessant shellfire day and night whereas military reports show that the fire wasn't incessant. So if a a split-second photo doesn't capture indoor or outdoor cremation at it's height, that doesn't mean anything. There were far more telling photos than the one of May 31, by the way. See <a href="http://holocaustcontroversies.blogspot.com/2009/11/that-plume-was-actually-even-bigger.html" rel="nofollow">this blog</a>.Roberto Muehlenkamphttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03608133715777146924noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24597325.post-17463841524103528562010-09-26T23:07:58.989+01:002010-09-26T23:07:58.989+01:00«How many kilograms of coke do U think was necessa...<i>«How many kilograms of coke do U think was necessary to cremate one corpse? (Hint: It takes longer than 20 minutes to cremate a body and much more than 3.5kg coke, which the mythologists allege.) David Irving points out: "it takes 30 kilograms of coke to incinerate one body -- it would take many trainloads of coke to incinerate 120,000 corpses.»</i> <br /><br />Cremating one body is one thing, cremating hundreds or thousands on a continuous or near-continuous basis is something entirely different. It takes a lot of coke to heat up the oven, but once it is heated only small amounts of coke have to be added, so the larger the number of bodies burned on a continous or near-continuous basis, the lower the average amount of coke per body required. The triple-muffle ovens of Birkenau crematoria II and III used 15.5 kg of coke per hour in continuous operation, according to Jährlings memo of 17 March 1943. This means that if more than one corpse per hour could be burned in those ovens, contentions regarding coke consumption and the incompatibility of coke deliveries in 1943 with the number of deportees known to have been gassed at Auschwitz-Birkenau in that year go down the drain. I demonstrated that up to 3 or 4 corpses per hour could be burned in the Birkenau ovens due to the fact that many of the victims were women and children, see <a href="http://rodohforum.yuku.com/reply/27089/t/A-message-to-Jonnie-Hannover-Hargis-.html#reply-27089" rel="nofollow">here</a>. And even if coke deliveries had been insufficient, this would only mean that open-air cremation with wood and liquid fuel had to complement the crematoria. In this respect see the blog <a href="http://holocaustcontroversies.blogspot.com/2006/07/open-air-cremations-in-auschwitz.html%22" rel="nofollow">Open-Air Cremations in Auschwitz, August 1943</a>. <br /><br /><i>"During Hungarian evacuation many thousands were killed/day.<br /> There are no requisition orders for the necessary coke."</i><br /><br />How do you know? The surviving records might be incomplete. And how much coke would have been required, considering large-scale recourse to open-air cremation? <br /><br /><i>"The aerial photos would show mounds of coke."</i><br /><br />Because you say so or for some reason worth considering? Coke wouldn't necessarily be stored in the open, air photo quality was not what it is today, and air photos captured only a few split seconds of camp life. <br /><br /><i>"Ur so-called witnesses said the Hungarian evacuations did cause a bottleneck, which required burning in pits where, "human fat was scooped up in buckets on long, curved rods and poured all over the sizzling pyre."</i> <br /><br />A bottleneck as concerns crematorium capacity, not as concerns fuel. The use of human fat to help the burning of the corpses is entirely plausible, contrary to the claims of "Revisisionist" propagandists. <br /><br /><i>«The "huge smoldering pits" and crematoria "belching smoke & flame" at Auschwitz, during the evacuation did not show up in the aerial photos, taken during that time.»</i> <br /><br />As the photos captured only a few split seconds of camp life, that would be nothing to write home about. The chimneys would hardly have been belching smoke and flame all the time.Roberto Muehlenkamphttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03608133715777146924noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24597325.post-73121619784321747782010-09-26T21:21:00.095+01:002010-09-26T21:21:00.095+01:00What fuel was necessary was brought along as requi...<i>What fuel was necessary was brought along as required, big deal. Requirements weren't so huge as to warrant assuming logistical bottlenecks. </i><br /><br />How many kilograms of coke do U think was necessary to cremate one corpse? (Hint: It takes longer than 20 minutes to cremate a body and much more than 3.5kg coke, which the mythologists allege.) David Irving points out: "it takes 30 kilograms of coke to incinerate one body -- it would take many trainloads of coke to incinerate 120,000 corpses. <br /><br />During Hungarian evacuation many thousands were killed/day. There are no requisition orders for the necessary coke. The aerial photos would show mounds of coke.<br /><br />Ur so-called witnesses said the Hungarian evacuations did cause a bottleneck, which required burning in pits where, "human fat was scooped up in buckets on long, curved rods and poured all over the sizzling pyre."<br /><br />The "huge smoldering pits" and crematoria "belching smoke & flame" at Auschwitz, during the evacuation did not show up in the aerial photos, taken during that time.<br /><br /><i>Particularly from May to August 1944, during the time of the alleged destruction of the Hungarian Jews and the Jews from the Lodz ghetto, fires are said to have been burning in the fire pits day and night.[33] But the air photo of May 31, 1944, is the only one to show even relatively small drifts of smoke rising behind crematorium V.[34] </i><br /><br />Read more: http://www.vho.org/GB/Books/dth/fndaerial.html<br /><br />http://www.air-photo.org/english/<br /><br />Those "relatively small drifts of smoke" was probably from clothes or trash burning.666isMONEYhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04278844324811261409noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24597325.post-66523140897157330072010-09-26T20:31:11.126+01:002010-09-26T20:31:11.126+01:00«Zyklon B is very toxic & explosive too.»
Exp...<i>«Zyklon B is very toxic & explosive too.»</i><br /><br />Explosive in concentrations far above those required to kill human beings, yeah. Just use lower concentrations, and you have no problem. With PG the concentration cannot be dosed, you get what the machine produces. Against toxicity of Zyklon B the SS could protect themselves with gas masks. And it was something they needed to have in the camp for disinfestation anyway, so why not use it for a dual purpose? <br /><br /><i>«If the Nazis were to gas ppl in a tunnel or railroad delousing facility, they would be dead in the railroad car & could be transported anywhere to be removed with a conveyor-belt.»</i><br /><br />Dragged out of railway car after railway in rigor mortis? Not a very practical alternative to a gas chamber, and also difficult to implement in a secluded camp area, apart from it being more difficult to take the bodies to places of cremation. But let's assume they could have this, could have that: what the hell does this matter in the face of evidence that they did it the way they did? <br /><br /><i>«Another witness "obviously mistaken," lol . . . why should we believe any of these malicious liars?!»</i><br /><br />Witnesses may be mistaken about lots of details without this meaning that they are "malicious liars". The witness that is 100% right or 100% wrong doesn't exist, which is why eyewitness testimonies are compared with each other, and with other evidence if possible, to see where there are matches. <br /><br /><i>«Eyewitness testimony is unreliable.»</i><br /><br />Some is, other is not. Eyewitness testimony needs to be handled carefully, the wheat must be sifted from the chaff. Historians and legal professionals know how to do that, so no problem. <br /><br /><i>«Forensic & logistic evidence is best.»</i><br /><br />No evidence is "best", every category has its advantages and shortcomings. What is "logistic evidence", by the way? <br /><br /><i>«Logistics of the body-disposal is a good topic to discuss too: like where was all the necessary fuel to cremate hundreds of thousands of corpses?! (Especially during the Hungarian evacuation at Auschwitz.)»</i> <br /><br />What fuel was necessary was brought along as required, big deal. Requirements weren't so huge as to warrant assuming logistical bottlenecks. <br /><br /><i>«What do the aerial reconnaissance photos show? (Hint, no huge piles of coke, no outdoor pit burning.)»</i><br /><br />Actually air photos do show outdoor pit burning, though only a few split seconds thereof as there was no systematic aerial surveillance of the camp, just a few air photos taken now and then in connection with bombing missions against industry. There's no reason why huge piles of coke, or wood for that matter, should have been stored outside in a manner visible on the few aerial photos that were taken. Besides, the resolution of air photography at the time did not compare to what is possible at present.Roberto Muehlenkamphttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03608133715777146924noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24597325.post-77143512723952857792010-09-26T17:32:13.900+01:002010-09-26T17:32:13.900+01:00Zyklon B is very toxic & explosive too. If the...Zyklon B is very toxic & explosive too. If the Nazis were to gas ppl in a tunnel or railroad delousing facility, they would be dead in the railroad car & could be transported anywhere to be removed with a conveyor-belt.<br /><br />Another witness "obviously mistaken," lol . . . why should we believe any of these malicious liars?! Eyewitness testimony is unreliable. Forensic & logistic evidence is best. Logistics of the body-disposal is a good topic to discuss too: like where was all the necessary fuel to cremate hundreds of thousands of corpses?! (Especially during the Hungarian evacuation at Auschwitz.) What do the aerial reconnaissance photos show? (Hint, no huge piles of coke, no outdoor pit burning.)666isMONEYhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04278844324811261409noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24597325.post-72282262080229941962010-09-26T17:18:58.202+01:002010-09-26T17:18:58.202+01:00«There's many more practical, safer ways to ex...<i>«There's many more practical, safer ways to exterminate ppl than with louse disinfestant and diesel exhaust: Gas 'em in a tunnel with the locomotive fumes, gas 'em in a railroad-car delousing facility, back the train into a water-filled trench on a railroad siding, gas 'em with the fumes from the crematoria, gas 'em with the 'producer-gas," which was used to run Nazi trucks & buses (35% carbon monoxide) . . .</i><br /><br />Actually the methods you are suggesting were far less practical than gassing in a closed room with engine exhaust or Zyklon B. Producer gas, for instance, was so toxic and explosive that the killers would have risked gassing themselves or blowing themselves up. It's also not like dragging the corpses out of a tunnel or a railway delousing facility would have been easier than dragging them out of a gas chamber, apart from the fact that either method would have been hard to implement in a secluded camp on a regular basis. And submerging a train to drown the people inside ... are you kidding me? <br /><br />Now, let's assume that there would have been easier and more practical methods. What makes you think that mass killers at all times applied the easiest and most practical methods, and that your Nazi heroes were not error-prone mortals like anyone else? History is full of inconceivably stupid things that people have done. <br /><br /><i>«Some of the holohoaxers said the zyklon was dumped in through holes in the ceiling and swept out the doors. (IMT testimony of Vaillant-Couturier, 28 jan 1946.)»</i> <br /><br />The witness in question was obviously mistaken about certain details, as witnesses often are without this meaning that they are lying or that everything in their testimony is wrong. Big fucking deal.Roberto Muehlenkamphttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03608133715777146924noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24597325.post-50956334044057671842010-09-26T17:04:42.549+01:002010-09-26T17:04:42.549+01:00There's many more practical, safer ways to ext...There's many more practical, safer ways to exterminate ppl than with louse disinfestant and diesel exhaust: Gas 'em in a tunnel with the locomotive fumes, gas 'em in a railroad-car delousing facility, back the train into a water-filled trench on a railroad siding, gas 'em with the fumes from the crematoria, gas 'em with the 'producer-gas," which was used to run Nazi trucks & buses (35% carbon monoxide) . . .<br /><br />Some of the holohoaxers said the zyklon was dumped in through holes in the ceiling and swept out the doors. (IMT testimony of Vaillant-Couturier, 28 jan 1946.)666isMONEYhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04278844324811261409noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24597325.post-24596348068125549052010-09-26T16:41:40.798+01:002010-09-26T16:41:40.798+01:00So where does the article say that forensic invest...So where does the article say that forensic investigations of the murder weapon are irrelevant? Nowhere. It such investigations were possible (which unfortunately is not the case here because the killers had all the time in the world to remove the murder weapon), their results would of course be relevant in that they would provide additional knowledge about the murder. <br /><br />What is irrelevant is the "Revisionist" whining about diesel engines not being suitable for mass murder. It's irrelevant for the simple reason that knowledgeable witnesses spoke of gasoline engines and not diesel engines, whereas casual witnesses not familiar with the device may well have been in error about its particulars, big deal. <br /><br />You apparently also haven't yet understood the difference between gassing inanimate objects (for which your circulation contraptions might be recommendable) and gassing living, moving and screaming beings (for which they were not necessary).Roberto Muehlenkamphttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03608133715777146924noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24597325.post-5179690398294889402010-09-26T16:32:52.616+01:002010-09-26T16:32:52.616+01:00If that's the case, Ur title for the article i...If that's the case, Ur title for the article is "irrelevant" and Ur the "idiot." (Notice in Ur tag-cloud "idiot" is one of Ur fav words.) A dispersing apparatus is necessary because it is safer & more efficient. See this jpeg I made: http://666ismoney.com/sitebuilder/images/ZyklonDachau-1045x1408.jpg666isMONEYhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04278844324811261409noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24597325.post-12581786649890400512010-09-26T01:54:42.408+01:002010-09-26T01:54:42.408+01:00A forensic examination of the alleged murder weapo...<i>A forensic examination of the alleged murder weapon is not "irrelevant."</i> <br /><br />You obviously didn't read the article, idiot. Read it before hitting the keyboard next time. <br /><br /><i>The liars can not even get their lies straight, why should we believe any of it.</i><br /><br />What liars? <br /><br /><i>Moreover, it's not practical to kill ppl with louse disinfestant as alleged. If the Nazis were to use Zyklon, they would-have used a Zyklon dispersing apparatus such as was in the delousing chambers</i> <br /><br />Coulda-woulda-shoulda dooda. Your Nazi hereoes were practical people, my friend. They didn't have a dispersing apparatus in the homicidal gas chambers because none was needed. They were gassing living beings who in their death panic would provide for whatever circulation was required, not inanimate objects like in the delousing chambers. Think before writing.Roberto Muehlenkamphttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03608133715777146924noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24597325.post-8821712741616043962010-09-26T01:35:48.018+01:002010-09-26T01:35:48.018+01:00A forensic examination of the alleged murder weapo...A forensic examination of the alleged murder weapon is <i>not</i> "irrelevant."<br /><br />The liars can not even get their lies straight, why should we believe any of it.<br /><br />Moreover, it's not practical to kill ppl with louse disinfestant as alleged. If the Nazis were to use Zyklon, they would-have used a Zyklon dispersing apparatus such as was in the delousing chambers.666isMONEYhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04278844324811261409noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24597325.post-48727192792460521792010-04-18T16:49:32.846+01:002010-04-18T16:49:32.846+01:00As I wrote elsewhere, they shouldn't have left...As I wrote <a href="http://rodohforum.yuku.com/reply/245840/t/Why-the-Gassing-Hoax.html#reply-245840" rel="nofollow">elsewhere</a>, they shouldn't have left this "Richard" loony out of the asylum in <a href="http://holocaustcontroversies.blogspot.com/2010/02/owner-of-this-website.html?showComment=1266538101025#c6497423684443094692" rel="nofollow"> Prague</a>.Roberto Muehlenkamphttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03608133715777146924noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24597325.post-45302047993161153332010-04-18T15:38:29.036+01:002010-04-18T15:38:29.036+01:00Where excatly does he claim that he is trying to p...Where excatly does he claim that he is trying to prove "through detailed technical discussion, that diesel engines cannot used for mass gassings efficiently. Therefore, there were no diesel gas chambers. Therefore, there was no Holocaust." as YOU claim?<br /><br />Maybe he is just trying to prove that there are some really BAD LIARS who's "stories" are used still used to this day to "prove" the Holocaust to the gullible despite the other evidence?<br /><br />The next question is WHY? WHY? WHY?Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12117494349594020616noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24597325.post-35786446324130070522010-02-01T17:14:41.620+00:002010-02-01T17:14:41.620+00:00> What part of the concept of DISHONESTY are yo...> What part of the concept of DISHONESTY are you "believers" unable to understand?<br /><br />Excuse me, but why do you think we, true skeptics, don't understand it? You, denial believers, are dishonest indeed. It's the core of your HD religion.<br /><br />> Why do you repeatedly cling to the fragments of testimonies of people who have been DISCREDITED through their own lies (that were not, I might add, obtained through torture or coercion) presumably because they suit your agenda.<br /><br />Discredited by whom? By an anonymous shitstain? :)))<br /><br />> Just try this crap in an normal courtroom and see what happens - their entire testimony is considered UNRELIABLE and as such is not acknowledged by the court as evidence.<br /><br />Nope, as was shown by many real trials in West Germany and elsewhere. You know nothing.<br /><br />> Just wait until this new database that cross-references ALL the witness testimonies about these topics in one report goes online - the gross inconsistencies will be exposed once and for all.<br /><br />Oooh, "just you wait" rhetoric. I'm trembling, trembling! By the way, do you have the statements from the Israeli Demjanjuk trial? I'm told several witnesses said that the engines were gasoline. So why don't you put all the statements online, and we'll check :)Sergey Romanovhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04063444062099331337noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24597325.post-72003231401598080982010-02-01T14:34:12.752+00:002010-02-01T14:34:12.752+00:00What part of the concept of DISHONESTY are you &qu...What part of the concept of DISHONESTY are you "believers" unable to understand?<br /><br />Why do you repeatedly cling to the fragments of testimonies of people who have been DISCREDITED through their own lies (that were not, I might add, obtained through torture or coercion) presumably because they suit your agenda.<br /><br />Just try this crap in an normal courtroom and see what happens - their entire testimony is considered UNRELIABLE and as such is not acknowledged by the court as evidence. <br /><br />Oh, except in Israel that was, where hearsay evidence and repeated leading of the witnesses by the prosecution was allowed and the defense NEVER cross-examined witnesses who were clearly making up fairy-tales.<br /><br />Hmmm...<br /><br />Just wait until this new database that cross-references ALL the witness testimonies about these topics in one report goes online - the gross inconsistencies will be exposed once and for all.<br /><br />We will see exactly "who said what" about the means of gas production in one report - all source-referenced to eliminate disputes.<br /><br />I cant wait...Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12117494349594020616noreply@blogger.com