In a discussion related to Jewish mass graves Roberto Muehlenkamp admitted to having no real evidence – I turned the discussion into a topic about two specific locations: Poldolski versus Bikernieki forrest. I did so via a third party who brought up those locations. In one of the admissions Mr. Muehlenkamp said:
I just said that I don’t necessarily have the kind of evidence that k0nsl yells for, as lying k0nsl well knows.
Unfortunately I cannot find the first admission which was a bit more clear whilst this one is prudent in comparison.
Mr. Muehlenkamp does however clearly admit to having no real evidence for his hateful claims – and this isn’t just with regard to these two locations I listed earlier; this applies to all so-called Holocaust Mass Graves, for there is zero data to support the notions made by the Holocaust ideologues.
What’s more, this had Mr. Muehlenkamp quite worked up so he did his usual “step-around-the-issue”-dance which involves asking what sort of evidence would be satsifying in this case, so he’s basically asking the obvious:
The acceptable form of evidence would be a similar way of conduct with that of the Katyn discovery where the Germans meticulously documented every bit of evidence with real data and with international experts in the field participating, and with representatives from the major countries of those times as spectators. One can with a clear conscience say that none of this exists for any of the Holocaust claims. They have basically only stories and worthless paperwork which all conflict in their many ‘convergences’ – they use one bit whilst they put the other bit in the trash – as long as it fits their dark purpose it’s okay to use. Just patch, and move on. A motto for Holocaust propagandists.
Also, since this discussion, or any discussion with Mr. Muehlenkamp, is a constant marathon, a virtual matrix that never ends, I decided to cut it short with him and simply ask him for exactitude in evidence, that’s to say: the following discussion broke loose:
The fact that your “arguments” are reduced to this lame and puerile bitching is what is quite telling, actually.
Hardly puerile. I just expect you to back up your gunslinger case with exactitude in evidence – paperwork is essentially useless in this case as we know how unreliable this is as evidence because history gangsters are misusing it in one way or the other.
One cannot really misrepresent cold, hard data if presented in it’s entirety. Like it or not – my ever so friendly Roberto – you must be able to back up your hate with evidence. Can we agree on that point, at least? At any rate, what’s really telling here is that you have admitted to having no real evidence. I have the quotes and screenshot to prove it, dirtbag.
Who said that historiography and criminal investigation are limited to forensic investigation, or that forensic investigation is a sine qua non ingredient of either?
I’ve seen no person say such a thing in this topic. You’re probably in your usual state of delusion.
A true believer’s pious and desperate prayer. Got nothing better to offer, k0nsl?
Telling you that forensic data proving your claims to be lies is not a sign of a “true believer” prayer – it is the predicament of a person with science on his side. You and your cohorts are the true believers who pray’s every night to your foul scum god Simon Wiesenthal.
Two more questions, which I’m sure you’ll run away from
I never run away from questions that are asked of me in good spirit.
1. Do you accept as a fact that no less than 681,692 people were executed by the Soviet NKVD in 1937-38? Yes or no?
This is a subject that resembles your darling’s case in some respect, namely: the numbers vary a lot and many sources paint it different, it’s not a number which has been lariated in print – but one can safely say that the numbers are usually not very far off from each other.
Enough can be said that a lot of people died, often a very horrible death. Do you deny this?
2. If the answer to the previous question should be “yes”, how do you think this figure was established?
Was it established on the basis of forensic investigation of the burial places?
Or was it established on the basis of documentary evidence, i.e. paper that you “wipe your ass” with?
I have attached a picture of a True Believer to this entry. It’s from a “not-so-rare” encounter with a Holocaust Believer who got so worked up during the discussion of his belief that he stuck a stick in his mouth and ran away, pure desperation.
Apparently the poor sod was backdoored so somebody recorded the pics through his webcam
There’s more pictures of that True Believer in this post (along with dreary commentary):
I crafted this entry very hastily so it might be updated in the future with more material. The gist of the discussion has been saved for posterity: Roberto Muehlenkamp has no real evidence for the hate he is engaged in spreading.
Please permit myself to perform a modest victory dance:
I don’t think it necessary to re-post over twenty pages with trivia when one can simply cut it short and to the point. Yes?