Erich Fuchs was a mechanic who SUPPOSEDLY installed, repaired and then operated an engine over a long period of time supposedly to MASS-MURDER hundreds of thousands of civilians. Therefore a reasonable assumption is that he would DEFINITELY know and remember what type of engine it was and how many cylinders it had, even decades later. It is not a casual, everyday thing he was admitting to, the mass-murder of crores of people using an engine.
Only a person who is suffering from Dunnings-Kruger syndrome and who knows nothing about engines would think for a second that Erich Fuchs wouldn’t remember correctly the specific details that he ‘confessed’ to of the strangely very SPECIFIC yet non-existent Soviet engine that he FALSELY ‘confessed’ he installed, fixed and operated at Sobibor.
If he could be forgiven for not remembering what engine he installed and operated and maintained, then he only had to say “sorry, I don’t remember”.
But any honest person knows that would NOT have been accepted. THAT response would NOT have been believed. How could anyone seriously believe he could forget something extrordinary like that?
He supposedly installed a weapon of mass-murder and he doesn’t remember what it was exactly?
He claimed he remembered certain very specific details that were incorrect??
Pfuhhhh! C’mon. Don’t be ridiculous.
So... let us apply some critical, reasonable, rational analysis:
why would a man in captivity, facing trial for mass-murder, confess to the crime but invent very specific details that — being an expert — he presumably KNEW didn’t match any Soviet engine?
Hmmmm? Could it have been part of a plea bargain?
Could he have been offered the following alternative: ‘Lie for us. Confess to the crime and get a reduced sentence.
OR, tell the truth, deny you were involved in any mass-murder and definitely get a death sentence plus your family will suffer consequences and repercussions’.
Was that the choice?
We know he did get a very light sentence for allegedly mass murdering so many alleged people.
Did he choose to lie, but gave specifics that he hoped posterity would discover were bogus?
Just like Eichmann did, when he ‘confessed’ to the ludicrous, non-existent, captured Soviet U-boat diesel engine being the murder weapon at an unidentifiable, vague description of an ‘extermination camp’ ?
Erich’s testimony is analysed here
Then those Jews were not “eye-witnesses”. (Duh! )
They are instead lie-witnesses.
Which is the premise that this topic-thread is detailing.
So thanks for further proving and supporting this premise.
Because that witness testimony does NOT deny the realms of physical possibility. It does not require us to believe nonsense. It does not require a suspension of normal critical faculties.
If a witness says they walked 100 metres to a small corner shop and bought a loaf of bread with a credit card, we all know that is within the realms of human and physical possibility. So we have no reason to doubt their testimony.
But... if the same witness said they were teleported into a hovering, gigantic, invisible space-ship and given a loaf of bread by aliens, we are permitted to express some doubt.
Some very revealing Psychological projection on display here.