There are indications that it may have happened, however often AS repeats that there are not.Aryan Scholar wrote: ↑Thu Jun 29, 2017 3:51 pmSuch "possibility" is being ruled out because it did not happened, it do not exist, there are not any indication it happened, it is a mere figment of your imagination. How many times this has to been repeated until you understand that?Roberto wrote: ↑Thu Jun 29, 2017 3:19 pmNo, I consider a possibility that is not unrealistic given the indications. And I'm still waiting for arguments from AS that would rule out this possibility.Aryan Scholar wrote: ↑Thu Jun 29, 2017 3:52 amRoberto fabricates imaginary non-existent authoritative evidence and then say I am jumping on conclusions when I conclude it do not exist.Roberto wrote: ↑Wed Jun 28, 2017 7:47 pm
The "scholar" is jumping to conclusions that are at odds with the indications I provided (number of victims stated down to the tens and thus suggesting a count rather than an estimate, excavations/exhumations elsewhere). And the essential credibility of the Soviet reports in question follows from their essential coincidence with evidence independent of these reports, especially the Jäger Report.
More gibberish from AS, actually. Instead of arguments.Aryan Scholar wrote:Essential credibility? Essential coincidence?
More gibberish from Roberto.
So why should one rule out the possibility despite these indications?