https://abcnews.go.com/amp/Internationa ... d=84345007
Have any of you ever heard of the “mound of ashes” at Majdanek? I didn’t until having a debate with someone.
Ashes don't tell us much of anything, unless they are (at minimum) measured and verified as actual crematory remains in the precise locations where they are alleged to have been buried, etc. Creating a "mound of ashes" is akin to creating a "mound of shoes", which I notice is also featured in the article link you provided. We know the Germans were burning lots of things (as nations in similar situations have done), everything from confidential records to entire buildings in what has been called a "scorched earth" policy upon their retreat. Ashes were abundant. This does not tell us how many ashes of corpses are in any potential ashes located at Majdanek (assuming these ashes exist at all), nor what the backgrounds of these hypothetical corpses might have been. Corpses were everywhere during/after WW2, and cremation was the preferred method to control disease and dispose of the many thousands of corpses across any given territory. Claiming a "mound" and building a symbolic structure on top of it tells us nothing in particular, however it does align with the pattern of Allied/Jewish organizations preventing a more comprehensive, independent forensic investigation into claims of the so-called 'Holocaust'. The key questions we need to ask, I think, are:Bane wrote: ↑Tue Jan 28, 2025 1:15 am https://abcnews.go.com/amp/Internationa ... d=84345007
Have any of you ever heard of the “mound of ashes” at Majdanek? I didn’t until having a debate with someone.
Could be worth discussing but best to start another thread if not clearly related to the Majdanek 'ash mound'.
Callafangers wrote: ↑Tue Jan 28, 2025 2:02 amThe key questions we need to ask, I think, are:Bane wrote: ↑Tue Jan 28, 2025 1:15 am https://abcnews.go.com/amp/Internationa ... d=84345007
Have any of you ever heard of the “mound of ashes” at Majdanek? I didn’t until having a debate with someone.
- Can we trust what they are claiming to be true, here?
- Is their key focus to expose the objective truth, wherever it leads?
- Are there potential conflicts of interest?
- Can we trust the chain-of-custody in any proclaimed 'evidence'?
- Who benefits from us believing this particular story? Is it the same people telling it?