And another witness falls…
As revisionists are well aware, many of the defenders of the traditional Holocaust rely heavily on alleged “eye-witnesses” to the events. Yet how many “eye-witnesses” have not only been exposed by revisionists, but have been admittedly scandalized by the mainstream press? Still, that does not stop Holo defenders from standing by their withering fortress, and using even those discredited accounts for support. Alas, we are told that while a witness' memory may have failed, there still remains a fundamental truth in their statements and it rests in support of the Holocaust. Such circular logic is hard to break by revisionists, because the defenders seem to only gain more energy for every discredited witness. Here at the Inconvenient History blog, we aim to provide a more commen-sense approach to the issues.
Nevertheless, without further ado, here is mainstream analysis of Simon Wiesenthal's less than truthful accounts.
Bibliographic information about this document: n/a
Other contributors to this document: n/a
Editor’s comments: n/a