>>18683033
obviously you say it's an 'event' so you believe it's true.
if you believe it's true then it would be antagnoizing to you to try and explain why some of the parts of it are . . . curiously hyperbolic.
and it's used as a wedge issue, not the 'event' as you say.
but why would it be an 'event'? it would be 6 million murders.
individual murders with names of people
those names are curiously absent from monuments, etc.
so, as a 'topic' or what some might call a 'fable' it's used as a wedge issue to devide because people who believe that those murders really happened are not going to listen to anyone who says 'hey, maybe it's a bit of hyperbole'
obviously something happened.
was it 6 million murders?
600,000 murders?
only one murder is enough for people to be outraged.
why do people have to have it be such a round number of 6million?
when Nazis killed people in Rome the Romans made an exact count.
they put a name on each person.
clearly that happened, the evidence was used to execute people.
as far as it goes in Eastern Europe, from my point of view, why the fixtation on just the Jews?
and again,it's a trigger issue.
and you're here using that issue beliving it's an 'event'.
so if you believe that why do you need to know what anonymous strangers think about it?
how many peole were killed in St. Petersburg?
how many Polish officers were executed by the Soviets?
why just the Jews?
and the answer I have is "when they only mention Jews do they not realize that it seems partisan and not correct"
Even if it were one person, that is too many, anon.
that's what I think