Churchill
Platinum Member
How did you select which experts to trust? what constitutes an expert anyway? Would you say a Holocaust survivor has a degree of expertise?But I have access to experts and I have read their positions and looked at the facts on the ground. I certainly haven't intentionally dismissed (a priori) content so as to avoid the facts contained therein.
Fair enough, so how did you identify the Genocide Project site as being edited by "experts"?Because I don't know the expertise of anyone on wikipedia and when I looked through the footnotes and saw the selection of sources and read through them, I saw a pattern of bias.
What "bias" did you see in the Wikipedia footnotes?
You don't seem to understand the diference between citing a source and relying on a source.Then I looked at the background, scope and products (and reviews) of the material and writers on the Genocide Education Project and saw actual qualifications. Why would you rely on wikipedia? That's a bad habit.
Evident to you when reviewing the history of the Third Reich, look at the events that pertain to the persecution of Jews in Germany and tell me at what point in the timelind up to the end of WW2, did the Nazis activities become a genocide?evident to whom? I would suggest you read Badenheim, 1939.
If you've read Badenheim then feel free to factor that in to your answer.
I thought it was obvious from what I wrote, for example I'd argue that Kristallnacht did not represent the transition from persecutuion to genocide.and what is "pre-Genocide"? Is that a technical term that applies to a specific range of time or do you mean it just as a generic, "all of history before a book used the word to describe an event"?
I am forming the impression that an expert in your view must be someone who does not recognize that genocide is underway in Gaza. Its a precondition for you, selection bias is what they call that.