Scrapbookpages Blog

April 24, 2017

The gas chamber at Auschwitz according to Wikipedia

Filed under: Germany, Holocaust, Uncategorized — furtherglory @ 1:21 pm

The following quote, regarding the gas chamber at Auschwitz, is from Wikipedia:

You can read the quote by clicking on this link and scrolling down to the bottom of the section on Gas Vans.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gas_chamber#Gas_vans

Begin quote

The gas chamber at Auschwitz I was amongst [sic] those blown up. It was reconstructed after the war to stand as a memorial, albeit with the entry door and the wall that originally separated the gas chamber from a washroom removed. The door that had been added when the gas chamber was converted into an air raid shelter was left intact.[5]

End quote

I have a section about the gas chamber in the Auschwitz I camp on my website at http://www.scrapbookpages.com/AuschwitzScrapbook/Tour/Auschwitz1/Auschwitz08.html

The following is a quote from my website:

Begin quote

Gas chamber in main Auschwitz camp

The Krema I gas chamber in the main Auschwitz camp, shown in the photo above, is a reconstruction which was done by the Soviet Union in 1947.

The original gas chamber had been converted by the Germans into an air raid shelter in September 1944. A new entrance door, which can be seen in the background of the photo above, had been added. In September 1944, the original gas chamber had been divided into four small rooms. In the photo above, you can see the reconstructed opening into the oven room on the left hand side. This opening had been closed up when the gas chamber was converted into an air raid shelter. During the reconstruction, the opening into the oven room was moved a few feet.

Sorry, but I believe that Wikipedia is wrong about the Auschwitz gas chamber. I am not allowed to make changes on Wikipedia because I am a Holocaust denier.

 

26 Comments »

  1. The words “a [gas chamber] reconstruction which was done by the Soviet Union in 1947”
    should more likely read “a reconstruction which was done by the KGB in 1947”.

    Comment by CB — April 25, 2017 @ 10:54 am

  2. I updated this article with a link to the text I am talking about. It is actually in a section claiming to be about Gas Vans? The quote is from the bottom of the section.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gas_chamber#Gas_vans

    Comment by furtherglory — April 24, 2017 @ 4:39 pm

    • Here under is a screenshot for posterity.

      Comment by hermie — April 25, 2017 @ 4:30 am

  3. “The gas chamber at Auschwitz I was amongst those blown up.”

    I think they are confusing Bunker I with the original gas chamber.

    Gas Chamber I
    Crematory
    Crematory I * The gas chamber was installed in the mortuary of the crematory, and could contain between 700 and 800 persons (17 x 4.5 m). The Zyklon B was poured into the gas chamber through openings in the roof. This gas chamber had no dummy shower fittings on the ceiling. The use of the mortuary had an additional benefit in that it possessed a strong ventilation system, in contrast to the cellar of Block 11.
    The gas chamber was put into operation in autumn 1941. The last killings were carried out in December 1942…The number of victims who perished in this gas chamber is unknown. Filip Müller, who belonged to the Sonderkommando of Crematory I for about one year, estimated the number of victims at some ten thousand while Jean-Claude Pressac calculated a maximum of 10,000.
    After its use as a gas chamber the SS used the building as an execution site. Following completion of the four large crematories at Birkenau the gas chamber was used for other purposes, and in 1944 it was converted into an air-raid bunker.
    After the liberation of Auschwitz the building was partly re-constructed into its original state. So today’s visitor sees a re-construction with original parts.”

    http://www.deathcamps.org/gas_chambers/gas_chambers_auschwitz.html

    Comment by brycesdaddy1105 — April 24, 2017 @ 2:07 pm

    • You are quoting an old website that is completely and totally wrong about everything.

      Comment by furtherglory — April 24, 2017 @ 3:16 pm

      • “You are quoting an old website that is completely and totally wrong about everything.”

        Sure it is.

        Comment by brycesdaddy1105 — April 24, 2017 @ 4:07 pm

    • Brycesdaddy wrote: “I think they are confusing Bunker I with the original gas chamber.”

      No, they aren’t. Or else they wouldn’t add: “It was reconstructed after the war to stand as a memorial, albeit with the entry door and the wall that originally separated the gas chamber from a washroom removed.”

      They are confused by the word “reconstructed.” They fail to see that “reconstructed” just means “whose ceiling has been roughly pierced with 4 holes by Communists after the war” (plus a few walls brought down and Zyklon-introduction chimneys added). Understandable confusion.

      Comment by hermie — April 24, 2017 @ 8:52 pm

      • “No, they aren’t. Or else they wouldn’t add: ”It was reconstructed after the war to stand as a memorial, albeit with the entry door and the wall that originally separated the gas chamber from a washroom removed.”

        They are confused by the word ”reconstructed.” They fail to see that ”reconstructed” just means ”whose ceiling has been roughly pierced with 4 holes by Communists after the war” (plus a few walls brought down and Zyklon-introduction chimneys added). Understandable confusion.”

        Just as confused as deniers are trying to figure out where the Jews went if the Nazis didn’t kill them.

        Comment by brycesdaddy1105 — April 24, 2017 @ 9:00 pm

      • Understandable confusion because the right word for such an alteration is “falsified,” not “reconstructed.”

        Comment by hermie — April 24, 2017 @ 9:04 pm

        • “Understandable confusion because the right word for such an alteration is ”falsified,” not ”reconstructed.”

          Naturally deniers could clear up any confusion by figuring out where the Jews went if they didn’t die.

          Comment by brycesdaddy1105 — April 24, 2017 @ 10:03 pm

          • Stop evading the current topic with your ridiculous upside down burden of proof. We’re not in Nuremberg and your evasions don’t work with me. Just admit that your statement (about the Wikipedia editors confusing Bunker I with Krema I) was erroneous and move on.

            Comment by hermie — April 25, 2017 @ 4:17 am

            • “Stop evading the current topic with your ridiculous upside down burden of proof. We’re not in Nuremberg and your evasions don’t work with me. Just admit that your statement (about the Wikipedia editors confusing Bunker I with Krema I) was erroneous and move on.”

              No. But, I will wonder why deniers keep calling camps “transit camps” when they can’t prove anyone was ever transited through them.

              Comment by brycesdaddy1105 — April 25, 2017 @ 5:10 am

              • But you patently have no problem with believers calling these places “extermination camps” when they can’t prove anyone was ever gassed (or electrocuted, or steamed, or suffocated [in vacuum ‘death chambers’]) to death there. This is what happens when faith is strong enough to make someone accept a reverse burden of proof as a normal and probative thing, I suppose…

                Comment by hermie — April 26, 2017 @ 4:37 am

                • “But you patently have no problem with believers calling these places ”extermination camps”

                  Nope. Coz that’s what they were.

                  “when they can’t prove anyone was ever gassed (or electrocuted, or steamed, or suffocated [in vacuum ‘death chambers’]) to death there.”

                  Hermie, that’s Rizoli-level stupid.

                  “This is what happens when faith is strong enough to make someone accept a reverse burden of proof as a normal and probative thing, I suppose…”

                  Reverse Burden of Proof, a denier definition:

                  Deniers say this to avoid providing any actual evidence of their own.

                  Comment by brycesdaddy1105 — April 26, 2017 @ 5:22 am

                • Brycesdaddy wrote: “Nope. Coz that’s what they were.”

                  BD wrote: “Hermie, that’s Rizoli-level stupid.”

                  Holo-propagandists wouldn’t have resorted to all kinds of things supposed to explain why they couldn’t/can’t prove the ‘Holocaust’ (alleged genocidal code words and euphemisms, alleged concealment units having erased all traces of the slaughter) if they were able to ‘prove’ it without testimonial/Ufological ‘evidence.’ Obvious…

                  BD wrote: “Reverse Burden of Proof, a denier definition: Deniers say this to avoid providing any actual evidence of their own.”

                  Normal burden of proof (a believer definition) : Victors only tell the truth. Thus their words need no palpable evidence to be true. Testimonies supporting their narrative are probative enough. Might (military victory) is right (the source of the undeniable truth). To ask for palpable evidence from victors (an abnormal burden of proof) is the symptom of paranoid hyper skepticism and anti-Semitic hatred.

                  Comment by hermie — April 26, 2017 @ 6:14 am

                • “BD wrote: “Hermie, that’s Rizoli-level stupid.”

                  “Holo-propagandists”

                  Do you have those rolls of toilet paper that give you neat words of the day?

                  “wouldn’t have resorted to all kinds of things supposed to explain why they couldn’t/can’t prove the ‘Holocaust’ (alleged genocidal code words and euphemisms, alleged concealment units having erased all traces of the slaughter) if they were able to ‘prove’ it without testimonial/Ufological ‘evidence.’ Obvious…”

                  The thing I’ve learned is that deniers wouldn’t accept proof of the Holocaust if it danced naked in front of them wearing nothing but a Hitler mask.

                  BD wrote: ”Reverse Burden of Proof, a denier definition: Deniers say this to avoid providing any actual evidence of their own.”

                  “Normal burden of proof (a believer definition) :
                  Victors only tell the truth. ”

                  😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣😂😂😂😂😂😂🤣🤣🤣😂😂😂😂😂😂🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣😂😂🤣

                  The thing I’ve always enjoyed about you is your self-absorbed proclamations of “The Truth.”

                  “Thus their words need no palpable evidence to be true. ”

                  Except the documents that exist that back up those testimonies, plus all of the corraborating, independent testimonies that back up those testimonies.

                  “Testimonies supporting their narrative are probative enough.”

                  See above about documentation.

                  “Might (military victory) is right (the source of the undeniable truth). ”

                  Sure it is.

                  “To ask for palpable evidence from victors (an abnormal burden of proof) is the symptom of paranoid hyper skepticism and anti-Semitic hatred.”

                  Except that deniers wouldn’t believe it and can’t produce evidence of their own.

                  Comment by brycesdaddy1105 — April 26, 2017 @ 7:56 am

                • BD wrote: “Do you have those rolls of toilet paper that give you neat words of the day?”

                  Yes, I often use pages of Hilberg’s book as toilet paper. But I don’t think that this specific word comes from that source.

                  BD wrote: “The thing I’ve learned is that deniers wouldn’t accept proof of the Holocaust if it danced naked in front of them wearing nothing but a Hitler mask.”

                  And the thing I’ve learned about believers is that they visibly think that their extravagant theories about ‘deniers’ are equivalent to arguments.

                  BD wrote: ”The thing I’ve always enjoyed about you is your self-absorbed proclamations of “The Truth.””

                  The ability to formulate one’s own analysis and conclusions is the privilege of higher intellects.

                  BD wrote: “Except the documents that exist that back up those testimonies, ”

                  Only when read through the Holohoax decoding ring, i.e. by distorting such documents with alleged genocidal code words and euphemisms.

                  BD wrote: “plus all of the corraborating, independent testimonies that back up those testimonies.”

                  Ufologists can produce the same ‘evidence’ : an impressive list of corroborating, independent testimonies. The belief that truly independent testimonies were produced at the postwar mock trials is gullible to say the least. Even judge Gray and Robert Van Pelt couldn’t reject Irving’s cross pollination theory at the Irving-Lipstadt trial in 2000. And any testimony is corroborating when superficial and vague enough, what is the main characteristic of most Holocaust testimonies. Even if it’s true that these testimonies often achieved the feat of producing a large number of ludicrous absurdities and impossibilities in spite of their superficiality and vagueness.

                  Comment by hermie — April 26, 2017 @ 5:18 pm

                • “BD wrote: ”Do you have those rolls of toilet paper that give you neat words of the day?”

                  “Yes, I often use pages of Hilberg’s book as toilet paper. But I don’t think that this specific word comes from that source.”

                  Really? You should read it, you MIGHT learn something.
                  Besides, I find the Holocaust Handbook series very useful in lining my bird’s cage. It’s currently crapping its way through “Giant with Feet of Clay.”

                  BD wrote: ”The thing I’ve learned is that deniers wouldn’t accept proof of the Holocaust if it danced naked in front of them wearing nothing but a Hitler mask.”

                  “And the thing I’ve learned about believers is that they visibly think that their extravagant theories about ‘deniers’ are equivalent to arguments.”

                  I’m still waiting for deniers to tell me where the Jews went. I’m not holding my breath but it would be nice to know.

                  BD wrote: ”The thing I’ve always enjoyed about you is your self-absorbed proclamations of “The Truth.””

                  “The ability to formulate one’s own analysis and conclusions is the privilege of higher intellects.”

                  😂
                  OK, if you think so.

                  BD wrote: ”Except the documents that exist that back up those testimonies, ”

                  “Only when read through the Holohoax decoding ring, i.e. by distorting such documents with alleged genocidal code words and euphemisms.”

                  Well, you would think the Nazis would’ve told us where they stashed all of those Jews without using code words or euphemisms.

                  BD wrote: ”plus all of the corraborating, independent testimonies that back up those testimonies.”

                  “Ufologists can produce the same ‘evidence’ : an impressive list of corroborating, independent testimonies. The belief that truly independent testimonies were produced at the postwar mock trials is gullible to say the least. Even judge Gray and Robert Van Pelt couldn’t reject Irving’s cross pollination theory at the Irving-Lipstadt trial in 2000. And any testimony is corroborating when superficial and vague enough, what is the main characteristic of most Holocaust testimonies. Even if it’s true that these testimonies often achieved the feat of producing a large number of ludicrous absurdities and impossibilities in spite of their superficiality and vagueness.”

                  Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzz…..

                  Comment by brycesdaddy1105 — April 26, 2017 @ 5:41 pm

                • DB wrote: “I’m still waiting for deniers to tell me where the Jews went. I’m not holding my breath but it would be nice to know.”

                  At least, one can already say with certainty that they didn’t go into the soil of Treblinka, Belzec and Sobibor. Or else the Holo-scam team would have jubilantly shown us the bones and cremains of all these Jews a long time ago. This restricts the search space a little bit. Good luck for your search throughout the rest of this planet, dear accuser. The good old days when nobody would “require proof of [the victors’] facts of common knowledge” (http://avalon.law.yale.edu/imt/imtconst.asp#art21) before believing you, couldn’t of course last forever. The world has been patient enough with Holohoaxers for a long time. Now prove your charges with palpable evidence or just admit that your allegations belong in mythology at best and in the long list of war lies at worst.

                  For my part, I’m still waiting for a plausible explanation of why the Soviets, the Americans and the Israelis would have recorded and reported massive population movements completely demolishing their own WW2 & post-WW2 propaganda. States don’t collect and publicize information severely damaging their own interests. Would be silly and foolish. This is obvious. I’m not holding my breath either, but it would be nice to have something better than the current theory of spontaneous generation increasing tenfold the Jewish population of Palestine and adding a few million additional individuals to the American Jewish population after the war.

                  And also, I’m still waiting for the delivery notes of the mountains of wood needed for the cremation of the millions of dead Jews Holocaust conspiracy theorists claim to have been gassed and incinerated there.

                  BD wrote: ”Well, you would think the Nazis would’ve told us where they stashed all of those Jews without using code words or euphemisms.”

                  But you wouldn’t think that the Soviets (who captured all the documents in Eastern Europe) would have kept and publicized the documents recording such deportations and resettlements anyway. Not rocket science to understand that the right place for documents showing your own propaganda lied when it claimed that the Reinhardt camps were slaughterhouses, is a bonfire. Holocaustianity is the last field in this world where knowledge depends on the reliability of Soviet allegations and actions, i.e. on confidence in Soviet honesty and concern for the truth. Everywhere else, such a thing is met with skeptical smiles at best. For good reasons.

                  Comment by hermie — April 27, 2017 @ 3:39 am

                • “DB wrote: ”I’m still waiting for deniers to tell me where the Jews went. I’m not holding my breath but it would be nice to know.”

                  “At least, one can already say with certainty that they didn’t go into the soil of Treblinka, Belzec and Sobibor.”

                  Yeah, they did. Sorry about that. Sorry for them, too. It sucks when the only excuse the Germans could come up with is, “Well, you are Jews.”

                  “Or else the Holo-scam team would have jubilantly shown us the bones and cremains of all these Jews a long time ago.”

                  You mean like the piles of ash, bone and body parts the Poles found when they investigated Treblinka, Sobibor and Belzec?

                  “This restricts the search space a little bit. Good luck for your search throughout the rest of this planet, dear accuser.”

                  Who says I am accusing anyone of anything? It’s simply fact.

                  “The good old days when nobody would ”require proof of [the victors’] facts of common knowledge” (http://avalon.law.yale.edu/imt/imtconst.asp#art21) before believing you, couldn’t of course last forever. The world has been patient enough with Holohoaxers for a long time. Now prove your charges with palpable evidence or just admit that your allegations belong in mythology at best and in the long list of war lies at worst.”

                  Well, deniers could help with that if they could prove where the Jews went.

                  “For my part, I’m still waiting for a plausible explanation of why the Soviets, the Americans and the Israelis would have recorded and reported massive population movements completely demolishing their own WW2 & post-WW2 propaganda. States don’t collect and publicize information severely damaging their own interests. Would be silly and foolish. This is obvious. I’m not holding my breath either, but it would be nice to have something better than the current theory of spontaneous generation increasing tenfold the Jewish population of Palestine and adding a few million additional individuals to the American Jewish population after the war.”

                  See, this is the fun part where I ask you for proof. I want to see statistics and records.

                  “And also, I’m still waiting for the delivery notes of the mountains of wood needed for the cremation of the millions of dead Jews Holocaust conspiracy theorists claim to have been gassed and incinerated there.”

                  So, are you saying there was no wood in Poland?

                  BD wrote: ”Well, you would think the Nazis would’ve told us where they stashed all of those Jews without using code words or euphemisms.”

                  But you wouldn’t think that the Soviets (who captured all the documents in Eastern Europe) would have kept and publicized the documents recording such deportations and resettlements anyway. Not rocket science to understand that the right place for documents showing your own propaganda lied when it claimed that the Reinhardt camps were slaughterhouses, is a bonfire. Holocaustianity is the last field in this world where knowledge depends on the reliability of Soviet allegations and actions, i.e. on confidence in Soviet honesty and concern for the truth. Everywhere else, such a thing is met with skeptical smiles at best. For good reasons.”

                  Comment by brycesdaddy1105 — April 27, 2017 @ 5:41 am

                • BD wrote: “Yeah, they did. Sorry about that. Sorry for them, too. It sucks when the only excuse the Germans could come up with is, “Well, you are Jews.””

                  Never heard this. Trial transcript or exterminationist poetic license???

                  BD wrote: “You mean like the piles of ash, bone and body parts the Poles found when they investigated Treblinka, Sobibor and Belzec?”

                  Your Bolshevist ‘reports’ again !?

                  BD wrote: “Who says I am accusing anyone of anything? It’s simply fact.”

                  I’d like to hear you say this to a judge. 😉

                  BD wrote: “Well, deniers could help with that if they could prove where the Jews went.”

                  And zoologists could also help cryptozoologists if they could prove where bigfoots are not hiding. But why would they do such a thing? No scientific evidence of bigfoot, no bigfoot. This is how it works. Unless major interests get involved and media, politicians & academics lower their evidential standards to a ridiculous level..

                  BD wrote: “So, are you saying there was no wood in Poland?”

                  No, I’m saying such supplies of huge amounts of wood would have necessarily caused many paper trails.

                  Are you saying the areas around Treblinka, Sobibor and Belzec were deforested during WW2???

                  Comment by hermie — April 27, 2017 @ 5:27 pm

                • “BD wrote: ”Yeah, they did. Sorry about that. Sorry for them, too. It sucks when the only excuse the Germans could come up with is, “Well, you are Jews.””

                  “Never heard this. Trial transcript or exterminationist poetic license???”

                  No, it’s called reality.
                  Are you saying the Germans didn’t do anything to the Jews? That they didn’t single them out for being Jews? What crime did they commit, except for being Jews?

                  BD wrote: ”You mean like the piles of ash, bone and body parts the Poles found when they investigated Treblinka, Sobibor and Belzec?”

                  “Your Bolshevist ‘reports’ again !?”

                  Who else was going to investigate those sites? The Poles investigated German crimes committed in Poland. Makes sense, right? Is there an issue or just another convenient excuse for not accepting evidence that runs contrary to denier bullshit?

                  BTW, would you accept “Bolshevist” proof of “transit camps?” Or would that be too “Bolshevist?”

                  BD wrote: ”Who says I am accusing anyone of anything? It’s simply fact.”

                  “I’d like to hear you say this to a judge. ;-)”

                  A judge would accept facts. In fact, judges in Western Germany already did.

                  BD wrote: ”Well, deniers could help with that if they could prove where the Jews went.”

                  “And zoologists could also help cryptozoologists if they could prove where bigfoots are not hiding. But why would they do such a thing? No scientific evidence of bigfoot, no bigfoot. This is how it works. Unless major interests get involved and media, politicians & academics lower their evidential standards to a ridiculous level..”

                  Translation:
                  It really bothers me when you actually ask for proof of denier bullshit theories.

                  BD wrote: ”So, are you saying there was no wood in Poland?”

                  “No, I’m saying such supplies of huge amounts of wood would have necessarily caused many paper trails.”

                  Who says that information would be accessible or saved? We’re talking wood delivery.

                  “Are you saying the areas around Treblinka, Sobibor and Belzec were deforested during WW2??”

                  Did I say that?

                  Comment by brycesdaddy1105 — April 27, 2017 @ 6:11 pm

                • BD wrote: “No, it’s called reality. Are you saying the Germans didn’t do anything to the Jews? That they didn’t single them out for being Jews?”

                  No, I’m not saying that. Off topic. We’re talking about slaughtering them at the Reinhardt camps, not about singling them out.

                  BD wrote: “What crime did they commit, except for being Jews?”

                  The seizure of the levers of power in Europe and elsewhere. Any struggle for freedom ‘oppresses’ a specific group of individuals. It’s inevitable. No freedom for India without ‘oppressing’ the British aliens. No freedom for the working classes without ‘oppressing’ the speculative financiers. No freedom for the serfs without ‘oppressing’ the aristocrats. And no freedom for the Europeans and Americans without oppressing the Jewish aliens…

                  BD wrote: ”Who else was going to investigate those sites?”

                  An multipolar international team of experts, such as in Katyn. Even if I doubt that the findings of such a team would have been reliable in the postwar atmosphere of hatred anyway.

                  BD wrote: “The Poles investigated German crimes committed in Poland. Makes sense, right? Is there an issue or just another convenient excuse for not accepting evidence that runs contrary to denier bullshit?”

                  Don’t pretend you don’t know what kind of Poles performed such biased ‘investigations.’ The fingerprints of Moscow were everywhere.

                  BD wrote: “BTW, would you accept “Bolshevist” proof of “transit camps?” Or would that be too “Bolshevist?””

                  I would first assess the reliability of such proofs. Bolshevist or not, I would deal with such documentation with caution. I don’t regard Americans as more reliable and less liars than the Bolsheviks.

                  BD wrote: ”A judge would accept facts. In fact, judges in Western Germany already did.”

                  A judge would laugh at you for saying “This is fact” when only bringing groundless allegations.

                  The judges in post-WW2 ZOG-Germany are grotesque servants. Their state-sponsored verdicts are pathetic.

                  BD wrote: ”Translation: It really bothers me when you actually ask for proof of denier bullshit theories.”

                  Translation: I don’t plan to request or provide palpable proofs of the ludicrous conclusions of the victors’ kangaroo courts. And I’ll just keep exhibiting my ridiculous testimonial ‘evidence’ like a bigfoot hunter until the end of times.

                  Funny evasion of your due burden of proof. Hilarious Medieval evidential standards…

                  BD wrote: ”Who says that information would be accessible or saved? We’re talking wood delivery.”

                  And who says that information about the deportation of numerous Jews to Far Eastern ghettos would be accessible or saved? Once again, why would the Soviets have kept and released documents demolishing their own propaganda? What would be the point of such a silly policy?

                  BD wrote: “Did I say that?”

                  No vouchers of countless deliveries of firewood. No deforested areas. No millions of corpses in the soil of these areas. Or in other words, no palpable material in the exterminationist file. You’re lucky to be on the side of the victors not having to provide evidence of their assertions. Or else your childish politically-motivated horror story would have been classified as the groundless conspiracy theory it is a long time ago…

                  Comment by hermie — April 28, 2017 @ 8:38 am

                • You wrote: “BD wrote: “What crime did they commit, except for being Jews?”

                  The word Jew is a verb meaning to cheat someone — or to “Jew” someone down.

                  I once worked for a company that was owned by Jews. Each employee had to use two different names, one name under which they did business with companies, and a second name under which they stole from the same companies.

                  Comment by furtherglory — April 28, 2017 @ 12:18 pm

                • Furtherglory wrote: “The word Jew is a verb meaning to cheat someone — or to “Jew” someone down.”

                  Comment by hermie — April 29, 2017 @ 4:30 am


RSS feed for comments on this post.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Blog at WordPress.com.

%d bloggers like this: