You brought it up, so it seems like you know full well what happened.
Quote from the OP; "who wrote the sources that wikipedia used"
Yes, so he's criticizing it, as opposed to blindly citing it as you did.
More interesting than Wikipedia is the possibility that we might agree on the issue at hand: that an unbiased source might reflect the idea that jew Leo Frank tampered with and/or faked parts of his dead daughter's private diary to sell for a profit, and that this action happened to assist in perpetuating a status of victimhood among the jews, being that the resultant propaganda would be distributed to warn young white children about the horrors of white nationalism, in the context of it resulting in the Holocaust, for decades and decades.
Your delusions are not 'possibilities', and Hitler was not a white nationalist.
Such a hurtful insult. Again, you want to talk about anything except what you did, and you know full well what you did considering that you brought it up.
You brought it up, so it seems like you know full well what happened.
Yes, so he's criticizing it, as opposed to blindly citing it as you did.
Your delusions are not 'possibilities', and Hitler was not a white nationalist.
Topic Status: avoided by obsfucation
Jew Status: defended by omision
Pil Status: pul'd
Oh yeah, it's Antonio time
You're quite the master of obfuscation yourself, citing Wikipedia as a reliable source and then wanting to talk about anything but that.
Quote it, dirtbag, I'll wait.
Such a hurtful insult. Again, you want to talk about anything except what you did, and you know full well what you did considering that you brought it up.