you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 3 points 1 year ago (2 children)

You provided a second claim from somebody else. That's not a source. Sources include verifiable facts.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    If you actually bothered to read the book at least a little bit, you'd have read he actually sources a fair bit.

    He's also providing an eyewitness account from his time there. I'm not sure how much more primary you want to get.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago

    If you had actually bothered to link the specific instances where he sources those claims, we would have read them.

    But you didn't, because you probably didn't read a book you want us to go on a wild goose chase for. Eyewitness accounts from anglos are only good enough to wipe your ass with and even then there's better alternatives.

    No facts then? Cool, I thought so.

  • source
  • parent