Well, taking into account the aforesaid, there is nothing to be surprised in the following info:
|Poster of the exhibition that won't open in Paris....|
Having explored 2500 sq.m of territory at Salaspils camp and excavated just one fifth thereof, the commission found 632 child corpses supposedly from 5 to 9 years of age; the corpses were situated in layers...In my sincere opinion, such an exhibition can spoil the image of Latvia in the one and only case. In case the current Latvian government considers the country an heir of Nazis who established this concentration camp back in 1941. An heir of that Lettische freiwilligen SS-Legion veterans of which are considered by the Latvian establishment today as the most true WW2 veterans on the basis they were supposedly mostly conscripted legioners.
At the distance of 150 m from this grave in the direction to the railway the commission discovered a place 25x27 m in size with the ground impregnated with an oily substance and mixed with ashes containing unburnt remains of bones of children from 5 to 9 years of age: teeth, articular heads of femoral and humeral bones, ribs, etc.
Even if someone disagree with the estimations and statements of the exhibition organizers, a proper scientific approach would be to arrange a panel discussion or whatever, to exchange opinions, arguments, prove one or another viewpoint, etc.
However, banning the exhibition means what? Does it mean today's Latvia accepts charges of WW2 crimes on its "current account"?
What a nice and exemplary tolerant European country is currently presiding the EU, isn't it?
Post Scriptum: Russian historian Alexander Dyukov, whose "Historical Memory" foundation organized the exhibition that Moscow and Minsk already saw, was announced persona non grata by Edgars Rinkēvičs, the Latvian Minister of Foreign Affairs. Evidently, to clean up the image of the country. I wonder whether the questions I ask here will bring me the same fruit as an answer.