It looks like we’re going to have to see what Faurisson has to say
there is no business like Shoah-business
That’s a fact, not just a funny saying, though it is a funny saying too. It runs the “business” of the western lifeworld itself, where all business takes place. Printing money for Israel is only one of those businesses that operates within this broader business.
Let’s relook at it aesthetically
the soap operatics of the plot
It is a story made for old ladies to watch, I have to admit. One thinks of the word “maudlin”. I’m running out of snot to blow into my hankie here. Should I wail at the sky with tears in my eyes, what do you want?
It’s not the worst tragedy in all of history? Time to let out a loud gasp! You take that back, it’s the worst thing that’s ever happened. We love our innocent merchant-caste that is the ancient, medieval, and modern exemplification of hyper-capitalism, don’t we? I’m sure for a people like that it would be impossible to gather the funds needed to convince you to sympathize with them.
Okay ! Let’s begin at the beginning. We need an expert report about the weapon of the crime. If you think that Fred Leuchter is wrong in his forensic expert report as well as Germar Rudolf, Walter Lüftl and the Institute of Forensic Research in Krakow (what about your silence on this ?) there is an obvious solution : produce your own expert report
Emphasis mine. Do you want to respond to that? If I’m going to be busting out my box of kleenex everytime politics is brought up I’d like to know that the soap opera is at least based on true events. So even would Noam Chomsky. And what about those writings of Teodor Jeske-Choiński – it seems like for hundreds of years those Jews of Poland did not treat Polish people like they were human beings. If you put both of these concepts together, they didn’t even get what they deserved.
Just some casual Socratism from this French professor of literature, Faurisson
Why do these revisions not make you wince at all?
Revisionism means to revise a generally accepted fact. E.g. a generally accepted fact was, in the past, that earth is flat and the sun goes around the earth. Now, people who had the idea of revising this accepted truth, found that the earth is round. And that the earth goes round the sun. Other examples: Nero set fire on Rome. This is false. Napoleon set fire on Moscow. This is false.
Oh, ok. We didn’t have the facts right for whatever reason. Why the silence? Why’s it so important to you? How is it different from revising the history of Napoleon? Why are people terrified to even read someone like Faurisson? It’s not just a show, it’s your favorite show, this shoah soap opera. People better not question anything about it, it’s perfect the way you understand it.
Gotta trust Spielberg’s version of it, he’s not known for fiction or anything after all
It’s a story we were told as children and it’s up for questioning like any other one.
Just because he’s Spielberg doesn’t mean that we can say that one movie of his isn’t the best one in his filmography. In fact I can’t think of a single movie of his I don’t like. Whether they’re all factually accurate is a different story. Why is it that you can hear that Saving Private Ryan was an exaggeration of the real events and not bat an eyelash and then go into freak-out mode if someone says that Schindler’s List was overly sentimental?