>>35
Not sure what you are suppose to mean by this
Reading failure or something?
I am allergic to bullshit. Which is the main reason I like judging people for what they do say and do
Tl;dr: I don't like straw-man arguing.
not a revisionist
what do you mean by "at least not yet"?
When I hear two sides out, and one side is consistently full of BS, while the other side at least makes
some sense, then guess which side I'll end up listening to?
What "bullshit" would that be exactly?
Isn't that obvious by now?
- Failure to Believe, is, to this date, the only jailable thought-crime in any of Europe's self-declared democracies. What for, really, if the evidence really is that solid?
- By pigheadedly nazifying Unbelievers, thereby dictating that only Hitler-lovers can possibly ever fail to Believe,
we effectively end up declaring that the Holocaust was somehow the only evil thing that the Nazis ever did.
That last point is actually the biggest problem, as it inexorably leads us to conclude
- that the Chrystal Night was somehow not evil,
- that the SS, SA and Gestapo were somehow not evil,
- that the Entartede Kunst thingy was somehow not evil,
- that book-burning sessions are somehow not evil,
- that having all those concentration camps lying around in the first place, was somehow not evil…
…not to mention stuffing people into those camps, for felonies such as having the wrong skin tone, or some thought-crime, etc.
Srsly, all these things did happen. Not even revisionists even try to deny it.
And all of them were crimes against humanity. In their own right. No need for another crime topping that off, for it to be evil.