mmm.
So there is no space in academia for an outrageous premise?
Well poor old Galileo. He came out with the outrageous statement that the Earth went round the Sun. This was absolute heresy against the prevailing wisdom. We can guess it was certainly against the aims and the objectives of the University of Pisa. The "evidence" he offered was his telescope. Rubbish! He was accused of painting the stars on the lens. The authorities were so outraged they took him down to the dungeons where he was "shown the instruments" of torture. Even worse, his wife scolded him for putting his pension at risk and his daughter's fiancee broke off the engagement.
Bye the bye, wasn't Chomsky involved with defending a French academic holocaust-denier back in the '80's?
Chomsky defended Faurisson's right to free speech as do I - Im Jewish but I don't believe holocaust denial should be banned, just that it should not be treated seriously or given a priveleged platform, and that those who continue to pedal such vile theories
have the right to face the consequence of their actions, It does not mean that he endorsed any of the contents of Faurisson's books. He did NOT.
And in any case I dont agree with everything Chomsky says. Never have. Does the fact that he says something somehow make it more true or more worth listening to?
Nobody is saying that Kollerstrom should be jailed for what he believes. But you believe something you face the consequences. He published his work under his own name and used his PhD to bolster his arguments.
I also have a few problems with the outcome and I'm uncomfortable with the fact that some people seem to be celebrating this (not you BK as after what you went through you are perfectly entitled to).
Comparing holocaust denial to Galileo's theory, a man who suffered, was imprisoned and died for his discoveries is utterly, utterly contemptible.
holocaust denial is not some radical theory which goes against what "they" want you to believe.
Quite the opposite.
I have "doubts" about 9/11 and I think serious questions need to be asked about how much was known before the attacks.
But this is not the same as denying the holocaust, believing in a Jewish conspiracy to decieve the world. Not the same. As I wrote
here and
here there are many victims of the holocaust who people in positions of power would prefer that people did not remember.
It is my belief that the numbers of deaths from the holocaust is UNDERESTIMATED.
More gypsies died, as a proportion of the pre-war population, than the Jews but hardly anything is said about it. Forced sterelisation programmes were being imposed in some countries in Eastern Europe until the fucking 1980s
Admitting that the gypsies were a deliberate target of extermination by the Nazis would mean those Eastern European governments admitting that what THEY were doing was wrong!
But its all a conspiracy isnt it? It was all a hoax, dreamed up by a "filthy people who lie a lot", right?
Whose purposes does it suit to deny that gypsies and serbs were ever targetted? why make up a lie that the ustasha were really a brave group of fighters defending croatia against the "evil" serbs? why deny that hundreds of Jews from the Channel Islands, occupied by the Nazis during the war, were ever killed? that anthony eden and the british government during the war sent jews back to their deaths in germany?? that there was anything dodgy about the way companies such as IBM and IG Farben behaved during the war, or the catholic church for that matter???
Think about it. think for fucks sake!!
What possible motivation could someone have in promoting such lies? Why?
It isnt people who want to expose government cover ups is it? would anyone who was seriously interested in uncovering the truth behind historical events and what we are told in the media want to endorse this sanatised version of WWII?
and yep, definitely agree there 100%
