Thank you, Sailor and CY. Hannover does not seem to undertsand that simply declaring a statement does not make it the truth, it should be backed up with at least a fact or two. You forget that what you are saying might be common knowledge to you and other Revisionists, but someone on the outside might not have a clue. By doing little more than reiterating your original statement when asked for more information, you are in fact effectively alienating people who might want to know more about the issue.
Here is an example of Hannover's argument in reverse:
RUTGER: Revisionism is widely accepted and respected. Revisionist historians occupy prominent place in history departments of the most prestigious universities of US and Europe.
HANNOVER: Please name one historian like that.
RUTGER: Sorry, I dont have faculty lists from those universities. I do know that to assert that Holocaust is a sham will get one wide recognition in any unversity.
HANNOVER: Faculty lists are readily available online. You made a statement that you "know" something, please share with us how you know it.
RUTGER: I know it because people most definitely have been rewarded for questioning the 'holocau$t' sham, very simple. I find it bizarre that anyone would question that fact.
Does not sound too convincing, now does it? Yet all I did was use Hannover's actual statements from this thread.
For Tom: a simple brief search on Google gives us this revisionist site which specifically lists Revisionists who got in trouble with the law. Why Hannover can't or won't do something like this is beyond me...
"...Against stupidity the gods themselves struggle in vain..." /Friedrich Schiller/