What you call "throwing a bone" others might see as being objective and open-minded. How can we expect opponents to consider our views if we are going to stick our fingers in our ears and intone loudly "I can't hear you" at the suggestion that even one tenth of what has been alleged could have some foundation? Historiography should be the search for facts, not the imposition of every aspect of a preconception.
My eyes and ears have been and are wide open, I read what they say; but there is no sense in making concessions (aka: throwing them a bone) if concessions are not warranted by facts.
While those like Clem and Steven F are overly dramatic and hyper personal in their critique of such concessionaires, they are IMO generally quite correct.
Trying to appear reasonable by making unsubstantiated concessions is simply illogical and unscientific.
Kingfisher:
As you never tire of saying, Revisionists have won the battle (evidence). What you should add is they are one hell of a way from winning the war (convincing the public).
With the media firmly in the hands of Jewish supremacists, and even they openly admit it, there have been problems getting the truth about the Revisionist positions on the 'holocaust' storyline. But people know that there are "deniers", no doubt about it, which is a big step in itself. People worldwide are beginning to see the evils of Zionism and the lies the Zionists tell, which also assists in adding credibility to Revisionism.
The whole 'fact' of the 'holocaust' is held together by media indoctrination, smoke & mirrors, doubletalk, and fear of ridicule. In the long run people tend to rebel against being told how to think and what to think about. They're also becoming tired of being told what they supposedly think, i.e.: a supremacist Jew writes something 'holocaust' related, which is most everything these days, and then goes on to say something like 'the public is horrified by holocaust deniers', when in fact I do not find that to be the case. In basic one on one discussions most feel that Revisionists have the right to speak and publish as they wish. Which is why it's important for people to realize that some countries have laws against free speech when such speech concerns the 'holocaust' storyline. When people realize that these laws exist it immediately creates a reaction of 'But why?'
People are putting the pieces together. They see who the liars are and understand how the liars make statements and engage in actions which are detrimental to society at large.
- Hannover
