Twitter | Pretraživanje | |
John-Paul Pagano
Think about the type of mind that generates the phrase “questioned Holocaust orthodoxies”.
Reply Retweet Označi sa "sviđa mi se" More
John-Paul Pagano 2. velj
Odgovor korisniku/ci @johnpaulpagano
Of course, this is a standardized lie that Chomsky flacks use. Chomsky went beyond his pointed selection of Faurisson as a free speech cause to sanitize the French Holocaust-denier as a “relatively apolitical liberal of some sort.”
Reply Retweet Označi sa "sviđa mi se"
John-Paul Pagano 2. velj
Odgovor korisniku/ci @johnpaulpagano
There’s a subtle key in Greenwald’s framing—Faurisson “questioned Holocaust orthodoxies”—that exemplifies the oppositional nihilism of Chomsky and his imitators.
Reply Retweet Označi sa "sviđa mi se"
John-Paul Pagano 2. velj
Odgovor korisniku/ci @johnpaulpagano
No one denies that Robert Faurisson is a Holocaust-denier—no one, except subtly, Noam Chomsky, who originally recast Faurisson as a “relatively apolitical liberal”, and Greenwald, who now says that Faurisson “questioned Holocaust orthodoxies.”
Reply Retweet Označi sa "sviđa mi se"
John-Paul Pagano 2. velj
Odgovor korisniku/ci @johnpaulpagano
If pressed, Greenwald would likely admit that Faurisson is a Holocaust-denier, because it would be too damaging to equivocate. (Chomsky, whose moral idiocy operated in an earlier era, might have continued to wriggle. Let me know, if you can.)
Reply Retweet Označi sa "sviđa mi se"
John-Paul Pagano 2. velj
Odgovor korisniku/ci @johnpaulpagano
But why not admit it loudly from the beginning? To immediately and clearly admit that Faurisson is a rank Holocaust-denier would have strengthened their pose in defense of free speech. Yet both Chomsky and Greenwald’s initial instinct was to recast Faurisson as something else.
Reply Retweet Označi sa "sviđa mi se"
John-Paul Pagano 2. velj
Odgovor korisniku/ci @johnpaulpagano
It’s only later, when criticized, that Chomsky and Greenwald go to the mattresses with their rationale about Holocaust-denial being irrelevant to defending free expression, or making it more urgent. Because it serves them, they purport THEN to be clear-eyed about Faurisson.
Reply Retweet Označi sa "sviđa mi se"
John-Paul Pagano 2. velj
Odgovor korisniku/ci @johnpaulpagano
This subtle shifting, like the rhetorical equivalent of an infected tooth, indicates the rot at the base of the oppositional nihilism Chomsky & Greenwald represent: it’s not principled, it’s about ANY principle, that erodes the foundations of our society, which they simply hate.
Reply Retweet Označi sa "sviđa mi se"
John-Paul Pagano 2. velj
Odgovor korisniku/ci @johnpaulpagano
It indicates that the oppositional nihilism that Chomsky and Greenwald represent is not about critically challenging ourselves or seeking the truth. It is meant to manufacture uncertainty about the truth, so we destroy ourselves.
Reply Retweet Označi sa "sviđa mi se"
Jäger von Heinrich Kramer 2. velj
Odgovor korisniku/ci @johnpaulpagano @DavidNeiwert
I'm sure you're already familiar with it but recounts Greenwald's history of defending Nazis.
Reply Retweet Označi sa "sviđa mi se"
John-Paul Pagano 2. velj
Odgovor korisniku/ci @jaegervonkramer @DavidNeiwert
I am, but I’ve been on this squalid Greenwald beat since like 2006. I’m actually the one who first found that Greenwald had been illegally recording people while defending Matthew Hale, which Neiwert mentions.
Reply Retweet Označi sa "sviđa mi se"