Because “Holocaust Denier” sounds so unfairly judgmental for this kind of calm reasonable-sounding Hitler-defending “revisionist”:
. . . Cooper proceeded, in a soft-spoken, faux-reasonable way, to lay out an alternative history in which Hitler tried mightily to avoid war with Western Europe, Churchill was a “psychopath” propped up by Zionist interests, and millions of people in concentration camps “ended up dead” because the overwhelmed Nazis didn’t have the resources to care for them. Elon Musk promoted the conversation as “very interesting” on his platform X, though he later deleted the tweet.
From great op-ed by Michelle Goldberg
Got to feel bad for those overwhelmed Nazis, right? They didn’t want the war, did their best to avoid it, then they had to fight everyone and wind up vilified by billionaire Zionists for not protecting their Jews better while under attack…
See, not denial at all, simple revisionism [1], an honest disagreement about allegedly disputed historical facts. The ever fair and dazzlingly nuanced NY Times editorial board rests its case.
I truly don’t get the motives of the New York Times, but the Grey Lady certainly cuts a piss-poor figure representing a free press during the frantic gallop of American fascism.
His shot ear has healed miraculously in a very short time, as this recent photo shows. More proof to faithful Evangelicals of how much God loves this flawed vessel.
[1] In historiography, historical revisionism is the reinterpretation of a historical account.[1] It usually involves challenging the orthodox (established, accepted or traditional) scholarly views or narratives regarding a historical event, timespan, or phenomenon by introducing contrary evidence or reinterpreting the motivations and decisions of the people involved. Revision of the historical record can reflect new discoveries of fact, evidence, and interpretation as they come to light. The process of historical revision is a common, necessary, and usually uncontroversial process which develops and refines the historical record in order to make it more complete and accurate.
One form of historical revisionism involves a reversal of older moral judgments. Revision in this fashion is a more controversial topic, and can include denial or distortion of the historical record yielding an illegitimate form of historical revisionism known as historical negationism (involving, for example, distrust of genuine documents or records or deliberate manipulation of statistical data to draw predetermined conclusions). This type of historical revisionism can present a re-interpretation of the moral meaning of the historical record.[2]
gratuitousblahg 