Woah, woah, woah. Your original comment was about the book? I wondered which you meaned between the two, and dismissed the comment being about the book as it didn’t make sense alongside the comment.

---

So let me get this right,

Your saying ‘How to Sell a Genocide’ as the books “title does leave a bad taste and doesn’t communicate scientific rigor”?

If so, fair enough, everybody’s got an opinion on things. It’s a racy title for sure.

---

But then the last part of the comment, if we’re talking about the title of the book still, makes no sense,

but it being a opinion piece with little value that should not be read

This indicates you’ve read the book? But, have you? If yes, then don’t mind me I assumed wrong. But if no, then how do you know it’s an opinion piece with little value if you haven’t read the book?

And who describes a whole book as an opinion piece? Especially considering most books have gone through referencing and fact checking processes. And doubly in cases like this where legal teams for news/media companies will inevitably be sniffing about.

I’m confused by your comment.

---

I just want to clear up any possible confusion about the location of this library below,

And reasoning for book removals from libraries can be pretty shallow in the US according to my perception, though that’s more of a school and minor library thing.

This is a library in Sydney, Australia. Near where two terrorists shot and murdered more than 10 people at a Jewish party at Bondi beach late last year.