My new post at David Horowitz’s NewsReal blog looks at recently released letters written by Noam Chomsky:
CounterContempt has released two letters which they say are a sampling of correspondence showing that Chomsky’s relationship with Holocaust deniers was more serious than he has let on.
These letters are between Chomsky and L.A. “Lou” Rollins, “a writer and contributing editor at the Institute for Historical Review (IHR), the North American headquarters of Holocaust denial and Nazi literature.”
CounterContempt opines that this is a “very friendly correspondence, complete with praise for the denier’s work, and an offer of assistance on Chomsky’s part.”
***
The following paragraphs were included in my original draft but didn’t make it into the final version of the post:
Now, it is a sad fact that certain famous accounts of Holocaust survival have turned out to have been highly exaggerated, if not outright fiction. No less a personage than Simon Weisenthal admitted to employing exaggeration of facts and figures, to “raise awareness.”
Sadly, this tactic has been embraced by the Left to promote lesser causes such as “global warming,” and it is not only counterproductive, but morally wrong. In the case of the Holocaust, these frauds fuel the very anti-Semitism they are intended to defeat.
However, it isn’t clear to me from reading this letter whether or not Chomsky is calling Wiesel’s story of his World War 2 imprisonment “fraudulent” per se.
Someone who has called Wiesel’s story a fraud, though?
Why, Robert Faurisson, writing for the Institute for Historical Review!
It is obviously Weisel’s support for Israel that sticks in Chomsky’s craw in this letter.
However, how that support is “fraudulent” — as opposed to “disagreeable” or even “immoral” — isn’t clear to me. Unlike Chomsky, I’m not an expert in semantics…
