Chomsky: "... wouldn't [one] at least suspect the motives of someone who denies genocide (the Holocaust, in particular). Of course. Thus, I do suspect the motives of Wiesel, Bernard Lewis, the anthropological profession, the American Jewish Congress and ASI, Faurisson, Western intellectuals who systematically and almost universally downplay the atrocities of their own states, and people who deny genocide and atrocities generally. But I do not automatically conclude that they are racists; nor do you. Rather, we ask what leads them to these horrendous conclusions. There are many different answers, as we all agree. Since the points are again obvious, a rational person will proceed also to question the motives of those who pretend to deny them, when it suits their particular political purposes."
I would e.g. be suspicious of the motives of soi-disant leftists who use a ridiculous "soft on naziism" charge against people like Chomsky (or Cockburn) to rule them outside the limits of allowable debate -- as rightists once used "soft of communism"... --CGE
On Tue, 18 Jun 2002, Chip Berlet wrote:
> Justin has it nailed. I always tell folks the same thing, on a pure
> level of logic:
>
> > "There was no Holocaust" does not imply, "The Jews are > wicked,"
>
> then add that in 30 years of research I have yet to find an actual
> instance where they are not linked.
>