Egyptian State News: Jews Invented Holocaust
A state-run Egyptian newspaper has printed a series of articles which deny the Holocaust, and claim that it was a Jewish invention to win world sympathy for the creation of a Jewish state.
Tell that to any living allied soldier who liberated a death camp and see where it gets you. Yeah, and my grandmother tatooed that number on her own arm to make the argument more convincing, right? Oh, and like, Hitler never ever wrote about a “final solution” in Mein Kampf, oh heavens no. And the Nazis who stood trial at Nuremberg, none of them attested to mass extermination, not at all. It was all some big Jewish conspiracy that every nation on earth fell for.
Yes, I know… It’s futile to waste my time even contemplating such idiocy. Noam Chomsky once said that, “The moment you even begin to question whether or not there was a Holocaust you lose your humanity.” Still, I find it ironic that this sort of Holocaust denial is precisely the propaganda it claims to be “defending the world” against. You’ve got to wonder how gullible people really are.
What’s more outlandish — that a European nation would continue in a 2,000 year old tradition of killing Jews, or that we allegedly inferior Jews were able to trick the entire world into believing we had been slaughtered? I wonder…
But this isn’t the issue is it? The issue is, what the fuck is the government of a modern, industrialized nation doing spreading these abhorrent lies, and what do they really stand to gain from it, other than to increase hatred for Jews and the Jewish state? Do they want to go back to war?
[Update] Under U.S. pressure, the publication has apologized for printing the series. (c/o Arieh)
Then why does Chmosky support Neo Nazis?
what kind of horseshit lie is that? you wanna make some preposterous claim like that, you better back it up. and if the best you can come with is werner cohen’s distortions and iies, you can have a nice day.
mo i heard in the past about these accusations. can u refer me to a place where i can learn more about it?
all i’ve got for you is this jewschool post which i wrote back in may:
http://www.jewschool.com/2004/05/exposing-myth-noam-chomsky-is.php
Yo, I met Chomsky, and he is real.
This man invented the field of linguistics. Back when he was getting started, he couldn’t get tenure at any of the Ivys because he was a Jew, so he went to MIT. Later, after he became an academic rock star, he could’ve had his own department at any school he wanted, but stuck with MIT. They did right by him, so he did right by them. That’s a mensch.
Here’s a good source from a fellow Israeli blogger: diary of an anti-chomskyite. Chomsky’s contributions to languistics are seminal, but his rants against Israel and America are, in my opinion, worthless.
Make that “linguistics,” although if I were Chomsky I’d probably deny that I misspelled it.
that guy’s blog is ridiculous … excerpt from context & twist, twist, twist
No, Josh H. is dead on. Chomsky is responsible for incredible advancement in linguistics, which has affected theory in a multitude of areas (like psychology, music, etc).
But he is also a staunch opponent of Israel (note, I didn’t say anti-Semite… I don’t know about that). And that’s not very helpful.
A few years back, Columbia University’s Miller Theater held a “Theater of Ideas” program featuring Chomsky and Edward Said. The notion of that event is still laughable and disgusting.
More to the point: Egypt’s anti-Semitic record is nothing new (remember the TV series not long ago that was based on the Protocols of the Elders of Zion?). Strangely, Egypt is coming to Israel’s aid with respect to taking some security resposibility in the Gaza strip post-disengagement (although they’re clearly not doing enough to stop weapons smuggling). I guess the anti-Semitism is some nasty bone they have to throw to their masses to be able to carry out more moderate policies… but it’s still nauseating.
Chomsky is responsible for incredible advancement in linguistics, which has affected theory in a multitude of areas (like psychology, music, etc).
Largely discredited, no? I thought his big thing was the structuralist theory of language, ie our brains are hard-wired and precoded and stuff. This was later debunked. Or so I seem to recall learning once upon a time…
Mobius, I read Kerstein’s Chomsky blog regularly and I find it to be well-written and compelling. He quotes Chomsky at length, so it will take more than calling it ridiculous to convince me otherwise. Kerstein or not, I think it’s hard to argue that Chomsky isn’t rabidly anti-Israel.
Chomsky’s big thing in linguistics is Universal Grammar, “i.e. our brains are hard-wired and precoded and stuff” as 8opus said. Structuralist linguistics is the theory that there are no abstract essences or definitions to words, phonemes (sound-units), or parts of speech – all meaning comes from opposition, instead. In other words, “blue” doesn’t mean “blue” because there’s some Platonic abstract entity out there called “Blue” that blue things relate to – “blue” only means “blue” because the language we speak contrasts it with “red”, “green”, “purple”, etc.
In Linguistics there are hard-core Chomskyites and hard-core Anti-Chomskyites. Some Anti-Chomskyites accuse Chomsky of “ruining” not just Linguistics, but many other fields of study by extending his theoretical conclusions to them.
“The moment you even begin to question whether or not there was a Holocaust you lose your humanity.”
I think the same could be said for those that believe Israel caused 9/11, as John Brown does.
I think Chomsky’s politics stopped developing when he was a 19 year old anti-WTO anarchist hippy punk. People are greedy. People rebel against greed. Snore-fest.
His linguistic theory is complicated to say the least, and changes frequently. “Strong” versions of structuralist grammar no longer hold water. Don’t too much attention to the post above my own, as Chomskian theory really has very little to say about semantics (I think steg may be talking about the arbitrary nature of the sign, a much older idea articualted by F. Sassure).
“I think Chomsky’s politics stopped developing when he was a 19 year old anti-WTO anarchist hippy punk. ”
hehehe…. wasnt the WTO establisehd in 1995 and Chomsky born in 1928? So when Chomsky was 19 the year was 1947… so he wasnt even a pro-Israeli (did i say pro? i meant anti..) then.
mobius attempts to defend his antisemitic idol noam chompsky by claiming werner cohen is a liar; well, lets look at one quote from cohen’s site: “Chomsky has remained obdurate. To Rubinstein he wrote the following:
I see no anti-Semitic implications in denial of the existence of gas chambers, or even denial of the holocaust. Nor would there be anti-Semitic implications, per se, in the claim that the holocaust (whether one believes it took place or not) is being exploited, viciously so, by apologists for Israeli repression and violence. I see no hint of anti-Semitic implications in Faurisson’s work …” cohen says that chomsky has never denied writing that. so mobius, what say you, do you have any evidence that chomsky denies writing that; and if you dont, since its so damning, chomsky, if not denying it, must be admitting its true. so mobius, do you really think chomsky is not a jew hater if capablle of writing the above?
#1. avi i thought you said you weren’t going to come ’round here no more.
#2. noam chomsky isn’t an antisemite, he’s an anti-zionist who grew up on a kibbutz in the 1920s.
#3. he is not my hero, he is simply someone who i think provides an interesting angle from which to look at such situations.
#4. it is not antisemitic (though it is incredibly distasteful) to conduct research and publish findings which suggest that gas chambers did not exist. it IS antisemitic to say that the jews made it up so that they could garner world sympathy. faurisson does no such thing.
#5. “Nor would there be anti-Semitic implications, per se, in the claim that the holocaust (whether one believes it took place or not) is being exploited, viciously so, by apologists for Israeli repression and violence.” I agree… And do you know why? Because you’re doing it right now.
Huh? Mobius, you said Avi Green is “doing it right now.” But he didn’t even mention Israel in his entire post, except when quoting Chomsky. Also, why is he banned? Since when does living on a Kibbutz give you immunity to anti-semitic charges? And why is denying the existence of gas chambers not anti-semitic? Would publishing findings which suggest that Jews drink Christian blood on Passover be anti-semitic? Arab countries do it all the time.
Avi’s not banned… he volunteered to stand aside, an offer I gladly accepted because 9 out of 10 times he hasn’t anything intelligent to offer the conversation. Usually his remarks are along the lines of “Mobius is an antisemite and hates Israel,” and “Jewschool may as well be a KKK site.”
As for him not saying anything about Israel, if you’d been following Avi’s comments over the course of the last year, you’d know full well what he’s about and what he’s up to. He’s a sensationalist who decries any criticism of Israeli policy as antisemitism.
Finally, denying the existence of gas chambers as part of historical and scientific research — even if that research is innaccurate, as Faurisson’s was — is different than flatly saying such things without any backup, and only with the intent of besmirching Jews. Faurisson couild care less about Jews, he could care less about politics, he could care less about anyt of these things. He stands by his research, and that is all, and by Chomsky’s estimation, there is no agenda behind it whatsoever. Go watch the video clip in the blogpost I linked to up top and then tell me if you think this guy is a bonafide Jew-hater waging an antisemitic campaign. As far as I can tell, the guy’s just an asshole. Chomsky even says, if you want to challenge Faurisson’s findings, you won’t have any trouble doing so whatsoever. He was only defending the guy’s right to publish his work.
Beyond that, I would likewise defend an antisemite’s right to publish blood libels. Not because I agree with what they’re publishing, but because it is better to have it out in the open in the public sphere where it can be challenged with fact, then for it to appear as though there is a Jewish campaign to suppress the “truth” or somesuch nonsense.
more from chomsky: “Anti-Semitism is no longer a problem, fortunately. It’s raised, but it’s raised because privileged people want to make sure they have total control, not just 98% control. That’s why anti-Semitism is becoming an issue. Not because of the threat of anti-Semitism; they want to make sure there’s no critical look at the policies the US (and they themselves) support in the Middle East.” i guess mobius would say the above isnt antisemitism either. and btw, mobius i did offer to stop posting here, i thought your leaving for israel might open your eyes and thought process. it hasnt, im back.
Chomsky even says, if you want to challenge Faurisson’s findings, you won’t have any trouble doing so whatsoever. He was only defending the guy’s right to publish his work.
It actually requires a great ammount of effort to refute the barrage of decontextualized “facts” holocaust revisionists collect and distort for the prupose of putting forth their assholic (though not anti-Semitic I guess) agendas.
Beyond that, I would likewise defend an antisemite’s right to publish blood libels. Not because I agree with what they’re publishing, but because it is better to have it out in the open in the public sphere where it can be challenged with fact, then for it to appear as though there is a Jewish campaign to suppress the “truth” or somesuch nonsense.
I defend the right to publish blood libels too. However, Jews seem to be the only group of people who feel obliged to libel themselves in the name of “Truth”. How odd and sad.
avi green, did you read the whole article? he is referring to the united states specifically.
Chomsky is a Zionist.. he’s just the old style of Zionist that believed in a binational state, not in a “Jewish state”
I saw him speak for 3 hours on CSPAN about his family, life, books etc and the middle east was discussed extensively
JB:
“Chomsky is a Zionist.. he’s just the old style of Zionist that believed in a binational state, not in a “Jewish state”
Can you explain what this means?
“I saw him speak for 3 hours on CSPAN about his family, life, books etc and the middle east was discussed extensively”
What does this add to the debate?
johnBrown is probably referring to Hashomer Hatzair movement and Brit SHalom and other supporters of the binational state, who were zionists. I dont think i would categorize Chomsky as a zionist, though not as an anti-zionist, too.
“johnBrown is probably referring to Hashomer Hatzair movement and Brit SHalom and other supporters of the binational state, who were zionists. I dont think i would categorize Chomsky as a zionist, though not as an anti-zionist, too.”
Yes, what do you call someone who would solve a 21st century problem with a solution from the early 19th? What would Benny Morris say about a binational state considering the current state of the Israel-Arab conflict? I think, unfortunately, that he would actually side with Kahane: it would be a death sentence. People that advocate such a solution are neither Zionists nor anti-Zionists, I agree. They are simply people that hold no viable position because of their tenuous relationship with reality.
Sorry that should be “early 20th” (for the Hashomer Hatzair kibutzot at least).
Mobius, I’m not saying we should limit Faurisson’s speech, I’m only saying he can be called an anti-semite. Many anti-semitic libels are purported to have research behind them – that does not make them any less anti-semitic. But I think you agree with me here: I would likewise defend an antisemite’s right to publish blood libels. As is often the case, I think when we agree on terms, we hold very similar views.
I tried watching the video, but I couldn’t get it to work.
avi green, did you read the whole article? he [noam chomsky] is referring to the united states specifically.Asaf Shtull-Trauring
Really Asaf?
“By now Jews in the US are the most privileged and influential part of the population. You find occasional instances of anti-Semitism but they are marginal. There’s plenty of racism, but it’s directed against Blacks, Latinos, Arabs are targets of enormous racism, and those problems are real. Anti-Semitism is no longer a problem, fortunately. It’s raised, but it’s raised because privileged people want to make sure they have total control, not just 98% control. That’s why anti-Semitism is becoming an issue. Not because of the threat of anti-Semitism; they want to make sure there’s no critical look at the policies the US (and they themselves) support in the Middle East.” thus speaks saint of the new left, noam chomsky. perhaps he and the saint of the paleo conservatives, pat buchanin, really are the same person!
actually, isnt it interesting that if you only look at the words, the exact statements by the extreme left typified by chomsky and the extreme right typified by buchanin when talking about israel could come out of either’s mouth. so we jews should be commended for being a unifying influence in this world, we have magically brought the far left/right together. aint love grand.
This site is pathetic and weak like most of you Zionists. You will never be able to knock “Jew Watch” off the number one spot when you search “JEW” on google. WHy because we rule the internet and it is the start of our revolution. I do not hate any particular race, but the multi everything that you Zionists push on the world and in turn have strict internal laws in Israel against multi anything.