Trevor Loudon's New Zeal blog has moved to

TrevorLoudon.com

redirecting you there now

Wednesday, February 20, 2008

MAH Launches "Nazism Is Leftism"

MAH from Zionist Anti-Communist has established a second blog covering a subject dear to my heart.


Its called Nazism is Leftism

The local "stormtroopers" may not like this post, fisking the policy platform of the New Zealand National Front.

32 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

nazism is leftism rightwingers are leftwingers fuckers are suckers and jews are devilworshippers...what the fucking stupid site is this

11:13 AM  
Blogger mah29001 said...

"nazism is leftism rightwingers are leftwingers fuckers are suckers and jews are devilworshippers...what the fucking stupid site is this"

And you, simply can't and won't take how a neo-Nazi group like the New Zealand National Front could be labeled "right-wing" when these neo-Nazis don't promote traditional right-wing policies at all? You believe that nationalized healthcare is a right-wing policy? A centralized control over tye economy, right-wing?

Didn't Karl Marx stated in one of his planks that he wanted a centralized economy? Education when it came to being "free"?

11:46 AM  
Blogger George said...

Yes, those Nazis were SO concerned about social equality!

1:32 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I knew Muldoon was a leftest extremist with all that think big crap.

2:36 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Well anon,

I think trevor would agree with you about muldoon being a socialist. Well at least he did do way back when he was publishing the New Zeal news sheet

Y.

7:32 PM  
Anonymous james said...

George said...
Yes, those Nazis were SO concerned about social equality!"

Yes they were....as long as everyone was organised and subserviant to them they were thrilled ....as all socialists tend to be.

7:53 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Crikey. You have to wipe the spittle off the screen of that site. The first thing I saw was the claim that Noam Chomsky supports the arguments of the Holocaust denier Faurrison, but of course that's not true - Chomsky famously argued that Faurrison and other Holocaust deniers should be allowed to publish their work, even though it is repugnant. I doubt whether Trev would disagree.

Scrolling down, I saw an attempt to link some bloke called Pierce to the vast Nazi-social democratic conspiracy by pointing out he had links with the John Birch Society as well as the left. Didn't our man Trev spend most of the '80s distributing JBS lit?

3:54 AM  
Blogger mah29001 said...

Chomsky's an apologist for Hezbollah terrorists. He's rabidly anti-Israel and he supports totalitarian nations such as Cuba, North Korea, Iran, Saddam's Iraq. Want any further proof it this?

6:30 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

It's odd that you should reply to a specific point about Faurrison by bringing in Chomsky's views on Iraq, Cuba etc

I was querying Chomsky's alleged support for Faurrison. You say he's a keen promoter of Faurrison's Holocaust denial. But AFAIK he merely defends Faurrison's right to publish his repugnant views. I've certainly seen him saying that in the movie Manufacturing Consent. Do you have a source for Chomsky denying the Holocaust? If he really is such an enthusiastic denialist then you should be able to find some quotes, eh?

11:51 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Found a wiki on the Faurrison affair:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faurisson_Affair

Hardly seems like Chomsky is 'a prominent defender' of Holocaust denial. I agree with him when he says that Faurrison is entitled to free speech, even if the viws he expresses are horrible. Sounds very libertarian, actually:


'Faurisson's conclusions are diametrically opposed to views I hold and have frequently expressed in print (for example, in my book Peace in the Middle East, where I describe the Holocaust as "the most fantastic outburst of collective insanity in human history"). But it is elementary that freedom of expression (including academic freedom) is not to be restricted to views of which one approves, and that it is precisely in the case of views that are almost universally despised and condemned that this right must be most vigorously defended. It is easy enough to defend those who need no defense or to join in unanimous (and often justified) condemnation of a violation of civil rights by some official enemy. [6]



Let me add a final remark about Faurisson's alleged "anti-Semitism." Note first that even if Faurisson were to be a rabid anti-Semite and fanatic pro-Nazi -- such charges have been presented to me in private correspondence that it would be improper to cite in detail here -- this would have no bearing whatsoever on the legitimacy of the defense of his civil rights. On the contrary, it would make it all the more imperative to defend them since, once again, it has been a truism for years, indeed centuries, that it is precisely in the case of horrendous ideas that the right of free expression must be most vigorously defended; it is easy enough to defend free expression for those who require no such defense. Putting this central issue aside, is it true that Faurisson is an anti-Semite or a neo-Nazi? As noted earlier, I do not know his work very well. But from what I have read -- largely as a result of the nature of the attacks on him -- I find no evidence to support either conclusion. Nor do I find credible evidence in the material that I have read concerning him, either in the public record or in private correspondence. As far as I can determine, he is a relatively apolitical liberal of some sort.'

11:58 AM  
Blogger mah29001 said...

"Do you have a source for Chomsky denying the Holocaust?"

Er, how about Chomsky meeting with Hassan Nasrallah, the Hezbollah terror leader who favors a second holocaust against the Jews living in Israel? Have you miss something like that?

You "anarchists" seem quite fond of defending Chomsky. Chomsky, this and Chomsky that. Where's your condemnation against his defense for totalitarian societies such as Cuba, Iran, North Korea and Saddam's Iraq? Why does Chomsky suggest that Americans like me are "bad and evil" and are "easily brainwashed" when he's defending some of the most totalitarian societies on the planet?

Chomsky also gets his paycheck from the taxes that I have to pay. Yet continues to retain professorship if he believes America is totalitarian?

6:45 PM  
Blogger mah29001 said...

I would also like to know why you anonymous would still continue to also defend a man who not only defends totalitarian societies such as Cuba, North Korea but also was promoted by Osama bin Laden as being one of the "most capable" Americans.

Chomsky also stated prior to the U.S.-NATO led invasion of Afghanistan after the September 11th, 2001 attacks there would be a "silent genocide" against the Afghani people. But Chomsky never once criticized the horrible theocracy of the Taliban, or for the Talibans' destruction of Buddhist structures.

7:44 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

So you have no proof Chomsky denies the holocaust? Its a simple request, show the proof, as in a quote of him denying it, or admit you are slandering him via interview association.

8:20 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Chomski is left wing, so therefore he is a holocaust denier.

9:28 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The claim being queried is that Chomsky supports Faurrison's argument that the Holocaust never happened. Where is the evidence that this is true? Where has Chomsky said the Holocaust never happened?

I don't see what meeting the head of Hizbollah or going to Cuba or whatever has to do with the question about whether Chomsky endroses Faurrison's argument that the Holocaust never happened. I'm not really interested in 'defending' Chomsky, or 'attacking' him. I don't base my views on Chomsky's. I'm just curious about whether he thinks the Holocaust didn't happen or not. That's a pretty provocative claim, and I'd just like to know where the evidence is for it.

If the only evidence for Chomsky being a Holocaust denier is that he thinks Faurrison has the right to free speech, even if he uses that right to promote the repugnant view that the Holocaust never happened, then I'm afraid I am a Holocaust denier too, because I also believe in free speech even for people who promote repugnant views.

So, once again, where does Chomsky say he doesn't believe the Nazis committed a genocide against the Jews? If he really is such an enthusiastic Holocaust denier, then there must be some references you can give.

12:32 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hmm. I googled Chomsky criticises the Taliban just to check your latest claim - viz, that Chomksy has never criticised the Taliban - and found this, from a 2002 article by Chomsky:

'As anticipated, most of the population was greatly relieved to see the end of the Taliban, one of the most retrograde regimes in the world; and relieved that there was no quick return to the atrocities of a decade earlier, as had been feared.'
http://www.chomsky.info/articles/20020201.htm

You might not agree with Chomsky's overall take on Afghanistan, but surely calling the Taliban 'one of the most retrograde regimes in the world' counts as a criticism? It just seems like you're making things up, mister.

12:39 AM  
Blogger mah29001 said...

And why did Chomsky visited Hezbollah terrorists? They support the genocidal PLO terrorist Imad Mugniyah who also trained terrorists for Osama bin Laden.

If you can't look at Chomsky's visit to these Hezbollah terrorists, shame on you. You defend Chomsky as if he were a cult leader of some sort. The neo-Communist dictator-wannabe Hugo Chavez who is also a protege of the retired Communist Cuban dictator Fidel Castro has also promoted his work, the same Chavez who referred Bush to be the "devil".

6:57 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Wow. You really don't get it, do you? It's fine to criticise Chomsky's views. Go ahead - I don't care, blast away. He's not my guru. I don't take my politics from him. I've never even read one of his books. I don't even know what an 'anarchist' actually is. Nor do I care. All I'm asking is whether he agrees with Faurrison about the murder of six million Jews being a fiction.

What's not permissible is to make up claims about people you disagree with. That's why you should either provide evidence that Chomsky supports Faurrison's argument that the Holocaust happened or withdraw the claim. And you shouldn't have said Chomsky never criticised the Taliban when a five minute google search shows he did.

Duh, it's not rocket science is it? When you make up things which are obviously untrue then you make yourself look like a wally. But go ahead, if you must - flame away and call me a Castroite or a Chomksyite or a Satanist whatever else you want.

9:17 AM  
Blogger mah29001 said...

Er, didn't Chomsky made this statement prior to the U.S.-NATO led invasion of Afghanistan to ouster the Taliban?

"Plans are being made on the assumption that they may lead to the death of several million people. Very casually, with no comment and with no particular thought about it. It looks like what is happening is some sort of silent genocide."

http://semiskimmed.net/misc/chomsky_genocide.html

11:13 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Man you're weird. What the hell have these random facts about Chomsky got to do with whether or not he agrees with Faurrison about the Holocaust?

I don't follow Chomsky politically. I've seen his movie, Manufacturing Consent, and that's it. I've got no interest in his politics. Zilch.

What I do care about is defending the libertarian position that anyone should be entitled to free speech, even if what they say is repugnant. That's why I'm interested in what you claimed on your blog about Chomsky and Faurrison.

If Chomsky supports Faurrison's view that the Holocaust never happened, then I think he should be condemned for that.

But if as seems the case he merely said that Faurrison is entitled to hold denialist views without being punished by losing his job and being prosecuted, then I think you are way out of line to criticise Chomsky. Because that's the libertarian view, right? We don't want the state regulating what can and can't be said. Better to let people have their say and then refute them.

So what I'm asking you to do is to back up the claim on the front page of your website by showing me where Chomsky argues in favour of Faurrison's view that the Holocaust never happened.

Instead of answering this simple request for a reference you've started going on about Chomsky's views on Cuba, Afghanistan, etc

Once again: where does Chomsky say he agrees with Faurrison's claim that six million Jews weren't killed by Hitler?

If you're criticising Chomsky just because he's defending Faurrison's right to free speech, then you should say so, and explain why you don't agree with the libertarian position on free speech.

It does seem to me that you just feel free to make up things about people you don't like - hence my point about you saying Chomsky never criticisng the Taliban when a quick google makes it clear he has. You don't check your own claims out. Not a very responsible approach to research.

Anyway, if you reply to me again please answer my request for a reference to Chomsky's denial that Hitler committed a Holocuast against European Jewry. A quote and a source will be enough.

11:41 AM  
Blogger mah29001 said...

Just keep on defending your boy there. Chomsky is also the same person who believes that America "acts like" National Socialist Germany even though Chomsky has defended totalitarian societies such as Cuba, Taliban's Afghanistan, North Korea and so on.

You're defending Chomsky as if he were the next best thing to slice-bread. Really, you really want to defend a man who was also endorsed by Osama, says America acts like the Nazis but sits comfortable in his armchair living lavashly? Isn't that the picture of a total fraud and a liar?

12:05 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Oh my. Mah, I DON'T SUPPORT CHOMSKY'S POLITICS. I HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH THEM.

I am, however, concerned that you have falsely accused him of supporting the Holocaust, when he appears to have supported the right of a Holocaust denier to free speech - ie, taken the LIBERTARIAN position that I support.

It amazes me that you would put a claim on the frontpage of your website and then refuse to answer a simple question about it.

If you reply to me again please answer my request for a reference to Chomsky's denial that Hitler committed a Holocuast against European Jewry. A quote and a source will be enough.

12:20 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

'I don't follow Chomsky politically. I've seen his movie, Manufacturing Consent, and that's it. I've got no interest in his politics. Zilch.'

mah's interpretation of this statement:

'You're defending Chomsky as if he were the next best thing to slice-bread.'

Uh-huh...

12:25 PM  
Blogger mah29001 said...

"I am, however, concerned that you have falsely accused him of supporting the Holocaust, when he appears to have supported the right of a Holocaust denier to free speech - ie, taken the LIBERTARIAN position that I support."

Chomsky, Libertarian? You mean when he defends someone like Hugo Chavez whom wishes to be like his mentor Fidel Castro?

Are you likely to also deny this Partners in Hate by Werner Cohn of Noam Chomsky and various holocaust deniers?

http://wernercohn.com/Chomsky.html

1:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Thankyou! A reference! Mann from heaven! I will look at it! Was that so difficult?

Are you of the opinion that Holocaust deniers, Chomsky, or anyone else should have their views restricted by the state? I hope not.

1:06 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Well, I've had a quick look at that site, and it does NOT argue that Chomksy denies the Holocaust.
On the contrary, the author concedes that Chomsky does not agree with Faurrison et al about the Holocaust never happening. I quote:

'To round out the picture of Chomsky's relationship to Faurisson and the neo-Nazi movement, something needs to be said about Chomsky's repeated assurances that he disagrees "diametrically" with Faurisson, that in his opinion the Holocaust did occur. In fact Chomsky has very few words to say about the subject, but they are words that he uses often. He allowed, by way of an obiter dictum in an earlier book Peace in the Middle East, that the Holocaust had been "the most fantastic outburst of collective insanity in human history." Now, whenever his relationship to the neo-Nazis is in any way challenged, he trots out these very same words, quoting himself verbatim, neither adding nor subtracting from this ten-word formula. The abracadabra nature of this declaration carries little evidence of conviction and certainly lacks in persuasive power. Nevertheless, with respect to the historical reality of the Holocaust and when writing for an American audience, Chomsky does not wish to be counted among the neo-Nazis.'

How does that back up your claim, mah, that Chomsky denies the Holocaust?

The author attacks Chomsky for defending the rights to free speech of Faurrison and other Holocaust deniers.

I disagree with his view that these people should not enjoy freedom of speech but, as I have said, that's a different question to whether the Holocaust ever happened.

So it seems you can't find any evidence for your claim that Chomksy along with Faurrison denies the Holocaust of the 1940s.
You've offered no quote from Chomsky denying the Holocaust, and it doesn't seem to me like you can even find anyone on the internet who agrees with you that Chomsky denies the Holocaust. It looks like even Chomsky's strongest critics, such as the guy you have linked to, refrain from making the charge.

You're out on your own on this one, it seems. Best to withdraw your charge, I think.

1:15 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Interestingly, the man mah links to doesn't seem to like libertarians, either:

'As we have seen, Chomsky boasts that he will defend the freedom of expression of anyone, any time, presumably regarding anything, and that he does not need to see disputed material in order to defend its right to be heard and published. Chomsky is completely mindless in his declarations for unrestricted freedom. Some of his more extravagant postures on these matters are reminiscent of extremist "libertarians" from Caligula to Charles Manson.'

So Charles Manson was a libertarian?! I very much agree with complete freedom of speech, even for those with repugnant views, like Robert Faurrison. The alternative is censorship, and I am opposed to that.

1:19 PM  
Blogger mah29001 said...

Chomsky's no Libertarian. He's a shill for totalitarian states such as Cuba and Stalinist North Koera. You anonymous, are nothing more than a shill for Chomsky.

1:46 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Oh dear, back to the irrelevant personal attacks. I thought you were about to have a rational discussion with me.

Did you actually read the Werner Cohn text you posted a link to? If you did, how did you miss his explicit acknowledgement that Chonsky does NOT agree with Faurrison and neo-Nazis about the Holocaust never happening?

Here it is again:

'with respect to the historical reality of the Holocaust and when writing for an American audience, Chomsky does not wish to be counted among the neo-Nazis'

So, mah, why did you post as 'evidence' for your claim that Chomksy denies the Holocaust a text that concedes that he does no such thing?

Is there anyone, besides yourself, who even believes that Chomksy denies the historical reality of the Holocaust?

2:25 PM  
Blogger mah29001 said...

"So, mah, why did you post as 'evidence' for your claim that Chomksy denies the Holocaust a text that concedes that he does no such thing?"

So why do you anonymous don't seem to criticize Chomsky's trip to Lebanon where he sits with the genocidal Hassan Nasrallah?

3:39 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Changing the subject again when you're asked to back up a claim that you made?

I know nothing about Chomsky's trip to Hezbollah except the stuff you've been carrying on about. But if he did go and see the head of Hezbollah and acted all matey then, hey, sign me up on the dotted line to condemn him. I don't like Hezbollah and I oppose fundamntalist Islamism. I oppose all religions (though I'm for freedom of worship, of course). But since I've already said I don't have an interest in Chomsky's politics I don't see why on earth I have go through everything he's ever done and say I disagree with it!

What I'm concerned about is your claim that Chomsky denies the Holocaust. It's pretty obvious by now that you are unable find anything, or indeed anyone, that can back you up. Werner Cohn certainly doesn't. It amazes me that you would maike such a rash claim without any evidence.

Once again, though, why did you post as 'evidence' for your claim that Chomksy denies the Holocaust a text that concedes that he does no such thing?

It genuinely puzzles me as to why you'd do such a thing. Did you simply not read what you posted as proof for your claim?

Perhaps you're going to stop digging this big hole for yourself and admit that you have no evidence that Chomsky denies the Holocaust of the 1940s?

3:54 PM  
Blogger Trevour Loudoon said...

Chomsky interviewed Nasrallah the terrorist and didn't stab him thru the heart with a pencil, so according to Mah logic, that makes him a Holocaust denier. Please don't torture the man to produce evidence when there is none.

8:53 PM  

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home