HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017227.jpg

4.2.12
WC: 191694

his “research,” and distorted the historical record. 50 I exposed Faurisson’s deceptions in my own writings, while continuing to defend his right to rewrite history.

Chomsky wrote an essay that he allowed to be used as a foreword to Faurisson’s next book, about his career as a Holocaust denier! In this book, Faurisson again calls the gas chambers a lie and repeats his claims about the “hoax” of the Holocaust.

Faurisson concludes that this passage proves (I) that a “special action” was nothing more than the sorting out by doctors of the sick from the healthy during a typhus epidemic; (2) that the “atrocious scenes” were “executions of persons who had been condemned to death, executions for which the doctor was obliged to be present”; (3) that “among the condemned were three women who had come in a convoy since the women were shot and not gassed (emphasis added).

Faurisson, who said he had researched the trial, knew that his own source, Dr. Kremer, had testified that the gas chambers did exist. Yet he deliberately omitted that crucial item from his book, while including the fact that the women were shot. Faurisson also knew that the three women were “in good health.” Yet he led his readers to believe that Dr. Kremer had said they were selected on medical grounds during an epidemic. Finally, Faurisson states that those who were shot had been “condemned to death.” Yet he knew they were shot by the SS for refusing to enter the gas chambers.

A French scholar named George Wellers analyzed this diary entry and the surrounding documentation for Le Monde. He did actual historical research, checking the Auschwitz record for October 18, 1942. His research disclosed that 1,710 Dutch Jews arrived that day. Of these, 1,594 were sent immediately to the gas chambers. The remaining 116 people, all women, were brought into the camp; the three women who were the subject of the Kremer diary must have been among them. The three women were, in fact, shot—as Faurisson concludes. But that fact appears nowhere in Kremer’s diary. How then did Faurisson learn it? Professor Wellers was able to find the answer with some simple research. He checked Dr. Kremer’s testimony at a Polish war crimes trial. This is what Kremer said at the trial: “Three Dutch women did not want to go into the gas chamber and begged to have their lives spared. They were young women, in good health, but in spite of that their prayer was not granted and the SS who were participating in the action shot them on the spot.” (emphasis added).

That is not “extensive historical research.” It is not research at all. It is the fraudulent manufacturing of false antihistory. It is the kind of deception for which professors are rightly fired: not because their views are controversial, but because they are violating the most basic canons of historical scholarship. It is typical of Faurisson in particular, and of Holocaust denial “research” in general. Yet Chomsky was prepared to lend his academic legitimacy to Faurisson’s “extensive historical research.”

140

HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017227