Noam Chomsky
PersonRelationship Network
Event Timeline
| Connected Entity | Relationship Type |
Strength
(mentions)
|
Documents | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
person
Jeffrey Epstein
|
Correspondent |
10
Very Strong
|
5 | |
|
person
Joscha Bach
|
Acquaintance |
10
Very Strong
|
3 | |
|
person
Ehud Barak
|
Intellectual interest |
7
|
2 | |
|
person
Jeffrey Epstein
|
Friend |
7
|
1 | |
|
person
Lawrence Krauss
|
Professional intellectual |
7
|
3 | |
|
person
Lawrence Krauss
|
Business associate |
7
|
3 | |
|
person
Jeffrey E. (Epstein)
|
Correspondents |
6
|
1 | |
|
person
Valeria Chomsky
|
Familial likely |
6
|
1 | |
|
location
Israel
|
Critic |
6
|
1 | |
|
person
Jeffrey Epstein
|
Business associate |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
Jeffrey Epstein
|
Intellectual correspondence |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
Lawrence Krauss
|
Professional academic |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Jeffrey Epstein
|
Intellectual social |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
jeffrey E.
|
Acquaintance |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
The Author (Dershowitz)
|
Adversarial intellectual rivals |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Robert Faurisson
|
Defender subject |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Valeria Chomsky
|
Friend |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Jeffrey Epstein
|
Interest connection |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
jeffrey E.
|
Correspondent advisor |
5
|
1 | |
|
organization
[REDACTED]
|
Business associate |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Joscha Bach
|
Debaters intellectual adversaries |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Descartes
|
Professional academic |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Author
|
Adversarial professional |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Robert Faurisson
|
Defender supporter |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Woody Allen
|
Proposed panelists |
5
|
1 |
| Date | Event Type | Description | Location | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| N/A | N/A | The Author challenges Chomsky to a public debate regarding anti-Semitism and Holocaust denial. | N/A | View |
| N/A | N/A | Recurring 'lively interchanges' and 'intellectual exchange and stimulation' where Jeffrey was an ... | Not specified | View |
| N/A | N/A | General reference to 'lively interchanges' and intellectual exchanges where Jeffrey was an active... | Unspecified | View |
| N/A | N/A | The document refers to regular 'lively interchanges' and 'intellectual exchange and stimulation' ... | Not specified | View |
| N/A | N/A | Phone call from Noam Chomsky and Lula (from prison) to the redacted sender | Prison (Origin) | View |
| N/A | N/A | Filming of [REDACTED] and Noam Chomsky | Arizona (Implied) | View |
| N/A | N/A | Author attended Camp Massad. | Camp Massad | View |
| 2025-01-22 | N/A | Valeria and Noam scheduled to leave Cambridge for Arizona. | Cambridge to Arizona | View |
| 2019-05-12 | N/A | Trip to Arizona to see Noam Chomsky | Arizona | View |
| 2019-02-10 | N/A | Proposed meeting between [Redacted] and Noam Chomsky | Tucson | View |
| 2016-12-26 | N/A | An email exchange occurred between Noam Chomsky and Jeffrey Epstein, discussing US politics (Dona... | N/A | View |
| 2016-11-13 | N/A | Email exchange discussing Donald Trump's election victory. | Email correspondence | View |
| 2016-11-13 | N/A | Email exchange regarding the 2016 US Presidential Election results. | N/A | View |
| 2016-07-10 | N/A | A discussion or meeting where Joscha Bach presented an argument that 'triggered' Noam Chomsky. Jo... | Unknown | View |
| 2016-07-09 | N/A | A gathering or meeting where Joscha Bach debated Noam Chomsky. | Unknown (implied physical m... | View |
| 2015-08-01 | N/A | Invitation to speak at Parliament (declined by Chomsky) | Parliament | View |
| 2015-08-01 | N/A | Proposed visit to New York or New Mexico | New York or New Mexico | View |
| 0009-07-01 | N/A | Meeting or gathering involving Joscha Bach, Jeffrey Epstein, and Noam Chomsky. | Unknown | View |
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017228.jpg
This document appears to be a page from a book manuscript (likely by Alan Dershowitz) dated April 2, 2012. It details the author's intellectual conflict with Noam Chomsky regarding Chomsky's defense of Holocaust denier Robert Faurisson, including a letter the author wrote to the Boston Globe and a refused challenge to debate. The text concludes with the author mentioning being asked to defend another neo-Nazi, Matthew Hale. The document bears a House Oversight Bates stamp.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017227.jpg
This document appears to be a page (140) from a manuscript or book included in House Oversight records, dated April 2, 2012. The text is a polemic critique of Noam Chomsky for supporting Robert Faurisson, a Holocaust denier. It details historical analysis by scholar George Wellers regarding Dr. Kremer's testimony about Auschwitz gas chambers, arguing that Faurisson fraudulently omitted facts to support his denial, and criticizing Chomsky for legitimizing this work.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_016956.jpg
This document appears to be page 153 of a book or academic essay discussing cognitive science and learning theories. It contrasts 'bottom-up' learning (associated with behavioral psychologists like Skinner and machine learning) with 'top-down' learning (associated with Plato, Descartes, and Chomsky). The author uses the example of detecting email spam—specifically distinguishing between obvious 'Nigerian' scams and more subtle predatory journal solicitations—to illustrate how prior abstract knowledge helps in pattern recognition.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017425.jpg
This document appears to be a page (338) from a draft manuscript or report (dated 4.2.12) produced to the House Oversight Committee. It provides a critical analysis of the United Nations' historical bias against Israel, contrasting the UN's harsh treatment of Israel with its tepid response to the Cambodian genocide. The text specifically critiques Noam Chomsky's comparisons of the two regimes and details the virulent anti-Semitism observed by Irwin Cotler and Mary Robinson at the 2001 Durban Conference.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017424.jpg
This document, bearing a House Oversight Bates stamp, appears to be a page from a manuscript or book analyzing the United Nations' historical response to the Cambodian genocide versus its treatment of Israel. The text criticizes the 'hard left' (specifically citing Noam Chomsky, Gareth Porter, and George Hilderbrand) for downplaying Khmer Rouge atrocities as 'Western propaganda' while simultaneously noting the UN's swift condemnation of Zionism via Resolution 3379. The document highlights the diplomatic actions of Daniel Patrick Moynihan and Abba Eban in opposing the anti-Zionist resolution.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017418.jpg
This document appears to be a page from a book draft or manuscript (likely by Alan Dershowitz, given the style and content) discussing the political shift of the National Lawyers Guild (NLG) and the 'hard left' during the 1960s and 70s. It details the author's break with the NLG after it shifted from a liberal human rights organization to a radical leftist group that criticized Israel and supported regimes like Pol Pot's Cambodia. The text specifically highlights anti-Israel rhetoric from Father Daniel Berrigan in 1973 and the takeover of the NLG at the 1971 Boulder convention.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017417.jpg
This document appears to be a page (330) from a draft manuscript, likely by Alan Dershowitz, dated April 2, 2012. The text recounts a grim experience playing basketball on death row and discusses the political shift in human rights discourse during the 1970s, criticizing 'hard left' figures like Noam Chomsky and former clients Angela Davis and Abbie Hoffman for their stance on socialist regimes and Israel.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017226.jpg
This document appears to be a page (Chapter 9, page 139) from a manuscript, likely by Alan Dershowitz, submitted as evidence to the House Oversight Committee. It details the author's controversy with Noam Chomsky regarding the defense of French Holocaust denier Robert Faurisson in the 1970s. The text discusses the boundaries of free speech versus the falsification of history, citing specific details of Faurisson's claims and a diary entry from an SS doctor at Auschwitz.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017103.jpg
This document appears to be a page (p. 16) from a draft memoir (dated 4.2.12), likely written by Alan Dershowitz given the biographical details (age 9 in 1948, Camp Massad attendance). The text recounts the author's childhood memories of Israel's 1948 War of Independence, attending a Zionist summer camp where Noam Chomsky was a counselor, and the formation of his political ideologies. It also details a later encounter in Los Angeles with Vidal Sassoon where they sang the Palmach anthem together.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017098.jpg
This document appears to be page 11 of a manuscript or autobiographical statement by Alan Dershowitz (inferred by context), dated April 2, 2012, and bearing a House Oversight Committee Bates stamp. The text lists numerous high-profile individuals the author has advised, including Presidents and celebrities, as well as prominent figures he has debated. It details his involvement in legal cases, his media advocacy for Israel, and mentions that in 2010 he declined an offer from the Israeli Prime Minister to serve as Israel's Ambassador to the UN.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_027680.jpg
This document contains an email/message log from May 3, 2019, between Jeffrey Epstein (using the alias e:jeeitunes@gmail.com) and a redacted individual. They discuss the redacted individual's upcoming travel schedule, which includes a trip to Arizona to visit Noam Chomsky and a trip to Germany to speak at the Bundestag. Epstein proposes sending his team to film the meeting with Chomsky and offers to arrange a meeting with 'KSA' (Saudi Arabia) in Germany.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_027425.jpg
This document is a digital forensic log of an email or message thread from September 21, 2018, between Jeffrey Epstein (using the alias jeeitunes@gmail.com) and a redacted individual. The conversation centers on Brazilian politics, specifically the imprisonment of Lula da Silva and the rise of Jair Bolsonaro (referred to as 'Bolsonara' and 'my guy' by Epstein). The redacted sender claims to have received a call from Noam Chomsky and Lula from prison.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_028961.jpg
An email thread from December 24, 2015, between Jeffrey Epstein and Noam Chomsky. They discuss the cognitive differences between visual processing and language acquisition, with Chomsky explaining that language is an internal system of knowledge while vision is an input system. Epstein argues about 'software' vs 'hardware' in visual processing.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_023630.jpg
This document appears to be a page from a draft article or book manuscript (possibly by a journalist like Michael Wolff) detailing a series of high-profile meetings at Jeffrey Epstein's residence. It describes interactions with global political figures (Kevin Rudd, Ehud Barak), scientists, and billionaires, while exploring Epstein's attempts to rehabilitate his image as an 'honest broker' free of institutional ties. The text also details Epstein's idiosyncratic scientific theories, specifically comparing cancer cells to terrorist networks.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_023123.jpg
This document is a proposal for 'The New Origins Project Presents: Strange Bedfellows,' a discussion series moderated by Lawrence Krauss designed to pair cultural celebrities with famous scientists. The document lists 12 proposed panels featuring high-profile figures such as Johnny Depp, Elon Musk, Barack Obama, and Woody Allen, noting that '23 participants have already agreed in principle.' The document appears to be from a House Oversight Committee production, indicated by the footer stamp.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_023121.jpg
This document is a proposal for 'The New Origins Project Presents: Strange Bedfellows,' a series moderated by Lawrence Krauss that aims to pair cultural celebrities with famous scientists for public dialogues. The document lists 12 proposed pairings for the first season, including high-profile figures like Barack Obama, Woody Allen, Elon Musk, and Johnny Depp, noting that '23 participants have already agreed in principle.' The document bears a 'HOUSE_OVERSIGHT' stamp, indicating it was part of a congressional review, likely related to investigations into Jeffrey Epstein's funding or associations with scientific organizations.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_023120.jpg
This document is a pitch or proposal for a television series titled 'Strange Bedfellows,' moderated by physicist Lawrence Krauss. The proposal outlines a first season consisting of 10 episodes featuring high-profile pairings of cultural icons (e.g., Johnny Depp, Barack Obama, Woody Allen) with prominent scientists and intellectuals (e.g., Noam Chomsky, Steven Pinker, Elon Musk). The document appears to be part of the House Oversight files (indicated by the footer), likely related to investigations into Krauss's funding or associations, which historically included Jeffrey Epstein, though Epstein is not explicitly named in this specific text.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_029198.jpg
An email chain from August 2018 between physicist Lawrence Krauss and Jakob Köllhofer (Director of DAI Heidelberg). Krauss negotiates travel expenses, specifically requesting approval for a 4500 Euro flight ticket. He previously suggested that involving Noam Chomsky in a dialogue at the institute might justify higher funding ('free up some more money'), but in the final email confirms Chomsky cannot attend.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_029192.jpg
This document contains an email thread from August 17, 2018, between physicist Lawrence Krauss and Jakob Köllhofer (Director of DAI). Krauss informs Köllhofer that a prior engagement in Göttingen was cancelled, leaving him without funding for his airfare to Germany. Krauss attempts to secure travel funding from Köllhofer by suggesting he could fly economy or potentially convince Noam Chomsky to join him for a dialogue event, which might 'free up some more money.' The document is stamped with 'HOUSE_OVERSIGHT', linking it to congressional investigations, likely regarding Epstein's associates.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_029181.jpg
This document is an email chain from August 2018 between Lawrence Krauss (ASU) and Jakob Köllhofer (DAI). They discuss logistics and funding for a potential event, with Krauss proposing a discounted travel cost of 4500 Euros. Krauss also suggests attempting to bring Noam Chomsky to the event to 'change the dynamics' and potentially secure more funding, though a later email confirms Chomsky is unavailable.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_025414.jpg
This document contains a log of messages from February 9, 2019, between Jeffrey Epstein (using the alias 'jeeitunes') and a redacted individual. The redacted individual, currently in Tucson, requests a meeting with Noam Chomsky. Epstein confirms Chomsky is willing to meet and provides briefing advice, warning the individual to be gentle regarding discussion of Bolsonaro because Chomsky's wife is Brazilian and they are friends with Lula. Epstein offers to connect them via email.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_025155.jpg
This document is page 9 of a 'Brockman, Inc. Frankfurt 2016 Hotlist,' bearing a House Oversight Bates stamp. It details book proposals for agency clients, specifically featuring Hugo Mercier's work on cognitive science (referencing his book 'The Enigma of Reason') and a proposal titled 'Genetic Rescue' by Ryan Phelan with contributions by Stewart Brand. The document outlines the academic credentials of the authors and the thematic content of their proposed books, ranging from social psychology to conservation genomics.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_029519.jpg
An email dated April 20, 2019, from Richard Kahn (HBRK Associates Inc.) to Jeffrey Epstein. The email is marked as High Importance and contains a link to a Mediaite article regarding Noam Chomsky's political commentary on Donald Trump and the Russia investigation.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_029235.jpg
An email thread from September 2015 initiated by Lawrence Krauss (ASU), addressed to Noam Chomsky and Jeffrey Epstein (using the alias 'Jeffrey E.'). Krauss shares a New Yorker article about militant atheism. Noam Chomsky replies, discussing the irrationality of the International Relations profession and offering an opinion on the 'Davis' case (likely the Kim Davis marriage license controversy), stating that if she cannot follow the law, she should quit.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_029234.jpg
This document is an email thread from September 2015 involving Jeffrey Epstein, physicist Lawrence Krauss, and linguist Noam Chomsky. The discussion centers on philosophical views regarding religion, fanaticism, and secular dogma, with Chomsky providing a lengthy analysis of 'secular religions' and American exceptionalism. Significantly, the top email from Epstein invites Krauss to bring 'depp' (likely Johnny Depp) to visit him in the Caribbean.
Defense of Faurisson
Characterized Faurisson's work as findings based on extensive historical research.
Character testimonial for Jeffrey
A positive testimonial about Jeffrey's intellectual qualities, curiosity, and character, describing him as a valued friend and source of intellectual stimulation.
Intellectual exchange
The document mentions 'More lively interchanges' and 'intellectual exchange and stimulation' in which Jeffrey was an 'active participant'.
Foreword to Faurisson's book
Chomsky wrote an essay used as a foreword to Faurisson's book.
Defense of Faurisson
Stating he sees no anti-Semitic implications in the denial of gas chambers.
Refusal to debate
Claiming nobody believes there is an anti-Semitic connotation to Holocaust denial.
Character statement about Jeffrey
A positive personal statement describing Jeffrey's intellectual qualities and the author's friendship with him.
No Subject
Provided three separate quotes calling the journal fascinating and expressing thanks for receiving it.
No Subject
Provided three separate quotes calling the journal fascinating and expressing thanks for receiving it.
Re:
Chomsky responds to Epstein, commenting on Trump's ghost-writer, relaying an anecdote about Tony Blair in Saudi Arabia, acknowledging Epstein's prediction about Trump avoiding the White House, and continuing a discussion on linguistics and 'field models'.
No Subject
Epstein quotes 'one of donalds closet people' and makes a derisive comment that Trump has written three books, making him one of the few people who has written more books than he has read.
No Subject
Chomsky responds to Epstein's linguistic query, suggesting the closest concept is an 'array of meaning postulates' in Carnap's sense, which Jerry Fodor has explored. He notes it is multidimensional but not a 'field'.
No Subject
Epstein wishes Chomsky 'happy chanukah' and initiates a linguistic discussion, proposing a model that uses 'fields' instead of definitions, similar to a magnetic field, based on context.
Re:
Chomsky responds to Epstein, commenting on Trump's ghost-writer, relaying an anecdote about Tony Blair in Saudi Arabia, acknowledging Epstein's prediction about Trump avoiding the White House, and continuing a discussion on linguistics and 'field models'.
No Subject
Epstein quotes 'one of donalds closet people' and makes a derisive comment that Trump has written three books, making him one of the few people who has written more books than he has read.
No Subject
Chomsky responds to Epstein's linguistic query, suggesting the closest concept is an 'array of meaning postulates' in Carnap's sense, which Jerry Fodor has explored. He notes it is multidimensional but not a 'field'.
No Subject
Epstein wishes Chomsky 'happy chanukah' and initiates a linguistic discussion, proposing a model that uses 'fields' instead of definitions, similar to a magnetic field, based on context.
Re:
Chomsky explains the differences between vision (input system) and language (internal capacity/system of knowledge), noting they look wholly different.
Re:
Epstein clarifies he is referring to the software of vision, not the hardware.
Re:
Chomsky writes: 'I presume that the software just guides the hardware. Don't see how that changes the considerations.'
Re:
Epstein replies: 'Vision rules needed to craft coherent image . Edges? " Faggehtabowtit." Two edges crafted by software'
Unknown/Blank
Epstein asks why we wouldn't expect auditory grammar to be a mutation of the visual grammar system, noting children aren't taught to see.
Re: [Subject Redacted]
Detailed discussion on dogma, secular religion, ridicule, and the 'Davis' case.
Re: an article you may both hate. or like. (implied)
Chomsky comments on the 'IR profession' and gives his opinion on 'Davis', stating she should quit if she cannot follow the law.
Re: an article you may both hate. or like.
Lengthy philosophical discussion on dogma, ridicule, and 'Davis'.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity