Chomskian bellylaugh of the week

Oliver Kamm notes two items:

1. Chomsky demanded that the Guardian remove from its web site an interview with him in which the interviewer asked some tough questions, because he felt that his views were "inaccurately" represented.

2. Chomsky believes that the "freedom of speech" of one of his journalist friends was atrociously violated because a publisher decided not to publish her book. The publisher's decision had a lot to do with people feeling that she had "inaccurately" represented certain recent historical events.

A-hem.

And it gets better: The "inaccuracy" Noamster was upset about was that the interview made it sound like he hangs out with people who deny genocide. His friend got into hot water for claiming that the Bosnian genocide was largely a hoax.

Chomsky likes to claim that all things absolutely must be said, indeed shouted from the housetops, whether they're true or not: It's the principle of the thing! A glorious universal principle! Actually I've heard of much worse principles, if it were pursued honestly. But it's funny, how few cases he thinks this principle actually applies to, and how much they have in common. And of course it never applies to anybody saying anything uncomplimentary about him.