Friday, February 10, 2006

Holocaust deniers attack me: lies, more lies, and damn lies

Michael Hoffman, who has accused me of calling for the assassination of David Irving, now claims that on the O'Reilly Factor I called for the firing of Electrical Engineering professor Arthur Butz.

That's a lie. O'Reilly started the conversation by acknowledging that since Butz has tenure he can't be fired. What then, he asked, can be done? I said don't let him teach. Don't assign any classes to him. Assigning classes to him is giving him the University's passive imprimatur.

Rather than calling for his firing, essentially I was suggesting that the guy should get paid for doing nothing.

BTW, rather than being upset, I find this just confirms for me what People like Hoffman are all about. I don't expect from the likes of Michael Hoffman anything akin to the truth. He just should not be so blatant about his lies. Then again, his supporters are not terribly concerned with reality.

This is what he has to say:

A couple of evenings ago Steven Spielberg's poster girl for Holocaust" story-telling, Deborah Lipstadt, went on national television to brazenly demand that Dr. Arthur R. Butz, professor of Engineering at Northwestern University, be terminated from his tenured teaching position for expounding opinions about the
gas chambers not consonant with Lipstadt's opinions.

Does the Forward advocate "screaming bloody murder" about Lipstadt's tyrannical fiat to Northwestern? Surely you jest. Repression against Prof. Butz is halachic. Censorship of anti-Muslim bigotry is not. The indignation is entirely selective. That's not the American way, but that's the way of the rabbis.


Veronika said...

Professor Lipstadt:

I would like to begin by saying that I am supportive of many of the arguments made by Dr. Butz, but that I also think that you too have many valid points with regard to the Holocaust issue. I am a little bit troubled by the fact that you would even suggest that Dr. Butz should simply sit behind his desk and be stripped of all his classes because of comments he made.

For good or ill, we as Americans must uphold everyone's Constitutional right to freedom of speech and thought, no matter how much we may disagree with what that individual may think or feel. If I had the power to disenfranchise every person with whom I have disagreed over my lifetime, Howard Stern, Shawn Hannity, David Duke, and many others would no longer be in the public eye, because I would have eradicated them from the public sphere long ago. However, this is not my right; and it is their right to say whatever they like --so long as nobody is physically hurt or harmfully slandered by their remarks -- no matter how much it may offend you or me.

I would like you to consider this argument, Dr. Lipstadt, because I really believe that you bring more harm than good to your side of this debate when you verbally attack your opponents. Dr. Butz is a very intelligent man who has a lot of excellent inquiries regarding the legitimacy and consistency of the Holocaust as told by the majority of survivors. I feel that if you really do have a solid database of evidence (for the Holocaust) from which to draw, then you would have little to lose by confronting Dr. Butz' arguments as proposed in his book, instead of labeling him an "anti-Semite."

I urge you to consider what I have proposed and I do hope that I will see my comments posted in your blog. Thank you for your time.

TheZoeJ said...

His vehement anti-semitism is barely hidden by his supposedly eloquent diatribe.

Calling you a "poster-girl for Holocaust" is perhaps one of the most ridiculous things I have ever heard. What does it even mean?

That you strive to reveal the lies behind deniers' words, that you strive to protect the memory of the millions of people massacred in the Holocaust and also address important questions on the nature of historical discussion - these are things to be admired and talents to be cherised not derided.

Hoffman clearly holds none of these things dear.

Dave said...

I think these guys are exceptionally angry with Deborah, because she crushed their most visible figure in public, turning David Irving into a jester, replete with cap and bells. He was as close as the neo-Nazis had to a legitimate figurehead and point person. But he not only got zapped, he had to admit he was wrong on a number of major points, looked a fool, denied connections to his most loyal followers and fans, and wouldn't put them on the stand as his "expert witnesses."

So they're enraged about being hammered so hard.

I also think they're mad as hell at being beaten by a woman. One of the interesting things I've noticed in studying neo-Nazis and their ilk is their treatment of women. While there are a few visible female figures in this alleged movement, like April Gaede and her poor kids, it's a male-dominated world, with women treated as objects or servants.

My favorite take on the subject was in an interview with a woman who fled the National Alliance. One of the many points was how all the men there had mail-order brides from Russia or the Czech Republic. They regarded women as James Bond toys. And the big boss, Pierce, was on his third ex-wife. The latest "Eva" had fled as soon as she got her green card. What a surprise.

In the neo-Nazi world, women are second-class citizens. As in the Islamic world. So they must really hate Deborah...Jewish, intellectual, articulate, female...and she turned the neo-Stormtroopers into comic relief.

You know, you could sue Hoffmann for defamation...but it wouldn't be worth it. O'Reilly should address this issue. It's his show.

Olah Chadasha said...

I saw your interview with O'Reilly and thought your idea was extremely logical in the face of the big T: Tenure. As you said in "Denying the Holocaust", people, like Hoffman, want to and strive to convince people that denial of the holocaust is the same as simply expressing the "other side" or another opinion. Therefore, he thinks that Butz's "opinions" fall under free speech, so it shouldn't effect his teach at all. His anti-semetism shines through when he makes a moral equivilency between what Dr Butz has done and the Muslim cartoons. Does anybody listen to what this man has to say?

I'm actually afraid of the answer to that question...