Oliver Kamm has, following a criticism of Chomsky in Prospect, been defending Emma Brockes's interview with Chomsky in The Guardian, which was recently removed due to supposed inaccuracies. Kamm, in several posts, defends the factual accuracy of Brockes's claims, mostly dealing with Chomsky's literal support, not just defence, of genocide-denying Diana Johnstone. He condemns The Guardian for kowtowing.
I just sent this email to Kamm:
Something I wonder, in the middle of this mess, is why, if Chomsky is - as his defenders claim him to be - such a friend of free speech, he is going to great lengths to defend the right of people such as Faurisson and Johnstone, who are plainly wrong, to say what they want without suffering the slightest bit of consequence yet not defending Ms. Brockes's right to criticize him without having her column pulled. By his unorthodox definition of censorship, is he not violating his own principles?