کاغذهایم تمام شده
بنیاد سید حسین نصر
گولم سکوت را شکست
شهبارا

نوام چامسکی انارشیست چپ گرای امریکا از مدافعان خمرهای سرخ بوده است.
Chomsky has been criticized for opinions voiced in a number of articles and books in which he discusses the political situation in Cambodia between 1975 and 1979 and the contemporary media response in the US during that period.
In 1977 Chomsky, with Edward S. Herman, published a review article, "Distortions at Fourth Hand." Examining reports of mass atrocities committed by the Cambodian Khmer Rouge, they argued that there were "sharply conflicting assessments" of events in Cambodia and that the American media were selective in publishing the most anti-communist accounts. The media were creating "a seriously distorted version of the evidence available, emphasizing alleged Khmer Rouge atrocities and downplaying or ignoring the crucial U.S. role, direct and indirect, in the torment that Cambodia has suffered." Chomsky and Herman wrote:
Space limitations preclude a comprehensive review, but such journals as the Far Eastern Economic Review, the London Economist, the Melbourne Journal of Politics, and others elsewhere, have provided analyses by highly qualified specialists who have studied the full range of evidence available, and who concluded that executions have numbered at most in the thousands; that these were localized in areas of limited Khmer Rouge influence and unusual peasant discontent, where brutal revenge killings were aggravated by the threat of starvation resulting from the American destruction and killing.
They also made this comment about Cambodia under the Khmer Rouge:
But if postwar Cambodia is more similar to France after liberation, where many thousands of people were massacred within a few months under far less rigorous conditions than those left by the American war, then perhaps a rather different judgement is in order. That the latter conclusion may be more nearly correct is suggested by the analyses mentioned earlier.[10]
This argument was expanded in the pair’s 1979 book After the Cataclysm: Postwar Indochina and the Reconstruction of Imperial Ideology.
Subsequently, Chomsky was accused of "minimising the Khmer Rouge atrocities in Cambodia".[11] According to Fred Barnes, writing for the U.S. magazine The New Republic, he had observed Chomsky at a seminar and felt that he "seemed to believe that tales of holocaust in Cambodia were [...] propaganda." Barnes speculated whether Chomsky felt the notion of genocide in Cambodia was "part of an effort to rewrite the history of the Indochinese war in a way more favorable to the U.S."[12] Commenting in defence of Chomsky on this incident, Christopher Hitchens noted that
since this meeting took place in the year after Chomsky and Herman had written their Nation article, and in the year when they were preparing The Political Economy of Human Rights, we can probably trust the documented record at least as much as Mr. Barnes's recollection... It is interesting, and perhaps suggestive, that Barnes uses the terms "genocide," "holocaust," and "mass murder" as if they were interchangeable. His last two sentences demonstrate just the sort of cuteness for which his magazine is becoming famous.[12]
When one examines the source material that Chomsky and Herman cite, the alleged contradictions are not apparent. The largest alleged contradiction is “repeated discoveries that massacre reports were false”, but alas “space limitations preclude” them from providing any examples. Another alleged contradiction is:
To cite a few cases, they state that among those evacuated from Phnom Penh, “virtually everybody saw the consequences of [summary executions] in the form of the corpses of men, women and children rapidly bloating and rotting in the hot sun,” citing, among others, J.J. Cazaux, who wrote, in fact, that “not a single corpse was seen along our evacuation route,”
The context of Cazaux's remark was his complaint that the Khmer Rouge tightly controlled what foreigners could see: “all that is certain is that none of the foreigners who saw the start of the revolution will be able to witness its progress.” The “virtually everyone” refers to Cambodians, not foreign newsmen. Most of the newsmen in Cazaux's group commented that what they saw was unlikely to resemble what Cambodians saw, thus in context, no contradiction. Under a communist regime, it is entirely unsurprising that foreign newsmen fail to see what escapees report seeing.
In the New Criterion, Keith Windschuttle described Chomsky as the Pol Pot regime’s "most prestigious and most persistent Western apologist." Noting Chomsky's statement that "the United States and Israeli leadership should be brought to trial" for war crimes, Windschuttle wrote:
Yet Chomsky’s moral perspective is completely one-sided. No matter how great the crimes of the regimes he has favored, such as China, Vietnam, and Cambodia under the communists, Chomsky has never demanded their leaders be captured and tried for war crimes. Instead, he has defended these regimes for many years to the best of his ability through the use of evidence he must have realized was selective, deceptive, and in some cases invented.[13]
گولم سکوت را شکست