You seem to be totally blind to Chomsky's characterisation of the situation. That Chomsky is lending support to Faurisson's credibility (i.e. passing off academic dishonesty and fraud as free speech issues, calling Faurisson an apolitical liberal and selectively citing his work to make it appear that he's not antisemetic, defending fraudulent research as 'findings' and then claiming that 'findings' is a totally neutral term which can include fraud, etc.) is exactly the criticism leveled by his opponents, and it seems to be a valid one. I've showed evidence of this repeatedly in this thread and you refuse to address it.