Chomsky still in denial

[Ally]

Noam Chomsky: Hard for me to respond to the rest of the letter, because I am not persuaded by the assumption that much documentation and other evidence has been uncovered. To determine that, we'd have to investigate the alleged evidence. Take, say, the physical evidence. There are ways to assess that: submit it to specialists -- of whom there are thousands -- who have the requisite background in civil-mechanical engineering, materials science, building construction, etc., for review and analysis; and one cannot gain the required knowledge by surfing the internet. In fact, that's been done, by the professional association of civil engineers. Or, take the course pursued by anyone who thinks they have made a genuine discovery: submit it to a serious journal for peer review and publication. To my knowledge, there isn't a single submission.

One of the major consequences of the 9/11 movement has been to draw enormous amounts of energy and effort away from activism directed to real and ongoing crimes of state, and their institutional background, crimes that are far more serious than blowing up the WTC would be, if there were any credibility to that thesis.

for more info - http://www.bloglines.com/blog/ewing2001?id=1521

[IronSnot]

I had to think about that for a minute, seeing as I think that this, if outed, would be one of the big events of history.

But he's probably correct, blowing up the WTC is not as much of a crime as the invasion of Iraq for example or for that matter, Nagasaki and Hiroshima.

It's the damage to belief systems which is the big difference. Countries like the US are expected to invade and bomb other countries (always after the propaganda industry paints said country as being in need of an invasion or bombing of course) but they're not expected to carry out false flag attacks on their own citizens. So really what is the major difference between WTC and Hiroshima for a lot of people is not the fatality figures but the shock of realising your own side is a lying, vicious, murderous pack of kunts. (I hope this appropiate use of contemporary language is allowed by the mods)

If you didn't think they were a pack of lying vicious murderous kunts for the nuking of Hiroshima but you do think they are for 9/11, well then you've probably still got a way to go yet.

[John White]

[Ally]

no john it's from Friday. Remember Chomsky was the first to publish that America 'deserved' the arab blowback after all their meddling in other countries affairs. This is what the left embraced and laughed at America when it happened at the time and that's why they find it sort hard to rearrange their dissonance about 91 now.


here's noam's blog, some good comments follow it.


http://blogs.zmag.org/node/2779

[John White]

From Friday?

OK, thats damning, he cant be that badly informed... I could give him BOTD if he'd said it a couple of years ago (and its word for word what I remember from a Russian interview @2003) and kept stumn since, but not if he just said that...

[iro]

why doesnt someone in his inner circle give him the steven jones thermite peer reviewed paper? its imposible to email chomsky directly - he gets thousands of mails a day.

i loved chomsky for 10 years, read about 7 of his books dilligently, and on this i cannot defend him 1% he is wrong and stubbornly deflective. why?

[MiniMauve]

I don't think everyone realizes how uninformed the majority of the pooulation of western nations are on 911. I so often hear on this forum how so-and-so must be in collusion with the authorities because no one could be that badly informed but unless a person makes a determined attempt to inform themselves, it will all seem to be just another conspiracy theory. Chomsky is just an old, tired crusader who is too busy and too set in his ways to take on 911. And frankly, even if he was interested in 911, he's too busy with more important (yes I said it) issues, like that past 4 decades+ of american hedgemny and tyranny conducted mainly by it's intelligence agencies. Far greater crimes than 911 have been committed in that history of terror.

I think Ironsnot's got it right, 911 isn't that important an event in comparison with the grim list of atrocities around the world in the last couple of decades. What has made it greater than what it is in western civilization is because of two reasons IMO. One, as Ironsnot says, it's a false-flag operation, and two, it's because it was westerners that died. Since I was a young boy and old enough to understand what was being siad on the news, I've always been disgusted by how media portray deaths of their countrymen as somehow vastly more important than deaths of others, in a place crash for instance. It is this mentality that is prevasive in American society - just look at the news on Iraq. The fact that hundreds of thousands of Iraqis died does not trigger a robust anti-war movement in the states but have a few hundred GIs die and suddenly it's time to bring the troops home. I also see this in British and Canadian media but not to the same degree. Reguardless, I find it personally revolting.

[iro]

[prole art threat]

Chomsky is a liar. End of. He's a Zionist to the bone, a veritable paid pied piper leading his unthinking flock into a Zionist darkness.

And he is the most BORING political writer that has ever lived. He does his level best to complicate politics in order to serve his own ends. What a complete *.

[iro]

[prole art threat]

[prole art threat]

I trust Alex Jones more than that Chomsky twat any day of the week. He even thinks the CIA didnt knock off JFK. I wish someone would knock him off.

[iro]

[John White]

My contribution to the blog

[prole art threat]

[iro]

that is a stupid and incredibly mis-informed statement prole

if it wasn't for the social workers parties formed in the early 20thC you would not have paid holidays, union support, workers rights, maternity leave, benefits, the NHS, 40 hour weeks, freedom from discrimination and literally equality in voting power at the ballot box (for what its worth - not much!!)

the left have now become neutered and irrelevant - i agree, but in chomsky's youth it was significantly important and a crucial paradigm to preserve and strengthen

i am not a socialist all the same

you still havent addressed my question of hiw can he be a zionist when he is anti-israeli/pro palestine and is anti empire. thats a flaw in your brash opinion

[prole art threat]

When he was younger he was a Zionist.

[prole art threat]

A bit like when Osama was younger, he was a CIA tactician.

[iro]

[prole art threat]

[paul wright]

People living in their heads and terribly intellectual are not necessarily intelligent as regards the world . Take Aspergers for example. He's not necessarily stupid or a shill. Just cant crawl out of his ideological construct, maybe.

[prole art threat]

[iro]

prole are you capable of intelligent thought? did you take my post in context or are you just looking for something to sh*t on?

before the workers got a voice with the socialist parties working hours and conditions in this country were awful. Our generation has no idea..although things are slipping backwards nowadays

[TimmyG]

without left parties like the socialist party constantly fighting for basic human rights for workers, things would be much worse thats fo sure

chomskys a funny one int 'ee? you'd think he'd be able to look at the evidence independently. if not the physics side of things, the pakistani ISI connection and foreknowledge

one of my friends who i have been trying to talk about 9/11 (being an inside job) to, who is a fan of chomsky, first thought i was crazy and over sensitive about american lives (when america does so much bad stuff to other countries)?!!.. and then, after further debate, told me he didn't think it made any difference if it was an inside job or not!!!!

me and other friends of mine (who are aware of 911) have since persuaded him to look at some of the evidence and he has reassessed his opinion on the issue i think

[paul wright]

The trouble with the left is they cant move on, they can't set things in context, they can't bring themselves to reveal the true depravity
It goes against their ideology
Anyway Timmy, are you going to organize Manchester?

[prole art threat]

[iro]

[TimmyG]

[Andrew Johnson]

[Dogsmilk]

Personally, I'm a bit annoyed Chomsky seems to have taken to using the phrase 'conspiracy theory' to describe the truth movement in some of his talks.
That's got (inaccuarately) hurled at him planty of times over the years (particularly over the propaganda model), and he's talked about how it's a phrase that stops serious deabte (in relation to his own work). It's a teensy bit snide for him to use it against truthers when he knows full well how loaded that phrase is.

But if he endorsed the truth movement, he'd get crucified by the straight press and never get taken seriously again. He's not daft - he won't risk his reputation (rightly or wrongly). I'd be amazed if he went 'truther' even if he decided there was something in it. Which he obviously hasn't. I'd forget about winning him over if I were you.

But I can't understand why people slag him off just because he doesn't believe what they do. How's that reasonable?
How many truthers are there who have embraced a set of beliefs (like governments aren't cuddly, benign entities) which gave them the mindset that allowed them to even contemplate the US government was capable of orchestrating 911 by reading stuff like Chomsky in the first place.
Before I read Chomsky (amongst others) in the 80's I was - I confess - something of a tory. Boy, did he open my eyes.
I doubt I'm the only one to have that experience.
Shill, zionist or disinformation agent my hairy bum crack.