Thursday, January 04, 2007


Noam Chomsky is part of the cover-up

Go get him guys! They got to him!
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. That is, I suspect, why the 9/11 movement is treated far more tolerantly by centers of power than is the norm for serious critical and activist work. How do you personally set priorities? That's of course up to you. I've explained my priorities often, in print as well as elsewhere, but we have to make our own judgments.
And more to the point the following exchange:
ZNet Sustainer: Dear Noam, There is much documentation observed and uncovered by the 911 families themselves suggesting a criminal conspiracy within the Bush Administration to cover-up the 9/11 attacks (see DVD, 9/11: Press for Truth). Additionally, much evidence has been put forward to question the official version of events. This has come in part from Paul Thompson, an activist who has creatively established the 9/11 Timeline, a free 9/11 investigative database for activist researchers, which now, according to The Village Voice’s James Ridgeway, rivals the 9/11 Commission’s report in accuracy and lucidity (see,,mondo1,52830,6.html, or

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.
Add Chomsky to the list of conspirators which now includes Michael Moore, Amy Goodman, Alex Cockburn (who thinks the conspiracy theorists are "nuts") and pretty much every celeb activist out there with the dubious exception of Thom Hartman.

thank you
Chomsky's going to be against any 9-11 conspiracy theory because he didn't initiate it and can't control it's direction. I stopped listening to Chomsky way back in the 1970's--just another warmed over Marxist-Leninist Leftist theoretician way off base about what societies need to function cooperatively, e.g., no place for religious beliefs in his analytical picture of social change.
Heh, no wonder Thom Hartman takes Dave Berman seriously. The guy can't even keep his own blog up and running.
Stephen, you are a nut. Osama bin Laden took credit for 911. Get a life.
Chomsky's going to be against any 9-11 conspiracy theory because he didn't initiate it and can't control it's direction.

OK, I laughed.
Eric, there has been another police shooting in Eureka near Rita's Mexican restaurant.
Heard about it on the news 8:40. Robbery suspect, right?
"Chomsky's going to be against any...theory because he...can't control it's direction"

Stephen, what do you mean by this? When has Noam Chomsky ever "controlled" anything?
Oh, and Chomsky is not a "Marxist-Leninist Leftist theoretician."
cover the big toe with cotton wool to protect the powere of thoes with none.
No, he's a warmed-over Marxist-Leninist Leftist theoretician. And what he has controlled is the dominant political theory of the Left for the last 20 years. I don't know of any other Leftist theoretician as well known in activist circles as Chomsky.
Chomsky is a fruitcake.
Stephen obviously does not know what a Marxist-Leninist Leftist is, and Anonymous, above, probably knows nothing at all.
I wish Jon Stewart would take on the conspiracy nuts, but there is one solid reason why he won't: they are beyond parody.
Chomsky has no credibility after being an apologist for the Khmer Rouge.
Can you site an example?
Yes. Chomsky has no credibility after being an apologist for the Khmer Rouge. Did you mean do you have any support for the statement?
Doesn't take much before you liberals start eating your own.
Leftists eat their own. Liberals eat Leftovers.
Will you fools who take the Big Lie of 9/11 seriously please do yourself a favor? Watch the movie Loose Change (download at - if you cowards can handle the truth!
I've seen Loose Change and I am shocked that more people haven't by now. What a movie! You're right when you're right. Some people are way too scared to deal with what really happened on 9/11.
The real reason people like Eric Kirk and other naive, foolish individuals can't stand Loose Change is because they're not man enough to handle the truth. The evidence clearly points in one direction - this evil government that wasn't even elected to begin with is the real culprit behind 9/11.
Other great websites are:
and hundreds more......
Go take a look for yourself.
Don't let anyone else tell you what to think about 9/11.
Decide for yourself.
Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?

Free Website Counter
Free Web Site Counter

Cost of the War in Iraq
(JavaScript Error)
To see more details, click here.
Click for