 |
Chomsky Confronted on 9/11
Admits LIHOP is “conceivable”
James Corbett
The Corbett Report
Friday, Nov 6th, 2009
A 9/11 activist recently confronted Noam Chomsky on his previous, well-publicized disparaging remarks about 9/11 truth. After spending several minutes repeating his tired arguments about the impossibility of 9/11 as an inside job, Chomsky then concedes that the notion that the Bush Administration knew of an impending attack and let it happen on purpose is “conceivable.” Watch footage of the confrontation in the video player below:
The video comes from a speaking engagement that venerated linguist and political commentator Noam Chomsky was giving at the First Unitarian Church of Portland on October 2, 2009. In his question, 9/11 activist Mark Abell first details the historical precedents of the Reichstag fire and FDR’s foreknowledge of Pearl Harbor to establish that false flags and LIHOP events have been used in the past to justify warmongering. Then he asks why the notion of 9/11 as an inside job is such an “inconceivable idea” for Chomsky to a round of applause from the audience.
Chomsky then launches into a diatribe against the notion of a 9/11 inside job before bizarrely declaring the Bush Administration “absolved” of the crimes of 9/11 because it would have been “senseless” for them to use their CIA-created, DIA protected, State Department handled and White House sanctioned Sunni terrorists to carry out an attack they openly called for that Chomsky himself admits they benefited from. He then states that it is “conceivable” that the administration knew about an attack ahead of time and let it happen, but adds dismissively that he doesn’t know of any evidence for the idea.
It would be truly surprising if Chomsky did not know of any of the evidence that the administration knew specific details of the plot ahead of time. Aside from well-covered issues like the Presidential Daily Briefing of August 6, 2001 (immortalized in this moment from the 9/11 Commission hearings), there is the still-unresolved issue of the 9/11 insider trading, the sworn testimony of FBI whistleblower Sibel Edmonds, the information provided by FBI informant Randy Glass, and literally hundreds of other pieces of evidence that directly demonstrate foreknowledge of administration officials about the 9/11 attacks. But perhaps Mr. Chomsky has not yet seen this information.
Despite seeming to be singularly uninformed on the relevant names, dates, figures and facts surrounding the issue of government complicity in 9/11, Chomsky apparently sees no intellectual dishonesty in calling this evidence “outlandish” while maintaining that Osama Bin Laden is most likely the mastermind behind the 9/11 attacks despite the fact that no solid evidence has ever been presented to suggest such a thing. Of course, the issue of Chomsky’s intellectual dishonesty on 9/11 is by no means new. The Corbett Report released a two-part documentary last year entitled “Noam Chomsky: Manufacturing Dissent” which painstakingly details how Chomsky’s 9/11 arguments are dishonest and inconsistent:
Abell must be commended for using a focused, contextualized question to get Chomsky to go further than before on the possibility that we are being lied to about 9/11. One can only hope that others will take up this example to continue the work of confronting prominent politicians, intellectuals and decision makers about the lies of 9/11. Only by doing so can we supply the definitive answer to Chomsky’s infamous two word dismissal of 9/11 truth: “who cares?”
Prison
Planet.tv Members Can Watch
Fall Of The Republic
Right Now Online -
Don't Miss Out! Get
Your Subscription Today!
CANCER CONSPIRACY? Are
"they" suppressing the cure? Will YOU
be the next victim? Learn
the Secret Truth! - READ FULL STORY
-
- Social bookmarks
- Email this article
-
- Print this page
72 Responses to “Chomsky Confronted on 9/11”
 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | |||||||
| By N2H | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
November 6th, 2009 at 5:17 am
Does anyone actually take this guy seriously?
. Reply:
November 6th, 2009 at 5:36 am
Sadly yes, many do.
Chomsky makes me Vomsky Reply:
November 6th, 2009 at 6:28 am
I used to think Chomsky was where it was at but I have since awoken from my fake left wing slumber.
Chomsky has made out very nicely from the system he pertains to dislike. His writings, of which some are still impressive, have ultimately changed nothing. It’s easy to see why when you look who pays him > http://web.mit.edu/pugwash/www/milres.html
Great article by Corbett and I’m looking forward to his book http://www.reportagebook.com/
Tok$ick Reply:
November 7th, 2009 at 4:55 am
You have failed to make any solid connection between Chomsky’s paychecks and the American military. The military may fund linguistics research, but you haven’t shown Chomsky has been the recipient of such a grant. This is basic leg work man. Stop being lazy. By the way, I completely agree military funding corrupts the university. But you have got to realize universities are vast places, with all kinds of activities going on.
I agree he’s made out very well for himself in the United States, but hardly any more than other star academic, who work at prestigious universities that can afford to pay handsomely, and who are wise with their money. It’s not like he’s a billionaire. I don’t think it would have been a sign of greater adherence to some principle if he had left the United States and lived in a mud hut in the jungle. By means of his stature as a linguist he has carved out a reputation as a critic of the American government. He could not have done that without being an MIT superstar.
Do Logic Reply:
November 6th, 2009 at 9:44 am
In late 1999 in New Mexico I had the chance to ask Chomsky a focused “contextualized” question regarding Clinton. Chomsky equivocated and dissimulated, avoided the question. Afterward, as the crowd left the room, several people came to me and commented that I had a good question and that it was too bad he had not a better answer. Essentially Chomsky had claimed Clinton was different from previous Presidents because he did not have the press behind him, that Clinton did not have the power to control the press in the same fashion as “the right”, which is clearly absurd.
Enemies all around Reply:
November 6th, 2009 at 10:29 am
Good comments, Logic, Vomsky, and blindboy. Chomsky is scum.
The issue of fake lefty gatekeepers is of paramount importance right now.
They are doing a fantastic job of fooling Obama worshipers supporting war and torture and corporate welfare. Their skill is truly amazing to behold. They manage to come off as groovy pro peace intelligent people who care about democracy human rights and the USA.
IMO here is a list of the best lying scum in the NWO arsenal of fake left propaganda:
Arianna Huffington
Bill Maher
Keith Olberman
Amy Goodman
Larissa Alexandrovna
Michael Moore
Katrina Vanden Huevel
Alexander Cockburn
The number of relatively smart well intentioned people who have been led down the garden path by this group is hard to estimate. Surely these liars will burn in Hell some day. Until then they will do a very good job of keeping the NWO in control.
Tok$ick Reply:
November 7th, 2009 at 4:57 am
More seriously than the people that populate this forum? Definitely.
you jackass Reply:
November 8th, 2009 at 7:02 am
How pathetic. JFK truth? Chomksy doesn’t wanna hear it. 9/11 truth? He doesn’t wanna hear it. The elites biggest crimes, crimes which if exposed would do more good than all his years of ranting about East Timor, go ignored by Chomksy. God forbid they label him a “conspiracy theorist”. Chomksy is a sick joke.
November 6th, 2009 at 5:25 am
this is a kick ass short film about martial law, and police brutality, and the rise of the republic you must see this and pass it on very power short film- amazing how close it all really is! Rise of the Rattlesnake -> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qx6tTH4RQfA
November 6th, 2009 at 5:50 am
This guy is just another pseudo intellectual ass. An actor put in place by the illuminati to act as a gatekeeper and to shut up the few cattle who are kicking up some dust. This guy has no credibility.
Another “star” that has fallen from “heaven”.
. Reply:
November 6th, 2009 at 6:10 am
He used to say -”it doesn’t matter” who killed JFK. Now he says the same about 9/11. He works at MIT, US intelligence hotbed. Connect the dots…..
its all planned Reply:
November 6th, 2009 at 3:51 pm
yea, it ‘does’nt matter, anymore for him..there is no redemption for sellouts.
Tok$ick Reply:
November 7th, 2009 at 4:45 am
Every major university in the United States is a center of recruitment and funding by any number of government agencies. Who funds research? The American government. Where? At the universities. Where are the most capable, most intelligent, potential leaders of the future? At the universities. Where are government agencies recruiting? At the universities. Yes, it’s all quite obvious.
In my opinion it is a terrible compromise of the independence of universities to be in the thrall of government funding, but this state of affairs has been in place since the late 19th century, growing ever since, when the US government pushed its then chaotic higher education system into a new order by dangling the carrot of a university pension system. The universities lined up, resulting in the system we have today.
A sensible response to this problem would be to (a) learn something about it by reading books and papers on the subject, and (b) talk about it sensibly with people who are similarly concerned.
Making statements linking MIT to US intelligence is pointless.
you jackass Reply:
November 8th, 2009 at 7:03 am
Does your back hurt from bending over so far for your media hero?
Tok$ick Reply:
November 7th, 2009 at 4:46 am
If Chomsky is a pseudo intellectual, you’re a mentally retarded baboon. Relative comparisons are a bitch.
November 6th, 2009 at 7:30 am
Why didn’t the questioner raise the issue of the PNAC documents calling for a “catalysing event”?Pity
November 6th, 2009 at 7:34 am
I stopped reading his stuff and buying his books right after 9/11.
November 6th, 2009 at 7:46 am
Chomsky drones on like that psyop freak Huxley.
The guy has never ever considered Skull N Bones underworld is connected to Afgan Opium and Oil.
You think Israel drove vans around WTC and wrote PNAC because of fear from Afgans ?
Zionist wanted Afgan to be 1of 7 occupied neighboors, according to Gen. Wes Clark.
Add Iran and Pak and there are 3 to go………hmmmm. I suspect Saudi would be #7 ??????
November 6th, 2009 at 7:47 am
“JINSA Jews now run the Pentagram”(Colon Bowell 2004)
November 6th, 2009 at 7:55 am
Chomsky is a putz
November 6th, 2009 at 7:56 am
OK Noam. Good enough. You can get off the stage now.
November 6th, 2009 at 8:03 am
Chomsky is a Zionist Shill and Gatekeeper for Israel. He is used to limit and control information regarding Israhell. He is a TRAITOR to America.
9/11 was done by Israel and Zionist Traitors
NWO/Globalization = Jew Communism/Marxism + Jew Central Banking + Jew Mass Media
Al Qaeda = 1st Cover Story for the truly Blind
Illuminati = Back Up Cover Story for the Half Awake Sheeple
CFR hater Reply:
November 6th, 2009 at 8:09 am
Thanks for being right to the point, former US Marine. What a world is being imposed on us!!
I don't think so. Reply:
November 6th, 2009 at 9:09 am
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yVbRx9a3SOQ
There are no nations at the top. The world was perfect before 1948? I don’t think so.
The Jews are the scapegoats for the Satanist elites.
The Shnozz Reply:
November 6th, 2009 at 11:47 am
Bullshit…they’re not scapegoats. Why do you think they were kicked out of 80 countries historically? Because they were scapegoats?
Whateva
Great post Former US Marine Says
Tis true
Tok$ick Reply:
November 7th, 2009 at 4:35 am
The influence of Israel on American politics is unfortunate, but so is the history of persecution of Jews. We need a position that criticizes Israel, and reduces the influence of the Israeli Lobby, while denying Jews none of the rights and freedoms we enjoy. To do otherwise is a liquidation not only of Jews, but of our principles. The claims of Former US Marine are insanity.
you jackass Reply:
November 8th, 2009 at 7:05 am
Did Chomskhy mention the Israeli role in 9/11? He is a zionist gatekeeper:
http://www.bollyn.com/solving-.....icle_11424
November 6th, 2009 at 8:05 am
Chomsky’s job, I hate to say it, is to make us Americans hate America. He’s only a shill–period!
November 6th, 2009 at 8:26 am
We all know who Chomfreak works for and who he is covering up. His cousins the Weehawken Five. Just another traitor to American cashin in like the Goldman Sachs crowd
while ripping off the US Treasury with Geithner and Bernache help. really easy to figure out.
Tok$ick Reply:
November 7th, 2009 at 4:32 am
Your post helped me figure something out. But it’s not what you think.
you jackass Reply:
November 8th, 2009 at 7:05 am
Do you even know who the Weehawken 5 are? Chomksy didn’t tell you idf you do.
November 6th, 2009 at 8:32 am
Maybe MR. MIT sold out treasonous con man should watch this.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vaCYEEO-58I
November 6th, 2009 at 8:53 am
Some of these comments are a little ridiculous. Yes, I think most of us know 911 was an inside job but at the same time I think we have to be a little more tolerant of peoples’ opinions. He entertains the “Let it Happen” scenario as a possibility and that is his opinion, I don’t think it is helpful for our cause to ridicule and call others names for merely having a substantiated opinion different than ours.
Whether he is a paid shill or not is another matter. Let’s save the more brutal condemnation for those who participated in 911 and are more intimately involved in actively covering it up.
frazier Reply:
November 6th, 2009 at 10:09 am
“substatiated” by ignoring alot of information?
The Bohemian Grove FLU Reply:
November 6th, 2009 at 10:32 am
A traitor is a Traitor.
The Bohemian Grove FLU Reply:
November 6th, 2009 at 10:36 am
we have been listen to Harvard and MIT bull shit artists forever. It really is not that complicated. Watch the Soap Opera watch Geithner and Bernacke rip off the US Treasury
for Goldman Sachs it is simple really. The Weehawwken Five knew and 500 Billions dolars worth of Spy crap and 100,000 PHDs and All the Graet and Brilliant( they will tell you how Great they are) and nobody knew anything here in Americksy but THE Weehawken Five did? gee go back to Harvard really. study soime more BS.
Bill Reply:
November 6th, 2009 at 11:40 am
Just look at Bush’s on camera reaction in that classroom when he was informed.
fist of fun Reply:
November 6th, 2009 at 12:25 pm
It’s pretty hard to reconcile the LIHOP scenario once one knows about the thermitic material discovered in the WTC dust. Years ago I noticed a consistent effort by message board shills to steer the argument toward LIHOP. Once they talk you down to LIHOP, all the hard forensic evidence goes out the window and it’s all a matter of contradictory testimony and conflicting interpretations. Also, LIHOP leaves the basic premise of the “War on Terror” unrefuted, since if you buy into that scenario, the attacks were actually carried out by OBL and muslim terrorists.
November 6th, 2009 at 1:42 pm
Don’t forget the USS Sullivans and then The USS Cole. All tied into the cons at the top.
They whine about the “terrorists” while lining their sold out pockets. They will be whining
until they train the US Treasury and Build their big sold out mansions and run around on their sold out yachts whining “the Terrorists the terrorists” phonies ass “society”. Nothing but con men and women. sold out …… we could just rig a puppet to go ‘the terrorist, the terrorist”
November 6th, 2009 at 1:43 pm
I f you want to see Foresight and the Future listen to Mr. Farrakhan from 1995. He has the
whole sold out show pegged.
November 6th, 2009 at 2:37 pm
You guys are just pissed off because Chomsky doesn’t say the things you want to hear.
Move on with you unclear mission.
November 6th, 2009 at 2:43 pm
This typical of a slow talking half asses intellectual BS artist. A ask the clown if you see him
how can we be 12 Trillion In debt. Where did it come from to “borrow” and The New American Century drooled over a New Pearl Harbor why would somebody want a New Pearl Harbor and be in a position to “Capitalize on it”.
its all planned Reply:
November 6th, 2009 at 4:04 pm
i truly believe greed is the root of all evil.
November 6th, 2009 at 2:47 pm
Former Marine said: “Illuminati = Back Up Cover Story for the Half Awake Sheeple”
Now THAT is the ultimate disinformation if I’ve ever heard any. Sorry, but the conspiracy goes much further than “the jews” or even the zionists. Get off it already and stop trying to make the anti-NWO movement look anti-semitic. The rabbit hole goes extremely deep and it does not end with “the jews”. At the heart of the conspiracy is something extraordinarily SATANIC. Not jewish. The dark lords are not limited to any one race, country, or religion (unless you’re talking about the satanic “religion”).
The Bohemian Grove FLU Reply:
November 6th, 2009 at 2:51 pm
it is not that complicated Warburg and the Federal Reserve. Geee maybe you should read and ask simple dumbass questions.
its all planned Reply:
November 6th, 2009 at 7:32 pm
‘…the rabbit hole goes extremely deep..’ cant argue that point,
at some point, i must concede, the basic fact of the matter, and it all truly boils down to this: it appears mans downfall is always caused by capitulating to ‘externals’ and ignoring the essential truth of the matter, and that being..>we are all spiritual essences, being fooled by manifestations of physical matter…this i think, is the real lie. money and toys are not the real goal here , ultimately. they are simply illusions, created by man to appear to have value . dont drink the koolaid kiddies.!!. It truly is a war of principalities, good versus evil. it is really that simple. just like there are no aethiests in the foxhole,… when you die, the only REAL estate you get to take with you is your very essence…your spiritual soul. once sold, never recovered… So, all you, sellouts, there is still time. repent of your wrongdoing and pray for divine intervention, I will also offer up some small sacrifices in your behalf even though they may fall on deaf ears. overcome evil with good. ..works for me! “and you will know them by their stripes”
Tok$ick Reply:
November 7th, 2009 at 4:28 am
Talk of the “dark lords” is the really perfect end point of all conspiracy theorizing. The enemy is never just like you and me, fallible human beings sometimes featuring mysterious desires with a bad habit of breaking the rules. No, they are evil beings that come from another world, Hell maybe, or a planet far away. Their natures are so grotesque we could never have a conversation with them. It would be just too icky!
And the conspiracy has been going on for a long long time, over generations!
What we know is just the tip of the iceberg!
Once you’ve gone down the rabbit hole, good luck getting out.
It makes me think that religion got something right: in the face of a propensity towards conspiracy theorizing, religion posits a conspiracy of the good, which combats and overcomes any conspiracy of evil. It is this faith in the conspiracy of the good that keeps the average human being on an even keel, and gives them powers, real or imagined, to defend against the dark lords.
Secular society, having forbidden God as a clown, is bitten by the paranoid feeling that all is not right, but provides nothing in its place as a psychological defense. Thus the power of the dark lords.
This must be Satanism itself, to be animated in this life by fear of the dark lords, rather than by the love of God.
November 6th, 2009 at 3:22 pm
anyone know if chomsky has mossad ties?
following the money is a good place to start
November 6th, 2009 at 4:55 pm
They didn’t do 911 to invade Iraq they did it to discredit the USA for the same reason they lied about Iraq. In the end they will use all the lies about 911 to make America look totally out of control. So the UN can come in a take control of more and more of our business. problem, solution, reaction. They will use the truth to destroy US in the future.
November 6th, 2009 at 5:14 pm
The reason people like Chomsky scoff or dismiss conspiracy theories is because they are Full of Conceit….Chomsky can’t admit any conspiracy that he isn’t aware of or has been already informed of cause he’s soooo super educated that nothing get by him!!!
November 6th, 2009 at 5:29 pm
Chomsky is a devil.
November 6th, 2009 at 6:16 pm
Chumpsky I understand has amassed over 15 mil and has a home(on stolen land) in Israel. Can’t trust this Zionist fabricator. If the truth of 911 becomes broadly accepted Isreal will be history and all of Chumpsky’s retirement villa will be reclamated. Let’s make it happen !!!!!!!
Dr. StrangeFlu Reply:
November 6th, 2009 at 8:32 pm
That makes sense then if this is true. An old time Double Agent. Of course he would not want to talk about anything but the Standard Story. The Weehawken Five were just
“lucky” that they knew 9/11 was coming and they were so happy that the building were falling down. Why it was a bid dancing party with high fives and whoopees. Watch the building fall and watch everybody die why who would not be dancing a big party.
So iwould Mr. Double Agent Chomsky want to say anything against his “cousins”.
Probably has some kick ass War Profiteer stocks aka Warburg style. Amazing 500 Billion
dollars worth of failed Intelligence Officers and equipment knew nothing.
Tok$ick Reply:
November 7th, 2009 at 4:17 am
“That makes sense then if this is true.”
This is the mantra of the conspiracy theorist. It’s about suspicion looking for a bit of evidence to confirm itself, so the suspicion makes sense. “I had a suspicion Chomsky was an old time Double Agent, but until you provided this evidence that he’s working for Israel, I didn’t quite believe it. Now I can believe it.”
Of course, all depends on whether the claim is true, and whether the claim proves he’s a double agent.
Does Chomsky own land in Israel? He is Jewish, so it is not implausible. But do you have any evidence of this?
If it were true, would this evidence prove Chomsky was an agent of Israel? No it wouldn’t.
Here is a link you might have missed where it is claimed Chomsky is in league with Holocaust deniers:
http://wernercohn.com/Chomsky.html
Chomsky seems to be all things to all people. Now a left wing nut hated by Fox News, then a “gatekeeper” pushing out the real left, hated by Prison Planet. Now he’s an Israeli double agent, says Dr. StrangeFlu, then a Holocaust denier, says Werner Cohn. He’s working for the left and against it, for Israel and against it. There is no cause he supports with his left hand that he doesn’t undermine with his right hand.
If you don’t see yourself trapped in a whirlpool of accusations that you don’t even own, you have no idea where you are, or what you are doing.
November 6th, 2009 at 7:59 pm
apparently “Chop Ski” is used to speak at audiences of zombies that are drinking his KoolAid to the last drop,
Chomski, Says, no the government wouldn’t of done this because, they wouldn’t have blamed it on people that would bring them to Afghanistan, like that they wouldn’t of have gone true the Afghan war in all the problems that come with it, they would have blamed the Iraqis, it would of ben more convenient,
then, he says, they wouldn’t put the blame on Saudis, because it would be a problem for them, but yes Saddam, would put the blame on the Saudis, on & on, Disinformation vs disinformation.
I didnt listen to hole video, I had enough after a few minutes.
Tok$ick Reply:
November 7th, 2009 at 1:36 am
If you didn’t listen to the video, you don’t have a right to an opinion about the video. This is a basic principle of fair play in intellectual dealings. If you didn’t read the book, don’t write a review. If you didn’t listen to the argument, don’t propose faults.
Chomsky is an intellect worth paying attention to. “Paying attention to” does not mean believing everything he says. It means listening and considering the views of the man.
I venture a guess that for you one is either a slavish fan of someone’s point of view, or an enemy. Thinking for one’s self means adapting independently to the opinions of others. Because it is an activity of independence, thinking requires effort. Principles will help guide us towards the sorts of efforts we need to make.
If you are serious about having a point of view, do the work. Otherwise your opinion is of value to yourself alone, and on merely psychological grounds.
you jackass Reply:
November 8th, 2009 at 7:07 am
Stop being a groupie. The man is fallible. Hes actually worse than that…..
November 6th, 2009 at 8:41 pm
So here we after afetr 9/11. Right after 9/11 worst thing that every happened on American soil. So are police men arrest the 9/11 Weehawken Five. And the media says nothing except a couple of papers. No follow up no BIG TV coverage. NONE. So besides haveing the dumbest Intelligence aagencies Officers in History (getting paid to protect from a bunker) so besides having 500 Billion worth of spy crap and satellites and more Agencies than we even know and Generals and bla bla and war colleges and bla bla so besides having all this
the Weehawken Five knew and nobody here knew nothing. Then they are caught and let go and immediately some people here where ready to defend them and big TV said nothing.
What more needs to be said.
November 6th, 2009 at 8:49 pm
But where would we be without our lovely double agents to cry and whine about the “terrorists”. I mena without the Neo-Cons to whine about the terrorists I mean how would they be able to cash in on the war and get rich off their stocks and stuff. So you have to have the whinning scared Society and then they can whine like babies “the terrorist, the terrorist and cash in on the war at the same time. So Warburgish so TYPICAL>>>>>.
Like a little planned rehersed generational planned MOVIE played out so beautifully in all the American wars.
November 6th, 2009 at 9:02 pm
Chomsky admitted to the real reasons behind 9/11, he would be out of some paid gigs that he makes a living at.
November 6th, 2009 at 9:43 pm
waht is so funny they all (Warburg Clones) blab off the same script. They always play the
‘terrorits whinning part’ then they get rich off it. So predictable and the cover-up stuff.
Like the USS Liberty and the Weehawken Five. always the same speal. always.
November 6th, 2009 at 9:51 pm
We need 100 more War Colleges and 10,000 more spy agencies amd 100,000 more think tanks with the Brilliant and Great ( they will tell you they are great that is how you will know they are) and 1000 more Generals and Admirals to really be secure. because obviously the
Weehawken Five knew and they evn said they knew 9/11 was going to happen. So obviously all of humpity dumptiy’s spy crap must be broken and still probably is since we had to give 2 trillions dollars to usless banksters that can’t do simple math.
November 6th, 2009 at 9:59 pm
Basically it eventually dawns on you that it is the Double Agents sold out country and not yours your people can fight and die for the place but it will never be yours. Omaha Beach
can be yours and Arlington can be yours but that is it. Period nothing else.
November 6th, 2009 at 10:16 pm
glenn Beck is why better than this clown because he uses a Blackboard. Wonce you take the bla,bla ,bla talk away the Blackboard makes it so obvious. Glenn Beck’s explaination of the 2 Trillion dollar rip off of the Treasury for Goldman Sachs and the hand full of people that made out like absolute bandits was beautiful and easy to understand. Like 7 people Geithner
and Bernake and Goldman Sachs ripped the place off beautifully like a buch 5 year olds.
November 7th, 2009 at 1:24 am
Chomsky’s response is not a diatribe. He begins by giving his opinion that the idea that the Reichstaag and Pearl Harbor incidents were pretexts for expansion of state power are themselves theories, and not proven facts. Then he asks why, if 9/11 was a conspiracy to invade Iraq, the conspirators blamed it on Saudis, and then invaded Afghanistan. If they had blamed Iraq, they could have had a direct invasion of the country with the whole world’s approval. Conspiring to blow up the WTC and then blaming the Saudis would have been completely insane.
This sounds like a sensible counter position. It may not be true, but it is not a diatribe.
This article is written by someone who is like a religious fundamentalist. It is more important to refrain from questioning one’s beliefs than it is to tell the truth.
Holding quality beliefs depends on our determination to question those beliefs. I can believe the moon is made of glass my whole life, if I refuse to hear any opposing opinion, and be quite pleased with it. One of the aces up any conspiracy theorists sleeve is the claim, implicit in all such views, that ones knowledge is not only the best knowledge, it is under attack by powerful assailants for whom the knowledge is a dangerous threat to their power. Such attacked knowledge must, according to this point of view, be defended.
But unless the root of the belief in the conspiracy is itself questioned, the knowledge that springs from it cannot be trusted, and the defense may be misguided.
We can never know anything for certain. We have to weight the balance of our knowledge against common sense. Once we have decided common sense is no longer working -and it often fails- we run great risks of getting things wrong. We must redouble our efforts to know the facts, check logical connections, and be fairminded to our opponents.
I would like to close with an observation. One claim, repeated in many different ways, is that a power out there (such as the government, corporations, the UN, etc) are using fear
to short circuit people’s thinking processes, and get them to accept further incursions into their daily lives, perhaps even to kill them with a bioweaponized vaccine. To this I register the following observation: Prison planet, Alex Jones, and many others also use fear to get their point across. They claim the world is an extremely dangerous, scary place, filled with powerful actors who want to destroy you. Do you suppose this fear influences your ability to think about these subjects? If you believe the general population is hoodwinked by fear, then you can be hoodwinked by fear as well.
When you venture into a territory of knowledge that is defined by fear, and when you throw off common sense along the way, you must tread very carefully.
Good luck with your investigations.
burnout the rich to keep warm Reply:
November 7th, 2009 at 4:09 am
sorry mate, you’ve come to the wrong site.
too much information for the average plebs posting here. they attack intelligence, and wallow in their insignificant guided minds.
truth doesn’t exist, it’s a fantasy, truth is long gone, it’s gone the way of the dinosaur.
happy dollar crash.
November 7th, 2009 at 4:00 am
I thought I’d make more comments now that I’ve looked at both parts of Manufacturing Dissent, the mini-doc critical of Chomsky. I’ll take up two points, the car analogy, and the “so what?”
1. I can’t find evidence of Chomsky making the statement Zwicker claims he made, but perhaps some of you are more resourceful. Let’s say he did say it. The claim is, roughly, it is permissible to dismiss conspiracy theories because you can make conspiracy theories about anything, for example a car accident. Zwicker parlays this by a logical analysis of the example. He is correct that it is indeed possible to have a conspiracy to cause a car accident. This would appear to dismiss Chomsky’s claim, since if you can have such a conspiracy, it is not invalid to theorize about them.
But all this is beside the point, really. His intention was to highlight the possibility of over-theorizing a situation, like emphasizing elements that are not relevant, making connections that are not there, or not proven, and thereby arriving ridiculously at an empty conspiracy theory. The car accident is used as an example because it is the sort of thing we would not generally believe to be caused by a conspiracy, even though sometimes they are.
It seems obvious to me that every major event in American history has its conspiracy theorists. McCarthy thought there was an active conspiracy Communist in Hollywood. Many people think there was a conspiracy surrounding the JFK assasination. Some think the Moon landing footage was nothing but the product of a conspiracy to deceive the Soviets. There are others.
(Much of American foreign policy was animated by the idea of a Communist conspiracy, which was in fact true and well documented. But even in this case, if you read your history, spook analysis of wheels within wheels often became wheels unhinged, and the intelligence community, if the public accounts are any indication, got it wrong much of the time. And badly.)
Some of these conspiracies may be true. Probably most are not. But whether they are true or not, there are many people who spend a great deal of energy believing in them, learning a great deal of facts, and arguing amongst themselves. A conspiracy theory becomes a whole worldview.
It is this propensity of people to see a conspiracy in events that is the target of Chomsky’s dismissal. Many people will see a conspiracy in a car crash (where there is none).
2. This gets me to the second point, the “So what?”
a. Given (1), “so what?” could mean: “I don’t have time to get into the intertwining details of your theory, any more than I have time to get into the theories about the JFK assassination. So you think you have special insight into the events that contradict the accepted story. So what? Get in line.”
b. Nobody can question the breadth of Chomsky’s critique of American foreign policy. For more than 30 years he has been consistently drawing a portrait of the United States as a warmongering exporter of terror and has backed up these claims with keep observations, and firm logic back by evidence.
“So what?” could mean: “Your conspiracy theory, whether it is valid or not, doesn’t tell me anything really novel about the moral compass of American leadership. So you think American leadership is bankrupt. So what? Tell me something I don’t already know.”
c. “So what?” could indicate conspiracy theorizing is not a useful contribution: “You could spend all your energy on the details of your pet conspiracy theory, but so what? Once you’ve come to the opinion the American government has serious problems, what will you do? What does this way of coming at the problem accomplish besides demanding strict belief in your opinion?”
—
I’m no Chomsky-ite. I do not flock to his speeches, or agree with everything he says. But he has acted as a good example of what critical journalism can do to speak truth to power.
Those who dismiss him out of hand prove themselves inadequate to the task of dismissal. They found their empty power on the belief, apparently widely shared on these forums, that there are the believers and the non-believers. The believers get credibility, and the non-believers do not.
It is a basic value of inquiry, scientific and otherwise, and recognized in the Constitution that people will have different points of view. That is why there is freedom of the press, and why we have more than one representative. Given Chomsky’s undeniable track record of critiquing the United States when most intellectuals do not, one would think people questioning the role of American foreign policy would give him some respect, even if they thought his views were now out of date. Instead we get a fundamentalist attitude that there is the us and the them, and Chomsky’s a them!
Yes, he is not like you, but the distinction is not flattering for the inhabitants of this website, where mob mentality rules.
burnout the rich to keep warm Reply:
November 7th, 2009 at 4:22 am
your post that i could not put so eloquently are spot on. fuck me! do we have a thinker on this site? nah, he’s a government shill. ha.
enjoy the melt down.
Tok$ick Reply:
November 7th, 2009 at 5:08 am
I post for posterity, when in some distant century a wandering hunter finds this webpage lodged under a heap of wreckage.
burnout the rich to keep warm Reply:
November 7th, 2009 at 4:42 pm
kudos to you, but you’re wasting your well written efforts on disney on acid plebs. cheers to you, and i hope you get as far away from that self destructive hole as soon as possible.
peace.
you jackass Reply:
November 8th, 2009 at 7:08 am
You are a Chomksy-ite, you present the same tired excuses for him all of his slavishly devoted fans do.
November 7th, 2009 at 8:38 am
Maybe it’s just me, but I’ve always felt that truly great minds are ignored by their contemporaries and admired by the men of the future. So it was with Schopenhauer, Veblen, and Machiavelli – to give but three examples.
Perhaps it would be better to pay more attention to the great minds of the past than to closely follow the words of the popular thinkers of the present.
By the way, has anyone here read Sombart’s ‘The Jews and Modern Capitalism?’