Noam Chomsky

**Major_Armstrong** · 12 Sep 04,, 03:03

Another terrorist at the level of Michael Moore:

http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles...le.asp?ID=4146

**Rahul** · 12 Sep 04,, 03:05

He seems to be rather out of touch with reality although in his actual field of linguistics, he's considered the best. I remember at MIT when I visited, they were mentioning him as the modern founder of the field, although they (smartly IMO) glossed over his political writings.

**Ironduke** · 12 Sep 04,, 03:36

I wouldn't call them terrorists, just wrong all of the time.

Chomsky should stick to his field.

**Confed999** · 12 Sep 04,, 14:29

Originally Posted by Ironduke

just wrong all of the time.

Chomsky should stick to his field.

Amen...

**Ray** · 12 Sep 04,, 20:27

Isn't he the old harridan who finds the whole world out of step?

**barrowaj** · 13 Sep 04,, 00:10

Can you explain to me how Noam Chomsky and Micheal Moore are terrorists? They just write books and make movies. However, the way people portray them is that these two would like to put Saddam Hussein in charge of our country.

The link you posted said that the September 11th attacks was a cause for celebration for progressives. It is obviously a fringe publication in the first place, but making a statement like that is not only insulting, but purely idiotic.

Its a shame that so many Americans are brainwashed by a sort of groupthink that they are willing to beleive crap like this in the name of patriotism. This is not the way of democracy! Dissent IS patriotism!

**Confed999** · 13 Sep 04,, 01:09

Originally Posted by barrowaj

Can you explain to me how Noam Chomsky and Micheal Moore are terrorists?

The things they say can be interperted to support the terrorist "cause". If he believes this is the case, then he would see them as terrorists.

Originally Posted by barrowaj

This is not the way of democracy! Dissent IS patriotism!

As is support. They have the same right to their beliefs as Noam Chomsky and Micheal Moore. I hardly think it's anything to do with "brainwashing", more like differing opinion, as many of them would say you're the "brainwashed" one.

**jjacobs43** · 15 Sep 04,, 21:40

Originally Posted by Ironduke

I wouldn't call them terrorists, just wrong all of the time.

Chomsky should stick to his field.

I think before anybody insults Chomsky they should read some of his books and not just some shortened articles. He is not just an "America Hater". He has some very powerful philosophical arguments for believing what he does.

**Prodigal Son** · 01 Oct 04,, 06:03

Chomsky's "the media is controlled by right-wing fanatics" line is eerily similar to folks on the right like Rush Limbaugh who go on about the "liberal media". The media is a profit-driven institution, like any other in the United States, which means the profit-motive influences what they do and don't report. Once you realize that and the fact no source is perfect you'll realize going to a bunch of sources is the best thing to do.

**Seeker** · 02 Oct 04,, 01:13

Originally Posted by jjacobs43

I think before anybody insults Chomsky they should read some of his books and not just some shortened articles. He is not just an "America Hater". He has some very powerful philosophical arguments for believing what he does.

I read 'Hegamony or Survival' and I did quite like it, although I found the writing stlye hard to follow at times. I'm used to references in history to be better documenented and explained. It did open my eyes to some different ways of looking at resent historical events. I always suspected that Regans war in latin America was corruption covered up and had little doubt of the blood soaked trail that indirectly lead to DC. But even Chomsky reports that some of the casualities were over blown. And while I accepted [at that time] at face value American explainations ,I suspected there was alot more....but that was the cold war and we turned a blind eye to alot of things back then.

In N America we live in a very sheltered highly processed & conditioned society that has virtually only one vision of the world. It falls on those who want to be more realistic about history to seek and ask for other POV. When you see people claiming differing POV as "Amercia Hater" you are seeing a really efficent propaganda/conditioning machine at work.

I have come to the conclusion that it is the duty of all citizens of any democracy not to believe anything their government tells unless its explained in tripplicate and question every thing....otherwize you end up with the government you deserve.

Chomsky shows a nice little example of the hypocracy of big governments and their policies. At the time of the Kosovo war, the USA was fighting the Serbs who where getting arms from Israel who in turn had got them from the USA...

**Donnie** · 02 Oct 04,, 01:35

Originally Posted by Seeker

I have come to the conclusion that it is the duty of all citizens of any democracy not to believe anything their government tells unless its explained in tripplicate and question every thing....otherwize you end up with the government you deserve.

so instead we should blindly believe michael moore and chomsky? and yet when we question his motives, his sources, and question his explaination, we are labled "brainwashed" now thats hypocracy.

Originally Posted by Seeker

Chomsky shows a nice little example of the hypocracy.....

i just showed you another one.

**Seeker** · 02 Oct 04,, 07:41

Originally Posted by donnie

so instead we should blindly believe michael moore and chomsky? and yet when we question his motives, his sources, and question his explaination, we are labled "brainwashed" now thats hypocracy.

i just showed you another one.

Well if you what to go blindly believeing any thing , you have learn't nothing.

Calling some one an 'America Hater' cause he questions a society or war is not an acceptable reaction. Its just an extremely childish behaviour. If you have a problem with what either have said then I suggest you address those points.

BTW, if you really do blindly believe in things....my brother owns a bridge in Brooklen he will sell you for a steal.

**Yiannis** · 02 Oct 04,, 13:42

I have read a couple of his books and several articles of his. I enjoyed the wealth of facts he presents, but I find his inability to lucidly connect them together and draw some well substantiuated conclusions annoying and severley detracting from the value of his writtings.

In short, his poilitics is a bit naive. He is not well grounded on International Relations theory from an academic perspective, and it shows. His books are full of facts (some obscure) and opinions, with little in the way of theory and conclusions. As a previous poster mentioned, it would behove him more to stick to his field and put his powerfull intelect to better use there.

In the end if he is remembered at all , it will be because of his studies in common linguistic denominators around the world and not his studies of US intervention around the same.

As for being a terrorist, the naivete of many of his opinions should not blind us in recognising that he has made some positive contributions, such as exposing the plight of East Timorese and Cypriots, as well as Kurds in the West. Anyway, one of the reasons America is the greatest nation in the world is that it allows all voices to be heard.

**Donnie** · 05 Oct 04,, 15:28

Originally Posted by Seeker

Well if you what to go blindly believeing any thing , you have learn't nothing.

except i get called brainwashed when i question moore

Originally Posted by Seeker

Calling some one an 'America Hater' cause he questions a society or war is not an acceptable reaction. Its just an extremely childish behaviour.

yes it is an acceptable reaction, not that i agree with it, but its hypocritical to say that people like moore can lie and twist the trooth, basicaly saying anything he wants, but then turn around and say that someone cant critisize him for doing it, so now your critisizing someone who is critisizing someone who is critisizing someone, just as much as moore has his right to say what he wants, those people have the right to say what they want about him, just like you have the right to think its unacceptable for them to critisize moore (although it would be hypocritical to do so), this brings me to my right to call you a hypocrit, and now you have the right to critisize me for thinking your a hypocrit, what a great system dont you think?

Originally Posted by Seeker

If you have a problem with what either have said then I suggest you address those points.

i have.

Originally Posted by Seeker

BTW, if you really do blindly believe in things....my brother owns a bridge in Brooklen he will sell you for a steal.

um, excuse me, where did i say i blindly believe anything?

**Confed999** · 06 Oct 04,, 01:22

Originally Posted by donnie

yes it is an acceptable reaction, not that i agree with it, but its hypocritical to say that people like moore can lie and twist the trooth, basicaly saying anything he wants, but then turn around and say that someone cant critisize him for doing it, so now your critisizing someone who is critisizing someone who is critisizing someone, just as much as moore has his right to say what he wants, those people have the right to say what they want about him, just like you have the right to think its unacceptable for them to critisize moore (although it would be hypocritical to do so), this brings me to my right to call you a hypocrit, and now you have the right to critisize me for thinking your a hypocrit, what a great system dont you think?

Nice one...