Interesting Chomsky 9/11 video

jackprune

New Member
Hi, reformed CT'er here.

Metabunk played key role in bringing me down to earth. You and your friends do a good thing Mick. Thank you.

A turning point for me was "Truth" movement leaders attacking Noam Chomsky because he disagreed with them. They call him a "gatekeeper" of all things. Huh?! Really? Those are big words. I mean, Chomsky has, arguably, been "speaking truth to power" for decades. A gatekeeper?! Really?! It may be true, but just because he disagrees? That's pretty flimsy evidence to dismiss someone of his caliber. I began to question "Truthers", not Chomsky. And eventually I found Metabunk.

I searched, but don't see that this video has been posted:

Interesting Chomsky answer to 9/11 question:
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
Welcome Jack. And that's a great video there, very lucid exposition from Chomsky.

The other thread has a different video, older, and I think Chomsky was less familiar with the Truther arguments at that point:
 

jaydeehess

Senior Member.
Well Chomsky hasn't always been the epitome of reasoned thought, iirc he thought Pol Pot was a great guy at one time, but on this topic he's on the money.
 

jackprune

New Member
Yes, lucid is a good descriptor.

Pol Pot a great guy etc.? Hmm. That doesn't sound like Chomsky to me.
Perhaps someone else said it of him? I don't know.

Meanwhile, I thought this video was very good.

Interesting linguistics topics in there. What an incredible mind.

 

Henry Crun

New Member
Well Chomsky hasn't always been the epitome of reasoned thought, iirc he thought Pol Pot was a great guy at one time, but on this topic he's on the money.

My experience has been that there are three main types of criticisms of our Noam (1) when the person quotes what Chomsky says and just leaves it with no comment to show how Unamerican Chomsky is (like "If the Nuremberg laws were applied, then every post-war American president would have been hanged."), but when you look at the quote, you think "ah yes, but what he's saying is actually true isn't it". Or (2) they say "Chomsky says that ...." and you look at what he said and it wasn't what was quoted at all. Or (3) I can't remember what the third one is but I'm sure there's another.

So, actual Chomsky quote please? I suspect this is a type (2) criticism but am open to persuasion. :)
 

Henry Crun

New Member
Hi, reformed CT'er here.

Metabunk played key role in bringing me down to earth. You and your friends do a good thing Mick. Thank you.

A turning point for me was "Truth" movement leaders attacking Noam Chomsky because he disagreed with them. They call him a "gatekeeper" of all things. Huh?! Really? Those are big words. I mean, Chomsky has, arguably, been "speaking truth to power" for decades. A gatekeeper?! Really?! It may be true, but just because he disagrees? That's pretty flimsy evidence to dismiss someone of his caliber. I began to question "Truthers", not Chomsky. And eventually I found Metabunk.

I searched, but don't see that this video has been posted:

Great video, thanks. I did a transcript of the second half which I think bears repeating about 9/11.

“The Bush administration desperately wanted to invade Iraq. That’s a longstanding goal, there’s good reasons for it: they have the second largest energy resources in the world, right in the middle of the world’s major energy producing region you know perfectly obvious reasons which they in fact later stated but they were obvious anyway. So they wanted to invade Iraq: one uncontroversial fact. Second uncontroversial fact: they didn’t blame 9/11 on Iraqis they blamed it on the Saudis, mainly. That’s their major ally, so they blamed it on their major ally, not on the country that they wanted to invade.

Third uncontroversial fact: unless they were total lunatics they would have blamed it on Iraqis if they were involved in any way. That would have given them open season on invading Iraq, total support, international support, UN resolution. No need to concoct wild stories about weapons of mass destruction and contacts between Saddam and Al Qaeda which of course quickly exploded discrediting them, and no reason to invade Afghanistan which must have been a waste of time for them. But they didn’t. Well the conclusion is pretty straightforward: that they either total lunatics or they weren’t involved. And they’re not total lunatics. “
 

Henry Crun

New Member
Yep, and possibly in this case (although I've not seen the actual Chomsky quote) the accusation seems to have been debunked, from http://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/2779086.html just over half way down with :

pud :
04 Jul 2011 8:03:26am

"Chomsky should stand with his beloved Khieu Samphan today, too, I say."

Except that Chomsky has not committed any crimes against humanity and not been accused as such.

The quotes you provide validate Chomsky and the author of this article. He is simply questioning how the New York Times came to the conclusion of a regime backed slaughter given the source of the information. You obviously see something much more sinister in this. What part of this does Chomsky declare any support or sympathy for the Khmer Rouge, Pol Pot or Khieu Samphan?

In a so called democracy it is actually a good thing to have people who are prepared to question government and media and hold them to account and expose their hypocrisy. That's how democracy is supposed to work.
 

jaydeehess

Senior Member.
"We do not pretend to know where the truth lies amidst these sharply conflicting assessments; rather, we again want to emphasize some crucial points. What filters through to the American public is a seriously distorted version of the evidence available, emphasizing alleged Khmer Rouge atrocities and downplaying or ignoring the crucial U.S. role, direct and indirect, in the torment that Cambodia has suffered."
Chomsky and Herman, "Distortions"

Survivors of the regime would likely not agree that the atrocities by the KR were over emphasized.
 

jackprune

New Member
"Distortions" is a critique of American press. The use of the word "alleged" is not a defense of the Khmer Rouge, but an indictment against the scholarship of reporting on the Khmer Rouge in the American press.

I believe a couple of paragraphs up from your quote is likely what Chomsky is referring to with term "alleged"

I can't imagine Chomsky caring much for Pol Pot. It makes no sense.

I mean, if I point out that US officials (it seems) fabricated WMD intelligence to invade Iraq, does that mean I like Saddam? Of course not. Well, maybe on Fox News ;)!
 
Last edited:

Trigger Hippie

Senior Member.
Conspiracy-ologists will often build arguments as follows. The US government has done bad things in the past, therefore, Area-51, 9/11 false flag, chemtrails, bigfoot, UFOs are probably real.

Chomsky uses the same argument in Distortions at Fourth Hand. The first 800 words are an attack on the NY Times for poor and biased reporting on the reconstruction of post-war Vietnam. He then suggests that the same poor and biased reporting is true of the stories about Khmer Rouge atrocities in Cambodia. He states it quick clearly in the first sentence of the second part.

Well... no. The newspaper reports on Cambodia must be viewed in their own context based on their own claims of evidence. Chomsky simply favours reports that downplay communist atrocities, and proclaims news reports of savagery and genocide are unreliable insinuating it's because of past western media biases.

Sure, as long as one uses flawed logic to reject evidence they don't like.
 

Jason

Senior Member
Conspiracy-ologists will often build arguments as follows. The US government has done bad things in the past, therefore, Area-51, 9/11 false flag, chemtrails, bigfoot, UFOs are probably real.
But the simple truth of the matter is our government has lied to the public, and has used false flag operations in the past. If someone lies to you in your life or in your relationship it's only second nature to second guess them or not trust them entirely until they rebuild that trust. So I think we have to be able to let the conspirators have that feeling of untrust, and point to reasons why we can trust the government now. Which is hard to prove to be honest with you. So how do we help people see the light without referencing this.
 

Trigger Hippie

Senior Member.
and point to reasons why we can trust the government now.

I don't necessarily believe "the government" should be trusted. I'm very sceptical of their promises, comments and narratives.

Each of Chomsky's arguments stand or fail on their own merits. Because I disagree with his assessment of mid 1970's Cambodia does not mean I will necessarily disagree with his position on other unrelated issues, like 9/11. I don't believe he has an agenda, nor that he's a "gatekeeper", I just don't agree with how he assessed the situation in Cambodia.

Christopher Hitchens shattered my image of mother Theresa. Similarly Jaydeehess has made me aware of some criticism regarding Chomsky. Mainly that Chomsky, at least for a while, was counted among the ranks of genocide denialists. I really would never have thunk it.

This illustrates the cornerstone of scepticism. Don't assume, don't take anything for granted.
 
Last edited:

jackprune

New Member
Those papers are about distortion in American press, not the Khmer Rouge. Hence, the titles, "Distortions" etc.

I don't think Chomsky is saying the Khmer Rouge are good guys. He's saying the American press emphasizes Khmer Rouge atrocities and DE-emphasizing American culpability. And thus perpetrates a nationalistic agenda. It's a critique of the press, not a defense of Khmer Rouge. Herman and Chomsky's "Propaganda Model" is extremely well documented. That's what these papers are about.

Too, I think you will find Chomsky's focus is always on institutions where we might effect change (ie, American press, American gov't, etc) as opposed to institutions US citizen opinions and activism are unlikely to effect (ie., Khmer Rouge internal policy)

As for conspiratorologist? Well, so-called conspiracies do happen. The world is complex and a lot of people assert kooky things, but so-called conspiracies do happen. America, like any other power system, has a pattern of committing atrocities. It seems important pause and look at what we do. I believe this is Chomky''s agenda. It seems we invite narcissism by not focusing on our actions and pointing to the other guy. This is a great book on things America has done, repeatedly:

http://www.amazon.com/Overthrow-Ame...UTF8&qid=1402159966&sr=1-1&keywords=overthrow
 

Qualiall

Member
A bit off topic, but many times, the line between who we would consider a "conspiracy theorist" and someone having an honest political disagreement seem to blur. The motive for invading Iraq (and to a lesser extent Afghanistan--claims of being motivated by a desire to build an oil pipeline) to secure private interests vs some sort of humanitarian motive for example. The austerity measures taken by the WTO/NAFTA and other world trading agreements, and so on...
 
Thread starter Related Articles Forum Replies Date
Mick West Some Interesting Fibers and "Orbs". Ballooning Spiders? Skydentify - What is that Thing in the Sky? 13
C Interesting observation of moon light phenomena i can't find the answer to ???? General Discussion 4
skephu Interesting articles about contrail research Contrails and Chemtrails 8
Bruno D. Chocolate Diet hoax - interesting case about junk science General Discussion 4
J Interesting Contrail Shadow in the Polar Vortex Skydentify - What is that Thing in the Sky? 13
justanairlinepilot Interesting Refraction/Diffraction phenomenon [Subhorizon halos: Sub-sun, Sub-sundog] Skydentify - What is that Thing in the Sky? 12
nanotchi Interesting topic on alternet that talks about libertarianism being associated with conspiracy. Practical Debunking 22
Jay Reynolds Interesting Intelligent Article on Cloud Seeding/Weather Modification Contrails and Chemtrails 0
cloudspotter Interesting clouds [Row of fallstreak clouds] Skydentify - What is that Thing in the Sky? 35
Critical Thinker Interesting research on 'thought control'.... how long before CTer's freak out? General Discussion 0
Cairenn Interesting FB profile General Discussion 0
Billzilla Photos of interesting cloud shapes Contrails and Chemtrails 1
Mick West Interesting Contrails create five crosses in the Atlantic Contrails and Chemtrails 14
Jay Reynolds Interesting 'generic' websites General Discussion 1
jvnk08 Chomsky dispels 9/11 conspiracies with sheer logic [video] 9/11 385
J White dot in top left of Gimbal video UFO Videos and Reports from the US Navy 2
bird_up "Gimbal UFO video rendered in 3D" by Abominati0n UFOs, Aliens, Monsters, and the Paranormal 0
M 'UFO' video just shows contrail formation? Contrails and Chemtrails 3
Mick West Mike Lindell's 2-Hour Election Fraud Claim Video "Absolute Proof": Hacking Claims Election 2020 7
Mick West Debunked: Video of Poll Worker "Filling In" Ballots. Election 2020 3
Trailblazer Reutlingen Fake UFO Video 2013 UFOs, Aliens, Monsters, and the Paranormal 3
V GIMBAL Video: Simulating the ATFLIR Tracking and Gimbal Rotation UFO Videos and Reports from the US Navy 20
Rocky Gettysburg 'ghosts’ run across road [Windscreen smudge] General Discussion 4
D Falmouth "Shadow Creature" Video [Black Cat?] UFOs, Aliens, Monsters, and the Paranormal 10
G Belarus demonstration video Current Events 2
M Fast moving object "intersecting clouds" in Hungarian YouTuber's video [Insect] Skydentify - What is that Thing in the Sky? 2
U Looking for debunkings of the “Plandemic” video Coronavirus COVID-19 17
Jesse3959 Being seen from space - methods to demonstrate that sats are real and provide live video? Flat Earth 6
R Claim: Apollo 15-17 Live TV Feed - Antenna signal would be interrupted from all the violent shaking when Astronauts touch the buggy General Discussion 26
J Identifying the Mountains in JTolan's "Rocky Mountains" IR Video Flat Earth 31
Mick West Explained: RARE Video Footage of "Alien Space Craft" WATCHING ISS Astronaut! UFOs, Aliens, Monsters, and the Paranormal 1
Wizard Mexican UFO Video? [Oil Rigs] UFOs, Aliens, Monsters, and the Paranormal 6
Mick West Original Flir1, Gimbal, and Go Fast UFO "Raw" Video Files UFO Videos and Reports from the US Navy 33
Mick West Simulating the Nimitz UFO video as a blurry plane UFO Videos and Reports from the US Navy 51
jarlrmai UFO video in Arizona from Reddit Skydentify - What is that Thing in the Sky? 22
Trailblazer Explained: video of concentric circular "chemtrails" (E-3 Sentry AWACS plane, Feb 1 2019) Skydentify - What is that Thing in the Sky? 3
Mick West Old USAF "UFO" Video Mentioned By Chris Mellon Skydentify - What is that Thing in the Sky? 15
mudr0 Need Debunking: Video claiming zigzaggin objects and movement prove EVA filmed in pool General Discussion 33
Ravi Utah Drone video of UFO [Probably an insect] UFOs, Aliens, Monsters, and the Paranormal 132
Mick West Blowing out Candles with a Single Punch General Discussion 47
Mick West Some New-ish WTC7 Photos (and video?) Corner Damage 9/11 6
B Bob Lazar 1989 Video Analysis Method UFOs, Aliens, Monsters, and the Paranormal 1
MisterB Debunked: Isle of Man from Blackpool at water level proves flat earth [refraction] Flat Earth 19
Mick West NYT: GIMBAL Video of U.S. Navy Jet Encounter with Unknown Object UFO Videos and Reports from the US Navy 452
deirdre Debunked: Lights chasing each other carving holes in clouds (fake video, fallstreak holes) Skydentify - What is that Thing in the Sky? 17
StarGazer SpaceX Falcon 9 Captures Video of its own Contrail from Space UFOs, Aliens, Monsters, and the Paranormal 17
T FE balloon video curvature analysis using Blender Flat Earth 4
Mick West Explained: Viral Video of 787 Leaving Thick Contrails with Forced Perspective Skydentify - What is that Thing in the Sky? 1
Astro Debunked: Astronaut's Arm Fades During ISS Video Proving "Green Screening" Science and Pseudoscience 1
Trailblazer Jet Airways intercept video "UFO" (airliner, flight LH998 or LH66?) Skydentify - What is that Thing in the Sky? 14
Related Articles


















































Related Articles

Top