Noam Chomsky,Donald Trump fail the 9/11 LITMUS TEST. Who else?

Note: this poster DOES have full conviction that 9-11 was an inside job.

I mention Donald Trump, because i just saw him on Larry King Live, and he was saying, "Hillary is terrific, Rudy Giuliani is terrific, they are both great people, i know them well......."
And i couldnt believe my ears.
I mean, you then must NOT know them well, OR you yourself dont want to face the reality, which makes you a coward.
Anyway, Chomsky, has repeatedly said and still maintains that 9-11 couldnt have been an inside job, but if it is, who cares?
I mean,what is wrong with these people?

Anyway, the point is, 911 is a great litmus test to guage any politician or famous actor i think.
Wouldnt you agree?
I mean, 6 years down the line..........come on people.Wake up and smell the BS.
So i would love to see the names of famous folks,who all deny or openly think 911 truthers are 'tinfoil hat wearing kooks'.


[edit on 16-10-2007 by vladmir]

Remember a lot of those famous folks don't want to risk obscurity by challenging the powers that be.

It's no excuse because it's not like they really NEED any more money, I know I could retire on what they already have.

Originally posted by johnb
Remember a lot of those famous folks don't want to risk obscurity by challenging the powers that be.

Actually, that is kind of what Chomsky has built his reputation on. I would be interested to see what his exact reasoning is for ruling it out completely. Noam Chomsky's opinion carries more weight than most in my book.

reply to post by johnb


I know, that reminded me of what Steven Bassett,Executive Director of the Paradigm Research Group said about Steven Spielberg in an interview on GoogleVideo.
Im paraphrasing here, but he said that Spielberg has made tens of millions of $$$ making films about Aliens and UFO's, yet when a reporter asked him if he believed that aliens visited Earth and about UFO's, he declined to comment!
He said something like, oh, i cant talk about that!

Riiiiight!

Chomsky is priceless. He believes that the US is the world's leading terrorist nation . . . BUT . . . he doesn't believe that 911 was an inside job.

You want to know why, because he's an aesthete and prefers to believe that 911 was a way for the US to been seen as having gotten what they deserve, payback. He prefers that version of events because he's an egotist.

He's like all the little tattletale nerds you knew in highschool. He wants to see people get their come-uppance. His favorite phrase (in secret of course) is, "I told you so." He needs to get his head out of his butt-hole and realize that things are even worse than he thought they were.

Chomsky doesn't know it but Yeats's "rough beast" is incubating in his own back yard.

reply to post by vladmir


So what you are saying is that someone with a different opinion than yours is either oblivious or a coward? Is it not possible that perhaps a third option exists- they have seen the same info and came to a different conclusion than you obviously have?

reply to post by BlueRaja

There are numerous options. Many times a person sitting in on a rigged card game will have more than just one crook to contend with. Some people expressing support for the Bush administration could actually be in on the crime. A person who says that even if 911 was an inside job, it doesn't matter is spending far too much time in his ivory tower.

Chomsky is a classic academic. As long as the problem is happening far far away, he will be prominently dissecting and exposing it. If the problem is happening on his front door, that puts him in a very awkward position. Academics will usually turn their attention elsewhere at that point.

Nazi Germany had two kinds of academics, basically, the ones who stayed, turned a blind eye and helped the regime, and the ones who jumped ship and left.

As things get worse I bet that Chomsky stays and helps the regime. Even jumping ship would require that he dismount from his high horse and I doubt that Chomsky would ever consider taking such a humiliating step.



[edit on 16-10-2007 by ipsedixit]

reply to post by ipsedixit


My point though was that to flat out say that because someone didn't come to the same conclusion, that the only reasons would be some deficit in their mental faculties, or that they were in on something, not allowing for differences of opinion, was perhaps a bit arrogant. I've seen all the 9/11 Truth evidence, and I haven't found it convincing. I'm certainly not an idiot, nor a conspirator, and when I see assertions like that, I find it insulting at the very least.
My logic is based on the KISS principal(i.e. Occam's Razor), and that 3 people can keep a secret if 2 of them are dead. This isn't to say that I don't believe there are people out there that don't have my best interest at heart. It's just that IMHO it's a different set of people than the Truthers are worried about.

[edit on 16-10-2007 by BlueRaja]

[edit on 16-10-2007 by BlueRaja]

reply to post by ipsedixit

You know what you have said about Chomsky is insightful, i found myself nodding in agreement reading it.

Heres an interesting and fitting quote from this website:
brockley.blogspot.com...

"To talk about Chomsky’s coldness seems trivial, but I think it is crucially important. What Chomsky demonstrates is common amongst idealists: love of humanity, hatred of humans."

"These two prejudices of Chomsky reveal his fundamentally elitist worldview, his distaste for the messy reality of ordinary human beings.
You never read human stories in his books.
People are just pawns manipulated by the great powers,
sponges uncritically absorbing the lies told to them by Fox News,
nameless innocentmenwomenandchildren to be mowed down by the evil empire and stacked up anonymously in a bodycount to be compared dispassionately to some other bodycount."

Originally posted by BlueRaja
reply to post by vladmir

 

So what you are saying is that someone with a different opinion than yours is either oblivious or a coward? Is it not possible that perhaps a third option exists- they have seen the same info and came to a different conclusion than you obviously have?

We think we have the luxury to endlessly discuss and go back and forth on this, splitting hairs, while somehow time is going to stop while we make up our minds.

Lets think about this for a minute.
We think we have the luxury of having a third opinion.
I will show you how there is no third opinion possible here.
Quote from the transcript of President Bush's address,Transcript of President Bush's address - September 21, 2001:
Either you are with us or you are with the terrorists.

Now, Bush and gang ARE the REAL terrorists.
And i am certainly not with them.

So, you tell me, which side does that leave me ?????

reply to post by BlueRaja

I think you are illustrating the limits of the usefulness of logic when it comes to skullduggery. I'm with you when you draw attention to the fact that there can be more than two reasons for people to come to different conclusions.

As far as secrets go, compartmentalization helps people to keep secrets, and threats of physical harm helps even more. Best of all are a few exemplary murders. Ask the folks at the National Inquirer about that or Tom Daschele.

I think a lot of average people, simply don't understand crime, criminals or brutal politics. You say that the problem ' . . . is a different set of people than the Truthers are worried about." That's where the discussion ends for you. You believe you are entitled to your opinion and you have decided what that opinion is. Fair enough, but that is not where it ends for the 911 truth movement.

We want our day in court. We don't want a sham investigation and a whitewash in the press. Are you saying that Christie Todd Whitman, telling the people of Manhattan that the air was safe to breathe at ground zero is someone you don't have to be worrried about?

How about Larry "pull it" Silverstein. You think you don't have to worry about some landlord who suggests that the firemen "pull" one of his buildings because it has a couple of small fires in it and to heck with people working at the base of it or to heck with people who had property in the building. You've got your blinders on, Dobbin, that's the whole problem with this issue.

This is not about truth. We know what the truth is. The problem is the sheeple, who are being driven to the ruin of their country.

[edit on 16-10-2007 by ipsedixit]

[quoteSome people expressing support for the Bush administration could actually be in on the crime. A person who says that even if 911 was an inside job, it doesn't matter is spending far too much time in his ivory tower.



OH NO.............they are coming to take me away!!!!!

reply to post by vladmir

Where I live I've had a ringside seat to the upbringing of a young man who is now out in the working world, just bought his first house, etc., etc. This guy worships Chomsky. Chomsky's appeal among young people who regard themselves as sharp independant thinkers is staggering and to me, alarming.

Chomsky is the intellectual university student's ideal. The brilliant guy who stands off and scores clever points off all the frauds and phonies in power. He is "Holden Caulfield" all grown up, mowing down the phonies.

Essentially his main audience is the world of the university, dominated by adolescents. He's a kind of "Captain Kangaroo" of the upper end of the education system, basically an academic entertainer.

He's a perfect left wing gatekeeper, in a perfect position to misle students keeping them well focussed away from the action.

[edit on 16-10-2007 by ipsedixit]

Incidentally, Donald Trump is the other luminary mentioned by the OP as having failed the litmus test. Here he is on Bush:

Google Video Link

I'm having trouble embedding the video, so here is the URL:

video.google.ca...

I think Trump should be regarded in a much different light than Chomsky.

Nobody expects trenchant, down to the bone analysis of policy and world historical perspective from "the Donald."

I think he does his country a service in interviews like the one quoted because he is able and willing to state the plain truths that anyone with half a clue in their head knows but is either afraid to utter or just not in a position to utter.

He's not wasting his clout. He is an extremely smart man and sure footed in doing as much as he can safely get away with, given all his other responsibilities as a family man and as a businessman. If other people were as brave as Trump we would be in a much better position.

My only concern about people like him and Allan Greenspan for instance, is that they are paving the way for the other half of the Bush/Clinton tag team to enter the ring.


[edit on 16-10-2007 by ipsedixit]