Comments on: Analysis of the sophistry of Noam Chomsky on 9/11

By: Terence G Byrne

Terence G Byrne — Tue, 26 Oct 2021 01:23:49 +0000

My apologies, Colin, I ought to have included a few links for you to see evidence for what I advanced. This one, below, addresses all the molten/boiled WTC metals, which by themselves totally sinks the USG Official 911 Conspiracy Fairy Tale. But there is much much more in many categories that show that none of the things advanced by the usa/911Omission Commission have any truth/validity to them.

Cheers.

Point TT-6: The Claim that There Was No Molten Steel or Iron in the WTCPoint TT-6Buildings

http://www.consensus911.org/point-tt-6/

By: Terence G Byrne

Terence G Byrne — Tue, 26 Oct 2021 01:17:17 +0000

In reply to Colin Doran.

I am surprised that you do not understand the meaning of gatekeeper, but let’s just give you a pass on that. More Important, since you make a claim to being the opposite of “truthers” that must mean you believe you advance the truth and nothing less.

How did the alleged perpetrators of this event, the Muslim hijackers, who created 1300F fires, per the usa official story, manage to melt [2800F] and boil [5000F] WTCs 1, 2 & 7 structural steel? You’re going to have to do some fancy math to explain that one. FEMA did a study of a piece of WTC7 melted/boiled steel. Then there is the USGS that found molten molybdenum [4735F], RJ Lee Group who noted boiled lead [3180F], also they found iron microspheres of 5.87% of WTC dust, normal is 0.04 percent. Interestingly, iron microspheres are the major byproduct of nanothermite/thermitic reactions. Even more interesting, US Livermore Labs mid 1990s nanothermite was found in WTC dust. What was a brand new, “a new generation of super explosives” [Randy Simpson – lead scientist] nano scale nanothermite doing in WTC dust? Had they been using the office closet as a storage units for this “new generation of super explosives”? That’s enough for now. Your serve.

By: Colin Doran

Colin Doran — Mon, 19 Apr 2021 12:12:48 +0000

I’d love to know how Noam Chomsky ‘gatekeeps’ anything. The 9/11 truth movement seems to have gotten along fine without Noam Chomsky having any effect on them. I would hazard a guess that most Americans had never even heard of Noam Chomsky before the 9/11 truth movement started to talk about him. And the fact is that the 9/11 truth movement are the people who have drawn attention to his views on 9/11. They interview him, or refer to interviews he has given, they write articles and make videos about his views about 9/11 and then tell everyone how Noam Chomsky is trying to influence people’s views about 9/11, views that they themselves have advertised.
The problem is that Noam Chomsky is intelligent and perceptive enough to recognise the distorted nonsense of the 9/11 truth movement and is honest enough to say so. This is of course a bad idea because people in the 9/11 truth movement can’t understand the idea that other people might disagree with them. Apparently if you call yourself the ‘truth’ movement then what you are promoting must be the truth. How could anyone disagree with ‘the truth’?

By: bill

bill — Sun, 21 Feb 2021 09:47:04 +0000

In reply to Nixak.

really insightful and have copied for a deeper look….came here wondering if my concerns of Chomskys presence on Corbyns peace group were legitimate or not ,to refresh.I think you offer Ch many honorable escape routes from being managed opposition,like indeed the author here,but the jaws have closed around him,whilst we dont like to consider the Opposition as being that clever….. as someone else pointed out to me Vince Bugliosi also fitted the Ch bill being enabled to write a book that GHWB is a war criminal over Iraq with the sole purpose of building his credibility with the Left,to establish support for his coming doorstopper on JFK….

By: Sonja

Sonja — Wed, 31 Jul 2019 20:16:52 +0000

In reply to Admin. Admin, I am disappointed with your comment. I would like to see the video of Putin, even though I would not believe that he knows the answer.

By: Quinnjin Williams

Quinnjin Williams — Fri, 06 Jul 2018 05:22:00 +0000

In reply to Benny.

Occams razor. Did 3 buildings collapse in the manner of a controlled demo from fire and structural damage alone for the forst time in history or was it just a controlled demo. Obviously the latter is more likely.
Proceed from their.
Did middle eastern terrorists who could barely fly sesnas succesfully get training in the US and then hijack planes and perform incredible actobatic feats and not get brought down on the most heavily defended air space on earth or was their path cleared.
Was it just a coincidence tha allof this perfectly dove tailed with neocon administration who had cheated elections to gain power or did the organise the whole fucking thong in collusion with foreign agenvies using assets they had already worked with in the past ? Did larry silverstein tjusthe owner of the building happen to not turn up that morning, ulike every other morning… or was he simply warned ? Did he increase his insurance coincidentally also in the preceeding weeks or …. was he warned ?
Occams gillete mk 4 does not support the argiment you make. Neither does any other razor for that matter.

By: Quinnjin Williams

Quinnjin Williams — Fri, 06 Jul 2018 05:09:21 +0000

In reply to Interesting Things. Rt and demo now. Hardly mainstream.

By: Nixak

Nixak — Sat, 05 May 2018 07:47:19 +0000

Noam Chomsky is an intellectual icon of the ‘left’, as such his opinions carry much weight w the ‘left’. And no doubt Chomsky’s quite knowledgeable re US politics & geopolitics; otherwise few would want to even know his opinion re matters like the ‘JFK Hit’ & the 9-11 ‘New Pearl Harbor’ Event.
IMO Chomsky began to ‘show his hand’ / “show a ‘tell’ ” so to speak circa 1992-93 w the release of Oliver Stone’s classic movie ‘JFK’. Chomsky responded by writing his ‘Rethinking Camelot’ which attempted to negate ‘JFK’s’ premise [from a so-called ‘left’ perspective] of motive for JFK’s death based on policy implications, w IMO Chomsky’s ‘Rethinking Camelot’ effectively working tandem Gerald Posner’s ‘JFK: Case Closed’ which attacked Stone’s ‘JFK’ by doubling-down on the legitimizing of the ‘Warren {c}Omission’s’ report’s ASSertion that LH.Oswald was JFK’s ‘lone ‘nut’ assassin’ [FYI: I’m not claiming Chomsky knowingly actively collaborated w Posner, but IMO that’s almost beside the point]. IMO it’s noteworthy that for 30 yrs prolific author Chomsky wrote &/or said practically ZIP about JFK publicly, especially considering he co-edited [along w Peter Dale Scott] his long time comrade’s Dan Ellsberg’s ‘Pentagon Papers’ [PP], which had an entire chapter on JFK’s plans to get out of Vietnam by the end of 1968 [many say by the end of 1965]. Yet Chomsky apparently had little to say publicly on the matter till Oliver Stone’s ‘JFK’ made it & the ‘JFK Hit’ such a hot topic. Then Chomsky writes ‘Rethinking Camelot’ which claimed that LBJ [& later Nixon] effectively carried out JFK’s policies in Vietnam to its so-called ‘logical’ conclusions- a LAME ASSertion that IMO is almost blatantly FALSE. Further one has to ask how can 2 intellectual heavy-weights of the ‘left’ [Chomsky & Peter Dale Scott] work together as co-editors of the same primary source info [Ellsberg’s PP], & yet somehow come to almost mutually exclusive conclusions- Chomsky: ‘JFK had NO firm plans to exit Vietnam & LBJ’s massive escalation was just an extension of JFK’s Vietnam policies -vs- Scott: JFK not only was planning to get out of Vietnam by the end of 1965 [IMO the PP say by the end of 1968], but JFK actually had begun to set that initial stages of his plan in motion by Oct 1963 via NSAM 263??!
– After Chomsky’s ‘Rethinking Camelot’ it has become ‘trendy’ by many ‘leftist’ thinkers / talking-heads to trash JFK & diss any significance re his assassination, in-fact belittling & actively discouraging any on the ‘left’ from examining any dissent from & counter evidence to the ‘Official Tale’ [= the US Govt’s version] of the JFK Hit- Dismissing such as a ‘waste of time’. Yet many of these same ‘leftist talking-heads’ are a bit equivocal re MLK’s assassination [the 50th anniversary was just a month ago]. Many ‘Chomskyites’ are seemingly a bit more open to the idea that elements of the US Govt [IE: the FBI, CIA, military intel, etc] were somehow behind MLK’s murder, yet still often ASSert: ‘James Earl Ray was certainly the shooter…’ Thus effectively undercutting the whole point -&- They seldom speak of the 1999 King Family vs Loyd Jower’s civil trial’s findings that MLK died due to a hi-level conspiracy involving US Govt intel agencies, elements of the Memphis PD & Mafia, etc.
– Chomsky has often said that every POTUS since FDR was/is a war criminal, & technically that may indeed be so -But- Chomsky has written only 1 book making such a case for just 1 POTUS in particular- That’s JFK in ‘Rethinking Camelot’. Prolific author Chomsky to the best of my knowledge, has NOT written a single book [nor even an extensive article] trashing any other post WWII POTUS, whether it be so-called ‘moderate’ Repug POTUS Ike Eisenhower [uhm, NO! JFK did NOT get the US into Vietnam- It was Ike along w his VP ‘Tricky Dick’ Nixon, & the Dulles Boys, who did], nor LBJ or Tricky Dick Nixon. Hell has Chomsky even bothered to write a book taking George Bush Jr to task for his regime’s Iraq Attack Pt2 based on LIES, ala ‘Rethinking Camelot’ re JFK & Vietnam??
– Note: IMO ‘Ole Ike’ Eisenhower has curiously gotten the ‘kid-glove’ treatment by most ‘leftist’ thinkers ala Chomsky. FYI: it was on Ike’s watch that the US got into Vietnam & SE.Asia; Ike built up the US nuke arsenal to insanely massive proportions; planned to Bay of Pigs; OKed the over-throw & then assassination of the Congo’s Patrice Lumumba, among other things. Yet to hear many Chomskyites tell it, one would think Ike had jack to do w these, they were all JFK’s doing. Maybe because ‘Ole Ike’ swan-song was his memorable ‘Beware of the Military Industrial Complex’ speech, some ‘leftists’ think Ike should get a ‘pass’.
One ‘might’ be inclined to dismiss Chomsky’s ‘JFK Blind-Spot’ as his disdain for the ‘liberal-left’s’ ‘misguided’ ‘saintification’ of a ‘Liberal Cold Warrior’ like JFK, who Chomsky likely dismisses as a typical ‘pampered rich kid’ of privilege’ who should NOT be admired by any ‘real-leftist’. But then came the 9-11 New Pearl Harbor’ event, & when Chomsky was asked about his opinion of the likelihood of 9-11 being an ‘inside job’, or at-least key elements both inside & [technically] ‘outside’ of the US Govt knowing in advance it was coming & deliberately stood-down to ‘let it happen’; Chomsky started spouting the same LAME WFT BS as he did re the ‘JFK Hit’!! And thus like he did re the ‘JFK Hit’, Chomsky effectively gives ‘left-cover’ for the ‘Official 9-11 Conspiracy Theory’ [= the Bush-Cheney Regime’s ‘tall-tale’]!! When someone of Chomsky’s astuteness does this once [re JFK], one might chalk it up to a ‘personal’ contemptuous blind-spot Chomsky has re JFK -But- When he did again re the 9-11 ‘New Pearl Harbor’ event, IMO he’s clearly showing a curiously disturbing pattern here, that can NOT easily be dismissed.
–
IMO like the ‘flag-ship’ program in the US for ‘progressive views’ is Amy.G’s DN! which has also been a favorite venue for Chomsky. Re the 9-11 issue I know of at least twice Amy.G & DN! featured debates between supporters vs dissenters of the official 9-11 ‘conspiracy theory’ [1X it featured the young guy of ‘9-11 Loose Change’ fame vs the editor of ‘Popular Mechanics’]. But IMO what’s most note-worthy re 9-11 & Amy.G is that despite the fact there’s film-evidence of Amy.G herself being in the crowd as a eye-witness to the sudden collapse of WTC7 [you may still be able to pull it up on YouTube], she has NEVER publicly acknowledged this fact & FAILED to even mention it during the 2 debates she & DN! had on the issue. IMO Amy.G that’s a CONveniently ‘curious’ oversight!!
– PS: A few yrs back TRNN w Paul Jay [which was kicked off w a plug from Chomsky] had a series of interviews w Dr Paul Craig Roberts. But at one point Dr Roberts apparently went ‘off script’ by just briefly mentioning the 9-11 Truth Movement & the impact it was having on public discourse- Yet he did NOT belabor the point, he just mentioned it. I can NOT help but notice that Paul Jay has NEVER had Dr Roberts back on TRNN for an interview since that little ‘incident’.

By: flaxgirl

flaxgirl — Sat, 09 Dec 2017 11:34:32 +0000

In reply to Admin.

Sure. Just want to give a link to this video on why Russia didn’t make it which I came across a couple of days ago – and there’s a fascinating little twist at the end. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vi6fjs_8Yx8