Unholy Alliance: Zinn, Chomsky, Bin Laden


Every so often we experience what Jung called synchronicity—the sudden perception of a possibly meaningful pattern in apparently unrelated events. I had one of these moments myself last week.

The first element was the passing of Howard Zinn.  I believe as much as the next guy that every man’s death diminishes me, but to be honest, in this case I was hard pressed to feel a sense of loss.  Matt Damon might regard him as Parkman’s equal, but in truth Zinn was a savage parody of a historian, one of those radical hacks whose every word subtracts from the sum total of human knowledge.The best and worst that can be said of his People’s History of the United States is that it has benumbed the faculties of many young people over the last couple of decades. It is perhaps the best example in recent years of the way in which some of the fecal matter thrown onto the wall of our intellectual culture not only sticks but becomes a lasting act of defacement.

In checking out the obits on the internet, I ran into Amy Goodman’s tribute to Zinn at democracynow.org.  She interviewed by telephone Alice Walker, Naomi Klein and Noam Chomsky. Predictably, all three remembered Zinn as a rebel truth teller to the end, someone whose passing embodied the kitschy defiance of Joe Hill’s last words: “Don’t mourn, organize.”  But the Chomsky’s interview appeared to have a little something more.

To digress for a moment, I should say that while many of my friends have tried to deconstruct the complex intellectual pathology behind Chomsky’s lifelong effort to affirm the transcendent evil of America, I’ve always thought of him simply as someone with a truth problem—not only in what he says but even more in what he says about what he has said.  He associated himself with a rancid group of French Holocaust deniers, for instance, but when called on it claimed he was only defending their rights to free speech. Long after the fact, he continued to supply backup for Pol Pot’s genocide in Cambodia, but when called on this, he said that his detractors were just a bunch of neo-Nazis out to get him (a compartmentalized response that ignores his support for exactly such neo-Nazis in the Holocaust denial matter.)

When it comes to the truth, in other words, Noam Chomsky is slipperier than a whole school of fish.  Lying for him is an art form, a squid’s ink which he emits and then uses as cover to escape from responsibility for what he has just said.

Even so, it was a shock to see Chomsky’s response when Goodman asked him about Zinn’s 1967 book The Logic of Withdrawal. Chomsky replied that it was brilliant and that Zinn, because the reviewing establishment was ignoring it, asked him to write about it in Ramparts, which he did. According to the transcript of the interview on Goodman’s website, Chomsky went on to describe Ramparts as “a left wing journal I was running then.”  (See here.)

Chomsky never “ran” Ramparts. He was a distant voice in the years I was an editor at this premier magazine of the New Left–someone a coast away who tended to repeat over and over again criticisms he initially made in the New York Review of Books of the intellectual elite that ran the Vietnam War. My strongest memory of him is from 1967. I solicited an article more or less on what had become his standard topic.  It arrived poorly written and requiring considerable work. Because he didn’t like the changes I made, Chomsky told me that he would never again write for Ramparts and in fact did not for several years. (I recently reviewed the Ramparts experience here.)

Claiming to have run a publication that kept him at arm’s length would have been an odd lie, even for a mendacity addict like Chomsky. My colleague David Swindle found a link to the audio of the Goodman show. I listened to it and Chomsky appears actually to have said “a left wing magazine that was running then,” without the “I.”  Vile phrasing for someone who is accounted to be an expert in language, but not the bald faced lie that the printed transcript suggests and not the synecdoche that it first appeared for the body of lies which comprises Chomsky’s oeuvre since the ’60s.

But back to the rush of synchronicity I alluded to above. It came a day after the Goodman interview, when Osama bin Laden spoke up from whatever dreary cave in which he is presently immured.  After attacking the Great Satan for causing climate change in a diatribe that called up a possible Jon Stewart monologue (“…the arch terrorist provided a kiss of death for global warming theory today by offering his unqualified support for it just as the East Anglia Climategate was calling the whole deal into question…”), bin Laden got down to the business of blackguarding America as a global terror state.  And who did he cite as proof for this theorem? None other than Chomsky himself.  Bin Laden had praised him two years earlier for showing how public opinion is “manufactured” by decadent democracies; now he gave it up again for his hero: “Noam Chomsky was correct when he compared the U.S. polices to those of the Mafia.”

Bin Laden, Zinn, and Chomsky. How synchronous their harmonies.  How collaborative the ideas in their weave.  How much they deserve each other.

  • bubba4

    I think David's anomosity towards Chomsky is an outgrowth of the fact that Chomsky dissed him from the beginning and he's felt disrepected ever since. I thought Chomsky was an contributing editor of ramparts 5-6 years before you got there when it was very small and quarterly. I see he bragged on and on about it though…in an obvious attempt to diminish you.

    • davarino

      Finally, you side with the dudes you feel most comfortable with. Thats ok bubba, I had your number a long time ago. As a matter of fact you have the same proclivity for playing fast with the truth just like chumpsky, oh and very slippery as well. I think that may be a tactic you guys use, because the truth is to hard to deal with. Should I start putting quotes around what I'm saying now in order to save you some time? One of these days you will have an epiphany, hopefully you will be honest enough with yourself to admit it.

      Oh well, cant wait for the other two to join zinn. It would be interesting to see how well their BS works on the devil. In the mean time young skulls full of mush continue to be sucked into the snake charmers delusions.

      • http://intensedebate.com/people/bubba4 bubba4

        I was just making fun of Horowitz. The sides you talk about and your place on them is all inside your head. The world is a complex place Davarino and it confuses, so it's easier to think of the whole ball of wax as a false dichotomy….and you're on the "good" side….lol

        Horowitz has written about Chomsky many, many times and it's clear that Chomsky couldn't give a dead dog's ass what Horowitz thinks or has to say.

        • davarino

          okie dokie

    • USMCSniper

      Professor Chompsky is a grotesque intellectual incompetent (your kinda guy bubba4) working in the obscure field of linguistics who has never done anything of any significance other than make a ridiculous spectacle out of himself. I considered him a non-colleague when I was a MIT.

      • http://intensedebate.com/people/bubba4 bubba4

        Yeah I forget you're a brilliant scientist with a PHD is physics….

    • http://intensedebate.com/people/Stephen_Brady Stephen_Brady

      Instead of your psychological approach to understanding David's animosity towards Chomsky, do you think that it's … at least … possible that David simply disagrees with virtually everything that Chomsky stands for?

      For my part, I think David merely understands where Chomsky has come from, and opposes him and his beliefs from the standpoint of someone who once shared those beliefs, and now understands the intellectual and moral bankruptcy of them.

      The Left, however, holds an abiding hatred of anyone who once was part of their movement, and moved towards the Right. In effect, it is a "traitor" effect.

      • http://intensedebate.com/people/bubba4 bubba4

        Well sure…that's the narrative. Horowitz was once a part of the global communist conspiracy until he was "saved" saw the light and converted to a "conservative" world view.

        "the left" is an FPM anti-concept. You can hate it all you want and give it whatever qualities you want. No one will sue you. No one will be able to counter your opinion of it. Because "it" is suppose to be political shorthand for which way in the political spectrum you are from "center". In the 60's, long before Horowitz began working to take-over some of the nomenclature and control thoughts on the matter, the "left" was a much more organized group of people that fought for civil rights, worker's rights, women's rights, etc. This idea that there has been one "left" throughout time that is the cause of all human misery….well that's just a crazy fantasy that makes pummeling political enemies easier.

        Since Horowitz calls anyone that disagrees with him a stalinist, marxist, and much much worse, it's hard to know when, if ever, he actually has a real reason to do so.

        • http://intensedebate.com/people/Stephen_Brady Stephen_Brady

          Yes, I remember the 1960's, from High School, to Vietnam, and then to college. I have experienced the Left in a number of different venues, and my idea of it isn't too much different than David's.

          The civil rights movement was supported by most of us on the Right. Worker's rights is merely shorthand for the labor unions. Women's rights was and is a combination of breaking the "glass ceiling" and … I've heard it called this … "having the right to destroy the contents of the womb". More and more rights. More and more equality, like "marriage equality" (which was called homosexual marriage, just a year ago).

          Through all of this, there was one central fact, Bubba. There were many semi-organized group of people, sharing the same values, beliefs, and ideology, and also sharing the same disdain for America. They were, and are, the Marxist left. I can point to one man, Karl Marx, and show the well-spring of these groups basic ideology.

          The same cannot be said of the Right. We on the Right adhere to a love of freedom and liberty, born of our adherence to a Constitution written by some of the greatest men in world history. We will not give up this Constitution, or our liberties, without a fight.

          Most of the people whom David disagrees with ARE Marxists. Whether they are Stalinists or Maoists depends on the individual. But Marx is the well-spring …

        • davarino

          bubba, in your world of everyone is right and wrong at the same time, you might want to consider that zinn and chompsky actually side with one group/ideology over another. It must be an accident they attack the US more than the "other group". Sorry I inadvertantly identified groups, but I dont have any other way of describing intities. It might supprise you to find out they overwhelmingly side with, support, fist bump, bow down to stalinists, marxists, islamists and maoists. Sorry I just have this habit of catigorizing things. Am I wrong, or is it all an illusion?

          • http://intensedebate.com/people/bubba4 bubba4

            You can count of the fact that you for the most part are always wrong.

            I know what you mean about Chomsky and Zinn. It's something I noticed about film critics….they are always attacking films. They must hate movies and want to see them destroyed.

            And it's "entities" and that is exactly your problem. The attacks around here aren't against the communist party….they aren't against a particular identifiable "group" or "entity"…the "left" is anyone that disagrees. It's FPM that is fronting a worldview.

            On almost every article someone talks about how the "left" thinks this or does this and is so ammoral and crazy and whatever….WHO are they talking about?

            Calling someone names right out of the box is a sign of weakness. It's a tool to just quickly marginalize anything a person says or does…..give it characteristics, motives and beliefs so you can take to personally hating it.

            The universe is a paradox, but it is not a moral one. If any of you actually knew anything about Chompsky and Zinn, then your criticisms of them might actually mean something. If you want to label them and get into a circle jerk about how American you are and how much you hate Marx, then you're on your own.

        • objectivefactsmatter

          "Well sure…that's the narrative"

          That happens to be factual.

  • AntiFascist18

    Zinn was a Jew for Hitler, and Chomsky, the Holocaust denier, still is.
    Of course Bubba's a Hitler-lover anyway, so not much difference there. Too bad we can't offer him Zinn's pathetic corpse for a lampshade – after all, the United States military whom Zinn denigrated almost his entire life, save for the time when as a Communist he "regretted" bombing Nazis prevented the likes of Bubba and his like-minded buddies to commit such acts.

    But we can still give the little Nazi Zinn's corpse anyway. Maybe the pissant will make a shrine of it.

    • Jack

      Thank you for your well-reasoned insights, AntiFascist18.

    • Jack


    • http://intensedebate.com/people/bubba4 bubba4

      I doubt you really know anything about Zinn or his books besides what FPM has told you. And sure…everyone you don't like is a Nazi. Just look how fast you unstable idiots start racking up false charges and assigning people beliefs. How could anyone take you seriously. You think joking about human lampshades gives your points some weight….but it doesn't. It makes you a joke.

      It's the easiest thing in the world for an intellectually dishonest douchebag to make false assertions and say whatever he wants on a website…just look at you.

      • objectivefactsmatter

        "I doubt you really know anything about Zinn or his books besides what FPM has told you."

        It's clear you're projecting. This big is a huge problem. Then again, you don't see the problem so you're not likely to be looking for causes like Zinn.

  • http://www.19.org Edip Yuksel

    Ben Laden is a product of CIA and American imperialism, and every person with sound mind and intentions who follows the current affairs would know it.

    Mr. Horowits and his cabal are the evil twins of Ben Laden. They all belong to a pack that promote wars and bloodshed. They need each other, they feed on each other.


    • http://intensedebate.com/people/Stephen_Brady Stephen_Brady

      "Mr. Horowits and his cabal are the evil twins of Ben Laden. They all belong to a pack that promote wars and bloodshed. They need each other, they feed on each other."

      followed by, "Peace".

      It took me a while to stop laughing. Sorry, Edip …

    • AntiFascist18

      And you're a pathetic imbecile if you believe even a modicum of the ignorant rant you posted here.

    • Robert Wargas

      In other words, bin Laden (please correct your spelling) wouldn't have killed any non-combatant civilians in his life if it weren't for American troops' being stationed in other countries?

      I'm just trying to see if you realize the illogical implications of your statement about American "imperialism."

    • therealend

      Will the US be blamed for WWII as well? There was no CIA then so maybe not. What is it that you don't blame on the US or Israel? Acne? Dandruff, maybe?

  • http://www.itecode.com eerie Steve

    Ah synchronicity! But someone William James’ Philosophy of Religion trumps that:


    To me, people like Zinn and Chomsky are the nuevo-Cynics. The new Ciceros who live fat off the hog but then are butchered by Mark Anthony who then will later nail their hands on the White House door.

    Wouldn’t it be something if we brokered a deal to have Prince Bin Laden sold to the dinks who then eat his brains? There are cannibal tribes in New Guinea, aren’t there? They would fight the Moslems with greater zeal. Let’s reenact that scene from Hannibal with Bin Laden taking Liotta’s place.

    Front page mag dot com !!!! PR 10 USA #1

    • USMCSniper

      Now you are thinking straight, This is a good plan to sell Chompsky and bin Laden as long pigs to the dinks in New Guinea. Say 99cents a pound plus delivery and handling?


    Chomsky is a "complete hypocrite". http://www.techcentralstation.com/1019055.html

  • AntiFascist18

    Part Two,____Until one day, Josef Stalin, the beloved hero of Zinn and the workers and peasants (except those he killed) decided one day he didn't like the amount of Jews and former International Brigade members running Communist governments in Eastern Europe. And Slansky, Frejka, and others in the Czech Commie hierarchy were Jews. Slansky was purged, imprisoned, tortured by those whom he had trained to torture others.__ Holocaust survivor Heda Margolies Kovaly's husband, Ruda Margolis was one of those purged. Frejka was still untouched, sitting in his office when a distraught Mrs. Margolies went to see him about her husband. The old Communist looked out the window then at the young woman. He said wearily, months ago I might have been able to do something. I was honored, a minister. But today "I'm just a stinking Kike" (his words – not mine). A few weeks later, they came for Frejka, who with Slansky and Ruda Margolies were murdered by Stalin a year later, accused of being Zionists and – Nazi collaborators.____This was the worker's paradise a guy like Zin loved. Too bad he didn't experience it himself…he probably would have mouthed those same words the doomed Frejka did.

  • nick f.

    You live in the USA. United States of Amnesia. You pathetic individuals couldn't hold a candle to the bravery of Airman Howard Zinn who fought bravely in the name of liberty in WWII. CIA imports/exports the American drug trade and was overlooked by Gov. Clinton of Arkansas and pres. Reagan in tandem. Working together to deteriote our nation fromwithin. Child abduction/sex slavery/terrorism, all organized and executed by many of the 16 'secret' intelligence agencies of our beloved nation. Israel abducting and theiving organs from youth to sell around the world, corneas, livers of young men and women ripped from them by admission of israeli authorities and this is who We are aligned with?!! It is grotesque. Zinn had nothing to hide. The new wave of young people will posess the new intellect needed to further ethical progress, without this corrupt government you all hold so dear. The jig is up.

    • http://intensedebate.com/people/Stephen_Brady Stephen_Brady

      What about Brigadier General James (Jimmy) Stewart?

      However, the rest of your statement is simply too ridiculous to comment on …

    • USMCSniper

      Nicky, Nicky, what nonsense you spew. I am sorry but I have seen more combat in my16 months in Vietnam as a fireteam leader than Airman Zinn – but I still thank him for his 25 missions – and my father, and two of his brothers flew from 27 to 38 missions over Germany and France between 1940 and 1945 including D Day.

      Howard Zinn was right about one thing, which he published about two months ago where he wrote:

      "I think people are just dazzled by Obama's rhetoric, and that people ought to begin to understand that Obama is shallow and going to be a mediocre president — which means, in our time, a very dangerous president ."

    • antifascist18

      What planet did you fall off of, girlieboy?

      Yeah Zinn did fight in WWII…so did over 400 members of the Abraham Lincoln Brigade, and numerous other Leftards. Why? Because when Mother Russia was invaded on June 22, 1941 it was no longer an "Imperialist War", two, even the most hardened Marxist of Jewish Birth twit knew he could conceivably be turned into a lampshade if Hitler had won. Most served honorably, especially the OSS guys like Milt Wolff and Irv Goff.

      BUT…in the self-hating Zinn's cause he had "bomber's remorse" in bombing Nazis. Never mind they wiped out his relatives and would have gladly done the same to him, he "REGRETTED" bombing them. However this moral retard never regretted being a Stalinist, you jerk. As for your Israel remark…so typical of a girlieboy retarded Islamohitlerite.

      How's your uncle Adolf. You should join him.

      • Jack

        What exactly is a girlieboy retarded Islamohitlerite?

      • dobbs

        Zinn regretted the he was unaware from his B-17 of the human chaos below and looked into the deaths of civilians that were bombed. He also questioned the necessity of attacking civilian targets. Its hardly the same thing. Theres a difference between hating ones self and reflecting on past and indeed present actions no matter how righteous the goals.

  • flyingtiger

    I dug out my old copy of the peoples history of the United States. I blew the dust off. I checked the index for both Thomas Edison and the Wright brothers. The wright brothers are not mentioned and edison is only mentioned as a business investor. Three americans whose inventions inproved the world and they have no place in the Zinn's book.
    This alone tells you about the quality of his masterpiece.

    • Dobbs

      I doubt it does have the Wrights or Edison but its not about them. From the introductions to both the book and the audio book (which is quite different and focuses only on the 20th century) I understand that Zinn was not doing a history of the great men such as Politicians and Inventors. He was looking at how the people who are often ignored in other histories have experienced and viewed events. He also said something along the lines that as a result the book was not a complete history and that other histories have something to offer.

      • objectivefactsmatter

        "He was looking at how the people who are often ignored in other histories have experienced and viewed events."

        Historians ignoring the people not involved. Oh, they had views anyway eh? The hubris of the elites! Kill them all and bring on communism then.

        Psychos. It would be different if his goal was to bring balance and acknowledge how completely provincial his focus was, but he presents it as "the important" history that people really need to know to implement the "radical agenda" we all need to save the world. Give me a break. He's just as delusional as all of the other communists and commie dupes.

  • Tom Tonka

    The Left declared Solidarity with the "Muslim Brotherhood" back in the 1960's.
    The "Muslim Brotherhood" was present at the 1969 SDS Regional Council meeting at University of Buffalo after being transported across the Peace Bridge at Niagara Falls into the USA from the Canadian side.

  • AntiFascist18

    Zinn would never comment, nor note the wonderful accomplishments of our country…heck, we were evil, even when we went to fight Hitler. Never mind that if it wasn't for the U.S. Armed Forces, the Brits, and yes, grudgingly enough with a reminder they sucked Hitler's tit for 2 years until he TURNED on them, Zinn's beloved Russians, Zinn would have been a lampshade.

    America, the land of Lincoln, the country that has done so much good for the world, is still, in the words of Lincoln and despite pissants like Zinn and Obama the "last best hope of mankind".

    That is why the guy is evil. Anyone like him, Chomsky, Soros should easily be compared with those totalitarian Jew-killers whom they grovelled to – and in the case of Chomsky and Soros still do.

    • trickyblain

      Lincoln never used those exact words (he said "last best hope of Earth"). Your quote is taken from Ferdinand Mount: " For all its terrible faults, in one sense America is still the last, best hope of mankind, because it spells out so vividly the kind of happiness that most people actually want, regardless of what they are told they ought to want."

      Zinn would, no doubt, agree with this statement. If you had actually objectively read his work, you would see that.

      • http://intensedebate.com/people/bubba4 bubba4

        What's this strange "objectively" you speak of? – lol

      • Dobbs

        I expect Zinn would and so may Chomsky who has repeatedly said America is in many ways the freest country in the world.

        • objectivefactsmatter

          "I expect Zinn would and so may Chomsky who has repeatedly said America is in many ways the freest country in the world."

          Sure, when cornered. So what? They've done enormous damage to the public understanding of history and politics.

  • Jack

    Paging David Swindle, the young man who apparently gets paid to edit this site… Are you proud of being associated with these people? When you were in college, did you hope to eventually work for guys who would respond to Howard Zinn's death by saying that Zinn and Noam Chomsky are the same as Bin Laden, the Nazis, and Stalin?

    • http://intensedebate.com/people/Bonnie_ Bonnie_

      Uh, yeah, Jack, that's what we're all saying. With some pretty good proof to back it up, too.

      I, personally, am proud to see the deconstruction of Zinn, this vile man, at his passing. Perhaps we can make sure "A People's History" is thrown into the dustbin of history right along with the murderous regimes he supported.

      • Jack

        But you don't have any proof to back it up. David Horowitz calls Zinn an unrepentant Stalinist, but in real life, Zinn denounced Stalin repeatedly. In A People's History, he wrote that Stalin "killed peasants for industrial progress." In his autobiography, he mentioned "Joseph Stalin and the Gulags of murder and torture." In an essay I found on his web site (http://www.howardzinn.org/default/index.php?optio… he referred to, "Khrushchev's startling revelation of Stalin's crimes at the 20th Party Congress." And in his play Marx in Soho, he had Marx go on at length about how the Soviet Union was a horrible perversion of Marxism.

      • Robert Wargas

        Good response, Bonnie.

        And to "Jack," what more proof do you need that Chomsky and Zinn preferred sociopaths and murderers to the United States government? Is it merely an accident that they have expressed support, at one time or another, for a cast of characters like Pol Pot, Mao Tse-tung, Fidel Castro, Arafat, Hamas?

        • Robert Wargas

          I can hear the response forming in your head. "The United States government are sociopaths and murderers, too." My response is: OK, even if we grant this, why would Zinn and Chomsky then support other murderers?

          Saying the United States is evil does not constitute a sufficient justification to support other evil. It's like a neo-Nazi justifying his desire for a second Holocaust by saying that the CIA has killed people, too.

          • Jack

            Robert, neither of them have supported Pol Pot, Mao, or Hamas. Zinn did express some support for Cuba's government, and that's definitely to his discredit. His book also said something about China being in the hands of a people's government in early 1949, although later in the book he said that the Chinese Communists had a bloody record of suppression and he criticized the U.S. for dealing with them. I guess you'd say that his desire to bitch and moan about the U.S. outweighed his tendency to suck up to communist governments in the latter case–I don't know, maybe you'd be right. Overall, he was probably too soft on communist dictatorships, but the fact remains that most of the stuff you, David Horowitz, and the brain-damaged asshole who calls himself antifascist18 are saying is just factually wrong. I'll leave it at that.

      • objectivefactsmatter

        "I, personally, am proud to see the deconstruction of Zinn, this vile man, at his passing. Perhaps we can make sure "A People's History" is thrown into the dustbin of history right along with the murderous regimes he supported."


    • AntiFascist18

      Paging Jack the Lad, aka Idiot Lad.

      Sorry but even with their "Jewish" birth Zinn and Chomsky are associates of Stalin, and in the case of Chomsky a defender of Holocaust deniers while the pisspot Zinn "regretted" bombing them. Guess they preferred being a lampshade, or smoke and ashe in the sky over Poland.

      Furthermore both of them defend Arab Muslim Aggression and terrorism against Jewish women and children while being hypocritical enough to not vacant their own homes on OCCUPIED NATIVE AMERICAN SOIL.

      As Mark Levin would say – You're AN IDIOT!

  • BS1977

    Zinn, Chomsky, Che, J Wright, Ayers….Alinsky…the list goes on and on…,.ingrate complainers who live on the American largesse, but who whine and cry at the same time. Enough of these bums….by the way, seems like more libtards and lefties are posting on FPM than conservatives…why? Because no one goes to Daily Kos, MoveOn, Air America or MSNBC…..so no one will see their bilge, except on Conservative venues.

    • trickyblain

      Maybe because those sites aren't calling somebody a Nazi/complainer/commie/marxist/Islamofacist/scum/pissant/ devil /Hitler-lover? Just because the man wrote a book from the perspective of the people in this country that got screwed over? Someone at FPM needs to soberly explain why this was such a problem, because y'all don't seem to be able to refute Zinn's work, you just don't like that he wrote it. Why?

      BTW: Huffington post is the most visited political blog cite on the Web. FPM is not in the top 100. Those "libtards" you mention that are posting here are the only ones who demonstrate any real knowledge of Zinn's work – the "Retardicans" here(Stephen Brady a rational exception) are just spewing bile about which they are, quite clearly, completely clueless.

      • http://intensedebate.com/people/Stephen_Brady Stephen_Brady

        I thank you for you kind statement, at the end of your post. However, I can get down to spewing bile, if I feel the need (or the urge) to do so!

  • 080

    What Chomsky and Zinn both do is the loading of the deck. Propaganda is thought to be lies. Much more important is the one-sidedness of their writings. Sure, it's possible to disagree with the American government, but as an historian or a "political scientist" you must at least give a fair hearing to their side of the story. The writings of Zinn and Chomsky are about themselves. They have written their opinions into "history". BORING!!!!

  • trickyblain

    What an awful, awfully written article. This is the man who accompanied Horowitz on his public change-of-political heart? The only thing more annoying than an author who uses imbecilic logic, poor sentence structure and scattered organization is an author who uses imbecilic logic, poor sentence structure and scattered organization while simultaneously projecting a tone of arrogance and superiority. Hack.

    After tying Zinn to Chomsky– and making uncited and false claims about the accuracy of Zinn's work — Collier links them both to bin Laden. His reasoning: bin Laden quoted Chomsky. Of course, bin Laden has also quoted and expressed admiration for Jefferson, Lincoln and Teddy Roosevelt. According to Collier's logic, they are part of this "unholy alliance" as well.

    True believers never cease to amuse.

    • VN Vet

      The logical difference is that it's hard to tie bin Laden to Jefferson, Lincoln and Teddy Roosevelt, by any kind of an association, because these three peope were pro-Americans. The association of Zinn, Chumpsky and bin Laden is much more easily understood, and thus the connection is made .

      • http://intensedebate.com/people/bubba4 bubba4

        the "connection" is made is some cultic mindspace tricky doesn't believe in.

        This guilt by extremely distant association (or no association) is the Ray Charles= God argument.

        God is love
        love is blind
        Ray Charles is blind
        Ray Charles is god

  • WestWright

    Note, find a treatment for the Zinnaholics that still infest this country.

  • bardefa

    Yo, Chompsky, what will you do when you grow up? Wisdom comes not from learning…and thinking is not your forte.
    No, you cannot clean my house. No RRReds permitted. Up yours.

  • Dj JEM

    I like Chomsky, one of the few brillant critical brains in the US left ;)

  • smugger

    Chomsky's okay.
    To poop on.

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/attackcartoons attack

    back in school i invented a game called "chomsky". it was exactly like the kevin bacon game. only you took some random event in the news, and in six stages or less blamed america.


  • Jack

    There's no "deconstruction" happening on this site; David Horowitz and his friends are dedicated to heaping abuse on their political enemies, not honestly critiquing their arguments. That's why this site attracts illiterate buffoons like AntiFascist18, who licks his lips over the thought of a Jewish World War II veteran being turned into a lampshade by the Nazis.

    • AntiFascist18


      Be thankful you don't live near me. I lost relatives in the Holocaust that your fellow FASCIST buddy Chomsky denied, your hero Zinn "regretted" bombing Nazis.

      That speaks volumes about you – and by the way, I dare a girlieboy ignoramus like you to compare your HISTORY degrees with mine.

      But you can always join your Uncle Adolf…the sooner the better, Zinn's already there to greet you, you dumb Nazi pissant, so PISS OFF.


      • Jack

        If you have a history degree, it's a very sad commentary on the state of American higher education.

        • Jack

          Did you write your dissertation on "girlieboy retarded Islamohitlerites"?

          • http://intensedebate.com/people/bubba4 bubba4


  • http://nvvam.org Mr. Steve Sir

    Zinn has some friends that recently came back & served in the Special Forces who fought against Bin Laden financed terror campiagns. It wouldn't be too difficult to cut your head off & mount it on the tomb of Adolf Hitler. Zinn could've died for this country in a real war & he fought until the end. Zinn & I are both veterans, If he has carte blanche to say peace, I have carte blanche to say go fight, I hope you get caught & maybe you can pretend you see Zinn & Chomsky before you get beheaded. If they were there … hahahahaha, you would be begging them for mercy & not Bin Ladin … hahahahahahahahahahahaha.

  • BS1977

    There once was a man named Zinn
    Whose mind was in a terrible spin
    With Mao and Stalin he was tight
    He thought the left was right
    And ended up in the looney bin.

  • Antoine

    Funny how one talks about truth and writes the following: "He associated himself with a rancid group of French Holocaust deniers" The "group of French Holocaust deniers" was one Professor named Robert Faurisson, who got fired after denying the holocaust in a private publication he wrote. What is so shocking to defend someone's freedom of speech? If you care to read Chomsky's answer on this topic: http://www.chomsky.info/letters/1989—-.htm

    This sentence does not make sense " it was a shock to see Chomsky’s response … “a left wing journal I was running then." especially since you refute it a few lines below " I listened to it and Chomsky appears actually to have said “a left wing magazine that was running then,” without the “I.”

    You might want to read a few of his books, just to know what you're talking about next time. You can find some mistakes he made, so far I found misquotations, unfortunately his arguments seem too well researched to be reasonably argued against.

  • luthersetzer

    See http://www.facebook.com/HowardZinnsThesesAreFeces for more opportunities to dump on the memory of Howard Zinn. I will never forgive the history department at my "gifted" public boarding high school, the North Carolina School of Science and Mathematics (NCSSM), for forcing this man's pseudo-intellectual sewage down our throats for the required U.S. History course my junior year 1982-83. I could have gone my entire life without that grueling toxin of the spirit. I wish someone had given me warning of communist propaganda and helped me to prepare accordingly. Anyone thinking of attending NCSSM needs to be aware of this state of the school's academia, especially given the NCSSM requirement of 60 hours of summer communi(s)ty service.