It’s Time to Dump Chomsky into the Wastebasket of History


Noam Chomsky has shown his true colors in his recently published “reaction” to the targeted killing of Osama Bin Laden. He apparently thinks Osama Bin Laden is the innocent victim of a cold-blooded murder that is worse than if George W. Bush were to be assassinated in his “compound.” He doesn’t believe Bin Laden’s own admission of complicity in the murder of 3,000 people on 9/11, writing that it is about as credible as Chomsky’s “confession that I won the Boston Marathon.” Nor does he believe the evidence gathered by the 9/11 Commission, the grand jury that indicted Bin Laden, the numerous confessions and claims of responsibility by Al Qaeda operatives, and the video showing those who flew the planes in the presence of Osama Bin Laden and Ayman al-Zawahiri. He believes there is absolutely no “evidence”—”nothing serious”—that Bin Laden played any role in 9/11. He also accuses President Obama of “simply lying when he said, in his White House statement, that ‘we quickly learned that the 9/11 attacks were carried out by Al Qaeda.’” To avoid any appearance of partisanship and to show that he is an equal opportunity despiser of all American presidents, he writes that “uncontraversally” President Bush’s “crimes vastly exceed bin Laden’s.” (Guernica. My Reaction to Osama bin Laden’s Death. Noam Chomsky. May 6, 2011.)

If Bin Laden and Al Qaeda were not responsible for 9/11, who was? The United States? The Zionists? Maybe it never happened at all, as some hard-left “intellectuals” have claimed. After all, Chomsky is agnostic with regard to the Nazi Holocaust and believes that Holocaust denial is not anti-Semitic. Writing in defense of the Holocaust denier Robert Faurisson’s claim that the so-called Holocaust was a fraud perpetrated by the Jewish people, Chomsky assured his readers that “nobody believes there is an anti-Semitic connotation to the denial of the Holocaust . . . whether one believes it took place or not.” Chomsky is himself guilty of genocide-denial, having assured his readers (at the height of the Cambodian genocide) that the Khmer Rouge—which he admired—was being falsely accused of mass murder.

The real question is why any reasonable person pays any attention to the ignorant rants of this America-hater, Israel-basher and conspiracy theorist. I can understand why Osama Bin Laden himself was, according to the Wall Street Journal, “a fan of Noam Chomsky.” Bin Laden said that “Chomsky was correct when he compared U.S. policies to the Mafia.” (See: Bin Laden wasn’t an anti-Semite after all, since he liked at least one Jew, though he named one of his daughters Safiyah after Mohammad’s aunt, because, he proclaimed, “Safiyah killed Jews.”) I can even understand why radical anti-American zealots like Hugo Chavez and Fidel Castro admire him. But he has been described on his own book jacket as “arguably the most important intellectual alive.” He has also been called the most influential academic in the world. What does this say about today’s consumers of intellectual and academic wares?

I have debated Chomsky on several occasions and have found that he simply makes up facts and then characterizes them as “uncontroversial.” This tactic works with sycophantic college audiences on the hard-left, but anyone who bothers to check “Chomsky facts,” as his critics aptly dub them, will find that the source is often conspiratorial websites and hate propaganda. “Chomsky facts” bear little relationship to real facts, except on “Planet Chomsky,” where a different reality governs.

The time has come to dump Noam Chomsky into the wastebasket of history. He has been proved wrong—factually, morally, politically and in every other way—by the verdict of history. He was wrong about the Nazi Holocaust, the Communist genocides, the “peaceful” intentions of Hezbollah, and the alleged “war criminality” of every American president in recent memory. Bret Stephens of the Wall Street Journal correctly characterized Chomsky as “a two-nickel crank” with “paranoid notions of American policy.” Christopher Hitchens has called him a charter member of the “paranoid anti-war ‘left’” who believes that “America is an incarnation of the third Reich that doesn’t even conceal its genocidal methods and aspirations.”

Chomsky has no credibility among serious people who care about truth. He would be a joke if he were not so influential among the unthinking hard-left and the anti-intellectual academics who propagandize their naïve students to move to Planet Chomsky, where they can live their paranoid lives devoid of any contact with the reality of planet Earth. Nor would he have any credibility on political issues were he not a famous linguist—famous despite his absurd semantic claim that there is no “anti-Semitic connotation” to denying the Holocaust and calling it a fraud perpetrated on the world by the Jews! Even if his linguistic accomplishments were not controversial, they would not qualify him as a guru on the political, legal and military matters on which he regularly opines.

Chomsky will continue to hurt America and decent values so long as his political rants continue to be taken seriously by some of the intellectual elite who help to manufacture consent and create the illusion of credibility on the part of a hateful crackpot.

 

  • Bob Akbar

    Foam Chompsky suffers from a certain psychopathy called intelligentsia. It’s been going around since about the time of Marx. It’s where you get to be so smart you become a blitherig idiot.

    Lots of my friends in academia have it. Impressionable members of the public are also vulnerable.

    The only cure is a slap in the face which unfortunately is against the law.

  • poptoy1949

    Way past time to dump him. And Thank you for doing just that. next time please do not wait so long. This man is and always has been Poison . So may i be the first to say Thank You. P.S. He belongs in the waste bin as other BAD JEWS. And yes there are BAD JEWS. For Example George Soros the Bastard.

    • Hannas Giesler

      What did chomsky say about the holocaust? The fact remains, as Arthur Conan Doyle's charater would say, We must extrapolate from the facts and whatever remains, however dubious in first appearance, must be the truth. 1) We know Bush planned to invade Iraq and Afghanistan before winning the presidency (The documental proof available in Library Of Congress or Gerg Palast's website.). 2. We know that the military industrial complex was gravely concerned about downsizing at the end of the cold war. 3. We know that Al-Qaeda was not involved in 9/11 according to the FBI.. 4. We know that the supporters of the American World Empire (See Bretton-Woods documents and shut the hell up denying it.) were gravely concerned about losing the ability to exploit the poorer nations as it has routinely done since WWII. 5. We know from now declassified documents under the Kennedy administration that a suggestion from the CIA and Military Indust. complex was to blow up a commuter plane full of American citizens somewhere in the south in order to justify military action against Castro (Thankfully, it was not carried out.). This gives us a good understanding of our value as citizens under the corrupt government we have now and have had for the last decades.

  • Sean

    I recall that when Chomsky was first asked by some European leftists about the allegations in "Loose Change" that Bush was behind 9/11 he actually said something sane along the lines of Ockham's Razor, about how improbable that scenario was and how difficult it would have been to persuade people in engage in the murder of their own fellow citizens. But from this article it appears that ultimately he could not resist endorsing another outrageous pretext for "hating and blaming America first." He is the modern equivalent of "The Man Without A Country."

  • davarino

    I know people like him and they are mentally ill, bipolar, or something worse. Im not talking about people who entertain the rants of Alex Jones, and his like, because they are just not smart enough to check information themselves and apply context. I am talking about people who clearly make things up on the fly and have done it so long they dont know what the truth is any more. I think you really start to go crazy if you do that to long. People like him say these things with such a straight face they almost seem credible, and listeners start to believe his BS and worship him, which feeds his narcissism, which encourages him to tell more BS.

    He's an old fool

    • timwnelson

      Hey, bipolar is a mood disorder. I'm bipolar. Most of us aren't that disconnected from reality, we're just moody. I can't fathom how grandstanding strutting frauds like Chomsky, MIchael Moore, Gore Vidal (to name a few) are such darlings of the left.

      • ziontruth

        Spot on.

        Psychology is junk. All of it. Chomsky's treason and the Muslims' penchant for suicide-murder are both to be explained not through psychology but as stemming from holding evil ideologies. They hold that doctrine, they act accordingly.

  • ze-ev ben jehudah

    N.Chomsky,the mesuggene,I have seen the Shoa from the inside out.
    I survived by a miracle,that is,if you would call it a miracle.,because I had
    blond hair and blue eyes and they told me often: this could not be a Jew
    and that kept me alive long inough to be liberated .After the war I was 10
    years old and all my family ;Father mother one brother and a sister uncles and
    aunts,all in all some 96 members were gone, slaughterd in the death camps,
    by the nazi's. And you think I made this all up mr Chomsky?.Do you think I wasn't
    born but fabricated in some laboratorium here in Europe?
    No mr Chomsky and all those who distort history in a likewise manner! it stinks
    and I can't stand the smell of it any longer.

    • Embo

      It is a blessing you survived to bear witness Ben Jehudah, and a blessing that you speak out loud and clear on the likes of Chomsky. Please continue to do so, tell the deniers, the anti-semites, the crackpots the truth in all ways possible.
      Thank you and good health–

  • jacob

    Elsewhere but good old USA and its pseudointellectual "elites" , CHOMPSKI
    would have long ago be history or confined to a psychriatric hospital…

    Good thing EISENHOWER ordered filmed all the atrocities found by American
    troops, stating prophetically that it wouldn't take long before certain people
    would deny this monstrosity ever happened and blatant proof of his words are
    the works of pseudointellectual imbeciles such as CHOMPSKI, IRAN's Sinister
    Midget, most Muslims and to this day, stupid Judeophobes in general

    • Hank Rearden

      Yes, Eisenhower had great foresight on that matter. He also insisted that troops who were close by be paraded through the camps we liberated for the same reason and so the troops would know what they were (still) fighting against. I have always wondered how Holocaust deniers deal with the 1st and 3rd Army films, even though we didn't liberate some of the biggest death camps, such as Auschwitz, which were liberated by the Russians. Patton also describes the camps he saw in his war diary, which is in the public domain.

      In addition our army required local Germans to be paraded through the camps so they could not deny their existence later. Some local political leaders in Germany went home and committed suicide.

  • Raymond in DC

    "He has been proved wrong—factually, morally, politically and in every other way—by the verdict of history." His acolytes are true believers, ever ready to defend him.

    Shortly after Apple created iTunes U, I noted in an obscure computer blog my disappointment that the only submission thus far in the area of International Politics (which I'd studied at McGill and Michigan) was by "the left-wing radical, Noam Chomsky". That brief remark was enough to unleash the harshest stream of criticism I'd ever encountered on that blog. The general response was that I was too ignorant to recognize his brilliance, and should shut up about things I didn't understand. (So much for tolerance of differing opinions.)

    Similar things could be said about Egyptian-born but self-described "Palestinian" Edward Said. Though his "Orientalism" thesis has long since been discredited, his influence in academia has only grown over time.

  • ydroustan

    Thank you. I agree with your article 100%. The man is so screwed that he is very likely mentally ill. In any case I dumped his rantings in the garbage can a long time ago.

  • StephenD

    So tell me, as a "Lingusit" is he going to be at the White House with Common? They must love him too. Hey, birds of a feather, right?

  • steven l

    Chomsky must be suffering from mental confusion. He must hate the few hundred years of the "domination" of the Western world (white man society). His provocative postures are self-centered. He must be one of these egomaniacs who are sprinkled here and there throughout the history of humanity. He succeeded in one thing: he made a name for himself in the sea of left pseudo-intellectuals. Most of us don't. He is one of the many kings among the morons of this world.

  • BIG CANADIAN IRISH

    an old – vile – treasonous man and the sooner hes dumped and forgotten the better.

  • BS77

    an old fashioned traitor….but among leftist circles, this means tenure, big 401K, nice home
    and speaking engagements. what a steaming pile.

  • Armando

    There goes another self-hating Jew and self-hating American. I can't understand how some people donate money to these so-called institutions of higher learning that support characters like this piece of excrement who should long ago have been flushed down into the toilet of historical oblivion.

  • sedoanman

    "The Branding of the World's Top Intellectual: Noam Chomsky"
    By Peter Schweizer Published 10/19/2005

    "Note from the Author: Whereas readers of The Prospect found the top public intellectual in Chomsky, I found a poster child for modern-day capitalism and, because of his anti-capitalist views, a complete hypocrite."
    http://www.ideasinactiontv.com/tcs_daily/2005/10/

  • cjk

    Actually it might be good if he stays around because he exposes all who back and applaud him for what they are. After all anyone who currently lays credence to his views is either a non-thinking idiot, agenda driven rabid leftist, or something else apart from a seeker of truth. These types are unsalvageable by exterior arguments anyway and need to be quarantined intellectually.
    I see him as providing a short cut for vetting some of them.

  • BITOA

    CHOMPSKY'S A CUNY-LINGUIST!

    • welldoneson

      I think Bitoa meant to write "cunning linguist".

    • Sacha

      Actually, Chomsky doesn't get that joke. See Ali G interviewing Chomsky on Youtube. In that video, Chomsky does not seem to understand humor at all.

  • Bob Akbar

    gNoam Frothingmouth suffers from neuro-cortical polarization. It makes him see everything in exact reverse. It’s like living inside of a mirror, or walking around permanently cross eyed, poor guy.

    He has the look of a cunning toad on his face. Very enigmatic. Must be something going on back there. Plus, he’s still wearing the same pair of glasses he bought in 1971. You’d think MIT wd buy him a pair of glasses. He clearly doesn’t want to change his trademark look and confuse his sycophants.

    We haven’t heard much about linguistics from him in about 30 years. Pays better to beak off. U just think of the most outrageous way of looking at it and then spout it off. It’s diabolical in its simplicity.

  • Bonnie_

    You can "dump" him but it is far too late. The poison of the hard-left America haters permeates our education system down to grade school levels, where elementary children are taught all about slavery and civil rights and the bombing of Hiroshima, but nothing about western values, World War II, and the murdering communists from Mao to Stalin. My children made origami cranes in school to mourn the dead of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, but never learned a single fact about the Rape of Nanking. My children's curriculum in middle and high school is based on an America-bashing, hate the dead white European male agenda that includes one teacher (memorably) describing how the "red sun" eclipse was caused by the children's parents gas-guzzing cars. And, of course, they all have to study the works of the loathsome and discredited Howard Zinn.

    As long as William Ayers and Howard Zinn and their corrupted agendas are taught in our schools, you'll find a great number of eager followers of Chomsky. If you do not teach truth and you do not teach logic, you generate a nation of serfs.

    • Bob Akbar

      U r absolutely right Bonnie. Cultural self-criticism is the ONLY thing we learn in school any more, from K to grad school. We are all trained as experts in social self-criticism. We are all trained geniuses in the art of criticizing ourselves, in uncovering our hidden sins. We reflexively pick ourselves apart. It has become the fabric of our thinking. If you comment on Taliban savagery they tell us that we are no better.

      Well, I wd like to criticize somebody else’s culture for a change. Surely we arn’t the only bastards in the world. No doubt there are bastards all over the place.

  • phillyfanatic

    When Alan and Hitchens both blast this dope,it is time to come out full scale liberals and tell the world that this self-hating Jew and anti-American should just be …ignored . Liberals always seem to teeter between being fellow travelers for either communism or pro-Hamas or some other tyranny and finally waking up to blast the Leftists who are Quislings.

  • Dai of Edinburgh

    He's like the kid who simply replies 'Because' when you ask him why something did not happen. The man's a linguist and should stick to this profession. Where political and social comment is concerned, the 'Because' content of his contributions reveals that he is stepping way out of the realm of his knowlege base.

  • hector

    Above all else, Chomsky is tiresome and tedious. Just as politicians who have been in DC for too many decades and become corrupt in many ways, so has Chomsky become corrupt. He is corrupt in apparently believing himself a "star," rather than a professor, one who is supposed to teach. Maybe decades of preening and strutting an a dais before horny coeds has caused him to think he is actually more than he is, or at least what he is supposed to be. This makes him a big fish in a relatively small pond. It is reassuring to know that, given the sore state of education, very few among the rising generations know who he is.

  • Russ P.

    C'mon, Alan, quit holding back. Tell us what you really think!

  • CyrusT

    Dershowitz was, is and always will be a joke. Whether you agree with Chomsky's arguments or not – I for one, often don't – it's sad to see a so-called attorney setting forth such weak arguments. Dershowitz's article, if it can be called that, is actually nothing more than a bunch of hysterical personal attacks on Chomsky, misrepresentation of his arguments, mixed in with nonsensical nationalism. He does little to refute Chomsky's claims, although a more capable man could have done so . As an attorney myself, it's sad to see that Dershowitz carries the same title.

    • MixMChess

      Dershowitz provided a specific example of Chomsky's moral bankruptcy by citing Chomsky's recent quotes about the "assassination" of Osama Bin Laden. What more do you want?

    • ajnn

      i read the chomsky essay and deshowitz characterized it accurately. really odious nonsense.

  • 080

    Well, he does what many do. They mistake their own mentation which is a kind of second reality upon the world. The world doesn't give a damn. The dogs bark and the caravan moves on. For anyone even ;remotely connected to the facts Chomsky's work is directed and useful for the universal revolution which is about to break out. His version of international law is that promoted by al-Quaeda. He belongs with those great men of history like Kim Il-Sung. Very Il.

  • Hank Rearden

    Chomsky is a sophist, which is why it is so difficult to articulate where he is wrong. Sometimes he gets the facts wrong, and I do think he has gotten into the habit of making up his sources. But much of what he says is true. Israel shoots people; Nazi Germany shot people. America makes war; Nazi Germany made war. Therefore Israel / America is like Nazi Germany. The American economy is dominated by profit-making corporations; therefore America stands for profits, not people. It takes several paragraphs to contextualize assertions like this, whereas the charge is epigrammatic. There are flashes of illumination, such as his denial of the Pol Pot genocide, which occur because ultimately his version of reality is not true. A good part of his methodology comes under Thomas Sowell's observation that "all things are the same, except for their differences; and all things are different, except for their similarities." In human affairs, it is never one thing or the other; all human institutions exist on a continuum. It is the magnitude of their differences that is critical – for instance the difference between Nazi Germany and America.

  • Ghostwriter

    I think that he'd make a great villain in any novel,comic book,or movie.

  • generalissimo

    Why not:
    Dump this communist "alinskyist" in the sea, right next to his buddy Osama "has been" laden. They deserve each other. "arguably the most important intellectual alive"? Yes indeed, "arguably" is the operating word here!

  • WilliamJamesWard

    Wastebasket? What is Gehenna full………..put him where he belongs………William

  • Jim

    Perhaps some people listen to him for the same reason people spend millions for Andy Warhal's soup can paintings.

  • almostvoid

    What is this: Amerika ueber alles?

  • Glennd1

    Sure, Chomsky's is a radical crank, with little credibility or moral clarity. When other's ape him, I call it "Chomsky Derangement Syndrome". However, Dershowitz is a discredited fraud and an apologist for Zionism and all the depredations it has visited on the world, most notably, it's forcible "transfer" of 630,000 Arabs from their homes in Palestine between '47-'49. Any words that come from Dersh's mouth should be completely disregarded.

    I wonder, when will moral clarity come to America? It is possible to criticize the moraly depraved acts of the Zionists AND to despise Hamas, Hezbollah and Islamism. I say let them fight out for themselves, without our involvement. Zionism is a Jewish supremacist movement in that it asserts its rights above those of other's to land due to the imprecations of their God – which in principle is no different than the supremacism of Islam, based on its claims to various privileges based on Allah's word as revealed by Muhammed. WE AMERICANS HAVE NO HORSE IN THE RACE! And from a moral standpoint, on the narrow question of the displacement of the Arabs living in Palestine, there is no question that the Zionists are the guilty party.

    Eff Dershowitz and Chomsky – or is that to complicated a thought for the average Front Page reader?

    • MixMChess

      "However, Dershowitz is a discredited fraud and an apologist for Zionism and all the depredations it has visited on the world, most notably, it's forcible "transfer" of 630,000 Arabs from their homes in Palestine between '47-'49."

      You're a LIAR Glenn. Israel never forcibly transferred any Arabs before or after the 1948 War of Independence. Even anti-Israel historian has proven you wrong. The vast majority of Arabs fled on their own accord after being promised by invading Arab nations that they would "push the Jews into the sea" (read = genocide). What about the 850,000+ Jewish refugees from Arab countries?

      "Zionism is a Jewish supremacist movement in that it asserts its rights above those of other's to land due to the imprecations of their God – which in principle is no different than the supremacism of Islam, based on its claims to various privileges based on Allah's word as revealed by Muhammed."

      You're an idiot Glenn. Zionism is a SECULAR movement which asserts Jewish rights to the land of Israel based on historical fact and international law. Israel is a SECULAR DEMOCRACY which guarantees equal rights to all of its citizens regardless of religion, race or creed.

      Go back to stromfront loser.

      • Glennd1

        Here you are again with your tedious style. So, you are now claiming that Zionism doesn't base it's claim to Palestine based on the word of God? Lol, many Jews would be surprised to hear you say that. And in case anyone else is reading, the Jews haven't had a country in Palestine since the Roman empire. They fled to Babylon, where the Philistines (Jews) engaged in depraved conduct in accordance with Talmudic texts (this is an historical fact and why the word "Babylon" is used to describe a licentious society). Tell me this, why don't they demand Iraq back? They lived there more recently. Game, set, match.

        As for your first point that the Jews didn't drive the Arabs living in Palestine from their homes intentionally, I guess you don't read Benny Morris (the most renowned Jewish, Zionist, Israeli historian on the subject). He says quite the opposite. He claims the Jews did drive them off their land, but had no choice. Okay, different argument – I don't agree and I think the historical record shows that the small number of Jews living in Palestine went unmolested until the start of Zionism at the end of the 19th century. Only when an aggressive program of relocating Jews there and acquiring property (some of which was done in very questionable ways) as a part of the Zionist campaign, did serious conflict start to happen. But that is a different argument. Morris characterizes Arab enmity towards Jews differently at that time – unsuccessfully in my and many other folks eyes. But the fact is that Morris states in many places in his work that the Zionists did exactly what I'm saying they did.

        In fact, no serious scholar of the subject disagrees that the Zionists wanted to clear Palestine of Arabs to form their Jewish state, and did so between '47 and '49. There are way too many documents, statements, artifacts of actions and other pieces of compelling evidence for anyone who is serious to argue otherwise. Dershowitz does, but he's not serious. His take on the history is a joke and not used on in any academic settings as an account or analysis of the history. Remember, he's an advocate, not a a historian.

        Finally, it's really laughable to call Zionism a secular movement. Okay, let's agree to put it this way. It's a secular movement whose goal is to create a Jewish state in the land that Jews believe God gave to them – only a liar could try and call that a "secular movement".

        Look yourself in the mirror and tell yourself the truth, MixM. You just want the land "from the river to the sea" for your people and you don't give a damn about the 630,000 people who were driven off their land to give it to your people, nor do you care about their 5 million descendants who live in appalling conditions. You just want your land, period.

        My point is that, okay, you want to fight it out with the Arabs/Muslims for "your" land. Have at it. Get your gun and go to work. But don't expect me as an American to feel any moral duty to support you and your bloody cause. If only Truman had listened to his newly formed CIA and didn't sign on the U.N. resolution that created the Jewish territory, we'd be in much better shape. I despise Zionists, Hamas, PLO, Fatah (a little less), Hezbollah and Islamism. I'd be happy if you all killed each other off. The world would be a better place, for sure. I hope you start soon. I'm tired of hearing about the "situation in the middle east".

        • MixMChess

          "So, you are now claiming that Zionism doesn't base it's claim to Palestine based on the word of God?"

          You're an idiot and your comments reveal what little knowledge you actually have on Israel and the middle east. Theodor Herzl, the founding father of Zionism, was a secular Jew and based the idea of a Jewish state on secular democratic values. Zionism was originally a secular movement. Seriously, open a book – it won't bite I promise you.

          "…the Jews haven't had a country in Palestine since the Roman empire. They fled to Babylon."

          Until Israel's founding in 1948, no other peoples had a "country" in the holy land since the Roman empire either. The region was constantly "occupied" by foreign powers from the Romans, to the Byzantines, to the Malmuks, to the Arab Muslims, to the Ottomans, to the British and so on.

          That stated, Jews have always had a continuous presence in the Holy Land. Recall, Rome exiled only a portion of the population. The remaining Jews, banned from Jerusalem, flourished for centuries in other Jewish towns, such as Yavne, Rafah, Gaza, Ashkelon, Jaffa and Caesarea. Although the Jewish population was decimated by the Crusaders in the 12th century, it rebounded in the next centuries and grew as Jews returned in waves of immigration and settled in Safed, Jerusalem, Tiberius and Hebron. Since the Roman expulsion Jews have been immigrating back to and settling the land of Israel. Zionists in the 19th century were merely continuing this age old tradition.

          "…where the Philistines (Jews) engaged in depraved conduct in accordance with Talmudic texts (this is an historical fact and why the word "Babylon" is used to describe a licentious society)."

          Classic dig against the Talmud, nice one. I won't go into your defamation of the Talmud considering lies like yours have been debunked countless times going back centuries. You are a typical antisemite.

          "Tell me this, why don't they demand Iraq back? They lived there more recently."

          As stated above, Jews have always had a continuous presence in Israel and have historical and legal connections to the land. None of which is based in religion. I suppose for the religious (not me), it is merely icing on the cake.

          Game, set, match loser.

        • MixMChess

          "As for your first point that the Jews didn't drive the Arabs living in Palestine from their homes intentionally, I guess you don't read Benny Morris (the most renowned Jewish, Zionist, Israeli historian on the subject). He says quite the opposite. He claims the Jews did drive them off their land, but had no choice."

          I have read Benny Morris, obviously you haven't. In Benny Morris' "Birth of the Palestinian Refugee Problem," he conclusively states that: ""[T]here was no Zionist policy to expel the Arabs or intimidate them into flight" during the War of Independence. What Benny Morris does state is that Israeli troops encouraged or forced only a small percentage of Arabs to leave, and even this was due to the exigencies of the war itself. As Benny Morris states:

          "[T]he Palestine refugee problem was born of war, not by design, Jewish or Arab. It was largely a byproduct of Jewish and Arab fears and of the protracted, bitter fighting that characterized the first Israeli-Arab war; in smaller part it was the deliberation creation of Jewish and Arab military commanders and politicians."

          Historian Efraim Karsh explains further: "Israeli forces did on occasion expel Palestinians. But this accounted for only a small fraction of the total exodus, occurred not within the framework of a premeditated plan but in the heat of battle, and was dictated predominantly by ad hoc military considerations (notably the need to deny strategic sites to the enemy if there were no available Jewish forces to hold them)."

          "Only when an aggressive program of relocating Jews there and acquiring property (some of which was done in very questionable ways) as a part of the Zionist campaign, did serious conflict start to happen."

          This is laughable at best. Early Zionists legally purchased land from willing Arab landowners, often for exorbitant prices. And very few Palestinians were uprooted from their land from Zionist immigration and purchase of land.

          In fact, as anti-Israel historian Benny Morris has stated: "only 'several thousand' families were displaced following land sales to Jews between the 1880's and the late 1930's." As Alan Dershowitz points out, this is a "fraction of the number of people displaced by the Egyptian construction of the Aswan Dam."

        • MixMChess

          "In fact, no serious scholar of the subject disagrees that the Zionists wanted to clear Palestine of Arabs to form their Jewish state, and did so between '47 and '49."

          Actually, all serious scholars of the Middle East disagree with your statement. Zionist leaders from Theodore Herzl to Chaim Weizman to David Ben Gurion were dedicated to peaceful co-existence with the local Arab residents and to having them benefit from Zionist development. In fact Israel's Declaration of Independence states:

          ""The State of Israel… will foster the development of the country for the benefit of all its inhabitants; it will ensure complete equality of social and political rights to all its inhabitants, irrespective of creed, race or gender; it will guarantee freedom of religion, conscience, language, education and culture."

          The historical facts are clear. Israel accepted the 1947 partition plan which would have given the Jews a state in the Jewish majority areas and included a sizable Arab minority. It was the Arabs who repeatedly rejected compromise proposals because they did not want to share the land or accept Jews in the country.

          "There are way too many documents, statements, artifacts of actions and other pieces of compelling evidence for anyone who is serious to argue otherwise."

          There are no documents, statements, artifacts or evidence to support your claim. Chomsky might, but he's not a historian, he's a linguistics professor. Even anti-Israel "historians" such as Ilan Pappe and Benny Morris have stated that they are "advocates" first and not concerned with the facts. Pappe has gone on the record as stating that he doesn't have to base his "charges against Israel on facts" and insists that "creating a Palestinian narrative suffices."

        • MixMChess

          "Okay, let's agree to put it this way. It's a secular movement whose goal is to create a Jewish state in the land that Jews believe God gave to them – only a liar could try and call that a 'secular movement'."

          Only an idiot would make the above claim. Zionism's goal is to create a Jewish state in the land with which they have historical ties and a cultural identity. Look no further than modern Israel for proof. It is a SECULAR DEMOCRACY, which has no official state religion and guarantees equal rights to all of its citizens regardless of religion, race or creed. In fact, over 20% of Israelis are not Jewish.

        • MixMChess

          "You just want the land "from the river to the sea" for your people and you don't give a damn about the 630,000 people who were driven off their land to give it to your people…"

          Look yourself in the mirror and tell yourself the truth Glenn, you are a raving antisemite who merely uses Israel as an excuse to attack Jews.

          I don't want Israel for "just "my people." That's why I support Israel as a secular democracy which guarantees equal rights and protection under the law for all of its citizens.

          But you are right, I don't give a damn about the Palestinian refugees. In 1947 they had the opportunity to live in Peace with Israelis. Instead they chose a ware of genocide. Shame on them and shame on you for supporting such immoral and intransigent behavior.

          " nor do you care about their 5 million descendants who live in appalling conditions."

          You mean the appalling conditions that Palestinians created themselves? The Palestinians have received billions in aid to build their infrastructure, instead they spend the money on weapons to murder Israeli civilians and children. Israel provides Gaza alone with approximately 1 million ton in humanitarian aid annually. Recall, it was Israel who provided the Palestinians in the W. Bank with the necessary economic aid that allowed them to experience unprecedented economic growth in 2008 (over 8% increase). Seriously, get a freaking clue.

        • MixMChess

          "My point is that, okay, you want to fight it out with the Arabs/Muslims for "your" land. Have at it. Get your gun and go to work. But don't expect me as an American to feel any moral duty to support you and your bloody cause."

          U.S. support for Israel has been an important investment that has paid countless dividends back to the U.S. and saved U.S. taxpayers billions. But, I'll concede your point in that as soon as the U.S. stops funding the Palestinians ($500 million pledged just last year) and countless Arab dictatorships (that foment hatred and war against Israel and Jews), it can stop all funds to Israel. What's fair is fair.

        • ziontruth

          "So, you are now claiming that Zionism doesn't base it's claim to Palestine based on the word of God? Lol, many Jews would be surprised to hear you say that."

          There are other claims than the scriptural one. I for one, though being a religious (Orthodox) Jew, nearly always stake the claim on the fact that the Jews are the indigenous Palestinian nation–the oldest nation still extant having ties to this land. (The Arab settlers falsely calling themselves "Palestinians" have nothing tying them to Palestine.)

          "I think the historical record shows that the small number of Jews living in Palestine went unmolested until the start of Zionism at the end of the 19th century."

          That is because they acquiesced to living as second-class citizens under the Islamic apartheid system. So you're pro-apartheid, huh?

          "You just want your land, period."

          What a strange idea! I guess you also advocate for the right of Turks descending from the expellees of 1922 to return to Greece?

          "But don't expect me as an American to feel any moral duty to support you…"

          No way I'm expecting it. In fact, the sooner Israel gets weaned off "supporters" like you who have made it only too clear their "support" will come with a steep price, the better for Israel.

          "If only Truman … didn't sign on the U.N. resolution that created the Jewish territory, we'd be in much better shape."

          Nope. In fact, you'd be in much worse shape. If Israel, the lightning rod that had kept Islamic imperialism busy for three decades, had not come into existence, you and the Europeans would be right now already heavily colonized by Muslim invaders. Europe would be reciting the shahada in unison now, and America would be littered by Dearbornistans.

          Israel bought you time–a lot of time, essential time. And you, what do you do instead of taking advantage of that time? You blame Israel. Stupid, stupid anti-Zionists. Try growing a brain.

          • Glennd1

            Fine, then please just stop all the Zionist supporters in the U.S. from begging for U.S. support – another ridiculous claim by you. Fyi, your retorts are puerile. As for the U.S. benefiting more than it has suffered from supporting Isreal, you have to be delusional. It has cost us our relationships with much of the Arab and Muslim world and has made us hypocrites to much of the rest of the world. . But I don't need to argue with you – you already claim to be okay with what I want. I can't stand hearing about it anymore or having to deal with double talking liars like you. Bye bye. Fyi, I assume you will volunteer to fight or already in the IDF reserve, with all your bravado. Fight it out, take your land back or not. There is no moral reason or geopolitical one for the U.S. to pick sides.

          • ziontruth

            "Fyi, your retorts are puerile."

            In other words, you can't refute them.

            "As for the U.S. benefiting more than it has suffered from supporting Isreal, you have to be delusional. It has cost us our relationships with much of the Arab and Muslim world…"

            No problem. Ignore the terrorist threats over such states as Sweden and Spain, never friends of Israel. Ignore the plight of Egypt's Christians, the savagery of the Muslims inflicted on India's Hindus, the situation in Southern Thailand. Put your head in the sand, lest reality distract you from blaming Israel for all your trouble. Go ahead, I won't stand in your way.

            "Fyi, I assume you will volunteer to fight or already in the IDF reserve, with all your bravado."

            I did all the three full years of service in the Israeli Army, buckaroo. I'm not the one to be preached at in that department.

    • ziontruth

      "WE AMERICANS HAVE NO HORSE IN THE RACE!"

      You try to emphasize that point, going so far as to use caps-lock; but all around that point you say nothing but things that refute it completely.

      If you really believed you had no horse in the race, you wouldn't count Zionism's "crimes" like so many golden coins. And you wouldn't be speaking of "moral clarity," for the position that you have no horse in the race in a pragmatic one, precluding pronouncements on morality.

      As I said: You're a fraud.

  • JAdams

    Alan is correct except where it comes to 911.
    If you believe the story about 19 hijackers then you
    have not examined much of the evidence.
    Hundreds of thousands of tons of steel and concrete
    does not turn into a dust cloud and blow away.
    Take a look at the work of Dr Judy Wood: http://www.drjudywood.com/wtc/key.html

    • SpiritOf1683

      So they let you have a laptop and internet access in your padded cell.

  • Melykin

    Don't forget Chomsky is also an admirer of Slobodan Milosevic. High time this wing-nut is discredited. Yet his books are still read and believed in many college courses.

  • jewdog

    I'd be curious to see a Pew poll, or its equivalent, to find out just how popular Chmsky really is, especially among college students and faculty.
    The fact that he is taken as seriously as he is is very discouraging. No wonder China is clobbering us.

  • Johnny Walker

    Alan Dershowitz is a sycophantic blowhard who utterly fails to live up to his credentials. His specializes in the logical fallacy. Anybody with half a brain would reject his histrionic writings out of hand. He would do well to take a lesson from Doam Chomsky.

  • Ron

    Chomsky may think of himself as a linguist and an intellectual, but in reality he will only be remembered for his incredible ignorance and stupidity.

  • andy

    I wouldn't piss on that jiz bag if he were on fire

  • andy

    I woundt piss on that jiz bag if he were on fire

  • Hank Rearden

    Since Chomsky is a stranger to the truth, it makes you wonder just how solid his original academic work was. Maybe doing it he discovered the power of making things up and has followed that path since.

  • Tony

    The idea of calling Noam Chomsky anything, but brilliant is beyond laughable. I bet most of these people don't read documents from the state department or the international record. Then again they are probably middle class Americans who don't know any better.