XPost: can.politics, can.taxes, edm.general   
   XPost: calgary.general   
   From: Sheep....@..711.34512..WBCHNC.News.ukuscan.ca   
      
   "Chom Noamsky"  wrote in message   
   news:AMYUk.1671$jr4.834@edtnps82...   
   >   
   > I guess you can understand why the average person would be a wee bit   
   > skeptical based on the information given (unless you're Mark Hansel or   
   Alex   
   > Jones).   
      
   It plain to see you been living in a box for too long chimpy..Your hero's   
   are laughing there asses off at you clowns..   
      
   Howard Zinn: "I Don't Care" If 9/11 Was An Inside Job   
      
   Tuesday, November 18, 2008   
      
   World renowned peace activist and left-wing anti-war icon Howard Zinn   
   recently told an audience that he didn't care if 9/11 was an inside job,   
   echoing the disdainful and apathetic rhetoric of fellow liberal gatekeepers   
   Noam Chomsky and Alexander Cockburn in dismissing the efforts of the 9/11   
   truth movement.   
      
   Buddy Moore, Independent Candidate for US Senate in Colorado, asked Zinn if   
   he would join him in voicing doubts about the official 9/11 story and in   
   particular the demolition of the twin towers and Building 7.   
      
   Zinn said he was skeptical of the official story but then stated, "I don't   
   know much about the situation and the truth is, I don't care that much about   
   it, that's passed..that's a diversion from what we really have to do,"   
   adding that debating who was behind 9/11, "gets in the way of dealing with   
   the immediate situation".   
      
   Moore attempted to ask Zinn a follow up question about allowing the   
   perpetrators to go free but was largely shouted down by Zinn's fawning army   
   of left-wing sycophants.   
      
   Zinn's comments echo similar sentiments expressed by fellow left-wing   
   luminary, Noam Chomsky, who has repeatedly expressed arrogance and contempt   
   towards the 9/11 truth movement while invoking apathy towards the contention   
   that there was government complicity in the attacks, despite the fact that   
   the 9/11 attacks happening exactly as the government maintains was key to   
   launching the invasions of both Afghanistan and Iraq, as well as the massive   
   rollback in civil liberties that has occurred over the last seven years.   
      
   During a 2006 Internet forum event, Chomsky claimed that the 9/11 truth   
   movement peddled "arcane and dubious theories" and had distracted activists   
   from pursuing "crimes that are far more serious than blowing up the WTC,"   
   presumably belittling the deaths of around 2,000 Americans, along with   
   hundreds of thousands of Afghanis and Iraqis, as well as thousands of U.S.   
   troops in the wars that followed that could not have been launched without   
   the pretext of 9/11.   
      
   When a critic asked Chomsky why he was so dismissive of the supposition that   
   9/11 was a false flag event, pointing out numerous other examples throughout   
   history including the bombing of the Maine, the Gulf of Tonkin incident and   
   Pearl Harbor, Chomsky merely reiterated his insolence, stating, "The concept   
   of "false flag operation" is not a very serious one, in my opinion. None of   
   the examples you describe, or any other in history, has even a remote   
   resemblance to the alleged 9/11 conspiracy. I'd suggest that you look at   
   each of them carefully."   
      
   Chomsky actually dismissed U.S. government complicity in 9/11 a mere four   
   months after the event, and over a year before it was again invoked as a   
   reason to invade Iraq, when he told an audience at a FAIR event at New York'   
   s Town Hall, 22 January 2002, "That's an internet theory and it's hopelessly   
   implausible. Hopelessly implausible. So hopelessly implausible I don't see   
   any point in talking about it," in response to a question about U.S.   
   government foreknowledge.   
      
   Note that Professor Chomsky also vehemently maintains that Lee Harvey Oswald   
   was the long gunman in the JFK assassination, even despite polls showing   
   that around 80 per cent of the American public believe otherwise.   
      
   Chomsky was presented with convincing evidence for a wider plot by JFK   
   assassination experts as far back as 1969 and according to Selwyn   
   Bromberger, an MIT philosophy professor who had sit in on the discussion,   
   Chomsky indicated that he believed there was a conspiracy, but has failed to   
   voice his conclusion for nearly 40 years.   
      
   It's painfully clear that the likes of Zinn and Chomsky are intellectual   
   cowards who, despite being abundantly aware of the fact that both 9/11 and   
   the JFK assassination represent far wider conspiracies than the official   
   version of events dictates, they are afraid of using their prominent   
   soapboxes to bring either subject to wider attention for fear of whatever   
   reprisals might ensue. As Vincent Salandria enunciates, this makes them   
   worse than disinformation agents.   
      
   "I agree that Professor Chomsky is not a CIA agent," states Salandria, "But   
   with respect to his pronouncements on the JFK assassination he is worse than   
   a CIA agent. Without being an agent, with his enormous prestige as a   
   thinker, as an independent radical, as a courageous man, he does the work of   
   the agency."   
      
   Indeed, at the time of the release of Oliver Stone's JFK movie, Howard Zinn,   
   Noam Chomsky and another liberal luminary, Alexander Cockburn, went on a   
   seemingly orchestrated media campaign in an attempt to convince the public   
   that the JFK assassination was not a wider conspiracy and also that it didn'   
   t matter even if it was.   
      
   "When cornered themselves, Chomsky and Cockburn resort to rhetorical devices   
   like exaggeration, sarcasm, and ridicule. In other words, they resort to   
   propaganda and evasion," notes one blogger.   
      
   The same rhetoric was utilized when questions about 9/11 reached a   
   crescendo. Cockburn, Zinn and Chomsky not only dismiss clear evidence that   
   the official story is demonstrably false, but in addition attempt to   
   generate apathy around the whole issue, classic gatekeeper behavior in   
   preventing the left from becoming active in pursuing the truth about 9/11.   
      
   ......................   
      
   Do You Care Who Carries Out the Next Attack on America?   
      
   Before we launch world war 3, ask yourself: would you care if Iran, China   
   and Russia were really behind the attacks? Of course you would.   
      
   ...................   
      
   November 18, 2008   
      
   It is Spring 2009.   
      
   Just as many people have warned, a series of attacks using nuclear "dirty   
   bombs" kills thousands of Americans.   
      
   Government intelligence agencies point to Iran, China and Russia as the   
   source of the attacks.   
      
   The president and Congress set in motion plans for war against the 3 giants.   
   A war which will undoubtedly cost tens of trillions of dollars, kill   
   thousands of Americans, and cause untold misery for years to come.   
      
   Before we launch world war 3, ask yourself: would you care if Iran, China   
   and Russia were really behind the attacks?   
      
   Of course you would.   
      
   Well, then you would also want to know whether Bin Laden was really behind   
      
   [continued in next message]   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)