Noam Chomsky, Heroic or Evil?
As an aspiring publisher and former admirer of Professor Noam Chomsky, I have had occasion to listen to him twice, both times in New York City. The first time I heard him speak, he said something from which I learned, and so, too, the second time. But when I tried to debate him regarding the Kennedy Assassination as did my then husband, a man who was drafted so as to serve in Vietnam, after President Kennedy had been assassinated, which garnered him being exposed to Agent Orange, Professor Chomsky disagreed, and absolutely nothing would cause him to change his mind.
The letter that he sent me, which I included in the icon on my Web site that says Testimonials proves that Noam Chomsky is a hypocrite, because he does not seek that which I seek, i.e. accountability by the US Congress. Therefore, do take that letter with a grain of salt, because it is not worth anything.
Here is proof that Professor Noam Chomsky is what I have realized for several years now in an article written by Daniel L. Abrahamson.
Noam Chomsky: Controlled Asset of the New World Order
Chomsky as gatekeeper and master propagandist
By Daniel L. Abrahamson
The Pied Piper of the Left
Noam Chomsky is often hailed as America's premier dissident intellectual, a fearless purveyor of truth fighting against media propaganda, murderous U.S. foreign policy, and the crimes of profit-hungry transnational corporations.
He enjoys a slavish cult-like following from millions leftist students, journalists, and activists worldwide who fawn over his dense books as if they were scripture. To them, Chomsky is the supreme deity, a priestly master whose logic cannot be questioned.
However, as one begins to examine the interviews and writings of Chomsky, a different picture emerges. His books, so vociferously lauded in leftist circles, appear to be calculated disinformation designed to distract and confuse honest activists. Since the 1960's, Chomsky has acted as the premier Left gatekeeper, using his elevated status to cover up the major crimes of the global elite.
His formula over the years has stayed consistent: blame "America" and "corporations" while failing to examine the hidden Globalist overclass which pulls the strings, using the U.S. as an engine of creation and destruction. Then after pinning all the worlds ills on American imperialism, Chomsky offers the solution of world government under the United Nations.
In his book "The Conspirator's Hierarchy," Dr. John Coleman named Chomsky as a deep cover CIA agent working to undermine social protest groups. Certainly Dr. Coleman's claims appear validated by an honest review of Chomsky's role as a Left gatekeeper.
Since 9-11 [the attacks of 2001-09-11], he has steadfastly refused to discuss the evidence of government complicity and prior knowledge. Furthermore, he claims that the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), Bilderberg Committee, and Trilateral Commission are "nothing organizations." When critiquing poverty, he never mentions the Federal Reserve and their role in manipulating the cycle of debt.
Similarly, he claims that the CIA was never a rogue organization and is an innocent scapegoat; that JFK was killed by the lone assassin Lee Harvey Oswald; that the obvious vote fraud in 2004 did not occur; and that "peak oil" is real and good for humanity.
What he does advocate is population control, gun control, support for UNESCO, and the end of national sovereignty in favor of a one-world government under the U.N. In other words, the major goals of the New World Order.
Chomsky's role in propaganda paradigm is much like that of Karl Marx: to present a false liberation ideology which actually supports the desired solutions of the elite. Marx pointed out the inequalities and brutality of capitalism and then advocated a one world bank, army, and government with the abolition of private property and religion; in other words, the major goals of the New World Order.
Tens of millions of activists worldwide still remain trapped by this scam, failing to recognize the inherent autocratic and elitist structures of Marxism-Leninism or the newer incarnation under Chomsky.
The Globalist elites and their army of social scientists at the Tavistock Institute understand that people are going to question the inequities of the current economic system. For example, why is wealth distributed so unequally between classes and countries? Why are those living in third world nations allowed to die from preventable diseases and starvation? Why does the U.S. government sponsor and direct such murderous foreign policy? Why was America attacked on 9-11?
In other words, why is the world embroiled in such violence? Who is behind all this suffering? And most importantly, what solutions would relieve the poverty and destruction plaguing the worldwide population?
Enter Chomsky, the controlled opposition, to play the role of re-direct agent. He discusses a mere fraction of the real elite manipulation and then quickly pushes his followers into dead-end solutions and alienating rhetoric. Chomsky's hero status is further amplified by Left gatekeeper publications like Z Magazine, DemocracyNow!, The Progressive, and The Nation.
Is it a coincidence that all of those magazines receive major funding from Globalist front-groups like the Rockefeller Foundation, Ford Foundation, Carnegie Endowment, and MacArthur Foundation? Chomsky may be the head gatekeeper, but he works alongside a network of fellow Globalist assets like Amy Goodman who do their best to appear radical while avoiding all the hardcore issues and deliberately leading the Left into oblivion.
The following analysis will show that Chomsky, a deep cover agent for the New World Order, a master of black propaganda whose true motives become clear with a sober and honest examination.
September 11, 2001
Noam Chomsky has acted as the premier Left gatekeeper in the aftermath of the 9-11 crimes, lashing out at the 9-11 truth movement and claiming [that] any suggestions of government complicity are fabrications. The "radical" Chomsky takes a position so deeply rooted in denial that it makes the staged 9-11 whitewash commission look like an honest study. He belligerently refuses to discuss any of the massive evidence proving government foreknowledge and participation in the crimes, claiming it would destroy the activist movements worldwide:
"If the left spends its time on this, that's the end of the left, in my opinion: the mainstream would be utterly delighted. It is highly likely that nothing significant will be found. And if - which I very greatly doubt - something is found that would quickly send everyone in Washington to the death chamber, the left is unlikely to emerge triumphant."
In other words, Chomsky is telling his followers to ignore the evidence because according to him, none exists. However even if there is massive evidence, responsible activists should ignore it because it would be "the end of the Left." Chomsky's role as a 9-11 gatekeeper goes even further as he denies each piece of evidence individually. The following examples should suffice:
[First], as most honest 9-11 researchers know, 7 of the accused 19 hijackers are alive, proving the official story is a fabrication. Many of the remaining 12 were trained as U.S. Air Force bases and CIA-connected Huffman Aviation [in Venice, FL]. Many of the accused "religious fanatics" acted more like degenerate contract agents, as they flashed wads of cash, visited strip clubs, drank profusely, blew cocaine, smoked weed, cavorted with strippers and had strange meetings in the drug-rich Florida keys.
Men like Mohammed Atta fit the M.O. of an undercover CIA drug runner: a man trained at U.S. Air Force bases, fluent in many languages, able to evade INS regulations, working with drug dealers, and receiving wired bank funds from CIA-linked Pakistani intelligence. There remains no photographic evidence of these supposed hijackers ever getting on the planes (walking through airport security does not count). Furthermore, the autopsy list of Flight 77 which supposedly hit the Pentagon listed none of the accused hijackers.
Regarding the evidence of government complicity in training the hijackers, Chomsky wrote the following:
"Nothing empirical is impossible. Thus, it is conceivable that everyone in the White House is totally insane. And in my opinion, that's what they would have had to be to try something that would have been very likely to turn into an utter fiasco, and if by some miracle had succeeded, would almost certainly have leaked, so that they would all be facing the death sentence. Possible, but not likely."
[Second], what about the unprecedented NORAD [North American Air Defense] stand down on 9-11 which broke standard operation procedure? Over 67 times in 2001, NORAD had dispatched [interceptors for] jets when they deviated from their flight path. In 1999, when golfer Payne Stewart's single engine Lear [jet] depressurized, NORAD planes were flying around the vessel in 20 minutes.
But on 9-11, Ben Sliney, in his first day on the job as hijacking coordinator for the FAA, delayed calls to NORAD. Meanwhile NORAD ran at least 7 hijacking drills that morning like Operation Vigilant Guardian, where commercial jets crashed into government buildings in Manhattan, Washington DC, and Virginia. These "mock" drills, designed to [go] live on 9-11, helped to distract the honest people within NORAD and the FAA, and to evade suspicion from patriotic investigators within the CIA, FBI, and NSA's Echelon network.
Of the subject of the NORAD stand down, Chomsky wrote the following:
"Whether NORAD followed SOP, I have no idea, not having investigated the matter. I think the case is very weak, and diverts people from the really serious issues."
[Third], how about the document called "Operation Northwoods" signed off in 1962 by the Joint Chiefs of Staff like Generals Lemnitzer and Landsdale? These men, sworn to protect the Constitution, devised a plan to create false-flag terrorism in order to engineer a war with Cuba. Their treasonous plans included the following:
"Hijacking attempts against civil air and surface craft could appear to continue as harassing measures condoned by the Government of Cuba."
"Exploding a few plastic bombs in carefully chosen spots, the arrest of Cuban agents and the release of prepared documents substantiating Cuban involvement also would be helpful in projecting the idea of an irresponsible government."
"We could blow up a U.S. ship in Guantanamo Bay and blame Cuba . . . casualty lists in U.S. newspapers cause a helpful wave of indignation."
This document was discovered in the National Archives and has been the subject of mainstream articles by ABC News and others. It stands as clear evidence that the U.S. government has designed plans to engineer terrorist attacks and blame them on foreign enemies. Yet Noam Chomsky does not think the Northwoods document matters:
"Operation Northwoods example is only one of many reasons for being skeptical about this: it doesn't even come close, and it was not carried out. Furthermore, there is nothing in history that even remotely resembles what is being proposed. Of course, that does not show that the thesis is impossible: nothing could show that, by definition. And if someone can put together some evidence and refute the arguments as to why it is extraordinarily unlikely, then the matter will be worth pursuing."
Chomsky's role as the chief 9-11 gatekeeper proves he is distracting his leftist followers from the truth. Instead of facing the clear facts, he claims that 19 hijackers did it and that al-Qaeda is a real terrorist enemy. When presented with documented evidence, from living hijacker patsies to the NORAD stand down, he simply claims it doesn't exist. He resorts to emotional "they would never do it" appeals in order to deny the obvious.
Chomsky is exhibiting far more than logical skepticism, but instead is actively engaging in disinformation.
9-11 Prior Knowledge
Chomsky's denial of government complicity in the crimes of September 11  is one thing, but he goes further, claiming the government had no prior knowledge of the attacks. Mind you, this is a position even weaker than Michael Moore's tepid [documentary film] "Fahrenheit 9-11", which at least tacitly suggested a degree of prior knowledge.
Chomsky's position is untenable. For a man who prides himself on science and logic, his steadfast refusal to acknowledge mainstream media reports finds him using arguments similar to Holocaust deniers: one can show them photographs, videos, testimony, and physical evidence but the burden of proof is impossible. Such is the case with Chomsky who ignores the many government admissions of prior knowledge widely available even in the 9-11 whitewash commission report. Here is Noam Chomsky writing on government prior knowledge:
"That tells us even less. Every intelligence agency is flooded, daily, with information of very low credibility. In retrospect, one can sometimes pick out pieces that mean something. At the time, that's a virtual impossibility. By arguments like this we can prove that someone blew up the White House yesterday."
If they did not have prior knowledge, why were [vice president] Cheney and NORAD running drills that morning where hijacked jets flew into buildings in New York, Washington DC and Virginia? Also, wouldn't the NSA's Echelon network have picked up the chatter?
Of course, Chomsky does not even admit the Echelon network exists. This despite the NSA's openly acknowledged ability to monitor all phone calls, emails and satellite communication with keyword software which can identify phrases and immediately begin tracking the communication. This despite their admitted bases at Fort Meade [Maryland], with sister sites in the UK, Australia, Canada, New Zealand and other unknown locations.
Students of the intelligence world know full well that the NSA's Echelon network picked up the chatter for weeks before the attacks. In fact, the NSA admitted it, saying that on September 10 agents intercepted calls from hijackers but, ahem, did not translate them until after the attacks. Such admissions are red herrings, clearly designed to excuse massive prior knowledge at tops levels of the intelligence circles.
What about the Presidental Daily Briefing given to Bush in late August which discussed the threat of hijacked jets? What about intelligence groups like Able Danger and FBI agents like Robert Wright who warned of the flight school trainees? What about FBI agent John O'Neill's investigation into Al-Qaeda financing which was quashed by Bush? What about attorney David Schippers who desperately tried to warn [attorney general] Ashcroft about the impending attacks? Why was the CIA admittedly tracking the accused hijackers since 2000? Why was FEMA running drills in Manhattan that morning out of [building] WTC-7? Why did PNAC documents like "Rebuilding America's Defenses" call for "helpful Pearl Harbor style" attacks?
Those are just a smattering of the mountain of evidence proving beyond any reasonable doubt that the U.S. government had prior knowledge. But Chomsky must deny these, because his role is to mislead and distract while chastising the 9-11 truth movement.
CFR / Bilderberg / Trilateral Commission
Before and after 9-11, the key role for the Left Gatekeepers like Chomsky has been denying the existence of the overclass which prints the money, funds and manages the wars, ships the drugs, controls entire industries, and creates the scientific propaganda which plagues society. Instead they critique mid-level minions and front corporations while speaking in glittering generalities.
In the world of Left gatekeepers, the New World Order does not exist. There are no elite plans for global government. Instead they paint the picture of a profit-motivated world in which corporations control the government. But merely blaming corporations misses the forces which own their assets, manage their resources, control their boards of directors, and pull their strings.
Chomsky steadfastly denies the role of the Council on Foreign Relations, Bilderberg Committee, and Trilateral Commission in the creation and management of the wars and poverty he claims to condemn. When speaking on such "conspiracies," he said the following:
"It's the same with the Trilateral Commission, the Council on Foreign Relations, all these other things the people are racing around searching for conspiracy theories about - they're "nothing" organizations. Of course they're there, obviously rich people get together and talk to each other, and play golf with one another, and plan together-that's not a big surprise. But these conspiracy theories people are putting their energies into have virtually nothing to do with the way the institutions actually function." (Understanding Power, p. 348)
The CFR, funded by Wall Street and the Rockefellers after [World War I], is an organization openly sworn to destroying American national sovereignty in favor of world government. They have acted as the de-facto "secret team" in managing U.S. domestic and foreign policy, orchestrating wars like Vietnam and the first Gulf War. Almost all executives in the CIA and State Department have been members of the CFR, whether it was Dean Rusk, Allen Dulles and Robert McNamara during Vietnam, or Richard Armitage and George Tenet during the crimes of 9-11.
The CFR has been the dominant roundtable group pushing for a Panamerican Union by 2010 which would dissolve national borders and unite Mexico, Canada, and America under a single currency, with biometric ID cards and GPS-tracked vehicles on camera-strewn superhighways. How can Chomsky seriously claim the CFR is a "nothing organization" when their role in crafting policy is so clear? Whom is he trying to protect in denying the treasonous goals of the CFR?
Chomsky's stonewalling on the Bilderberg Group raises even more suspicions. Since 1954 the Bilderberg has served as the central brain of the New World Order, the major secret gathering for Globalist agents from across the globe. Bilderberg chairmen like Prince Bernhard and David Rockefeller have pushed for total global government, eugenics population control, engineering wars, and controlling the worldwide economy. Top politicians from America and Europe also undergo a grooming process at the Bilderberg [meetings]. Bill Clinton went in 1991 as Rockefeller's personal guest, and Tony Blair attended in 1993 before becoming Prime Minister. John Kerry attended in 2000, and John Edwards did two weeks before becoming the VP nominee in 2004.
Major members of the media, such as editors from the Economist, NY Times, Newsweek, Washington Post, [and] US News and World Report are regular attendees. Yet they rarely if ever mention the proceedings, sworn to secrecy by their globalist masters.
Nevertheless in recent years, the truth has emerged. Major media outlets like the BBC admit [that] the Bilderberg is planning for a one-world currency, bank, and army. Articles in Reuters and the Financial Times of London have admitted the existence of the Bilderberg Group, their grooming of politicians, and their secret plans for world governance. If these mainstream media reporters can admit the major role of the Bilderberg in shaping world affairs, why can't Chomsky? Why is he holding back?
Similarly, how can Chomsky seriously ignore the role of the Trilateral Commission, the brainchild of Globalist masters David Rockefeller and Zbigniew Brzezinski? This is the same Brzezinski who helped direct the first CIA funds to Osama bin Laden [in the 1980s], and in his book "Between Two Ages" called for a technotronic society with a microchipped population.
The Trilateral Commission openly admits they are trying to control the economy through closer European-Japanese-American cooperation. They operate much like the CFR, counting the worlds top elites, politicians, corporate executives, and media barons as members. They have been instrumental in creating the destructive "free trade" agreements that are destroying America's economy and national sovereignty in order to usher in world governance.
[Note that David Rockefeller was also Chairman of the CFR for many years prior to founding the Trilateral Commission. -ed]
Journalist Jim Tucker, a Spotlight reporter with impeccable credentials, also links the Trilateral Commission to the international narcotics trade, the $500 billion-plus racket from heroin and cocaine alone which helps fund the Globalist's house of cards.
What would motivate Chomsky to call the Trilateral Commission a "nothing organization?" Is it because they echo his goal of a world government? Or are there darker forces at work? When balanced against over 50 years of documented evidence, Chomsky's claims are exposed as nothing more than spurious lies and denial.
The Federal Reserve
Similarly, while Chomsky bemoans the widespread poverty in America and the Third World, he has never spoken publicly on the role of the Federal Reserve. Therefore most Leftist activists are unaware of the role played by this privately owned bank cartel which prints worthless fiat currency out of thin air. Since its secret formation at Jekyll Island in 1910, and subsequent illegal passage [of the Federal Reserve Act] during the Wilson administration, the Federal Reserve has held the American economy hostage: creating inflation and boom & bust cycles through managed money supply and interest rates.
Furthermore, every dollar printed is merely debt charged to the federal government. Thus while it only costs 10 cents to print a $100 bill, the U.S. government foots the bill for the full $100 to the private Fed.
The creation of the Federal Reserve, owned largely by the Rockefeller, Morgan, and Rothschild interests, has eluded the "radical" Chomsky. Furthermore he does not discuss the proven role of the Fed in creating recessions and depressions in order to purchase assets at a fraction of their value.
Chomsky ignores the role of the fiat currency system which drives down wages, inflates prices, and puts the American economy under the iron claw of a few elite families. Since the dollar is the base currency for worldwide trade and the current economic house of cards, shouldn't these topics be discussed?
Perhaps Chomsky stays mute because a central bank fits into his ideology. After all, one of the key planks in the Marxist and Fabian socialist agenda is a managed central bank in order to control the economy. Or perhaps Chomsky fears discussion of the Fed would expose the real hidden hand that runs the world economy. For him it is easier to blast the front corporations and low-level grocery boys.
(For more, see " Secrets of the Federal Reserve")
If he denies even basic government foreknowledge of 9-11, should it be any surprise that Chomsky avoids criticism of the CIA? When asked about the links between the CIA and bin Laden, and the CIA's overt support of the Taliban, Chomsky wrote the following:
"CIA support for bin Laden (which is not quite accurate) or the Taliban (also not quite accurate) doesn't seem to me remotely relevant."
How can Chomsky write this with a straight face? He is simply ignoring the documented evidence of CIA funding for the "freedom fighters" known as al-Qaeda, totaling over $6 billion. The cozy CIA/al-Qaeda relationship continued through the Bosnian conflict via training of the drug-peddling Kosovo Liberation Army.
What about the meetings between Taliban leaders, oil executives, and Bush administration officials from January to August 2001 to discuss building an oil and gas pipeline for Unocal? Chomsky also denies the mainstream reports from UK and French newspapers about two top CIA agents meeting with bin Laden for over ten days in July 2001 while he received dialysis at the American Hospital in Dubai.
But Chomsky goes further than that. While claiming to critique the CIA, he absolves the agency of any responsibility for its actions, from [its] Nazi origins via Project Paperclip to heinous mind control experiments like MK ULTRA. This horrific period in CIA history, a true Rosetta stone in understanding the New World Order, is scientifically ignored by Chomsky, who sees [or portrays -ed] the CIA as an innocent victim of White House orders:
"Or take the CIA, which is considered the source of a lot of these conspiracies; we have a ton of information about it, and as I read the information, the CIA is basically just an obedient branch of the White House. I mean sure, the CIA has done things around the world- but as far as we know, it hasn't done anything on its own.
There's very little evidence-in fact, I don't know of any-that the CIA is some kind of rogue elephant, you know, off on its own doing things. What the record shows is that the C.I.A. is just an agency of the White House, which sometimes carries out operations for which the Executive branch wants what's called "plausible deniability"; in other words, if something goes wrong, we don't want it to look like we did, those guys in the CIA did it, and we can throw some of them to the wolves if we need to. That's basically the role of the CIA, along with mostly just a collection of information."
(Chomsky, "Understanding Power")
Like all of Chomsky's claims, this one is based on emotion, conjecture, and opinion. He does not cite any specifics, knowing full well that his fawning minions will accept his word as gospel. Chomsky sees the CIA as a pathetic collection of scapegoat bureaucrats, acting as grocery boys for their master President. According to him, the CIA does not carry out secret projects on their own, and if accused of such, are innocent.
The JFK Assassination and CIA Role
Therefore is it any surprise that Chomsky endorses the lone assassin and magic bullet theory in the assassination of JFK? From his emergence as a guru of the Left in the late 60's, Chomsky has belittled anyone researching the anomolies stemming from the official story and Warren Commission cover-up. According to him, any examination is a complete waste of time:
"The Kennedy assassination cult is probably the most striking case. I mean, you have all these people doing super-scholarly intensive research, and trying to find out just who talked to whom, and what's the exact contours were of this supposed high-level conspiracy - it's all complete nonsense. As soon as you look into the various theories, they always collapse, there's just nothing there. But in many places, the left has just fallen apart on the basis of these sheer cults."
(Chomsky, "Understanding Power")
Chomsky's position puts him in the less than 15% of Americans who believe Oswald was the lone shooter. For such a self-proclaimed "anarchist" radical, Chomsky's trust in the Warren Commission's official story seems akin to a child's belief in Santa Claus.
The facts, of course, tell a different story. While far from perfect man, Kennedy ran afoul by opposing the very forces that took over after his death. He began withdrawing 5,000 CIA "advisers" from Vietnam; fired CIA chiefs Allen Dulles and Richard Bissell; disbanded the CIA and handed over covert operations to the State Department; ordered the creation of a silver-backed government currency to break the Federal Reserve monopoly; turned down the Operation Northwoods plan to engineer false flag terrorism and blame it on Cuba; and refused to invade Cuba and launch a full scale nuclear war during the Missile Crisis, a plan favored by hawks like General Curtis LeMay.
Chomsky ignores the true history of the Kennedy presidency because it would expose the shadow government takeover after his assassination.
What about Chomsky's claims that the CIA never acts as a rogue elephant? Do they hold up?
MK ULTRA and Project Paperclip
Chomsky has never publicly acknowledged the covert CIA mind control program known as MK ULTRA and its many offshoots. This program alone shows how the CIA was indeed a rogue elephant, as they ran an illegal campaign of propaganda, brainwashing, sex slavery, and poisoning of citizens.
In 1946, Globalist bagman Harry Truman began a covert plan [Operation Paperclip] to smuggle top Nazi SS officers, scientists, and propagandists into America. Those same war criminals quickly became the front line for the postwar U.S. intelligence machine. Reinhard Gehlen, one of Hitler's top intelligence chiefs, led postwar European intelligence for the CIA, becoming the darling of head honcho Allen Dulles.
Then, using his same crew of Gestapo and SS, aided by the Vatican and sponsored by the CIA, Gehlen set up "rat lines" which smuggled 5,000 of the worst Nazi criminals into South and Central America. Butchers like Klaus Barbie, Martin Bormann and Josef Mengele among others owed their freedom to this program.
Those same men would later aid CIA coups in Angentina, Chile, Paraguay, Brazil and other countries. After all, they were veteran experts: early Gehlen projects had included rigging elections in Italy and France.
By 1955, more than 760 German scientists had been became U.S. citizens, many specializing in black research projects. This growing cabal of Nazi doctors found a happy marriage with the control freak elitists infesting the NSA, CIA, and black operations government.
These men birthed the MK ULTRA program, focusing on mass mind control via drugs, hypnosis, subliminals, and pulsed electromagnetic waves. It was this mad science, spawned in the Nazi labs of Dr. Josef Mengele, that now obsessed men like Sidney Gottlieb, John Lilly, Jose Delgado and Ewen Cameron.
Their most famous project was the creation of "Manchurian candidates", used for political assassinations, drug transportation, espionage, and sabotage. Yet this was not limited to Sirhan Sirhan.
In fact, both Gottlieb and Cameron helped train thousands of pre-adolescent children for use in child prostitution, sex slavery, blackmail, satanic rituals and murder. Known as the Monarch Project, children were kidnaped from American streets and foreign nations and then programmed with trauma based mind control.
Other common victims for experimentation included prisoners, the homeless, and residents of mental institutions, all cherry-picked because they were defenseless. Details of this horrific and still operational program are available in rare and highly suppressed texts of Fritz Springmeier.
Why does Chomsky refuse to discuss MK ULTRA and its sister projects? Why does he claim the CIA was merely a pawn of the White House, when the record proves that Eisenhower and Kennedy had little, if any knowledge of MK ULTRA? Simply put: Why is Noam Chomsky covering for the CIA?
Elite Child Sex Rings
The Monarch Project of prostituting children deserves further mention (although Chomsky would disagree). In 1988, Vice President Bush was caught having 15 year-old callboy prostitutes visiting the White House late at night. The credit cards records to prove it were splashed across the front page of the Washington Times: "Homosexual Prostitution Inquiry Ensnares VIP's with Reagan, Bush Sr."
Unfortunately the star witness, [Bush aide] Craig Spence, was suicided in his hotel with piano wire before he could testify. Books like "The Franklin Coverup" by John DeCamp have further proven the links between the CIA and Army intelligence to the elite sex slavery rings. Cases like the "The Finders" in Washington DC, where customs agents discovered a CIA warehouse full of child porn and satanic torture [material], stand as yet further evidence.
In the former Yugloslavia, CIA front company Dyncorp has been convicted of operating in the human slave trade and using their C-130's [cargo planes] to ship many of the 200,000 women and children smuggled out every year. Furthermore, mainstream news outlets have shown evidence of U.N. "peacekeepers" assisting the sex trade in the Democratic Republic of Congo and Balkans.
Despite the voluminous amount of grotesque evidence, Chomsky has never discussed the elite sex trade. This is an issue so shocking, so paradigm-altering, that his Leftist followers would no longer trust their loving mother government, and that is the last thing Chomsky wants. After all, if the Leftists knew that top level politicians [and their masters -ed] are actually pedophiles practicing satanic ritual abuse, they would no longer trust the savior world government. The absence of Chomsky and the Left on the suffering of these children speaks volumes about their true moral character and motives.
Projects MK ARTICHOKE and MK NAOMI
Other MK ULTRA side projects included pushing LSD to the youth culture and attaching electrodes into prisoners heads, the latter perfected by Dr. Delgado. Adjunct programs like MK NAOMI and MK ARTICHOKE focused on genetically engineered viruses, biological agents, and radiation effects on American citizens. Common experiments included testing biological agents and atomic weapons radiation on soldiers, the mentally handicapped, people in subways, and even whole towns; putting cancer viruses into polio vaccines; and exposing pregnant women to radiation to test the effects on the fetus. These experiments have been documented as continuing into the 1980's and likely still continue today.
Chomsky does not discuss these horrendous programs, because it would awaken his readers to the cruelest fact: that the U.S. government will murder its own citizens and soldiers, killing hundreds of thousands of unwitting subjects simply for political gain. After all, if they would feed radiated breakfast cereal to thousands of retarded children, would these same parasitic elites not also kill more than 2,800 Americans on September 11?
Of course, MK ULTRA lives on today in our drinking water. It was around the time of its inception, in the 1950's, that the U.S. government began adding sodium fluoride to tap water in massive quantities. Should we be shocked? After all, the first people to use the deadly neurotoxin were the Nazis, who found [that] it pacified the concentration camp prisoners. Now, thanks to imported Nazi doctors helping our friendly neighborhood CIA, American citizens could enjoy the same privilege as those in Hitler's camps.
Chomsky has never discussed the effects of sodium fluoride, nor the lead and arsenic used in water as silent weapons of pacification [and contraception -ed]. As a scientist, he is apparently uninterested in sodium fluoride's proven link to cancer, leukemia, osteoporosis, Alzheimer disease, and brain damage.
So, should we be surprised that he never writes about the deadly poison aspartame found in thousands of products? Or genetically modified foods and growth hormones which destroy immune systems while causing blood disorders and swelling of the organs? Or cell phones which emit deadly microwave radiation leading to cancer, vision loss, and (according to published BBC reports) altering human DNA? Or the GWEN towers which pulse deadly ELF radiation across America?
Rockefeller Pharma Cartel
The Nazi doctors who didn't end up in American intelligence found cushy jobs in the pharmaceutical cartel firms like Merck and Eli Lilly. Chomsky never discusses the history of these firms; nor the Rockefeller control over the American Medical Association; nor the link between mercury-tainted vaccines and brain damage; nor the deadly mind control drugs like SSRI's (Prozac, Zoloft, etc.) and amphetamine-based Adderall/Ritalin pills pimped out to helpless children.
These drugs cause bone degeneration, memory loss, suicidal tendencies and added depression to the poor kids gobbling them like Flintstone's chewables [vitamins], all at the advice of their pill-pusher death merchant doctors. Meanwhile Chomsky stays true to form, ignoring these matters and instead calling for socialized, Federally-controlled healthcare which would further subsidize the pharma cartel. This is just another example of his bait and switch tactics, a sloppy mess of disinfo and elite sponsored solutions. Psychiatry and the "New Freedom" Initiative
Chomsky and his [fellow] Left Gatekeepers also ignore the assault from psychiatric community, largely controlled by the Rockefellers and Tavistock Institute, who seek to define every neurosis as a mental illness in order to push more drugs. Bush has signed the "New Freedom Initiative" to forcibly psychologically test all K-12 students in public schools, screen them for "mental illnesses," and force the children to take the recommended drugs.
This brainwashing agenda was pushed by the pharma cartel, with Glaxo Smith Kline, Eli Lilly, Merck and others investing millions in buy-offs and lobbying. But news of this extraordinary Stalinist plan never graced the pages of Chomsky's editorials, nor Z Magazine, The Nation, the Progressive, and DemocracyNow!. Perhaps this is because the New Freedom Initiative fits into their goal of government-controlled socialized health care.
The New Freedom Initiative, bolder than Stalin's wildest dreams, is just a small part of the eugenics agenda - a dominant Globalist goal which Chomsky and his Left Gatekeeper bagmen aid and abet. Chomsky has never written about the sinister American Psychiatric Association, nor the role of its former chief, Dr. Ewen Cameron, the aforementioned MK ULTRA villain and CIA child programmer.
Key aspects of the scientific eugenics movement such as population control, abortion legalization, poisonous vaccinations, and stem cell research find their most vocal advocates on the far Left of the managed political debate. Leftist college major [subjecs] like sociology advocate programs like parental licensing by the state, state-controlled child care, and Chinese style childbirth laws with forced sterilization as a penalty.
Leftists call for more vaccinations in the Third World despite the admittedly tainted vaccines used by the World Health Organization and UNICEF. All of this is indicative of an infiltrated movement, a Left deeply penetrated by Globalist agents driving activists into unwittingly championing the Brave New World.
(Also see " Scientific Dictatorship")
Population control by any means necessary is a major, some would say the major goal of the New World Order, perhaps even paramount to their goal of a cashless society control grid with microchipped slaves. The chief architects of population control are Bilderberg elitists like David and Nelson Rockefeller, Henry Kissinger, Prince Philip, Ted Turner, Alexander Haig, and Cyrus Vance. Their Malthusian nightmare requires killing 90% of the "useless eaters" through war, genetically engineered viruses, and engineered starvation. Declassified documents like NSM 200 and Global 2000 lay the plans out with cold precision.
Chomsky, the self-proclaimed radical, also advocates such depopulation methods. In Chomsky's book "Understanding Power," a collection of his talks with activists, a crowd member asks about population control, to which Chomsky responds:
"If we continue to produce energy by combustion, the human race isn't going to survive much longer…Yeah, population control is another issue where it doesn't matter if you do it, everybody has to do it. It's like traffic: I mean you can't make driving a car survivable by driving well yourself; there has to be kind of a social contract involved, otherwise it won't work." ("Understanding Power", p. 61)
Chomsky and other gatekeepers claim to maintain the moral high ground, but then advocate the eugenics agenda pushed by elite roundtable groups like the Bilderberg and Club of Rome. How can Chomsky claim to be an advocate for the Third World while simultaneously pushing for the managed murder agenda favored by Henry Kissinger?
Another one of the great successes of the Left gatekeeper has been pushing for the unconstitutional gun control agenda through their publications like The Nation, Z Magazine, The Progressive, and their internet kin at DemocracyNow! and Indymedia. It is a great achievement of propaganda when the supposed radicals "opposing Bush" call for a completely disarmed American populace and inflated budget for BATF thugs in ski masks. Chomsky mocks those who support the Constitutionally endowed right to bear arms. In fact, he says it doesn't exist:
"It's pretty clear that, taken literally, the Second Amendment doesn't permit people to have guns. But laws are never taken literally, including amendments to the Constitution or constitutional rights. Laws permit what the tenor of the times interprets them as permitting."
("Secrets, Lies, and Democracy")
Then later in the interview, Chomsky is asked if guns are a proper way to respond to government tyranny. He responds as follows:
"As for guns being the way to respond to this, that's outlandish. First of all, this is not a weak Third World country. If people have pistols, the government has tanks. If people get tanks, the government has atomic weapons. There's no way to deal with these issues by violent force, even if you think that that's morally legitimate.
Guns in the hands of American citizens are not going to make the country more benign. They're going to make it more brutal, ruthless, and destructive. So while one can recognize the motivation that lies behind some of the opposition to gun control, I think it's sadly misguided."
("Secrets, Lies and Democracy")
It would be one thing to hear such rhetoric out of the Fabian socialists in the Democratic party. But to have the supposed "fringe radicals" saying there is no second amendment and advocating gun seizures is remarkable. And because of globalist infiltration of the left, this policy once favored by Hitler, Stalin, Mao, and other mass murderers has found a comfortable home. Hence it has become common to hear activists protesting the Iraq quagmire while simultaneously calling for gun control.
Environmental Front Groups
As masters of propaganda, the Globalists have used their Left Gatekeepers to push eugenics and population control as necessary for the environment. This has been accomplished through the phony environmental movement and "Peak Oil" fabrications.
The Club of Rome, a globalist front group created in 1968, immediately began calling for population reduction under the guise of environmentalism. Other fronts like the World Wildlife Fund, managed by the aforementioned Prince Philip, vocally push for population control while seizing large swaths of land for "Mother Earth." Other pet projects such as the Kyoto Protocol, which would give the U.N. total control of energy resources, have floundered.
Past WWF board members have included Bilderberg founder Prince Bernhard, Hollinger media gopher and Bilderberg member Conrad Black, Shell chairman John Loudon, King Juan Carlos of Spain, Prince Henrik of Denmark, and accused drug dealer Henry Keswick.
Chomsky is one of the many re-direct agents who use the real environmental pollution problems to push for a fascist takeover by a world government. Much like the ideas discussed in the "Report From Iron Mountain," he uses the threat of global warming to justify totalitarian control:
"Suppose it was discovered tomorrow that the greenhouse effects has been way understimated, and that the catastrophic effects are actually going to set in 10 years from now, and not 100 years from now or something.
Well, given the state of the popular movements we have today, we'd probably have a fascist takeover-with everybody agreeing to it, because that would be the only method for survival that anyone could think of. I'd even agree to it, because there's just no other alternatives right now."
("Understanding Power", p. 388)
Here is Noam Chomsky, openly advocating a fascist takeover because the ends justify the means. This is classic problem-reaction-solution programming, as he points to the real threat of pollution and then offers the solution of tyranny.
(Also see " The Earth Charter and the Ark of Hope")
As previously stated, the environmental movement was funded and amplified by Globalist oil, banking, and drug cartels, with specific help from the Rockefeller Foundation. The WWF, along with other phony NGO's like the Sierra Club and Greenpeace consistently call for population reduction. Additionally these groups push the flat earth thesis of "Peak Oil," predicting that oil supplies will soon run out and of course…require massive worldwide population reductions.
Chomsky posted an entry called "Peak Oil" on his blog in June, 2004, writing the following: "The basic theory is incontrovertible. The only questions have to do with timing and cost."
Then in a radio interview with Steve Scherr, Chomsky said the following of Peak Oil:
"There's another side to this, there's a sense in which it's advantageous if the oil peak is earlier. The reason why is it will compel the world, primarily the U.S. here, to move toward something like sustainable energy. If there's unbounded amounts of hydrocarbons, we're just going to destroy the environment for human life or most biological life, so the earlier the peak is, in some respects - yes, it could be catastrophic, it could also be beneficial."
The "beneficial" aspects Chomsky discusses are likely the resulting population control and starvation that would ensue from such a shortage.
But, in reality, oil is abiotic and constantly regenerating. This, while huge wells go untapped in Russia, Equatorial Guinea, Nigeria, Sudan, Cuba, Indonesia, Iraq, Alaska, Venezuela, Bolivia, Norway, and the Gulf of Mexico [and Alaska -ed]. Additionally, refinery capacity has been deliberately shut down by the oil oligopoly in order to create artificial supply shortages. Market prices are controlled by the Anglo-American cartel and they intend to use this as a vehicle for engineered crises. At this year's Bilderberg meeting Henry Kissinger reportedly predicted $100 a barrel oil within a year. The only possible result is a complete worldwide depression.
It is within the "radical" Left that horror stories of diminishing oil find their home. Even within the 9-11 truth movement, authors like Mike Ruppert and Nafeez Ahmed have attempted to attach Peak Oil as the reason for government engineering of 9-11 and the wars in the Middle East. By polluting the activist movements with Peak Oil lies, the Globalists have created an army of strong advocates for $5 a gallon gasoline.
Project for the New American Century (PNAC)
Another triumph of Chomsky's disinfo campaign has been the active denial of the The Project for the New American Century (PNAC), a neocon group that published radical statements calling for world war, population control, and a worldwide police state back in 2000. The signatures on the documents included Dick Cheney and cabinet members like Paul Wolfowitz, Richard Armitage, Dov Zakheim, Donald Rumsfeld, Richard Perle, and Eliot Abrams.
It was Zakheim who previously ran Systems Planning Inc., which made remote-control software for commercial airliners. Also as comptroller of the Pentagon, he "lost" over $3 trillion of taxpayer money without explanation. Yet his corruption was not singular; after Bush took his figurehead position in the stolen election of 2000, all of the PNAC radicals became the architects of 9-11 and purveyors of pre-war lies about Iraq.
Their infamous "Rebuilding America's Defenses" document, produced in 2000 before 9-11, reads like prophecy, calling for theater wars against Iraq, Iran, and North Korea. They also admitted that "Further, the process of transformation, even if it brings revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event - like a new Pearl Harbor." September 11, anyone?
They also openly called for killer viruses to wipe out large sectors of the human population. The document states: "[A]dvanced forms of biological warfare that can 'target' specific genotypes may transform biological warfare from the realm of terror to a politically useful tool."
How can Chomsky and his kin ignore the statements of the PNAC cabal, whose mad plans for world domination read like the lost chapters of [Hitler's] "Mein Kampf"?
If the Left Gatekeepers won't discuss these published documents, how can we expect them to research the true history of AIDS and the potential emerging avian flu? Should we be surprised when they fail to mention the 60 plus dead microbiologists after 9-11, many of them leading researchers in emerging viruses? Should we look to Chomsky to find an expose of the heavy metals and biological agents in chemtrails?
Isreal and the Zionists
Many authors of the PNAC documents were radical Zionists linked to the Likud party in Israel, who presented similar plans to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in 1996 ("Policy for a Clean Break").
Chomsky, the supposed critic of Israel, has been praised by followers for his books like "The Fateful Triangle" which detail many Israeli war crimes. Furthermore he often criticizes the Isreali-linked network dominating U.S. foreign policy. But as always, Chomsky again avoids the hardcore issues, instead speaking in glittering generalities.
For example, he remains mute on the "Office of Special Plans," the ad-hoc nerve center of pre-war Iraq propaganda, run of Cheney's office. It was here that Zionist moles like Paul Wolfowitz, Larry Franklin, Douglas Feith, Stephen Cambone, and Richard Perle cooked up phony WMD threats, links to 9-11, and collaboration between secular Iraq and Al-Qaeda.
Those same gophers, many of them assets of the Israeli Likud party and intelligence syndicate Mossad, operated a two-way spy network; just as manufactured propaganda flowed from Mossad to the OSP moles, U.S. secrets on Iran secretly floated into Sharon's war cabinet.
In the middle of all the traitorous espionage was the mafia don of all lobbying cartels, the Israeli-controlled AIPAC. Top level AIPAC officers like Steve Rosen often acted as a go-between, then using that same fake intelligence to strong-arm the Congress where they control both sides (political parties).
All parties mentioned, from Rosen to Franklin, are now under investigation from the FBI and Justice Department for the aforementioned crimes. Major articles in the Washington Post now admit Franklin, working with Feith and Cambone, was passing secrets to Israel through AIPAC. Chomsky has never spoken publically about any of these topics, and certainly not the Mossad involvement in false-flag terror events like the USS Liberty and connections to 9-11.
When he isn't busy covering up the facts surrounding 9-11 or the crimes of the CIA, Chomsky spends time actively denying the vote fraud of 2004, which ushered in another term for the neocon dictatorship. Chomsky often brags that he does not vote in presidential elections, noting that both sides are owned by corporations. But he has openly denied the role of electronic voting fraud in 2000 and the more prominent example of 2004. In 2004, exit polls in Ohio and Florida showed John Kerry winning by a comfortable margin, but mysteriously [the official] numbers showed a Bush victory.
The room for vote fraud was immense. The Secretary of State in Ohio, Ken Blackwell, managed Bush's campaign in the state, much like Katherine Harris did in Florida during 2000. Diebold, the company which makes most of the electronic voting machines, is crawling with former CIA and NSA members and used convicted felons to design their software. The Diebold CEO Walden O'Dell is a Bush Pioneer [financial supporter] and wrote in a GOP fundraising letter that he was "committed to delivering electoral votes to the President."
The Diebold [voting machine software] code is private and has been exposed as being easily hacked by Bev Harris at BlackBoxVoting.org. In North Carolina and Georgia, machines were throwing out 5,000 block votes for Bush without explanation. But none of this seems to interest Chomsky, who finds the accusations of vote fraud to be without merit:
"I don't find the evidence compelling. An inaccurate count in itself is a random effect. As for collusion, yes, there are concerns, but concerns are not evidence. The problem that concerns you may or may not be real, but in my view, even if we take the worst case scenario, it is still marginal - just as the Florida chads were marginal in the 2000 elections. I know of no reason to suppose that electronic voting will have more than a random effect."
Chomsky and the gatekeepers cannot discuss the fraud of electronic voting because it would awaken too many people to the total bankruptcy of the system. It is important that college activists at Berkeley think their vote for Ralph Nader counted. If they knew the entire game was rigged like a Don King boxing match, too many illusions would break down.
Chomsky plays the left gatekeeper role perfectly, presenting a false dialectic of the evil American imperialist as the antagonist aggressor, contrasted by the savior U.N. world government as the benevolent deux ex machina.
This false propaganda model, pitting the imperialist U.S. against the godly [socialist] U.N. fits the classic M.O. of "poisoning the well." Essentially, Chomsky acts as a re-direct agent: he acknowledges many crimes of American foreign policy and then offers world government and international law as the solution.
The Globalists have long been masters of such a paradigm. In the early part of the 20th century, the same Wall Street bankers crafted the doctrines of Communism. While posing as a workers' liberation theology, it pushed for a central bank, world army, world court, world government, and the abolition of religion, private property, and the nation state.
(For more, see " Wall St. and the Bolshevik Revolution")
Like other "anarchist" agent provacatuers such as John Zerzan (who helped train violent mobs to ruin the Seattle WTO protests in 1999), Chomsky has called for the elimination of private property. He argues, "that some form of council communism is the natural form of revolutionary socialism in an industrial society."
In fact, Chomsky goes further, pushing for the elimination of the nation-state and national sovereignty to be replaced by a one world government:
"Well in my view what would be ultimately necessary would be a breakdown of the nation-state system, because I think that's not a viable system. It's not necessarily the natural form of human organization." (p. 314)Chomsky, echoing rhetoric from the phony Marxist doctrines, is essentially endorsing the major goal of the world elite: the breakdown of national sovereignty in favor of a one-world government.
Noam Chomsky is a shameless world government pimp, and has heaped lavish praise on men like Bertrand Russell who helped designed the New World Order. Luckily for him, Chomsky has been publicly rewarded for his faithful service to the U.N. cause. In Febraury 2004, he received the Award of Excellence at the U.N. Correspondents Association Club in New York. Previous winners included Globalist assets like Mikhail Gorbachev.
Since Chomsky is an avowed global government cheerleader, is it any surprise he supports some of the worst U.N. programs? UNESCO, the nightmare U.N. vehicle posing as an "aid" organization, finds a strong advocate with Chomsky.
Long a pet project of the Malthusian-obsessed Rockefeller clan, UNESCO projects include filtering pro-UN propaganda into American schools and with the goal of eventually merging the curriculum with Mexico and Canada in the proposed Panamerican Union; and seizing control of huge swaths of American federal lands through U.N. "World Heritage" sites. The first UNESCO chief Julian Huxley said during his tenure in 1948:
"The general philosophy of UNESCO should be a scientific world humanism, global in extent… It can stress the transfer of full sovereignty from separate nations to a world political organization. Political unification in some sort of world government will be required to help the emergence of a single world culture."
But Noam Chomsky, ever the advocate of the U.N., endorses the goals of UNESCO wholeheartedly and lambastes the evil conservatives who question its motives:
"UNESCO - because it's working for the Third World we practically put them out of business. The United States launched a huge propaganda campaign against UNESCO in the 1970's and Eighties - it was full of outrageous lies, totally fabricated, but nevertheless it sufficed to eliminate the Third World orientation of UNESCO. and make it stop doing things it was doing around the Third World, like improving literacy and health care and so on." (p. 86)
Many credit Chomsky's "Manufacturing Consent" with being the premier study of government propaganda. In Leftist circles it is hailed as a Bible, a rite of passage for any true activist to understand the system. But again, Chomsky's work, while appearing radical, is actually gatekeeper disinfo.
Chomsky spends the entire book attempting to prove that newspapers diminish American war crimes while exaggerating those of foreign governments. Such a point is easy to prove, and he does so in his own droll and methodical manner.
Yet he stops there. Chomsky does not discuss the real elephant in the room: direct CIA collaboration with media outlets and journalists beginning in the 1950's under Operation Mockingbird.
Chomsky avoids writing about Mockingbird, the CIA program which covertly put major publishing, newspaper, and media outlets, as well as thousands of individual reporters under direct agency control. Agents included Ben Bradlee at Newsweek, Henry Luce of Time and Life, Arthur Sulzberger of the New York Times, Alfred Friendly of the Washington Post, and Joseph Harrison of the Christian Science Monitor.
Shouldn't this be a significant development for a historian authoring an honest study of propaganda? After all, who is to say that this program doesn't still continue? The Bush administration has admitted spending hundreds of millions on fake newscasts and paying individual reporters like Armstrong Williams to push talking points in newspapers. What about the times they haven't been caught? Exactly how many mainstream commentary and news outlets work with the CIA and White House?
Perhaps this is the reason why the scripts of the nightly news on ABC, CBS, and NBC are almost exactly the same, while Newsweek, Time, and the New York Times push the elitist agenda on cue (as seen most prominently in the run up to the war in Iraq).
Furthermore Chomsky does not discuss collaboration between the Bilderberg Committee and the major media outlets. Shouldn't this concern the so-called radical anarchist, when media editors attend secret meetings calling for eugenics, world government, and a cashless society control grid? Owners, editors and writers from Time, Newsweek, Economist, Washington Post, New York Times, CBS, NBC, ABC and every news outlet in between have attended the world government meetings.
Further, what about the influence of the CFR, which openly calls for a Panamerican Union and the end of American national sovereignty? The CFR counts amongst its members major editors, owners, and journalists in media outlets from PBS to CBS; CNN to News Corp.; New Republic to U.S. News and World Report.
Aren't these the reasons that journalists push the propaganda Chomsky identifies? In "Manufacturing Consent," Chomsky takes limited aim at an easy target. But he fails to dig deeper and examine the actual reasons why the propaganda permeates the mainstream media opinion. Clearly the influence of the CIA, CFR, Bilderberg Committee, and White House have turned major media outlets into little more than docile commissars. Furthermore, the interlocking interests of media owners with the military industrial complex have served to sway content even further.
Chomsky's "classic" study is little more than a "limited hangout" project. He is merely shooting the messengers, blaming journalistic "bias" while failing to follow the trail of money, power, corruption, and black propaganda. Instead, he identifies some passive propaganda and is hailed as a brilliant analyst and purveyor of truth by the Leftist minions. But his true achievement is ignoring the reasons behind the lies, as he executes a masterful bait and switch tactic. Is it a coincidence that Chomsky's co-author for "Manufacturing Consent," Edward Herman, has also denied any government complicity in 9-11?
While claiming to expose propaganda, Chomsky has perfected the art.
Chomsky and his gatekeeper contemporaries are perfect devices for the Globalists because they help define the limits of the false left-right paradigm. Much like David Horowitz, a former Leftist, currently does for the radical Right. Is it a surprise that he edited a book called "The Anti-Chomsky Reader?" It should only be natural since they both serve the same role of gatekeeper.
Puppets like Horowitz, Michael Savage, Sean Hannity, Michele Malkin, William Kristol, William F. Buckley and their kin serve as Right Gatekeepers. They criticize the failures of liberals and Democrats and then call for Bush worshipping, illegal wars, fascist government, and giving up all of our Constitutional rights for "security." In doing so they pollute the conservative movement and help marginalize true conservatives voices like Alex Jones, Ron Paul, and groups like Gun Owners of America.
Chomsky and his gatekeepers do the same thing. They write about the crimes of American imperialism and then call for population control, gun control, global government under the U.N., and a totally socialized Brave New World society.
The Left gatekeepers must manage the delicate tight rope act of appearing radical while in actuality calling for worldwide enslavement and murder. In all likelihood they get a little help from the propaganda scientists at the venerable Tavistock Institute in London and adjuncts of the CIA's Mockingbird program; clearly the Left's denial of 9-11 truths has been too coordinated too have simply been a freak occurrence.
In the mainstream it is the same with the staged battles between pawns like Democratic operative Al Franken and Republican Ann Coulter.
All of this is designed to create a tight spectrum, a masterfully crafted false paradigm to enslave the mind and give the people false choices. Thus at either extreme of the spectrum and all points in between, from Chomsky to Horowitz, one finds they are endorsing total enslavement and global government.
This is the genius of the New World Order, their complete castration of free political will through carefully managed propaganda agents. The rest of the media jackals serve as willing accomplices, mere useful idiots and power hungry sycophants with massive egos and more concern for their career than the truth.
Noam Chomsky and his Left Gatekeeper associates must be actively exposed for their role in the propaganda system. For nearly 40 years since they infiltrated the activist movement, these Left gatekeepers have made the activist movements impotent, territorial, confused, and ineffective.
Thus, instead of understanding their enslavement, many activists end up calling for tighter chains by echoing Chomsky's calls for gun control, population control, and a world government under the U.N. They end up critiquing the Iraq disaster without seeing government involvement in 9-11 and the CIA/MI6/Mossad creation known as Al-Qaeda.
Noam Chomsky and his clique of re-direct agents mercilessly push real activists into dead-end solutions. Until they are vocally exposed, the Left will continue to remain a managed asset of the New World Order.
PREVIOUS ARTICLE | NEXT ARTICLE
The Journal of History - Summer 2008 Copyright © 2008 by News Source, Inc.