i cant wait for his book.finally someone in the truth movement that covers the medias failure fully.

Looks like I may have had the wrong idea of GNN; I was unaware of The Road To Shanksville.

619 - hey it's got rotational symmetry (turn it upside down).

Thanks, Jon. I've been looking for that version of Ray's for some time. And your timing is great... I've always thought that this should be our national anthem. Thanks for leading a rousing chorus...

9/11 had much more impact on much more people. It cost us cash money and is still. The 'insecurity' craze after 9/11 saw huge money flow to 'protectors' like the U.S. military or security companies, while the 'civilian' economy layed off jobs, cut wages...
It's safe to say Halve the world wants to see the 9/11 perps HANG, they just don't know who they are.

yeah, i saw that this morning. Alito did his job. the fascism is creeping up faster now.......

Thanks, Max. It's good to see you working on this, I mean that sincerely.

Dear Police, And Military Personnel...

These people I know really, despite being otherwise well-informed on current events, just don't know much about 9/11. When I get some money I'm going to get new copies of both of David Ray Griffin's books, Paul Thompson's "Terror Timeline", etc. and donate them. Anyway, I think it's a worthy effort;
Jeremy A.

Its an incredible worthy effort!!!!!!!
I believe 911 was in no small part a counter offensive to the so-called "anti globalization "movement.

Point out who is in charge of the World Bank now, and then lead them to PNAC and DR. Griffin.

Dear Police, And Military Personnel...
Jon Gold | Homepage | 06.15.06 - 9:09 pm | #

That's a very important letter. I had tears in my eyes as I read it. Thanks for all the important things you do, Jon, in the quest for 9/11 Truth.

:)

JeremyA those Seattle anti-WTO activists went berserk back in 1999! That WTO stuff is fairly complex, so why can't they grasp & embrace 9/11 truth???

By all means, try to spread some truth up there!

http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.historylink.org/db_ima...

Does anyone know any big protest/activist forums online? The anti WTO/anti war/anti globalization/free mumia type crowd we always see show up places in masses?

I found Zwicker's comments on Noam Chomsky to be troubling and difficult. It also seems too convenient to label those who don't see or agree with LIHOP or MIHOP as agents.

Zwicker comes off really well; animated, informed and genuine.
His comments re left gatekeepers clearly gets a split reaction. I'm with those who agree with him and it's a big relief to hear him say it. I think a lot of us have been very frustrated over the years to have things like the JFK coverup go ignored by people who we would expect support from.

I can understand the frustration, but don't you think it's better to give a structural analysis pointing out why the organizations and institutions that create left gatekeeper positions tends to push people who conform into these authoritative roles rather than pop off a conspiracy theory about the CIA infilitrating the leadership of the left?

Seriously, calling a man like Chomsky a CIA operative without providing evidence doesn't sit well with me.

Chomsky is a bastard. i used to respect him before i woke up and realized how much of a tool he is.he may not work for the CIA, but he knows what NOT to talk about. hes a coward.

Noam Chomsky: Controlled Asset Of The New World Order

Daniel L. Abrahamson / PREVIOUSLY CARRIED AT RENSE.COM | April 6 2006

Noam Chomsky is often hailed as AmericaÂ’s premier dissident intellectual, a fearless purveyor of truth battling 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 is beyond question.

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. In fact, 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.

http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/april2006/060406Chomsky.htm

its sad to see how much sway a guy like Chomsky has over some people. i bet you anything his groupies will be here shortly to tell me how much good he has done.dont bother, i see right through his bullshit.

I found Zwicker's comments on Noam Chomsky to be troubling and difficult. It also seems too convenient to label those who don't see or agree with LIHOP or MIHOP as agents.
anonymous | 06.16.06 - 1:21 am | #

anonymous, I find everything you write here to be troubling & difficult, in that it's always designed to rebut truthers in one way or another.

Chris has Chomsky pegged^. It can't be explained any better than Chris did.

911:

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 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.

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.

Chomsky 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 MooreÂ’s tepid Fahrenheit 9-11, which at least tacitly suggested a degree of prior knowledge.

ChomskyÂ’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.

Of course, Chomsky does not even admit the Echelon network exists. This despite the NSAÂ’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, with sister sites in the UK, Australia, Canada, New Zealand and other unknown locations.

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 & front corporations while speaking in glittering generalities.

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 method.

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, and Arthur Sulzberger of The New York Times, Alfred Friendly of the Washington Post, and Joseph Harrison Christian Science Monitor.

ShouldnÂ’t this a significant development for a historian authoring an honest study of propaganda?

sorry for the long post, but seriously, dont fall for Chomskys bullshit, he may not be "CIA" per se, but he knows what his place is.please dont fall for it.

i am very far to the left in my personal beliefs.i would love nothing more than for Chomsky to speak honestly about 9/11(and other issues he ignores),if only to wake his rabid fans up. but i cant sit here and defend a guy like that just because i agree with him on most issues.i hope his groupie-like fans can do the same.

Extremely well-stated, Chris!^

I can't even imagine how many more effective, intelligent & moral people (which most "lefties" are for lack of a better word) would be in the movement if it weren't for super-gatekeepers like Chomsky.

thanks,yeah,its depressing how much power one man has over so many otherwise well informed people.these are people that naturally dont trust authority(with good reason) but since the leader Chomsky doesnt think 9/11 has any nagging questions that need to be addressed, his fans just stay right in lock step for the most part.and they get PISSED when you point out the great leaders flaws, hahaha.

It's not so much that Zwicker pointed out Chomsky's flaws that I have trouble with, but that he accused him of being a government agent based solely on his views. That's not only unfair, but illogical.

I've disagreed with Chomsky on a few crucial issues, most importantly about the 2000 and 2004 election fraud, but the fact that he both missed the significance of the issue and served to turn people away from examining the irregularities in the vote and the implications for our government didn't turn me against the man. Instead it turned me against the notion that I should allow any given person to totally direct my thinking or skepticism. Chomsky is limited. That doesn't mean that his entire body of work is without value or a distraction, it just means that it isn't a complete picture.

but the sway he has on so many people is dangerous, and he uses that sway to keep people from the "dangerous" issues like 9/11,voter fraud and CIA inflitration in the media. thats pure cowardice.

i almost wish Chomsky was a CIA asset. that would explain so much.(the guy writes a book on U.S. propaganda and leaves out operation mockingbird? coincidence? you be the judge.)

Chris,

Let's keep in mind that this is all relative. There's always someone to the left and right of you. Everyone has different boundary lines.

TruthMove has decided to offer specific information based on prioritizing what we feel are the more important subjects the the public should currently be learning about. As a result we do not include some subjects embraced by many progressive organizations.

We are not censoring those subjects, and would certainly be willing to discuss their significance, but have decided that some subjects are not as immediately critical to informed citizenship. Does that make us "leftwing gatekeepers"?

Keep in mind that Chomsky and many others who are called gatekeepers have institutional investments that dicated the parameters of their concern. We really can't be surprised that they protect their academic or professional standing. Of course we may be disappointed.

When it comes to gatekeepers, I'm presently more concerned with movement infiltrators who appear to act independently, but are really pursuing the agenda of an outside organization. I have the unique ability to detect ingenuine behavior, and I've seen a lot of it. Beware the forces of mediocrity.

Shouldn't people be honest in a truth movement?