Listen Carefully to a Master Gatekeeper: Chomsky dispels 9/11 "conspiracies" with "sheer logic"

Listen to a Master Gatekeeper: Chomsky dispels 9/11 "conspiracies"" with "sheer logic"

LOGIC? Hmmmm. Submitted for your valued critique and analysis.

The Art and Science of Gatekeeping.

Someone should refer him to,


Ignorant of the facts (for starters: 9/11 truth is non-partisan and attracts as many righties as those on the left), and enamored with the sound of his own voice, Noam Chomsky therein defines himself as a two-bit blowhard. Sad, really. Perhaps he should have a talk with the more enlightened and open-minded Howard Zinn.

Chomsky is hard for me to

Chomsky is hard for me to figure out, but one thing I'm sure of: He's not 'ignorant' regarding either 9/11 or the JFK assassination. For whatever reason, he has decided that honesty is not his policy on these particular topics.

Who Cares?

The master gatekeeper asks who cares? You have got to be kidding me. 9/11 and 11/22/63 weren't important? I have no idea where this clown is coming from. That's like saying WW2 wasn't important so lets just move on.

Who cares who did it?

Tell that to those who lost friends and family on 9/11, Gnome. Tell that to the future victims of false-flag terrorism.

"In the beginning of a change, the Patriot is a scarce man, brave, hated and scorned. When his cause succeeds, however, the timid join him, for then it costs nothing to be a patriot." - Mark Twain


Thanks for the comments guys. Don't forget to vote pls.

This man is DANGEROUS Gatekeeper.

He has spent years building up his "credibility" for moments such as this.

I had heard about his atrociously outrageous comments on 911 but to actually see him and hear him peddle his filthy lies and obsfucations is unbelievable.

We have to watch out for such characters.

Makes me wonder about space beamers and no-planers out there

What we need now is more rationale analysis from the likes of Richard Gage ( & Dr. David Griffin.

Our arguments must be based on solid facts, solid ground not conjecture such as exotic weapons and non-existent planes when multiple eye-witnesses have testified of hearing and seeing planes.

Conjecture, Hypothesis even if made in good faith will only distract us from much more SOLID EVIDENCE that we ALL have.

We must not waste valuable time and energy.

Let's work out strategies to deal with gatekeepers and keep a sharp eye and ear out for them.

I hope we have more contributions to analyze the various arguements and strategies gatekeepers use so that we are prepared to counter their propoganda.

We HAVE to take back the media.

The CONSTITUTION is NOT going to "collapse" into pulverized dust no matter how much thermate/explosives or planes they throw at

He's either an asset (CIA or other) or a

complete ass. He was actively lionizing the Afghan "resistance" in 80's (Al Queda, et al), supporting the Solidarity movement in Poland (in league with AFLCIA, Vatican, international banking cartels), and, in the early 90's actively calling for U.S. intervention against the demonized Serbs in Yugoslavia. Anyone who has been paying attention knows that these were the biggest and most important operations of the U.S. National Security State apparatus in our era. So I now strongly lean towards the former - that is deep cover asset of the apparatus mentioned. Either way, he needs to be combated, exposed, he's sort of a key figure in left liberal circles...

He is both

Better known as an ASSet.

He has links to Pentagon funding at his "work" at MIT.

Avram Noam Chomsky.. the good old boys club.

You should be able to connect the dots.

It is good that he denies both 911 and JFK.

Cause the same people who did JFK basically carried out 911.

By denying them together we can see the link.

The plot thickens does it not.

Probably does not want to ruffle some feathers with his AIPAC buddies.

"Chomsky states that he frequently receives undercover police protection, in particular while on the MIT campus, although he does not agree with the police protection"

^ Stroumboulopoulos, George (2006-03-13). Noam Chomsky on The Hour. CBC. Retrieved on 2007-09-04. (

Like the protection JFK got from the Secret Service on Dealey Plaza.

Of course he's going to say WHO CARES!

We have to see WHO is holding his leash.

Master Gatekeeper indeed.

Let's not be fooled and manipulated by such men.

The CONSTITUTION is NOT going to "collapse" into pulverized dust no matter how much thermate/explosives or planes they throw at

Chompsky vs Buckley

note: Buckley has already stated he was working for the CIA...

Truth Revolution: The Eleventh of Every Month

Skull & Bones:Education, military service,CIA, Howard Hunt

Education, military service and the CIA

Buckley attended the National Autonomous University of Mexico (or UNAM) in 1943 and was commissioned as a second lieutenant in the US Army the following year. In his book, Miles Gone By, he fleetingly recounts being a member of Franklin Roosevelt's honor guard when the president died. With the end of World War II in 1945, he enrolled in Yale University, where he became a member of the secret Skull and Bones society[citation needed], and was an active member of the Conservative Party and of the Yale Political Union, and served as Chairman of the Yale Daily News.

Buckley graduated from Yale in 1950. That same year, he married Patricia Alden Austin Taylor, (July 1, 1926 - April 15, 2007), the daughter of industrialist Austin C. Taylor. He met Pat, a Protestant from Vancouver, British Columbia, while she was a student at Vassar College in Poughkeepsie, New York. Buckley was her roommate's brother. Their son is the author Christopher Buckley. Pat Buckley was a prominent charity fundraiser for such organizations as the Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, the Institute of Reconstructive Plastic Surgery at New York University Medical Center and the Hospital for Special Surgery. She also raised money for Vietnam War veterans and AIDS patients.

In 1951, Buckley was recruited into the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), yet served for less than a year. Little has been published regarding Buckley's work with the CIA, but in a 2001 letter to author W. Thomas Smith, Jr., Buckley wrote, “I did training in Washington as a secret agent and was sent to Mexico City. There I served under the direct supervision of Howard Hunt, about whom of course a great deal is known.”

In a November 1, 2005, editorial for the National Review, he recounted that:

When in 1951 I was inducted into the CIA as a deep cover agent, the procedures for disguising my affiliation and my work were unsmilingly comprehensive. It was three months before I was formally permitted to inform my wife what the real reason was for going to Mexico City to live. If, a year later, I had been apprehended, dosed with sodium pentothal, and forced to give out the names of everyone I knew in the CIA, I could have come up with exactly one name, that of my immediate boss (E. Howard Hunt, as it happened). In the passage of time one can indulge in idle talk on spook life. In 1980 I found myself seated next to the former president of Mexico at a ski-area restaurant. What, he asked amiably, had I done when I lived in Mexico? "I tried to undermine your regime, Mr. President." He thought this amusing, and that is all that it was, under the aspect of the heavens.

While in Mexico, Buckley edited The Road to Yenan, a book addressing the communist quest for global domination, by Peruvian author Eudocio Ravines.

The CONSTITUTION is NOT going to "collapse" into pulverized dust no matter how much thermate/explosives or planes they throw at

Not sure what happend to this guy,.

Chomsky is often quite lucid on the control and opression structures and how they function,. I have no idea how he could be so lost in the woods here,. "Even if it is ture,so what?" so what? well I for one think that when the terrorists that kill 3000 people are elements inside the government that its a bit of a concern,. why dont you Nome? I just dont get it,. perhaps someone visited him and showed him pictures of his grand kids playing in the school yard,. with a suggestion to take this insane line on this particular issue,. . who knows.
Suppose people can keep sending him info. and hope he turns,. he usually shreads the power and control structures into nice little bits. He is also the one that pointed out that public opinion polls show that the majority of people have very sane ideas and leanings,. and it is the control structures that impose their twisted wills that causes most human suffering,. . hope he comes around.

Along with the Kennedy assassination and 9-11 of course.

And we should realize that there is an important faction within the CIA, etc. which are not rightists but share his left liberal perspective- known as 'Cold War Liberals' of the 40's - 90's.

Chomsky is age-marginalized

He is almost 80. People need to start retiring at or before the age of 70.

Although there will always be a few who can operate at higher, near-normal (prior) levels of physical and mental health past 70, the majority of people cannot.

After 65, years for most people are like "dog years", and people fairly quickly go downhill. And that is particularly true after 70.

I just saw Ray McGovern speak, and he implied that he will "retire" at the age of 70. He is 68 now, and I was surprised to see what he looked like and how he acted and how different he was from just a few years ago. (he told a story about his father being on the board of trustees for some company or organization and he announced that he was going to retire at 70 and suggested that others on the board do the same, but he was the only one who did — it's from his telling of that story that I interpret his intent on retiring — he seemed very tired)

I think there should be an upper limit age of 70 years old for the Supreme Court justices and all federal employees, including the President, Vice President and members of Congress. I'm up for an Amendment to the Constitution for that.

Senior 9/11 Bureau Chief, Analyst, Correspondent, Principle Investigator, Forensic 9/11ologist

To sin by silence when they should protest makes cowards of men. — Abraham Lincoln

Secrecy is the beginning of tyranny. — Robert Heinlein


Considering the consequences of the 911 perps being fully realized by the entire population, and the efforts they are going to, to derail the massive and ever growing movement, what do you think the possibilities are that people like Chomsky, already an annoyance to those criminals in charge, in collusion with the media, Chomsky and others quite possibly are in a threatened position, with no choice, but to deny it, at least outwardly, because of consequences to he or his family?

Same with Henry Waxman. One can't help but think threats exist to those that dare speak up. That dare call a hearing about the anomolies we all know about.

Considering that the craven actions we've seen thus far, it isn't such a stretch to think that death threats are out there.

The brilliant Greg Palast, who is already a thorn in Bu$hco's side, who won't make a statement supporting our quest for the truth, one can only guess why not. WE all know he is too smart, if he's honestly looked at the evidence, he's too saavy, and objective to deny it, at least not to himself, but again, outwardly, publicly he probably can't.

The reason I say this, is because, Chomsky has been very outspoken about the problem with the media, the horrors (unrejported by the mainstream media) our country has put upon other countries, for conquest of resources, secret wars, and atrocities. So, I'm having trouble buying his perspective here, as genuinely his. Just a thought, before we condemn him. Because, he is a gem, in having exposed much, this country's elite would rather we not know. Maybe, the powers that be are throwing around their nasty threats.

Bill Maher is probably another one, bright, and anti-Bush, probably in a position where he CAN'T speak out.

The most severe form of learning disorders are owned by those that "already know everything."

It's obvious....

....there are threats and intimidation in Washington AC/DC. Let's see, the short list, Anthrax delivered to Daschle and Leahy while resisting the Patriot ACT. Cheney's warning to Paul Wellstone. Carnahan's plane crash a few weeks before the 2000 election?

More recently, the revised account of Congressman Paul Gillmor's death, who was rumored to be investigating the latest suspicious spike of put options in mid-September? He was initially reported found dead in his apartment with no foul play suspected. Two weeks later, it's reported that he had blunt force trauma to his head and shoulders consistent with a fall!

...even the more subtle forms of intimidation such as allowing the Craig bathroom episode to become a major news story.

I surmise that's one or two political forces(threats of death, blackmailing the compromised) that helps explain the lack of strength by the Democrat-led Congress along with corruption (bought off).

It doesn't excuse anything, however. Paul Wellstone is a hero and this country is clearly in need of more of them. They can't knock off everyone--show some strength, Congress!

You are right about the rest of them, there's clearly a prohibition against 9/11 Truth in the U.S!

...don't believe them!

Well analyzed

You make a compelling case.

Having said that, they have more to fear from US than we have from them.

Credible people are already tearing the OCT to shreds as you must already know.

Personally I think we don't NEED men like Palast.

Such journalists strain out the gnat but end up swallowing the camel.

Intelligence Agencies control or "own" most major players in the media either thru coercion, blackmail or "other means"
such as financial gain, indoctrination, propganda or sheer stupidity.

911 is an Opportunity so separate the Patriots from the Snakes.

Palast doesn't rank high in my benchmarks, neither does Barbara Walters (who knows).

When the dam breaks, many will feign suprise and ignorance.

Let's not fall for their deception.

Full Accountability for those Complicit AFTER the Fact.

That includes the Amy "Good"mans and Avram Noam Chomsk's.

We do not seek revenge, just justice so such evil NEVER happens again.

This for ALL mankind. Just think of those jumpers and share my anger against those professional cover-up artists.

They too have to answer some tough questions alongside the Cheneys, Rices, Rumsfelds etc. etc

The CONSTITUTION is NOT going to "collapse" into pulverized dust no matter how much thermate/explosives or planes they throw at

It is ironic...

I was once a huge Chomsky fan. This was before I became immersed in 9/11 truth. I had contacted Noam several times prior by email and we carried on a small correspondence. When I started to get into this stuff, I sent him some evidence and asked his opinion. His answer was as dismissive as he is in this video, didn't want to seriously look at the evidence because the theory was a priori false so therefore why even examine the evidence. Having believed he was a serious scholar I was extremely disappointed by his outright dismissal of all the facts, especially building 7. I pressed him hard in several follow up emails about it, but he refused to budge on the matter. I started to fall out of love with Noam Chomsky. Then I saw this video (I believe this is old I think I saw this a long time ago. Anyway if not it was one just like it.) The part where he goes "Who cares. It doesn't matter even if it is true." My heart sank. I said to myself I am never listening to Noam Chomsky again. I love how two minutes before he says that the conspirators would be put before firing squads for it's seriousness as a crime, and then has the audacity to perform such a flagrant 180 on the matter and say it doesn't matter even if it is true.It became obvious Noam was consciously trying to not believe in the theory at all, for whatever reasons. I do not believe he is a CIA plant, though I think it is possible some CIA or FBI agent made it known to him that if he did come onboard with 9/11 truth, his stature as a leading intellectual and political figure would lend such credence to the 9/11 truth movement that he and his family's lives would be threatened. Being old and vulnerable, and not the young maverick he once was, I think he took the coward's way out and agreed to shut up about it. I do not know, just speculation. What I do know is reading all of Noam's stuff for all those years, and all the things about the CIA and it's abuses of power, talking about the CIA overthrowing Iran and Chile 20 years before Alex Jones was. I don't believe with everything he has exposed about the state apparatus that he is a part of it. But I can never know for certain. What I do know is that any illusions I had about Noam Chomsky being a single-minded truth seeker, someone who sought the truth no matter where it led him, were destroyed forever in that instant. He probably does know the truth about 9/11, though he will probably never admit it. And for that I can never believe in him again.

It is ironic because if it weren't for all of those years listening to Chomsky dissect private power, the history of corporate law and the rising danger of corporate power, the totalitarian nature of private power, the relationship between fascism and corporations, the collusion and corruption of government and corporate power, his dissection of the media and their function in America (in the seminal documentary "Manufacturing Consent.") Without all of these issues serving as a primer for 9/11 truth, I never would have been able to believe that corporate and government power could collude in such a way against it's own citizenry. Thanks to Noam's work, I knew that they already had been for years. So when evidence like building 7, the war games, molten metal in the foundations of the three towers, the fact that the WTC was the longest burning commercial fire in history burning underground for 99 days, the lack of any video of the pentagon attack, the lack of fighter interceptors, the failure to protect the pentagon when it is surrounded by AA batteries. Evidence like this causes consternation in many new initiates, because it leads them to the inevitable conclusion that the elite are plotting against them, something that is very difficult to believe at first. For me, because of Chomsky, I was able to easily accept this premise since he had shown me so much evidence prior to 9/11 of them doing this many many times over in the past.

Noam is dead to me now. I don't listen or read any of his new stuff. I don't write him anymore. I don't accept him as an intellectual authority anymore. He is no longer an tireless truth seeker on all issues in my eyes anymore. He has chosen his new role, and I'm sure he has his reasons, but he no longer has the right to pose as a tireless truth seeker when he consciously tries to not believe 9/11 truth when confronted with evidence as damning as building 7 and uses circular logic and non-sequiturs to prove why the theory cannot be true.

Let him know

"Noam is dead to me now. I don't listen or read any of his new stuff. I don't write him anymore. I don't accept him as an intellectual authority anymore. He is no longer an tireless truth seeker on all issues in my eyes anymore."

I wish you'd write one more email to him, letting him know what you used to think about him and what you think about him now.


summarily dismisses without any grounds...

or supporting facts....smells of...defending the State. There's nothing to see here so please move on! But, to dismiss inquiry about responsible parties, can only be taken as promoting the State's interests. What is that? Chomsky dismisses with a "who cares", who benefited or was responsible for 9/11 or the JFK assassination?

Chomsky supports a Security State tilting towards tyranny and a Terror State. I just hope discriminating minds can see no facts buttressed his arguments? It doesn't matter much why he is doing it, whether it's perceived threats to his position and safety or a chosen role as an operative for the State, we know with certainty which side he's taking!

Thanks for the symposium on Gatekeeping by Chomsky! You...

...can't believe him!

Old Video

This has been around for ages, a quick search brought this version up which was added to YouTube on April 04, 2006, also reprehensor linked to this video on August 13, 2006.

Chomsky has done a lot of

Chomsky has done a lot of good writing and analysis over the years, but he is dead wrong on JFK and 9/11. That's all there is to it. Maybe he's scared to go against the official versions of these two events, or maybe he is a gatekeeper after all. I really don't know, but he's wrong; dead wrong.

The hypocrisy of Chomsky's

The hypocrisy of Chomsky's position on 9/11 could not be more preposterous. He has made a career professing how the Security State and its Media control public perception. Yet he claims that the 9/11 attacks would have been too risky because any mistake would have immediately exposed the operation--as though no damage control would have been possible. He should begin by reading Thompson's Timeline. Had 9/11 been executed as flawlessly as he claims, we would not have a library of official contradictions, distortions, evasions and outright lies. We would not have documented destruction of evidence or an extensive cover-up admitted by the Commission Chairmen themselves.

In his haste to deny the evidence, however, Chomsky does make an important point: the perps could not have been sure the planes would hit their targets. This is the logical weakness of "lihop". To argue that WTC 1, 2 and 7 were rigged (or, for that matter, that the Afghanistan operation was scheduled for October) is to implicitly acknowledge the need for some sort of "inside" control over the success of the air attacks.

“On the altar of God, I swear eternal hostility against all forms of tyranny over the mind of man."--Thomas Jefferson

Got that, folks?

Whether or not 9/11 was an inside job doesn't matter.

Silly us, thinking that, if the truth became general knowledge, the people would rise up against their State oppressors.

Seriously, there's something weirdly desperate in Chomsky's polemics: It can't be true -- but on the other hand, it's impossible to determine empirical truth anyway. But, just in case it's true -- so what, who cares?

This overrated pundit only needs a clownsuit to complete his buffoonery.

Hiding from the truth.

The control of the left through Chomsky and others who have influence is essential to
the whole Imperial agenda including 9/11. Whether he is a Mockingbird mole, or whether
he has been threatened or intimidated into towing the official line is irrelevant, he can't come clean
now. Chomsky and his ilk are now becoming marginalized however, by the huge momentum of the truth movement, when you
hear someone with his intellect attempting to dismiss something this important with such weak argument it speaks volumes,
even to his, up to now, dedicated followers.

Even for those with the linguistic skills, intellect and reputation of Chomsky,
the bright light of truth is becoming difficult to hide from.

Here is what Chomsky's

Here is what Chomsky's employer, MIT, has been up to:

“On the altar of God, I swear eternal hostility against all forms of tyranny over the mind of man."--Thomas Jefferson

Barry Zwicker has totally

Barry Zwicker has totally destroyed Chomsky in chapter 5 of his book 'Towers of Deception'
Read that chapter *free* online it here: