Tuesday, May 16, 2006

More on Chomsky's Love Affair with Nazis

Further to my last post about Chomsky, the following item just cropped up. I attach a photograph also of Hezbollah troops giving the Sieg Heil, just to clarify what "Saint Noam" and all his followers are supporting. My original article "Masters of Deception" carries numerous cites which flesh out this relationship in detail. Very creepy indeed, that so many leaders of the "anti-war" camp are closeted Nazis or, as is the case with International ANSWER, Stalinist/Maoist celebrators of the Tienanmin Square massacre. J.D.



Noam Chomsky's Love Affair with Nazis
By David Horowitz and Jacob Laksin
FrontPageMagazine.com | May 15, 2006

Rarely has the world been afforded such a clear glimpse into the unholy alliance between Islamic extremists and secular radicals in the West. That’s exactly what it got last week when the foremost Imam of the radical Left, Noam Chomsky, bestowed his blessings on the world’s largest terrorist army, the Shiite jihad outfit sponsored by Iran and known as Hezbollah (“Party of God.”)

Following a meeting with Hassan Nasrallah, the Lebanese terrorist group’s “secretary general,” Chomsky announced his support for Hezbollah’s refusal to disarm. Then, in an echo of Nasrallah’s recent declaration that President Bush is the world’s top “terrorist,” Chomsky pronounced his own fatwa on the United States, calling it one of the “leading terrorist states.” It was a meeting of murderous radical minds.

In many ways, Chomsky’s newly forged friendship with Hezbollah -- the most recent entry in a lifetime befriending America’s most deadly enemies -- is the logical continuation of the professor’s longstanding admiration for global terrorists and Jew-haters. In fact, Chomsky devoted most of the nineties to touting Hezbollah as a “resistance” movement (which occasionally committed misguided acts against civilians) while singing its praises as a crusader for peace and social justice.
Hitler concealed his genocidal agendas from the German people and from his Chomsky-apologists. Hezbollah is more fortunate. In pursuing a second Holocaust of the Jews, it can count on Muslim support and apparently the support of American radicals as well. Therefore it makes no secret of what it intends. Its 1985 manifesto contains a section titled “The Necessity for the Destruction of Israel” that spells out the evil it seeks: “Our struggle will end only when this entity is obliterated. We recognize no treaty with it, no cease-fire, no peace agreements.” Like true jihadists, Hezbollah’s genocidal plans are not reserved for the Little Satan only but are its agenda for the Great Satan too. In 1993, Chomsky’s host Nasrallah declared: “Death to America was, is, and will stay our slogan.”

Read the full item at the given weblink

Several years ago, I saw "Noamsky," as I liked to call him, speak in Los Angeles. He was so boring that I fell asleep. I don't remember anything he had to say, even though I was somewhat excited to see him, as he was clearly the darling of the "lefties" with whom I socialized. He droned on endlessly, without making any clear points. I found no reason to dislike him then, but now I wonder what is his appeal, since he is clearly boring as hell. Although for some peculiar reason he is highly influential, I am quite certain that Noamsky is a pawn being used by one or more sides (or both at once, both being two sides of the same coin) in the insidious double-crossing game of politics. Could he be an agent of some sort? For the New World Order? How else could such a boring person who nonetheless represents immense peril to certain factions not only garner such attention but also remain unharmed, since the parties he's supposedly tangling with are - by his and the estimation of many others - so clearly dangerous themselves?

As an aside, do these leaders of Hezbollah as shown in the photo on your site appear to be the paragons of peace, as in "the peaceful religion"? Or their followers? (I have no idea if they are truly using the "Sieg Heil" gesture or if it's based on an older usage.) In this regard, why are all these "freedom fighting radicals" so concerned about the poor little Muslims, who are notoriously brutal to women (and children)? What on earth could be behind their support of Muslim regimes? Are they completely unaware of reality? Something is clearly wrong here. These people need a good shaking by the scruff of their necks.
Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home

In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, any copyrighted work in this message is distributed under fair use without profit or payment for non-profit research and educational purposes only. [Ref. http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml]

If you find this material of value, please donate to OBRL: http://www.orgonelab.org/donation

Or, purchase books on related subjects from our on-line bookstore: http://www.naturalenergyworks.net

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?