Noam Chomsky
ACORN.org > About > Allied Organizations > Social Policy

Snapshot (pdf) of full page at ACORN (courtesy of Matthew Vadum)

Chomsky not only is listed amongst the progressive academics and activists contributing to Social Policy magazine.

He is one of the editorial advisers.

Noam Chomsky’s Love Affair with Nazis – Front Page Magazine

In Chomsky’s version of the Elders of Zion, Israel is always the instigator, while the attacks of terrorists, whose declared objective is the establishment of an Islamic state on Israel’s grave, are invariably “defensive.” Chomsky blames an upsurge in Hezbollah terror, for example, on Israel’s 1992 assassination, of Hezbollah leader (and mass murderer) Sheikh Abbas Mussawi. Yet Chomsky neglected to mention that Mussawi, speaking on behalf of Hezbollah, openly proclaimed his genocidal goal: “We are not fighting so that the enemy recognizes us and offers us something. We are fighting to wipe out the enemy.”

Noam Chomsky meets with Hezbollah leaders in Lebanon

Transcript at Memri.

Noam Chomsky’s Support for Hezbollah – CAMERA

by Zachary Hughes –July 20, 2006

On May 8, 2006, MIT Professor Noam Chomsky began an eight-day visit to Lebanon where met with leaders of the terrorist organization Hezbollah. Chomsky received a hero’s welcome and effectively acted as a propagandist for the terrorist group as he repeated much of its rhetoric and lies on Lebanese television, including Hezbollah’s own Al Manar TV.

Chomsky expressed support for the arming of Hezbollah, in direct contradiction to UN Security Council Resolution 1559 calling for “the disbanding and disarmament of all Lebanese and non-Lebanese militias”:

Hezbollah’s insistence on keeping its arms is justified… I think [Hezbollah leader Sheik Hassan] Nasrallah has a reasoned argument and [a] persuasive argument that they [the arms] should be in the hands of Hezbollah as a deterrent to potential aggression, and there is plenty of background reasons for that. So until – I think his position [is] reporting it correctly and it seems to me [a] reasonable position, is that until there is a general political settlement in the region, [and] the threat of aggression and violence is reduced or eliminated, there has to be a deterrent, and the Lebanese army can’t be a deterrent. (Noam Chomsky, Al Manar TV, 13 May 2006)

……

[...]The professor has used the recognition gained for his linguistic scholarship to become one of the most outspoken critics of American foreign policy, despite his lack of training or academic pedigree in any field related to politics or international relations.

But there is a significant and qualitative difference between being an outspoken critic of one’s government and supporting and embracing a terrorist organization that plots that government’s destruction. Hezbollah and/or its armed wing is considered a terrorist organization by the U.S. State Department, the U.K., Canada, Israel, Australia, and the Netherlands. Hezbollah leader Sheik Hassan Nasrallah has frequently called for the destruction of the U.S. and Israel, and from time to time has personally led mobs in chanting “Death to America” and “Death to Israel.”

Even before its latest aggression, Hezbollah was responsible for murderous attacks on Israelis, rival Lebanese, and Americans, most notably the 1983 Marine barracks bombing that killed 241 American servicemen (Carol D. Leonnig, “Damages Awarded in Beirut Bombing,” The Washington Post, 9 Sept. 2003.). According to the U.S. Treasury Department:

Until September 11,2001, Hezbollah was responsible for more American deaths than any other terrorist organization. Hezbollah is known or suspected to have been involved in numerous terrorist attacks throughout the world, including the suicide truck bombings of the U.S. Embassy and U.S. Marine Corps barracks in Beirut in 1983 and the U.S. Embassy annex in Beirut in September 1984. Hezbollah also executed the 1985 hijacking of TWA Flight 847 en route from Athens to Rome and assumed responsibility for the suicide bombing of the Israeli embassy in Argentina in 1992….

Hezbollah was also responsible for the 1994 bombing of the Jewish Community Center in Buenos Aires, which killed 85 Jews. Yet Chomsky insisted in his 1994 book, World Orders Old and New, that Hezbollah was not a terrorist organization at all. Similarly, Chomsky maintained in his book that Hamas, an organization that has carried out numerous attacks against civilians in its stated goal of eliminating the Jewish State, is not a terrorist organization. (Noam Chomsky, World Orders Old and New New York: Columbia University Press, 1994, pp. 228-229.)

……

Noam Chomsky’s decades of promoting virulent anti-American and anti-Israeli propaganda have been dismissed by his supporters as simple “eccentricity,” but they in fact represent something far more damaging. Chomsky has used the influence granted him as a prominent linguist to support militant organizations and murderous dictatorships, including not only Hezbollah and Hamas, but also the Khmer Rouge in Cambodia and Slobodan Milosevic in Serbia. Chomsky’s advocacy for these groups is truly dangerous, for he minimizes the atrocities and murders that they have committed in an effort to whitewash them while implicating those he perpetually paints as the guilty parties—the United States and Israel. Chomsky’s selective use of history and frequent use of lies to advance the agenda of terrorist groups like Hezbollah and Hamas is among the most shameful and incendiary behavior ever undertaken by an American academic.

Continue reading >>>

Community organizing, a front to hide behind while attempting to radically and fundamentally change America as we know it…

Right Obama?

ACORN profile

Noam Chomsky profile

Related docs:

ACORN’s Core: Principles and Foundations of Acorn

Is ACORN Intentionally Structured as a Criminal Enterprise?

ACORN’s Hypocritical House of Cards

Have the left who are clamoring all over Jimmy Carter’s recent statements on Obama criticism equaling  racism forgotten this? More importantly why was he given a pass? I think we know the answer to that.

CARTER:  It already has sent a wave of approbation and admiration in many countries around the world just knowing that this black boy who grew up with just a loving mother and — and grandparents and that was about all he had to start with, has now had a chance to become the nominee of the Democratic Party for president.  We’ve seen a disillusionment about our country in the last eight years with a lot of things happening like torturing of prisoners and that sort of thing.  If Obama is elected, which I think he is gonna be, then I think that will be the transforming grace for the end of racism and prejudice and hatred between races in this country.

Carter actually said “boy” As in “black boy”. Not an imaginary “boy” according to the twisted leftard logic applied by Dowd.

Maureen Dowd, who jumped in front of the parade with her column Saturday, actually believed what she wrote — that when Wilson yelled “You lie,” he really meant “You lie, boy!”

Go read it all.

Hey Jimmy and Maureen, here is a thought — how about debating with facts instead of skin color?

Don Surber

Last year, dissent was patriotic.

This year, dissent is racist.

Yep, that pretty much sums it up.

Update: Jimmy Carter does not know when to shut up. What a washed up disgrace.

Not Backing Down: Carter Again Accuses Obama Critics of Being Racist (Video)

I’d like to report something “fishy”…

Mike's America

YOU

Barack Obama and the Strategy of Manufactured Crisis

Excerpt

Yet, no one to my knowledge has yet connected all the dots between Barack Obama and the Radical Left. When seen together, the influences on Obama’s life comprise a who’s who of the radical leftist movement, and it becomes painfully apparent that not only is Obama a willing participant in that movement, he has spent most of his adult life deeply immersed in it.

But even this doesn’t fully describe the extreme nature of this candidate. He can be tied directly to a malevolent overarching strategy that has motivated many, if not all, of the most destructive radical leftist organizations in the United States since the 1960s.
…..

The chart puts Barack Obama at the epicenter of an incestuous stew of American radical leftism. Not only are his connections significant, they practically define who he is. Taken together, they constitute a who’s who of the American radical left, and guiding all is the Cloward-Piven strategy.

Conspicuous in their absence are any connections at all with any other group, moderate, or even mildly leftist. They are all radicals, firmly bedded in the anti-American, communist, socialist, radical leftist mesh.

Signed,

An American who happens to care enough about this great country and it’s citizens to speak out.