Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 26 to 50 of 89

Thread: Noam Chomsky

  1. #26
    I am in Jail
    attaboy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Last Online
    11-12-2013 @ 11:30 AM
    Posts
    4,042
    "The smart way to keep people passive and obedient is to strictly limit the spectrum of acceptable opinion, but allow very lively debate within that spectrum."
    - Noam Chomsky

    Chomsky needs to post a comment about the sinister PC bunch and their desire to limit the spectrum of terms and words to choose from.

  2. #27
    I don't know barbaro's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Last Online
    @
    Location
    on pacific ocean, south america
    Posts
    21,404
    Quote Originally Posted by attaboy View Post
    "The smart way to keep people passive and obedient is to strictly limit the spectrum of acceptable opinion, but allow very lively debate within that spectrum."
    - Noam Chomsky

    Chomsky needs to post a comment about the sinister PC bunch and their desire to limit the spectrum of terms and words to choose from.
    Good point, Atta.

    Chomsky has already.

    But he basically BANNED from the MAINSTREAM MEDIA in the U.S.

    The PC hate him.

    The Jews hate him.

    Liberals hate him.

    Conservatives hate.

    Not much room left.
    ............

  3. #28
    R.I.P.
    DrB0b's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Last Online
    @
    Location
    ALL GLORY TO THE HYPNOTOAD
    Posts
    16,572
    Quote Originally Posted by Milkman View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by DrB0b View Post
    ^Damn! There's a big debate in the linguistic community at the moment about the errors in Chomsky's transformational grammars. I can't understand a word of it. I was hoping Booner could explain it to me.
    There always was and always will be debate in the linguistic community about this and that.

    And Chomsky's linguistic work, while heuristic, is outdated.

    But linguistics ain't the topic. If you want a linguistic forum PM me.
    I know many linguistic forums and post on them, thanks, it's something that interests me greatly but right now it's not relevant. Right now, on Teakdoor as opposed to a specialized forum, I'm interested in Boon Mees' statement that
    That's about the only thing he's been right about in his entire 'career'.
    I don't want a linguistic debate here, I just want Boon Mee to back up that statement. I have a strong suspicion he's talking rubbish - if he's not I'll admit he was right, but I want to hear why he thinks that everything Chomsky said, except in regard to Oswald, is wrong, remember that Chomsky has said a lot of things in many different areas. Nobody has yet been able to prove hm wrong in everything. Boon Mee says he can do it and that's a pretty big deal - I for one can't wait for him to expose Chomsky for the fraud Boon Mee says he is. I'll say here and now that I think Booner is making it up and doesn't understand 1% of what Chomsky says. I'm asking him to put his money where his mouth is, I don't think he can do it. He says almost everything Chomsky has said is wrong, I want Boon Mee to show us how that is the case. Go back in this thread, this time read all the responses, and tell us if you agree with Booners statement that everything Chomsky has said, with the sole exception of Oswald being a lone gunman, is wrong.

    I have a sneaking suspicion that many in the anti-Chomsky camp know nothing whatsoever about him except what they've read on blogs - I don't believe for an instant that Boon Mee has ever read a book or heard a lecture by Chomsky but I'm asking him to prove me wrong by backing up his statement that
    Quote Originally Posted by BoonMee
    That's about the only thing he's been right about in his entire 'career'.
    Is that clear? It's not about linguistics - it's about people making sweeping statements without backing them up. Chomsky is seen in Europe as one of the world's greatest living intellectuals, I want Boon Mee to show us how somebody who's considered one of the worlds greatest living intellectuals is wrong in everything he's ever said aside from Oswald not being a lone gunman.
    Last edited by DrB0b; 03-07-2007 at 01:34 AM.

  4. #29
    I am in Jail
    attaboy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Last Online
    11-12-2013 @ 11:30 AM
    Posts
    4,042
    ^^He can register at TD. We take in the poor, tired and huddled masses from all the other boards.

  5. #30
    I don't know barbaro's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Last Online
    @
    Location
    on pacific ocean, south america
    Posts
    21,404
    ^ and ^^ and ^^^

    Chomsky was the most cited living author in the world for 12 years.

    Now he is #8.

    If Boon Mee states this is the only thing he's been right about in his career, BOON MEE needs to be specific.

    It's OK to have an opinion, but Boon Mee needs to state where Chomsky is wrong.

    And this is about facts - not opinion.

    Question for BOON ME:

    What Chomsky books have you read?

    Tell me, so I can check my library to check and corroborate your comments with Chomsky's index.


    I'M WAITING.

  6. #31
    Suspended from News & Speakers Corner kerux's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Last Online
    16-09-2007 @ 07:25 AM
    Location
    Padded Cell Next to Zundel
    Posts
    1,493
    Quote Originally Posted by Boon Mee View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by kerux View Post
    Professor Noam Chomsky, one of the country's most famous dissidents, says that Lee Harvey Oswald was the lone gunman in Dallas. Anyone who still supports the Warren Commission hoax after forty years of countering proofs is either ill-informed, dumb, gullible, afraid to speak truths to power or a disinformation agent.
    That's about the only thing he's been right about in his entire 'career'.
    Oswald was the only gunman whether you conspiracy nutjobs believe it or not...
    Oswald 'had no time to fire all Kennedy bullets'


    By Tim Shipman in Washington, Sunday Telegraph


    Lee Harvey Oswald could not have acted alone in assassinating President John F Kennedy, according to a new study by Italian weapons experts of the type of rifle Oswald used in the shootings.

    n fresh tests of the Mannlicher-Carcano bolt-action weapon, supervised by the Italian army, it was found to be impossible for even an accomplished marksman to fire the shots quickly enough.



    Oswald 'had no time to fire all Kennedy bullets' | International News | News | Telegraph

    Us nutjobs don't have a problem with impossibilities like you sane people do. Or intellectuals like Chomsky

  7. #32
    Suspended from News & Speakers Corner kerux's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Last Online
    16-09-2007 @ 07:25 AM
    Location
    Padded Cell Next to Zundel
    Posts
    1,493
    Looking forward to your analysis of Chomsky's linguistic errors.
    Perhaps Chomsky should stick with linguistics. It's like a professional ball player going off and trying to make out as if he's an expert in astronomy.

    If Chomsky wasn't jewish and didn't have the backing of his jewish colloborators in the educational and publishing fields, we most likely wouldn't have to put up with his male cow dung being spread about like fertilizer to feed your minds of mush. Now with the internet taking control away from him and his buddies, his foolishness is becoming obvious to the critical thinkers among us.
    Is that clear?
    It's not about linguistics - it's about people making sweeping statements without backing them up. Chomsky is seen in Europe as one of the world's greatest living intellectuals, I want Boon Mee to show us how somebody who's considered one of the worlds greatest living intellectuals is wrong in everything he's ever said aside from Oswald not being a lone gunman.
    Chomsky is an idiot if he thinks Oswald acted alone. Period. Is that clear?

    Chomsky is an idiot if he thinks that the ZOG [ie, the US] being involved in 9/11 is an impossibility. Chomsky rants on and on in his books about the rougue terrorist nature of the US government, but then makes the ridiculous assertion that it is an impossibility that that same government was involved in 9/11?

    It's Chomsky that makes sweeping statements that he can't and refuses to back up, saying that even discussing the topic is foolishness. And people like you accept his assumed right to limit the debate to within the parameters he himself sets. He's not in the undergraduate class at MIT. He's in the real world when he steps outside the protected enclave of MIT.

    Is that clear?
    Last edited by kerux; 03-07-2007 at 05:24 AM.

  8. #33
    Thailand Expat
    GooMaiRoo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Last Online
    28-04-2016 @ 09:27 AM
    Posts
    1,132
    Perhaps Chomsky's hatred of America's ruling class is so thorough that he can't even conceive of a sitting president getting wacked by its more rabid elements for being too progressive. In Chomsky's eyes, a progressive American leader would be an impossibility. Recall that in 1976, a US House of Representatives committee concluded with 95% certainty that JFK was killed by a conspiracy. No one can accuse them of being conspiracy kooks. Numerous well-researched books on the subject poke huge holes in the Warren Commission. Chomsky seems to be brilliant in every other respect, but Kerux may be correct about this particular flaw in Chomsky's thinking.
    Last edited by GooMaiRoo; 03-07-2007 at 09:23 AM.

  9. #34
    R.I.P.
    DrB0b's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Last Online
    @
    Location
    ALL GLORY TO THE HYPNOTOAD
    Posts
    16,572
    Quote Originally Posted by kerux View Post

    Is that clear?
    Clearly irrelevant bullshit that you've copied from elsewhere again. Against some stiff competetion you've once again shown you're the dumbest person on this forum. Quit your alcoholic ramblings and make your point. If chomsky said..., if chomsky did.... Don't you know? Critical thinkers among us? You?, A critical thinker?

  10. #35
    I am in Jail
    stroller's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Last Online
    12-03-2019 @ 09:53 AM
    Location
    out of range
    Posts
    23,080
    Quote Originally Posted by kerux
    It's Chomsky that makes sweeping statements that he can't and refuses to back up, saying that even discussing the topic is foolishness. And people like you accept his assumed right to limit the debate to within the parameters he himself sets.
    Of course he can refuse to address certain issues he doesn't want to talk about when he is being interviewed. The right of free speech includes the right not to speak.

    What planet do you live on?

    Quote Originally Posted by kerux
    If Chomsky wasn't jewish and didn't have the backing of his jewish colloborators in the educational and publishing fields, we most likely wouldn't have to put up with his male cow dung being spread about like fertilizer to feed your minds of mush.
    You've got to make your mind up, is he shunned because of his just criticism of USrael, and an example of "Zionist" censorship, or is he protected to spread his "cow dung" because he's jewish?

    Maybe we can get back to discussing Chomsky's work without name-calling and all the hyperbole.

  11. #36
    I don't know barbaro's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Last Online
    @
    Location
    on pacific ocean, south america
    Posts
    21,404
    [quote=kerux;337602]
    If Chomsky wasn't jewish and didn't have the backing of his jewish colloborators in the educational and publishing fields, we most likely wouldn't have to put up with his male cow dung being spread about like fertilizer to feed your minds of mush.
    Factually wrong (again).

    Chomsky is not liked in the Jewish community because of his position on Israel-Palestine.

    The ADL follows him around, plants protesters at his speeches, and has a serious campaign against him.

    Collaborators?

    Please show a link or cite a source.

    Getting published is fairly easy in academia.

    Kerux, what books by Chomsky have you read?

    Or, did you just go googling again?

  12. #37
    Suspended from News & Speakers Corner kerux's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Last Online
    16-09-2007 @ 07:25 AM
    Location
    Padded Cell Next to Zundel
    Posts
    1,493
    I picked up some books by Chomsky in Bangkok once, skimmed through them and read the blurbs. Didn't see much I hadn't already known. Don't need to give that intellectual fraud my few baht.

    Now, according you some of you, you have to have read books and not have gleaned info from the internet in order to be relevant and informed?

    Great, I'll remember that when discussing the Bible.

    Show me one quote of Chomsky's where he blames the problems we face on Zionism.
    Last edited by kerux; 03-07-2007 at 02:19 PM.

  13. #38
    I don't know barbaro's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Last Online
    @
    Location
    on pacific ocean, south america
    Posts
    21,404
    Quote Originally Posted by kerux View Post
    I picked up some books by Chomsky in Bangkok once, skimmed through them and read the blurbs. Didn't see much I hadn't already known. Don't need to give that intellectual fraud my few baht.
    Thanks for the honest answer.

    Your answer is "no."

  14. #39
    R.I.P.
    DrB0b's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Last Online
    @
    Location
    ALL GLORY TO THE HYPNOTOAD
    Posts
    16,572
    Quote Originally Posted by Milkman View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by kerux View Post
    I picked up some books by Chomsky in Bangkok once, skimmed through them and read the blurbs. Didn't see much I hadn't already known. Don't need to give that intellectual fraud my few baht.
    Thanks for the honest answer.

    Your answer is "no."

    Kerux, if you haven't read him how do you know he's a fraud?

  15. #40
    Suspended from News & Speakers Corner kerux's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Last Online
    16-09-2007 @ 07:25 AM
    Location
    Padded Cell Next to Zundel
    Posts
    1,493
    Didn't you read my posts above? Start there. I'll bring some more evidence in the hours to come. It's well known Chomsky's a fraud.

  16. #41
    Suspended from News & Speakers Corner kerux's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Last Online
    16-09-2007 @ 07:25 AM
    Location
    Padded Cell Next to Zundel
    Posts
    1,493
    Quote Originally Posted by Milkman View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by kerux View Post
    I picked up some books by Chomsky in Bangkok once, skimmed through them and read the blurbs. Didn't see much I hadn't already known. Don't need to give that intellectual fraud my few baht.
    Thanks for the honest answer.

    Your answer is "no."

    Is there some reason I should?

  17. #42
    I am in Jail
    stroller's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Last Online
    12-03-2019 @ 09:53 AM
    Location
    out of range
    Posts
    23,080
    Quote Originally Posted by kerux
    It's well known Chomsky's a fraud.
    That is an odd assertion, coming from someone who rejects much of what is "well known".

    It is a misplaced fallacious argument:
    "Appeal To Widespread Belief (Bandwagon Argument, Peer Pressure, Appeal to Common Practice):
    the claim, as evidence for an idea, that many people believe it, or used to believe it, or do it.
    "

  18. #43
    R.I.P.
    DrB0b's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Last Online
    @
    Location
    ALL GLORY TO THE HYPNOTOAD
    Posts
    16,572
    Quote Originally Posted by kerux View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Milkman View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by kerux View Post
    I picked up some books by Chomsky in Bangkok once, skimmed through them and read the blurbs. Didn't see much I hadn't already known. Don't need to give that intellectual fraud my few baht.
    Thanks for the honest answer.

    Your answer is "no."

    Is there some reason I should?
    Yes, you wouldn't look quite so much if an idiot if, just for once, you had some idea of what you were talking about. Chomsky a zionist?, yeah, and Hitler was an Indonesian muslim!

  19. #44
    Suspended from News & Speakers Corner kerux's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Last Online
    16-09-2007 @ 07:25 AM
    Location
    Padded Cell Next to Zundel
    Posts
    1,493
    Please show me where I said Chomsky was a Zionist.

    And while you're reviewing, please bring those quotes where Chomsky blames the problems we non-jews face on Zionism.

    Stroker does alot of attacking of other posters, but he's quite short on actually providing any evidence to support his views.

  20. #45
    Suspended from News & Speakers Corner kerux's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Last Online
    16-09-2007 @ 07:25 AM
    Location
    Padded Cell Next to Zundel
    Posts
    1,493
    Quote Originally Posted by DrB0b View Post
    Kerux being against him is pretty much proof that chomsky is on the side of the angels. By the way kerux, it's considered good form to point out when you're cutting and pasting from somebody else's writing - your post above was copied directly from questionsquestions without any acknowledgment. Actually looks like oilempires plagiarised it from there before you plagiarised it from them. Stealing makes Baby Jesus cry! Don't you have any opinions of your own or are you just a palimpsest?


    Noam Chomsky, at a FAIR event at New York's Town Hall, 22 January 2002, in response to a question from the audience about US government foreknowledge of 9/11. At that time, 9/11 investigators had already presented substantial documented evidence for: prior warnings, Air Force stand-down, anomalous insider trading connected to CIA, cover-up of the domestic anthrax attacks, inconsistencies in identities & timelines of "hijackers", US connections to al Qaeda in Balkans, a Pak ISI-al Qaeda funding connection, etc etc etc. http://www.questionsquestions.net/to...tekeepers.htmL
    Your full of male cow dung again. I didn't cite from the link you posted, and the site I did post from was plainly linked.

    Here it is: Where Noam will not roam - Chomsky's limited dissent on 9/11 and JFK

    What are we expected to do now, follow our links back to the source? And since when is posting info and the link plagerzising? Or stealing?

    Not only that, had you actually spent some time investigating instead of being in such a hurry to falsely accuse me of plagerizing and stealing, you might have found this reference link at the bottom of the page I cited.
    Michael Parenti on Noam Chomsky and JFK, as a characteristic example of Left anticonspiracism:
    Conspiracy Phobia on the Left www.questionsquestions.net/documents2/conspiracyphobia.html


    You're the drunk who needs to stop pointing out the toothpicks in the eyes of others, and work on removing that timber from your ass.
    Last edited by kerux; 03-07-2007 at 03:29 PM.

  21. #46
    I am in Jail
    stroller's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Last Online
    12-03-2019 @ 09:53 AM
    Location
    out of range
    Posts
    23,080
    Quote Originally Posted by kerux
    Stroker does alot of attacking of other posters, but he's quite short on actually providing any evidence to support his views.
    The evidence is implicit in applying comprehension and logic after reading my comment, on this occasion - something you have shown to find difficult.

    Quote Originally Posted by kerux
    And while you're reviewing, please bring those quotes where Chomsky blames the problems we non-jews face on Zionism.
    There aren't any.
    Chomsky does not share your racial/racist agenda.

  22. #47
    I am in Jail
    stroller's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Last Online
    12-03-2019 @ 09:53 AM
    Location
    out of range
    Posts
    23,080
    Quote Originally Posted by kerux
    the site I did post from was plainly linked.
    You have not indicated which are your words and which are quotes. It was not clear to which portion of the text the link referred to.
    I suggest quotation marks or quote boxes for this purpose.

  23. #48
    Thailand Expat Boon Mee's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Last Online
    Yesterday @ 05:10 PM
    Location
    Ao Nang
    Posts
    44,563
    Quote Originally Posted by kerux View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Boon Mee View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by kerux View Post
    Professor Noam Chomsky, one of the country's most famous dissidents, says that Lee Harvey Oswald was the lone gunman in Dallas. Anyone who still supports the Warren Commission hoax after forty years of countering proofs is either ill-informed, dumb, gullible, afraid to speak truths to power or a disinformation agent.
    That's about the only thing he's been right about in his entire 'career'.
    Oswald was the only gunman whether you conspiracy nutjobs believe it or not...
    Oswald 'had no time to fire all Kennedy bullets'


    By Tim Shipman in Washington, Sunday Telegraph


    Lee Harvey Oswald could not have acted alone in assassinating President John F Kennedy, according to a new study by Italian weapons experts of the type of rifle Oswald used in the shootings.

    n fresh tests of the Mannlicher-Carcano bolt-action weapon, supervised by the Italian army, it was found to be impossible for even an accomplished marksman to fire the shots quickly enough.



    Oswald 'had no time to fire all Kennedy bullets' | International News | News | Telegraph

    Us nutjobs don't have a problem with impossibilities like you sane people do. Or intellectuals like Chomsky
    It's been proven time and time again that Oswald would have had lots of time to get off those three shots. And, he was a crack shot.

    Just another bullshit conspiracy theory...

  24. #49
    Suspended from News & Speakers Corner kerux's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Last Online
    16-09-2007 @ 07:25 AM
    Location
    Padded Cell Next to Zundel
    Posts
    1,493
    Bring some of that proof here, would ya?

    It is in the Warren Commission Report?

  25. #50
    Suspended from News & Speakers Corner kerux's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Last Online
    16-09-2007 @ 07:25 AM
    Location
    Padded Cell Next to Zundel
    Posts
    1,493
    Quote Originally Posted by stroller View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by kerux
    It's well known Chomsky's a fraud.
    That is an odd assertion, coming from someone who rejects much of what is "well known".
    It's also well known that the sun sets in the west.

Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •