NOAM CHOMSKY: “I REGARD MYSELF AS A SUPPORTER OF ISRAEL”

It’s a wonder that Israel didn’t let this man in…. but a bigger wonder why they apologised about it. Perhaps the following interview will explain why…


“I don’t regard myself as a critic of Israel, I regard myself as a supporter of Israel”…..
In his own words….. from his own mouth! (At 4:00 on video)

9 Comments

  1. May 30, 2010 at 09:47

    […] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Lynn Jacobs, thejewishquestion. thejewishquestion said: NOAM CHOMSKY: “I REGARD MYSELF AS A SUPPORTER OF ISRAEL”: It’s a wonder that Israel didn’t let this man in…… http://bit.ly/bpMjFK #israel […]

  2. JUST A SUPPORTER, alright said,

    May 30, 2010 at 20:35

    A supporter of ‘apartheid’ and ‘murder’ and ‘endless war’ and genocide against Palestinians, and for that matter, ‘goyim’ of all races and colors who are NOT JEWS.

    that’s the ‘supporter’ Noam Chumpsky is! Kind of like Prescott Bush was a supporter of the wehrmacht via the Thyssen / Krupp financing. I wonder how much of Noam’s money goes for funding of bulldozers that kill 23 year old American girls when they’re standing in front of them? Or, better yet, how many ‘WP’ rounds Noam personally has bought with his tithing to Israel??

    I must be talking about a different Noam Chumpsky than the man that supposedly caused the enlightenment and then murder / fratricide of Pat Tillman. What a role model Pat chose. There are better ones out there, he could have picked Henry Kissinger, of East Timor genocide fame, perhaps.

    Noam Chumpsky is a supporter of DEATH, and MURDER, and ENDLESS WAR MONGERING BY ISRAEL.

    I guess that’s fine with some people. I don’t think the term ‘scholar’ applies to his sorry zionist jewish a*s, however!

  3. Steve Hines said,

    May 30, 2010 at 21:18

    I don’t understand your implication. OK, so Chomsky is a dissident American Jew. He supports Israel the exact same way Hezbolla, Hamas, the Arab League and the UN support Israel. In fact, I would call the readers of this blog ‘supporters of Israel’ by the same standards. I know I fall into that category. I am a secular anti-war American of Anglo-Puritan heritage. So, namely, as far as I can tell (and feel free to post some rebuttal to this if you can find any supported in Chomsky’s work) this brand of support for Israel consists of calling for a non-expansionist state along the lines of UN 242 (we can go into all kinds of detail in some other post). According to Chomsky, expansionism was a trade for security and is ultimately national suicide for Israel. All of that is quite separate from Chomsky acknowledging US-Israel crimes. He has made a special avocation of documenting them in excruciating detail so that history will be quite clear to future generations. (I liked the interviewer transitioning to another topic by calling the issue ‘complex’. Read Fateful Triangle and you will see how unambiguous the crimes are and who the actors are etc.) Let’s see some of you NON-supporters of Israel spend a couple of years of forensic scholarship compiling and publishing a devastating record if US-Israeli crimes against the indigenous population of Palestine and what we like to think of as general humanity. I’m starting to see why Chomsky shies away from conspiracy theory. This record is crystal clear and has been in print for 30 years. Oh, btw, in case you don’t care to actually read Fateful Triangle, can you at least tell me what is objectionable in this interview?

  4. sorryidontlikenoam said,

    May 30, 2010 at 21:56

    It’s simple, Steve. There is one brand of Zionist Jew (and Chomsky is most certainly a Zionist, having lived n a Kibbutz) that believe that the path to “Israel’s” survival is through it’s acting as a non-criminal state, atoning for its crimes, and making peace with its neighbors.

    There is a fundamental difference between a ZIonist like Chomsky, and *this* reader of Desert Peace. Chomsky says himself that he is a supporter of the “State of Israel.” Some of us simply do not believe that “Israel” should exist, and that the basis for its current, undeniable existence is aggresive, violent force – not ridiculous UN mandates.

    The ONLY given justifications for the Ashkenazi domination of Palestine are: 1) “God gave ‘us’ this land, it says so in the bible. ” and 2) “If you do anything against us, you’re dead.”

    In the first case, anyone can see clearly that Ashkenazim are NOT descended from the biblical Hebrews. So even if you believe in this sick, disgusting religion crap, there’s no justification for a bunch of Eastern Europeans to be occupying Palestine.

    The second case can be summarised as “might makes right,” which is of course the basis of Fascism, totalitarianism, Maoism, and a bunch of other sick ideologies,

    Orthodox leftists pretend that we’d be missing out on all this great research if there were no Chomsky. It’s another blossom of the cult of personality tree that lives in the garden of the left.

    Chomsky plays his role. You can see it everytime he calls 9/11 truth a “conspiracy theory” – an epithet that’s been hurled at him when he’s been telling the truth. He ought to know better; and it’s so blatant that he no longer deserves our trust.

  5. ss said,

    May 31, 2010 at 00:26

    I grew up in a zionist household. It took me a while but I learned to think for myself. I realized what Israel was really doing. And I immediately realized that Chomsky is a left gatekeeper.
    But, I have found a way to make good use of him myself—he is a great tool for slowly bringing the other brainwashed zionists into reality. Pictures of murdered Palestinian children just provoke denial in the zionist mind and righteous indignation.
    The only way to deprogram them is to use their own tools, work slowly and build upon their humanity. Chomsky–as a “supporter of Israel” is a valid first step to reality.
    Bringing people out of a zionist mindset is hard work–but absolutely worth it. And it CAN be done. Except with my best friend’s brother–a former AIPAC lobbyist. Some people are just too brain damaged to save.

  6. John said,

    May 31, 2010 at 02:21

    When a people seek racial purity, they become intolerant. When they become intolerant they see enemies plotting against them, they see enemies harming them, all words seem a threat. Confusion overtakes them and irrationality reigns. Chomsky’s interview was interesting but Israel’s problems stem from Israel’s head not Chomsky’s head. This interview is ultimately, a distraction, turning on fine shades of interpreting an activist’s opinions. Stealing land, cruel tortures, war crimes, etc. would be more relevant issues for this reporter to address.

  7. Jon said,

    May 31, 2010 at 02:37

    Mearsheimer gave a lecture recently making the same point. Israel is on the apartheid path. That can last for a while, but not long term. Their only hope is a two state solution along the lines of the international consensus, but there’s little hope of that ever happening. So he does believe Israel will be dissolved ultimately. The aggressive elements have won the day. This is the Dershowitz types. Chomsky would like to see that prevented. You can watch Measheimer here.

    http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2010/05/the-response-to-mearsheimer.html

  8. LO PHATT said,

    May 31, 2010 at 03:50

    For a “scholar” of his calibre, he has to do an enormous amount of “selective” study to not see the hypocrisy of Isra-Hell. Whether it’s the “ancestral” claim (by primarily Turko-Mongolian stock who never lived anywhere near Palestine), or “Israel has a right to exist” argument.
    It is worth noting that “Israel” only existed as a nation for a very brief and contentious period long before the rise of the Roman Empire. Conflating the word “Israel”, the actual meaning of the term and selling the idea that they were an actual “nation” at one time in written history as justification for the theft of the native inhabitant’s land and their subsequent exploitation must require quite a feat of “fuzzy thinking” for a man of Prof. Chomsky’s stature.
    In short, there is no excuse for this insult to civilization. The actual behavior is a long-established pattern. The only thing new is that there is now a “center” from which to control operations and extort assistance from others.
    No, there is no point to reading Chomsky because, when he starts to zero in on the causes of the problems he has a fundamental dilemma. So, what’s the point of studying the “scholar” if he can’t arrive at the logical conclusions? He’s a tool. They trot him out to help define the “limits” of “acceptable” discussion. All controlled and manipulated by the masters in Tel-Aviv.

  9. I concur, SORRYIDONTLIKENOAM said,

    May 31, 2010 at 05:14

    I think what the guy above you has no clue about, is to buy ‘half of a lie’ is akin to buying the whole nine yards of the lie, and for Noam Chumpsky to vehemently ‘deny’ Israeli planning and execution via MOSSAD, of the 9/11 mass murder, false flag attack in New York on Sept. 11, 2001, is truly, utterly, ‘buying’ half the lie, and legitimizing the WHOLE LIE that is ISRAEL.

    Israel is a ‘lie’ because it was created for the Rothschilds zionist banking cartel as a ‘kings x’ so to speak, a base of operations, a ‘homeland’, at the cost of Palestinians who had no reason to be shoved off their land for the creation of the abomination that is Israel. When the british crown drafted the Balfour Agreement and gave Barron De Rothschild his ‘kings x’, they screwed a couple of generations of Palestinians, ad infinitum, and never truly legitimized Israels artificiality based on a bunch of cigar smoking banksters drawing lines on a map in a smoke filled room in Britain that day. Caving in to Barron De Rothschild, they effectively ‘stole’ everything from Palestine, didn’t offer any repayment of any kind, just essentially ‘ripped off’ the land and expected the Palestinians to just ‘evaporate’ into ‘thin air’ and ‘cease to exist’ then. Well, unfortunately, it didn’t exactly work out that way, did it?

    Then, we had the 6 day war, again precipitated by these same Rothschilds, to ‘expand’ the land grab, which it did, in fact, do. Goading Nasser into the war wasn’t necessarily too difficult. Israel had full military support, via lifeline from the U.S. in the form of sidewinder missiles for their A-4 skyhawk jets we’d sold them earlier, and a fresh supply of more Skyhawks, as well as nearly endless munitions supplied by the carrier, U.S.S. America. In essence, Nasser wasn’t fighting Israel, he was, in fact, fighting the U.S., again, for the Rothschilds gain. Amazing how that Rothschilds name keeps popping up thru history, when it comes to ISRAEL and DEATH DEALING.

    so, yeah, I concur with Chumpsky and his discounting of 9/11 as a ‘conspiracy theory’ the same as a bold-faced, facetious LIE of magnanimous proportions. With a single statment, Noam could ‘re-legitimize’ himself as a true critic of Israel, but he’s a GATE KEEPER, just like Amy Goodman and Bill Maher are GATE KEEPERS about 9/11 truth, which is a QUINTESSENTIAL TRUTH because until you wrap your mind around the absolute level of death dealing thru history, right up to 9/11 and the recent Gaza murdering by Israel, you haven’t truly said a goddamned thing in deference to Israeli aggression or killing. Toss the organ harvesting that Noam never mentions on the heap, and well, you can clearly see he’s full of ‘caca’ at the very least when he, tongue-in-cheek the whole time, self-proclaims himself to be a ‘ardent critic’ of Israeli murder and wrong doing.

    And actually, if Noam were a man of integrity, he’d denounce the U.S. as the ‘tool’ Israel always uses to push it’s weight around in the Middle East, because with out unequivocal U.S. backing, Israel would have indeed been wiped off the map, nukes or not, by any number of states who see it the way we see it, as a ‘blight’ and a ‘chancre’ on the ass of the Middle East.

    Noam Chumpsky, as I refer to him as, is the obvious, facetious liar that he is, not because of Israel, but because he himself personally has ZERO INTELLECTUAL INTEGRITY and hence, should never, ever be called a spokesperson for anything connected to JUSTICE. He’s a shill, purely, and a lying, speaks out of both sides of his mouth, Shill, to put it bluntly. He should be denounced at every opportunity for this reason alone, not because he’s a jew, but because he is to the core, a ZIONIST. This is not a game being played for brownie points, this is a war off ZIONISTS against those of us who object to that agenda, for just cause. For good cause.

    thanks, SORRYIDONTLIKENOAM, you hit Noam right between the lying eyes!


%d bloggers like this: