Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

The treachery of Noam Chomsky

Expand Messages
  • World View
    More on the treachery of Noam Chomsky Benjamin Merhav Dear friends, following are my two first articles in a series titled, The
    Message 1 of 1 , Sep 5 9:35 PM
      More on the treachery of Noam Chomsky
      Benjamin Merhav <benjaminmerhav@...>

      Dear friends,

      following are my two first articles in a series titled, The
      Treachery of Noam Chomsky.My own background and views are on my
      autobiography link (www.geocities.com/bmerhav),and the other link
      (www.geocities.com/benmerhav)is what remains of my newsletter, The
      Newsletter for Exposing Zionist Crimes, which "disappeared" due to
      zionist sabotage. Yahoo! allowed me to keep the remaining links as
      inactive webpages.
      Your comments/criticism are invited. You are welcome to
      publicise the articles as widely as possible.

      Sincerely, Benjamin Merhav
      Melbourne, Australia


      Born into and raised by a "deeply Zionist"(in
      his own words) family, Noam Chomsky has remained loyal to zionism*
      all his life, albeit under the cover and pretence of a "Left"guru in
      the West. This contradiction ,between Chomsky's loyalty to zionism
      and his well publicised "Left views", is only one of several
      contradictory and absurd behaviours of his ,which merit the
      question : is Noam Chomsky an impostor ? The other contradictions
      are related to the first one, but each of them is an
      absurdity/deception on its own. Thus, for example,while publishing
      books and articles which purport to criticise the USA foreign
      policies, its imperialist military interventions in other countries
      in particular, he had been holding for many years a well paid senior
      teaching position at MIT, which is the brain centre of the USA
      military-industrial complex under the control of and financed by the
      Pentagon. All of which expose another Chomsky absurdity, namely ,his
      persistent push into the ranks of Anarchist groups around the world
      by purporting to act as their guru, as if he himself has been nothing
      but a dedicated Anarchist all his life.
      Since zionism has been central to Noam
      Chomsky's activities and views it would be necessary to take firstly
      a close (yet brief) look at zionism and at the zionist apartheid
      regime of Israel so that the implications are grasped correctly.

      Zionism, political zionism, is a form of fascism. From its
      beginning it was looking for imperialist patronage in exchange for
      service to the British empire**. After the 2nd WW the patronage of
      zionism shifted to the world's centre of finance capital, the USA
      plutocracy.It meant that zionism had to serve the interests of the
      huge USA transnational corporations, and it has been doing this job
      ever since then.
      This job of spearheading the global rule (not just in the
      Middle East) for the huge USA transnational corporations has been
      undetaken by the zionist apartheid regime of Israel with great zest
      (albeit with great secrecy), and to the grateful acclaim of the USA
      rulers. Hence their continued sponsorship of this racist regime,
      which in turn encourages further zionist impunity (like its
      production and deployment of WMD), and more perpetration of zionist
      war crimes and zionist crimes against humanity in Palestine and
      elsewhere around the world.
      Acting as the spearhead for the USA transnational corporations
      does not, in itself, make the zionist apartheid regime of Israel a
      fascist regime, nor zionism a fascist ideology. Even their racist
      feature do not make them necessarily fascist, but combined with the
      militaristic worship of force/power; and with zionist aggressive
      territorial expansionism manifested by periodical invasions of
      neighbouring countries; and with a zionist political system in Israel
      where all political parties are zionist (with the exception of an
      Arab minority whose representatives are under constant threat of
      expulsion or arrest whenever they fail to toe the zionist line);and
      with some 8,000 political prisoners, most of whom tortured and
      detained without trial for years ;and with fascist legislation like
      the Emergency Regulations(Defence), 1945, the zionist apartheid
      regime of Israel is a fascist regime with a fascist ideology and
      fascist policies. The judiciary there follows the zionist line
      too ,and the recent case of Tali Fahima, an Israeli woman peace
      activist of jewish background, who has been detained without trial,
      tortured, incarcerated in solitary confinement, and only after one
      year in prison her trial begins in secrecy, proves the fascist
      character of the regime too. There is freedom there for fanatical
      zionists, and only partial and conditional freedom for Israeli
      citizens who are not fanatical zionists.
      A very impotant fascist episode in the history of zionism is
      the active collaboration of the top zionist hierarchy with the
      fascist regimes of Mussolini and Hitler before, during, and after the
      2nd WW (when top Nazi war criminals were saved from the gallows due
      to the intervention of the zionist hierarchy). That collaboration
      began in the early 1920s by Vladimir Jabotinsky, the founder of
      fanatical zionism, who befriended and supported Mussolini. This
      friendship culminated in the military training by the Black Shirts of
      Jabotinsky's youth followers (Betar), some 135 of them. However, the
      hierarchy of "mainstream Zionism" did not lag behind Jabotinsky. As
      soon as Mussolini imposed his rule in Rome, all the rest of the top
      zionist hierarchy went on a pilgrimage to Rome, to meet Mussolini.
      They continued to court Mussolini well into the mid '30s, even after
      his invasion of Ethiopia, and after his alliance with Hitler
      (see ,for example, Lenni Brenner's books about zionist collaboration
      with Mussolini and the Nazis). Then, during the war, was the zionist
      collaboration with the Hitler regime which began with the Ha'avara
      agreement and culminated with the collaboration in the mass
      murder of Jews in Hungary, as would be revealed during the Kastner
      trial in Israel during 1954-1955 (see Ben Hecht's book, Perfidy).
      So you would think that a person like Noam Chomsky, who
      claims to be anti-fascist and anti-imperialist, would condemn
      zionism, and the zionist apartheid regime of Israel, but he has
      not,and he never wrote a single sentence which condemns zionism or
      the zionist apartheid regime of Israel. Moreover, he has many zionist
      friends there in Israel, and he used to spend his vacations in his
      beloved zionist kibbutz there.
      Then there is the other absurdity, namely, what was
      this "Left guru"doing at MIT, the USA brain centre of the military
      industrial complex ,where he had been holding a teaching position for
      so many years ? To answer this question we would need to take a brief
      look at MIT.
      In an article titled, MIT Research Heavily Dependent on
      Defense Department Funding, D.J. Glenn, writes that "MIT is the
      number one non-profit Department of Defense contractor in the
      nation..." and he concludes by saying : " The fact that (MIT) chooses
      to devote less than 20% of research effort to things other than more
      efficient means to kill is more than disgusting, it is criminal."
      (see www-tech.mit.edu/V109/N7/glenn.07o.html).
      Another author, B. Feldman, writes under the title, MIT&The Air
      Force, write that :
      "If an estimated 3,565 civilians were, indeed, killed between October
      8, 2001 and Christmas Day 2001 as a result of the U.S. Air Force's
      military campaign in Afghanistan, then an argument might be made that
      MIT shares some moral responsibility for these Afghan civilian
      deaths. And if 2002 brings another escalation in U.S. Air Force
      military activity in Iraq, it might be productive for anti-
      racist/anti-war folks in the U.S. to again demand that MIT end its
      collaborative relationship with the U.S. Air Force, once and for
      all." (www.questionsquestions.net/docs0209/1112 __mit.html) And in
      reply to a reader's question he states as follows :

      "Although MIT Professssor Chomsky has been on the payroll of the 12th-
      largest recipient of US Air Force war contracts in recent years, the
      article isn't asserting "that Chomsky is a controlled person." But
      there is evidence that Z magazine was unwilling to print an
      article about MIT's links to the U.S. Air Force's space warfare
      preparations and to the Pentagon's think-tank, the Institute for
      Defense Analyses, a few years ago. "
      The question which begs itself again then is what is
      the "guru of the Left" doing at MIT ? If the answer is that he had
      been just earning his livelihood, than it is a manifestly false
      answer, not only because it was his choice (he could have gone to
      another university), but also because he had been there for many
      years as a senior lecturer, and the bosses of the institution had
      been very proud to have him there.
      This cynicism is very typical of Chomsky. He says he
      supports the Palestinian cause, yet he makes best of friends with the
      zionists. Anything which suits his ego and his selfish interests is
      good, and if it does not he either ignores it or goes against it.
      Zionism is , presumably, part of his ego or else it suits his selfish
      interests, so why go against it ? All of which bring us to his
      contradictory attitudes to military draft (conscription) in
      the USA. In an article titled, Noam Chomsky Vs Noam Chomsky, Frank
      Speiser quotes Chomsky as follows :

      "I might add, for what it's worth, that although I was actively
      involved in organizing and supporting resistance (including support
      for draft resisters) in the 60s, and was saved from a likely prison
      sentence only by the Tet offensive, I was never opposed to the
      draft. If there is to be an army, it would be best, I think, for it
      to be mainly a citizen's army. In part for the reasons that the top
      command oppose that option."
      In a plutocracy like the USA, the centre of world capitalism,
      there can be no "citizens' army", because the army – be they
      conscripts or mercenaries – is an instrument of the ruling class, not
      of the people. As a "guru of the Left" he certainly knows that, or is
      it, perhaps, his position with IMT that made him advocate compulsory
      military conscription to the USA army ?
      Let us return now to his attitudes to zionism. As I mentioned
      before, Noam Chomsky has been immersed in zionism from the day he was
      born, and he has never been willing to even attempt to reconsider his
      zionist outlook. Take ,for example, the zionist theory of the "Jewish
      nation". It never occurred to him, or to his cronies, that it is a
      plain zionist propaganda lie, and a big lie at that ! There is
      no "Jewish nation", only a Jewish religion. The first efforts of T.
      Herzl, the founder political zionism, had not been directed towards
      the zionist colonisation of Palestine, but to convince his congress
      "delegates" that they are all part of the "Jewish nation". Why ?
      Because Palestine could have been replaced by another geographic
      location (like Uganda, for example), whereas it was more important
      for zionism to show the world that there is a "Jewish nation" that
      needs a "homeland" where it can establish its own state. When Noam
      Chomsky visited Australia a few years ago he gave an interview to The
      Australian Jewish News, the local zionist rag, and this mouthpiece of
      zionism in Australia was very happy to give the interview a prominent
      place ! Chomsky too was friendly to his zionist host because if
      it is "the Jewish News", then they are automatically his buddies,
      even if they are fanatical zionists !
      On the USA invasion and occupation of Iraq, a colossal war
      crime against the Arab people of Iraq, Noam Chomsky expressed his
      support for the zionist-USA plan of "elections". Ghali Hassan, in his
      article, Iraq Elections And The Liberal Elites : A Response to Noam
      Chomsky ,(countercurrents.org) ,quotes Chomsky as follows :

      "In Iraq, the January elections were successful and praiseworthy.
      However, the main success is being reported only marginally: The
      United States was compelled to allow them to take place. That is a
      real triumph, not of the bomb-throwers, but of non-violent resistance
      by the people, secular as well as Islamist, for whom Grand Ayatollah
      Al Sistani is a symbol" (Khaleej Times Online, 4 March 2005)

      Commenting on Chomsky's statement Ghali Hassan wrote :

      "Mr. Chomsky is either completely out of touch with reality in Iraq,
      or simply ignorant of the legitimate rights of the Iraqi people to
      self-determination. Firstly, the elections were a farce. The majority
      of the 14 million eligible Iraqis to vote have boycotted the
      elections. Since the invasion and Occupation of Iraq, Iraqis have
      protested and requested immediate free and fair elections, however,
      the Bush administration 'stifled, delayed, manipulated and otherwise
      thwarted the democratic aspiration of the Iraqi people'. The US
      administration turned down the idea of elections, claiming that
      technical problems would permit elections in two years at the
      earliest. Prominent Iraqi politicians and patriots, and UN officials
      who are familiar with the conditions there immediately refuted this
      argument. (See note [1] for detail). According to Joachim Guilliard
      of German Campaign against the Embargo on Iraq, "Another important
      element of the US strategy was that the elections took place under
      the 'Transitional Administrative Law (TAL)'" drawn up by pro-Israel
      US jurists, such as the 32-year old pro-Israel Noah Feldman of New
      York University."
      However, the most obvious zionist orientation of Chomsky
      can be seen in his attitude to the Israel-Palestine conflict. Thus,
      for example, his treacherous support for the "Geneva Accord" has been
      exposed last year by Noah Cohen, in his article, Noam Chomsky
      and "Left" Apologetics for Injustice in Palestine,
      (www.ifamericansknew.org) as follows ":
      "Chomsky's concept of "realism" has a striking resemblance
      to the colonial discourse of "manifest destiny": Good or bad, right
      or wrong—so the argument goes—these are the facts on the ground; this
      is the way of history. In the name of this "realism," activists and
      intellectuals in the international community have simultaneously
      asserted themselves as pro-Palestinian, and yet taken it upon
      themselves to concede every fundamental right to which the
      Palestinian people lay claim. In pointing to the Geneva Accords as a
      legitimate compromise, Chomsky concedes all of the following rights
      on their behalf:

      the right to reclaim sovereignty over the land stolen from them in
      1948; the right of refugees even to return to this land;
      the right to reclaim the most densely settled land in the West Bank;
      the right to freedom of movement within the new Palestinian "state"
      (since the West Bank settlements—to be declared permanently a part
      of "Israel"—cut that territory into isolated cantons, and these
      cantons are in turn separated from Gaza);
      the right to full sovereignty over borders and airspace;
      the right to maintain an independent military capable of self-
      the right to full control of resources.
      In general, this means that the "best possible compromise," that
      promises to "lead to something better," requires first that
      Palestinians officially concede all of the material conditions on
      which the right to self-determination depends. It's hard to see
      how these concessions could possibly lead to "something better."
      I had some personal experience with Chomsky's treachery
      too, when his loyalty to zionism and to the zionist apartheid regime
      of Israel was exposed to me for the first time. It happened during
      1986-7, when the Israeli nuclear whistle-blower, Mordechai Vanunu,
      was kidnapped by the zionist Gestapo from Europe ,where he presented
      full proof of Israel's underground nuclear bombs factory in Dimona to
      a London newspaper. Knowing the vengeful methods of the zionist
      Gestapo I feared for Vanunu's life, and I immediately began to sound
      the alarm bells by contacting people and organisations to alert them
      to the impending danger. Soon I managed to make contact with Vanunu's
      girlfriend, Judy Zimmet, who lived in Boston, and I advised her to
      contact Noam Chomsky, who lived not far from her place, and ask for
      his support for Vanunu by demanding his immediate release from the
      Israeli prison. She reported back to me that she was very
      disappointed following her meeting with him because he refused to
      commit himself to do anything for Vanunu. In fact, Noam Chomsky has
      not done anything to help Vanunu to this day !
      Isn't it time the people on the Left, all over the world,
      wake up to the treachery of Noam Chomsky and his cronies before they
      inflict more damage on the Left ?
      *I do not spell zionism with a capital Z for the same reasons that I
      do not spell fascism with a capital F.

      **In his address to the fourth zionist congress in London, 1900,
      T.Herzl , the founder of political zionism, stated :"It is of
      increasing importance to the nations of civilization that on the road
      to Asia – the shortest road to Asia – there would be set up a post of
      civilization, which would be at the service of civilized mankind.
      This post is Palestine...and the Jews will be prepared to defend this
      post with blood and substance."(The Balfour Declaration, by Leonard
      Stein, London,1961, at p.19).


      In my article, More On The Treachery of Noam
      Chomsky, I pointed out the various absurdities/deceptions of Noam
      Chomsky's political activities under the cover of his purported "Left
      guru" role while maintaining his loyalty to zionism all his
      life. Can anyone be a fascist and an anti-fascist at the same time ?
      Of course not , you would answer, and it would be safe to say that no
      one would dispute such an answer. Yet , the zionists who established
      the kibutz settlements in Israel - the bastions of zionist
      colonisation in Arab Palestine, in particular those who belonged to
      the Hashomer Hatzair (or Hakibutz Haartzi) organisation - did attempt
      to do just that, namely, purport to be Left (and anti-fascist) while
      maintaining their loyalty to zionism. Their daily Hebrew newspaper,
      Al-Hamishmar, had under its title-name the following caption : "For
      Zionism, for Socialism, for Fraternity of Nations". Noam Chomsky has
      been their admirer/follower much of his adult life, and his politics
      show that he has adopted their "Left " rhetorics while maintaining
      his loyalty to zionism. As a matter of fact , he was known in Israel
      for having chosen his favourite Hashomer Hatzair kibbutz settlement
      where he spent his annual vacations for many years.
      In his article, Damage Control : Noam Chomsky
      and the Israel-Palestine Conflict, Jeffrey Blankfort, a Left
      journalist in the USA, reveals what Noam Chomsky has been attempting
      to cover up with his "Left" rhetorics, namely, his loyalty to zionism
      as follows :

      "What is less generally known is that he admits to having been a
      Zionist from childhood, by one of the earlier definitions of the
      term – in favor of a Jewish homeland in Palestine and a bi-national,
      not a Jewish state – and, as he wrote 30 years ago, "perhaps this
      personal history distorts my perspective." *

      Although well concealed from the public, and
      covered up with Left rhetorics and cliches,the loyalty of Noam
      Chomsky to zionism permeates all of his political views, particularly
      his commentaries about the zionist conflict in Palestine. Thus, for
      example, he never condemned the zionist apartheid regime of Israel,
      and he is opposed to the condemnation of zionist racism manifested by
      that regime. Accordingly, Chomsky opposes the imposition of
      international sanctions on the zionist apartheid regime of Israel.
      Jeff Blankfort ,in his above article ,quotes Chomsky as admitting it
      during an interview as follow :

      "...when Chomsky was asked if sanctions should be applied against
      Israel as they were against South Africa. He responded:
      In fact, I've been strongly against it in the case of Israel. For a
      number of reasons. For one thing, even in the case of South Africa, I
      think sanctions are a very questionable tactic. In the case of South
      Africa, I think they were [ultimately] legitimate because it was
      clear that the large majority of the population of South Africa
      was in favor of it. Sanctions hurt the population. You don't impose
      them unless the population is asking for them. That's the moral
      issue. So, the first point in the case of Israel is that: Is the
      population asking for it? Well, obviously not. "
      Omar Barghouti, a Palestinian political analyst,
      reacted to Chomsky's objection to sanctions against Israel with
      surprise mixed with anger ,understandably. Here is Jeff Blankfort's
      article again :

      "That response (by Chomsky) also disturbed Palestinian political
      analyst, Omar Barghouti, who, while tactfully acknowledging Chomsky
      as "a distinguished supporter of the Palestinian cause," addressed
      the issue squarely: Of all the anti-boycott arguments, this one
      reflects either surprising naiveté or deliberate intellectual
      dishonesty. Are we to judge whether to apply sanctions on a
      colonial power based on the opinion of the majority in the oppressors
      community? Does the oppressed community count at all? " Omar
      Barghouti , in an open letter to UNESCO, dated 2nd of March ,2005
      (electronicintifada.net) states the Palestinians' demand for
      imposition of sanctions on the zionist apartheid regime of Israel,
      concluding as follows :

      "In the spirit of international solidarity, moral consistency and
      resistance to injustice, we, Palestinian academics and intellectuals,
      call upon UNESCO to immediately withdraw its support for IPSO
      (Israeli-Palestinian Science Organisation) and any other similar
      effort that assists, cooperates with or otherwise promotes Israeli
      scientific or cultural institutions until Israel desists from
      violating Palestinian human rights and fully complies with the
      pertinent precepts of international law and UN resolutions. "

      The above statement echoes an earlier
      Palestinian academics' call for international academic boycott of
      Israel, on the 7th of July , 2004, published by
      electronicintifada.net, as follows :

      "We, Palestinian academics and intellectuals, call upon our
      colleagues in the international community to comprehensively and
      consistently boycott all Israeli academic and cultural institutions
      as a contribution to the struggle to end Israel's occupation,
      colonization and system of apartheid, by applying the following:

      1.Refrain from participation in any form of academic and cultural
      cooperation, collaboration or joint projects with Israeli

      2.Advocate a comprehensive boycott of Israeli institutions at the
      national and international levels, including suspension of all forms
      of funding and subsidies to these institutions;

      3.Promote divestment and disinvestment from Israel by international
      academic institutions;

      4.Exclude from the above actions against Israeli institutions any
      conscientious Israeli academics and intellectuals opposed to their
      stateÂ's colonial and racist policies;

      5.Work toward the condemnation of Israeli policies by pressing for
      resolutions to be adopted by academic, professional and cultural
      associations and organizations;

      6.Support Palestinian academic and cultural institutions directly
      without requiring them to partner with Israeli counterparts as an
      explicit or implicit condition for such support."

      The Palestinian demand for boycott ,divestment and
      sanctions against the the zionist apartheid regime of Israel was
      repeated again, and endorsed by a very broad coalition of Palestinian
      organisations on the 9th of July, 2005, in the Palestinian Civil
      Society call for boycott ,divestment and sanctions against Israel.

      Obviously, Noam Chomsky is on the side of the zionist
      apartheid regime of Israel, but how many people on the Left in the
      West have noticed that ?
      * www.leftcurve.org



      To subscribe to this group, send an email to:

    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.