Noam Chomsky: 9-11: Institutional Analysis vs. Conspiracy Theory

[pk]

..... aaaaaaaannnnnnddddd......

... we're into 20 pages. And none the fucking wiser. Still, it's something to do innit.

I'm quite tempted to write a program to generate these threads. Wouldn't be too hard. Kindof like a bunch of turing-test machines sitting in a circle, talking fairly intelligent sounding bollocks to each other until the end of time.

Or until some cunt mentions "black ops" and quotes fucking Goebbels, for crying out loud...

 

[Mungy]

..... aaaaaaaannnnnnddddd......

... we're into 20 pages. And none the fucking wiser. Still, it's something to do innit.

I'm quite tempted to write a program to generate these threads. Wouldn't be too hard. Kindof like a bunch of turing-test machines sitting in a circle, talking fairly intelligent sounding bollocks to each other until the end of time.

don't forget the few pages of people swearing, debating the poster rather than the content and of course people posting "not this shite again zzzzzz" and variations thereof.

there have been some good posts on this thread from all three sides of the conspiracy fence posts like ours that are nothing to do with the topic only detract from the debate, whether its a good debate or not. after all, if we don't like a thread, we don't have to read it or contribute to it.

 

[Blagsta]

No it's not 'the Jews'. Icke refers to a ruling elite comprised of a few families, some of which happen to be Jewish. He gives whole day-long lectures without mentioning the word 'Jew' - rather curious for an anti-semite. It may appear by isolating stuff about Jewishness from many millions of words he has written that there's some hidden issue but it really isn't. As for the Talmud, I think it's a racist load of nonsense too (among other religious institutions which he will also criticise).

So why does he go on about the Jews then?

 

[Structaural]

If Icke's being discussed, it's time for the bin surely.

 

[Loki]

So why does he go on about the Jews then?

Aren't lizards and jews aspects of the same thing in Icke's worldview...

 

[tarannau]

Aren't lizards and jews aspects of the same thing in Icke's worldview...

No, but a disproportionate number of jews are actually evil reptilian agents according to Icke. Funny that.

No racism there at all, oh no sirree. Not even the slightest implication; in the same way that folks who seem obsessed on about black issues & perceived legal inconsistencies whilst implying that black folks are generally savage and primitive aren't racist at all. He's just exercising his right to free speech innit.

"He's not really a reptile, erm I mean jew, he's my kind of reptile...'

 

[Jazzz]

So why does he go on about the Jews then?

He doesn't.

 

[Blagsta]

He doesn't.

Errrr...you must be blind then. He's just been quoted doing so.

 

[ZAMB]

What about the Gulf of Tonkin? Wasn't that a faked incident by the US to start a war? Where the press knew the truth quite soon but just went along with the govt. [Just an attempt to get us off lizards, Cluedo and such]

The official story was that North Vietnamese torpedo boats launched an "unprovoked attack" against a U.S. destroyer on "routine patrol" in the Tonkin Gulf on Aug. 2 — and that North Vietnamese PT boats followed up with a "deliberate attack" on a pair of U.S. ships two days later.

The truth was very different.

Rather than being on a routine patrol Aug. 2, the U.S. destroyer Maddox was actually engaged in aggressive intelligence-gathering maneuvers — in sync with coordinated attacks on North Vietnam by the South Vietnamese navy and the Laotian air force.

"The day before, two attacks on North Vietnam...had taken place," writes scholar Daniel C. Hallin. Those assaults were "part of a campaign of increasing military pressure on the North that the United States had been pursuing since early 1964."

On the night of Aug. 4, the Pentagon proclaimed that a second attack by North Vietnamese PT boats had occurred earlier that day in the Tonkin Gulf — a report cited by President Johnson as he went on national TV that evening to announce a momentous escalation in the war: air strikes against North Vietnam.

But Johnson ordered U.S. bombers to "retaliate" for a North Vietnamese torpedo attack that never happened.

Nearly three decades later, during the Gulf War, columnist Sydney Schanberg warned journalists not to forget "our unquestioning chorus of agreeability when Lyndon Johnson bamboozled us with his fabrication of the Gulf of Tonkin incident."

Schanberg blamed not only the press but also "the apparent amnesia of the wider American public."

And he added: "We Americans are the ultimate innocents. We are forever desperate to believe that this time the government is telling us the truth."

http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=2261

 

[nino_savatte]

Aren't lizards and jews aspects of the same thing in Icke's worldview...

Oy! Some of my best friends are lizards.

 

[editor]

He doesn't.

His own site is stuffed full of references to 'Jews.'

 

[Blagsta]

What about the Gulf of Tonkin? Wasn't that a faked incident by the US to start a war? Where the press knew the truth quite soon but just went along with the govt. [Just an attempt to get us off lizards, Cluedo and such]




http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=2261

That's very different though. That's lying about what happened after the event, not planning the event, the lie and all the consequences...

 

[ZAMB]

That's very different though. That's lying about what happened after the event, not planning the event, the lie and all the consequences...

Isn't the point that the main event never happened. It was a convenient lie to get the American people's support for starting a war.

 

[RaverDrew]

His own site is stuffed full of references to 'Jews.'

So what ? That means nothing in itself.

Your site is stuffed full of references to "drugs" doesn't mean you condemn them, or condone them for that matter.

 

[editor]

So what ? That means nothing in itself.

Your site is stuffed full of references to "drugs" doesn't mean you condemn them, or condone them for that matter.

Oh dear. I suggest you read the thread before jumping in again.

Jazzz was claiming that Icke "doesn't go on about the Jews".

He clearly does, so Jazzz's claim is a bit like me saying that urban75 has no references to drugs.

 

[phildwyer]

Oh dear. I suggest you read the thread before jumping in again.

Jazzz was claiming that Icke "doesn't go on about the Jews".

He clearly does, so Jazzz's claim is a bit like me saying that urban75 has no references to drugs.

There's nothing wrong with "going on abut the Jews" though, is there? The question is: does he do so in an anti-semitic fashion?

 

[Larry O'Hara]

There's nothing wrong with "going on abut the Jews" though, is there? The question is: does he do so in an anti-semitic fashion?

he certainly does, as I showed in an analysis of his writings as far back as 1994, in books he still sells & has never repudiated. That is why we got him thrown out of the UK Green Party.

 

[RaverDrew]

Oh dear. I suggest you read the thread before jumping in again.

Jazzz was claiming that Icke "doesn't go on about the Jews".

He clearly does, so Jazzz's claim is a bit like me saying that urban75 has no references to drugs.

The editor goes on about drugs all the time.

 

[Blagsta]

So what ? That means nothing in itself.

Your site is stuffed full of references to "drugs" doesn't mean you condemn them, or condone them for that matter.

Icke goes on about a world wide conspiracy involving Jews, the Protocols of the Elders of Zion etc. What other conclusion can we draw other than he is a raging anti-semite?

 

[RaverDrew]

Icke goes on about a world wide conspiracy involving Jews, the Protocols of the Elders of Zion etc. What other conclusion can we draw other than he is a raging anti-semite?

He also goes on and on about evil reptilians, does that prove that he suffers from Herpetophobia ?

Find me a quote where he attacks Jewish people, tells them to convert, advocates harm towards them etc

Icke is quite clearly bonkers in some respects, but just because he talks about what he believes to be negative aspects of the jewish faith, does not make him a racist or anti-semite.

The hypocrisy is, that some of the same people that are attacking him in this thread are quite happy to slag off other faiths such as christianity

Anyone that has read any of his books would no that he considers all forms of religon to be a method of control.

 

[editor]

Anyone that has read any of his books would no that he considers all forms of religon to be a method of control.

He's a fucking nutcase and you'd have to have a screw loose yourself to take him seriously.

Icke is now arguing in all seriousness that the Illuminati plot to take over the world is actually being carried out by a race of extraterrestrial reptiles in human form. They are described, literally, as being child-sacrificing, blood-drinking Satan-worshippers capable of changing their shape, whose ranks include George Bush, Bill and Hilary Clinton, Queen Elizabeth, the Queen Mum, Bob Hope and Kris Kristofferson, among others

In this book, Icke went even further. He began to flirt explicitly with Holocaust denial, saying "why do we play a part in suppressing alternative information to the official line of the Second World War?

How is it right that while this fierce suppression goes on, free copies of the Spielberg film, Schindler's List, are given to schools to indoctrinate children with the unchallenged version of events. And why do we, who say we oppose tyranny and demand freedom of speech, allow people to go to prison and be vilified, and magazines to be closed down on the spot, for suggesting another version of history."
He also denounced the Nuremberg Trials as "a farce" and "a calculated exercise in revenge and manipulation."
http://www.publiceye.org/Icke/IckeBackgrounder.htm

 

[Blagsta]

He also goes on and on about evil reptilians, does that prove that he suffers from Herpetophobia ?

Find me a quote where he attacks Jewish people, tells them to convert, advocates harm towards them etc

Icke is quite clearly bonkers in some respects, but just because he talks about what he believes to be negative aspects of the jewish faith, does not make him a racist or anti-semite.

The hypocrisy is, that some of the same people that are attacking him in this thread are quite happy to slag off other faiths such as christianity

Anyone that has read any of his books would no that he considers all forms of religon to be a method of control.

A few have already been quoted.

btw, being Jewish is an ethnicity as well as a faith

 

[RaverDrew]

From your same link ed

"I strongly believe that a small Jewish clique which has contempt for the mass of Jewish people worked with non-Jews to create the First World War, the Russian Revolution, and the Second World War....They then dominated the Versailles Peace Conference and created the circumstances which made the Second World War inevitable. They financed Hitler to power in 1933 and made the funds available for his rearmament."

 

[tarannau]

Anyone that has read any of his books would no that he considers all forms of religon to be a method of control.

Whereas his quasi-messianic 5 hour speeches to his flock and constantly offered DVDs, books and other guff about reptiles don't serve as a method of control do they? It's strange how someone attacks organised religions and then sets up a movement which is ostensibly very similar and inspires similar devotion/irrational beliefs in its followers. A little hypocritical perhaps?

BTW your justification for Icke not being racist isn't exactly convincing. Icke's a savvy enough media operator to avoid saying something directly anti-semitic, but hell even the BNP can mostly manage that nowadays. Few people are in doubt about their intentions though - you've got to wonder what effect constantly focusing on 'negative aspects of the jewish faith' and implying jews are a key part of some shadowy illuminati has in reality? It's not exactly conducive to good racial/religious relations is it - in effect it's a more palatable way of presenting the same arguments as the most raving of anti-semites. Only using reptiles.

 

[RaverDrew]

and this...

Jon Ronson, an award winning British journalist (who happens to be a Jew) included a chapter on Icke in his book Them: Adventures with Extremists (a best seller in Britain). Ronson was in Vancouver in March 2000 to research the circus which is every David Icke presentation and film a segment for a documentary which paralleled Them. Ronson, himself, does not believe Icke is an anti-Semite and told this reporter that he had interviewed members of the hierarchy of the British equivalent of the Canadian Jewish Congress who told him. 'Icke's not an anti-Semite. He may be a mental case but he's not an anti-Semite.'

 

[editor]

From your same link ed

So how's that disproving that he doesn't go on about the Jews?



Do you take Icke seriously?

 

[RaverDrew]

So how's that disproving that he doesn't go on about the Jews?



Do you take Icke seriously?

It's hardly anti-semetic.

I read Icke's stuff with an open mind, some of it seems bonkers and far fetched, hysterically stupid, and hilarious. Some of it is quite interesting tbh.

 

[tarannau]

and this...

And I can point you to a number of people who met Icke and believe he's an anti-semite, including members who worked alongside him and subsequently threw him out of the Green Party, that hotbed of back-stabbing politicos. One of them's even a poster on these boards.

You're not dealing with the substantive point though Drew. If someone continually expounds the same views as raving anti-semites, albeit in a more polite manner and with some bizarre analogy of them as reptiles, does that really make them that much less odious? Or are we supposed to take the reptile nonsense literally and pity the man?

 

[editor]

It's hardly anti-semetic.

Err, where have I said it is?

Mind you, there sure seems to be a lot of people who think his bonkers ravings are anti-semetic.

 

[Jazzz]

Would anyone who is either 1) Jewish 2) has attended an Icke lecture lately like to say he's anti-semitic? or indeed 3) has read one of his books and is not Larry O'Hara