Noam Chomsky: U.S. more "fundamentalist" than Saudi Arabia or the Taliban

Noam Chompsky needs to please his sowdi mastas apparently feeds this drivel. l do not understand how even the most old fashioned liberal loon could ever support this idoit on steroids! it is no wonder Israel refused his entry last time he tired to enter the WEst Bank. men like him and Carter just never give up, there is no shame with these people!

"About half of the [US] population believes that all living species were created 6,000 years ago in their current form."

hmmmm, Muslims believe Israel had Muslims before it had Jews...

When Noam is wrong, he's really wrong....but his words are intentional and Islamically inspired...meant to confuse, distract, cause dissent, .....but he does like the sound of his own voice and his Muslim followers continue to toe the party line...whether or not it's a lie...If a Muslim says it...it must be true...

Senility + Brain calcification + mental constipation, give you a crappy outlook on life...It won't get you second prize in a beauty contest, but it might get you interviewed on Al-Alam TV...

Good ol' Noam! A perfect example of an educated fool, who thinks his knowledge and expertise in one field makes him expert in other fields of which it's clear he knows very little.

That's why you see so many stonings and beheadings here, you see. Moral equivalence on steroids from an intelligent man apparently completely lacking a moral compass (hence his support for the Palestinian jihad), who insists on engaging in utterly witless and ideology-driven moral equivalence.

Don't expect Fool Chomsky to note that. Getting facts in the way of leftist political dogma would make their whole anti-Western, anti-human-rights and anti-capitalist narrative to crumble in micron-sized flakes in a NY minute.

Noam Chomsky, a man barely alive...we can rebuild him..faster...on second thoughts, don't bother, he's a learnèd numbnuts who won't understand metaphysics until the day it bites his sorry ass.

So where is Chomsky's error? He didn't say the societies are identical in every respect. Standing from the outside we think Ahmadinejad is pretty crazy to take seriously belief in the coming Mahdi. But our country does this as well.

And many in our country don't concern themselves with environmental catastrophe because of belief in a second coming of Jesus. Why worry about that when Jesus will take care of everything?

When such large sections of our population can put on total blinders and say that the earth is 6000 years old they can believe anything, including a book with talking snakes and donkeys, and zombies exiting their tombs and running around a city. That's perceived as normal here while we laugh at the ridiculous things Muslims believe like 72 virgins. We're more similar than people realize.

And many in our country don't concern themselves with environmental catastrophe because of belief in a second coming of Jesus.

Maybe two or three...This formula does not seem to apply to the people on the oil rich gulf coast...Unless you count Rasools low level concern...

You see, Jon, there is this nagging thing about 'no atheists in foxholes'...The two or three waiting for rapture, don't want to die of hurricane/tornado exposure first, so they head for the shelter, hopefully...If they are too stupid or stupified to come in out of the rain, they have a huge problem...It's a good thing there are so few of them...The former sec of int James Watt had the rapture, so why bother idea, and was laughed out of office...

If Noam wants to talk about Americans believing in fictions, he might mention the number who believe in anthropogenic global warming, and those who believe that 9/11 was a Bush-Cheney inside job, and those who believe that Big Oil controls gas prices and makes exorbitant profits, and those who believe that wind-power and solar panels will solve the energy crisis, and those who believe that Castro's Cuba is a paradise of equal educational opportunity and free medical care for all, and those who believe (like the Clintons) in a "vast right-wing" conspiracy. He might mention all his fellow left-wingers who enthused first about Stalin's Russia, then Mao's China, and then Castro's Cuba and Ho Chi Minh's Vietnam -- all genocidal dystopias.

Chomsky is like Naomi Kline. They found a niche for making money. That's all they care about. They can afford to separate themselves from the chaos they are contributing to when the s**t hits the fan.

But when the s**t hits the fan, some people will remember who these traitors sided with and will come looking for them.

Just saying...

The crucially significant thing that escapes from the attention of Chomsky and other similar attitudes showing people -and it is astonishing, really how it escapes from their attention- is that we in 'Western' societies can express freely our considering the religion coloured idiocy as idiocy. Something that has grave consequences in Muslim areas.

And the fact that in our civilization we have all this freedom is because our main references have been those of Bible, even if it has been misunderstood so often. That's to say because our civilizational references are not aggresive... they are peaceful, even towards the strangers. We have as central criterions such ones as the scandalously non conformist 'love your enemy' (this non conformity is the reason of progress also). This is a crystal clear fact, be it accepted or not . Everyone may open the New Testament and see it for him/herself.

Our 'Western' societies are far from being angelic societies, surely. They are full of problems. They have many defects, no doubt but... they are the only ones leaving a space for self criticism and ethical and, dare to say, existential progress. Just this is the reason that we should protect them as our eye cores.

Let be honest: is it possible to have in Iran an Iranian Michael Moore? The very strange thing is why he, himself, is not realizing this so loudly crying fact so that he may be much more modest in his sometimes just criticism. He looks so smart but...

Apparently Nefertiti is not the only Queen of denial.

From linguistics to geo-politics, Noam Chomsky has been proven wrong time and time again. It's a reflection of our corrupted culture that he wasn't banished to the intellectual wilderness long ago.

Well, this fundamentalist Christian sure believes in talking snakes--one of them's named Noam Chomsky.

In this statement, Chomsky reveals that the whole Western Left has only a destructive agenda. We dared to ask if they really could unleash unprecedented productive forces once they got rid of capitalism and strangled the last senator with the guts of the last preacher, and, lo and behold, all they could show us was an impoverished world and lots of corpses. We called their bluff when we elected Reagan, and they've hated the USA more than they love their mothers and children ever since.

"Noam Chomsky: We must bear in mind that the US is a very fundamentalist society, perhaps more than any other society in the world - even more fundamentalist than Saudi Arabia or the Taliban. That's very surprising. About half of the [US] population believes that all living species were created 6,000 years ago in their current form."

Sounds like a Charles Johnson talking point. Expect a thread in praise of Chomsky on LGF in 3...2...1...

Chumpsky and Chuckles...last time I checked, the Southern Baptist weren't beheading blasphemers, stoning adulterers and declaring unrestricted warfare on "infidels".

Chumpsky Chompsky, a man who bit the sky instead of reaching for it. (Apos to Douglas Bader RAF)

How I despise this equating of Christianity and Islam.

Therefore, it does not really matter what you do today - whether you blow up the world with nuclear weapons, or destroy the environment, or anything - because all this would be taken care of.

Nonsense. Christianity teaches no such thing. It teaches the opposite - that we are responsible before God to be good stewards of all we have, whether it's our financial resources, our time, or the natural world. And certainly to care for people, which are the most precious of God's creations.

Unfortunately, this is a common idea. I hear it all the time.

Last night, at the pub (yes, I know, the place is full of left-wing buffoons, but I like live music and a bit of a dance)...a kind of conversation with three people, which started with one complimenting me on my dancing style (she said coyly).
One of the people was Iranian. A certain topic came up. I said something about the violence in Islam. They all said, no no, where do you get that idea, you are wrong. I said read the texts for a start, and they said well? So I gave them 8:12 for starters. They didn't want to hear me, but told me Christianity was as bad, and what about Buddhism...you can imagine how it all went...they seemed annoyed that I had read up on all the religions. I said read the texts, look at the history, read the papers, etc.
So they said I was shouting and that they can't talk to anyone who shouts. I was not shouting, but it was a pub after all and they had not heard my Koran quote so I had had to raise my voice.
The rule seems to be that only ignorance and inane moral equivalency is socially acceptable.
As for Chomsky, I have read him too. Enough to make me drop out of linguistics, as his views dominated the field.
The daunting thing is that any fight for freedom is weighed down by a heavy load of ungrateful, obstructive, lazy, vacuous baggage.

I'd like to hear Chomsky's whole speech, though for some reason I can't access the MEMRI clip. Anyways, from what's here, these look like the same simplistic mindless mantras and cliches Chomksy's been uttering for the past decade or more. The fact that 81 year old Chomsky may be (or once was) intelligent about linguistics and has become a celebrity does not mean he is any more intelligent than any other celebrity spouting opinions on areas outside his/her area of expertise. We should give no more credence to what Chomsky says about Islam and "fundamentalism" than any other celebrity, who has never taken the time to study these things, yet who is routinely asked to give quotes on such topics, as if he is some kind of oracle.

In this case, he is once again being used as a (willing) tool, a mouthpiece, for anti-American rhetoric. Ironically, in engaging in this type of propaganda in the venue mentioned below, he is probably contributing to anti-American sentiment.

Following are excerpts from an interview with American linguist and political activist Noam Chomsky, which aired on Al-Alam TV on June 22, 2010. The translation is from the Arabic voiceover. Noam Chomsky: "We must bear in mind that the US is a very fundamentalist society, perhaps more than any other society in the world - even more fundamentalist than Saudi Arabia or the Taliban. That's very surprising. About half of the [US] population believes that all living species were created 6,000 years ago in their current form."

I'm not sure what's crazier/more divorced from what the empirical evidence tells us: The belief that all the living species were created just 6000 years ago*, or the belief that the U.S. is more "fundamentalist" than the Taliban and Saudi Arabia. I think holding to the latter delusion, as Chomsky does, in propagating it (he is literally asking us to "bear in mind" this delusional belief), is more dangerous. Anyways, the U.S.'s minority of people who believe in a 6000-years-ago creation isn't trying to enforce this propaganda on the population, nor do they have the power to do so, nor do most of them want to do so, nor does the structure of the government or the substance of its constitution allow them to do so. Saudi Arabia draws its laws from Quran and Hadith, and has the death penalty for apostasy (which includes denying publicly that Allah is the creator), allows men to marry and have sex with child brides, doesn't allow women to drive, doesn't allow men and women to mix in public, doesn't allow non-Muslims to practice their religion (except hidden away in private), doesn't allow non-Muslims to go to Mecca (there are rare exceptions), persecutes homosexuals, persecutes religous minorities, allows men to marry four wives, does not allow Muslim women to marry non-Muslim men, did not abolish slavery until 1962, runs a nefarious guest workers program in which human rights are violated, has no real freedom of expression, has "religious police" running around monitoring people's behaviour and nosing and interfering in everyone's business (and causing deaths), issues fatwas in which women are instructed to breast-feed adult men, had a sheikh (in the 1990s) who declared the earth to be flat, and so on. Saudi Arabia is a major exporter of Islamic Wahhabist propaganda to mosques and thus Muslims across the world and throughout the west. Nothing needs to be said about the Taliban, whose latest claim to fame is attempting to lethally gas girls who attend school.

*And, even on this particular criterion, did Chomsky base his opinion on polls of Saudis' views on this? If not (and I think not), then why does he draw any assumptions about how old the Saudis think the Earth is? Does he not think that most of them believe that all the species were created by Allah, as preached from the Quran? How is this less fundamentalist than what the minority of Americans believe? Does Chomsky even have a clue as to what is taught in schools in Saudi Arabia? There is no indication that he has any clue what he is talking about. He has conducted zero research on the subject, surveyed zero research on the subject, unless you consider his own armchair assumptions and bias as "research."

If the U.S. were more fundamentalist than Saudi Arabia on important issues such a freedom of expression, why does Chomsky live in the West and in the U.S. in particular? Wouldn't he want to get out of this fundamentalist backwater and go to a more modern and enlightened place, like Saudi Arabia? Or wouldn't he want to spend his time working with those relatively enlightened, open, fair, and non-violent Taliban in Pakistan and Afghanistan? Of course he doesn't, but my point is that he is being deeply dishonest when he says these things about the Taliban and Saudi Arabia being less fundamentalist than the U.S. We can readily deduce from his actions that he doesn't fully believe what he's saying, otherwise his actions and his living arrangements--which he has the financial wherewithal to change immediately--would be different.

"It's entirely possible that Ahmadinejad and George Bush are spiritual brothers. It is likely that they both believe that the Second Coming is near. It may be the Mahdi, or Jesus Christ, or somebody else, but pretty soon, everything is going to be solved, because all the glorious and miraculous things will happen exactly as predicted. All religions know this and believe in this. Therefore, it does not really matter what you do today - whether you blow up the world with nuclear weapons, or destroy the environment, or anything - because all this would be taken care of."

There may indeed be a significant minority of Christians in the U.S. who believe in a second coming, but again, Chomsky is making a comparison by filling in the blanks to make the Muslim side look equally (or less?) fundamentalist regarding belief in end-times scenarios. Where are the polls on what Muslims believe about this? (No need for polls; Chomsky is famous, he is/was a linguist! He doesn't need any pesky and uncooperative facts!) He is also assuming if someone believes in an end-times scenario, what must logically (and always and everywhere?) follow from this is some kind of preference for, or at least indifference to, the destruction of the world, people, and the environment. But how many end-timers actually believe this? How many would have no problem with taking or allowing some actions toward annihilating the world, the population, the environment? I suspect it is a tiny percentage at best. Yet Chomsky simply imagines that they (all?) would want, or be indifferent to, a man-made armageddon.

I would agree with Chomsky that belief in a destructive end-times scenario, like the belief in an afterlife hell-fire punishment/destruction of disbelievers, can have dangerous consequences in society when taken literally and seriously by some people who follow through with what this logically implies, particularly in regards to penalties for blasphemy, public apostasy; and in regards to religiously-based warfare. However...

Chomsky: "All religions know this and believe in this."

No they don't. And many people in the main religions that have an armageddon scenario in their texts do not necessarily believe this.

In short, Chomsky doesn't know what he's talking about and is just propagating his own ignorance, absurdity, and bias. Dangerous delusions must be met with sober analysis and response. These latest remarks from Chomsky compound absurdity upon absurdity. "Colorless green ideas sleep furiously" makes more sense than this!

Isn't it amazing how fast we forget what's really behind Ahmadinejad's zeal? (Seen anything "fundamentalist" there, Chomsky? Nope...)

'The Mystical Menace of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad'
http://www.danielpipes.org/3258/the-mystical-menace-of-mahmoud-ahmadinejad

[...] Thanks to the president of Iran, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, a new word has entered the political vocabulary: mahdaviat [...] means "belief in and efforts to prepare for the Mahdi." In a fine piece of reporting, Scott Peterson of the Christian Science Monitor
http://www.csmonitor.com/2005/1221/p01s04-wome.html
shows the centrality of mahdaviat in Mr. Ahmadinejad's outlook and explores its implications for his policies [...] The most dangerous leaders in modern history are those (such as Hitler) equipped with a totalitarian ideology and a mystical belief in their own mission. Mahmoud Ahmadinejad fulfills both these criteria, as revealed by his U.N. comments. That combined with his expected nuclear arsenal make him an adversary who must be stopped, and urgently.

So how come, you may ask yourself, these well-learned intellectuals like Chomsky and his multitude followers on US campuses are able to get themselves to subscribe to all that stuff? The -- rather inconvenient -- answer revealed in full details here:

'Purifying the World: What the New Radical Ideology Stands For'
http://spme.net/library/pdf/PurifyingtheWorld.pdf

When looking for an explanation as to the folly of the Leftist's mentality consider de Tocquevlle, "How a great mind, joined to a weak soul, sometimes serves to increase the weakness of the latter! The brilliant faculties of the one give reason and color to the cowardice of the other." .......It is this 'weak soul' that ultimately will lead to the gas chambers and gulag.

Nothing else can be expected of the destroyer of academic linguistics in the USA and around the world. He is the USA's Lysenko. -- By the way did anyone keep those photos of him a couple years ago wearing Hezb'ollah battle fatigues? They quickly disappeared from the internet.

Now, Noam Chumpsky, as you believe the US is more fundamentalist than Saudi Arabia or the Taliban, it is long past time we offloaded you to those fundamentalist 'paradises' Saudi Arabia or North Waziristan, with a kippot superglued to your head and a passport stamped "Jewish". Then you'll discover the real meaning of fundamentalism just as the blade is about to slice through your worthless neck.

Bon voyage, traitor. It couldn't happen to a nicer person.

Maybe Chomsky has a point. After all, who could preach nihilism with such fervor as a nihilistic fundamentalist as he? Clearly, his lemmings follow him in rapt dicipleship.
That is, until once in awhile we find one taken a breather and, we ask them if they believe Chomsky ever worked as hard in a year as thehy do in a day.

"The crucially significant thing that escapes from the attention of Chomsky ...is that we in 'Western' societies can express freely our considering the religion coloured idiocy as idiocy."

Not only can we freely express our criticisms of religion:

1) The criticisms in the West of religion include a much larger palette of various degrees of condemnation -- all the way up to utter denunciation -- as well as various degrees of mockery.

2) These freely expressed forms of antipathy against religion mostly involve Christianity, with Judaism and Scientology a close second, followed perhaps by Mormonism, and then some New Agey cults: Thus, the main way Westerners routinely express their freedom to criticize, condemn and/or mock religion in fact involves, most of the time, the very founding religion of the West!

3) Most importantly, perhaps, this general and diverse antipathy toward religion in the West has become a veritable Science; a veritable Art; and a veritable Industry.

Just to pluck one example out of thousands that could illustrate my third point: Consider the fact that nearly every used bookstore, nearly every major bookstore chain, nearly every college textbook store, and the curriculum of nearly every college and university throughout the West includes one of the most virulently anti-Christian manifestos in modern Western history, embodied in much of the corpus of Nietzsche's writings, the most famous being The Anti-Christ, The Genealogy of Morals, and Beyond Good and Evil -- all of which are regularly re-issued in glossy Penguin paperbacks to be used in history classes, or philosophy classes, or literature classes, or comparative religions classes throughout the West.

This is merely but one small glimpse into the veritable forestry of Western freedom that often is missed for the simplistic trees -- and not only by neo-Trotskyite ideologues like Chomsky, but also by many people high and low throughout the West.