Chomsky and 9/11

You make perfect sense. As I've said earlier in this thread -- with the amount of people it would've taken to orchestrate this, it would've inevitably leaked.

so it's ok to speculate from one side of a theory, but not the other...can you hear that? sounds like hypocrisy.
People in high positions who talk about the proof that the government planned and carried out the 9/11 attacks* would be committing career suicide. They'd probably get fired right away and lose their retirement pensions. At least future opportunities for advancement would disappear. Check out this video.

9/11 in the Academic Community - Winner Univ. of Toronto Film Festival (2013)

There's some good info here.
Similarly, peace groups and congressional Democrats made a big deal of Bush’s alleged lies regarding Iraqi weapons of mass destruction. But this political posturing conveniently contributed to erasing from the public’s memory the fact that in 2003 Saddam’s purported weapons of mass destruction, on their own merits, were not an urgent concern to the U.S. population. They would certainly represent a threat to Iran, to Israel, to Europe, but their direct threat to the United States could be demonstrated only through Osama's logistical means to smuggle them into mainland U.S. territory as proven by the official 9/11 narrative. In other words, the rationale for the Iraq war was double-pronged: Saddam had weapons of mass destruction and Osama could deliver them through his 9/11 logistics. Without 9/11, the justification for the Iraq war would crumble. Keeping in mind that the Bush administration had to go through lengthy political maneuvering before being able to launch the Iraq war, it is likely that the absence of 9/11 would have made it impossible.

Yet, as of 2010-Oct, with very few small-scale exceptions—such as Veterans for 9/11 Truth and Cindy Sheehan—the peace movement has ignored 9/11 Truth. Some prominent peace leaders, such as Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) professor emeritus Noam Chomsky, are actually among its most rabid opponents. As of 2010, Chomsky was reported to state that he would review 9/11 Truth only after some MIT structural engineering professor would communicate to him that the twin towers were demolished. Knowing that the average high school kid will understand the demonstration of the twin towers’ demolitions, Chomsky’s challenge is tantamount to confessing that he knows 9/11 to be a false flag but will wait for others to denounce it. In 2010-Nov, PressTV reported that Chomsky stated that "the Taliban [...] requested evidence…and the Bush administration refused to provide any [because] they did not have any." However, he stopped way short of going to the logical end of his reasoning, affirming instead that the FBI "believed that the plot may have been hatched in Afghanistan, but was probably implemented in the United Arab Emirates and Germany." This disingenuous statement could easily be interpreted as a damage-control tactic in the wake of David Ray Griffin's 2010-June essay on the illegality of the Afghan war based on the reality of 9/11.

Peace leaders’ failure to speak up on 9/11 adds another tricky piece to the puzzle of the 9/11 censorship. Since 9/11 Truth is by far the surest and quickest way to summarily cancel the post-9/11 wars and since 9/11 Truth holds the promise of preventing future false flags and therefore future wars, its benefit to the peace movement is self-evident. Chomsky and other peace leaders’ concerted efforts to steer their followers away from 9/11 Truth and send them on a wild goose chase behind a multitude of issues that 9/11 Truth would nullify are baffling.
Last edited:
As a major conspiracy person I looked at this event and it just doesn’t make sense to be a conspiracy.

First of all it is way too complicated with far too many people involved and the likelihood hood of failure is extremely high.

They could have just had one terrotist use a dirty bomb in the city and gotten the same result. The 1000 different things needed for this to go correctly would be almost impossible to do. That complication alone means it wasn’t the government.

Yes there are lots of unexplainable things but that doesn’t make it a conspiracy. Look at a tornado that destroys a block of houses and you will see many impossible things there like a piece of grass stuck through a telephone pole but that doesn’t mean the government planned it only that it’s unexplainable