Posted on 05/15/2006 7:15:38 AM PDT by SJackson
Rarely has the world been afforded such a clear glimpse into the unholy alliance between Islamic extremists and secular radicals in the West. That’s exactly what it got last week when the foremost Imam of the radical Left, Noam Chomsky, bestowed his blessings on the world’s largest terrorist army, the Shiite jihad outfit sponsored by Iran and known as Hezbollah (“Party of God.”)
Following a meeting with Hassan Nasrallah, the Lebanese terrorist group’s “secretary general,” Chomsky announced his support for Hezbollah’s refusal to disarm. Then, in an echo of Nasrallah’s recent declaration that President Bush is the world’s top “terrorist,” Chomsky pronounced his own fatwa on the United States calling it one of the “leading terrorist states.” It was a meeting of murderous radical minds.
In many ways, Chomsky’s newly forged friendship with Hezbollah -- the most recent entry in a lifetime befriending America’s most deadly enemies -- is the logical continuation of the professor’s longstanding admiration for global terrorists and Jew-haters. In fact, Chomsky devoted most of the nineties to touting Hezbollah as a “resistance” movement (which occasionally committed misguided acts against civilians) while singing its praises as a crusader for peace and social justice.
Typical was Chomsky’s 1996 book, World Orders Old and New Citing with approval a journalist’s observation that Hezbollah “is not a terror organization,” Chomsky explained that the terrorist who blew up 243 U.S. Marines in Lebanon and murdered untold citizens of Israel was only engaging in “legitimate resistance” against an oppressor and “avoids striking civilians except in retaliation for Israeli attacks on Lebanese civilians.”
Elsewhere in his book Chomsky claims that, in launching its attacks against Israel Hezbollah “carefully avoided civilian areas” and assured his readers that Hezbollah attacks were always “retaliatory.” Israel through Chomsky eyes presented quite a different story. Dispensing altogether with the studied euphemisms that marked his descriptions of Hezbollah, Chomsky unequivocally denounced Israel for using “terror weapons” to commit “atrocities” such as targeting “civilians” with “no provocation”.
The resulting effort bore little resemblance to fact. Rather than consider well-documented reports of Hezbollah’s repeated shelling (at its Iranian master’s prompting) of Northern Israel, killing women and children in the process, , Chomsky rejected the reports as so much American and Israeli propaganda. How after all, could the Great and Little Satans be telling the truth?
Rather than reflect on the fact that Hezbollah terrorists deliberately entrenched themselves among Arab civilians to cause the casualties so that Chomsky could protest, Chomsky falsely charged, that the Israeli military targeted the civilians, a claim which no reasonable human being could make. Even the anti-Israel UN felt compelled to acknowledge that “Hezbollah had resorted to using civilian areas to provide a human shield for its terrorist activity.”
In Chomsky’s version of the Elders of Zion, Israel is always the instigator, while the attacks of terrorists whose declared objective is the establishment of an Islamic state on Israel’s grave, are invariably “defensive.” Chomsky blames an upsurge in Hezbollah terror, for example, on Israel’s 1992 assassination, of Hezbollah leader (and mass murderer) Sheikh Abbas Mussawi. Yet Chomsky neglected to mention that Mussawi, speaking in behalf of Hezbollah openly proclaimed his genocidal goal: “We are not fighting so that the enemy recognizes us and offers us something. “We are fighting to wipe out the enemy.”
In Chomsky’s writings about Hitler’s heirs, the genocidal roles are always reversed. When Hezbollah broke an informal 1995 agreement to suspend attacks against civilian targets, Chomsky condemned Israeli military strikes, again omitting the fact that the complete annihilation of the Jewish state was Hezbollah’s stated goal.
In his 2000 book Fateful Triangle, Chomsky complained about media coverage that described Hezbollah’s shelling of the so-called Israeli “security zone” in Southern Lebanon as “terrorism,” Chomsky insisted that it was instead an act of “indigenous resistance to the rule of Israel and its proxies.” As usual, Chomsky was lying. Hezbollah’s attacks were against civilians inside the security zone not military targets. In a typical projection, Chomsky maintained in the face of the facts that it was Israel who was killing civilians, and (another lie) that Israel’s , official policy was to attack “villages and civilians” in Lebanon.
Today as its Iranian patron calls on the Muslim world to exterminate the Jews and finish Hitler’s job, Hezbollah is blessed by the embassy of America’s most prominent leftist, and better still, a self-hating Jew. While the international community and even the United Nations (whose resolutions Chomsky has repeatedly used as a sledge hammer against Israel), demands that the terrorist Party of God – which is an occupying army in Lebanon -- lay down its weapons, Chomsky provides the occupiers with a moral defense. According to Professor Chomsky there is a “persuasive argument” that the weapons “should be in the hands of Hezbollah as a deterrent to potential aggression and there is plenty of background and reasons for that.” (Many Lebanese are not persuaded. Commenting on Chomsky’s visit, a Lebanese observer pointed to the professor’s ignorance of the fact “that the Hezbollah arms scare the Lebanese people more than the Israelis.")
In fact, of course, the only “potential aggression” comes from Chomsky’s friends. In 2004, Hezbollah inked an agreement with Hamas – similarly dedicated to the extermination of Israel -- to continue their joint terrorist attacks against Israel. Hezbollah has also provided political support and weapons training to Hamas and al-Qaeda. In 2004, Hezbollah also launched an unmanned aerial vehicle that crossed Israeli airspace before crashing.
Hitler concealed his genocidal agendas from the German people and from his Chomsky-apologists. Hezbollah is more fortunate. In pursuing a second Holocaust of the Jews, it can count on Muslim support and apparently the support of American radicals as well. Therefore it makes no secret of what it intends. Its 1985 manifesto contains a section titled “The Necessity for the Destruction of Israel” that spells out the evil it seeks: “Our struggle will end only when this entity is obliterated. We recognize no treaty with it, no cease-fire, no peace agreements.” Like true jihadists, Hezbollah’s genocidal plans are not reserved for the Little Satan only but are its agenda for the Great Satan too. In 1993, Chomsky’s host Nasrallah declared: “Death to America was, is, and will stay our slogan.”
As his pilgrimage to Hezbollah’s mecca confirms, it is Noam Chomsky’s life-dream as well.
Bump!
Chomsky is the Pride of MIT.
Articles on Israel can also be found by clicking on the Topic or Keyword Israel.
..................
So how does this idiot rationalize the bombing of Israeli school children?
has ANY MIT faculty member ever resigned or even protested Chomsky's evil or his hypocrisy? Or does his eminence in semantics mean he gets to praise terrorists?
The sooner Noam Chomsky is gone the better.
As this thing with Iran escalates, Hezbollah will be the chief means through which they fight us. Chomsky will no doubt try to get their side of the story, but he may be horrified to find himself a hostage, just like other do-gooders in the 1980s who thought they could reason with Hezbollah.
And Hamas, both of whom are also affiliated with the Muslim Brotherhood, who's participation in Egyptian elections the US supported.
Maybe she'll start a trend.
I don't think Chomsky has ever met a dictator or terrorist he didn't like.His hatred of the US,Israel,and democracy is pathalogical.For more info on this"icon"of the left check out the "The Anti-Chomsky Reader",Collier/Horowitz.
Chomsky is a psychopath.
Chomsky only typifies what I've always said about the left. They believe the Jews are a threat to world peace. This thinking is dangerous and must be discredited at every turn.
Neah. He makes the left look almost as silly as it really is. Leave him alone. Better yet, get the lefties to endorse him.
It also proves that being Jewish does not mean he will by definition be not anti-Semitic. Another case is Russia's Vladimir Zhirinovsky.
Zhirinovsky's Jewish? I thought he was just insane.
His father is Jewish, believe it or not. Now using biblical definition he of course has Jewish blood. Probably akin to another "uncle Tom".
Hw would have to be. But among the far left, He would be a hero.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.