and the RATS, take another one in the..............................HA ha!!!
Posted on 05/16/2010 8:58:41 AM PDT by Nachum
Now, if we could get smart too and ban Chomsky.
The problem is, is that it would be an awfully large load of garbage.
We could start with the entire Obammy regime, and a large portion of Congress, the media, Hollywood and the universities.
When I went through teaching school 8 years ago, we had to read a lot of Chomsky. I had no idea until I started “supplementing” my background on Chomsky he was a really, far-left radical.
If I were Israel, I wouldn’t let him in either.
He will wear this like a badge of honor. He’ll have his passport framed on his wall.
The Jewish blood dripping off his hands gave him away.
Good. But there was no option to flog him??
I had to read a lot of Chomsky linguistic stuff, too. After a while it seemed to me there was a lot of overworshiping of some fairly mundane ideas. Now I understand. To the left, a leftists every thought is golden.
BTTT
“....For it is written: If anyone of you moonbats causes one of these little ones to reject Truth for the intellectual crack of leftism — look at me, Chomsky, I’m talking to you — if any of you little tenuremites eating away at the spiritual foundation of the West do this, it would be better for you to have a large millstone hung around your pencil neck and drowned in the depths of your own bullshit. ....” ~ Gagdad Bob http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2253289/posts?page=83#83
<>
The admirers of Professor Noam Chomsky spend much time and expend much effort in reassuring each other that when, a quarter-century ago, their hero intervened in support of the Holocaust denier Robert Faurisson he was disinterestedly and even heroically defending the principle of free expression. Readers who have followed the story from my earlier posts http://oliverkamm.typepad.com/blog/2004/11/chomsky_and_hol_1.html will know that that is nonsense. Chomsky defended the political legitimacy of Faurisson’s beliefs, and not merely the right to express those beliefs. He did this - inexcusably speculating that Faurisson was “a relatively apolitical liberal of some sort” – despite being fully aware that he was speaking of an antisemite and an apologist for Nazi Germany. ..”
Continue reading by scrolling down to Chomsky and the True Believer dated November 25, 2004 here: http://oliverkamm.typepad.com/blog/2004/11/index.html
Lots more on Chomsky in these archives:
http://oliverkamm.typepad.com/blog/archives.html
<>
I have a plan to destroy America
July 11, 2006
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1663652/posts
Editor’s note: In 2004, Richard D. Lamm, former governor of Colorado, addressed a conference sponsored by the Federation for American Immigration Reform in Washington. The following remarks are reprinted with his permission.
[snip]
“...Lastly, I would censor Victor Davis Hanson’s book “Mexifornia” – this book is dangerous; it exposes my plan to destroy America. So please, please – if you feel that America deserves to be destroyed – please, please – don’t buy this book! This guy is on to my plan. “The smart way to keep people passive and obedient is to strictly limit the spectrum of acceptable opinion, but allow very lively debate within that spectrum.” – Noam Chomsky, American linguist and U.S. media and foreign policy critic.
<>
“..The pathological narcissist imagines he’s giving you milk when he’s actually feeding you poop; in short, he’s not a bountiful breast but a toxic a$$hole. Once you get a feel for this, you can really appreciate the ubiquity of the dynamic. Ever wonder how Noam Chomsky can be so prolific? Because the large intestine never sleeps. ..” ~ Gagdad Bob http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2047396/posts?page=8#8
Didn’t that man blame the US for 9/11?
“Didn’t that man blame the US for 9/11?” ~ Del Rapier
Yes. Check these links:
The admirers of Professor Noam Chomsky spend much time and expend much effort in reassuring each other that when, a quarter-century ago, their hero intervened in support of the Holocaust denier Robert Faurisson he was disinterestedly and even heroically defending the principle of free expression. Readers who have followed the story from my earlier posts http://oliverkamm.typepad.com/blog/2004/11/chomsky_and_hol_1.html will know that that is nonsense. Chomsky defended the political legitimacy of Faurisson’s beliefs, and not merely the right to express those beliefs. He did this - inexcusably speculating that Faurisson was “a relatively apolitical liberal of some sort” – despite being fully aware that he was speaking of an antisemite and an apologist for Nazi Germany. ..”
Continue reading by scrolling down to Chomsky and the True Believer dated November 25, 2004 here: http://oliverkamm.typepad.com/blog/2004/11/index.html
Lots more on Chomsky in these archives:
http://oliverkamm.typepad.com/blog/archives.html
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.