Chomsky loves that only in America can he make all that money writing & lecturing about fields that he has never had the guts to actually work in himself-Which is everything outside Linguistics! Instead of seeking an actual Policy-Making Position Himself, and-with his superior wisdom-Show he can do a better job, and get better results, than those he has spent his career merely criticizing from the sidelines, like the armchair critic that he is! And btw: We can debate the, ' morality ', of the Viet Nam Conflict, but in all the years since the Iraq War, no one-Not Chomsky-Not anyone else-Has ever produced any proof that the Bush Administration knew that the pre-war Intel about Iraq was not true at the time! No One! So please get your facts right on that point!

@@mck1972 Comrade, I read your comment with interest, and understand where you're coming from, I really do. However, your opinion on Chomsky - the man as you portray him - is yours to hold, wrong as it is. Firstly, when a mediator of a debate, television presenter, interviewer, documentary maker, whoever, describes Chomsky as a linguist, they use that term to say he is a man with academic credentials. His job at M.I.T., as distinguished professor, meant he couldn't be dismissed as just some nut. His lifes work was telling the people how they are consistently lied to and deceived by those who are supposed to have their best interests at heart. You may find truth uncomfortable but deny it at your peril. Secondly, we can't debate the morality (I know, a big word) of the firebombing of innocents in Vietnam because the whole assault was unquestionably on a scale immoral beyond debate. The lie spun to the American populous claiming 'weapons of mass destruction' in Saddam's Iraq in order to control oil resources in that country is a shameful thing for any decent American citizen to have to face. You seem to suggest that pre-invasion intelligence didn't show there were no WMDs in Iraq but surely the burden of proof works the orher way - intelligence sources should have shown there WERE weapons of mass destruction in that sovereign state in order to be mandated to attack Iraq to prevent possible aggression by Saddam. Facts, you say -those are worth a ponder! Chomsky's one hundred books are full of facts and he would laugh at any contention that his business is a money one. He is also a tireless activist - in three dimensions in protests on the street and through media work spanning 60 years. Thank you for reading this far.

@@robertthomas4234 , I have never denied Chomsky’s expertise in the one field of Linguistics. Yet Chomsky’s expertise in the one field of Linguistics is simply not relevant to any field outside Linguistics. Nor does Chomsky’s expertise in the one field of Linguistics grant him any expertise in properly establishing that people are, ‘ consistently lied to and deceived by those who are supposed to have their best interests at heart. ‘. Because establishing that anybody, ‘ lied ‘, or ‘ deceived ‘, anyone else, requires producing legitimate proof of what was in their minds at the time. Chomsky produces ZERO legitimate proof of what was in anyone’s mind at the time! Chomsky’s paranoid conspiracy theories about what HE THINKS anyone else’s motives were-Are NOT legitimate proof! And apparently I need to reiterate that the Worse that Chomsky THINKS that our Policy Makers have acted all these years, then the Worse that this makes Chomsky himself look, for never seeking an actual Policy Making Position Himself, and-with his superior wisdom-Show he can get better results! Instead of spending his life merely complaining from the sidelines about fields that he has never had the guts to actually work in, nor accept responsibility for, himself-Like the armchair critic that he is, and calling it, ‘ tireless activism ‘! And apparently I also need to reiterate that in all the years since the Iraq War-No One, Not Chomsky, not anyone else, has ever produced any legitimate proof that the Bush Administration knew the pre-war Intel to be untrue at the time! No One! Again, Chomsky’s paranoid conspiracy theories about what HE THINKS anyone else’s motives were-Are NOT legitimate proof! These are REAL, ‘ uncomfortable truths ‘, that both you and Chomsky need to, ‘ ponder ‘, until you face up to them!

He's critical because he loves his country and wants it to be better. I have infinite respect for Noam and people like him.

@@Raz2000 , And so the more that Chomsky, ' loves his country and wants it to be better ', and the Worse that Chomsky THINKS that our Policy Makers have acted all these years, then the Worse that this makes Chomsky himself look, for never seeking an actual Policy Making Position Himself, and-with his superior wisdom-Show he can get better results! Instead of spending his life merely complaining from the sidelines about fields that he has never had the guts to actually work in, nor accept responsibility for, himself-Which is everything outside Linguistics-Like the worthless armchair critic that he is!

Search : ' Noam Chomsky : US Is The World's Biggest Terrorist '

Dr Chomsky is GREAT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

And we clap for George Bush instead of bringing him to the International War Court

And billions in war pigs pockets.

People should be very clear on the salient distinction between what a career Linguistics Professor THINKS is, ' Terrorism ', Vs What Actually is, ' Terrorism '. Because Chomsky himself has no clue of this salient distinction! SMH

@@mck1972 In your opinion that is. Big deal!

@@KeithWilliamMacHendry , Really? So you value the opinion of a Linguistics Professor on this subject-Even though he has never actually worked in Government, Foreign Policy, Law, International Affairs, National Security, or any other related field, himself?

@@almo3250 , It does not make sense to state that a Career Linguistics Professor, who has never actually worked in any other field, is not qualified to judge those who have done so-Really???

@@mck1972 why are you shaking your head smart ass? In case you were unaware, everything is what everybody, individually, thinks it is. If you want to be pedantic, you can systematically deconstruct everything by saying there is no way to absolutely define anything with words. As if you had a better grasp of any concept than Chomsky.

Sorry? A million people marched through London to oppose the invasion of Iraq.

​​@@Johnconno key word: London

He was underestimating Noam Chomsky's ability to recall the specifics of such an obscure document that had nothing to do with the topic at hand. The only thing Noam couldn't recall was the page number of the declassified document, which Sorrenson asked for. I had secondhand embarassment for him-he didn't even want to do the follow up, but was forced to by the presenter.💀@@BDog317

Sorenson was an inveterate Kennedy fluffer with a vested interest in perpetuating the Kennedy mythology.

Wonder just how stupid he felt after that?

@@robertbentley3589 …..with language and a setting as we have here, it’s best to give some context to your remarks. Isn’t it interesting that almost all members of the patriarchy are so immersed in their own thoughts and so solipsistic, and usually gun owners.

that would be real democracy

@@Raz2000 You must be a troll.

It would pass overwhelmingly, haven't you been paying attention? People only oppose wars in the US vocally when 1) it involves conscription, 2) it is seen as a wedge to use for partisan purposes. The Bush administration benefitted from the Iraq war using the second condition, as the 'midterm' mentioned at the beginning here went in favor of the governing party for the first time since the Depression (even in WW2 the Democrats lost a significant number of seats in 1942), but eventually it turned against them the opposite way. The Afghan war never gained the same controversy & largely was just disregarded in most discourses, which is why it went 20 years before people pretended for a month they cared about the aftermath of the withdrawal before predictably forgetting it happened. Right now everyone claiming to be for Ukrainian direct intervention would disavow immediately & revise history when the body bags started showing up at Dover. Look how at the beginning Chomsky even considers Iraq had WMDs, which was the overwhelming consensus prior to the Iraq intervention even by opponents, it's revisionist history that the Bush administration was the lone voice selling a position that everyone else bravely opposed but was disregarded. The original opponents were claiming the worst case scenario was going to be fighting Ba'athists itself, I can only think of 2 people discussing the possibility of internicene tribal aftermath (1 of which was supporter Christopher Hitchens, making the argument it would be better for the US to be present in such an event than letting it happen upon self induced implosion of the regime, for regional stability). But no, people who think like Ron Paul or Kucinich don't really exist in America, people just say that when a war is unpopular & shamelessly shill for the next one unless they see a partisan disadvantage, which is why Republicans have beenp pretending to oppose war but all the neocons went back to their original positions in February when thinking about fighting a nuclear power.

@@intagliooglethorpe8434 I like Ron Paul. He mentioned allot of things that the public wasn't aware of.

@@Monica.. I voted for him & donated money. That still is not where most Americans are before hot potatoes become a thing.

Yanis Veroufakis is another good candidate

Chomsky has had his entire life to seek any actual Policy Making Position. Yet instead he chose to merely complain from the sidelines! SMH

Good insight. Tell us more.

Excactly the kind biased paranoid rant, about fields that you have never actually worked in, that Chomsky has been spouting his entire career! SMH

A psychopath of the darkest order.

He definitely knew.

@@xx133 did you notice his state of arousal? Why the need to defend himself? He still lives in the lie it seems.

“End biology’s only experiment with higher intelligence.” It’s a point he’s made before about nuclear war.

What did he mean by this?

He's talking about humans as a species (the biology's experiment with higher intelligence) and about actions that will lead to our extinction, perpetrated by our own hands.

the shadows disappear when you shine the light, without and within. When the masses of the world become aware and equanimous, compassionate opposition will liberate humanity from the grips of ignorance.

Shame on us uk and usa blair and Bush war criminals should have been prosecuted!

Cry nazi

Everything what you're saying is the promotion of the New World Order.

The US is in political bed with Saudi

And your source for that claim is?

US is in bed with Saudi. Not good.

@@joelwest5396 , Monday Morning Armchair Quarterbacks like Chomsky complaining from the sidelines. Way Worse.

I'll answer myself...because nothing anybody says in public discourse or anywhere else can possibly make a difference, because all they were fighting about during and after WWII was who was going to be top of the Fascist heap. Its a fait accompli.

@kimshaw-williams not true, talking to the masses is exactly what the media does to propagate. he is a danger to _them_ . fortunately, he is so good in his field of linguistics that his benefits outweigh the truths he spreads. if he was not an immensely successful scientist, he would have disappointed already.

LOL The real reason is that anyone who lives in reality, knows the trith that Chomsky actually has NO Idea WTF he is talking about when it comes to any field outside Linguistics! 😀😀😀

The old potus money whores.