- Joined
- Apr 13, 2011
- Messages
- 34,951
- Reaction score
- 16,311
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- Political Leaning
- Socialist
After years of denials, the Central Intelligence Agency has revealed that it did keep a file on Noam Chomsky, an eminent American linguist and anti-war academic, in the 1970s. But the files may have illegally been destroyed, report American media.The CIA had previously denied that it gathered information on the Massachusetts Institute of Technology professor, well-known for his anti-war activism in the Vietnam era. But now, after a freedom of information request, attorney Kel McClanahan received a memo that confirms the agency gathered records on the American leftist icon, the Foreign Policy reports.
In the document - dated June 1970 - a CIA official asks colleagues from the FBI for information about an upcoming trip of a group of anti-war activists to North Vietnam. The official says in the memo that the trip had “the endorsement of Noam Chomsky.”
The magazine obtained the document and applied for comment to professor Athan Theoharis, an expert on FBI-CIA cooperation and information-gathering.
Read more @: CIA ?admits? to having file on Chomsky, might have destroyed it ? RT USA
Yea i find this incredibly messed up and disturbing. We are a surveillance state and we have become incompetent to accept that. [/FONT][/COLOR]
Why are you using the present tense in your response to something that happened back in the 70s?
How is he "anti-American"?Not having a file on Chomsky would be absurd. He's a bombastic anti-American douchebag of considerable influence over the protected and ignorant.
Ok... What does this have to do with Russia again?And, in Russia, the band ***** Riot remains in prison over a harmless public demonstration (convicted of disrespecting religion).
How is he "anti-American"?
Ok... What does this have to do with Russia again?
Because these practices have continued to this day.
:roll: Yes he "blames everything on the US and capitalism" Maybe just because he condemns US foreign policies does that automatically make one "anti-American"?Are you not familiar with Chomsky, or do you lack critical thinking ability? He blames everything on the US and capitalism, he's a first-rate self-serving utopia-based populist whore (no wonder people living protected and ignorant lives adore him).
Original story found here: Exclusive: After Multiple Denials, CIA Admits to Snooping on Noam Chomsky | The CableYour source is Russian propaganda.
This isnt about Russia or Iran.I felt it appropriate to point out that Russia imprisons bands for harmless demonstrations based on convictions of "disrespecting religion". You can't see how that might be relevant in a discussion of state police actions? Frankly, jailing peaceful demonstrators based on 'disrespecting religion' is far more egregious than having a file on an anti-American douchebag (who is loved by protected, ignorant and hateful sheep). He's all about "us vs. them"; it's enough to make me wish his uneducated, non-critical thinking cheerleaders would just be football fanboys instead of hateful political orcs. But, hey, I suppose the political world also needs dim-witted propaganda spewers.
I wonder what PressTV has to say about this. hahaha
hahahah Chomsky a populist! Now that a good one.Are you surprised that the CIA keeps files on people who attempt to undermine US interests (and the country itself) with populist BS? I, for one, am happy they do and I hope they continue.
Think that is fascism? Some people really need to live in other countries to get some perspective. Naivety in geopolitics is unbecoming, and for some people actual experience is critical for intellectual growth.
:roll: Yes he "blames everything on the US and capitalism" Maybe just because he condemns US foreign policies does that automatically make one "anti-American"?
As usual we begin to talk more about the source than the actual content of articles.
Really? Who is"us" and who is "them"?You know that's not the reason. He's an "us vs. them" douchebag who leads a convoy of populist short busses. He's not so different than Chavez, a clown adored by those without the ability to break away from populist political cultism.
Perhaps you should use sources other than overt propaganda arms.
So Chomsky needs to live in another country because he criticizes US foreign policy.. Are we moving to "America like it or leave it", and undermining any academic analysis or criticism of our actions?
I was refering to people who embarrassingly lack geopolitical perspective, not Chomsky but his fanboys.
Really? Who is"us" and who is "them"?
So what in this report do you find as use as "propaganda"?
So a "fanboy" of Chomsky should leave America to get "perspective"?
I mean you could just explain...You don't know Chomsky's "us" and "them"? No wonder you can't understand what I'm refering to.
Soo... Every other news organization that reports this as well is part of this machine? And that they have some aim of "dispariging" their enemy?I didn't say this report was. Do you believe that a propaganda arm only publishes flat-out propaganda? No, they publish any article dispariging of their "enemy" and propaganda articles. Although I did find the part about "it's possible they were disposed of improperly" totally unfounded fluff added for the sheep who question nothing from propaganda arms.
Yes. They need to travel and see other countries, especially Europe and developing countries. However, being a tourist is not the same as living somewhere. Really, they need to live in other places to get some perspective on geopolitics. I'm not saying that they should leave because they suck (they do) or that they can never come back. I'm just saying that crying about BS like an ignorant child gets old and it would help if the crybabies got some perspective in life beside their mother's basement and liberal arts college paid for by their parents.
ISoo... Every other news organization that reports this as well is part of this machine? And that they have some aim of "dispariging" their enemy?
I mean hot damn we might soon be getting into Chomsky's analysis on the media!
Why only Chomsky's "fanboys"?
So you're saying CNN and major US media outlets arent "propaganda"? How are they not?No, just RT, PressTV and Venezuela's website that has an office in New York of 5 people in order to get a .com instead of .ve.
So they a "propaganda" arms because they are in a different country?If one cannot recognize those as propaganda arms, then there's really nothing anyone can do to help them.
Chomsky is a utopian? Its really not. I mean we are talking about Chomsky are we not?Wouldn't that be off-topic? And besides, discussing Chomsky is like discussing Marx - nothing but "us vs. them" and utopia BS. As I mentioned earlier, it's no wonder that kids with zero life experience or perspective adore the pupulist douchebag.
So you're saying CNN and major US media outlets arent "propaganda"? How are they not?
So they a "propaganda" arms because they are in a different country?
Chomsky is a utopian? Its really not. I mean we are talking about Chomsky are we not?
I never said they were not a "propaganda arm" I'm simply saying if RT is a "propaganda arm" then i fail to see how CNN or FOX or any other news outlet by that matter is not a "propaganda arm"...Because, unlike RT, PressTV and VenezuelaBS, such articles are not their focus (and they do not additionally produce flat-out propaganda). It amazes me that you would employ such baseless reasoning as "if others carry the article, then RT is not a propaganda arm". That's ridiculous logic and, frankly, appears hopeless.
So we do have propaganda arms. Just because you are privately owned doesnt make you a "non-propaganda" arm?That doesn't make any sense. We have propaganda arms (of organizations, groups, etc) here in the US. We just don't have a government run outlet as our major source of information, like those countries do.
No ive read 6 of his books, i love watching and rewatching his interviews, not saying im a utopian im just saying i dont see how one could call Chomsky a utopian or a populist.It doesn't look as if you know anything about him, so I'm not sure.
I never said they were not a "propaganda arm" I'm simply saying if RT is a "propaganda arm" then i fail to see how CNN or FOX or any other news outlet by that matter is not a "propaganda arm"...
So we do have propaganda arms. Just because you are privately owned doesnt make you a "non-propaganda" arm?
No ive read 6 of his books, i love watching and rewatching his interviews,
So no answer?hahaha
Uhhh ever heard of a white house briefing? Pentagon military analyst program? The ad council?Of course groups in the US have propaganda arms, but the government does not.
Uhh Russia and Venezuela all have privately owned media outlets and many are owned by opposition to the government..In Russia, Iran and Venezuela, the government regimes dominate the media with government owned and run propaganda arms. See the difference?
Sure i have Slavoj ZizekI'm not surprised. Confirmation bias is a strong force. Ever read criticism of Chomsky? Of course not.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?