(In attesa di poterlo tradurre, pubblichiamo questo documento nella sua forma originale)

From: John Kaminski


By Daniel L. Abrahamson

Noam Chomsky is often hailed as America's premier dissident
intellectual, a fearless purveyor of truth fighting against media
propaganda, murderous U.S. foreign policy, and the crimes of
profit-hungry transnational corporations.

He enjoys a slavish cult-like following from millions leftist students,
journalists, and activists worldwide who fawn over his dense books as
if they were scripture. To them, Chomsky is the supreme deity, a
priestly master whose logic cannot be questioned.

However as one begins to examine the interviews and writings of
Chomsky, a different picture emerges. His books, so vociferously lauded
in leftist circles, appear to be calculated disinformation designed to
distract and confuse honest activists. Since the 1960's, Chomsky has
acted as the premier Left gatekeeper, using his elevated status to
cover up the major crimes of the global elite.

His formula over the years has stayed consistent: blame "America" and
"corporations" while failing to examine the hidden Globalist overclass
which pulls the strings, using the U.S. as an engine of creation and
destruction. Then after pinning all the worlds ills on American
imperialism, Chomsky offers the solution of world government under the
United Nations.

In his book "The Conspirator's Hierarchy," Dr. John Coleman named
Chomsky as a deep cover CIA agent working to undermine social protest
groups. Certainly Dr. Coleman's claims appear validated by an honest
review of Chomsky's role as a Left gatekeeper.

Since 9-11, he has steadfastly refused to discuss the evidence of
government complicity and prior knowledge. Furthermore he claims that
the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), Bilderberg Committee, and
Trilateral Commission are "nothing organizations." When critiquing
poverty, he never mentions the Federal Reserve and their role in
manipulating the cycle of debt.

Similarly, he claims the CIA was never a rogue organization and is an
innocent scapegoat; that JFK was killed by the lone assassin Lee Harvey
Oswald; that the obvious vote fraud in 2004 did not occur; and that
peak oil is real and good for humanity.

What he does advocate is population control, gun control, support for
U.N.E.S.C.O., and the end of national sovereignty in favor of a
one-world government under the UN. In other words, the major goals of
the New World Order.

Chomsky's role in propaganda paradigm is much like that of Karl Marx:
to present a false liberation ideology which actually supports the
desired solutions of the elite. Marx pointed out the inequalities and
brutality of capitalism and then advocated a one world bank, army, and
government with the abolition of private property and religion; in
other words, the major goals known of the New World Order.

Tens of millions of activists worldwide still remain trapped by this
scam, failing to recognize the inherent autocratic and elitist
structures of Marxism-Leninism or the newer incarnation under Chomsky.

The Globalist elites and their army of social scientists at the
Tavistock Institute understand that people are going to question the
inequities of the current economic system. For example, why is wealth
distributed so unequally between classes and countries? Why are those
living in third world nations allowed to die from preventable diseases
and starvation? Why does the U.S. government sponsor and direct such
murderous foreign policy? Why was America attacked on 9-11?

In other words, why is the world embroiled in such violence? Who is
behind all this suffering? And most importantly, what solutions would
relieve the poverty and destruction plaguing the worldwide population?

Enter Chomsky, the controlled opposition, to play the role of re-direct
agent. He discusses a mere fraction of the real elite manipulation and
then quickly pushes his followers into dead-end solutions and
alienating rhetoric. Chomsky's hero status is further amplified by Left
gatekeeper publications like Z Magazine, DemocracyNow!, The
Progressive, and The Nation.

Is it a coincidence that all of those magazines receive major funding
from Globalist front-groups like the Rockefeller Foundation, Ford
Foundation, Carnegie Endowment, and MacArthur Foundation? Chomsky may
be the head gatekeeper, but he works alongside a network of fellow
Globalist assets like Amy Goodman who do their best to appear radical
while avoiding all the hardcore issues and deliberately leading the
Left into oblivion.

The following analysis will show that Chomsky, a deep cover agent for
the New World Order, a master of black propaganda whose true motives
become clear with a sober and honest examination.


Noam Chomsky has acted as the premier Left gatekeeper in the aftermath
of the 9-11 crimes, lashing out at the 9-11 truth movement and claiming
any suggestions of government complicity are fabrications. The
"radical" Chomsky takes a position so deeply rooted in denial that it
makes the staged 9-11 whitewash commission look like an honest study.
He belligerently refuses to discuss any of the massive evidence proving
government foreknowledge and participation in the crimes, claiming it
would destroy the activist movements worldwide:

"If the left spends its time on this, that's the end of the left, in my
opinion: the mainstream would be utterly delighted. It is highly likely
that nothing significant will be found. And if -- which I very greatly
doubt -- something is found that would quickly send everyone in
Washington to the death chamber, the left is unlikely to emerge

In other words, Chomsky is telling his followers to ignore the evidence
because according to him, none exists. However even if there is massive
evidence, responsible activists should ignore it because it would be
"the end of the Left." Chomsky's role as a 9-11 gatekeeper goes even
further as he denies each piece of evidence individually. The following
examples should suffice:

1) As most honest 9-11 researchers know, 7 of the accused 19 hijackers
are alive, proving the official story is a fabrication. Many of the
remaining 12 were trained as U.S. Air Force bases and CIA-connected
Huffman Aviation. Many of the accused "religious fanatics" acted more
like degenerate contract agents, as they flashed wads of cash, visited
strip clubs, drank profusely, blew cocaine, smoked weed, cavorted with
strippers and had strange meetings in the drug-rich Florida keys.

Men like Mohammed Atta fit the MO of an undercover CIA drug runner: a
man trained at U.S. Air Force bases, fluent in many languages, able to
evade INS regulations, working with drug dealers, and receiving wired
bank funds from CIA-linked Pakistani intelligence. There remains no
photographic evidence of these supposed hijackers ever getting on the
planes (walking through airport security does not count). Furthermore,
the autopsy list of Flight 77 which supposedly hit the Pentagon listed
none of the accused hijackers.

Regarding the evidence of government complicity in training the hijackers, Chomsky wrote the following:

Nothing empirical is impossible. Thus, it is conceivable that everyone

in the White House is totally insane. And in my opinion, that's what

they would have had to be to try something that would have been very

likely to turn into an utter fiasco, and if by some miracle had succeeded,

would almost certainly have leaked, so that they would all be facing the

death sentence. Possible, but not likely.

2) What about the unprecedented NORAD stand down on 9-11 which broke
standard operation procedure? Over 67 times in 2001, NORAD had
dispatched jets when they deviated from their flight path. In 1999,
when golfer Payne Stewart's single engine Lear in depressurized, NORAD
planes were flying around the vessel in 20 minutes.

But on 9-11, Ben Sliney, in his first day on the job as hijacking
coordinator for the FAA, delayed calls to NORAD. Meanwhile NORAD ran at
least 7 hijacking drills that morning like Operation Vigilant Guardian
where commercial jets crashed into government buildings in Manhattan,
Washington DC, and Virginia. These "mock" drills, designed to give live
on 9-11, helped to distract the honest people within NORAD and the FAA,
and to evade suspicion from patriotic investigators within the CIA,
FBI, and NSA's Echelon network.

Of the subject of the NORAD stand down, Chomsky wrote the following:

"Whether NORAD followed SOP, I have no idea, not having investigated
the matter. I think the case is very weak, and diverts people from the
really serious issues."

3) How about the document called "Operation Northwoods" signed off in
1962 by the Joint Chiefs of Staff like Generals Lemnitzer and
Landsdale? These men, sworn to protect the Constitution, devised a plan
to create false-flag terrorism in order to engineer a war with Cuba.
Their treasonous plans included the following:

-"Hijacking attempts against civil air and surface craft could appear
to continue as harassing measures condoned by the Government of Cuba."

-"Exploding a few plastic bombs in carefully chosen spots, the arrest
of Cuban agents and the release of prepared documents substantiating
Cuban involvement also would be helpful in projecting the idea of an
irresponsible government."

- "We could blow up a U.S. ship in Guantanamo Bay and blame Cuba . . .
casualty lists in U.S. newspapers cause a helpful wave of indignation."

This document was discovered in the National Archives and has been the
subject of mainstream articles by ABCNEWS and others. It stands as
clear evidence that the U.S. government has designed plans to engineer
terrorist attacks and blame them on foreign enemies. Yet Noam Chomsky
does not think the Northwoods document matters:

Operation Northwoods example is only one of many reasons for

being skeptical about this: it doesn't even come close, and it was not

carried out. Furthermore, there is nothing in history that even remotely

resembles what is being proposed. Of course, that does not show that

the thesis is impossible: nothing could show that, by definition. And if

someone can put together some evidence and refute the arguments as to

why it is extraordinarily unlikely, then the matter will be worth pursuing.

Chomsky's role as the chief 9-11 gatekeeper proves he is distracting
his leftist followers from the truth. Instead of facing the clear
facts, he claims that 19 hijackers did it and that al-Qaeda is a real
terrorist enemy. When presented with documented evidence, from living
hijacker patsies to the NORAD stand down, he simply claims it doesn't
exist. He resorts to emotional "they would never do it" appeals in
order to deny the obvious.

Chomsky is exhibiting far more than logical skepticism, but instead is actively engaging in disinformation.

9-11 Prior Knowledge:

Chomsky denial of government complicity in the crimes of September 11
is one thing, but he goes further, claiming the government had no prior
knowledge of the attacks. Mind you, this is a position even weaker than
Michael Moore's tepid Fahrenheit 9-11, which at least tacitly suggested
a degree of prior knowledge.

Chomsky's position is untenable. For a man who prides himself on
science and logic, his steadfast refusal to acknowledge mainstream
media reports finds him using arguments similar to Holocaust deniers;
one can show them photographs, videos, testimony, and physical evidence
but the burden of proof is impossible. Such is the case with Chomsky
who ignores the many government admissions of prior knowledge widely
available even in the 9-11 whitewash commission report. Here is Noam
Chomsky writing on government prior knowledge:

That tells us even less. Every intelligence agency is flooded, daily,

with information of very low credibility. In retrospect, one can

sometimes pick out pieces that mean something. At the time, that's

a virtual impossibility. By arguments like this we can prove that

someone blew up the White House yesterday.

If they did not have prior knowledge, why were Cheney and NORAD running
drills that morning where hijacked jets flew into buildings in New
York, Washington DC and Virginia? Also, wouldn't the NSA's Echelon
network have picked up the chatter?

Of course, Chomsky does not even admit the Echelon network exists. This
despite the NSA's openly acknowledged ability to monitor all phone
calls, emails and satellite communication with keyword software which
can identify phrases and immediately begin tracking the communication.
This despite their admitted bases at Fort Meade, with sister sites in
the UK, Australia, Canada, New Zealand and other unknown locations.

Students of the intelligence world know full well that the NSA's
Echelon network picked up the chatter for weeks before the attacks. In
fact, the NSA admitted it, saying that on September 10 agents
intercepted calls from hijackers but, *ahem*, did not translate them
until after the attacks. Such admissions are red herrings, clearly
designed to excuse massive prior knowledge at tops levels of the
intelligence circles.

What about the President Daily Briefing given to Bush in late August
which discussed the threat of hijacked jets? What about intelligence
groups like Able Danger and FBI agents like Robert Wright who warned of
the flight school trainees? What about FBI agent John O'Neill's
investigation into Al-Qaeda financing which was quashed by Bush? What
about attorney David Schippers who desperately tried to warn Ashcroft
about the impending attacks? Why was the CIA admittedly tracking the
accused hijackers since 2000? Why was FEMA running drills in Manhattan
that morning out of WTC-7? Why did PNAC documents like "Rebuilding
America's Defenses" call for helpful Pearl Harbor style attacks?

Those are just a smattering of the mountain of evidence proving beyond
any reasonable doubt that the U.S. government had prior knowledge. But
Chomsky must deny these, because his role is to mislead and distract
while chastising the 9-11 truth movement.

CFR/Bilderberg/Trilateral Commission:

Before and after 9-11, the key role for the Left Gatekeepers like
Chomsky has been denying the existence of the overclass which prints
the money, funds and manages the wars, ships the drugs, controls entire
industries, and creates the scientific propaganda which plagues
society. Instead they critique mid-level minions & front
corporations while speaking in glittering generalities.

In the world of Left gatekeepers, the New World Order does not exist.
There are no elite plan for global government. Instead they paint the
picture of a profit-motivated world in which corporations control the
government. But merely blaming corporations misses the forces which own
their assets, manage their resources, control their board of directors,
and pull their strings.

Chomsky steadfastly denies the role of the Council on Foreign
Relations, Bilderberg Committee, and Trilateral Commission in the
creation and management of the wars and poverty he claims to condemn.
When speaking on such "conspiracies," he said the following:

It's the same with the Trilateral Commission, the

Council on Foreign Relations, all these other things

the people are racing around searching for conspiracy

theories about-they're "nothing" organizations. Of

course they're there, obviously rich people get

together and talk to each other, and play golf with

one another, and plan together-that's not a big

surprise. But these conspiracy theories people are

putting their energies into have virtually nothing to

do with the way the institutions actually function.

(Understanding Power, 348)

The CFR, funded by Wall Street and the Rockefellers after WW II, is an
organization openly sworn to destroying American national sovereignty
in favor of world government. They have acted as the de-facto "secret
team" in managing U.S. domestic and foreign policy, orchestrating wars
like Vietnam and the first Gulf War.. Almost all executives in the CIA
and State Department have been members of the CFR, whether it was Dean
Rusk, Allen Dulles and Robert McNamara during Vietnam or Richard
Armitage and George Tenet during the crimes of 9-11.

The CFR has been the dominant roundtable group pushing for a
Panamerican Union by 2010 which would dissolve national borders and
unite Mexico, Canada, and America under a single currency, with
biometric ID cards and GPS-tracked vehicles on camera-strewn
superhighways. How can Chomsky seriously claim the CFR is a "nothing
organization" when their role in crafting policy is so clear? Whom is
he trying to protect in denying the treasonous goals of the CFR?

Chomsky's stonewalling on the Bilderberg raises even more suspicions.
Since 1954 the Bilderberg has served as the central brain of the New
World Order, the major secret gathering for Globalist agents from
across the globe. Bilderberg chairmen like Prince Bernhard and David
Rockefeller have pushed for total global government, eugenics
population control, engineering wars, and controlling the worldwide
economy. Top politicians from America and Europe also undergo a
grooming process at the Bilderberg. Bill Clinton went in 1991 as
Rockefeller's personal guest, and Tony Blair attended in 1993 before
becoming Prime Minister. John Kerry attended in 2000, and John Edwards
did two weeks before becoming the VP nominee in 2004.

Major members of the media, such as editors from the Economist, NY
Times, Newsweek, Washington Post, US News and World Report are regular
attendees. Yet they rarely, if ever, mention the proceedings, sworn to
secrecy by their globalist masters.

Nevertheless in recent years, the truth has emerged. Major media
outlets like the BBC admit the Bilderberg is planning for a one-world
currency, bank, and army. Articles in Reuters and the Financial Times
of London have admitted the existence of the Bilderberg,

their grooming of politicians, and their secret plans for world
governance. If these mainstream media reporters can admit the major
role of the Bilderberg in shaping world affairs, why can't Chomsky? Why
is he holding back?

Simlarly, how can Chomsky seriously ignore the role of the Trilateral
Commission, the brainchild of Globalist masters David Rockefeller and
Zbigniew Brzezinski? This is the same Brzezinski who helped direct the
first CIA funds to bin Laden, and in his book Between Two Ages called
for a technotronic society with a microchipped population.

The Trilateral Commission openly admits they are trying to control the
economy through closer European-Japanese-American cooperation. They
operate much like the CFR, counting the worlds top elites, politicians,
corporate executives, and media barons as members. They have been
instrumental in creating the destructive "free trade" agreements that
are destroying America's economy and national sovereignty in order to
usher in world governance.

Journalist Jim Tucker, a Spotlight reporter with impeccable
credentials, also links the Trilateral Commission to the international
narcotics trade, the $500 billion-plus racket from heroin and cocaine
alone which helps fund the Globalist's house of cards.

What would motivate Chomsky to call the Trilateral Commission a
"nothing organization?" Is it because they echo his goal of a world
government? Or are there darker forces at work?

When balanced against over 50 years of documented evidence, Chomsky's
claims are exposed as nothing more than spurious lies and denial.

Federal Reserve:

Similarly, while Chomsky bemoans the widespread poverty in America and
the Third World, he has never spoken publicly on the role of the
Federal Reserve. Therefore most Leftist activists are unaware of the
role played by this privately owned bank cartel which prints worthless
fiat currency out of thin air. Since its secret formation at Jekyll
Island in 1910, and subsequent illegal passage during the Wilson
administration, the Federal Reserve has held the American economy
hostage: creating inflation and boom & bust cycles through managed
money supply and interest rates.

Furthermore every dollar printed is merely debt charged to the federal
government. Thus while it only costs 10 cents to print a $100 bill, the
U.S. government fits the bill for the full $100 to the private Fed.

The creation of the Federal Reserve, owned largely by the Rockefeller,
Morgan, and Rothschild interests has eluded the "radical" Chomsky.
Furthermore he does not discuss the proven role of the Fed in creating
recessions and depressions in order to purchase assets at a fraction of
their value.

Chomsky ignores the role of the fiat currency system which drives down
wages, inflates prices, and puts the American economy under the iron
claw of a few elite families. Since the dollar is the base currency for
worldwide trade and the current economic house of cards, shouldn't
these topics be discussed?

Perhaps Chomsky stays mute because a central bank fits into his
ideology. After all, one of the key planks in the Marxist and Fabian
socialist agenda is a managed central bank in order to control the
economy. Or perhaps Chomsky fears discussion of the Fed would expose
the real hidden hand that runs the world economy. For him it is easier
to blast the front corporations and low-level grocery boys.


If he denies even basic government foreknowledge of 9-11, should it be
any surprise that Chomsky avoids criticism of the CIA? When asked about
the links between the CIA and bin Laden, and the CIA's overt support of
the Taliban, Chomsky wrote the following:

"CIA support for bin Laden (which is not quite accurate) or the Taliban
(also not quite accurate) doesn't seem to me remotely relevant."

How can Chomsky write this with a straight face? He is simply ignoring
the documented evidence of CIA funding for the "freedom fighters" known
as al-Qaeda, totaling over $6 billion. The cozy CIA/al-Qaeda
relationship continued through the Bosnian conflict via training of the
drug-peddling Kosovo Liberation Army.

What about the meetings between Taliban leaders, oil executives, and
Bush administration officials from January to August 2001 to discuss
building an oil and gas pipeline for Unocal? Chomsky also denies the
mainstream reports from UK and French newspapers about two top CIA
agents meeting with bin Laden for over ten days in July 2001 while he
received dialysis at the American Hospital in Dubai.

But Chomsky goes further than that. While claiming to critique the CIA,
he absolves the agency of any responsibility for its actions, from Nazi
origins via Project Paperclip to heinous mind control experiments like
MK ULTRA. This horrific period in CIA history, a true Rosetta stone in
understanding the New World Order, is scientifically ignored by
Chomsky, who sees the CIA as an innocent victim of White House orders:

Or take the CIA, which is considered the source of a

lot of these conspiracies; we have a ton of

information about it, and as I read the information,

the C.I.A. is basically just an obedient branch of the

White House. I mean sure, the C.I.A. has done things

around the world- but as far as we know, it hasn't

done anything on its own.

There's very little evidence-in fact, I don't know of any-that

the C.I.A. is some kind of rogue elephant, you know, off on its

own doing things. What the record shows is that the

C.I.A. is just an agency of the White House, which

sometimes carries out operations for which the

Executive branch wants what's called "plausible

deniability"; in other words, if something goes wrong,

we don't want it to look like we did, those guys in

the C.I.A. did it, and we can throw some of them to

the wolves if we need to. That's basically the role

of the C.I.A., along with mostly just a collection of

information. (Chomsky, "Understanding Power")

Like all of Chomsky's claims, this one is based on emotion, conjecture,
and opinion. He does not cite any specifics, knowing full well that his
fawning minions will accept his word as gospel.

Chomsky sees the CIA as a pathetic collection of scapegoat bureaucrats,
acting as grocery boys for their master President. According to him,
the CIA does not carry out secret projects on their own, and if accused
of such, are innocent.

JFK Assassination/CIA role:

Therefore is it any surprise the Chomsky endorses the lone assassin and
magic bullet theory in the assassination of JFK? From his emergence as
a guru of the Left in the late 60's, Chomsky has belittled anyone
researching the anomolies stemming from the official story and Warren
Commission cover-up. According to him, any examination is a complete
waste of time:

The Kennedy assassination cult is probably the most

striking case. I mean, you have all these people

doing super-scholarly intensive research, and trying

to find out just who talked to whom, and what's the

exact contours were of this supposed high-level

conspiracy-it's all complete nonsense. As soon as you

look into the various theories, they always collapse,

there's just nothing there. But in many places, the

left has just fallen apart on the basis of these sheer

cults. (Chomsky, Understanding Power)

Chomsky's position puts him in the less than 15% of Americans who
believe Oswald was the lone shooter. For such a self-proclaimed
"anarchist" radical, Chomsky's trust in Warren Commission's official
story seems akin to a child's belief in Santa Claus.

The facts of course, tell a different story. While far from perfect
man, Kennedy ran afoul by opposing the very forces that took over after
his death. He began withdrawing 5,000 CIA "advisers" from Vietnam;
fired CIA chiefs Allen Dulles and Richard Bissel; disbanded the CIA and
handed over covert operations to the State Department; ordered the
creation of a silver-backed government currency to break the Federal
Reserve monopoly; turned down the Operation Northwoods plan to engineer
false flag terrorism and blame it on Cuba; and refused to invade Cuba
and launch a full scale nuclear war during the Missile Crisis, a plan
favored by hawks like General Curtis LeMay.

Chomsky ignores the true history of the Kennedy presidency because it
would expose te shadow government takeover after his assassination.

What about Chomsky's claims that the CIA never acts as a rogue elephant? Do they hold up?

MK ULTRA/Project Paperclip:

Chomsky has never publicly acknowledged the covert CIA mind control
programs known as MK ULTRA and its many offshoots. This program alone
shows how the CIA was indeed a rogue elephant, as they ran illegal
campaign of propaganda, brainwashing, sex slavery, and poisoning of

In 1946, Globalist bagman Harry Truman began a covert plan to smuggle
top Nazi SS officers, scientists, and propagandists into America. Those
same war criminals quickly became the front line for the postwar U.S.
intelligence machine. Reinhard Gehlen, one of Hitler's top intelligence
chiefs, led postwar European intelligence for the CIA, becoming the
darling of head honcho Allen Dulles.

Then, using his same crew of Gestapo and SS, aided by the Vatican, and
sponsored by the CIA, Gehlen set up "rat lines" which smuggled 5,000 of
the worst Nazi criminals into South and Central America. Butchers like
Klaus Barbie, Mortin Bormann and Josef Mengele among others owed their
freedom to this program.

Those same men would later aid CIA coups in Angentina, Chile, Paraguay,
Brazil and other countries. After all, they were veteran experts: early
Gehlen projects had included rigging elections in Italy and France. By
1955, more than 760 German scientists had been became U.S. citizens,
many specializing in black research projects. This growing cabal of
Nazi doctors found a happy marriage with the control freak elitists
infesting the NSA, CIA, and black operations government.

These men birthed the MK ULTRA program, focusing on mass mind control,
via drugs, hypnosis, subliminals, and pulsed electromagnetic waves. It
was this mad science, spawned in the Nazi labs of Dr. Josef Mengele,
that now obsessed men like Sidney Gottlieb, John Lilly, Jose Delgado
and Ewen Cameron.

Their most famous project was the creation of Manchurian candidates,
used for political assassinations, drug transportation, espionage, and
sabotage. Yet this was not limited to Sirhan Sirhan.

In fact, both Gottlieb and Cameron helped train thousands of
pre-adolescent children for use in child prostitution, sex slavery,
blackmail, satanic rituals and murder. Known as the Monarch Project,
children were kidnaped from American streets and foreign nations and
then programmed with trauma based mind control.

Other common victims for experimentation included prisoners, the
homeless, and residents of mental institutions, all cherry-picked
because they were defenseless. Details of this horrific and still
operational program are available in rare and highly suppressed texts
of Fritz Springmeier, which usually fetch over $300 a piece.

Why does Chomsky refuse to discuss MK ULTRA and its sister projects?
Why does he claim the CIA was merely a pawn of the White House, when
the record proves that Eisenhower and Kennedy had little, if any
knowledge of MK ULTRA? Simply put: Why is Noam Chomsky covering for the

Elite Child Sex Rings:

The Monarch Project of prostituting children deserves further mention
(although Chomsky would disagree). In 1988 Vice President Bush was
caught having 15 year-old call boy prostitutes visiting the White House
late at night. The credit cards records to prove it were splashed
across the front page of the Washington Times: "Homosexual Prostitution
Inquiry Ensnares VIP's with Reagan, Bush Sr."

Unfortunately the star witness, Craig Spence, was suicided in his hotel
with piano wire before he could testify. Book like "The Franklin
Coverup" by John DeCamp have further proven the links between the CIA
and Army intelligence to the elite sex slavery rings. Cases of like the
"The Finders" in Washington DC, where customs agents discovered a CIA
warehouse full of child porn and satanic torture, stand as yet further

In the forrmer Yugloslavia, CIA front company Dyncorp has been
convicted of operating in the human slave trade and using their C-130's
to ship many of the 200,000 women and children smuggled out every year.
Furthermore, mainstream news outlets have shown evidence of UN
Peacekeepers assisting the sex trade in the Democratic Republic of
Congo and Balkans.

Despite the voluminous amount of grotesque evidence, Chomsky has never
discussed the elite sex trade. This is an issue so shocking, so
paradigm-altering, that his Leftist followers would no longer trust
their loving mother government, and that is the last thing Chomsky
wants. After all, if the Leftists knew that top level politicians are
actually pedophiles practicing satanic ritual abuse, they would no
longer trust the savior world government. The absence of Chomsky and
the Left on the suffering of these children speaks volumes about their
true moral character and motives.


Other MK ULTRA side projects included pushing LSD to the youth culture
and attaching electrodes into prisoners heads, the latter perfected by
Dr. Delgado. Adjunct programs like MK NAOMI and MK ARTICHOKE focused on
genetically engineered viruses, biological agents, and radiation
effects on American citizens. Common experiments included testing
biological agents and atomic weapons radiation on soldiers, the
mentally handicapped, people in subways, and even whole towns; putting
cancer viruses into polio vaccines; and exposing pregnant women to
radiation to test the effects on the fetus. These experiments have been
documented as continuing into the 1980's and likely still continue

Chomsky does not discuss these horrendous programs, because it would
awaken his readers to the cruelest fact: that the U.S. government will
murder its own citizens and soldiers, killing hundreds of thousands of
unwitting subjects simply for political gain. After all, if they would
feed radiated breakfast cereal to thousands of retarded children, would
these same parasitic elites not also kill more than 2,800 Americans on
September 11?


Of course MK ULTRA lives on today in our drinking water. It was around
the time of its inception, in the 1950's, that the U.S. government
began adding sodium fluoride to tap water in massive quantities..
Should we be shocked? After all, the first people to use the deadly
neurotoxin were the Nazis, who found it pacified the concentration camp
prisoners. Now thanks to imported Nazi doctors helping our friendly
neighborhood CIA, American citizens could enjoy the same privilege as
those in Hitler's camps.

Chomsky has never discusses the effects of sodium fluoride, nor the
lead and arsenic used in water as silent weapons of pacification. As a
scientist, he is apparently uninterested in sodium fluoride's proven
link to cancer, leukemia, osteoporosis, Alzheimer disease, and brain

So should we be surprised that he never writes about the deadly poison
aspartame found in thousands of products? Or genetically modified foods
and growth hormones which destroy immune systems while causing blood
disorders and swelling of the organs? Or cell phones which emit deadly
microwave radiation leading to cancer, vision loss, and (according to
published BBC reports) altering human DNA? Or the GWEN towers which
pulse deadly ELF radiation across America?

Rockefeller Pharma Cartel:

The Nazi doctors who didn't end up in American intelligence found cushy
jobs in the pharmaceutical cartel firms like Merck and Eli-Lilly.
Chomsky never discusses the history of these firms; nor the Rockefeller
control over the American Medical Association; nor the link between
mercury-tainted vaccines and brain damage; nor the deadly mind control
drugs like SSRI's (Prozac, Zoloft, etc.) and amphetamine-based
Adderall/Ritalin pills pimped out to helpless children.

These drugs cause bone degeneration, memory loss, suicidal tendencies
and added depression to the poor kids gobbling them like Flintstone's
chewables, all at the advice of their pill-pusher death merchant
doctors. Meanwhile Chomsky stays true to form, ignoring these matters
and instead calling for socialized, Federally-controlled healthcare
which would further subsidize the pharma cartel. This is just another
example of his bait and switch tactics, a sloppy mess of disinfo and
elite sponsored solutions.

Psychiatry/ New Freedom Initiative:

Chomsky and his Left Gatekeepers also ignore the assault from
psychiatric community, largely controlled by the Rockefellers and
Tavistock Institute, who seek to define every neurosis as a mental
illness in order to push more drugs. Bush has signed the New Freedom
Initiative to forcibly psychologically test all K-12 students in public
schools, screen them for "mental illnesses," and force the children to
take the recommended drugs.

This brainwashing agenda was pushed by the pharma cartel, with
GlaxoSmithKline, Eli Lilly, Merck and others investing millions in
buy-offs and lobbying. But news of this extraordinary Stalinist plan
never graced the pages of Chomsky's editorials, nor Z Magazine, The
Nation, the Progressive, and DemocracyNow. Perhaps this is because the
New Freedom Initiative fits into their goal of government-controlled
socialized health care.

The New Freedom Initiative, bolder than Stalin's wildest dreams, is
just a small part of the eugenics agenda; a dominant Globalist goal
which Chomsky and his Left Gatekeeper bagmen aid and abet. Chomsky has
never written about the sinister American Psychiatric Association, nor
the role of it's former chief, Dr. Ewen Cameron, the aforementioned MK
ULTRA villain and CIA child programmer.

Key aspects of the scientific eugenics movement such as population
control, abortion legalization, poisonous vaccinations, and stem cell
research find their most vocal advocates on the far Left of the managed
political debate. Leftist college majors like sociology advocate
programs like parental licensing by the state, state-controlled child
care, and Chinese style childbirth laws with forced sterilization as a

Leftists call for more vaccinations in the Third World despite the
admittedly tainted vaccines used by the World Health Organization and
UNICEF. All of this is indicative of an infiltrated movement, a Left
deeply penetrated by Globalist agents driving activists into
unwittingly championing the Brave New World.

Population Control:

Population control by any means necessary is a major, some would say
the major goal of the New World Order, perhaps even paramount to their
goal of a cashless society control grid with microchipped slaves. The
chief architects of population control are Bilderberg elitists like
David and Nelson Rockefeller, Henry Kissinger, Prince Philip, Ted
Turner, Alexander Haig, and Cyrus Vance. Their Malthusian nightmare
requires killing 90% of the "useless eaters" through war, genetically
engineered viruses, and engineered starvation. Declassified documents
like NSM 200 and Global 2000 lay the plans out with cold precision.

Chomsky, the self-proclaimed radical, also advocates such depopulation
methods. In Chomsky's book "Understanding Power," a collection of his
talks with activists, a crowd member asks about population control, to
which Chomsky responds:

If we continue to produce energy by combustion, the human race

isn't going to survive much longer...Yeah, population control is another

issue where it doesn't matter if you do it, everybody has to do it. It's like

traffic: I mean you can't make driving a car survivable by driving well
yourself; there has to be kind of a social contract involved, otherwise
it won't work. (61)

Chomsky and other gatekeepers claim to maintain the moral high ground,
but then advocate the eugenics agenda pushed by elite roundtable groups
like the Bilderberg and Club of Rome. How can Chomsky claim to be an
advocate for the Third World while simultaneously pushing for the
managed murder agenda favored by Henry Kissinger?

Gun Control:

Another one of the great successes of the Left gatekeeper has been
pushing for unconstitutional gun control agenda through their
publications like The Nation, Z Magazine, The Progressive, and their
internet kin at DemocracyNow! & Indymedia. It is a great
achievement of propaganda when the supposed radicals "opposing Bush"
call for a completely disarmed American populace and inflated budget
for BATF thugs in ski masks. Chomsky mock s those who support the
Constitutionally endowed right to bear arms. In fact, he says it
doesn't exist:

It's pretty clear that, taken literally, the Second Amendment doesn't
permit people to have guns. But laws are never taken literally,
including amendments to the Constitution or constitutional rights. Laws
permit what the tenor of the times interprets them as permitting."
(Secrets, Lies, and Democracy)

Then later in the interview, Chomsky is asked if guns are a proper way to respond to government tyranny. He responds as follows:

As for guns being the way to respond to this, that's outlandish. First

of all, this is not a weak Third World country. If people have pistols,

the government has tanks. If people get tanks, the government has atomic

weapons. There's no way to deal with these issues by violent force, even

if you think that that's morally legitimate.

Guns in the hands of American citizens are not going to make the

country more benign. They're going to make it more brutal, ruthless

and destructive. So while one can recognize the motivation that lies

behind some of the opposition to gun control, I think it's sadly

misguided. (Secrets, Lies and Democracy)

It would be one thing to hear such rhetoric out of the Fabian
socialists in the Democratic party. But to have the supposed "fringe
radicals" saying there is no second amendment and advocating gun
seizures is remarkable. And because of globalist infiltration of the
left, this policy once favored by Hitler, Stalin, Mao, and other mass
murderers has found a comfortable home. Hence it has become common to
hear activists protesting the Iraq quagmire while simultaneously
calling for gun control.

Environmental Front Groups:

As masters of propaganda, the Globalists have uses their Left
Gatekeepers to push eugenics and population control as necessary for
the environment. This has been accomplished through the phony
environmental movement and Peak Oil fabrications.

The Club of Rome, a globalist front group created in 1968, immediately
began calling for population reduction under the guise of
environmentalism. Other fronts like the World Wildlife Fund, managed by
the aforementioned Prince Philip, vocally push for population control
while seizing large swaths of land for "Mother Earth." Other pet
projects such as the Kyoto Protocol, which would give the UN total
control of energy resources, have floundered.

Past WWF board members have included Bilderberg founder Prince
Bernhard, Hollinger media gopher and Bilderberg member Conrad Black,
Shell chairman John Loudon, King Juan Carlos of Spain, Prince Henrik of
Denmark, and accused drug dealer Henry Keswick.

Chomsky is one of the many re-direct agents who use the real
environmental pollution problems to push for a fascist takeover by a
world government. Much like the ideas discussed in the Report From Iron
Mountain, he uses the threat of global warming to justify totalitarian

Suppose it was discovered tomorrow that the greenhouse effects has

been way understimated, and that the catastrophic effects are actually

going to set in 10 years from now, and not 100 years from now or something.

Well, given the state of the popular movements we have today, we'd probably

have a fascist takeover-with everybody agreeing to it, because that would be

the only method for survival that anyone could think of. I'd even agree to it,

because there's just no other alternatives right now. (Understanding Power, 388)

Here is Noam Chomsky, openly advocating a fascist takeover because the
ends justify the means. This is classic problem-reaction-solution
programming, as he points to the real threat of pollution and then
offers the solution of tyranny

Peak Oil:

As previously stated, the environmental movement was funded and
amplified by Globalist oil, banking, and drug cartels, with specific
help from the Rockefeller Foundation. The WWF, along with other phony
NGO's like the Sierra Club and Greenpeace consistently call for
population reduction. Additionally these groups push the flat earth
thesis of "Peak Oil," predicting that oil supplies will soon run out
and of course...require massive worldwide population reductions.

Chomsky posted an entry called "Peak Oil" on his blog in June, 2004,
writing the following: "The basic theory is incontrovertible. The only
questions have to do with timing and cost."

Then in a radio interview with Steve Scherr, Chomsky said the following of Peak Oil:

There's another side to this, there's a sense in which it's

advantageous if the oil peak is earlier. The reason why is it will

compel the world, primarily the U.S. here, to move toward something

like sustainable energy.

If there's unbounded amounts of hydrocarbons, we're just going to
destroy the environment for human life or most biological life, so the

earlier the peak is, in some respects - yes, it could be catastrophic,

it could also be beneficial.

The "beneficial" aspects Chomsky discusses are likely the resulting
population control and starvation that would ensue from such a shortage.

But in reality oil is abiotic and constantly regenerating. This, while
huge wells go untapped in Russia, Equatorial Guinea, Nigeria, Sudan,
Cuba, Indonesia, Iraq, Alaska, Venezuela, Bolivia, Norway, and the Gulf
of Mexico. Additionally, refinery capacity has been deliberately shut
down by the oil oligopoly in order to create artificial supply
shortages. Market prices are controlled by the Anglo-American cartel
and they intend to use this as a vehicle for engineered crises. At this
years Bilderberg meeting Henry Kissinger reportedly predicted $100 a
barrel oil within a year. The only possible result is a complete
worldwide depression.

It is within the "radical" Left that horror stories of diminishing oil
find their home. Even within the 9-11 truth movement, authors like Mike
Ruppert and Nafeez Ahmed have attempted to attach Peak Oil as the
reason for government engineering of 9-11 and the wars in the Middle
East. By polluting the activist movements with Peak Oil lies, the
Globalists have created an army of strong advocates for $5 a gallon

Project for the New American Century (PNAC)

Another triumph of Chomsky's disinfo campaign has been the active
denial of the The Project for the New American Century (PNAC), a neocon
group that published radical statements calling for world war,
population control, and a worldwide police state back in 2000. The
signatures on the documents included Dick Cheney and cabinet members
like Paul Wolfowitz, Richard Armitage, Dov Zakheim, Donald Rumsfeld,
Richard Perle, and Eliot Abrams.

It was Zakheim who previously ran Systems Planning Inc., which made
remote-control software for commercial airliners. Also as comptroller
of the Pentagon, he lost over $3 trillion of taxpayer money without
explanation. Yet his corruption was not singular; after Bush took his
figurehead position in the stolen election of 2000, all of the PNAC
radicals became the architects of 9-11 and purveyors of pre-war lies
about Iraq.

Their infamous "Rebuilding America's Defenses" document, produced in
2000 before 9-11, reads like prophecy, calling for theater wars against
Iraq, Iran, and North Korea. They also admitted that "Further, the
process of transformation, even if it brings revolutionary change, is
likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event
- like a new Pearl Harbor." September 11, anyone?

They also openly called for killer viruses to wipe out large sectors of
the human population. The document states: "[A]dvanced forms of
biological warfare that can 'target' specific genotypes may transform
biological warfare from the realm of terror to a politically useful

How can Chomsky and his kin ignore the statements of the PNAC cabal,
whose mad plans for world domination read like the lost chapters of
Mein Kampf?

If the Left Gatekeepers won't discuss these published documents, how
can we expect them to research the true history of AIDS and the
potential emerging avian flu? Should we be surprised when they fail to
mention the 60 plus dead microbiologists after 9-11, many of them
leading researchers in emerging viruses? Should we look to Chomsky to
find an expose of the heavy metals and biological agents in chemtrails?


Many authors of the PNAC documents were radical Zionists linked to the
Likud party in Israel, who presented similar plans to Prime Minister
Benjamin Netanyahu in 1996 ("Policy for a Clean Break").

Chomsky, the supposed critic of Israel, has been praised by followers
for his books like "The Fateful Triangle" which detail many Israeli war
crimes. Furthermore he often criticizes the Isreali-linked network
dominating U.S. foreign policy. But as always, Chomsky again avoids the
hardcore issues, instead speaking in glittering generalities.

For example, he remains mute on the "Office of Special Plans," the
ad-hoc nerve center of pre-war Iraq propaganda, run of Cheney's office.
It was here that Zionist moles like Paul Wolfowitz, Larry Franklin,
Douglas Feith, Stephen Cambone, and Richard Perle cooked up phony WMD
threats, links 9-11, and collaboration between secular Iraq and

Those same gophers, many of them assets of the Israeli Likud party and
intelligence syndicate Mossad, operated a two-way spy network; just as
manufactured propaganda flowed from Mossad to the OSP moles, U.S.
secrets on Iran secretly floated into Sharon's war cabinet.

In the middle of all the traitorous espionage was the mafia don of all
lobbying cartels, the Israeli-controlled AIPAC. Top level AIPAC
officers like Steve Rosen often acted as a go-between, then using that
same fake intelligence to strong-arm the Congress where they control
both sides..

All parties mentioned, from Rosen to Franklin, are now under
investigation from the FBI and Justice Department for the
aforementioned crimes. Major articles in the Washington Post now admit
Franklin, working with Feith and Cambone, was passing secrets to Israel
through AIPAC. Chomsky has never spoken publically about any of these
topics, and certainly not the Mossad involvement in false-flag terror
events like the USS Liberty and connections to 9-11.

Vote Fraud:

When he isn't busy covering up the facts surrounding 9-11 or the crimes
of the CIA, Chomsky spends time actively denying the vote fraud of
2004, which ushered in another term for the neocon dictatorship.
Chomsky often brags that he does not vote in presidential elections,
noting that both sides are owned by corporations. But he has openly
denied the role of electronic voting fraud in 2000 and the more
prominent example of 2004. In 2004, exit polls in Ohio and Florida
showed John Kerry winning by a comfortable margin, but mysteriously
numbers showed a Bush victory.

The room for vote fraud was immense. The Secretary of State in Ohio,
Ken Blackwell, managed Bush's campaign in the state, much like
Katherine Harris did in Florida during 2000. Diebold, the company which
makes most of the electronic voting machines, is crawling with former
CIA and NSA members and used convicted felons to design their software.
The Diebold CEO Walden O'Dell is a Bush Pioneer and wrote in a GOP
fundraising letter that he was "committed to delivering electoral votes
to the President."

The Diebold code is private and has been exposed as being easily hacked
by Bev Harris at In North Carolina and Georgia,
machines were throwing out 5,000 block votes for Bush without
explanation. But none of this seems to interest Chomsky, who finds the
accusations of vote fraud to be without merit:

I don't find the evidence compelling. An inaccurate count in itself is a

random effect. As for collusion, yes, there are concerns, but concerns are

not evidence. The problem that concerns you may or may not be real, but in

my view, even if we take the worst case scenario, it is still marginal --

just as the Florida chads were marginal in the 2000 elections. I know of no

reason to suppose that electronic voting will have more than a random effect.

Chomsky and the gatekeepers cannot discuss the fraud of electronic
voting because it would awaken too many people to the total bankruptcy
of the system. It is important that college activists at Berkeley think
their vote for Ralph Nader counted. If they knew the entire game was
rigged like a Don King boxing match, too many illusions would break

World Government:

Chomsky plays the left gatekeeper role perfectly, presenting a false
dialectic of the evil American imperialist as the antagonist aggressor,
contrasted by the savior UN world government as the benevolent deux ex

This false propaganda model, pitting the imperialist U.S. against the
godly UN fits the classic MO of "poisoning the well." Essentially,
Chomsky acts as a re-direct agent: he acknowledges many crimes of
American foreign policy and then offers world government and
international law as the solution.

The Globalists have long been masters of such a paradigm. In the early
part of the 20th century, the same Wall Street bankers crafted the
doctrines of Communism. While posing as a workers' liberation theology,
it pushed for a central bank, world army, world court, world
government, and the abolition of religion, private property, and the
nation state.

Like other "anarchist" agent provacatuers such as John Zerzan (who
helped train violent mobs to ruin the Seattle WTO protests in 1999),
Chomsky has called for the elimination of private property. He argues,
"that some form of council communism is the natural form of
revolutionary socialism in an industrial society."

In fact, Chomsky goes further, pushing for the elimination of the
nation-state and national sovereignty to be replaced by a one world

"Well in my view what would be ultimately necessary would be a
breakdown of the nation-state system- because I think that's not a
viable system. It's not necessarily the natural form of human
organization." (314)

Chomsky, echoing rhetoric from the phony Marxist doctrines, is
essentially endorsing the major goal of the world elite: the breakdown
of national sovereignty in favor of a one-world government.

Noam Chomsky is a shameless world government pimp, and has heaped
lavish praise on men like Bertrand Russell who helped designed the New
World Order. Lucky for him, Chomsky has been publicly rewarded for his
faithful service to the UN cause. In Febraury 2004 he received the
Award of Excellence at the UN Correspondents Association Club in New
York. Previous winners included Globalist assets like Mikhail Gorbachev.


Since Chomsky is an avowed global government cheerleader, is it any
surprise he supports some of the worst UN programs? U.N.E.S.C.O, the
nightmare UN vehicle posing as an "aid" organization, finds a strong
advocate with Chomsky.

Long a pet project of the Malthusian-obsessed Rockefeller clan,
U.N.E.S.C.O projects include filtering pro-UN propaganda into American
schools and with the goal of eventually merging the curriculum with
Mexico and Canada in the proposed Panamerican Union; and seizing
control of huge swaths of American federal lands through "UN World
Heritage" sites. The first U.N.E.S.C.O chief Julian Huxley said during
his tenure in 1948:

"The general philosophy of UNESCO should be a scientific world
humanism, global in extent... It can stress… the transfer of full
sovereignty from separate nations to a world political organization…
Political unification in some sort of world government will be
required…to help the emergence of a single world culture."

But Noam Chomsky, ever the advocate of the UN, endorses the goals of
U.N.E.S.C.O wholeheartedly and lambastes the evil conservatives who
question its motives:

U.N.E.S.C.O--because it's working for the Third World--we practically

put them out of business. The United States launched a huge propaganda

campaign against U.N.E.S.C.O. in the 1970's and Eighties- it was full of

outrageous lies, totally fabricated, but nevertheless it sufficed to eliminate

the Third World orientation of U.N.E.S.C.O. and make it stop doing things

it was doing around the Third World, like improving literacy and health care and so on. (86)


Many credit Chomsky's "Manufacturing Consent" with being the premier
study of government propaganda. In Leftist circles it is hailed as a
Bible, a rite of passage for any true activist to understand the
system. But again, Chomsky's work, while appearing radical, is actually
gatekeeper disinfo.

Chomsky spends the entire book attempting to prove that newspapers
diminish American war crimes while exaggerating those of foreign
governments. Such a point is easy to prove, and he does so in his own
droll and methodical method.

Yet he stops there. Chomsky does not discuss the real elephant in the
room: direct CIA collaboration with media outlets and journalists
beginning in the 1950's under Operation Mockingbird.

Chomsky avoids writing about Mockingbird, the CIA program which
covertly put major publishing, newspaper, and media outlets, as well as
thousands of individual reporters under direct agency control. Agents
included Ben Bradlee at Newsweek, Henry Luce of Time and Life, and
Arthur Sulzberger of The New York Times, Alfred Friendly of the
Washington Post, and Joseph Harrison Christian Science Monitor.

Shouldn't this a significant development for a historian authoring an
honest study of propaganda? After all who is to say that this program
doesn't still continue? The Bush administration has admitted spending
hundreds of millions on fake newscasts and paying individual reporters
like Armstrong Williams to push talking points in newspapers. What
about the times they haven't been caught? Exactly how many mainstream
commentary and news outlets work with the CIA and White House?

Perhaps this is the reason why the scripts of the nightly news on ABC,
CBS, and NBC are almost exactly the same, while Newsweek, Time, and the
New York Times push the elitist agenda on cue (as seen most prominently
in the run up to the war in Iraq).

Furthermore Chomsky does not discuss collaboration between the
Bilderberg Committee and the major media outlets. Shouldn't this
concern the so-called radical anarchist, when media editors attend
secret meetings calling for eugenics, world government, and a cashless
society control grid?

Owners, editors and writers from Time, Newsweek, Economist, Washington
Post, New York Times, CBS, NBC, ABC and every news outlet in between
have attended the world government meetings.

Furthermore, what about the influence of the CFR, which openly calls
for a Panamerican Union and the end of American national sovereignty?
The CFR counts amongst its members major editors, owners, and
journalists in media outlets from PBS to CBS, CNN to News Corp., New
Republic to U.S. News and World Report.

Aren't these the reasons that journalists push the propaganda Chomsky
identifies? In "Manufacturing Consent," Chomsky takes limited aim at an
easy target. But he fails to dig deeper and examine the actual reasons
why the propaganda permeates the mainstream media opinion. Clearly the
influence of the CIA, CFR, Bilderberg Committee, and White House have
turned major media outlets into little more than docile commissars.
Furthermore, the interlocking interests of media owners with the
military industrial complex have served to sway content even further.

Chomsky's "classic" study is little more than a limited hangout
project. He is merely shooting the messengers, blaming journalistic
"bias" while failing to follow the trail of money, power, corruption,
and black propaganda. Instead, he identifies some passive propaganda
and is hailed as a brilliant analyst and purveyor of truth by the
Leftist minions. But his true achievement is ignoring the reasons
behind the lies, as he executes a masterful bait and switch tactic. Is
it a coincidence that Chomsky's co-author for "Manufacturing Consent,"
Edward Herman, has also denied any government complicity in 9-11?

While claiming to expose propaganda, Chomsky has perfected the art.


Chomsky and his gatekeeper contemporaries are perfect devises for the
Globalists because they help define the limits of the false left-right
paradigm. Much like David Horowitz, a former Leftist, currently does
for the radical Right. Is it a surprise that he edited a book called
"The Anti-Chomsky Reader?" It should only be natural since they both
serve the same role of gatekeeper.

Puppets like Horowitz, Michael Savage, Sean Hannity, Michele Malkin,
William Kristol, William F. Buckley and their kin serve as Right
Gatekeepers. They criticize the failures of liberals and Democrats and
then call for Bush worshipping, illegal wars, fascist government, and
giving up all of our Constitutional rights for "security." In doing so
they pollute the conservative movement and help marginalize true
conservatives voices like Alex Jones, Ron Paul, and groups like Gun
Owners of America.

Chomsky and his gatekeepers do the same thing. They write about the
crimes of American imperialism and then call for population control,
gun control, global government under the UN, and a totally socialized
Brave New World society.

The Left gatekeepers must manage the delicate tight rope act of
appearing radical while in actuality calling for worldwide enslavement
and murder. In all likelihood they get a little help from the
propaganda scientists at the venerable Tavistock institute in London
and adjuncts of the CIA's Mockingbird program; clearly the Left's
denial of 9-11 truths has been too coordinated too have simply been a
freak occurrence.

In the mainstream it is the same with the staged battles between pawns

Questo articolo viene da Luogocomune

L'indirizzo di questo articolo è: