What a lying sack of shit. To think I used to read this guy’s every word.
-
He says that ‘something would have leaked out’. Well, some things have leaked out, like the testimonies of Norman Mineta, William Rodriguez, Sibel Edmonds and the rest that were essentially omitted from the Commission’s final report.
-
‘You couldn’t predict what was going to happen, whether the plane would hit the World Trade Center’. This depends entirely on the method, and since Chomsky seems ignorant of even the most basic and widely-documented stories that contradict the official version it’s probably safe to assume he’s pretty ignorant about the possibility of remote controlling commercial and military aircraft, NORAD procedures and history, and so on.
-
Again, ‘any hint of a plan would have leaked’ - well, it took the best part of 40 years for the Northwoods documents to be made public, so that’s bullshit from the off. That was a lot more than a ‘hint of a plan’, though it was never carried out.
-
Appears to say ‘to take a chance on something like that would be meaningless’. I don’t know what he might mean by this.
-
‘If you look at the evidence then anyone who knows anything about the sciences would instantly discount that evidence’. Since there are at least some professional scientists whose work explicitly states that 9/11 was an inside job this is a fallacious and inaccurate appeal to authority. He goes on to say that there are a lot of unexplained phenomena and that this is true of scientific experiments and that ‘that’s just the way the world is’. This argument is nothing short of stupid - ‘the world is unexplained, so we should just ignore this bunch of unexplained stuff that appears to contradict the conclusion that I’m peddling’. Or, more simply, ‘the world is confusing, so believe what I tell you’. Utter crap.
-
‘The belief [that 9/11 was an inside job] is so… has such low credibility that I don’t really think it’s serious’. He might as well be sticking his fingers in his ears and shouting LALALALALALALA…
-
‘Even if it is true, which is extremely unlikely, who cares? It doesn’t mean anything significant’ It’s of utmost significance, since it remains the de facto excuse for any otherwise unpopular policy or set of events.
He’s not only a lying sack of shit, he’s a shameless sophist, using his authority to use ludicrous arguments that less educated people won’t understand are circular and self serving.