1. “Noam Chomsky’s glaring logical inconsistencies
Academic activist Chomsky is known to the 911 Truth Movement as a denier of the facts of controlled demolition of the three WTC buildings, in spite of the massive amount of
irrefutable evidence (most of us see it as ordinary common sense backed up by hard core science).
As I recall, Chomsky also insisted, as many deniers do, that any conspiracy would have to be too large, that too many people would have to be involved, for it to have occurred. Then he dismissed his challengers with a wave of the hand and said, “What does it matter?”
I suspect that when Chomsky did this, he knew his arguments couldn’t stand up, but he couldn’t admit his mistake or the fact that he had been deceived, so he resorted to outright denial and a pretense of apathy; I also believe he still can’t admit that he was wrong but probably knows it deep inside.
…
I wonder how Chomsky reconciles the notion that if 9/11 was a conspiracy involving terrorists, only 19 conspirators are required, but if it was a conspiracy involving government officials, it would require thousands … if terrorists are really that much more competent than government officials, maybe we should employ terrorists to run govt,.. perhaps that’s what’s happening already.
…
Noam is an “official” intellectual and is allowed to officially criticize the empire as part of the “necessary illusion” of our democracy. However, he knows that his international reputation makes any dissent on 911 an “official” problem with severe potential consequences. This is war folks, plain and simple people have been murdered and nothing less than the fate of the empire is at stake. Chomsky is smart enough to know which fights to take on and if he even hints at having an open mind regarding 911 truth his fate could be sealed.
http://www.911blogger.com/node/21779
2. “Obama Fears Military Revolt
Still, Ellsberg believes Obama will “go against his own instincts as to what’s best for the country and do what’s best for him and his administration and his party in the short run facing elections, which is to avoid a military revolt.”
That means the president will likely authorize a sizable increase of US forces in the region, Ellsberg said, because Obama fears that top US military commanders will stage a revolt if he rejects their requests for additional soldiers.”
http://www.truthout.org/1102096
3. “75% of Potential Recruits Too Fat, Too Sickly, Too Dumb to Serve “
