Reading manufacturing consent

Chomsky sucked Pol Pots dick, he doesn't get to lambast anyone for supporting cruel and tyrannical regimes

So you are just being liars and hypocrites?

No he did not. Chomsky expressed skepticism over certain reports coming out of Cambodia. When these reports were verified, he recanted and apologized.

Then maybe he should have shut the fuck up until he had the facts instead of blaming America for the genocidal autism of a Cambodian faggot

that's a meme

*a Cambodian faggot endorsed and financed by the CIA

>It is a fair generalization that the larger the number of deaths attributed to the Khmer Rouge, and the more the U.S. role is set aside, the larger the audience that will be reached. The Barron-Paul volume is a third-rate propaganda tract, but its exclusive focus on Communist terror assures it a huge audience
Pol Pot dindu nuffin, he a gud boi it's all Murricas fault!

>He's manipulating you for his own interests and the interests of his tribe.
What tribe? You must be referring to the Tribe of Hellenists because this AshkeNAZI Jewish traitor is not working in my interests, nor is he working in the interests of the Jewish people. Nor does he adhere to the Torah or the Oral Law. Not only does he not work for my interests, he works against my interests. He blasphemes the Jewish state, the Nation of Israel. He denies the Jewish connection to Judea & Samaria, the land of our forefathers. He sides with the Nation of Ishmael over the Nation of Israel. For this he will never be forgiven.

None of it's true.

Yes of course. There are worse evils than lies and hypocrisy. It's a child's mentality to get upset by that.
>boohoo Daddy lied to me when I was little
Before D-Day the allies misled the Germans into thinking the landings would be near Calais. Are you sore about that?

Where exactly does the quote say that "Pol Pot dindu nuffin"? I swear anti chomskyites are the most retarded people I've read.

You are assuming your state has our best interests on their minds. Aren't you literally going against the founding fathers' intentions?

He's openly critical of religion and ethno-nationalism. He doesn't shy away from criticizing Judaism or Jews either.

Isn't it Shabbat? Aren't you not allowed to use electronics?

>Isn't it Shabbat?
According to Goy-time, yes. According to Jew-time, no.
>Aren't you not allowed to use electronics?
No. Some Orthodox (especially Satanic Hasids) claim "igniting a fire" is equivalent to electronics, I disagree.

Many humans have a secret low self-esteem that convinces them the only way that they can survive is to cheat and lie attack others and take their belongings. This is where all of these political parties and religions and belief systems and social hierarchy come from. There's a term for this an Academia and it is called a cultural hegemony and it is always founded in paranoia based on secret low self-esteem which is then overcompensated with exaggerated ego and Then followed by Psychopathic Behavior.

>Trump wanted to stay out of Syria
>"RUSSIAN SPY RUSSIAN SPY PUTIN'S COCKHOLSTER"

It's not just the presidents, there's a gun to each of their heads.

Chomsky is still a Zionist, he is just a much more subtle, cunning and intelligent Zionist than, say, Benjamin Netanyahu

>Chomsky is still a Zionist
No he isn't. He does nothing but spread anti-Israel propaganda. He doesn't believe G-d gave us the Land of Israel, nor does he believe the Jews were chosen out of all the nations. He's a Hellenist.

>anti-Israel propaganda

Like?

I think its in Americas and my own interests for America to maintain its hegemony. I'm sure the founding fathers would approve. In any case we don't need their approval or Chomskys. Chomsky hasn't solved morality, he has no way of knowing that America is not doing the right thing. Is the responsibility of the state to be moral or practical?

So you support your government's decisions?

doesn't have to be though.

Some of them. I understand sometimes ruthless decisions need to be taken, and I prefer a world where America is supreme to the alternative

>""""""Greater good"""""""

>I think its in Americas and my own interests for America to maintain its hegemony. I'm sure the founding fathers would approve. In any case we don't need their approval or Chomskys. Chomsky hasn't solved morality, he has no way of knowing that America is not doing the right thing. Is the responsibility of the state to be moral or practical?
Considering that after America brought '''''''''''Democracy''''''''''' To Iraq half of the country was under ISIS control and the other half was under an Iranian puppet state. I have seen enough to know America is just as morally inferior as the superpowers before it, and the ones after it. The only reason people don't wish for the complete death of American Hegemony is because the other superpowers don't pretend they are a Liberal Western Democracy. Also, what America has been doing since 1991 was neither moral, nor practical.

Why not? A point can be valid even if the person making it is hypocritical.

Since the 19th century*

Chomsky is a self-described Zionist who opposes the BDS movement and the Palestinian right of return. He also denies that the Israel lobby has any influence on the US foreign policy, as well as the fact that neoconservatism is a primarily Jewish movement which puts the interests of Israel above the interests of the US. By becoming one of the leading critics of Israel he was merely following Theodor Herzl's (in)famous dictum - "We will lead every revolution against us". In effect, he is as Zionist as an average centrist Israeli politician.

>Bleh bleh more unsubstantiated shill drivel and I also don't have any worthy arguments to counter his.

So you imply that all corrupt actions against other countries are good for the world.