Infamous linguist and amateur foreign policy pundit Noam Chomsky made an appearance at the University of Texas in Austin a few weeks ago. He spoke in the LBJ auditorium for about three hours about the history of U.S. foreign policy as well as current events. His deceitful rhetoric focused mainly on the Israel-Palestinian conflict, as well as the War on Terrorism. Many students in attendance said that they still remember the comments Chomsky made approximately one year ago after the September 11 attacks.
Therefore, his appearance sparked a protest by a number of UT student groups including Texans for Israel, Young Conservatives of Texas and Students for American Values. Other protestors from the Austin community, including members of freerepublic.com were also present. These students and concerned citizens engaged in debate with attendees, handed out literature exposing Chomsky as anti-American and waved American flags to show solidarity with the President.
Among Chomsky’s verbal tirades were statements such as, "The main way to prevent terrorism is to take a look at Crawford and Washington." This was just one of the first of his ridiculous diatribes against the United States. By attempting to place the blame of the world’s woes on the United States, the linguist tried to invoke outrage and disgust for America from his listeners. About a thousand or so radical students appeared to be in an almost hypnotic state as they listened to Chomsky’s anti-American statements. Many of the leftist student groups had set up tables with books for sale, free literature and other radical paraphernalia. These various groups included anarchists, the green party, international socialists and the campus coalition for peace and justice.
Chomsky’s most suspect comment was, "This is the best time I can remember for organization and activism. The system of power is frail." Apparently, he wants the current system of power, i.e. the United States government, to be taken over by radicals such as him. Why else would he refer to the relative strength of the government? This statement is nothing short of outright sedition. He does not advocate voting at election time to put into place representatives that agree with his ideology. Rather, he seems to be advocating other means to bring about a radical change in the nature of the U.S. system of government. Many young people certainly understand this to mean that they should take any measures, violent or otherwise, to bring about this change. This is apparent at meetings of the International Monetary Fund and other anti-globalization protests that have turned violent over the past few years. Chomsky is the main hero for the radical left, and his many disciples have already put his words into action before. It is probable that they will continue to do the same in the near future.
One of the most fallacious arguments Chomsky made was that a war with Iraq would "only enhance the issue [of terrorism]." Seeing how the elimination of Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction would prevent terrorists from obtaining those weapons, his argument is utterly wrong. The policy of destroying those regimes that harbor terrorists has one main goal: to prevent the possibility of terrorist attacks by disrupting terrorist support networks. Groups such as Al Qaeda would love nothing more than to use the most powerful weapons devised by man to destroy the U.S. Osama bin Laden has stated that he intends to kill all Americans wherever they are. He once told ABC News reporter John Miller, "We predict a black day for America and the end of the United States."1 If Al Qaeda can get weapons of mass destruction from countries such as Iraq, one can be certain that they will use them on American interests.
The professor of linguistics also called Attorney General John Ashcroft’s efforts to secure the homeland, "proto-fascism." He continues to label American leaders with invectives while ignoring the real fascists that exist in the world. Rather, Chomsky makes excuses for thugs like Saddam Hussein who control the press, murder political dissidents and refuse to buy food for their own people. While civil libertarians may disagree somewhat to the extent that security has been tightened, America is not even close to being a fascist country. The only rights that have been altered are those granted to suspects of crimes that affect national security. The average citizen is not remotely affected by legislation such as the USA Patriot Act, contrary to what some people would have us believe.
Chomsky concluded his lecture with a seditious call for activists to prevent the U.S. from winning the war on terrorism. His exact words were, "If the U.S. wins a cheap victory, the world is in deep trouble. Don’t let them get away with it." It is obvious that he wants radical activists to thwart the efforts of the American government in defeating Iraq. Spreading lies about the motives and actions of the U.S. government to its citizens and other people around the globe is not only dangerous, it is absolutely traitorous. Why is it that Americans today allow these kinds of statements to go unchallenged, despite their obvious and quite serious implications?
1 Horowitz "Think Twice Before You Bring The War Home" 2001 p.19