Talk:Noam Chomsky (the truth that burns)

Chomsky perspective

This text would absolutely not be accepted on Wikipedia, but I find it more informative than most of their version. -- Jack-arcalon (talk) 20:43, 1 March 2018 (UTC)

For what it's worth, I don't like this article but I defend it's right to exist. I think this article is extremely limited while exaggerated and even untrue in parts, though some satirical. He's not a commie. But it is an authentic perspective expressed.

Personally I really like most of the Chomsky phenomenon. He was a great introduction to the evil hegemony of empire. I don't know Chomsky personally but I do know that he thinks it's not worth further investigation of JFK's assassination, 9/11 (the foundation and justification for the perpetual global war on terror), the anthrax attacks (that silenced all political and media inquiries), the Smith-Mundt Modernization Act of 2012 (unleashing domestic psychological operations (false flags) and propaganda), or investigations of any of the other nonsense or countless suppressed alternative media stories. He is clearly a limited hangout and gatekeeper, and that is inexcusable - even if they did threaten him or his children or his grandchildren.

~ JasonCarswell (talk)

Don't see any issues with the disambiguation note at the top

I don't see any problem with the disambiguation note. -- Crew (talk) 22:45, 30 September 2020 (UTC)