On The Back Of A Tiger - An Interview With The Filmmakers

anniejohnson

Member
Joined
Jul 9, 2019
Messages
36
I know things take time. I'm sure a documentary takes a ton of time to complete. Personally, I'm glad they're spending the time they need on it. However, since the project was at least partially crowd funded, I can't help feel just a little annoyed at the lack of updates.
 

anniejohnson

Member
Joined
Jul 9, 2019
Messages
36
What is a "right-wing anarchist?"

Chomsky may have authoritarian personality traits, sometimes apparent in the way he doesn't feel it necessary to justify or back up his opinions, stating them as if they were facts, but a lot of his lectures and classes on media, politics, etc. are extremely enlightening. It's definitely useful stuff.
 

anniejohnson

Member
Joined
Jul 9, 2019
Messages
36
Some of the political opinions on this forum sound like they come from young people raised on the internet with no access or interest in books .
 

Kartoffel

Member
Joined
Sep 29, 2017
Messages
1,199
What is a "right-wing anarchist?"

Chomsky may have authoritarian personality traits, sometimes apparent in the way he doesn't feel it necessary to justify or back up his opinions, stating them as if they were facts, but a lot of his lectures and classes on media, politics, etc. are extremely enlightening. It's definitely useful stuff.

Chomsky is an outright moron, and authoritarian of the worst sort. He has destroyed linguistics with his Generative Grammar nonsense, and stopped any progress in the understanding of language and thought for decades. Only now people like Lera Boroditzky and Stephen Levinson are starting to show what an idiot Chomsky is, and that his entire academic work is nothing but a pathetic justification for genetic reductionism and elitist drivel.
 

anniejohnson

Member
Joined
Jul 9, 2019
Messages
36
Chomsky's linguistic theories may be wrong and they may have set everyone back a long, long time, but he definitely is not a moron. I remember Peat saying that he suspected that Chomsky realized early on that he could essentially fool people with a bogus theory without any evidence, so he just went ahead and did it. Have you ever listened to Chomsky speak about the Vietnam war or the media?

EDIT: Chomsky's grammar theory took over all sorts of different departments, but is that really his fault? I think it speaks more to how stupid the other academics were.

In the end, Chomsky has tried to use his academic fame to do something good.
 

burtlancast

Member
Joined
Jan 1, 2013
Messages
3,263
In the end, Chomsky has tried to use his academic fame to do something good.

Chomsky about 911 conspiracy theory:

" Even if it were true, which is extremely unlikely, who cares ?"

He's being protected by the medias from contradictors: you'll never see him debate people like David Ray Griffin or Fetzer on important issues like government crimes and corruption, because he would be totally embarrassed on facts.

Also, to affirm its "extremely unlikely" takes the cake considering the unimpeachable evidence accumulated for the past 60 years by military officers for Pearl Harbour being a conspiracy to enter WW2.
 

Waynish

Member
Joined
Oct 11, 2016
Messages
2,206
He's being protected by the medias from contradictors: you'll never see him debate people like David Ray Griffin or Fetzer on important issues like government crimes and corruption, because he would be totally embarrassed on facts.

Also, to affirm its "extremely unlikely" takes the cake considering the unimpeachable evidence accumulated for the past 60 years by military officers for Pearl Harbour being a conspiracy to enter WW2.

Yep, he is controlled opposition, and likely didn't even write most of his own technical papers. It is frustrating seeing people get swept up by his antics. High IQ battlegrounds, I guess.
 

Arnau

Member
Joined
Apr 8, 2018
Messages
63
Location
Barcelona
FYI

Just got answered today by Jeremy Stuart on Instagram about the Documentary, here is a screenshot:
 

Attachments

  • IMG_1651.PNG
    IMG_1651.PNG
    30.8 KB · Views: 247

Ledo

Member
Joined
Jul 31, 2015
Messages
406
FYI

Just got answered today by Jeremy Stuart on Instagram about the Documentary, here is a screenshot:
At this point these guys should dump all info into the public domain to be sorted out. All raw video, all correspondence, etc.

If at some point they feel they can make editorial commentary or video they can go for it but let the raw data out. After all the people have paid for it , ask Bernie.
 

theLaw

Member
Joined
Mar 7, 2017
Messages
1,403
FYI

Just got answered today by Jeremy Stuart on Instagram about the Documentary, here is a screenshot:

Sounds like this is the logical conclusion to these guys biting off more than they could chew with this project.

On the bright side, it will be released for everyone to see, so it will definitely get a wider audience.
 

tara

Member
Joined
Mar 29, 2014
Messages
10,368
Yeah, and they poison wells, too.
It's lucky Gentiles are so universally benign, isn't it? Never profit inappropriately from pharmaceuticals, never use media deceptively, never set up and scapegoat vulnerable groups ...
Ray’s got nothing but contempt for Chomsky
I've heard Peat disagree with Chomsky on his linguistic theory.
Otherwise, they seem have related viewpoints in a number of areas.
Chomsky ...., but a lot of his lectures and classes on media, politics, etc. are extremely enlightening. It's definitely useful stuff.
+1
I think he does a lot of reading of relevant research, and would be quite able to back up his opinions with relevant documentation. You can't cite every source in every interview - it takes too much time - so I'm not sure if he should be faulted for this. I don't know if he has authoritarian attitudes. I do think he has areas in which he is authoritative based on being very well informed, and that many of the things he says are to encourage people to question what is going on behind the rhetoric of power and authority.
Some of the political opinions on this forum sound like they come from young people raised on the internet with no access or interest in books .
+1
Chomsky is an outright moron, and authoritarian of the worst sort. He has destroyed linguistics with his Generative Grammar nonsense, and stopped any progress in the understanding of language and thought for decades. Only now people like Lera Boroditzky and Stephen Levinson are starting to show what an idiot Chomsky is, and that his entire academic work is nothing but a pathetic justification for genetic reductionism and elitist drivel.
Whether or not you agree with what he has written about linguistics, there's no need for the personal attacks. Forum rule 1.a: Be polite and respectful.

I won't express an opinion on the linguistics. I've heard him on other subjects, however, and Chomsky is a sharp and well-informed. And from what I've seen recently, remains so as a nonagenarian.
you'll never see him debate people like David Ray Griffin or Fetzer on important issues like government crimes and corruption, because he would be totally embarrassed on facts.
"Manufacturing Consent", and his ongoing talk and writing are significantly about government corruption etc, including corrupt ways US government has found to manufacture wars against the middle east etc. It looks to me as though he would have some common ground with Griffin, even if he doesn't care about or endorse the 'inside job' story. They would both agree that there is a problem with the so-called 'War on Terror', for instance, and the way the war against Iraq was motivated.
Delving into a conspiracy theory is not always the most effective thing to point attention to if the crime is happening on a larger scale in broad daylight.

Surely Chomsky has observed and commented on government crime and corruption over the decades, both his own and others.
 

burtlancast

Member
Joined
Jan 1, 2013
Messages
3,263
Delving into a conspiracy theory is not always the most effective thing to point attention to if the crime is happening on a larger scale in broad daylight.

As opposed to which other course of action, more effective to expose the ongoing crime, according to you ?
 

tara

Member
Joined
Mar 29, 2014
Messages
10,368
As opposed to which other course of action, more effective to expose the ongoing crime, according to you ?

I had started to draft a reply to this, but apparently didn't finish and post, and now lost whatever I'd started ...

IIR, my intention was a general statement - if Chomsky or anyone else wants to to use unrefuted facts to focus attention on the large ills done in broad daylight, that is a reasonable and useful thing to do.

The 11 Sep 2001 attack on the towers was a nasty, deadly, tragic act, and those knowingly involved in planning or carrying it out were criminal on a large scale.

The US invasion of Afghanistan, for instance, resulted many times more deaths, many of them civilian, and was more advertised than hidden. The so-called 'War on [sic] Terror' was a nonsense used to control the domestic populace as well as international. Drawing attention to how such ills were/are conducted and inappropriately justified has no less value, IMO.

I think turning up the facts at various levels is useful. No-one can do it all.
 

burtlancast

Member
Joined
Jan 1, 2013
Messages
3,263
IIR, my intention was a general statement - if Chomsky or anyone else wants to to use unrefuted facts to focus attention on the large ills done in broad daylight, that is a reasonable and useful thing to do.

And my intention was to alert Chomsky refuses persistently to debate David Ray Griffin or Jim Fetzer on the 911 facts pointing out to government complicity, because he would be exposed on his contradicting lies.

You answered that elaborating on conspiracy theory possibilities isn't always the best way of exposing overt crimes.

When asked to explain which other ways are best to expose the 911 crime according to you, you divert the discussion over to Chomsky's criticism of the Afghanistan war, and refuse to answer the 911 debate problem you specifically quoted me about.

You quoting me seems to have no real purpose, really.

The ignore option looks like the best thing for this situation.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Dec 18, 2018
Messages
2,206
This is not my fight,but i was interested in the mysterious 9/11 hologram.I know the writings of Chomsky only at a surface level,but he absolutely would be the guy to talk about it.My conclusion:if ,and only if 9/11 was perpetrated by the goverment
of the day,it is so outrageous that not enough people could believe in it without societal,and personal repercussions.The branding of the conspiracy-theorist.It would be not the perfect,but good-enough-crime to avoid
prosecution endlessly.its NSDAPs Big Lie.its too ridiculous and a real trap,that we shoudnt care,this fight is over.
So at a societal and face to face level,leftists shouldnt care.
 

postman

Member
Joined
Mar 3, 2016
Messages
1,284
This is not my fight,but i was interested in the mysterious 9/11 hologram.I know the writings of Chomsky only at a surface level,but he absolutely would be the guy to talk about it.My conclusion:if ,and only if 9/11 was perpetrated by the goverment
of the day,it is so outrageous that not enough people could believe in it without societal,and personal repercussions.The branding of the conspiracy-theorist.It would be not the perfect,but good-enough-crime to avoid
prosecution endlessly.its NSDAPs Big Lie.its too ridiculous and a real trap,that we shoudnt care,this fight is over.
So at a societal and face to face level,leftists shouldnt care.
Have you heard about the dancing Israelis on 9/11? There are many news articles and also declassified FBI documents on the subject.
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom