You are here

Joe Giambrone challenges Chomsky on 9/11

Broadcast here December 4th, 10-11:00 a.m. Central (1500 GMT). For only $3.95 a month you can listen to shows on-demand before they are broadcast – and also get free downloads and other perks from Kevin! If you are a subscriber, just log in to the members area of to get early access to the shows. Non-subscribers only get access to the No Lies Radio show archives the day after the broadcast here. Help Kevin keep these shows on the air – become a subscriber today!

Journalist-author Joe Giambrone joins us to discuss his challenge to Noam Chomsky, many of whose statements on 9/11 are bizarre and nonsensical. Along the way we discuss 9/11-anthrax, Mideast politics, and much more.

You’re a world-famous linguist, Noam. WTF does this mean?
A Public Challenge to Professor Noam Chomsky:
Debating the September 11th Attack Evidence

Joe Giambrone

Opening Statement

Professor Noam Chomsky of MIT has made odd and frankly specious claims regarding skepticism of the government’s official story of the September 11th, 2001 attacks ( His statements were misleading and have, in fact, misled many people who defer to him as an expert on these matters.

There are clearly two sides to this discussion if we are to eliminate obfuscation and side-issues. Senator Bob Graham of Florida has stated, on numerous occasions: “Re-Open the 9/11 Investigation Now” (Huffington Post, 9/11/2012). If Professor Chomsky would simply defer to Senator Graham, who was the Chairman of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence on 9/11, who co-wrote the “Joint Inquiry” (House/Senate) investigation into the 9/11 attacks, and who actually saw the FBI’s intelligence reports–unlike Professor Chomsky–then this debate would be over.

But there is another side to this debate. Vice President Dick Cheney made that position perfectly clear when he repeatedly telephoned Democratic leader Senator Tom Daschle to demand that the Congress not investigate the 9/11 attacks at all (CSPAN,, 3:55). Cheney was accompanied by President George W. Bush the following week, with the exact same message to Senator Daschle. Daschle, however, refused to cave in to the White House pressure. When the investigation report produced results displeasing to the Bush Administration it was censored.

So, in the binary world of Bush and Cheney, either Mr. Chomsky is in favor of fully investigating the September 11th attacks, or he is not. There is no middle ground; there is no third path. There is no need at all for elaborate semantic arguments.

The fact of a major cover-up of the September 11th attacks is undeniable. To claim otherwise would be indefensible. The redacted 28 pages of the Joint Inquiry investigatory report establish this cover-up as an incontrovertible reality. Those 28 pages detail state sponsorship of the 9/11 hijackers in the U.S., including money and logistical support, according to the man who co-wrote them: Senator Graham. 

Further, a mansion in Sarasota Florida was repeatedly visited by purported hijackers, including Mohamad Atta, and yet the government has hidden its surveillance of these pre-9/11 activities (Herald Tribune, April 16, 2013, FBI officials made false statements in regard to this Florida terror cell. An ongoing legal battle lingers over this second cover-up, the first concerning the terror cell based in San Diego, Ca. 

Professor Chomsky, as an authority on linguistics and on the clarity of words, should respond directly to these facts and to this public challenge. Either a 9/11 cover-up exists, which we must demand an end to as a free and open society; or else there is no government cover-up, and the 9/11 crimes have been solved.

So which is it?

End of Opening Statement


Joe Giambrone is an American author, freelance writer and filmmaker. Non-fiction works appear at WhoWhatWhy, Counterpunch, Globalresearch, Foreign Policy Journal, OpedNews, High Times and other online outlets. His science fiction thriller Transfixion and his Hollywood satire Hell of a Deal are available through Amazon, B&N, Smashwords and Createspace.


7 Thoughts to “Joe Giambrone challenges Chomsky on 9/11”

  1. I LOVE Noam Chomsky! I LOVE Mike Rivero! I LOVE you!. BUT!!! No one is right 100% of the time. Take the good and leave the bad. Trying to sort out the bull shit from the reality is like a cat walking on it's hind legs. It may not be done well, but you're amazed that it can be done at all!!! I follow one blog until they say something really stupid, and then I check out another. Anything is better than listening to the constant propaganda of the MSM, government, and other brain-dead, flag-waving morons that are everywhere around you. My rule of thumb is: If you want to know who did it, look at who benefited. P.S. I love this site and I also love the other truth jihad sites. Keep it up.

  2. Anonymous

    "Saudi Arabia" (uttered a countless number of times to say the least), "The Bin Laden family", "about Oil"…etc.

    At times Joe Giambrone sounded just like Noam Chomsky. Or is it just me having too much cocaine running around my brain ?.

  3. Maybe you should stop accepting those "paid" gigs at High Times … or Bush Enterprises LTD.

  4. Anonymous

    I went and rewatched his previous response to 9/11. It's beyond shocking. I had forgotten how blatantly insane he's already been:

    "I mean even if it's true, which is extremely unlikely, I mean: who cares?"

    That was in 2007. Anyone who's listened to Noam about the September 11th attacks after 2007 should be in a mental ward.


  5. Kevin,
    I probably can answer your questions. Your theory makes no sense for several reasons & relies on ignoring what we know was suppressed & covered up. You think Zionists would want to send the message that supporting Israel is dangerous & results in getting Americans killed in multiple attacks over the years? Your theory HELPS the agenda of suppressing the main motive for the 9/11 attack: Suppression in US is dramatic pattern which manipulates the American people) Note what the two top commissioners admitted after the 9/11 Report was released. Note all the political statements made by the perpetrators which pundits & politicians suppress

    If you look at what government officials want the public to think & what they don't want the public to think it is clear that government officials have gone out of their way to suppress or downplay the motive of anger at US support of Israel. Conspiracists missed that glaring point. If 9/11 was "government generated" or "government created" then it makes no sense why there aren't messages from terrorists saying "we attacking you because we hate your freedoms" (which is what many US officials want the public to think) and why instead do we have many messages from terrorists saying that the reason they are attacking is because of their anger over US support of Israel (which is the last thing government officials want the public to think!) Conspiracists ignore how much government officials & pundits go out of their way to deny & obscure the motive of anger at US support of Israel!

    This glaring fact is going right over many people's heads. If what you think is true then who the hell made these messages & why? "We swore that America wouldn't live in security until we live it truly in Palestine. This showed the reality of America, which puts Israel's interest above its own people's interest. America won't get out of this crisis until it gets out of the Arabian Peninsula , and until it stops its support of Israel." -Osama bin Laden, October 2001 

    "… the Mujahideen saw the black gang of thugs in the White House hiding the Truth , and their stupid and foolish leader, who is elected and supported by his people, denying reality and proclaiming that we (the Mujahideen) were striking them because we were jealous of them (the Americans), whereas the reality is that we are striking them because of their evil and injustice in the whole of the Islamic World, especially in Iraq and Palestine and their occupation of the Land of the Two Holy Sanctuaries." -Osama Bin Laden , February 14 , 2003

    It makes no sense to think "government officials" are "fabricating messages" like these (even calling Bush a liar about hiding the motive)? How does that theory make sense? If 9/11 was "government created" then why didn't they "create messages" which stated a motive which they (the government officials) would want the public to believe?  Instead we can read many messages (although most mass media underreported them and in many cases SUPPRESSED them or misrepresented them about how the attackers are attacking because they are angry about specific US foreign policies!) The 2 top 9/11 commissioners worried that the US public might want to reassess the policy of supporting Israel if they understood that the 9/11 attack was motivated by anger at US support of Israel?

    Tom Murphy
    Representative Press

  6. Tom, open your eyes. Since 9/11 the US has become vastly more pro-Zionist, even though – or rather BECAUSE – the official story ADMITS that US support for Israel is a factor in generating anger and potential attacks on the US. 9/11 was a psy-op designed to "seal in blood" the US-Israel relationship against the "evil terrorists."

    It's true that lots of pesky little attacks on the US abroad, with the "terrorists" proclaiming they did it because of US support for Israel, could have sapped and undermined the "special relationship." That is precisely why the Zionists did 9/11 as a massive INOCULATION against that long-term threat. Just as the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor did not scare the US away from joining Churchill's war on the Axis, but had the precise opposite effect, so the New Pearl Harbor obviously had exactly the effect it was designed to have: To drag the US into a series of wars for Israel that have already lasted almost four times as long as US involvement in WWII, and will continue as a "100 years war" that "will not end in our lifetimes" (as they openly told us).

    This is so obvious I doubt very much that you don't get it. I think you're parroting somebody's psy-op propaganda line.

Leave a Comment