On Sunday, the Wall Street Journal published a report detailing information contained within a “trove” of previously unreported documents of the deceased sex trafficker Jeffrey Epstein. Those documents, which have not been publicly released and appear to have been passed solely to the Journal, included Epstein’s private calendar and meeting schedules. The documents, per the Journal, contain “thousands of pages of emails and schedules from 2013 to 2017” and – as the report notes – detail Epstein’s dealings with several prominent individuals whose names were not on his flight logs or his infamous “little black book” of contacts. One of these individuals is the renowned linguist, political commentator and critic of capitalism and empire, Noam Chomsky.
Chomsky, who has previously discussed the Epstein case in interviews and who has maintained that Epstein’s ties to intelligence agencies should be considered a “conspiracy theory,” had not previously disclosed these meetings. Chomsky, when confronted by Journal reporters, was evasive, but ultimately admitted to meeting and knowing Jeffrey Epstein.
Many, largely on the left, have expressed dismay and confusion as to why someone with the political views of Chomsky would willingly meet, not once but several times, with someone like Jeffrey Epstein, particularly well after Epstein’s notoriety as a sex trafficker and pedophile. As this report will show, Epstein appeared to view Chomsky as another intellectual who could help guide his decisions when it came to his scientific obsessions – namely, transhumanism and eugenics. What Chomsky gained in return from meeting with Epstein isn’t as clear.
Why Did Chomsky Meet with Epstein?
According to the Journal, Chomsky’s meetings with Epstein took place during the years 2015 and 2016, while Chomsky taught at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, or MIT. Chomsky told the Journal that he met with Epstein to discuss topics like neuroscience with other academics, like Harvard’s Martin Nowak (who was heavily funded by Epstein). On a separate occasion, Chomsky again met with Epstein alongside former Israeli Prime Minister, Ehud Barak, allegedly to discuss “Israel’s policies with regard to Palestinian issues and the international arena.” A separate date saw Chomsky and his wife invited by Epstein to have dinner with him, Woody Allen and Allen’s wife Soon-Yi Previn. When asked about the dinner date with Woody Allen and Epstein, Chomsky referred to the occasion as “an evening spent with a great artist.”
When confronted with this evidence, Chomsky initially told the Journal that his meetings and relationship with Epstein were “none of your business. Or anyone’s.” He then added that “I knew him [Epstein] and we met occasionally.”
Before continuing further, it is important to note that aside from Epstein, both Ehud Barak and Woody Allen have been accused of having inappropriate sexual relationships with minors. For instance, Barak was a frequent visitor to Epstein’s residences in New York, so often that The Daily Beast reported that numerous residents of an apartment building linked to Epstein “had seen Barak in the building multiple times over the last few years, and nearly half a dozen more described running into his security detail,” adding that “the building is majority-owned by Epstein’s younger brother, Mark, and has been tied to the financier’s alleged New York trafficking ring.”
Specifically, several apartments in the building were “being used to house underage girls from South America, Europe and the former Soviet Union,” according to a former bookkeeper employed by one of Epstein’s main procurers of underage girls, Jean Luc Brunel. Barak is also known to have spent the night at one of Epstein’s residences at least once, was photographed leaving Epstein’s residence as recently as 2016, and has admitted to visiting Epstein’s island, which has sported nicknames including “Pedo Island,” “Lolita Island” and “Orgy Island.” In 2004, Barak received $2.5 million from Leslie Wexner’s Wexner Foundation, where Epstein was a trustee as well as one of the foundation’s top donors, officially for unspecified “consulting services” and “research” on the foundation’s behalf. Several years later, Barak put Harvey Weinstein in contact with the Israeli private intelligence outfit Black Cube, which employs former Mossad agents and Israeli military intelligence operatives, as Weinstein sought to intimidate the women who had accused him of sexual assault and sexual harassment.
In addition, Barak previously chaired and invested in Carbyne911, a controversial Israeli emergency services start-up that has expanded around the world and has become particularly entrenched in the United States. Barak had directed Epstein to invest $1 million into that company, which has been criticized as a potential tool for warrantless mass surveillance. Leslie Wexner also invested millions in the company.
In Woody Allen’s case, he has been accused of sexually assaulting his adopted daughter Dylan Farrow when she was 7 years old. That abuse claim has been corroborated by witnesses and other evidence. Furthermore, Allen refused to take a polygraph administered by state police in connection with the investigation and lost four exhaustive court battles related to child custody and his abuse of Dylan Farrow. One of the judge’s in the case described Allen’s behavior towards Dylan as “grossly inappropriate and that measures must be taken to protect her.” Actress Mia Farrow, Dylan’s mother, alleged in court that Allen took a sexual interest in her adopted daughter when she was between the ages of two and three years old.
Allen subsequently “seduced” and later married another adopted daughter of Farrow’s, Soon-Yi Previn, whom Allen first met when Previn was a child. However, Previn has stated that her first “friendly” interaction with Allen took place when she was a teenager. In 1992, Mia Farrow found nude photos of Previn in Allen’s home and has stated that this was her motive for ending her relationship with Allen.
In the case of Allen and Epstein, and potentially Barak as well, their sexual proclivities and scandals were well known by the time Chomsky met with these men, making a strong suggestion that this type of behavior was not seen by Chomsky as taboo or as a barrier to socialization. It is more likely than not that there was some other major draw that led Chomsky to overlook this type of horrendous behavior toward vulnerable minors.
In terms of reaching a deeper understanding about why Epstein would have been interested in Chomsky – and vice versa, it is important to review – not just the information recently reported by the Wall Street Journal, but also what Epstein himself said of Chomsky before his 2019 death. According to an interview conducted in 2017, but later published in 2019 when Epstein was a major news topic, Epstein openly stated that he had invited Chomsky to his townhouse and he also explicitly stated why he had done so. Oddly, this early acknowledgement of Epstein’s regarding his relationship with Chomsky was left out of the Journal’s recent report.
In that interview, which was conducted by Jeffrey Mervis and later published in Science, Epstein stated that following about Chomsky:
[…] Epstein readily admitted to asking prominent members of the scientific establishment to assess the potential contribution of these so-called outcasts [i.e. MIT students Epstein described as being “on the spectrum”].“So, I had Jim Watson to the house, and I asked Watson, what does he think about this idea,” a proposal to study how the cellular mechanisms of plants might be relevant to human cancer. Watson is a Nobel laureate and co-discoverer of the structure of DNA. “Likewise with [Noam] Chomsky on artificial intelligence,” he said, referring to one of the pioneers in the field.
In fact, Epstein expressed great respect for the opinions of these elder statesmen. “It’s funny to watch Noam Chomsky rip apart these young boys who talk about having a thinking machine,” Epstein noted. “He takes out a dagger and slices them, very kindly, into little shreds.”
Thus, per Epstein, his interest in inviting Chomsky to his house was explicitly related to the “artificial intelligence,” which was a major scientific interest of Epstein’s. This also provides a major clue as to how Chomsky and Epstein might have first been introduced.
Chomsky, Epstein and MIT
Chomsky is most widely viewed as a famous linguist, political commentator and critic of modern capitalism and imperialism. So, why did Epstein seek to meet with him instead on Artificial Intelligence matters?
Well, an admitted “friend” of both Chomsky’s and Epstein’s was the AI pioneer Marvin Minsky. Like Chomsky, Minsky was a long-time professor and academic at MIT. It is very possible that Minsky connected the two men, especially considering the fact that Epstein was a major donor to MIT. Epstein described himself as being “very close” to Minsky, who died in 2016, roughly a year after Epstein began meeting with Chomsky. Epstein also financed some of Minsky’s projects and Minsky, like Ehud Barak, was accused of sexually abusing the minors Epstein trafficked.
Chomsky’s views on linguistics and cognition, for those who don’t know, is based very much on evolutionary biology. Chomsky was also a pioneer in cognitive science, described as “a field aimed at uncovering the mental representations and rules that underlie our perceptual and cognitive abilities.” Some have described Chomsky’s concept of language as based on “the complexity of internal representation, encoded in the genome, and their maturation in light of the right data into a sophisticated computational system, one that cannot be usefully broken down into a set of associations.” A person’s “language faculty,” per Chomsky, should be seen as “part of the organism’s genetic endowment, much like the visual system, the immune system and the circulatory system, and we ought to approach it just as we approach these other more down-to-earth biological systems.”
Despite their friendship, Minsky greatly diverged with Chomsky in this view, with Minsky describing Chomsky’s views on linguistics and cognition as largely superficial and irrelevant. Chomsky later criticized the widely used approach with AI that focuses on statistical learning techniques to mine and predict data, which Chomsky argued was “unlikely to yield general principles about the nature of intelligent beings or about cognition.”
However, Chomsky’s views linking evolutionary biology/genetics with linguistics/cognition were notably praised by the aforementioned Martin Nowak, who had attended one of the meetings Epstein had with Chomsky. Nowak, a professor of biology and mathematics and head of the Program for Evolutionary Dynamics at Harvard, later stated that he had “once broke out a blackboard during dinner with Epstein and, for two hours, gave a mathematical description of how language works,” further revealing that Epstein was interested in aspects of linguistics. It is unclear if this particular meeting was the same that Chomsky had attended alongside Nowak to discuss “neuroscience” and other topics.
However, given the importance of evolutionary biology and genetics to Chomsky’s theories, it is hardly surprising that Jeffrey Epstein would have gravitated more towards his views on AI than those of Minsky. Epstein was fascinated by genetics and, even per mainstream sources, was also deeply interested eugenics. Take for example the following from an article published in The Guardian in 2019:
Epstein was apparently fixated on “transhumanism,” the belief that the human species can be deliberately advanced through technological breakthroughs, such as genetic engineering and artificial intelligence.
At its most benign, transhumanism is a belief that humanity’s problems can be improved, upgraded even, through such technology as cybernetics and artificial intelligence – at its most malignant though, transhumanism lines up uncomfortably well with eugenics.
Thus, Epstein’s interest in AI, genetics, and more was tied into his documented obsession with “transhumanism,” which – as several Unlimited Hangout reports have noted – is essentially a rebranding of eugenics. Indeed, the term transhumanism itself was first coined by Julian Huxley, the former president of the British Eugenics Society and the first head of UNESCO who called to make “the unthinkable thinkable again” with regards to eugenics.
Aside from transhumanism, Epstein also had an avowed interest in “strengthening” the human gene pool, in part by impregnating as many women as possible with his “seed” in order to widely disperse his genes. These views may also explain Epstein’s interest in associating himself with people like James (Jim) Watson. As noted earlier in this article, Epstein stated in 2017 that he had invited both Watson and Chomsky to his home on separate occasions.
Watson has been a controversial figures for years, particularly after he openly stated that people of African descent are genetically inferior and less intelligent than their European counterparts. He also previously promoted the idea that women should abort babies that carried a “gay gene,” were such a gene ever discovered. He also felt that gene editing should be used to make all women “prettier” and to eradicate “stupidity.” Notably, Watson made all of these comments well before Epstein invited him to his home.
Watson was also praised, controversially, after these same comments by another Epstein-funded scientist, Eric Lander. Lander, who was recently Biden’s top science advisor, was forced to resign from that post last year after being accused of harassing those who worked under him in the Biden administration’s Office of Science and Technology. Prior to joining the Biden administration, Lander had collaborated with Watson on the Human Genome Project and later ran the Broad Institute, a non-profit born out of collaboration between MIT and Harvard.
Returning to Chomsky, though he may not have been aware of Epstein’s interests in eugenics and transhumanism, it has since become clear that Epstein’s main interest in Artificial Intelligence – his stated purpose for courting Chomsky – was intimately tied to these controversial disciplines. However, Chomsky did know of Epstein’s past, and likely also knew of Woody Allen’s similar past before meeting him as well. He turned a blind eye on those matters, telling the Journal that Epstein had “served his sentence” and, as a result, had been granted a “clean slate.” In saying this, Chomsky is apparently unaware of Epstein’s controversial “sweetheart deal” that resulted in an extremely lenient sentence and non-prosecution agreement. That “deal” was signed off on by then-US Attorney Alex Acosta because Acosta was told to “back off” Epstein because Epstein “belonged to intelligence.” Chomsky had previously told several people, including an Unlimited Hangout reader, that an Epstein-intelligence agency connection is a “conspiracy theory.”
Given Chomsky’s odd views on Epstein’s past and the fact that Epstein frequently discussed transhumanism and eugenics around other prominent scientists, it is possible, though unproven, that Chomsky may have known more about Epstein’s true interests in AI and genetics.
Would Chomsky have been willing to overlook these ethical conundrums? Given his political views on capitalism and foreign policy, many would likely say that he would not. However, finding ways to circumvent these ethical conundrums with respect to AI may have been one of Epstein’s main reasons for heavily funding MIT, particularly its Media Lab. Epstein, in addition to his own donations, also funneled millions of dollars from Bill Gates and Leon Black to the Media Lab.
According to former Media Lab employee Rodrigo Ochigame, writing in The Intercept, Joi Ito of MIT’s Media Lab – who took lots of donations from Epstein and attempted to hide Epstein’s name on official records – was focused on developing “ethics” for AI that were “aligned strategically with a Silicon Valley effort seeking to avoid legally enforceable restrictions of controversial technologies.” Ito later resigned his post at the Media Lab due to fallout from the Epstein scandal.
Ochigame writes:
A key group behind this effort, with the lab as a member, made policy recommendations in California that contradicted the conclusions of research I conducted with several lab colleagues, research that led us to oppose the use of computer algorithms in deciding whether to jail people pending trial. Ito himself would eventually complain, in private meetings with financial and tech executives, that the group’s recommendations amounted to “whitewashing” a thorny ethical issue. “They water down stuff we try to say to prevent the use of algorithms that don’t seem to work well” in detention decisions, he confided to one billionaire.
I also watched MIT help the U.S. military brush aside the moral complexities of drone warfare, hosting a superficial talk on AI and ethics by Henry Kissinger, the former secretary of state and notorious war criminal, and giving input on the U.S. Department of Defense’s “AI Ethics Principles” for warfare, which embraced “permissibly biased” algorithms and which avoided using the word “fairness” because the Pentagon believes “that fights should not be fair.”
Ochigame also cites Media Lab colleagues who say that Marvin Minsky, who worked with the Lab before his death, was known to say that “an ethicist is someone who has a problem with whatever you have in your mind.” Also troubling is the fact that Ito, and by extension the Media Lab, played a role in shaping White House policy with respect to AI. For instance, Obama called Ito an “expert” on AI and ethics during an interview with him in 2016. Ito, on his conversation with Obama, said the following: “[…] the role of the Media Lab is to be a connective tissue between computer science, and the social sciences, and the lawyers, and the philosophers […] What’s cool is that President Obama gets that.”
If you are Jeffrey Epstein, with a history of illegal and criminal activity, and interested in avoiding the regulation of controversial technologies you feel are necessary to advance your vision of transhumanism/eugenics, financing groups that greatly influence “ethics” policies that helps limit the regulation of those technologies would obviously benefit you.
Ochigame goes on to write:
Thus, Silicon Valley’s vigorous promotion of “ethical AI” has constituted a strategic lobbying effort, one that has enrolled academia to legitimize itself. Ito played a key role in this corporate-academic fraternizing, meeting regularly with tech executives. The MIT-Harvard fund’s initial director was the former “global public policy lead” for AI at Google. Through the fund, Ito and his associates sponsored many projects, including the creation of a prominent conference on “Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency” in computer science; other sponsors of the conference included Google, Facebook, and Microsoft.
Notably, Epstein was tied into these same circles. He was very, very close, not just with Bill Gates, but with several other top Microsoft executives and was also known to have a close relationship with Google’s Sergey Brin, who has recently been subpoenaed in the Epstein-JPMorgan case, as well as Facebook/Meta’s Mark Zuckerberg. Notably, many of these same companies are currently pioneering transhumanist technologies, particularly in healthcare, and are deeply tied to either the military or intelligence, if not both.
The MIT-AI-Military Connection
Chomsky is just one of several prominent academics and intellectuals who were courted by Epstein in an attempt to supercharge the development of technologies that could help bring his controversial obsessions to fruition. Notably, many of these characters, including Chomsky, have had their work – at one point or another – funded by the U.S. military, which has itself long been a major driver of AI research.
For example, Minsky and Danny Hillis, a close associate of Epstein’s in his own right, co-created a DARPA contractor and supercomputer firm called Thinking Machines, which was aimed at creating a “truly intelligent machine. One that can see and hear and speak. A machine that will be proud of us,” according to one company brochure. Minsky was Hillis’ mentor at MIT and the pair sought out Sheryl Handler, who worked for a genetic-engineering start-up at Harvard called the Genetics Institute, to help them create their supercomputer firm.
Thinking Machines, which made poor business decisions routinely from the beginning, was only able to function for as long as it did due to multi-million dollar contracts it had secured from the Pentagon’s DARPA. With the close of Cold War, DARPA sought to use its clout with Thinking Machines to push the company to develop a product that could deal with things like modeling the global climate, mapping the human genome and predicting earthquakes. Subsequent reporting from the Wall Street Journal showed that the agency had been “playing favorites” and Thinking Machine’s “gravy train” abruptly ended due to the bad publicity, subsequently leading to the collapse of the company.
Hillis, around this time, met Jeffrey Epstein. The introduction may have been brokered by former Microsoft’s Chief Technology Officer Nathan Myhrvold, a friend of Hillis’ who grew close to Epstein in the 1990s and even took Epstein on an official Microsoft trip to Russia. Myhrvold, who was also named as an abuser of the minors Epstein trafficked, was one of the other top Microsoft officials who was close to Epstein beginning in the 1990s. Another was Linda Stone, who later connected Jeffrey Epstein to Joi Ito of MIT’s Media Lab. As previously mentioned, Epstein would later direct the long-time head of Microsoft, Bill Gates, to donate millions to the Media Lab.
Chomsky’s own history at MIT brought him into contact with the military. For instance, during the early 1960s, Chomsky received funding from the Air Force, which aimed to program a computer with Chomsky’s insights about grammar in an attempt to endow it “with the ability to recognize instructions imparted to it in perfectly ordinary English, thereby eliminating a necessity for highly specialized languages that intervene between a man and a computer.” Chomsky later stated of the military funding of his early career that “I was in a military lab. If you take a look at my early publications, they all say something about Air Force, Navy, and so on, because I was in a military lab, the Research Lab for Electronics.”
Chomsky has since denied that military funding shaped his linguistics work in any significant way and has claimed that the military is used by the government “as a kind of a funnel by which taxpayer money was being used to create the hi-tech economy of the future.” However, reports have noted that this particular project was very much tied to military applications. In addition, the man who first recruited Chomsky to MIT in the mid-1950s, Jerome Wiesner, went on to be Chomsky’s boss at MIT for over 20 years as well as “America’s most powerful military scientist.”
To Chomsky’s credit, after this program ended, he became fully, and publicly, committed to anti-war activism. This activism led him, at one point, to consider resigning from MIT, which he declined to do – likely because he was rather quickly granted professorship. As Chris Knight writes, “this meant that instead of resigning, Chomsky’s choice was to launch himself as an outspoken anti-militarist activist even while remaining in one of the US’s most prestigious military labs.”
By staying at MIT, Chomsky chose to maintain his career, in relative proximity to the centers of power he would later become an icon for denouncing. However, it shows that Chomsky, from this time onward, began to make some choices that undermined his radicalism to an extent. Chomsky may have rationalized his decision to stay at MIT in the 1960s because it gave him a better platform from which to espouse his political and anti-war views. It is not unheard of for prominent public figures to make such compromises. However, in light of the recent Epstein revelations and what they appear to signal, it seems that Chomsky, particularly in his later years, may have become too comfortable and too willing to make these types of compromises – ones that a much younger Chomsky would have surely rejected.
Thanks for writing about this, I was hoping you could elaborate on the other connections that were raised in the revelations specifically around your other work about Mossad connections?! Namely that “One of Chomsky’s meetings with Epstein involved former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak. Chomsky said they discussed “Israel’s policies with regard to Palestinian issues and the international arena.”
Great article! I was rather perplexed seeing Chomsky’s name surface also.
Excellent and informative as Always.
Balanced too
Thank you for all your hard work and research.
AI is disturbing. Just reading about and watching videos on Replika shows how it can be used to brainwash and manipulate people. When looking at images or videos now I wonder if they are clever AI creations or genuine. AI can not only make convincing deep fake images but make recordings of voices which sound just like this person or that.
These things could take a real toll on people’s mental health.
As Aldous Huxley said “Never have so many been manipulated by so few.”
The American Stasi is an excellent example of (As Aldous Huxley said) “Never have so many been manipulated by so few.”
As a teen watching the Kennedy assassination followed by the escalation of the war in Vietnam and for many years after, Chomsky only came into my field of interest as a linguist. Far more influential for me regarding war was All Quiet on the Western Front , Bob Dylan, Buffy St Marie, KennethPatchen, Jesus of Nazareth, Country Joe, McDonald, Joan Baez, and most decisively Martin King’s speech on Vietnam. I did not start to listen to and read some Chomsky until many decades later in the 80s and was a bit underwhelmed because his analysis showed such a systemic corruption by colonialism and yet when audiences asked what could be done he had little to offer and frequently urged listeners to vote Democrat even when Hillary was egging on a war with Russia in Syria. (I hated both Hillary and Obama and Trump) At that point I began to wonder why Chomsky was so popular and whether he actually had any effect on the war machine. He also lied often about the Kennedy assassination and Kennedy’s resistance to escalation in Vietnam. When he urged recently that vax resistors should be quarantined and implied they should be starved, a serious totalitarian streak was shown . I had already turned against him and begun to say he was the crocodile tears face of the Democratic Party. The most revealing aspect of this excellent article is the fact that Chomsky called Epstein’s connection to intelligence agencies “a conspiracy theory” after it was publicly used by the judge to minimize his sentence. This is an inexcusable misdirection about a story that could not be more significant. To me Noam Chomsky is a gray space, a passionless analyst of empire whose net effect in this all too numbing culture is a pile of anesthetizing books weighing in on the side of pseudo-informed passivity.
excellent comment!
True on all points!
For some reason I read your comment. I turns out I agree with you. Chomsky is all to keen to point out JFKs shortcomings and to try and debunk the vast mountains of proof that he was killed by a cabal of powerful people connected to the CIA. I found myself feeling quite hopeless after reading his books and wondered if the US propaganda system is to drown people with too much information to the point of despair. I know one thing. If I found myself at a dinner table with Epstein I would slit his throat from ear to ear. Fuck Noam Chomsky.
I agree with much of Chomsky’s seemingly anti-imperialist views and note that he has spoken up for Julian Assange on at least one occasion.
Nonetheless, I am troubled by his dismissal of JFK’s towering contributions to humanity and his dismissal of mountains of evidence which debunked the ‘lone nut assassin’ Lee Harvey Oswald theory. Not long after I first saw Oliver Stone’s JFK (back in 1992?) I was persuaded, although indirectly, by Chomsky to dismiss that towering film.
Phillip Adams, the host of the Australian Broadcasting Commission’s (ABC) Late Night Live radio program mockingly dismissed JFK. This unexpected ridicule of JFK caused me, in an embarrassed, panicked and illogical reaction, to disregard all the hard evidence I had seen on the movie screen. I am told that Phillip Adams obtained those views from Noam Chomsky and irresponsibly conveyed them to his audience. Those views are certainly consistent with what I have since seen Chomsky say elsewhere.
It took me 15 years, until around 2007, at the time I was made aware of bizarre inconsistencies of the officlal 9/11 narrative, that I realised that the movie JFK was every bit as good as i had thought when I first saw it on the big screen.
It seems to me that Chomsky has substantially diminished the great good that could have been achieved from Oliver Stone’s JFK.
What a change in perception from when I first read “Manufacturing Consent” eons ago. Thank you for the continued enlightenment Whitney. I suppose Noam’s strong collectivist leanings somehow got him into close company with the control apparatus that he appeared to be dissenting against.
Doesn’t it suck that everyone thought were nice anti imperialism radical communists really align with all the other radical, pro-imoeralism Communist Totalitarians in nature and action. Chomsky is no different than any other other than he MAY not use Stalinists brutality. Socialism is Communism, is fascism is totalitarianism. All of the same root.
Great insight. Cleared up a lot of confusion. The military-induatrial-left was catalysed by Noam Chomsky and the rotten banker Biden – J P Morgan is much clearer. As far as eugenics, we only have to look at Bidens KKK connections and racism. Great job
Whitney, I suddenly had the sense of a potential “Operation Paperclip” overlap here.
Hi
All limited hangouts will hang!
Whitney
You write all these exposes about Jeffrey Epstein but can you tell us who Brock Pierce is,…. exactly?…or how about Nathan Wolfe of Metabiota?…..google images Nathan Wolfe and Ghislaine Maxwell…..what about Nikolai Mushegian, Autumn Radtke, Tiantian Kullander?
Jeffrey Sachs?………the CFR’s Wuhan lab investigator man?
get the picture?
Thank you for your service!
Hi Whitney
A musical interlude……who do YOU work for?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7xxgRUyzgs0
Gandhi, Mandela… flawed… Mother Teresa, immensely so. I don’t think we can be human without flaws. It is to be human. It’s a major reason why I gave up heroes long ago. Nevertheless, Chomsky stings. I expect his intellect to explain his motivation. But I’m not hurt enough to stop being grateful for his anti-war stance and his anti-neoliberalism contributions. If a pyschopaths the best surgeon for my operation, he gets the job. I’m like a hung jury wanting to drink a beer with the ‘suspect’. Regards the article, Whitney, you may be the only journalist who bothered to explain one of the oddest links in years. Thanks.
Mike Hampton. Well said. For heaven’s sake Chomksy has inspired masses, nay millions to be anti-war, anti-imperialism, anti-violence. When you don’t do anything at all it is easy to have a clean record. But when you are extremely active, as Chomsky still is even now, there are bound to be actions that don’t make sense.
I am sickened by the tendency of people to gang up against individual so easily without thinking it through.
Who else has endlessly spoken out against the violence of Israel, the violence of American foreign policy? Who is the most outspoken person against the U.S. lack of help in trying to bring peace to Ukraine?
I am very sad about Chomsky’s support for vaccines, especially the so-called Covid vaccines. I put it down to that not everyone is perfect.
Wake up and read just some of the millions of words Chomsky has written you very very ignorant people.
Consider that the mainstream has shunned Chomsky forever.
Why do I bother?
Epstein met with Chomsky to learn how to “manufacture consent”. LOL
The two paragraphs on Woody Allen cite Maureen Orth’s 2014 Vanity Fair article on “10 Undeniable Facts About Woody Allen Sexual-Abuse Allegation.” This article has been put into doubt, point by point, by both Robert Weide and Rick Worley. This is the problem with open-source research: writers look for supporting facts on the Internet, find them, then build arguments on untrue information. Allen’s son Moses Farrow has refuted his sister’s and mother’s invention of the sex abuse claim, that is, there’s no consensus on Dylan Farrow’s claims. I like Webb’s take on transhumanism, but she’s got a moralistic streak which, on the positive side, drives her research but on the negative side, deforms her judgments.
His silence in that phone call, said it all.
You can’t be serious. IDK their business but who cares what a sibling, halfsibling, or stepsibling PARTICULARLY OF THE OPPOSITE GENDER says? His father has obviously convinced him he knows something he cannot so that he will make a fool of himself for his father’s benefit. The intermittent reinforcement of conditional approval (abuse) also trains obedience into dogs and the need to demonstrate value á la Will Smith slapping Chris Rock for sadistic Jada. Moses is no different.
Hi Whitney,
I’ve been hearing you talk about ID2020 lately and I know that you know most what’s going on around it.
I’ve been researching about it for my cause and I found press conference at the UN TV channel about it (20.05.2016) when its founder, John Edge, talked about it. https://media.un.org/en/asset/k17/k17peww8gf
At 4:30 you have his verbatim statement: “This is the start of a 15-year ambition”, 4:42: “… if we have a goal that’s 15 years long, then you have to design a process or system that matches that ambition.”
This is stated fact and proof that all of this this lunacy was pre-planned.
I hope that you can use it.
Keep up the good work.
May God bless you and keep you safe, cause we need you.
These facts are perplexing and surrealist.
I remember Shimon Peres talking about Bill Gates not being a capitalist and the effects of nanotechnology injected to transform the human brain.
In what moment the pinky and the brain are part of this craziness?
😵
Woman to women, you are an amazing, fearless researcher and writer and are worth your weight in gold. Or bitcoin…. These are real monsters hiding in plain sight and it’s overwhelming to read that such monsters not only exist, but appear to be multiplying. I’ve watched dozens of your interviews on YouTube so have become familiar with your research. I’m in my 70’s and having been a past hippie, I remember the “dawning of aquarius” era, which was said to mark the beginning of secret revealed. Your work is not only appreciated but necessary. I can’t thank you enough.
Great work as usual, Whitney! About 20 years ago I met with Chomsky here in Boulder to get his endorsement of Senator Mike Gravel’s project for National Direct Democracy: evanravitz.com/vote/endorsers
When I learned that he believed the government story about 9/11, I emailed with him. He doubted the government could do such a thing, but perhaps more important, he said if people found out the government was behind it that they would elect a fascist strong man to save them. I thought he was wrong then and Trump proves people would do that anyhow.
Here in Boulder I spearheaded the countries first online petitioning for direct democracy, which removes the need for millions to hire petitions to get on the ballot:
petitions.bouldercolorado.gov
This makes it as easy as Switzerland, we’re petitions can be left unattended in stores and offices, the result being so many initiatives and referenda that they vote four times a year on them and a fifth time for candidates. After centuries of this, the Swiss have the highest median net worth, one of the lowest poverty rates and the highest newspaper readership, because people can do something about what they’re reading!
We have encountered incredible headwinds from the city and state staff, documented ad tinyurl.com/petitionstory
The 800 lb gorillas can manipulate representative government, but cannot manipulate the voters. We could sure use some outside journalism…
No one is what they seem. We all have our fallen nature to contend with. Sin is seductive, but when it turns a blind eye to suffering of the innocent we have serious problems. If our goals prevent us from standing up for other living beings, human or otherwise, who cannot defend themselves what possible good can come from them? For all I know Noam Chomsky was a raging pedophile all of his life. Too many hypocrites to be shocked at this point. I think Epstein was running a multifaceted DARPA operation with black mail or carrots for the influential along with an intense genetic experiment (using those in his “care” as guinea pigs). I believe McCain’s wife, that they all knew about it and most if not all used the services in one way or another.
Epstein’s primary role was to provide blackmail material to the Mossad in order to compromise and neutralize and potential enemies or critics of the Zionist agenda. Chomsky has been an out-spoken critic of Israel’s treatment of the Palestinians, though out of the other side of his mouth he claimed to support Israel’s right to exist.
The best way to ensure that Chomsky didn’t take his advocacy for the Palestinians too far would be to have photos and video of him with underage children.
All this talk about AI and transhumanism is probably a smoke screen and misdirection to obscure the Mossad’s desire to get something on Chomsky to ensure his silence on Israel.
Looking at the photo of James Watson I could imagine a lot of women
supporting some male gene editing.
All too often moral concessions are made in the pursuit of science and the betterment of the human condition. Operation Paperclip to name just one. Yes, he’s a pedophile but…Yes, they are Nazis but..
Extraordinary work. Thank you for having the courage and tenacity to do the very important work that you do. This is one of the best and most informative pieces I’ve ever read.
Why is the obvious avoided?
Chomp-sky is elderly and perhaps mentally human. “Intelligent meat!?” ridiculous!
Did he not recommend that healthy people who knew better than to get injected with experimental genetic “vaccines” should be isolated in camps? He’s also had a weird, shadow totalitarian streak.
So Witney writes this article and then does a live stream podcast with Russell Brand
Ok