One needn't agree with Chomsky in order to find that this volume relies primarily on strawpersons, red herrings, argumentum ad hominem, and other irrationalisms. In addition to being scurrilous and manifestly erroneous, for instance, the suggestion that Chomsky is anti-semitic and supportive of any dictator just because the US dislikes same does not make Chomsky's arguments wrong.
Such accusations indicate an inability to read. A similar reading comprehension problem arises in what may be the signature challenge to Chomsky, regarding his writings about Cambodia. Chomsky's actual argument has some subtlety to it, but that argument is typically ignored, and Chomsky is turned into an apologist for the policies of the Khmer Rouge, which is demonstrably false.
The final chapter, regarding Chomsky's linguistics, is comical, indicating an attempt to refute Chomsky at all levels, a challenge ontologically, Chomsky sous rature. I suppose the next edition will attempt to demonstrate that his birth certificate is faked--a locus of debate appropriate for the jingo-simian proto-teabaggery herein.