Noam Chomsky, Hero or Zero?

[Gorgo]

Quote by: Mr.Vicchio damn I through something out there you cannot defend against.

If all you're here to do is disrupt this thread, go away. You obviously have nothing to say, so why are you here?

[Gorgo]

Quote by: The Analog Kid but he's heaped praise on and in fact has essentially sided with our adversaries.

Nonsense with nothing to back it up.

Quote by: The Analog Kid What makes it "criminal behaivior"? Because a group of nations in the UN being bribed by Saddam didn't give their consent?

Then there was no reason to invade Iraq in the first place, right? If the UN means nothing, then neither Gulf War was legal.

[Gorgo]

Quote by: The Analog Kid The rest of us must post things from sources approved by Leftists,

This is disingenuous. Everyone has responded to this as though it came from a legitimate web site except for one remark by me. If you think Frontpagemag has anything of merit on it, then show it to us. I have yet to see it.

[Gorgo]

Quote by: Mr.Vicchio I don't give damn WHO wrote the article, those are PRO-Chomsky sites.

Yes, and if you think Christopher Hitchens has any need to show Chomsky as any kind of a hero, you need to tell us what that is, because that's not been his history.

[Mr.Vicchio]

Quote by: Gorgo If all you're here to do is disrupt this thread, go away. You obviously have nothing to say, so why are you here?

Gorgo, I am contributing, I am calling you out for using indefensible defense of your hero.

You always want others to leave when you cannot answer thier charges, but you love to hang on threads you have nothing to add but insults too.

[The Analog Kid]

I will only respond to the part that mentions my post here...

Sheesh, then why quote the entire post?

My original quote says "without some backup" and by that I mean verifiable. Using the tactic of trying to make detractors prove a negative is obvious.

What sort of backup would suffice to you?

Nonsense with nothing to back it up.

Oh Come on! You cannot change this fact despite trying to do so.
His praise of the NVA is akin to Walter Duranty's praise of the Soviets.

Then there was no reason to invade Iraq in the first place, right? If the UN means nothing, then neither Gulf War was legal.

I don't look to the UN, an amoral body where dictators are on equal standing to republics, to determine what should or should not be legal.

But that was a nice dodge of you. Why don't you answer the question.

I'd also like you to show us all the heaping pro-American praises Chomsky has heaped on the US, as previously requested.

Obviously, if he's a patriot and loves this country, he has something positive to say about it, doesn't he?

This is disingenuous. Everyone has responded to this as though it came from a legitimate web site except for one remark by me. If you think Frontpagemag has anything of merit on it, then show it to us. I have yet to see it.

Im just observing a pattern on the internet of leftists continually decrying sources yet they believe they are entitled to use any source they want.

[Gorgo]

Quote by: The Analog Kid His praise of the NVA is akin to Walter Duranty's praise of the Soviets.

What praise of what NVA? I don't know who Walter Duranty is and don't know why it's relevant. Again, Chomsky did not make that speech on Radio Hanoi, and you have nothing to back it up. You have a transcript which could have been made by anyone, even Radio Hanoi. He did not make that speech. If you have some other evidence that he said nice things about someone that you don't think he should have in some way that you think that he shouldn't have, please let me know.

Quote by: The Analog Kid I don't look to the UN, an amoral body where dictators are on equal standing to republics, to determine what should or should not be legal.

Fine. But it is part of what constitutes International and national law. As does Nuremberg and the Geneva Conventions. It is illegal to attack other countries. It is clear that al-Shifa was a pharmaceutical plant. Even if it wasn't, attacking it was a violation of the UN Charter, and the Geneva Convention - http://www.counterpunch.org/gorman10182003.html

[Gorgo]

Before anyone starts a thread on Horowitz, I suggest you do a search for other threads on Horowitz.

[Gorgo]

http://cns.miis.edu/research/wmdme/biblio.htm

Paul Richter, "Sudan Attack Claims Faulty, U.S. Admits," Los Angeles Times, September 1, 1998.

[Gorgo]

Well, someone said that Wikipedia is a good source, and I find this statement to be true from what I've seen. I can't find an article or interview right now to source except for this, but I've seen him write such things:

'While he is almost uniformly critical of the United States government's foreign policy, Chomsky expresses his admiration for the freedom of expression enjoyed by US citizens in a number of interviews and books. According to Chomsky, other Western democracies such as France and Canada are less liberal in their defense of controversial speech than the US. However, he does not credit the American government for "giving" freedoms but rather the long history of mass movements in the United States that fought for them. He is also sharply critical of any government suppression of free speech.'

[grandpa]

Chomsy has criticized all forms of government. I don't think I've ever heard of him supporting Soviet China because Chomsy actually criticizes Communism, being an anarcho-syndicalist and all.

And he is not anti-Semitic, being a Jew himself. He defended the free speech of people who may or may not be anti-Semitic/Holocaust deniers.

Grandpa h.

[The Analog Kid]

What praise of what NVA?

His entire portrayal of the events that occurred in SE Asia are just delusional.

Many of his problems lie in his moral confusion.

I don't know who Walter Duranty is and don't know why it's relevant.

Read about him and you'll see why.

[quote] Again, Chomsky did not make that speech on Radio Hanoi, and you have nothing to back it up.

Well, just because it isn't on the internet does not necessarily mean it didnt happen.

From what I understand it has been verified:

Broadcast by Radio Hanoi on April 14, and published in the _Asia-Pacific Daily Report_ of the U.S. government's Foreign Broadcast Information Service, April 16, 1970, pages K2-K3.

Apparently this guy is the archivist who found the transcript of the speech.
http://www.ocf.berkeley.edu/~sdenney/
http://www.blogger.com/profile/3346091

He appears to me to be a left leaner (if you look at his personal links) so I hardly think he'd invent documents for a dreaded "neocon" like Horowitz.


He found it for Tim Starr, the journalist who wrote 2 anti chomsky articles on Horowitz' website.
http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles...le.asp?ID=6087

You have a transcript which could have been made by anyone, even Radio Hanoi. He did not make that speech.

What makes you 100% certain he did not make the speech?

Actually, in finding this guy's name Im doing a little more research. I'll let you know what I find.

If you have some other evidence that he said nice things about someone that you don't think he should have in some way that you think that he shouldn't have, please let me know.

Actually, it appears to me as though he's praised just about every dictatorship in existence yet I still cannot seem to find any praise from him about the Good Ol' US of A, can you?

Fine. But it is part of what constitutes International and national law. As does Nuremberg and the Geneva Conventions. It is illegal to attack other countries.

Again, had the UN been honest and endforced it's own laws, this war could've been "legal" under your definitions.

It is clear that al-Shifa was a pharmaceutical plant. Even if it wasn't, attacking it was a violation of the UN Charter, and the Geneva Convention - http://www.counterpunch.org/gorman10182003.html

Well, the subject is up for debate. For a long time I was under the impression that it was a bogus act but when I read Cohen's 9/11 testimony I began doing a little more homework on the matter. I'll be the last person to defend or excuse Clinton.

We still have a kunundrum though. What do we do about a UN who refuses to enforce the law or it's resolutions?


We know for a fact that high ranking officials from the UN and member nations were involved in the largest financial scam in world history. We also know that this largest financial scam in history seems to involve certain member states more than others and those member states were the ones that voted to keep Saddam in power. We now know because they, or their friends, would profit from doing so.

So as you attack and criticise the Bush administration for corruption and crime, I'd suggest that you, as an apparrant proponent of world government and world governing bodies, begin to examine the institution in which you seem to put all your faith in.

[moustache]

Quote by: Lou Minotti I'm not a fan of Chomksy's political stances but could you be more specific? What makes him "anti american"?

Read through the first few pages Lou, I addressed it already.

[moustache]

Quote by: The Analog Kid For a long time I was under the impression that it was a bogus act but when I read Cohen's 9/11 testimony I began doing a little more homework on the matter. I'll be the last person to defend or excuse Clinton.

This is exactly how I feel. Im not one to defend or excuse clinton either. The way I see the affair is this:

It is not 100% proven that the "pharmaceutical" plant was in fact that, and it is not 100% proven that it was really an illegal weapons provider. correct?

But what we do know is that there is lots of evidence backing the theory that the plant gave nerve gas to saddam, and minimal evidence that they didnt.

[RickSp]

It is slightly refreshing that conservatives have found someone new to obsess over. They were stuck on Jane Fonda for so many years. It really got boring. Good they have found a new outlet for their obsessive compulsive disorders.

[grandpa]

Actually, it appears to me as though he's praised just about*
everydictatorship in existence yet I still cannot seem*
to find any praise from him about the Good Ol' US of A, can you?*

This is just silliness. So because somebody, an anarcho-syndicalist even (who tend to not praise ANY country for anything very quickly) does not praise America, it means he supports every dictatorship in history?

What of the dictators America has supported in the past?
I think the only way Chomsky truly supported dictators is with his tax dollars.

Grandpa h.

[fedfem]

Quote by: moustache This is exactly how I feel. Im not one to defend or excuse clinton either. The way I see the affair is this: It is not 100% proven that the "pharmaceutical" plant was in fact that, and it is not 100% proven that it was really an illegal weapons provider. correct? But what we do know is that there is lots of evidence backing the theory that the plant gave nerve gas to saddam, and minimal evidence that they didnt.

And we all know we have proof Saddam had chemical weapons----NOT!

Don't you think he would have used it when we went in?

[The Analog Kid]

This is just silliness. So because somebody, an anarcho-syndicalist even (who tend to not praise ANY country for anything very quickly) does not praise America, it means he supports every dictatorship in history?

What is silly about it? I've read quotes that say he loves America, wants it to uphold it's values, etc, etc...
I just want a inkling of evidence that he does indeed love America.
I'd say that being in the "America does all wrong" camp is just as harmful and disingenious as the "America can do no wrong" camp that leftists decry and moan about.

What of the dictators America has supported in the past?

What of them?

Don't you think he would have used it when we went in?

That was the going consensus, that he was planning on using them.
Thats why contingencies were pondered, even shown in the famous "Downing Street Memo".

[moustache]

Quote by: fedfem And we all know we have proof Saddam had chemical weapons----NOT!

Actually we do have proof that Saddam had nerve gas...

[fedfem]

Quote by: moustache Actually we do have proof that Saddam had nerve gas...

Show me. Last I heard no WMD have been found. I am sure we would have heard if there were.