quote:

---

“The United States wants to silence the one free television channel in the Arab world because it's broadcasting a whole range of things from Powell over to Osama bin Laden. So the US is now joining the repressive regimes of the Arab world that try to shut it up. But if you listen to it, if you listen to what bin Laden says, it's worth it. There is plenty of interviews. And there are plenty of interviews by leading Western reporters, if you don't want to listen to his own voice, Robert Fisk and others. And what he has been saying is pretty consistent for a long time. He's not the only one but maybe he is the most eloquent.”

[Source: http://www.zmag.org/GlobalWatch/chomskymit.htm. There you have it – the words of bin Laden are “worth hearing”. Now this truly fits the definition of “seditious” (go look it up, if you don't believe me). Unbelievable; he probably got a kick out of Hitler, too. Mr. Linguistics also exhibits his appalling lack of grammatical expertise in this quote. Moral relativism at its finest..]

to be continued...

rubysue

If your head is wax, don't walk in the sun.



Edited by - rubysue on 11/02/2001 15:45:41

---

quote:

---

I have provided ample evidence demonstrating the following about Chomsky and his "ideas":

1) He resorts regularly to obfuscation and linguistic "trickery" to confuse the issue.
2) He provides outrageous commentary that has no basis in fact or scholastic reference that I can see.
3) He has no real sympathy for the victims of September 11 but rather uses the tragedy of that day to resort to red herring "bait and switch" arguments to grind his favorite hate America axes. He also believes the words of bin Laden are "worth hearing".
4) He has been devious and quite cunning about his statements concerning Holocaust denial and the Cambodia atrocities, including being "caught in the lie" numerous times, as evidenced by meticulously researched articles by other academicians.

---

quote:

---

Where's the ample evidence? Taking sentences out of context is all the evidence I've seen from you. The student dissertation on Cambodia appears to do the same. Is this the method by which you will expose to the world the cunning and deviousness of Chomsky? Rants, empty assertions, deliberate misconstructions of sentences taken from lengthy speeches, interviews, and articles? Pretty slim evidence. It won't go far with minds that are willing to slog through the oft-tedious analytical steps of Chomsky's work. He lays building block upon building block for his arguments. Where are your blocks? You seem very in line with the sheep mindset of America, not the truly skeptical. That is, skip all the reasons for adopting a position. Just go directly to the position, and bleat how terrific it is to be there. So much for dialogue. So much for the practice of skeptical inquiry and questioning.

---

quote:

---

The O'Reillys and Limbaughs of the world have proven that starting fights by asserting outlandish semi-facts (the key is to always have some thread of fact so someone somewhere can believe you might be stating fact) can be a fun and inexpensive way to get high on a power trip. "Look at how excited I got those folks!"

---

quote:

---

That was so they could stop growing opium poppies.

---

quote:

---

Dear Sir:

I am deeply disturbed to hear of the United States supplying the Taliban with a large amount money for any reason. Though the Taliban has recently declared they will stop the production of poppy, a prime ingredient in the production of opiates, this is insufficient reason for such an amount of US tax dollars to go to a suppresseive regime like the Taliban. The Taliban has proven itself to be a regime of extreme sectarian origin unsupported by the majority of Muslims. With the exception of the drug issue the Taliban has still failed to comply with UNSCR 1267.

Would not the 43 million be better spent educating our young people to the effects of drug use. Or training our own law enforcement to better deal with the drug trade. Increasing the number of law enforcement officials dedicated to preventing the import of illegal narcotics into the US would also be more preferable.

Osama bin Laden is still free to practice his Jihad, holy war, against the US and its citizenry. Various terrorist organization are still free to use Afghanistan as a base of operations, avoiding international prosecution for acts of terrorism. These are the facts regarding terrorism against the US: over 500 are dead and 1000 injured in the past 18 years. Americans who enlist in our Armed Forces are well aware of the potential threat to their lives the average citizen is unlikely to be aware they are a taget. On a personal note, I have lost a friend to terrorism and nearly lost my brother to the same.

Please recall, bin Laden has been indicted by the UNSC for the bombings of US embassies in Nairobi, Kenya and Dar es Salaam, Tanzania. During these attacks over 200 innocent civilians were killed and over 4000 innocent civilians were injured. The US also believes bin Laden is behind the attacks at the World Trade Center and the USS Cole in Yemen. Remember, bin Laden fought with the Mujahideen against the Soviets. The Afghani regime feels some gratitude toward this man for his efforts with the Mujahideen.

Is the citizenry of the US to accept the payout of 43 million US tax dollars to Mullah Mohammed Omar and his Taliban regime while gross human civil right violations are perpetrated daily? Recently his regime called for all Hindi citizens of Afghanistan to wear identifying badges. Niid I remind you...Jews were required to wear indentifying badges during the reign of the Third Reich? Supplying a regime with clear anit-US sentiments that enacts laws closely paralleling those of the Third Reich is, at best, irresponsible.

They have, in addition to forcing Hindus to wear badges, declared that women of any failt wear the burkha, an act that results in the dehumanization of women. It allows male citizens to beat women to death for what would not even be considered a minor infraction in this society. Our citizens cry out against the heinous crime of female circumcision and the dehumanization caused by the enforced wearing of the burkha. Yet our government, elected officials, choose to ignore its citizenry and supply a society, that we as a whole declare anathema to our own beliefs and our support of the Constitution and its relevant Amendments, with 43 million of our tax dollars in support of their view on the drug trade issue. This issue then begs the question of how long the Taliban will support the anti-drug issue in the face of supporting the mass of its own citizenry. Though, I doubt, the veracity of the claim that the Taliban will use these funds in the manner which the US government intends.

The Taliban is also responsible for the destruction of several peices of our world history. They destroyed the largest known statues of Budda located in their desert. They did this despite cries from other countries to let them remove the statues.

Consider the whole picture instead of the rosy parts of policy that coincides with the particular view the US government holds. Do not in any way approve support for a society that suppresses any human rights. Do not ignore history and fail to see the close relation between the current Taliban doctrine and that of the Third Reich. And ask yourself, how long before the Taliban begins its own concentration camps composed of Hindus and Arabs. Are we, by your vote, supposed to support the mass murder and annihilation of thousands of individuals? This is not why I served my country.

Respectfully,


Patricia E Gaskins

---

quote:

---

quote:

---

Where's the ample evidence? Taking sentences out of context is all the evidence I've seen from you. The student dissertation on Cambodia appears to do the same. Is this the method by which you will expose to the world the cunning and deviousness of Chomsky? Rants, empty assertions, deliberate misconstructions of sentences taken from lengthy speeches, interviews, and articles? Pretty slim evidence. It won't go far with minds that are willing to slog through the oft-tedious analytical steps of Chomsky's work. He lays building block upon building block for his arguments. Where are your blocks? You seem very in line with the sheep mindset of America, not the truly skeptical. That is, skip all the reasons for adopting a position. Just go directly to the position, and bleat how terrific it is to be there. So much for dialogue. So much for the practice of skeptical inquiry and questioning.

---

You know rubysue - this sounds very like the arguments coming from those who believe the Cydonia Face on Mars is an intelligent contruction, or that the human is too stupid to actually get to the moon, or that the ISS isn't really up there somewhere circling overhead. I just realized this with the language used here. How many times have we heard the argument of the *sheep mindset* blindly following the government and what NASA says.

SJ,

This is not a sheep mentality. I would suggest to further your argument you refrain from the ad hominem. I've already had this discussion with Gorgo - I will tell you once and once only. Because I do NOT agree with you in no way reduces me to a lack of skepticism. I am Skeptical of YOUR claim and YOUR position. Why, I don't know, maybe I actually enjoy political science - maybe I've actually read something besides one narrow minded view. Maybe I've had friends that can't stand Chomsky's friends and have been exposed to his ill treatment.

And just maybe I'm a little sick and fucking tired of being called a criminal by association. Here's how it works, the government engages in criminal activity, that criminal activity is carried out by the US military, I have five years active duty time under my belt. Hmm, worked in a court of law against Charles Manson and his cult - bet the same argument here would work.

Freedom of speech is freedom to express your opinions. Freedom of speech is not forcing your fucking opinions down my fucking throat. @tomic, Gorgo, LP, rubysue, Lisa, Slater, etc, et al, may at some point agree and some point disagree. However, I hope that we will all see that for what it is. I've noticed that Gorgo tends to call women with whom he argues 'hysterical' or they have no clue what they are talking about - he has however, never done this with Garrette. I think if you read back through the previous posts you will notice this. However, I think it is just possible that we can resolve our differences. I even wonder if Gorgo realizes he's doing this.

@tomic and I don't agree necessarily, but I think he's coming from the point of Santanya (?) Those who fail to remember the past are doomed to repeat it.

You see there is a fundamental difference between you and I SJ. I joined the Marines for many reasons but one reason matters here - I hate war. Sound strange. My first response to the stand up order for DS/S was 'oh FUCK!' The military is necessary and military action is necessary. I understand reality - that is where Chomsky blows it. He's preaching Utopia wrapped up in nice big words. Same as most preachers wandering around. Never, tell me or anyone else that we lack any skepticism because we don't agree with you. That would be a severe lack of it - falling in blindly and following just what you say I should. Baa!

It is by the goodness of God that in our country we have those three unspeakably precious things: freedom of speech, freedom of conscience, and the prudence never to practice either of them. -Mark Twain

Edited by - Trish on 11/04/2001 21:26:39

---