Printable View
From AlterNet: Noam Chomsky: The U.S. Continues to Be a Terrorist StateQuote:
There are academic conferences and sober volumes on terrorism trying to find some appropriate definition [of terrorism], and the “appropriate” definition has a very definite condition to meet. It has to include the terror that they carry out against us but exclude the terror that we carry out against them.
Hopes and Prospects
The biggest meanest kid on the block wins
Nice guys always get beat up
Very nice thing to be proud of, Paps. Except, notice how we're not winning?
With that stated, why is Obama letting the war rage on? I thought he was going to change things. I guess what he meant by that was that Bush wasn't changing this fast enough for the worse, so Obama stepped up to do just that.Quote:
Originally Posted by oldredfordette
yeah, I agree.Quote:
Except, notice how we're not winning?
since after WWII we've had badly picked fights run badly,
in all the wrong places for all the wrong reasons...
Quote: "The biggest meanest kid on the block wins"
Only for the interim, he usually pushes too hard in one direction and winds up in jail or dead.
Quote: "Nice guys always get beat up "
And wind up the real winners in the end.
Quote:
"Nice guys always get beat up "
The graveyard is full of a lot of nice people who met up with people who weren't quite so nice.Quote:
And wind up the real winners in the end.
On one side, when our people are captured by them, they are cut up and hung from bridges, beheaded on live video and broadcast globally, brutally tortured [[google al queda torture handbook), and burned alive.Quote:
The U.S. Continues to Be a Terrorist State
On the other side, when their people are captured by us, we courtmarshall our soldiers for punching someone in the ribs while resisting capture, we imprison our soldiers for hurting the feelings of killers by putting panties on their heads, and apologize for keeping prisoners in conditions that are better than most civilians homes in the entire middle east.
Who's intimidating who?
Wow. That was a very adept illustration of the point made by the leading quote.Nice bellyfeel skills.Quote:
[The definition of terrorism] has to include the terror that they carry out against us but exclude the terror that we carry out against them.
Obama is dammed if he does and dammed if he doesn't ...hypocrisy at the finest...he goes after terrorists ..yet he is a Muslim...he continues to fight wars ...and he isn't moving fast enough ...or is it because he doesn't want to leave if there is a chance to clean up this mess that was started 8 years ago...he must know something we don't...
draw down troops was a responsible thing [[he didn't start it correct?_) but he knows he couldnt just cut and leave either...as far as Afghanistan it is being fought the way it should have ...go after terrorists in Pakistan if need be...
do I agree w/everything ..no ...time to go? maybe...should prosecute neocons yes...they started this with falsde pretense and for oil an dother countries..they should shoulder the balme...and if Obama stopped it tommorrow the tea party would find something wrong with that anyway....
And other places continue to be as well... Hah! I would not expect any other point of view from Chomsky... Though I have agreed with some of his ideas.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jimaz
Oh and don't forget being a recipient of the Nobel prize he [[president Obama) is obliged not be too much of a wartime consigliere as such [[Godfather reference). And he cannot appear to be too "Bushy" in his responses internationally etc. Thus, he must bend of backwards [[or forwards:p) depending on how you look at it! Indeed on several levels Obama is a bound man..... taking extra care not to offend in a dangerous world--very difficult. And everyone is not quiet responding to all the PC "preambling" and rambling about. Interesting times indeed!
Quote:
Originally Posted by gibran
Not necessarily.Quote:
Obama is dammed if he does and dammed if he doesn't ...hypocrisy at the finest...
The #1 concern of the people during the election was the economy.
The economy is still broken with near 10% unemployment.
If he fixes it, instead of continuing to attack it, he will be a success.
Quote: "The graveyard is full of a lot of nice people who met up with people who weren't quite so nice."
Everybody winds up in the graveyard, your point?
The economy is broken... so why send monies to a country whose economy isn't...[[thats what Noam would say ..LOL) and one that flaunts international laws and uses our technology [[ stolen and reversed design) to booster their computer and arms sales while 'it's the economy" here that is losing....
Wars are easier to start than to stop. Obama seems to be giving the military industrial complex a sop by increasing our presence in Afghanistan while we stand down [[somewhat) in Iraq. After all, we still have that huge base there to man. Still, it has to be terrifying to have unmanned drones flying around and killing people.
From the BBC
Israel denies Noam Chomsky entry
Renowned US scholar Noam Chomsky has been denied entry to the West Bank by Israeli immigration officials.
Prof Chomsky, renowned for his work on linguistics and philosophy, was planning to deliver a lecture at Birzeit University.
Prof Chomsky, 82, had been trying to enter from Jordan.
An Israeli interior ministry spokeswoman said it was to trying to clear the matter up and allow Prof Chomsky to enter.
Prof Chomsky said the officials were very polite but he was denied entry because "the government did not like the kinds of things I say and they did not like that I was only talking at Birzeit and not at an Israeli university too."
He added: "I asked them if they could find any government in the world that likes the things I say."
Prof Chomsky's Palestinian host for the visit, Mustafa al-Barghouti, told Reuters: "This decision is a fascist action, amounting to suppression of freedom of expression."
The interior ministry spokeswoman, Sabine Hadad, said: "We are trying to contact the military to clear things up and if they have no objection we see no reason why he should not be allowed in." Prof Chomsky has frequently spoken out against Israeli occupation of Palestinian territories.
Story from BBC NEWS:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/h...st/8685930.stm
Published: 2010/05/16 23:46:06 GMT
Good move on Israel's part.
Good move? Suppressing freedom of speech? Our own President and Vice President are saying the same things Chomsky is, think they should be denied entry as well?
sst--
Read the article that this thread is about. In it Chomsky says that he considers Obama the President of "a leading terrorist state." This has nothing to do with suppression of freedom of speech. It has to do with security considerations. Would you call banning the woman in this video from Israel suppression of free speech?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8fSvyv0urTE
I wouldn't .I'd call it a legitimate security concern. If we could have kept the 9/11 terrorists out of our country, we would have been justified. If you'd really be concerned about free speech, you wouldn't focus on Israel. Opinions, including those more extreme that Chomsky's, are freely expressed there. But try organizing public Christian prayer in Gaza or Saudi Arabia. See how long you'd last.
Quote: "Prof Chomsky has frequently spoken out against Israeli occupation of Palestinian territories."
Why he was allegedly denied entry. Incidentally the exact same thing our Pres and Veep are saying.
How dare an American criticize Israel! After all the billions of dollars we've sent Israel, too!
Steve there is a big difference...when you say your a democracy act like one...closed socities don't claim to support freedom of speech...they are wrong too and should open themselves up...but then you have to ask why would a democracy be afraid of a 82 year old academic whose youth was spent in the country that now banned his entery....is that a real democracy?
While we can't change closed societies that easily, we can help ensure democracy in those that accept our funds...
Harvard Law Prof. Alan Dershowitz told Channel 1 on Monday that “it was absolutely foolish to ban Chomsky for two reasons: one, because you should never ban someone because of their opinions, and two, because Chomsky is such a very ineffective speaker.” While I agree with the first part of Dershowitz's assessment, his second is petty and personal....but then again Alan is petty and an apologetic for a foreign country to begin with...