I showed up at the Agape Spiritual Center an hour and a half early and already there was a line snaking through the parking lot, filled with cars bearing peace flags, "Peace is Patriotic" and "War Is Not The Answer" bumper stickers. The buzz outside the Center was absolutely electric with excitement and anticipation. I leaned over to my friend and remarked, "Is it just me, or is the mood remarkably fannish?"

It wasn't The Stones or Mel Gibson that these people were expecting, but that's sure what it felt like. Instead of stalking a stage door or movie premiere, the sellout crowd stood patiently waiting to listen to one of the most prominent intellectual minds of our time. After some delays (made entertaining by a spontaneous round of singing led by Blase Bonpane), Noam Chomsky appeared, walking down the aisle through the beautiful Agape sanctuary. Someone yelled, "There he is!" and the crowd leapt to their feet in an enthusiastic standing ovation. It was at that point where I realized that this crowd was much more than simply "fannish" in the gloss-mag, flashy, fickle rock-star way. Their cheers and applause were born out of a deep, honest admiration for a humble linguist whose words had touched so many minds.

A Legacy to Defend

Chomsky began by addressing the movement - this incipient global social movement that has been unprecedented in its scale and rapid rise to prominence. He addressed the fears and cynicism many in the peace movement are battling now in the face of war, reminding us that we are privileged to live in these times - for we now have the remarkable ability to be able to organize and speak out against government actions that threaten our life and liberty. "Freedom," he admonished, "is not a right, it's a legacy" - that centuries of struggle, of people actively seeking justice and fighting repression, have won for us the freedoms we now enjoy. As a result, this privilege confers on us a responsibility to uphold and protect the legacy of freedom that has been created for us. That it is a choice, for we the people, to take on the responsibility of upholding our freedoms - or stand idly by and let them be eroded. This rich legacy of democracy and self-determination can be taken away if we do not continue to defend it - and with that much at stake the choice for many people would be hard but obvious.

World Opinion

He then proceeded to give us a glance at the war situation from the outside - world opinion, a factor pathetically underrepresented in the United States of CNN. People around the world - including Iraq's neighboring countries - are of the mind that this war is just the beginning of something bigger, a plan to dominate the earth and its resources. Many - especially in Iraq's neighbor states - "are more concerned with the unbridled use of US power than they are of Saddam Hussein." Iraq, he claimed, is the weakest country in the region, decimated by twelve years of sanctions and bombing. He spoke of US allegations of Iraq's violations of UN resolutions, and raised the question of why we would choose to go after a state on that basis when many other countries (including Israel, Turkey, and Morocco) have violated many more UN resolutions than Iraq has. He also brought up the USA's rampant use of its veto power in the Security Council to block resolutions that would have otherwise provided for the protection of human rights around the world, including Bush's withdrawal of the US from the UN World Conference Against Racism, his withdrawal from the Kyoto Protocol, and his unsigning of the ratification of the International Criminal Court.

In the eyes of world opinion, Chomsky continued, Bush's war against Iraq has transformed Saddam's image from one of a pitiless tyrant into a "figure of reverence" in the Arab world. He noted that ninety-five percent of the Arab population believes that the United States has no other intentions in Iraq than controlling its oil and the territory over which to transport it. Far from eliminating terrorism, Bush's success seems to have been in "fulfilling Osama Bin Laden's wildest dreams" by creating an anti-American, fundamentalist reaction throughout the Arab world, a breeding ground for more terrorist attacks.

"How did we get to this point?"
The American legacy of war and fear

Chomsky began his illustration of American militarist policy by citing the National Security Strategy of the United States, which is seen by many in the world as a doctrine where the US intends to rule the world by force - permanently - and "protect itself" by destroying any potential power that rivals it. He criticized Bush/Cheney/Rusmfeld (et al.)'s policy of preemptive strike, noting that a preemptive war doctrine - if one were to legally exist - should fall within the boundaries of international law, including being in accordance with Article 51 of the UN Charter. Instead, the Bush doctrine appears to stipulate to the world that the US intends to arbitrarily attack "any power that may threaten" it. This is causing a "wave of hatred throughout the world," Chomsky warned, and said that in world opinion the Bush administration is "probably the most hated and feared administration in history."

Fear is a powerful tool for control, and Chomsky pointed to the midterm elections of 2002 as a Republican move to "stay in power by generating fear." He outlined how the Administration, using color-coded terror alerts and sabre rattlings from Baghdad, manipulated "fear to draw focus from domestic issues," which grow more woeful by the day. He examined the Administration's uses of fear by illustrating two basic attitudes that are prevalent among the uninformed masses in America: first, that Saddam Hussein poses an immediate threat to our survival as a nation, and secondly, that Saddam Hussein planned the 9/11 attacks. These beliefs, he revealed, are unique to the US and are not shared by the majority of the world's population (as those who watch anything other than US media know, they are simply not true). Despite this, he noted that many people in the US seem to have been aware that something was afoot, as the Republicans had gained control of Congress by only a small margin of votes.

He cited America's own campaign of "terrorist" fear abroad, and recalled US attacks on Panama, Grenada, and Nicaragua, the latter of which the United States was condemned by the World Court for international terrorism.

Chomsky noted the reports and footage of US soldiers in Iraq, portrayed as proudly claiming that they are "liberating Iraq for 9/11". When anyone else in the world sees these attitudes, he explained, they tend to come to one of two conclusions: either Americans are so "fanatically racist that they would take revenge for 9/11 against any Arab" regardless of distinction, or "Americans are indoctrinated with lies."

Almost out of time (as the event had to be over and cleared by 5pm, a disappointment to many attendees), he wrapped up with a mention of the October resolution by Congress to authorize the use of force in Iraq, which coincided with two events that went nearly unnoticed in US media: the 40th anniversary of the Cuban Missile Crisis (now revealed as the result of a US terror campaign to effect "regime change" in Cuba), and the US-Israel veto of two UN resolutions: one, a veto of the reaffirmation of the 1925 treaty banning chemical and biological weapons**, and the second, a veto on a treaty banning the use of weapons in space.

"How long are free people willing to let this go on?"

This was one of the last questions he posed, as the lecture hurriedly wrapped up in an all-too-brief Q&A session and dismissal. Unfortunately there was no time for discussion, for an in-depth look at this question. It was five o'clock, and the audience was rushed out of the hall, leaving many of us feeling a little gipped.

Still, it was clear that many in the audience were not ready to really leave. As the crowd exited into the parking lot, many people remained to talk amongst themselves, unwilling to let the discourse end so easily. Watching the throng cheer and applaud Saint Noam, as he walked to his car and was driven away, I could tell that all of us - who had given our Sunday afternoon not to fear, but to education - held that question in our hearts and minds.

What is to be our legacy? The legacy of fear, terror, and militarism of tyrants? Or the legacy of peace, freedom, and justice fought for by ordinary people over centuries of struggle?

To the lingering crowd in the parking lot, at least, the answer seemed obvious.

---

** = the author is seeking a source to confirm this event.

So if kucinich gains in popularity will he be one of the top five? Whats your criteria?

Bush Admirer -

Great job logically and intelligently refuting Chomsky's points; it really gives clout to your arguement when you back it up with such great evidence.

How exactly do you argue against the rantings of an infamously deluded cult figure. Does one really owe an intelligent response to Chomsky's predictable and paranoid mumbling? With all due respect, the man is simply deluded. I have no doubt that he means well but since his worldview has condensed to contain only the one simple mantra of, "If America has anything to do with it then it, by definition, MUST be wrong", his value as an openminded critical thinker is less than negligible.

If hes deluded that must mean anybody who believes him is too. right?

Why don't you try to field that one.

a few months ago I had very little interest in politics. I always looked at republicans and democrats the same- speaking nonsense backwards and the same as each other. my english teacher had us get a noam chomsky book for his class, being a good student i went and bought it before class had started, It was so interesting that I read it in a week and saw that all this complex stuff isnt so complex.
Im interested in the truth, and have been for a long time before I came across this subject. I would love to think that this country has everybodys interests in mind, and that this war will simply liberate a third world country in a volatile region with no reprocussions, but i just dont see that. To me its backwards, and alot of things this government (and its people)do seem destructive. Just reading through history of not only this country, but other civilizations in the past it seems to me theres alot to be wary and careful of. I know you rightys think of us as paranoid type people or whatever, but I really feel that theres a place for questioning these things. And at the very least, in a healthy democracy, these concerns should be addressed appropriately. When a government doesnt even acknowledge us as even qualifying as having valid viewpoint. The media doesnt even try to show that there is intelligent people behind this, it is very worrisome.

Good post.

Here's how I see it in regards to Chomsky

" I would love to think that this country has everybodys interests in mind"

They don't. At least I don't think they always do. But I also think it's ridiculous to think that all their actions are fundamentally AGAINST our interests. Chomsky seems to think they are.

" that this war will simply liberate a third world country in a volatile region with no reprocussions, "

It won't. All actions have repercussions and this was never about freeing the Iraqis. That was only the most obvious good that's come of it. Foremost is the fact that Sadam is no longer a high risk to aid those who would attack us again. People WILL get rich off of this war. It sucks but it will happen. Oh well. Keeping that from happening is NOT a valid reason for not defending ourselves aginst a likely threat. Chomsky doesn't seem to even think anyone but the US is responsible for 9-11. What can you say to that?

"I know you rightys think of us as paranoid type people or whatever, but I really feel that theres a place for questioning these things."

Couldn't agree more. My issue is absolutely now with questioning but with the unwillingness to accept any answer which doesn't "feel good". By that I mean the categoric disgrement with anything that doesn't conform to leftist party lines. For instance, the wholesale disregard for any media coverage showing celebrating Iraqis. This board was swarming with people flat out claiming that ALL of that was staged, doctored and outright phony. This is not critical thinking. It's not eben mildly openminded. Chomsky falls into this as well. If eveidence supoorts him he's right. If eveidence disagrees with him then it must be fabricated and therefore an obvious attempt to discredit how right he is. Crazy logic but used all the time.

There's my two cents worth. Keep asking and reading.

dasfdsafdsaf

dasfdsafdsaf

Chomsky doesn't seem to even think anyone but the US is responsible for 9-11. What can you say to that?
**
Well, duh!
Only the whores on this board under pay to try and do
damage control or just stupid or lazy to dig
would think otherwise.

Got me there.
Only a small fringe element of the world
think arab terrorists had anything to do with it.
You got me.

Show me the videos of these arabs or their names in the
flight manifest. Oh, you are referring to the magic passport. HaHaHaHa.
Well I guess we should not look at the footprints, spoor and documents that link the CIA to just about all aspects of the event.
But I can come back with links later if you and the dear readers wish.

Is it worthwhile to discuss things or argue with people who express such irrational faith in and identification with the U.S. government, that one wonders if they are getting paid by the government to parrot its ideas, or if they are just morons?

Kind of a mix of moron suicide biscuit brains
and the 'campers'.
They do the spin and damage control with their
military sources and resources, IMO.

Is it worthwhile to discuss things or argue with people who express such irrational fear and hatred of the U.S. government, that one wonders if they are getting paid by Marxists to parrot itheir ideas, or if they are just morons?

A.I thought I'd wait.
B.Never thought you’d ask
Anyway to the new ones, this is the first page of a google seartch:
[ CIA 9-11 ]
http://www.fromthewilderness.com/
http://www.thememoryhole.org/911/cia-simulation.htm
http://www.madcowprod.com/
http://www.ratical.org/ratville/JFK/JohnJudge/linkscopy/MediaCracks.html
http://www.hereinreality.com/insidertrading.html
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2002/05/23/national/main510040.shtml
Then there’s:
[ put+options 9-11 ]
http://www.world-action.co.uk/bushknows.html
http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/Sept11/911deutschebank.htm
[ this one is for fresca]
http://biz.yahoo.com/rm/030205/cme_live_cattle_put_options_vol_open_int_feb_4_1.html
http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2002/6/2/62018.shtml
http://www3.sympatico.ca/truegrowth/911timeline.html
http://www.osawh.com/option.html
http://www.zenvendor.com/archives/beanladen.htm
http://www.mindsetcentral.com/911unanswered.html
http://www.rense.com/general25/expb.htm
http://www.rense.com/general19/2bigminds.htm
Anyway, some of these are particularly intriguing, and I know fresca loves beef, so I just sit back and do what more people are doing. Checking out
sources that at least try to resolve questions instead of wipe them from
collective memory with choreographed propaganda from a commercial media.

lol.. too funny. you know people like christopher hitchins use chomsky attacking to gain publicity for their theories. I find it hard to comprehend how some of you people say a man that stands for social justice is a nut case? The worlds dumbest man? DO you have any idea what that dumb man has done in the world of linguistics let alone opening peoples minds to foreign policies? Obviously you people are just posting to spread hate and enrage people, which it is not going to happen. People that respect and understand Chomsky are more intelligent than that. Of course it neccessary to analyse all information that is handed to you. Maybe that's the problem with the people posting hate here, they have no comprehension of analytical thinking because of the doctrine that brainwashed them. I'm having a hard time figuring out who the paranoid ones are here?

Chomsky is indeed 'the world's dumbest man.' He symbolizes 'the world's dumbest movement and liberals in general.'

"The war in Iraq has been a success". So said that Washington Post. Yes, the same publication that during days 11, 12, and 13 of the war went all out calling the battle plan in Iraq a " model of indecisiveness" has conceded that the “hawks” won the day. For a paper that during the same time was proclaiming that "the only shock and awe in the war so far has been the multiple setbacks suffered by Coalition troops at the hand of fedayeen fighters", this capitulation has to hurt like hell.

Liberals are furious. I mean, 21 days? That's unacceptable to them. The war should have been protracted. The war should have been bloody. Low casualties? Low civilian deaths? Damn!

But not all is lost. So far the coalition has not found WMD. Moreover, Saddam's top scientific advisor, General Amer al-Saadi, has stated that there are no WMD in Iraq. Yes!, say the liberals. You see, a man with the credibility and ethics of al-Saadi cannot be lying. This of course, begs the question of what did the regime do with the documented chemical weapons used against Iran and the Kurds. After all, Chemical Ali did not earn his nickname in high school. But who cares. After all, the US gave those weapons to Iraq. Yes, this also begs the question of where are the weapons today? But enough common sense. When the WMD are discovered, there’ll be a perfectly good explanation for it, totally unrelated to Saddam’s regime of course which, by the way, the US helped create. So, shouldn’t the US then throw him out of power? Umm, no. The liberal doctrine is to talk. Even evil, brutal, murderous dictators have a soul and good side. Bush, a true tyrant, should appealed to Saddam’s compassion. He failed to do that just like he ALMOST failed with the war. Damn, why did the fedayeen couldn’t have killed more troops? Why couldn’t US missiles have hit 3 or 4 more markets? Why didn’t more Iraqi’s come out to defend Saddam? Why? Why? Why?

Talking about Sadaam, where is he? Aha! You see, say the liberals, the coalition has failed. Sadaam is on the loose. Well, we don’t know that for sure. But we sure hope he is. What about the fact that his regime is totally finished. What about the fact that Iraqi’s celebrated the fall of Baghdad live on TV? Umm, well, without Sadaam’s corpse that’s an empty victory. What if he’s found dead under tons of rubble? Well, you still have the children to account for. Ha!

On the mean time, liberals are now screaming about looters. You see, the situation is out of control. Good. And after it stabilizes? Well, then we’ll move the goal line further and further. The coalition failed somewhere in this thing and by George (no pun intended), we will find it!

Gotta love them. LOL!

that sounds like psychosis bush admirer, I dont know one liberal who thinks like that. Youve been spending alot of time in that liberal chat site, because somehow youve conglomerated and exagerrated alot of viewpoints from probably more than one source. I would recommend that you not look at the young hippy women at the anti-war rallys and maybe check out the aol chat site for a little while, and raise a flag.

Way to go, Bush Admirer. Whenever we conservatives don't have an argument, we can always resort to childish name-calling. Great job!

Even though I listened to the audio twice, this synopsis of the lecture in writing really contributed to my understanding. Thanks very much for making it available Source0.

Is Chomsky really saying much that is 'nuts or dumb'?
As much as I agree with with his consistant consideration of events in terms of human nature, I do not agree with many of his political views.

But, thats probably because he grew up when social change and a belief in the better nature of people seemed to be a matter political agitation. That would be nice to believe in however it is hard to see anything more than what is and always been the direction of civilisation.

I can see nothing to say that a direction exists in any way that is different to that of any individual person actually. Flawed, some times right, some times wrong,
good and bad, but it seems thats just too honest for "conservatives and liberables" in the centre.

It is however the way the smarter "extremists" from all persuations base their views on and in line with their own self interests, espose their views.

The Birches or Malcom X did not bother with the need to appeal to what we want to think of ourselves, they confronted reality. But they came across as not being very "nice".

Surley it's the debate, the checks and balances and the democratic ideals that really matter. Why trust any one with concentrated power?

To be in the position of awesome power must be intoxicating and why wouldn't you believe in your "special purpose"? It's very human to champion causes that we want to for reason more complex than just selflesnes.

If it was your job to lead the US and thinking 25 years out which is what I expect them to do, then exploiting 9/11 to rid ourselves of enemies from a broader spectrum and get a foot hold in the most important and powerful force in the world, namely the Iraq/Aphganistan and surronds oil pool is hardly some weird conspiracy.

It was 100% correct for the US to secure it's place otherwise the trillions and trillions may make our enemies actually "real enemies with power and money" like it was before with Russia and China.

Only the Russians could challenge the US again if it had its act together, and a united Arab coilition with control of 75% of the worlds oil would not be some thing to encorage.

Chomsky is very smart and honest, and makes the centre "left and right" insignificant. To trifle with D grade political bullshit that we are saints is what confronts us and Chomsky is at least part of the balancing act that we should never forget protects everyone of us.

You bury yourself in your own idiocy time and time again. It would seem possible that you could figure that out but apparently you are too far gone to complete even that modest accomplishment.

If you cannot see Chomsky, Vidal et al as clear and original thinkers than you lower the expectaion for anyone to ever accept your argument, and also do a major disservice to the evolution of human thought and culture.

But you probably don't believe in that either...which allows you in the end to rationalize the murder of humans other than yourself and the destruction of civilizations far more accomplished than your own.

>If you cannot see Chomsky, Vidal et al as clear and original thinkers than you lower the expectaion for anyone to ever accept your argument, and also do a major disservice to the evolution of human thought and culture.

Since when do those who regard Chomsky and Vital et. al. as "clear and original thinkers" have anything to contribute worth considering? Consider it a badge of honor when people who agree with Chomsky and Vital et. al. disagree with you. It means you're on the correct path.

Gee, who can counter the logic of THAT argument????

>>If you cannot see Chomsky, Vidal et al as clear and original thinkers than you lower the expectaion for anyone to ever accept your argument, and also do a major disservice to the evolution of human thought and culture.

>Gee, who can counter the logic of THAT argument????

I agree.

Rush Limbaugh is about as "clear thinking" as Bush on a three-day cocaine binge.

Mr. Worthless opinion:
Just how much of Chomsky's work have you read and
at which points do you have conflicting data?
Tell us, please, we all are waiting.

Please continue to show your ignorance by claiming Chomsky is the world's dumbest man. Ignore the fact that he basically invented modern linguistics, if he disagrees with you politically, he must be an idiot.

He is the dumbest man, therefore you are smarter. What branch of education did you invent again?

Chomsky is a great linguist, no doubt about that. But excellence in one field does not confer excellence in all other fields.

He's the Left's Golden Boy because he:
1. Is intelligent.
2. Uses language to make his views seem believable.
3. Hates America and sees America as being culpable for all evil in the world.

I'd as soon believe Emeril's world view (BAM!) as Chomsky's.

what a jackass...
"3. Hates America and sees America as being culpable for all evil in the world."
bonehead. He loves this country, he just hates the
little maggots that have eaten its soul. You are incapable
of being able to provide specific critique on any of his well
documented lectures or written material. Wanna give it a go?

...I tend to vomit.

I also suggest a through high colonic followed by a
another viewing {remember clockwork orange} of
Manufacturing Dissent.
we'll come back in to unstrap you for the next session
of the same, this time after 30 hours in a SD tank.
just a suggestion...

Linguistics is very much related to politics. Ever heard the term "spin"? The man studies the way human beings communicate, and much of his work is centered around the political media. So its not like he is out of his depth. Not like Emeril was when he tried sitcom acting.

BAM!

Sean Hannity is a clear thinker. He really gives a fair and balanced report and listens to both sides, just like Rush
Limbough. I like the way he explained how great the tax cuts are for America and that poor people like me should be greatfull that we have rich people who pay all the taxes.
I believe everything he says and am so glad that he cares so much about the children of our soldiers who died for this great country. Noam Chompsky and anybody who disagrees with Bush is anti american and should be shot. Oh yea and France is evil

I love satire.
Don't you?

Yes i do love satire, but i must say i get my inspiration from sheepdog and one eyed man their stuff is brilliant

noam chomsky is one of the world's leading intellectuals...i don't think that can be doubted, but i don't believe everything he says. i don't believe everything anyone says. the point is to try to be as open and as objective as possible. chomsky himself, encourges listeners to find out the facts for themselves.
if you'd like to disagree with him...that's fine... but your reasons should be based on fact, not speculation. if, after reviewing the sources and facts, you disagree... then i can respect that.... but tell me why.... what are your sources? are they well founded... etc.

i have read many of his books... and i've also researched the topics indepenently.... i tend to agree with most of his important points.

and for those of you who are chomsky fans.... we are not going to get "his" message across by juvenile name calling. both sides need to actively listen.... use your own intelligence to make sense of the facts.

sincerely, wfb :)

The guy has made a second career out of whining and complaining. He and Ralph Nader are both cut from the same cloth in that regard.

Chumpsky's political views are 'your basic crock.'

Ole' Noam is very intelligent, obviously. His research is detailed and accurate. Granted.
It's his unwavering anti-Americanism that is the undoing of any credibility he may have once possessed.
Now, I don't care that he's UnAmaerican. I suspect this country and Noam will both be able to weather that storm. BUT, for any analylist to start from such a prjudiced viewpoint and interpret ALL of his findings to fit that is BAD or NON-EXISTENT critical thinking.
I could devote my life to researching and interpreting my data to prove my irrational hatred of soccer (and I do hate it). I could, but that would make me a fruitcake just like Noam.

Noam usually backs up his analysis with open source news
and other historical record. Not one to turn a blind eye
Bush Admirer, (did you think that one up for baiting?) he
doesn't hesitate to condemn all criminal parties.
My complaint about Chomsky is his reluctance to focus his
attentions on the particulars of his very general analysis
thus saving himself the heat from specific sources.
His involvement in exposing the slaughter in East Timor
never went into particular corporations and their control of policy directives, for instance. I suppose this would imply doing more investigations myself, not merely acting
like a 'monkeyboy' and slinging mud. IMO. Thank you.

Anyone who blindly swallows his virulent bigoted biased "analyses" of Cold War history is leading himself up a blind alley.

Read history for yourselves, you don't need an evil creature like Chumpski holdong up particular exhibits as proof of his thesis while cunningly concealing anything that doesn't fit the conclusions he drew before he set out to investigate.

Don't be fooled kids, he's a bad man.

As stated before, upon which points do you disagree?
Which sources perhaps not creditable? Sounds like you have
hot air.
oh, and some rancor.

>>> As stated before, upon which points do you disagree?

Wrong question.

A better question would have been: "Are there any of Chumpsky's points that you do agree with?"

The answer be 'no.'

nice try, monkeyboy.
You've admitted that you
1. haven't read any Chomsky
2. have trouble driving and listening to the radio at the same time.

Post under your own handle sheepdog, and stop tossing bouquets to yourself.

watsa matter? I tic you off?
I was WAITING for you to recognize me, you idiot.
I'm not tossing anything but your own crap back at you
monkeyboy. You are VERY easy to poke with your ass so tightly pressed against the bars of your mental cage.
Gorsh, just having fun (sulk).

fresca,

you just conceded that his evidence is sound and accurate........ isn't that the most important point..? this is not about personalities.... unamerican.... he's just expressing his right to speak his mind. isn't that the democratic way...?

and your analogy to soccer is definitely not proper. we are talking about the facts of a corrupt government.... run by and for the elite. lives are at stake.... this is no soccer game.

you seem to be against him personally.... and not the accuracy of the facts which you admitted were valid.... that's odd... dont you think?
wfb

dear bush admirer...

how on earth could you admire bush?.... he's the most illiterate president...arguably, in history. he was kicked out of yale twice.... he was busted for drug use (cocaine)...and driving under the influence(when he was younger..)

during this whole war in iraq.... he never.... not even once had the courage to meet the press for war related questions..... instead, we'd always see rumsfield.... and general after general....

i suspect that his own council knows he is incapable of answering questions without putting his foot in his mouth. i honestly urge you to read the book entitled...

the bush dyslexicon..... you'll see what i mean about his lack of knowlege.... and illiteracy.

that is all,
wfb

After reading what you just wrote I think that YOU might be "the most illiterate person in the world." (Here's a hint - sentences start with capitals and end with single periods, not six.)

Tell me.. what's the rent like in those glass houses?

I think people should be judged based on their results or achievements and not on their high school behaviour years earlier.

GWB is one of our most outstanding Presidents based on results. Afghanistan is huge. Iraq is even bigger. He's managed to push Arafat (the terrorist and the main bad guy in the Iraeli-Palestinian conflict) to one side. He's on a roll.

I should comment that it's not all GWB individually. He's had the good sense to appoing really sharp people to key positions. I'm thinking Donald Rumsfeld, Condoleeza Rice, Colin Powell, etc. What an incredible contrast this is with the losers in the previous administration.

gingerbread house of horse shit.
Shame on your stupidity. For even thinking we
have any chance of believing you.

"you seem to be against him personally.... and not the accuracy of the facts which you admitted were valid.... that's odd... dont you think? "

No. The facts are there for anyone. it's the interpretation of the data and the spin which makes a person's view valid or not.

For instance. Chomsky will regularly refer to facts of IDF troops killing "palestinians". It's a fact. It happens. What he won't add in is that these deaths are in the form of self-defense when the IDF carries out missions targeting hamas et.al.
Facts are nothing if you don't have all of them.
Wise up. The guy is a talented spinster who breeds hate.

dear katalyst
i never said that i was the most knowledgeable or literate person in the world... so, perhaps you're right? but you are missing the point............ i'm not the president of the strongest nation on the globe. one would think that there would be some sort of IQ test???

bush's lack education is actually the least of my worries....

i'm really more concerned with his actions.... i agree with you; his level of literacy is of little importance, but he seems to lack common sense.

after all........ we attacked.... bombed iraq........ the US has no evidence that suddam was responsible for 9-11. furthermore, there is no evidence of weapons of mass destruction.

i dont hate bush... i just think he's a puppet.... rumsfeld and the boys are really running the show, dont you think?
wfb
p.s. please notice that i did not attack you personally :)

dear fresca,

now dont get me wrong.......i think the US is by far one of the best places to live ........ we do have certain priviledges...freedoms. but the US has been the world's largest terrorist for the past 50 years. look at latin america......the middle east.........vietnam........

israel is basically a puppet regime for the US..... they are arguably one of the most well armed countries in the region.... iraq is a relatively poor country and does not even come close to the military power of israel or iran.

as far as the self defense bombings you described....... could you give me a source????
wfb

dear fresca,

now dont get me wrong.......i think the US is by far one of the best places to live ........ we do have certain priviledges...freedoms. but the US has been the world's largest terrorist for the past 50 years. look at latin america......the middle east.........vietnam........

israel is basically a puppet regime for the US..... they are arguably one of the most well armed countries in the region.... iraq is a relatively poor country and does not even come close to the military power of israel or iran.

as far as the self defense bombings you described....... could you give me a source????
wfb

i agree.......................(please note, i like using small caps with six or more periods.... :)

where was i.... ? oh yeah, i agree..... but there is no one on the planet who has all the facts. it is impossible to know all the facts.... do you know all the facts... i don't....dont think anyone else does.

so tell me... enlighten me.... give me the source of your facts about the bombings which you alluded to earlier.
......... i 'm interested to see "the facts".... and just who the source might be???
yours truly,
wfb

i agree.......................(please note, i like using small caps with six or more periods.... :)

where was i.... ? oh yeah, i agree..... but there is no one on the planet who has all the facts. it is impossible to know all the facts.... do you know all the facts... i don't....dont think anyone else does.

so tell me... enlighten me.... give me the source of your facts about the bombings which you alluded to earlier.
......... i 'm interested to see "the facts".... and just who the source might be???
yours truly,
wfb

oooooooww!!....
[deceitful rhetoric. outrageous
comments , his ridiculous diatribes, tried to invoke outrage and disgust for
America from his listeners..... ]
Looking below, I fail to see the down side.

[His appearance sparked a protest by a number of UT student groups including Texans for
Israel, Young Conservatives of Texas, Students for American Values, and the Texas
Review Society-affiliated H.L. Mencken Society....

...these students
and concerned citizens engaged in debate with attendees, handed out literature authored
by David Horowitz, President of the Center for the Study of Popular Culture, exposing
Chomsky as anti-American, and waved American flags to show solidarity with the
President. ]
damn, ya gotta love this little rooster. I love the above accolades from the
caught under the picket fence pig-like squealing.
The man’s a bit timid on some subjects but he does agitate. Go Chompsky.

"so tell me... enlighten me.... give me the source of your facts about the bombings which you alluded to earlier.
......... i 'm interested to see "the facts".... and just who the source might be???
yours truly,
wfb"

If by "bombings" you are referring to the countless "palastinian" terrorist attacks on Israeli citizens then I'll leave it up to you to find the scads of documentation about it that's been generated over the last 50 or so years.

And even a cursory reading of Chomsky's take on the middle east shows his prediliction to demonize Israel for defending itself.

Now, please, cite some proof of this notion that America is the leading terrorist state. A very Chomskiesque statement to be sure.

fresca,

could you at least come up with one source of credible evidence......... after all, it is the israelies who are occupying palestinian land. i think your story may be one sided....
i believe that both sides in the conflict have participated in this unending battle.

so i ask you again... if you're at all serious about this matter.... show me whatcha got..
i will ...... if you will. :)

wfb

dear bushie boy,
your article was entertaining... not very enlightening...

Responding to Chomsky' statement, David Horowitz wrote, "In point of fact - and just for the record - however ill-conceived Bill Clinton's decision to launch a missile into the Sudan, it was not remotely comparable to the World Trade Center massacre.

read this.......... and please notice that i've included specific sources.... :)

observing that the toll of the "horrendous crime" committed on Sept. 11 with "wickedness and awesome cruelty" may be comparable to the consequences of Clinton's bombing of the Sudan in August 1998. That plausible conclusion may be shocking to those who have been well-trained to consider their crimes against the weak to be as normal as the air they breathe. But as in innumerable other cases, the picture looks different at the other end of the guns. Dr. Idris Eltayeb, one of Sudan's handful of pharmacologists and chairman of the board of the pharmaceutical factory destroyed by US missiles, says that the crime "was just as much an act of terrorism as at the twin towers - the only difference is we know who did it. I feel very sad about the loss of life [in New York and Washington], but in terms of numbers, and the relative cost to a poor country, [the bombing in Sudan] was worse" (James Astill, Guardian, Oct. 2, 2001).

Unfortunately, he may be right, even if we do not take into account "the political cost to a country struggling to emerge from totalitarian military dictatorship, ruinous Islamism and long-running civil war" before the missile attack, which "overnight [plunged Khartoum] into the nightmare of impotent extremism it had been trying to escape" (Astill). These political costs may have been even more harmful to Sudan than the destruction of its "fragile medical services," Astill concludes three years after the attack, confirming the reasoned judgment of Financial Times correspondent Mark Huband

haven't read anything of his yet, huh?

Anyone who is totally one sided (like chomsky) is a waste of time to quote or read because
A) his own bias will prevent him from seeing what is the truth so even if he does find the truth it was merely the million monkeys on a typwriter method.
B) Even if he was right the people who matter on one side would never listen to him because he is obviously against them
C) He just encourages the side that he supports to be more argumentative as opposed to negotiating by always harping on about how justified they are (no matter how evil their actions are).

you're disappointing me bushie....

have you ever really openly listened to what chomsky had to say.... in order to truly listen you have to be objective and logical. i 'm beginning to feel that you may not really be actively listening to his arguments.... and he does supply a multitude of credible sources.... often times from declassified government documents( US documents)... from the security council.... CIA FBI .... etc.....

have you bothered to check out those sources, or have you preemptively dismissed any chance for an authentic discourse?
as far as the article posted...... as far as i can tell... the author could be just as irrational as you seem to be. his views don't carry any weight cause he doesnt have credible sources.

and, by the way.... david horowitz seems to be making up his own propaganda:

Chomsky is currently leading the insidious campaign to browbeat American universities into divesting assets linked to Israel. Chomsky even favored French leftist Robert Faurisson by authoring a preface to his asinine book denying the existence of Nazi gas chambers entitled "Maemoire en daefense : contre ceux qui m'accusent de falsifier l'histoire : la question des chambres aa gaz." Faurisson, who the Irish newspaper The Sunday Tribune described as "a leading Holocaust-denier," himself authored the preface to Ernst Gauss' revisionist screed "Dissecting the Holocaust : The Growing Critique of 'Truth' and 'Memory.'"
Chomsky is currently leading the insidious campaign to browbeat American universities into divesting assets linked to Israel. Chomsky even favored French leftist Robert Faurisson by authoring a preface to his asinine book denying the existence of Nazi gas chambers entitled "Maemoire en daefense : contre ceux qui m'accusent de falsifier l'histoire : la question des chambres aa gaz." Faurisson, who the Irish newspaper The Sunday Tribune described as "a leading Holocaust-denier," himself authored the preface to Ernst Gauss' revisionist screed "Dissecting the Holocaust : The Growing Critique of 'Truth' and 'Memory.'"

HOROWITZ IS MANIPULATING THE TRUTH.....

I ACTUALLY HEARD CHOMSKY'S RESPONSE TO THIS CLAIM. HE DID NOT KNOW WHAT THE BOOK WAS ABOUT.... AND WHEN HE FOUND OUT.... HE STATED THAT THESE HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH HIS PERSONAL VIEWS..... AFTER ALL THIS HE DID DEFEND THE AUTHOR.... HE WASNT DEFENDING THE CONTENT OF THE BOOK.... HE WAS DEFENDING THE AUTHOR'S RIGHT TO PUBLISH THE BOOK.... IT'S CALLED FREE SPEECH.

wfb.

bushman,

why would chomsky go to all this trouble.... he really doesnt have much to gain.... the guy's 73 years old.... he doesnt need the money thank you.... they pay quite well over there at mit. do you know how much passion this man has.... he cares about your rights even more than you do.

use common sense.... why would someone go to all this trouble.... ??????

use your common sense.... when he's speaking... does he seem genuine?... you know body language says alot.... according to a recent psychological study on human communication:

9% words................. 31% tone of voice.
........................60% body language

the study found that body language and tone of voice convey more substance than the actual words.....

the words are important.... but if the body lingo doesnt match up.... it's safer to believe your intuition

of course.... its just a study... but i thought it was interesting.... no one can prove or disprove it....

have you ever heard someone shouting " Me... oh I'M NOT ANGRY!!!!!".... but the tone of his voice and facial expression tell you otherwise???

"could you at least come up with one source of credible evidence......... after all, it is the israelies who are occupying palestinian land. i think your story may be one sided....
i believe that both sides in the conflict have participated in this unending battle. "


Please tell me exactly what you want a source of info showing. Suicide Bombs? Israeli retaliation? What?

I'm serious, I don't know what you're asking.

I do agree with you though.

The reason why I go on and on in support of Israel around here is not because I think that Israel is lilly white. I'm not Jewish and have no ties to the place. I agree that BOTH sides are caught in a cycle of BOTH of their making. Neither side is innocent and neither side is a pure victim.

But most folks around here would sooner die than even entertain the notion that the palestinians are anything but poor innocent oppressed angels.

I'm simply asking for someone here to admit that the sides of BOTH streets are dirty.

Israel IS occupying palestinian land. Granted.
AND, they occupy that land because that land was lost by neighboring arab states in an unsuccessful attempt to anihilate them in '67.

That's just the plain fact.

If it was up to me, I'd dismantle the settlements. I'd then give Palestine statehood over One of the occupied territories augmented by adjoining land equal to the amount of the other territory. I don't think Palestine should be split up and I don't think it should bisect Israel. I think that would, agian, end in tears for both sides. I'd make damn sure that the State of Plasetine did everything in it's power to annihilate ALL terrorist groups AND the same for Israel. Finally, make Jerusalem a...well..I don't know what to do with Jerusalem...as far as I'm concerned just pave it, but I doubt they'll go for that.

Anyway, that's my plan.

I'm just waiting for one of the "seemingly" racist regulars around here to start acknowledging that the arabs have a hand in this too.

someone posted this shit under my name.
Please people
LIBERATE PALESTINE NOW !!!

That would be ME, Bush Admirer.

"could you at least come up with one source of credible evidence......... after all, it is the israelies who are occupying palestinian land. i think your story may be one sided....
i believe that both sides in the conflict have participated in this unending battle. "


Please tell me exactly what you want a source of info showing. Suicide Bombs? Israeli retaliation? What?

I'm serious, I don't know what you're asking.

I do agree with you though.

The reason why I go on and on in support of Israel around here is not because I think that Israel is lilly white. I'm not Jewish and have no ties to the place. I agree that BOTH sides are caught in a cycle of BOTH of their making. Neither side is innocent and neither side is a pure victim.

But most folks around here would sooner die than even entertain the notion that the palestinians are anything but poor innocent oppressed angels.

I'm simply asking for someone here to admit that the sides of BOTH streets are dirty.

Israel IS occupying palestinian land. Granted.
AND, they occupy that land because that land was lost by neighboring arab states in an unsuccessful attempt to anihilate them in '67.

That's just the plain fact.

If it was up to me, I'd dismantle the settlements. I'd then give Palestine statehood over One of the occupied territories augmented by adjoining land equal to the amount of the other territory. I don't think Palestine should be split up and I don't think it should bisect Israel. I think that would, agian, end in tears for both sides. I'd make damn sure that the State of Plasetine did everything in it's power to annihilate ALL terrorist groups AND the same for Israel. Finally, make Jerusalem a...well..I don't know what to do with Jerusalem...as far as I'm concerned just pave it, but I doubt they'll go for that.

Anyway, that's my plan.

I'm just waiting for one of the "seemingly" racist regulars around here to start acknowledging that the arabs have a hand in this too.

"If it was up to me, I'd dismantle the settlements. I'd then give Palestine statehood over
One of the occupied territories augmented by adjoining land equal to the amount of the
other territory. I don't think Palestine should be split up and I don't think it should bisect
Israel. I think that would, agian [again], end in tears for both sides"
excellent. Now we're talking. But no more annihilations please.
there’s been too damn much of that already.

Are we actually in some sort of agreement?
Hmmm. Fine with me.

maybe west bank and gaza strip should be two different countries.
then they dont have to connect.
If we are willing to accept this preoccupation with cutting countries up into smaller bits this is one of the more practical opportunities for it.

"maybe west bank and gaza strip should be two different countries."

How so. Two different arab countries within Israel or what.
What exactly are you saying?

ermm could it be that sheep dog isnt actually insanly pro palestine (and pro chomsky etc etc) and the only thing between us is that he tends to jump th the conclusion that people are KKK members very easily?
hmm too much to hope for I guess.

Could it be that you're an oblivious buffoon?

Not me. This is easy. If someone writes something under my name, and it doesn't sound like me, then it wasn't me.

I'm pro Palestinian and pro Israeli, neither of
which has clean hands in this matter. The victims are the innocents
who were never allowed to see the direction their leadership has taken
them, who ignore the fact that no one has the right to inflict harm upon another.
I see an ocean of sorrow and anger constantly replenished
by the attitude of superiority and a wish for revenge that is so well
orchestrated, by evil entities to prolong this vendetta.
Like Mic Jager said, ‘too much blood’.

I did not submit the above post.

what i'm asking for is simple. exactly where are you getting your information about the conflict between israel and palistinian people. which newspaper... author...etc.

that's important because we are way over here on the other side of the world.... so we get our information from various sources....

the most credible evidence usually comes from sources which have no stake in this matter.... that is, objective. ...or at least as objective as possible.

does this make sense?
wfb

I get all of my news and information from Fox News. They're the most objective news outlet around. Whatever they report is the truth.

i think what sheepdude meant was that your last comment about israel and palestine was rather fair.... i can tell that you were genuine in your remarks.... that's good.... we shouldnt just bash each other.... it's about an open dialogue. we don't have to agree.... but we should agree to seek the truth.
wfb

i think what sheepdude meant was that your last comment about israel and palestine was rather fair.... i can tell that you were genuine in your remarks.... that's good.... we shouldnt just bash each other.... it's about an open dialogue. we don't have to agree.... but we should agree to seek the truth.
wfb

that last comment said it all.

wfb

i hope thats not true!..eeeeeeeeeeeeeek.... either some idiot is impersonating you .... or that was surely a joke .... right?

wfb

fresca.... you're joking.... right? lol... :)

wfb

That WAS me, you schizo. Just shut the hell up and go fuck yourself.

bushy,
osama bin-chomsky??? you really hate him don't you.

you probably didnt notice, but that article is all opinion....
a judge would throw him out of the court... tooooo much heresay.... he doesnt mention the pertinant facts..... and...one can never be sure but this guy has military printed on his forehead..... he doesnt seem to be a very objective source.

i'm sad that you can't see the lack of substance in his "article".................
sheesh,
wfb
p.s. look at the guys credentials:

Mackubin Thomas Owens is professor of strategy and force planning at the Naval War College in Newport, RI, and an adjunct fellow of the Ashbrook Center. The views expressed here are his own and do not reflect the position of the War College, Navy Department, or Department of Defense.

call me what you will..... i wouldnt do that to you.

it is just really sad that you get all of your information from FOX..... :(

how do you know they're telling the truth?
wfb
i wish you all the best ....fresca....
if you're really seeking the truth... you should look at many different sources... cross check your findings...

""maybe west bank and gaza strip should be two different countries."

How so. Two different arab countries within Israel or what.
What exactly are you saying?
"

That's the last post from me, if that helps clear anything up.

As far as sources about palestinian suicide attacks and Israeli retaliations, I'm not sure what you're asking.
Surely you know that just about every news source ,right or left, documents these occurences daily.
Sorry, still wondering what you are asking.

But, here are the news sources that I go to out of habit each day.

KABC
KFI
KPFK (believe it or not)
Several indymedia sources
FOX
CBN (Canadian News )
CNN
LINK (middle east documentary channel on Direct TV - not neccessarily daily as it sorta comes and goes)
LA Times
ESPN BASEBALL

so there you have it.

"How so. Two different arab countries within Israel or what.
What exactly are you saying?"

- two seperate countries independant of israel and each other. (either that or gaza could be given to egypt if that suits them.)

personally I believe spliting up countries tends to create unviable states however palestine is already unviable spliting it up into two geographical areas wont make things much worse.

Sheepdog - despite the childish distortion of my nickname I think we all agree with you "too much blood".

"- two seperate countries independant of israel and each other. (either that or gaza could be given to egypt if that suits them.) "

On the surface that sounds fine, but I think ONE state will have it's hands full with the problems of creating a viable infrastructure, let alone cutting the resources in half and trying to come up with two countries.

I agree that two unnconnected halves of a country is bound to fail.

...I'm sooooo easily hurt. It must have been the 'Sheepy'
remark. Today (as well as yesterday, and the day before) I've been
posting with other nicks because of the deviant
mimics posting as myself, Diogenes, systemfailure and Meyer
London and it has made me a bit annoyed.
Alright Scottie, we'll just try to ignore the little weasels. They're like lice
today.
How does one go about defusing the madness and hate that
threatens the life of this planet? We've got nowhere else to go.

And could you pee on me Fresca? Please!

"I've been posting with other nicks because of the deviant mimics posting as myself, Diogenes, systemfailure and Meyer London and it has made me a bit annoyed."

the guys been doing this
with fresca bush admirer
simple simon eric daveman
for months now
yet u did nothin
u stayed quiet about it
just how long did you
think
that it was going to be
until it was your turn?

...I wasn't going to say anything but since you brought it up...
Thanks "?"

...I asked the individual to 'please cut it out' and
I've been the target of posers for years.
I'm only a dog so don't expect me to be jesus.
Hell, I'm not even a christian.

what matters is you've got to say..... i couldnt care less on which screen name your all using....

what is this 5th grade???

i'm new to this site... and i'm finding that it's no use.... a waste of time.... have fun playing your little games
bye people!
wfb

I remember a thread where we discussed registering nicks, and you, sheepdog, were quite against the idea.

So when this guy is imping you, you shouldn't let it bother you so. It's simpy the price you have to pay for freedom.

and I still do. Even you annoy me sometimes so don't
feel left out. I've been faintly amused more then once
by your antics. Still trying to shut down IMC, Eric?

...nobody wants to shut down indyMedia.

It's too much fun.

So your other name is Eric, huh daveman?

I agree that two unnconnected halves of a country is bound to fail.

- Palestine will fail anyway - at least in as much as zimbabwae for example is currently a failure.
they can have the sucess of independance of course.
I dont see any way around that it has no resources besides its proximity to israel and no likelyhood of foreign support and no stability (PLO vs Hamas etc). Palestines sucess is a non issue that is why spliting it up might be OK.
if it was given to egypt and someone else it might stand half a chance (although I expect they would just let it waste away).

- Sheepdog -
-- How does one go about defusing the madness and hate that threatens the life of this planet? We've got nowhere else to go.

-- Either we sacrifice some personal freedoms and rights or we cannot stop madness and hatred. I take no psoition on which is worse here but unfortunatly it is one or the other.

This is because hatred in general is "taught" I mean it is biased lessons in school about evil jews or muslims that create the problem even mroe so than actual actions by either side - ie the myth is far worse than the reality.
but you cant stop people teaching hate unless you restrict their ability of free speach.. Similarly it seems that it is highly unlikely that the two governments will just agree to make peace while their people still hate each other.

I did have a thought just now (undeveloped as it is)
-------------
If there is a solution on the government level then it is that you have an external power who is not a friend of israel or palestine infact is quite willing to become their mutual enemy since a friend of either side will (in their mind) just encourage that side to fight on.
basically whenever one side does somthing that breaches the "roadmap to peace" or whatever the guidelines are then that side is punished for it in whatever manner ie economic.

but anyway no one is willing to pay the price of finding a solution...

Do you actually think that anybody gives a shit about your opinions?

I'll get back to you on your idea.
Ignore the above.

Please get back on your anti-psychotic meds.

palestine is a few bits of other countries populated by a variety of people from neighbouring countries occupied by yet another country.
It has hardly any industry except those dependsnt on the same country ithat is occupying it.
Seems that it would be VERY hard to make it viable for only these reasons besides the fact that it is riddled with terrorist organizations who are likely to turn their attentions on each other and fight for power when this is all over (if it is ever over).
For example arafat can only avoid their wrath if it is directed at someone else.

I still don't give a shit about your opinions, beotch.

Sheepdog,
I was looking through the list of sources you provided. I found the article from
www.world-action.co.uk/bushknows.html
to be very interesting.

It was called "The Case for Bush Administration Advance Knowledge of 9-11 Attacks"

While I was at 'World-Action', I read some other interesting stories on that site, including (I'm not making this stuff up):

1952: "FLYING SAUCERS EXIST"
COVERT GLOBAL WORLD WAR
1,300 MEN ABDUCTED FOR 3 WEEKS

VATICAN ADMITS ET IS REAL IN 1999

WHAT THE ASTRONAUTS REALLY SAW

GENOCIDE WARNINGS IN PROPHECY

You read things like:

"1952: "FLYING SAUCERS EXIST"
COVERT GLOBAL WORLD WAR
1,300 MEN ABDUCTED FOR 3 WEEKS

VATICAN ADMITS ET IS REAL IN 1999

WHAT THE ASTRONAUTS REALLY SAW

GENOCIDE WARNINGS IN PROPHECY"

And then, on the same site, read "The Case for Bush Administration Advance Knowledge of 9-11 Attacks"...

...and you take it seriously?

Consider the source, man.

Agape is a cult of brainwashed people who are being blackmailed with the secrets given during so called counseling sessions.

Quite interesting that the post by "Bush" states Noam Chomsky is the dumbest man alive when I thought it was Mr. Bush? I've heard Chomsky speak many times and I haven't heard a more clear voice that pays attention to facts. It's an amazing statement when people like Rush, Hannity, Colmes, O'Rielly and many others bombard the airwaves with foolishness and propaganda. Is it really that hard for America to see how ignorant that group of men are? If so, I see why we are in such a horrible state where people truly do not know what their own government is doing or what the definition of democracy is.

From http://rubberducky.org/cgi-bin/chomsky.pl:

"A consequence of the approach just outlined is that this analysis of a formative as a pair of sets of features is not quite equivalent to an important distinction in language use. However, this assumption is not correct, since the systematic use of complex symbols appears to correlate rather closely with a descriptive fact. Of course, this selectionally introduced contextual feature cannot be arbitrary in the traditional practice of grammarians. I suggested that these results would follow from the assumption that a case of semigrammaticalness of a different sort may remedy and, at the same time, eliminate the extended c-command discussed in connection with (34). Summarizing, then, we assume that the speaker-hearer's linguistic intuition does not readily tolerate the levels of acceptability from fairly high (eg (99a)) to virtual gibberish (eg (98d))."

The man's obviously a genius.

he woke up from a drugged stupor just long enough to write down something Dr. Chomsky was saying out of context during one of his lectures!

Looks like IMC LA is about to fail again (oops, just did), but anyway...
'Mr. Wilson' you're kinda ignorant of Chomsky in my opinion as I have read much of his works and the references he uses for his analysis are
from mainstream sources. I don't know about the link you were referring to but I only dispute his reluctance to address the issue of conspiracy
in the assassinations of various figures such as JFK, RFK etc.
Rather than pull some segment of a dissertation from a source I have never heard of, try debunking one of his major works such as Manufacturing Consent, Deterring Democracy, Fateful Triangle
or any of the works written that are listed here.
http://www.researchresources.net/chomsky.htm

I was refering to this:
> That's what Chomsky did. He just made some stuff up without doing any real research! Unfortunately, it caught on, and now he's the darling of the Left, and his opinion on all manner of subjects is sought, and given even where it is not sought. He's just riding the wave of something that happened to sound good at the time.

Chomsky...a big honkin' fraud.<
you are a fraud,

Chomsky has his small handful of cult followers, and that's about it. He's taken seriously by them, but not much beyond them. There's always a gravy-train if you look hard enough.

DennisTheMenace:"the dissertation segment I posted was generated by software using language similar to Chomsky's. "

Really? Can you site which source written by Chomsky is "similar"?

So...the short answer is "No, Mr. Wilson can't site any sources written by Chomsky that are similar"...

...try to be more concise next time...this ain't a 10th grade essay question....if it was, you'd get an "F"....

"A consequence of the approach just outlined is that this analysis of a formative as a pair of sets of features is not quite equivalent to an important distinction in language use. However, this assumption is not correct, since the systematic use of complex symbols ..."

Sounds like the way Noamy writes, it makes no sense just like he doesn't, you can dance to it, I give it a 8.5.

...cite the comparitive source...other than your overtaxed imagination....

...oh, that's right...you've never READ any Chomsky...otherwise you might upset those little delusions of yours...can't have that now, can we?

Is every Republican a fuckin' liar or what? I think "Liar" and "Republican" have pretty well been established to be synonymous...at least as evidenced by the bleaters on this board....

Whatever.
:&

"....it makes no sense...."

Gee, why am I not surprised that Chomsky might be difficult for you to comprehend...I'll bet you'd have trouble with a 2nd grade primer...

Chumpski is God.

>One other alternative: you're an idiot.

Please don't insult idiots by comparing them to KPC.

Thank You.

...see...it's so frustrated it's talking to itself....

I usually like to post with important information however this little clip says it all - click the link. If America elects Bush for the "first" time, they truly deserve the mess we are in.

http://media.ebaumsworld.com/sovereignty.mov