The Stupidest Intellectual (re: Chomsky and His Ideas)

[MMMMMM]

Specifically, and quickly, I don't think it's certasin, just very likely, that al Qaeda did it.

1) in character for them

2) 19 hijackers were Saudis

3) bin-Laden is Saudi

4) Wahabbi hatred of US is very strong

5) al Qaeda calls for jihad

6) I think the tape was probably real

7) These fanatical deluded nuts are eager as hell to do us harm--they did the USS Cole and other incidents--they openly assert their intentions

8) and that's just off the top of my head--do we really need more than all that? If a guy tells you he's going to kill you on Sunday and you know he means it and will try to do so, do you really need more proof before you act?

[Ed Miller]

Having gone to MIT, I had the privelege of attending many of Chomsky's lectures. Perhaps I was just an "impressionable college student," but the most notable thing about his work is that every point he makes is reasoned and well-referenced. While certainly one could argue with his point of view, this article is simply ignorant... something that Chomsky can never fairly be called.

[brad]

ok last post of the night.

1) agree that al queda needs to be targeted if only for the USS Cole attack. but thats another issue.

2) as far as proof of 911 you can see its a bit sketchy. as far as bin laden tape i think you see thats not much since it can be faked very easily, and we know that at least one was a fake, which leads us to ask who faked it, and why?

3) the bin laden tape (the one put out by arab sources, not US) where he says the US will 'turn into a choking hell' (eg, a police state thought crime deal) , didnt he deny being the mastermind of 9-11 (although he may have praised the attack?) ? i really dont remember.

4) do you think by (extra-constitutionally i might add) scrapping the bill of rights we will be safer and even if we are safer do you think it is a good idea?

[MMMMMM]

I don't recall all the details about the tapes either and wasn't aware that one is considered to be fake.

Regarding the Bill of Rights: I think for U.S. citizens it is extremely important. For "guests", visitors, those on visas, illegal immigrants, etc., I think that our security considerations now may well need to take higher priority in some cases. Also I think border patrols need to be greatly enhanced and illegals deported and the INS quickly and truly reformed.

[MMMMMM]

His points are extremely well-researched which lends a strong air of credibility to his writings--the problem is simply that "well-researched" does not necessarily mean "well-reasoned"--especially with Chomsky.

[brad]

i cant keep up with all of it but heres a link for one tape at least.

http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/Con...l=968705899037

http://www.prisonplanet.com/news_ale...02_terror.html

(second one is archive of first)

ive heard or read a lot more and it all seems to be a bunch of bs at least for the tapes. (like one video with the 'fat bin laden' with the big nose who doesnt even look like bin laden)

-------------------------------------------------

well then as far as rights and borders you are at direct odds with US government as their policy is to get rid of bill of rights (trade liberty for security) while leaving borders wide open.

if you need links to document the mexican border being wide open very easy to find. latest story i saw a border patrol agent got beaten up (he was alone) and it took like 30-45 minutes for anyone to come help him. also heard in one county all border patrol had been pulled out and told to stand down. citizen groups are patrolling some areas because of the private property damage and criminal stuff illegal alien crossers are causing, but they are being demonized in the press. a US congressmen from southern arizona, a member of mecha (mexican KKK), says we need to 'legalize a reality' and dissolve the border. i can get links to support everything i said.

[Insp. Clue!So?]

Which books of his have you read?

Do you really, truly get your information about the world from people like Ann Coulter?

[MMMMMM]

I haven't read his books, although I have read somewhat lengthy segments of his writings which seem to me distorted (sometimes insidiously so) and poorly reasoned.

I had issues with some of the reasoning tactics Chris Alger used in our past debates regarding various matters, and I elucidated my problems with Chris' approach and reasonings on this forum. This was before I was even vaguely familiar with many of Chomsky's stances. Interestingly, I later found that Chomsky appeared to use the some of same devices as Chris in his arguments--especially false equivalences-- and the holding up of the USA to moral standards which could not have been achieved due to pragmatic considerations of the Cold War and the need to employ workable foreign policy over idealistic but unworkable foreign policy (note here I am nor defending all past actions of the USA, just some), while attaching lesser importance to the more heinous actions of others which resulted in far more deaths.

In later readings of articles critical of Chomsky, I noted criticisms of the very techniques and fallacies to which I had first objected in my arguments with Chris Alger. So I didn't develop such objections due to reading others: I developed them on my own, and later found that others shared similar criticisms of Chomsky's techniques and portrayals. As I read more segments of Chomsky's writings, my earlier impressions received additional confirmation.

Regarding Ann Coulter, the only information I have gotten from her is the quote which I thought rather appropriate when it comes to dealing with true fanatics--and I got that through a third party.

[patrick dicaprio]

why even waste your time. chomsky is like L.ron hubbard now. lots of loyal fans but the rest know he is nuts.

Pat