Newest Chomsky Video and the return of the evil empire!!!!!

www.democracynow.org.../06/24/1423212&mode=thread&tid=25

A return of John Negroponte to the world of politics. Hooray for third world countries...especially if they have lots of brown skinned people!!!!
Some of you will remember Johnny boy from the Reagan days when he helped facilitate the ILLEGAL war on Nicaragua (for which we became the ONLY country ever to be found guilty of international state terrorism by the world court) and Honduras.
Lets see...now we have Cheney, Powell, Wolfewitz, Rumsfeld, Poindexter and Negroponte back from the Reagan days.

Its hard to believe the machine can keep such a straight face these days.


There is no friend anywhere - Lao Tse

I cant get the link to work

YA..it appears that the whole Democracynow.org website is down. Ill give it a few hours and check back with the link. In the meantime...do a search for Voice_of doom and Chomsky videos. I've posted a few including a 3 hour lecture at MIT from MAy 20th this year...impressive stuff in my opinion.

There is no enemy anywhere - Lao Tse

Thank God for Chomsky. My favorite quote; sums up perfectly what I think of Capitalism:

"Personally, I'm in favour of democracy, which means that the central institutions of society have to be under popular control. Now, under capitalism, we can't have democracy by definition. Capitalism is a system in which the central institutions of society are in principle under autocratic control. Thus, a corporation or an industry is, if we were to think of it in political terms, fascist; that is, it has tight control at the top and strict obedience has to be established at every level--there's little bargaining, a little give and take, but the line of authority is perfectly straightforward. Just as I'm opposed to political fascism, I'm opposed to economic fascism. I think that until the major institutions of society are under the popular control of participants and communities, it's pointless to talk about democracy."

Originally posted by kegs
Thank God for Chomsky. My favorite quote; sums up perfectly what I think of Capitalism:

"Personally, I'm in favour of democracy, which means that the central institutions of society have to be under popular control. Now, under capitalism, we can't have democracy by definition. Capitalism is a system in which the central institutions of society are in principle under autocratic control. Thus, a corporation or an industry is, if we were to think of it in political terms, fascist; that is, it has tight control at the top and strict obedience has to be established at every level--there's little bargaining, a little give and take, but the line of authority is perfectly straightforward. Just as I'm opposed to political fascism, I'm opposed to economic fascism. I think that until the major institutions of society are under the popular control of participants and communities, it's pointless to talk about democracy."

- too true, the man's one of the few talking coherent sense today, a true genius and a genuine humanitarian.

The pity of it is we see so little of him in the supposedly open and free 'mainstream'.

any way to put link to video, chomsky is a must read/listen to. He is banned from newpapers, radio and tv- he must have something importtant to say, and he must be right.

...From intelligent Human ventures because he is an utter LUNATIC who has NEVER proven a single insane claim he has made BUT has enjoyed the CAPITAL (that's MONEY) that has found its way into his pockets from making them...

PITIFUL...

m...

Originally posted by Springer
...From intelligent Human ventures because he is an utter LUNATIC who has NEVER proven a single insane claim he has made BUT has enjoyed the CAPITAL (that's MONEY) that has found its way into his pockets from making them...

PITIFUL...

Speaking of pitiful...I think we should remember that the motto of this website is Deny Ignorance. Thus when we assert something as factual we should use some "facts" to back it up.
Since Noam Chomsky is Professor Emeritus at one of the the most prestiges university's in the world and has authored more than 40 books (with footnotes attached) I think he would need to be absolutely sure that his "facts" are just that. In fact I would say that his "job" would depend on it.
But given the considerable amount of evidence that our ATS "Business Consultant" has offered up..............

pathetic indeed...


Quick EDIT - LINK IS Working again!!!!!


[edit on 27-7-2004 by Voice_of Doom]

Originally posted by Voice_of Doom

Speaking of pitiful...I think we should remember that the motto of this website is Deny Ignorance. Thus when we assert something as factual we should use some "facts" to back it up.
Since Noam Chomsky is Professor Emeritus at one of the the most prestiges university's in the world and has authored more than 40 books (with footnotes attached) I think he would need to be absolutely sure that his "facts" are just that. In fact I would say that his "job" would depend on it.

Chomsky is a linguistics professor, and he has his job for being distinguished in his field. When it comes to political opinions which have no bearing on his profession, why would it matter to MIT? I'd hardly be surprised if the faculty and administration held the same viewpoints as him.

www.city-journal.org...

Chomsky is a Professor Emeritus which means that he is allowed to teach and lecture in any field of the university if he so chooses. Thats what the distiction and honor means. Chomsky himself has often expressed that he enjoys teaching in other fields as a way to "keep himself sharp" though he says that he sometimes needs a graduate student for help in some of the advanced mathmatic courses.
The comment I made has nothing to do with his "political" bent as you are correct in that it has little do with his liguistics field, but was directed at Springer who commented that he has never made a verifiable remark.
There is no way that a University with MIT's reputation would allow a teacher to continue to work and represent the college who had written books of unscholarly caution. I.E, if the work quotes a source...that source should exist.
The New York Times calles Chomsky, "arguably the most important intellectual alive". His research and footnotes are exhaustive. In fact in his newest book, "Hegemony or survival" he says that he will only quote sources from center to right (politically) to prove that his assertions are correct regardless of political stripe.
My problem is Springer...and others like him who choose not to review the material or fact check themselves but instead make inaccurate and obscure statements as if they were true. He made no reference to any particualr point Chomsky had in his 20 minute interview...I would bet that he didn't even watch the video. And since we claim to be seeking the truth here...perhaps studying the material in question might be a good place to start.
.
.
.or I could just be crazy....but since Chomsky probably has a IQ higher than certain people here can count, I choose to give him the benefit of the doubt. But I always check things out that bother me. Thinking for oneself should still be the way to go.


there is no enemy anywhere - Lao Tse