Come on, Noam, you got to get over not having been born an Episcopalian. Soon.

There were two bombings in Argentina. Und so weiter. A historian this man is not.

He is as vulgar an apologist (his term) for Pali terror as AIPAC is a vulgar apologist for Israeli terror.
Vulgar knows vulgar.

I don't see him apologizing for Palestinian terror. For instance, he agrees that the Klinghoffer murder was disgusting and compares it to the two deaths of the wheelchair-bound Palestinians at Jenin. That's not a comparison you make if you're defending an atrocity--it's a comparison you make if you're saying that "our" side (the Western good guys) do the same sorts of things as "their" side. He's right, but it's virtually impossible to find anyone in mainstream US circles who will admit this. At best they'll admit that the Palestinians have some legitimate complaints, but then we'll usually get some stupid comparison such as the one that bulldozing houses isn't morally equivalent to suicide bombing, thereby letting us know who the civilized people are and who the thugs are.

I do think that Chomsky isn't necessarily the best spokesperson f you want to persuade the unpersuaded about US or Israeli crimes. The rhetorical style seems to drive some people away. For me it was an eye-opening experience, reading Chomsky. I read Chomsky for years, but nowadays I mostly read human rights reports and firsthand accounts from people actually on the scene, so I don't go out of my way to read Noam's stuff anymore. But I don't think your criticism is fair, donescobar.

PLO: Push Leon Overboard

Do you know why Leon couldn't make it as a boxer?
Couldn't take a shot to the head.

You're all right. I have been and remain "unfair" about Chomsky. There are qualities about his kind of "salon socialism" (in addition to the careful selectivity of his historic examples) that I find repulsive. It's not that he's wrong about US bullying, "imperialism," about the inequities at home and the horrors committed abroad. He is either unwilling or unable (or both) to look at at the thousands of places and faces that nourish or at least permit the attitudes for such US behaviors. How about close to home, where Harvard and MIT both are esentially institutions with the primary duty to provide brain power to keep the practitioners of and profiteers from US actions in power. Shut them down? Never. Violation of academic freedom, boychik, and deprives me and mine of salary and TIAA/CREF pensions.
So, he picks his scapegoats and attacks, closing one eye to the "shining examples" that mut be exempt from scutiny. One of those is his own backyard. Archie Bunker was more honest.

Could you please be more specific about exactly where in the essay Chomsky is acting as an "apologist" for "Pali"(or,if you prefer donescobar,Araboushim)violence?
If you'd ever actually read or listened to Chomsky himself,you'd know he's pretty candid about his employment at MIT making him an enabler and beneficiary of the military-industrial complex.Similar to any of us who have participated in the American lifestyle,including military service,employment at a corporation or university,paying taxes,etc.On the other hand,he's used his perch to do more than most expose the reality and repercusions of his and our participation.
He's a teacher,donescobar,not a saint.

Oh, he's too clever by half most of the time. And extremely selective in his use of facts. Like string theorists and modern literary critics, he figured out there are enough dumb fucks like you people who can be easily dazzled by some big words and seemingly bold insights, which are often mere sleights of hand. And he misses more than he comprehends.

BobS

Yes, but don't you find that kind of "candor,"--gosh, I'm just another humble enabler of the US military-industrial monster that's destroying or bullying chunks of our planet--just too, too cloying? Doesn't it belong into one of those "oh-my God,Kimberly, there are children without dental care in West Virginia" articles in The New Yorker, surrounded page after page by ads for spas, fur coats and Upper East Side restaurants?
Chomsky is his own shtick. He's not wrong about many things, but finally, he's shallow and often dishonest. He could benefit a whole hell of a lot by reading a little Brecht.

Donescobar, you might have more of a point on the MIT issue--I'm not sure. Maybe I need to read Brecht myself.

Donald Johnson

I know, I'm strident when it comes to academic "critics of the system." On one, level, what else can they do but feed off it and blast away at it at the same time. Brecht understood, perhaps too well. With Chomsky, that understanding is acknowledged so coyly, so unctuously that it sharpens my reading of the intellectual's dilemma of helplessness. But not in his case. By "making us aware" of all the evils of our system while serving it and publishing, lecturing and living the good life, he makes sure there will be nothing beyond the "awareness" that serves him and his paymasters so well. Look, he's saying, I make you aware, that's my role. What more could you want? And look, his bosses at MIT and their clients at the Pentagon say, he's free to voice all the dissent he wants. What more do you want? That's all there is, folks. End of cartoon.

are you sure you're angry at chomsky and not the generally harsh environment for even anti-authoritarian leftists...?

You're probably right: both.
Why should "the authorities" give a damn if a bunch of leftists yell at them? And my bet is, you're not going to see the "best and brightest" taking to the streets again or taking over buildings. They love private "propty" too much. The Reagan Revolution taught its children well.

donescobar,lost in your snit about Chomsky's inability to don a cape and leap tall buildings at a single bound or his refusal to don a loincloth and wander far and wide while attempting to avoid stepping on insects,you have still failed to cite an example of his apoligism for the sand nigger's(why not call a(sand)spade a(sand)spade,donescobar?)murder of civilians.

Take his article, "Guillotining Gaza," Ju;ly 30, 2007, Information Clearing House.

He writes: "Obviously, the United States and Israel do not recognize Palestine or renounce violence." True, so far. But the "obviously" is a red flag. He does not add: "And Hamas does not recognize Israel or renounce violence." Also true, so far. But somehow, by gum and by golly, not so "obvious" to Professor Chomsky. He doesn't acknowledge the horse and carriage link. You don't have to an Israel-lover or apologists to say that they are not the sole ingredient of the problem and hatred in the ME. Nor is the US, in this case. In other cases, sure. In his fondue of history, all things melt into one bad ingredient.

Nowhere does he write that Israel or the US are the "sole" ingredients for conflict in the Middle East.In the example you cite,his "apologism" consists of his omission of a sentence(the obligatory "Palestinians do bad things too" that is a necessary part of reporting on the conflict in this country)that would make little sense in the paragraph that offends you.It seems that you,like proponents of our noble enterprise in Iraq,would label anyone who departs from,or attempts to contextualize,the simple-minded narrative that informs the public discourse in this country as "apologists" for terrorism,Saddam,etc.

Aw, BobS, I'm not at all like those "proponents of our noble enterprise in Iraq." They're knee-jerkers, unfortunately with much money and power. Chomsky, in his own way, is a knee-jerker too, and that's in part what I don't like about him.

I think Chomsky generally assumes his readers know about the crimes of the enemy. He isn't necessarily right about that, but it's how I generally read him.

On the MIT issue, I don't have any deep thoughts. I'm in no position to be throwing stones myself, since I do less than Noam and live a comfortable life. There is a lot of hypocrisy in this.

They all do it. Blessed with deft insight and my superior wisdom, I know this. If you don't, well, you're an idiot deserving of my unparalled snark.

donny escobrooks escalates donnybrooks! pass it on.

I find Chomsky's writings hard going sometimes, for some of donescobar's reasons. I have not liked some of his articles in Zmag, for instance. But I've felt very differently about his spoken work - for instance, the material collected in the book "Understanding Power". This is of course full-on corny, but that book changed my life.

This happened because Chomsky was the first author I'd ever read who invited me to apply my scientific training to historical and current events. The comparisons which he invokes were the principal means by which this occurred. (My favorite is his comparison of the economic advancement of Soviet Russia to that which did not occur in Brazil over the same time period.)

So I think that the aspect of Chomsky's technique which was so powerful for me is perhaps the part which donescobar objects to. I don't agree that this makes him an apologist for Palestinian terror, but the process of making that comparison, and countless others like it, has opened the eyes of a LOT of people.

Noam Chomsky deserves an award for that, not a load of sniping because his particular anarchist's cave is an endowed chair.

ISRAEL-PALESTINE? QUIT paying them to kill each other, quit giving them guns.

"He is as vulgar an apologist (his term) for Pali terror as AIPAC is a vulgar apologist for Israeli terror.
Vulgar knows vulgar"
-Donescobar

Donescobar, please point to an example of where Chomsky has acted as an apologist for Palestinian terror? Furthermore, what in your estimation should be the proper Palestinian response to continued Israeli ethnic-cleansing and occupation?

"He is either unwilling or unable (or both) to look at at the thousands of places and faces that nourish or at least permit the attitudes for such US behaviors. How about close to home, where Harvard and MIT both are esentially institutions with the primary duty to provide brain power to keep the practitioners of and profiteers from US actions in power"
-D

This makes no sense, at least coming from someone who has actually read Chomsky (I'm beginning to have my doubts). He has long maintained that as an intellectual (in the western sense) he is the beneficiary of enormous privilege which therefore entails a tremendous degree of responsibility. Unlike many of his contemporaries in academia, Chomsky has placed his intellect and privilege in the service of truth rather than power. In fact, many of the "thousands of places and faces" you speak of as enablers of US terror and aggression are the very institutions that Chomsky has spent his career criticizing and exposing as bastions of morally depraved cretens. Of course you would know some of this if you had actually read his work at any length.

Look, I'm not denying that Chomsky exposes many of the evils and inequities of the American system and its empire-building.
What I find irritating is :
1. He stays on the surface, almost always. He does not look at the underlying human drives and flaws that incline toward support of our system and against questioning it.
2. You claim he spent his career criticising the institutions that support our terror and aggression, yet he has remained a tenured faculty member of one that has contributed a huge share of the scientific and technological arsenal to improve that very terror and aggression. Now, could he have moved from MIT to an institution not engaged in such work. Many, many times over, from liberal arts colleges like Haverford to State Universities in many places. But he loves the prestige of MIT, the SA peasants who got slaughtered more effectively thanks to MIT technology be damned.
He chuckles in self-effacing honesty about this. Some find that admirable. I don't.
I find the pieces he's written about the ME (the ones I've read, at least) to reveal empathy for the Palestinian position, and that is fine. He cannot understand (has he even tried?) how some of the Israeli mindset became what it is today. He doesn't have to like it or approve, but does he even understand the forces that shaped it, pre-and-after the founding of Israel? I ain't seen nuthin. Could be it exists and I missed it.

Could be you just haven't looked.His knowledge of the subject is encyclopedic and dates back 60some years to his youth when he identified himself as a Zionist.Fateful Triangle is a good place to start.
You make one legitimate point,that being Chomsky's continued affiliation with MIT when he could have easily found a position at a less officious institution.Then,like you have in most of your comments,you diminish your own credibility by suggesting he "chuckles" gleefully at the irony(you might try avoiding the use of loaded terms like "apologist" and "knee-jerker" and "chuckles" that you can't back up.It's the kind of cheap rhetoric I expect from someone like O'Reilly looking to score cheap debating points with his somewhat ignorant audience,but not here.).
If you're looking for an examination of our tendency "toward support of our system and against questioning it" you might check out Manufacturing Consent.
And if you're really interested in getting past the surface,I believe he's written a bit on language and it's relation to cognitive psychology.

But I read "Manufacturing Consent," which Chomsky co-authored. Like his other books, which are collections of short essays or interviews, almost everything is (mostly) unconnected, shallow observations that could have made it into a "Left Reader's Digest," if such a publication existed. Take his observation on the role of our media:" "to amuse, entertain and inform, and to inculcate individuals with the values, beliefs and codes of behavior that will integrate them into the institutional structure of the larger society."
Vow! For a high school kid in 1949, that might have earned an A. For Noam twenty or so years later, a post-colonialist yawn. In the USA? In the UK? In China? Differences, nuances, explanations, history--fuggedaboutit. Noam has spoken, and even if the "insight" is old and teeny, we're supposed to stand in awe? Please.
Grant him his work in linguistics and accept his dissent from America's worst policies and deeds abroad and at home. For the latter, he's no better than the earnest kid from Bard College marching vs one of our wars. Right, but with no particular perception or vision of why.

Chomsky's empathy for Zionism in its original idealistic form is there in his earlier works. You can find it reprinted in "Towards a New Cold War". You don't see it in his later works, I don't think, presumably because he's gotten angrier over the years.

And your first criticism, that he stays on the surface, is probably right. I think he admits it, though he also tends to say he's suspicious of theories about such things that go beyond what we all know about our own motives. Sometimes I think he says you can learn more from literature about what drives people than you can from the social sciences. He might be right about this. (I wonder if he's read Brecht?)

The MIT criticism, as I said before, might hit home, but I for one can't criticize Noam for this, since he does a lot more than I do.

Very fair and reasonable, Donald Johnson.

But what is one to make of this kind of statement (of which there are many)in "Israel, the Holocaust, and Anti-Semitism," in "Chronicles of Dissent," 1992. There he calls the Holocaust "The most fantastic outburst of insanity in human history."
That explains it all. A bad case of insanity was what it was. Nothing about Jew-hatred in Christian Europe since the middle ages, economics and class, Jewish assimilation in Germany since Frederick the Great, nothing about the Jewish role in socialism and Soviet communism or in the arts, nah, just a touch of that old insanity.
Has he read nothing? Not Arendt, not Stern, not Hilberg, not the testimony of Hoess, not the transcripts of the Auschwitz trials, not Grass, not Browning ("Ordinary Men"), nothing? Seems so.
In the same essay he says "Actually, my political views haven't changed much since I was about 12 or 13." Now he's talking.

Clearly,donescobar,you were more well read in media criticism than myself when I first became acquainted with Manufacturing Consent nearly two decades ago.Chomsky's and Herman's testable propaganda model which has been widely adopted since it's publication was a seminal event in my own understanding of political economy.
But,inasmuch that by then it was old news to you (20 years,by your own account-1949 plus twenty years or so)please share with me the names of any earlier volumes where their propaganda model was offered,or even any works of your own preceeding it's publication that demonstrated your precocious grasp of what Chomsky and Hermann have undeservedly been taking credit for.

You'll find lots in two places:
The Frankfurt School (Adorno et al)--just google a bit and in the Birmimgham (UK) School of Popular Culture (Many books listed, going back to post WWII), esp Raymond Williams' work.
I'm not knocking Chomsky and Herman introducing Americans to these thoughts, whether they pioneered them or not isn't important to readers who find them for the first time. Credit is due for that.

On the Holocaust issue, Chomsky is simply not the person to go to for deep analysis of human motives, whether on the individual level or on a larger societal scale.

Actually, I have my own complaint about his media criticism. I also read Manufacturing Consent and agree with what he and Herman say, but as you say, it leaves out the human element (or that's how I'd put it). There's not much talk about what actually goes on in the minds of mainstream journalists and editors when they lie or cover up US atrocities. He's asked about this and I think his response is something to the effect that it doesn't matter--he identifies the pattern and talks in vague terms about how you expect elites to behave this way and I agree. But when I'm talking to the unconverted I'd like to be able to say how it all works in detail. Are NYT editors and journalists aware of their biases? Do they consciously slant things? How are the truthtellers weeded out? (We know in some cases, like when Ray Bonner got kicked off the El Salvador beat in the early 80's.)

So I'm not angry at Noam like you are, but I agree that he's inadequate on some subjects.

Donald Johnson: I must disagree. You do exactly what Noam does, You pay for it. (money greases the wheel and away she rolls)PONTIFICATE all WE like, it's just a bandaid on a sucking cheast wound.

i like noam because he focuses on behaviors instead of reasons; it seems to me that roots are a difficult study under such rapidly-changing growing conditions.

I don't follow what you mean, Mike.

Hapa--I'd like someone who could do both. That is, point to patterns found in all societies (the people at the top think they're God's gift to the planet and insist on that storyline in whatever passes for the media in that society). But also, since we live in this society, I'd sorta like to know more details about how it works here. Chomsky gets the pattern down--our atrocities are sugarcoated and the enemy atrocities are not. But I want someone on the inside of the journalistic enterprise telling me how it works on a case-by-case basis. And how come there are occasional exceptions to the rule, like Seymour Hersh?

Not that it's Noam's fault he doesn't know everything.

I take no position on this discussion, but I am disappointed that there are a mere 35 comments on a post about Noam Chomsky, Israel/Palestine, terrorism and Hezbollah. This is not the internet I knew.

I think Chomsky might say that reporters behave as they do because of a combination of an internalization of the values of the machine they are part of and simple survival.
I never suggested Chomsky (or Herman) weren't standing on the shoulders of earlier generations,donescobar.I was pretty specific that their particular innovation was the propaganda model they offer.While it's not likely to be the last word on the subject,it remains an influential book,and is particularly accessible to non-experts like myself.Could you please be a little more specific regarding what work and by whom they lifted their idea(as you've suggested a couple of times now)?I appreciate your invitation to google,but am currently a little busy.
You know,this started with you disparaging Chomsky as an "apologist" for Palistinian terror, a charge for which you offered no evidence when challenged.You were correct in pointing out he hasn't successfully led a revolution and that he is probably as much a hypocrite as any of us(I myself confess to bemoaning the inequities of our health care system while making a pretty comfortable living inside of it).While you're also correct in asserting his lack of omniscience,particularly in areas in which he's claimed no particular expertise such as the Holocaust,your grabbing that last one out of the blue and my coupling it with your imaginary apologism accusation and your use of racial perjoratives(not to mention the entirely meaningless Episcopalian crack) makes it tempting to pigeonhole your prejudicial point of view.
So,what do you think of Norman Finklestein?

Oh Lordy, BobS, aren't we politically correct.
And by the way, it's Finkelstein. How insensitive to Jewish readers!
Kidding, of course, but unfortunately you're not.
First, omitting the fact that Hamas may want peace as little as the Israeli government is apologising. It's also disingenuous.
I was joking about Noam's, say, "discomfort" with his background. A lot of us have had or still have that experience.
I suggest that you take serious things seriously, but a dead earnest approach to the tweaking of a public figure isn't part of it.
So, have a Guinness or Fulller's ESB and take a more Pythonesque approach. Cheers.

Donald Johnson: Take the Gaza election, YOU don't honestly think the Jews paid to have the election overturned, WE did,U&I. (and Noam, of course0 Israel MADE money off that.

"I ain't seen nuthin. Could be it exists and I missed it"
-donescobar

Yes, I believe so.

Chomsky's inability to don a cape and leap tall buildings at a single bound or his refusal to don a loincloth and wander far and wide while attempting to avoid stepping on insects

Perfect.

Don't forget, Noam should also get the word out by passing out mimeographed zines at Free Mumia rallies. Who does he think he is, using his position to get actual books published by THE SYSTEM, man?

Seriously, donescobar, don't you have anything better to do, like bitch about some punk band who, like, totally sold out or something? Unfreakingreal.

I'll gladly take your advice to adopt a more Pythonesque approach,if you'll consider my advice that you adopt a less Dershowitzian approach.

"apologist for palestinian terror".. you jewish fascist filth... 100 years ago you would've called people defending blacks "apologists for nigger terror".

Israel is yet another fascist white supremacist incursion of europeeans into another people's land. How many millions did fascist white christians and jews exterminate when they took over North and South America? Did the natives get a country? Do natives get a blank cheque to kill and slaughter their neighbours with

What was the score of the last fascist jewish filth incursion in Lebanon? 1000 dead lebanese vs 30-something dead jews? Half of Lebanon in ruins vs a few rooftops in Jewsrael? Why the fuck should any humane person seek to "balance" their opinion on this? Do any of you fascist jewish filth apologist balance the point of the Nazis? The point of view of the Slavers? I don't hear any of you out on a limb to balance the point of view of the Chan-what's-his-name dude from the latest school shootings massacre?

If the retarded religious fanatic fantasy mythical land of the jews was somewhere in the middle of the Kalahari desert, nobody would've gave a FUCK about it. But since it's conveniently located a spit away for them largest deposits of oil on the planet, bam! The 5th army in the world. 3 billion $/year in unconditional support from US. Every single atrocity commited in Palestine and Lebanon vetoed at UN. Every single fascist greedy white supremacist land grab vetoed and encouraged. Gotta keep the owners of the oil on their knees...

what the fuck is "palestinian terror"? Make a fucking table and put on column one the number of people killed by palestinians and on the other the number of people killed by fascist zionist jews. Also, the number of cities and villages RAZED off the face of the earth by palestinians and lebanese and the number of cities and villages razed off by israelis.

But because fascist jews own Citibank and World Bank and Intel and so on, fascist jews get the green light.

Atrocity after atrocity but still, somehow they are exempt because, you know, Hitler killed 6 million jews? So what? A fascist jewish filth name Henry Kissinger is responsible for over 3 MILLION dead in Vietnam, Cambodia, Laos and various South and Central America nations. A fascist jewish filth supervised a fascist war that melted with napalm and agent orange HALF A JEWISH HOLOCAUST worth of asians. You know what the FASCIST JEWISH FILTH called HENRY KISSINGER got for that? A FUCKING NOBEL PEACE PRIZE. Jews commit mass murder and genocide and they award themselves nobel peace prizes.

Why the fuck can jewish fascist filth like Dershowitz of what the fuck is his name call for genocide of arabs/muslims on live TV and live with it, but if you merely question the Holocaust you could end up in jail? The same reason that white fascist filth can sell cancerigen cigarettes defended by the state, but black and brown people get murdered and imprisoned for trying to sell far-far, fucking-far safer and beneficial drugs like marijuana...

What the fuck is history? How the fuck do we know what actually happend in Germany? For two decades after Hiroshima and Nagasaki "history" was that japanaese burned their own children to make it look like nuclear weapons have harmful effects on civilians, when in fact they are perfectly safe?
Right now, for more than 50% of americans "history" is that Saddam was loaded with WMD and ready to nuke US...

History is what the winners of the war write.

6 million jews killed by a handful of germans and austrians is "Holocaust" with capital H. TENS of millions of natives killed by fascist white eruopeeans, christians AND jews in North and South America isn't even mentioned. Only if you are a professioanl doctor in history. 3 million asians melted by an army at the command of a fascist jewish filth called Henry Kissinger is "Rambo" for American history...

Why the fuck should Palestinians and Lebanese pay for what a bunch of fascist white christians did in Europe?

Did fascist white christians and jews pay for the horrors of colonialism and slavery that FAR OUTWIEGHT the jews holocaust? Why the fuck can the Klu-Klux-Klan protest for the extermination of blacks with police protection, but if you denounce fascist jewish filth atrocities against the natives of the land they forcibly occupy you get to be "anti-semitic" and could end up in jail?

Just wait for it. For what you've done and keep doing in Iraq, in Palestine, in Lebanon, even in Somaila and so on, payback will come. 9/11 was bad? Wait 'till the next plane that parks in the middle of a skyscrapper has a nuke on board...

3000 fascist, ignorant, fat, SUV driving filth dead in the WTC is a "monstrous crime". 1 million dead iraqis from 2003 till today is "debatable". The other million starved to death by that fascist filth Clinton were "worth it", in the words of a fat fascist bitch.

In all your history, if we add it up, there are probably one million blacks, natives, asians, browns murdered for every white man killed. And the white christian and jewish man got all the loot and all the land.

Retribution is coming. Solution isn't "peace" Solution is justice. Justice means balance. You'll have to pay up for all you've stolen.

Should be easy. I don't like the Dersh.He defends everything Israel does, I just want it not to be "wiped out."
I also think the Dersh and Noam have some things in common. Take a look at an article about Noam by Peter Schweizer, "Noam Chomsky, Closet Capitalist" and you'll see what I mean.
As Brecht put it so well: "Grosse Maenner soll man ehren, aber nicht glauben." (paraphrase)
Bestow honors on 'great men,' but don't believe them.

"apologist for palestinian terror".. you jewish fascist filth... 100 years ago you would've called people defending blacks "apologists for nigger terror".

Israel is yet another fascist white supremacist incursion of europeeans into another people's land. How many millions did fascist white christians and jews exterminate when they took over North and South America? Did the natives get a country? Do natives get a blank cheque to kill and slaughter their neighbours with

What was the score of the last fascist jewish filth incursion in Lebanon? 1000 dead lebanese vs 30-something dead jews? Half of Lebanon in ruins vs a few rooftops in Jewsrael? Why the fuck should any humane person seek to "balance" their opinion on this? Do any of you fascist jewish filth apologist balance the point of the Nazis? The point of view of the Slavers? I don't hear any of you out on a limb to balance the point of view of the Chan-what's-his-name dude from the latest school shootings massacre?

If the retarded religious fanatic fantasy mythical land of the jews was somewhere in the middle of the Kalahari desert, nobody would've gave a FUCK about it. But since it's conveniently located a spit away for them largest deposits of oil on the planet, bam! The 5th army in the world. 3 billion $/year in unconditional support from US. Every single atrocity commited in Palestine and Lebanon vetoed at UN. Every single fascist greedy white supremacist land grab vetoed and encouraged. Gotta keep the owners of the oil on their knees...

what the fuck is "palestinian terror"? Make a fucking table and put on column one the number of people killed by palestinians and on the other the number of people killed by fascist zionist jews. Also, the number of cities and villages RAZED off the face of the earth by palestinians and lebanese and the number of cities and villages razed off by israelis.

But because fascist jews own Citibank and World Bank and Intel and so on, fascist jews get the green light.

Atrocity after atrocity but still, somehow they are exempt because, you know, Hitler killed 6 million jews? So what? A fascist jewish filth name Henry Kissinger is responsible for over 3 MILLION dead in Vietnam, Cambodia, Laos and various South and Central America nations. A fascist jewish filth supervised a fascist war that melted with napalm and agent orange HALF A JEWISH HOLOCAUST worth of asians. You know what the FASCIST JEWISH FILTH called HENRY KISSINGER got for that? A FUCKING NOBEL PEACE PRIZE. Jews commit mass murder and genocide and they award themselves nobel peace prizes.

Why the fuck can jewish fascist filth like Dershowitz of what the fuck is his name call for genocide of arabs/muslims on live TV and live with it, but if you merely question the Holocaust you could end up in jail? The same reason that white fascist filth can sell cancerigen cigarettes defended by the state, but black and brown people get murdered and imprisoned for trying to sell far-far, fucking-far safer and beneficial drugs like marijuana...

What the fuck is history? How the fuck do we know what actually happend in Germany? For two decades after Hiroshima and Nagasaki "history" was that japanaese burned their own children to make it look like nuclear weapons have harmful effects on civilians, when in fact they are perfectly safe?
Right now, for more than 50% of americans "history" is that Saddam was loaded with WMD and ready to nuke US...

History is what the winners of the war write.

6 million jews killed by a handful of germans and austrians is "Holocaust" with capital H. TENS of millions of natives killed by fascist white eruopeeans, christians AND jews in North and South America isn't even mentioned. Only if you are a professioanl doctor in history. 3 million asians melted by an army at the command of a fascist jewish filth called Henry Kissinger is "Rambo" for American history...

Why the fuck should Palestinians and Lebanese pay for what a bunch of fascist white christians did in Europe?

Did fascist white christians and jews pay for the horrors of colonialism and slavery that FAR OUTWIEGHT the jews holocaust? Why the fuck can the Klu-Klux-Klan protest for the extermination of blacks with police protection, but if you denounce fascist jewish filth atrocities against the natives of the land they forcibly occupy you get to be "anti-semitic" and could end up in jail?

Just wait for it. For what you've done and keep doing in Iraq, in Palestine, in Lebanon, even in Somaila and so on, payback will come. 9/11 was bad? Wait 'till the next plane that parks in the middle of a skyscrapper has a nuke on board...

3000 fascist, ignorant, fat, SUV driving filth dead in the WTC is a "monstrous crime". 1 million dead iraqis from 2003 till today is "debatable". The other million starved to death by that fascist filth Clinton were "worth it", in the words of a fat fascist bitch.

In all your history, if we add it up, there are probably one million blacks, natives, asians, browns murdered for every white man killed. And the white christian and jewish man got all the loot and all the land.

Retribution is coming. Solution isn't "peace" Solution is justice. Justice means balance. You'll have to pay up for all you've stolen.

Finally, Jonathan, someone to have over for tea.

Who here at ATR (our crazy Unckle excepted) has advocated that Israel be "wiped out"? And specifically where has Chomsky endorsed that point of view,which is the implication of putting "wiped out" in quotation marks(sorry,donescobar,but that's straight out of the Dershowitz playbook)?Of course,I won't hold my breath waiting on specifics,inasmuch as you've artfully ignored previous attempts to have you back up your assertions(still waiting on the name of that book that Chomsky and Herman lifted their idea from as well).
And even assuming it were the case that we did wish to see Israel "wiped out",pretending Hamas is an existential threat to Israel or Jews(as is arguably the case with Israel regarding Hamas in particular and Palestinians generally)is laughable and insulting to the audience here-like I suggested earlier,that kind of bullshit rhetoric is the stock in trade at Fox,not here.

Apparently, Chomsky is supposed to give a condensed history of the world from the perspective of all the relevant actors any time he's asked a question about world events (and people complain about his books now). Then he's supposed to psychoanalyze individuals within those events, maybe even bringing up the latest insights from evolutionary psychology to explain just why the human animal itself is so depraved.

You know, he often says that only in America do people constantly want everything explained to them, constantly ask "What should we do? Where should we go? What do we do when we get there? Why?" etc. Everywhere else in the world, they tell you what they're doing about their situation. We have here some people who apparently aren't budging from their chairs until Noam explains the entire world to their satisfaction.

The comment that he supposedly doesn't know anything about Jewish history because he once referred to the Holocaust as "insanity" is enough to convince me that donescobar has never actually read him, other than looking for something to complain about. I mean, seriously, that's just insanely stupid.

This obsession with the purity of the messenger reminds me of ideologically driven music, like punk rock, or attempts by some vegans to completely and totally disentangle themselves from any atom that has ever been involved in any capacity in cruelty or suffering. Is Ouroborosian a word? Well, if not, it is now, because that's the best way I can describe this unbelievably pointless navel-gazing. We could have an angel come down on a golden beam of light to deliver the same critique of American foreign policy, and donescobar would be there with a magnifying glass, scrutinizing the feathers of its wings. Noam doesn't deliver his critiques from a vacuum outside of space/time, so he's shallow and dishonest. Or something. My head hurts from even trying to comprehend such a stupid idea.

Oh, for chrissake, BobS, learn to read.
I didn't say anyone here at ATR proposed wiping out Israel. That it remains a hope, however faint at this time, in the minds of Hamas and others, has been quoted regularly for years. Nor did I ever say Chomsky endorsed "wiping out" Israel. He wants a "solution," one state or two, but that topic never came up.
I gave you two sources for finding publications (books, articles, papers) on early culture studies, which include quite bit on the media.
I did say that unlike Dersh, I don't defend Israeli actions just because they are Israeli, but that I hope peace can be achieved before demographics and time could grant some anti-_Israel fanatics making the "wiping out" a possibility.
Is that clear enough? Don't bring in crap like Fox, which I despise. If you can't stand criticism of a deity of the Left like Chomsky, some light, other serious, say so.

you jewish fascist filth, etc.

Now that's the internet I know.

Learn to stand by what you write,instead of back-pedaling and evading when your audience isn't content to just trust your bullshit(and once again,thanks for the invitation to go googling,but from where,please,did Chomsky and Herman lift their propaganda model that on the one hand you dismiss as sophmoric and on the other render them your applause for delivering to American readers?).If it's fair for you to accuse Chomsky of being an "apologist"(your term) for Palestinian terrorism based on things he HASN'T written that you would have prefered he did,it's certainly fair for me to "read" between the lines when you write "wiped out" in the context of your argument for Chomsky's supposed "apologising"(again,your term).
If you can't stand being compared to Fox,quit fucking acting like the crew there.

Dersh, not Noam, is mentioned in the sentence where "wiped out" occurs.
What a non-fiction writer chooses to omit does matter. You can interpret the omission the way you want, but it's still a conscious omission.
Now do try to understand this: Chomsky and Herman applied some ideas about how states/establishments use the media that had been around since Adorno, Williams, Marcuse. They didn't lift specific paragraphs or words. Many others built upon those ideas too. That's fine. But Chomsky and Herman built very, very little. There isn't much there, there, in "Manufacturing Consent." Better than nothing, but like Cliff Notes to the real book.
You want to read the authors mentioned, good luck.

And as my last message to you, in case you should wonder what it was Prof. Chomsky left out, it's stuff like this in the release from Hamas on the anniversary of the petition, requesting that the UN rescind because: "Palestine is Arab Islamic land, from the river to the sea, including Jerusalem...there is no room in it for Jews." JPost, Nov.29, 2007.
Note: not "Israelis," but "Jews."

JesusH
You write as much and on as many topics as Noam and appear in public, you should be prepared to take scrutiny and criticism. The "expectations" you attribute to me(explaining it all, angelic nature) are all in your head. No wonder it hurts.

Our crazy Unkle does have his grains of truth but, let's have cooler heads prevail on this issue...

The trouble is, Unkle doesn't see that he's more right than he knows and he would be wise to realize that it can be dangerous to be 'more right than others'. Especially when YOU believe it.

DonE, you still haven't justified your original and false claim that Chomsky is an apologist for Palestinian terror. And, re your 'quotation' from Hamas, it's just as I suspected:

http://themagneszionist.blogspot.com/2007/12/jewish-media-mistranslates-hamas.html

How very Dershowitzian of you.

On the other hand, the Israeli military is promising/threatening/offering a new Shoah in Gaza, and looking to German tactics in the Warsaw ghetto for inspiration:

http://www.distantocean.com/2008/02/and-by-holocaus.html

I'f I may point out, if one looks at Mt. Moriah, from near or afar, one sees, not a Temple, but a Mosque.

An omission that's all in your head,donescobar.I'm sure Chomsky would be happy to stipulate 'Palestinians do bad things,too'(as would most of us other Hamas "apologists").I'd actually suggest to him that he give that title to everything he writes on the subject.
As for myself,I deliberately chose not to write that Manufacturing Consent was the single most important book written since the Enlightenment.However,I think even a critic of Chomsky like yourself would agree that any book that makes even "very,very little" original contribution to any subject is noteworthy,particularly when it's outside one's field of expertise.My own experience is that innovation,be it in music or medicine(or probably even media criticism)is measured in inches,not miles.

I have no problem with the last two sentences at all.
All posts containing: Israel, Palestine, Hezbollah, Hamas etc I will stay away from. They bring too many Uncles out of the woodwork, or the inner Uncle in others.

I admire your patience,donescobar,for waiting this long to level the anti-Semitism charge,however indirectly and deniable(even cowardly)you do.

Did you read the Unckle post? The "jewish filth" etc stuff. What is that? That's the kind of, er, emotion, this topic often generates. Here, very rarely, on other blogs in bunches.
So stuff your fake outrage and do take a reading comprehension course.

"the inner Uncle in others"
Did I mention the deniability built into your comment?

What, in the name of Belzebub, am I "denying?"
The Uncles comment was aimed at "Unckle" here and the Uncles, inner and coming out, on many websites.
But this must end. I'm neither your English teacher nor your therapist.

donE, I believe that BobS was referring to the "inner Unckle" in yourself.

Long arguements over Noam's opinions YET NO solutions, no answers, no direction, nothing actionable, while 45 Palestinians die overnight(many civilians, some children). Does Noam have ANY posible solutions stated? How about xyz, he's saving the russian grid? How about electricity in Gaza? Food? Health? Peace?

But Duncan, I don't refer to any group of human beings as "filth." I don't want anyone, from a 12-year-old girl in Gaza to a 47-year-old father of four in Israel, killed or maimed. I used "Palis," which I thought was a a neutral abbreviation; Jonathan pointed out who uses it and I haven't since. Years ago I contributed to the "Peace Now" movement in Israel and distributed its materials here. I married a shiksa (sp?) and was disowned by my mother's Jewish family. I generally cannot stomach the stench of religious "chosen-ness" and self-righteousness. So, what "inner Uncle?" The idea that I hope Israel continues to exist, albeit in peace with its neighbors? That there are many, many others responsible for what now is in the ME besides the Israelis? If that's it, then let that be my inner Uncle. Or, that I find not everything Chomsky says or writes first-rate or perceptive, and a few things even silly and disingenuous? That I can live with too.
Stay well.

Gosh,married to a shiksa AND a Peace Now supporter.But you forgot to tell us who some of your best friends are.
After several days of arguing that Noam Chomsky is a terrorist sympathizer(my word),you're a little late announcing you're gonna "stay away from" any posts pertaining to Hamas,Israel,etc.,especially after the sudden arrival and your subsequent referrel to some hate filled lunatic who brings out "the inner Uncle in others".Which "others" do you mean,putz?We ain't on "other blogs".
Like I wrote,if you're gonna slap labels on people for the things they don't say,don't get all pissy when I read between the lines,especially after too many years of phrases like 'anti-Semite'and 'self-hating' being used inappropriately to truncate arguments with anyone who disagrees with the way the US has mishandled the conflict in the occupied territories.
I'll stand by what I wrote-it's the implication you meant to impart,which I fully expected you to deny.Thank you for being so predictable.

1. When "unckle" appeared, Jonathan referred to "the Internet he knew," or blogs on which that kind of bile appears. It is possible to relate what appears on one blog to occurrences on others.
2.My best friends: Ariel Sharon, Meier Kahane, Alan Dershowitz, Joe Lieberman, Marty Peretz.
3. There is nothing you wrote one could possibly deny.

That Dershowitz,Peretz,et al.,are among your intellectual idols isn't surprising to anyone who's paying attention.
What I found surprising is that we didn't get to read about the Arabs you've had to dinner.

That Dershowitz,Peretz,et al.,are among your intellectual idols isn't surprising to anyone who's paying attention.

Bob, with respect, I encourage you not to use the tactic of taking obvious jokes and pretending they're meant seriously. This is not just for donescobar's sake but my own, since if jokes were taken literally I would end up getting shot.

Also, generally speaking, I support more light and less heat.

Fair enough.Although I do in fact think donescobar has more in common with the execrable Unckle Bob (or torture APOLOGIST Dershowitz) than he would be comfortable admitting.Folks I respect(like Noam Chomsky,for instance) aren't so comfortable using dismissive terms like "Pali"(or kike,or nigger,or spick).Frankly,I think you pick up shit like that by hanging out with people of questionable character,like the sociopathic Kahane,for instance.
And no offense,but if you think that's "heat",you wouldn't have made it through salad with dinners at my Grandma's,and the table full of opinionated assholes(present company included)that entailed.