"Noam Chomsky: My Reaction to Osama bin Laden’s Death"

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 11, 2011 1:38 AM GMT


    We might ask ourselves how we would be reacting if Iraqi commandos landed at George W. Bush’s compound, assassinated him, and dumped his body in the Atlantic. Uncontroversially, his crimes vastly exceed bin Laden’s, and he is not a “suspect” but uncontroversially the “decider” who gave the orders to commit the “supreme international crime differing only from other war crimes in that it contains within itself the accumulated evil of the whole” (quoting the Nuremberg Tribunal) for which Nazi criminals were hanged: the hundreds of thousands of deaths, millions of refugees, destruction of much of the country, the bitter sectarian conflict that has now spread to the rest of the region
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 11, 2011 2:22 AM GMT
    The winner writes the history books.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 11, 2011 2:53 AM GMT
    In GWB's case, there would have been similar rejoicing by the American people. Chomsky, whom I sometimes agree with, is wrong on this issue because bin Laden was not a head of state but a criminal. I would have preferred he be captured and stand trial but I'm not willing to think I know better in that situation than a Navy Seal.
  • musclmed

    Posts: 3284

    May 11, 2011 2:56 AM GMT
    Caslon18000 said

    We might ask ourselves how we would be reacting if Iraqi commandos landed at George W. Bush’s compound, assassinated him, and dumped his body in the Atlantic. Uncontroversially, his crimes vastly exceed bin Laden’s, and he is not a “suspect” but uncontroversially the “decider” who gave the orders to commit the “supreme international crime differing only from other war crimes in that it contains within itself the accumulated evil of the whole” (quoting the Nuremberg Tribunal) for which Nazi criminals were hanged: the hundreds of thousands of deaths, millions of refugees, destruction of much of the country, the bitter sectarian conflict that has now spread to the rest of the region



    Well how about another thought trail. The fact that Noam Chomsky is free to say what he just did, without himself hanging from a tree is testimony to the fact that we do not live in the sort of doctored or contrived controlled society he envision the United States to be.

    ChomskyThus Obama was simply lying when he said, in his White House statement, that “we quickly learned that the 9/11 attacks were carried out by al Qaeda.”


    How does he know what Obama knew at the time?
    Even if we stipulate that Obama said a false statement there is a difference between a lie and a untrue statement.
    Isn't he supposed to be a linguistic expert?
    Why isnt that accusation of a lie just garbage propaganda?

    Last we go through a ridiculous needless analysis on a island of pure liberalism in Chomsky, on which no difference is made between domestic crimes and international warfare.

    Does Chomsky even think he could have ever wrote so many books, said so many thing, in ANY OTHER COUNTRY IN HISTORY?

    Chomsky
    Same with the name, Operation Geronimo. The imperial mentality is so profound, throughout western society, that no one can perceive that they are glorifying bin Laden by identifying him with courageous resistance against genocidal invaders. It’s like naming our murder weapons after victims of our crimes: Apache, Tomahawk… It’s as if the Luftwaffe were to call its fighter planes “Jew” and “Gypsy.


    What does a name of a operation mean?
    Chomsky here states killing by Geronimo is justified. But what was September 11th? a food fight?




    good riddens to Obscurity, I hope he is remembered by this essay.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 11, 2011 4:02 AM GMT
    musclmed said
    Caslon18000 said

    We might ask ourselves how we would be reacting if Iraqi commandos landed at George W. Bush’s compound, assassinated him, and dumped his body in the Atlantic. Uncontroversially, his crimes vastly exceed bin Laden’s, and he is not a “suspect” but uncontroversially the “decider” who gave the orders to commit the “supreme international crime differing only from other war crimes in that it contains within itself the accumulated evil of the whole” (quoting the Nuremberg Tribunal) for which Nazi criminals were hanged: the hundreds of thousands of deaths, millions of refugees, destruction of much of the country, the bitter sectarian conflict that has now spread to the rest of the region



    Well how about another thought trail. The fact that Noam Chomsky is free to say what he just did, without himself hanging from a tree is testimony to the fact that we do not live in the sort of doctored or contrived controlled society he envision the United States to be.

    ChomskyThus Obama was simply lying when he said, in his White House statement, that “we quickly learned that the 9/11 attacks were carried out by al Qaeda.”


    How does he know what Obama knew at the time?
    Even if we stipulate that Obama said a false statement there is a difference between a lie and a untrue statement.
    Isn't he supposed to be a linguistic expert?
    Why isnt that accusation of a lie just garbage propaganda?

    Last we go through a ridiculous needless analysis on a island of pure liberalism in Chomsky, on which no difference is made between domestic crimes and international warfare.

    Does Chomsky even think he could have ever wrote so many books, said so many thing, in ANY OTHER COUNTRY IN HISTORY?

    Chomsky
    Same with the name, Operation Geronimo. The imperial mentality is so profound, throughout western society, that no one can perceive that they are glorifying bin Laden by identifying him with courageous resistance against genocidal invaders. It’s like naming our murder weapons after victims of our crimes: Apache, Tomahawk… It’s as if the Luftwaffe were to call its fighter planes “Jew” and “Gypsy.


    What does a name of a operation mean?
    Chomsky here states killing by Geronimo is justified. But what was September 11th? a food fight?




    good riddens to Obscurity, I hope he is remembered by this essay.


    Every time I think you've posted the dumbest thing ever on RJ, you go ahead and outdo yourself. Despite your quoting the article, you do not seem to have comprehended it. And then you spell "riddance" wrong.

    Again, if you're an MD, I'll eat my hat. Can't you just confess to being a troll?
  • musclmed

    Posts: 3284

    May 11, 2011 4:19 AM GMT
    Christian73 said
    musclmed said
    Caslon18000 said






    Every time I think you've posted the dumbest thing ever on RJ, you go ahead and outdo yourself. Despite your quoting the article, you do not seem to have comprehended it. And then you spell "riddance" wrong.

    Again, if you're an MD, I'll eat my hat. Can't you just confess to being a troll?


    Cant help yourself can you .

    1)Personal attack, 2)spelling error. What else? What about content?

    So its just dumb. That's what immature little girls and boys say when they just do not like things. A mark of an intelligence right? Calling something dumb?

    You define troll, by turning just about thread around into some weird personal vendetta.
    For me its a silly argument you have about me and what I do for a living. For others its comment on psychiatric meds, others just idiotic name calling.
    You cannot fake my specialty, ask q1w2e3.

    Nephrology is not a color by number chart you could easily fake or fascimile.
    Its good to have self esteem, and project you know something. But I am certain you absolutely know 0 about medicine.

    But maybe you ( test as a med student or Mcat level as you described yourself)
    http://www.realjock.com/gayforums/1500571?forumpage=4
    Christian73[Really, dumbass? It would be hard for me to NOT know what a dialysis machine looks like since I worked for 5 years in a health center where we did dialysis and I looked hem every single day.

    Plus, I tested at a medical school reading level when i was junior in high school. You may be an MD but you're not in my league intellectually. You're not even clos


    WHO CARES? if that mattered at all in forum. Everyone has an equal voice.
    *(by the way you made a spelling error in that thread).

    Your a self important snob. With a very bad terminal attitude and its sad that it seems to at least infects just about every post you make.

    What a bet you would loose, if in fact you were important enough to even refute your baseless comments about me.

    The only bet I would take to verify any part of my career would that you would permanently banned from RJ by force of contract.

    So eat your hat.... or just shove it up you know what.

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 11, 2011 7:38 AM GMT
    Caslon18000 said

    We might ask ourselves how we would be reacting if Iraqi commandos landed at George W. Bush’s compound, assassinated him, and dumped his body in the Atlantic.
    I'd be pissed cause I live on the Atlantic. Couldn't they dump him in the Pacific?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 11, 2011 1:06 PM GMT
    paulflexes said
    Caslon18000 said

    We might ask ourselves how we would be reacting if Iraqi commandos landed at George W. Bush’s compound, assassinated him, and dumped his body in the Atlantic.
    I'd be pissed cause I live on the Atlantic. Couldn't they dump him in the Pacific?


    I thought the bible predicted he'd be cast into the lake of fire...
  • musclmed

    Posts: 3284

    May 11, 2011 1:17 PM GMT
    jprichva saidChrist, even when you're proclaiming how brilliant you are, your post is full of new spelling errors ("loose"? really? My son did better than that in sixth grade). And "your' instead of "you're"?

    I'm with Christian on this one. The closest you are to a doctor is that you probably drive your mom once a month to see hers in exchange for her letting you live in her basement.


    When was the thread ever about me? And no one was proclaiming brilliance. I was just pointing out how empty and baseless his post was.
    Everyone has a right to a voice on a forum.
    But apparently if you do not fit the small life experience of a "Administrator /Organizer" and a in your case who knows??? you couldn't have a conversation on RJ.

    If it even was important, don't you think another physician on RJ would call someone out if they thought anything you both say were true?


    Its a forum not a spelling bee. And the mark of weak and undisciplined person that chooses to bring a red marker to a forum instead of a polite discussion of ideas.



    You want to join the bet too? since you are "with him" ?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 11, 2011 7:51 PM GMT
    Doctors and spelling have nothing to do with each other. Specifically, doctors, typing, legibility and proofreading have nothing intrinsically overlapping.

    One of my partners has perfect spelling and is a prolific reader, and his handwriting and typing skills are HORRIBLE. One of my other partners has terrible spelling but very legible handwriting, almost exaggerating the embarrassment of her misspelling.

    I try to do neither. I type and use speech recognition.icon_lol.gif
  • musclmed

    Posts: 3284

    May 12, 2011 1:01 AM GMT
    jprichva said
    musclmed said
    Its a forum not a spelling bee. And the mark of weak and undisciplined person that chooses to bring a red marker to a forum instead of a polite discussion of ideas.
    You want to join the bet too? since you are "with him" ?

    Listen, pal, I have profound respect for doctors. My father and sister are both MDs. I have a wide and lifelong acquaintance with hundreds of physicians, and I've encountered a number professionally as well.

    To a one, they are smart and literate. They also know how to spell, and they care to do it properly since it is just as easy to type a word correctly as incorrectly. When you type incorrectly, and then whine about how anyone who cares about such things is "weak", all you do is display your utter disrespect for language, communication, and detail.

    And it's kind of important that a physician care about detail, no?

    This is why I think you're a fraud.


    It is not a forum about spelling.

    I am not the one whining. It is you and one or two others that just hijack a topic and talk about that.
    If I cared to put the time in effort here as I do in a dictation or report I would.

    Put yourself up to the same standards, a review of some of the inane things you have said are filled with spelling and grammatical errors.
    .
    I am sure it makes you feel better in the brief second you critique people about spelling, but it is very telling about your ability to handle challenge in your life.

    If you understand something and its spelled wrong, whats the point? unless you have really nothing else to say otherwise.


    Fraud?
    thank god in the anonymity of the internet right? When you are interested in wagering something substantial. I am willing to make sure its known you are wrong.

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 12, 2011 3:36 AM GMT
    I like Chomsky, but his reasoning here is specious. The Nazis were not hanged because of the side effects of war (death, destruction, refugees, and division).

    They were hanged because they were found guilty of egregious human rights violations including genocide and ethnic cleansing -- both of which are well outside of international law governing the rules of war.

    As for Osama bin Laden, he was an enemy combatant. A well-known one yes, but neither a citizen nor sovereign of any state. No one is going to cry about his killing on what was for all legal purposes a battlefield.

    George W. Bush, meanwhile, was a sovereign head of state who sought and received authorization for military action from the representatives of the people of the United States of America.

    His Iraq war was ill-advised but sanctioned by Congress, perfectly legal, and conducted well within the bounds of international rules of engagement.

    Chomsky is comparing apples, oranges, and spaceballs here, and not making much sense.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 12, 2011 5:10 AM GMT
    TroyAthlete saidI like Chomsky, but his reasoning here is specious. The Nazis were not hanged because of the side effects of war (death, destruction, refugees, and division).

    They were hanged because they were found guilty of egregious human rights violations including genocide and ethnic cleansing -- both of which are well outside of international law governing the rules of war.

    As for Osama bin Laden, he was an enemy combatant. A well-known one yes, but neither a citizen nor sovereign of any state. No one is going to cry about his killing on what was for all legal purposes a battlefield.

    George W. Bush, meanwhile, was a sovereign head of state who sought and received authorization for military action from the representatives of the people of the United States of America.

    His Iraq war was ill-advised but sanctioned by Congress, perfectly legal, and conducted well within the bounds of international rules of engagement.

    Chomsky is comparing apples, oranges, and spaceballs here, and not making much sense.


    I see Chomski's point in the matter.

    The Iraqi people can (rightfully) look at the reams of evidence from the 2000 and 2004 elections, and conclude that Bush stole both elections. Therefore, Bush is an illegitimate head of state...and far more dangerous than OBL. (Birther republicans drew the same conclusion about Obama...but on zero evidence.)

    But wait, there's more!!

    This illegitimate head of state (and his surrogates) engaged in a relentless campaign of lies, deceptions and phony evidence about WMD. They told other heads of state, congress, the media, and the American people that we needed to go to war and destroy Iraq. They demanded the power to go to war...and anybody who dare opposes would have the blood of mass death and destruction on their hands.

    Bush ran a big con...and hundreds of thousands of young men and women are dead or maimed. Far worse than OBL? The answer is obvious.
  • musclmed

    Posts: 3284

    May 12, 2011 8:58 AM GMT
    White4DarkerFL said
    TroyAthlete saidI like Chomsky, but his reasoning here is specious. The Nazis were not hanged because of the side effects of war (death, destruction, refugees, and division).

    They were hanged because they were found guilty of egregious human rights violations including genocide and ethnic cleansing -- both of which are well outside of international law governing the rules of war.

    As for Osama bin Laden, he was an enemy combatant. A well-known one yes, but neither a citizen nor sovereign of any state. No one is going to cry about his killing on what was for all legal purposes a battlefield.

    George W. Bush, meanwhile, was a sovereign head of state who sought and received authorization for military action from the representatives of the people of the United States of America.

    His Iraq war was ill-advised but sanctioned by Congress, perfectly legal, and conducted well within the bounds of international rules of engagement.

    Chomsky is comparing apples, oranges, and spaceballs here, and not making much sense.


    I see Chomski's point in the matter.

    The Iraqi people can (rightfully) look at the reams of evidence from the 2000 and 2004 elections, and conclude that Bush stole both elections. Therefore, Bush is an illegitimate head of state...and far more dangerous than OBL. (Birther republicans drew the same conclusion about Obama...but on zero evidence.)

    But wait, there's more!!

    This illegitimate head of state (and his surrogates) engaged in a relentless campaign of lies, deceptions and phony evidence about WMD. They told other heads of state, congress, the media, and the American people that we needed to go to war and destroy Iraq. They demanded the power to go to war...and anybody who dare opposes would have the blood of mass death and destruction on their hands.

    Bush ran a big con...and hundreds of thousands of young men and women are dead or maimed. Far worse than OBL? The answer is obvious.



    Although obscure and in my opinion wrong, your "tongue and cheek" analysis has more logic than Chomsky's

    But if you want to go there. The guy below ( Iraqi) could believe and imagine just about any story.

    http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2011/05/11/world/IRAQ-1/IRAQ-1-articleLarge.jpg
    http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/11/world/middleeast/11iraq.html

    And I am sure as in your discussion about a illegitimate 2004' election you could also believe just about any story.

    It really just who you talk to . But even less than conservative news organizations shoot this stolen election theory down.
    http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2006/06/03/kennedy

    But even if you think Bush was illigitimate. Regime change from violation's of the ceese fire agreement from the first WAR preceded BUSH.
    Congress formally endorsed the vision of bringing democracy to Iraq during the Clinton Administration.

    Chomsky goes on ad-nauseum about propaganda. But this "essay" is just full of the same thing he speaks against.

    He claimed Obama "simply lied". There is no way on this earth he could support that accusation without a statement from Obama that he lied.
    Chomsky would have to know all that intelligence about 9/11 and what was known afterwards. Does Chomsky have security clearance?

    Since he is a "linguist" why would he say such a thing?

    But you cannot be suprised at what he writes and thinks. On September 11th 2001 he wrote

    On September 12, 2001, Chomsky wrote:

    "The terrorist attacks were major atrocities. In scale they may not reach the level of many others, for example, Clinton’s bombing of the Sudan with no credible pretext, destroying half its pharmaceutical supplies and killing unknown numbers of people."

    Even before the smoke clears, before the United States knew if there would be more attacks Chomsky here states it couldn't be worse than what the U.S had been guilty of.

    But Chomsky also defended Pol Pot in Cambodia, although lauded by the left , time has allowed him to be relatively discredited in his attempts to "lie".
    Ironic he accuses Obama of lying .