Now I certainly don't agree with a lot of Chomsky, bvut this dude clearly
has an axe to grind. For instance,
After 9/11, he was more concerned about a fictitious famine in Afghanistan
than about the nearly 3,000 incinerated in The World Trade Center attacks.
What a fucking idiot. The 3000 were already dead, the 'famine' was
about-to-be. A Chomsky nut could say Chomsky helped avert complete
catastrophe (though there apparently was a decent amount of famine after
all, but nothing like 3MM.)
But this misses the point. Mr Donald will no doubt chime in yammering on
about Chomsky's lies, but that also misses the point. Chomsky makes very
strong arguments supporting a very different view of world events, and he
often quotes primary and secondary sources. If you are going to disagree
with Chomsky (and in many areas I do), then you've got to actually get off
your lazy ass and look up the sources and do some f-in' homework. Only then
are you qualified to refute him.
-TD
From: R.A. Hettinga [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: The Full Chomsky
Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2004 16:20:43 -0500
http://www.mensnewsdaily.com/archive/c-e/chapin/2004/chapin111004.htm
MensNewsDaily.com
The Full Chomsky
November 10, 2004
by Bernard Chapin
Question: How could a linguist working as a college professor have
omniscient insight regarding the inner-workings of the American government
and exclusive knowledge concerning the hidden motivations of every
government official in our nation's history?
Answer: There's no way he could.
Yet, such common sense does little to refute the fact that Noam Chomsky
is
one of the ten most quoted figures in the humanities. He has published
screed after screed deconstructing American foreign policy positions and
never has given any indication that his insinuations may somehow be limited
by lack of connections or first hand evidence (or, in some cases, any
evidence whatsoever). Since the 1960s, he has fully played the role of
Wizard Professor and created an entire library's worth of pseudo-academic
smog .
Until recently, there have been few antidotes for his morass of
accusations and allegations, but now we have The Anti-Chomsky Reader,
edited by David Horowitz and Peter Collier, which offers purchasers the
service of deconstructing the deconstructor. Once you've finished reading
it, you'll be highly grateful as Chomsky's lies are so pervasive and
counter-intuitive that it's a wonder anyone but the paranoid ever read him
in the first place.
The Anti-Chomsky Reader is a compilation of essays outlining and refuting
the travesties that the M.I.T. linguist has passed off as truth. It does
not confine itself to politics alone. Substantial space is given to the
analysis of his scholarly publications in linguistics. These are addressed
in two chapters called, A Corrupted Linguistics and Chomsky, Language,
World War II and Me. In the area of his chosen field, many have given him
an intellectual pass but this work does not. His linguistic ideas may be as
spurious as his political tomes. All sources give him initial credit for
his core academic assumption about the biological basis of grammar, but
it seems that he has engaged in little in the way of scientifically
verifiable work over the course of the last fifty years. Chomsky's creative
terminology dazzles admirers but his new theories inevitably amount to
nothing
Overall, the compendium leaves no region of his reputation left
unexamined. Anti-Americanism is central to his worldview. He never sees
this nation as being superior to any other. At best, we mirror the
pathologies of totalitarian states. We can discern this clearly in Stephen
Morris's Whitewashing Dictatorship in Communist Vietnam and Cambodia. The
author sums up Chomsky's fetish for defending the Vietnamese and Democratic
Kampuchea aptly when he argues that,
As a radical political ideologue, he is crippled by an intense emotional
commitment to the cause of anti-Americanism. Operating on the principle
that 'my enemy's enemy is my friend,' he wholeheartedly embraced the
struggle of two of the world's most ruthlessly brutal regimes.
Chomsky's hopes for mankind are vested in murderous revolutionaries and
not in his own nation. It is our nation, and never the Khmer Rouge, which
gives its citizens the freedom to vote, the freedom to trade, and, most
obviously, the freedom to spread the type of sedition that Noam Chomsky has
been disseminating for close to 40 years.
He does not limit himself to Asia, however. The professor has constantly
minimized the acts of many totalitarian states. Chomsky regarded Soviet
control of eastern Europe, when compared to the American presence in
Vietnam, as being practically a paradise We see a man who cares far more
about Holocaust deniers than the six million who were exterminated in gas
chambers or desolate Russian ravines.
After 9/11, he was more concerned about a fictitious famine in
Afghanistan
than about the nearly 3,000 incinerated in
