It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Professor Noam Chomsky speaks of U.S. led invasion of Iraq

page: 2
0
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 24 2005 @ 01:03 PM
link   
i think this man knows what he is saying,
he is a professor after all.
are you a professor, doctor H? oh, wait a minute your a doctor!
anyway,
i can cleary see what dont you like him, and his "liberal" talking.
it gets on your nerves, because its true.
i understand that.




posted on Jan, 24 2005 @ 01:17 PM
link   
I do teach a couple of classes on Psyc......be afraid, be very afraid.



posted on Jan, 24 2005 @ 01:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by DrHoracid
I do teach a couple of classes on Psyc......be afraid, be very afraid.


yeah, that's pretty scary.
are you trying to terrorise us? should we be reporting you to the department of homeland security?
noam chomsky makes sense and all the liberal lefty labels in the world won't change the fact that this man is for 'the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth'.
'ideas' are not a bad thing, dr. horacid. 'socialism' is not 'demonism' contrary to your paintjob.

noam chomsky for president. that would be AMAZING.



posted on Jan, 24 2005 @ 01:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by DrHoracid
I do teach a couple of classes on Psyc......be afraid, be very afraid.

i knew your answer to the "problem" would be:
fear.
fear and terror.
just like "they" tought you...

"keep them afraid and they will consume everything you give them"



posted on Jan, 24 2005 @ 01:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by billybob

Originally posted by DrHoracid
I do teach a couple of classes on Psyc......be afraid, be very afraid.


yeah, that's pretty scary.
are you trying to terrorise us? should we be reporting you to the department of homeland security?
noam chomsky makes sense and all the liberal lefty labels in the world won't change the fact that this man is for 'the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth'.
'ideas' are not a bad thing, dr. horacid. 'socialism' is not 'demonism' contrary to your paintjob.

noam chomsky for president. that would be AMAZING.


Sorry but Socialism is a failed experiment. It does not take into account one basic human trait. Everyone is different. Socialism tends to reduce all to the lowest common denominator. There is no motivation to succeed. Eventually they all fail. The original pilgrims tried socialism and almost starved. Not until capitalism came along did they have enough food to have the first thanksgiving.



posted on Jan, 24 2005 @ 01:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by poonchang

Originally posted by DrHoracid

Try this source............it's "official" encyclopedia data on this idiot..........
The same source I quoted earlier.................

en.wikipedia.org...


I tried your "official encyclopedia data"
from wikipedia. At the top of the page it warns, "The neutrality of this article is disputed." Usually, earning a Ph.D involves a lot of research.

I'm not calling you a liar, I just think you're full of it.

P.S.-Chomsky for president.


Typical....almost all articles in wikipedia have the same warning when it comes to personalities or even words. I have little to fear from someone located in "poonchang". The left always seem to think "all" PhD's are liberal or must be fake.

I submitt to you that Chomsky is a fake..............his ideas are based on failed human experiments, it must have killed him when USSR fell apart......



posted on Jan, 24 2005 @ 02:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by DrHoracid

Originally posted by poonchang

Originally posted by DrHoracid

Try this source............it's "official" encyclopedia data on this idiot..........
The same source I quoted earlier.................

en.wikipedia.org...


I tried your "official encyclopedia data"
from wikipedia. At the top of the page it warns, "The neutrality of this article is disputed." Usually, earning a Ph.D involves a lot of research.

I'm not calling you a liar, I just think you're full of it.

P.S.-Chomsky for president.


Typical....almost all articles in wikipedia have the same warning when it comes to personalities or even words. I have little to fear from someone located in "poonchang". The left always seem to think "all" PhD's are liberal or must be fake.

I submitt to you that Chomsky is a fake..............his ideas are based on failed human experiments, it must have killed him when USSR fell apart......


For the record, I'm located at Poonchang Palace and there is no need to fear me. I simply question your credentials: it seems to me that someone that has earned no less than TWO Ph.D's and hates Chomsky as much as you do, would have better sources than wikipedia.com.



posted on Jan, 24 2005 @ 02:37 PM
link   
[For the record, I'm located at Poonchang Palace and there is no need to fear me. I simply question your credentials: it seems to me that someone that has earned no less than TWO Ph.D's and hates Chomsky as much as you do, would have better sources than wikipedia.com. ]

I DO NOT HATE this man.

OK hows this.................

"There’s a famous definition in the Gospels of the hypocrite, and the hypocrite is the person who refuses to apply to himself the standards he applies to others. By that standard, the entire commentary and discussion of the so-called War on Terror is pure hypocrisy, virtually without exception. Can anybody understand that? No, they can’t understand it.
—Noam Chomsky, Power and Terror, 2003
Noam Chomsky was the most conspicuous American intellectual to rationalize the Al Qaeda terrorist attacks on New York and Washington. The death toll, he argued, was minor compared to the list of Third World victims of the “far more extreme terrorism” of United States foreign policy. Despite its calculated affront to mainstream opinion, this sentiment went down very well with Chomsky’s own constituency. He has never been more popular among the academic and intellectual left than he is today.

Two books of interviews with him published since September 11, 2001 both went straight onto the bestseller lists.[1] One of them has since been turned into a film entitled Power and Terror, now doing brisk business in the art-house movie market. In March 2002 the film’s director, John Junkerman, accompanied his subject to the University of California, Berkeley, where in a five-day visit Chomsky gave five political talks to a total audience of no fewer than five thousand people. "

www.newcriterion.com...

Just how much space do you want me to waste on this "god" of yours?



posted on Jan, 24 2005 @ 05:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by DrHoracid
Why should you "listen" to anyone? Read, research and form YOUR own opinion.


Trust me Dr. I am fully aware of my ability to form my own opinions for myself. As a matter of fact I'm naturally one opinionated & stubborn s.o.b and for the most part hold my opinion to be quite well informed if and when I actually decide to form one.

"Why" I have attempted to listen to your opinion was simply because I thought you may actually have something to say which might interest me. I have read Chomsky at various times but in no way consider myself any kind of expert on the man or his lifes work. As you most likely know, especially in your profession, another method used to do research is to communicate and exchange ideas with people. That is all I was trying to do actually and it's unfortunate that it never really got off the ground.

So thanks for the memories and I will make every effort from this day forward to avoid asking you for your side of the issue or any opinion you may have, especially ones that are interesting enough to actually have some logically formulated supporting details.


My personal opinon of this guy is he is old school "socialist" period. He got left behind in the 80's when America woke up and realized that liberalism was and is a big lie. Form your own opinon.........


Yeah, you seem to think I misunderstood you the first time when you voiced your personal opinion of the man. However, I understood your stance very clearly and while I don't agree with you, I don't think that is a problem. What I was waiting to her from you was some specifics of why you have and have formed those opinions. Simply for the sake of conversation and that's all. Which I no longer have any interest in, so who cares.

I sure hope you're better at communicating with your clients then you are here. Take care.



posted on Jan, 24 2005 @ 09:49 PM
link   


"There’s a famous definition in the Gospels of the hypocrite, and the hypocrite is the person who refuses to apply to himself the standards he applies to others. By that standard, the entire commentary and discussion of the so-called War on Terror is pure hypocrisy, virtually without exception. Can anybody understand that? No, they can’t understand it.



Sounds about right to me.. I dont get your point with this remark. He speaks some more truth and you ignore it. Even if you dont beleive the US directly commits "terrorist" acts (which I do), then you have to at least concede that we support many countries and groups that do.

As long as we support people that use the exact same tactics that label some terrorists, I'll agree with that statement wholey.



posted on Jan, 25 2005 @ 03:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by DrHoracid

Chomsky, is a typical arrogant ultra-left wing academic with no knowledge of the real world outside of his little world of left wing worshipers. He is of the "old" school of academic "socialist" still trying to enforce there "ideas" and agenda on the world. He's not even that good of a linguist much less a authority on anything rational................



This thread is meant to be about Chomshy's criticism of the invasion of Iraq, which offers a perfect opportunity for a good old left v right debate. With all due respect though, surely it would be more pertinent to discuss or refute the ideas and issues presented, rather than attacking the character of the man presenting the ideas?



posted on Jan, 25 2005 @ 04:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by Paul
This thread is meant to be about Chomshy's criticism of the invasion of Iraq, which offers a perfect opportunity for a good old left v right debate. With all due respect though, surely it would be more pertinent to discuss or refute the ideas and issues presented, rather than attacking the character of the man presenting the ideas?


Holly Jesus!! Finally someone understands the point!!! My God man you just came right in here and did, in one try, what the Dr. couldn't do after two pages of endless emotional bitching. Apparently you must have 3 or more PHD's or some special gift of perception to be able to instantly pick up on that idea which was, by this time, a potentially good topic suffering it's last dying breath.

Where were you about 10 hours ago when I actually was in the mood to listen and debate some Chomsky??? :puzz:



posted on Jan, 25 2005 @ 04:55 AM
link   
i am happy to see that for every ten "doctors" that are present on this forum,
comes one or two SANE people, that like to think with their own heads.
glad to see you all!
dont be strangers, you hear!?


[edit on 25-1-2005 by Souljah]



posted on Jan, 25 2005 @ 05:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by Paul

Originally posted by DrHoracid

Chomsky, is a typical arrogant ultra-left wing academic with no knowledge of the real world outside of his little world of left wing worshipers. He is of the "old" school of academic "socialist" still trying to enforce there "ideas" and agenda on the world. He's not even that good of a linguist much less a authority on anything rational................



This thread is meant to be about Chomshy's criticism of the invasion of Iraq, which offers a perfect opportunity for a good old left v right debate. With all due respect though, surely it would be more pertinent to discuss or refute the ideas and issues presented, rather than attacking the character of the man presenting the ideas?


Why debate or discuss ideas that are based on the ignorant ramblings of a second-class linguist? He is as I said an "old" school socialist who's ideas are failed, he has nothing to add to society whatsoever other that the ramblings of old school socialist dogma. If you wish to "worship" at the feet of this "intellectual academic" then do so. His ideas and opinions are a complete waste of time...................



posted on Jan, 25 2005 @ 05:55 AM
link   
No wonder people vote Bush if they go see the shrink or go to school for some of doctors lessons


Its becouse of the people like Chomsky (and some people on ATS) that i think there is still some reason in America. Movie The corporation is especially interesting. IBM and holocaust, quite disturbing. Capitalists wanting to own every last peace of earth, be it ground,water or air, sick. These people must be stopped by any means. Chomsky just drops the curtain for those that are not blind yet.

On the other hand, its becouse of people like the good doctor Meng... ups Horacio that i think America is ultimately going to sink under the weight of its own sh... PhD my patuschkin.



posted on Jan, 25 2005 @ 06:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by nukunuku
No wonder people vote Bush if they go see the shrink or go to school for some of doctors lessons


Its becouse of the people like Chomsky (and some people on ATS) that i think there is still some reason in America. Movie The corporation is especially interesting. IBM and holocaust, quite disturbing. Capitalists wanting to own every last peace of earth, be it ground,water or air, sick. These people must be stopped by any means. Chomsky just drops the curtain for those that are not blind yet.

On the other hand, its becouse of people like the good doctor Meng... ups Horacio that i think America is ultimately going to sink under the weight of its own sh... PhD my patuschkin.



The article previously linked and now linked yet again below is as definative as possible on Chomsky. READ the data it is rather complete and informative of this "God" of yours. He supported the slaughter of over 2 million Cambodias for example..............

"Although he lost some of his appeal in the late-1970s and 1980s by his defense of the Pol Pot regime in Cambodia,"

READ the DATA first..............

www.newcriterion.com...

There is no further reason for me to waste time and fingertips discussing the ideas of a manic like this........

"Chomsky has declared himself a libertarian and anarchist but has defended some of the most authoritarian and murderous regimes in human history. His political philosophy is purportedly based on empowering the oppressed and toiling masses but he has contempt for ordinary people who he regards as ignorant dupes of the privileged and the powerful. He has defined the responsibility of the intellectual as the pursuit of truth and the exposure of lies, but has supported the regimes he admires by suppressing the truth and perpetrating falsehoods. He has endorsed universal moral principles but has only applied them to Western liberal democracies, while continuing to rationalize the crimes of his own political favorites. He is a mandarin who denounces mandarins. When caught out making culpably irresponsible misjudgments, as he was over Cambodia and Sudan, he has never admitted he was wrong.

Today, Chomsky’s hypocrisy stands as the most revealing measure of the sorry depths to which the left-wing political activism he has done so much to propagate has now sunk."


[edit on 25-1-2005 by DrHoracid]



posted on Jan, 25 2005 @ 06:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by mOjOm

Originally posted by Paul
This thread is meant to be about Chomshy's criticism of the invasion of Iraq, which offers a perfect opportunity for a good old left v right debate. With all due respect though, surely it would be more pertinent to discuss or refute the ideas and issues presented, rather than attacking the character of the man presenting the ideas?


Holly Jesus!! Finally someone understands the point!!! My God man you just came right in here and did, in one try, what the Dr. couldn't do after two pages of endless emotional bitching. Apparently you must have 3 or more PHD's or some special gift of perception to be able to instantly pick up on that idea which was, by this time, a potentially good topic suffering it's last dying breath.

Where were you about 10 hours ago when I actually was in the mood to listen and debate some Chomsky??? :puzz:


I was just turning in for the night about then Mojom, that was half past midnight on this side of the pond


I'm afraid I don't have any PHDs to my name - maybe in the future though, who knows!?



posted on Jan, 25 2005 @ 06:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by DrHoracid

Originally posted by nukunuku
No wonder people vote Bush if they go see the shrink or go to school for some of doctors lessons


Its becouse of the people like Chomsky (and some people on ATS) that i think there is still some reason in America. Movie The corporation is especially interesting. IBM and holocaust, quite disturbing. Capitalists wanting to own every last peace of earth, be it ground,water or air, sick. These people must be stopped by any means. Chomsky just drops the curtain for those that are not blind yet.

On the other hand, its becouse of people like the good doctor Meng... ups Horacio that i think America is ultimately going to sink under the weight of its own sh... PhD my patuschkin.



The article previously linked and now linked yet again below is as definative as possible on Chomsky. READ the data it is rather complete and informative of this "God" of yours. He supported the slaughter of over 2 million Cambodias for example..............

"Although he lost some of his appeal in the late-1970s and 1980s by his defense of the Pol Pot regime in Cambodia,"

READ the DATA first..............

www.newcriterion.com...

There is no further reason for me to waste time and fingertips discussing the ideas of a manic like this........

"Chomsky has declared himself a libertarian and anarchist but has defended some of the most authoritarian and murderous regimes in human history. His political philosophy is purportedly based on empowering the oppressed and toiling masses but he has contempt for ordinary people who he regards as ignorant dupes of the privileged and the powerful. He has defined the responsibility of the intellectual as the pursuit of truth and the exposure of lies, but has supported the regimes he admires by suppressing the truth and perpetrating falsehoods. He has endorsed universal moral principles but has only applied them to Western liberal democracies, while continuing to rationalize the crimes of his own political favorites. He is a mandarin who denounces mandarins. When caught out making culpably irresponsible misjudgments, as he was over Cambodia and Sudan, he has never admitted he was wrong.

Today, Chomsky’s hypocrisy stands as the most revealing measure of the sorry depths to which the left-wing political activism he has done so much to propagate has now sunk."


[edit on 25-1-2005 by DrHoracid]


Hey hes not my god, as far as im concerned hes just the counter weight to your capitalist gods, as is Moore. I dont have to guess you dislike both of them for being traitors of your "america uber alles dream" , they do have the balls to stand up and say something. As for what you say about his hipocricy, even if its true, its nice to see at least some fossils were willing to learn even after they got their PhDs.



posted on Jan, 25 2005 @ 06:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by DrHoracid


Why debate or discuss ideas that are based on the ignorant ramblings of a second-class linguist? He is as I said an "old" school socialist who's ideas are failed, he has nothing to add to society whatsoever other that the ramblings of old school socialist dogma. If you wish to "worship" at the feet of this "intellectual academic" then do so. His ideas and opinions are a complete waste of time...................


Dr, I do not worship at the feet of anyone, nor do I deride the name a fellow person (at least not without providing corroborating logic or reason).

If Chomsky's 'ramblings' are as weak and non-constructive as you say, then surely a man of your calibre would have no problem discrediting them with critical analysis and structured, useful debate, rather than countering with unsubstantiated diatribe?

Tell us what you find so abhorent about Chomsky's thinking (not Chomsky's character), maybe we can have a rational discussion about it, gain something, instead of bitching?



posted on Jan, 25 2005 @ 06:50 AM
link   
Ok Then explain how you can not find a man who feels that both the cambodian massacre, and the 9/11 attacks were justifed abhorrant?



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join