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.

 

America has been Defeated - US Professor

page: 2
0
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 31 2006 @ 05:43 AM
link   
Notoroius they won?

why are there terrorists and what are they fighting for?




posted on May, 31 2006 @ 06:06 AM
link   
I haven't read this latest work of Chomsky...
But i've studied his views on Kosovo and East-Timor crisis and their handling by the West (US in particular)
Chomsky has a habit of fitting things that provedly happened into his own framework of reasons, without trying to actually take into account any other possible motives for the events, but those that fit his anti USA agenda.

For his example his claims that Kosovo bombings caused or at least accelerated the massacares going on is ridiculous. Because the ethnic cleansing was planned well before the actual air campaign.

His views on US' ingorance and denial about the East Timor Crisis of '99 is correct, He claims that USA did not want to interfere with it's allies "dirty work", but allowed it... but even in this case he exaggerates the participation/support of USA in the Violence in East Timor..

In my opinion Chomsky is a intelligent man and a good writer, but he twists facts to fit his own agenda. Unless you've studied the issues he writes about, it's easy to fall into his "traps"


ps. I have plenty of inside info on kosovo operations, since my friends have srved and currently serve there



posted on May, 31 2006 @ 06:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by Gools
Shoot the messenger eh Seekerof?


In this applied case, Gools, the "messenger" is mrconspiracy.
The author of this anti-American article is Mr. Noam Chomsky.
If you are refering to the alleged 'message' that Mr. Noam "Anti-America" Chomsky is giving, it is a 'message' that he has BEAT TO DEATH, over and over. Do not think so, try using Google and search out all the articles he has written and you will see TWO things in common here: Anti-America and Anti-Semite.





Your anti-liberal foaming at the mouth routine is getting tiresome.

And?
My "anti-liberal foaming at the mouth" is about as "routine" as your anti-Bush, anti-war, anti-(fill in the blank if I missed anything)?
"Tiresome" is relative, unless of course, as a MODERATOR, your attempting to send me a subliminal message?

Further, my understanding is that this is an opinion board and as long as I, or anyone else giving their opinion, stay within the Terms and Conditions of this site, whether one is a "foaming at the mouth" anti-liberal or anti-Bush, everything remains status quo, thus yeah, "tiresome" is relative to one's perspective, would'nt you say?




seekerof

[edit on 31-5-2006 by Seekerof]



posted on May, 31 2006 @ 08:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by Seekerof
The author of this anti-American article is Mr. Noam Chomsky.
If you are refering to the alleged 'message' that Mr. Noam "Anti-America" Chomsky is giving, it is a 'message' that he has BEAT TO DEATH, over and over.


So seekerof, you are saying that to be a thinker, scholar or philosopher is considered anti-american these days?



posted on May, 31 2006 @ 09:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by Seekerof
The author of this anti-American article is Mr. Noam Chomsky.
If you are refering to the alleged 'message' that Mr. Noam "Anti-America" Chomsky is giving, it is a 'message' that he has BEAT TO DEATH, over and over.


Yeah, it seems some people might disagree with you on that one seekerof.


Wikipedia
Noam Chomsky has received many honorary degrees from the most prestigious universities around the world, including the following: University of London, University of Chicago, Loyola University of Chicago, Swarthmore College, Delhi University, Bard College, University of Massachusetts, University of Pennsylvania, Georgetown University, Amherst College, Cambridge University, University of Buenos Aires, McGill University, Universitat Rovira I Virgili, Tarragona, Columbia University, University of Connecticut, Scuola Normale Superiore, Pisa, University of Western Ontario, University of Toronto, Harvard University, University of Calcutta, and Universidad Nacional De Colombia. He is a Fellow of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences and the National Academy of Science. In addition, he is a member of other professional and learned societies in the United States and abroad, and is a recipient of the Distinguished Scientific Contribution Award of the American Psychological Association, the Kyoto Prize in Basic Sciences, the Helmholtz Medal, the Dorothy Eldridge Peacemaker Award, the Ben Franklin Medal in Computer and Cognitive Science, and others. He is twice winner of The Orwell Award, granted by The National Council of Teachers of English for "Distinguished Contributions to Honesty and Clarity in Public Language"


Did you even read the extract referred to in this thread?

I must thank mr conspiracy for starting this thread.


And to echo koji_K, I find it very strange how this thread went of in other directions than to discuss many of the undisputable truths mentioned in this most exellent piece from Chomskys book.

Vaak



posted on May, 31 2006 @ 11:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by Gools
Your anti-liberal foaming at the mouth routine is getting tiresome.


Perhaps he's tired of the anti-conservative foaming at the mouth
routine that is prevelant on this board.

Think of it this way Gools .... you don't want this site to turn into
a group think echo chamber do you? Be glad that there are actually
one or two non-anticonservatives floating around this board to
keep everyone sharp with their answers.

Back to the topic...

en.wikipedia.org...

Geee .. yet another a liberal college academic claiming the terrorist
hits are our own fault and that we will/have lost to terrorists.

Noam Chomsky is highly educated. His work in Psychology is impressive.
His politics are such that he belongs to the IWW; and he blames America
first for terrorist attacks. Considering that he is so well educated, I find
him short sighted. IMHO he is a frustrated anti-Vietnam war hippy who
never left college and he WANTS America to loose the war on terror so
that's why he's claiming we did. And I disagree with him. (which I'm
allowed to do) We haven't lost. We won't loose either unless the
terrorist appeasers have their way.


Noam Chomsky has received many honorary degrees from
the most prestigious universities around the world ...


LOTS of people get honorary degrees. LOTS of people get piles of them
just as Norm Chomsky has. Mother Angelica, the TV Nun, has 5
honorary doctorates from prestigious universities. Are you all going
to start agreeing with her and the Roman Catholic faith because she
has them??

The Bee Gees ... Mr. Rogers .... TONS of honorary degrees are out there.


[edit on 5/31/2006 by FlyersFan]



posted on May, 31 2006 @ 11:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by FlyersFan

Originally posted by Gools
Your anti-liberal foaming at the mouth routine is getting tiresome.


Perhaps he's tired of the anti-conservative foaming at the mouth
routine that is prevelant on this board.

Think of it this way Gools .... you don't want this site to turn into
a group think echo chamber do you? Be glad that there are actually
one or two non-anticonservatives floating around this board to
keep everyone sharp with their answers.


There is anti and pro everything foaming at the mouth routines going on this board. And we have tried our best to stop it. I've (and other mods) given p-troll warns to both sides before, which is enough proof that we are trying to be as non-partial as possible.

We don't need any of that crap. IMO both democrat and republican cheerleaders are part of the problem, because they both don't understand the real problem. Neither of their political parties have their interests at heart. But that of the big corporations and the international bankers. There is hardly anyone in Washington who genuinely cares about you!!

You can discuss either Noam Chomsky and his messages (civilised though!), but I think the latter would be more fruitful. Don't you think?

[edit on 31-5-2006 by TheBandit795]



posted on May, 31 2006 @ 11:26 AM
link   
It seems as though we have spent more time arguing over how we think of Noam Chomsky as opposed to discussing the point of this thread, which I thought was the article itself. It really seems sad that we have to argue and start a political spitting game over something, and accuse people of being "liberal foamers" or "conservative foamers."

I thought the most important part was discussing the issues at hand. Mr. Chomsky brings up many points that should be addressed no matter what part of the political spectrum you are on. Whether or not you like the author, the points made in the original post are points that should be discussed by both sides, as if we do not, we are all doing a disservice to ourselves.

Just my 2 cents.



posted on May, 31 2006 @ 11:33 AM
link   
It seems even more likely knowing that it could slow China's economic growth that we would launch air strikes on Iran. My hands are just fine where they are, submitter.



posted on May, 31 2006 @ 11:51 AM
link   
I'm not surprised that a College Professor made these statements. Remember the old saying.

Those who can do, those who can't teach.



posted on May, 31 2006 @ 11:53 AM
link   
First off a HUGE tactical mistake was made and should have been done. We could possible batter iran with Air strikes which we should, heck i say we move to germany, or europe, WHOS WITH ME



posted on May, 31 2006 @ 12:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by niteboy82
It seems as though we have spent more time arguing over how we think of Noam Chomsky as opposed to discussing the point of this thread, which I thought was the article itself.


That's what the "shooting the messenger" technique accomplishes and why it was used IMO.

As you have seen, it's very effective. I should have left my initial post at that and not made the additional comment since that served to further distract from the topic. My bad (even though I was right
) .

I can't wait for Bush to be gone and a democrat to be president. Then, when I start ranting and raving against the follies and faults of that administration I can be labelled a foaming at the mouth neo-con.


To some people, no matter what the issue is, criticism of Israel = anti-semite (even if your a Jew - like Chomsky) or criticism of US foreign policy = anti-american or criticism of economic policy = communist etc. There's just no getting through to people like that.

Like I said in an earlier post, playing the partisanship game only ensures that nothing substantive gets done and that the conditions for failure continue to their logical conclusion.

On the topic of the article, I have to agree with much (but not all) of Chomsky's geopolitical analysis as it mirrors much of my own findings through independent reading and study (mostly from an economic and peak oil perspective - Chomsky is not a peak-oil type as far as I know but does admit that geopolicitcs are influenced by oil politics).

The article is well worth a read if you can put asside your pre-conceptions about who the author is and evluate what he is talking about.
.



posted on May, 31 2006 @ 01:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by deltaboy
Talk about predictions after predictions. I remember reading many books where it predicts America would fall after the Vietnam war. Or that America would have a revolution after the Great Depression, etc. Thats why its annoying. People like Chomsky do these things to attract attention by making What if or the consequences if doing this.

[edit on 30-5-2006 by deltaboy]


How funny you say that...

America was hijacked by a bunch of fascist crooks during and after the Vietnam War (I mean the Nixon/Kissinger/Brezinski/Reagan who plunged the country into depression and created the basis of a global tyranny through setting up dictatorships everywhere on the planet.

And about the Great Depression... well there was not really a revolution, as I never heard of anybody predicting such, but the entire US economy was also hijacked by Roosevelt's private cabal of socialists and bankers. Remember that it's during the Depression that your dollar has fallen in the hands of the Federal Reserve bank, and with that, the American people has lost a huge part of his economical independance to the globalists. Not a revolution, rather a coup d'État

I suggest to people like you to stop always being on the defensive and actually try to understand what Chomsky is talking about. Chomsky's not stupid, and he's even less some political zealot defending an agenda. He admitted at many times being for a free society based on true democratic principles, which is not an agenda but rather an ideal, and one that can be achieved within a reasonable timeframe if people stop behaving like sheeps towards the authority.

And NO Chomsky is NOT "anti-American". This is preposterous to say things like that, given that he's worked inside the American scientific community for decades and he benefited more to the American people, through education and science, that any corporate servant, including Dubya, has.



[edit on 31/5/06 by Echtelion]



posted on May, 31 2006 @ 01:42 PM
link   
I am getting sick and tired of this Lefty-Righty accusations.

PEOPLE OF THIS WORLD!

YOU HAVE BEEN PROGRAMMED AND MANIPULATED FOR CENTURIES!

If you think that Left or Right is the Correct side for you, then you are Wrong as never before. There is NO Left and there is no Right - Surprsingly Both; the Left and the Right Politicians are actually Working on the same Goal; have you Guessed it already?

TO DIVIDE AND RULE THE MASSES!


Antony Sutton on "Left" versus "Right" and the Hegelian dialectic in American politics

Probably the most difficult task in this work will be to get across to the reader what is really an elementary observation: that the objective of The Order is neither "left" nor "right." "Left" and "right" are artificial devicces to bring about change, and the extremes of political left and political right are vital elements in a process of controlled change.

The discussion and the funding is always towards more state power, use of state power and away from individual rights. So it doesn't matter from the viewpoint of The Order whether it is termed left, right, Democratic, Republican, secular or religious - so long as the discussion is kept within the framework of the State and the power of the State.

This manipulation of "left" and "right" on the domestic front is duplicated in the international field where "left" and "right" political structures are artificially constructed and collapsed in the drive for a one-world synthesis.

WE ARE BEING PLAYED LIKE MONKEYS IN A CAGE!

And THEY are Laughing at us, and at our Incompetance to Come Togather As ONE PEOPLE!

If you want to know who THEY are - read some Books.

So when "Somebody" says, that one Scholar is a Left-Wing-Liberal-Ape - he is going EXACTLY where they want him to.

Meditate on that...



posted on May, 31 2006 @ 01:48 PM
link   
Seekerof,

Instead of wasting server space maybe on should read, evaluate and contemplate strategies to contest what was said within the article.

I beleive in totality this is what transpires from the Article as steps the United States must take presently and in the future in prospective of a more stable and productive democracy, and and if somehow this reads as Anti-American or even Anti-Semetic, then i'm utterly lost for thoughts.

1) accept the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court and the World Court;
2) sign and carry forward the Kyoto protocols;
3) let the UN take the lead in international crises;
4) rely on diplomatic and economic measures rather than military ones in confronting terror;
5) keep to the traditional interpretation of the UN Charter;
6) give up the Security Council veto and have "a decent respect for the opinion of mankind," as the Declaration of Independence advises, even if power centres disagree;
7) cut back sharply on military spending and sharply increase social spending.

There are a great deal many additives that members could add for this current administration to contemplate and carry through with, including a plethora of domestic issues and international.

Luxifero

[edit on 31-5-2006 by Luxifero]



posted on May, 31 2006 @ 01:50 PM
link   
Noam Chronsky says we're defeated because the US government

1. Can't protect its citizens- Since 9/11 how many Americans have died in the US as a result of enemy action?

2. The Government is above the law?- No $#!% wow this is unheard of a government acting like it runs the place. Well as far as here in the US it does and have once again yet to see anything tyrannical or anything else indicating that our liberties are under threat.

As far as people outside the world I'd say lets make a deal. We'll pull out of these hellholes that we currently occupy around the world and in exchange you take care of your damn selves. That means when there is a drought, famine, tsunami or anyother natural calamity don't call us, take it to Chirac. You may have to buy a few Airbus airliners in exchange for his help but thats the price of doing business when you have limited options.

3. Lack of democracy- Overstated sensationalism. No matter how many times someones has told me its coming I have still yet to see the NWO march down the street and place the nation under martial law. Again just more outrageous crap we have to deal with in today's society.

As far as his claim that the US is disintegrating. The only disintegrating I've seen is the poor state of the nations affairs which is far more attributible towards the liberal policies that have turned this nation into a nanny state I'm ofcourse referring to the Medi-Care and Social Security systems which are probably going to bankrupt us.



posted on May, 31 2006 @ 01:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by niteboy82
It seems as though we have spent more time arguing over how we think of Noam Chomsky as opposed to discussing the point of this thread, which I thought was the article itself. It really seems sad that we have to argue and start a political spitting game over something, and accuse people of being "liberal foamers" or "conservative foamers."

I thought the most important part was discussing the issues at hand. Mr. Chomsky brings up many points that should be addressed no matter what part of the political spectrum you are on. Whether or not you like the author, the points made in the original post are points that should be discussed by both sides, as if we do not, we are all doing a disservice to ourselves.

Just my 2 cents.




Well you're right, but that's exactly the tactics of that bunch of reactionary trolls here (who, strangely, turn out to have hundreds of thousands ATS points most of the time, btw!) who will never accept to discuss an idea without treating its author of being a liberal anti-american just because he's being even remotely critical to the US administration. People like that have nothing else to do than bring down and repress every idea and everyone that does not fit their totalitarian political leanings. Not any honest sharing of their thoughts, no informed debate, nothing... just shallow and repressive reactions.

[edit on 31/5/06 by Echtelion]



posted on May, 31 2006 @ 02:22 PM
link   
Chomsky IS a liberal and he IS anti-American, and he is NOT being "moderately critical" of the U.S. He lies over and over, and, like most liberals, instead of actually getting up and trying to physically do anything about it, he just runs his mouth over and over. And SeekerOf never claimed being a scholar or philosopher or whatnot was anti-American, but being one that lies to push their anti-American agenda is.

Sort of like the Dixie Chicks; no one said they are anti-American to be against Bush or the War, people said they are anti-American because they kept their mouths shut in the U.S. and then went to a foreign nation and before an anti-American audience stated that they were sorry Bush was from Texas. That showed cowardice and that they were sucking up to foreigners, when their primary fan-base was American.

Chomsky is nothing more than a ranter with an anti-American agenda.



posted on May, 31 2006 @ 02:22 PM
link   
Wait a minute.
You must ALWAYS consider the source of a piece of information, when arguing it's validity.
It usually it's SOP on ATS, if I'm not mistaken.
How many times has someone linked a website with supporting information, only to get
a hard time, because the source may not be reputable?

Same thing here.
It's obvious that in the history of Chomsky's writings, he has bent, adjusted, mangled the truth to make his point.

Or, is it just in this case, that we ignore the source, because he is a "thinker", or a philosopher, or a professor? Is he all the sudden, a born again truthmonger?



posted on May, 31 2006 @ 02:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by Echtelion

How funny you say that...

America was hijacked by a bunch of fascist crooks during and after the Vietnam War (I mean the Nixon/Kissinger/Brezinski/Reagan who plunged the country into depression and created the basis of a global tyranny through setting up dictatorships everywhere on the planet.



Thats funny, you forgot to mention Kennedy and Johnson...



And about the Great Depression... well there was not really a revolution, as I never heard of anybody predicting such, but the entire US economy was also hijacked by Roosevelt's private cabal of socialists and bankers. Remember that it's during the Depression that your dollar has fallen in the hands of the Federal Reserve bank, and with that, the American people has lost a huge part of his economical independance to the globalists. Not a revolution, rather a coup d'État


Nooo really, no revolution because as I say people were predicting and crap.

www.britannica.com...

The depression made the Western world ripe for revolution as every political faction in society looked frantically for a cure.


Of course you can say when people look for solutions, revolutions are pretty much the norm to solve it as most people would assume.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join