en-us https://www.intensedebate.com/users/1664549 Comments by RobertWargas http://www.newsrealblog.com/2011/05/10/noam-chomsky-americas-most-boring-public-intellectual-on-the-death-of-osama-bin-laden/#IDComment152346130 The bulk of Chomsky's article was about how no actual evidence has been put forward linking bin Laden to 9/11. This is ridiculous and doesn't require an annotated post. You yourself admit bin Laden took credit in 2004, so that should lead you to see why I thought Chomsky's argument was strange and weak. They had evidence after 9/11 of bin Laden's involvement, but they weren't about to release all their intelligence findings to the public or to the Taliban, especially since that evidence would have upset intel links with other countries to track finances, etc. The complicated nature of this is evident just from reading the 9/11 Commission report or the work of scholar-journalists like Rohan Gunaratna. The government didn't just pick Afghanistan on a map and say, "Well, we have to bomb somewhere, but we don't know where, so just attack them." That's how it happened in the radical fantasy world, but in the real world things are more complex. Regarding Bush = bin Laden, no argument I give will convince you that this is not the case. Fine. We're different people. Sun, 15 May 2011 14:47:52 +0000 http://www.newsrealblog.com/2011/05/10/noam-chomsky-americas-most-boring-public-intellectual-on-the-death-of-osama-bin-laden/#IDComment152346130 http://www.newsrealblog.com/2011/05/10/noam-chomsky-americas-most-boring-public-intellectual-on-the-death-of-osama-bin-laden/#IDComment152344733 I don't think he's thoughtful on anything, since it seems he drew all of his conclusions some time in the 1940s. Sun, 15 May 2011 14:40:02 +0000 http://www.newsrealblog.com/2011/05/10/noam-chomsky-americas-most-boring-public-intellectual-on-the-death-of-osama-bin-laden/#IDComment152344733 http://www.newsrealblog.com/2011/01/10/remember-this-of-course-not/#IDComment152239171 "I won't begrudge your ignorance of Soviet history..." Trotsky's politics were indistinguishable from the state terror policies of Lenin (and, later, of Stalin) until he was targeted by the higher ups. He wasn't targeted because he all of a sudden became a Jeffersonian democrat; Russia under Trotsky would have been the same as Russia under Lenin or Stalin. Many so-called Trotskyists during the Cold War were way too soft on the Soviet Union, but it depended on which tradition they were coming from--"left" and "right" Schachtmanism and so forth. It is actually not "shockingly ignorant" to equate Marxism with Stalinism. Many fine writers have done so, including some like Leszek Kolakowski who knew more about Marxism than any one alive. Hannah Arendt also had that tendency, although I don't believe she came out and said it as bluntly as Kolakowski. "also doubtful of your knowledge on Hitchens' stated political views. He is no longer a socialist, and says that he still looks at history through Marx's materialist interpretation - something which nearly all mainstream historians do as well." Fine. I challenge you to a debate on Hitchens's political views. I know more about them than you, I assure you. You must be joking that "nearly all mainstream historians" look at history through dialectical materialism. This is one of the stupidest things I've ever heard someone say. I have a graduate degree in history from an Ivy League university and I can assure you'd be laughed at by some pretty accomplished historians. Sun, 15 May 2011 03:37:03 +0000 http://www.newsrealblog.com/2011/01/10/remember-this-of-course-not/#IDComment152239171 http://www.newsrealblog.com/2011/05/10/noam-chomsky-americas-most-boring-public-intellectual-on-the-death-of-osama-bin-laden/#IDComment152109365 Who mentioned Bogdanor? See Oliver Kamm's work. Much more devastating. And I'm not going to get into another comments-section war of attrition with a Chomskyite, in which every piece of evidence of Chomskyan distortion simply begets another request for more "substantive" evidence. The discussion quickly turns into something way too large and boring and discursive. These are blog posts, for Christ's sake, not Harvard dissertations. If you want some more "substance" then, as I said, delve into Kamm's many, many articles on Chomsky, all of which are absolutely full of citations. Sat, 14 May 2011 17:17:12 +0000 http://www.newsrealblog.com/2011/05/10/noam-chomsky-americas-most-boring-public-intellectual-on-the-death-of-osama-bin-laden/#IDComment152109365 http://www.newsrealblog.com/2011/05/10/noam-chomsky-americas-most-boring-public-intellectual-on-the-death-of-osama-bin-laden/#IDComment152089957 Chomsky supporters are like Quranic or biblical literalists. Once one thing is admitted as Truth, everything else in the canon is untouchable. I've never, ever (and please prove me wrong on this) met a Chomsky supporter who only agrees with him on some things and not others. No one ever says, "Well, I like his writing on East Timor, but on the mass murders at Srebrenica he's a nutjob." That's because the Chomsky canon is not about political analysis but emotional satisfaction. Sat, 14 May 2011 16:06:40 +0000 http://www.newsrealblog.com/2011/05/10/noam-chomsky-americas-most-boring-public-intellectual-on-the-death-of-osama-bin-laden/#IDComment152089957 http://www.newsrealblog.com/2011/05/10/noam-chomsky-americas-most-boring-public-intellectual-on-the-death-of-osama-bin-laden/#IDComment152088952 "I think what you offer here is an effort to assuage those that find their faith weakening. What you offer is a substance free means of reassuring people that there's nothing to see here. If you are reading this and you find yourself in that position, know that David is simply completely wrong." This paragraph makes no sense. Who has "faith" and why would it be "weakening"? Regarding Chomsky's books, I remain thoroughly unimpressed. It was reading Oliver Kamm's blog posts on him that first got me thinking about how his writings are case studies in how not to use source material. From there, I noticed many other writers saying the same thing and pointing out instances of flagrant deception and subterfuge. Yes, Chomsky is very widely cited, right up there with Sigmund Freud, another worthless sophist. Sat, 14 May 2011 16:01:40 +0000 http://www.newsrealblog.com/2011/05/10/noam-chomsky-americas-most-boring-public-intellectual-on-the-death-of-osama-bin-laden/#IDComment152088952 http://www.newsrealblog.com/2011/05/10/noam-chomsky-americas-most-boring-public-intellectual-on-the-death-of-osama-bin-laden/#IDComment152087849 My feelings on those murders are probably very much the same as your own. But how come I don't draw the conclusion, as you probably do, that the horrors of East Timor mean that Chomsky is therefore correct on Bosnia, Kosovo, Al Qaeda, etc.? That's what I meant about using them as talking points. They're supposed to serve as examples of how Chomsky is right about everything, including the absurd position that there's no evidence bin Laden bore any responsibility for 9/11. Sat, 14 May 2011 15:55:42 +0000 http://www.newsrealblog.com/2011/05/10/noam-chomsky-americas-most-boring-public-intellectual-on-the-death-of-osama-bin-laden/#IDComment152087849 http://www.newsrealblog.com/2011/05/10/noam-chomsky-americas-most-boring-public-intellectual-on-the-death-of-osama-bin-laden/#IDComment151488013 Yes, David. Very few Chomsky cultists have actually read his work. Usually it's enough for them to skim through one of his shorter pamphlets or interview collections, memorize a few talking points (East Timor, Ariel Sharon, etc.) and then proclaim themselves foreign policy experts. Thu, 12 May 2011 21:48:41 +0000 http://www.newsrealblog.com/2011/05/10/noam-chomsky-americas-most-boring-public-intellectual-on-the-death-of-osama-bin-laden/#IDComment151488013 http://www.newsrealblog.com/2011/05/08/a-fake-mlk-quote-and-leftists-sympathy-for-the-devil-1/#IDComment150140272 Facebook over this last week has demonstrated the unbound evil of the radical Left. Sun, 8 May 2011 22:48:30 +0000 http://www.newsrealblog.com/2011/05/08/a-fake-mlk-quote-and-leftists-sympathy-for-the-devil-1/#IDComment150140272 http://www.newsrealblog.com/2011/05/04/justice-or-revenge-the-morality-of-celebrating-osama-bin-ladens-death/#IDComment149227045 A piece like this needed to be written. Thanks, Calvin, for being up to the task. Thu, 5 May 2011 19:16:43 +0000 http://www.newsrealblog.com/2011/05/04/justice-or-revenge-the-morality-of-celebrating-osama-bin-ladens-death/#IDComment149227045 http://www.newsrealblog.com/2011/02/18/paul-begala-accuses-republicans-of-hypocrisy-to-distract-you-from-obamanomics/#IDComment129293368 Good article. Sat, 19 Feb 2011 22:49:26 +0000 http://www.newsrealblog.com/2011/02/18/paul-begala-accuses-republicans-of-hypocrisy-to-distract-you-from-obamanomics/#IDComment129293368 http://www.newsrealblog.com/2011/02/09/newsreal-blog-and-the-freedom-center-at-cpac-this-week/#IDComment127429657 Absolutely. Fri, 11 Feb 2011 23:29:05 +0000 http://www.newsrealblog.com/2011/02/09/newsreal-blog-and-the-freedom-center-at-cpac-this-week/#IDComment127429657 http://www.newsrealblog.com/2011/01/31/genocide-supporter-noam-chomsky-rears-his-head-again-on-egypt/#IDComment126194747 You're welcome. And I'm sure that, as an Armenian, you've run into people who will do and say anything to keep the past covered. Sat, 5 Feb 2011 22:06:45 +0000 http://www.newsrealblog.com/2011/01/31/genocide-supporter-noam-chomsky-rears-his-head-again-on-egypt/#IDComment126194747 http://www.newsrealblog.com/2011/01/31/genocide-supporter-noam-chomsky-rears-his-head-again-on-egypt/#IDComment126194491 I agree. Sat, 5 Feb 2011 22:04:48 +0000 http://www.newsrealblog.com/2011/01/31/genocide-supporter-noam-chomsky-rears-his-head-again-on-egypt/#IDComment126194491 http://www.newsrealblog.com/2011/01/31/genocide-supporter-noam-chomsky-rears-his-head-again-on-egypt/#IDComment126063622 You look at Chomsky and see a hero, pure and simple. I look at him and see someone who has said and done many things, many of which lead me to conclude he holds or has held *extremely* nasty views over the years. I am not called upon to relinquish these beliefs simply because he has denounced state crimes. Plenty of people denounce state crimes without writing some of the filth he has; I'll reserve my praise and appreciation for those writers. That's it. Please leave me alone. We're different people. Sat, 5 Feb 2011 03:34:17 +0000 http://www.newsrealblog.com/2011/01/31/genocide-supporter-noam-chomsky-rears-his-head-again-on-egypt/#IDComment126063622 http://www.newsrealblog.com/2011/01/31/genocide-supporter-noam-chomsky-rears-his-head-again-on-egypt/#IDComment126061855 By "cherry picking" I'm assuming you mean I didn't quote the other millions of words he's written in which he doesn't employ his rhetorical skills for the benefit of Pol Pot or Mao. Of course I've cherry picked: That's what you do when you quote. If I had given you a dozen other quotes, you'd be asking me to consider other things. Give you a hundred more, you'd still say I'm cherry picking. And so on and so on until I had reproduced every single sentence he's ever written except for "Colorless green ideas sleep furiously." Sat, 5 Feb 2011 03:19:56 +0000 http://www.newsrealblog.com/2011/01/31/genocide-supporter-noam-chomsky-rears-his-head-again-on-egypt/#IDComment126061855 http://www.newsrealblog.com/2011/01/31/genocide-supporter-noam-chomsky-rears-his-head-again-on-egypt/#IDComment126061039 You're right: there are plenty of people who deny or excuse genocides for all sorts of reasons. You've proved nothing except they're all sickos, including you for twisting yourself into rhetorical knots trying to defend extremely sordid quotes from your guru. "So once again, I call that you retract your statement that Chomsky supports genocide." Not a chance. You asked for quotes. I gave them to you. They're published for the world to see. Sat, 5 Feb 2011 03:13:02 +0000 http://www.newsrealblog.com/2011/01/31/genocide-supporter-noam-chomsky-rears-his-head-again-on-egypt/#IDComment126061039 http://www.newsrealblog.com/2011/01/31/genocide-supporter-noam-chomsky-rears-his-head-again-on-egypt/#IDComment125804897 I have to say that after receiving several e-mails from Chomsky defenders as well as reading several responses on this comments section, I can safely say that most Chomsky fans (at least those who scour blogs for articles on him) have not actually read his work. They display a stunning ignorance of everything this man has ever written. It's as though they've seen a few interviews with him and declare themselves fans because they think it's cool, not actually recognizing that he has about a fifty-year backlog of ridiculous statements that people have been slamming for years. Most of them are stunned to learn of what he wrote in his older books when I quote those books to them. I am merely a young blogger rehashing what other, better writers (Paul Bogdanor, Oliver Kamm, David Horowitz, Alan Dershowitz) have been discussing for years, and none of this has trickled down to the average undergrad anarchist. Fri, 4 Feb 2011 01:36:37 +0000 http://www.newsrealblog.com/2011/01/31/genocide-supporter-noam-chomsky-rears-his-head-again-on-egypt/#IDComment125804897 http://www.newsrealblog.com/2011/01/31/genocide-supporter-noam-chomsky-rears-his-head-again-on-egypt/#IDComment125802946 By the way, your idea about anti-Semitism not logically following from Holocaust denial is something only a brainwashed lemming would say. Here's the reason: The Holocaust is probably the most well documented historical phenomenon ever to occur. Ask any history professor. Mountains of photos, confessions, diaries, witness testimonies from both sides, etc. To deny its occurrence means drawing a totally illogical conclusion in the face of insurmountable evidence. Such a conclusion could only come from sordid motives. I can't believe I have to explain this. Only to a Chomskyite. Fri, 4 Feb 2011 01:23:06 +0000 http://www.newsrealblog.com/2011/01/31/genocide-supporter-noam-chomsky-rears-his-head-again-on-egypt/#IDComment125802946 http://www.newsrealblog.com/2011/01/31/genocide-supporter-noam-chomsky-rears-his-head-again-on-egypt/#IDComment125802156 Who cares what he'd say in an email? He published these statements. Have you read After the Cataclysm? The quotes speak for themselves. There are dozens of others. You don't need Chomsky to argue against U.S. foreign policy. Ditch the guy. Make your arguments without tying yourself up in knots defending him. Fri, 4 Feb 2011 01:17:31 +0000 http://www.newsrealblog.com/2011/01/31/genocide-supporter-noam-chomsky-rears-his-head-again-on-egypt/#IDComment125802156