“Soft despotism is a term coined by Alexis de Tocqueville describing the state into which a country overrun by "a network of small complicated rules" might degrade. Soft despotism is different from despotism (also called 'hard despotism') in the sense that it is not obvious to the people."

Thursday, May 23, 2013

Noam Chomsky: US drone strikes are terror weapons and their use constitutes a terrorist operation.


  1. Noam Chomsky..........

    ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha

  2. Bwahahahahahahahahahhahahdadadadadadahaha!!

  3. November 30, 2011

    Khmer Rouge Apologist Noam Chomsky: Unrepentant

    Khmer Rouge Apologist Noam Chomsky: An Offense to all who died under Pol Pot

    A Review of his record to date

    By Nate Thayer


    1. JP Sartre also thought the Khmer Rouge a fine group of folk, IIRC.


    2. Noam Chomsky: The Khmer Rouge Were Actually Pretty OK, Guys

      Posted on November 30, 2011

      Chomsky: Khmer Rouge? Shmer rouge!

      Khmer Rouge Apologist Noam Chomsky: Unrepentant

      Journalist Nate Thayer conducts a rousing take-down of linguist Noam Chomsky’s astoundingly long-standing denial of Khmer Rouge atrocities. Chomsky, as of 2011, still refuses to join the leftist Khmer Rouge apologists of the 1970′s in taking back his earlier works.

      No, he still believe the Khmer Rouge atrocities were a mass fabrication, and he still believes that a vast media – and refugee? – conspiracy came together to unfairly demonize the Khmer Rouge. Also, it’s all America’s fault. Someone get this guy on Nuon Chea’s defense team.

      I have not bothered to read any of Chomsky’s work previously, and judging from Thayer’s description of his opinions, I doubt I will do so in the future. (Maybe for sheer comedy value, or if I am in the mood to feel extremely angry, and sometimes, I am.

      What I find most repellant about Chomsky’s stance is his belief that the accounts of refugees – which most journalists writing on the Khmer Rouge have heavily replied upon – are intrinisically untrustworthy.

      This is because refugees, presumably addled, desperate, and “unusually” opposed to the ruling regime will tell Western reporters whatever they want to hear to demonize their “enemies” and perhaps secure some measure of fame or safety for themselves.

      For someone who purports to be an enemy of imperalism and an advocate for the third world, this is the absolute worst kind of patronizing twaddle. I imagine there are thousands of Khmer Rouge survivors out there who would beg to argue differently. (But perhaps they are just biased and addled too).

      And as Thayer points out: if thousands upon thousands of Cambodian refugees have somehow managed to orchestrate a collective lie about the extent of Khmer Rouge atrocities—well, that massive lie would surely register as humanity’s most impressive conspiracy to date.

      But, no, Chomsky holds strong in the face of overwhelming evidence:

      “I am very pleased that there has been such a hysterical reaction to these writings. They’ve been analyzed with a fine tooth comb to try to find some error, and to my knowledge, the end result is that not even a misplaced comma has been found.

      True, a lot of errors have been found in fabricated material attributed to me, but that’s a sign of the desperation of the apologists for state violence. If you know of an exception, I’d appreciate it if you’d inform me. I haven’t yet seen one.”

      Yes, Noam. You are smarter, a better source, and a more reliable arbiter of justice than the entire Cambodian people. I am truly sorry I ever doubted you.

    3. (((((And as Thayer points out: if thousands upon thousands of Cambodian refugees have somehow managed to orchestrate a collective lie about the extent of Khmer Rouge atrocities—well, that massive lie would surely register as humanity’s most impressive conspiracy to date.))))

      Conspiracy monger, Noam Chomsky.

  4. Or, as my beloved Aunt would have said:

    piddle, piddle, piddle

  5. >>>Noam Chomsky has shown his true colors in his recently published "reaction" to the targeted killing of Osama Bin Laden. He apparently thinks Osama Bin Laden is the innocent victim of a cold-blooded murder that is worse than if George W. Bush were to be assassinated in his "compound." He doesn't believe Bin Laden's own admission of complicity in the murder of 3,000 people on 9/11, writing that it is about as credible as Chomsky's "confession that I won the Boston Marathon." Nor does he believe the evidence gathered by the 9/11 Commission, the grand jury that indicted Bin Laden, the numerous confessions and claims of responsibility by Al Qaeda operatives, and the video showing those who flew the planes in the presence of Osama Bin Laden and Ayman al-Zawahiri. He believes there is absolutely no "evidence"—"nothing serious"—that Bin Laden played any role in 9/11. He also accuses President Obama of "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.'" To avoid any appearance of partisanship and to show that he is an equal opportunity despiser of all American presidents, he writes that "uncontraversally" President Bush's "crimes vastly exceed bin Laden's." (Guernica. My Reaction to Osama bin Laden's Death. Noam Chomsky. May 6, 2011.)<<<

    Bin Laden's Defender: Noam Chomsky

    by Alan M. Dershowitz
    May 11, 2011 at 4:00 pm

    Chomsky, a man only a rat could love.

    1. >>>The time has come to dump Noam Chomsky into the wastebasket of history. He has been proved wrong—factually, morally, politically and in every other way—by the verdict of history. He was wrong about the Nazi Holocaust, the Communist genocides, the "peaceful" intentions of Hezbollah, and the alleged "war criminality" of every American president in recent memory. Bret Stephens of the Wall Street Journal correctly characterized Chomsky as "a two-nickel crank" with "paranoid notions of American policy." Christopher Hitchens has called him a charter member of the "paranoid anti-war 'left'" who believes that "America is an incarnation of the third Reich that doesn't even conceal its genocidal methods and aspirations."<<<

  6. Work is the curse of the drinking man.


  7. Investigative journalist Jeremy Scahill and author Noam Chomsky recently sat down together at Harvard University to discuss Scahill’s groundbreaking new book, "Dirty Wars: The World is a Battlefield." Amy Goodman hosted the discussion, which was sponsored by the Carr Center for Human Rights Policy, Harvard Kennedy School and the ACLU of Massachusetts.


    AMY GOODMAN: What an honor it is to be here with Jeremy Scahill and Noam Chomsky. And I wanted to start with Noam responding Jeremy’s investigations and the description, putting it in the context of the history of U.S. foreign policy.

    NOAM CHOMSKY: I had received an email this morning from a person who I’m sure many of you know about. It’s Fred Branfman.


    If the current targets disappear, they’ll move on to new targets, because that’s the nature of these systems, just like the planes who had nowhere to bomb so they decided to send them to bomb northern Laos. And they’ll come home. Already happening. And we can expect more and more of it. I think that’s the historical background that should very much be kept in mind.

    AMY GOODMAN: Jeremy?

    JEREMY SCAHILL: [inaudible] Sorry. You know, there was a—there was a time when Amy and I, I think we were in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, and we were—I’m from Milwaukee, but we were doing Democracy Now!, the show, from there, and Amy had been on a speaking tour going all around the country and had given probably, you know, 200 speeches in like 199 days or something. I mean, it was this incredible tour that she was on.


    But in reality, you had this merciless killing campaign that was being run by General Stanley McChrystal and Admiral William McRaven, where they were just bumping off the leadership of any cell that would pop off—pop up, but also just killing a tremendous number of people, in general.


    AMY GOODMAN: Jeremy, you were talking about U.S. officials. Can you talk about McRaven and Gardez?

    JEREMY SCAHILL: Well, that’s a—yeah, that’s a—so, one of the stories in the book, and also you’ll see this in our film, one of the characters in our film is Admiral William McRaven, who is, I think, one of the most powerful military figures in modern U.S. history. McRaven is the current commander of SOCOM, the Special Operations Command, in charge of all special operations activity across the globe in more than a hundred countries.

    Pakistan To Laos

  8. This comment has been removed by the author.

    1. .

      Well, the blog's brain trust has spoken and what can you say?

      Evidently, they didn't bother to listen to or view the video since they didn't comment on it at all, not the drones, not the terrorism, no rebuttals, no informed debate, merely a commentary on other views Chomsky has expressed.

      I found that I agreed with most of what Chomsky had to say in the video. Unfortunately, there is none here to argue with since the brain trust has gone to bed.

      ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha




      piddle, piddle, piddle

      And the voice of the loons was heard in the land.

      Perhaps, it wasn't all that unfortunate that they went to bed.


    2. Q, the concept of intelligent debate is beyond their pay grade. It is all shekel and jive.

    3. A duopoly of desertification of reason.

    4. A conversation with either is like the classic Dunkin Donut Dilemma: A powdered jelly donut or a pallid bagel with mediocre coffee.

    5. Nonsense but since you use Norm and Juan Cole as your liberty's vanguard?

      give me a break.

    6. But you have to like YOUR "shekel" and jive comment.

      shows your bias.


      ps, the bagel comment as well.

    7. Deuce, if you would put up someone(s) a little more >>sane<< to make your points, it would help.

      I could offer you some alternative names if you asked me to do so, but probably would decline.

      Your sources are so outrageous, it makes it easy to debunk.

      If a man has denied the Cambodian slaughter, questions Nazi Holocaust, the Communist genocides, the "peaceful" intentions of Hezbollah, and the alleged "war criminality" of every American president in recent memory, why should anyone listen to him about drones?

      A man can be many things, I've always said, 'the world's greatest linguist' and a total fool.

      Find better sources, then the duopoly of desertification of reason will be challenged and won't be so quick to hoot. It is awfully hard not to hoot when the ball drifts over the plate like that.

    8. bwhaaahhaaaaahaaaa - this from boobie American Thinker acolyte!

  9. California continues to get 21% of its electricity from non-large hydro Renewables.


    1. As did the Californian city of Lancaster, Sebastopol, city in Western Sonoma County, California, has approved an ordinance that now mandates that new homes be constructed with solar panels. Unlike Lancaster, however, Sebastopol mandated it for new commercial buildings as well.


      2nd California City Mandates Solar

  10. The US secretary of state, John Kerry, has acknowledged years of disappointment over the Israeli-Palestinian peace process at the start of his fourth recent visit to the area, but added that he hoped to confound sceptics and cynics.

    Kerry met the Israeli prime minister, Binyamin Netanyahu, and the Palestinian president, Mahmoud Abbas, and won strong support for his peace mission from the British foreign secretary, William Hague, who is also visiting the Middle East.

    Speaking in Jerusalem, Kerry said: "I know this region well enough to know there is scepticism; in some quarters there is cynicism and there are reasons for it. There have been bitter years of disappointment. It is our hope that by being methodical, careful, patient - but detailed and tenacious - that we can lay on a path ahead that can conceivably surprise people and certainly exhaust the possibilities of peace."

    He praised Netanyahu's seriousness in trying to find ways back to the negotiating table. Later he and Abbas discussed their "shared commitment to the peace effort", a statement said.

    Both sides have said they want to see Kerry's efforts succeed. The Palestinians claim that the secretary of state has asked to be given until 7 June to make progress, and they have agreed to refrain from pursuing their statehood claims at international bodies until then.


    and just to give Kerry a helping hand>>>>>>

    The Israeli government has taken steps to authorise four new Jewish settlements in the occupied West Bank.

    It has begun a legal process that could see four settlement outposts given legal approval under Israeli law.

    The decision has been condemned by Palestinian officials.

    It comes just days before the United States Secretary of State John Kerry is due to meet the Israeli and Palestinian leaders to discuss restarting peace talks.

    "The timing is very significant because it's a direct affront to all efforts at trying to revive any kind of peace negotiations. It's an attempt to tell the Americans that Israel calls the shots," PLO official, Hanan Ashrawi told the BBC.

    "It's also a message about the true nature of this Israeli coalition government. It's an anti-peace government."

    A spokesman for the office of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu declined to comment.

    1. and just to give Kerry a helping hand>>>>>>

      In complete violation of the oslo accord the palestinians went around the peace process and applied for UN membership as a county.

      have refused to come to the table for 5 years.

      if you have any fairness you would show both sides.

      being a bigot you only condemn Israel

  11. Hi! I've been reading your site for a while now and finally got the courage to go ahead and give you a shout out from Porter Texas! Just wanted to tell you keep up the fantastic job!

    Also visit my web page :: waist to hip ratio chart