Noam Chomsky on Israel: An Apartheid State

[Darkwind]

He is extremely influential in US.
Here you are again putting you fingers in your eras and screaming "nananana" at the top of you lungs to avoid facing reality.

and at any rate, he thinks he is a supporter of Israel, a loving critic, and Israel takes him seriously even if you don't!

Appeal to False Authority

He's a linguist...and from some reports, not a very good one.

His hatred of America is well-established. His love of terrorist regimes is well known.

Dismissed.

Is he a cunning linguist?

hehe

 

[westwall]

Noam Chomsky is not only the foremost linguist of modern times, but has also been an outspoken Jewish critic of Israel Here he speaks at Boston University on Israeli Apartheid.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZV3YnZnL99M

In this interview Chomsky addresses the history of Zionist thought and the Palestinian right of return:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dRu2mUcFXpg

Noam Chomsky supported the killing fields of Pol Pot. **** Chomsky and every murdering piece of shit who thinks he's somehow smart. He's nothing more than your typical progressive preaching death and destruction.

Any moron who listens to what that despicable POS has to say is likewise nothing more than a despicable swine.

 

[amity1844]

As the article specifies...By the Left.

He is hailed as a linguist by linguists, and as a leftist by leftists.

And sorry, those articles attempting to discredit him have no credibility of their own.

But still I have an issue with him as a linguist. He became so monolithic in his field he just about couldn't be challenged. He believes in universal grammar, meaning that some aspects of language are universal because they are rooted in the structure of the human brain. Then awhile back, a missionary, not knowing anything about Chomsky's work, wrote a lexicon of an unknown Amazonian language in which he claimed that language did not have tenses or any other time references. There was a huge flap. Hope I'm remembering this right. It was a decade or more ago. And I am no linguist.

So...you're not a linguist, but you feel qualified to dismiss the views of linguists who criticize Chomsky's theories.

Like I said -- cult of personality.

They don't have his stature.

But I am actually not a gigantic fan of Chomsky for just the reasons you mention, and I would rather stay out of the linguistics wars. I remember that poor little missionary trying to make a contribution and getting sort of .... well .... demolished.

Nonetheless Chomsky is brilliant. He is very likeable and people love him whether they agree with him or not. His major contribution to Israel in the early days was to the kibbutz movement. He is now a very vocal critic of Israeli policy toward Palestinians.

And he is not a progressive. He is sort of an anarchist, anarcho-syndicalist.

 

[Billo_Really]

Noam Chomsky supported the killing fields of Pol Pot. **** Chomsky and every murdering piece of shit who thinks he's somehow smart. He's nothing more than your typical progressive preaching death and destruction.

Any moron who listens to what that despicable POS has to say is likewise nothing more than a despicable swine.

Can you name something he specifically said that you disagree with?

 

[daveman]

Chomsky whitewashed the Cambodian genocide, claiming it wasn't as bad as people said, and the people killed deserved it for being collaborators.

What a Commie-sucking bastard.

I meant a quote of his.

Why? Here's 200 Chomsky lies, with sources proving his statements are false.

http://www.paulbogdanor.com/200chomskylies.pdf

Beyond that, I'm not playing your usual yappy-dog games. Chomsky's a liar. Period. End of story.

 

[westwall]

Chomsky whitewashed the Cambodian genocide, claiming it wasn't as bad as people said, and the people killed deserved it for being collaborators.

What a Commie-sucking bastard.

I meant a quote of his.

Here you go. Chomsky's support of the Khmer Rouge is well known. His sycophants have been trying to hide it since the end of the 90's, but the record is very clear. His first quote I posted was the exact same argument used by revisionists trying to minimalize the Holocaust. Great company you keep....


“In the first place, is it proper to attribute deaths from malnutrition and disease to Cambodian authorities?”

Since my father died of malnutrition and disease, I am especially outraged by this question. While my family worked and died in rice fields, Chomsky sharpened his theories and amended his arguments while seated in his armchair in Cambridge, Massachusetts. I believe that he would probably have me blame the Americans and their bombs for causing everything around the Khmer Rouge to go wrong.

Incredibly, Chomsky and Ed Herman did precisely that when they claimed:


“If a serious study… is someday undertaken, it may well be discovered… that the Khmer Rouge programmes elicited a positive response… because they dealt with fundamental problems rooted in the feudal past and exacerbated by the imperial system.… Such a study, however, has yet to be undertaken.”




Chomsky and the Khmer Rouge ? The Observer | FrontPage Magazine

 

[daveman]

He is hailed as a linguist by linguists, and as a leftist by leftists.

And sorry, those articles attempting to discredit him have no credibility of their own.

But still I have an issue with him as a linguist. He became so monolithic in his field he just about couldn't be challenged. He believes in universal grammar, meaning that some aspects of language are universal because they are rooted in the structure of the human brain. Then awhile back, a missionary, not knowing anything about Chomsky's work, wrote a lexicon of an unknown Amazonian language in which he claimed that language did not have tenses or any other time references. There was a huge flap. Hope I'm remembering this right. It was a decade or more ago. And I am no linguist.

So...you're not a linguist, but you feel qualified to dismiss the views of linguists who criticize Chomsky's theories.

Like I said -- cult of personality.

They don't have his stature.

But I am actually not a gigantic fan of Chomsky for just the reasons you mention, and I would rather stay out of the linguistics wars. I remember that poor little missionary trying to make a contribution and getting sort of .... well .... demolished.

Nonetheless Chomsky is brilliant. He is very likeable and people love him whether they agree with him or not. His major contribution to Israel in the early days was to the kibbutz movement. He is now a very vocal critic of Israeli policy toward Palestinians.

So the hell what? He's a lying sack of shit.

 

[amity1844]

Come on, don't discredit yourself by blathering. Say something worthwhile or shut up.

 

[Billo_Really]

The best thing about Chomsky, is he really knows how to hit the nail on the head...

If we don't believe in freedom of expression for people we despise, we don't believe in it at all.

Everybody's worried about stopping terrorism. Well, there's a really easy way: stop participating in it.

Wanton killing of innocent civilians is terrorism, not a war against terrorism.

Propaganda is to a democracy what the bludgeon is to a totalitarian state.​

 

[Billo_Really]

So the hell what? He's a lying sack of shit.

I don't see how you can come to that conclusion when you can't even say a specific thing that he said?

 

[Picaro]

I don't know which Chomsky hates more...America or Israel.

Doesn't matter. He's easily dismissable as irrelevant.

Name something Chomsky specifically said that you disagree with.

Chomsky whitewashed the Cambodian genocide, claiming it wasn't as bad as people said, and the people killed deserved it for being collaborators.

What a Commie-sucking *******.

And he continued to praise Pol Pot for years after his original source for his claims retracted his statistics and published new ones that established Pot did indeed kill millions.

He's not a scholar, just a publicity hound who sells books and rakes in speaking fees to and from faux 'Peace Leftist' antisemites. He also mentored the nut job phoney Norman Finklestein, the guy who claimed to be an expert on Middle East history but didn't speak or read a single Middle Eastern language. lol

 

[westwall]

The best thing about Chomsky, is he really knows how to hit the nail on the head...

If we don't believe in freedom of expression for people we despise, we don't believe in it at all.

Everybody's worried about stopping terrorism. Well, there's a really easy way: stop participating in it.

Wanton killing of innocent civilians is terrorism, not a war against terrorism.

Propaganda is to a democracy what the bludgeon is to a totalitarian state.​

Funny how progressives the world over just love that asshole.

 

[Billo_Really]

Here you go. Chomsky's support of the Khmer Rouge is well known. His sycophants have been trying to hide it since the end of the 90's, but the record is very clear. His first quote I posted was the exact same argument used by revisionists trying to minimalize the Holocaust. Great company you keep....


“In the first place, is it proper to attribute deaths from malnutrition and disease to Cambodian authorities?”

Since my father died of malnutrition and disease, I am especially outraged by this question. While my family worked and died in rice fields, Chomsky sharpened his theories and amended his arguments while seated in his armchair in Cambridge, Massachusetts. I believe that he would probably have me blame the Americans and their bombs for causing everything around the Khmer Rouge to go wrong.

Incredibly, Chomsky and Ed Herman did precisely that when they claimed:


“If a serious study… is someday undertaken, it may well be discovered… that the Khmer Rouge programmes elicited a positive response… because they dealt with fundamental problems rooted in the feudal past and exacerbated by the imperial system.… Such a study, however, has yet to be undertaken.”




Chomsky and the Khmer Rouge ? The Observer | FrontPage Magazine

There's nothing wrong with the first statement, because its nothing but a question.

The second is just conjecture.

 

[Billo_Really]

Funny how progressives the world over just love that asshole.

Do you disagree with any of those?

 

[Picaro]

They think quoting him gives them cred or something, no matter how baseless his premises are.

 

[Billo_Really]

And he continued to praise Pol Pot for years after his original source for his claims retracted his statistics and published new ones that established Pot did indeed kill millions.

He's not a scholar, just a publicity hound who sells books and rakes in speaking fees to and from faux 'Peace Leftist' antisemites. He also mentored the nut job phoney Norman Finklestein, the guy who claimed to be an expert on Middle East history but didn't speak or read a single Middle Eastern language. lol

Where's your link to him praising Pol Pot?

 

[Billo_Really]

They think quoting him gives them cred or something, no matter how baseless his premises are.

Which one of those is baseless?

 

[westwall]

Funny how progressives the world over just love that asshole.

Do you disagree with any of those?

Progressives have murdered more people in 100 years than all the religions have in the last 2,000. I value people way more than progressives do. Progressives are scum.

 

[amity1844]

So anyway, this thread isn't about Chomsky's career or view on Cambodia, it about his views of Israel and what he said in those two interviews on Israel/Palestine.

 

[westwall]

And he continued to praise Pol Pot for years after his original source for his claims retracted his statistics and published new ones that established Pot did indeed kill millions.

He's not a scholar, just a publicity hound who sells books and rakes in speaking fees to and from faux 'Peace Leftist' antisemites. He also mentored the nut job phoney Norman Finklestein, the guy who claimed to be an expert on Middle East history but didn't speak or read a single Middle Eastern language. lol

Where's your link to him praising Pol Pot?

Here is his statement. The reality was over 900,000 died due to Pol Pots agricultural policies.

“At the end of 1978 Cambodia [under the Khmer Rouge] was the only country in Indochina that had succeeded at all in overcoming the agricultural crisis that was left by the American destruction.”

Language and Politics (AK Press, 2004), pp. 245-6. Cf.: “it was a condition of survival to turn (or return) the populations to productive work. The victors in Cambodia undertook drastic and often brutal measures to accomplish this task… At a heavy cost, these measures appear to have overcome the dire and destructive consequences of the US war by 1978,” After the Cataclysm (South End Press, 1979), p. viii.
72 Marek Sliwinski, Le Génocide Khmer Rouge: Une Analyse Démographique (L’Harmattan, 1995), p.