Community | May 07, 2011 | 203 comments

Noam Chomsky: My Reaction to Osama bin Laden’s Death

source: http://www.guernicamag.com/blog/2652/noam_chomsky_my_reaction_to_os/

Image
Mikey_Pogoloff

http://www.guernicamag.com/blog/2652/noam_chomsky_my_reaction_to_os/

It’s increasingly clear that the operation was a planned assassination, multiply violating elementary norms of international law. There appears to have been no attempt to apprehend the unarmed victim, as presumably could have been done by 80 commandos facing virtually no opposition—except, they claim, from his wife, who lunged towards them. In societies that profess some respect for law, suspects are apprehended and brought to fair trial. I stress “suspects.” In April 2002, the head of the FBI, Robert Mueller, informed the press that after the most intensive investigation in history, the FBI could say no more than that it “believed” that the plot was hatched in Afghanistan, though implemented in the UAE and Germany. What they only believed in April 2002, they obviously didn’t know 8 months earlier, when Washington dismissed tentative offers by the Taliban (how serious, we do not know, because they were instantly dismissed) to extradite bin Laden if they were presented with evidence—which, as we soon learned, Washington didn’t have. Thus Obama was 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.”

Nothing serious has been provided since. There is much talk of bin Laden’s “confession,” but that is rather like my confession that I won the Boston Marathon. He boasted of what he regarded as a great achievement.

There is also much media discussion of Washington’s anger that Pakistan didn’t turn over bin Laden, though surely elements of the military and security forces were aware of his presence in Abbottabad. Less is said about Pakistani anger that the U.S. invaded their territory to carry out a political assassination. Anti-American fervor is already very high in Pakistan, and these events are likely to exacerbate it. The decision to dump the body at sea is already, predictably, provoking both anger and skepticism in much of the Muslim world.

Continued...


http://www.guernicamag.com/blog/2652/noam_chomsky_my_reaction_to_os/
  1. groups:
    Community,   Politics,   US Politics,   Current Cultural Issues,   3 more
  2. tags:
    FAIL,  Osama bin Laden,  Stupid,  International Law,  3 more
  3.     
    |

203 comments // Noam Chomsky: My Reaction to Osama bin Laden’s Death

  • letsliveinpeace
  • Jahvega
  • Radical_Centrist
  • Jahvega
  • crystalman
  • congoboy
  • RaceBannon
    • +3
      RaceBannon  

    • Spot on, of course in the sea of hyper xenophobia people are fiercely debating murder on a person whom none of us know anything about, but we support it because it makes us feel like good citizens united in a common cause. There is no doubt we are all living in the era of the symbolic, hopefully we can catch on soon before the people are swayed to support more "causes".

    • 2 years ago
  • ampersand
  • Radical_Centrist
  • congoboy
  • crystalman
  • congoboy
  • tlbuffin
  • VanessafromDC
  • congoboy
  • tlbuffin
  • totally_dilapidated
  • tlbuffin
  • Radical_Centrist
  • Radical_Centrist
  • Radical_Centrist
    • 0
      Radical_Centrist  
    • tlbuffin:

      Aside from Watergate Nixon was one of the best Presidents of the later part of the 20th Century. I wish the worst thing W & Obama did/are doing was lie about having knowledge about some people breaking into an Office Building. Last I checked no one died as a result of Watergate.

    • 2 years ago
  • congoboy
  • congoboy
  • samthesixth
  • tlbuffin
  • Wetdog
    • 0
      Wetdog  
    • Radical_Centrist:

      By sanctioning, trying to evade detection and prosecution of official Republican party actions authorizing and implementing the take over of the US government by criminal action, Richard M. Nixon was guilty of treason against the United States. Made even worse by his position as president----he was subverting the very democracy and constitution that he swore to uphold and defend.

      Richard M. Nixon's actions, and those of his accomplices spit in the face of every sacrifice made by any and all veterans that ever fought for freedom and democracy.

      They tried to steal your freedom and democracy by deceit and privilege.

      Richard M. Nixon should have been shot by firing squad.

      Richard Nixon was the most shameful excuse for a president this country has ever had.

      .

    • 2 years ago
  • Radical_Centrist
  • congoboy
    • +1
      congoboy [removed]  
    • tlbuffin:

      glad to hear your a self thinker. i can respect you for that even though we rarely agree. but i am incapable of hating obama the man or his guts. his policies are a different matter. even if youre wrong at least you are doing something right. peace

    • 2 years ago
  • crystalman
  • congoboy
  • crystalman
  • congoboy
  • crystalman
  • Colin_McCabe
    • +11
      Colin_McCabe  

    • The CIA director gave an interview in which he said that the SEALs mission was to kill Osama unless he offered to surrender. Since the SEALs were working under direction of the CIA it was basically him admitting that the CIA had a kill order out on Osama. Why are we shocked?

      What I'd like to see is the U.S. Reaction to say Canada sending in a special ops team to kill a terrorist in the U.S. as the U.S. Would likely take it as an act of war but then again we do have the "perks" of being the #1 nation in terms of economic size. *sings MC Hammers "can't touch this"*

    • 2 years ago
  • totally_dilapidated
  • Colin_McCabe
  • totally_dilapidated
    • +4
      totally_dilapidated  
    • Colin_McCabe:

      I see... you have a crew!
      I suppose you would have to, not having a strong intellect.

      This is going to be more fun than I thought....

      First, I must cut an opening in the box you put over me
      Then, I can meet you in your concept out-of-the-box state.

      It's already proving to be... curious... for it's narrow and reactive view.
      One that runs for help when the concept is challenged.

      Voting up and down so dramatically is funny. At the least, you have a comic edge to your mental state. Some might think bully, pussy comes to mind for me.

    • 2 years ago
  • Maurepas
    • +6
      Maurepas  
    • Colin_McCabe:

      Difference is two fold. 1 Canada isn't funding our military, the way we fund Pakistan's, 2 if there were a terrorist in the United States, we'd give them over to the Canadians if they demanded it(though, more likely, they'd probably just leave him at Guantanamo themselves).

      It's Pakistan's own fault it wouldn't cooperate, put its bets on the wrong horse.

    • 2 years ago
  • SFirman
  • totally_dilapidated
  • Colin_McCabe
  • Colin_McCabe
    • +1
      Colin_McCabe  
    • Maurepas:

      Sorry I wasn't meant to be taken literally. I was just making a point that if someone came here and carried out a military raid under the direction of a spy agency the United States would flip its lid.

      Pakistan wasn't given a choice in cooperation or not. They were never informed of the raid nor the years of surveillance on the compound that Osama was eventually found in. Why didn't we tell them? They simply can't be trusted.

    • 2 years ago
  • totally_dilapidated
    • +5
      totally_dilapidated  
    • Colin_McCabe:

      It's all come crystal clear Colin

      Tonight... on the Independent Film Channel was the flick:
      Bullet (1996)
      starring Mickey Rourke and Tupac Shakur

      Mickey Rourke had a brother, Ted Levine
      He played a "not-right-in-the-head" dude coming back from the war

      I would swear on a stack of bibles and a turn-of-the-card bet you were
      the inspiration for that character...

    • 2 years ago
  • Colin_McCabe
  • totally_dilapidated
  • Colin_McCabe
  • totally_dilapidated
  • Colin_McCabe
    • -5
      Colin_McCabe  
    • totally_dilapidated:

      As a Current user you should know not to pick arguments in which you cannot win. This will be my last comment to you considering your taste for throwing terrifying e-insults (sarcasm) rather than debating me with facts on the issues. Enjoy that box of yours :)

    • 2 years ago
  • totally_dilapidated
    • +4
      totally_dilapidated  
    • Colin_McCabe:

      ...nice hypocritical close.

      And too, your syntax is telling
      you wrote:
      "...you should know not to pick arguments in which you cannot win."

      It's a simple reveal Colin.
      You are not here for commentary and challenge.
      Yours is to dominate.
      If you do not dominate, you're here to win something?
      What is it?

    • 2 years ago
  • congoboy
    • +5
      congoboy [removed]  
    • Colin_McCabe:

      dont know about the cia but i'd welcome any nation willing to help take out unsavory islamo-facist types in this country, even if it trudged a bit on our sovereignty. the thing is though, why would they bother as we have the best of the best and dont really need the help of our salmon crunching friends from up north. eh?

    • 2 years ago
  • congoboy
  • congoboy
  • congoboy
  • congoboy
  • congoboy
  • congoboy
  • samthesixth
  • curtisreed
    • +4
      curtisreed  
    • Colin_McCabe:

      are you suggesting that the govt of the USA knowingly protects and shelters terrorists on the INTERPOL lists?

      because last I saw, we cooperated with the canadians and others to capture terrorists and deliver them to justice.

      Oh...wait, I see where you're going. We haven't handed over George Bush and Condoleeza Rice, right?

      Yeah, on the moral equivalency scale you apparently support, the USA ranks right up there with the Taliban and Pakistan.

    • 2 years ago
  • curtisreed
    • +6
      curtisreed  
    • totally_dilapidated:

      You are right. There is a group of rabid FAAAAAR left kooks on this site--not surprising, since it is CURRENT--who form a circle-jerk posse to attack anyone who disagrees with their theories.

      They don't even bother to argue points, they just level ad hominem attacks, insults, and the old down vote and then declare themselves the victors on the battlefield of ideas.

      Welcome to the fray, buddy. It's good to have someone else here "inside the box".

    • 2 years ago
  • curtisreed
    • +3
      curtisreed  
    • Colin_McCabe:

      now that sounds right. our guys finally got it through their heads that there are too many spies within the ISI.

      by the way...the reports indicate we didn't even tell our allies the Brits, French or Germans for the same reasons. It might just be that many of those "moderate Muslim" interpreters and translators working "for us" within our agencies (and those of our allies) are double agents.

    • 2 years ago
  • totally_dilapidated
  • samthesixth
  • VanessafromDC
  • tlbuffin
  • Colin_McCabe
  • VanessafromDC
  • VanessafromDC
  • VanessafromDC
    • 0
      VanessafromDC  
    • tlbuffin:

      So why is Bush trying to grab all the credit.........Bush=8 Years and nothing happened.....Obama = 2 Years and the S.O.B. is dead....BTW ....Eye of Newt announced he's running....What a fucking side show this is going to be....Is Trump the Hump staying in or dropping out?

    • 2 years ago
  • unimatrix0
    • -2
      unimatrix0  

    • Once Chomsky expresses doubt about Osama bin Laden's responsibility for the attacks of 9/11 he surrenders all credibility on the issue.

      Sad to see a once respected intellectual slide into disrepute - perhaps the poor old guy is slipping into senility - regardless, it is a sad situation.

      Also sad that some are so star struck by Chomsky they are unable to think critically for themselves, but must be spoon fed their opinions by others.

    • 2 years ago
  • congoboy
  • CitizenHill
    • -7
      CitizenHill  

    • F**k Chomsky.
      He, like most liberal elitists will not and cannot grasp that Islam is at war with western civilization, and that jihadi Muslims have no code of honor - as the world witnessed by the beheading of Daniel Pearl.

    • 2 years ago
  • dinm76
  • CitizenHill
    • -3
      CitizenHill  
    • dinm76:

      Nah, it must be your armpit overpowering your sense of smell, otherwise you'd recognize the smell of reality - which seemingly is a clear and ever present failing of a progressive to discern.

    • 2 years ago
  • congoboy
  • congoboy
  • Radical_Centrist
    • +1
      Radical_Centrist  
    • congoboy:

      Not all Zionist are Jews nor are all Jews Zionist. In fact Born Again BRAINWASHED Christians make up most of the Zionists in North America. I am not saying all Born Again Christians are brainwashed, just the ones who think God supports the stealing of peoples land by any means necessary.

    • 2 years ago
  • congoboy
    • 0
      congoboy [removed]  
    • Radical_Centrist:

      we in the jewish community, especially in the middle east where we're hated by just about everyone outside of israels borders do appreciate the support of christians world wide. it seems those who either dont know the history of the middle east or have their heads up their asses and refuse to accept reality, parroting others who know even less are a bigger threat to peace in the region than the murdering, hate filled, rhetoric spewing, islamo-facists themselves.

    • 2 years ago
  • Radical_Centrist
    • 0
      Radical_Centrist  
    • congoboy:

      Coming from a family FULL of Southern Baptist Ministers, and from the age of Birth to 22 averaging about three days a week in one Church function or another I would submit my knowledge of the scripture "BOTH" Old & New Testament is thorough. I would be MORE than Happy to have a private discussion with you about Religion any day of the week and twice on Sunday because it is my opinion after MUCH study that Zionism is not supported in either the Old or New Testament.

      I have had this discussion MANY times with Freecrack, I have no problems with Jews. I do have a problem with most Zionist no matter their religion. Zionism is a POLITICAL movement it has NOTHING necessarily to do with Religion. Look at it first major proponents many of therm were ether Atheists or Agnostics.

    • 2 years ago
  • congoboy
    • 0
      congoboy [removed]  
    • Image
    • Radical_Centrist:

      As a Jew and a supporter of the homeland of israel originally ordained by god, i see nothing wrong with the basic context of zionism as defined by wikipedia. nor should anyone else feel threatened by a jewish state. i guess one could surmise that in a sense there is also palestinian zionists. israel has been and is open to a palestinian state but the sadistic bastards keep lobbing explosives across the border into civilian neighborhoods. i also realize not all palestinians are trouble makers but enough of them are that it makes peace impossible. if the palestinians would lay down their guns there would be peace, if the israelis put down their guns there would be no israel. Zionism (Hebrew: ציונות‎, Tsiyonut) is a Jewish political movement that, in its broadest sense, has supported the self-determination of the Jewish people in a sovereign Jewish national homeland.[1] Since the establishment of the State of Israel, the Zionist movement continues primarily to advocate on behalf of the Jewish state and address threats to its continued existence and security. In a less common usage, the term may also refer to 1) non-political, Cultural Zionism, founded and represented most prominently by Ahad Ha'am; and 2) political support for the State of Israel by non-Jews, as in Christian Zionism.

      Zionism does not have a uniform ideology, but has evolved in a dialogue among a plethora of ideologies: General Zionism, Religious Zionism, Labor Zionism, Revisionist Zionism, Green Zionism, etc. However, the common denominator among all Zionists is the claim to Eretz Israel as the national homeland of the Jews and as the legitimate focus for the Jewish national self-determination (as shown, among others, by Gideon Shimoni).[2] It is based on historical ties and religious traditions linking the Jewish people to the Land of Israel.[3]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zionism

    • 2 years ago
  • jubal
    • +4
      jubal  

    • Cyrstalman is the epitome of the ignorant calling the learned traitors.

      Its like the guy with the little johnson calling the guy with the big johnson...pee wee.

    • 2 years ago
  • congoboy
  • jubal
    • 0
      jubal  

    • I am with Chomsky on this one. The whole operation is suspect. Too many "unfortunately we had or didn't have blah blah blahs" leaves too many holes and creates reasonable doubt about the sincerity and veracity of the claims.

    • 2 years ago
  • congoboy
  • Anarchadiator
  • Mikey_Pogoloff
  • crystalman
    • -9
      crystalman  

    • It's worth paying attention to the name of this magazine: "Guernica" , which indicates the trend and the spirit that has, on the Left, been false and propagandistic.

      Guernica, as many know, is the name of a village in northern Spain that was bombed on April 26, 1937 by German and italian planes during the Spanish Civil War.

      Picasso, a communist living in Paris, painted a famous painting with that name.

      There were killed between 3000 and 4000 people, it was market day and there were people from other villages. That was the first bombing of a population in the Spanish Civil War. Picasso painted this picture to order to express the horror of war. Very nice, but all lies.

      The reality:

      The most serious investigations contradict the Marxist propaganda and set the death toll at 126.

      The attack lasted several hours and consisted of several attacks of short duration. That made that from the first attack there were not more people in the streets.

      The targets were bridges and communication routes. There was a fire, which spread and the firemans where sent by the Basque authorities several hours after the beggining of fire, which allowed to destroy under the most of the town, as they already had done on other occasions, as in Eibar or Irun, facilitated appear as victims.

      It was not the first bombing of a city in the War of Spain,the marxist republicans had already bombarded Zaragoza, Oviedo, Cordoba and others.

      Picasso's painting was not painted by the bombing, was painted before and just adapted it by changing some figures. At first it was a painting in honor of bullfighting.

      So naming this magazine Guernica is a perpetuation of the lies and propaganda that characterises the Left.

    • 2 years ago
  • Mikey_Pogoloff
  • jubal
  • totally_dilapidated
    • +1
      totally_dilapidated  
    • Mikey_Pogoloff:

      Your cut-n-paste poster is part of a group here.
      They draw their inspiration from these websites:

      Jihad Watch : Robert Spencer
      Atlas Shrugs : Pamela Geller

      Together these pillars of creepiness wrote a book:

      The Post-American Presidency : Pamela Geller with Robert Spencer

      It's an Islamophopic, nationalist, white supremacist, racist, paranoid screed.
      You can spot the readers of this vile work in a heartbeat by the virulent
      posts against Obama.

      You can also tell who is who by reading a post that has you feeling the
      need to take a shower...

    • 2 years ago
  • crystalman
  • galwayman
  • figgdimension
  • unimatrix0
    • -2
      unimatrix0  

    • Chomsky is out of touch, spinning a tale for a little attention for a cadre of equally outdated and out of touch pseudo-intellectuals.

      Osama's death was an act of war, and nobody with any credibility is arguing differently.

      For Chomsky to entertain the idea that bin Laden was not behind 9/11 only serves to confirm that Chomsky is irrelevant.

    • 2 years ago
  • Mikey_Pogoloff
    • 0
      Mikey_Pogoloff  
    • unimatrix0:

      I find it more than incongruous that someone who would say:

      "I pride myself in taking a punch and will gladly take another because I choose to live my life in the company of Gandhi and King... I reject, absolutely, revenge, aggression, and retaliation. The foundation of such a method, is love... "

      would also utter the wretched and ignorant comments you so often bless us with, Uni. I can only imagine how much respect you and your views would garner from King and Gandhi were they alive today.

      I also find it amusing that someone with such radiant credentials as yourself would call Chomsky a pseudo-intellectual. An emeritus professor at MIT and world renowned linguist, author of 100 books including work on the infamous Pentagon Papers, etc... and you are?

      At least you didn't run out with your usual "hall monitor" mentality and try to flag this as spam or not news. Maybe you can make a bunch of BS groups called Left Wing Nuts, Left Wing spam, and so on that you can tag everything you don't agree with on the left as well. Hopefully over time, you can mold Current into the comfortable little shell of narrow discourse that you would like to imagine the real world is.

    • 2 years ago
  • figgdimension
    • +2
      figgdimension  
    • unimatrix0:

      ...or perhaps YOUR irrelevant . Pseudo-intellectual ,are you serious geez okay kettle!
      Chomsky's points and questions are valid and need to be addressed before we cause more destruction on political lies and power grabs.

    • 2 years ago
  • unimatrix0
    • 0
      unimatrix0  
    • Mikey_Pogoloff:

      Mikey, your ad hominem attacks serve only to reveal the poverty of your position and your character.

      But to stay on point, I will simply reiterate my claim that anyone who seriously suggests bin Laden is not responsible for the 9/11 attacks is irrelevant, and not to be taken seriously.

    • 2 years ago
  • Mikey_Pogoloff
  • unimatrix0
    • +1
      unimatrix0  
    • Mikey_Pogoloff:

      I am flattered that you feel the need to continue the personal assault, clearly I wounded you in the past, and you hold a grudge.

      However, the fact that you fail to address my critique of Chomsky's conspiracy theory non-sense simply reaffirms my previous claims.

      Are you capable of offering any argument besides personal attacks?

    • 2 years ago
  • Mikey_Pogoloff
  • unimatrix0
    • +2
      unimatrix0  
    • Mikey_Pogoloff:

      Yes, while all you could do was obfuscate with silly and childish persona attacks, on three separate occasions above I made the following similar charges:

      1) "For Chomsky to entertain the idea that bin Laden was not behind 9/11 only serves to confirm that Chomsky is irrelevant."

      2) "But to stay on point, I will simply reiterate my claim that anyone who seriously suggests bin Laden is not responsible for the 9/11 attacks is irrelevant, and not to be taken seriously."

      3) "However, the fact that you fail to address my critique of Chomsky's conspiracy theory non-sense simply reaffirms my previous claims."

      On each occasion you failed to address the point. Is this because you are incapable of mounting an adequate defense? Or have I wounded you so badly in the past that you are now incapable of offering a coherent, rational response?

    • 2 years ago
123
1 - 100 of 203

top videos