GO DAYTON FLYERS!!!
Last active: Never Not logged in [Login ]
 

Printable Version |
Subscribe | Add to Favorites
<<  1    2    3    4  >>
New Topic New Poll
Author: Subject: Fisk, Pilger, Chomsky, Said, Goodman, Klein, etc
Krydor
The Man






Posts 5425
Registered 10-28-2002
Location In
Member Is Offline

Mood: Going to Maiden

posted on 6-22-2006 at 06:03 PM Edit Post
You sure you aren't defending Chomsky? Half a billion over 10 years, the 10 years of the 90's. Is it your position that no other country got more than that? Are you basing this position on an innaccurate statement of fact by Chomsky?

Did you bother to look into this at all? Number one: Israel. Number two: Egypt. Number 3: Colombia. I can't find the breakdown for the 90's, but from what I can gather Egypt has recieved 30 BILLION since 1979. Start at Wiki and then start mucking through government online archives. It's unlikely that they got 29.6 billion for the 80's and 400 million for the 90's.

You just took it as "fact" that Colombia was number one because Noam said so. Just concede the point. It may have been a misstatement, but it is unquestionably wrong. It is not a matter of opinion.

The fact you stated was that Colombia was the number one country for US military aid in the 1990's. This is not true. Don't do this:

quote:
In arms sales alone, it is $564 million between 96-99. That is over half a billion in 4 years. If one includes 2000 like you have done, it increases even further, much further.


That ain't military aid, you tool. It's very Chomsky of you, but pretending that their purchasing arms and military aid are the same thing is absolutely dishonest. Concede the point.

Thus, the discussion ends. Done with it. Chomsky misrepresented a fact, you compound the error by defending his misrepresentation.






View User's Profile View All Posts By User U2U Member   Krydor 's Aim   Krydor 's Yahoo
chretienbabacool
The Great One






Posts 3444
Registered 3-5-2003
Location Columbia, MO
Member Is Offline

Mood: Go Cubs!

posted on 6-22-2006 at 06:36 PM Edit Post
Of course, selling arms is worse.

But that's something all the Western countries dp. As Lord of War said, the top 5 exporters of arms in the world are the 5 permanent members of the UN Security Council. That's much more worthy of a discussion then whether Noam misrepresents facts or not.

[Edited on 6-22-2006 by chretienbabacool]





Go Cubs!

And just imagine if, instead of the Palins, the Obama family had a pregnant, underage daughter on display at their convention, flanked by her black boyfriend who "intends" to marry her. Who among conservatives would have resisted the temptation to speak of "the dysfunction in the black community"?

View User's Profile E-Mail User View All Posts By User U2U Member
benoitbrokemyneck
John Edwards is a faggot.






Posts 4109
Registered 3-17-2002
Location Inside The Internets
Member Is Offline

Mood: not dead yet

posted on 6-22-2006 at 06:43 PM Edit Post
So Israel maintains terror and human rights' violations? I don't know honestly if you feel that way or not? And Egypt? I don't know if Egypt does either... perhaps human rights abuses, but I don't know much about if they support terrorism. The statement by Noam wasn't just about military aid... it was about military aid to nations that " maintain terror and human rights violations"... so if you're lumping Israel into that category, along with Egypt and Columbia, then yes, Columbia is 3rd and Chomsky is incorrect. Otherwise he is correct. No need to call names.

I'm not going to call you a tool because you didn't reach the 564 million number. There are tons of numbers here to deal with. That is what I found by going through either Wiki or your busted ass link... I honestly don't recall. But please, show exactly were you derived you half billion statement. Not that argueing over half a billion versus a number that is roughly half a billion makes any sense... but your in a huffy, and it would be nice if we (that includes you) could try to keep some level of understanding on what sources to use.


I fail to see how this simple request has been met with so much hostility and name calling. Either one can prove that Chomsky's facts are riddled with errors or not. No need to call names. We can pretend to be grown ups today, Krydor.





Keepin' it German

View User's Profile View All Posts By User U2U Member
Krydor
The Man






Posts 5425
Registered 10-28-2002
Location In
Member Is Offline

Mood: Going to Maiden

posted on 6-22-2006 at 07:58 PM Edit Post
Dammit man. The fact presented was that Colombia recieved the most US Military Aid in the 1990's. This isn't some magical term.It's a measurable one, with certain things that make it the way it is.

Scroll down for a chart, read the rest while you're at it. This is a place for you to start, yes start.

Here's a really real 1997 US Government Report Clickety

quote:
Military Assistance

Most U.S. military assistance is from the Foreign Military Financing (FMF) program, which is administered by the Department of Defense. It provides grants and loans that enable foreign governments to purchase military equipment from the United States. Lately, FMF has focused on grants for a few, mostly Middle Eastern, recipients. In 1997, assistance to Egypt and Israel consumed 94 percent of the program's appropriation of almost $3.3 billion.


So, somewhere between 1997 and 2000, Colombia took 1.7 billion dollars a year in Military Aid to make it number one? What the fuck? Chomsky is wrong, his "fact" is nonexistent in any Government account of funds dispersal, and that includes the military.

You asked me to disprove a fact, you presented this one, it's fucking wrong. It's not even partially correct by any measure. The bulk of military aid is from the FMF.

You've decided to add bullshit caveats to distract from the main point, that being Noam made shit up and presented it as fact. Colombia at no time in recorded history has been the number one recipient of US Military aid. Period, full stop. There is no equiocation, relativism or any mushy thinking on this one.

Concede this and we'll move on to the Drug War and human rights violations. You have now been presented with documentary evidence by bean counters that completely disproves the so called fact.






View User's Profile View All Posts By User U2U Member   Krydor 's Aim   Krydor 's Yahoo
benoitbrokemyneck
John Edwards is a faggot.






Posts 4109
Registered 3-17-2002
Location Inside The Internets
Member Is Offline

Mood: not dead yet

posted on 6-22-2006 at 08:12 PM Edit Post
You've decided to add bullshit caveats to distract from the main point,

Please explain what you mean here.

You do know the difference between military aid, and military aid to a nation that has links to terrorism and records of human rights' abuses... no? This was never added by me. It is the very first question that I thought you wanted to tackle. Go ahead and read your posts, its been what you and I have been discussing all along. NEVER did I add anything.

[Edited on 6-22-2006 by benoitbrokemyneck]





Keepin' it German

View User's Profile View All Posts By User U2U Member
Krydor
The Man






Posts 5425
Registered 10-28-2002
Location In
Member Is Offline

Mood: Going to Maiden

posted on 6-22-2006 at 08:42 PM Edit Post
BBMN,

You wanted me to counter this:

quote:
It’s... [Columbia] the leading recipient of US military aid in the 1990’s maintaining the terror and human rights violations.


The first part is a lie. Colombia is not, nor ever has been, the leading recipient of US Military aid. We've established that by now, I assume.

The second part of that statement is a faulty sentence construction, so we'll pretend he meant "...1990's while maintaining..." Lucky for us, the second part is merely an opinion! Because, if one were to look at the, um, facts or something that surround that statement, it's wrong.

What happens in Colombia is not government sanctioned (so they say) and the bulk of the atricities are carried out by the Cartels, paramilitaries and FARC (backed by Chavez in Venezuela). What Noam has done is "BLAME THE USA" for atrocities carried out by non governmental (with serious issues regarding paramilitaries) groups.

See, this whole thing is part of Noam's grand conspiracy theory regarding the USA funding terror states, or something. It's a seriously convoluted mess.

Do you concede that Colombia is not now, nor ever has been the leading recipient of US Military Aid? There's no point in continuing, if not.

[edit]

On further reflection, it seems to me that you are missing the point entirely. Look down the list I helpfully provided. Would it have more of a difference if Saudi Arabia was number 3 for military aid? I could pluck almost any country off that list and show you a littany of human rights abuses that makes Colombia (which openly acknowledges the problem and is actually doing what it can to stop it) look mild.

And yes, Human Rights Abuses in Egypt (apparently a relative term, who knew?) are far worse than those of Colombia. All kinds of state sanctioned stuff that should curl your hair. Or not, if you are the riot cop with the baton...

[Edited on 6-22-2006 by Krydor]






View User's Profile View All Posts By User U2U Member   Krydor 's Aim   Krydor 's Yahoo
benoitbrokemyneck
John Edwards is a faggot.






Posts 4109
Registered 3-17-2002
Location Inside The Internets
Member Is Offline

Mood: not dead yet

posted on 6-22-2006 at 09:18 PM Edit Post
So Israel is ranked #1, Egpyt #2, and Columbia #3, of the nations that we've lended military aid to, that have records of human rights' abuses and terrorism connections?
View User's Profile View All Posts By User U2U Member
Krydor
The Man






Posts 5425
Registered 10-28-2002
Location In
Member Is Offline

Mood: Going to Maiden

posted on 6-22-2006 at 10:27 PM Edit Post
What? The number 3 country in the 90's for military aid was Colombia, yes? We agree on this? Good, something has sunk in.

However, what has happened here is the jamming of two unrelated points to make a bigger one that isn't cohesive. Firstly, Chomsky doesn't say what you think he does.

He says three things about this that we have discussed. One is a lie, one is (apparently) his opinion and the third one is a misrepresentation.

1) Colombia was the number one recipient of US military aid in the 1990's. Fabrication. Lie. Falsehood

2) Colombia is the WOST human rights abuser in the world. Opinion? Apparently. Must be, because I sure as hell cannot find the data, nor can you.

3) Colombia (the government) is complicit in the majority of human rights abuses (murders and whatnot of civilians). The evidience from HRW runs the opposite of Noam.

This is the argument as laid out by Noam. You bought into it. The first part and the other two parts are unrelated. The other two parts are only related if one were to take the first one as accepted fact.

Y'see, your question didn't make sense. Do the Israeli & Egyptian governments have similar ties to terrorists that the Colombian government has? Um, well, lessee... Colombia is under attack by FARC and others who blow up civillians and assasinate civic leaders, same thing happens in Israel all the time, as in Egypt. I guess one could put forward that there are similarities. One could even go the insane way and mention the secret police of Egypt and Israel's Mossad. Whatever floats your boat.

We don't get to talk about "human rights abuses" as such things are nebulous matters of opinion, remember? There is no way one can measure such things. Gulags are great for the jailer.

You can start your backtracking any time or just bloody well admit you are a Chomskyite.






View User's Profile View All Posts By User U2U Member   Krydor 's Aim   Krydor 's Yahoo
benoitbrokemyneck
John Edwards is a faggot.






Posts 4109
Registered 3-17-2002
Location Inside The Internets
Member Is Offline

Mood: not dead yet

posted on 6-23-2006 at 02:08 PM Edit Post
quote:

1) Colombia was the number one recipient of US military aid in the 1990's. Fabrication. Lie. Falsehood


Damn it! Noam has not made the above claim. I'll fix it for you... "Columbia was the number one recipient of US military aid in the 1990's that has maintained connections to human rights' abuses and terrorism." Can you at least pretend that you aren't deleting parts of his statement when you address them??! Nobody will ever agree on what exactly constitutes terrorism... well maybe people will agree on that, but nobody is going to agree one what nations, do and do not have such connections. To some America is a terrorist state, to other's its the most moral nation in the world... USA! USA! So I will happily concede that there is too much room for debate on that issue and not make it a requirement. I will not however do the same for human rights' abuses.

Personally I don't think that Israel has had any type of recorded (at least in the international community, or UN...I might be wrong) widespread human rights' abuses. This would take them off the list of nations that receive military aid and (this has been a prerequisite from the very start) records of human rights's abuses. This would negate Israel completely. Egypt then is 1, and Columbia 2. Chomsky appears to me, to be wrong. Wrong by one mind you.

quote:
2) Colombia is the WOST human rights abuser in the world. Opinion? Apparently.


I see you still are having trouble understanding what I am asking for here. Despite asking specifically for questions of fact to be addressed, as well as pointing out the first two facts, you still want to pretend you don't get it by addressing points that are irrelevant to what I have stated I want to address.

quote:
3) Colombia (the government) is complicit in the majority of human rights abuses (murders and whatnot of civilians). The evidience from HRW runs the opposite of Noam.


So Columbia's military doesn't have issues with human rights'? Whaaa?! This is not worth arguing on any level. The abuses do exist. Just ask the UN. Or Amnesty International. Or WOLA. Here is a very partial list...


Alirio de Jesus Pedraza Becerra: Pedraza, a lawyer with the Committee of Solidarity with Political Prisoners (Comité de Solidaridad con Presos Políticos, CSPP), was "disappeared" by eight heavily armed men on July 4, 1990. His whereabouts have never been determined. At the time, he was representing the family members of scores of peasants killed when the Luciano D'Eluyart Battalion opened fire on a protest march in 1988 in Llano Caliente, Santander. We are not aware of any arrests in this case.

Blanca Cecilia Valero de Durán, CREDHOS: This human rights defender belonging to the Regional Human Rights Committee for the Defence of Human Rights (Comité Regional para la Defensa de los Derechos Humanos, CREDHOS) was shot and killed on January 29, 1992 in Barrancabemeja, Santander. The then Colonel Rodrigo Quiñones Cárdenas, director of intelligence for Colombian Navy Intelligence Network 7, was believed responsible for her murder and scores of other political killings by government investigators. Nevertheless, Quiñones was acquitted by a military tribunal, although the Fiscalía named him as the "unequivocal" intellectual author. He remains on active duty. Two people were convicted in the killing.

Oscar Elías Lopez, CRIC: This human rights lawyer had been advising the Indigenous Regional Council of Cauca, (Consejo Regional Indígena del Cauca, CRIC). He was killed in Santander de Quilchao by heavily armed men on May 29, 1992.

Julio Cesar Berrio, CREDHOS: He was a security guard employed by CREDHOS, also involved in a CREDHOS investigation. He was shot dead on June 28, 1992, allegedly by men working for Navy Intelligence Director Colonel Quiñones.

Ligia Patricia Cortez Colmenares, CREDHOS: Cortez, an investigator with CREDHOS, was killed on July 30,1992, alongside several Union members. We are not aware of any arrests in this case.

Jairo Barahona Martínez, Curumaní Human Rights Committee: This activist was killed on September 29, 1994 in Curumaní, Cesar following his abduction and torture. According to members of human rights organizations who collected information and pressed for a proper judicial investigation into the killing, members of the security forces were implicated in the assassination. No one has been brought to justice.

Ernesto Emilio Fernández, human rights defender: He was shot while driving home with his children on February 20, 1995. We are not aware of any arrests in this case.

Javier Alberto Barriga Vergal, CSPP: This human rights lawyer was killed in Cucutá on June 16, 1995. We are not aware of any arrests in this case.

Josué Giraldo Cardona, co-founder and president of the Meta Civic Committee for Human Rights: Giraldo was killed on October 13, 1996 after months of alleged harassment and threats by paramilitaries and military intelligence officers working for the 7th Brigade, then commanded by General Rodolfo Herrera Luna.

Elsa Alvarado and Mario Calderón, CINEP: Alvarado and Calderón were investigators with the Center for Research and Popular Education (Centro de Investigación y Educación Popular, CINEP). On May 19, 1997 a group of masked gunmen forced their way into Alvarado and Calderón's apartment, killing Elsa, Mario, and Elsa's father. Although some material authors of the crime are under arrest, the intellectual authors remain at large. Arrest warrants have been issued for Fidel and Carlos Castaño as the intellectual authors of the killings.

Jesús María Valle Jaramillo, "Héctor Abad Gómez" Permanent Committee for the Defense of Human Rights: Valle was assassinated on February 27, 1998 by unidentified gunmen, after repeatedly denouncing military / paramilitary links. Formal criminal charges were brought by the Attorney General's office against paramilitary leader Carlos Castaño and eight others. Six paramilitaries are currently detained. Despite strong indications of military involvement in the crime, no formal investigation has been opened against military personnel.

Eduardo Umaña, human rights lawyer: Umaña was killed in Bogotá on April 18, 1998. Several alleged gunmen are either under arrest or wanted for extradition. Shortly before his murder he had denounced the role of a military intelligence unit in paramilitary activity and human rights violations. The intellectual authors remain at large.

Jorge Ortega, union leader: This union leader and human rights defender was killed in Bogotá on October 20, 1998. Two former police officers have been implicated in the attack and are in prison. However, the intellectual authors remain unidentified.

Everardo de Jesús Puertas and Julio Ernesto González, CSPP: Puertas and González, lawyers with the CSPP, were shot dead on the January 30, 1999, as they traveled by bus from Medellín to Bogotá. We are not aware of any arrests in this case.

Dario Betancourt, academic: Betancourt, a professor at Bogotá's Universidad Pedagógica Nacional, was forcibly disappeared on May 2, 1999, and his body was found on September 2, 1999. There have been no arrest warrants issued in this case.

Hernan Henao, academic: Henao, the Director of the University of Antioquia's Regional Studies Institute, was killed on May 4, 1999. There have been no arrest warrants issued in this case.

Guzmán Quintero Torres, journalist: Quintero, a journalist who had investigated reports of corruption within the armed forces, was killed on September 16, 1999, in Valledupar (Cesar). The Attorney General's Office detained two paramilitaries allegedly involved in the killing, but the intellectual authors have not been identified.

Jesús Antonio Bejarano, academic: Bejarano, a former government official involved in the peace talks with the FARC, was killed on September 16, 1999. There have been no arrest warrants issued in this case.

Alberto Sánchez Tovar and Luis Alberto Rincón Solano, journalists: Journalists Sánchez and Rincón were allegedly detained and executed by paramilitaries on November 28, 1999, in El Playón (Santander), while covering municipal elections. Three paramilitary gunmen have been arrested, but the intellectual authors remain unidentified.

Jairo Bedoya Hoyos, indigenous activist: Bedoya, a member of the Indigenous Organization of Antioquia (Organización Indígena de Antioquia, OIA), was abducted on March 2, 2000. There have been no arrests in this case.

Margarita Maria Pulgarín Trujillo, Fiscalía: Pulgarín, a prosecutor specializing in investigating links between the military and paramilitary groups, was killed in Medellín on April 3, 2000. No arrest warrants have been issued in this case.

Jesús Ramiro Zapata Hoyos, Segovia Human Rights Committee: Zapata, the leader of an umbrella organization of human rights groups, was abducted and killed on May 3, 2000 in Segovia, Antioquia. The day he was abducted, Zapata had reported to local authorities that paramilitaries had been seeking information on his whereabouts. Paramilitaries had occupied the area the month before.

Elizabeth Cañas Cano, Association of Family Members of the Detained and Disappeared, ASFADDES: Cañas, an member the Association of Families of the Detained and "Disappeared" (Asociación de Familiares de Detenidos Desaparecidos-Colombia, ASFADDES), was shot dead near her office on June 11, 2000. She had lost relatives in the 1998 Barrancabermeja massacre. Witnesses to the massacre and other ASFADDES members are currently in grave danger of further attacks.

Jairo Bedoya, Olga Rodas, Jorge Salazar, and Claudia Tamayo, IPC: These four human rights workers belonging to the Institute for Popular Training (Instituto Popular de Capacitación, IPC) based in Medellín, Antioquia were abducted from their offices on January 28, 1999 by an armed gang. Several days later paramilitary commander Carlos Castaño claimed responsibility for the kidnappings, claiming the four as "prisoners of war." He remains at large.

Piedad Córdoba de Castro, Senator: On May 21, 1999 Córdoba, Liberal Party Senator and president of the Senate's Human Rights Commission, was abducted in Medellín by a group of fifteen armed men. The next day, paramilitary leader Carlos Castaño issued a public statement claiming responsibility for the abduction. She was later released.

Diana Salamanca Martínez, Justice and Peace: Salamanca, a human rights worker, was abducted on November 10, 1999 by paramilitary forces in Dabeiba, Antioquia. Three days later, following a national and international outcry, Salamanca was released to church workers in Necoclí, Antioquia. She reports having been transported overland in a truck, passing unhindered through various military and police checkpoints. We are not aware of any arrests.

San José de Apartadó: On February 19 and July 8, 2000, alleged paramilitaries killed 11 civilians in San José de Apartadó. According to eyewitnesses, personnel of the 17th Brigade were in the area at the time of both massacres and failed to prevent or stop the killings. An army helicopter allegedly belonging to the 17th Brigade hovered overhead at the time of the July 8 massacre.

El Aro: Colombian prosecutors collected evidence linking the 4th Brigade, under the command of General Carlos Ospina Ovalle, to the October 25, 1997, massacre committed by paramilitaries in El Aro. Government documents show that a joint army-paramilitary force surrounded the village and maintained a perimeter while about 25 paramilitaries entered the town, rounded up residents, and executed four people.

El Salado: On 18 February 2000, a massacre of dozens of civilians was initiated in El Salado, Bolívar. Entering on Friday the 18th and leaving Sunday the 20th, some 300 paramilitary members killed at least 46 townspeople, including a six year-old girl and an elderly woman. Despite pleas to intervene, the regional military reportedly set up a roadblock and prevented humanitarian workers from entering the area. Admiral William Porra, second in command of the Navy, continues to claim that the deaths were a result of combat, not of the executions related by dozens of witnesses.

Norte de Santander: The recent string of paramilitary massacres in Norte de Santander illustrate the Colombian military's unwillingness to protect the civil population from violence even in the face of repeated national and international warnings. Following is a brief chronology of attacks in the last year:

29 May 1999: Twenty five civilians killed in La Gabarra by a group of roughly 400 paramilitaries. Shortly following, Amnesty International USA issued the first of many urgent appeals, calling on the state authorities to take preventative measure to protect the civil population.
17 July 1999: Fourteen people were killed and thirty abducted by paramilitaries in Tibú, where the Colombian Army's Counter-guerrilla Battalion #46 "Heroes of Saraguru" is stationed.
20 August 1999: Paramilitary massacre of at least thirty in Caño Lapa, municipality of Tibú.
20 November 1999: Paramilitaries killed a peasant and burned down several homes in the municipality of El Tarra.
19 January 2000: Three people were killed and two were abducted by paramilitaries in El Tarra.
3 March 2000: Paramilitaries burned the village of Filo Gringo to the ground, in spite of warnings sent to the Army's 5th Brigade in previous days by state authorities and NGO's.
6 April 2000: Another massacre in Tibú, within one kilometer of the army's "Heroes of Saraguru" base, despite repeated assurances by Colombian Embassy officials in Washington, D.C. to Amnesty International that the Colombian Army was confronting the paramilitaries.

quote:
The first part and the other two parts are unrelated. The other two parts are only related if one were to take the first one as accepted fact.


So the whole point that Chomsky is driving at, is soley dependent on Columbia being the top military aid recepient? Why is that? What if they are the second to top recepient by one penny? What does that change about his point?! Nothing. His point, whether Columbia is number one, or number two, is that we are aiding a government with known and widespread human rights' abuses. If their government is giving weapons to these paramilitary groups as well as the military itself, and these weapons were given to the government, or even sold to their government by the US, then I fail to see what Chomsky is missing in his point. Bad shit is happening, and we are complicit. No?

quote:
You can start your backtracking any time or just bloody well admit you are a Chomskyite.


No need to backtrack. You proved that Chomsky was wrong by one nation in his statement that Columbia was the leading receiver of military aid from the US, of any nation with ties to human rights abuses. Wow, they are number 2! You shattered his arguement to the core.

[Edited on 6-23-2006 by benoitbrokemyneck]

View User's Profile View All Posts By User U2U Member
Krydor
The Man






Posts 5425
Registered 10-28-2002
Location In
Member Is Offline

Mood: Going to Maiden

posted on 6-23-2006 at 06:34 PM Edit Post
Ah, I get it. I get it completely. In order for Chomsky to make sense, we have to parse his sentences and play Match Game '76. He certainly does not give the whole story. Nor would I expect him to, as he has an agenda.

Is it the dollar amount or the ties to "terrorism" that has become the stunning lynchpin to this over the top argument? If the Saudis purchased plenty of US Military equipment in the 90's, and unquestionably maintained ties to terrorist organizations, where do they fit in? If the PA recieved hundreds of millions a year in USAID that never reached the citizenry and was funneled into the various Arafat headed terrorist groups, how does that tie in to the theory? We've redrawn the term from military aid to just plain old aid now. You'd best not do that, else Noam's argument simply falls apart.

It doesn't, because he's fixated on Colombia. Therefore, numbers are fudged. What was the situation on the ground in the '90's? The Cartels ruled the country. Judges who would dare prosecute the heads of the Cartels were murdered. Anti-Cartel politicians were murdered (I recall Escobar blowing up a loaded passenger jet to get one man).

The systemic corruption of Colombia allowed Escobar house arrest in a wonderful villa so that he could rule his empire. He later "escaped". I think you'll find a sharp increase in military aid around that time.

One of the human rights abuses of the 90's, I'm sure, was the gunning down of Pablo as he tried to evade capture. Boo Hoo. Who mourns Pablo? Not I. Think Al Capone with a Country to control, instead of a city.

The ties to terrorists thing is what seems to be the deal, yes? So, we're talking about the paramilitaries. The human rights abuses are probably the secret courts that don't allow the due process gauranteed in the Colombian Constitution.

So, now some kind of explicit link that the military aid went to the paramilitaries and not to the Colombian Army is in order, I'd assume.

[edit because there was a line break in the wrong place]

[Edited on 6-23-2006 by Krydor]






View User's Profile View All Posts By User U2U Member   Krydor 's Aim   Krydor 's Yahoo
benoitbrokemyneck
John Edwards is a faggot.






Posts 4109
Registered 3-17-2002
Location Inside The Internets
Member Is Offline

Mood: not dead yet

posted on 6-23-2006 at 07:27 PM Edit Post
There are plenty of connections to the military itself. Just read my last post.
View User's Profile View All Posts By User U2U Member
Krydor
The Man






Posts 5425
Registered 10-28-2002
Location In
Member Is Offline

Mood: Going to Maiden

posted on 6-23-2006 at 09:14 PM Edit Post
I did, and it highlighted the Paramilitaries. This branches off the discussion into other areas.






View User's Profile View All Posts By User U2U Member   Krydor 's Aim   Krydor 's Yahoo
benoitbrokemyneck
John Edwards is a faggot.






Posts 4109
Registered 3-17-2002
Location Inside The Internets
Member Is Offline

Mood: not dead yet

posted on 6-23-2006 at 09:38 PM Edit Post
It also talks about the military itself. You know, that thing that the government runs... that government being the one we were, and still are lending aid to. Yea.

Plus are you suggesting that the paramilitary groups are not connected to the military. Not that this is the curx of my point here, as the military is just as guilty...

View User's Profile View All Posts By User U2U Member
Krydor
The Man






Posts 5425
Registered 10-28-2002
Location In
Member Is Offline

Mood: Going to Maiden

posted on 6-24-2006 at 02:54 AM Edit Post
Originally posted by benoitbrokemyneck
It also talks about the military itself. You know, that thing that the government runs... that government being the one we were, and still are lending aid to. Yea.


Ah, so the criteria for aid of any sort revolves primarily around the human rights record of the government in question? Therefore, aid to North Korea should happen under no circumstances and so on. It's a moral argument that ignores certain realities, or Realpolitik (eeef you weeeeel).


Plus are you suggesting that the paramilitary groups are not connected to the military. Not that this is the curx of my point here, as the military is just as guilty...


No, I've been pretty specific that there are some serious problems with government links to the paramilitaries and what those groups did and are currently doing. That, however, has very little to do with military aid. One might make the moral argument against it.

Here's the reality of the situation: The paramilitaries came about because the various Colombian administrations were unable/unwilling to combat the various drug cartels. Plenty of winks and nods at the time. That's coming home to roost now, as the paramilitaries occupy the same kind of untouchable position Escobar did, for many of the same reasons.

At any rate, I assume the conclusion to your argument is that aid should be cut or removed entirely. That leaves Colombia at a distinct military disadvantage as they battle FARC terrorist backed by Venezuela, the lingering trafficing of illicit drugs and the paramilitaries (who come with plenty of government insiders and sympathizers).

None of the shit going on in Colombia is happening in a complete vacuum. In my opinion (see, that's how you write it so that the reader knows you are speaking about things drawn from facts, and not facts themselves), hanging Colombia out to dry, as Noam implies should be done, will lead to the collapse of government and an even worse human rights condition in that country.

The paramilitaries have few funding issues, the cartels and FARC are about the same. The actual arm of the government that Noam wishes to cut off does have problems financially. Like it or not, they are just the lesser of 4 evils. It's sad, it's true and with the situation the way it is there is the opportinity to change the country. Let it collapse, and that opportunity vanishes.

The overall topic is far, far broader than "Colombia takes lots of money from the USA, Colombia has serious human rights issues. In order to fix both problems, we shouldn't send them any more money." That's way to linear, even for me, and I'm king of linear thought.






View User's Profile View All Posts By User U2U Member   Krydor 's Aim   Krydor 's Yahoo
mr_mysterious2
Showstopper






Posts 709
Registered 3-2-2002
Member Is Offline

Mood: New Japan

posted on 6-26-2006 at 11:00 AM Edit Post
So... what about Naomi Klein?

Someone stole my computer so I haven't been keeping up to date on the debate, but it looks like typical Krydorian equivocation to me.

Jeb - You criticise his sources. I'd be interested to know, why is the WWI work he cited so roundly rejected?

Krydor - The only criticism you've brought up that sticks as far as I can see is that Chomsky can be criticised for bad sentence structure.

Personally, I won't put myself in the camp of universally supporting any of the names listed in the thread's topic (though I will go on record as saying that I tend to agree with Klein's criticisms quite frequently).

The central issue that seems to be relevant in all their analysis of the US is the critique of America maintaining economic imperialism through militarism. Regardless of their proposed solutions or stances, that element is central to all the arguments and is rarely addressed or even acknowledged in mainstream media.

Yes, they have an "agenda", or perhaps, termed more accurately, they express an opinion as seen through the lense of a very specific world view. But when the best you can do to debunk the central thesis is nitpick at one or two poorly phrased sentences or bad citations, it belies the debate that lies at the heart of the matter.

I think the real problem that most people have with the so-called far left is the fact that they suggest the possibility that America is a force for evil in the world and has been for a long time. Rarely, if ever, do I see any of these commentators suggest that America is the only force for evil. Being the most powerful, however, it is the one nation that can do the most damage.

To that extent, to see their analysis as an apparent justification of atrocities in other states is an error. Its my belief that their views in regards to American use of military power come from two central ideas: Even in world politics, for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction and in order to check the problem of a superpower creating a chain reaction of instability there needs to be a balance of power to discourage recklessness.

More importantly however, the so-called far left is interested in pointing out that hypocrisy in the American tolerance of what states do exposes the economic interests that lie at the heart of all American military policies.

oh dear... its 6 am... I should get some sleep...

blah, blah, blah, and... um... blah

View User's Profile View All Posts By User U2U Member
Krydor
The Man






Posts 5425
Registered 10-28-2002
Location In
Member Is Offline

Mood: Going to Maiden

posted on 6-26-2006 at 07:40 PM Edit Post
Originally posted by mr_mysterious2
So... what about Naomi Klein?


I don't know, what about her?


Someone stole my computer so I haven't been keeping up to date on the debate, but it looks like typical Krydorian equivocation to me.


Really? How so? Did they also steal the past three pages of this thread from the internets? Bah. Found that Fisk retraction of his muckraking? Doesn't exist.


Krydor - The only criticism you've brought up that sticks as far as I can see is that Chomsky can be criticised for bad sentence structure.


Really? My main criticism is that his work is poorly reasearched and poorly written. Colombia isn't the number one abuser of human rights (one can play "it's his opinion" all he wants, doesn't make it informed). Colombia isn't the number one recipient of Military Aid from the USA, and it has not been at any time. The human rights situation is improving, not spiraling downward.


Personally, I won't put myself in the camp of universally supporting any of the names listed in the thread's topic (though I will go on record as saying that I tend to agree with Klein's criticisms quite frequently).


I don't universally support any author. I will dismiss hacks like Fisk and Chomsky out of hand because their analyses have yet to reflect reality.


The central issue that seems to be relevant in all their analysis of the US is the critique of America maintaining economic imperialism through militarism.


This is one of those deals where we'd best agree on terms. Sounds remarkably like the same kind of thing one might find in Marxist propaganda. Did I say might? I mean does and has since Stalin decided that ruling the world via financing revolutions might be fun.


Regardless of their proposed solutions or stances, that element is central to all the arguments and is rarely addressed or even acknowledged in mainstream media.


Possibly because something outside stirring rhetoric is needed before anyone can take it seriously?


Yes, they have an "agenda", or perhaps, termed more accurately, they express an opinion as seen through the lense of a very specific world view. But when the best you can do to debunk the central thesis is nitpick at one or two poorly phrased sentences or bad citations, it belies the debate that lies at the heart of the matter.


Of whom do you speak? Fisk or Chomsky? Which debate is that? 'Merica running about murdering reporters or the evils of the Military/Industrial Complex? One is utter bullshit and the other stance tells only one side of it.


I think the real problem that most people have with the so-called far left is the fact that they suggest the possibility that America is a force for evil in the world and has been for a long time.


That, also is little more than Cold War propaganda. It's easily dismissed because history shows it to be false.


Rarely, if ever, do I see any of these commentators suggest that America is the only force for evil. Being the most powerful, however, it is the one nation that can do the most damage.


Odd, then, that it doesn't do the most damage.


To that extent, to see their analysis as an apparent justification of atrocities in other states is an error.


Ah, the general way of writing a hard left op-ed is to begin with something like this: Sure, suicide bombers in marketplaces is bad but it belies the greater evil of the military industrial complex/poverty/dispair or anything else that is America's "fault".

For reference, anything Chomsky has written regarding the War on Muslim Fanatics.


Even in world politics, for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction and in order to check the problem of a superpower creating a chain reaction of instability there needs to be a balance of power to discourage recklessness.


A balance of power held by what ideology? Last time, it was the USSR. Balance-schmalance. I'll take Pax Americana any day.


More importantly however, the so-called far left is interested in pointing out that hypocrisy in the American tolerance of what states do exposes the economic interests that lie at the heart of all American military policies.


Yes, no blood for oil, the great Afghan pipleline, the dug in US forces in Saudi Arabia. All that rot. Hopefully, we're just talking about the past 10 years or so, because one would have a hell of a difficult time with those notions circa 1962-1995.






View User's Profile View All Posts By User U2U Member   Krydor 's Aim   Krydor 's Yahoo
benoitbrokemyneck
John Edwards is a faggot.






Posts 4109
Registered 3-17-2002
Location Inside The Internets
Member Is Offline

Mood: not dead yet

posted on 6-27-2006 at 04:32 PM Edit Post
My head hurts

So I put two facts up to be addressed... And after post upon post, it has been determined as far as I can tell, that with the first fact, Chomsky was off by one (Columbia was number two inline behind Egypt), and the second fact was 'conceded' by Krydor (I guess that means its correct... not sure how facts are conceded).

So it only took 329452 words to settle two facts. Chomsky was wrong by one, and right on the other fact. I'm starting to realize the futulity of this venture. I guess I'm actually realizing the futulity of dealing with you, Krydor. One shouldn't have to spend 6 posts explaining the simple concept of what a question of fact is. Nor should one have to fend of accusations over wanting to know the reasoning behind 'why is Chomsky so wrong... prove it." I literally haven't read him in years, but when I did, he seemed pretty good with his facts. All I wanted to was a critique of his facts. But all you want is to argue his conclusions. Don't you think that a so called 'liberal' (which he isn't) and a guy that is pretty hard to the right like yourself, are inevitably going to come to vastly different conclusions when given the same info? That is why I wanted to go after facts...

Oh well, this has been a fun little exercise in stupidity. I really don't plan on transcribing the whole book at this point.... just too much effort for two facts alone, let alone an entire book. Classes have started again, I'm looking to do more freelance, and I still have to run a fucking office alone, so I just can't justify this. Maybe if we could've gotten two questions down in 2 posts, rather then 22 posts I would be singing a different tune...





Keepin' it German

View User's Profile View All Posts By User U2U Member
Krydor
The Man






Posts 5425
Registered 10-28-2002
Location In
Member Is Offline

Mood: Going to Maiden

posted on 6-27-2006 at 05:11 PM Edit Post
As to the other "fact", what does it mean? Something about Colombia surpassing Turkey as a recipient of military aid. What does that mean, exactly? I dismissed it because of the point he was trying to make involved (I think, but who knows) US sponsored genocides or somesuch. Once they were done spreading mayhem, they set their sights on Colombia.

Has Noam ever written a similar peice involving US aid (of any sort) to the Palestinian Authority? No. Which means he is not being objective by any rational measure and merely wishes to push his agenda.

Oh, by the by, you linked to a wiki page involving points of fact as defined in a US court of law. Which means that if Noam said what he said "on the stand", as it were, any middling attorney would have shredded him.

Quick look at Stoicism. I'm throwing that in there so you may glimpse into the workings of my mind. Fairly long read, but it may help you understand why I take issue with the poor writing and poor research that leads to faulty conclusions that are the essence of Chomsky's writings.






View User's Profile View All Posts By User U2U Member   Krydor 's Aim   Krydor 's Yahoo
benoitbrokemyneck
John Edwards is a faggot.






Posts 4109
Registered 3-17-2002
Location Inside The Internets
Member Is Offline

Mood: not dead yet

posted on 6-27-2006 at 05:19 PM Edit Post
I accept your apology for the name calling, and all your stuborness in general when it came to understanding what a question of fact is and why I would choose that to be addressed.

You are ray of sunshine, Krydor... a model for all that post here.





Keepin' it German

View User's Profile View All Posts By User U2U Member
Krydor
The Man






Posts 5425
Registered 10-28-2002
Location In
Member Is Offline

Mood: Going to Maiden

posted on 6-27-2006 at 05:46 PM Edit Post
Originally posted by benoitbrokemyneck
I accept your apology for the name calling, and all your stuborness in general when it came to understanding what a question of fact is and why I would choose that to be addressed.

You are ray of sunshine, Krydor... a model for all that post here.


Wow, sarcasm!

The idea/notion/purpose of this thread was for me (or anyone, really) to pick apart certain darlings of the left. My initial post here was about the Fiskian notion that the US Armed forces were murdering/intentionally targeting journalists. even though it was soundly debunked, I don't imagine those that believe it will change their minds.

Next comes Chomsky. Three statements, one of faulty construction and objectively wrong by any measure, yet voiciferously defended by you. Another that leads to a paranoid conspiracy theory regarding the US spreading mayhem, which you have yet to address. The final one being an "opinion", and in your world everyone's opinion is equally valid on any topic, regardless of how ill informed it is.

The problem here is that one cannot argue facts. When an item shows up that is in error, it must be dismissed. The problem with dismissing the error filled initial statements is that their removal also removes the foundation of the argument in toto.

The two of us can have a rational discussion on Colombia, and probably agree on most things with regards to the situation. I'm not going to do that using Chomsky's "facts". You seem quite prepared to do so.






View User's Profile View All Posts By User U2U Member   Krydor 's Aim   Krydor 's Yahoo
benoitbrokemyneck
John Edwards is a faggot.






Posts 4109
Registered 3-17-2002
Location Inside The Internets
Member Is Offline

Mood: not dead yet

posted on 6-27-2006 at 06:42 PM Edit Post
I have time to post yes. But do I have time to wage war over an entire booklet? No.

Jeb, just look at this thread. Read it straight through, and then think about how long it took for me and Krydor to post all of this... over two facts in one paragraph. Now multiply that times about 500 to cover an eighty page book. Seriously, its a waste of time. Sorry to disappoint you. I'm just tired of this. All I wanted was something past "Well he has errors, trust me..." and got this cluster fuck. Maybe if he could just approach the subject with honesty and precision, instead of attacking me for daring to question those that dare to question Chomsky, then this would have indeed take about a 50th the effort that it did. Maybe you have time to engage in this task? By all means... It took one week exactly to get done with one paragraph... now imagine an additional 80 pages or so. I have plenty of time to engage in something that resembles something constructive, but if every 3rd post by Krydor is him pretending not to understand my clearly stated directions, and then calling me names, then we no longer have anything other then a stupid cluster fuck of a thread. Take for example, him saying that Columbia received a half billion in military aid... and then I say I found figures saying it was 564 million. I want to know where he got his figure from to keep on the same page. Krydor however wants to call me a 'tool'... It's not clean, its not rational. Its not an examination of the facts. It is lame and childish on his behalf.

I can go all day with Krydor and you've seen that many times. But the appeal is wearing thin... especially after the crap he has done (over and over and over) in this particular thread. Sorry, but it has nothing to do with me being hypocritical or defeated, I just can't in all honesty keep wasting my time with this debacle. If one paragraph takes a week, I'm guessing 80+ pages takes about a year. Or two. I have time, just not that much time. Or patience for the shit Krydor's pulling here (you tool!).

[insert funny, yet non-relevant picture here]

[Edited on 6-27-2006 by benoitbrokemyneck]

View User's Profile View All Posts By User U2U Member
Krydor
The Man






Posts 5425
Registered 10-28-2002
Location In
Member Is Offline

Mood: Going to Maiden

posted on 6-27-2006 at 07:27 PM Edit Post
Originally posted by benoitbrokemyneck
I have time to post yes. But do I have time to wage war over an entire booklet? No.


Nor even a 2 page column of your choosing. You picked an 80 page booklet for the precise reason that this would become what it was.


Jeb, just look at this thread. Read it straight through, and then think about how long it took for me and Krydor to post all of this... over two facts in one paragraph.


Oh, I'm sure Jeb's been following this thread. Two facts in one paragraph that one you finally begrudingly admit is wrong and another that is seemingly irrelevant when compared to the direction Noam took.


Now multiply that times about 500 to cover an eighty page book. Seriously, its a waste of time. Sorry to disappoint you. I'm just tired of this. All I wanted was something past "Well he has errors, trust me..." and got this cluster fuck.


He's wrong on one fact, you admitted it. If it takes 500 pages to dissect each purported fact for you come through with "yeah, he was off a little bit, but that doesn't reflect poorly on the overall theme, even though that fact was a lynchpin to a larger conspiracy." By the end of it, it will be a mess if you voiciferously defend that which is proven to be false.


Maybe if he could just approach the subject with honesty and precision, instead of attacking me for daring to question those that dare to question Chomsky, then this would have indeed take about a 50th the effort that it did. Maybe you have time to engage in this task?


Interesting phrasing, that. Honesty and precision regarding Chomsky when we've established that he is neither honest nor precise? Your mission, should you choose to accept it, is defense of Chomsky's error riddled diatribes. When the problems are pointed out, you go into full apologist mode.


By all means... It took one week exactly to get done with one paragraph... now imagine an additional 80 pages or so. I have plenty of time to engage in something that resembles something constructive, but if every 3rd post by Krydor is him pretending not to understand my clearly stated directions, and then calling me names, then we no longer have anything other then a stupid cluster fuck of a thread.


Ah! Even though the clearly stated directions were "pick something by Chomsky and I'll shred it". Jeb has pointed out that his sources are discredited and I have pointed out that his conclusions are faulty based on the evidence provided. Even the evidence is open to interpretation.

Therefore that makes his opinion what we want to go after, right? Opinions are not open to debate! Huzzah. Mushy headed claptrap.


I can go all day with Krydor and you've seen that many times. But the appeal is wearing thin... especially after the crap he has done (over and over and over) in this particular thread.


Delusions of grandeur. You want to know a secret? Magnus and Jeb (to some extent MHJ) get the better of me on many occasions because they have their shit together on the topic at hand. Multiple sources from respected academics and thought provoking analyses. Even if I despised Magnus (which I don't), I would be forced to respect him because he was so goddamn able to argue effectively.

You simply do not have that skill in your repitoire. Apologia and appeals to authority abound. Chances are pretty good you'd have a shot if you would spend more than 6 seconds trolling DU and Zmag to reinforce opinions you already held.


Sorry, but it has nothing to do with me being hypocritical or defeated, I just can't in all honesty keep wasting my time with this debacle.


Sure it does. If it takes 2 pages for you to admit a factual error and not address the underlying thesis presented by Chomsky in that first page, then how can it continue?

quote:

Me: Chomsky is wrong, here are the facts.

You: Wait, no you're wrong because you read the sentence wrong!

Me: The sentence has two unrelated thoughts. It's poorly written.

You: Well, you have to rewrite it so that it makes sense.

Me: Even with the rewrite, it's factually incorrect. Besides, shouldn't he have written it correctly in the first place?

You: I wish people would discuss the facts, and not his opinion.


Thus, it begins again, the closed feedback loop. It took you 2 pages to admit the error of Noam and were dismissive of it, even though the point of the exercise was to show that Noam played fast and loose with factual information.






View User's Profile View All Posts By User U2U Member   Krydor 's Aim   Krydor 's Yahoo
benoitbrokemyneck
John Edwards is a faggot.






Posts 4109
Registered 3-17-2002
Location Inside The Internets
Member Is Offline

Mood: not dead yet

posted on 6-27-2006 at 07:57 PM Edit Post
I don't read Zmag. I don't know what DU is. I haven't apologized for him. I said he was wrong. He was. On one of two facts. Half the time I see you highlight my words and then I expect you're going to address them and you don't. It's bizarre. You have attacked me over and over. You called me a 'tool' because apparently I was using a different website for numbers then you were. You know that action has no use in an open and honest conversation... so when I point it out you ignore me, while highlighting my observation as if you addressed it. You're an ass, and this thread has proved that.

When you talk to someone say at a bar or work, and they have different information then you reguarding say anything really, do you call them names? Or do you ask where they found their info? I'm pretty sure you wouldn't call them names, but here you don't have to make sense or engage in rational conversation. You just can call names for no apparent reason. Also I could care less about Magnus or MHJ getting the better of you. I have no idea why you think I would care at this point. This hasn't been an arguement on my behalf... its been me asking for proof and you calling me names for asking for proof. It's an insult to anyone actually paying attention that you act like this is not the case.

edit; All of this shit I'm talking about can be summed up by the above post by Krydor. Notice who I was talking to... notice who responds.... Yea, he is totally on the up and up in this thread. I'm fucking spent.

[Edited on 6-27-2006 by benoitbrokemyneck]

View User's Profile View All Posts By User U2U Member
mr_mysterious2
Showstopper






Posts 709
Registered 3-2-2002
Member Is Offline

Mood: New Japan

posted on 6-27-2006 at 10:46 PM Edit Post
Colombia isn't the number one abuser of human rights (one can play "it's his opinion" all he wants, doesn't make it informed). Colombia isn't the number one recipient of Military Aid from the USA, and it has not been at any time. The human rights situation is improving, not spiraling downward.

Sigh... The sentence can be read in such a fashion that one doesn't interpret that to be his claim. When you post a portion of the sentence, you can make that claim, but only taken out of context.

On the issue of America being a force for evil, I see history supporting that claim. I continue to maintain that reckless interference in the affairs of small states for an edge in Cold War strategic interests resulted in wholly negative outcomes, not the least of which was the birth of the Islamic terrorist movement, something that I put under the category of the equal and opposite reaction... the CIA refers to it as "blowback".

As for the Fisk retraction, I'm not aware that one exists, on the other hand, I'm not aware that one doesn't exist. Nevertheless, although the radio chatter brings his claim into question, I don't consider it sufficient to negate his claim entirely.

Jeb: on the issue of Beard, you say that the Hegelian synthesis has led to historians mostly dismissing his claim. Perhaps Chomsky should dedicate more time to a critical analysis of Beard, but the term mostly constitutes a sufficient enough caveat to suggest that Chomsky could be taking a minority historical viewpoint and is entitled to rely on his claim. The mere existence of a questionable citation doesn't necessarily mean that his reliance on such a work did not take place within an uncritical assessment of the competing historical theories.

View User's Profile View All Posts By User U2U Member
Krydor
The Man






Posts 5425
Registered 10-28-2002
Location In
Member Is Offline

Mood: Going to Maiden

posted on 6-27-2006 at 10:56 PM Edit Post
Originally posted by benoitbrokemyneck
I don't read Zmag. I don't know what DU is.


Seriously, you don't know what the Democratic Underground is? Good lord, you should look 'em up, because you'd fit right in.


I haven't apologized for him. I said he was wrong. He was. On one of two facts.


It was a concerted effort to get that one. The other is relevant how in the overall theory put forward? C'mon, it's like, you know, in the next line.


Half the time I see you highlight my words and then I expect you're going to address them and you don't. It's bizarre. You have attacked me over and over. You called me a 'tool' because apparently I was using a different website for numbers then you were.


Yeah, that's just how it went. It's the feedback loop. You were using inappropriate phraseology in the hopes that no one would catch on. You merrily interchanged terms because you thought they meant the same thing. You purposely misrepresented numbers regarding the dollar amount given to Colombia in order to "double" it.


You know that action has no use in an open and honest conversation... so when I point it out you ignore me, while highlighting my observation as if you addressed it.


Ah, I see! I'm being dishonest and closed. Completely understand, in spite of your numbers misrepresentation, I'm the villan. This is why you've addressed the conspiracy theory behind Colombia overtaking Turkey in the military aid department. That's the key to what we are discussing and one you have not addressed at all.


You're an ass, and this thread has proved that.


Oh, you'll have a hard time finding me denying that. I know what I am and (more to the point) who I am. I'm completely comfortable with it.


When you talk to someone say at a bar or work, and they have different information then you reguarding say anything really, do you call them names?


Oh, the lesson in etiquitte. And yeah, if I know someone well enough, I'll call 'em names. If they are incorrect in a statement, I'll openly tell them and correct them. I'm more than patient with people who simply don't know, but have no tolerance for those who knowingly misrepresent information.


Or do you ask where they found their info? I'm pretty sure you wouldn't call them names, but here you don't have to make sense or engage in rational conversation. You just can call names for no apparent reason.


No apparent reason? Sure there is, it's quite apparent. You distort facts and general information and to get a correction is like pulling teeth.


Also I could care less about Magnus or MHJ getting the better of you. I have no idea why you think I would care at this point.


Because you are under the impression that you give as good as you get, and I feel it is necessary to dissuade you from that line of thought. Your ability to argue/debate has not improved.


This hasn't been an arguement on my behalf... its been me asking for proof and you calling me names for asking for proof. It's an insult to anyone actually paying attention that you act like this is not the case.


Um, yeah. That's exactly how this thread went down. Someone, and I forget who, posted a link to an anti-Chomsky site. The meat of the link pointed out some inconsistencies between what Chomsky said and what actually happened. You decided to dismiss the information. Argumentum Ad Hominem was your weapon of choice, even though Chomsky said what the link purported.


edit; All of this shit I'm talking about can be summed up by the above post by Krydor. Notice who I was talking to... notice who responds.... Yea, he is totally on the up and up in this thread. I'm fucking spent.


If it was a private letter to Jeb, then I helpfully suggest you don't put it in an open thread with various misrepresentations of the discussion at hand.






View User's Profile View All Posts By User U2U Member   Krydor 's Aim   Krydor 's Yahoo
<<  1    2    3    4  >>
New Topic New Poll


go to top


Powered by XMB 1.8 Partagium Final SP1
Developed By Aventure Media & The XMB Group
Processed in 0.3192000 seconds, 21 queries