April 11, 1989 www.amazon.com Watch the full lecture: thefilmarchived.blogspot.com Z Communications is a media group founded in 1986 by Michael Albert and Lydia Sargent. Its publications include Z Magazine, ZNet, Z Media, and Z Video and are generally of a left perspective. Z Communications is based outside Woods Hole, Massachusetts. Regular contributors to its publications include Uri Avnery, Noam Chomsky, Alexander Cockburn, Tim Wise, Amira Hass, Norman Solomon, Robert Fisk, John Pilger, Edward S. Herman, Anthony Arnove, Joshua Frank, Eleanor Bader, Barbara Ehrenreich, Bashir Abu-Manneh, “Mickey Z,” and formerly Howard Zinn. Lewis Franklin Powell, Jr. (September 19, 1907 – August 25, 1998) was an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States. He developed a reputation as a judicial moderate, and was known as a master of compromise and consensus-building. He was also widely well-regarded by contemporaries due to his personal good manners and politeness. John Locke (29 August 1632 28 October 1704), widely known as the Father of Liberalism, was an English philosopher and physician regarded as one of the most influential of Enlightenment thinkers. Considered the first of the British empiricists, he is equally important to social contract theory. His work had a great impact upon the development of epistemology and political philosophy. His writings influenced Voltaire and Rousseau, many Scottish Enlightenment thinkers, as well as the American revolutionaries …
Video Rating: 5 / 5
Well of course the U.N. will back the Palestinians…they back anything and everything that’s anti-U.S.; and majority of palestinians are devout Muslims content with hating the infidel.
As for the U.N. “promoting peace”, what a terrible record they have; Vietnam, Cambodia, Laos, China, etc. Thanks to the U.N., atrocities in Africa and elsewhere continue to this day. You might think the U.N. “promotes peace”, I see it as promoting corruption. Saddam and UN’s “Oil for Food” made him rich…haha
@DeviantFormula …You would know that even the most ardent zionists (Goldstone, Shlomo Ben Ami, Benny Morris, etc.) admit that Palestinians are defending against the aggression of colonization and genocide (or “population transfer” if the term makes you feel better). The UN resolutions, Geneva Conventions, ICJ and human rights NGOs simply solidify the legality of the native’s position.
@DeviantFormula lol, if you bothered to check the facts, you would notice that every year for the last 4 decades, the entire world votes for peace at the UN, while the U.S., the colonizers and a few other client states vote “no”. You would know that the PLO joined the international consensus around ’76 (peaceful solution based on ’67 borders). You would know that HAMAS came after colonization, occupation, etc.
@shakur420 Everyone has the right to self-defense, despite what any corrupt organization like the U.N, ICJ or Human Rights Commission says. That’s not the point when it comes to your argument though. Palestinians do not want peace, nor are they merely “defending” themselves. They committ terrible atrocities in the name of Allah. And to be fair, Israel committs atrocities too.
Nonetheless, Palestinians love war, and they will never commit to peace until killing every Jew…
1989
@DeviantFormula The argument is that if people reject the notion of Palestinians defending themselves by bombing civilian areas, like tel aviv, then the same standard applies to those who attack Gaza under the (non-existent) guise of self defense. Palestinians, according to the UN, the Geneva Conventions, the ICJ and all Human Rights groups on the planet have every right to use force to defend themselves againsts the zionists. There is no such bases for attacking the Palestinians.
Execute Julian Assange!
@shakur420 Oh you’re right Shakur420…I’ll believe a man who says, and I quote word for word, “I would ask the listener whether he harbours any guilt for having supported Hitler and the Holocaust and insisting the Jews be sent to extermination camps. It has the same answer. Since it never happened, I obviously can’t have any guilt for it.”
Now, go smoke some more weed and believe in fairy tales; they go hand in hand with sister mary jane. Btw, pothead holiday 4-20 = Hitler’s B-day…lol, gj..
@DeviantFormula lol, I didn’t realize that I needed to do your work for you. The amount of available literature and videos involving Chomksy’s scholarship regarding the Indochina wars are staggering. The fact that you even deny that is ample reason to assume that you’re talking out of your ass. Do I really need to tell you to google the word “Chomsky” with relevant words like “Cambodia”, “Indochina”, “Vietnam”, “Khmer Rouge”, “Pol Pot”. Is that really necessary? lol
@staticenz It’s this simple, staticienz. If a person wants to be taken seriously, they will, upon making contentious propositions, rise to the challenge of attempting to prove them. I repeat, then, that you’ve failed, as I suspected. Any attempt to evade this perfectly reasonable and in fact responsible expectation would offer credence to the charge of “charlatan”.
@mdoob11
No place is a good place to be pretentious, unless that’s a character trait you admire in yourself and others. Anyways, I figured you’d be too lazy to address my reference. You asked, I gave, you dismissed. Your case needn’t be rested when my point’s already been made. It’s exactly the outcome I predicted. My original comment still stands as true as the day I made it.
@staticenz What better a place to be pretentious than on youtube? As to the dispute, I rest my case. “I guarantee you will be unsuccessful, testimony to the point I was making: Chomsky exemplifies Genius. Good day, charlatan”
@mdoob11 BTW, if you’re really that interested in doing any individual critical analysis google search “200 Chompky lies”. It’s a study done by Paul Bogdanor. It’s in PDF format. It’s well referenced and footnoted with hundreds of reliable source materials. It’s really just the tip of the iceberg but it sheds light into an area many Chompskites (like yourself) refuse to acknowledge. The guy’s an anti-semitic, communism loving, fraud. Much of academia has acknowledged it, so should you.
@mdoob11
Aren’t we just full of ourselves today. “Charlatan”? lol I can not, nor will I attempt to justify my reasoning for disliking the “Chomper” (lol?) in 500 characters or less.The man has outright lied so many times that listing them all here on Youtube (to a complete stranger) is not only pointless, but would be completely and utterly fruitless in the end. Accept the premise that he could be wrong, and analyse it. Or, if you want to be an ignorant lemming, that’s your choice.
@staticenz You’ve already committed an error. His influence is not restricted to “a select few circles”, unless you think computer language, philosophy (specifically of the mind), psychology (specifically cognitive, as well as doing away with behavioral), neuroscience, and so on, are “a select few” lol. Further, there are many who’ve made incredulous achievements in other fields, and aren’t on the top 1000 quoted list, let alone the 8th most ever and most for a living person. Try again.
@staticenz You speak of sophistry and make an utterly ridiculous association between C and H. Before I listen to any more of your quite transparent, and quite shallow I might add, attempt to slander the Chomper, I submit a modest request: please indicate a view, believe, factual assertion, you get the point, of Chomsky’s that you purport is incorrect, explaining briefly why. I guarantee you will be unsuccessful, testimony to the point I was making: Chomsky exemplifies Genius. Good day, charlatan
@mdoob11
I don’t doubt that he’s a linguistics genius. There are only a select few circles in which his “genius” is of any value. He’s self aggrandizing and wildly presumptuous. The second I hear someone quoting Chomsky, the sophism red-flag raises and I immediately realize I’m about to be inundated with several lines of anti-establishment nonsense. Admittedly , prior to critical objectivity, his arguments seem convincing. So did (incoming Godwin)….Hitler’s.
@staticenz It’s not a stretch. In social science and arts and humanities indexes, Chomsky is the most cited living man, and the 8th most of all time. Indeed, Professor Chomsky is in illustrious company. The top ten cited sources during the period were: Marx, Lenin, Shakespeare, Aristotle, the Bible, Plato, Freud, Chomsky, Hegel and Cicero. So, excuse you when you claim it’s a stretch. Are you unfamiliar with his revolutionary work in linguistics, revolutionary in a number of disciplines?
@dopeskies
That’s a stretch. He’s simply the loudest and most popular.
@shakur420
Thanks for not explaining your rebuttal….other than the typical, “I’m right b/c I said so” argument which is prevalent among morons….
Do your homework, you might not look so common…
🙂
@DeviantFormula and as for the quote about Tel Aviv, that is a rhetorical question and the obvious answer is NO! He’s just applying the same logic Israel uses when they defend bombing Gaza, to show them how if you apply it the other way around, the obvious answer is no.
So, if it’s wrong for Tel Aviv it is wrong for Gaza. As you probably know, Chomsky was very much opposed to the bombing of Gaza, why would he be for bombing Tel Aviv?
@DeviantFormula no he doesn’t deny the cambodian genocide, that’s a lie. And I agree with him that people shouldn’t be called anti-semitic just because they believe something like that. I think the people who believe that the holocaust took place are wrong, but it doesn’t automatically follow that they are anti-semite!
@DeviantFormula He “denies the Cambodian genocide”?? HAHA. Sure. Thanks for explaining to everyone how unfamiliar you are with Chomsky and his work. Do your homework, you might not look so ignorant.
@grantorgeir
Chomsky also said, “There’s little doubt that those under the military occupation would be much better off if the occupation were terminated. Does it follow that we should bomb Tel Aviv?”
@grantorgeir
Some Quotes: “I see no anti-Semitic implications in denial of the existence of gas chambers, or even denial of the holocaust. Nor would there be anti-Semitic implications, per se, in the claim that the holocaust (whether one believes it took place or not) is being exploited, viciously so, by apologists for Israeli repression and violence.”