Galloway wipes the floor with Sky News anchor

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

Says you, someone with an admitted deficiency of knowledge on this particular subject. Why you continue to embarass yourself with completely uninformed rants about his personal political leanings that contribute nothing substantive to the conversation (other than to solidify your position as inconsequential), I'll never know, but I would urge you to stop as your posts are only successful in detracting from the conversation and painting yourself further into a corner.

deficiency of knowledge and embarassing myself? contribute nothing substantive to the coversation? inconsequential? painting into a corner?

just so I'm clear ... if I start to insult everyone in big diatribes am I starting to add to the discussion and not embarass myself?

If you look back ... I've actually remained pretty calm and pretty consistent in my opinion ... it's the guys that have Chomsky tatoo's on their hoops that have lost control and chased me all over the place.

I've said the guy isn't the best source because he has an obvious bias. That's all I've said. Given the history of the guy that really can't be disputed.

I urge you to take a step back, take a deep breath, and relax a little bit.

I handle attacks on my heros with much less stress clearly.

[Lanny_MacDonald]

Originally Posted by Azure

Where do I derail discussions? Seriously man, I may take a certain post made by someone and respond to it, but I hardly ever try to flatout change the subject.

Actually, you're extremely good at obfuscation. I know that's a big word, it means arm waving.

Not all of us have 5 years of University education to show for like Agamemnon.

Yeah, but your 5 years of high school sure is impressive!

Advice taken. Like I said before, I try my best to stay within the realms of the topic we are talking about.

Say it with me, obfusication.

But, hell, don't waste your time with me, just put me on your ignore list like everyone else around here does. Seems to work for them.

Best advice you could give someone!

[nuckles]

Originally Posted by Lanny_MacDonald

Exactly. That's actually what I appreciate about Chomsky. The guy is consistent no matter who is office. He critizes what America is based on what she could do. I like that even if I do not agree with his politics. A lot of the things he says resonates because it is true, whether we wish to admit is or not.

Noam Chomsky put it best - “Everybody’s worried about stopping terrorism. Well, there’s a really easy way: stop participating in it.”

That resonates truth.

[Calgaryborn]

Originally Posted by nuckles

Noam Chomsky put it best - “Everybody’s worried about stopping terrorism. Well, there’s a really easy way: stop participating in it.”

That resonates truth.

I don't know. I don't participate in Terrorism and it hasn't appeared to have stopped.

Wasn't that the early stance for many nations when Hitler invaded Poland. One wonders how many lives would have been saved if the world would have intervened before Hitler began his campaign. Germany was in violation of conditions they were given after the first World War concerning building up of their military but, the world sat back.

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by Calgaryborn

I don't know. I don't participate in Terrorism and it hasn't appeared to have stopped.

Wasn't that the early stance for many nations when Hitler invaded Poland. One wonders how many lives would have been saved if the world would have intervened before Hitler began his campaign. Germany was in violation of conditions they were given after the first World War concerning building up of their military but, the world sat back.

Another way of looking at it is that the conditions placed on Germany after the first World War are what led to German aggression later. The one thing history has taught us is that it is easier to avoid a problem by removing the conditions that cause it, than having to deal with it head-on through violence and war.

This is why the War on Terrorism is so ill-conceived. War is a condition that begets terrorism. You can't defeat a tactic with a war when that tactic is a result of war (as well as poverty).

[drp_69]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

This is why the War on Terrorism is so ill-conceived. War is a condition that begets terrorism. You can't defeat a tactic with a war when that tactic is a result of war (as well as poverty).

I tire of this so much. I cant believe that the terrorist action is being blamed on a 'war'. Its so easy to blame ourselves for this, but hey guys this is not OUR fault.
You know I really wonder what would Canadians reaction to a real extreme terrorist action. Who would we blame? The Liberals? The Toronto Star or the Globe and Mail? Perhaps, that evil and untrue National Post.(a coporate bastion) Nah, we would blame the USA and their invasion of Iraq. Its so easy to, cause we hate them and we speak from some kind of higher moral ground.It is so embarassing.

[nuckles]

Originally Posted by drp_69

I tire of this so much. I cant believe that the terrorist action is being blamed on a 'war'. Its so easy to blame ourselves for this, but hey guys this is not OUR fault.
You know I really wonder what would Canadians reaction to a real extreme terrorist action. Who would we blame? The Liberals? The Toronto Star or the Globe and Mail? Perhaps, that evil and untrue National Post.(a coporate bastion) Nah, we would blame the USA and their invasion of Iraq. Its so easy to, cause we hate them and we speak from some kind of higher moral ground.It is so embarassing.

No I would blame it on our involvement in Afghanistan and if you can't believe that Terrorist action is being blamed on a war than you are living in LA LA Land , it really isn't that hard of a concept to grasp.

An eye for an eye leaves the whole world blind

[HOZ]

Originally Posted by nuckles

No I would blame it on our involvement in Afghanistan and if you can't believe that Terrorist action is being blamed on a war than you are living in LA LA Land , it really isn't that hard of a concept to grasp.

An eye for an eye leaves the whole world blind

The 9/11 was being plotted while the USA was trying to create lasting peace between Israel and the Palestinians. So obviously they do not need a war to be upset at us.

The first step towards defeating the terrorists: stop blaming ourselves
Gerard Baker. The Times

And for this it just won’t do to claim it’s all about bad US foreign policy. It is repetitive but necessary to point out that we didn’t start this war when we invaded Iraq. The attacks on 9/11 were planned not only before we invaded, but during a time when the US was expending extraordinary effort to try to forge a lasting settlement between Israel and the Palestinians.
And if our actions have radicalised the jihadists we should remember that they are animated at least as much by our ridding Afghanistan of their spiritual brethren, the Taleban, as they are by whatever crimes the US may have committed in Baghdad. The same applies to Israel and Lebanon. Not only is the current war the direct result of Hezbollah’s aggression, its deeper causes lie in the continued determination of Israel’s enemies, increasingly emboldened by Tehran, to liquidate the Jewish state.

[drp_69]

Thanks HOZ, and thanks to Gerard Baker, and I had not even read that article!
Blaming ourselves, or the US, plays RIGHT into the extremists hands, its what they want.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by nuckles

No I would blame it on our involvement in Afghanistan and if you can't believe that Terrorist action is being blamed on a war than you are living in LA LA Land , it really isn't that hard of a concept to grasp.

An eye for an eye leaves the whole world blind

it's a theory ... that's all it is.

It's certainly a theory that makes sense and I can see it, but to suggest someone that doesn't buy into said theory is in la la land is a little over the top.

like Hoz pointed out, you leave things be and things like 911 can still reach up and bite you on the butt.

to me that theory is too limiting though. You can't just leave things that are already sour to spoil further. Do you need a war to fix it? Nope ... not saying that, but to just leave it and hope a lack of war will fix things seems way to much like a parent just giving in to their child and then being shocked when the kid turns out to be a complete failure as an adult.

tough call, no easy answers, and certainly no one has to be in la la land to suggest that there are no easy answers.

[White Doors]

And to blam eit on 'poverty' is moronic. Are there poor people in India? I'd gander that there is. I don't see them blowing themselves up. Well the Indians of the Hindu faith anyways).

Man, it really amuses me how many people in the west buy the terrorist clap trap that we are bringing this on ourselves.. That this is all the West's fault. I guess it is true for some, that if you hear a lie over and over again it becomes the truth. Speaks very badly for our education system and the gullibility of alot of people. Holy White-man guilt batman!

[Azure]

Actually, you're extremely good at obfuscation. I know that's a big word, it means arm waving.

Big word?

Is that the same thing as derailing a thread? Because I wasn't accused of arm waving, rather taking every 'single' or 'many' threads off course.

Yeah, but your 5 years of high school sure is impressive!

Say it with me, obfusication.

Sorry, I don't have 5 years of University education that allows me the read the minds of people that existed 60 years ago.

Best advice you could give someone!

[Agamemnon]

Originally Posted by Azure

Sorry, I don't have 5 years of University education that allows me the read the minds of people that existed 60 years ago.

What you call mindreading they call 'books'. There happen to be a few written about all periods of history, and you can learn a lot by reading them.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by Agamemnon

What you call mindreading they call 'books'. There happen to be a few written about all periods of history, and you can learn a lot by reading them.

I never called it mindreading, you did.

I can read every single history book out there, still wouldn't give me the power to read the minds of people that existed half a century ago.

[Agamemnon]

Originally Posted by Azure

I never called it mindreading, you did.

Seriously? You just said

read the minds of people

I can read every single history book out there, still wouldn't give me the power to read the minds of people that existed half a century ago.

No... but we're not mindreading. We're commenting on history, of which there is a ton of information out there. You're allowed to have an opinion of history and reality without being a mind reader (oops... I mean reading the minds of people, sorry).

[calculoso]

Originally Posted by Lanny_MacDonald

Chomsky is considered one of the greatest minds alive today, whether any of us wants to say otherwise. The guy has more degrees than a thermometer and lectures on too many subjects to list. He is recognized by his peers as being on a completely different level of thought and understanding.

From your experience in business, does having "more degrees than a thermometer" translate well into the real world?

I worked with one guy that had 2 master's degrees and 3 bachelor's degrees, and was the worst manager / employee that I've ever seen! Sure the guy was smart, and could write / theorize on a subject like the best of them, but it didn't help him when push came to shove.

Sure Chomsky can be a great mind. He's no doubt very intelligent. Does that immediately translate well into real world appliability?

[Azure]

Originally Posted by Agamemnon

Seriously? You just said

No... but we're not mindreading. We're commenting on history, of which there is a ton of information out there. You're allowed to have an opinion of history and reality without being a mind reader (oops... I mean reading the minds of people, sorry).

And on both accounts I was referring to your comment of having 5 years of University education, which you called as good as "mindreading" to some extent.

At least remember what you post....

[Lanny_MacDonald]

Originally Posted by calculoso

From your experience in business, does having "more degrees than a thermometer" translate well into the real world?

Nope, normally those guys with all the paper are useless as tits on a bull. Business and academia are two different creatures.

I worked with one guy that had 2 master's degrees and 3 bachelor's degrees, and was the worst manager / employee that I've ever seen! Sure the guy was smart, and could write / theorize on a subject like the best of them, but it didn't help him when push came to shove.

We agree. Big difference between the classroom and the boardroom.

Sure Chomsky can be a great mind. He's no doubt very intelligent. Does that immediately translate well into real world appliability?

Chomsky speaks to the acadmeic issues though. I've never heard Chomsky start talking about economic theories or how business should be run to be successful, I think he tends to stick to what he knows and that societal issues and the concepts of corporate social responsibility.

[calculoso]

Originally Posted by Lanny_MacDonald

Nope, normally those guys with all the paper are useless as tits on a bull. Business and academia are two different creatures.

We agree. Big difference between the classroom and the boardroom.

Chomsky speaks to the acadmeic issues though. I've never heard Chomsky start talking about economic theories or how business should be run to be successful, I think he tends to stick to what he knows and that societal issues and the concepts of corporate social responsibility.

So, if he speaks from an academic (aka theoretical) viewpoint, why does he get so much credit for his views on the real world?

Social issues and social responsibilty are okay to theorize on, but they have to have some kind of basis in real world applyability to be valuable. If not, it's just an ideal that will never come true... and holding someone to such an ideal is impossible and unrealistic.

(asking honestly): Why should Chomsky get so much credit for his views if they are based solely on academia?

[Lanny_MacDonald]

Originally Posted by calculoso

Why should Chomsky get so much credit for his views if they are based solely on academia?

That's a fair question. I guess he gets so much credut because he is willing to challenge the system and speak to its flaws elloquently. He also demands that all stakeholders have their say in matters. That's a pretty solid approach. If he were out on the fringe I don't think he would get the attention he does. I think what he says resonates with so many people that it makes his comments worth listening to. I have yet to sit down with someone and listen to one of his lectures and have them come away thinking the guy has a lot on the ball and has some good ideas, no matter their political affiliation. Chomsky makes common sense arguments and supports them with academic research. That's a helluva lot better than most people we deal with in the world to day.