[R-G] A very important article

[Macdonald Stainsby]

> I don't think it an important article at all. This view of Israel as
> wagging the yankee tail is a very close relative of conspiracism, with a
> dash of anti-semitism thrown in.

Far be it for Carrol to deny himself the pleasure of his repugnant, silly
campaigning against "conspiracism", this is not only grotesque in its
accusations-- anti-semitism is a tar and feather job of the ruling class,
not the left (unless clear and unequivocal, not "You only say that cuz you
hate Jews!")-- but also ridiculous as well.

I seriously doubt Carrol is as naive as to agree with Chomsky on two of
the main points where his tacit reluctance to criticise Israel properly
comes out. Is Israel "juat another client state", such as El Salvador? Do
the financial, political and military connections, strategic placements,
etc etc... really leave one with that impression?

Does Israel really get off the hook for the term Apartheid? Is it really
"inflammatory"? When Chomsky speaks about East Timor, Yugoslavia,
elsewhere-- genocide is a term he applies *according to the letter of
international law*, but apartheid wasn't a category as such. It is a
series of violations of international law with a similar
racially/ethnically separationist intent-- something that is only in line
with Israel in so far as Israel's digressions of the law go even further
than in South Africa.

Finally, when one opposes the sanctioning of Israel on the basis of it
"will punish the civilians", few countries have populations that more
clearly need to account for their acts; the overwhelming majority of
Palestinians *demand* suchy sanctions for one (by Chomsky's standard of
"ask the population what they want", you have to ask Palestinians-- not
Israelis-- what they want, but more importantly the Israeli population is
overwhelmingly settler based, in the time since the illegal expulsion of
Palestinians, another international law point that has been dubbed
"dreamland".

Which of these points about Chomsky's weakness on Israel is not relevant?
I appreciate the article because it recognizes the pre-eminence of
Chomsky, speaks of his important and positive role like few others have
ever attained in the US-- a truism that speaks volumes as to why it
matters that Chomsky is not dealing with the same freedom of conscience
and lack of subjectivity as in other cases.

That, and ignoring the immense power that Zionist planners of all
religions have over the US is a remarkable way to be derelict in your
analytical duty.

Macdonald


--
Macdonald Stainsby
Co-ordinator,
http://oilsandstruth.org
--
moderated radical discussion list:
http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/rad-green
--
In the contradiction lies the hope.
-Bertholt Brecht.