At 07:47 AM 9/21/2001, Fred Welfare wrote:
>In a message dated 9/19/2001 12:29:50 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
>[log in to unmask] writes:
>
> > If Pakistan
> >  does submit to U.S. demands, it is not impossible that the government will
> >  be overthrown by forces much like the Taliban -- who in this case will
> >  have nuclear weapons.
>
>Aside from several other ludicrous statements in this post, this is an
>incredible leap, as well.

Why?  Pakistan is not that much less of a religious fundamentalist state
itself, you know.  There are very strong groups sympathetic to the Taliban
in Pakistan - power hangs by a thread.  Note the large turnouts at
anti-American rallies.

>Chomsky seems to be without a hint of common sense
>and under the impression that the terrorists are omnipotent and that the US
>is thoroughly guilt-ridden.  Everyone understands clearly that Iraq is under
>a blockade for the production of biological weapons.

So why isn't the US under blockade for the same crime?  What about Israel's
development of nuclear weapons?  Aid to Pakistan was blocked because they
developed nuclear weapons - why not Israel?  Why not the UK or France?

> >this is the first time since the War of 1812 that its national
> >territory has been under attack, even threat. Its colonies have been
> >attacked, but not the national territory itself. During these years the US
> >virtually exterminated the indigenous population, conquered half of
> >Mexico, intervened violently in the surrounding region, conquered Hawaii
> >and the Philippines (killing hundreds of thousands of Filipinos), and in
> >the past half century particularly, extended its resort to force
> >throughout much of the world. The number of victims is colossal.
>
>Non of this is true at all.

You are wrong here.  It's not opinion at all - 1,000,000 Indonesians is
just for starters.  All this is documented in a number of places.  You're
just another damn list troll.

Alister


"I simply do not agree that the state, or any other system of
organized power and violence, should have the authority to
determine what people think or say. If the state is granted the
power to shut me up, my counter argument is not that what I am
saying might be valuable. That would be a contemptible position,
in my view."  --> Noam Chomsky