In a message dated 3/1/02 9:51:31 PM Pacific Standard Time, [log in to unmask] 
writes:


> I guess that means I'm not a Chomskyite.  I certainly did know that
> Daniel Pearl had been kidnapped, held hostage, and finally murdered.  I
> didn't know he was Jewish.  His being Jewish was not an "event of the
> day."

   Then I accept your naiveté.

> Are you sure?  How did they know he was Jewish before they kidnapped
> him?  I still think you are lying.

   So now I am a liar. A liar about something specific, or a liar in general? 
Never mind, your answer would be irrelevant to me.
 
> Unknown. Here's why.  <snip>  What would happen in your
> hypothetical situation would depend on what was being done to help the
> Muslim from Pakistan.

  Obfuscation and rationalization. The answer is that the shrieking would 
still be increasing in intensity on this list from fellas like you.   

 As I recall, shortly after Sept 11th, a hindu
> 
> sikh gas station operator was murdered in Utah or someplace around
> there, apparently by bubbas bent on getting their revenge.  I never
> heard the man's name reported.  That case didn't raise anywhere near the
> level of noise the Daniel Pearl case has, but it certainly was reported
> in the media, and the President did condemn it.  I didn't raise my voice
> in indignation about that case either, excpet as it was yet another
> indication of the larger problem of using violence to get justice.

  More obfuscation and rationalization. The person you are referring to is 
suspected of being shot and killed by a fella who used the WTC attack as an 
excuse. He was quickly arrested and will stand trial for murder. Do I really 
need to point out that the act of this killer was not an organized action 
taken by a group dedicated to the destruction of Jews and America? Do you see 
why your comparison is misleading? Or was that your intention?
  I



> Sidebar:  What you would not see in your hypothetical case is the US Air
> Force dropping cluster bombs and daisy cutters in northern Idaho.
> 

    Point of fact: The US Air Force is not dropping anything on Pakistan as a 
result of the Pearl killing.

> >   And here is a clue. The denizens of Noamland are consistent in their 
> claim
> > that the United States is 'evil'.  This is to be expected since America 
> is
> > the very heart of capitalism, and thus anathema to any self-respecting
> > Chomskyite. So why does it bother you to be perceived as anti-US?
> 
> Simmons, clearly you base your criticism on your beliefs that inspired
> your statement above, that the leftist objective is to bring down the US
> government and capitalism.  That's generally false.  The leftist
> objective is to protect the people and to eliminate and prevent
> suffering by building a just society.  That will require a lot of
> changes in the world at alrge, not just the US.

      I bet you said that with a straight face. I guess you're just a closet 
capitalist that simply wants to make capitalism work better.:-))

Yes, and I have spoken against it many times.  And I have also said many
> 
> times (others have said it as well) that terrorist attacks like the one
> against Daniel Pearl, like the one against the people of NYC and DC, and
> like the one against the civilians of Afghanistan ought to be treated as
> crimes, because crimes is what they are.

     People are able to discern between a crime and an act of war, Martin. We 
are increasingly living in a world of transnational entities. Corporations, 
NGOs, criminal cartels. Add to these militant political organizations like Al 
Qaeda. Like it or not, as the nation state continues to decline in relative 
power, the rules are changing. Membership in Al Qaeda is not at all 
equivalent to being born, without one's consent, into the citizenship of a 
state. Membership in Al Qaeda is a voluntary commitment to kill members of a 
different religion (or in fact, killing those holding a more moderate view of 
Islam) for the purpose of expanding Islamic domination.
Yours,
Issodhos