:There is no "even split", even counting the comments of the involved parties, and while neither I nor that discussion are the final word on the matter; when you take Chomsky to RSN, the result is always the same. Obviously Chomsky is more reliable than a random blog, and is a reliable source for statements he has made, but he's not a historian and should not be given undue weight. That effectively means he shouldn't be used as a source for historical facts. I trimmed "further reading" because it was undue, and this emphasis on Chomsky has been a distraction. I was accusing you of stalking because you edited both United States support of authoritarian regimes and Iran and state sponsored terrorism back-to-back shortly after I did, then Khmer Rouge and this talk page on the same day only a few hours after me, in each case appearing to challenge my changes. Plus, I knew we had interacted before, although I couldn't recall where or why.