Newsgroup: it.politica.internazionale
Titolo: Noam Chomsky, il linguista che parla a vanvera

Noam Chomsky: You Ask The Questions
(Such as: is human survival really under serious threat? And how easy is it
for you, as a linguist, to understand teenage slang?)
04 December 2003
Where is the "silent genocide" you predicted would happen in Afghanistan if
the US intervened there in 2001?
Mike Dudley, Ipswich
That is an interesting fabrication, which gives a good deal of insight into
the prevailing moral and intellectual culture. First, the facts: I predicted
nothing. Rather, I reported the grim warnings from virtually every
knowledgeable source that the attack might lead to an awesome humanitarian
catastrophe, and the bland announcements in the press that Washington had
ordered Pakistan to eliminate "truck convoys that provide much of the food
and other supplies to Afghanistan's civilian population".
All of this is precisely accurate and entirely appropriate. The warnings
remain accurate as well, a truism that should be unnecessary to explain.
Unfortunately, it is apparently necessary to add a moral truism: actions are
evaluated in terms of the range of anticipated consequences.
Il linguista che straparla del dominio dell'Impero americano ha la faccia
tosta di dire di non fare previsioni.
Il linguista ammette di fare un collage dalle fonti piu' disparate, fonti
che poi magari utilizzano i libri di Chomsky per accreditare le proprie
balzane previsioni.
Che poi le previsioni siano state completamente sballate non conta, le
analisi del linguista sono giuste sempre e comunque. Ipse dixit.
Will there be a state of Israel in 50 years' time? What form will it take?
Jo Honer, Portsmouth
There is still a bare prospect for the kind of two-state settlement that has
been supported by a broad international consensus since the mid-1970s,
including the majority of Americans, but has been unilaterally barred by the
US. But that prospect is fading fast. Israel is in no danger as a state, but
for the Palestinians, the future is not pleasant to contemplate.
Il linguista falsifica la storia.
Gli Stati Uniti non si sono mai opposti alla creazione di due stati in
Palestina.
Dalla risoluzione dell'Onu nel 1947 agli incontri di Clinton con Arafate e
Barak gli Stati Uniti hanno appoggiato la creazione di due stati.
A non volere ciň sono stati gli stati arabi nel 1947 ed Arafat nel 1999.
Do you think the Iraqi people would be better off if Saddam Hussein was
still in power?
Clive Norton, Godalming
Certainly not. That is why I have opposed US-UK policies since they began
their strong support for the murderous thug 25 years ago, continuing long
after his worst atrocities were well-known. They returned to support for
Saddam in 1991 when he crushed a rebellion that might have overthrown him,
because they held the "strikingly unanimous view [that] whatever the sins of
the Iraqi leader, he offered the West and the region a better hope for his
country's stability than did those who have suffered his repression" (New
York Times).
Parlare di un appoggio angloamericano a Saddam dopo il 1991 č una balla.
Vedi embargo e no fly zone.
Certo poi il linguista cade nel ridicolo stigmatizzando la scelta di tenere
in piedi Saddam per favorire la stabilita' nella regione.
Ovviamente ora Chomsky ritiene deleteria la caduta di Saddam.
What do you do for fun? And do you have a favourite joke?
Liz Sturt, Petworth
I am constitutionally incapable of remembering jokes for more than 10
minutes. For fun? Grandchildren - something I highly recommend.
Scoperto finalmente il motivo della cantonate di Chomsky: la sua memoria
dura solo dieci minuti.
Linguista ci faccia un piacere di dedichi ai nipotini ed eviti di scrivere
balle.

memoria dura solo dieci minuti.
eheheheh :)))
-Stefano