-- Luke
On Mon, 17 Sep 2001, Stephen E Philion wrote:
> Now you're just trying to convince us that Chomsky's argument is one of
> moral equivalence. Pathetic, that has nothing to do with Chomsky's
> argument. Like I said, if more people had acted like Chomsky in the
> 1980's, well maybe you wouldn't have to worry about your daughter's safety
> from terrorist attacks. I think your support for the CIA's role in
> Afghanistan in the 1980's and your support for retaliation contribute to
> the very disaster that you've been forced to react to this week.
>
> In reality you're angry at Chomsky for not supportinng the war machine.
> There are sound moral arguments for doing that, which you cast as
> unpatriotic. I wish more people were unpatriotic when we were militarily
> and financially supporting the 'forces of freedom' in Afghanistan 20
> years ago...
>
> Steve
>
>
> On Mon, 17 Sep 2001 LeoCasey at aol.com wrote:
>
> > And one last point on the nature of the exchange here: what a grand irony
> > that the very folks who injected race into the discussion, by labelling as
> > racist a rejection of Chomsky's moral equivalence between an act that took
> > one life, and was designed to minimize the loss of innocent human life,
> > with an act that took thousands upon thousands of innocent life, and was
> > designed to maximize the loss of innocent life, now complain about being
> > race baited. Imagine the chutzpah of someone like me that I might actually
> > respond to such a charge.
> >
> >
> > Leo Casey
> > United Federation of Teachers
> > 260 Park Avenue South
> > New York, New York 10010-7272
> > 212-98-6869
> >
> > Power concedes nothing without a demand.
> > It never has, and it never will.
> > If there is no struggle, there is no progress.
> > Those who profess to favor freedom, and yet deprecate agitation are men who
> > want crops without plowing the ground. They want rain without thunder and
> > lightning. They want the ocean without the awful roar of its waters.
> > -- Frederick Douglass --
> >
> > .
> >
> >
>