<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN"> <HTML><HEAD> <META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1"> <META content="MSHTML 5.50.4611.1300" name=GENERATOR> <STYLE></STYLE> </HEAD> <BODY bgColor=#ffffff> <DIV>Steve:</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>"I think you assume that Carrol's signing the petition was for the purpose of supporting Milo's patriotism or other such ideological notions. From what I know of Carrol as a Marxist, I find that unlikely."</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>If Carrol had loftier intentions, he sure hasn't stated them here. All I know is what I read in the petition, a pro-Milo statement straight up and down. And a fair number of other signers, in the comments section, make it clear this is what they're signing on to. And I notice Chomsky didn't sign it, and I seriously doubt he would, given the wording. </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>But enough about this. You don't think it's a big deal signing a petition supporting a murderous thug and ethnic cleanser. Fair enough. That's your benchmark, and you're welcome to it. </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>"i mean sitting around and having a beer and talking to journalists are quite different contexts. And again, big deal, if he blubbered and pounded his chest in anger like Todd Gitlin or Hitch, would the NYT then have given him space to make his critique of Bush's manipulation of 911, which Chomsky was predicting from the get go and later shown to be spot on about.  No, Gitlin, Hitch, would still have been getting the invites for contributions and Chomsky would remain smeared on a daily basis...How else could it be?"</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Why do you have this impression that Chomsky's anger should be a media tactic? I've suggested nothing of the kind, and know, having worked with the dear professor in the past regarding media appearances (it was FAIR's critique of MacNeil/Lehrer that got Chomsky on that show during the Gulf War build-up), that he's gonna be shut out and smeared no matter what he does. I was speaking about him as a humanist, not as a potential talk show guest.</DIV> <DIV><BR>"--nah, they worked together, I saw plenty of it. You assume that demonstrations were not part of saving people's lives in El Salvador, but the priests and nuns who were working in El Salvador didn't view the matter in the same way.  I lived in NYC and saw plenty of interaction between CISPES folks and religious activists."</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>"No you didn't!" </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>"Yes I did!"</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>"Uh uh!"</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>"Uh huh!"</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Jesus H -- where'd you learn to debate: Romper Room? I'm telling you about my personal experience, and that's what it was. Were you there in the tiny basements in small New England towns with Salvadoran refugees, waiting for word that it was safe to move? Or in the small Unitarian churches with refugees wearing bandannas over their faces to hide their identities? I must have missed you and the CISPES cadre you insist was there.  </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>DP</DIV></BODY></HTML>