Representative Press Blog

Carlos, Chomsky is not an apologist for terrorism.

You continue to play your games by avoiding the very first point I made on this thread. Can you answer it or not?
In 1831, terrorists killed Americans because of slavery. (do you deny this? Does admitting this mean one is an "apologist" for terrorism?) Would ending slavery have been "giving in to terrorism"?
I notice no one dealt with the very first point I made.

"to try to distract us from the real dangers of Islamofascism". that you even use the term "Islamofascism" shows that you are ignorant. Fascism is not the political system that they call for. What is mainly called for is resistance to policies that the West has imposed upon them. The little political structure that bin Laden has discussed involves consultive councils, not fascism. The bottom line is what motivates the attacks and you are in denial if you think the attackers are motivated by something other that resisting our policies. (how many times does the facts have to be laid out? Even the 1998 Fatwa which was quoted by Darleen says explicitly why they attack, she and others attempt to take a line that is quoted in it and with total abondoment of logic try to argue that it means they are motivated by a dessire for a "worldwide Caliph". The games being played here have an obvious motive. If you can convince yourself that what the terrorists are motivated by is "unreasonable" then the US foriegn policies need not change.

"desperate attempt to prove that the US is always to blame for whatever goes wrong"
NOT always wrong, wrong where it is wrongs. Was slavery wrong? The slave owners had people like you who bent over backwards making excuses for slavery.
The US backed the most extreme elements in the Middle East. Both the religious Jihad and Saddam, so don't tell me the US has not done wrong. And the more I think about it, can you guys READ? What does the 1998 Fatwa say? It explicitly says to other Muslims WHY the fight is being waged. And I showed you, I showed you how people like Tenet take the key sentence and chop of the second part in order to suppress the reason why. The 1998 Fatwa is a message to fellow Muslims and it says why and it doesn't say what you guys claim. And US officials quote from it and omit half of the key sentence, "in order to ..." In order to what? If it was in order to "establish a worldwide Caliph" why the hell doesn't it say so? (remember this is a message for Muslims) You guys are so over the top ridiculous it is unreal. For God sakes I am walking you guys through each step and showing you the facts, stop crossing your arms and refusing to think. Are you saying you can't even be reasoned with?