Ralph Nader says, "I Do Like Kucinich"

Ralph Nader says, "I Do Like Kucinich"

Joel Kovel looks at "The Israel lobby"
What you can learn in a footnote

Expert: Bin Laden Warned of 'Unprecedented' Attack

Expert: Bin Laden Warned of 'Unprecedented' Attack
(Reuters) Sep 11, 11:19 AM ET

Saudi dissident Osama bin Laden warned three weeks ago that he and his followers would carry out an unprecedented attack on U.S. interests for its support of Israel, an Arab journalist with access to him said Tuesday.

Abdel-Bari Atwan, editor of the London-based al-Quds al-Arabi, an Arabic-language weekly news magazine, said Islamic fundamentalists led by bin Laden were "almost certainly" behind the attack of the World Trade Center in New York.

"It is most likely the work of Islamic fundamentalists. Osama bin Laden warned three weeks ago that he would attack American interests in an unprecedented attack, a very big one," Atwan told Reuters.

"Personally, we received information that he planned very, very big attacks against American interests. We received several warnings like this. We did not take it so seriously, preferring to see what would happen before reporting it."

Atwan has interviewed bin Laden and maintains close contacts with his followers. ...

This information was reported by Reuters on the day of 9/11. Some news outlets reported it, but many didn't or after initially reporting it, they later left out the reference to Israel. (On TV I only saw this report mentioned once and it looks like it slipped in because Tom Brokaw read from the news wire, reading it live on air without knowing what it was going to say. I didn't see him make one mention of it after) UPDATE: I found another mention, this time by CBS, where someone read this Reuters newswire to include the part mentioning Israel. Here is an example of where they didn't read “Israel”

Another Attack on RepresentativePress

Another Attack on Representative Press

Once again, someone has falsely claimed that one of my web pages or videos violates one of the terms of use of a particular site. This false report, which has disabled my googlepages site, is yet another attempt to censor my political speech.

This is the message I get at my page http://representativepress.googlepages.com/:
"This site has been disabled for violations of our Program Policies. If you feel this disabling was in error, please visit our contact page to let us know. Contact Us"

This is the latest sabotage of Representative Press. Those attempting to censor my political speech have used this tactic before. Hopefully Googlepages will re-enable my account soon. When they did this to a video I put on YouTube, YouTube saw these dirty tricks for what they were, thankfully. See my video: I Heard Back from the YouTube Team about the CENSORED VIDEO

Getting the truth out is a constant battle, I could use any help I can get. Please support Representative Press any way you can. I need to get more equipment and redouble my efforts. This Christmas Please Buy Your Christmas Gifts Through the Representative Press Store or make a donation to Representative Press

The site they managed to get deleted was the one I linked to from the banner at my YouTube account: "You can help spread the word, pass this link on to everyone you can" Please pass the link of my YouTube account on to everyone you can: http://www.youtube.com/representativepress

If anyone has any advice about getting a GooglePages website re-enabled, please leave a comment: See video: Another Attack on Representative Press: Website SABOTAGE

Please ask Lou Dobbs if this is his idea of journalism.

Dear Amy and Juan,

Please ask Lou Dobbs if this is his idea of journalism. When he had Michael Scheuer, the former chief of the CIA unit tracking Osama Bin Laden, on his show, Scheuer said that Bush and Clinton, both parties are lying about the very reason that we are being attacked by terrorists. This is an EXTREMELY SERIOUS FACT and one that goes unreported in mainstream media. I have never seen anyone in MSM actually say that the President is lying about this! What kind of journalist skips to the next question when he is presented with such an earth shattering statement?

Aired July 7, 2005:

DOBBS: And Michael, as we have reported here tonight, radical Islamist terrorism was not even one of the principal elements at the G-8 meeting until, of course, these tragic barbaric attacks today. What do you make of that?

SCHEUER: I make of the fact, sir, that unfortunately the politicians are very comfortable with preaching the idea that this is a very small group of people who are opposing us, and that they hate us for our freedoms and our liberties. The politicians really are at great fault for not squaring with the American people. We're being attacked for what we do in the Islamic world, not for who we are or what we believe in or how we live. And there's a huge burden of guilt to be laid at Mr. Bush, Mr. Clinton, both parties for simply lying to the American people.

DOBBS: Are you hopeful that we're going to see improved border security, improved homeland security, a real commitment?
http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0507/07/ldt.01.html

Please do ask him about this. Is the fact that Bush, Clinton and the rest of the politicians are lying about the very reason America is being targeted by terrorists a non-issue to this guy?!? This was the clearest and most direct statement I have ever heard said on TV about this - and the only time I have heard Scheuer (or anyone ever) say they are actually LYING about this and Dobbs does no follow up? Please hold him accountable for this. Please ask him, this is too extreme not to note.

Sincerely,
Tom Murphy
Representative Press

The CNN political team chooses the videos, not you.

Marty Kaplan points out "the game that CNN is really playing" in his article The CNN/RubeTube Debate, "The notion that the CNN-YouTube debate represents a grass-roots triumph of the internet age is laughable."

"For all the talk about online voter empowerment, the web is still too immature a medium to set an agenda for a national debate, says CNN senior vice president David Bohrman.

"If you would have taken the most-viewed questions last time, the top question would have been whether Arnold Schwarzenegger was a cyborg sent to save the planet Earth," says Bohrman, the debate's executive producer. "The second-most-viewed video question was: Will you a convene a national meeting on UFOs?" - CNN-YouTube Debate Producer Doubts the Wisdom of the Crowd

Look at 10Questions.com, they let people vote and the top ten questions the people picked were not "crazy."

SEE VIDEO: The CNN political team chooses the videos, not you.

It is a disgrace that CNN picks the videos! This is the kind of question they don't want asked

Bohrman's comments about most watched are disingenuous, the videos selected should be the ones voted on, not most watched. For God sakes, I have to watch a video before I can decide if it should be asked in the debate. Bohrman is making up excuses.

This is a question that should be asked!

CNN/YouTube Republican Debate: Giuliani 9/11 Question Giuliani claims, "American foreign policy had nothing to do with the September 11th. September 11th happened because these people who hate us, hate us because of the freedoms that we have." Giuliani is lying to us. see my question. Think Bohrman would allow this to be asked?

See this article: CNN-YouTube Debate Producer Doubts the Wisdom of the Crowd

"For all the talk about online voter empowerment, the web is still too immature a medium to set an agenda for a national debate, says CNN senior vice president David Bohrman.

"If you would have taken the most-viewed questions last time, the top question would have been whether Arnold Schwarzenegger was a cyborg sent to save the planet Earth," says Bohrman, the debate's executive producer. "The second-most-viewed video question was: Will you a convene a national meeting on UFOs?""


It is a disgrace that CNN picks the videos! This is the kind of question they don't want asked

Bohrman's comments about most watched are disingenuous, the videos selected should be the ones voted on, not most watched. For God sakes, I have to watch a video before I can decide if it should be asked in the debate. Bohrman is making up excuses.

This is a question that should be asked!

CNN/YouTube Republican Debate: Giuliani 9/11 Question Giuliani claims, "American foreign policy had nothing to do with the September 11th. September 11th happened because these people who hate us, hate us because of the freedoms that we have." Giuliani is lying to us. see my question. Think Bohrman would allow this to be asked?

CNN/YouTube Republican Debate: Giuliani 9/11 Question

CNN/YouTube Republican Debate: Giuliani 9/11 Question 6 Videos

Giuliani claims, "American foreign policy had nothing to do with the September 11th. September 11th happened because these people who hate us, hate us because of the freedoms that we have." Giuliani is lying to us.

Contact CNN: 404-827-1500 or http://www.cnn.com/feedback/cnntv
Mr. Giuliani, how can you lie
to the American people about
why we were attacked on 9/11
and lie about why we're still
at risk of being attacked again?

You could be electrocuted! See video warning about the dangers of opening your eMac

see video: You could be electrocuted! See video warning about the dangers of opening your eMac

Kucinich for President

Kucinich for President

Support Kucinich: Money Bomb December 15

Support Kucinich: Money Bomb December 15

It's called 'impeachment' IMPEACH THEM NOW

It's called 'impeachment' IMPEACH THEM NOW

It's called Impeachment

Stop The War President IMPEACH!

Stop The War President IMPEACH!

Stop The War President IMPEACH!

U.S. Citizens Speak: Bush, Don't Strike Iran!

U.S. Citizens Speak: Bush, Don't Strike Iran!

If I could ask the media a question

The media helps to sell the idea of bombing Iran by the very fact that they refuse to report that bombing Iran would be a war crime. Bombing Iran would be illegal. Bombing Iran would be a violation of international law.

If I could ask the media a question it would be this: Why the hell can't you report the truth and inform the American people of the basic fact that attacking Iran is illegal?

The first step is to stop using the term "blame America."

Greg, I am disappointed to see you write something like this: "If an Arab sort of blames America for 9/11, it's despicable"

Saudi Prince Alwaleed bin Talal neither "blamed America" NOR did he "sort of blame America."

Prince Alwaleed bin Talal's statement to the media was, "At times like this, we must address some of the issues that led to such a criminal attack. I believe the government of the United States of America should reexamine its policies in the Middle East and adopt a more balanced stance towards the Palestinian cause. While the U.N. passed clear resolutions numbered 242 and 338 calling for the Israeli withdrawal from the West Bank and Gaza Strip decades ago, our Palestinian brethren continue to be slaughtered at the hands of Israelis while the world turns the other cheek."

Greg, I noticed you omitted mention of what "the issues" were which were clearly spelled out in the statement, namely the U.S. government's policy of support for Israel and the resulting suffering of the Palestinians. You mischaracterized Prince Alwaleed bin Talal's statement, he did not say "America deserved 9/11."

Are you telling me you by into Giuliani's manipulative game of insisting that talking about the motive for the crime of 9/11 means that one approves of the crime or sees it as a justifiable act? Giuliani uses a dirty trick in order to prevent the policy of supporting Israel's crimes from being examined. Giuliani attempts to intimidate people into not questioning the policies or angering people so much that cannot think about the policies.

From what you wrote and what you didn't write, I get the impression that you don't want the American people to realize why it is that terrorists attacked on 9/11 or that you don't want the American people to do something about the policies that unnecessarily make us all targets. Tell me this is not the case and that you will work to make others aware of the devious games politicians and pundits have been playing on the American people. Clearly Giuliani serves the agenda of keeping the status quo with regards to the policy of supporting Israel so he deceives the public to prevent them from even thinking changing the policy of supporting Israel.

I can't think of a more vulgar violation of the people's rights then to rob them of the freedom to decide for themselves if they want to risk their lives over specific foreign policies.

Greg, your article morphs Clinton, Bush and other political elites into a single concept called "America" which you then insist is blameless. This is a dirty game because politicians and their horrible policies are not "America itself." Your artificial construct means that the people of the United States can never hold their politicians accountable for political policies. And that is a serious problem because our lives continue to be totally unnecessarily put at risk because of these illegal and immoral policies. These polices are precisely what enrage people into committing acts of terrorism against the U.S. in spite of the lies Guiliani and other politicians tell. "The politicians really are at great fault for not squaring with the American people. We're being attacked for what we do in the Islamic world, not for who we are or what we believe in or how we live. And there's a huge burden of guilt to be laid at Mr. Bush, Mr. Clinton, both parties for simply lying to the American people." - Michael Scheuer, Former CIA Bin Laden Unit Chief

Greg, you can help stop these politicians from putting our lives at risk. The first step is to stop using the term "blame America." The next step is to call for an end to all illegal and immoral foreign policies.

Kucinich Reads Resolution to Impeach Vice President Cheney 3 Videos

Kucinich Reads Resolution to Impeach Vice President Cheney 3 Videos

Richard B. Cheney, in violation of his constitutional oath to faithfully execute the office of Vice President of the United States, has openly threatened aggression against the Republic of Iran absent any real threat to the United States.

Despite no evidence that Iran has the intention or the capability of attacking the United States and despite the turmoil created by United States invasion of Iraq, the Vice President has openly threatened aggression against Iran.

The Vice President, who repeatedly and falsely claimed to have had specific, detailed knowledge of Iraq's alleged weapons of mass destruction capabilities, is no doubt fully aware of evidence that demonstrates Iran poses no real threat to the United States of America.

The Vice President's deception upon the citizens and Congress of the United States that enabled the failed United States invasion of Iraq forcibly altered the rules of diplomacy such that the Vice President's recent belligerent actions towards Iran are destabilizing and counterproductive to the national security of the United States.

In all of this, Vice President Richard B. Cheney has acted in a manner contrary to his trust as Vice President, and subversive of constitutional government, to the prejudice of the cause of law and justice and the manifest injury of the people of the United States.

Wherefore Richard B. Cheney, by such conduct, warrants impeachment and trial, and removal from office.

Why should the Palestinians answer for the Holocaust?

Well, if an atrocity was committed in Germany, or Europe for that matter, why should the Palestinians answer for this?

MR. WALLACE: Okay. Last December, you said this: "The Europeans created a myth -- the Holocaust."

A myth?

PRESIDENT AHMADINEJAD: Well, I don't understand, what questions are you going to put to me?

MR. WALLACE: The questions I intend to put to you are things that you have said in the past, things that have made headlines.

PRESIDENT AHMADINEJAD: Well, I have said these in the past. Do you want us to repeat what has been said already? That would produce a very repetitious -- if I can use that word -- interview.

Put a new question to me, sir.

MR. WALLACE: Please. I am doing the questioning.

America is trying to understand President Ahmadinejad. And one of the ways that we can understand you is by repeating various things that you have said over a period of the past years. Certainly you're not ashamed of the things that you've said --

PRESIDENT AHMADINEJAD: That is very correct. I am not ashamed, and I have -- whatever I have said is correct. There are many things that the American public must come to know. Many others, on the other hand, don't want the American public to know about these. It will be best if we talk about those as well.

MR. WALLACE: For instance?

PRESIDENT AHMADINEJAD: Well, with regards to unemployment in the U.S. and the behavior of the American administration throughout the (war/world ?), and also the literacy rate in the U.S., and the wars that have been waged by the American government in the past 100 years, imposed it on others -- these are important issues.

MR. WALLACE: I see --

PRESIDENT AHMADINEJAD: But with regards to the Holocaust --

MR. WALLACE: Yes --

PRESIDENT AHMADINEJAD: -- well, my question is, if something has happened, I am sure that there are very clear evidence out there available. And this is something which has had a hand, if I can use that word, in the equations and the formulas of the past 60 years.

And on the pretext of this, a land has been occupied. Millions of people have been made refugees. Thousands of people to date have been killed, sir. Thousands of people have been put in prison. Well, at the very moment, a great war is raging because of that.

So apparently this was an important issue. If this is real, then they should let everyone research it. Everyone should talk about it. And once it is prohibited -- of course, research and talking about it is prohibited -- that brings about questions. If it is a reality, well, it will only help if we do more research on the subject.

My question was not this, to be honest with you, in the first place. What I did say was that if this is a reality, if this is real, where did it take place?

MR. WALLACE: In Germany. In Germany.

PRESIDENT AHMADINEJAD: Who caused this? In Europe --

MR. WALLACE: In Europe.

PRESIDENT AHMADINEJAD: (In English.) In Europe.

MR. WALLACE: If I may, so what you are suggesting -- one moment -- what you are suggesting, then -- that Israel should be over in Germany, because that's where the Holocaust took place?

PRESIDENT AHMADINEJAD: (Through interpreter.) I'm not saying that, mind you.

Well, if an atrocity was committed in Germany, or Europe for that matter, why should the Palestinians answer for this? I'm not saying that the answer to the Holocaust led to the establishment of a government. This is something that the British and the Americans are saying. I am saying that if this happened, the Palestinians must not pay for this or be responsible for this. They had no role to play in this. Why on the pretext of the Holocaust they have occupied Palestine? This is the question that Western media -- mass media never bothered with, and to date, I have not received an answer. I think that they have to provide answers to this question. If they do just that, many of the outstanding issues will be resolved automatically. Please remember that we are saddened when a person is killed in any part of the world.

MR. WALLACE: I understand. I understand. Look, if you could -- if you could keep your answers concise, I beg you, we'll get more questions in.

PRESIDENT AHMADINEJAD: Well, one of your questions required -- all of your questions require a book-long answer. If you want me to just finish the interview, please tell me and we can wrap up right now.

I am making a video response to you

Justin,

I had sent you a message back in June. I am planning a video in response to your reply back to me. I wasn't motivated to respond to your reply to me for the simple reason that your reply was dismissive and unreasonable. This was your reply to me, "I am capable of forming my own opinions. Thanks." That was a reply to my message about Prof Jones being wrong. In that message, I had included a link which asked you to check out the fact that "The very thing that Griffin points to as a feature of a fire caused collapse we can see in photos of the World Trade Center."

I just watched your David Ray Griffin Interview and I see you make no mention of this critical fact which Griffin is ignorant of. At the link I sent you, I wrote, "The very thing that Griffin points to as a feature of a fire caused collapse we can see in photos of the World Trade Center.

Griffin writes, "in fire-induced collapses---if we had any examples of such---the onset would be gradual. Horizontal beams and trusses would begin to sag; vertical columns, if subjected to strong forces, would begin to bend. But as videos of the towers show, there were no signs of bending or sagging, even on the floors just above the damage caused by the impact of the planes." But contrary to what Griffin claims, there were indeed signs of bending or sagging. Witnesses reported it and photos document it. Griffin is simply wrong.

Your reply to me suggests that you didn't even take the time to look at the information I was trying to make you aware of. For someone putting themselves out there as one who is "researching various aspects of the September 11th, 2001 terrorist attacks." I find your response to me especially disappointing and frustrating. What kind of scholar is so sure of his position that he refuses to even look at facts he is being presented with?

I am making a video response to our video David Ray Griffin Interview which will highlight the errors that Griffin makes and which you failed to address.

Since I plan to point out in my video how unreasonable your original reply was to me, I thought I would give you the opportunity to review what I had originally sent you and to formulate some sort of response that won't put you in such a bad light. I assume no scholar would want to look unreasonable and unwilling to even review information that calls into question their theory.

In your interview, Mr. Jackman asks Griffin what is the "the biggest piece of eye-opening evidence" and Griffin says that if the question is what is "the clearest evidence that it was an inside job," he answers, "I, like many other people, would probably say building 7." It is incredible that this man can be ignorant of something so well documented and available but perhaps he too doesn't take the time to review information which people send him. Griffin could take a look at the facts laid out at this link and see that building 7 was hit by debris from WTC 1 and was on fire for about 7 hours. Please review the link for yourself. You will see that it is no mystery why the building collapsed. Captain Chris Boyle of Engine 94 explained, "on the north and east side of 7 it didn't look like there was any damage at all, but then you looked on the south side of 7 there had to be a hole 20 stories tall in the building, with fire on several floors. Debris was falling down on the building and it didn't look good."

Fire chief Daniel Nigro clearly thought the building could collapse. Here's what he said, "The biggest decision we had to make was to clear the area and create a collapse zone around the severely damaged [WTC Building 7]. A number of fire officers and companies assessed the damage to the building. The appraisals indicated that the building's integrity was in serious doubt."

Ignorance spreads when there is an unwillingness to engage in a dialog.

-Tom
Representative Press

UPDATE: Here is his e-mail back to me.

Dennis Kucinich for President Telling the Truth at Debate

Dennis Kucinich for President Telling the Truth at the Debate

Zionist Pressure Fails to Stop Overcoming Zionism Book

Zionist Pressure Fails to Stop Overcoming Zionism Book

Joel Kovel, author of Overcoming Zionism, said, "What we don't have is any kind of real debate on this subject in our country at this time ... basically these Zionist repression groups have had pretty much a free hand ... that's why I wrote the book. I mean, I wanted to -- I disregarded all the taboos, that you're not supposed to talk about Israel in any depth in this country." (see video) Joel Kovel, author of Overcoming Zionism, talks with Amy Goodman about Zionist pressure which caused University of Michigan Press to drop his book from distribution.

War Crime

The elites running this country are ruining our country by ignoring our Constitution, ignoring international law and acting like committing a war crime is simply "an option." The elites who run our government disrespect our Constitution and the rule of law. The elites who run our government share a depraved mindset which accepts the notion that "might makes right" if the U.S. government is doing it. Depraved pundits and politicians push the idea that it would be OK for the U.S to attack Iran. Depraved pundits and politicians take for granted the sick idea that international law is to be ignored. They have no respect for our Constitution. Article 6, clause 2 of the U.S. Constitution says "all the treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land." Signing the UN Charter means the U.S. will adhere to the international law against war crimes.

Re: Don't Let Them Trick Us into Another War

Mainstream Media is Selling Another War

Dana Pushes Bush's Big Lie, Reporters Sit on their Asses

Don't Let Them Trick Us into Another War

Don't Let Them Trick Us

into Another War

Rep. Dennis Kucinich has been working for us for years

Rep. Dennis Kucinich has been working for us for years

Re: STUDENTS: A CHALLENGE FOR YOU

Re: STUDENTS: A CHALLENGE FOR YOU


Response to davisfleetwood and his video: ANTI WAR student protest Iran Iraq Bush Cheney Middle East Israel 9/11 September 11

Are you aware of the fact ...

Once again I try to reason with a 9/11 "truther."Below is my YouTube message exchange with "natetruth":

My message to him:
Sent: October 23, 2007
Read: October 23, 2007
Subject: Are you aware of the fact

Are you aware of the fact that the very thing David Ray Griffin points to as a sign of a fire induced collapse actually happened? Trusses DID sag and columns DID bend well before the buildings collapsed.

GOOGLE: "The very thing that Griffin points to as a feature of a fire caused collapse we can see in photos of the World Trade Center."

His reply to me:
Sent: October 23, 2007
Subject: Re: Are you aware of the fact

yaya, you guys always start messaging me every time I load a video. I am aware of what Griffin says. Griffin is nothing to me, I don't fallow what one person says, mostly this guy. I have been involved with the studies of this for years buddy. I'm sure you have your points and I've watched your videos before. I am at ground zero every Saturday talking to people, come if you are ever around. But I don't have time to start a debate with another person out of the dozens that I have. I'll waist valuable time and you will also,

Cheers

Nate E

My message back to Nate:
Sent: October 24, 2007
Read: —
Subject: Re: Re: Are you aware of the fact

Nate,

Why is it every single time I contact one of you guys, you can't defend or even attempt to defend your theory?

At this point I can cut and paste from my own arguments and notes so I am not "wasting time." Are you telling me you don't have anything already written to refute my point?

If we are to have a functioning society, we should be able to respond logically to people and especially if we insist on advancing a particular theory.

Griffin believes in "controlled demolition" (like you I am assuming)

Griffin writes, "in fire-induced collapses---if we had any examples of such---the onset would be gradual. Horizontal beams and trusses would begin to sag; vertical columns, if subjected to strong forces, would begin to bend. But as videos of the towers show, there were no signs of bending or sagging, even on the floors just above the damage caused by the impact of the planes."

But contrary to what Griffin claims, there were indeed signs of bending or sagging. Witnesses reported it and photos document it!

9/11 conspiracy people are still at it
http://representativepress.blogspot.com/2006/05/911-conspiracy-people-are-still-at-it.html

Do you deny that trusses were sagging and columns were bending well before the collapse of the buildings? Apparently the reason the "controlled demolition" crowd believes what they do is because they are ignorant of the basic fact that well before the buildings collapsed, Trusses DID sag and columns DID bend.

If I take the time to go down to the WTC site, are you going to stare silently when I make the above point? Be honest with yourself, your theory doesn't make sense and the evidence debunks it.

WTC Pre-Collapse Bowing Debunks 9/11 "Controlled Demolition" Theory
http://www.representativepress.org/BowingDebunksExplosives.html

-Tom

Nate's message back to me:
Sent: October 24, 2007
Subject: Re: Re: Re: Are you aware of the fact

I recieved three of the same message, you are cut and pasting

Now debate online all day with someone else who has the time or no job. I told you where I'll talk and when I have the time, have a good one,

Nate E

Dana Perino Pushes Bush's Big Lie, Reporters Sit on their Asses

Dana Perino Pushes Bush's Big Lie, Reporters Sit on their Asses

Thom Hartmann's Hypocrisy for Israel Part 2

Thom Hartmann's Hypocrisy for Israel Part 2Thom Hartmann tries to dismiss as a bizarre "conspiracy theory" the idea that Israel pushed for a war against Iraq. Apparently Thom Hartmann is so eager to dismiss any idea that Israel was part of the push for the Iraq War that he misrepresents the basic information.

Thom Hartmann's Hypocrisy for Israel Part 1

Thom Hartmann's Hypocrisy for Israel Part 1
Thom Hartmann's Hypocrisy for Israel Part 1

Nobel economics winner says market forces flawed

"Unfortunately, this [ the “free market”] remains something of a state religion in the US, so while hundreds of newspapers have reported on Maskin’s winning of a Nobel, few seem to have bothered to pick up the Reuters story of what the Nobel Prize winner actually says. (In fact, as I write this, the wire story is already a day old, and while I might have missed something, I can’t find it in a single American newspaper.)
The efficiency of the great free market, absolutely proven once again." - Bob Harris

"Societies should not rely on market forces to protect the environment or provide quality health care for all citizens, a winner of the 2007 Nobel Prize for economics said on Monday. ... In its statement with the award, the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences said the market's efficiency may be undermined because consumers are not perfectly informed, competition is not completely free, and "privately desirable production and consumption may generate social costs and benefits." - Nobel economics winner says market forces flawed

Links: A note to a Youtuber about "Socialism" 

Huffington Post article and two Chomsky articles

Kucinich Campaign update 10-15-07

Scott Pelley Suppresses "War President's" Incompetence

Scott Pelley Suppresses "War President's" Incompetence

Tell Your Senators NOW To Oppose Kyl-Lieberman Amendment on Iran!

Tell Your Senators NOW To Oppose Kyl-Lieberman Amendment on Iran! "The Kyl-Lieberman amendment, if passed, would put the Senate on the record supporting the "use of all instruments of United States national power in Iraq," including military force, to "combat, contain, and roll back" Iran's influence in Iraq."

Mainstream Media is Selling Another War

Several bloggers and pundits have been pushing this a lie that President Ahmadinejad of Iran is a "dictator."

Several bloggers and pundits have been pushing a lie that President Ahmadinejad of Iran is a "dictator." That is a lie. He is not a dictator, he was elected in 2005 and there will be another election in 2009. Last year, Ewen MacAskill and Simon Tisdall in Tehran reported in The Guardian that "Ahmadinejad was the clear favourite to win a second term in 2009"
That is from a June 21, 2006 article called "A year on, Ahmadinejad's popularity is soaring"

Bloggers and pundits who push the lie are warmongers. They feed into the war propaganda which the Bush Administration and the mainstream media are selling to the American people. The Bush Administration is committing war crimes against Iran right now.

the Iraq war is largely about oil- Alan Greenspan

"the Iraq war is largely about oil." - Alan Greenspan

"I am saddened that it is politically inconvenient to acknowledge what everyone knows: the Iraq war is largely about oil" - Alan Greenspan
The Age of Turbulence: Adventures in a New World by Alan Greenspan

Learn the details about the Iraq Oil Law!: "At at noon press conference, on May 24, 2007, at the Cannon Terrace, on Capitol Hill, Rep. Dennis J. Kucinich (D-OH), ripped into the Bush-Cheney Gang's legislative scheme to privatize the oil of Occupied Iraq. He charged: "Privatizing Iraq's oil is theft.""

• See VIDEO: Rep. Dennis J. Kucinich: "Privatizing Iraq's Oil is Theft!"
• See VIDEO: Raed Jarrar on the Iraq Oil Law
• "The Iraq Oil Law... a little known document at the heart of the war. A law that would put the country's most valuable resource into the hands and wallets of foreign multinationals." See VIDEO: On The Map with Avi Lewis: John Bolton (full interview)

"Iraq War plans were in the works, long BEFORE the 911 World Trade Center attack." See VIDEO below!

NYT bias for Israel continues

NYT bias for Israel continues
Action Alert

"When Human Rights Watch recently released two investigations of the 2006 Israel/Lebanon war, the New York Times found the group's documentation of unlawful attacks against Israel to be far more newsworthy than unlawful attacks committed by Israel." - Whose Human Rights Matter?

ACTION: Ask New York Times public editor Clark Hoyt to investigate why the Times considered the Human Rights Watch report on Hezbollah's military tactics much more newsworthy than the group's similar investigation of Israeli actions.
CONTACT:
New York Times
Public Editor
Clark Hoyt
(212) 556-7652
public@nytimes.com
The NYT bias for Israel is a pattern! SEE:
"Howard Friel and Richard Falk reveal the persistent ways the New York Times has ignored principles of international law in order to shield its readers from Israel's lawlessness."

Pat Condell posted a "video response to Osama"

Pat Condell posted a "video response to Osama" but gets all his facts wrong. This is my email to him:

Dear Pat,

I think you will be surprised to learn what bin Laden actually said in his latest video. You should take note of the fact that Michael Scheuer, the former Chief of the CIA's Bin Laden Unit, says Bush is simply lying about what bin Laden says: The politicians really are at great fault for not squaring with the American people. We're being attacked for what we do in the Islamic world, not for who we are or what we believe in or how we live. And there's a huge burden of guilt to be laid at Mr. Bush, Mr. Clinton, both parties for simply lying to the American people."

Bin Laden mentioned Michael Scheuer in his latest video, did you know that? See below.

Bin Laden has never said that he is attacking us because he wants us to convert to Islam, he has made it crystal clear that it is the polices of supporting Israel and other oppressive regimes, the killings and theft that he wants us to end.

If you read what he said in the latest video, it is clear that he is talking about policies. His reference to Islam was saying that we could use it as leverage to achieve what we want. He INVITED us to Islam (not demanded), saying if those in power saw that we (the American people) were going to search for an alternative to the capitalist system, those in power would meet our demands to end the unjust polices.

Look what bin Laden actually says (by the way, Bush says we should listen to what the enemy says):

"People of America: the world is following your news in regards to your invasion of Iraq, for people have recently come to know that, after several years of the tragedies of this war, the vast majority of you want it stopped. Thus, you elected the Democratic Party for this purpose, but the Democrats haven't made a move worth mentioning. On the contrary, they continue to agree to the spending of tens of billions to continue the killing and war there, which has led to the vast majority of you being afflicted with disappointment. I will come back to reply to this question after raising another question, which is: Why are the leaders of the White House keen to start wars and wage them around the world, and make use of every possible opportunity through which they can reach this purpose, occasionally even creating justifications based on deception and blatant lies, as you saw Iraq?"

Bin Laden then explains that it is "the owners of the major corporations who were benefiting" from these wars. Bin Laden talks about the Iraq war being unnecessary:

"This war was entirely unnecessary, as testified to by your own reports. And among the most capable of those from your own side who speak to you on this topic and on the manufacturing of public opinion is Noam Chomsky, who spoke sober words of advice prior to the war, but the leader of Texas doesn't like those who give advice. The entire world came out in unprecedented demonstrations to warn against waging the war and describe its true nature in eloquent terms like "no to spilling red blood for black oil," yet he paid them no heed. It is time for humankind to know that talk of the rights of man and freedom are lies produced by the White House and its allies in Europe to deceive humans, take control of their destinies and subjugate them. "

Bin Laden states what millions of Americans already know:

"So in answer to the question about the causes of the Democrats' failure to stop the war, I say: they are the same reasons which led to the failure of former president Kennedy to stop the Vietnam war. Those with real power and influence are those with the most capital. And since the democratic system permits major corporations to back candidates, be they presidential or congressional, there shouldn't be any cause for astonishment - and there isn't any- in the Democrats' failure to stop the war. And you're the ones who have the saying which goes, "Money talks." And I tell you: after the failure of your representatives in the Democratic Party to implement your desire to stop the war, you can still carry anti-war placards and spread out in the streets of major cities, then go back to your homes, but that will be of no use and will lead to the prolonging of the war."

Bin Laden points out that our political system is not protecting the interests of the American people:

" It has now become clear to you and the entire world the impotence of the democratic system and how it plays with the interests of the peoples and their blood by sacrificing soldiers and populations to achieve the interests of the major corporations. ... the world is being dominated by the democratic system, which confirms its massive failure to protect humans and their interests from the greed and avarice of the major corporations and their representatives."

"And despite this brazen attack on the people, the leaders of the West - especially Bush, Blair, Sarkozy and Brown- still talk about freedom and human rights with a flagrant disregard for the intellects of human beings. So is there a form of terrorism stronger, clearer and more dangerous than this? This is why I tell you: as you liberated yourselves before from the slavery of monks, kings, and feudalism, you should liberate yourselves from the deception, shackles and attrition of the capitalist system."

"If you were to ponder it well, you would find that in the end, it is a system harsher and fiercer than your systems in the Middle Ages. The capitalist system seeks to turn the entire world into a fiefdom of the major corporations under the label of "globalization" in order to protect democracy."

"And Iraq and Afghanistan and their tragedies; and the reeling of many of you under the burden of interest-related debts, insane taxes and real estate mortgages; global warming and its woes; and the abject poverty and tragic hunger in Africa: all of this is but one side of the grim face of this global system."

"So it is imperative that you free yourselves from all of that and search for an alternative, upright methodology in which it is not the business of any class of humanity to lay down its own laws to its own advantage at the expense of the other classes as is the case with you, since the essence of man-made positive laws is that they serve the interests of those with the capital and thus make the rich richer and the poor poorer."

"And if you would like to get to know some of the reasons for your losing of your war against us, then read the book of Michael Scheuer in this regard."

"To conclude, I invite you to embrace Islam ... The true religion also puts peoples' lives in order with its laws; protects their needs and interests; refines their morals; protects them from evils; and guarantees for them entrance into Paradise in the hereafter through their obedience to Allah and sincere worship of Him Alone.

And it will also achieve your desire to stop the war as a consequence, because as soon as the warmongering owners of the major corporations realize that you have lost confidence in your democratic system and begun to search for an alternative, and that this alternative is Islam, they will run after you to please you and achieve what you want to steer you away from Islam. So your true compliance with Islam will deprive them of the opportunity to defraud the peoples and take their money under numerous pretexts, like arms deals and so on. "

Pat, I hope you find the info useful, you ar being manipulated by mainstream media which isn' telling you the truth. Please see these links:
http://representativepress.blogspot.com/2007/05/convert-or-die.html

http://representativepress.blogspot.com/2006/06/just-out-of-curiosity.html

Please see these videos (they address your points) and see the links in the video descriptions:
What motivated the 9/11 hijackers? See testimony most didn't
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J1bm2GPoFfg

"Sit Down!" The Power to Silence Part 2
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D7EB1FxENxQ

Politicians Simply Lying to the American People about Motive
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dHyUhdRFbB8

-Tom

Dick, you are wrong about bin Laden.

Dick Eastman insists bin Laden had nothing to do with 9/11.

Dick,

You wrote this about bin Laden, "The man has already told his followers that he had nothing to do with 9-11 -- would the man make himself a liar?"

You are referring to a September 28, 2001 interview with bin Laden when he still was on the run and had to worry that the Taliban would arrest him. That time period is critical to understanding what he said. The Taliban DID say they would arrest him IF there was evidence of Bin Laden's guilt. CLEARLY bin Laden couldn't make an admission of guilt RIGHT AT THAT critical time. Bin Laden's goal was not to get apprehended so until he could get beyond the reach of authorities in Afghanistan, he lied while on the run. On Sept. 28, he lied to a reporter, where do you get he "told his followers"?

Remember:
Taliban demand evidence of Bin Laden's guilt
Afghanistan's deputy prime minister, Haji Abdul Kabir, told reporters that the Taliban would require evidence that Bin Laden was behind the September 11 terrorist attacks in the US.

"If the Taliban is given evidence that Osama bin Laden is involved" and the bombing campaign stopped, "we would be ready to hand him over to a third country", Mr Kabir added. http://www.guardian.co.uk/waronterror/story/0,1361,573975,00.html

AT THAT TIME bin Laden couldn't say "yes, I was behind it" because THAT WOULD BE EVIDENCE OF HIS GUILT WHICH THE TALIBAN WOULD HAVE TO RESPOND TO!

Dick, you ignore all the evidence. Osama bin Laden has repeatedly said he was behind attacks on the U.S. and U.S. interests and he has repeatedly said why: "Your position against Muslims in Palestine is despicable and disgraceful. America has no shame. ... We believe that the worst thieves in the world today and the worst terrorists are the Americans. Nothing could stop you except perhaps retaliation in kind. We do not have to differentiate between military or civilian. As far as we are concerned, they are all targets, and this is what the fatwah says ... . The fatwah is general (comprehensive) and it includes all those who participate in, or help the Jewish occupiers in killing Muslims. " - Osama bin Laden May 1998

"We swore that America wouldn't live in security until we live it truly in Palestine. This showed the reality of America, which puts Israel's interest above its own people's interest. America won't get out of this crisis until it gets out of the Arabian Peninsula , and until it stops its support of Israel." -Osama bin Laden, October 2001

"... the Mujahideen saw the black gang of thugs in the White House hiding the Truth, and their stupid and foolish leader, who is elected and supported by his people, denying reality and proclaiming that we (the Mujahideen) were striking them because we were jealous of them (the Americans), whereas the reality is that we are striking them because of their evil and injustice in the whole of the Islamic World, especially in Iraq and Palestine and their occupation of the Land of the Two Holy Sanctuaries." -Osama Bin Laden , February 14 , 2003

In an Oct. 2004 speech, Osama bin Laden said that Bush is still misleading the American people by not telling us the real reason why al-Qeada attacks us. Bin Laden said that, "contrary to what [President George W.] Bush says and claims -- that we hate freedom --let him tell us then, "Why did we not attack Sweden?" It is known that those who hate freedom don't have souls with integrity, like the souls of those 19. "[The 19 hijackers of 9/11]

Bin Laden is angered by U.S. support for Israel and was angered when America gave permission for Israel to invade Lebanon. He is angered by the injustice and was determinated to punish the transgressors. He decided "we have to punish the transgressor with the same -- and that we had to destroy the towers in America so that they taste what we tasted, and they stop killing our women and children."

Bin Laden says any nation that does not attack them will not be attacked.

Text from the speech Osama bin Laden delivered in a videotaped message which aired on the Arab language network Al-Jazeera October 29, 2004. Transcript of his speech translated by CNN senior editor for Arab affairs Octavia Nasr:

You, the American people, I talk to you today about the best way to avoid another catastrophe and about war, its reasons and its consequences.

And in that regard, I say to you that security is an important pillar of human life, and that free people do not compromise their security.

Contrary to what [President George W.] Bush says and claims -- that we hate freedom --let him tell us then, "W" It is known that those who hate freedom don't have souls with integrity, like the souls of those 19. [The 19 hijackers of 9/11] May the mercy of God be upon them.

We fought with you because we are free, and we don't put up with transgressions. We want to reclaim our nation. As you spoil our security, we will do so to you.

I wonder about you. Although we are ushering the fourth year after 9/11, Bush is still exercising confusion and misleading you and not telling you the true reason. Therefore, the motivations are still there for what happened to be repeated.

( Continued ... Why did we not attack Sweden? )

He has repeatedly made it clear why he is doing it for years:

"in 1995 , the explosion in Riyadh took place, killing four Americans, in a clear message from the people of that region displaying their rejection and opposition to the American policy of bankrolling the Jews and occupying the Land of the Two Holy Sanctuaries. The following year, another explosion in Al-Khobar killed 19 Americans and wounded more than 400 of them, prompting them to move their bases from the cities to the desert . Then in 1998 , the Mujahideen warned America to cease their support to the Jews and to leave the Land of the Two Holy Sanctuaries, but the enemy refused to heed this warning, so the Mujahideen, with the ability from Allah , smashed them with two mighty smashes in East Africa . Then again America was warned, but she refused to pay attention to the warnings, so the Mujahideen destroyed the American Destroyer, the USS Cole, in Aden, in a martyrdom operation, striking a solid blow to the face of the American military and at the same time, exposing the Yemeni Government as American agents, similar to all the countries in the region." -Osama bin Laden February 14, 2003

eMac Danger: CRTs can carry a lethal high voltage charge

WARNING!
CRTs can carry a
lethal high voltage charge
even after the computer
is turned off and unplugged.
You could be electrocuted.
eMacs have CRTs (cathode-ray tube) displays. It is dangerous to open up your eMac.
"A CRT can carry a charge even when the display or system is turned off, and can build up a secondary charge after the power is removed.

These areas of a CRT can present a shock hazard:
* Anode cap and connector
* High-voltage cable
* Yoke assembly
* Flyback transformer
* Any exposed soldered connections

Dangerously high voltages flow through these parts until the display is disconnected from its power source and properly discharged. Do not touch any of these parts inside the product housing until after the display is disconnected from its power source and properly discharged." - Safe Working Procedures and General Maintenance < see more at link

leverage to achieve what we want

Bin Laden has never said that he is attacking us because he wants us to convert to Islam, he has made it crystal clear that it is the polices of supporting Israel and other oppressive regimes, the killings and theft that he wants us to end.

If you read what he said in the latest video, it is clear that he is talking about policies. His reference to Islam was saying that we could use it as leverage to achieve what we want. He INVITED us to Islam (not demanded), saying if those in power saw that we (the American people) were going to search for an alternative to the capitalist system, those in power would meet our demands to end the unjust polices.

Look what bin Laden actually says (by the way, Bush says we should listen to what the enemy says):

"People of America: the world is following your news in regards to your invasion of Iraq, for people have recently come to know that, after several years of the tragedies of this war, the vast majority of you want it stopped. Thus, you elected the Democratic Party for this purpose, but the Democrats haven't made a move worth mentioning. On the contrary, they continue to agree to the spending of tens of billions to continue the killing and war there, which has led to the vast majority of you being afflicted with disappointment. I will come back to reply to this question after raising another question, which is: Why are the leaders of the White House keen to start wars and wage them around the world, and make use of every possible opportunity through which they can reach this purpose, occasionally even creating justifications based on deception and blatant lies, as you saw Iraq?"

Bin Laden then explains that it is "the owners of the major corporations who were benefiting" from these wars. Bin Laden talks about the Iraq war being unnecessary:

"This war was entirely unnecessary, as testified to by your own reports. And among the most capable of those from your own side who speak to you on this topic and on the manufacturing of public opinion is Noam Chomsky, who spoke sober words of advice prior to the war, but the leader of Texas doesn't like those who give advice. The entire world came out in unprecedented demonstrations to warn against waging the war and describe its true nature in eloquent terms like "no to spilling red blood for black oil," yet he paid them no heed. It is time for humankind to know that talk of the rights of man and freedom are lies produced by the White House and its allies in Europe to deceive humans, take control of their destinies and subjugate them. "

Bin Laden states what millions of Americans already know:

"So in answer to the question about the causes of the Democrats' failure to stop the war, I say: they are the same reasons which led to the failure of former president Kennedy to stop the Vietnam war. Those with real power and influence are those with the most capital. And since the democratic system permits major corporations to back candidates, be they presidential or congressional, there shouldn't be any cause for astonishment - and there isn't any- in the Democrats' failure to stop the war. And you're the ones who have the saying which goes, "Money talks." And I tell you: after the failure of your representatives in the Democratic Party to implement your desire to stop the war, you can still carry anti-war placards and spread out in the streets of major cities, then go back to your homes, but that will be of no use and will lead to the prolonging of the war."

Bin Laden points out that our political system is not protecting the interests of the American people:

" It has now become clear to you and the entire world the impotence of the democratic system and how it plays with the interests of the peoples and their blood by sacrificing soldiers and populations to achieve the interests of the major corporations. ... the world is being dominated by the democratic system, which confirms its massive failure to protect humans and their interests from the greed and avarice of the major corporations and their representatives."

"And despite this brazen attack on the people, the leaders of the West - especially Bush, Blair, Sarkozy and Brown- still talk about freedom and human rights with a flagrant disregard for the intellects of human beings. So is there a form of terrorism stronger, clearer and more dangerous than this? This is why I tell you: as you liberated yourselves before from the slavery of monks, kings, and feudalism, you should liberate yourselves from the deception, shackles and attrition of the capitalist system."

"If you were to ponder it well, you would find that in the end, it is a system harsher and fiercer than your systems in the Middle Ages. The capitalist system seeks to turn the entire world into a fiefdom of the major corporations under the label of "globalization" in order to protect democracy."

"And Iraq and Afghanistan and their tragedies; and the reeling of many of you under the burden of interest-related debts, insane taxes and real estate mortgages; global warming and its woes; and the abject poverty and tragic hunger in Africa: all of this is but one side of the grim face of this global system."

"So it is imperative that you free yourselves from all of that and search for an alternative, upright methodology in which it is not the business of any class of humanity to lay down its own laws to its own advantage at the expense of the other classes as is the case with you, since the essence of man-made positive laws is that they serve the interests of those with the capital and thus make the rich richer and the poor poorer."

"And if you would like to get to know some of the reasons for your losing of your war against us, then read the book of Michael Scheuer in this regard."

""To conclude, I invite you to embrace Islam ... The true religion also puts peoples' lives in order with its laws; protects their needs and interests; refines their morals; protects them from evils; and guarantees for them entrance into Paradise in the hereafter through their obedience to Allah and sincere worship of Him Alone.

And it will also achieve your desire to stop the war as a consequence, because as soon as the warmongering owners of the major corporations realize that you have lost confidence in your democratic system and begun to search for an alternative, and that this alternative is Islam, they will run after you to please you and achieve what you want to steer you away from Islam. So your true compliance with Islam will deprive them of the opportunity to defraud the peoples and take their money under numerous pretexts, like arms deals and so on. "

Noam Chomsky: The Relevance of Anarcho-syndicalism Parts 1-6

The Relevance of Anarcho-syndicalism
Noam Chomsky interviewed by Peter Jay
The Jay Interview, July 25, 1976

• Part 1
• Part 2
• Part 3
• Part 4
• Parts 5 & 6

Noam Chomsky: The Relevance of Anarcho-syndicalism Part 5 & 6

The Relevance of Anarcho-syndicalism
Noam Chomsky interviewed by Peter Jay
The Jay Interview, July 25, 1976

Parts 5 & 6:



CHOMSKY: [continued ...] Precisely because much of the most meaningless drudgery can be taken over by machines, which means that the scope for really creative human work is substantially enlarged.

Now, you speak of work freely undertaken as a hobby. But I don't believe that. I think work freely undertaken can be useful, meaningful work done well. Also, you pose a dilemma that many people pose, between desire for satisfaction in work and a desire to create things of value to the community. But it's not so obvious that there is any dilemma, any contradiction. So, it's by no means clear -- in fact, I think it's false -- that contributing to the enhancement of pleasure and satisfaction in work is inversely proportional to contributing to the value of the output.

QUESTION: Not inversely proportional, but it might be unrelated. I mean, take some very simple thing, like selling ice-creams on the beach on a public holiday. It's a service to society: undoubtedly people want ice-creams, they feel hot. On the other hand, it's hard to see in what sense there is either a craftsman's joy or a great sense of social virtue or nobility in performing that task. Why would anyone perform that task if they were not rewarded for it?

CHOMSKY: I must say, I've seen some very cheery-looking ice cream vendors...

QUESTION: Sure, they're making a lot of money.

CHOMSKY: ... who happen to like the idea that they're giving children ice-creams, which seems to me a perfectly reasonable way to spend one's time, as compared with thousands of other occupations that I can imagine.

Recall that a person has an occupation, and it seems to me that most of the occupations that exist -- especially the ones that involve what are called services, that is, relations to human beings -- have an intrinsic satisfaction and rewards associated with them, namely in the dealings with the human beings that are involved. That's true of teaching, and it's true of ice cream vending. I agree that ice cream vending doesn't require the commitment or intelligence that teaching does, and maybe for that reason it will be a less desired occupation. But if so, it will have to be shared.

However, what I'm saying is that our characteristic assumption that pleasure in work, pride in work, is either unrelated to or negatively related to the value of the output is related to a particular stage of social history, namely capitalism, in which human beings are tools of production. It is by no means necessarily true. For example, if you look at the many interviews with workers on assembly lines, for example, that have been done by industrial psychologists, you find that one of the things they complain about over and over again is the fact that their work simply can't be done well; the fact that the assembly line goes through so fast that they can't do their work properly. I just happened to look recently at a study of longevity in some journal on gerontology which tried to trace the factors that you could use to predict longevity -- you know, cigarette smoking and drinking, genetic factors -- everything was looked at. It turned out, in fact, that the highest predictor, the most successful predictor, was job satisfaction.

QUESTION: People who have nice jobs live longer.

CHOMSKY: People who are satisfied with their jobs. And I think that makes a good deal of sense, you know, because that's where you spend your life, that's where your creative activities are. Now what leads to job satisfaction? Well, I think many things lead to it, and the knowledge that you are doing something useful for the community is an important part of it. Many people who are satisfied with their work are people who feel that what they're doing is important to do. They can be teachers, they can be doctors, they can be scientists, they can be craftsmen, they can be farmers. I mean, I think the feeling that what one is doing is important, is worth doing, contributes to those with whom one has social bonds, is a very significant factor in one's personal satisfaction.

And over and above that there is the pride and the self-fulfilment that comes from a job well done -- from simply taking your skills and putting them to use. Now, I don't see why that should in any way harm, in fact I should think it would enhance, the value of what's produced.

But let's imagine still that at some level it does harm. Well, okay, at that point, the society, the community, has to decide how to make compromises. Each individual is both a producer and a consumer, after all, and that means that each individual has to join in these socially determined compromises -- if in fact there are compromises. And again I feel the nature of the compromise is much exaggerated because of the distorting prism of the really coercive and personally destructive system in which we live.

QUESTION: All right, you say the community has to make decisions about compromises, and of course communist theory provides for this in its whole thinking about national planning, decisions about investment, direction of investment, and so forth. In an anarchist society, it would seem that you're not willing to provide for that amount of governmental superstructure that would be necessary to make the plans, make the investment decisions, to decide whether you give priority to what people want to consume, or whether you give priority to the work people want to do.

CHOMSKY: I don't agree with that. It seems to me that anarchist, or, for that matter, left-Marxist structures, based on systems of workers' councils and federations, provide exactly the set of levels of decision-making at which decisions can be made about a national plan. Similarly, state socialist societies also provide a level of decision-making -- let's say the nation -- in which national plans can be produced. There's no difference in that respect. The difference has to do with participation in those decisions and control over those decisions. In the view of anarchists and left-Marxists -- like the workers' councils or the Council Communists, who were left-Marxists -- those decisions are made by the informed working class through their assemblies and their direct representatives, who live among them and work among them. On the state socialist systems, the national plan is made by a national bureaucracy, which accumulates to itself all the relevant information, makes decisions, offers them to the public, and says, "You can pick me or you can pick him, but we're all part of this remote bureaucracy." These are the poles, these are the polar opposites within the socialist tradition.

QUESTION: So, in fact, there's a very considerable role for the state and possibly even for civil servants, for bureaucracy, but it's the control over it that's different.

CHOMSKY: Well, see, I don't really believe that we need a separate bureaucracy to carry out governmental decisions.

QUESTION: You need various forms of expertise.

CHOMSKY: Oh, yes, but let's take expertise with regard to economic planning, because certainly in any complex industrial society there should be a group of technicians whose task it is to produce plans, and to lay out the consequences of decisions, to explain to the people who have to make the decisions that if you decide this, you're likely to get this consequence, because that's what your programming model shows, and so on. But the point is that those planning systems are themselves industries, and they will have their workers' councils and they will be part of the whole council system, and the distinction is that these planning systems do not make decisions. They produce plans in exactly the same way that automakers produce autos. The plans are then available for the workers' councils and council assemblies, in the same way that autos are available to ride in. Now, of course, what this does require is an informed and educated working class. But that's precisely what we are capable of achieving in advanced industrial societies.

QUESTION: How far does the success of libertarian socialism or anarchism really depend on a fundamental change in the nature of man, both in his motivation, his altruism, and also in his knowledge and sophistication?

CHOMSKY: I think it not only depends on it but in fact the whole purpose of libertarian socialism is that it will contribute to it. It will contribute to a spiritual transformation -- precisely that kind of great transformation in the way humans conceive of themselves and their ability to act, to decide, to create, to produce, to enquire -- precisely that spiritual transformation that social thinkers from the left-Marxist traditions, from Luxembourg, say, through anarcho-syndicalists, have always emphasized. So, on the one hand, it requires that spiritual transformation. On the other hand, its purpose is to create institutions which will contribute to that transformation in the nature of work, the nature of creative activity, simply in social bonds among people, and through this interaction of creating institutions which permit new aspects of human nature to flourish. And then the building of still more libertarian institutions to which these liberated human beings can contribute. This is the evolution of socialism as I understand it.

QUESTION: And finally, Professor Chomsky, what do you think of the chances of societies along these lines coming into being in the major industrial countries in the West in the next quarter of a century or so?

CHOMSKY: I don't think I'm wise enough, or informed enough, to make predictions and I think predictions about such poorly understood matters probably generally reflect personality more than judgment. But I think this much at least we can say: there are obvious tendencies in industrial capitalism towards concentration of power in narrow economic empires and in what is increasingly becoming a totalitarian state. These are tendencies that have been going on for a long time, and I don't see anything stopping them really. I think those tendencies will continue. They're part of the stagnation and decline of capitalist institutions.

Now, it seems to me that the development towards state totalitarianism and towards economic concentration -- and, of course, they are linked -- will continually lead to revulsion, to efforts of personal liberation and to organizational efforts at social liberation. And that'll take all sorts of forms. Throughout all Europe, in one form or another, there is a call for what is sometimes called worker participation or co-determination, or even sometimes worker control. Now, most of these efforts are minimal. I think that they're misleading -- in fact, may even undermine efforts for the working class to liberate itself. But, in part, they're responsive to a strong intuition and understanding that coercion and repression, whether by private economic power or by the state bureaucracy, is by no means a necessary feature of human life. And the more those concentrations of power and authority continue, the more we will see revulsion against them and efforts to organize and overthrow them. Sooner or later, they'll succeed, I hope.

See New Chomsky Video: Our security is being put at even greater risk by the Bush Administration's continuing threats against Iran.