I’ve responded to a few stories on http://mah29001.wordpress.com and so far non of my comments, or the comments of others, have been approved. I’m sure there is a perfectly reasonable account for this, but until the author has the chance to go through his mail, here are my comments to some of mah29001’s stories.
I think you’re in the minority even among those ostensibly from your own political affiliation if you think Chomsky embraces, much less courts, the endorsement of a West Ham supporter like Bin Laden.
Similarly few would argue that ordinary Afghans were unlikely to be particularly perturbed by the prospect of yet more bombing, no matter the country which was dropping them, after years of war with Russia – a campaign which I’m sure you are already aware we paid for and trained Osama Bin Laden to fight in.
These sort of mixed messages were never designed to foster peace and understanding among a people who can barely read, let alone understand something like 9/11 in anywhere near the level of complexity you and I can.
Even though we probably don’t agree about the details, you can at least see that’s what Chomsky was getting it when he said, “compel them to turn over people suspected of criminal atrocities”? There isn’t a creed of man on the planet who responds positively to violence, especially when it’s coldly dropped on innocents and destitute farmers, from 30 thousand feet.
For what it’s worth, I couldn’t agree with you more on the “phony fall of Communism”. But I think you’ve missed the satirical point of the McCain / Palin picture you’ve linked to on my blog (above). It’s not amusing because they’re republican, or because she’s a woman. It’s funny because it looks so realistic, while being completely impossible at the same time. It would be just as funny if it were Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid or Margaret Thatcher and Tony Blair, for the same reasons.
I might also suggest that it’s funny for one very important reason, you might learn a lot from. It’s because “the Left in the USA, and also the rest of the world” know that people like yourself don’t like it and can’t brush it off. There is nothing funnier than someone who can’t take a joke, or laugh at their own expense. Life’s too short my friend and it’s the only one you’re going to get. Enjoy it! Look at McCain’s wrinkly arse, for the LULZ!
I have mixed feelings on the tactics of these so-called Robin Hood hackers. I think for the most part they are simply being geeks who can and it is other people who superimpose political meaning or malice on what has been done, after the fact. Similarly, I think this would be a disingenuous defence, were it to transpire that whoever was responsible for the hack, did so at the behest of someone linked to Obama, however tenuously.
But I think in this case you do yourself an injustice by not pointing out some of the facts, as discernible from the chat-show clap trap, by simple deduction.
The attackers, whatever their motivation it may transpire to have been, accessed Yahoo! Mail using publicly available information. This is as much a commentary on the fallibility of a widely used public service as it is evidence that public servants should not be using it to conduct state business when there is a bough and paid for, fastidiously audited system already in place, for executive use.
Secondly, I think it’s unfair and perhaps I’ll grant you deliberately inflammatory to suggest that Gawker would have acted differently were it Obama who was targeted, since clearly the same could be said of the pro-republican media, if it transpired that someone from the democrat campaign had used unsecured protocol to conduct business, on behalf of the electorate and tax payer.