Corporations, not leftist academics, enforce politically correct limits on

[TheCainer]

speech?

I think Norm Chomsky makes some very valid points, especially given the corporate media we have today?


He said the First Amendment offered protection from government constraints on free speech, but not from corporate limitations.[/I]
"Nothing prevents me from saying in the United States that the Iraq War was the worst crime in the 21st Century, but I can reach only very marginal audiences on what is pretty obvious fact," Chomsky said. "You can say in the United States within the mainstream that the Iraq War was a strategic blunder, as Obama did, but try saying that it's a crime of aggression of a kind that led to the hanging of Nazi criminals at Nuremberg. Try to write an op-ed about that."

Thoughts?

Link

 

[gr8indoorsman]

Originally posted by TheCainer:


He said the First Amendment offered protection from government constraints on free speech, but not from corporate limitations.[/I]
"Nothing prevents me from saying in the United States that the Iraq War was the worst crime in the 21st Century, but I can reach only very marginal audiences on what is pretty obvious fact," Chomsky said. "You can say in the United States within the mainstream that the Iraq War was a strategic blunder, as Obama did, but try saying that it's a crime of aggression of a kind that led to the hanging of Nazi criminals at Nuremberg. Try to write an op-ed about that."

Thoughts?

Let's just parse through this statement... The Iraq war is the worst war crime of the 21st century? I'm sorry for losing the forest for the trees, but does this guy have his head buried in the sand? Declaring war on a fictional basis doesn't make it a war crime. You can declare war based on whatever you want to declare it on. There's no ratifying body that says the US can or cannot declare war on another sovereign state other than the United States Congress, which, by the way, voted overwhelmingly FOR going to war against Iraq. Thus, the idea that the declaration of war was a war crime at all, let alone the worst one of the century, is a farce. That the author expects readers to accept that as "pretty obvious fact" renders the rest of his column moot, especially in light of atrocities being committed and widely publicized by forces such as ISIS against civilians. Going on to compare Nazi military leaders to the military leaders in the US only makes it all that much more absurd. Yes, on one hand, you have a regime that systematically demonized and sought to cleanse its lands of a specific ethnic group, and on the other hand you have the United States which used dubious "evidence" as justification to declare war on... that's right... a regime that historically sought to systematically cleanse its lands from a specific ethnic group!

Brilliant!

The reason no one will let him say that is because it's completely absurd, not because of "corporate censorship." Did Americans commit war crimes during the Iraq war? Yep. Was the declaration of war itself a war crime? Of course not.

 

[Purdue85]

first of all, it's NOAM Chomsky.

Originally posted by TheCainer:
speech?

I think Norm Chomsky makes some very valid points, especially given the corporate media we have today?


He said the First Amendment offered protection from government constraints on free speech, but not from corporate limitations.[/I]
"Nothing prevents me from saying in the United States that the Iraq War was the worst crime in the 21st Century, but I can reach only very marginal audiences on what is pretty obvious fact," Chomsky said. "You can say in the United States within the mainstream that the Iraq War was a strategic blunder, as Obama did, but try saying that it's a crime of aggression of a kind that led to the hanging of Nazi criminals at Nuremberg. Try to write an op-ed about that."

Thoughts?

Any self-respecting radical leftist socialist should be able to get that right when quoting the dirt bag.

Second, can you point me to who the "corporate" is?

This is what fails as intellectual thought. A "corporation" is a piece of paper. It's not a human being, it has no thought, no limitations, no (un)limitations. It's idiotic socialist drivel to try to assign actions to a piece of paper. Some of the radicals on this forum make the same idiotic mistakes.

Finally, your request to have "thoughts" about someone opining something devoid of "thought" is humorous, if not pitiful.

 

[GMM]

"Try to write an op-ed about that"

There's a reason the term "persecution fantasy" exists. The idea that somehow "they" will prevent you from criticizing the Iraq War is pure delusion. Op-eds? How about numerous movies, marches, political speeches, etc. in addition to the thousands and thousands of words written in denunciation of that war. But poor widdle Noam Chomsky thinks he's a victim of some sort of oppression? Pure delusion.

He said the First Amendment offered protection from government constraints on free speech, but not from corporate limitations.

[/I]Something tells me he'd like to establish a commission, of experts of course who are totally unbiased and neutral, who'd fairly and reasonably regulate what corporations can and can't do when it comes to political issues. Maybe they could label it the Ministry of Truth.

 

[qazplm]

Mitt Romney

doesn't agree with you. He thinks corporations are people, my friends.

 

[Purdue85]

"You didn't build that."

Originally posted by qazplm:
doesn't agree with you. He thinks corporations are people, my friends.

I wasn't aware you thought so highly of Romney. Regardless, you're wrong. Again. Imagine that. Romney correctly believes corporations are legal entities (businesses) which are run by people.

Contrast Romney with "The One" who is so arrogant he thinks he built it.

"You didn't build that." What sheer stupidity.

 

[BoilersRock]

Re:

Why are you willing to re-interpret what Romney plainly and clearly stated, but "The One" is to be taken verbatim?

 

[Purdue85]

The One? Verbatim?

Originally posted by BoilersRock:
Why are you willing to re-interpret what Romney plainly and clearly stated, but "The One" is to be taken verbatim?

Q: When has "The One" ever been taken "verbatim"??!

A: He hasn't. Not when the radical said he wanted to "fundamentally transform" America... not when he said wanted to bankrupt coal companies ... not when he said he wanted to get to single-payer (i.e., socialist) health "insurance"...

Q: When have YOU ever taken ... "The One" ... "verbatim"?

A: you haven't.

....I could go on.

This piece of (crap) radical has been given a pass by every liberal media news outlet, and every liberal-socialist poster on this forum. It's been.... "re-interpreted".

Now, this idiot says he wants to ... "require" ... voting. Says it would be ... "transformative".

Yeah. Of course, he ... "loves" ... this country.

Yeah. But, it needs ... "transforming".

 

[BoilersRock]

Re: The One? Verbatim?

I haven't called out Romney, nor have I given Obama any kind of pass.

Instead, I asked about your double-standards. Which, by your attempt at a run-around answer, you seem to be quite comfortable with. And that's okay.
This post was edited on 3/21 5:20 PM by BoilersRock

 

[Purdue85]

Re: The One? Verbatim?

Originally posted by BoilersRock:
I haven't called out Romney, nor have I given Obama any kind of pass.

Instead, I asked about your double-standards. Which, by your attempt at a run-around answer, you seem to be quite comfortable with. And that's okay.
This post was edited on 3/21 5:20 PM by BoilersRock

You don't get it. Never mind, I'll move on.

Double standards? If you gave a damn about double standards your head would have exploded by now. Which you seem to be quite comfortable with. And that's okay.

 

[BoilersRock]

Re: The One? Verbatim?

Originally posted by Purdue85:

Originally posted by BoilersRock:
I haven't called out Romney, nor have I given Obama any kind of pass.

Instead, I asked about your double-standards. Which, by your attempt at a run-around answer, you seem to be quite comfortable with. And that's okay.
This post was edited on 3/21 5:20 PM by BoilersRock

You don't get it. Never mind, I'll move on.

Double standards? If you gave a damn about double standards your head would have exploded by now. Which you seem to be quite comfortable with. And that's okay.

I suppose if you are comfortable with your answers, thatll do.





This post was edited on 3/26 8:20 AM by BoilersRock

 

[Professor Emeritus]

Maybe Chomsky can't get an op-ed published on the subject because he is a bad writer.