19
Chomsky on Israel-Palestine 21 years ago
(yt.artemislena.eu)
Selected transcript:
2:19 Let's talk about in the Middle East for example
where Chevron says we are experiencing terrorist
bombings and therefore we have to have a big
operation in the in the West Bank and and root out
terrorism
2:30 and and people say "hey you're violating human
rights"
2:34 Yeah the what's that this is the 35th year of a
harsh brutal and vicious occupation supported
unilaterally by the United States, constant terror and
2:44 atrocities -- suppose Palestinians say
2:48 "well we're under terrorist attack for 35 years
therefore we have a right to carry out suicide
bombings" -- do you accept this?
2:55 Does anybody except this? Nobody accepts this.
Right, then how come
2:59 everyone accepts the Israeli claim to be doing it
which is much weaker claim?
3:04 They are the military occupiers.
3:08 Those who defend suicide bombing, and
they're very few, have not a leg to stand on.
3:14 Those who defend the Israeli atrocities,
including the US government,
3:20 most intellectual opinion, a good bit of the West
generally, yeah they don't have a leg to stand on
either -- and have a much weaker position.
3:27 You asked us after September 11 one of your
points we ought to look in the mirror we being
America or the West way to look in the mirror at
3:34 our own was that a way of saying look people
like bin Laden are angry at us
3:41 for good reason why what I was saying
3:46 The statement of mine that you just quoted is a
very conservative statement;
3:51 In fact it was articulated by George Bush's
favorite philosopher Jesus Christ who pointed out
famously defined the notion hypocrite --
4:04 a hypocrite is a person who focuses on the other
fellas crimes and refuses to look at his own.
Credit to the Chomsky Subreddit, link to better transcript
Obligatory reminder that Chomsky is a dedicated genocide denier, i would be hesitant to claim him an authoritative source on geopolitics.
From my point of view, he more argues the definition of genocide than denies it happend.
Is this gonna turn into a discussion of arguing about the definition of genocide denial?
Nah I dont care that much, as long as he agrees its a bad thing its all the same to me.
You're wrong. He unsurprisingly uses a very precise definition of the word and is hesitant to use it given how loaded the term can be and how often it is misused. Here's an in-depth analysis of Chomsky's use of the word (PDF link): https://digitalcommons.usf.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1738&context=gsp
It's long, just read the conclusion if you don't have time.