[quote]SexMachine wrote:
1.Chomsky denied the Cambodian Genocide, claiming that the killing had been inflated “by a factor of 100.”[18][19] He further asserted that the (in reality) 2 to 3 million Cambodians slaughtered by the Khmer Rouge from 1975 to 1978 were morally comparable to Nazi collaborators during WW2, and that Pol Pot’s Cambodia was “comparable to France after liberation [from the Nazis].”
2.Chomsky recently (1995) claimed, in the wake of overwhelming evidence to the contrary, that the death toll in Cambodia may have been inflated “by a factor of a thousand.”[21] Since he was responding to an estimate of two million dead, his words would imply that the real toll was on the order of two thousand.
3.Chomsky has claimed that Pearl Harbor saved millions of lives and that America and Britain used Nazi armies to attack the Soviet Union and prolong the Holocaust.
8.Chomsky openly claimed in 1977 that Pol Pot had saved up to one million lives.[38] He did so by citing a Ford administration prediction that the Khmer Rouge would likely kill more than one million people, and then falsely restating it to imply that more than one million Cambodians would starve to death if US aid was cut off.
9.Chomsky has praised Imperial Japan for allegedly “saving maybe tens of millions of lives.”
None of this pertains to the original point. Why was the Pol Pot genocide reported on widely and the East Timor genocide was not?
[quote]SexMachine wrote:
1.Chomsky denied the Cambodian Genocide, claiming that the killing had been inflated “by a factor of 100.”[18][19] He further asserted that the (in reality) 2 to 3 million Cambodians slaughtered by the Khmer Rouge from 1975 to 1978 were morally comparable to Nazi collaborators during WW2, and that Pol Pot’s Cambodia was “comparable to France after liberation [from the Nazis].”
2.Chomsky recently (1995) claimed, in the wake of overwhelming evidence to the contrary, that the death toll in Cambodia may have been inflated “by a factor of a thousand.”[21] Since he was responding to an estimate of two million dead, his words would imply that the real toll was on the order of two thousand.
3.Chomsky has claimed that Pearl Harbor saved millions of lives and that America and Britain used Nazi armies to attack the Soviet Union and prolong the Holocaust.
8.Chomsky openly claimed in 1977 that Pol Pot had saved up to one million lives.[38] He did so by citing a Ford administration prediction that the Khmer Rouge would likely kill more than one million people, and then falsely restating it to imply that more than one million Cambodians would starve to death if US aid was cut off.
9.Chomsky has praised Imperial Japan for allegedly “saving maybe tens of millions of lives.”
And wow, your copying and pasting right-wing propaganda from Conservapedia. And we all know how honest conservative think-tanks are. Just like Professor BIll Black shedding light on the purposeful deception of the conservative think-tank The Heritage Foundation. They are mere ideologues who need to form the truth to fit their preconceptions of how the world should work.
And wow, your copying and pasting right-wing propaganda from Conservapedia. And we all know how honest conservative think-tanks are. Just like Professor BIll Black shedding light on the purposeful deception of the conservative think-tank The Heritage Foundation. They are mere ideologues who need to form the truth to fit their preconceptions of how the world should work.
[/quote]
I copied and pasted nothing from conservapedia. We done now?
It’s not his sources, it’s his selective and rather poor use of them to make things appear in a way that is not true.
[quote]
True. Although he does both. He gets caught out using some radical “journalist” on the KGB payroll so he uses relatively respectable sources but takes them out of context to distort their meaning. Many he quotes have said so themselves and have asked him to remove their quotes from his “work.”
None of this pertains to the original point. Why was the Pol Pot genocide reported on widely and the East Timor genocide was not?[/quote]
Ahh…no, it was established:
East Timor had a population of 1 million roughly half of whom were Indonesians
Cambodia had a population 15 times that.
It WAS reported inn the WSJ as I showed.[/quote]
It WAS NOT reported during the height of the atrocity by any U.S. corporate news source while Pol Pot’s atrocities were, why? Why is one atrocity newsworthy while another is not?
It’s not his sources, it’s his selective and rather poor use of them to make things appear in a way that is not true.
[quote]
True. Although he does both. He gets caught out using some radical “journalist” on the KGB payroll so he uses relatively respectable sources but takes them out of context to distort their meaning. Many he quotes have said so themselves and have asked him to remove their quotes from his “work.”[/quote]
If you want a poor use of an argument to make things appear true when they are not try the conservative Heritage Foundation.
If his sources are so bad why has he not been defeated in a debate using your criticisms as a basis? Of all the sources he cites who has asked him to erase their quotes from his ‘work’?