Topic: US, UK abusing power in 'war', says Chomsky - Conclusion

topic by
Someone
11/27/2001 (9:52)

The question to be asked is whether the specie of mankind was on the verge of destruction and whether their intelligence was being tested by the biological error?

'Some of these questions have to do with the immediate events, some with the most fundamental issues and some are combined,' he said, adding that the most important questions were 'what is terrorism and what is the war that has been declared against it. And what are the dangers to the continuation of the human survival in future.'

Another important question, he said, was as to what extent it was easy to proceed against the people who were involved in terror and the war against terrorism. He said there were natural and irrational approaches within the existing institutions and ideological structures. The extent they do danger to all was the main question that must be addressed.

Discussing what the world had learnt from these events about the principles and values that guided the most powerful forces of the world, he said even before Sept 11, most of the Afghan population was relying on the international food aid for their survival. That number, he said, had now risen from 0.5 million to seven million as a direct result of the terrorist attacks in the US.

He said the international media had also reported huge casualties in Afghanistan and the UN itself had appealed to the US to stop bombing so that it could re-start its relief operations inside the war-ravaged country. But, ironically, these appeals were rebuffed by the US without any comment.

Mr Chomsky recalled that only 10 days before the bombing, the United Nation's Food and Agriculture Organization had warned the world that seven million people would face starvation in Afghanistan if the military action was initiated. He said this warning was repeated after the bombing began and the UN agencies demanded that the US must avoid this action as these would aggravate the human catastrophes.

Citing media reports, he said, the bombing had already destroyed the farm plantation of about 80 per cent of the country, which meant more famine and hunger in Afghanistan next year. He said several months had already been wasted with no food delivered to the Afghans.

'These are the estimates on which civilizations are relying as the coalition forces are making plans to further destroy the hunger-stricken country,' he said. 'The consequences of their crimes will never be known and they are quite confident about that. And that is the enormous outcome of the crime of the powerful and they don't like to see in the mirror any more than the others do. And they are free in this obligation as a world power they have to carry.'

He also referred to the new American threats of extending its war against terrorism to other countries like Somalia and Sudan. 'They (Western media) did not mention that in the case of Somalia the US was there not long ago and left hopeless people there by 10,000 US troops,' he said. 'In the case of Sudan, the US bombed it in 1998, destroying pharmaceutical supplies that a factory produced. The death toll during this attack was not known and nobody cared to investigate the crime. But there had been some investigations
by the German embassy in Sudan and their estimates were that several thousand people were killed in that attack on the factory. But we do not know the official figures of casualties.

'So it is quite natural to pick these countries, target them in the war against terror that arouses no comments. And without looking at the world Press you must be confident that they will never discuss these issues in public.'

Discussing the term 'terrorism', he said it appeared that the term to 'wipe out evil from the earth' used by President Bush's speech writers was borrowed from ancient epics about the incarnation of the gods.

'The goal of the civilized world has been clearly announced at many places that we must eradicate the evil, suppress the terrorism,' he said.

'To place the enterprise in its right perspective it is useful to recognize that the power to eliminate the plague (of terrorism) is not new. It started from President (Ronald) Reagan and Secretary of State, George Shutlz. Their organizations came into office claiming that their struggle against world terrorism would be the core of their foreign policy and they reacted against this plague by reorganizing campaign against the international terrorism on an unprecedented scale.'

Mr Chomsky said that the United States had rejected all moves made by the former Soviet Union to reduce nuclear weapons of mass destruction. Instead, he added, the United States had started manufacturing these weapons at a large-scale.

The US scholar said that the United States itself recognized nuclear weapons as the most important means for mass destruction.

Mr Chomsky said that the US claimed that its missile defence system was not offesnive. However, China, Russia and other world powers have strong reservations about it fearing that the US programme might start another race for achieving nuclear warfare stretching to the boundaries of space by using satellite navigational system.

He also recalled that the United States had opposed a UN resolution, that had defined terrorism, because it excluded freedom-fighters from terrorism. He said since Nelson Mandela was then a 'terrorist' in the eyes of the United States, it opposed that resolution and vetoed it.

The visiting American scholar was given a standing ovation by the audience when he finished his lecture.

Later, Editor of Dawn, Saleem Asmi, presented 'special issues' of Daily Dawn, which had been brought out in the recent past on special subjects and topics.

'At Dawn, we try to do things in our own humble way to project views of different segments of the society,' Mr Asmi said. 'We often bring out publications on special topics. I have the honour to present these reports to you. You may not have time even to go through them but just having them received by you would be an honour for our organization.'
************
http://www.dawn.com/2001/11/27/top4.htm

reply by
randy erb
11/27/2001 (10:28)

reply top

Unlike the person who posted this trash, I have the courage to state my name. I used to have some respect for Chomsky, but his inflated figures for the casualties in the Sudan bombing exceed those of the government of Sudan by thousands. He is also silent on the fact that the US provides most of the food to Afganistan and that he refuses to speak out against the slavery that the Sudan is practicing. The Muslim countries have no thought of helping their bretheren in Afganistan with food. The US went out and bought tons of grain from Iran to ship to Afganistan. Why didn't Iran or Pakistan just donate it since they claim to be so concerned about their fellow Muslims? I don't think that my views would be allowed in Pakistan, and I would suffer the fate of the Christians who were murdered in church. So much for Dawns respect for academic freedom. I suggest that Chomsky live there and enjoy that freedom that he claims is so precious to him. I have no respect for people who aren't willing to put their own ass on the line for their ideas.