Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : War -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Nadine Carroll who wrote (6508)	10/11/2001 11:29:41 PM
From: Hawkmoon	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 23908

I particularly enjoyed this paragraph from Hitchens rejoinder against Chomsky: "Incidentally, the New York Times for October 2 carried a report on page B4. The World Bank now estimates that the shock suffered by the international economy as a result of September 11 will have the following effects on poorer societies. "It is estimated that 40,000 children worldwide will likely die from disease and malnutrition and 10 million people will fall below the bank's extreme poverty line of $1 dollar a day or less as a result of slower economic growth." No doubt Chomsky will wish to factor this in. Or will he prefer to say that the World Bank is the problem in the first place? His casuistry appears to be limitless."

To: Nadine Carroll who wrote (6508)	10/12/2001 1:58:02 AM
From: Thomas M.	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 23908

Well, no, he doesn't shred him. Chomsky simply compared the death tolls of the two events. The facts stand. Essentially, Hitchens disagrees with Chomsky's tone. This is because of a disagreement they had a few months ago. Regardless, Hitchens has earned the right to bash Chomsky, because Hitfchens does not run around touting the party line on politics. As I said when I first read his article, it was not an altogether bad piece. Tom