From jad@ckuxb.att.com Ukn Jan 18 12:19:59 1993 Received: from att-out.att.com by css.itd.umich.edu (5.67/2.2) id AA19592; Mon, 18 Jan 93 12:19:56 -0500 Message-Id: <9301181719.AA19592@css.itd.umich.edu> To: pauls@css.itd.umich.edu Date: Mon, 18 Jan 93 12:14:41 EST From: jad@ckuxb.att.com Status: RO X-Status: Article 19251 of alt.conspiracy: Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy,alt.activism,alt.society.civil-liberty,alt.individualism,alt.censorship,misc.headlines,soc.culture.usa,misc.activism.progressive Subject: Part 4, NOAM CHOMSKY: The New World Order Message-ID: <1993Jan16.001547.7831@mont.cs.missouri.edu> Followup-To: alt.conspiracy Originator: rich@pencil.cs.missouri.edu Keywords: NOAM CHOMSKY: The New World Order Sender: news@mont.cs.missouri.edu Nntp-Posting-Host: pencil.cs.missouri.edu Organization: UVA. FREE Public Access UNIX! Approved: map@pencil.cs.missouri.edu Lines: 167 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * (continuation) NOAM CHOMSKY: Now, there were some things that were not discussed. At least I didn't see them discussed. For example, one thing NOT discussed was the worst air tragedy of the decade. That was the bombing of an Air India plane in 1985 which killed three hundred and twenty- nine people. There's a book by Leslie and Andrew Cockburn called, "OUT OF CONTROL" which discusses some of the background for this. Apparently, the two people who bombed it were trained in a paramilitary training camp in Alabama. This was supposedly a sting operation that went out of control. The fact that the U.S. had been involved in training the people who bombed it was acknowledged a couple of months later by the Attorney-General, Edwin Meese, in India, who sort of promised the Indians that we would be careful to see that that doesn't happen again. But that was not a "horrific symbol of international terrorism" in that you don't have huge squads of thousands of people scouring the region to see what sensors you can discover, and so on and so forth. That one I didn't see mentioned, though it's the worse air tragedy of the decade. There was some mention of another air tragedy -- the downing of an Iranian commercial jet with two hundred and ninety people killed. That's also more than "the most horrific symbol of terrorism of the decade." That was described, for example by the Middle East correspondent of the Boston Globe, Mary Kurdias[sp], as she put it: "The accidental downing of the Iranian passenger plane by the U.S.S. Vincennes" which was part of a naval armada that had been sent by George Bush to help out his pal, Saddam Hussein in the Iran-Iraq War. And, in fact, the shooting down of this plane was a rather decisive event in ending the war on Iraqi (meaning U.S.) terms. A question one might ask is: How can the news columns (these are news columns, remember) be so sure that it was an accidental downing? Well, of course, there's an easy answer to that. The U.S. did it, and therefore, it follows that it was an accidental downing, just as U.S. international terrorism is laudable. It's low-intensity conflict; a good thing. It's not terrorism. However, not everyone agrees. Again, there's a spectrum of opinion. In this case, for example, one of the people who does NOT agree is U.S. Navy Commander David Carlson, who was the commander of the vessel right nearby the Vincennes, who wrote an article in the U.S. Naval Institute Proceedings in which he describes (I'm quoting it now) how he "wondered aloud in disbelief as they watched the Vincennes shoot down what was perfectly obviously a commercial airliner, a passenger jet, taking off at a commercial corridor." And his assumption is that this is out of a need to prove the viability of its high-tech missile system. Well, the commander of the Vincennes didn't go completely unpunished. The President reacted. He granted him the Legion of Merit Award, along with the officer-in-charge of shooting down the commercial airliner (I'm quoting from the citation), "for exceptionally meritorious conduct and outstanding service, and for the calm and professional atmosphere under his command in the Gulf." The shooting down of the airliner was not mentioned in the citation, although that's the only known action of the Vincennes. The media kept a dutiful silence about this, at least at home. In more civilized parts of the World like, for example, Malaysia, Third World journals were quite open about reporting the facts, including the Legion of Merit award, in reviews of U.S. international terrorism which, they don't understand, is only low-intensity conflict, and accidental. Libya's response to these charges was a call for a hearing by the World Court or some other international inquiry, a call that was regarded as reasonable by the Arab League, but it was, of course, dismissed here, without any discussion, as utter nonsense. That's what's known as "invigoration of international institutions," just as what I just described is what's known as "the abandonment of the double standard." For those who are willing to consider fact, what I've just mentioned is like a crumb from a mountain of evidence that illustrates what a Salvadoran Jesuit journal recently described as "the ominous halo of hypocrisy covering U.S. statements and actions" -- an "ominous halo of hypocrisy" that sickens and disgusts any honest person who suffers through the daily output of the commissar culture. That's a major element of the "New World Order", just as it was an element of the old world order. Well, let's put that aside and turn to the third feature which that lead article in the Journal of Palestine Studies finds so encouraging, along with most other opinion: "the personal commitment of the President to a just and comprehensive settlement." Let me now review at least what I think is happening. It seems to me that three major questions arise about what's going on right now. One is: Why is it happening now? Why this big diplomatic flurry right now? Two: Is there a break with traditional American policy? And three: What about the apparent conflict between the United States and Israel? Let's start with the first: Why right now? And in fact, we might turn back to page one of the Boston Globe which has that lead story about the U.S. charges against Libya. That's the lead story, and, by accident or because they've got a subversive in the editorial board or something, there's an adjacent story next to it which discusses White House concern over polls that show that George Bush is falling rapidly because of the problems with the domestic economy. Well, could there be a correlation between those facts? Actually, there could be! The story of the past ten years -- the major story of the last ten years is the huge assault against the general public, which you're familiar with -- the huge transfer of resources from a large majority of the public, in fact, to wealthy, priveleged sectors; investors, and so on. Now when a state is involved in policies of that kind, it's necessary to divert the public -- the ignorant and meddling outsiders -- somehow, so that they won't pay attention to what's going on around them. And that's true whether it's a totalitarian state or a democratic state. And there aren't a lot of ways to do this. Two of the ways are to inspire fear of terrible enemies who are about to destroy us. And that's got to be accompanied by awe for our amazing leaders who rise just in time, and save us from destruction so that we can, once again, be standing tall, as Ronald Reagan put it when he succeeded in overcoming the threat to our existence from Grenada, if you can remember that far back. In fact, this is pretty much the story of the last ten years. About every year or two, there's some fantastic threat to our existence. But then, with incredible heroism, our leader somehow beats it down. And that's a natural concomitant of the social policies that are being carried out domestically. You'd find that in any state. Just as another natural concomitant is various devices to set sectors of the targeted populations -- most of the population .... set them against each other so that they hate each other, and so on, instead of having them paying attention to what's going on. This is all pretty standard. (to be continued) * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * A 90-minute video documentary, from which this transcript was made, is available exclusively from JCOME. In addition to the full Chomsky lecture, the documentary contains background information about Chomsky and JCOME -- the only Jewish-American organization that has Chomsky on its Advisory Committee. JCOME is extending a special offer at this time. To get a copy of the video documentary simply send a check for $20 (only $15 for the documentary and $5 shipping) and indicate you read about Chomsky and JCOME on Internet or e-mail. Send to: The Jewish Committee on the Middle East P.O. Box 18367 Washington, D.C. 20036 Phone orders cannot be taken. But for additional information about JCOME -- including copies of recent magazine ads and the MID-EAST REALITIES newsletter that can be sent directly to your fax machine -- call JCOME 24-hours daily to: (202) 362-JCOME (202) 362-5266 E-mail: jcome@mcimail.com FAX: (202) 362-6965 [JCOME on MCIMail] + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + JCOME would be grateful to you for posting the installments of this transcript to computer bulletin boards, as well as posting hardcopies in public places, both on and off campus. + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Transcribed for JCOME by John DiNardo.