Sam Harris Made Himself Look Like an Idiot in a Email Exchange with Chomsky and Has Shared It

[rug]

Why would he make this public?

May 2, 2015
By AlterNet Staff / AlterNet

The popular atheist and torture-supporter Sam Harris recently tried to "engineer a public conversation" with radical linguist Noam Chomsky "about the ethics of war, terrorism, state surveillance, and related topics." Harris shared the exchange publicly, chalking it up as an "unpleasant and fruitless encounter."

Readers might disagree.

April 26, 2015
From: Sam Harris
To: Noam Chomsky


Noam — I reached out to you indirectly through Lawrence Krauss and Johann Hari and was planning to leave it at that, but a reader has now sent me a copy of an email exchange in which you were quite dismissive of the prospect of having a “debate” with me. So I just wanted to clarify that, although I think we might disagree substantially about a few things, I am far more interested in exploring these disagreements, and clarifying any misunderstandings, than in having a conventional debate. 

If you’d rather not have a public conversation with me, that’s fine. I can only say that we have many, many readers in common who would like to see us attempt to find some common ground. The fact that you have called me “a religious fanatic” who “worships the religion of the state” makes me think that there are a few misconceptions I could clear up. And many readers insist that I am similarly off-the-mark where your views are concerned.

In any case, my offer stands, if you change your mind.


Best, Sam

April 26, 2015
From: Noam Chomsky
To: Sam Harris

Perhaps I have some misconceptions about you. Most of what I’ve read of yours is material that has been sent to me about my alleged views, which is completely false. I don’t see any point in a public debate about misreadings. If there are things you’d like to explore privately, fine. But with sources.

http://www.alternet.org/belief/sam-harris-made-himself-look-idiot-email-exchange-chomsky-and-has-shared-it-world

Can someone tell me is AlterNet is one of the "Right Wing sources"?

[mr blur]

1. In our experience, no-one can tell you anything.

[rug]

3. Kindly list those who you speak for.

[AlbertCat]

100. Kindly list those who you speak for.

There's not enough band width....

[rug]

106. Ah, you must be one of the "we" he mentioned.

Are there more of you? Where do you meet to decide what to say? This is fascinating!

[Lordquinton]

2. If you don't know what is and isn't a right wing source

then maybe you shouldn't be on a left wing, progressive website.

[rug]

5. If you don't know what is and is not sarcasm

then maybe you should hesitate before pressing Enter.

So, quinton, what do you think of Sam?

[Lordquinton]

14. Brilliant man who often has hit pieces posted about him by theists

I mean, another hit piece on a "new" atheist? Is that all you've got? Your Dennitt piece got you a hide so you ran for a hit piece you felt would be safe? Why don't you post something with substance (After actually checking the source, of course).

I mean you could work on maybe making your own position less heinous, and less lieing about atheists.

[rug]

15. I thought his brilliance was especially on display regarding Iraq.

[Lordquinton]

63. It's funny, the Pope's quote's get a shelf life of less than 4 months

yet you keep harping on something Harris said a decade ago. You're also taking it out of context and deliberately misinterpreting it.

Why do constantly rely on right wing talking points to silence people?

[rug]

75. Are you obseessed with Francis? I'm pretty sure he is against war, inclding the invasion of Iraq.

Tell me, quinton, what is Harris' "context" for cheering the Iraqi invasion?

If you need to rely on right wing talking points, I won't try to silence you. I'll destroy them instead.

[beam me up scottie]

82. "If you need to rely on right wing talking points, I won't try to silence you. "

Now you're being "silenced" for posting right wing garbage?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1218195530

[rug]

102. You make a poor weaver. Yoi're no good at spinning.

Are you now ready to defend Harris? That's the topic.

[LiberalAndProud]

85. His war stance is questionable.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/08/18/pope-francis-force-iraq_n_5688628.html

It seems to me that if military force wasn't justified in defense of Shiites, it's neither justified in defense of Christians. Except it is if you're the pope.

[rug]

103. Not quite.

On Iraq, Francis was asked if he approved of the unilateral U.S. airstrikes on militants of the Islamic State who have captured swaths of northern and western Iraq and northeastern Syria and have forced minority Christians and others to either convert to Islam or flee their homes.

"In these cases, where there is an unjust aggression, I can only say that it is licit to stop the unjust aggressor," Francis said. "I underscore the verb 'stop.' I'm not saying 'bomb' or 'make war,' just 'stop.' And the means that can be used to stop them must be evaluated."

But, he said, in history, such "excuses" to stop an unjust aggression have been used by world powers to justify a "war of conquest" in which an entire people have been taken over.

He's reiterating the "just war" doctrine and talking about air strikes, not invasions. FWIW, he's wrong.

Now, compare that to Harris in 2003.

[Lordquinton]

96. Yes, the Pope is a position known for being anti war

The catholic church has a long and glorious history of non-violence

Last I heard it wasn't a crime to be for a war, even if you're wrong, so I'v got nothing to defend. Now there's the matter of countless pedophile priests your pope is covering for. Tell me, why do a public figure's personal opinions that have little to none in actual influence in the world concern you more than the leader of your church covering for criminals?

[rug]

104. Lol. You were in the process of making a colorable point, and then . . . . PEDOPHILIA!!111

It is tiring to repeatedly encounter a caricature.

[AlbertCat]

101. VAre you obseessed with Francis?

Are you obsessed with the Catholic Church?


... and Gnu Atheists?

[rug]

105. Let me se . . . .

The answer to one is no.

The answer to two is . . . . no.

And the answer to three is . . . .



. . . . no!

[beam me up scottie]

17. "another hit piece on a "new" atheist? Is that all you've got?"

Yep.

That's all he's got, the fact that he referenced his locked right wing hit piece proves that this is just another anti-atheist call out.

And there's this straw man:

There are some right in this thread who equate criticism of the New Atheists with Right Wingery.

No, we equate right wing anti-atheist hit pieces with right wing anti-atheist bigots.


It's not our fault if the people who post rw rants get their threads hidden.

[rug]

41. Tsk, are you afraid to attack me directly, bmus?

Are you afraid to call me a bigot directly?

Even after you wrote this fine piece of projection?

Well I get confused with all the cries of religious persecution in here.

Criticism of the RCC makes one an anti-catholic bigot to some.

[beam me up scottie]

43. Why do you support the world's largest homophobic oppressor?

[rug]

46. Ask Lord Quinton.

Now. I'm all ears. Repeat your insinuation directly.

[beam me up scottie]

55. Lord Quinton supports the world's largest homophobic oppressor?

Why would a liberal do that?

[rug]

56. Ok, run away then.

[beam me up scottie]

58. WHOOOOOOOOOOOSH!

That was the point running away, maybe you can still catch it.

[rug]

60. Bye.

It's been pointless!

[beam me up scottie]

61. Why would a liberal support the world's largest homophobic oppressor?

Running away from the point doesn't mean it isn't there.

Look in the rear view mirror, rug.

[Lordquinton]

64. You refuse to answer, so I can't help, why do you support bigoted orginizations?

[rug]

70. Ask bmus.

[beam me up scottie]

74. I don't support bigoted organizations, why do you?

[rug]

76. Ask quinton.

[beam me up scottie]

77. He doesn't either. Why do you?

[Lordquinton]

94. I'm asking you, who refuses to answer

Your silence on the matter is speaking for you.

[beam me up scottie]

4. Aw, still smarting over that hidden thread?

Can someone tell me is AlterNet is one of the "Right Wing sources"?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1218195530

What a pity.

Such an awesome spittle flecked rant against those nasty Gnu™ Atheists, dead despite your valiant efforts to defend it.

[rug]

7. Not at all. Is that gloating I see?

It's too bad I was at a picnic while all the hurt fee-fees were rushing to post in the thread.

Maybe one of these days you'll see the benefits of a thicker skin.

But I doubt it.

[Goblinmonger]

31. Not at all?

Then why the passive aggressive bullshit at the end of the post.

You got a post hidden for, I would assume, linking and passing on right-wing bullshit. It sucks but the bigger man would just admit it and move on.

YMMV.

[rug]

39. I know it mst displease you but not even a teeny weeny bit.

Now before you go on with your usual "Big Lie" revisionism, despite pissing you off, that article is not "right-wing bullshit". In fact it doesn't mention politics at all. But it does shred the failings of the so-called new atheists. Re[etition of a lie does not magically turn it into truth.

The alert (double check with Warren), rather than challenge the content, linked to extraneous articles suggesting it was from a banned source on DU. Which is, of course, complete bullshit.

I can understand his, and your, eagerness to stifle criticism. If that's all you got left, gp fpr it, monger.

[Warren Stupidity]

99. You used your op to bring up your hidden post, now you are complaining that we are discussing the

meta that you started. The article you posted was rightwing anti-atheist screed from a notable rightwing idiot, posted on a notable rightwing news outlet. Your source stank, your op got hidden, and you can't let it go.

But really, the question that remains unanswered here is: why to you continue to give monetary support to an expressly homophobic and misogynist organization that uses that money to attempt to advance legislative and judicial agendas in this country and others that are expressly homophobic and misogynist?

[rug]

107. You used a skewed alert message to hide what you didn't want tio hear.

Much easier than rebuttal.

Now go post the alert message, Warren. Inquiring minds want to know.

[Warren Stupidity]

111. I didn't alert on you rug. But keep going on about it, it is charming.

[rug]

114. Of corse you didn't. I have always found you to be honest and sincere.

I can not go as far as charming.

[Warren Stupidity]

116. You've made an assertion without evidence and are sticking to it.

How unusual for you.

[rug]

118. Is there a reason I shold believe you?

All prior evidence notwithstanding.

[AtheistCrusader]

119. He is telling the truth.

[rug]

130. You know this how?

[AtheistCrusader]

132. Because I know for certain who did alert on it.

Warren is outside the scalar set of DU users who created that alert.

[rug]

134. Let me see: Warren says so. You know "for certain" who did.

Very convincing.

[AtheistCrusader]

137. Fortunately, it is not my job to convince you. But you are wrong to blame him.

[rug]

139. Just as well since you haven't.

[AtheistCrusader]

141. Do you have some evidence that he did?

Or is this a 'faith' thing?

[Warren Stupidity]

120. yes. Your spelling skills have deteriorated to the point where you really should just believe me.

[rug]

131. "Spelling skills"

BTW. Your first word should be capitalized.

[Warren Stupidity]

151. Take a look at your recent posts. New phone?

something is going on. usually you are more accurate.

[rug]

153. No, but the "u" key is broken.

[Warren Stupidity]

168. Oh. I can help with that. Usually the key isn't really broken, there is just too much

snot, bread crumbs and other crap in the keyboard.

Take a piece of newspaper and spread it on a table. If you have an aerosol spray cleaner that helps a lot:


1. unplug the keyboard from the computer.
2. hold the keyboard over the newspaper, upside down.
3. gently shake, less gently if nothing comes out, and observe all the crap falling out of your keyboard. Disgusting, yes?
4. use the aerosol spray to force more junk out - they come with a directional nozzle (aka a straw) that lets you get deep into the keyboard and force all that snot out.
5. repeat until nothing more is getting excreted.

Generally this fixes the problem, although sometimes you have to disassemble the keyboard (carefully as they are designed to basically break while you are trying to do this) by getting the plastic cover off the top so that you can force more of the snot out of the thing.

Good luck!

[rug]

169. That's helpful but the key is missing.

Cat got into it. I've just been pressing whatever's nderneath it.

[Warren Stupidity]

123. where is your evidence for your assertion that I sent the alert?

[rug]

133. I read it, its links, and your replies.

And I'm quite familiar with your m.o. when challenged.

Now, where's your evidence, other than you say so?

[Warren Stupidity]

149. what?

"other than you say so?" - seriously? On your say so you know it is me that did the deed, but my say so is insufficient.

rug, you are being petulant and foolish. Enough already. You are embarrassing yourself.

[rug]

150. Yes, your say so is insufficient.

[Warren Stupidity]

154. ok. I guess that settles it then.

[mr blur]

121. Oh dear, did you get hurt and nobody rushed to protect you?

You just have no idea, but you're amusing.

[rug]

136. Do you think I need protection from . . . . a mr blur?

[AlbertCat]

160. Do you think I need protection from

Hubris?

Credulity?

[rug]

161. Not number 1.

Number 2, perhaps.

[Warren Stupidity]

164. Depends if you need protection from number 2.

[rug]

165. The credulous are the ones that need protection.

[Lordquinton]

166. no, it seems to have really touched a nerve with you

You're lashing out at everyone like the Spanish inquisition trying to find who sold you out.

[rug]

167. Oh, no, it's much more precise than that.

Besides, I'm eating muffins.

Well, I can't eat muffins in an agitated manner. The butter would probably get on my cuffs. One must eat muffins quite calmly, it is the only way to eat them.

Algernon, Act II.

[Warren Stupidity]

170. Depends.

[rug]

171. The most credulous tend to have the least power.

[Goblinmonger]

140. You clearly have the alert. Why don't you post it?

Then we can all judge whether the alerter was grasping at straws.

My prediction: they weren't. How do I know?: because you posted right-wing talking points written by a right-wing nutbag published on a right-wing rag. Other than that, your OP was fine.

[rug]

143. I don't want to plagiarize the author.

And you need another tactic besides repeating "The Big Lie".

Now before you go on with your usual "Big Lie" revisionism, despite pissing you off, that article is not "right-wing bullshit". In fact it doesn't mention politics at all. But it does shred the failings of the so-called new atheists. Re
The alert (double check with Warren), rather than challenge the content, linked to extraneous articles suggesting it was from a banned source on DU. Which is, of course, complete bullshit.

I can understand his, and your, eagerness to stifle criticism. If that's all you got left, gp fpr it, monger.

Now, let's test your integrity. What do you think of the alternet article on Harris?

[Goblinmonger]

147. I'm sure they would be fine with it.

They know you and 7 jurors have it.

As to the article? I'm a huge fan of Chomsky for many reasons. His grammar thoughts actually being pretty high on the list. He's crazy smart. I'm sure he handed Harris his ass in any conversation they had. Plus, as I've said before, I don't agree with Harris' view on war and usually side more with Chomsky's thoughts on that issue. So, no surprise, I don't land with Harris on this one.

Calling something a "big lie" doesn't make it a big lie.

[rug]

148. That's a complete nonanswer.

Did you read the article?

BTW, posting bullshit as truth does not make it truth. Not even on the tenth repetition.

[Goblinmonger]

152. How is that a non-answer?

Chomsky handed Harris his ass. Harris is a tool for the most part when it comes to the issue of war. What else do you want me to say? Revoke my support of Harris for atheist Pope? OK. I don't support Harris (or anyone for that matter because it isn't a real fucking thing) for atheist Pope.

Sweet fucking Christ on a trailer hitch. For someone that ties themselves into knots when trying to not answer a question about the homophobic sexist bigot you have running your church, you have certainly become someone that doesn't recognize a direct answer when it pokes you in the nose.

[rug]

155. I saw little reference to the content of the exchanges.

But, I'll take your word for it.

[Warren Stupidity]

159. "BTW, posting bullshit as truth does not make it truth."

finally you've said something sensible in this thread.

[rug]

162. I hope you take it to heart.

But I'm a cynic.

[Warren Stupidity]

156. that's hysterical.

"I don't want to plagiarize the author."

The author, an anonymous DU member, has zero authorship rights to the alert message. Alerts are routinely posted here, a fact you are well aware of.

The problem of course is that once you post the alert you have done nothing to further your rabbit hunt against the dastardly alerter.

[rug]

157. The comment had nothing to do with intellectual property, warren.

Sorry that escaped you.

[Warren Stupidity]

158. what escapes me is why you continue to carry on your rabbit hunt.

It was just a hidden post. Why are you so ridiculously bent out of shape?

[rug]

163. Let me check.

Nope, my shape is fine, if not outstanding.

[AtheistCrusader]

145. "Other than that, your OP was fine."

[TM99]

6. First, AlterNet is a leftist/progressive news

and commentary site.

Second, so why did Sam Harris publish these? Well, my guess is he is a bit of a Narcissist. He loves the lime-light. He is absolutely certain, much like a religious fanatic, that he is right and everyone else is wrong.

Being a big fan of Chomsky since I was introduced to his writings by my father, also a linguist, at a young age, I really enjoyed reading the entire exchange.

I have had similar ones with the hardcore New Atheist.

[rug]

8. Gee, I'm not sure.

There are some right in this thread who equate criticism of the New Atheists with Right Wingery. That is, when they're not busy denying there is such a thing as New Atheism.

I'd hate to offend them.

[TM99]

9. They are big kids.

Offend away.

They dish it, they can receive it.

[rug]

11. No, I really think they can't.

Good thing there's place to lick wounds.

[Goblinmonger]

32. False

The equating would be that the person you passed off as awesome what a Right Wing nut. It had nothing to do with criticism.

If I posted a Right Wing nut saying gay marriage was evil, passed it off as thought worth exploring, should I be shocked when people don't like that I'm posting Right Wing nuts?

[rug]

37. Have you qoted Sam Harris recently?

[Goblinmonger]

51. Not that I can think of right now.

Could be wrong.

[Cartoonist]

67. Have you quoted the Pope recently?

[rug]

69. Have you posted any cartoons lately?

[beam me up scottie]

88. I don't think Cartoonist has had any ops hidden lately.

Have you?

[rug]

108. Naturally. As have you.

[Cartoonist]

91. Did you miss this one?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1218&pid=192967

[rug]

110. I did. It sank so quickly.

[Cartoonist]

113. The whole thread did

Even when it was ressurected.

[skepticscott]

30. It's so sad

that the irony of this post went a mile over your head...

[Lordquinton]

65. Why did Chomsky agree to publish them?

Why is no one asking that question?

Maybe it's Noam's narcissism that led him to agreeing to them being published?

[TM99]

73. Nice try but no cigar.

The idea of publishing personal correspondence is pretty weird, a strange form of exhibitionism – whatever the content. Personally, I can’t imagine doing it. However, if you want to do it, I won’t object.

Harris wrote about Chomsky and initiated the contact. Chomsky never wrote about Harris and has zero to defend here.

I thought New Atheists didn't have holy men?

[beam me up scottie]

78. Atheists have holy men?

Why didn't somebody tell me?

Fuck.

I'm always the last to know.

[Goblinmonger]

86. I'm sorry.

It was me. I was supposed to tell you and it completely slipped my mind. Blame it on me.

[beam me up scottie]

87. Dammit, Gobby.

Now I'm going to be behind on ring kissing.

[Goblinmonger]

89. There's a make-up session for ring kissing on Tuesday.

The information will be in all 70 of our intertubes FTP download sites

[beam me up scottie]

90. And I suppose we'll have to start tithing too.

Next thing you know they'll advise us on morally acceptable sexual acts.

[Goblinmonger]

92. Oh, hell, no.

We may have voted in a new atheist pope with tithing requirements, but it's still have at it in the sex acts department. Some things are non-negotiable. I mean, it's not like we are going to have a homophobic, sexist pope. What kind of shitty organization would do that? Like, who'd want to be a member of that place?

[beam me up scottie]

93. Oh, that's a relief.

Ikr?

What kind of liberal would support and defend a homophobic organization with a religious leader who often uses hate speech towards lgbt people?

Crazy.

[Lordquinton]

95. He still agreed

And while you're all piling on Harris because you finally found a non-rightwing hit piece on a "new" atheist you haven't considered anything but it's because of his own evilness that he did it, not maybe giving their followers a glimpse of what an exchange would look like and why it won't be happening in the future.

Not sure about your last line, real non-seuitor there.

[TM99]

97. So what?

The exchange makes only Harris look like a fool.

He is evasive, meandering, insulting, and a narcissist. Oh, and most importantly, he is a bigot.

Evilness?

My last line reflects the contortions I see people like yourself go through in order to defend a man who is being an asshole. I thought Atheists didn't have leaders to follow?

[LiberalAndProud]

10. The earlier hidden thread aside, this is a really interesting piece.

As for if we're meant to choose between Chomsky or Harris, I tend to weight their ideas on the merits of the arguments. Sam was emotionally traumatized on September 11. I don't know that his intellect will ever overcome his emotional response. That said, his criticism of the Islam state is not without merit.

[rug]

12. It's not withot some merit but it's being buried by, well, him.

[LiberalAndProud]

13. I can only imagine that you very much dislike Sam Harris.

It's probably very similar to my feelings while listening to Bill Donahue.

[rug]

16. If the two of them were stck in an elevator,

The firefighters would find them smiling and playing whist.

[LiberalAndProud]

18. The same could probably be said of any two regulars

in the war room Religion group.

[skepticscott]

19. The funny thing is, we don't have to "choose" between

Harris and Chomsky to decide whether it makes even the remotest sense to believe in gods. We don't have to like a single thing that Sam Harris has ever said to think that the pope and everyone who gives him and his church money or supports them in any way is supporting the vilest, most homophobic bigotry promoted anywhere on the planet. Or to think that radical Islam is one of the biggest threats to human freedom that currently exists.

[LiberalAndProud]

20. Sure, we don't.

But if you have no arguments in favor of your position, ad hominem is all that's left.

[beam me up scottie]

21. Shhh!

You're going to blow it for rug.

Trying to associate DU atheists with Harris distracts people and may prevent them from criticizing his support of the most misogynistic and homophobic organization in history.

Ignoring the RCC's record on human rights makes his criticism of atheists who criticize religion seem almost genuine.

[rug]

23. It wolud take more than him - and you.

Q. What do you think of Harris?

A. RCC! Pope Photo OP! (Insert Belshi gif)

[Goblinmonger]

33. I strongly disagree with his views on war.

I am confused by his views on Muslims and Islam.

I agree with a lot of what he says about religion in general (the two things mentioned above excepted, of course).

That about covers it. Good thing is, he isn't my leader. Or any atheists leader. The leader of your church is a homophobic, sexist bigot. And you have to live with that as long as you are in that church.

[rug]

35. You're becoming a cliche.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1218&pid=195702

[Goblinmonger]

52. I answered your question straight up.

I know that is something foreign to you, but you are attacking me for that?

[Lordquinton]

66. Says the guy who is pavlovian about Dawkins/Harris/Atheists

Any thing remotely critical sets forth a torrent of atheist hate from your fingertips, and you call us cliche? At least we're not harping

[rug]

68. A pyschologist, fenichel, is more apt here than a physiologist, Pavlov.

Otto Fenichel, The Psychoanalytic Theory of Neurosis (London 1946).

He did groundbreaking work on projection.

[edhopper]

38. you can't

Restate that enough.

It is the clear truth.

[skepticscott]

29. Ah, poor rug

His beloved RCC is the most homophobic organization in the known universe..and he can neither change that nor separate himself from it.

Stop stalking me, btw...I can't have any friends here...

[beam me up scottie]

34. He got caught with his agenda showing.

And he blames us because jurors decided right wing bigotry has no place here.

You have plenty of friends here, scott, don't let the bullies get you down.

[skepticscott]

36. Oh, the bullies are totally inconsequential...

But maybe two friends...too obnoxious to sustain more

[rug]

45. Do tell. What's the agenda, bmus?

[rug]

44. "His beloved RCC is the most homophobic organization in the known universe"

[edhopper]

109. You find the Church's homophobia funny?

I find it frightening and sad.

[rug]

112. No, I find him amusing and his hyberbole engrossing..

Your post I find immersed in disingenuity.

[rug]

22. There's a reason President Obama doesn't say things like "radical Islam"

No matter how many republicans and Islamophobes attack him for eschewing that term.

He's not stupid.

[LiberalAndProud]

24. Statesmanship is one of Obama's great strengths.

Which has what to do with this thread?

[rug]

25. That term was posted.

[LiberalAndProud]

26. Just a tangential thought, then?

President Obama's choice of words carrying much greater weight in the conduct of world affairs, I appreciate that he is circumspect. Still and all, I don't see that that has any bearing on this discussion or the words we use.

[rug]

27. Words matter. They're vessels of ideas.

[LiberalAndProud]

28. Yes.

And without specifying radical Islam, we're chastised for being Islamophobes. Can't win for losing, I guess.

[Warren Stupidity]

40. OIC still upset about a jury agreeing that posting rightwing hate is not acceptable.

No rug, alternet is fine. But you really should check your sources first *before* posting your daily diatribes against atheists.

[rug]

42. Go on, warren, post that cobbled together alert nessage for all to see.

You didn't fool three of the jurors. Let's see how you do here.

[Goblinmonger]

48. at least you're not bitter.

[rug]

49. No, although I daresay your posts would curdle milk.

[Goblinmonger]

53. I don't think I've been overly acidic.

'Cause it's acid that makes milk curdle not bitterness.

Nice try, though.

[rug]

59. You teach English, don't you.

[Goblinmonger]

71. I realize the gut reaction to attack me when you say something stupid.

But you were clearly trying to turn the "oh you're bitter" back on me when you said I could curdle milk. Except basics are bitter and acids curdle milk. But, yeah, let's try insult me because you said something fucking stupid. Nobody notices what you're doing. Really. You covered it up quite well. I'll keep your secret.

[Warren Stupidity]

62. wow, I actually didn't understand how upset you are about this.

Last edited Mon May 4, 2015, 01:43 PM - Edit history (1)

it was just a hide. And no, I didn't alert. I was happy to just have your sources exposed for all to see, I saw no reason at all to hide your rightwing hate screed.

[Goblinmonger]

47. So i guess I'm supposed to check with you

So we can compare notes on rug's jury alert. I don't know shit about it. You? I feel like he's full of crap, but thought I'd check.

[rug]

50. Make sre he posts it.

I know how close you are. Or you can check your DUmail to see if you missed it.

[Goblinmonger]

54. Though you deny the bitterness

someone looking in might think that you are reacting like you are because of the privilege you are used to. Your buddy that calls everyone else on it probably won't say so because she knows how you react when your fee-fees are hurt.

[rug]

57. Or,

someone looking in may think you're so bitter at someone you must mention her in a completely unrelated post.

Tsk.

[Goblinmonger]

72. Just making sure the privilege claim gets made

even when she isn't here to make it.

So, are you still standing behind your right wing nutcase that you championed in your hidden OP? Probably doesn't feel any different than supporting your Pope.

[rug]

80. No, you're not. You're stll smarting over whatever hmiliation she inflicted.

As to your last paragraph, did you forget post 39 already?

Now before you go on with your usual "Big Lie" revisionism, despite pissing you off, that article is not "right-wing bullshit". In fact it doesn't mention politics at all. But it does shred the failings of the so-called new atheists. Re the alert (double check with Warren), rather than challenge the content, linked to extraneous articles suggesting it was from a banned source on DU. Which is, of course, complete bullshit.

Repetition does not make a lie a truth.

But you're fully aware of that, teaching rhetoric and all.

[Goblinmonger]

83. So if it doesn't mention "politics" it isn't right wing nuttery?

That's an interesting excuse to make.

The guy who wrote it is a right wing nut. He published it in a right wing nutcase publication. He is pushing right wing nuttery in what he wrote. He wrote similar right wing nuttery for the former Mayor.

Walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, it gets your fucking right wing nuttery OP hid. That's what happened. You could have just said, "Hey, my bad. I won't push right wing nuttery on here anymore." Or you could bluster and insult and try to act like those of us that thought it was right wing nuttery (which is was) are the ones that are wrong because your little fee-fees are hurt and DU mommies are here to with your binky to make it feel better. It is clear the option you took. Me, I'm not surprised.

[rug]

117. "your little fee-fees are hurt and DU mommies are here to with your binky to make it feel better."

Tsk. You sound like you need cookies and warm milk.

[A HERETIC I AM]

122. .......

Fascinating.

Just absolutely fascinating.

[Goblinmonger]

125. Oh, that's sweet of you.

Trying to make him feel better and all.

[Goblinmonger]

124. That's all you got?

I mean, your quips used to be, I don't know, mildly amusing. This is kind of pathetic.

[rug]

128. I did quote you.

[Jim__]

79. Why did Harris make it public?

He probably thinks he won the exchange. You know, Chomsky's afraid to debate him.

[rug]

81. Yeah, I see some that going on here too.

[Goblinmonger]

84. Yeah, it's from you.

Don't know what I'm talking about? Go ask BMUS.

[rug]

115. QED.

[ananda]

98. Thoughts

The first line really got me: the "popular" atheist and torture supporter. It just struck me as highlighting everything that's wrong with this country. It reminds me of people like Ted Cruz and Ben Carson, supposedly intelligent well-educated people, who have cravenly turned their backs on the principles and policies that harm so many people. I don't know if I should add Clarence Thomas here, but he must have some education and smarts. Still, with all that supposed education, it's hard to find any humanity or rational thinking in any of these guys. And yet they're "popular"? Sheesh.

Now after reading the entire exchange, I appreciate Chomsky more than ever ... not only for his penetrating insight and analysis of international crimes on the part of oppressive countries and rulers, but also for the idea that we are all complicit in them as citizens. I think by extension this involves the idea of "civic duty" on the part of citizens in order to right wrongs and redress the balance of power when the abuse of power occurs

[Jim__]

126. Yes, it's extremely disappointing how quickly this country turned to accepting torture.

Accepting it and even believing it's a good thing. Chomsky is our leading public intellectual and, in large part, the conscience of our country. I hope he is around for a long time to come.

[AtheistCrusader]

127. Alternet is a progressive site. Can't you tell the difference?

[rug]

129. So it is. How do you like its article?

[AtheistCrusader]

135. I have to read through the whole thread.

I am of the opinion that Chomsky is the superior intellect of the two, so I don't doubt Harris may have made an ass of himself.

Fortunately he's not my pope, so if he was hoist by his own petard, I'm just going to grab some popcorn.

[rug]

138. Actually, just reading the article can form your opinion.

[AtheistCrusader]

142. Why would I do that?

Isn't the source material available to read directly?

[rug]

144. No, It was a private email correspondence between Harris and Chomsky.

Harris posted it. Hopefully in toto.

[AtheistCrusader]

146. Yes.

That's what I would call publicly available.

(Granted, on your point about fidelity)