Chomsky to RT: All superpowers feel exceptional, inflate security myth for ‘frightened population’
Get short URL Published time: October 10, 2013 04:21
It’s a frightened population and the security argument has weight. People feel, somehow, that the government is not protecting us. Take, say, drones. The drone campaign is by far the biggest terrorist campaign in the world. It’s never described that way but that’s of course what it is. Furthermore it’s a terrorist generating campaign. From the highest levels and most respected sources it’s recognized that the drone attacks create potential terrorists on quite a substantial scale.
かつて、私も、ドローンが現地のひとにとっては、テロだ、と書いたことがあったが、チョムスキーも、そう思っていたらしい。
There is plenty to criticize in Iran but the real issue is quite different. It’s the refusal of the West, primarily of the United States, to enter into serious diplomacy with Iran. And as far as Iran violating the will of the international community, that depends on a very special definition of international community which is standard in the West where the term means the United States and anybody who goes along with it.
The nearby region, in the Arab world, Arab’s don’t like Iran it’s quite unpopular there are hostilities that go back very far. But they do not regard Iran as a threat, a very small percentage regard Iran as a threat. The threats they perceive are the United States and Israel, so they are not part of the world as far as “international community” is concerned but it’s a western obsession.
イランが”国際社会”に順応していない、というのは、アメリカーイスラエルの言いなりになっていない、ということなわけですね。
So for example in 2010 there was a very positive advance that could have mitigated whatever the threat is supposed to be. Turkey and Brazil reached a deal with Iran in which Iran would ship out its low-enriched uranium in exchange for storage in Turkey, and in return the west would provide isotopes for Iran’s medical reactors. As soon as that was announced Brazil and Turkey were bitterly condemned by Washington and by the media, which more or less reflexively follow what Washington says.
アメリカのメディアの大半が政府の言うことの垂れ流し、という状況は、日本と似ている。
ＮＹＴの在日記者でさえ、体制追随で、米軍を怒らせるような、米兵によるアジア人女性性奴隷搾取については、絶対に報道できない。
If you read yesterday’s New York Times big front page article on the capture of Abu Anas, the jihadi target in Libya, read down to the bottom of the article and there’s a quote from the Secretary of State who is asked in a press conference whether this was legal and he says “Yes this is legal it’s in accord with American law.” That means American law says we can go into any country we like and kidnap somebody we want and that’s legal. Of course is that anybody else’s law? Suppose Al-Qaeda or some other country, Yemen or whoever, comes to the United States and kidnaps John Kerry. Is that legal? If it’s legal by their laws
リビアでのアルカイダ幹部拘束について、アメリカ法に適っていても国際法に適っているわけではない、とまともな意見ーーーーアメリカ、あるいは、西側諸国の主要なメディアがこれをあまり、問題にしなかった、というのは、異様だ。
