After denied entry to West Bank and Israel, Chomsky likens Israel to 'Stalinist regime'

[MikeWB]

http://www.haaretz.com/print-edition/news/after-denied-entry-to-west-bank-chomsky-likens-israel-to-stalinist-regime-1.290736

After denied entry to West Bank, Chomsky likens Israel to 'Stalinist regime'
Linguist Noam Chomsky was scheduled to lecture at Bir Zeit University near Ramallah, meet PA Prime Minister Fayyad.

By Amira Hass
Tags: Israel news West Bank Noam Chomsky
The Interior Ministry refused to let linguist Noam Chomsky into Israel and the West Bank on Sunday. Chomsky, who aligns himself with the radical left, had been scheduled to lecture at Bir Zeit University near Ramallah, and visit Bil'in and Hebron, as well as meet with Palestinian Prime Minister Salam Fayyad and various Palestinian activists.

   
American linguist Noam Chomsky.

Photo by: Bloomberg
In a telephone conversation last night from Amman, Chomsky told Haaretz that he concluded from the questions of the Israeli official that the fact that he came to lecture at a Palestinian and not an Israeli university led to the decision to deny him entry.

"I find it hard to think of a similar case, in which entry to a person is denied because he is not lecturing in Tel Aviv. Perhaps only in Stalinist regimes," Chomsky told Haaretz.

Sabine Haddad, a spokesperson for the Interior Ministry, confirmed to Haaretz that the officials at the border were from the ministry.

"Because he entered the Palestinian Authority territory only, his entry is the responsibility of the Office of the Coordinator of Government Activities in the Territories at the Defense Ministry. There was a misunderstanding on our side, and the matter was not brought to the attention of the COGAT."

Haddad told Haaretz that "the minute the COGAT says that they do not object, Chomsky's entry would have been permitted."

Chomsky, a Jewish professor of linguistics and philosophy at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, had spent several months at Kibbutz Hazore'a during the 1950s and had considered a longer stay in Israel. He had been invited by the Department of Philosophy at Bir Zeit.

He planned to spend four days in the West Bank and give two lectures.

On Sunday, at about 1:30 P.M. he came to the Israeli side of the border with Jordan. After three hours of questioning, during which the border officer repeatedly called the Interior Ministry for instructions, Chomsky's passport was stamped with "Denied Entry."

With Chomsky, 81, were his daughter Aviva, and a couple of old friends of his and his late wife.

Entry was also denied to his daughter.

Their friends, one of whom is a Palestinian who grew up in Beirut, were allowed in, but they opted to return with Chomsky to Amman.

Chomsky told Haaretz that it was clear that his arrival had been known to the authorities, because the minute he entered the passport control room the official told him that he was honored to see him and that he had read his works.

The professor concluded that the officer was a student, and said he looked embarrassed at the task at hand, especially when he began reading from text the questions that had been dictated to him, and which were also told to him later by telephone.

Chomsky told Haaretz about the questions.

"The official asked me why I was lecturing only at Bir Zeit and not an Israeli university," Chomsky recalled. "I told him that I have lectured a great deal in Israel. The official read the following statement: 'Israel does not like what you say.'"

Chomsky replied: "Find one government in the world which does."

"The young man asked me whether I had ever been denied entry into other countries. I told him that once, to Czechoslovakia, after the Soviet invasion in 1968," he said, adding that he had gone to visit ousted Czechoslovak leader Alexander Dubcek, whose reforms the Soviets crushed.

In response to the official's question, Chomsky said that the subjects of his lectures were "America and the world," and "America at home."

The official asked him whether he would speak on Israel and Chomsky said that because he would talk of U.S. policy he would also comment on Israel and its policies.

He was then told by the official: "You have spoken with [Hassan] Nasrallah."

"True," Chomsky told him. "When I was in Lebanon [prior to the war in 2006] I spoke with people from the entire political spectrum there, as in Israel I also spoke with people on the right."

"At the time I read reports of my visit in the Israeli press, and the articles in the Israeli press had no connection with reality," Chomsky told the border official.

The official asked Chomsky why he did not have an Israeli passport.

"I replied I am an American citizen," Chomsky said.

Chomsky said that he asked the man at border control for an official written explanation for the reason his entry was denied and that "it would help the Interior Ministry because this way my version will not be the only one given to the media."

The official called the ministry and then told Chomsky that he would be able to find the official statement at the U.S. Embassy.

The last time Chomsky visited Israel and the West Bank was in 1997, when he lectured on both sides of the Green Line. He had also planned a visit to the Gaza strip, but because the Palestinian Authority insisted that he be escorted by Palestinian guards, he canceled that part of the visit.

To Haaretz, Chomsky said Sunday that preventing him entry is tantamount to boycotting Bir Zeit University. Chomsky is known to oppose a general boycott on Israel. "I was against a boycott of apartheid South Africa as well. If we are going to boycott, why not the United States, whose record is even worse? I'm in favor of boycotting American companies which collaborate with the occupation," he said. "But if we are to boycott Tel Aviv University, why not MIT?"

Chomsky told Haaretz that he supports a two-state solution, but not the solution proposed by Jerusalem, "pieces of land that will be called a state."

He said that Israel's behavior today reminds him of that of South Africa in the 1960s, when it realized that it was already considered a pariah, but thought that it would resolve the problem with better public relations.

[§N9sh2bj]

"The official asked Chomsky why he did not have an Israeli passport."

Exactly. Sounds like more song and dance. Playing both sides of the issue.

They don't mind if there is a stage, as long as they are the only people on it getting 95% of press time, with the rest left to dupes.

[Ognir]

One more nail in the coffin of the zionist parasites

[jai_mann]

I didn't realize that scumbag chumpsky was 81. With any luck he'll kick the bucket soon and stop contributing to the cover up of talmudic jewish crimes and mentality. He sure went to bat for them on 9/11, the SOB. And I've no doubt that this little ditty is an issue of maintaining/regaining credence with fools.

[Negentropic]

Notice that good-ole-boy-commie Chomsky likens the regime to a Stalinist one, never a Leninist one, since all die-hard commies of the Chomsky ilk still consider only Stalin's extra-hardcore gulag mass-massacarism an aberration from the worthy ideals pursued by that fuckwad mass-murderer Lenin and fully support Marxism and so-called "socialism" everywhere in the world. Any form of mixed economy, especially 'socialism,' of course, plays right into the banksters' hands.  Only fascism with a nationalistic ruler(the surgeon's knife of fascism necessary to completely remove the parasite from the host as Ezra Pound called it back in Mussolini's Italy, supporting Mussolini only because he opposed the bigger criminals, the banksters, rather than fascism itself, same as Celine in France) and a constitutional laissez-fair republic barring them or any other government enforced interference in the economy are their true enemy.  Any sort of fascism or communism with a non-nationalistic puppet ruler, of course, also plays into their hands. Chomsky likes to play into the hands of the guys at the very top of the pyramid. I used to read a lot of Chomsky in the '90s and I don't remember him mentioning The Rothschilds, The Warburgs, Lazard Bros, Israel Moses Sief, Kuhn-Loeb and company etc. hardly ever, nothing about the Jewish banksters that owned the Fed and the other centeral banks around the world, just America does this and America does that, Israel does this and Israel does that.  Nothing that I can ever remember about the West funding his favorite pet-humanist project of communism. Or the documented history of the west supporting and holding up communism as the necessary enemy all throughout its history (Major Jordan's Diaries, Wall Street & the Bolshevik Revolution).  Will bleeding heart old man Chomsky, who cares so much about the Palestinians, it makes me cry, now attempt to investigate the connections of this "Stalinist" regime and the events of 9/11 which directly led to the mass-murder of millions in endless wars?  Of course not!  He's a friggin gatekeeper plain and simple just like Ron Paul on the other end of the spectrum.  There are different levels of litmus tests for so called self-styled 'truth tellers' who pretend to possess a pair.  Each level of so-called 'truth teller' has their litmus test. For Chomsky and Ron Paul it's 'come clean on 9/11 or shut your fucking traps!'   For Alex Jones it's on two levels, first "it's come clean on the lead role of Israel and Mossad in 9/11 and the US Media and recant your 'Arabs own the media' rant or shut your fat fuck face up once and for all you douchebag !"  then on the second level, one he would never even in his wildest dreams have the balls to cross would be to come clean on the real events of the 'holohoax' as opposed to the fables. After all, can't the fat-fuck motherfucker do the 'research'?  All it takes is a few weeks of research on the internet.  For guys like DBS, Rivero, Rense and Bollyn and the rest, it's Killtown and the 'no planes theory.'  They can't dismiss it with logic so they just say it's 'disinfo' 'irrelevant' 'divide-&-conquer" blah blah blah. Basically it's hard for someone with any ego at all to admit they've been duped not only about the official story but also the very planes themselves by a completely complicit whore media. Kaminski and Fetzer are the only two guys who have not dismissed NPT and Fetzer and Barrett are now on the Israel 9/11 train also.  All this is redundant but that's the detour we are at now folks.

Here's Chomsky's idol spilling the beans about his true motives,

http://www.the7thfire.com/new_world_order/zionism/karl_marx_spills_the_beans.htm


Is it possible that someone of Chomsky's learning does not know about these writings of Marx?  Of course not! He only knows that most of the fringe-radical liberals who follow him don't know about these writings.

"There are persons, too, who see not the full extent of the evil which threatens them; they solace themselves with hopes that the enemy, if he succeeds, will be merciful.
"It is the madness of folly, to expect mercy from those who have refused to do justice; and even mercy, where conquest is the object, is only a trick of war; the cunning of the fox is as murderous as the violence of the wolf, and we ought to guard equally against both."  (Thomas Paine)

"One day, an Englishman will come along and write my biography. But it cannot be an English man of the present generation. They won't be objective. It will have to be an Englishman of the next generation, and one who is totally familiar with all the German archives"  Adolf Hitler  (anticipating David Irving)

"Of 3,000 people employed on the staff at the Nuremberg Courts, 2,400 were Jews" - Louis Marschalko (author of "The World Conquerors: the Real War Criminals")

http://zundelsite.org/english/zgrams/zg1997/zg9709/970923.html



Judea Declares War on Germany!" - Daily Express headline, March 24, 1933.

"Judea Declares War on Germany! Jews of all the World Unite! Boycott of German Goods! Mass Demonstrations!" - These were all headlines in the Daily Express on March 24, 1933.

"The Israeli people around the world declare economic and financial war against Germany. Fourteen million Jews stand together as one man, to declare war against Germany. The Jewish wholesaler will forsake his firm, the banker his stock exchange, the merchant his commerce and the pauper his pitiful shed in order to join together in a holy war against Hitler's people." - Daily Express, March 24, 1933.


"Each of you, Jew and Gentile alike, who has not already enlisted in this sacred war should do so now and here. It is not sufficient that you should buy no goods made in Germany. You must refuse to deal with any merchant or shopkeeper who sells any German-made goods or who patronises German ships or shipping.... we will undermine the Hitler regime and bring the German people to their senses by destroying their export trade on which their very existence depends." - Samuel Undermeyer, in a Radio Broadcast on WABC, New York, August 6, 1933. Reported in the New York Times, August 7, 1933.
"Joining with Samuel Untermeyer in calling for a war against Germany, Bernard Baruch, at the same time, was promoting preparations for war against Germany. 'I emphasised that the defeat of Germany and Japan and their elimination from world trade would give Britain a tremendous opportunity to swell her foreign commerce in both volume and profit.'" - "Baruch, The Public Years," by Bernard M. Baruch, p.347.
Samuel Untermeyer was a Jewish leader and close friend of presidents Wilson and Roosevelt.
Bernard Baruch was a presidential adviser to Wilson, Roosevelt and Truman.


"This declaration called the war against Germany, which was now determined on, a 'holy war'. This war was to be carried out against Germany to its conclusion, to her destruction" (Diese Erkl舐ung nannte den Krieg gegen Deutschland, der nun beschlossen sei, einen heiligen Krieg. Dieser Krieg m・se gegen Deutschland bis zu dessen Ende, bis zu dessen Vernichtung, gef・rt werden). - Dr. Franz J. Scheidl, Geschichte der Verfemung Deutschlands.


"War in Europe in 1934 was inevitable." - H. Morgenthau, Secretary of the U.S. Treasury, Hearst Press, September, 1933 (also quoted in "The Palestine Plot" by B. Jenson, p. 11).


"For months now the struggle against Germany is waged by each Jewish community, at each conference, in all our syndicates, and by each Jew all over the world. There is reason to believe that our part in this struggle has general value. We will trigger a spiritual and material war of all the world against Germany's ambitions to become once again a great nation, to recover lost territories and colonies. But our Jewish interests demand the complete destruction of Germany. Collectively and individually, the German nation is a threat to us Jews." - Vladimir Jabotinsky (founder of the Jewish terrorist group, Irgun Zvai Leumi) in Mascha Rjetsch, January, 1934 (also quoted in "Histoire de l'Arm馥 Allemande" by Jacques Benoist-Mechin, Vol. IV, p. 303).


"Hitler will have no war (does not want war), but we will force it on him, not this year, but soon." - Emil Ludwig Cohn in Les Annales, June, 1934 (also quoted in his book "The New Holy Alliance").

"We Jews are going to bring a war on Germany." - David A. Brown, National Chairman, United Jewish Campaign, 1934 (quoted in "I Testify Against The Jews" by Robert Edward Edmondson, page 188 and "The Jewish War of Survival" by Arnold Leese, page 52).

"We want to bring about a deep hatred for the Germans, for German soldiers, sailors, and airmen. We must hate until we win." - Lord Beaverbrook, quoted in Niemals! by Heinrich Goitsch.

"There is only one power which really counts. The power of political pressure. We Jews are the most powerful people on earth, because we have this power, and we know how to apply it." - Vladimir Jabotinsky, Jewish Daily Bulletin, July 27, 1935.

"Before the end of the year, an economic bloc of England, Russia, France and the U.S.A will be formed to bring the German and Italian economic systems to their knees." - Paul Dreyfus, "La Vie de Tanger" May 15, 1938.

On the 3rd of June, 1938, the American Hebrew boasted that they had Jews in the foremost positions of influence in Britain, Russia and France, and that these "three sons of Israel will be sending the Nazi dictator to hell." - Joseph Trimble, the American Hebrew.

"Germany is our public enemy number one. It is our object to declare war without mercy against her. One may be sure of this: We will lead that war!" - Bernard Lecache, the president of the "International League Against Racism and Anti-Semitism," in its newspaper "Droit de Vivre" (Right to Life), 9 November, 1938.
"The war now proposed is for the purpose of establishing Jewish hegemony throughout the world." - Brigadier General George Van Horn Mosely, The New York Tribune, March 29, 1939.

"I wish to confirm in the most explicit manner, the declaration which I and my colleagues made during the last months, and especially in the last week: that the Jews "stand by Great Britain and will fight on the side of the democracies." Our urgent desire is to give effect to these declarations. We wish to do so in a way entirely consonant with the general scheme of British action, and therefore would place ourselves, in matters big and small, under the co-ordinating direction of His Majesty's Government. The Jewish Agency is ready to enter into immediate arrangements for utilizing Jewish manpower, technical ability, resources, etc." - Chaim Weizmann, President of the World Jewish Congress, Head of the Jewish Agency and later President of Israel, the London Times, September 5, 1939, and the London Jewish Chronicle, September 8, 1939.

"The millions of Jews who live in America, England and France, North and South Africa, and, not to forget those in Palestine, are determined to bring the war of annihilation against Germany to its final end." - Central Blad Voor Israeliten in Nederland, September 13, 1939.

"Stop talking about peace conditions! Break Germany in pieces!" - The Daily Herald, No.7426, 9 December, 1939.

"The Jews, taken collectively, view this war as a holy war." - The Daily Herald, No.7450, 1939, quoted in "Reichstagsbrand, Aufkl舐ung einer historischen Legende," by U. Backes, K.H. Janﾟen, E. Jesse, H. Kler, H. Mommsen, E Tobias.

"Even if we Jews are not physically at your side in the trenches, we are morally with you. This war is our war and you fight it with us." - Schalom Asch, Les Nouvelles Litterairres, February 10, 1940.

"In losing Germany, Jewry lost a territory from which it exerted power. Therefore it was determined to re-conquer it." - Louis Marschalko, "The World Conquerors : The Real War Criminals."

"The World Jewish Congress has been at war with Germany for seven years." - Rabbi M. Perlzweig (head of the British Section of the World Jewish Congress), Toronto Evening Telegram, February 26, 1940.

"The Second World War is being fought for the defense of the fundamentals of Judaism." - Rabbi Felix Mendlesohn, Chicago Sentinel, October 8, 1942.

"We are not denying and are not afraid to confess that this war is our war and that it is waged for the liberation of Jewry... Stronger than all fronts together is our front, that of Jewry. We are not only giving this war our financial support on which the entire war production is based, we are not only providing our full propaganda power which is the moral energy that keeps this war going. The guarantee of victory is predominantly based on weakening the enemy forces, on destroying them in their own country, within the resistance. And we are the Trojan horses in the enemy's fortress. Thousands of Jews living in Europe constitute the principal factor in the destruction of our enemy. There, our front is a fact and the most valuable aid for victory." - Chaim Weizmann, President of the World Jewish Congress, Head of the Jewish Agency and later President of Israel, in a Speech on December 3, 1942, in New York.

"Played golf with Joe Kennedy (U.S. Ambassador to Britain). He says that Chamberlain stated that America and world Jewry forced England into World War II." - James Forrestal, Secretary of the Navy (later Secretary of Defense), Diary, December 27, 1945 entry.

"It is untrue that I or anyone else in Germany wanted war in 1939. It was wanted and provoked solely by international statesmen either of Jewish origin or working for Jewish interests. Nor had I ever wished that after the appalling first World War, there would ever be a second against either England or America." - Adolf Hitler, April, 1945.

The joke doing the rounds of the British Union of Fascists at this time was that the Jewish national anthem was, 'Onward Christian Soldiers.'



"Nobody made a greater mistake than he who did nothing because he could only do a little." —Edmund Burke



This was one of Ezra Pound's favorite books:











"The problems confronting us now are no longer seen as problems. Truth is perceived as the problem, as the real enemy, and more and more we look to our government to protect us from it.

When the War in the Gulf began we therefore not only accepted, we embraced with patriotic fervor, press censorship of the war. We would only see what our government wanted us to see and we saw nothing wrong with that. We liked it that way. Our government was looking after us. It wasn't that long ago, however, that we felt nothing but pity for the poor Soviet people whose undemocratic government controlled the media and censored all the news from the war in Afghanistan.

The wimping of truth took another step recently when the diplomatic cables of our Ambassador to Iraq were declassified by the State Department.
The justification for the entire war rested on the premise that war was unavoidable and that our Ambassador in the firmest of tones had warned Saddam Hussein not to violate the territorial integrity of Kuwait. Our State Department assured us that this was true. Our Ambassador, testifying in front of the Senate, reaffirmed the truth of this position.

It now turns out, just as we expected, that it was all a lie. But the fact that our government now feels safe in declassifying these tapes bespeaks another truth.
They are no longer afraid of truth because they know that the truth will have little impact on us. Their message to us is this: we've given you a glorious victory and we've given you back your self esteem...now here's the truth. Which do you prefer?

The implications are terrifying. We are being told that we can't have both anymore, truth and self esteem. We have to choose. One excludes the other.
The implications are even more terrifying than this. Our government now perceives that we are entering a new phase where we, in return for self esteem, are willing to lie to ourselves.

We are rapidly becoming prototypes of a people that totalitarian monsters could only drool about in their dreams. All the dictators up to now have had to work and work hard at suppressing the truth. We, by our actions, are saying that this is no longer necessary, that we have acquired a spiritual mechanism which can denude the truth of any significance. In a very fundamental way we, as a free people, have freely decided that we want to live in some post-truth world."

--- Steve Tesich – "The Wimping of America"



"I seek to trace the novel features under which despotism may appear in the world. The first thing that strikes the observation is an innumerable multitude of men all equal and alike, incessantly endeavoring to procure the petty and paltry pleasures with which they glut their lives. Each of them, living apart, is as a stranger to the fate of all the rest—his children and his private friends constitute to him the whole of mankind; as for the rest of his fellow-citizens, he is close to them, but he sees them not—he touches them, but he feels them not; he exists but in himself and for himself alone; and if his kindred still remain to him, he may be said at any rate to have lost his country.

Above this race of men stands an immense and tutelary power, which takes upon itself alone to secure their gratifications, and to watch over their fate. That power is absolute, minute, regular, provident, and mild. It would be like the authority of a parent, if, like that authority, its object was to prepare men for manhood; but it seeks on the contrary to keep them in perpetual childhood: it is well content that the people should rejoice, provided they think of nothing but rejoicing. For their happiness such a government willingly labors, but it chooses to be the sole agent and the only arbiter of that happiness: it provides for their security, foresees and supplies their necessities, facilitates their pleasures, manages their principal concerns, directs their industry, regulates the descent of property, and subdivides their inheritances—what remains, but to spare them all the care of thinking and all the trouble of living? Thus it every day renders the exercise of the free agency of man less useful and less frequent; it circumscribes the will within a narrower range, and gradually robs a man of all the uses of himself. The principle of equality has prepared men for these things: it has predisposed men to endure them, and oftentimes to look on them as benefits.

After having thus successively taken each member of the community in its powerful grasp, and fashioned them at will, the supreme power then extends its arm over the whole community. It covers the surface of society with a net-work of small complicated rules, minute and uniform, through which the most original minds and the most energetic characters cannot penetrate, to rise above the crowd. The will of man is not shattered, but softened, bent, and guided: men are seldom forced by it to act, but they are constantly restrained from acting: such a power does not destroy, but it prevents existence; it does not tyrannize, but it compresses, enervates, extinguishes, and stupefies a people, till each nation is reduced to be nothing better than a flock of timid and industrious animals, of which the government is the shepherd.

I have always thought that servitude of the regular, quiet, and gentle kind which I have just described, might be combined more easily than is commonly believed with some of the outward forms of freedom; and that it might even establish itself under the wing of the sovereignty of the people. Our contemporaries are constantly excited by two conflicting passions; they want to be led, and they wish to remain free: as they cannot destroy either one or the other of these contrary propensities, they strive to satisfy them both at once. They devise a sole, tutelary, and all-powerful form of government, but elected by the people. They combine the principle of centralization and that of popular sovereignty; this gives them a respite; they console themselves for being in tutelage by the reflection that they have chosen their own guardians. Every man allows himself to be put in leading-strings, because he sees that it is not a person or a class of persons, but the people at large that holds the end of his chain. By this system the people shake off their state of dependence just long enough to select their master, and then relapse into it again.

A great many persons at the present day are quite contented with this sort of compromise between administrative despotism and the sovereignty of the people; and they think they have done enough for the protection of individual freedom when they have surrendered it to the power of the nation at large. This does not satisfy me: the nature of him I am to obey signifies less to me than the fact of extorted obedience."  Alexis de Toqueville – Democracy in America

"People talk a lot nowadays about the dignity of work and about the need for it. But it's a fraud. There is dignity in work only when it is work freely accepted. Only idleness has a moral value because it can serve as a criterion by which to judge men. It is fatal only to the second rate. That is its lesson and its greatness. Work, on the other hand, crushes everyone down to the same level. It provides no basis for judging men. It brings into action a metaphysics of humiliation. Under the form of slavery which the society of right-thinking people now give it, the best men cannot survive its effects... " --- Albert Camus, Journals

"The individual is handicapped by coming face to face with a conspiracy so monstrous he cannot believe it exists." J. Edgar Hoover

"Be not intimidated , therefore, by any terrors from publishing with the utmost freedom whatever can be warranted by the laws of your country; nor suffer yourselves to be wheedled out of your liberty by pretenses of politeness, delicacy or decency. These, as they are often used, are but three different names for hypocrisy, chicanery and cowardice." – John Adams

"In death as in life, I defy the Jews who caused this last war, and I defy the power of darkness which they represent. I warn the British people against the crushing imperialism of the Soviet Union. May Britain be great once again and in the hour of the greatest danger in the West may the standard be raised from the dust, crowned with the words — you have conquered nevertheless. I am proud to die for my ideals and I am sorry for the sons of Britain who have died without knowing why. -"  William Joyce's defiant statement before his execution for treason


and last but not least the idol of Spike Lee and the hero of America's multi-cultural youth, vigilantly standing by Rahm Emmanuel in protecting the principles of the founding fathers:

(October 18, 2008)
"Theoretically, there is nothing that can stop the government from taxing 100% of income so long as the people get benefits from the government commensurate with their income which is taxed. I do not see why the government cannot tax those who have more and syphon some of these revenues into savings which can be utilized in investment for future development. - Barack Obama Sr.  (Mr. Peanut-Head Theoretic, who wrote that fuckin' speech for the teleprompter in charge?  you can bet it was an Irishman! )

[Free Truth]

...I've no doubt that this little ditty is an issue of maintaining/regaining credence with fools.

That is a really good point.

[Wimpy]

Very nice compilation of quotes Negentropic.