Talk:Eqbal Ahmad - Revision history

Claire Robinson: Removing all content from page

2009-05-07T15:16:46Z

Removing all content from page

Paul: loses any meaning

2008-02-05T17:48:30Z

loses any meaning

Idrees at 12:09, 8 January 2008

2008-01-08T12:09:18Z

Idrees at 12:06, 8 January 2008

2008-01-08T12:06:38Z

New page

EA is not a terrorologist by any stretch. He only once gave a lecture and an interview (to David Barsamian) on the subject ''critical'' of terrorologists. I think we'll need to lay out a clearer definition, otherwise this would be pretty pointless. A terrorologist in my view is someone who claims expertise on the subject that conforms to the prevailing ideology.

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:16, 7 May 2009
Line 1:		Line 1:
−	EA is not a terrorologist by any stretch. EA worked with Fanon, and was Edward Said's main inspiration in his political writings. Both Chomsky and Said consider him one of the greatest Left intellectuals of the past half century. He only once gave a lecture and an interview (to David Barsamian) on the subject ''critical'' of terrorologists.

−	I think we'll need to lay out a clearer definition, otherwise this would be pretty pointless. A terrorologist in my view is someone who claims expertise on the subject that conforms to the prevailing ideology.
−
−	~~== loses any meaning ==~~
−
−	If we are going to put Eqbal Ahmad in this list, then this terrorology business loses any meaning. We must distinguish the crowd who use terror to smear/demonize others and to justify "our" violence from the courageous individuals who fight against this tendency. Ahmad falls into the latter category, and i find his inclusion in the terrorology list appalling
−
−	~~--[[User:Paul\|Paulo]] 17:48, 5 February 2008 (UTC)~~

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:48, 5 February 2008
Line 2:		Line 2:

	I think we'll need to lay out a clearer definition, otherwise this would be pretty pointless. A terrorologist in my view is someone who claims expertise on the subject that conforms to the prevailing ideology.		I think we'll need to lay out a clearer definition, otherwise this would be pretty pointless. A terrorologist in my view is someone who claims expertise on the subject that conforms to the prevailing ideology.
		+
		+	== loses any meaning ==
		+
		+	If we are going to put Eqbal Ahmad in this list, then this terrorology business loses any meaning. We must distinguish the crowd who use terror to smear/demonize others and to justify "our" violence from the courageous individuals who fight against this tendency. Ahmad falls into the latter category, and i find his inclusion in the terrorology list appalling
		+
		+	--[[User:Paul\|Paulo]] 17:48, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 12:09, 8 January 2008
Line 1:		Line 1:
−	EA is not a terrorologist by any stretch. He only once gave a lecture and an interview (to David Barsamian) on the subject ''critical'' of terrorologists. I think we'll need to lay out a clearer definition, otherwise this would be pretty pointless. A terrorologist in my view is someone who claims expertise on the subject that conforms to the prevailing ideology.	+	EA is not a terrorologist by any stretch. EA worked with Fanon, and was Edward Said's main inspiration in his political writings. Both Chomsky and Said consider him one of the greatest Left intellectuals of the past half century. He only once gave a lecture and an interview (to David Barsamian) on the subject ''critical'' of terrorologists.
		+
		+	I think we'll need to lay out a clearer definition, otherwise this would be pretty pointless. A terrorologist in my view is someone who claims expertise on the subject that conforms to the prevailing ideology.