I think your concern is understandable. However, I would suggest that *if* I have an ideological slant with which you strongly disagree, does that make my analysis any less valuable provided that I am up front about myself and any agenda that I may have? I have tried to be transparent about my name, my past, and my views (see my blog, http://www.jeffvail.net/ for nearly 4 years of writings on topics like our involvement in Iraq).

I'm not sure, however, that you've correctly identified my bias or agenda (we all have one at some level). You might want to start by taking a look at my book, "A Theory of Power," which was positively reviewed by Noam Chomsky, John Zerzan, and Daniel Quinn. You can read it free at my site.

Other than that (and I hope I don't sound defensive--not my intent, and I'm sorry if so), thank you to everyone for the warm welcome!

Mr. Vail - Thanks for that reply. I certainly will take a look at your book. And I'm sorry if I got the bias / agenda wrong. I'll check it out. I will also give you a warm welcome because its especially valuable to be able to discuss these issues with the broadest possible grouping of opinion. I did check out some of your writing and found it very thoughtful. I just want to make the point that the human suffering in Iraq is something not often brought up on this site, and I think its important to remember that dimension, and come to some understanding of all of our complicity and the connection to our level of consumption. I'll look forward to your articles and the chance to respond.

Hi Devon. I want to thank you for your comments and the discussion that followed. It's been beneficial on more than one level. I think we can all agree that the Iraq war has been and is complex and a disaster that has touched the lives of millions and destroyed the lives of too many.

I am an ardent opponent of the war and of the empire that wages it. I am not an opponent of the nation in which the empire is based any more than those who opposed Hitler were (necessarily) anti-German. However, I have close friends who very much disagree with me on all this. Moreover, I respect their opinion on various other issues no matter how strongly we might disagree on the empire project.

Likewise, the TOD is not an anti-war or anti-empire site even though there might be a lot of that kind of sentiment here. There is no reason to exclude someone for their views on the Iraq war if they can bring something to the party on the issue that is central to TOD. People with expertise, or just interest in PO, range all over the political map. That has to be reflected in TOD.

Mr. Vail,

Would you mind giving me a source for the Noam Chomsky review.
I followed your link :

positively reviewed by Noam Chomsky, John Zerzan, and Daniel Quinn.

And found the lonely and solitary word "Fascinating", I am sure Mr. Chomsky said more? I would like to see what context this positive review of "fascinating" was used.

As well on a quick scan of the positive review:

"Fascinating"

--Noam Chomsky, author of Hegemony or Survival, described by the New York Times as "arguably the most important intellectual alive."

on that quick reading, I would get the idea that this fascinating book was written by "arguably the most important intellectual alive"

I would think that this sort of self promotion a reason to be wary of your opinions.

Crystal-,

I'm sorry if the wording was misleading--the "arguably most importany intellectual alive" is the NY Times describing Chomsky, certainly not me!

I'm sorry if the wording was misleading--the "arguably most importany intellectual alive" is the NY Times describing Chomsky, certainly not me!

For what it's worth, I found the wording abundantly clear.

Hi Pitt,

Abundantly clear would read:

--Noam Chomsky, author of Hegemony or Survival, who is described by the New York Times as "arguably the most important intellectual alive." (sloppy writing by the publisher or ?, anyway not of all that much importance I would agree).

I notice that my prime question, or request, for access to, the full review by Noam has not been addressed.

I have had only a slight chance to look at Mr. Vail's book (took a look at chapter 5 on but what I have read so far I find interesting in its variance with my thoughts in this area. A book which I have been reading lately might be of use to Mr. Vail:

Plant Technology of the First Peoples in British Columbia, Royal British Columbia Museum Handbook, by Nancy J. Turner.,1947-. UBC press Vancouver

About Mr. Vail's views and involvement in the war in Iraq I would expect more transparency here in the form of a direct statement. I have a hard time with agreeing to any censorship other than that which involves children, and do not wish at all to muzzle Mr. Vail and even *if* his views and aims were to prove morally or ethically reprehensible. I would still accept him as a commenter, in that case, but I do not think being 'elevated' to a position of authority would be appropriate. This is merely my view and nothing to get too excited about. I hope we can have reasonable discussion here.

you want the guy to roll around in cow-dung and then self-flagellate himself or something? come on now.

What is the 'or something'? I usually like your posts, Chimp, and this one was no exception.