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.