Chávez the linguist

Apparently, that was a very interesting talk:

From Tenser, said the Tensor reporting here.


6 thoughts on “Chávez the linguist

  1. ahhaha!!! καλό!

    (“σοβαρά” πάντως, με αυτά και με αυτά, του Τσόμσκυ του εχει βγει το κακό όνομα :-ΡΡ)

  2. It means: read the comments- and search the trackback, and google– as well, before you link to a blogpost. If it’s really a photoshoped image – and a photoshoped image which replaces one very specific book by Chomsky with another equaly specific one, oh-oh! The guy might be an irresponsible twat. You don’t have to be one, just because you might have landed, one way or another, in Cyprus. C’mon!

    No, i don’t get THIS joke.

  3. Easy, tiger, lighten up.

    At the time I posted this (today), the whole world had seen the President of Venezuela holding up a copy of ‘Hegemony or Survival’, as also reported in the Guardian link I provided in the Speaking of the Devil post.

    A marker of my not having fallen for the photoshopped image (apart from the assumption that I read what I link to) is the single quotes around ‘story’ in the description of the link to Tensor’s post.

    So, please, give me some credit: I am neither so gullible nor as immune to irony as most of Outposters. Moreover, I have reasons both to resent ‘twat’ as a term used to offend and to find Chávez holding up The Minimalist Program roaringly funny.

  4. … and before I get comments on, for instance, Outposters not being gullible, I would agree: the correct way to read the relevant sentence is

    I am neither so gullible [semi-colon of sorts] nor as immune to irony as most of Outposters

    So, ‘most of the Outposters’ only takes scope over ‘immune to irony’.

  5. Touche!
    Didn’t see the quotation marks on the link’s desription. Hard day – with google buying youtube today I guess I became a bit negligently oversensitive to information dissemination via the web.

    As for the ‘twat’ – he is; beyond any collapsed-to-feminism analysis of the term, the guy is a horrid, obnoxious piece of politics. Almost up there with W and Ahmadinejad. We do not disagree on that, do we? Crossing himself was not the only piece of theatricality. Nor was ‘offering’ ‘cheap oil’ to ‘London’s poor’. There’s no Citgo in the UK I believe and with the 7-11 / Citgo deal mutually abandoned, that’s a lot of nationalised oil revenue being dumped on London’s tarmac.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s