Agreed.

Say the Chinese communist party were to split into two factions, both deeply committed to communism, but with subtle differences when it comes to implementation details, then all of a sudden you'd have a model democracy, right?

Your comment does a pretty good job of describing how extremely successful the public relations industry is. First, these people protesting know something is horribly wrong with their society, but the way their society actually works has been so carefully muddled and obfuscated that when they try to tell you what's wrong and how to fix it they tend to become confused and incoherent. Second, the public viewing thousands of people trying to organise in order to improve their society as spoiled squatting bums, now that's a a PR success if there ever was one.

It is irrelevant how many American votes of agreement the war got, congressional or otherwise, I'm talking about the war being illegal from the UN point of view, hence an international crime.

What about committing the supreme international crime, a war of aggression against Iraq?

Is that an "atrocity" enough for you?

Well yes, the rich will allow you to climb pretty high, but only as long as you serve their interests.

If you can't beat them, join them, if you can't join them, serve them.

Guess I'll discard the "always have to press ENTER" bug report.

Yeah, this looks quite contradictory doesn't it? Now, let's look at the context and see if it really is.

Some guy calls Chomsky a moron, I find that rather moronic (that is, calling Chomsky a moron, not calling someone a moron), so in general terms he exposed himself as a moron by calling someone else a moron, and I put that forth as a nicety. It simply does not follow that I find the act of calling someone a moron moronic per se.

If this supposed contradiction of mine makes you feel better or is somehow comforting, feel free to misunderstand me in any way you see fit.