SIVACRACY.NET

Actually it is Berube who sounds nuts (if we must use such terms) in the various acts of hand-waving employed. E.g: the introduction of the term "Milosevic-defenders". Chomsky is not a Milosevic defender, nor is he doing that in the quoted text. To question the legitimacy of Chomsky's progressive credentials is in itself a joke!

But let us move to more substantial content, when it finally appears, after the first few paragraphs of bile... oh wait... there is none. At no point does Berube seem to offer any argument to support his statement that Chomsky's words are a "pack of lies". Rather he provides a lot of embedded links to pages elsewhere, while peppering his text with indignation and inanities, while castigating Herman and Johnstone. Note that even the considerable text he quotes from Ian Williams is nothing but opinion.

Here are samples from Williams:

"It is clear that the US was dragged unwillingly and half-heartedly into the Balkans..."

"It is also true that if the US had made..."

Clear! True! How? Why? To whom? No reasoning or facts are offered to substantiate these points.

To answer your question:

People take Chomsky seriously rather than Berube because Chomsky is a serious scholar and a straight speaker. This is clear even from a trivial comparison of the qouted Chomsky text and Berube's wild and willy-nilly response.