Plaza Man: Bob Groden vs the city of Dallas

[Peter Lemkin]

Chomsky is a strange bird. On the control of the press, on almost any/every US attack on other nations by any means, on civil rights, on the oligarchy sucking up all the power and money in society and the world, on militarism and burgeoning police state and so much more he is on the mark......BUT....when it comes to false-flag operations such as Dallas or 911 he fails totally. I know many think he is some kind National Security agent and I wouldn't vigorously try to convince someone he was not; however, I get the feeling there is something else going on. I listened recently to Chomsky have a discussion with Belafonte - and of the things they spoke about [important things one would have to categorize as a radical view on society] they agreed. They avoided those things Chomsky won't touch in a progressive manner. I personally can not explain why Chomsky acts as he does with the most important covert ops / false-flag ops. Personally, I find it hard to believe he'd be allowed to be so radical and critical on everything else as long as he led the public and progressives astray on those other few issues. It is possible, and I don't dismiss it as a possibility, but I find it unlikely. I think something strange is going on in his thinking process that simply doesn't allow him to imagine such complex false-flag events. Maybe he will yet change his mind on these matters or we may someday learn what is behind this apparent dichotomy. Yes, Amy Goodman is analogous. She too is generally progressive, but won't touch Dallas, the other major political assassinations, nor 911 in any meaningful way.

The explanation, as jaded as it might seem, is that he is a "lifetime actor." He's there to set the extreme condition where the "left" must not tread. 'If Chomsky says it, it must be true.'

Lifetime actors can arrive at their positions via the carrot and/or the stick. He's doing what he is supposed to do. And yes, Amy Goodman is one imo. Any prominent person who influences range of thought and emotion will receive The Visit. I suspect there are many such persons.

Again, I'm not going to argue - only state that this view of yours and others may be going a bit too far. I have relatives, not in visible national positions I grant, who are progressive but think I'm nuts when I speak about Dallas or 911. Something in their psychological make-up just won't let them go there without any 'visit'. I guess you'd posit that Chomsky and Goodman showed them where to go and no further (rather than listen to their kin; i.e. me) - and that is one possibility. Another is that Chomsky and others also just can't go there without external coercion or 'visit'. Goodman I think was afraid of loosing her sponsorship if she went over the line. Chomsky has had no sponsorship and has lived off of his salary as a professor and his many books. Others like 'Mack' I think on can make a much stronger case for having been led into the darkness. Anyway, I think there is little evidence at this point on these two in order to decide and one has to just make a call until there is..... The key to my scepticism is where the line is drawn. If it was an attempt to keep progressives or even liberals from not going too far into conspiracies and dirty deeds in the back rooms of society, I'd think they'd move the line much further toward the 'right'....again just my sense on this when one doesn't have evidence. I do admit that some [Mack, Posner, Russo and many others I can name] show more evidence of having been pushed, pulled, sucked into being gatekeepers. I just think one needs evidence before one makes 'the claim'. I don't think my relatives have been visited - they just are following a certain mindthink in the society - and yes, it is in part - in large part - constructed by those behind the curtains. Some of it is a natural human fear of the implications 'if all that you say is true'..... Time will tell on Chomsky and Goodman. I am equally disappointed in Chomsky and Goodman - and condemn them for what they do not cover, having the platform to do so. I guess the difference is whether or not the 'rest' they talk about/write about needs to be ignored because of what they refuse to talk about. I think I can see far beyond where they stop, and hope others with my views will develop a public voice/platform and influence others to see beyond, as well.......