12-11-2009, 03:13 PM
(This post was last modified: 12-11-2009, 04:54 PM by Dawn Meredith.)
aluate
I completely agree. Not only is Chomsky not stupid, over the decades he has been engaged in a debate on the assassination issue. With Marcus, so elequently detailed by Jim DiEugenio, and Vince Salandria. There are likely countless others. "Rethinking Camelot" is, in my opinion, a book as completely dishonest that it compares to Case Closed. Chomsky did not evaluate the evidence fairly and reach a conclusion, he choose the "evidence" that would support his purposeful conclusion: that there was no conspiracy because JFK was not worth killing.
To hear him add "who cares?" made me ill. Precisely because he is the darling of the left. But he is also rather typical of the left on issues of conspiracy. They just won't go there.
I' d love the hear what Chomsky would say upon reading JFK and the Unspeakable. I'm afraid however it would be one more "who cares?"
Jack makes a good point, why dignify this intellectually dishonest individual?
I think we must, because people with the kind of voice afforded to writers like Chomsky who pretend not to see the links between the assassinations and 9-11 must be confronted directly. I have struggled for years to understand how Chomsky can espouse two so diametrically opposite views: a voice against US imperialism and a denier of of conspiracy fact.
I cannot "prove" that he is anyone's asset, but ask yourself, when he is confronted with evidence of deep political significance, of criminal conspiracy at the highest levels and his response is "who cares? then whose interest is being served? Why would he go to such a length as to even write a book so dishonest as "Rethinking Camelot" ?
For me CD"s montra works just fine.
Dawn
Mark Stapleton Wrote:Jan Klimkowski Wrote:Chomsky is wrong about the assassination of Kennedy. But I see no proof that this is because he an asset of the CIA or the NSA or some other intelligence agency.
Jan, the problem is the only people wrong about the Kennedy assassination, and by wrong I mean those who insist there was no conspiracy, are people who are stupid or bent, and Chomsky's not stupid.
I completely agree. Not only is Chomsky not stupid, over the decades he has been engaged in a debate on the assassination issue. With Marcus, so elequently detailed by Jim DiEugenio, and Vince Salandria. There are likely countless others. "Rethinking Camelot" is, in my opinion, a book as completely dishonest that it compares to Case Closed. Chomsky did not evaluate the evidence fairly and reach a conclusion, he choose the "evidence" that would support his purposeful conclusion: that there was no conspiracy because JFK was not worth killing.
To hear him add "who cares?" made me ill. Precisely because he is the darling of the left. But he is also rather typical of the left on issues of conspiracy. They just won't go there.
I' d love the hear what Chomsky would say upon reading JFK and the Unspeakable. I'm afraid however it would be one more "who cares?"
Jack makes a good point, why dignify this intellectually dishonest individual?
I think we must, because people with the kind of voice afforded to writers like Chomsky who pretend not to see the links between the assassinations and 9-11 must be confronted directly. I have struggled for years to understand how Chomsky can espouse two so diametrically opposite views: a voice against US imperialism and a denier of of conspiracy fact.
I cannot "prove" that he is anyone's asset, but ask yourself, when he is confronted with evidence of deep political significance, of criminal conspiracy at the highest levels and his response is "who cares? then whose interest is being served? Why would he go to such a length as to even write a book so dishonest as "Rethinking Camelot" ?
For me CD"s montra works just fine.
Dawn