Chomsky vs Bill Ryan

[Kotch]

Hi All,

I decided to dive into the deep end of this forum with an interesting thought (or perhaps a gratuitous mind-fart)

One of my greatest influencers is Noam Chomsky. The issue I have with him is that as a hardcore scientist he will not issue any thoughts on the esoteric.

Then I got to thinking - the things that I respect about him are the depth of his knowledge & exerience, his deep humility and intelligence and his empathy for the human experience.

Well, I know someone else that captures those aspects, but does indeed talk about esoteric subjects.

So can we say that PA's Bill Ryan is the Chomsky of the esoteric?

Thoughts?

Kotch

[Jad]

I thought you were announcing a PPV of Chomsky vs Ryan from the title! 😂

[Arcturian108]

I have almost zero respect for Chomsky as after 9/11 he immediately supported the government's story line about that magic show.

[Kotch]

Posted by Arcturian108 (here)
I have almost zero respect for Chomsky as after 9/11 he immediately supported the government's story line about that magic show.

With respect, that wasn't my read of his response. My take was that he wasn't willing to entertain any speculation on what happened, and that in a sense it wasn't imortant, in that the attack was aimed against TPTB who would inevitably use it to further their agenda.

Cheers,

Kotch

[AutumnW]

Barry Zwickers, one of the more respected journalists in Canada:

But I became one of those in the Left puzzled, even mystified, as a result of Chomsky's insistence for more than 40 years that Lee Harvey Oswald was the lone gunman who killed JFK. This puzzling anomaly took on new significance after 9/11 with Chomsky's opposition to questioning the official 9/11 story - which questioning he says is a huge mistake for the Left.

As I studied his work ever more closely under the intense illumination of 9/11, I became increasingly amazed at patterns, dealt with in this chapter, that emerge from his body of work. Disbelief turned to shock. I feel i have been duped. I feel embarrassment that mainly I duped myself, that I had been in denial. With these realizations came anger from feeling betrayed by someone I welcomed into my innermost sanctum of trust.

http://educate-yourself.org/cn/noamc...t04oct07.shtml

Anyone who shows any kind of consistency of understanding of human nature, group dynamics and conspiracy is beyond Chomsky. So I wouldn't say that Bill Ryan is the esoteric Noam Chomsky. Chomsky has been a huge disappointment, sucked the wind out of the progressive movement with his take on 911.

I do understand what you are saying Notch but understand that Chomsky is so blinkered in his thinking he comes across as a gatekeeper.

[AutumnW]

A more detailed summary of Chomsky's take on the Kennedy assasination, driving home the point that he is essentially a Marxist and sees domestic issues through this lens. Sometimes he's right but other times he's wrong. And he's not just wrong. He's OMG wrong.

As many of us will recall, at the time of the release of Oliver Stone’s film JFK, Chomsky, along with his deceased cohort Alexander Cockburn, went on a jihad against almost everything depicted in the movie. Their critiques were as bad, in some ways worse, than those of the MSM. Their campaign was two-pronged. The first angle was to promote the idea that the Warren Commission was correct;

https://kennedysandking.com/john-f-k...f-noam-chomsky

When I first heard about this a few years back, my head almost exploded with cognitive dissonance. His apparent confusion about 911 conspiracy and framing it as a waste of time to study...I blew off as a guy who was getting old and weird in his thinking. But...promoting the Warren commission report as correct?? That blew my hair back!

[Kryztian]

Chomsky was, for a very brief time, in the 1960's, sympathetic to the JFK conspiracy camp. And then something abruptly changed. For this story and much more on how Noam Chomsky is attuned to much that goes on in the world, and yet completely out to lunch on other matters, I recommend The Corbett Report Episode 285: Meet Noam Chomsky, Academic Gatekeeper.

[Kotch]

Posted by Kryztian (here)
Chomsky was, for a very brief time, in the 1960's, sympathetic to the JFK conspiracy camp. And then something abruptly changed. For this story and much more on how Noam Chomsky is attuned to much that goes on in the world, and yet completely out to lunch on other matters, I recommend The Corbett Report Episode 285: Meet Noam Chomsky, Academic Gatekeeper.

Yikes!! I completely missed this! I guess I have some research to do...

[Kryztian]

Posted by Kotch (here)

Posted by Kryztian (here)
Chomsky was, for a very brief time, in the 1960's, sympathetic to the JFK conspiracy camp. And then something abruptly changed. For this story and much more on how Noam Chomsky is attuned to much that goes on in the world, and yet completely out to lunch on other matters, I recommend The Corbett Report Episode 285: Meet Noam Chomsky, Academic Gatekeeper.

Yikes!! I completely missed this! I guess I have some research to do...

Well, I shouldn't have been so completely negative. Chomsky has a lot of wisdom and a lot to offer. He does a tremendous job of explaining what is wrong with the foreign policies of the U.S. and the other NATO countries. I don't every regret having listened to him, but there are a lot of important issues that he does not delve into.

[Caliban]

Chomsky, forget him.

Read and listen to Michael Parenti. Yeah, he's basically a commie but he's effin brilliant and honest and unafraid to ask questions about all of it, including JFK. Good writer too.

Noam's like Amy Goodman. Stale bread. Boring. Vacuous. Ultimately superficial. MIT who gives a s---t.

Now Bill Ryan on the other hand. I hear he's pretty good at five card draw...fifteen thousand feet in the air...

[Kotch]

Posted by Kryztian (here)

Posted by Kotch (here)

Posted by Kryztian (here)
Chomsky was, for a very brief time, in the 1960's, sympathetic to the JFK conspiracy camp. And then something abruptly changed. For this story and much more on how Noam Chomsky is attuned to much that goes on in the world, and yet completely out to lunch on other matters, I recommend The Corbett Report Episode 285: Meet Noam Chomsky, Academic Gatekeeper.

Yikes!! I completely missed this! I guess I have some research to do...

Well, I shouldn't have been so completely negative. Chomsky has a lot of wisdom and a lot to offer. He does a tremendous job of explaining what is wrong with the foreign policies of the U.S. and the other NATO countries. I don't every regret having listened to him, but there are a lot of important issues that he does not delve into.

Seems like he's only interested in what is academically provable or a historically proven fact. Maybe I can foregive him that, but I agree this is very disillusioning!

Kotch

[Satori]

I confess I have never followed Chomsky. My first inrorduction to him was a year or so after 9/11. He was on a panel speaking on the subject of 9/11 or something else that led into 9/11. His remarks were to the effect that 9/11 occurred as we were told in the official conspiracy theory. "Get over it. Move on" or words to that effect.

I knew then and there he is an establishment shill. Wittingly I believe. From what I knew about him then, he was too intelligent and thoughtful the be fooled by the official 9/11 conspiracy theory. Thus, in my view, he was a a shill. He is highly suspect in my book.

So, too, Greg Palast for the same reason.

[AutumnW]

i like Greg Palast, but when I hear him lionizing the Guardian newspaper, it leaves me pretty cold. Like, how could such an intelligent person really believe that the Guardian isn't part of the problem, gatekeeper of the left.

Here's a good one. Chomsky did soften his stance a wee bit many years after 911, admitting that the twin towers and building 7 may have been prewired to implode, but said if that was the case, it would have been Al Queda or Saddam Hussein who were responsible for it??? What the....

[Justplain]

I first heard of Noam Chomsky in a 1977 linguistics class, as a brilliant theoretical linguist who demonstrated that language has universal deep structure that can be used to make endless sentences. This universal deep structure also proved that human intelligence is equally prevalent across all linguistic users, meaning that all people were of general high intelligence. This 'endless sentence' discovery was also used to disprove that humans were skinner-ian 'Pavlov dogs', or automatons.

Another brilliant work of his was this one. Noam Chomsky outlines the current crises in the USA and western democracy in ‘Requiem for America’. The deliberate concentration of wealth and power in the hands of a select few have brought us to the crossroads of historically unprecedented inequality. A half century of policies designed to favor the most wealthy at the expense of the majority may well be the lasting legacy of our time - the death of the middle class, and swan song of functioning democracy. A potent reminder that power ultimately rests in the hands of the governed.

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=wp6Rbgv1MLg

So I gather from other posts in this thread that he hasn't done his homework in some areas of controversy, which is to his detriment, and perhaps the public's. However, his brilliant insights into conventional economic and political affairs in mainstream American academia has helped pave the way for the pending wave of mainstream socialism that promises universal healthcare and more accessible post secondary education for Americans.

Despite being a Jew, Chomsky is also highly critical of Israel 's racist tendencies, which is gratifying for a well known academic.

Yes, Chomsky inappropriately endorsed the psyop official stories on jfk and 9/11, and I assume he would do the same on ufo's. However, in the areas where he has done his homework, he is brilliant.

Now for Professor Bill Ryan, he is obviously a man ahead of his time. Often eloquent, and very humane in his outlook. Bill has touched many of us through his mentorship on Avalon as well as some of the brilliant journalism he did with Kerry at Camelot. The paranormal is an extremely difficult subject matter to keep a steady grasp of, and Bill has done very well in this regard.

So Bill and Noam deserve some accolades. However, Bill's taste in headwear makes him the hands down winner in my book. That, and Bill has much better takes on jfk, 9/11 and the paranormal!

[DaveToo]

Posted by Kotch (here)

Seems like he's only interested in what is academically provable or a historically proven fact. Maybe I can foregive him that, but I agree this is very disillusioning!

Kotch

I used to respect Chomsky. Not any more.

First of all (and this is extremely important) his position is that unless 'conspiracy theories' have been proven by certified academics who have published peer-reviewed papers on the matter, they must by default be discarded as worthless pieces of disinformation.

In the case of JFK and 9/11 one doesn't have to be a rocket scientist or rely on certified academics who have published peer-reviewed papers to know that the official government stories are simply untrue.

In both cases, any person with average intelligence who is able to reason can discover on their own, or be shown, that the official government stories are fairy tales.

The fact that there aren't many published academic papers proving the government stories are false does not automatically make them true (Chomsky's logic).

Chomsky and most people can be forgiven (let off the hook) for statements they made about JFK and 9/11 in the immediate aftermath of those events.
However, to continue to keep one's head buried in the sand and take a stand that toes the government line decades after the events requires an explanation.

In Chomsky's case, I believe he is either a government shill or was given an ultimatum: toe the line or face an 'undesired personal outcome'.
In either case, he could have given us signals of some sort to let us know the quandary he is in. He has failed to do this.

I have also lost almost all respect for Amy Goodman, Jon Stewart and numerous other public figures for the positions they have taken on this matter.

[AutumnW]

Chomsky, of ALL people should be aware of covert operations--have a basic idea of how they work. I mean, isn't that his specialty? I watched or read an interview he did where someone posed the 911 question to him about it being an inside job. He responded that the congress would never agree to something like that? WTF?

Like in the movie, 'Tropic Thunder,' Chomsky should never go 'full retard.' It's just not believable.

[T Smith]

Chomsky's work, Manufacturing Consent is spot on. He seems, or rather "seemed" to get it.

It's not just 9/11. I've seen him since tow the line on many issues that are blatant Statist propaganda. He is way too smart for that. I just can't take him seriously anymore.

[section9]

I have enormous respect for Chomsky's analysis of the American propaganda ministry as analyzed in Manufacturing Consent.

His stance on JFK and 9/11 are kind of a tell, though, and an indication that people on the Left should start looking at Chomsky the way UFO people eventually learned to look at Carl Sagan.

[petra]

Posted by Kotch (here)
One of my greatest influencers is Noam Chomsky. The issue I have with him is that as a hardcore scientist he will not issue any thoughts on the esoteric.

I've never heard of Noam Chomsky, but this thread certainly got my attention. I can't make up my mind whether to be angry or laugh

Mr. Chomsky sounds like he might be a bit of an asshole, judging from people's reactions! That doesn't mean you cannot learn stuff from him though - I've learned quite a bit from assholes over the course of my life.

Bill Ryan's special quality that I see is, he's really good at "talking to people at their level". Talking to people ahead of their level is either like talking to a wall, or worst case, dangerous! I don't think talking to Bill is dangerous at all though.

I think it goes without saying that "Bill Wins" ha ha

[Kryztian]

Posted by petra (here)
Mr. Chomsky sounds like he might be a bit of an asshole, judging from people's reactions! That doesn't mean you cannot learn stuff from him though - I've learned quite a bit from assholes over the course of my life.

Amen to that. I think you learn a lot more when you are actively disagreeing than when you are just passively sitting there listening and saying "uh-huh, uh-huh."