These people remind me of high school cliques...  There were always two groups diamterically opposed, if one group promoted one fad, the other hated it, and vise versa.  They are stuck in a social dance.

To break this would distance themselves from either part of their well-understood view of political dynamics.  They lack the courage to step away, and think for themselves. 

>>>To break this would distance themselves from either part of their well-understood view of political dynamics. They lack the courage to step away, and think for themselves. <<<

It's more than simply courage, though we could have more of that--they don't have a better frame--a better world?-to replace it with. People are trained to accept the frames they see as inevitable forces of nature. It's remarkable how someone who is not even aware of the frame can react SO violently to it being challeneged, because their whole world is being challenged.

Take bullying in schools. Teaching kids it's okay to get away with terrorizing people and conversely that if you are terroized no one will heklp you, clearly is bad in SOO many ways, not the least of which you are training future sociopaths. Who will be a public safety problem, for those of you who miss the point. Yet for decades teachers were either wet(oh, you poor victim) or hapless(well, what can you do?). Well, for starters you can suspend the bully for endangering student safety--because that is what will happen in the adult world. You can also contact the familiy as they are probably part of the problem--this is not too difficult to see when you meet them(no, it's not the money or lack there of; it's how they interact with each other). Then you can figure out where the kid learned bulling people was okay, and hopefully help him/her learn new interaction skills.

On the otherside, schools can stop having policies to punish kids for defending themselves. Way to create the victims of tomorrow, twits. And you can actually teach kids to defend themselves, each other and other usefull crisis skills.

But this all takes training and a clue--something educators and even parents were MIA on for decades. Instead there was a frame: the strong have a right to get away with what they want and the weak are at fault for anything bad that happens to them. And no matter how sypathetic a teacher might be, they could not think outside this frame.

This frame needs to be replaced with: the strong have a responsibility to protect the weak AND TEACH THEM HOW TO BE STRONG, so the weak are no longer weak--we are all stronger when we are all stronger.

It is very hard for people to think beyond their frames. Most have to have a shock to motivate them--the frame has to fail in some intrinsic way. For many 911 was that shock. The fact that mass murder IS NOT enough of a shock for many people shows two things:

1: the strength of the frame: obey authority--if you don't you will be punished. This started in childhood.
2:The fact they have considered no replacement frame, say: authority has a GREATER, not lesser, responsibility to account for itself.

Well, that's me.

This is a subject that Barrett deals with very well in his latest book, Truth Jihad. He lays out the problem that Chomsky-types have when they are forced to consider something that doesn't fit their standard frame. When you think that everything the leaders of the US do is corrupt, you will easily accept the story that Chomsky sells about how our leaders wouldn't do this because the terrorist have a legitimate reason for doing it. It's stupid, but since Chomsky pushes it, his acolytes fall in line.

I would love to get Chomsky alone in a room and fight this one out with him. I can't figure out, other than money, what would motivate him to keep this fraud going.

just hardcore CIONTELPRO by choice.

..."I would love to get Chomsky alone in a room and fight this one out with him. I can't figure out, other than money, what would motivate him to keep this fraud going."

.

>>I can't figure out, other than money, what would motivate him to keep this fraud going.<<

When last I emailed him and he responded, amoung other things with something like, "well if you've read my books you know what I think is going on," (very rough paraphrase) an idea occured to me: what if he's talking in code? They've threatened his family or something and he's trying to send out a message by saying the maddest things a person like him should know better about? And that's like the signal, completely contradicting himself? And what he's really saying is: You have to stop them before it's too late!

Okay, that's probably an optimistic fantasy--blame it on too many "Doctor Who" episodes. But the brain does reach to explain the unexplainable.

If that were true, he is doing a really bad job at signaling his devotees his true viewpoint on the subject.

A man with such mastery of the language should be able to signal his followers to break from his lead and follow a different path. 

>If that were true, he is doing a really bad job at signaling his devotees his true viewpoint on the subject.<

LOL! Yes, you are probably right--I tell you, it's the "Doctor Who" episodes! Real life does tend to be less complicated.

Especially since he has spoken about how when people use the term "conspiracy theory" they are trying to cover something up, and prevent you from researching it more. Yet he has summed up alternate 9/11 theories as merely "a conspiracy theory", while knowing the stigma attached to those words. Very strange.

"I will not withdraw from this war even if Laura and Barney are the only ones supporting me." -George W. Bush

And yet the idea has it's points--like this.

9/11 Commission Report?

Hello.... what columns?

Gee.... I wish they would allow the books on the construction of the WTC to be published again.... so we can see for ourselves.

Really? It's hard to get books on the WTC construction? Not that I'd be surprised--it's hard to get live footage of the attacks on line--you know, the ones where the anchor says "it was just like-just like a demolition-like when they implode buildings". Clips of the towers falling, seems to be lots of those--from very restricted angles. Nothing to see--move along...

Now I have to tease you--get registered, you trolling shill!

*wink*

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aZS5a7je5Vs

Isn't analog film so charming?

Very interesting: the outside columns took all the wind load and SOME of the tower's load--almost the reverse of the OT.

And while I was at YouTube I took a gander at this on the side:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xhDOq305oh0&mode=related&search=

An ABC anchor states his opinion that the tower's collapse HAD to be planned.

See, before the propaganda machine got in gear, people weren't so stupid after all!