However, I do not think it invalidates in any way his other contributions to linguistics, political writting, activism and spreading information. They're all worthwhile activities even without immediate results. I think I understand why he takes the position he does.
From the article:
Selwyn Bromberger, an MIT philosophy professor who had sit in on the discussion, said to the author: "If they are strong enough to kill the President and strong enough to cover it up, then they are too strong to confront directly . . .
It has now become clear to me that leading progressive/left/liberal thinkers and writers like I.F. Stone, Noam Chomsky and Alexander Cockburn will only criticize the monied and powerful to the extent that they think it is safe for them to do.
I would also hesitate to put my life on the line to prove something most people already suspect.
