< 7 | CIA AGENT | 9 >
pg 7 NAG profile
Addendum on Loren Goldner
It is educational to identify the means by which we settled the question conclusively, whether Goldner was merely a scummy dupe or a "witting" operative. Goldner provided the conclusive evidence in a 15-page recent letter to Peter Rush. When this letter is compared with other hard evidence in Goldner's dossier, the proof that he is a witting agent is complete.
First, a give-away which would be minor by itself. Toward the bottom of one page of the typewritten-letter> Gardnervs-lakc-1"" ately blacked out about one-fifth of the--page he had^previo-usly written, using heavy brush-pen strokes, almostly completely overlapping. With bright light and a magnifying glass, we reconstructed the blacked-out section. The important thing is that there was no important reason for him to have troubled himself on this matter. However, instead of retyping the pages involved (like a good agent less lazy would have done) or even simply explaining that he had considered the arguments made foolish after re-reading them, he penned in an elaborate lie — a wholly unnecessary lie.
One knows perhaps a child who, hand caught in the cookie jar and mouth full of cookies, will swallow quickly and insist with the "sincerest" of expressions, "Oh, you shouldn't have startled me. I just caught a mouse that had run into the jar; if you hadn't come in just now, he wouldn't have gotten away." That child is Goldnerfs psychopathological cousin. Such blurtings are in themselves virtually conclusive proof that the culprit is a pathological liar. That by itself proves only that he is a pathological liar, not all of whom are witting agents. However, all agents are pathological liar s (as witness the case of Marion Kes'ter at Sunday's New York City meeting and on other occasions this has been documented.) The pathological lie pattern also goes with the paranoid-schizophrenic tendency, and indeed more or less depends upon that tendency.
The most important feature of the letter is Goldner's point of view, which on every point is that of a supporter of the Ukran-ian bandit, Makhno.. This is not surprisingf of course, in the light of his initial and continuing"identification with tHe" "Situationists," and his collaboration with such outright'Makhnoid fascists as the Chicago "Nightwatch" pair. He bitterly hates both the Soviet Union and Trotsky in exactly the terms all "left"-Makhnoids do.
The significance of this is that he has associated himself with a succession of professedly and actually Marxist organizations while being a fanatical Makhnoid steeped in the specific cant of the Russian language studies cults. It suffices to show that he was at least a conscious agent for the fascist variety of anarchist organizations, who penetrated each of these organizations for reasons other than any non-existent tendency for agreement with their politics. By itself, this evidence proves that he was some sort of conscious agent, if not necessarily a CIA