Podcast: Play in new window | Download | Embed
Welcome back to New World Next Week – the video series from Corbett Report and Media Monarchy that covers some of the most important developments in open source intelligence news. This week:
Story #1: It’s a “Massacre”: World Decries High Death Toll In Gaza Protests
https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/.premium-it-s-a-massacre-world-decries-high-death-toll-in-gaza-protests-1.6091448
Wikipedia: United States Recognition Of Jerusalem As Capital Of Israel
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_recognition_of_Jerusalem_as_capital_of_Israel
Gaza Massacre Film Earns Rave Reviews at Cannes
https://www.yahoo.com/news/gaza-massacre-film-earns-rave-reviews-cannes-131155329.html
Story #2: Are We Living In The 50-Year Rage Cycle?
http://archive.is/phUVn
Wikipedia: Cliodynamics
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cliodynamics
Wikipedia: Kondratiev Wave
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kondratiev_wave
The Purge: Election Year – FLNWO #38
http://mediamonarchy.com/2016/11/flnwo-purge-video/
Story #3: EFF Wins Flawless Victory Over Podcasting Patent Troll
https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2018/05/eff-wins-final-victory-over-podcasting-patent
The Idealist: Aaron Swartz and the Rise of Free Culture on the Internet
https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/23492684-the-idealist
U.S. Media Whitewashes Gaza Massacre
https://consortiumnews.com/2018/05/14/u-s-media-whitewashes-gaza-massacre/
US Blocks UN Probe Into Gaza Deaths
https://news.antiwar.com/2018/05/15/us-blocks-un-probe-into-gaza-deaths/
Seven Palestinian journalists injured as Gaza protests continue
https://cpj.org/2018/04/seven-palestinian-journalists-injured-as-gaza-prot.php
Kinsella on Liberty
http://www.stephankinsella.com/kinsella-on-liberty-podcast/
You can help support our independent and non-commercial work by visiting http://CorbettReport.com/Support & http://MediaMonarchy.com/Support. Thank You.
Great to see you two back at it, your show was missed, and your clarity of thought and open-mindedness, even more so.
Has anyone checked to comments on the yahoo article about the Gaza massacre film? Quite an incredible landslide, from which I have to deduce that yahoo news is quite popular among the Zionist crowd or has a very docile editor.
During the last 70 years, we have experienced more changes than in all of our previous histories combined. There is not a single aspect of our lives that has not been affected by the technological,which is a whole lot more than just smartphones, evolutions which just keep crashing on us. We also have access to more information, good information, than at any other time in our history. We have changes that would have shocked Jules Verne.
Of course, we also have these changes mixed in with the rotten carcasses of our infrastructures. I’m assuming the US isn’t the only one whose infrastructure is less than ideal. In short, our system is in a state of change. The whole Thermodynamic Law thing. All of our systems, technical, cultural, everythingal; are unable to handle the complexities of our present needs. In a sense, this pattern of rage coincides to the regular rhythms of rage; but these last 50 years have seen the bulk of these changes. So this change is going to be huge.
In most of the books that hijack the Laws of Thermodynamics to illustrate whatever personal growth option they are promoting; they call this period the stage right before you experience a paradigm shift and reach this next new awesome stage of nirvanna for only 9.99 plus shipping and handling! It’s true enough, but they do slick it up a bit before they put it on the shelf for you.
In general, for those who have used this hijacking for their meditation; the illustration is true enough. And if it is a good course, they will let you in that the period of transition from the collapse of the present system to the next has a lot to do with the emotions you bring into it. Fear/hope/whatever. I’m bringing a bowl. JimBob who ain’t scared of no shifty paradigms.
I feel like I’m missing something in this odd exchange/challenge started by Gaslight. Pretty sure Manbearpig is speaking coherently and consistently as she has during the two or so years I’ve been reading here. Or is it just me? (Wouldn’t be the first time…)
Pearl,
Gaslight is here to bless us with his sage knowledge and enlightenment that we all are dying to hear, of course.
I just read all this myself, and it looks like they are arguing for different things. While I agree it’s good to keep informed about current shenanigans around the world; there isn’t a whole lot I can really do about poor Wi Pup being falsely imprisoned in Bangkok for stealing a rice ball. While the community can certainly help in resolving the details of those events; it’s not the limit of what we can do.
I know James has been wanting to do more solutions oriented work; I think that gaslight just wants to get started on it. At least here, it would be an area in which we could be sure of why we are doing it and why. And who wouldn’t want to be part of a solutions orientated thread? Unless your the kind of person who likes to murder puppies. That’s about it. JimBob who is sure he’s right on that though he did no research at all on any of this.
Copyright is a fallacious idea. At it’s best the notion of ownership is really just a superficial reason to take care of things. The resonance of that consideration has stuck with me for almost half my life. I can’t unsee it. I am interested to hear debates by Kinsella.
Thank you JamesC and JamesP for another great broadcast and sharing awareness at that level.
As someone who is about to dive into the patent process, I disagree. I wouldn’t do what I am about to do if I didn’t have the protection I will need in order to recoup my investment. An investment in an idea that would not have existed had I not invented it. Yet, the anti crowd in the patent/copyright protection thing always claim the creation is not the property of the creator.
I agree the systems are flawed, but providing a safe nursery for new ideas to bloom is a necessity. But does anybody ever see any middle ground? No, it’s always just ban this or free that. JimBob who likes just going off on an old man rant being as his is one and all.
Santa,
Excellent points about the validity of protections afforded through patent/copyright law. Certainly, for the individual. As you intimate, if the cost involved with the development of your idea was not potentially protected through patent law, what then?
How easy, then, for the unscrupulous, with better means and deeper pockets, to run with your idea, develop/copy it, produce it, market it, corner it. Will they, through the goodness of their hearts, offer you anything for it, or a price relative to its value?
Good luck with that.
However, as I understand it, I absolutely see the beauty of James’ vision of information and ideas freely flowing, owned by none and accessed by all. What I don’t understand is how that vision in its pure form could possibly materialize without comprehensive revisions of existing laws and regulations effecting property rights, intellectual rights, corporate law, as well as the definition and scope of ownership, itself.
Though, must one really wonder on balance, who benefits economically from existing patent laws? Except for a minority of independent, talented, savvy, and perhaps even lucky inventors, it’s fairly obvious as a whole who benefits from tying up the rights, control and ownership of a multitude of products vis-à-vis patent laws.
In essence, it would seem that patent laws ultimately help in the consolidation of power and wealth into the hands of those best able to monetize(capitalize)the utility of exclusiveness that patents afford, while these same entities, colluding with legislators, help marginalize, even criminalize, that which isn’t as yet patentable…like, for instance, weeds.
But, there definitely can and should be a middle ground, especially with regard to intellectual rights when it effects the public domain, and essentially when it resides within the public domain, including intellectual property rights of public, as well as private universities. Here we are talking about the use verses the ownership of knowledge. Even if such knowledge is privately archived, is there nothing owed to society, such as simply providing public access to it?
In a similar vein, existing laws allowing for what amounted to a legal persecution of Aaron Swartz was nothing less than a travesty. When an individual rocks the draconian state, as we all know, bad things happen.
On another note, a fascinating note, a most amazing and utterly surprising biography came out in the form of a movie recently, featuring a scientific inventor whose identity, had it been left a mystery, would never have been guessed in a thousand million years! At least not by me.
Here’s a link to a short biography, but, the movie is a must see. It is definitely a “Bombshell”! I’ll link that, too.
http://www.women-inventors.com/Hedy-Lammar.asp
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt6752848/
One last note: This does not constitute a rant, but age? It is only a number. And nothing more!!!
It’s true ideas can be held up with the patent system. There are even the classification laws which cover things as interesting as solar panels that are TOO efficient. Yeah, Jon Rappaport had an interesting article on that one. And that is just one. But overall, most businesses are honest. Most of the dis-honesty which taints the entire system is done by a minority of the business population. Even in corporate, there are a plethora (Three Amigos Rule!) of people who haven’t been turned into complete Borg drones.
It needs a lot of work in all of the areas. But I think to eliminate these protections would undermine liberty by discouraging people from creating for their own reasons. Maybe I don’t care to benefit everyone in the world. Who I want to benefit is my right to decide. And as long as the good outweighs the bad of that decision in regard to harming others, I’ll probably do as I please. As usual. I see more harm come from idealism than I ever saw from people just being their normal selfish/compassionate selves. We need the inequality to have liberty. So, I don’t worry about the joys of spreading ideas for free around the globe. I’ve my own agendas to pursue with the profits I earn. Just like everybody else. And this is how I intend to pursue them.
So, my motive is strictly selfish in an Ayn Rand fashion, even though I don’t really agree with her on that philosophy. Common Law principles would do a fine job of revising the laws in my opinion. Which probably don’t amount to nearly as much as I think it does, which ain’t much. But it’s a motive I’m comfortable with.
By the way, haven’t clicked on that link yet, but Hedy rocked! Hard to believe anyone could be smarter than she is beautiful. But she managed it with style. However, age does matter. I remember my college days and now I laugh when I go by the college in Gainesville, Fl. They used to look so sexy when I went and now they all look like children. I don’t know what’s happened to these colleges but that is a crime to me! 🙂 Oh well, it’s Sunday and today I’ve decided to practice Rastafarian. Early worship on the Sabbath! JimBob who is now hungry for some reason.
Guardian article. They covered so many aspects, went around and back…is it possible they omit something important? Yes, they did. I will cover this later.
There was a thinker who talked about cycles and their inevitability before Kondratiev, but I won’t mention his name. At this point I will be like Guardian.
We shouldn’t be surprised with emotionally loaded outbursts. Barneys and the ilk successfully manufactured people that would be probably described by Freud like: Super-Id, Ego Consumerus, (Super Ego terminally sick), the kind of people nowadays system needs.
But just bashing emotions as responsible for obliterating critical thinking is just completely wrong. Decision making is not possible without involvement of emotions and that is proved in neuroscience.
Following Guardian’s mental acrobatic is excellent: Elite Overproduction
“elite overproduction”, for example; as a consequence of inequality, there are periods in history when there are too many extremely rich people for the positions of power that extremely rich people typically occupy. This results in them going rogue and buying themselves into power by hosing money at elections.”
What a bullshit.
For Guardian, there is absolutely no problem because of billions of poor.
Regarding the topic of article Guardian should have mentioned a game called Ultimatum Game.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ultimatum_game
“One player, the proposer, is endowed with a sum of money. They are tasked with splitting it with another player, the responder. Once the proposer communicates their decision, the responder may accept it or reject it. If the responder accepts, the money is split per the proposal; if the responder rejects, both players receive nothing.”
It has been found that if proposer splits 70% for him, the proposition is normally rejected, although this is irrational because no one gets anything. Also, with fMRI they noticed strong emotional reaction (disgust) respondents had in this situations. Looks like we are wired for fairness.
I see many similarities between Ultimatum Game and Real Life.
Is it possible that after a while people loaded with negative emotions just can’t accept usual “that’s how things are in the world” and everything ends up in rage?
Even if all the preceding statements you made before your last paragraph were wrong; it would still be the right answer. But it doesn’t have to end up in rage. Rage is blind and self-destructive. In the final analysis, all of us are guilty of participating in this social construct. While maybe we oughta let V get a couple of them; I’d say the French Revolution looks pretty tame compared to what we are capable of doing nowadays. JimBob who might go swamping for a bit if people started breaking out them guillotines.
“Even if all the preceding statements you made before your last paragraph were wrong”
What are you pimping here??!!
Sure, it doesn’t have to end up in rage but we shouldn’t be surprised if it does.
“In the final analysis, all of us are guilty of participating in this social construct.”
I don’t consider myself guilty of still participating to some extent in this system .
Thank you for giving me opportunity to analyze this misapprehension that usually goes something like:
People have ability to choose, therefore they have responsibility for choice and they might be guilty because of choice and maybe also punished at the end. What has been said is Truth, whole Truth and nothing but the Truth. Really????
Can people be hold responsible and maybe guilty because of things they were not aware of, things they didn’t comprehend?
What about Oedipus who unknowingly killed his father and marry his mother?
Punishment of people that were not aware of their crime is The Ultimate Cruelty.
For the end I would like to express one thought with help of Set Theory from mathematics: Understanding is a subset of Awareness set.
Well, I was trying to be nice. Still trying. What was I pimping? Nothing. I was noting the last statement didn’t need to have your preceding statements to be true to validate it. There are a gazillion paths to people being fed up. And I wonder why you just shrug off any reaction other than rage as an acceptable attitude. It is but one reaction. It is your choice to be in whatever emotional state you are in. After all, those who cannot control (or I’d go further to say create) their emotions are ruled by them. The emotion you choose is going to have an impact on the experience you are undertaking. It’s going to affect your decisions and so on. But you decide to just poo-poo it away and spend all your time mangling my comments into mush. By the way, you are a part of all of this. You are guilty of being gullible and of sustaining this system. We all are. We have given it so much more power just by naming it. It just solidifies it further in our minds that the system is real. It’s not. I choose to not address the rest of your comment because I couldn’t really make any sense of it. JimBob who apparently ain’t very good at agreeing with people.
“Well, I was trying to be nice. Still trying.”
“…spend all your time mangling my comments into mush. By the way, you are a part of all of this. You are guilty of being gullible and of sustaining this system.”
I miss some consistency.
“And I wonder why you just shrug off any reaction other than rage as an acceptable attitude.”
I never said nor imply it is acceptable. You are not nice, you are deceptive.
“It is your choice to be in whatever emotional state you are in. After all, those who cannot control (or I’d go further to say create) their emotions are ruled by them.”
You really don’t know much about emotions, that is obvious. Ask someone for literature if you really want to discuss these matters outside the bar.
“I choose to not address the rest of your comment because I couldn’t really make any sense of it.”
I’m not surprised. I think you are “choice theory” believer (lots of people are). Are you having a problem with cognitive dissonance? Just a little bit, maybe? I’ve noticed some anger at the end. Quite a lot of inconsistency also.
James made an excellent video about CD, you should check.
First of all, you are projecting your emotions into my words. Which falls under the heading of your problem. There’s no lack of consistency either. I didn’t say I was going to try real hard. After all, in the comment I was responding to, you had just mangled my comments together in a manner to suit your own personal bias in order to attack me for complimenting your previous statement. You are not sensing anger from my comments. You are sensing it from yourself. Maybe if you read my words with a FogHorn Leghorn voice you might be able to figure it out. JimBob who also chuckles on occasion.
hahahahahaha
“…..you are projecting your emotions…”
Now you try with persuasion that you know something about “shrink stuff” although it is obvious from your previous post that you don’t know much. That might pass with 70% of Facebook users.
Your inconsistency won’t go away with your claim of opposite.
Anyone can check if I was malicious when I was “mangling your comments”.
You are becoming increasingly more pathetic. By now it is very obvious who you really are.
TO CORBETT REPORT COMMUNITY
I will use this thread to show others who ‘I Shot Santa’ really is.
You have successfully dig your own hole.
I think that you’re insane, but that’s just my opinion. Nor do I really care about your delusions. We will simply not converse anymore. JimBob who does find crazy people amusing, but that don’t mean he’s gonna dig into their thoughts.
And remember in that wonderful documentary that Adam Curtis did for the BBC on game theory where the only person who wanted to make the profile fit someone other than a paranoid schizophrenic was a recovered paranoid schizophrenic. Of course, all of their systems turn out to be a lie anyway. Spin, spin, spin. That facial recognition net? Works as good as that magic spray they use in CSI. Which it doesn’t in real life. Yes, we have many ways to kill you; just trust us on that. JimBob who don’t think the new skynet is going to cause us to endure any more terminator movies.
Santa,
With no idea what you guys are actually discussing, skimming over comments quickly, I had this question b/c it caught my eye:
Is there such a one as a recovered paranoid schizophrenic?
After years of thorazine, et al, what are they(recovered to), then?
Just saying.
I choose to not look into that one out of fear of what I’ll find. I will say though that when the guy who they say is recovered was talking about the seriousness of his program; he did seem panicky enough in all the right places. But maybe I’m using his program. Noooooooooooo! JimBob who also generally has no idea of what he is discussing.
A big LLOLLOOLOL from the but maybe I’m using his program. Nooooooooooo!
Funny!
Just because they’ve chosen to invest themselves in a lie doesn’t make it true. I’m not sure, but I believe I have heard that Cambridge Analytica may have over-stated their capabilities.
While I enjoyed most of my professors, and even thought about being one (for about 10 secs.), I can’t help but laugh a bit whenever someone says the word prestigious in the same sentence as university. Academia is the kingdom of the most petty Machiavellian shenanigans! Those Ivy leaves cover enough childish political wrangling to make a Game of Thrones fan go “No Way! That’s just too over the top!” I know your in academia, so I figure you get to see this daily.
But if you think about it, how many people ever really bother looking at the system they choose to believe in? We make people appear superior because of some position they hold. But how true is that thinking? In a meritocracy, there would be a lot of validity to this mindset. Of course, in a meritocracy one would have to continue to merit the position after they sat in that particular throne of power. But we don’t live in a meritocracy in our “public” institutions. Which makes them all a little less prestigious to me. JimBob who didn’t become a professor, but wouldn’t have been very prestigious anyway if he had become one.
NYT Columnist Blames Palestinians For Being Shot
https://youtu.be/pJQu7uUmO-U?t=12m11s
I linked to a particularly interesting moment when the camera shows the MSNBC newscaster’s face as she was saying “… and the whitehouse today, their response to that was, it is hamases fault and they are using them as … as tools for propaganda.”
Looks like a bit of an internal conflict to me. I’m sure her conscience will be subdued momentarily.
Thanks. I hit that link and then went back to the beginning of the video. While I agree with your reaction on hers, the rant he unleashed on the NYT guy sort of hit a false chord with me. I had the feeling he was taking that guys statement out of context. The guy was actually telling the opinion the general public had been fed. He was telling the truth. I quit watching after that to type this, but I probably won’t watch the rest. I don’t really watch his show, but I’ve seen a number and have like it in the past, just that one segment hit me wrong. After SE, I thought I should let you know about it.
I don’t know much about Jimmy, other than I’ve seen him listed as a far-left fake news site, but he seems pretty non-political in the ones I’ve seen. More corruption orientated, than party orientated from what I’ve noted. I like the ones I’ve seen, and only this one segment hit me wrong, which means it’s probably a screw up. Or I’m wrong. JimBob who just throws it on out there and see what sticks after it runs through that fan.
I’m not sure to which segment you are referring, that which was taken out of context. I don’t know this guy Friedman but based on the 2003 video he does look like an asshole
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZwFaSpca_3Q
Dore is OK, but he does extend his platform to various politicians, I usually skip those videos. He does look like someone who may garner more popularity with the “normies” and he has dug up some nice videos, he apparently spends quite a lot of time following mainstream media.
In that segment, which is the one I was referring to, he isn’t describing whether the war was worth it; he was describing the state of regional perspectives. Not his perspective, but those imaginary public perspectives. As such, what he was saying was true in a lot of people’s minds and that is the message he was conveying. Not that it was worth it, but what was the group mind-set that brought it. JimBob who probably made that a whole lot more confusing that it need be, but that’s not really his problem so he’s okay with it. 🙂
From this segmennt what you state here does not follow? Is there a larger segment which puts things into the proper conext?
I have no idea as this was my first time seeing it. I haven’t reviewed it since, but I might look at it again later on. But I felt he was describing what we did and why we did it; and I felt he didn’t answer whether he thought it was good or bad. I suspect he felt it was just news. I’m not saying I’m right, but I’ve got my third eye on as much as I can nowadays. But, I do like his show, people can learn how to be aware by watching media like that. That’s going to be a useful trick no matter what future we bring about. JimBob who thinks old age is great for keeping you from worrying about the future by bringing it straight into your present.
mkey
I had been wondering if there was a way to link to a youtube video at a specific time. So, once again, like learning about using the bracket tags for italics and bold lettering, you’ve now, albeit, unbeknownst, addressed this issue for me as well. Thanks!
I like Jimmy Dore. He’s never expressed anything that I can recall that I wasn’t in agreement with. At least that’s my take away, thinking of him. Although I don’t necessarily think to seek him out, whenever I’ve come across him, he always seems to make a lot of sense, including what he’s expressing on the program you’ve linked.
His take down of Thomas Friedman is spot on. I get the New York Times, and have realized for many years that what this editorial windbag represents is nothing other than a neocon friendly shill for Zionist hegemony.
The clip that Dore highlighted depicts an even more reprehensible scumbag of a fatally twisted ideologue than I had heretofore imagined.
mkey
I just read your post above. I don’t know the make-up of Dore’s audience, whether they would generally conform to the notion of being “normies”, or not. He certainly tends to set the record straight in terms of the drivel one hears from MSM. So, if he is appealing to normies, then that’s great, because he’s imparting an excellent lesson in critical thinking that they’re not about to get anytime soon from your typical brainwashing MSM channel.
More power to Jimmy Dore!
He is doing good work. I based my normies hypothesis on that he may attract some MSM viewers due to how he pays much attention to it, so if a normie would look for sometheing they saw on MSM.
He also keeps his commentary relatively simple, repeats a lot so it has some skull penetration potential.
I noticed some of that. He’s almost giving a class in how to pay attention. People swallow that up when they get a dose of that. But you generally have to sneak up on them first. But thinking is the first step to freedom. JimBob who has also noted that sometimes thinking can be the first step to the end of freedom as well; so better choose wisely grasshopper.
Well, that’s just the thing with Dore. As mkey aptly mentioned, Dore keeps it fairly simple, and therefore doesn’t hit you over the head with anything that would be hard to swallow, especially if you’re used to a mainstream diet. And, he really does do a good job breaking it down, without getting too far into more nebulous wheres and whys of conspiracy theory. I think you’re right – it is like he’s holding a class: Critical Mainstream Media Analysis 101.
You have a sharing button on youtube, below the video, on the right side.
https://i.imgur.com/9Oclbnz.png
That was cool.
So cool!
First of all, I am NOT pro-Zionist. Now we have that out of the way, I must say your interpretation of the “Gaza massacre” is as biased as I have ever known both of the James’s to be.
No mention of these points:
1. 50 of the Palestinian “innocents’ were adult male known members of Hamas.
https://the-eyeontheworld.blogspot.com.au/2018/05/gaza-hamas-admit-that-50-of-62-people.html
2. The use of hand grenades, kites with Molotov “cocktails” and the blatantly obvious line of burning tyres to conceal ‘enemy action’.
https://legalinsurrection.com/2018/04/photo-gaza-protesters-loft-molotov-cocktail-on-swastika-kite-over-israeli-border/
Very disappointing review Mr’s Corbett & Pilato.
Better luck next time.
The “eye of the world” website looks as objective as they get. Information provided therein must be solid and thustworthy.
thoth52
In the eye on the world interview, Salah Al-Bardawil made no mention of the ages of any of the victims, either from Hamas or the others. Perhaps, if there were children killed (I’m not sure how anyone is defining children. Does such a description include teenagers?), maybe he’s attempting to deflect any ridicule, or maybe not. In any event, contrary to the headline above the video, Salah Al-Bardawil did not describe the members of Hamas who were killed as “gunmen”. That is imagery the website is ascribing, as if to be member of Hamas means you have to, by rights, be toting a gun. I didn’t notice any guns in any of the photographs, did you? However, what Salah Al-Bardawil did say was that all of the people killed were martyrs. To the Palestinian psyche, martyrdom has no age limits.
At legal insurrection, they take issue with the protesters burning a pile tires to create a smoke screen.
Well, I’m sorry, man, but if I were among those who gathered at the border to protest and hurl stones, I’d keep that baby burning, too, if it meant not getting picked off by sniper fire so easily.
And the swastika on the kite? Perhaps they were trying to tell the Israeli soldiers what they think of them, i.e., that the Israelis are acting like Nazis. Is that so difficult to imagine, from people living in an open air concentration camp?
When this rabble group of Palestinian protesters start shaving their heads, saluting Heil Hitler, and wearing swastika armbands, okay, then I’ll believe they’re but a bunch of neo-Nazis.
By the way, just to get this conclusion out of the way, those two websites couldn’t express more right-wing, hardcore Zionist bias if they tried.
I’m just gratified to know, as you stated, they don’t equate with your thought processes.
It’s very good he mentioned he’s not pro Zionist, because it certainly wouldn’t follow. We do, however, now have a quandary of sizeable proportions here: why would a non pro Zionist refer to a far right Zionist-as-can-be site?
On second look, if we take what he wrote i.e. “NOT pro-Zionist” and add an “a” we get “NOT a pro-Zionist” in which case “pro” would not stand for “for” but as a shorthand for “professional” in which case the whole thing makes a bit more sense.
It doesn’t necessarily follow, does it – far-right Zionist websites appealing to someone with a non Zionist mind-set.
Although, any individual can certainly be leaning (read biased) on any given particular axis, and be argumentatively persuaded to see events in a much further biased light provided that it remains compatible with their thoughts, ideas and emotions, especially, however inaccurate and skewed such arguments may be.
I can easily see someone who champions Israel, and yet is not a Zionist, be persuaded by Zionist viewpoints.
Unfortunately, there’s no getting around the emotionally charged conundrum which is the Palestinian/Israeli conflict.
In the novel My Promised Land, by Ari Shavit, who is an Israeli born Jew, he states that the mass expulsion of the Palestinians, along with the destruction of their many towns and villages, constitutes an unspoken truth among all Israelis, with all being historically aware of such facts surrounding the statehood of Israel.
This historical reality will forever remain the central and primary pivot about which the psyche of both the Palestinian and the Israeli turn. And, it is this very reality that is at once being fiercely voiced, as it is a truth that has been psychologically and systematically buried and suppressed.
While I don’t think it applies in this particular case, though I am no authority on much of anything, it’s a good idea to become familiar with those type of articles. They tell their strategies in them if you read them correctly. Most of these kind of sites are actually (not any specific ideology here, just extreme views) run by some pretty pathetic individuals; but still, it gives you a feel for the battleground. JimBob who thinks that it would have been great had any of his exalted leaders ever visited them dang battlefields themselves before they became evidence for war crimes.
santa
I believe something did get screwed up in two of your above posts with regard to the Charlie Rose interview, and basically for the same reasons.
First of all, I came to the conclusion that none of Dore’s clips took this guy’s message out of context, whatsoever. As far as I’m concerned, you, or anybody, can take Friedman’s 3 minute block of diatribe, chop and toss it like a salad, and still nothing of it would be taken out of context, or be misconstrued. Try it, and see for yourself. I’d like to get a transcript of it, myself, and mess around with it. I think you can cut it, chop it, mix it, and it will sound the same each time. But, in any event, I really do think you’re giving Dore a bum wrap claiming he was taking Friedman’s words out of context. I don’t see that at all.
But, I think I know why you probably do. And that’s because you’ve taken the entire interview out of context.
Like completely. lol
First of all, Rose didn’t ask Friedman what he thought of regional perspectives, or what the general public thinks.
He asked Friedman what Friedman thinks, his personal thoughts, and very specifically, Rose asked Friedman if he thought the war, now that it was over (what a fucking joke), was worth it. To which Friedman replied in the affirmative, it was worth it. Then he goes on with his reasons why he thought it was worth it, and not anybody else’s perspective, or at least no else he’d like us to know about.
We have to remember, this is 2003, and Friedman’s answer was in fact not so much a personal perspective as it was a prepackaged narrative designed to mold perspective. After all, he spat out word for word, exactly, the precise, emotionally charged message, that the PTSB wanted the general public to feel, believe and accept as a justification for, and the worthiness of, their false flag initiated Iraqi war.
I contend that his flawlessly delivered neocon contrived answer, from top to bottom, was designed to help in supporting and shaping the mind-set of the deceived and clueless general public, rather than reflect it.
So, he wasn’t telling any truth. Hell, no. Unless you believe that he believed the Kool-Aid he was delivering, which amounted to parroting the official lie, word for word.
This really is the question we should be asking ourselves; did Friedman – a regular editorial columnist at The New York Times, who never makes any bones about demonizing Iran, then and now, actually believe the fable of the neocon zeitgeist?
I say no way. Think about it…. As a premium gatekeeper, which I believe he is, writing in the most exclusive op-ed pages in the world at least monthly, or biweekly, shilling for the Zionist government of Israel, demonizing Iran, always supportive of the neocon agenda, and in this interview with Rose, spouting verbatim rhetoric from none other than the premium edition of the neocon playbook; did he, Friedman, fall prey to the big lie? Was he really, actually entranced?
How much would you like to bet he wasn’t?
Like I said earlier, I haven’t re-checked it since then. I like to let things settle and pick some quite time for those. But they can definitely chop things up. It really all depends on if that was the question he was answering. I don’t doubt he’s not a pleasant fellow, but neither am I. JimBob who occasionally threatens to matter, but really; what’s the point?
A pilot project for a new libertarian floating city will have 300 homes, its own government, and its own cryptocurrency
http://www.businessinsider.com/floating-city-plans-seasteading-institute-peter-thiel-blue-frontiers-2017-12
I’m sure the rent will be a pittance. Note: moving to the sea to escape government by forming a new government … wait, what?
F-35 stealth fighter sees first combat, in Israeli operation
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-44210403
Not often do you hear/read Israelis state they “attacked” someone, they usually only retaliate. This one is for the posterity.
‘They deserve no mercy’: Iraq deals briskly with accused ‘women of Isis’
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/may/22/they-deserve-no-mercy-iraq-deals-briskly-with-accused-women-of-isis
How would one go about confirming anything from this article? All of this may just have happened, but the way the article is written it’s simply unbelievable.
That actually sounds completely believable to me. I was talking with someone who had been in one of the Iraq conflicts and we were swapping “you won’t believe how stupid this was” stories, and he said that when they turned over people who were suspected (over the flimsiest of reasons) to the Iraqi soldiers to take back, none of them ever made it back. They simply didn’t have time. I know, you wouldn’t believe how that solves the whole backlog situation. Don’t think it’s just because the Iraqis are inhuman, they are not. They are actually wonderful people, but they’ve been through some of the most hellish conditions imaginable for decades now. Hard times can forge the soul better than anything. JimBob who’s got a good mid-range temper on his forging, but he’s okay with that.
Dear all,
I am an Israeli Jew who has decided to add a comment to this thread.
Before I mention what I want to say, I want to be clear that I am very grateful for the alternative media and The Corbett Report. I used to believe in the official 9 11 story and now thankfully I woke up and am convinced it was a false flag event. Also, I have nothing against there being alternative view points about actions of the IDF and Zionist policy.
But…
I feel sometimes there is a kind of ”Any claim against the IDF must be right because it is different than the mainstream media” attitude, which can then lead to inaccurate reporting.
The protests were certainly not entirely peaceful ones. (Although perhaps so in part?). There were fire ignition kites being used (As someone mentioned earlier in this thread). And a further obvious point is that Israel did have cases of suicide bombers and people intentionally getting close to the security fence could be potential terrorists using ladies and children around them as human shield. In fact, to my best recollection there have been cases in the past of suicide bombers faking needing an ambulance to try to sneak into Israel.
I am not saying there is no room for discussion as to whether the IDF’s reaction was reasonable or not. But there clearly is a danger of not representing the true complexity of the situation and simply assuming the opposite of the official IDF position is true.
Hope this may spark an interesting discussion,
Doing my best to be honest and yet appreciative of the community at the same time,
Sunny (Not my really name)
Sunny,
As a fellow Corbett member, I am glad you are here. And I am glad that you presented this perspective. Thanks.
Is it or is it not OK to shoot civilians which are used as human shields? If yes, then this simple pretense can be used to bomb or shoot anyone or anything. It’s like the broad “terrorists!” blanket accusation which can justify anything.
It seems to me that in modern movies the civilian shield which blocked the person of authority from shooting is not used that often any more. Probably because it isn’t supposed to work any longer.
HomeRemedySupply and mkey thanks for the replies.
mkey I have to be honest since I read your reply, I felt that unlike other issues that I can hopefully make a quick contribution to from time to time in this community, this one is quit challenging for me to further a deep discussion into at the moment. A slightly silly complaint as I was the one opening it up…
I guess years and years of being exposed to various arguments from both sides of the conflict and my personal involvement as an Israeli in it make it a matter that needs time and energy on my behalf to first have clarity what my own current updated stances on the matter are. With a conflict I feel does have many complexities.
But I will say something regarding what you said. Not quit a counter argument. Just something I truly feel from my experience living here in Israel and as an Israeli Jew.
There is this wired feeling that things tend to go to extremes in viewpoints about the conflict. And although there are immoral Zionists, and to my shock worst of all completely immoral Zionist leaders especially given 9 11, there are actually a substantial amount of ones that do their best to fight for the existence of Israel in a decent manner also through service in the military and they really try to be decent soldiers. I do not know if they are majority percentage wise, but still they certainly seem to be around and these days too.
Actually, Victor Ostrovsky, the mossad agent who blew the whistle on mossad using a deception against Libya, to my best recollection said about how a small group of madmen have hijacked the general Israeli cause.
So honestly, I do believe a significant amount of soldiers would be asking themselves how to fight for Israel decently, and not be busy trying to figure out deceptive ways to kill for no reason. Though obviously not all of the soldiers, and not necessarily the majority of them.
If someone like that becomes a unit leader naturally that will have a very strong positive impact on the functioning of the unit.
But one could easily decide that all Zionist and IDF soldiers are part of the mad Zionist group. Which I am very doubtful is the case.
What may be making matters worse, is that the Israeli psyche is so concerned with conspiracy theories being antisemitic, that the ones here willing to work hard to fight for Israel decently but also for humanity and peace are likely to want to avoid any dealing with the matter. And also when they hear that the conspiracy researchers often say the IDF is consistently doing massacres, possible with them having been there and having tried their best not to shoot unless it seemed completely necessary, further decreases the chances of them looking into alternative news. (But I am not saying there are no unnecessary killings with false justifications happening, I presume that happens to)
And the crazy anti semitic conspiracies fear has some basis in reality as there are idiotic theories like that all Jews drink blood or wine that symbolises blood on passover (What?!)
I guess I have a kind of dream that the two groups, the decent willing Zionist and conspiracy researches would be working together rather than each thinking the other group are crazy. So far I have mainly been unsuccessful in trying to further this in Israel.
OK, I think I wrote enough for one comment. Maybe I am getting things wrong, just trying to share my impression of things. But I don’t expect anyone to necessarily agree with me. Hope the sharing was interesting.
This is a small addition to my longer last comment which is awaiting moderation. so it will not make sense before the longer comment will be available to be read as well.
Small factual addition to the last comment. Regarding the mentioning of theories that are likely untrue and for real antisemitic. Checked online and there is an interpretation that the red wine in Passover symbolises the blood of Israelis killed by Paroh. Although there always tend to be many different interpretations in the Jewish tradition and I was unaware of that one. Also this does not suggest the wine as symbolising the blood of others to be killed. I guess things can kind of become like a chinese whisper and end up in crazy theories.
Not that there aren’t silly or possibly wrong things in the Jewish tradition, but I have to say some things said are just wild unfounded theories and for some reason they tend to be prevalent among some conspiracy researches (Also like the ones that my race are aliens busy controlling the world).
How does a good guy remain a good guy in a war of aggression? Where’s the logic in that? They had good intentions? They fired less bullets than they could have? Shot less civilians then they could have?
Videos of Israelis cheering on as bombing of Gaza goes under way are plentyfull on the internet. I have a hard time visualising any sort of understanding in near future for such individuals. It’s always easiest to state “it’s just the minority” but where’s the suppporting evidence? These people come from the people and the same is true in any nation of the world.
Insisting on mixing these “crazy conspiracy theories” into the discussion holds no tenure because none of the regular commenters on this site (nor our host) give them any creedence, at least not publically.
To that effect, would Zionists (European Jews, biblical Jews and non Jews alike; “Jew” is just another label which can be easilly countered by an emotional reaction to antisemitism and public shaming) need to be aliens to have a incredibly strong influence on the world affairs? That’s just plain misdirection of the argument.
I.e. they can’t be aliens so they can’t have this influence. This is nothing but mind fog, they do not need to be aliens to have such success, all (as if that isn’t a steep requirement, I realize it is) that is required is a strong vertical generational transfer of values and wealth, something the “common man” can’t match even to a tune of 1% so each generation gets to start over to a certain extent.
hi mkey,
You are totally right about the alien conspiracy being completely unrelated to the gaza reporting. I mentioned it as something which may stop Israelis and jews from looking into conspiracy theories. In general, not to do with this site.
The Corbett Report is very good about avoiding these crazy conspiracy theories and I actually highly appreciate that.
And I also think some Zionists do have a huge power influence, and unfortunately, use it to promote evil conspiracies. But the vast majority of Zionists know nothing about it. (I did not as a young men).
Back to the IDF, to my mind a decent soldier would do their best to shoot only when they understand it as necessary to stop/prevent suicide bombings or other atrocities in Israel. That is how I understand it.
I read up about this event now, and if this reporting is true, apparently a Hamas cofounder himself admitted the description ”peaceful protests” is a deception.
https://www.timesofisrael.com/hamas-co-founder-admits-we-are-deceiving-the-public-about-peaceful-protests/
I do think it is completely fair that alternative views are available about IDF policies, and maybe there is some or much truth to them. To my mind it seems a complex situation with probably a lot that I do not know.
But soldiers firing at protests which are violent ones or violent intending (Opportunity to go near the security fence which everyone knows could be used by those willing to kill Israelis to go through)…I think the term massacre is most likely not a fair description of what happened.
And if I were a soldier who would have shot only against violence or clear potential violence of some sort in this situation, and then read The Corbett Report said a massacre occurred, possibly it would discourage me from taking other reports in the website as worth considering.
I’ll repeat once again: illegal occupation of Palestine. When people get bombed and shot at, they strike back. But in case of Israel it’s ALWAYS a retaliatory strike. Always. Just look at the death counts and you’ll get a lucid picture. Even those targetless missile strikes can’t even begin to justify the state of affair in the invaded land of Palestine.
The guy putting the boot in the face of a native is not a good guy. If the native strikes or attempts to strike back, the boot guy is still not the good guy.
Coincidently, one of my brothers (who is a minister and director of a very large northern Midwest church), called me last night. He and relatives and church members just returned from Israel after spending about 10 days over there.
One of the first things he brought up was how bad the Palestinians have it over there. He was amazed and aghast.
I was glad to hear him say it. Years ago, I had mentioned the Palestinian plight to him, but the words were like leaves blowing in the wind.
Following only “official” sources, one will fail miserably to get a decent picture about what may be going in what is left of Palestine. This fact alone shows how strong is the influence wielded by Zionists over the media.
I respect you presenting the view point and the story and you may be right (Though I have my doubts). But even if true, to my mind this does not make what seems to me to be very inaccurate reporting about the Gaza event ok. If the alternative media is there to help create something better than the main stream media, surely an effort should be made to be as accurate as possible?
My current feeling is that the history of the conflict is full of deceptions from the Zionist leaders, some other lesser Zionists AND ALSO the Palestinian leaders and other Arab/Muslims.
So just believing any Palestinian claim might also be missing reality.
Some claim the Palestinians are suffering because of deceptions by their own leaders. This is probably an over simplification but there may be some truth to it. Here is one Palestinian former Hamas member claiming this is the case, just picked this of the web now:
http://www1.cbn.com/cbnnews/israel/2017/september/must-see-un-stunned-as-ex-hamas-member-blasts-palestinian-authority-not-israel
He may be wrong, he may have believed fake propaganda, but he may be right too.
Here is a quote from Hamas: ”We love death like our enemies love life”
https://unitedwithisrael.org/hamas-we-love-death-like-israelis-love-life/
As an Israeli I do ask myself, are these reasonable people to try and talk with? Should be really be busy making sure the number of deaths is even with enemies that don’t mind dying? That even LOVE dying.
I do not feel it is immediately fair to decide that ALL Zionists are bad and Palestinians ARE ALL decent and good just because of the state they are in and there being more from their side dying.
But I do want to overthrow the current Zionist leaders, and have decent honest ones instead. And I am pretty sure there is right and wrong done by people from BOTH sides of the conflict.
Yes, Hamas members (whom may just as well be controlled opposition) just adore death but in the meantime in the real world they are not very proficient at it:
Almost 9 to 1
https://israelpalestinetimeline.org/charts/
Same here
https://ifamericaknew.org/stat/deaths.html
15.8 to 1
https://www.countthekids.org/
Nowhere have I claimed Plaestinians can’t do wrong or that Israelis can’t do good, haven’t even implied it nor do I think along those lines. There are the oppressors and the oppressed. There are those who initiate violence and those who are backed up in a corner.
If Israelis would pack up, disassemble the nukes and leave Palestinian territory and THEN get attacked by Hamas I would of course hold the position that Hamas is obviously in the wrong and that they should back off.
I understand what you are saying.
Thanks for adding your perspectives.
Thanks for making me revisit that video. The song is like a bandage for the soul.
Bump
”In other words, Hamas was fulfilling the functions for which it was originally created: to prevent the creation of a Palestinian State. And in this regard, Hamas and Ariel Sharon, see eye to eye; they are exactly on the same wave length…”
I think that likely to be at least in part true.
However the vast majority of Zionists and Israelis I presume wont. Guess they will at most believe something like this, if at all they will become aware of the issue:
“When I look back at the chain of events, I think we made a mistake,” David Hacham, a former Arab affairs expert in the Israeli military who was based in Gaza in the 1980s, later remarked. “But at the time, nobody thought about the possible results.”
https://theintercept.com/2018/02/19/hamas-israel-palestine-conflict/
And the reality does remain that the enemy does exist for us Israeli citizens. I am hopeful for the bigger picture becoming known.
In addition, as I have suggested before, I do not think this means inaccurate reporting on current events is therefore OK. If the aim of the alternative media is to help give accurate news, maybe it should work hard to come close to the aim at all reports done?
Writing PLO deception in google, knowing that the PLO existed before hamas, I came across a claim for PLO connections with the KGB. Obviously this can not be the full picture, but do you think there may be some truth to it?
https://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4874089,00.html
I never heard about this before. And I only read the title and the beginning of the article. I am sharing it with the question, are there perhaps more complexities than the ones generally known and discussed in the alternative news?
Even if yes, to me it does not change the point of needing to overthrow the current Zionist leadership though.
Also as an Israeli a claim I sometimes heard is that there are have been so many atrocities done by arab leaders toward Palestinians which are ignored.
Again, presenting this as another possible complexity in the history of the conflict. Which I tend to think is more complex than what is present in both mainstream and alternative media. Although at least the alternative media include conspiracy research which seems vital to know the bigger picture. That is why I follow sites like The Corbett Report and try to pass on that which I find to be quality investigative journalism from it.
Also in this case, I have only read a bit of the article:
https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/4615/jordan-palestinians
Here is a quote from it:
”The mistreatment of Palestinians at the hands of their Arab brothers is an issue that is rarely mentioned in the mainstream media in the West. Most journalists prefer to look the other way when a story lacks an anti-Israel perspective.”
Sorry for so many comments, but this addition felt very necessary:
Just to be clear I don’t mind there being an anti IDF journalism report. If it is backed by evidence and done with thorough research, I think it is good that it will be available and maybe I can learn from it.
Saying that the protests were peaceful, and saying that necessarily all shootings were a massacre, to my mind seems to be based on shallow research, and is simply inaccurate. Possibly very inaccurate.
I am glad that you comment Sunny.
It helps to add balance to perspectives.
And you have very good manners with your comments.
”I am glad that you comment Sunny.
It helps to add balance to perspectives.
And you have very good manners with your comments.”
Thanks HomeRemedySupply!