Interview 1666 – James Corbett on Research, China and the Media

by | Oct 10, 2021 | Interviews | 56 comments

via The Unregistered Podcast: The dean of independent investigative journalism, James Corbett of the Corbett Report, returned to the show to talk about the alliances between western elites and the Chinese Communist Party, and his upcoming course at Renegade University on the history of the mass media.


The Unregistered Podcast

James Corbett teaches “Mass Media: A History” for Renegade University (Corbett Report subscribers: please see the latest newsletter for a discount on this course)

Really Simple Syndication – #SolutionsWatch

How to Access the Library of Alexandria – #SolutionsWatch ( books)

Research Resources You Should Know About – #SolutionsWatch (Television news archive)

History Commons 9/11 Timeline

The WWI Conspiracy

How to Play 3D Chess

China and the New World Order

AIG Exposed

The Secret (Insurance) Agent Men

Henry Kissinger’s Secret Trip to China

Bloomberg Report – Heirs of Mao’s Comrades Rise as New Capitalist Nobility

Zhou Enlai on the Effects of the French Revolution: “Too Early to Say.”

History Is Written By The Winners

Wall Street and the Bolshevik Revolution

Towards Capitalist Restoration

Echoes of WWI: China, the US, and the Next “Great” War

China’s Suspiciously American Arsenal: A Closer Look

Report: Israel Passes U.S. Military Technology to China

Bloomberg News Killed Investigation, Fired Reporter, Then Sought To Silence His Wife

An Aristocracy of Critics


  1. Very interesting discussion.


    A name that sprang to mind as I was listening was Jardine Matheson:

    A common denominator between US, Israel, Britain and China is, of course, the Rothschilds.

    In answer to the question of the interviewer “Why China?” I would’ve evoked a continuation of the Opium Wars, with visions of the Sacking of the Summer Palace floating before my eyes…
    The humiliation and taming of the Dragon by the British Empire…

    China’s a founding member of the UN and a member of the Bank for International Settlements (though I can’t seem to easily find when exactly they were integrated).

    • This is all I could find about China’s integration into BIS:

      BIS Representative Office for Asia and the Pacific

      The BIS established its Representative Office for Asia and the Pacific (Asian Office) in Hong Kong SAR in July 1998.

    • Excerpt from corporate controlled wikipedia page on James Matheson:

      Jardine wanted the opium trade to expand in China and despatched Matheson to England to lobby the Government to press the Qing government to further open up trade. Matheson’s mission proved unsuccessful and he was rebuked by the then British Foreign Secretary the Duke of Wellington. In a report, Matheson complained to Jardine over being insulted by an “arrogant and stupid man”. Matheson expressed his views plainly, contemporaneously describing, “… the Chinese [as] a people characterised by a marvelous degree of imbecility, avarice, conceit and obstinacy…”[10]

      Matheson returned to Asia in 1838 and the following year Jardine left for England to continue lobbying.[7]

      Jardine’s lobbying efforts proved more effective than his partner’s and he succeeded in persuading the new British Foreign Secretary Lord Palmerston to wage war on Qing China. The subsequent First Opium War led to the Treaty of Nanking which allowed Jardine Matheson to expand from Canton to Hong Kong and Mainland China…

    • The first sentence of the now paywalled Financial Times article I’d posted above:

      “…When Rothschild appointed Jardine, Matheson & Co to act as its agent in China in 1838, the venerable banking group was relying on one of the few British firms with its roots in Asia to act as its…”
      This purchase rekindled a relationship between the two British family firms dating back to 1838, when Rothschild appointed Jardine, Matheson & Co. to act as its agent in China…

      Wiki reports that 11 years earlier:

      The Canton Register was an English language newspaper founded by Scottish merchants James Matheson and his nephew Alexander together with Philadelphian William Wightman Wood, the first editor. First published in Canton on 8 November 1827 and printed every two weeks, it was one of China’s first English-language newspapers.[1]

      Seems that inscrupulous opium dealers have always known the importance of media for business, as indicated in this excerpt of an entire whitewashing document about the company:

      James Matheson
      A more volatile temperament than
      his partner and enthusiastic about
      new ideas. A keen reader (he
      bought Morrison’s Grammer of the
      Chinese Language and his Chinese
      dictionary), and founded the first
      English-language newssheet in
      China – the Canton Register…

      During the mid 1800s, tea, silks, cotton and opium were traded
      through different firms along the vast trade routes between
      China, India and Britain on sailing vessels and later steam
      ships. The times were tough and the competition was fierce.
      The huge East India Company had held a powerful monopoly
      on trade between England and the Far East until 1834, but even
      after the British government moved to end it, market conditions
      remained challenging with large numbers of private traders vying
      for business.
      Yet William Jardine and James Matheson, being astute
      businessmen, were able to stay well ahead of their rivals.
      As James Matheson wrote in a letter in 1832:
      “We can often see further and sooner than others in business…”…

      …After the ending of the East India Company’s monopoly, the
      Firm also moved quickly to ensure theirs was the first ‘free’ tea
      delivered to the docks of Glasgow, Hull and Liverpool. Beginning
      with only a few of their own small ships and chartering others,
      Jardines soon owned a large fleet of fast, handsome sailing
      clippers that could out-sail most competitors…”

      Seems British banking baron Rothschild covered his business interests, if not expanded them, following the end of Britain’s very visible monopoly on Asian goods.

      And of course,

      The Group also
      has strategic interests in other entities, such as a 20% stake in investment bank, Rothschild

      as reported by the same PR doc:

      which is actually a rather comical on when you read between the euphemistic lines.

    • Keep in mind the REPUBLIC of China was a founding member of the UN. That is now known as Taiwan.

      Taiwan’s betrayal by the US regime and the UN was shameless.

      • Holy cow! That’s an important distinction! Thanks for pointing it out to me! The People’s Republic of China and the Republic of China! Completely different entities! And very important to understanding what’s going on today!
        Boy do I feel embarrassed! Growing pains.
        That distinction changes everything. wow.
        Back to the drawing board with me!
        Gotta love this site and its commenters!

        • It’s OK, very easy to confuse the two. Typically, when “anti-Communism” was popular, the dichotomy was “Taiwan, ROC vs. Red China.”

          • Your disculpation is oddly comforting. Thanks! 😎

            I always “knew” there was a difference between the two, that Taiwan was a sorta good guy compared with the communist bad guy, but I never paid attention to the actual names and the details of the history which in reality of course, are not details except insofar as the devil is in the details… anyhow, gotta go pretend to be an English teacher now…

      • Beyond the Rothschilds for sure! Just taking the more visible threads left hanging out there on the net to weave myself a narrative. A perilous endeavour!

        • All of this would take LIFETIMES, in the plural, to fully understand!

          I had a lot of “basic education” from both sides of my family, both of whom knew tyranny personally (both Imperial Russia and the USSR). As for my personal research, it’s been 33 years, since I was 17. Thousands and thousands of books, hundreds of them via Interlibrary Loan. I must have cost my local libraries many thousands of dollars in fees. Best education I could have imagined.

          In the late ’80s and early ’90s, I was loosely affiliated with the local John Birch Society chapter in my home town. I didn’t subscribe to a lot of what they asserted, but most of the material I accessed or viewed was useful. JBS during the ’60s and ’70s began warning folks of “public health” statutes, and their utility in bringing down a republican society. What’s going on now was no surprise to me.

          If you go “all the way,” you appear to recognize you can encounter topics that will incur varying degrees of risk to yourself, especially if you should discuss any of it with those unaware or with reason to be “offended” by such matters. Don’t be turned off by the risk, just be careful.

          • …especially with business students, I found out the hard way…

            • My undergrad degree was Anthropology & Political Science, and my graduate program was Library & Information Science. I expected that I would have to be a chameleon within the social “sciences,” but the fanaticism of librarians and library students was surprising, as bad as “gender studies” or “ethnic studies”! Granted, there was a 22-year gap between studies, but I was very naive to think Library Science still valued free thinking and open-mindedness.

              Business? Yeah, whether real-world or “education,” all about not damaging “shareholder value” or profit margins or entailing “unnecessary litigatory risk.”

              • Information management… I’m not familiar with the activity of Library science, but I suppose as with anything, it depends on the raison d’être of the practice: Is it to facilitate the edification of humanity or to control perception? If organization becomes an end in and of itself then of course the dogmatic, inhuman and malleable sides of the practice can flourish.
                Dunno, but it seems as if it resembles any powerful tool that can be used for both constructive and destructive purposes in the name of rigor.

              • nosoapradio:

                A Master’s in Library (and Information) Science is the entry degree to professional librarianship.

                Librarians function as gatekeepers of information and knowledge. In the past, this was usually in favor of maintaining quality material for the broadest audience. More recently, though, librarians are functioning as agit-prop “activists” in favor of Marxism and defective/degenerate “culture.” Many libraries in the United States, and probably elsewhere, are actively promoting freak shows for children, with transsexuals in sometimes awful costumes and aiming to be “hands-on” with the kids. Most librarians push material for collections that is politically correct, whether or not the material is actually “valuable,” especially in the long-term, and, conversely, blocking inclusion of “offensive” material that offends the (non-)”sensibilities” of select portions of the population.

                The big organizations, the American Library Association, and major library systems themselves, are definitely “institutional-minded,” too.

              • Fact Checker:

                Yes, I’m aware of the sex manuals purporting to be “LGBT empowerment” books in schools. Lawn Boy is, quite obviously, intended to normalize pedophilia (including pederasty, “pedophilia light”). School librarians are the worst, since their target population IS the target: “before 8, or it’s too late.” Get them exposed to the Sodoomite and transsexual degeneracy, and then continue to feed them with enabling material. After all, homosexuality is not a natural phenomenon (within a natural habitat), and “making” homosexuals is the only way it’s done (both through recruitment, but also as a consequence of child sex abuse).

                You won’t like what’s coming soon any more than I do: open & outright challenges to age of consent statutes. The goal is to do for pedophilia what was done with homosexuality.

  2. 1666, wasn’t that the peak of strength of the Sabbatei Zevi (sp) phenomena, you know, the sect of diablos that cloaked themselves in Judaism but practice a cult that is 180 degrees off from there.
    Later furthered by Jacob Frank, Adam Weishaupt, Amschel Mayer et al? Just sayin….

    • How, exactly, were these weird cults not actually practicing “Judaism”?

      With all due respect, I suspect you don’t understand “Judaism” is very different than the official narrative. It’s NOT about the Old Testament, nor did it exist prior to Jesus Christ.

      • What I am very familiar with is the millennia of dissimulation and duplicity about who and what “Jews” and “Judaism” are.

        The “traditions of the elders” that Jesus spoke of and soundly condemned became the “Babylonian Talmud” in written form after His ascension.

        This “Babylonian Talmud” is the so-called “Oral Torah” of the “elders” – the Rabbis – of “Judaism.”

        That “Oral Torah” – NOT, again NOT – the Written Torah of Moses, as laid out in the first five books of what is commonly known as the Old Testament, is the true foundation of “Judaism.”

        Jews who are “Torah-observant” are called Karaites, and those folks have been hated by the “Rabbinical Jews” for centuries.

        As with Islam, Jews, both real and adoptive/converted (the latter, the vast majority), are free to ignore the extreme parts of their ideologies, and be decent people. Unfortunately, the self-chosen Master Race mythology is central to their “religion,” and it permeates “being Jewish.” One has to consciously reject it, along with a significant portion of what most Jews believe is critical to “being Jewish.”

        So, to conclude, the only “good Jews” are those who REJECT “Judaism,” in all its forms, including Marxism and Judeo-Freemasonry. Some of them have even rejected the “traditions of the elders” and embraced the Messiah who came and will come again. They have, again, found favor with the Father, YHVH, joining the continuous stream from Abraham to Moses to Christ – for the religion of Moses is now called Christianity.

  3. Great interview, very interesting!

    “China and the New World Order” is turning out to be much more important doc than I initially thought in retrospect!

    Keep up the amazing work James!

  4. Thanks James and I appreciate the recommendation to just either listen or download the MP3.

    I like to download everything.

    • I’m kind of chuckling, because the NUMBER would eventually come up.

      This is Interview “One”666.

      I guess there will be those who will stretch some significance to the automatic counter.
      Just like some Hotels do not have a floor 13.

      • I guess there will be those who will stretch some significance to the automatic counter.

        Future tense unnecessary. Someone beat you to it.

      • It’s been 33 years since I had my eyes opened by Antony Sutton’s magnum opus. I must be a Freemason shill! LOL

  5. I believe VERY FEW “Anti-China War Hawks” are sincere. They are playing a role assigned to them or volunteered for. Of course, I’m referring to the Big Players, not the little fools who get their “reality” from the Talmudvision.

    I believe “Collaborationists” are, likewise, playing a role, most likely, volunteered for.

    In reality, this planet is controlled by a shadow “super-government,” a de facto world government, that has direct control of, or massive ability to coerce, nearly all governments on Earth (those not coerced are “rogue states”). We see “circumstantial” evidence routinely, where most governments will act in lockstep to something and/or via a method, that “makes no sense” and/or strains credibility. The recent “global tax agreement” comes to mind. There is the open discussion of humanity-manipulating plans, like the infamous The Great Reset, and then we see such agendas being implemented by “authorities” across the world. And their agenda propaganda memes are instantly adopted on a widespread basis: “build back better,” and so on.

    I need not speculate (or declare what I actually do know) about this shadow world government. It exists, it is actually ruling us, and it doesn’t really matter who or what is actually running the satanic show [my previous writings give readers a strong hint who I think composes this regime’s “officer corps”). The one fact we can agree on, I imagine, is that this world government NEEDS TO GO. Making it go away would be humanity’s most daring enterprise, since the stakes are literally life on Earth. Hence, alas, I also believe that the Book of Revelation is being laid out before our eyes right now, and it’s very, very, very likely that the visions the Holy Spirit gave St. John are going to be how things play out for us in the next few years, with near-total devastation of humanity before the Return of Jesus Christ stops it (Matthew 24:21-22).

    • You sure get triggered by Jesus Christ!

      Without Christianity, Europe would have been a backward wasteland centuries ago. No Charles Martel, no Jan III Sobieski. Hence, the reason why what Henry Ford called The World’s Foremost Problem worked for centuries to infiltrate, undermine, and, in the last two or so centuries, take effectively-full control of Europe’s key institutions.

      Where would Europe be if the Celts or the Germanics had continued their ancient traditions? They’d have fought amongst each other, as always, as before, while Muslims or Mongols or whomever flowed in and took them out. The fratricidal conflicts of the “royalty” of Europe, acting in concert and/or on accord of their banksters, would have had all the negatives, with no potential of the positive of unity in the Name of Christ. The Vikings, for example, were more interested in selling White women to the Turks & Africans, et. al., than any sort of preservation of European cultures.

      It wasn’t Christianity, Jesus-variety or Paul-variety, that destroyed Europe. It was the blind, egocentric stupidity that always had utter contempt for ANYTHING spiritual, non-material. To be honest, your position against Christianity and the position of the Talmudists against Christianity are, in effect, identical. People such as yourself have ALWAYS been their best allies, holding no eternal ideals, applying “situational ethics” to all scenarios, for profit, power and/or prestige. What we can call, generically, corruption. You can’t corrupt a sincere Christian, especially so a sincere Christian living where the majority of people are also sincere Christians (you’d be ejected, righteously). Materialists don’t want to understand that, believing “everyone has their price.”

      When the One whom you deny returns, He will, indeed, establish a kingdom from Jerusalem, and all those who rejected Him and helped His enemies – humanity’s enemies – will bow. “The Jews” will be on their knees, as well.

      • I made a mistake. I wrongly thought you were a serious, sincere, and actually informed person. Clearly I was in error.

        [[No Charles Martel, no Jan III Sobieski.]]

        [THE HORROR! Such indispensable personages that they were household names throughout the 17 Century, no doubt! (I don’t know or care who these obscurities were.)]

        I could, maybe, excuse you for not recognizing Jan III Sobieski, but Charles Martel? And if you didn’t know who they were, it takes mere seconds to look them up.

        Two of Western Civilizations most important figures. “Obscurities”?! Not sure if I should laugh or cry.

        “Fact Checker”?! Yeah, with the same integrity and veracity as the “best” of Facebook or the Washington Post.

        • You’re giving me the impression of a pseudo-“intellectual” who would write for Vox or BuzzFeed. I can’t help but visualize Dunning-Kruger Effect, sorry.

          The Battles of Tours and of Wien (Vienna) are key points of history that even a truly educated high schooler understands.

          I said nothing about Charlemagne, but off you go…

          If this forum had an ignore feature, I would reluctantly be using it right now, for these “discussions” with you serve no useful purpose.

    • Oh, and as for some sort of Project Blue Beam “Second Coming,” I don’t doubt that’s a possibility. Maybe a fake “Jesus” – warned about in the Bible – will arrive in a UFO. The media-driven “Christians” will be flailing their arms in excitement, failing to listen to the Spirit telling them it’s another con-job in a trail of con-jobs. He’ll tell the world about “the unity of religions,” and laud the “cooperation” of “Christians” and Jews and other New Age types, as “enlightened.”

      When fake “Jesus” arrives, I’ll be calling him/it out. You can’t understand, of course, since spirituality is utterly foreign to you.

      • “Proper research”?!

        How do you know I have not done “proper research” on terrain theory? Because I don’t agree with you, I must be “ignorant”?

        As for what sort of Christian I am, it’s always very interesting that those who don’t believe have “moral lessons” for those of us who do. You might want to read the Book of Revelation, and learn about the Lake of Fire for those who hate Jesus Christ. It’s not about MY enemies, but His. Forgiveness & grace from me is dished out generously. And Christ, too, has offered the greatest generosity and forgiveness possible, but it is, as our consumerist society says, “a limited time offer.” I’m qualified to judge why people have lived lives of evil, but He is.

        • The only projection here is from you.

          I’ve found that only extreme leftists start spewing about “hate” as you do when they’ve got no rational arguments to defeat their opponents.

          Most of what is valuable in Western Civilization is either Christian in origin, or Christianity advanced it towards the modern forms. Hospitals and universities, for example, at least when they were oriented towards righteousness. The concept of individual freedom in “the West” goes all the way back to the Old Testament, when cultures neighboring the Israelites laughed at the concept that someone needed a “fair deal” in regards to their life. Of course, anti-Christians prefer to rip the Old Testament’s context away, and whine about how “extreme” some of its rules were compared to what is now claimed as “progressive” – never mind the pagan societies offered their subjects little to NO rights at all in the same era.

          I wish your username were true: the LAST “humanist.” “Humanism” is the root of so many of this civilization’s ills, being that “humanism” is a materialist ideology derived from the anti-Christian/anti-Christ Marxist and fellow traveler ideologies and movements of the late 19th and early 20th Centuries, based on the dangerous tyranny of “intellectualism.” While the extreme left loves to spew about Christendom’s errors and atrocities, they aren’t too happy when someone of faith points out that materialist ideologies, always acting in the name of and allegedly to the benefit of “humankind,” hold the indisputable world records for mass murder and human suffering.

          “Humanism” is a ridiculous “utopian” model. It’s best summed up in Robert Louis Stevenson’s The Four Reformers:

          FOUR reformers met under a bramble bush. They were all agreed the world must be changed. “We must abolish property,” said one.

          “We must abolish marriage,” said the second.

          “We must abolish God,” said the third.

          “I wish we could abolish work,” said the fourth.

          “Do not let us get beyond practical politics,” said the first. “The first thing is to reduce men to a common level.”

          “The first thing,” said the second, “is to give freedom to the sexes.”

          “The first thing,” said the third, “is to find out how to do it.”

          “The first step,” said the first, “is to abolish the Bible.”

          “The first thing,” said the second, “is to abolish the laws.”

          “The first thing,” said the third, “is to abolish mankind.”

  6. It is claimed Mussolini said “fascism” should be called corporatism since it is the merger of state and corporate power. It doesn’t matter if he actually said that; that statement reflects a description of what actually exists in the so-called “developed” world.

    As a lifelong anti-Marxist, I have found that those who object to the use of the terms “fascism/t” to describe what actually exists in our world are usually people who admire Mussolini or his mustachioed fellow traveler to the north. It doesn’t bother me, except in the context of “Antifa” – and only because “Antifa’s” “anti-fascism” is inherently dishonest (most “Antifa” operations are funded by members of modern fascism, i.e., corporations, including 501(c)(3) “charities”).

    As for Capitalism, I refuse to lionize it, since I regard it as an inherently criminal system, largely at odds with Adam Smith’s beliefs. “Free Enterprise” is what we should aim for, and we should not conflate the two. Understanding what Capitalism is now is best understood through the work of Werner Sombart and others who saw or see how it works and what is its motivations. For me, there is no “good” Capitalism and “bad” Capitalism – Capitalism aims to amass capital, by any means necessary, including over mountains of bodies.

    • “Capitalists simply don’t care about rules or law and order except as it benefits them.”


      “I don’t believe in any money system. (And you can’t get perfect systems from imperfect humans. You just can’t.) However, I also believe that we can make an imperfect system, whether communism or capitalism, work – if everyone participating has good intentions.”


      Many of us believe that the form of government and/or economic system is not the key determinant, but WHO is running the system, and what motivates them.

  7. Marxism was never actually primarily about economics. It is a materialist world view, an ideology based on anti-spirituality, accepting only what can be seen and measured. What is currently called “science.”

    China is “Communist” in all the important ways: materialist, anti-faith, technocratic (“science”). The CCP has restrained the more delusional phenomena Marxism can generate, like Lysenkoism (although America and “the West” are completely on-board with neo-Lysenkoism – “science” molded to conform to ideology, “how someone identifies as” and so on).

    Some have compared modern China’s real ideology to “National Bolshevism,” a nationalist Communism similar to National Socialism. The Chinese, being a proud people with millennia of proud history (despite the horrors across time), are very, what many in “the West” would call “racist.”

  8. Why do you call Chomsky a “traitor”?

    I have found him to be a sincere man, a committed Marxist who actually believes in what it advocates, unlike most. And a mostly-honest Jew. Does that mean I agree with him, especially with conclusions? Nope, not often. But I can admire him for being sincere.

    • A sincere person does not resort to such an extensive panoply of well-honed logical fallacies and sophistry. Just a tiny sample below. Much more to be found in his treatment of Faurisson, Palestine, Iran and other geopolitical topics:

      A partial list of his propaganda techniques:

      Absurdities Framing to exclude contrary outlooks
      Ad hominem sallies Ignorance flaunted as admirable
      Bald assertions that are mis-statements Inappropriate selectivity
      Bandwagon psychology Insinuation
      Bizarre non-sequiturs Internal contradiction
      Bullying Major premises hidden in passing (taken as read)
      Diminishment of the importance of the important Misdirection
      Dismissiveness Misleading asides (useful for avoiding answering questions directly)
      Diversions (e.g. not answering the questions) Mixing apples and oranges
      Failure to provide minimal evidence Obfuscation
      Fake humility Restriction of options (Limitation of possible questions)
      Fake open-mindedness Scare tactics
      False parallels Setting up straw men
      False paradigm creation & perpetuation Sweeping generalisations
      False syllogisms Word inflation

      It’s true that I know very little about the assassination [of JFK] [ignorance flaunted]. The only thing I’ve written about it is that the claim that is was a high level conspiracy with policy significance is implausible [false paradigm creation & perpetuation and internal contradiction: he admits knowing “very little” so on what basis does he find any claim “implausible?” yet he can falsely create and perpetuate the paradigm that ‘high level conspiracies with policy significance don’t exist!] to a quite extraordinary degree [adding to the internal contradiction, word inflation, failure to provide minimal evidence.] History isn’t physics [ obfuscation ] and even in physics nothing is really “proven” [ misdirection, vis a vis the laws of physics, and bizarre non-sequitur ] but the evidence against this claim is overwhelming [ internal contradiction, word inflation, bald assertion, failure to provide minimal evidence] from every testable point of view [ sweeping generalisation, bald assertion, failure to provide minimal evidence, internal contradiction ] , remarkably so for a historical event [ word inflation, failure to provide minimal evidence.] Given that conclusion, which I think is very well founded [ bandwagon psychology, failure to provide minimal evidence, ] that I have written about, a lot, [ internal contradiction: earlier he said the only ting he’s written about it is to claim implausibility ] I have no further interest in the assassination [ dismissiveness, evasion, miniising importance of the important ] and while I’ve read a few of the books [ internal contraction: he opens by saying that he knew “very little”, reading “some books” surely qualifies as more than “very little” ] out of curiosity [ dismissiveness, suggesting closed-mindedness, not even fake open-mindedness ] I haven’t given the matter any attention [ internal contradiction: for someone who “hasn’t given the matter any attention” he has arrived at extremely strong and controversial opinions against the body of evidence. ] and have no opinion about how or why JFK was killed.” [ internal contradiction: he has an opinion, which he has just energetically expressed, that the way JFK was killed was not by a state conspiracy. ]

      • nosoapradio’s video link gave me sufficient information to reconsider Chomsky as “sincere” and “trustworthy.”

        I am curious about your reference to his treatment of Faurisson. Chomsky apparently defended Faurisson. Is this untrue? Defending a so-called Holocaust™ Denier™ takes balls, even as a Jew (witness what was done to Dr. Finkelstein).

        • This is exactly what he said in reference to Faurisson and his book:

          “…the Holocaust was the most extreme atrocity in human history, and we lose our humanity if we are even willing to enter the arena of debate with those who seek to deny or underplay Nazi crimes.” -Noam Chomsky

          He reformulates ever so slightly this same statement at 9 minutes and 6 seconds into this video:

          In other words, he promotes censorship in the name of free speech.

          Which reminds me of what appeared to be all those cops of Mexican origin in full riot control regalia guarding the US border… A photo Broc West used in a recent Corbett podcast…

          • Thank you! Chomsky deserves nothing. The “most extreme atrocity”? LOL. And “lose our humanity” for concerning ourselves with facts? Just another fraud from academia.

            • Yea.
              Better late than never, I guess.

            • my response that is.

      • Thanks for that!

        I shall remember this anytime Chomsky should come up again. Those are definitely “mind boggling” positions he asserts about JFK and the Cheney-Bush regime. A fool? A con man? Who knows. It’s one thing to admit one does not know the whole truth, and quite another thing to claim to “know” something is allegedly not true. It’s OK to say, for example, one isn’t sure if 9/11 was a LIHOP or MIHOP, but to claim “Bush” et. al. weren’t involved is an absurdity, one I believe that is self-evident.

        Now I can understand why he isn’t really “marginalized” among the “intellectuals.”

    • No, I’m not “up to speed,” largely because I don’t follow Chomsky or other leftist “intellectuals” closely. Now I’ve been informed about him.

  9. Jon Rappoport is not credible on many things he’s claimed.

    I don’t know if he’s crazy, dishonest, or actually a shill.

    I’ve yet to see evidence that germ theory is false. And, yes, I’ve seen all the “arguments” in favor of “terrain” theory and other “alternative models.” They just are not convincing, like the “arguments” in favor of a Flat Earth. I mention the latter since I’ve found nearly every person in favor of one is also in favor of the other.

    Insisting that germ theory is false is nothing more than arguing about what color the lifeboats actually were as the Titanic continued to sink lower into the Atlantic.

    • And disagreement is not a problem. 🙂

    • “[W]hy animals in a fully sterile environment die”

      Because we NEED the microbes in order to live. Not a slam dunk for or against either theory.

      “Béchamp is more convincing than Pasteur, ultimately.”

      Purely a matter of opinion, regardless of one’s training or experience. Of course, I see nothing inherently wrong or evil with Pasteur’s assertions.

      We can concur that “mainstream medicine” is corrupt beyond imagination (the pathological & ubiquitous lies about the sham “vaccines” are prima facie evidence their system is irredeemable, and must be replaced, not merely “reformed”). But I simply do not concur that Pasteur was, at best, “in error,” at worst, a fool or con-man. People-centered, scientifically-sound true medicine is very possible within the context of germ theory.

      • Microbes come in an exceptionally wide variety, just like people or fauna. Many are “friendly” (and actually essential to our life). Hence, my previous comment.

    • I like a lot of John Rappoport’s content. I disagree with his position on viruses though. Although, I do think terrain theory makes a lot of sense as a contributing factor in illness caused by bacteria and viruses.

      Terrain only doesn’t make sense to me based on my lived experiences and getting sick and also my work with patients who have been helped by antibiotics and antivirals. Viruses are just pieces of dna or rna that can cause damage to the body if they are able to get inside, like prions are pieces of protein that can do damage to the body and pathogenic bacteria excrete toxins that damage the body. Then there’s toxins in the environment that can damage the body. The terrain will affect the probability of that happening along with genetic susceptibility and unique physiology. This makes the most sense to me based on what I observe with my own senses.

      • The one thing that everyone might agree on is the importance of maintaining one’s health by the most natural means possible. Mainly diet, physical activity and spiritual growth.

        The flatness of the earth and the proper designation of exosomes can always be debated after the potential, global, life as we know it ending elephant in the room is dealt with. Should we survive.

      • I believe terrain theory does not completely disavow the physical viral particles. Some researchers believe viruses are cell debris which contains of genetic material like RNA and DNA and a protein layer. A build up of excess junk or waste like cell debris is usually harmful.

        What researchers supporting terrain theory are arguing against is the invasive nature of viruses. They argue against a virus being able to hijack the much more complex human cell, force it to reproduce more of the same viruses, then repeat that process until it overtakes enough cells to be able to spread to another human being.

        A possible terrain theory approach to viral spread would be that our cells are damaged from toxins, excess amount of cell debris falls off those damaged cells, that fallen cell debris combined with other toxins can damage other cells, that makes cell debris fall off of newly damaged cells, and then the process repeats itself. Possibly to the point where we produce enough waste to spread to other people.

        If they are fully healthy then their body would easily handle waste from another human. If they have damaged cells and high amounts of inflammation in their body then excess waste from another person would overload their system and trigger a major detox event which we know as an infection.

        • That’s interesting, I didn’t know about that aspect of terrain theory. I wonder how that theory would explain why anti-viral medicines work to alleviate symptoms. AZT was a very toxic drug used for HIV, often leading to worse outcomes. Newer medicines have less side effects and have helped many people.

          The chicken pox virus has been shown to cause shingles in the elderly as their immune system weakens dormant virus re surfaces causing a painful rash. They are given acyclovir or vancyclovir which helps. I know acyclovir also works for herpes. Herpes can also be managed with dietary changes, adding lysine. This is how germ theory explains how these medicines work though. I wonder how a terrain theory would explain why these medicines work.

        • I agree, that any time there is a push for silencing alternative theories and data, an alarm bell should go off. This is an indicator of corruption and some agenda being pushed.

          There was a lot of controversy about the relationship between HIV and AIDS. I think there was a prominent scientist at UC Berkeley who claimed HIV does not cause AIDS. I think he was still there when I was a student.

          What I have observed in persons with HIV tends to be explained nicely with germ theory, or rather a combination of influences (individual susceptibility combined with exposure to a foreign substance from another person). I have done a lot of volunteer work in the HIV/AIDS community and had the opportunity to speak with people who have the condition and also have two friends with the condition. Based on what they have said, the recall how they got this illness. Many were healthy prior to contact with infected persons. One person went off the medications and tried a lot of natural remedies. He went to another country for another protocol, including spiritual healing. I was told he passed away while over seas.

  10. Very actual topic. Thank you, excellent interview!

Submit a Comment


Become a Corbett Report member