http://www.businessinsider.com/michael-flynn-putin-trump-austria-far-right-2016-12
Some interesting food for thought.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xZP8gsG3Kwk&feature=youtu.be&a
All this really happened. Your take on a false flag seems to be that they are actors. There is no need for actors if it really happens.
Look at what went on the the Polonium murder of Litvanenko. He was supporting the claims of Boris B. that --not that the terrorist attacks didn’t happen, not that the Russian secret service did it, but that they pushed for it and allowed it to happen. No crisis actors needed.
In the same way, if these events were false flags or not, no crisis actors are needed. I think you falsely assume that they must be there.
As for whether this was arranged in Turkey or not, I have no idea. I’m NOT GOING to have any idea. Neither are you. Nature of the beast, and all that.
Accept the reality that you aren’t going to know, that you aren’t going to be able to tell, and you’ll quit wasting valuable psychological energy on it.
Just sayin’.
Still stinks to high heaven.
Mainstream media pushes the bias of their controllers. Alternative media is currently degenerating into a rumour mill that is overly reliant on opinion and light on original reporting. How many people with blogs hit the streets and do actual interviews outside of their echo chambers?
Just because mainstream is completely unreliable doesn't automagically make alternative media, right or left, worthy. There is pollution there.
Hi Chris,
I have taken a step back from commenting at PP due to some things about the site that bring it further away from its mission statement, of "creating a world worth inheriting,"
specifically:
-
Rank inconsistency regarding your comment moderation. (I have brought this up, with specific examples, in the past, and am happy to repeat those same examples if you would like me to.)
-
A significant amount of "air time" on politics and geopolitics by you specifically and less of a focus on your brilliant core message of the three E's and constructive responses, in spite of the fact that you have made some glaring errors in political/geopolitical analysis (e.g. the Brexit outcome, believing fake tweets, misidentifying Janukovitch's political alliances, characterizing Utah state senator Ken Ivory's call to give Utah control of low-EROI shales of Utah as a type of federalism, instead of the legislative facet of a corporate grab promoted by ALEC).
This is in spite of the fact that the geopolitical talk is, for the most part, impractical, unproductive and divisive. Whereas I have seen you rightly espouse the benefits of being practical, productive, and consistent in different ways.
This comment about Jeff Bezos's media is a good example of how clumsily you wade into politics. The right compared Obama to Hitler repeatedly, and also, if I'm not mistaken, to Stalin. Below are some examples, from Glenn Beck, with whom you are now doing interviews, as I understand it.
In other words, someone that you are working with has done the almost the exact same thing that you claim Bezos is doing, and which you have described as:
"a level of moral demonization [that] is dangerously over the top."Here and here are links to Beck indirectly comparing Obama to Hitler or, in this case, a generic unhinged dictator. These comparisons are even more direct than the one you are wringing your hands about.
If Bezos' program is so dangerous, than why have you not only remained silent about very similar instances, and have even gone so far as to have recently chosen to work with one of the corporate media's masters of division and propaganda, Glenn Beck?
In other words, why is it that you remain silent when Beck plays with fire but that "worries you" when Bezos does it?
While I continue to hold your work on the three E's in very high regard, and still share it, I don't understand how you expect to be taken seriously in the realms of politics and geopolitics when you make significant numbers of avoidable errors as well as simply choose to take sides and be divisive in your own way, as you did in this case.*
And, just for the record, my position has been, and continues to be, that just about all national politics and geopolitics is hopelessly FuBar, and that PP will truly live up to its mission statement when it turns away from these divisive topics.
BTW, students and I made a hugel in the school garden this year that actually worked (sort of…I still have a lot to learn). I'd love to hear more about your garden and less about your often inconsistent take on politics. I realize that's probably not going to be the direction you choose, but your mission statement will not even be approached, much less achieved by continuing to wallow in the swamp of politics and corporate media.
Hugh
*If you can accuse Bezos of taking sides simply by airing a show about fascism, it is perfectly legitimate to point to the times when you have called out some parts of the corporate media while choosing to work with other parts, such as Beck and Russia Today.
Indeed, you yourself have repeatedly reminded your readers of the existence of white nationalist, fascist-leaning elements of the Maidan government in Ukraine while never mentioning the fact that threads of this type of fascism also exists in Russia. Any real geopolitical analyst of the Russia-Ukraine tension is aware of this, yet you do not mention the existence of fascist and anti-semitic groups in Russia that are supportive of Putin (example link here). I work with both Russian, Ukrainian, and Kazakh students and I have seen various instances of open anti-semitism by members of all three countries. Just focusing on Ukrainian anti-semitism is an example of your biased analysis, the very thing you claim to be qualified to warn us against.
interesting comment hugh, thanks for posting.
i will second the part of your comment where you mention that political talk is unhelpful and unproductive, and i'd like to see peakprosperity remain focused on the 3Es and away from political nonsense.
however, i think chris was right to take bezos to task for his being an instrument of the deep state. this isn't a political position. we should be aware that bezos is bought and paid for, with a juicy $600 million CIA contract. the man knows what side his bread is buttered on.
and there's nothing wrong with chris doing an interview with beck to spread the peakprosperity message to beck's not insubstantial audience. it shouldn't be interpreted as condoning beck or all of his beliefs.
or do you take the divisive position that one should only speak to people with whom one agrees 100%?
and there may well be room for criticism of beck, i'm not familiar with him, but the time that you reach out to him and his audience, is probably not the best time to put forth such criticism, that is counter-productive.
Hugh,
Since you claim to place a high value on accuracy. You should be more careful to accurately represent Chris' statements. He did not " accuse Bezos of taking sides simply by airing a show about fascism" as you put it,he correctly noted the Bezo's owned WA PO role in the divisive Russian Dupes propaganda campaign then noted the over the top propaganda, inclusion of the T for Trump logo in the billboard artwork for the show on a Nazis ' in America. He called out the association with Trump to Hitler, not the airing of the show, (a Phillip K Dick novel adaptation in it's second season btw.)
Your challenge to Chris regarding calling "out some parts of the corporate media while choosing to work with other parts, such as Beck and Russia Today" is misdirection based on false equivalence.
The equivalent question to ask is, given the opportunity, would Chris work with Jeff Bezo's Washington Post to reach their readership with the PP message? I suspect the answer is yes.
There is not enough digital ink or time to call out every instance of Godwins law in the media or malfeasance in governments and societies. that doesn't delegitimize calling it out when it is topical and relevant to a discussion at hand.
Your insistence on equally weighting the presence of fascist elements in the Russian society( which Putin's government has disavowed and prosecuted) with Chris' earlier analysis of the active role of similar elements in the US supported Ukraine coup is not only falsely equivalent but irrelevant.
Indeed Chris didn't mention that those same elements exist in the US or just about every country on earth either. That doesn't change the fact that the US government / Obama was on the side of the fascists in that situation and Putin was on the side of the persecuted and Russia's legitimate regional and historical self interest.
Your critique of Chris' Geopolitical analysis, is to my mind just a petty assertion of your own political leanings and biases rubbed raw when Chris's take on world events doesn't coincide with your world view or interpretation of events.
Your scolding Chris to censor himself and abstain from Geopolitical analysis on his own web site is as nonsensical as the justifications you cite in support of your argument. I will give you marks for consistency though, as it is congruent with your previous attempts to censor discussion here and I'm not surprised to see you return from your commenting hiatus only to pick this same bone.
Geopolitical analysis and discussion of governmental media and political machinations are integral to how we will experience the effects of the three E's indeed to how they will be manifested and distributed in our society.
I value Chris' analysis in this regard and welcome discussion and intelligent debate on those topics. I give him high marks for doing this in as non partisan (left right) approach as possible.
mememonkey
Thank you Hugh for once again expressing the many ways in which you feel slighted and emotionally wrought over the content decisions of this site.
May I once again apologize for not delivering precisely the content you prefer and in the exact order?
Clearly you deserve to have things exactly your way at all times and I should know that by now, and my failure to respond to your many long missives of discontent is a clear mark that I am being stubbornly obstinate and purposely not taking your emotional needs into account.
I shall also apologize for not having thought Brexit would pass, which is a true mark of analytical shame, me being practically the only person who thought it would not pass in the entire world. Clearly if one cannot predict everything geopolitical with 100% accuracy, one should entirely refrain.
Finally, the fact that I continue to trust my own experience and insights and track record over those of a teacher from an elite, foreign high school who only occasionally drops by to passionately and wordily criticize me must be truly vexing and troubling to you. It is indeed an upsetting mystery that I promise to look into.
In the meantime, may I leave people with this…you may, of course, form your own opinions.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wuSDfVRGI54
I very much value what Chris and his entire group of guests has to say about geopolitics. To me, his thinking is incisive and centered in a broad global context in ways that others are not. Many are simply brilliant and explained with great clarity.
Same with the writing of DaveF, Dave Collum, CHS and Adam. Along with many regular and guest posters.
I do understand that not everyone will agree with everything. That is just the way it is and is 100% fine.
People who disagree should feel welcomed to not read an item. Or to read and bring other information to the discussion. Or to add to the discussion as more information becomes available and evolves over time.
What doesn't work are criticisms against the person. Hugh's post above is an attack on the person.
- You are unfair (and I have saved examples that prove it)
- you have made mistakes in the past (and I have saved examples of this too)
- you are divisive,
- you are illogical,
- you have given interviews with people I disagree with (therefore I can fault YOU for THEIR words)
- you may only talk about the issues that I approve of. I wish to control the content of your writing.
- Adolf Hitler liked puppies.
- You like puppies.
- Therefore you are just like Adolf Hitler and I am so angry with YOU for what HE has done!
As a bit of a nautical buff, I've always been interested in better understanding the events surrounding the attack on the USS Liberty (AGTR 5).
Curious as to any thoughts you might have on this topic?
[quote=USS Liberty Veterans Association]IN JUNE 1967 jet aircraft and motor torpedo boats of the Defense Forces of the State of Israel brutally assaulted the American naval intelligence-gathering ship, USS Liberty, while in international waters off the coast of the Sinai Peninsula in the Mediterranean Sea. The attack was preceded by more than six hours of intense lowlevel surveillance by Israeli photo reconnaissance aircraft, which buzzed the ship as low as 200 feet directly overhead. The carefully orchestrated assault that followed was initiated by high performance jet aircraft. This was followed by slower and more maneuverable jets carrying napalm, and was finally turned over to lethal torpedo boats, which blasted a forty-foot hole in the ship's side. The attack lasted more than two hours, deliberately killing 34 Americans and wounding at least 171 others. Over 821 rocket, cannon and machine gun holes were inflicted. When the Liberty stubbornly remained afloat despite her damage, Israeli forces machine-gunned her life rafts, firefighters, stretcher bearers, and sent troops carrying helicopters to finish the job, no survivors were to be taken.
[/quote]
USS Liberty Veterans Association
… but I can't let a few things go by:
[quote] and I have saved examples that prove it [/quote]
On my planet it's perfectly reasonable if someone has examples to illustrate a concern they're expressing. In fact, I'd take their concern more seriously precisely because of the examples.
[quote]slighted and emotionally wrought over the content decisions of this site.[/quote]
Sigh ... that isn't exactly a shining example of learning from someone else's perspective.
----------
Hanging around PP is like panning for gold in a Yukon river: there are valuable nuggets to be found but ya gotta be able to process the sludge.
For me, Peak Prosperity is about making connections. Were the 3 E's acting upon us in isolation then it may be possible to run a site solely dedicated to their respective disciplines. The problem is that life isn't that tidy, these items cannot be contained in neat, little boxes, they crossover. In fact, entire systems are organised around the principle of resource distribution in the forms of either capitalism, socialism, feudalism, tribalism or theological lines. Take the medium of exchange as an example - the entire concept of monetary creation is a political question - i.e. who has the right to do it?
One of my favourite quotes from my favourite philosopher;
If people are narrowing their perspective regarding the 3 E's perhaps it would serve as a challenge for them to run a competing website without reference to any type of state or privatised mechanism. Take something as simple as water. Who gets to distribute it? The state or private organisations? Who regulates the price? The market or regulatory committees? These are all real questions that require real solutions. You'd soon realise the impossibility of what you are asking.A state? What is that? Well! open now your ears to me, for now I will speak to you about the death of peoples.State is the name of the coldest of all cold monsters. Coldly it lies; and this lie slips from its mouth: "I, the state, am the people."It is a lie! It was creators who created peoples, and hung a faith and a love over them: thus they served life.Destroyers are they who lay snares for the many, and call it state: they hang a sword and a hundred cravings over them.Where there are still peoples, the state is not understood, and is hated as the evil eye, and as sin against laws and customs.This sign I give to you: every people speaks its own language of good and evil, which its neighbor does not understand. It has created its own language of laws and customs.But the state lies in all the tongues of good and evil; and whatever it says it lies; and whatever it has it has stolen.Everything in it is false; it bites with stolen teeth, and bites often. It is false down to its bowels.
All the best,
Luke