Global Research, Chossudovsky, Russia, Propaganda

Moderators: Elvis, DrVolin, Jeff

Re: Global Research, Chossudovsky, Russia, Propaganda

Postby stefano » Thu Oct 23, 2014 6:52 am

Sounder » Thu Oct 23, 2014 11:45 am wrote:In this case it is asserted that Putin (or Bashar or Gaddafi) bashing is to support Empire. Specifically, the Empire desired by transnational élites.


I can't agree with that. What, so opposing Empire means not mentioning (or refusing to see?) the crimes of the Empire's enemies? That is not only obscene but counterproductive. It does nothing whatsoever to make anyone think a bit harder about what is going on, and instead just further solidifies the existing little silos of political positions taken for reasons of self-identification. A process of which it is a symptom, as well - if the Empire is bottomless evil, then by rejecting its narratives and buying this Che t-shirt I am, in my own way, fighting the good fight.

I have to say, Sounder, for someone who has a lot to say about transcending dualities you seem very prone to picking goodies and baddies.
User avatar
stefano
 
Posts: 2672
Joined: Mon Apr 21, 2008 1:50 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Global Research, Chossudovsky, Russia, Propaganda

Postby American Dream » Thu Oct 23, 2014 7:06 am

I'm going to add the whole article from Louis Proyect- "The Unrepentant Marxist" and Counterpunch regular contributor- not because I unconditionally support all his opinions (I don't) but because I think it is relevant and he raises some points that bear looking into. Proyect was once a Trotskyist, and now appears to be a somewhat less orthodox Marxist-Leninist who has retained significant elements from his Trotskyist past.

He brings what I see as both the strengths and weaknesses of many Marxist-Leninists of this general sort to the table: The analysis and critique of social problems is often quite cogent, the proposals for action regarding those proposals sometimes inspire less confidence. For whatever it is worth, I think he is on the right track regarding journalistic practices in general and on the Russian State in particular.

Anyway, here is the article:


http://louisproyect.org/2014/07/20/robert-parrys-folly/

July 20, 2014
Robert Parry’s folly

Image
Robert Parry


Robert Parry is part of a cadre of investigative journalists who have put themselves at the disposal of the Kremlin on the matters of Syria and/or Ukraine. Like Walter Duranty who justified Stalin’s policies to NY Times readers in the 1930s, we see Parry, Seymour Hersh and Robert Fisk using journalistic tricks of the trade to make Putin seem like an innocent victim of a worldwide conspiracy involving the CIA, NATO, George Soros-type NGO’s, Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International, NY Times op-ed writers, and other miscreants bent on… Bent on what exactly? In the 1930s Stalin was defending state-owned property for the same reason that Jimmy Hoffa fought against Bobby Kennedy’s investigation of racketeering in the Teamster’s Union. The union was Hoffa’s source of wealth and power. As such it was in his in own class interests to keep the union strong.

But what exactly does that have to do with Putin? Russia is the third largest recipient of Foreign Direct Investment in the world after the USA and China so such an alleged conspiracy would in effect be breaking down an open door. Just three days ago RT.com reported: “Current Rosneft and Exxon projects unaffected by sanctions – Rosneft CEO”. The article points out:


Rosneft has strong links with both the US and UK oil industry.

Rosneft has even made moves into the Western hemisphere, and owns about 30 percent of an ExxonMobil oil field in the Canadian province of Alberta.

Rosneft accounts for 40 percent of Russian oil output, and also has strong partnerships with Norway’s Statoil and Italy’s Eni.


Rosneft is an oil company. Gazprom, a gas exporter as its name would imply, has the same kind of mutually beneficial relationships with their Western counterparts as the Christian Science Monitor reported on May 2nd:

Although the European Union has imposed its own tough sanctions on 48 Russian individuals, Gazprom is arguably where daylight exists between the Obama administration and the EU on the issue of penalizing Moscow for its actions in Ukraine.

The numbers make it clear why. Russia is the EU’s third-biggest trading partner, after the U.S. and China; in 2012, bilateral EU-Russian trade amounted to almost $370 billion. The same year, U.S. trade with Russia amounted to just $26 billion.


For all of the rhetoric about the inevitable clash between Russia and the West, there is no evidence that it has anything to do with economics. I defy anybody to find an article prior to the crisis in the Ukraine that refers to Russia as inimical to capitalist interests. All you need to do is look at one of those advertising supplements in the NY Times that appears every year or so to confirm this. You know the kind I am talking about, the one that has articles to the effect of Russia being an open door for investors.

It is only when some unfortunate group of peoples finds itself on the wrong side of Russian foreign policy that the rhetoric about a new Cold War bubbles up once again. For Parry and company, there are never any legitimate grievances in a place like Syria or Ukraine. What you get is an “outside agitator” theory in which the natives become restless after a phone call from a Virginia Nuland or a Saudi prince. Russia is entitled to support any military action to put down these fifth columns until law and order is restored. In many ways, the excuses made for the iron fist are the same as Israel’s in Gaza. It is no surprise that both Bashar al-Assad and more recently Abdel Fattah el-Sisi align themselves with Russia over Islamic “extremism” and vice versa.

Russia’s President Vladimir Putin has made a startling intervention in Egypt’s political turmoil by backing its defence minister for the presidency, before an election has even been declared.

Whether the minister, the newly promoted Field Marshal Abdulfattah el-Sisi, will stand for president in elections scheduled for later this year is the biggest talking point in Egyptian politics, with elements of a personality cult already forming around him.

His aides have consistently denied reports that he has already made a decision, but Mr Putin chose to ignore that while welcoming him on a visit to Moscow.

“I know that you have made a decision to run for president,” Mr Putin said. “That’s a very responsible decision: to undertake such a mission for the fate of the Egyptian people. On my own part, and on behalf of the Russian people, I wish you success.”


Turning now to Parry’s article, “Airline Horror Spurs New Rush to Judgment”, you are struck by his use of the trump card—the unnamed Spooks who really know what is going on. In other words, we are up against the same tried and true method of Seymour Hersh.

Regarding the shoot-down of the Malaysian jetliner on Thursday, I’m told that some CIA analysts cite U.S. satellite reconnaissance photos suggesting that the anti-aircraft missile that brought down Flight 17 was fired by Ukrainian troops from a government battery, not by ethnic Russian rebels who have been resisting the regime in Kiev since elected President Viktor Yanukovych was overthrown on Feb. 22.

Oh really? Well, I am told that some CIA analysts view Vladimir Putin as the recipient of Joseph Stalin’s brain in experimental surgery conducted by a Martian who landed on earth in 1990 determined to save the universe from George Soros and Samantha Power. Who told me that? Sorry, I must keep my sources confidential. Okay, just this one time I will divulge my source. It is Herman Goldstein, my neighbor who read it in an investor’s newsletter out of Corpus Christi, Texas. Mums the word.

Parry continues:

According to a source briefed on the tentative findings, the soldiers manning the battery appeared to be wearing Ukrainian uniforms and may have been drinking, since what looked like beer bottles were scattered around the site. But the source added that the information was still incomplete and the analysts did not rule out the possibility of rebel responsibility.

No, this is Parry and not Onion.com. I love the bit about beer bottles scattered around the site. You’d think that he would have mentioned vodka in order to make it sound more plausible. The last time I read anything this ridiculous was when Mint Press reported on rebels playing around with sarin gas containers causing an accident that cost the lives of hundreds in East Ghouta. Those Ukrainian troops and Syrian rebels, just like Bluto and Otter getting into trouble in “Animal House”.

Much of Parry’s finely honed investigative reporting talents, burnished at Newsweek no less, are turned to casting doubt on the possibility that the separatists had a ground to air missile capable of reaching 33,000 feet.

I wonder if Parry needs some brushing up on Google since a brief search would reveal that such missiles not only exist but have been used previously. Last Monday a missile brought down a Ukrainian military transport, the AN-26, from a height of 21,000 feet—far beyond the reach of a MANPAD. Well, who knows? I suppose if Parry had learned of this, he would have blamed drunken Ukrainians as well.

To drive his point home, Parry refers to the sarin gas incident that supposedly was a false flag operation intended to justify an American “regime change” invasion of Syria that would have put the FSA in power. Yes, I know. It sounds ridiculous at this point with so many articles referring to the White House’s preference for Bashar al-Assad over any and every rebel but let’s follow Parry’s tortured logic since it is clear that so many of our “anti-imperialists” will take him at his word.

Despite the war hysteria then gripping Official Washington, President Obama rejected war at the last moment and – with the help of Russian President Putin – was able to negotiate a resolution of the crisis in which Assad surrendered Syria’s chemical weapons while still denying a hand in the sarin gas attack.

Actually, there was no “war hysteria” in Washington, or more specifically in the White House. An astute analysis of Obama’s designs appeared in the NY Times on October 22nd 2013, written when the alarums over a looming war with Syria were at their loudest. It stated “from the beginning, Mr. Obama made it clear to his aides that he did not envision an American military intervention, even as public calls mounted that year for a no-fly zone to protect Syrian civilians from bombings.” The article stressed the role of White House Chief of Staff Dennis McDonough, who had frequently clashed with the hawkish Samantha Power. In contrast to Power and others with a more overtly “humanitarian intervention” perspective, McDonough “who had perhaps the closest ties to Mr. Obama, remained skeptical. He questioned how much it was in America’s interest to tamp down the violence in Syria.”

Well, no matter. The NY Times is the boss’s newspaper and we should never believe whatever it prints. We are far better off with someone like Robert Parry who spent a decade writing for Newsweek. Wheeling out his heavy artillery, he refers his readers to an unimpeachable source:

In watching Obama’s address, I was struck by how casually he lied. He knew better than almost anyone that some of his senior intelligence analysts were among those doubting the Syrian government’s guilt. Yet, he suggested that anyone who wasn’t onboard the propaganda train was crazy.

Since then, investigative journalist Seymour Hersh has revealed other evidence indicating that the sarin attack may indeed have been a rebel provocation meant to push Obama over the “red line” that he had drawn about not tolerating chemical weapons use.

Well, Seymour Hersh revealed no “evidence” at all. Evidence would be like something presented to a jury in a murder trial, like a bloody knife or tampered brakes on a car. All Hersh did was assure his readers that Bashar al-Assad was pure as the driven snow because someone who worked for the CIA told him so.

For those who want to read genuine investigative reporting instead of this “unnamed sources” crapola from Parry or Hersh, I refer you to Elliot Higgins, aka Brown Moses, who as far as I know, never worked for Newsweek.

Sy Hersh’s Chemical Misfire

Two munitions were linked to the Aug. 21 sarin attack: a Soviet M14 140 mm artillery rocket with a sarin warhead and a previously unknown munition that appeared at multiple locations. Since the sarin attack, eight separate examples of the previously unknown type of munition have been filmed and photographed in the Jobar, Zamalka, and Ein Tarma suburbs of Damascus, an example of which is shown below.




The munitions are used by Syrian government forces and are known as “Volcanoes.”
The term “Volcano” is also used for a smaller improvised rocket used by pro-government forces.
The type of Volcano used in the Aug. 21 attack comes in three known types: A chemical and explosive type are both launched from a two-barrel launcher, while a large explosive type is launched from a single-barrel launcher.
The explosive type has been used since November 2012, while the first known instance of the chemical type being used was June 2013.


I suspect it is exactly this kind of analysis—based on evidence—rather than the specious use of unnamed sources that will ultimately reveal who is responsible for the downing of the Malaysian jet.
American Dream
 
Posts: 19946
Joined: Sat Sep 15, 2007 4:56 pm
Location: Planet Earth
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Global Research, Chossudovsky, Russia, Propaganda

Postby Sounder » Thu Oct 23, 2014 8:19 am

Sounder » Thu Oct 23, 2014 11:45 am wrote:In this case it is asserted that Putin (or Bashar or Gaddafi) bashing is to support Empire. Specifically, the Empire desired by transnational élites.

Stefano wrote...
I can't agree with that.


And that is fine; maybe we can discuss the issues.


What, so opposing Empire means not mentioning (or refusing to see?) the crimes of the Empire's enemies?


Not at all, why does one require the other in your eyes?
That is not only obscene but counterproductive.


Yes, it would be if it were so.

The folk described as the big baddies of our age, happen to be targets of transnational elites. While these baddies have their own creep factor, they are dwarfed in their effects compared to the TE’s ability to effect both my life and your life, directly.


It does nothing whatsoever to make anyone think a bit harder about what is going on, and instead just further solidifies the existing little silos of political positions taken for reasons of self-identification.


I am all for thinking a bit harder, help me out.

A process of which it is a symptom, as well - if the Empire is bottomless evil, then by rejecting its narratives and buying this Che t-shirt I am, in my own way, fighting the good fight.


We can say we reject the narrative all we want, but that doesn’t make it so. Also, lets be clear, the Empire is not bottomless evil. It provides measures of social stability, of a sort, and a canvas on which the evolution of consciousness of society and individuals develop.

I have to say, Sounder, for someone who has a lot to say about transcending dualities you seem very prone to picking goodies and baddies.


Wrong read, I do not seek to transcend dualities, I attempt to reconcile elements of duality that ‘think’ they are ‘opposed’ but are in fact, in their essential nature, complimentary.
All these things will continue as long as coercion remains a central element of our mentality.
Sounder
 
Posts: 4054
Joined: Thu Nov 09, 2006 8:49 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Global Research, Chossudovsky, Russia, Propaganda

Postby stefano » Thu Oct 23, 2014 9:54 am

Sounder » Thu Oct 23, 2014 2:19 pm wrote:
What, so opposing Empire means not mentioning (or refusing to see?) the crimes of the Empire's enemies?


Not at all, why does one require the other in your eyes?


Well it doesn't. That was my reading of "Putin bashing is to support Empire," and the reason I was prompted to post. I guess "bashing" wants defining, but I really don't see how it is to support Empire to know, and say, that Putin is murderous bad news.

The folk described as the big baddies of our age, happen to be targets of transnational elites. While these baddies have their own creep factor, they are dwarfed in their effects compared to the TE’s ability to effect both my life and your life, directly.

I agree, and absolutely believe that those transnational elites are the greatest threat there is to the world. I still don't see why that means "Putin bashing is to support Empire" - to the contrary, the creepiness of those baddies is the same as that of the English-speaking ones, just in a different place. The dynamic of control and exploitation is the same, and morally equivalent. empire is Empire.

To oppose the TE exclusively because it threatens to affect my life is the ethical equivalent of the rich lobbying not to pay taxes - it is to base my ethics on my situation. "Where you stand depends on where you sit." I don't like that. In fact I'm pretty fortunate, socio-economically more the kind of person that this system feeds than the kind of person it feeds on. I don't oppose the system because I have to do dull work for low pay, or because my situation is precarious. I oppose it because it offends my sense of fairness.

It does nothing whatsoever to make anyone think a bit harder about what is going on, and instead just further solidifies the existing little silos of political positions taken for reasons of self-identification.


I am all for thinking a bit harder, help me out.

Well, surely knowing about the apartment bombings in 1999 is a terrific introduction to 9/11, or false flag strategies in general? Or knowing that Bashar Al-Assad let jihadists out of jail for propaganda purposes, so that he could claim that he was fighting terrorist madmen, relates in important ways to the dynamic between Saddam and Bush, or that between Al-Qaeda and the US intelligence services? But if you adopt the position that bashing the enemies of Empire is support of Empire then you might tend to reject conspiracy theories about the apartment bombings, or argue (as at least one poster has here) that the story about Assad letting the jihadists out is bullshit (it's not). Doing so reduces the extent to which you have an understanding of power and the ways it is exercised.

We can say we reject the narrative all we want, but that doesn’t make it so. Also, lets be clear, the Empire is not bottomless evil. It provides measures of social stability, of a sort, and a canvas on which the evolution of consciousness of society and individuals develop.

I quite agree. But here, too, it's common to see people who ought to know better talk about the US as though it's the ultimate fascist state, the evillest empire that human history has yet seen. People who argue that way do so to feel they're in the right, or engaged in something heroic.

I do not seek to transcend dualities, I attempt to reconcile elements of duality that ‘think’ they are ‘opposed’ but are in fact, in their essential nature, complimentary.

Okay... Not sure I get you but will pay more careful attention. Cheers.
User avatar
stefano
 
Posts: 2672
Joined: Mon Apr 21, 2008 1:50 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Global Research, Chossudovsky, Russia, Propaganda

Postby American Dream » Thu Oct 23, 2014 10:26 am

I found this article generally helpful:

Putin’s Cold New World
Slawomir Sierakowski ▪ Summer 2014

Image
Vladimir Putin speaking in Crimea, March 18, 2014

Is Russia somehow different from other powerful nations? For Westerners, it has generally been an unpredictable country, and therefore an interesting one for travelers and scholars. Books by intellectuals who have traveled there and promised to explain its peculiarities are a well-established tradition. Such texts have been written by, among others, Denis Diderot, Madame de Staël, Adolphe de Custine, John Reed, Anatole France, André Gide, George Bernard Shaw, H.G. Wells, Bertrand Russell, and Jean-Paul Sartre.

Some, like Sartre, stumped for the Soviet Union, acknowledging its monstrosities long after the rest of the world had recognized them. We can laugh at the naïveté or corruptibility of these otherwise great thinkers. But attempting to understand Russia can wreck even the most astute minds. Max Weber, the author of two monographs on Russia that attempted to treat it with concepts formulated for describing Western society (rationalization, bureaucracy, and so on), did not understand the meaning of the Bolshevik Revolution. He reduced it to the overthrow of an ineffective monarch.

Foucault, meanwhile, was mistaken in the other direction, believing that the invention of the Panopticon was the best universal descriptor for institutions of discipline in Western society. Yet the first Panopticon was built not in the West, but in Russia, constructed by Jeremy Bentham’s brother Samuel in Krichev at the request of Catherine the Great. It is one of the many examples of how Russia received Western ideas—like anarchism, nihilism, Marxism, and neoliberalism—and turned them into brutal reality.

The Cold War placed the West in a new situation. With the development of weapons of mass destruction, the danger was no longer losing a war but total annihilation. It was then that systematic and intensive study of the history of the Soviet Union, Russia, and its subordinate nations began. This was a search for a solution to the puzzle of Russian difference, with the hope that the behavior of its leaders would finally become predictable.

But Russian politics is a mystery even to many Russians. The gap between authority and society in Russia is not present on a similar scale anywhere else. We wonder why Putin’s actions in Ukraine strengthened his popularity at home (with favorable poll numbers of up to 80 percent) and helped marginalize any protest. The handful of intellectuals, artists, and human rights activists who do not support Putin have ended up like Alexander Herzen, who supported the 1863 uprising in Poland and consequently lost the friendship of Russian émigré society and half of the subscriptions to his journal Kolokol, to say nothing of the absolute condemnation he experienced in Russia itself.


Continues at: http://www.dissentmagazine.org/article/ ... -new-world
American Dream
 
Posts: 19946
Joined: Sat Sep 15, 2007 4:56 pm
Location: Planet Earth
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Global Research, Chossudovsky, Russia, Propaganda

Postby Wombaticus Rex » Thu Oct 23, 2014 11:24 am

The gap between authority and society in Russia is not present on a similar scale anywhere else.


Image
User avatar
Wombaticus Rex
 
Posts: 10896
Joined: Wed Nov 08, 2006 6:33 pm
Location: Vermontistan
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Global Research, Chossudovsky, Russia, Propaganda

Postby seemslikeadream » Thu Oct 23, 2014 11:40 am

CULTURAL REVOLUTION, WHICH CLAIMED TENS OF MILLIONS
Mazars and Deutsche Bank could have ended this nightmare before it started.
They could still get him out of office.
But instead, they want mass death.
Don’t forget that.
User avatar
seemslikeadream
 
Posts: 32090
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2005 11:28 pm
Location: into the black
Blog: View Blog (83)

Re: Global Research, Chossudovsky, Russia, Propaganda

Postby American Dream » Thu Oct 23, 2014 11:48 am

Excellent point, WR. I would go further and assert that even though opposing Uncle Sam is de rigeur for me as a resident of conscience inside USG controlled territory, it would be folly to lionize the Chinese State, the Russian State, the Syrian State, the Iranian State, the North Korean State, etc.

Glassy eyed sectarian leftists who follow such an "enemy of my enemy is my friend" approach are derisively called "tankies" by more anti-authoritarian leftists, in remembrance of the Stalinoid/Maoist types who supported the Soviet tanks going in during the popular/workers' rebellion of Hungary in 1956.
American Dream
 
Posts: 19946
Joined: Sat Sep 15, 2007 4:56 pm
Location: Planet Earth
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Global Research, Chossudovsky, Russia, Propaganda

Postby seemslikeadream » Thu Oct 23, 2014 11:51 am

good to see that you're feeling the love for CounterPunch AD.....do we get to take that one guy off the no fly list now?
Mazars and Deutsche Bank could have ended this nightmare before it started.
They could still get him out of office.
But instead, they want mass death.
Don’t forget that.
User avatar
seemslikeadream
 
Posts: 32090
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2005 11:28 pm
Location: into the black
Blog: View Blog (83)

Re: Global Research, Chossudovsky, Russia, Propaganda

Postby Wombaticus Rex » Thu Oct 23, 2014 12:07 pm

American Dream » Thu Oct 23, 2014 10:48 am wrote:Excellent point, WR. I would go further and assert that even though opposing Uncle Sam is de rigeur for me as a resident of conscience inside USG controlled territory, it would be folly to lionize the Chinese State, the Russian State, the Syrian State, the Iranian State, the North Korean State, etc.

Glassy eyed sectarian leftists who follow such an "enemy of my enemy is my friend" approach are derisively called "tankies" by more anti-authoritarian leftists, in remembrance of the Stalinoid/Maoist types who supported the Soviet tanks going in during the popular/workers' rebellion of Hungary in 1956.


Thank you for that interesting big of frontlines nomenclature -- had I merely heard it, I would have assumed the epithet derived from "think tanks" like Brookings or Open Society.

I'm also glad you took it in the spirit it was intended, a single point about a single line.

I did find the Dissident article quite tasty brainfood, but that stuck out. Not only because it was easy to think of a single counterexample, but also because it seems like such a hard thing to qualify, let alone quantify. My understanding based on essays I wrote years ago is that the African continent and the Arab democracies have the lowest voter turnout, per capita, so arguably there are other nations far more estranged from their constituencies. Saudi Arabia also comes to mind, although not for any reasons remotely related to "democracy."
User avatar
Wombaticus Rex
 
Posts: 10896
Joined: Wed Nov 08, 2006 6:33 pm
Location: Vermontistan
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Global Research, Chossudovsky, Russia, Propaganda

Postby American Dream » Thu Oct 23, 2014 12:21 pm

Saudi Arabia is also a compelling counter example. I don't think any of this takes away from the deep, deep problematic of the Russian State as described in the article, just from any sort of implication of absolute Russian exceptionalism, in the negative sense.

Russia, Syria, Iran, etc. are really fucked up, but the neoliberal monsters like the United States are just different, definitely not good and arguably not any better.
American Dream
 
Posts: 19946
Joined: Sat Sep 15, 2007 4:56 pm
Location: Planet Earth
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Global Research, Chossudovsky, Russia, Propaganda

Postby American Dream » Thu Oct 23, 2014 1:11 pm

American Dream » Tue Oct 21, 2014 4:45 pm wrote: I believe you find your "job" here frustrating and/or overwhelming at times- have I got that right? If so, what are the kinds of changes that might help make things better?


WR, in answet to my own question to you, I'm going to keep slad on "ignore" mode- not because I think she's a "bad person" (quite the opposite- I believe her to be a sincere and good-hearted person who I diagree with in significant ways), but rather because she and I tend to set each other off.

Hopefully this wiill help limit the tsuris factor around these parts.
American Dream
 
Posts: 19946
Joined: Sat Sep 15, 2007 4:56 pm
Location: Planet Earth
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Global Research, Chossudovsky, Russia, Propaganda

Postby Sounder » Thu Oct 23, 2014 6:05 pm

Sounder » Thu Oct 23, 2014 2:19 pm wrote:
What, so opposing Empire means not mentioning (or refusing to see?) the crimes of the Empire's enemies?



Not at all, why does one require the other in your eyes?



Well it doesn't. That was my reading of "Putin bashing is to support Empire,"


The first post reads; ‘in this case Putin bashing is to support Empire’. (Hey remind me to never be interviewed by you :coolshades ) I need to learn to be clearer, but I was reflecting on the media saturation of Putin bashing and human suggestibility and war and death. And can not but help to go back and make a call about who started this particular shitfest. Putin gave Obama and Syria some back down room, and he got the Ukraine difficulties in return.

and the reason I was prompted to post. I guess "bashing" wants defining, but I really don't see how it is to support Empire to know, and say, that Putin is murderous bad news.

Of course its not.
The folk described as the big baddies of our age, happen to be targets of transnational elites. While these baddies have their own creep factor, they are dwarfed in their effects compared to the TE’s ability to effect both my life and your life, directly.


I agree, and absolutely believe that those transnational elites are the greatest threat there is to the world. I still don't see why that means "Putin bashing is to support Empire" - to the contrary, the creepiness of those baddies is the same as that of the English-speaking ones, just in a different place. The dynamic of control and exploitation is the same, and morally equivalent. empire is Empire.

Yep
To oppose the TE exclusively because it threatens to affect my life is the ethical equivalent of the rich lobbying not to pay taxes - it is to base my ethics on my situation.
Not 'because it affects my life', because it affects life itself(to a greater degree). Thinking big Ag, nuclear power, big oil, money as debt, you know, the sort of things that debase as well as kill everybody's life's, not simply the specific victims of some 'bad' leader. Greater impact would seem to call for greater attention, would it not?
To suggest that the TE narrative is useful is not equivalent to opposing the TE exclusively. That would be pathetic.


"Where you stand depends on where you sit." I don't like that.

I agree, it need not be that way
In fact I'm pretty fortunate, socio-economically more the kind of person that this system feeds than the kind of person it feeds on. I don't oppose the system because I have to do dull work for low pay, or because my situation is precarious. I oppose it because it offends my sense of fairness.

We do what we can, but to be clear, we support and are supported by this system. Some think however that the human psyche is more ‘plastic’ than it’s given credit for and may indeed find a way toward and the ability to flourish under a less coercive system.
It does nothing whatsoever to make anyone think a bit harder about what is going on, and instead just further solidifies the existing little silos of political positions taken for reasons of self-identification.


I take your point although I think it’s misdirected. I do not rely on situational ethics. (Nor do I have much care for or interest in conspiracy speculations.)

I was merely trying to say that Western powers have no moral standing to ‘make the world straight’. Thankfully Russia and China realized this with the bombing of Libya.


I am all for thinking a bit harder, help me out.


Well, surely knowing about the apartment bombings in 1999 is a terrific introduction to 9/11, or false flag strategies in general? Or knowing that Bashar Al-Assad let jihadists out of jail for propaganda purposes, so that he could claim that he was fighting terrorist madmen, relates in important ways to the dynamic between Saddam and Bush, or that between Al-Qaeda and the US intelligence services? But if you adopt the position that bashing the enemies of Empire is support of Empire then you might tend to reject conspiracy theories about the apartment bombings, or argue (as at least one poster has here) that the story about Assad letting the jihadists out is bullshit (it's not). Doing so reduces the extent to which you have an understanding of power and the ways it is exercised.

OK, now this is getting old. Yes I knew about the apartment bombings long before coming to RI. It’s sad but I contain all to many data bits.

We can say we reject the narrative all we want, but that doesn’t make it so. Also, lets be clear, the Empire is not bottomless evil. It provides measures of social stability, of a sort, and a canvas on which the evolution of consciousness of society and individuals develop.


I quite agree. But here, too, it's common to see people who ought to know better talk about the US as though it's the ultimate fascist state, the evillest empire that human history has yet seen. People who argue that way do so to feel they're in the right, or engaged in something heroic.

But I don’t do that and yet you are still talking as if I do.
I do not seek to transcend dualities, I attempt to reconcile elements of duality that ‘think’ they are ‘opposed’ but are in fact, in their essential nature, complimentary.


Okay... Not sure I get you but will pay more careful attention. Cheers.


No worries, nobody else does either.
Thank-you
All these things will continue as long as coercion remains a central element of our mentality.
Sounder
 
Posts: 4054
Joined: Thu Nov 09, 2006 8:49 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Global Research, Chossudovsky, Russia, Propaganda

Postby American Dream » Thu Oct 23, 2014 9:43 pm

Regarding the recent flareups here, what may not be clear is the context, from my point of view. I was feeling under attack from Belligerent Savant and stillrobertpaulson who were both coming on very aggressively towards me. Belligerent had just agent-baited me (something about "was I just going out to gather intel?" in the midst of the dual attack) and stillrobertpaulson was continuing with an (untrue) campaign regarding me allegedly saying false things about Robert Parry, which was intentionally begun when I was unable to "speak" and very upset about it- not sure why such a thing would be done right after my account was suspended, but the timing was very, very wrong.

Anyway, I was tense, feeling under fire because I didn't want to engage- it was too upsetting and I don't want to fight- and stillrobertpaulson wouldn't take no for an answer just kept upping the drama in his posts. That's the context for me speaking impersonally during those moments. I'm trying to be good, even though I'm upset. WR seeming like he was joining forces with them and ignoring their agent-baiting and what felt like trolling to me, only added to the tension, to be quite honest.

Their methods of engagement were definitely aggressive and I find agent-baiting triggering and unacceptable. To be honest, it felt unfair that WR seemed to be jumping on board their band wagon without saying anything about that unfair agent-baiting (which I find quite triggering) and the escalating aggression based on the demand that I must respond and give stillrobertpaulsen what he wants. Actually- no, I am not required to engage with him under any circumstance and especially if the vibe doesn't feel good to me.

That was a relatively easy topic as I feel no big personal stake in the matter, even though I am a person of Ukrainian descent. Much harder is people pushing racist/fascist/anti-Semitic type ideas. As a person of color, a Jew and an anti-Fascist, I find such views not only so personally triggering that I can't really engage, but also: abhorrent, corrosive to the good hopes I have for the conspiracy community, and strengthening of the trend for dominance by the straight white men with a sympathy for reactionary ideas who will- by definition- perpetuate all the usual "isms". This of course will make R.I. more racist, patriarchal etc. as an old boy network with a dominant line strengthens itself and diverse voices are made unwelcome, whether explicitly and/or implicitly.

Yes, I could report things to the mods, but I just keep getting messages that WR has thrown my old complaints "In the trash". Nothing else- not even a brief dialogue, ever seems to happen. I don't feel faith in that method right now.

I'm trying to be a good citizen here, but it is all upsetting. I'm trying to keep a grip, even when I am triggered, so I am pulling back some, trying to stay engaged a bit, maybe I'll converse a little, but this does not feel like a "safer place" to me!
American Dream
 
Posts: 19946
Joined: Sat Sep 15, 2007 4:56 pm
Location: Planet Earth
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Global Research, Chossudovsky, Russia, Propaganda

Postby Belligerent Savant » Thu Oct 23, 2014 11:17 pm

.

AD: I was feeling under attack from Belligerent Savant and stillrobertpaulson who were both coming on very aggressively towards me. Belligerent had just agent-baited me (something about "was I just going out to gather intel?" in the midst of the dual attack) and stillrobertpaulson was continuing with an (untrue) campaign regarding me allegedly saying false things about Robert Parry, which was intentionally begun when I was unable to "speak" and very upset about it- not sure why such a thing would be done right after my account was suspended, but the timing was very, very wrong.


"agent-baiting"? Hardly. I don't need to recap the content of my prior posting in this thread. Stillrobertpaulsen directed a question to you Re: Parry, based off a comment you made yourself about Parry, and I was interested in your response, be it a retraction, rebuttal, or any variation of a reply -- it's a minimal courtesy in the spirit of online discourse. The irony here is that you are doubly responsible for any real or feigned agita you may be feeling at the moment: this could have all been avoided if you A) simply addressed stillrobertpaulsen within a reasonable timeframe, or B) avoided replying to this thread with only another copy/paste effort, as it was your response to this thread that re-presented the post from stillrobertpaulsen, directly above yours.

AD: To be honest, it felt unfair that WR seemed to be jumping on board their band wagon without saying anything about that unfair agent-baiting (which I find quite triggering) and the escalating aggression based on the demand that I must respond and give stillrobertpaulsen what he wants.


WR was certainly not jumping on a bandwagon. There was no bandwagon to jump on. You needn't look beyond the reflection of your mirror for the primary mover of this 'incident'.
User avatar
Belligerent Savant
 
Posts: 5217
Joined: Mon Oct 05, 2009 11:58 pm
Location: North Atlantic.
Blog: View Blog (0)

PreviousNext

Return to General Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 50 guests