Kansas Crimson

TDub wrote: ↑Fri Feb 24, 2023 9:32 am tiny desk concerts are usually pretty good

Seeing this band live is a great experience. They had a pop up show at the Mutual Musicians Foundation in KC a few years back and I went. It was fun because of the venue which is a crazy place. The Polsky Theater might be the best venue in the region for listening and hearing music.

I know he’s a CIA analyst who served from 1963-1990 under JFK to Bush Sr.

Not much more, I admit!

But I figured if there WAS more to him, this would be a good place to be told about it.

Go figure Japhy, once again, promptly and comprehensively shrugs the whole thing off as simply more Russian propaganda, just like you do with absolutely everything that doesn’t align with your world view.

At the very least, did you like his bit about Colin Powell?

He has a degree in Russian Studies

Hes a contributor to RT (Russian State News) and Sputnik News.

He is widely known as a mouthpiece for Russian propaganda.

now you know more about him.

Thanks.

Even more reason to take the dood with a grain of salt.

Kinda makes you wonder why the UN even put a microphone in front of his face

And if this indeed is a good place to vet doods, what are we to think of Seymour Hersh?

ousdahl wrote: ↑Fri Feb 24, 2023 10:08 am
But I figured if there WAS more to him, this would be a good place to be told about it.

Go figure Japhy, once again, promptly and comprehensively shrugs the whole thing off as simply more Russian propaganda, just like you do with absolutely everything that doesn’t align with your world view.

At the very least, did you like his bit about Colin Powell?

No, you were being lazy and you figured that the fact that he worked at the CIA under Bush meant he was legit.

That so many of your bombshell sources turn out to have links to RT or some Russian organization doesn't give you pause to think, "uh oh, this might make me look silly again, let me check this out" ? Is it really your policy to post shit you think might make you look like a rube because, "if it is, someone here will tell you about it"? You obviously don't enjoy having us tell you that your position is unfounded, so why don't you check that shit out before you open yourself up for public ridicule? I know you and think you are otherwise smarter than this. Why has this subject become such a blinders on obsession for you?

If you want me or anyone else to take your position seriously, bring us some serious information or data from a reliable source and we can discuss. If the source echos the story line as proposed by Putin there should be skepticism. His psychopathic track record is not one that is reliable. If the course is the US government it is good to look at that with skepticism as well. In the end we have the freedom of information act and oversight options that bring the truth to light even if it is years after the fact. In Russia high ranking people just fall out of windows and no one hears anything more.

Here's a bit about Ray McGovern and his involvement in Russiagate disinformation and his declaration that Gucifer was a an inside job by the DNC to make Russia and trump look bad.

The document, rewritten for propaganda effect, was published three weeks later and claimed to be the work of a new fake personality called Forensicator, which claimed that stolen DNC documents were copied to a computer located in the eastern US. If correct, it was devastating news for US intelligence – because it cleared the Russians.

Some former intelligence officials, from a group called Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS), backed up the claim. A group, including William Binney, a former technical director at the US National Security Agency (NSA), and former CIA officer Ray McGovern, were persuaded, without checking the file data, to say that the hacking was the work of insiders.

According to former NSA technical manager Tom Drake, “Ray’s determination to publish claims he wanted to believe without checking facts and discarding evidence he didn’t want to hear exactly reproduced the Iraq war intelligence failures which the VIPS group was formed to oppose”. He and other VIPS members refused to sign McGovern’s report.

But the VIPS endorsement was repeated by American media, from respected left-wing publication The Nation to controversial right-wing site Breitbart News. The ploy succeeded – and made it to the White House. Binney was invited on to Fox News and said allegations that Russia had hacked the DNC were unproven. Trump then told CIA director Mike Pompeo to see Binney to find evidence to support the claims. Pompeo met with Binney on 24 October 2017.

Binney said he told the CIA chief that he had no fresh information. But he said he knew where to look – in the surveillance databases of his former intelligence agency, NSA.

As a former top NSA insider, Binney was correct, but not in the way he expected. NSA’s top secret records, disclosed in the DoJ indictment earlier this month, lifted the lid on what the Russians did and how they did it.

Wow!

Even more reason to take the dood with a grain of salt.

Kinda makes you wonder why the UN even put a microphone in front of his face

Go figure Japhy, once again, promptly and comprehensively shrugs the whole thing off as simply more Russian propaganda, just like you do with absolutely everything that doesn’t align with your world view.

At the very least, did you like his bit about Colin Powell?

And if this indeed is a good place to vet doods, what are we to think of Seymour Hersh?

For real, I’m agreeing with you here!

I’m just also trying to point out that I’m perhaps the only one in this thread who IS willing to confront every bit of info possible, from every angle, rather than picking and choosing, and discrediting if not ignoring anything that might otherwise compromise your fragile feel-good world view.

(Or, prove me wrong by, for instance, simply responding to the above questions I had to copy and paste since you already ignored them the first time around)

To sincerely answer your question: “Why has this subject become such a blinders on obsession for you?”

It’s cuz I’d be thrilled for you to at least open yourself to the possibility that maybe, just maybe, as citizens of thee most militant warmongering nation in the history of nations, is maybe, perhaps, possibly, we’re also the most propagandized.

Has that even occurred to you?

You sure the one with the blinders on is me?

maybe the prescribed simplistic wartime narrative we’re being fed now isn’t entirely as it seems? Especially when even the slightest deviation from said narrative results in the “you’ve been brainwashed by Putin” gaslight, no matter how many times you condemn Putin anyway (btw fuck him).

And especially when the narrative is just so…oversimplified. For real, it reads like some fucking spaghetti western bullshit. Us good them bad! Freedom and Democracy! Rah rah!

Or do you wanna double down, yet again, on the idea that, though you proudly brag about how you knew the whole WMDs in Iraq thing was bullshit all along, you somehow know with even more certainty now that the same powers who deceived us about WMDs are like totally playing us straight this time about Ukraine.

Or, better yet, was WMDs in Iraq just more Russian propaganda too?

Cuz, come on Japhy. I too know you and think you are otherwise smarter than this. You’re one of the smartest people I know! Way smarter than me, even, I concede!

So why you gotta go full michhawk anyway?

ousdahl wrote: ↑Fri Feb 24, 2023 10:21 am Thanks.

Even more reason to take the dood with a grain of salt.

Kinda makes you wonder why the UN even put a microphone in front of his face

https://press.un.org/en/2023/sc15206.doc.htm

Wow. That’s a long ass article! I admit I didn’t read it all (yet)

But yea, avoid speculation. Since no one responded about Seymour Hersh, I’ll just say I’ll take him too to a grain of salt…maybe the Mai Lai Massacre, and the Pulitzer Prize too, were actually just more Russian fake news.

But, should we then launch a comprehensive investigation into who did perpetrate nord stream?

You know, just like Jose Qusdahl asked in that presser, which got no response beyond Hakeem Jeffries dodging the question and instead smugly parroting “We Stand With Ukraine” with a shit-eating grin.

Or, if we don’t wanna figure out who bombed Nord Stream, why not?

Is it not an act of war upon Russia or Germany or Sweden or sumptin?

Didn’t the EU leader Ursula threaten the strongest possible response against whodunnit?

https://amp.theguardian.com/business/20 ... tage-fears

japhy wrote: ↑Fri Feb 24, 2023 12:38 pm

ousdahl wrote: ↑Fri Feb 24, 2023 10:21 am Thanks.

Even more reason to take the dood with a grain of salt.

Kinda makes you wonder why the UN even put a microphone in front of his face

https://press.un.org/en/2023/sc15206.doc.htm

So tl;dr version is "they're looking into it".
I did take issue with a couple things in there.
One, saying Hersh has an impeccable record - not sure the Syrians he alleged gassed themselves would agree.
Two, the idea that the pipeline destruction is terrorism. No humans were targeted, it wasn't meant to elicit terror.

Is it worth discussing how the US might react to an attempt to sabotage an oil pipeline of our own?

#StandWithStandingRock

other than just to be nice and thoughtful. why would the US investigate Nordstream?

shouldn’t the countries to whom the pipeline “belongs” be doing the investigation?

or, perhaps, a truly independent 3rd party…give the Swiss a call?

ousdahl wrote: ↑Fri Feb 24, 2023 1:13 pm Is it worth discussing how the US might react to an attempt to sabotage an oil pipeline of our own?

#StandWithStandingRock

so, in this analogy, who does the Sioux represent?

ousdahl wrote: ↑Fri Feb 24, 2023 12:49 pm Wow. That’s a long ass article! I admit I didn’t read it all (yet)

But yea, avoid speculation. Since no one responded about Seymour Hersh, I’ll just say I’ll take him too to a grain of salt…maybe the Mai Lai Massacre, and the Pulitzer Prize too, were actually just more Russian fake news.

But, should we then launch a comprehensive investigation into who did perpetrate nord stream?

You know, just like Jose Qusdahl asked in that presser, which got no response beyond Hakeem Jeffries dodging the question and instead smugly parroting “We Stand With Ukraine” with a shit-eating grin.

Or, if we don’t wanna figure out who bombed Nord Stream, why not?

Is it not an act of war upon Russia or Germany or Sweden or sumptin?

Didn’t the EU leader Ursula threaten the strongest possible response against whodunnit?

https://amp.theguardian.com/business/20 ... tage-fears

VASSILY A. NEBENZIA (Russian Federation) said this significant meeting is coming together with a very different tone than the 30 September 2022 meeting on the same subject, namely the sabotage committed against the Nord Stream gas pipelines. It was clear at that time, in principle, who could be behind that act of international terrorism. The Russian Federation initiated criminal proceedings under its criminal code. Meanwhile, the United States leadership made several statements, which boiled down to the following: If the Russian Federation continues to act in a way that is not pleasing to the United States, the Nord Stream pipeline would be destroyed. The United States totally denied its participation in the sabotage, and still does.

His delegation convened the meeting because on 8 February, journalist Seymour Hersh released information showing that the United States executed the sabotage and did so with the help of a North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) ally. He proved that American divers in summer 2022 planted explosives under the Nord Stream, which were activated three months later by the Norwegians.

In case you missed the part that might explain why McGovern had a mic at the hearing, here is a clue, whoever called for the meeting might have invited the speakers. And Hersh did not "prove" anything. He tells a good story, it might turn out to be true. But so far he presented no evidence, just one anonymous source. Much like Mia Lia, if this happened there would have been many people with direct knowledge and there are internal documents which will confirm. Until those are brought to the public light it is speculation, but it is plausible. We will probably find out who did what at some point, too many people were involved to keep it quiet forever.

But what is pretty cut and dried is that Putin invaded Ukraine without a sane reason to fear for his country's security and his unhinged "reasons" have morphed from "nazis" to "but they are historically Russians they just don't know it yet" to saving Russia from "woke western culture".

And that is where you lose me. You started out "antiwar" and then "America started it" and now you are pursuing every meme inspired rabbit hole that appears in an attempt to prove something, anything, no really, you got something right. The one thing that seems to unify those who dismiss you is this; we are of the opinion that Putin invaded another country and has destabilized the entire planet. He did that, he owns it, no one prompted him. The war and the atrocities by Wagner are known documented facts. Nothing anyone else did, can justify his actions. What happens to Russia after that is on Putin's much deserving head.

If you want to talk about all of the dirty shit the US Government has done in the past and is still doing, fine, go ahead. But it has no context in who is right and wrong with regards to Putin invading Ukraine. If former Soviet satellites decide it is in their best long term interests to hitch their wagon to the west that is their prerogative as sovereign countries. They know what they had when they were tied to Russia and they now think we are the lesser of two evils. The only threat is to Putin's delusional ego. He has a declared he will Make Russia Great Again and every satellite that floats away bruises his ego. Fuck that psychopath.

Considering everything Putin has done to create a security issue for the rest of the world, if the loss of the pipelines inhibits his ability to sustain his crazy shit, some good has come of it.

potly, at least in this thread (particularly the 2nd and 3rd to last paragraphs)

Good post Japhy.

There’s a lot to cover - so much I hardly know where to begin.

Since trad identifies the 2nd and 3rd to last paragraphs, let’s start there. In fact, let’s try to narrow the whole thing, and this entire thread, down to one concise sentence…well, sentence and a half:

“If you want to talk about all of the dirty shit the US Government has done in the past and is still doing, fine, go ahead. But…”

(Man that feels like a big “but” coming, don’t it? Sir Mix A Lot must like it!)

“…but it has no context…”

I think this is the crux of the disagreements in this thread.

I think that the US’s own dirty shit we’ve done and are still doing on a global scale still very much has context relative to global affairs. To insist it does not just seems hypocritical, disingenuous, less an objective world view and more just the result of being subjectively propagandized to believe as much - that the US should get to do whatever it wants, and the rest of the planet should just have to deal with it…yet if any other country attempts the same dirty shit, it’s suddenly some globally destabilizing tragedy.

“…in who is right and wrong…”

See, again, this seems less some actual broader understanding of world affairs, and more some attempt to simply assign blame and embrace the good guy bad guy rhetoric - which, again, is entirely too oversimplified, lacking in objectivity, and precisely the way an imperial war machine hopes to condition its subjects to think.

That’s where Qusdahl comes in!

If there’s some reason I’ve persisted in this thread, it’s this:

be skeptical of the prescribed wartime narratives.

It’s frankly kinda sad more of you are not. You guys are too bright not to be!

Anything less than skepticism, and any insistence upon the prescribed rhetoric anyway, just seems like some silly stubborn misinformed take along the lines of, “but I’m still sure that we’ll find WMDs in Iraq…cuz the war machine told me so”

Does that get us anywhere?

KUTradition wrote: ↑Fri Feb 24, 2023 1:57 pm

ousdahl wrote: ↑Fri Feb 24, 2023 1:13 pm Is it worth discussing how the US might react to an attempt to sabotage an oil pipeline of our own?

#StandWithStandingRock

so, in this analogy, who does the Sioux represent?

Yea, not a good analogy.

I just tried to point out that if it was the US or most other countries in most other circumstances, such meddling (if not deliberate sabotage) would prob not be shrugged off so quick

Proof that not all republicans are Putin-loving seditionists?

Mitch McConnell tells U.S. to ‘wake up’ to threat of Russia on Ukraine war anniversary

The Senate Republican leader pushed back against calls from within his own party to pare back U.S. funding in support of Ukraine.

...“America and our friends need to finish waking up from our holiday from history, welcome Finland and Sweden into NATO by this summer, and make significant investments in military modernization and our defense-industrial capacities that are commensurate with the major challenges we face,” McConnell said in a statement, shortly before appearing alongside President Sauli Niinisto in Helsinki to support Finland’s bid to join NATO.

The message marked a stark contrast to the one pushed by former president Donald Trump and some congressional Republicans, who criticized President Biden’s trip to Kyiv earlier this week and have called for ending or slowing aid to Ukraine. In a tweet, Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga), a hard-right ally of House Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) and one of dozens of House Republicans to vote against Ukraine aid in May, called Biden’s trip “insulting” and proof that he “chose Ukraine over America.”

“If Putin were given a green light to destabilize Europe, invading and killing at will, the long-term cost to the United States in both dollars and security risks would be astronomically higher than the minuscule fraction of our GDP that we have invested in Ukraine’s defense thus far,” McConnell said in the statement.

[...]

KUTradition wrote: ↑Fri Feb 24, 2023 1:56 pm other than just to be nice and thoughtful. why would the US investigate Nordstream?

shouldn’t the countries to whom the pipeline “belongs” be doing the investigation?

or, perhaps, a truly independent 3rd party…give the Swiss a call?

I don’t disagree.

The thing about this is, perhaps, some conspicuous lack of an investigation