MAINSTREAM vs MAGA COOLER - For those who want to challenge the other side.

[W. Niederhut]

1 hour ago, Leslie Sharp said:

@W. Niederhut

You're probably aware Hungarian-American Sebastian Gorka, one time Trump advisor, was advisor to Orbán.  A frequent guest on the podcast Sebastian Gorka's AMERICA FIRST is Jack Posobiec, which might explain the pushback you're receiving here.

Has anyone actually watched the 6 min. clip attached to Carlson's 2-hour interview with Tate? Tate is a maniacal sadistic misogynist and Carlson sits wide eyed as he lies and lies and lies. The JFK assassination research community is damaged by any association whatsoever with this milieu of pathetic yet dangerous miscreants. 

Agreed, Leslie.

But, on the flip side, no one else in the mainstream U.S. media has ever been willing to tell the truth about the JFK assassination-- even giving a Fox platform to James DiEugenio and Lawrence Schnapf.

I think Fletcher Prouty faced a similar problem years ago.  As he said about the Liberty Lobby, he was, "a writer in search of a platform," which was unavailable in the Mockingbird mainstream media.

It's the same reason that some accurate critics of the U.S. military industrial complex could only find a platform at Russia Today.

(I used to read Russia Today just to get perspectives censored by the Mockingbird M$M.  Of course, some of it was Kremlin bs, but some of it was true.)

 

[Leslie Sharp]

43 minutes ago, W. Niederhut said:

Agreed, Leslie.

But, on the flip side, no one else in the mainstream U.S. media has ever been willing to tell the truth about the JFK assassination-- even giving a Fox platform to James DiEugenio and Lawrence Schnapf.

I think Fletcher Prouty faced a similar problem years ago.  As he said about the Liberty Lobby, he was, "a writer in search of a platform," which was unavailable in the Mockingbird mainstream media.

It's the same reason that some accurate critics of the U.S. military industrial complex could only find a platform at Russia Today.

(I used to read Russia Today just to get perspectives censored by the Mockingbird M$M.  Of course, some of it was Kremlin bs, but some of it was true.)

 

My argument is that Tucker Carlson didn't give Andrew Tate a platform in defense of "free speech." He promoted a vile sadistic misogynist.  And in doing so, he / they are automatically associated with Carlson's alleged noble, patriotic courage to discuss the JFK assassination Records Act when no one else would. In the minds of million who already doubt there was a conspiracy, and I'm speaking first hand from the blowback I've received from family and friends, the charge is: "See?! These are the crazies we've been telling you about all along!"   I can take the slings and arrows from the outside, but this collective self-inflicted injury is a mark of psychological dis-ease, imv.

Edited July 22, 2023 by Leslie Sharp

[Leslie Sharp]

@W. Niederhut. After I met Albarelli, I did the requisite due diligence to find he too had been interviewed (possibly on more than one occasion) on RT.  I decided I could live with that, with a wait and see attitude.  When we discussed it in earnest, he had a similar argument as did Prouty: any platform is better than none.  I'm not sure I even fault RFK Jr. for going on Fox so frequently, other than I feel like he's being batted around like a shuttlecock and it's his apparent obliviousness to the fact he's being used that is more disturbing than his being used! if that makes sense.

 

At some point, I'll share the significance of the Liberty Lobby  to the assassination investigation as presented in Coup. I hope you'll consider the research with an open mind.

[Benjamin Cole]

One could argue that President Biden, and the NYT have chosen to overlook, or even edit and censor out, the wearing of swastikas on various Ukrainian armed forces. 

The Russians, in contrast, lost about 10% of their total population in evicting the Nazis from their soil. That was called WWII. 

The Russians have deep reasons to loath, detest and revile Nazis. 

This does not make Stalin a nice guy, in fact he too was guilty of mass slaughter.  

Linking present-day US public leaders to Nazis....easily done, and this sort of slander can go in any direction. 

Why is the neo-liberal NYT covering up Nazi swastikas on Ukrainian uniforms? 

 

[Leslie Sharp]

31 minutes ago, Benjamin Cole said:

One could argue that President Biden, and the NYT have chosen to overlook, or even edit and censor out, the wearing of swastikas on various Ukrainian armed forces. 

The Russians, in contrast, lost about 10% of their total population in evicting the Nazis from their soil. That was called WWII. 

The Russians have deep reasons to loath, detest and revile Nazis. 

This does not make Stalin a nice guy, in fact he too was guilty of mass slaughter.  

Linking present-day US public leaders to Nazis....easily done, and this sort of slander can go in any direction. 

Why is the neo-liberal NYT covering up Nazi swastikas on Ukrainian uniforms? 

 

@Benjamin ColeYour failure to address the topic of this thread is worrisome.

Diverting it to your obvious obsession with Joe Biden is transparently deliberate.


Have you watched the Tate clip which includes footage of him whipping a woman with his belt?

Then, have you viewed the entire Carlson-Tate interview?  

And, what  are your thoughts on the wisdom of Carlson providing a sadistic misogynist air time?  

And finally, what do you think about the blowback that Carlson's name is on the Records Act AND Andrew Tate?  

Edited July 23, 2023 by Leslie Sharp

[Benjamin Cole]

I know nothing about Andrew Tate. He was on some TikToks is have seen, and he looked offensive and juvenile at best. 

I am concerned not the Tates of the world, who are essentially unimportant and can be squashed overnight. As he was. 

Tate commands no vast federal military and surveillance bureaucracies, or politicized prosecutorial agencies, or allied media outlets. 

Tate is the not the NYT (and other legacy news agencies) censoring images of swastikas on Ukrainian uniforms. 

I happen to oppose Putin's invasion of Ukraine, and consider Putin a war criminal. 

But reporters are supposed to tell the truth, not toe official party lines and censor reality. 

What little I know, Carlson was wasting his time talking to a runt like Tate. 

Tate was not an earnest and sincere defender of human rights, like many now in jail in Hong Kong. 

I advise Carlson to try to interview Jimmy Lai, Hong Kong publisher in prison for being a publisher. 

 

 

[Leslie Sharp]

1 hour ago, Benjamin Cole said:

I know nothing about Andrew Tate. He was on some TikToks is have seen, and he looked offensive and juvenile at best. 

I am concerned not the Tates of the world, who are essentially unimportant and can be squashed overnight. As he was. 

Tate commands no vast federal military and surveillance bureaucracies, or politicized prosecutorial agencies, or allied media outlets. 

Tate is the not the NYT (and other legacy news agencies) censoring images of swastikas on Ukrainian uniforms. 

I happen to oppose Putin's invasion of Ukraine, and consider Putin a war criminal. 

But reporters are supposed to tell the truth, not toe official party lines and censor reality. 

What little I know, Carlson was wasting his time talking to a runt like Tate. 

Tate was not an earnest and sincere defender of human rights, like many now in jail in Hong Kong. 

I advise Carlson to try to interview Jimmy Lai, Hong Kong publisher in prison for being a publisher. 

 

 

In other words, you're on the wrong thread?

[Ron Bulman]

2 hours ago, Benjamin Cole said:

Tate was not an earnest and sincere defender of human rights, like many now in jail in Hong Kong. 

How absurd.  Did you watch the six-minute clip?  People like Tate should be called out for what they are.  Imprisoned.

Edited July 23, 2023 by Ron Bulman

[Benjamin Cole]

3 hours ago, Leslie Sharp said:

In other words, you're on the wrong thread?

Maybe. The topic of the media, and media actors, censoring and polluting the news, from Tucker Carson, to the media blackout on the JFKA and the JFK Records Act (the full spectrum from legacy media NYT, WaPO, CNN, MSNBC etc.) perhaps belongs in this thread. 

However, I have had my say. 

 

[Leslie Sharp]

7 hours ago, Benjamin Cole said:

Maybe. The topic of the media, and media actors, censoring and polluting the news, from Tucker Carson, to the media blackout on the JFKA and the JFK Records Act (the full spectrum from legacy media NYT, WaPO, CNN, MSNBC etc.) perhaps belongs in this thread. 

However, I have had my say. 

 

Perhaps, but I'm still curious to hear your perspective, specifically, on Tucker Carlson's role as high profile mainstream media spokesperson for the Records Act long after Trump passed on his opportunity and his obligation to release ALL files? Where was the concern and outrage on Fox News when Trump failed the test in 2017 and again in 2019?

Meanwhile, Carlson and mainstream Fox News ( review News Corp board of directors) knowingly advanced Trump's Big Lie that 1) will soon land Trump & Co. a string of indictments, 2) cost Fox News $787m and counting, 3) fomented an existential Civil War in America? And if that isn't enough, the voice of reason in support of the Records Act sat down for two hours to interview a sadistic misogynist who by last count attracted 75 million hits on his tin-tok, at least one of which describes how he made his financial fortune webcamming porn for kids.

 

Edited July 23, 2023 by Leslie Sharp

[Matthew Koch]

Uhhhhhh...... So What?!? 

Barbara Walter once interviewed Sean Connery who was more misogynist in the interview than Andrew Tate was. 

By Leslie's "logic" you shouldn't what Barbara Walters interview with Dr Crenshaw. This topic doesn't have anything thing to do with the JFKA and should be moved to the Water Cooler where it belongs. 

 

 

[Leslie Sharp]

Why am I surprised you weighed in.

I challenge anyone on this forum, other than you, to equate Connery with Andrew Tate with a straight face.

The 6 minute clip of Tate shows him whipping a woman with his belt along with graphic descriptions of his sadistic attitudes toward women in general. Considering he appeals primarily to young, disenfranchised males around the globe — apparently 75 million tiktok hits to date — in a "sane" society he would be considered a danger writ large.

Yet, Carlson manages to normalize him in the 2 hour interview.  How do the optics alone, not to mention the content, impact any progress that might have been made by Carlson acting as spokesperson for the JFKA Records Act, a law that Trump failed to comply with fully?

Edited July 23, 2023 by Leslie Sharp

[Benjamin Cole]

2 hours ago, Leslie Sharp said:

Why am I surprised you weighed in.

I challenge anyone on this forum, other than you, to equate Connery with Andrew Tate with a straight face.

The 6 minute clip of Tate shows him whipping a woman with his belt along with graphic descriptions of his sadistic attitudes toward women in general. Considering he appeals primarily to young, disenfranchised males around the globe — apparently 75 million tiktok hits to date — in a "sane" society he would be considered a danger writ large.

Yet, Carlson manages to normalize him in the 2 hour interview.  How do the optics alone, not to mention the content, impact any progress that might have been made by Carlson acting as spokesperson for the JFKA Records Act, a law that Trump failed to comply with fully?

LS--

Here is the general problem, with the devolution of the US left into culture war and trivial cul-de-sacs, such as this little punk Andrew Tate. 

You have been trained to obsess on the Tates or the world, or the right of trans-women to play on the US women's soccer team, or whether certain country-music songs are secretly racist. 

Modern-day Donks actually like the CIA and FBI, and the surveillance state, and censorship---they believe those instruments are being used on their side in culture wars. Indeed, you are calling for Tate to be censored.  

Suppose I believe abortion is murder? Or that the use of cluster bombs is a war crime? Should I censor those who have other points of view?

Now, let's consider something actually important: 

"On March 9, 2023, the Biden-Harris Administration submitted to Congress a proposed Fiscal Year (FY) 2024 Budget request of $842 billion for the Department of Defense (DoD), an increase of $26 billion over FY 2023 levels and $100 billion more than FY 2022."

In addition, the VA bill: 

"The FY24 bill prioritizes our nation's heroes by providing $319.763 billion for the VA, which matches the President's Budget Request and is $16.481 billion above the enacted level. Other VA programs like the electronic health record modernization initiative are FULLY funded.

---

The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) projects that interest payments will total $663 billion in fiscal year 2023 (lets assign half of that to war spending).  

Add on $100 billion black budget

Oh, roughly $1.6 trillion for the intel-military.

Or, $4,800 for every man woman and child in the US. 

$19,200 from every family of four to finance the military-intel  state. Every year.

Every year and rising. 

Who cares about the little punk Tate, or Carlson's interview of the little punk Tate? 

Another important topic: Why did President Biden do a snuff job on the JFK Records Act?

These are real topics. 

Not the little punk Tate. 

 

[Leslie Sharp]

1 hour ago, Benjamin Cole said:

LS--

Here is the general problem, with the devolution of the US left into culture war and trivial cul-de-sacs, such as this little punk Andrew Tate. 

You have been trained to obsess on the Tates or the world, or the right of trans-women to play on the US women's soccer team, or whether certain country-music songs are secretly racist. 

Modern-day Donks actually like the CIA and FBI, and the surveillance state, and censorship---they believe those instruments are being used on their side in culture wars. Indeed, you are calling for Tate to be censored.  

Suppose I believe abortion is murder? Or that the use of cluster bombs is a war crime? Should I censor those who have other points of view?

Now, let's consider something actually important: 

"On March 9, 2023, the Biden-Harris Administration submitted to Congress a proposed Fiscal Year (FY) 2024 Budget request of $842 billion for the Department of Defense (DoD), an increase of $26 billion over FY 2023 levels and $100 billion more than FY 2022."

In addition, the VA bill: 

"The FY24 bill prioritizes our nation's heroes by providing $319.763 billion for the VA, which matches the President's Budget Request and is $16.481 billion above the enacted level. Other VA programs like the electronic health record modernization initiative are FULLY funded.

---

The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) projects that interest payments will total $663 billion in fiscal year 2023 (lets assign half of that to war spending).  

Add on $100 billion black budget

Oh, roughly $1.6 trillion for the intel-military.

Or, $4,800 for every man woman and child in the US. 

$19,200 from every family of four to finance the military-intel  state. Every year.

Every year and rising. 

Who cares about the little punk Tate, or Carlson's interview of the little punk Tate? 

Another important topic: Why did President Biden do a snuff job on the JFK Records Act?

These are real topics. 

Not the little punk Tate. 

 

If Tate was just a punk, why did Carlson and crew fly to Romania to interview him? Why did Carlson give him 2 hours air time? He's either a frightened former Fox host, or something else.

Watch Tate's clip. Watch the Carlson interview.  Come back when you have.

Edited July 24, 2023 by Leslie Sharp

[Benjamin Cole]

5 minutes ago, Leslie Sharp said:

Watch Tate's clip. Watch the Carlson interview.  Come back when you have.

OK I speed-watched the little punk Tate, and his entirely offensive business model, about three minutes wasted.   Pornography is big business and Tate is part of it. 

Tate was and is not a powerful anti-democratic force, and was squashed rather easily. No tears from me, although I have concerns about freedom of expression. 

If I believe the use of cluster bombs is a war crime, should I ban from social media those who support the use of cluster bombs? Some might say killing and maiming people, including inevitable civilians long after the war at hand is over, is more offensive than Tate's porno biz. 

I stand by my sentiment, that the US military-intel complex, which sucks down $1.6 trillion a year---nearly $5,000 for every man woman and child in the US---and has force of arms and runs a panopticon surveillance state, is of larger concern than the little punk Andrew Tate. 

Something about modern Donks---they are trained to bark at bonsai trees in a redwood forest of anti-democratic forces. 

Tate is a bonsai tree.