Interview 1120 – Sibel Edmonds Explains The Erdogan Takedown

12/23/201581 Comments

Sibel Edmonds of BoilingFrogsPost.com joins us once again to discuss the ongoing “reverse engineering” of Erdogan by the NATO/CIA/Kurdish/Israeli/Russian forces that oppose him. We talk about the hypocritical and nearly-unanimous coverage of Erdogan’s abuses and how and why this narrative is converging now to finish the US/NATO task of removing him from office to usher in a more pliable puppet.

SHOW NOTES:
Interview 809 – Sibel Edmonds Explains Erdogan’s Fall From Grace

Turkish PM Erdogan: The Speedy Transformation of an Imperial Puppet

75 US-Trained Rebels Enter Syria From Turkey

Is Erdogan Being Set Up For A NATO-backed Coup?

Turkey and Saudi Arabia alarm the West by backing Islamist extremists the Americans had bombed in Syria

ISIS Oil Trade Full Frontal: “Raqqa’s Rockefellers”, Bilal Erdogan, KRG Crude, And The Israel Connection

New evidence of Erdoğan’s secret meeting with al-Qadi emerges

BFP Exclusive: Syria – Secret US-NATO Training & Support Camp to Oust Current Syrian President

Russian FM plans to meet co-leader of Turkey’s pro-Kurdish HDP party

Philip Giraldi on the latest in Turkey

Gulen movement secretly funded 200 trips for lawmakers and staff

U.S. lawmakers got suspect Turkish campaign cash

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedintumblrmail

Filed in: Interviews
Tagged with:

Comments (81)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. Al Saleh says:

    When the media says “that is the bad guy” we should understand “a divide and conquer trick is being played”. This is why I don’t take part in any such campaign, and I endorse your positions not to take part in it, and to expose the trick to your audience.

    Erdogan, Al Saud, and Al Thani have targeted my people and ignited the current war and its associated crises in Syria. I have no sympathy for any of them, but in the same time, I know they are just pawns in the game, and their removal will not give the Syrian people or their own people any advantage. what will come after them is certainly worse for Syria, and for their own people.

    However, Divide and conquer can work in many different ways. I believe that refusing to talk to people who are dragged in the trick is not equal to refusing to cooperate with the trick.

    For Sibel, if you want to understand how a secular faction can be co-opted to support Gulan, read your government’s divide and conquer strategy:
    http://www.scribd.com/doc/155326255/Ron-Duchin-Conquer-and-Divide-National-Cattleman-s-Association
    and see this example of its application
    https://wikileaks.org/gifiles/attach/33/33714_Suncor%20Presentation-1210.pdf
    here is a full story about the history of this strategy
    http://www.mintpressnews.com/stratfor-strategies-how-to-win-the-media-war-against-grassroots-activists/166078/

  2. proverbs11vs30 says:

    Thanks James for this fantastic interview, lots of good insight into what is going on in Turkey and Im very excited regarding the new media site by Sibel and others, very cool to see.

  3. Mishelle says:

    Hero-seeking, worship, learned helplessness, INDEED! I believe Sibel has hit it spot on, I so appreciate her no-nonsense style, and I can’t wait to see her ambitious next steps. I believe, as you have both said before, in the arts we can make progress. I’m working on a novel, so I too am going toward ambitious solutions! Thanks for the great interview and all the great work! 🙂

  4. bob_fergus says:

    The new crowd funded media outlet alluded to by Sibel sounds like an exiting new step. Count me in! Can’t wait for the new year and perhaps a more truthful and relevant news and current affairs genre.
    Happy holidays to all!
    Bob

  5. jsalacus says:

    James and Sibel

    Regarding Putan, he may be corrupt, self-serving, etc. However he did bring the ISIS – Turkish connection to the fore and to the attention of our (semiconscious, etc.) media and to the attention of American public. I consider that a positive – don’t you? That is a real (as opposed to a rhetorical) question.

    Joe

  6. vumxmx says:

    Excellent interview. However, I think you overdo it in regards to Putin. The Russian entry into Syria saved it from turning into another Libya. He has also exposed the criminality of NATO and other States in regards to the financing of ISIS. These are all positive outcomes. So he’s not a saint. Do you really expect one in politics? Even saints in government and warfare would have to accomplish things with violence sometimes. To complain that the generality of mankind needs leaders and heroes is frankly unintelligent, since it fails to understand human nature. Evil is a fact of earthly existence and all too often it takes violence and guile to check it.

    Another point: I am always surprised at the absence of the elephant in the room in discussions of the Middle East. I refer to Zionism and Israel–the great taboo subjects in the West.
    everyone is cowed by them, with few exceptions, such as Paul Craig Roberts and the Saker.

  7. 911truther says:

    The analysis about Turkey has some merit to it, but the analysis of Russia and Putin is totally, egregiously wrong. Putin is the most popular leader in the world since FDR. He is standing up for his country against imperialism, and that is why he is so highly thought of in the world. He is fighting a real war on ISIS and has exposed U.S. support for ISIS for the whole world to see, and has forced the U.S.to change its policy and has brought Erdogan under control. Putin has continued to faithfully back Assad when Sibel said he was going to sell them out. Has he? Hardly! If Corbett has appeared on RT in the past and they did not tell him what to say, why then does he now say that he would not appear and a “mouthpiece” for Putin? This is not consistent at all, nor honest. I agree with Paul Craig Roberts. I think both of you are Russophobes.

    • michael2 says:

      Oligarchs are oligarchs, elites are elites, billionaires are billionaires…
      When you’re in that club the only friends you have are oligarchs, elites or billionaires.
      Their ideologies may differ slightly but their agenda is all the same… NWO! Are they going to relinquish their power and money for the greater good? No way.
      After the MH17 shoot down, Australian Prime Minister Tony Abbott at the time, said he was going to “shirt front” Putin at the G20 summit in Brisbane, and get to the bottom of it, instead all we got was photos of Putin and Abbott holding Koala Bears, smiling and looking like best mates.
      Don’t be fooled they’re all good friends with an agenda, just watch James’ China and the New World Order

      • 911truther says:

        I do understand that there is a world oligarchy or ruling class. What you right-wingers and libertarians will never understand is that the only answer to oligarchy is a strong government that represents the interests of the people. This is difficult to achieve, and never perfect, but it is what we must strive for. By promoting the idea that government itself is evil, you do the work of the oligarchs, who are thereby left free to exploit without any restriction.

        • Apollo Slater says:

          Government is evil as such. No matter who you set up as the government, they will be the “oligarchs” and “ruling class”, even if they are saints. The idea that government can “represent the interests of the people” is extremely naive if we look at history, especially 20th century history. You cannot build a civilized society by employing physical violence, which is what government is.

          • NotDole says:

            My evil provincial government just performed a surgery on me that would have cost 15 000 dollars in the US, I have been living in pain for a year, here the doctors are not opiophobes (its a new word and it fits) because we got no irrational DEA (who are the guys who invented warrantless wiretapping by the way, well, used it first on vast swats of innocent people starting in the 90’s).

            Also since 2 years, since the job I worked at did not cover my (yay) 3 health issues at once, they had a max of 2 since I was only working there since 8 years, I was getting coverage of 3 chronic problems only at my 10th year of work). The people who all have hovering magical .44 Magnums to their heads to pay income tax to pay for our healthcare give me a ill person welfare, like i said, i couldn’t get covered, so I get a generous 1820 dollars a month I would otherwise get 700 or so if I just didn’t want to work and was over 25 (the treatment they give to the young people under 25 now and how its almost impossible for them to get welfare now is what we already have in this Canadian province, L’Austérité. And that is a bad thing, but it only came into being when the “Liberal Party of Quebec” (read Hi-jacked 15 years ago by an ex federal prog-con ex’s chief when they were reduced to the laughable 3 seats, there was no such thing as a right wing party in Quebec and John “Jean” Charest hijacked it in 2003 and it’s been a neocon pary since then, well neocon, might be a strong word for Couilllard and his clique but still, they’re no Adlai Stevensons.

            • WannabePhilosopher says:

              Although I strongly disagree, I see where your coming from. But what about all the industrial scale death and destruction the state has brought throughout history? I don’t expect to convince you of anything, but I think any objective person would understand why many believe the very idea of government is evil. Therefore, in my opinion, the burden is always on the statists to explain how the variant that they advocate will result in a better human condition.

            • Apollo Slater says:

              Where did your benevolent government get the money to pay for your surgery? By robbing other people. You can argue the ends justify the means, that any crime is justified, as long as it benefits you. But it is unethical.

              Nobody paid for my medical treatments – I paid for myself, yes in the thousands of dollars. Sometimes you can’t afford everything you want or even desperately need. But ultimately we can’t prevent death. And it is absolutely unjustified for me to take someone’s earnings by force because it benefits me.

    • WannabePhilosopher says:

      His popularity means nothing to me. The Russian people have been mislead in the same way that people in the West support their political puppets. To point that out is far from being a “Russophobe.”

  8. paul6 says:

    I do not quite understand the, let us say, anti-russian sentiment in this video.
    Do you deny that Erdogan is involved in supporting ISIS?
    Do you deny that ISIS is essentially covert aggressive warfare by parts of “the West”, Turkey and Saudi Arabia and other gulf monarchies?
    Do you deny that Russia is helping defending the state of Syria against this aggression in full compliance with international law?
    Do you deny that Russia is also defending itself against a covert Gladio B type secret army that is poised to threaten the Russian state?
    What that Russia does is so wrong?

    • michael2 says:

      ditto to my reply to 911truther….

      • paul6 says:

        Is this supposed to be an answer to my questions?

        • michael2 says:

          Yes, unfortunately… It’s the way of the world…

          But as I see it (and I might be wrong), anyone in “true” power is corrupt no matter what side they are on, doesn’t matter where you are “divide and conquer” is everywhere.

          Look at the bigger picture, the world chess board, see it from above, remove any ideology or predisposition you may have… After a while, it just becomes obvious… Putin is no different to Carey, Bush, Clinton, Obama, etc… etc… They’re in the Club! The club they’re going to beat you over the head with…

          It’s all just a bullshit bunch of elites laughing at you!

          I commend James for his gentle even temper over so many years of reporting this crap…

          M2

    • 911truther says:

      All very good questions, none of which will be answered here. Sibel just lost some Paul Craig Roberts subscribers, including me.

  9. Mandela says:

    I also was disappointed with the coverage of Russia in this video. I had asked for an interview with James and Sibel about Turkey and was grateful for analysis. Thank you!

    My issue with the conversation about Russia was that it was all conclusions with almost zero analysis. Putin has become one of the richest men in the world while being a “public servant”. This can only happen by selling influence or thievery, neither of which are noble pursuits. The reality of this fact does not give us a free pass from evaluating Russian options and policies and replace this with sophomoric putdowns. The US in its hegemonic mania has been tirelessly working to isolate, cripple, and to destroy Russia from within. As the only country in the world who both has occasionally been able to disagree publicly with US policy and take actions that affect US plans, Putin has had a very delicate and difficult path. He has made huge costly mistakes and he has made shrewd judgements in difficult situations. In short, I feel that love him or hate him, Putin deserves reasoned analysis despite the overweening idolatry that is currently coming his way.

    • WannabePhilosopher says:

      Putin is nothing more than a tired lapdog of the global elite who could give a fuck about his own people just like Obama or Bush or Merkel or whoever else. He just happens to be in the lower levels of the global oligarchy. Be assured that if he had all the power that the West has he would implement the same exact policies. Just because some members of the global elite want to take out others doesn’t mean they aren’t all part of the same system.

    • Bilejones says:

      “Putin has become one of the richest men in the world while being a “public servant”.”

      Do you have any evidence for this assertion?

  10. vumxmx says:

    THE ESSENTIAL SAKER: from the trenches of the emerging multipolar world

    http://www.amazon.com/THE-ESSENTIAL-SAKER-trenches-multipolar-ebook/dp/B017PH62IE#reader_B017PH62IE

    http://profissionalize.com/subjects/politics-and-social-sciences/politics-and-government/political-science/history-and-theory/B017PH62IE.html

    One can read the Forward by Pepe Escobar and the author’s preface, Introduction and a fair amount of the first part of the book at Amazon.

  11. vumxmx says:

    The recent murder of Samir Kuntar by Israel has, yet again, inflamed the discussion about Putin’s relation to Israel. This is an immensely complicated topic and those who like simple, canned, “explanations” should stop reading right now. The truth is, the relationship between Russia and Israel and, even before that, between Jews and Russians would deserve an entire book. In fact, Alexander Solzhenitsyn has written exactly such a book, it is entitled “200 years together”, but due to the iron grip of the Zionists on the Anglo media, it has still not been translated into English. That should already tell you something right there – an author acclaimed worldwide who got the Nobel Prize for literature cannot get his book translated into English because its contents might undermine the official narrative about Russian-Jewish relations in general and about the role Jews played in Russian 20th century politics in particular! What other proof of the reality of the subordination of the former British Empire to Zionists interest does one need?

    I have already written about this topic in the past and, at the very least, I will ask you to read the following two background articles before continuing to read:

    AngloZionist: Short primer for the newcomers
    How a medieval concept of ethnicity makes NATO commit yet another a dangerous blunder

    The rest:

    http://thesaker.is/putin-and-israel-a-complex-and-multi-layered-relationship/

    • nosoapradio says:

      I’m curious how Berel Lazar, Lev Leviev, events in Chechnya, the murder of Christophe de Margerie, the “suicide” of Thierry Leyne, Pussy Riot, the unfortunate plane crash killing the entire Polish government and the more recent one killing a large gaggle of Russians as they flew out of Egypt fit into the Saker’s interpretation of events.

      I have difficulty accepting that such a “good man” as Putin, popular or otherwise, would be tolerated by the zionists, taking over BRICS banks and the rest, if he did not serve their purposes.
      I tend to think Putin is more zionist-affilitated than the Saker indicates:

      “…Russia

      Leviev’s friendship with Putin dated back to 1992, when the president, then a deputy mayor in St. Petersburg, authorized the opening of the first new Jewish school in the city (financed by Leviev) in half a century after the mayor hesitated to do it.

      Leviev had nurtured the relationship with Putin, brokering meetings for the first time between the new Russian president and prominent Israeli politicians. But he avoided being identified with the “Family,” a group of business tycoons who tried to convert their economic influence into political power…”

      http://www.icmrindia.org/casestudies/catalogue/Economics/Lev%20Leviev%20vs%20De%20Beers-Case%20Study.htm

      “…Chabad is Zionist, Rabbi Says
      A spokesman for the Chabad-Lubavitch Chassidic movement says the sect is Zionist in its support for Israel.
      …Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu, who addressed a Tel Aviv hall filled to capacity at the event, told the Chabad emissaries, “You stand atop of the mountain, and the Jewish people gathered at its base salute you. I am the first [to do so].”

      Among the hundreds of Chabad emissaries from the former Soviet Union to attend the event were Russia’s Chief Rabbi, Berel Lazar and philanthropist Lev Leviev, head of Africa-Israel…”

      http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/145899#.Vnuvj0_v1HE

      “…Mr Goldberg and Mr Laniado were also partners in Ascorp, the Angolan diamond monopoly controlled by Russian-Israeli billionaire Lev Leviev, who is a close friend of Vladimir Putin (Leviev had several numbered accounts at HSBC)…”

      http://www.irishtimes.com/business/financial-services/hsbc-revelations-shine-light-on-secretive-diamond-world-1.2097146

      Putin, Leviev and Lazar all seem to be working hand in hand… with Israel.

    • nosoapradio says:

      In reference to my comment on Putin and zionism that is awaiting moderation:

      For what it’s worth, and I’m no expert, I’d already posted a series of links attempting to establish Putin’s profound ties with Israel and zionism through the Putin/Leviev/Rabbi Lazar partnership on another Corbett thread a while back:

      https://www.corbettreport.com/interview-1113-new-world-next-week-with-james-evan-pilato-2/

    • M says:

      When it comes to Jews, lets just quote Abraham Foxman of the ADL when he was asked by a Jewish journalist of the fact that all eight major Hollywood studios are ran by Jews:

      “”That’s a very dangerous phrase, ‘Jews control Hollywood.’ What is true is that there are a lot of Jews in Hollywood,” he said. Instead of “control,” Foxman would prefer people say that many executives in the industry “happen to be Jewish,” as in “all eight major film studios are run by men who happen to be Jewish.””

      http://articles.latimes.com/2008/dec/19/opinion/oe-stein19

      They just happen to be Jews. I think the same can be applied when talking about the FED, banking, western media or Jeltsin era in general. They just happen to be Jews. 😉

      When it comes to Putin I have to say that when compared to his predecessor Jeltsin, he has been better at advancing the interest of the people in Russia and that is also when and why the dictator narrative started. It is sad to hear for sure about monetary corruption, but still without him the Jewish-Russian oligarchs would be still in control of the Russian media and the government.

      The hypocrisy of the Jewish organizations in general becomes quite obvious when you look at the arrest of the former media-mogul Vladimir Gusinsky in Greece. He was arrested on Russian Federations request, but set free after a pressure coming from Jewish organizations. He was not prosecuted in Russia for being a Jew, but for being a criminal but since he happens to be a Jew…

      I am not an antisemite, but I feel that without looking into the issue of why so many of these powerful people “happen to be Jews”, there is something missing from the puzzle. Not all Italian-American were members of the Cosa Nostra, but in order to join Cosa Nostra you had to be of Italian/Sicilian descent. In my opinion they just have different rackets. The rackets of the real Kosher Nostra seem to be legal businesses, but they also use illegal methods to advance their business and real object seems to be power itself.

      In the 19th century it was common belief among the people that Jews are planning conquer the world through financial system. I am not blaming all the Jews, just part of the < 1%, but looking at the situation today it seems the people might had been at least partly right.

      It is very hard to discuss this issue without being labeled an antisemite. One of the biggest newspapers in Scandinavia (Helsingin Sanomat) did a few years back in its monthly edition an article how Jews are high positions in society etc and one of the first comments was how the article was “antisemitic” even though it was just stating the facts.

      http://hs12.snstatic.fi/webkuva/taysi/560/1305601992448?ts=331

  12. stellar_consortium says:

    Awesome.

  13. ralphodavis says:

    Gratitude to both James and Sibel for this timely delve into the murk.

    It’s been clear for some time that Sibel possesses wholly unique and complex perspective. I’ve recently lamented the absence of her canny and cogent analysis of unfolding regional chaos and the staggering waste of humanity caught in its grip.

    Politics of division are rampant, sadly even here. As I told PCR earlier today; one can serve truth or state, but not both. I hate to see adults behave like precocious children in the unmistakable bloom of overwhelming and all consuming evil insidiously usurping our energies and diverting consciousness from clarity and hard truth.

    We simply don’t have the luxury of ample time to get it right this time. I don’t think we here in the west can conceive the imposed nightmare about to unfold.

    Cheers to all and, again, many thanks to the ever sensible James and Sibel.

    • Ukdavec says:

      ralphodavis

      In the absence of any automated ‘like’ or ‘dislike’ system (not that I am requesting one) could I simply express my support for the sentiments you express.

      Some of the comments expressed earlier expose the magnitude of the issues that any alternative media channel has to face.

      Do not be discouraged James.

  14. Apollo Slater says:

    RT was a KGB/FSB propaganda op from the start and I was surprised to see so many alt media figures buying in to it, including Lew Rockwell and James. Fortunately the veil of independence has been lifted and it’s easier to see it for what it is now.

    Do you compromise yourself by appearing on RT? If I were interviewed, I’d be acutely aware of who was hosting and choose my words more carefully than in a truly free environment. I think it’s impossible not to have your message affected. But, that doesn’t mean it’s not worth reaching a larger audience, even if you message is curtailed. It’s a tough call.

    • nosoapradio says:

      Yes, a tough call indeed…

      Perhaps the gesture of appearing on RT is a louder message than the voiced message itself. An unwitting endorsement of all things Rrrussian….

      The difficult risk assessment between not getting your message out and being associated with the soapbox brand… Eternal dilemma… a really tough call…

      In a world of highly technical, specialized issues, where people don’t necessarily have the time to formulate informed opinions the fallacy of association is predominant: and it’s instrumentalized manipulating both the moral highground and lowground.

      I’d even say that folks like Donald Trump are designed to be ambulant vehicles for this fallacy: He represents anti-muslim sentiment, shameless wealth devoid of style and climate scepticism.
      If Donald Trump embraces Climate scepticism than it must be an outrageous, despicable position.

      If Chomsky says “Who cares” who committed the 9/11 attacks, if Howard Zinn says they have no practical political significance then why look any further… too much trouble… they can’t be wrong… not going to upset, undermine, sabotage my political world view, my moral high ground by putting those sources into question. Because this is not just disagreement, this is active ridiculing of Truthers. Why would they actively ridicule Truthers, if truthers, aka “fanatics” (Zinn), aka “morons,idiots and a zillion other invectives (Monbiot)” had any leg to stand on?

      Well there I go again singing to the choir, pulverising the dead dog and busting down open doors (like the marines in the Iraki hospital when rescuing Jessica Lynch…)

      And then there’s the trap of publicizing your views while you’re constantly learning more and you have the intellectual integrity and sincere priority of seeking Truth (vs grooming your ego) that leads you to admit you were mistaken, manipulated or misguided on a particular point. (Jessica Lynch is a truly admirable Young woman on that point.)

      Admitting to one person you were wrong on some inconsequential topic is painful enough – imagine admitting to millions of subscribers you were misguided on a “key” issue… OUCH! (not saying Mr Corbett has ever been misguided about anything). But that’s another tough call – admit error and undermine credibility (for the gullible) or save face and subscriptions. Tough call…

      And then there’s context – RT may’ve been an important though subjective source for alternaitve views at a given time

      and then evolved with the world and social events to be associated with pure propaganda… maybe?

      now my son wants me to play hockey with him – continue my rant or go play with him…Touch call?

      Anyhow, be Merry!!

  15. candideschmyles says:

    Have to say I found some of the above comments far more interesting that the video itself.
    Recently I have been forced to reassess what I read and listen to here. What started out as a few minor differences of opinion have snowballed into the realisation that the content here is highly self contradictory. For a long time I thought I was getting an alternative narrative here but increasingly I am seeing only a subtle but consistent veiled support of the status quo with little analysis and getting heavier and heavier on biased assertions. The self imposed media blackout of Wikileaks extends here as does the rubbishing of RT. Combine that with the preaching from the hymnbook of the oligarchs on the climate question and James does seem so very very mainstream message for an alternative audience.

    • nosoapradio says:

      Gosh, Candideschmyles,for alternative analysis I think you’d probably feel a lot better over at Time Magazine:

      http://content.time.com/time/specials/packages/article/0,28804,2036683_2037118_2037146,00.html

      Person of the Year 2010

      Runners-Up

      Julian Assange

      http://time.com/3445231/climate-denier-settled-science/
      The Climate Deniers’ Newest Argument

      http://time.com/4155525/sam-kass-food-and-climate-change/
      This Is the Missing Ingredient in the Climate Change Fight

      https://www.rt.com/news/249513-putin-time-poll-russia/

      “President Putin has emerged victorious in Time magazine’s 2015 reader poll.”

      “…In a diverse field of competitors made up of pop stars, technology gurus, visionaries and politicians – and at a time when US-Russia relations have hit rock bottom – President Putin has emerged victorious in Time magazine’s 2015 reader poll.

      Among the 100 most influential people in the world, as hand selected by the editors of TIME, the Russian leader proved his rock-star credentials by edging out 24-year-old rapper Lee Chae-rin (better known by her stage name, ‘CL’) of the South Korean girl-group 2NE1 to claim the number-one spot with 6.95 percent of the votes in the final tally.

      Putin – the only world leader to rank in the top 10 – grabbed the global spotlight from the leading divas of pop music: Lady Gaga, Rihanna and Taylor Swift (2.6 percent, 1.9 percent and 1.8 percent of the votes, respectively). Aside from the Russian leader, the only non-celebrities to appear in the top 10 were the Dalai Lama (1.7 percent), Pakistani female activist Malala Yousafzai (1.6 percent) and Pope Francis (1.5 percent)…”

      pro-Putin, pro-AGW, pro-Wikileaks
      3 powerful reasons why you should subscribe to Time Magazine,

      and why Mr Corbett is definately not toeing the “oligarch’s” line…

      • candideschmyles says:

        Thank you for your inevitable response NoSoap. As always you post a few links with no substantial meaning to them to justify a weak predetermined position. Didn’t you know that Putin also made it to number one spot in Forbes magazine too? As the mag of choice for all defacto and aspiring globalists it must mean Putin is their man right?
        As for Julian Assange that poll stems from 5 years ago when western media was desperate to build a media argument over why Assange was a dangerous criminal and failed. Since then, with the exception of a handful of interviews that attempted to focus exclusively on the false rape allegations Julian has had no outlet save RT. The 80-100million documents he has published unredacted continue to be the greatest resource of government secrets but are ignored in a pact of silence by the MMS. And yes it is highly revealing that Corbett takes this same line. I have seen not one hint of anything resembling evidence presented here or anywhere else that challenges Jullian’s integrity. All James has offered is ad hominem insults on his appearance as his health declines after 5 years internment in a single room at the Ecuadorian Embassy.
        Looking at more of James work, with doubt thus sown, I see no journalism outside of a regurgitation of already extant work by others. True he puts his pieces together quite well and is a coherent narrator but there is nothing original, groundbraking or revealing. Instead there has been a steady move toward playing to the most lucrative audience in the alternative market, the quasi fascist right wing American. Or to give them their Latin name Homo Imbecillus.
        But as James Brown noser in chief I don’t expect your agreement on anything these days. I’m interested in deciphering facts from fictions. Anyone who is genuine in that pursuit has a hard enough time finding maybes let alone facts they can rely on. Corbett used to represent a few maybes for me. Now it’s just official altmed crud.

        • nosoapradio says:

          My inevitable response to yours Candideschmyles is the following:

          “…Didn’t you know that Putin also made it to number one spot in Forbes magazine too? As the mag of choice for all defacto and aspiring globalists it must mean Putin is their man right?…”

          Yes, actually, with a qualification as to who “their” refers to, one could make such a case.

          “…As for Julian Assange that poll stems from 5 years ago when western media was desperate to build a media argument over why Assange was a dangerous criminal and failed…”

          Yes following Cablegate in 2010, aka his selective collaboration with 5 of the most MSM newspapers in the west Julian has since been upstaged by a certain Edward Snowden who, after a series of harrowing escapes from the all-seeing eye of the NSA, was sanctified (via media darlings Glenn Greenwald and Laura Poitras) by an Oscar earlier this year. Yes, as with Forbes and Time “person-of-the-year” awards an Oscar means he is “their” man.

          Though your portrait of Assange is poignant your argument would’ve contained some substance and thus been more powerful had you detailed a handful of these 80-100 million earthshattering documents.

          The rest of your message is your inevitable verbose series of empty Ad Hominem attacks employed to criticize what you claim are… a long series of Ad Hominem attacks… without your actually substantiating anything.

          Speaking for myself only, as James Brown-noser-in-chief, I would add the obvious, that, in the beginning your comments as well presented a few “maybes” here but quickly became the predictable, highly formatted and thus easily discernible stream of fallacious and otherwise hollow bashing seen routinely in many “alt” site comment sections.

    • ralphodavis says:

      It really helps when making an argument to cite an example beyond a vague reference to self-perceived ‘self-contradictory content’, especially when citing the ‘high’ variety, as well as reference to imaginary play-books by equally unspecified oligarchs on any one of the hundreds of specific and open questions still remaining to be definitively answered and proven. Scientifically, of course.

      I’m also dying to know what exactly constitutes the ‘alternative audience’. I’d really like to know what that is.

      • candideschmyles says:

        I’m sorry Ralph. I do not feel there is anything ambiguous in my comment. And if you really need help on defining what an alternative audience is I fear any effort on clarifying the rest would help you little. Best if I keep it simple. Figure it out for yourself if you are so inclined. Or shoot the messenger. I’m easy either way.

        • ralphodavis says:

          I understand. It’s all about what you ‘feel’ rather than some specific fact to support your contentions.

          But thanks for keeping it simple and transparent nonetheless. Easy indeed.

          • candideschmyles says:

            I did try for a time to indulge in the explanation. But they make no difference to a predetermined position, so why should I bother?
            If your questions had been neutral I may well have clarified. But they were not.

            • ralphodavis says:

              Oh, ..hmm, ..huh, ..neutralized questions?

              WTF? Indulgently unclear, don’t you think?

              • candideschmyles says:

                Exactly what I meant. Neutral and neutralised are not the same. You prove any explanation would have been nothing but an excersise in futility.

              • ralphodavis says:

                Yes, of course, one achieves the other, ..as you continue evasion.

                Maybe you meant unbiased? If so, why not say so and clarify exactly what you mean?

                Then we can have a discussion.

              • candideschmyles says:

                Neutral, unbiased. Pick up any thesaurus.

    • Apollo Slater says:

      candideschmyles,

      I think you’re making more of this disagreement than it really is. “Alternative” doesn’t mean “agreement” and sometimes viewpoints will diverge. That’s normal and expected. What’s important is to not fall into a party line and to maintain a sincere search for truth. I really don’t think you can accuse James of keeping a party line or being insincere. He’s simply become uncomfortable with RT’s reporting recently, due to understandable political pressures on its reporting, and he’s made that clear. Nothing wrong with that. The idea that James is “mainstream” or working for the “oligarchs” is downright silly.

  16. vumxmx says:

    RT`s world

    https://www.rt.com/shows/crosstalk/325580-rt-broadcasting-media-public/

    Presstitute Ranks Expand

    Paul Craig Roberts

    Now the ranks of Washington’s presstitute propagandists include Sybil Edmonds, whom I supported to the hilt during her persecution by Washington, and Cobett, whose Corbett report I gave many hours on interviews. Now the two are carrying on Washington’s propaganda against RT and Putin, and are accusing me of “Putin worship” because I report the facts.

    We are witnessing even the victims of the American Police State collapsing and becoming presstitutes.
    Apparently, the new rule is: if you don’t hate Putin and all things Russian, you are not an American.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OxvPfWkYyUo#t=1447 [1]

    • ralphodavis says:

      It’s an interesting and all too repetitive phenomenon when ‘fans’ purport to support authentic journalistic principles yet abandon those standards so relativistically and with such force of emotion.

      Isn’t it clear by now how nuanced propaganda may be in full spectral view of its tiers of targeted audience? How it deftly plays on situational and personality sympathies to entrap subconsciously?

      While personally grateful that there is at least the semblance of a ‘network’ resistance to the blatancy of lies spewed freely by MSM in the west, to take the view that RT is pure as the driven snow and impossibly an agent of state isn’t just glaring contradiction of reality in itself by virtue of sheer absence of objective criticism of origination and function, it denies what’s readily apparent in its evolution of content when objectively viewed. Just a personal qualifying folly that I entertain.

      When PCR engages his clever little ‘presstitute’ accusations he simply reveals himself for the propagandist fraud that he is irrespective of the wave of authentic dissent that he rides after his long state career. One apparently still engaged.

      It’s the old-stuff of Dulles envisioned and MKU media mind-control, friends. Wise up.

      • nosoapradio says:

        I don’t have a clear idea about this but some wikipedia statements taken together might make one doubt that RT is fundamentally anti-Western:

        -“..RT America, previously known as Russia Today America, is a TV channel based in Washington, D.C..

        – “…During his (Mikhail Lesin) tenure and beginning in 2005, Lesin helped conceive and create the RT (Russia Today) television news network, he said, “to establish a news channel that would counter CNN and BBC with a Moscow spin….”

        -“…In a July 29, 2014, letter to then-Attorney General Eric Holder, Wicker wrote Lesin and his immediate family had “acquired multi-million dollar assets” in Europe and the United States “during his tenure as a civil servant,” including multiple residences in Los Angeles worth $28 million…. The properties are located at

        $13.8 million house of 1,200 square metres (13,000 sq ft) at 10 Beverly Park, Beverly Hills, California[d]
        $9 million house of 980 square metres (10,500 sq ft) at 321 Bristol Avenue, Brentwood, Los Angeles, California[e]
        $5.6 million house of 630 square metres (6,800 sq ft) in Beverly Park, Los Angeles, California[f]
        $4.3 million house along Mulholland Drive at 13327 Java Drive, Beverly Hills, California[g]
        $3.995 million house of 570 square metres (6,100 sq ft) in Palisades Highlands, Pacific Palisades, Los Angeles, California[h]

        It’s unclear if the FBI ever initiated a probe.

        -“…He (RT founder Lesin) is buried in Los Angeles…”

        • nosoapradio says:

          Having mentioned that, good gatekeeping à la Chomsky requires mixing profoundly shocking truths with an imperceptible though thick cushion of comfortable yet key lies which may well have been what RT was about… confounding even its founder…??

          again, no clear ideas on the subject, but could Lesin, like Berezovsky, have had a project that he mistakenly thought Putin had as well… but the ex-KGB agent covertly had other alliances more compatible with surviving Leviev…?

          Ok ok… I gotta knock off the egg nog…

          Berezovsky was looking forward to his trip to Israel… Lesin had no easily traceable connection to the occupiers of Palestine…

    • ccuthbert2001 says:

      To James and Sibel,

      This post is admittedly from a position of ignorance. But if things are as they seem, I implore you to take these sentiments seriously.

      When I saw your vid and heard your comments on Paul Craig Roberts, I was very disappointed. I assumed that you both had not spoken to him. Of course, I could be wrong on that, but his response to your comments makes me think that I’m correct.

      Rancorous in-fighting among sincere people is unfortunate and counter productive. It is wholly unnecessary. Just pick up the phone and call each other. Do NOT air your arguments publicly first.

      The situation among the powers that be is unknowable for all of us. It appears to me that there is a power struggle going on between the neo-cons and another faction that may have ties to (or is using) Russia and China. James, you seem to think that they are in more or less agreement. Maybe this rivalry between Russia and the western overlords is totally fiction. Or maybe there really is a power struggle.

      Be that as it may, making negative comments about Roberts without talking to him first, unless you have evidence you are not disclosing proving he’s a shill, is totally crummy.

      I suggest you approach him for an interview and debate. We would all benefit from it.

      PS, this reminds me of your comments about Chomsky being a “left gate keeper.” There are other, more credible explanations for his position on 911 than that. This has always struck me as lazy. Chomsky has done more to expose the inhuman activities of the powerful in his life than likely any of us can even imagine.

      • ralphodavis says:

        I missed the part where James or Sibel or both allude specifically to PCR as a shill. Or, was that just implicit guilt by association in referenced RT adoration by PCR? Was ‘Putin worship’ actually quoted by James, ..and would he be incorrect in so observing?

        It seems relevant to note as well that good professor Chomsky owes his salary, office and pension to a wholly Pentagon owned MIT. One’s high profile career may consist entirely of posturing in cultivated and sophisticated academic limited-hangout, eh?

        PCR has been on a run using increasingly flamboyant language that begs caution from such a highly placed former Asst. Treasury Sec. even if his statements often had generally reflected a high degree of critical truth.

        He seems a near-perfect positioned candidate for near-truth usefulness, too, but this recent undisciplined behavior on his part also seems like ego driven temperamentalism lacking good judgment as one might expect in a Manchurian retiree.

        It’s indisputable that PCR engaged ad hominem attack specific to both James and Sybil [sic] in rather childish fashion. There’s no mistaking his vehemence, but it should give pause to his credibility and promoted authenticity as independent geopolitical critic due to his extensive professional relationship to federal authority.

        A cryptic quote by the Robert Graves character; Roman Emperor Claudius, dying and confronted with the ooze of governmental and social corruption at the end of his rule transitioning to Nero that guaranteed a complete social ‘reset’ seems apropos these days, paraphrased: “Let all of the poisons that lurk in the mud ..hatch out”.

        Accordingly, deep human accounting is long past due and the stress of that process reveals the true character and intent of us all within an absolutely essential atonement. Bring it on.

        • ccuthbert2001 says:

          Ralph, I agree completely that PCR’s comment was a lousy ad hominem and wrote to him to tell him so. Just thought I’d mention it. But I still think that if James and Sibel didn’t talk to him first, that was equally crummy.

          I think a podcast with the three of them discussing the Syria situation would be very interesting, to say the least.

    • NotDole says:

      I think PCR to be one of the wisest persons i’ve heard interviewed by James.

      The guy has been in the embryo of insanity (Reagan’s America) and can lash at what American news have become as much as he wants.

      RT sure lost a few points these last few years. Last time I checked they let Pepe Escobar say what he wanted to say, where he made a sort of pause, and went “Look i’m not even saying this as an RT employee….” and he wasn’t fired.

      PCR is unfortunately right, without a strong popular leader in Russia, we’d already all be dead.

  17. vumxmx says:

    US National Insecurity: The Art of Blaming Russia (For Everything)

    http://21stcenturywire.com/2015/12/23/us-national-insecurity-the-art-of-blaming-russia-for-everything/

    ==============================================

    Ten years ago this week RT started to carve out its mark in international broadcasting – and what a ride it has been! Never far from controversy, this network has prided itself on being different and saying what many dare not utter in public. In this edition of CrossTalk, we ask how RT has changed the media environment.
    CrossTalking with Rob Taub, John Laughland, and Dmitry Babich.

    https://www.rt.com/shows/crosstalk/325580-rt-broadcasting-media-public/

  18. nosoapradio says:

    and Ms Edmonds explains:

    “…and I respect him, he writes magnificent articles, Paul Craig Roberts, but I’ve been so disappointed because I haven’t been able to publish any of his latest articles because every time I go there, he’s like, it’s “Messiah Putin” and the great Russian government and the greatest Russia…I mean this man was serving during Cold War Reagan, during the Reagan administration and now suddenly he even is engaged in Russia worship…”

    Where’s the “rancorous infighting?”

    Why should alt media figureheads all agree? So that “followers” can comfortably engage in hero-worship? This is precisely what Ms Edmonds and Mr Corbett are denouncing. From Chomsky, to Obama, to Assange, to Snowden, to Putin hero-worship.

    Ms Edmonds specifically states that she respects Roberts who writes magnificent articles. She does not respect hero-seeking and war-mongering.

    Can’t we respect her choice to be baffled in front of what she sees as inconsistant behavior when condoning “Shock-and-awe war-mongering” when it’s “our guys” while self-rightously despising it from the “bad guys”. She’s boycotting RT – all power to her! She articulates her position and does not engage in Ad Hominem unlike a certain PCR.

    Beyond respecting differences in opinion, how can anyone seriously believe that RT is a paragon of objective altruistic reporting and Putin the “common man’s man”???

    • ralphodavis says:

      In principle and with the luxury of unlimited time I’d agree that a non-participating boycott of all propaganda tainted media certainly has purpose and place and should be fully exercised.

      But here’s a current counter argument that underscores the urgency to which we’re all subject by virtue of imposed force of geopolitical momentum: https://www.rt.com/op-edge/326965-2016-us-syria-turkey/

      Pace of events is outstripping priorities of form, preference and personal axes of ego to grind. We just can’t afford petty pissing contests so typical of the webs.

  19. michael2 says:

    Holy Sh1t!

    What’s happened here? Divide and Conquer amongst Corbett Report Subscribers???
    The world has gone mad…

    Let me yell this out for those that are hard at hearing:
    RUSSIA TODAY IS RUSSIAN MAIN STREAM MEDIA
    You know, just like CNN, CNBC, FOX etc.. in US???

    Why are we here? (This website)… Simple, because we see the MSM bullshit, because we see The Powers that Shouldn’t Be bullshit…

    [insert sarcasm] Maybe there are some Trolls here?

    • ralphodavis says:

      The problem, although the apparent division here contradicts it, is in preaching to the choir alone and away from the madding crowd.

      As I read Pepe’s piece above it struck home that this particular issue is perhaps ill-suited for these times since we’re already so many steps behind the exposing of critical initiatives and crimes.

      Trolls abound, eh?

      • michael2 says:

        Hi Ralph,

        I thought the whole point of the Corbett Report was to bring the “madding crowd” to join the “choir”?

        Maybe I’m wrong, who knows, maybe we’re all too dumbed down already for literalalis from Thomas Hardy ;0)

        Meh… Remember MTV?

        M2

  20. nosoapradio says:

    Here’s an article from the RedefiningGod site that has some pretty interesting perspective as to why Putin is a fully collaborative agent of the Globalist project:

    “…It is such a good example of East/West dialectic propaganda and the “Putin as Savior” con that I decided it would be a good teaching tool for helping people to get real. And given all the confusing narratives that swirl around Putin and the current world situation, I think the best approach is to focus on two fundamental, telling things…

    1) Putin’s cooperation in the globalists’ 9/11 operation, and

    2) Putin’s promotion of the globalists’ UN as the solution to our current woes.

    So let’s get started……”

    http://redefininggod.com/

    p.s.: Requests for deeper analysis and differences of opinion not withstanding, and in the image of the East vs. West Good Cop/Bad Cop dialectic, conflict on the Corbett comment page is also, of course, clearly contrived…

    • nosoapradio says:

      sorry, forgot to mention that for the redefiningGod article I was referring to, you have to scroll down about 60% of the screen – it’s not ancient but it’s not their most recent post..

      • candideschmyles says:

        Let’s start at the first paragraph on the page.

        “In previous installments of the globalist prophecy series, I pointed out that the globalists are running a 3-step religious deception that involves 3 leaders. Step 1 is the introduction of a fake Antichrist, Barack Obama. Step 2 is the introduction of a “fake Christ / real Antichrist” I’ve named “Facra.” And Step 3 is the introduction of a “real Christ” I’ll name “Rech” (pronounced “wretch”). I also pointed out that each step has a designated propaganda team to promote awareness of the 3 figures in the public consciousness.”

        So its Facra Obama now is it. This is sheer lunacy. This is why this site has completely lost its way because its now catering to the psychotic level self deluder. It’s lunacy like this that assures the globalists and other assorted Mafia outfits have no need to fear the altmed.

        • nosoapradio says:

          How about starting with the article I referred to which begins thusly:

          “…Let’s cut the crap: Vladimir Putin is helping usher in the globalist New World Order (Addendum 2 – Alex Jones and David Icke’s role: bash the West, praise the East, sell the dialectic)…”

          Otherwise you’d predictably be engaging in a straw man fallacy, now wouldn’t you? Since the passage you quoted is not at all part of the article I referred to, that’s distorting my arguement, isn’t it?

          “Aaaah jeez, they go on about antichrists an’ all over there so they can’t possibly ever say anything interesting at all ever!! An’ besides I might ketchit!!”

          However if you scroll down as instructed you can largely circumvent the antichrist.

          Are you trying to scare people away? Why? Might there be something remotely subversive or even, heavens, thought provoking on that link?

      • nosoapradio says:

        Here’s the link where you don’t have to scroll down or wade in wierdness at all (until part 3):

        http://redefininggod.com/2015/11/lets-cut-the-crap-vladimir-putin-is-helping-usher-in-the-globalist-new-world-order/

    • NotDole says:

      You forgot about how it’s all 3D-Chess. If they can “win” in the brutal physical way, in their minds (the west) more than with bribes and integration, rhey’ll let nukes fly.

  21. candideschmyles says:

    Lose the logic and invoke the troll. How original.

  22. ccuthbert2001 says:

    OK, Gang, what is this that there’s divide and conquer or trolls here?

    Look, this is a real question and a very interesting one: are tptb in agreement and rowing together, or are there internal divisions? I don’t know that anyone thinks or is saying that RT is 100% reliable, or that Putin is a big Russian teddy bear, for pete’s sake.

    Yes, RT is paid for by the Russian gov’t and Putin is evil. Nothing could be more obvious. That does not mean that everything on RT is an abject lie, or that Putin is not moving in opposition to the Anglo American puppet masters.

    Do all these psychopaths follow the party line and will they do so FOREVER? Don’t you think that maybe, just maybe, with the Anglo American cabal showing some weakness, that other war lords might make an attempt to “capture the flag?”

    Roberts thinks that Russia and China can be a counter influence. James says that they are all on team Anglo American. Why not have a discussion about this? It would be far better than insulting each other, don’t ya think?

    Clearly, the neocon faction has been on top. It’s also clear that Kissinger and Brzezinski have been warning them not to mess with Russia, and that Putin has been clever in checking them recently. That looks to me like a division in the ranks. Is it genuine? What does it mean? Beats me, and I’d like some discussion on the matter.

    There is no personality cult here, either for the pols or the analysts. To say so is so juvenile I can’t believe it.

    • candideschmyles says:

      Precisely. RT has never been viewed by any halfway sane individual as anything but a Russian propaganda vehicle. However it’s simple, highly effective, remit has been to use verifiable fact in its reportage of non Russian news. It has been instrumental in providing an ongoing coverage of the racist fascism in the US police state that has been showing the world just where US hegemony is proceeding. It has stood near alone in its coverage of what’s really been happening in Syria, Turkey, Palestine, and more. It has provided a platform for many individuals from around the world, including James and Sybel, that have had no other international broadcaster air their stories. And its reporters coverage at White House press conferences are about the only ones asking probing questions and have revealed a wealth information and contextual narrative we would otherwise be without.
      To focus in on coverage of Russian airstrikes against ISIS, the first nation to actually hit them hard, makes no sense at all. With Sibel’s trip earlier this year to Turkey producing next to nothing in the way of shared information and this turning against RT in such a public show of alignment with MSM I am left questioning wtf is going on here.
      All this anti-Asssange, anti-Snowden stuff too without a shred of evidence to support it is really boiling my piss. How would Sibel, ex CIA Sibel, who “disappears” in Turkey for weeks without hardly a word to show for it like to be called what she calls them without evidence? Were you doing a wee job for your “old” masters Sibel?
      Fact is the first news source to truly reveal Gladio, and to this day still the best and most informative, was the 2 1/2hr long BBC documentary on the subject. Though never broadcast its release shows that no matter the organisation and funders reporters with integrity do try to find a way to get important issues out there. RT is to the west what the BBC was to Eastern Europe and those struggling against the old Soviet regime before Gorbachev. The last thing it needs is shot down. And the grossly unfair and illogical effort to do so has to be deeply questioned itself.

    • Q says:

      Putin is evil? Where is your attempt at critical evaluation there? If you insist on making value judgements, the more accurate method is to decry evil actions – the tangible result of questionable intentions. All individuals are complex in their motivations and to polarise so strongly over Putin serves to put you in risk of becoming a “divide and conquer” troll yourself.
      However, your other points are well made.

  23. vumxmx says:

    Good call, CCuthbert.

    ===================================

    “The Wicked Russians are Coming”

    https://www.lewrockwell.com/2015/12/eric-margolis/russians-coming-russians-coming/

  24. rockshot says:

    James and Sibel struck a nerve with this one. I have never seen so many shills on ONE podcast ever on YT.
    They are actually funny to read, like:
    “Sibel is a @#$ HYPOCRITE because she has a necklace and french doors!!!”

  25. john says:

    Well well well. Isn’t this a charming and lively discussion.

    Personally, I have rarely if ever found a pure hero or a pure villain outside of comic books. It seems to me that, if we care about understanding reality (as opposed to defending a narrative, the simpler the better), we are eventually forced to concede things like:

    “Putin is generally speaking a corrupt oligarch who nevertheless is certainly playing some interesting cards in Syria, some of which are genuinely refreshing in the way they call some bluffs of the corrupt US oligarchs.”

    Or: “James and Sibel are both awesome, but I don’t always agree with every single thing they say.”

    You know? Non-binary thinking. It’s a good thing. And it would save us all kinds of denouncing each other for asking questions that challenge our vested narrative, and all kinds of throwing out babies with our bathwater and so forth.

    So anyway. I really enjoyed Sibel’s insights about Turkey, fascinating and illuminating as always. However I was also disappointed in the nature of Sibel and James’s denunciation of Putin, not because I think they mischaracterized him, but because I kept hoping for an analysis of his actions vis-a-vis Syria and Turkey. I think they invited hopes for that by raising him as an issue at all, so I think it’s fair to be disappointed by how they neglected to get into any specifics.

    I wouldn’t bother to comment if it was just to criticize. Let me rather state it as an invitation to James and/or Sibel to respond here, as a few others have already done. Isn’t there something more interesting than either “Putin worship” or “Putin contempt” to add to your analysis of Russia’s moves with regard to Syria and Turkey?

  26. Q says:

    While propaganda remains one of the most virulent weapons in the Information Age I don’t think it serves to counter RT et. al. with dismissive and cynical rejection. There is an information war on, and unfortunately it is usually fought with conventional lowest common denominator armaments. While we should be wary of the hope-laced narcotic of hero worship surrounding Putin, he is by far and away a better politician (with all the grey-shaded nuances that entails) than any of his western “partners”. In an effort to defuse the messianic aura of Putin, James and Sibel are in danger of coming across as somehow condemning him for not /being/ that paragon as advertised, as if he was somehow able to right all of the perceived wrongs in the world (like the inevitable Oligarchies) through choice alone. He is as constrained as the rest of us by “context”, historical momentum and the various paradigms of invested identity.
    I echo the call for a more balanced evaluation of Putin’s administration and their agenda. He is not the second coming, but we shouldn’t make the mistake of writing him off for not being that so as to pointlessly fortify the smug high-ground of cynical objectivity.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Back to Top