Interview 1360 – New World Next Week with James Evan Pilato

05/17/201865 Comments

Welcome back to New World Next Week – the video series from Corbett Report and Media Monarchy that covers some of the most important developments in open source intelligence news. This week:

Story #1: It’s a “Massacre”: World Decries High Death Toll In Gaza Protests

Wikipedia: United States Recognition Of Jerusalem As Capital Of Israel

Gaza Massacre Film Earns Rave Reviews at Cannes

Story #2: Are We Living In The 50-Year Rage Cycle?

Wikipedia: Cliodynamics

Wikipedia: Kondratiev Wave

The Purge: Election Year – FLNWO #38

Story #3: EFF Wins Flawless Victory Over Podcasting Patent Troll

The Idealist: Aaron Swartz and the Rise of Free Culture on the Internet

U.S. Media Whitewashes Gaza Massacre

US Blocks UN Probe Into Gaza Deaths

Seven Palestinian journalists injured as Gaza protests continue

Kinsella on Liberty

You can help support our independent and non-commercial work by visiting & Thank You.


Filed in: Interviews
Tagged with:

Comments (65)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. Gaslight says:

    Story #2:

    Q: Are we living in a 50 year rage cycle.

    A: No

    We’re living in what can be described as a system in which we’re trained to react emotionally to all things, and it is not cyclical.

    It’s always present.

    Pick a side and be outraged, saddened, overjoyed, etc. This in an ancient technique stemming from long before Ed Bernays and Zbigniew Brzezinski. These men were not the “fathers” of anything. From Buddha to P.T Barnum. They all learned these ancient techniques from their mentors.

    This knowledge has been passed down through millennia.

    Merchants: Know your local market and it’s culture. Exploit them accordingly, and pit them against each other. Take on which ever persona is pragmatic, and keep them fearful of anything, and everything, including whether they’ll ever have another meal.

    Manufactured strife, and emotional response to all things obliterates critical thinking. That’s the primary way in which the masses are controlled.

    Folks are fond of saying we’re enjoying a renaissance of sorts. A time of enlightenment. The internet “information” age””

    Most certainly not.

    We’re living in the dark ages in every sense of the historical term.

    • I Shot Santa says:

      During the last 70 years, we have experienced more changes than in all of our previous histories combined. There is not a single aspect of our lives that has not been affected by the technological,which is a whole lot more than just smartphones, evolutions which just keep crashing on us. We also have access to more information, good information, than at any other time in our history. We have changes that would have shocked Jules Verne.
      Of course, we also have these changes mixed in with the rotten carcasses of our infrastructures. I’m assuming the US isn’t the only one whose infrastructure is less than ideal. In short, our system is in a state of change. The whole Thermodynamic Law thing. All of our systems, technical, cultural, everythingal; are unable to handle the complexities of our present needs. In a sense, this pattern of rage coincides to the regular rhythms of rage; but these last 50 years have seen the bulk of these changes. So this change is going to be huge.
      In most of the books that hijack the Laws of Thermodynamics to illustrate whatever personal growth option they are promoting; they call this period the stage right before you experience a paradigm shift and reach this next new awesome stage of nirvanna for only 9.99 plus shipping and handling! It’s true enough, but they do slick it up a bit before they put it on the shelf for you.
      In general, for those who have used this hijacking for their meditation; the illustration is true enough. And if it is a good course, they will let you in that the period of transition from the collapse of the present system to the next has a lot to do with the emotions you bring into it. Fear/hope/whatever. I’m bringing a bowl. JimBob who ain’t scared of no shifty paradigms.

    • mik says:

      Guardian article. They covered so many aspects, went around and back…is it possible they omit something important? Yes, they did. I will cover this later.

      There was a thinker who talked about cycles and their inevitability before Kondratiev, but I won’t mention his name. At this point I will be like Guardian.

      We shouldn’t be surprised with emotionally loaded outbursts. Barneys and the ilk successfully manufactured people that would be probably described by Freud like: Super-Id, Ego Consumerus, (Super Ego terminally sick), the kind of people nowadays system needs.

      But just bashing emotions as responsible for obliterating critical thinking is just completely wrong. Decision making is not possible without involvement of emotions and that is proved in neuroscience.

      Following Guardian’s mental acrobatic is excellent: Elite Overproduction

      “elite overproduction”, for example; as a consequence of inequality, there are periods in history when there are too many extremely rich people for the positions of power that extremely rich people typically occupy. This results in them going rogue and buying themselves into power by hosing money at elections.”

      What a bullshit.
      For Guardian, there is absolutely no problem because of billions of poor.

      Regarding the topic of article Guardian should have mentioned a game called Ultimatum Game.

      “One player, the proposer, is endowed with a sum of money. They are tasked with splitting it with another player, the responder. Once the proposer communicates their decision, the responder may accept it or reject it. If the responder accepts, the money is split per the proposal; if the responder rejects, both players receive nothing.”

      It has been found that if proposer splits 70% for him, the proposition is normally rejected, although this is irrational because no one gets anything. Also, with fMRI they noticed strong emotional reaction (disgust) respondents had in this situations. Looks like we are wired for fairness.

      I see many similarities between Ultimatum Game and Real Life.
      Is it possible that after a while people loaded with negative emotions just can’t accept usual “that’s how things are in the world” and everything ends up in rage?

      • manbearpig says:

        Very interesting comment.

        Though according to Scientific American

        “…Game theory is a standard tool of analysis for professionals working in the fields of operations research, economics, finance, regulation, military, insurance, retail marketing, politics, conflict analysis, and energy, to name a few…”

        social engineering should probably be added to that list…perhaps as a section of the military applications…

        • I Shot Santa says:

          And remember in that wonderful documentary that Adam Curtis did for the BBC on game theory where the only person who wanted to make the profile fit someone other than a paranoid schizophrenic was a recovered paranoid schizophrenic. Of course, all of their systems turn out to be a lie anyway. Spin, spin, spin. That facial recognition net? Works as good as that magic spray they use in CSI. Which it doesn’t in real life. Yes, we have many ways to kill you; just trust us on that. JimBob who don’t think the new skynet is going to cause us to endure any more terminator movies.

          • manbearpig says:

            “…Of course, all of their systems turn out to be a lie anyway…”

            Explain that to the most prestigious universities in the world such as Wharton school of finance or, hey, Cambridge University. The one collaborating with Cambridge Analytica:

            How is Cambridge University linked to Cambridge Analytica and the Facebook Data Scandal?


            “…An online experiment reveals that the overall level of cooperation in a group almost doubles when the previous actions of all its members are rendered transparent…”

            hmmmm, why does Emma Watson flash before my eyes?


            To be honest I haven’t had time to read these articles: I’d just remembered that I’d already linked Cambridge Analytica with Cambridge University a while back, when I had more time…

            • I Shot Santa says:

              Just because they’ve chosen to invest themselves in a lie doesn’t make it true. I’m not sure, but I believe I have heard that Cambridge Analytica may have over-stated their capabilities.
              While I enjoyed most of my professors, and even thought about being one (for about 10 secs.), I can’t help but laugh a bit whenever someone says the word prestigious in the same sentence as university. Academia is the kingdom of the most petty Machiavellian shenanigans! Those Ivy leaves cover enough childish political wrangling to make a Game of Thrones fan go “No Way! That’s just too over the top!” I know your in academia, so I figure you get to see this daily.
              But if you think about it, how many people ever really bother looking at the system they choose to believe in? We make people appear superior because of some position they hold. But how true is that thinking? In a meritocracy, there would be a lot of validity to this mindset. Of course, in a meritocracy one would have to continue to merit the position after they sat in that particular throne of power. But we don’t live in a meritocracy in our “public” institutions. Which makes them all a little less prestigious to me. JimBob who didn’t become a professor, but wouldn’t have been very prestigious anyway if he had become one.

          • candlelight says:


            With no idea what you guys are actually discussing, skimming over comments quickly, I had this question b/c it caught my eye:

            Is there such a one as a recovered paranoid schizophrenic?

            After years of thorazine, et al, what are they(recovered to), then?

            Just saying.

            • I Shot Santa says:

              I choose to not look into that one out of fear of what I’ll find. I will say though that when the guy who they say is recovered was talking about the seriousness of his program; he did seem panicky enough in all the right places. But maybe I’m using his program. Noooooooooooo! JimBob who also generally has no idea of what he is discussing.

              • candlelight says:

                A big LLOLLOOLOL from the but maybe I’m using his program. Nooooooooooo!


      • I Shot Santa says:

        Even if all the preceding statements you made before your last paragraph were wrong; it would still be the right answer. But it doesn’t have to end up in rage. Rage is blind and self-destructive. In the final analysis, all of us are guilty of participating in this social construct. While maybe we oughta let V get a couple of them; I’d say the French Revolution looks pretty tame compared to what we are capable of doing nowadays. JimBob who might go swamping for a bit if people started breaking out them guillotines.

        • mik says:

          “Even if all the preceding statements you made before your last paragraph were wrong”
          What are you pimping here??!!

          Sure, it doesn’t have to end up in rage but we shouldn’t be surprised if it does.

          “In the final analysis, all of us are guilty of participating in this social construct.”
          I don’t consider myself guilty of still participating to some extent in this system .

          Thank you for giving me opportunity to analyze this misapprehension that usually goes something like:

          People have ability to choose, therefore they have responsibility for choice and they might be guilty because of choice and maybe also punished at the end. What has been said is Truth, whole Truth and nothing but the Truth. Really????

          Can people be hold responsible and maybe guilty because of things they were not aware of, things they didn’t comprehend?

          What about Oedipus who unknowingly killed his father and marry his mother?

          Punishment of people that were not aware of their crime is The Ultimate Cruelty.
          For the end I would like to express one thought with help of Set Theory from mathematics: Understanding is a subset of Awareness set.

          • I Shot Santa says:

            Well, I was trying to be nice. Still trying. What was I pimping? Nothing. I was noting the last statement didn’t need to have your preceding statements to be true to validate it. There are a gazillion paths to people being fed up. And I wonder why you just shrug off any reaction other than rage as an acceptable attitude. It is but one reaction. It is your choice to be in whatever emotional state you are in. After all, those who cannot control (or I’d go further to say create) their emotions are ruled by them. The emotion you choose is going to have an impact on the experience you are undertaking. It’s going to affect your decisions and so on. But you decide to just poo-poo it away and spend all your time mangling my comments into mush. By the way, you are a part of all of this. You are guilty of being gullible and of sustaining this system. We all are. We have given it so much more power just by naming it. It just solidifies it further in our minds that the system is real. It’s not. I choose to not address the rest of your comment because I couldn’t really make any sense of it. JimBob who apparently ain’t very good at agreeing with people.

            • mik says:

              “Well, I was trying to be nice. Still trying.”

              “…spend all your time mangling my comments into mush. By the way, you are a part of all of this. You are guilty of being gullible and of sustaining this system.”
              I miss some consistency.

              “And I wonder why you just shrug off any reaction other than rage as an acceptable attitude.”
              I never said nor imply it is acceptable. You are not nice, you are deceptive.

              “It is your choice to be in whatever emotional state you are in. After all, those who cannot control (or I’d go further to say create) their emotions are ruled by them.”
              You really don’t know much about emotions, that is obvious. Ask someone for literature if you really want to discuss these matters outside the bar.

              “I choose to not address the rest of your comment because I couldn’t really make any sense of it.”

              I’m not surprised. I think you are “choice theory” believer (lots of people are). Are you having a problem with cognitive dissonance? Just a little bit, maybe? I’ve noticed some anger at the end. Quite a lot of inconsistency also.
              James made an excellent video about CD, you should check.

              • I Shot Santa says:

                First of all, you are projecting your emotions into my words. Which falls under the heading of your problem. There’s no lack of consistency either. I didn’t say I was going to try real hard. After all, in the comment I was responding to, you had just mangled my comments together in a manner to suit your own personal bias in order to attack me for complimenting your previous statement. You are not sensing anger from my comments. You are sensing it from yourself. Maybe if you read my words with a FogHorn Leghorn voice you might be able to figure it out. JimBob who also chuckles on occasion.

              • mik says:


                “… are projecting your emotions…”

                Now you try with persuasion that you know something about “shrink stuff” although it is obvious from your previous post that you don’t know much. That might pass with 70% of Facebook users.

                Your inconsistency won’t go away with your claim of opposite.
                Anyone can check if I was malicious when I was “mangling your comments”.

                You are becoming increasingly more pathetic. By now it is very obvious who you really are.

                I will use this thread to show others who ‘I Shot Santa’ really is.

                You have successfully dig your own hole.

              • I Shot Santa says:

                I think that you’re insane, but that’s just my opinion. Nor do I really care about your delusions. We will simply not converse anymore. JimBob who does find crazy people amusing, but that don’t mean he’s gonna dig into their thoughts.

    • arcadia11 says:

      it is not cyclical. it is situational.
      if so called major, some said to be extinction level events, were merely cyclical, then consciousness is altered and we have no reason to exist.

      we don’t need to manufacture new-age reasons for rage. we have long term cognitive dissonance – the whole planet is ptsd, even stockholm syndrome morphs into dissatisfaction. millions are at or approaching tipping point, chemtrails: spray some lithium, then stop, spray some more, then stop, mix with heavy metals etc. rage? at the very least and possibly just in time.

      and there is something we are missing. it is ‘there’ but we are not seeing it. we have been under full frontal assault for possibly ever. humans have addressed such suppression since time out of mind. we report, discuss, rail against and dodge the bullets. repeat. endlessly it seems.

      but: we already know. yes, we have figured out the plan. we know what is it. we have named it variously. dodging bullets depletes vital physical and mental energy – along with constant on-going debate (which often invalidates self-evident truth)we have potentially fatal distraction. the globalist psychopaths have openly gone amok. an invitation to act. the logical action is to disarm the shooters.

      i admit that when i contemplate the how of disarmament i come up against a seeming physical barrier located in the solar plexus area. i feel myself contact it and it seems i cannot get past it; a reminder of how well designed the matrix is and how heavily we have been conditioned to not see. it is a very real sensation and understanding. while frustrating, it is also compellingly encouraging. for obvious reasons. whatever is on the other side of that implantation must be so elementary that is must be contained at all cost.

      cheers –
      an aside: i am subscribed to corbett because he is solution-oriented.

  2. The Last American Vagabond says:

    Great to see you two back at it, your show was missed, and your clarity of thought and open-mindedness, even more so.

  3. manbearpig says:

    This all reminds me…

    I remember when Occupy Wall Street was in full swing, in France, a very old gentleman by the name of Stephen Hessel who’d written a book and who’d been a resistant during WW2 had been receiving a lot of fawning media attention since at least the spring of that same year; everywhere you could see the phrase “Indignez-vous!” tagged on the ground, walls etc. There were the Indignados in Spain making headlines during the same period as well and by the time Occupy Wall Street was stealing the media limelight, it was clear there was a general campaign to rile people up… internationally…
    I always thought, as it was vigorously promoted by the media, that in an ‘agent provocateur’ sort of way TPTSB were looking for a pretext for instituting a police state, or at least more restrictions on civil rights etc… But somehow despite all the encouragement, and ubiquitous images of huge indignant chanting crowds, the rage fire never really seemed to burn…in the West…
    all this during the initial sparks of the so-called Arab Spring…where it did have those spectacular effects…

    already 7 years ago…

    Today, this horrific massacre committed by the Israeli state the day of the deplorable inauguration of the U.S. embassy in Jerusalem is clearly an unspeakably vicious provocation to inflame generalized rage across the world.

    The dark photos of the dead and wounded flashed alongside the smug chummy pastel photos of Trump and Netanyahu can only inspire violent disgust and fury in those who view them…

    It certainly gives Europe and conceivably even Saudi Arabia a pretext for moving closer to the BRICS…

    at any rate, in line with their controlled demolition of the American Dream they’ve clearly got something sinister up their sleeve…even well beyond the horrific murder of these Palestinian protesters…using this horrendous act as a catalyst.

    We’re being positioned mentally for a major transition through the onslaught of Zombie, Virus, Cannibalistic child-killing movies, social media engineered antagonistic divides, lone shooters appearing out of nowhere and rogue governments ruthlessly firing on unarmed protesters.

    Certainly something to do with the advertized need to be protected by “Total transparency surveillance”

    scaring us into The Circle?

    dunno… ramping up morbid fear of each other…sounding that haunting siren that sends flocks of vegetarian Elois into the ravenous jaws of the controlling Morlocks…

    The Purge is nigh and we need protection more than ever

    from our own murderous governments!?

    An empowered Eastern-led U.N. to the rescue??

    • Gaslight says:

      “Brics” and, or “An empowered Eastern-led U.N.”? Really?

      These are most certainly pre-packaged alternatives contrived by the same SOB’s committing the atrocities outlined here.

      Same clique/different front men.

      Popular, mainstream “alternatives” are fabricated behind the scenes by the proven liars we’re complaining about here, and are (obviously) worth jack.

      But we’re supposed to embrace them as possible solutions?

      Just the same way America was foisted upon us as the answer to rule by “divine right”? Nope, fooled again.

      Same Pagans/different garb.

      Through the ages, they’re always 10 steps ahead, and waiting to catch us when we jump ship.

      “Hey, that island over there looks promising” Splash!

      The prepared nature of (even some “alternative”) media has become the message.

      When are we going to abandon this shell game, be spontaneous, and think for ourselves?

      …and are we even up to the task?

      • manbearpig says:

        “These are most certainly pre-packaged alternatives contrived by the same SOB’s committing the atrocities outlined here. ”

        good, that’s my point.

        “…Same clique/different front men…”

        Obviously. If you ‘ve been following Mr Corbett’s work.

        “…Popular, mainstream “alternatives” are fabricated behind the scenes by the proven liars we’re complaining about here, and are (obviously) worth jack…”

        quite right. Exactly my point.

        Wouldn’t a one world United Nations government built in BRICS be just a most convenient response to this contrived crisis?

        Now, do you get my point??

        • Gaslight says:

          Ohhh…so your closing question was sarcasm?

          …and I’m just parroting what I’ve heard here?

          I’m here for the (increasingly) occasional contribution this page can make in reference to subjects I consider relevant. I’ve seen a softening over time though, and I’m not the only one.

          Making a living off the 24-7 news cycle has it’s pitfalls; i.e: morphing into that which you’re berating. We may as well read last year’s papers if we’re going to take that approach.

          Tell me:

          If the deck is stacked, and the contrived alternatives saturating mainstream media are BS, then why cover them here ad nauseum?

          There’s a word for calling the same thing BS over, and over again.

          Perhaps you (the self proclaimed Corbett-trained monkey) can explain the merits of chasing the dangling carrots you openly acknowledge as such?

          • manbearpig says:

            Have you seen these?



            and “Phony Opposition, The Truth about the BRICS”?


            Well, amidst the rest of Mr Corbett’s prolific work over the years on countless subjects, it’s truly awe-inspiring to see how the above analyses prove ever more true, with each passing year…manifested in such diverse ways…

            Mr Corbett may not have been the very first person to evoke this phenomenon (but he was certainly up there) and he was certainly the most thorough and documented in describing this engineered game of musical masks and changing acronyms in maintaining the deep state status quo.

            The controlled demolition of the American Dream in favor of the Agenda 21 sustainable paradigm was something I’d myself evoked on the comments board of Information Clearing House some years ago before I became a Corbett Report Subscriber.

            So it’s both fascinating and frightening to see it unfold in such a myriad of ways as revealed by the painstaking work of such a diligent journalist as Mr Corbett.

            If that’s what you call chasing dangling carrots, so be it…

            The deck is stacked and the contrived alternatives in the mainstream are BS and it’s very important to keep covering their multiple forms and pretexts, analysing them and understanding how they work, to the extent possible.

            And there really is such a wide variety of BS to choose from one never tires of it! I don’t see the “ad nauseum” you refer to.

            And of course, there’s the ineffable pleasure of reading the perspectives and corresponding with the other (often more knowledgable) denizens of the Corbett comments board!

          • manbearpig says:

            I’m savouring the inimitable pleasures of the moderation queue but rest assured, answers to your ‘questions’ are forthcoming!

            • Gaslight says:

              If by savoring you mean stalling, then yes, you are indeed “savouring”

              P.T Barnum used to pen opposing opinions of himself under assumed names, and send them off to various newspapers; i.e. any press is good press.

              He was (of course) correct, and well versed in playing the public.

              Ponder that as you ponder the answer which obviously escapes you.

              …catching my point yet?

            • pearl says:

              I feel like I’m missing something in this odd exchange/challenge started by Gaslight. Pretty sure Manbearpig is speaking coherently and consistently as she has during the two or so years I’ve been reading here. Or is it just me? (Wouldn’t be the first time…)

              • Gaslight says:

                Hey Pearl,

                Dialogue such as: who joined BRICS, who dropped out of the EU, and “what it all means” is (in my opinion) a waste of time, and a contradiction for those who claim to understand the deck is already stacked, as they blither about the “implications” in the very next breath. Not to mention three consecutive stories/interviews pertaining to the Iran deal/no deal seesaw during the height of the Gaza carnage. We may as well talk about how well Warren Buffet dis this week and “what it all means for us”.

                I’m merely expressing a bit of frustration about the dichotomy I see here sometimes, and and I suppose I’m lobbying for more relevance, and less of what I consider fluff. Open source networks can be powerful. Let’s use them across a wide, various, and sundry spectrum of contributors. I could care less if I ever refer to another president by name again, and especially the use of derogatory terms describing their supporters. We all saw how min reacted to that a few day’s ago, and I agree with her. This behavior is not only pointless. It’s incendiary, and counter-productive to our cause. Again, we see a dichotomy here as the term “Trumpster” is used by those who claim to understand the things which drive the false left/right paradigm. It’s not enough for us in this group to say; “awwww you know what I mean when I say Trumpsters”. Not everyone (especially newcomers) will understand the connotation. So lets cut the kiddie terms.

                Corbett is a great source, this is not personal, so let’s put our on our thick skins here, and see how manbearpig answers.

                On another note:

                My screen name is Gaslight, not “Gaslighter”.

                That being said; Immediately upon my arrival here (after a mere handful of posts) manbearpig exclaimed; “I’m open to suggestions…even from a Gaslighter like yourself”.

                Those of you unfamiliar with the term can look it up.

                I’m going to ask miss manbearpig to please explain, and suggest she takes special care in how she does.

              • scpat says:


                Gaslight is here to bless us with his sage knowledge and enlightenment that we all are dying to hear, of course.

              • manbearpig says:

                Well actually, since we’re mincing words, this is what I said;

                “But I’m open to suggestions. Even from a Gaslighter.”

                on the “Financial Survival after the Iran Deal” page.

                With regards to Mina, and her posts suggesting Mr Corbett is responsible for the silliness that takes place on YouTube or implying that because you give donations you should be able to dictate what he says to flatter your ego, I took her at her word and fulfilled her request for feedback to tell her what I genuinely thought about all that.

                As for the following:

                “P.T Barnum used to pen opposing opinions of himself under assumed names, and send them off to various newspapers; i.e. any press is good press… He was (of course) correct, and well versed in playing the public.”

                Interesting nugget. I’ve noticed that not only is that the case with countries maniputively playing both good cop and bad cop, that’s exactly what trolls do on comments boards of websites such as Information Clearing House or even this one. And certainly on YouTube.

                So you see, corresponding with entities who post here is almost always instructive and gratifying especially as we get to know their personas better over time

                with no skins, thick or thin, to lose in the exchange.

              • Gaslight says:


                I just worded your “Gaslighter” statement as I remembered it.

                You know (of course) damn well that my understanding of your statement was accurate, and yet you slither away from answering why you called me a Gaslighter based on what now?

                I’ve seen your type a million times. Pseudo-intellectual, and full of innuendo, sarcasm, and contradictions.

                Have a pleasant weekend all


              • I Shot Santa says:

                I just read all this myself, and it looks like they are arguing for different things. While I agree it’s good to keep informed about current shenanigans around the world; there isn’t a whole lot I can really do about poor Wi Pup being falsely imprisoned in Bangkok for stealing a rice ball. While the community can certainly help in resolving the details of those events; it’s not the limit of what we can do.
                I know James has been wanting to do more solutions oriented work; I think that gaslight just wants to get started on it. At least here, it would be an area in which we could be sure of why we are doing it and why. And who wouldn’t want to be part of a solutions orientated thread? Unless your the kind of person who likes to murder puppies. That’s about it. JimBob who is sure he’s right on that though he did no research at all on any of this.

  4. mkey says:

    Has anyone checked to comments on the yahoo article about the Gaza massacre film? Quite an incredible landslide, from which I have to deduce that yahoo news is quite popular among the Zionist crowd or has a very docile editor.

    • manbearpig says:

      “And all the Samounis were against Hamas,” Savona added.

      hmmmm chalk one up for Israel

      “Ironically the Israeli pilot who killed them emerges as a kind of tarnished hero from the film for repeatedly refusing orders to fire on the survivors.”

      hmmm chalk a second point up for Israel

      and while it appears we have “the Palestinians'” point of view… in fact no…

      “…[The Samounis] were much less politically involved than most Gazans who are refugees,” who settled in the Strip after fleeing or being expelled from their homes in what is now Israel…”

      Best not get those politically involved Gazans talking! (another point chalked up for Israel)

      plus they paint a picture of Palestinians through the Samounis as a kind of backwards people

      “…”They consider themselves the original Gazans. They were kind of snobbish about that. They are like a separate community within Gaza, who marry among themselves and have their own dialect…”

      you’d almost be tempted to say “Thank god for new blood in Palestine!”

      I haven’t seen the documentary, but it’s thrust the Palestinian cause in the limelight

      but I’m not sure it’s to the greatest advantageous of this genocided people…


      “And all the Samounis were against Hamas,” Savona added…

  5. jason.s says:

    Copyright is a fallacious idea. At it’s best the notion of ownership is really just a superficial reason to take care of things. The resonance of that consideration has stuck with me for almost half my life. I can’t unsee it. I am interested to hear debates by Kinsella.

    Thank you JamesC and JamesP for another great broadcast and sharing awareness at that level.

    • I Shot Santa says:

      As someone who is about to dive into the patent process, I disagree. I wouldn’t do what I am about to do if I didn’t have the protection I will need in order to recoup my investment. An investment in an idea that would not have existed had I not invented it. Yet, the anti crowd in the patent/copyright protection thing always claim the creation is not the property of the creator.
      I agree the systems are flawed, but providing a safe nursery for new ideas to bloom is a necessity. But does anybody ever see any middle ground? No, it’s always just ban this or free that. JimBob who likes just going off on an old man rant being as his is one and all.

      • candlelight says:


        Excellent points about the validity of protections afforded through patent/copyright law. Certainly, for the individual. As you intimate, if the cost involved with the development of your idea was not potentially protected through patent law, what then?

        How easy, then, for the unscrupulous, with better means and deeper pockets, to run with your idea, develop/copy it, produce it, market it, corner it. Will they, through the goodness of their hearts, offer you anything for it, or a price relative to its value?

        Good luck with that.

        However, as I understand it, I absolutely see the beauty of James’ vision of information and ideas freely flowing, owned by none and accessed by all. What I don’t understand is how that vision in its pure form could possibly materialize without comprehensive revisions of existing laws and regulations effecting property rights, intellectual rights, corporate law, as well as the definition and scope of ownership, itself.

        Though, must one really wonder on balance, who benefits economically from existing patent laws? Except for a minority of independent, talented, savvy, and perhaps even lucky inventors, it’s fairly obvious as a whole who benefits from tying up the rights, control and ownership of a multitude of products vis-à-vis patent laws.

        In essence, it would seem that patent laws ultimately help in the consolidation of power and wealth into the hands of those best able to monetize(capitalize)the utility of exclusiveness that patents afford, while these same entities, colluding with legislators, help marginalize, even criminalize, that which isn’t as yet patentable…like, for instance, weeds.

        But, there definitely can and should be a middle ground, especially with regard to intellectual rights when it effects the public domain, and essentially when it resides within the public domain, including intellectual property rights of public, as well as private universities. Here we are talking about the use verses the ownership of knowledge. Even if such knowledge is privately archived, is there nothing owed to society, such as simply providing public access to it?

        In a similar vein, existing laws allowing for what amounted to a legal persecution of Aaron Swartz was nothing less than a travesty. When an individual rocks the draconian state, as we all know, bad things happen.

        On another note, a fascinating note, a most amazing and utterly surprising biography came out in the form of a movie recently, featuring a scientific inventor whose identity, had it been left a mystery, would never have been guessed in a thousand million years! At least not by me.

        Here’s a link to a short biography, but, the movie is a must see. It is definitely a “Bombshell”! I’ll link that, too.

        One last note: This does not constitute a rant, but age? It is only a number. And nothing more!!!

        • I Shot Santa says:

          It’s true ideas can be held up with the patent system. There are even the classification laws which cover things as interesting as solar panels that are TOO efficient. Yeah, Jon Rappaport had an interesting article on that one. And that is just one. But overall, most businesses are honest. Most of the dis-honesty which taints the entire system is done by a minority of the business population. Even in corporate, there are a plethora (Three Amigos Rule!) of people who haven’t been turned into complete Borg drones.
          It needs a lot of work in all of the areas. But I think to eliminate these protections would undermine liberty by discouraging people from creating for their own reasons. Maybe I don’t care to benefit everyone in the world. Who I want to benefit is my right to decide. And as long as the good outweighs the bad of that decision in regard to harming others, I’ll probably do as I please. As usual. I see more harm come from idealism than I ever saw from people just being their normal selfish/compassionate selves. We need the inequality to have liberty. So, I don’t worry about the joys of spreading ideas for free around the globe. I’ve my own agendas to pursue with the profits I earn. Just like everybody else. And this is how I intend to pursue them.
          So, my motive is strictly selfish in an Ayn Rand fashion, even though I don’t really agree with her on that philosophy. Common Law principles would do a fine job of revising the laws in my opinion. Which probably don’t amount to nearly as much as I think it does, which ain’t much. But it’s a motive I’m comfortable with.
          By the way, haven’t clicked on that link yet, but Hedy rocked! Hard to believe anyone could be smarter than she is beautiful. But she managed it with style. However, age does matter. I remember my college days and now I laugh when I go by the college in Gainesville, Fl. They used to look so sexy when I went and now they all look like children. I don’t know what’s happened to these colleges but that is a crime to me! 🙂 Oh well, it’s Sunday and today I’ve decided to practice Rastafarian. Early worship on the Sabbath! JimBob who is now hungry for some reason.

  6. mkey says:

    NYT Columnist Blames Palestinians For Being Shot

    I linked to a particularly interesting moment when the camera shows the MSNBC newscaster’s face as she was saying “… and the whitehouse today, their response to that was, it is hamases fault and they are using them as … as tools for propaganda.”

    Looks like a bit of an internal conflict to me. I’m sure her conscience will be subdued momentarily.

    • I Shot Santa says:

      Thanks. I hit that link and then went back to the beginning of the video. While I agree with your reaction on hers, the rant he unleashed on the NYT guy sort of hit a false chord with me. I had the feeling he was taking that guys statement out of context. The guy was actually telling the opinion the general public had been fed. He was telling the truth. I quit watching after that to type this, but I probably won’t watch the rest. I don’t really watch his show, but I’ve seen a number and have like it in the past, just that one segment hit me wrong. After SE, I thought I should let you know about it.
      I don’t know much about Jimmy, other than I’ve seen him listed as a far-left fake news site, but he seems pretty non-political in the ones I’ve seen. More corruption orientated, than party orientated from what I’ve noted. I like the ones I’ve seen, and only this one segment hit me wrong, which means it’s probably a screw up. Or I’m wrong. JimBob who just throws it on out there and see what sticks after it runs through that fan.

      • mkey says:

        I’m not sure to which segment you are referring, that which was taken out of context. I don’t know this guy Friedman but based on the 2003 video he does look like an asshole

        Dore is OK, but he does extend his platform to various politicians, I usually skip those videos. He does look like someone who may garner more popularity with the “normies” and he has dug up some nice videos, he apparently spends quite a lot of time following mainstream media.

        • I Shot Santa says:

          In that segment, which is the one I was referring to, he isn’t describing whether the war was worth it; he was describing the state of regional perspectives. Not his perspective, but those imaginary public perspectives. As such, what he was saying was true in a lot of people’s minds and that is the message he was conveying. Not that it was worth it, but what was the group mind-set that brought it. JimBob who probably made that a whole lot more confusing that it need be, but that’s not really his problem so he’s okay with it. 🙂

          • mkey says:

            From this segmennt what you state here does not follow? Is there a larger segment which puts things into the proper conext?

            • I Shot Santa says:

              I have no idea as this was my first time seeing it. I haven’t reviewed it since, but I might look at it again later on. But I felt he was describing what we did and why we did it; and I felt he didn’t answer whether he thought it was good or bad. I suspect he felt it was just news. I’m not saying I’m right, but I’ve got my third eye on as much as I can nowadays. But, I do like his show, people can learn how to be aware by watching media like that. That’s going to be a useful trick no matter what future we bring about. JimBob who thinks old age is great for keeping you from worrying about the future by bringing it straight into your present.

    • candlelight says:


      I had been wondering if there was a way to link to a youtube video at a specific time. So, once again, like learning about using the bracket tags for italics and bold lettering, you’ve now, albeit, unbeknownst, addressed this issue for me as well. Thanks!

      I like Jimmy Dore. He’s never expressed anything that I can recall that I wasn’t in agreement with. At least that’s my take away, thinking of him. Although I don’t necessarily think to seek him out, whenever I’ve come across him, he always seems to make a lot of sense, including what he’s expressing on the program you’ve linked.
      His take down of Thomas Friedman is spot on. I get the New York Times, and have realized for many years that what this editorial windbag represents is nothing other than a neocon friendly shill for Zionist hegemony.
      The clip that Dore highlighted depicts an even more reprehensible scumbag of a fatally twisted ideologue than I had heretofore imagined.

      • candlelight says:


        I just read your post above. I don’t know the make-up of Dore’s audience, whether they would generally conform to the notion of being “normies”, or not. He certainly tends to set the record straight in terms of the drivel one hears from MSM. So, if he is appealing to normies, then that’s great, because he’s imparting an excellent lesson in critical thinking that they’re not about to get anytime soon from your typical brainwashing MSM channel.

        More power to Jimmy Dore!

        • mkey says:

          He is doing good work. I based my normies hypothesis on that he may attract some MSM viewers due to how he pays much attention to it, so if a normie would look for sometheing they saw on MSM.

          He also keeps his commentary relatively simple, repeats a lot so it has some skull penetration potential.

          • I Shot Santa says:

            I noticed some of that. He’s almost giving a class in how to pay attention. People swallow that up when they get a dose of that. But you generally have to sneak up on them first. But thinking is the first step to freedom. JimBob who has also noted that sometimes thinking can be the first step to the end of freedom as well; so better choose wisely grasshopper.

            • candlelight says:

              Well, that’s just the thing with Dore. As mkey aptly mentioned, Dore keeps it fairly simple, and therefore doesn’t hit you over the head with anything that would be hard to swallow, especially if you’re used to a mainstream diet. And, he really does do a good job breaking it down, without getting too far into more nebulous wheres and whys of conspiracy theory. I think you’re right – it is like he’s holding a class: Critical Mainstream Media Analysis 101.

      • mkey says:

        You have a sharing button on youtube, below the video, on the right side.

  7. thoth52 says:

    First of all, I am NOT pro-Zionist. Now we have that out of the way, I must say your interpretation of the “Gaza massacre” is as biased as I have ever known both of the James’s to be.

    No mention of these points:
    1. 50 of the Palestinian “innocents’ were adult male known members of Hamas.
    2. The use of hand grenades, kites with Molotov “cocktails” and the blatantly obvious line of burning tyres to conceal ‘enemy action’.

    Very disappointing review Mr’s Corbett & Pilato.

    Better luck next time.

    • mkey says:

      The “eye of the world” website looks as objective as they get. Information provided therein must be solid and thustworthy.

    • candlelight says:


      In the eye on the world interview, Salah Al-Bardawil made no mention of the ages of any of the victims, either from Hamas or the others. Perhaps, if there were children killed (I’m not sure how anyone is defining children. Does such a description include teenagers?), maybe he’s attempting to deflect any ridicule, or maybe not. In any event, contrary to the headline above the video, Salah Al-Bardawil did not describe the members of Hamas who were killed as “gunmen”. That is imagery the website is ascribing, as if to be member of Hamas means you have to, by rights, be toting a gun. I didn’t notice any guns in any of the photographs, did you? However, what Salah Al-Bardawil did say was that all of the people killed were martyrs. To the Palestinian psyche, martyrdom has no age limits.

      At legal insurrection, they take issue with the protesters burning a pile tires to create a smoke screen.
      Well, I’m sorry, man, but if I were among those who gathered at the border to protest and hurl stones, I’d keep that baby burning, too, if it meant not getting picked off by sniper fire so easily.
      And the swastika on the kite? Perhaps they were trying to tell the Israeli soldiers what they think of them, i.e., that the Israelis are acting like Nazis. Is that so difficult to imagine, from people living in an open air concentration camp?
      When this rabble group of Palestinian protesters start shaving their heads, saluting Heil Hitler, and wearing swastika armbands, okay, then I’ll believe they’re but a bunch of neo-Nazis.

      By the way, just to get this conclusion out of the way, those two websites couldn’t express more right-wing, hardcore Zionist bias if they tried.

      I’m just gratified to know, as you stated, they don’t equate with your thought processes.

      • mkey says:

        It’s very good he mentioned he’s not pro Zionist, because it certainly wouldn’t follow. We do, however, now have a quandary of sizeable proportions here: why would a non pro Zionist refer to a far right Zionist-as-can-be site?

        On second look, if we take what he wrote i.e. “NOT pro-Zionist” and add an “a” we get “NOT a pro-Zionist” in which case “pro” would not stand for “for” but as a shorthand for “professional” in which case the whole thing makes a bit more sense.

        • candlelight says:

          It doesn’t necessarily follow, does it – far-right Zionist websites appealing to someone with a non Zionist mind-set.

          Although, any individual can certainly be leaning (read biased) on any given particular axis, and be argumentatively persuaded to see events in a much further biased light provided that it remains compatible with their thoughts, ideas and emotions, especially, however inaccurate and skewed such arguments may be.

          I can easily see someone who champions Israel, and yet is not a Zionist, be persuaded by Zionist viewpoints.

          Unfortunately, there’s no getting around the emotionally charged conundrum which is the Palestinian/Israeli conflict.

          In the novel My Promised Land, by Ari Shavit, who is an Israeli born Jew, he states that the mass expulsion of the Palestinians, along with the destruction of their many towns and villages, constitutes an unspoken truth among all Israelis, with all being historically aware of such facts surrounding the statehood of Israel.

          This historical reality will forever remain the central and primary pivot about which the psyche of both the Palestinian and the Israeli turn. And, it is this very reality that is at once being fiercely voiced, as it is a truth that has been psychologically and systematically buried and suppressed.

          • I Shot Santa says:

            While I don’t think it applies in this particular case, though I am no authority on much of anything, it’s a good idea to become familiar with those type of articles. They tell their strategies in them if you read them correctly. Most of these kind of sites are actually (not any specific ideology here, just extreme views) run by some pretty pathetic individuals; but still, it gives you a feel for the battleground. JimBob who thinks that it would have been great had any of his exalted leaders ever visited them dang battlefields themselves before they became evidence for war crimes.

  8. candlelight says:


    I believe something did get screwed up in two of your above posts with regard to the Charlie Rose interview, and basically for the same reasons.

    First of all, I came to the conclusion that none of Dore’s clips took this guy’s message out of context, whatsoever. As far as I’m concerned, you, or anybody, can take Friedman’s 3 minute block of diatribe, chop and toss it like a salad, and still nothing of it would be taken out of context, or be misconstrued. Try it, and see for yourself. I’d like to get a transcript of it, myself, and mess around with it. I think you can cut it, chop it, mix it, and it will sound the same each time. But, in any event, I really do think you’re giving Dore a bum wrap claiming he was taking Friedman’s words out of context. I don’t see that at all.

    But, I think I know why you probably do. And that’s because you’ve taken the entire interview out of context.

    Like completely. lol

    First of all, Rose didn’t ask Friedman what he thought of regional perspectives, or what the general public thinks.

    He asked Friedman what Friedman thinks, his personal thoughts, and very specifically, Rose asked Friedman if he thought the war, now that it was over (what a fucking joke), was worth it. To which Friedman replied in the affirmative, it was worth it. Then he goes on with his reasons why he thought it was worth it, and not anybody else’s perspective, or at least no else he’d like us to know about.

    We have to remember, this is 2003, and Friedman’s answer was in fact not so much a personal perspective as it was a prepackaged narrative designed to mold perspective. After all, he spat out word for word, exactly, the precise, emotionally charged message, that the PTSB wanted the general public to feel, believe and accept as a justification for, and the worthiness of, their false flag initiated Iraqi war.
    I contend that his flawlessly delivered neocon contrived answer, from top to bottom, was designed to help in supporting and shaping the mind-set of the deceived and clueless general public, rather than reflect it.

    So, he wasn’t telling any truth. Hell, no. Unless you believe that he believed the Kool-Aid he was delivering, which amounted to parroting the official lie, word for word.

    This really is the question we should be asking ourselves; did Friedman – a regular editorial columnist at The New York Times, who never makes any bones about demonizing Iran, then and now, actually believe the fable of the neocon zeitgeist?

    I say no way. Think about it…. As a premium gatekeeper, which I believe he is, writing in the most exclusive op-ed pages in the world at least monthly, or biweekly, shilling for the Zionist government of Israel, demonizing Iran, always supportive of the neocon agenda, and in this interview with Rose, spouting verbatim rhetoric from none other than the premium edition of the neocon playbook; did he, Friedman, fall prey to the big lie? Was he really, actually entranced?

    How much would you like to bet he wasn’t?

    • I Shot Santa says:

      Like I said earlier, I haven’t re-checked it since then. I like to let things settle and pick some quite time for those. But they can definitely chop things up. It really all depends on if that was the question he was answering. I don’t doubt he’s not a pleasant fellow, but neither am I. JimBob who occasionally threatens to matter, but really; what’s the point?

  9. mkey says:

    A pilot project for a new libertarian floating city will have 300 homes, its own government, and its own cryptocurrency

    I’m sure the rent will be a pittance. Note: moving to the sea to escape government by forming a new government … wait, what?

  10. mkey says:

    F-35 stealth fighter sees first combat, in Israeli operation

    Not often do you hear/read Israelis state they “attacked” someone, they usually only retaliate. This one is for the posterity.

  11. mkey says:

    ‘They deserve no mercy’: Iraq deals briskly with accused ‘women of Isis’

    How would one go about confirming anything from this article? All of this may just have happened, but the way the article is written it’s simply unbelievable.

    • I Shot Santa says:

      That actually sounds completely believable to me. I was talking with someone who had been in one of the Iraq conflicts and we were swapping “you won’t believe how stupid this was” stories, and he said that when they turned over people who were suspected (over the flimsiest of reasons) to the Iraqi soldiers to take back, none of them ever made it back. They simply didn’t have time. I know, you wouldn’t believe how that solves the whole backlog situation. Don’t think it’s just because the Iraqis are inhuman, they are not. They are actually wonderful people, but they’ve been through some of the most hellish conditions imaginable for decades now. Hard times can forge the soul better than anything. JimBob who’s got a good mid-range temper on his forging, but he’s okay with that.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Back to Top