When Did Bin Laden Die? – Questions For Corbett #039

04/14/201889 Comments

So we were told Bin Laden died in 2001. Then we were told he was dead in 2002. And 2005 and 2006 and 2007 and 2009 before he was killed again in 2011. So which is it? And how do we know? Good question. Join James as he explores this and other conundrums in the 39th edition of Questions For Corbett.

For those with limited bandwidth, CLICK HERE to download a smaller, lower file size version of this episode.

For those interested in audio quality, CLICK HERE for the highest-quality version of this episode (WARNING: very large download).

SHOW NOTES
Who Is Nicholas Rockefeller? – Questions For Corbett #038

Corbett on Pike WWIII Letter

How to Beat the Banksters at Their Own Game

Interview 928 – James Corbett Discusses Voluntary Solutions to Ending the Fed

Corbett Report Radio 169 – The Alternative Currency Solution with Eyal Hertzog

Complementary Currencies: A Beginner’s Guide

Think you know how to “End The Fed”? Take the #FedChallenge

India slashes Monsanto’s GMO seed royalty, says US firm ‘free to leave’ anytime

Expert panel recommends 10-year moratorium on GM food crop field trials)

ACSH: Monsanto Didn’t Cause Farmer Suicides in India

Who is ACSH?

Open Seeds: Biopiracy and the Patenting of Life

James Corbett Reacts to OBL “Death”

Osama Bin Laden Pronounced Dead…For the Ninth Time

Leaked Snowden docs show for first time that DNA test verified identity of Osama bin Laden’s body

CIA organised fake vaccination drive to get Osama bin Laden’s family DNA

He Led the CIA to bin Laden—and Unwittingly Fueled a Vaccine Backlash

The Killing of Osama Bin Laden

James Corbett on Ground Zero Radio

G. Edward Griffin Debunks the JFK/Fed Myth

Ochelli on JFK sources

Hornberger on JFK sources

The Ochelli Effect

Joacob Hornberger blog on FFF.org

Smashing Pumpkins live playlist

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedintumblrmail

Filed in: Questions For Corbett
Tagged with:

89 comments

  1. I Shot Santa ( User Karma: 89 ) says:

    At last!I have a relevant posting! James, I just got through watching this incredibly stupid video; not the video itself, but the content. The UK thought crimes. Where hate speech has just run amok apparently. People are getting their wallets raped by this now. Personally, I find it evidence that Ayn Rand was a prophet, but I would like to know your take on this madness. Basically, it’s a WTF question. Just what is the UK trying to do? Do they WANT their government to collapse? I don’t even have the ability to grasp how anyone could be this idiotic. Of course, I AM looking at stupid from a logical perspective; so their’s that. JimBob who figures it might be best to paraphrase anything that comes out of his mouth.

  2. mik ( User Karma: 3 ) says:

    Proposal for improving comments section

    Primary objective of proposal is to enable members to follow commentators they find worthy.

    Present situation:
    Comments section is flooded with crappy comments.
    Recent Comments box on Home Page is small and easily overflowed. It is easy to miss a comment from worthy member, particularly if he comments on not so recent pages.

    Solution:
    Introduction of slider in Recent Comments box and transform it from fixed-list-box to slider-scroll-list-box.

    This way it could be easily possible to reach and view all comments, let’s say a month ago.

    Pros:
    Solution is not complicated, no programing needed, not demanding on server resources.
    No one will miss a comment from commentator he finds valuable.
    Sharing and learning improved.

    Cons:
    see none (of course 🙂 )

    P.S.

    New reverse time sorting of comments is confusing. Former was better.

    1. mkey ( User Karma: 6 ) says:

      I made a similar suggestion in the past, but this type of site is really not the ideal solution to having discussions. A proper forum software plugin would be needed, I don’t know if wordpress has anything like that.

      But the recent comments list should be easy to extend.

      Actually, it’s super easy

      wpbeginner.com/beginners-guide/how-to-show-recent-comments-in-wordpress-sidebar/

  3. raddysh ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

    Hey James. My question for you is, “Now that it is absolutely accepted that everything he said (and lots more) was true can we now take the “hex” off of Edward Snowden?”

    1. mkey ( User Karma: 6 ) says:

      The thing James had to say about Edward is that he didn’t reveal much if anything new. Stuff he “revealed” was in the public domain a long time, some of it for over a decade.

      Which only raises the question, why did he say what he said at the time he said it? He was certainly given much attention by the media which usually covers up stuff like this with a half meter thich layer of concrete. IMO, Edward has “controlled agent” written all over his forehead.

      1. mik ( User Karma: 3 ) says:

        definitely not a real whistleblower.

        Interesting video:

        40min Edward Snowden Interview Globo Brazil TV News
        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k_alakIQ3I0&t=1388s

        I guess interview was recorded around one year after Snowden gave Greenwald all documents he had.
        In that year, Greenwald published almost nothing, although Snowden demanded everything has to be published (as I remember). He also got in bed with Omidyar.
        One might conclude that Greenwald screwed Snowden.

        Well in that video you can see both of them in the same room, old buddies, everything is fine.

        I know one thing for certain. I was in Snowden’s shoes and of course, a real whitsteblower, …..forget about interview, gentlemen in front of the camera.
        He would feel the whole weight of my punch.

        1. Fawlty Towers ( User Karma: 1 ) says:

          In that year, Greenwald published almost nothing, although Snowden demanded everything has to be published (as I remember).

          Can you please give citations where Snowden demanded “everything has to be published”?

          1. I Shot Santa ( User Karma: 89 ) says:

            Which leads us to an alternative conclusion. That being that Snowden could be genuine, and Greenwald is the choke-point to be controlled. Which would be the way I would look at the scene if’n I were in some fancy-smancy intelligence agency. JimBob who just thinks there’s a whole heap of ways to skin a cat, even though he kind of likes cats and so he’s not sure why anyone would want to skin one.

            1. manbearpig ( User Karma: 16 ) says:

              Well that eventuality had occurred to me watching the Globo Brazil TV News interview with Snowden that Mik posted above.

              Snowden might seem to be glossing over rage when speaking about the fact that Greenwald had not used the encryption program he’d asked him to. And he may’ve seemed stiff and calculated when speaking of Miranda’s extraordinary character and even his “no no no” might’ve seemed a bit giddy when insisting that the Russian’s surveillance of him was not too extensive…or then again he might not have.

              But if he’d been the real deal one day, he’s certainly been brought under control, adopting the “Government had the 9/11 info beforehand but let it happen” stance linked in my comment above and apparently sympathetically condoning Greenwald’s management of his recklessly won treasure and posing for the Academy award winning documentary that has saved no one from spying but has created an effectively impotent Hero and the illusion that whistleblowing is possible in the mainstream media. An engineered martyr of world-wide fame masking the castrated and controlled opposition it really is. Or has become. Hard to say.

              Anyway you slice it, (or skin it for that matter), it reeks.

              1. I Shot Santa ( User Karma: 89 ) says:

                If I may be so bold, Mr. ManBearPig; might I suggest you be a hero for others to worship instead? JimBob who just loves turning them tables around like that.

              2. I Shot Santa ( User Karma: 89 ) says:

                Well, he is in Russia. And Putin has made it obvious that he is not afraid to pull that “We have evidence about 9/11 that you just ain’t gonna believe” card. I also note that once you play that card, it don’t work anymore. But he has played it a couple of times already. I’m sure they have discussed the delicate nature of this card and they might have come to an agreement which you might find unethical while sitting all comfy in that chair, but ….. Anyway, geopolitics sure does have a world of players in it. JimBob who has trouble keeping up with what his crazy neighbors are doing, let alone crazy people on the other side of the world! I’m just glad they’re over there and not here.

              3. manbearpig ( User Karma: 16 ) says:

                I am indeed rather comfy snuggled into my end of the sofa attempting to concentrate on a translation due Monday morning

                but whether or not I find psyops, their witting and unwitting players and the agreements, threats and promises involved “unethical” does not change their apparent efficaciousness, profoundly manipulative and mostly misleading nature and existence.

                and I’d like to finish with a smug “fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me”

                except I keep getting fooled…even as I learn more and more and keep trying to understand.

                Actually, I’d really love to indulge in hero-worship myself.

          2. mik ( User Karma: 3 ) says:

            No, I can’t give you citations, my database is not that powerful.
            I might be wrong, but usually my memory serves me well. On the other hand, I think it is irrelevant for the point I’ve tried to make.
            Up to the interview, Greenwald published very little from the stash, making shady deals with millionaires…
            Real wistleblower would be pissed, I doubt he would like to have anything with Greenwald, especially being in the same room.

            1. Fawlty Towers ( User Karma: 1 ) says:

              No, I can’t give you citations, my database is not that powerful.
              I might be wrong, but usually my memory serves me well. On the other hand, I think it is irrelevant for the point I’ve tried to make.
              Up to the interview, Greenwald published very little from the stash, making shady deals with millionaires…

              What were the shady deals he made?

              Real wistleblower would be pissed, I doubt he would like to have anything with Greenwald, especially being in the same room.

              You are making a lot of personal assumptions. Do you have any knowledge of agreements made between Snowden and Greenwald?

              1. Fawlty Towers ( User Karma: 1 ) says:

                So, you (still) believe Snowden is a real whistleblower and I used verb believe on purpose, because you can’t rigorously prove that he actually is.

                I never stated my position on Snowden. I will now.
                I have no skin in the game.
                I don’t care if he is a genuine whistleblower or not.
                Only Snowden and his hairdresser (and possibly some family/friends/coworkers) know for sure if he is genuine or not.

                Until someone gives me a convincing argument (hopefully with some proof) I will go with the default story on this one.

                On the other hand you demand proofs for my claims. I’m not saying you shouldn’t, just be aware of what you are doing.

                I am not demanding proofs. I simply asked you if you had anything to back up a claim you made.
                Ironically, the claim you made stated that Snowden himself made a demand!
                “although Snowden demanded everything has to be published (as I remember).”

                Yes, I’m also making personal assumptions and theories. Since we don’t have all relevant information at disposal, there is no other way for better understanding.

                Let me ask you: Are ALL decisions and conclusions in your life made only when you have all relevant information on your hand?

                Good question!
                No, I don’t operate like that.
                However I am what is known as, a ‘critical thinker’. On issues that are important to me and I have time to research/reflect on, I hold back from making any commitment one way or another until I feel I have as much relevant information as possible.

                At times I will go with the default story. I am never ashamed to admit I was wrong if new information/proof surfaces that contradicts my position.

              2. mik ( User Karma: 3 ) says:

                “Secondly, he would be shooting himself in the foot as a whistleblower. The general public would subsequently dismiss him as a kook.”(your reply to @manbearpig)

                So, you (still) believe Snowden is a real whistleblower and I used verb believe on purpose, because you can’t rigorously prove that he actually is.
                On the other hand you demand proofs for my claims. I’m not saying you shouldn’t, just be aware of what you are doing.
                Yes, I’m also making personal assumptions and theories. Since we don’t have all relevant information at disposal, there is no other way for better understanding.

                Let me ask you: Are ALL decisions and conclusions in your Real Life made only when you have all relevant information (triple-checked) on your hand?

        2. mkey ( User Karma: 6 ) says:

          Any specific interesting part of that video? I’m a bit miffed to give it 33 minutes of my time.

          That hug between the two in the beginning looked quite acted out to me. Firstly at second 15 Edward hugs some woman, that looks like a normal hug to me. Then he hugs Greenwald as if he wears 12 inch needles for a beard. Even for a manhug that’s a bit too over the top for me. If they aren’t in relations close enough to warrant a hug, why hug at all? Granted, maybe that’s just a hood thing.

          1. Fawlty Towers ( User Karma: 1 ) says:

            Any specific interesting part of that video? I’m a bit miffed to give it 33 minutes of my time.

            I just watched all of it and I highly recommend it. I saw an extremely intelligent, well-spoken young man with great ideas and candidness.

            Judging by the comments on the video I am not alone.

              1. manbearpig ( User Karma: 16 ) says:

                Thanks. Very interesting analysis associating the timely arrival of these “whistleblowers” with critical moments in geopolitical history.

      2. Fawlty Towers ( User Karma: 1 ) says:

        mkey, if we assume for a moment that he is a “controlled agent”, what purpose(s) do you believe the controllers had in mind when they set him loose to do his mission?
        And have they been successful with this mission?

        1. mkey ( User Karma: 6 ) says:

          I’d say for achieveing the effect of normalization. There was a certain influx of the big brother controlling fascist state paraphernalia into the public domain during these past several years, thanks to some TV shows and the media.

          There also may be something in sending a message to any wannabe whistleblowers in form of “if you do something like this, better run and hide in the closest gulag.”

          I couldn’t really gauge how succesfull he was, but I think that role was played well and the boat moved in the right direction a bit further.

          For me, the media attention he got is a sure proof of foul play. These people harp on about very specific things at very specific times.

          1. manbearpig ( User Karma: 16 ) says:

            As mentioned multiple times on this site, there’d been other far less filmed and eulogized whistleblowers in the past who’d put their lives on the line denouncing ubiquitous spying and surveillance (Russell Tice et al).

            I’d say, the media is a language speaking to the (individual) and collective subconscious, forming people’s perceptions of the predominant paradigm we’re living in. (Modern Poor Man’s Bible; wikipedia.org/wiki/Poor_Man%27s_Bible)

            In preparation for the Smart paradigm, it was time to officially drill into people’s heads, once and for all, that we’re constantly being spied on, with “proof” to erase any ambiguity on that point. Time to mourn privacy and forget about it. To normalize total surveillance. Take spying out of the “Conspiracy” domain and make it a “respectable” topic.

            Also, creating heros to dicatate ulterior opinions on key issues is also useful.

            I also agree with the warning message given Mkey (evoked even though Snowden’s probably doing just fine where he is.)

            In reality I just felt like offering my 2 cents worth (and not much more) before I scuttled off bright and early into hamster land…

            1. Fawlty Towers ( User Karma: 1 ) says:

              In preparation for the Smart paradigm, it was time to officially drill into people’s heads, once and for all, that we’re constantly being spied on, with “proof” to erase any ambiguity on that point. Time to mourn privacy and forget about it.

              So Snowden’s purpose was not to shock the populace about the constant, omnipotent spying going on everyday on our personal lives but rather, send a message to “Get used to it folks!”?

              This is really what you believe?

              And this is what the media also tried to tell the public? This is why they found Snowden’s message to be so important?

              Strange that if Snowden’s message was to “Get used to it folks!” that Obama and two independent Whitehouse investigations all agreed with Snowden that the spying programs should be ended, one of which said that the spying program had no basis in law at all.

              Congress, both houses, said that the spying programs needed to be reformed and ended and protections implemented so that nothing like this happens again.

              I also agree with the warning message given Mkey evoked even though Snowden’s probably doing just fine where he is.

              So how do you give a warning message when the messenger is doing just fine? What exactly would the warning be in this case?

              1. Fawlty Towers ( User Karma: 1 ) says:

                manbearpig:
                On people’s feelings about privacy: FAWLTY TOWERS says: “…Well that’s your opinion. I don’t think the world has become blase at all with regards to their privacy…”

                The very fact that people continue to use smart meters, smartphones, apps, household appliances and certain toys, buy Google Homes, Amazon Echos, post photos and other personal info on Facebook, live with CCTV cameras everywhere, mostly don’t encrypt their data etc etc etc is proof they are blasé about their privacy.

                My house has a smart meter and I use it because I have no other choice, other than going off grid.
                None of my appliances are smart. I don’t use Facebook, Twitter etc.
                If I could control any CCTV cameras I would.
                If I had data that needed to be protected I would encrypt it.
                I am not blase about my privacy, to the contrary. Am I the rare exception? Possibly, possibly not.

                On the fact that there’s no hint of damning evidence in the historic treasure trove of data collected by the NSA and appropriated by Snowden FAWLTY TOWERS says:

                “…I don’t find it curious at all. Why should we have expected them to have shed light on 9/11?…”

                Isn’t the alleged pretext for collecting the data to get information about terrorists?

                Yes the pretext was certainly for collecting the data to get information about ‘terrorists’.

                With all of the double and triple hops involved in surveillance (nothing to do with mihops or lihops), absolutely no comments by any of the terrorists involved in the most high profile terrorist attack in human history used to justify the creation of Total Information Awareness were recorded in that unprecedented mass of information? Then who was being targeted?

                Simple answer to that. If we go with the official 9/11 story, the only terrorists involved were 19 hijackers (possibly 20) and Bin Laden.
                The data mining started after they died.

                If we go with the true 9/11 story, why would Snowden or Greenwald release any information (assuming they had any in the first place) that would incriminate any 9/11 perp?

                As for Snowden acting as a warning to potential whistleblowers MKEY already answered that one. Reality versus the official version of reality as portrayed in the media.

                Well MKEY gave mixed signals for the warning. On the one hand he’s saying you will be banished from your country (unexpected horror-of-horrors).
                On the other, he never addressed/accounted for Snowden’s not-so-uncomfortable lifestyle in another country.

              2. manbearpig ( User Karma: 16 ) says:

                About 9/11: FAWLTY TOWERS writes: “…However I wouldn’t go so far as to say it was designed from the outset to justify all kinds of surveillance…”

                Mass surveillance was clearly built into the Patriot Act (section 215) that was up and ready to roll as soon as 9/11 occured.

                And DARPA established the Information Awareness Office in January 2002. (so 3-4 months after 9/11)

                “…This was achieved by creating enormous computer databases to gather and store the personal information of everyone in the United States, including personal e-mails, social networks, credit card records, phone calls, medical records, and numerous other sources, without any requirement for a search warrant.[7] This information was then analyzed to look for suspicious activities, connections between individuals, and “threats”.[8] Additionally, the program included funding for biometric surveillance technologies that could identify and track individuals using surveillance cameras, and other methods.[8]…”

                en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Information_Awareness_Office

                On people’s feelings about privacy: FAWLTY TOWERS says: “…Well that’s your opinion. I don’t think the world has become blase at all with regards to their privacy…”

                The very fact that people continue to use smart meters, smartphones, apps, household appliances and certain toys, buy Google Homes, Amazon Echos, post photos and other personal info on Facebook, live with CCTV cameras everywhere, mostly don’t encrypt their data etc etc etc is proof they are blasé about their privacy.

                On the fact that there’s no hint of damning evidence in the historic treasure trove of data collected by the NSA and appropriated by Snowden FAWLTY TOWERS says:

                “…I don’t find it curious at all. Why should we have expected them to have shed light on 9/11?…”

                Isn’t the alleged pretext for collecting the data to get information about terrorists? With all of the double and triple hops involved in surveillance (nothing to do with mihops or lihops), absolutely no comments by any of the terrorists involved in the most high profile terrorist attack in human history used to justify the creation of Total Information Awareness were recorded in that unprecedented mass of information? Then who was being targeted?

                “…”Hops” refers to a technical term indicating connections between people. A three-hop query means that the NSA can look at data not only from a suspected terrorist, but from everyone that suspect communicated with, and then from everyone those people communicated with, and then from everyone all of those people communicated with.[34][35] NSA officials had said previously that data mining was limited to two hops, but Inglis suggested that the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court has allowed for data analysis extending “two or three hops”.[36]…”

                en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Section_summary_of_the_Patriot_Act,_Title_II

                As for Snowden acting as a warning to potential whistleblowers MKEY already answered that one. Reality versus the official version of reality as portrayed in the media.

              3. Fawlty Towers ( User Karma: 1 ) says:

                9/11 was clearly a psychological operation designed to justify all kinds of surveillance and liberty-cide legislation ushering the world into a new terrorism paradigm.

                The 9/11 mission had many goals. Yes it was clearly a psychological operation. I don’t know if it was designed to be one, but it certainly turned into one.

                I agree it was designed to justify liberty-cide legislation ushering the world into a new terrorism paradigm.
                However I wouldn’t go so far as to say it was designed from the outset to justify all kinds of surveillance.
                I think the justification of all kinds of surveillance developed over time as the “you are not safe unless we do this” excuse became their mantra.

                …Curiously, none of all the “Snowden Leaks” has shed any light on this horrific murder…

                I don’t find it curious at all. Why should we have expected them to have shed light on 9/11?

                …Snowden’s own words did not say “Privacy’s over, Get used to it” but where the entire event as portrayed in the media has ultimately, if not single-handedly, achieved the desired effect of making the world’s population blasé with regards to both their privacy and the American government.

                Well that’s your opinion. I don’t think the world has become blase at all with regards to their privacy. Americans to their government, sure.

                And in terms of symbolic heros entering the Global collective subconscious thanks to this operation, socialist leaning BRICS members, Russia and Brazil, were also burnished along with the LGBT community with Greenwald and Miranda playing international super activists defying the reactionary, obsolete and apparently impotent anglo-american governments. “Impotent” as Russia has taken Snowden in until at least 2020 where he lives “a surprisingly open life” by his own admission, Greenwald is enjoying his illustrious career at the Intercept, Miranda has become a politician in his own country and according to Wikipedia “…the two have been married for 11 years [and] In 2017, they adopted two siblings…”
                Thus, the main protagonists of the allegedly greatest secret info theft in the history of humanity have all, to a large degree, walked off into the sunset…

                So how does this hero’s life (Snowden’s) send a message to would-be whistleblowers?
                Do as I do and you too can become a hero with little to no downside?

                Bonus: Here’s what Snowden had to say about 9/11 as reported by RT:

                … Sound familiar?

                Yes, by coincidence I also watched that interview recently. I was disappointed that he didn’t say more about 9/11 but then, even if he has done his homework on it (which many bright individuals do not) he had little choice but to bite his tongue and not say anything more.

                First off the MSM would never give him the opportunity to broadcast the truth about 9/11 worldwide. They would edit it out from the interview.

                Secondly, he would be shooting himself in the foot as a whistleblower. The general public would subsequently dismiss him as a kook.

              4. manbearpig ( User Karma: 16 ) says:

                9/11 was clearly a psychological operation designed to justify all kinds of surveillance and liberty-cide legislation ushering the world into a new terrorism paradigm. (Curiously, none of all the “Snowden Leaks” has shed any light on this horrific murder.* (Snowden’s comments on 9/11 in Bonus below:))

                If, instead of international conflict, you imagine the International Deep State vs. The Masses, the following Wiki article might represent a useful introduction into the matter of Psychological Operations:

                n.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychological_Operations_(United_States)

                Yes, I believe the Edward Snowden affair with its sleek, high-profile Academy Award-winning fresco of harrowing flights, futile detentions and timely interviews was such a psychological operation where Snowden’s own words did not say “Privacy’s over, Get used to it” but where the entire event as portrayed in the media has ultimately, if not single-handedly, achieved the desired effect of making the world’s population blasé with regards to both their privacy and the American government. Such gadgets as the Amazon Echo the Google Home, smart phone features in addition to all of the endless spying “news” stories broadcast ad nauseum and Facebook’s mischief with Zuckerberg’s proclamations to this effect, all contribute to this wailing global wake of humanity’s privacy.

                And in terms of symbolic heros entering the Global collective subconscious thanks to this operation, socialist leaning BRICS members, Russia and Brazil, were also burnished along with the LGBT community with Greenwald and Miranda playing international super activists defying the reactionary, obsolete and apparently impotent anglo-american governments. “Impotent” as Russia has taken Snowden in until at least 2020 where he lives “a surprisingly open life” by his own admission, Greenwald is enjoying his illustrious career at the Intercept, Miranda has become a politician in his own country and according to Wikipedia “…the two have been married for 11 years [and] In 2017, they adopted two siblings…”

                Thus, the main protagonists of the allegedly greatest secret info theft in the history of humanity have all, to a large degree, walked off into the sunset…

                Bonus: Here’s what Snowden had to say about 9/11 as reported by RT:

                “…In response to a question from Williams concerning a “non-traditional enemy,” Al-Qaeda, and how to prevent further attacks from that organization and others, Snowden suggested that United States had the proper intelligence ahead of 9/11 but failed to act.

                “You know, and this is a key question that the 9/11 Commission considered. And what they found, in the post-mortem, when they looked at all of the classified intelligence from all of the different intelligence agencies, they found that we had all of the information we needed as an intelligence community, as a classified sector, as the national defense of the United States to detect this plot,” Snowden said. …”

                With unquestioning faith in the 9/11 commission’s conclusions:

                “Snowden suggested that United States had the proper intelligence ahead of 9/11 but failed to act.”

                Sound familiar?

                https://www.rt.com/usa/162576-nbc-snowden-september-attack/

                Disclaimer: A few of the most beloved members of my family and friends belong to the LGBT community.

                497 words.

              5. Fawlty Towers ( User Karma: 1 ) says:

                mkey:
                Are you doing this on purpose? Your conclusion there is in obvious collision with the second part of my post.

                Doing what on purpose? What is my conclusion?

            2. mkey ( User Karma: 6 ) says:

              I too think he’s doing just fine. I’d estimate he’s doing great, he just seems to be stuck in that god forsaken Russia. I wouldn’t have a problem being “stuck” in Moscow, for instance, assuming I could afford it.

              1. I Shot Santa ( User Karma: 89 ) says:

                Snow. Lots of snow. It does it regularly. If that don’t make a place godforsaken, then please illuminate me. JimBob who lives in fluorida for a very sunny reason.

              2. mkey ( User Karma: 6 ) says:

                Are you doing this on purpose? Your conclusion there is in obvious collision with the second part of my post.

              3. Fawlty Towers ( User Karma: 1 ) says:

                Can you please explain what is “god forsaken” about Russia?
                Have you ever been there?

          2. Fawlty Towers ( User Karma: 1 ) says:

            There also may be something in sending a message to any wannabe whistleblowers in form of “if you do something like this, better run and hide in the closest gulag.”

            Are you saying that Snowden willfully decided to screw up his life to send this message to any future wannabe whistleblowers?

            Or during his interview for candidacy do you think he mentioned he’d like to live in Russia for 5-10 years or indefinitely?

            1. mkey ( User Karma: 6 ) says:

              Well, if we assume as we did that he is a controlled agent, how did he screw up his life? He’s doing his job and since he’s doing it well I’d also assume he’s being nicely compensated for it.

              I have no idea what he would say in his interview for residency, but I feel fairly certain that some (future) president may “pardon” Edward, while garnering public sentiment for virtually nothing, enabling him to return to the states, supposing Edward even wants to do that.

              If Nixon pardoned that lieutenant who supposedly was in charge of killing dozens of dastardly civil… I mean members of Vietkong in form of elderly and children, I’m sure Edward would be able to get a benefecator of his own, should such a neccessity arise.

              Therefore, I disagree that in this scenario his life would be anywhere near ruined.

              1. mkey ( User Karma: 6 ) says:

                I’m not certain we’re on the same page here, I’ll spell it out.

                “Controlled agent” does something you tell them to do.

                They do that, get “condemmned” and are “forced” to “flee” to a “hellhole.”

                The public perception is such that this person got punished for spilling the beans.

                The actual person in question, with their life being effectively hung upside down, is actually a lot better off having been set nicely instead of truly banished since you don’t want the atually start talking.

                Publically banished, in reality not so much.

              2. Fawlty Towers ( User Karma: 1 ) says:

                Therefore, I disagree that in this scenario his life would be anywhere near ruined.

                Well I am confused. On the one hand you are saying his life is just fine now.
                And on the other hand you are saying that:

                There also may be something in sending a message to any wannabe whistleblowers in form of “if you do something like this, better run and hide in the closest gulag.”

                Now if he was being kept in some dungeon or some Guantanamo Bay-like setting I could see what you were saying above. But if he’s doing just fine in Moscow, how does that send a chilling message to wannabe whistleblowers?

  4. Mielia ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

    I have a question for Corbett.

    You have grown a decent reader and viewer basis. With its growth more emails and comments are incoming, thus more time is needed from you to attend these. How do you manage this complication of your success?
    Have you thought about dictating instead of typing emails and articles etc.? An acquaintance of mine usually records emails or other textes by voice (though mostly by slave device smartphone; I think on PCs and laptops it’s not that established).

  5. scpat ( User Karma: 2 ) says:

    Q4C:

    In your view, since 9/11, has U.S. government foreign policy really intended to achieve what the top brass publicly state are their objectives, but unintentionally just happen to be clumsy, have nearly all their strategies backfire on their stated purposes (e.g. empowering Iran and other Shi’a forces, Assad winning the Syrian war, emboldening terrorist groups, creating new ones and causing previous ones to grow stronger, etc) and generally appear to be bumbling around the Middle East and elsewhere?

    Or, do you think the planners in the U.S government knew that the situation in the M.E. was likely to unravel the way it has, but intentended it to, and hoped it would, as to justify endless war in the M.E. and whatever else their motives might be?

    1. I Shot Santa ( User Karma: 89 ) says:

      I’ve been wondering something similar. Except that I just took out “publicly stated” on the goals. However, it isn’t the incompetence which gets me; that is real. What gets me are all the news which just backfire time after time. I’m talking news announcements. You know, the ones in which the “truth bombs” go off on MSM. Is it possible that they are smart enough to just make themselves look stupid? I don’t think so. JimBob whose government experience has taught him that only the dumbest people ever stick with government jobs.

  6. aaronk ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

    Question for Corbett.

    Hi James, what’s the story with the pizzagate open-source investigation. Was this debunked? The alt-media community appears to be split on this, as with so many things lately.

  7. lorenzo.c ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

    On that note, a sincere thank you and hats off to good-old Broc in southern Vietnam!
    Anyway, my thoughts than skipped forward a couple of years and imagined a bright, almost radiant future, where between five to ten people have followed Broc’s example and, despite being scattered across the planet, they all found a meaningful way to achieve the same result he did. And here comes the kicker: despite being usually in contact only over the internet, a yearly physical meeting could be organized, each year either near or at the place of residence of another member of the group, in order to see new places, generate new ideas and new plans for the future, as well as to foster honest reciprocal friendships. This could be eventually expanded to willing members, gradually transforming it into an offline session of an otherwise online community. In conclusion, James, should you actually be interested in any of the suggestions I just made, please do let me know, because I have more to say, particularly on how I could actually follow Broc’s footsteps.

    1. I Shot Santa ( User Karma: 89 ) says:

      Broc in South Vietnam? I thought he was in Australia. Just goes to show how things/people just won’t stay where I think they are. By the way, great idea there. I’m not really sure how James keeps up with the work he does now. I get the notion he is living the grad school life of never-ending questions. JimBob who never questions the official line as he don’t even know what it is.

      1. lorenzo.c ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

        Hi I Shot Santa, that would be awesome, right? I mean, there are times when just thinking about it gives me goosebumbs. Thanks for your input!

      1. I Shot Santa ( User Karma: 89 ) says:

        When did that happen? Or am I just completely out of the loop on things and he’s always been based there? Either one is possible as some days the world is just one confusing blend of facts/truths/lies/mis-interpretations that never really settle into place before someone hits the puree button again. JimBob who knows that being a pothead could never cause one to get a little hazy on the details.

    2. Fawlty Towers says:

      I don’t mean to discourage you with this idea lorenzo but…
      Before you invest too much time thinking this through and
      coming up with a proposal for James on a new/improved bigger and better website…
      I don’t think it is likely at all that he will be interested.

      First of all what you are describing sounds an awful lot
      like a Newsbud clone (are you sure you aren’t a Newsbud spy 🙂 ? ).

      Second of all James absolutely relishes his independence. He thrives on it.

      Working as part of a team just isn’t his bag, whether he is leader
      or not.

      I will never forget that BFP video broadcast where Sibel was floating the idea of starting Newsbud (the name still hadn’t even been born).
      During the discussion someone asked James if he would be interested in working on such a team as a regular team member.

      His response? He “bristled” (the word he used) just from thinking about the idea! That was his polite way of declining any such offer.

      BTW, this was years before they had their falling out. They were still on excellent terms back then.

      Having said all that, this is not to say I don’t think improvements can be made to this site; for example the comments section (as has been mentioned) etc.

      1. lorenzo.c ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

        Hi Fawlty Towers, thanks for the input!

        I know, James always was and still is (particularly after the senseless beef with Sibel and Spiro) rightfully skeptical of any outside “influence”. Furthermore, let me state this very clearly: at this point this is all just talk, and should James come to the conclusion that this is about it for now, I’ll stop right away. I do also realize that, not only would the burden of proof fall on me, but it would also be pretty damn high…still, I’m prepared to give it a try!

        This website gave so much, that I think its high time I find a meaningful way to give some back.

        As I alluded to mkey, if anyone of you guys and girls has a better suggestion, I’m all ears. It’s not about about expanding the website per se, but rather: how can James have more time for both his family AND for the stuff he actually likes doing (researching and producing media), without neglecting all the otherwise important stuff?

        1. Fawlty Towers says:

          lorenzo I don’t think it registered/you understand, however good your intentions might be.
          This is not about “burden of proof/trust”
          (although after his latest war with Sibel, James’ ‘saboteur radar’ must be at their highest alert levels ever.)

          This is about independence. James’ DNA thrives on it.

        2. mkey ( User Karma: 6 ) says:

          I don’t think you can relegate commitments without losing independence.

          Collecting information – this is something anyone can contribute to (and many do) but this actually adds to the work load

          Digesting information – I don’t think anyone can do this reliably and objectively, therefore it can not be relegated with keeping independence in mind

          Keep up with correspondence – has to do with what I mentioned above and also maintaining privacy. Besides, James isn’t Obama to have a dozen people acting as him on social media, on his behalf

          Maintaining the website – again, a privacy issue

          Maintaining the community – susceptible to bias, moderation could be relegated to a certain extent, but you’d need to have hundreds of daily posts for it to be required

          Research, writing – essential to independence

          Things that could be outsorced: media production, proofreading and maybe some more mundane tasks, like booking a flight or a hotel or organizing some event or doing groceries and stuff like that, but I very much doubt he’d like to have a personal assistant.

  8. lorenzo.c ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

    Of course, one other aspect is the funny-money. Given all the things James is already doing on this front, it seems to me that the only real way to increase the revenue is to increase both the quality (if and when possible), and particularly the quantity of media produced, thereby potentially reaching more people. But how the heck can we expect him to do more than what he already is doing? My thought-process eventually led me to the distin­ction between replaceable tasks, and those tasks where James can and should not be replaced. I believe that the sheer amount of time that he already invested in these activities, make him the absolute best choice to cover what I feel to be his two core duties to the community: researching and articulating. James’ English, both written and spoken, his proven sense of moral independence, as well as his obsession for both checking and publishing the actual sources, have all inspired me to try to do the same. Taken together, they constitute the key ingredients that have practically kept me glued to the website for all this time. After having lined-up all the things that he must be doing behind the scenes just to keep the website running, I soon came to the realization that I have absolutely no clue how he does it. The list includes, but is not limited to:
    Keeping at least an overview of the incoming emails, questions, and comments;
    Devoting enough time to assess the contents of all book, video, and article suggestions;
    Covering as much of the global 24/7 English-language news cycle as possible;
    Keeping at least an overview of the solutions-oriented sources and keeping track of new developments;
    Following up on the information published on both people and events cited in older reports;
    Webmastering the website;
    Keeping track of the stuff you want/plan to address in the future;
    Coordinating the appointments with your various interview partners and/or colleagues;
    Making sure that all DVDs (and eventually books, hopefully) are produced/shipped/delivered as expected.

    I believe that to expand the reach of the website, without moving an inch from the scholarly principles James has painstakingly established, he should gather a small group of assistants. So, if I understand the sheer volume of work involved correctly, the first six of the aforementioned tasks would by themselves require at least one assis­tant: EACH. Of course, these people would not work for the website full-time, first because they probably don’t live anywhere close to James, and secondly because the budget simply isn’t enough: YET. But the advantages of having such people help him by doing at least some of this stuff is clearly demonstrated by the case of Broc West. Ever since he started editing the videos, he has single-handedly helped James have more time for both his family and the website, thereby significantly improving the content released, both in terms of visual quality, and in terms of quantity.

    1. mkey ( User Karma: 6 ) says:

      While this comment may not cover all that you wrote, James stated on a number of occasions that he could never give access to his website to people he doesn’t know physically (and I’d wager very, very well and in depth) which makes sense.

      Another issue is that I don’t think this site would technically be able to manage several different people with varying degrees of access rights.

      On a more personal note, I don’t think this community is going to expand to something gigantic any time soon. James has stated several times he has “several thousands subscriber” but we have barely a few dozen regular posters in the comments section. This is not to say I wouldn’t welcome a technically better implemented comments section, where things could be better organized and people could submit their own content. This would be something akin to standard forum software, which is freely available and fairly easy to setup and implement.

      1. lorenzo.c ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

        Hi mkey, thanks for the input!
        I know, James stated that on several occasions that I remember. Besides, how to blame him!?? In his position, I’d do the same. Anyway, I’m prepared to prove my committment, having already come up with a 4-step plan. I’m just waiting for James to signal that he is at least open to the possibility of someone trying to prove him/herself.

        On the issue of the varying degrees of access rights, I know far to little about IT to be able to contribute on this issue. Still, I do think that there are ways for James to outsource specific tasks, without having to change the website’s fundametal architecture.

        On the issue of the silent subscribers, you are most certainly correct. Furthermore, I sure do hope that the website does not expand to something “gigantic”. The team I’m talking about already started in 2014, at least according to the website’s “about” section, where Broc is mentioned as video editor since that time. What I mean is, it is not (and should not be) a rapid process. Also, the “few dozen regular contributors” like yourself are already more than enough to start with. Even if the website grows to, say, tens-of thousands of subscribers, 99% of them would continue to be “silent”, and only 0.01% would be “regular contributors”. And that is exactly how it should be, meaning: if you want high level content (which is the case of this website, including the comment section) how many do you expect can regularly contribute? Time-wise, English-wise, research-wise, topic-wise, etc…
        I do believe that in this case quality and quantity do not correlate.

        On the issue of a better implementation of the comment section, while I do agree wholeheartedly, I’m not able to help out on the technical side.

  9. lorenzo.c ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

    I encourage all members (including James, of course) to share their thoughts on the few following posts!

    So, during the last months, almost every time I consumed one of James’ new pieces, I found myself thinking about how great it would be to one day be able to work for the Corbett report community. This is also because he frequently reminds us of how he just doesn’t have the time to do all the stuff that needs to be done. So, after a few beers, one day in early September I started writing down some ideas on what my humble self could possibly do towards this expansion. One aspect which he often cites is the crowd-sourced nature of the information gathering process. It seems to me that on that front he havs exhausted almost all of the ways to foster that capability. The only other sug­gestion that I can make regards the introduction of a new section of the website; one that would be exclusively dedicated to the articles, videos and books produced and submitted by Corbett report members. In contrast to the comment section, in this new part of the website members would have the ability to briefly present and upload (or link to) their own “finished” works, both of research and of art. Of course, I make this suggestion having an example of such “fi­nished” contributions ready to be submitted: my masters thesis, which presents in English the available sources on the establishment and development of US-led stay behind networks in Austria (https://wp.me/P9DBWA-c).

    Anyway, such a separate section would obviously need to carry a big-ass disclaimer, unequivocally stating that James is not personally liable for any of the (possibly) preposterous/illegal content posted therein. In fact, in exchange for the possibility of being “published” on the website, I myself would be willing to sign a piece of paper saying that I am solely respon­sible for all the contents of my own book, no matter where its posted. In short, such a section would give members of the community both the adequate space to share something more than a comment or a bunch of links, AND the access to (potentially) tons of other interesting information researched and/or produced by largely like-minded individuals.

  10. lorenzo.c ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

    Hi everyone, my name is Lorenzo and it’s a real pleasure to introduce myself both to you and to the corbettreport community! First off, I wanna express both my sincere gratitude for all the incredible work James has done, and my deep shame for having just started to contribute financially to the website, given that it’s now more than five years that I regularly listen or read practically everything you’ve shared since.

    Here are my questions for James: do you aim at expanding the website further? If yes, how do you envision both the website and the community to be five years from now?

  11. dehardt ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

    I was surprised that Fletcher Prouty’s book on JFK was not mentioned as a very good source of info & analysis of the JFK assassination. I suppose there are too many books to mention all of the credible ones, but I found this one most compelling.

  12. joseph ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

    James,

    I left a question in the last QFC I think still bears answering:

    QFC038 ? + comment

    What keeps Saudi Aramco’s IPO from happening on China’s new ‘paper castle/oil futures exchange’? Saudi/US ‘petro-dollar’ will have to get shorted eventually. A financial ‘Thucydides trap’ if you will. Apparently Qatar was already doing Yuan denominated contracts for their carbon chains according to AT and Pepe Escobar http://www.atimes.com/article/house-saud-bows-house-putin/.

    Thank you James and keep up the excellent work!

    ps
    I’m sure you are tired of the “Oh but James your well being…black bags…torture…)”?. As appreciated as they are, I know it has to be exhausting to hear such cowardice all the time. Live in the sunlight and do not separate words and actions is what I say. I’m reminded of an excerpt from Meditations you can read your audience:

    “Waste no more time arguing about what a good man should be. Be one.”

    Marcus Aurelius

  13. amies ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

    Hi James! Largely for the benefit of newcomers, could you please explain on the next edition of QFC who JimBob is and the context in which this personality should be referenced in comments?

    1. Mark K. P. ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

      JimBob is a redneck who shot Santa for visiting his delightful state of Fluorida. That much is obvious.
      He also seems not to believe everything he reads and probably has genealogic links to winged hussar families from old Poland.
      But now we’re speculating

  14. bas ( User Karma: 6 ) says:

    Meanwhile, Bill Gates continues to sprout his GMO propaganda (https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/2018-04-10/gene-editing-good?cid=nlc-emc-paywall-free-reading-bill-gates-b-20180411). CFR-owned Foreign Affairs was so kind to put up his piece paywall-free to “educate” the policy makers on the benefits of genetic engineering. You know, because it fosters higher yields and reduce pesticide use. Oh wait, it doesn’t, and, in fact, does the exact opposite (https://scrutinisedminds.com/2017/10/24/gmos-kill-not-save-the-hungry-of-the-world/).

  15. ryan.s ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

    James,

    One of your questions was “How rich do you need to get to fight the NWO?” You answered that it’s not about money. You also added that while profit was not inherently bad, generally the super rich are almost always corrupt and did something bad to get where they are. You finished by saying: “prove me wrong.” I intend to give some examples of non-corrupted rich people.

    -Nassim Nicholas Taleb: He is a hedge fund manager and professor in risk management. He made a fortune (likely tens of millions) shorting the market in 2008 due to his knowledge of Austrian Economics (real economics lol). He didn’t screw anyone over by doing this. He made a voluntary agreement with people who trusted his advice in the financial markets. He got rich through purely voluntary transactions.

    Nassim endoresed Ron Paul in his presidential campaigns. Moreover, he’s been very vocally against the Federal Reserve, and more importantly, he’s been strongly against the current escalation with Syria. He’s very vocal and adamant that it was not Assad. I really do respect what he stands for; being austrian economics and non-interventionism, I just feel like he’s always on “our” side (anti-war, voluntaryist, doesn’t make money off coercion).

    -Mark Spitznagel: Is another super rich guy (billionaire) who I think is also on the side of the good guys. He was the economic advisor to Ron Paul’s campaigns, being on the side of Liberty. He gets his money off voluntary transactions. He’s worth about 6 billion and is pretty much the same boat as Nassim (investor off Austrian economic principles).

    -Gary Heaven: Founder of Curves (gym for women only). He also got rich off voluntary transactions. Moreover, he’s been vocal in the public light about the inconsistencies of 9/11; which is very dangerous for the CEO of a large company to do. Gary has also been vocally against these “Arab Spring” regime change wars (since he saw through them because of 9/11). Another “risky” position for CEO of a major company, especially in US where everyone tells you to “support the troops” like it’s some sort of religion.

    Moreover, when the earthquake occurred in Haiti, he took all of his boats and went over there to bring supplies and helping the Haitian people. During his time there, he tried to expose the corruption of Hillary Clinton and her fake charity. He put his money where is mouth is when the Haitian earthquake occurred. He got rich by women voluntarily deciding to join his gym. He didn’t coerce anyone to join his gym, they wanted to join. I don’t see anything wrong with what he did.

    Am I saying that these rich people are perfect? No, that’s not what I’m saying. Nassim can be sometimes rude to people on Twitter, he comes off as conceited (even though he’s normally correct and well thought out). Gary Heavin required franchisees to purchase his book (although it’s not like he got rich off his book). I’m not saying these people are the equivelant of the modern day jesus, but they’re clearly not “evil” or “bad” like Henry Kissinger.

    I don’t look at these people as the NWO, of anything they are the people challenging them (via investing in alt positions or calling them out publically).

    Moreover from personal experience, I’ve met a lot of generous and good-hearted “rich people.” I have extended family (via marriage) who happen to very wealthy (net worth estimate $35,000,000 – $70,000,000) who seem to be generous and kind. I don’t follow them everyday and track all their decisions, but I highly doubt they’re doing anything other than regular (non-evil) people do. They are just regular people who happen to have a high net worth.

    Finally, I grew up in a semi-rich family. The best way to describe my parents would be “Middle Class millionaires.” Being in the 1% of the US puts our family in the top 0.1% of the world. Though I am certainly not some NWO-supporting parasite, neither is my family. My family owns a small business.

    I will admit that if you look at the top 100 richest people in the world, you will certainly find some people who are bad people (Larry Silverstein, George Soros, Erik Prince), but not all.

    I’d like to hear what you guys think about this regarding the three people I mentioned above. All super rich, and yet all seem anti-NWO on some level. Maybe they aren’t perfect, but none of us are.

  16. St Gregory of Nyssa ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

    I have a question for Mr Corbett. How can you claim to fight against oppression when you embrace and propagate one of the most oppressive doctrines imaginable: namely, that some people are born psychopaths, whereas others are born normal?

  17. NoMeatNoDairyNoProblem ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

    When a supposedly progressive-leaning website like reddit upvotes virtually anything which shows the U.S. military in a positive light and buries virtually anything which shows the U.S. military in a negative light, I have to wonder what in the world is going on.
    I personally don’t think it’s even possible for this degree of military worship to genuinely exist on reddit and suspect that I’m actually seeing an example of next-level deep-state restructuring of a public forum through vote manipulation & shill posting. Have you come across any evidence (anecdotal or other) which might indicate that this is indeed what’s happening?

    1. Fawlty Towers says:

      I personally don’t think it’s even possible for this degree of military worship to genuinely exist on reddit and suspect that I’m actually seeing an example of next-level deep-state restructuring of a public forum through vote manipulation & shill posting.

      Easily solved.
      Just make it a mandatory cellphone registration site like Steemit. 🙂

  18. manbearpig ( User Karma: 16 ) says:

    I’ve always wondered what you thought about the IPS… guess you probably answered that and I missed it…

    in fact,

    Did I ever mention that it could be an interesting adventure to do an interview, say… with William Pepper, or why not Peter Dale Scott or that Spanish guy…Daniel Estulin…or …? or with anybody really, about the

    Warburg funded

    Institute for Policy Studies

    (whose office is in Washington D.C.)

    and their role in the creation of the New Left…?

    1963. Interesting time…

    “Our Mission: IPS is a progressive think tank dedicated to building a more equitable, ecologically sustainable, and peaceful society. In partnership with dynamic social movements, we turn transformative policy ideas into action.”

    ips-dc.org/about

    Have a nice vacation!

    1. manbearpig ( User Karma: 16 ) says:

      Come to think of it, there’s no reason why Mr. Pepper would known anything about the IPS, but PDS should and Estulin wrote about it in one of his books.

  19. rob32367 ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

    As for JFK info – in addition to Kings & Kennedy’s website and JFK facts website, I like:
    http://22november1963.org.uk
    It is easily searchable on the facts.
    And for audio listen to Mae Brussel about all things in the 60’s & 70’s

    As for books, start with Mark Lane’s Rush to Judgement to see how the WC screwed up. JFK & the Unspeakable is one of the best, James DiEugenio books Reclaiming Parkland & Destiny Betrayed, Fletcher Prouty JFK the CIA, Vietnam, and the plot to Assassinate JFK, and For all of the assassinations of the 60s DiEugenio & Lisa Pease published The Assassinations.

  20. Mark K. P. ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

    re Daniel’s questions and James’ response (from 48:00) yes money and trading can save the world, and some people are trying to turn the present system against its owners. Probably most famous these days is Ronald Bernard, a Dutchman who used to work for the banksters but bailed out when they wanted him to get into child sacrifices.
    Bernard calls himself a Social Entrepreneur and these days runs the “Bank of Joy” with the aim of demonstrating how beneficial a benevolent organization of capital and investment can be, even within the present system. Though he doesnt stop there and views this enterprise as an initial step in the peaceful overthrow of the present system.
    Anyhow since he worked within the BIS “global casino” he is acquainted both with real figures and the research work of various European firms on the financial elite who own almost everything (circa 8,000 people dominated by 13 major family groupings). In 2010 about 63 trillion dollars were needed to run the world economy while a trading capital of about 1,700 trillion was transacted and gambled by the elite through the BIS ; by 2016 this had grown to 77 trillion circulating among the rest of us while the elite was gambling with a whopping 75,000 trillion ; or enough for every man woman child on the planet to have 10 million in an account.
    These figures appear in the following Bernard lecture (Dutch with subtitles);
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=457akZFYnHo

    Although these figures may partly represent funny money they shouldnt be dismissed as fictional. They fundamentally represent the order of wealth generated by industrial and other modern technologies, coupled with the human labour of some three centuries exploiting those technologies. No one would dispute the dramatic rise in living standards in the west during that period , nor that technology is the key. It’s certainly possible for the vampiric monetary system to be overthrown and for the technology to remain and become enhanced.

  21. laurey ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

    But, JAMES! please practice a bit more Zen and have a complete holliday from this morass. MY (unsolicited) advice is to NOT post a darn thing and focus on the Family and your serenity (probably a conflict right there, eh?). Much appreciation.

  22. TampaDave ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

    SPOOKY to see tomorrow’s date under the title… you sent it back in time to Friday the 13th? Or is it an artifact of the IDL?

  23. I Shot Santa ( User Karma: 89 ) says:

    I confess that one of my greatest assets to my filing system is that I use a pretty fine filter in regards as to what gets downloaded onto my hard drive. Having access to too much information can paralyze you. Information itself is only potential power, not power itself.

    I’m glad I’m not you, James. Though I imagine you are loving the variety and depth of all the questions you get. I just had my fill of it nerding out in college. I’d never even heard of the 1871 question of Pike. Of course, I’ve only given the barest of glances at the whole masonic/illuminati thing. It just gets too crazy too quickly for me. I did like that one guy who was talking about the importance of having people who could understand the context of the systems (physical and mental) of the time period of the JFK assassination. It’s too easy to view historical events from the perspective of the reader’s time.

    My question regards a subject you have undoubtedly covered at length, but I have only followed you for a few years now. Feminism. I despise feminists. From our earliest years, under the tyranny of male dominance, the human vagina was regarded as a portal to higher dimensions. It represented everything better in our world. While this was not a perfect system, I think that we men were doing a pretty fair job of viewing women in a positive light. Today, people wear a vagina on their head and call that progress for women. Feminists have made a lot of headway into destroying the natural power of women. The sex that Troy would remember today if Helen’s power wasn’t so great. What is your take on the feminist movement? And do you think that beast will die an agonizing death soon? JimBob don’t mind asking the questions you’ve no doubt been asked 10,000 times before.

    1. mkey ( User Karma: 6 ) says:

      You don’t have any question marks there, but that’s a fair question you implied. Feminism is certainly an important topic, starting before WWI and the Rockefeller funded white feather movement, something James did talk about on that WWI thingy in Denmark (I think) and his QFC copout. But I doubt feminism is something James gets to see that often in everyday life, because feminism, and especially third wave feminism, is mostly a western construct which, I’d wager, doesn’t have a lasting hang time in the East.

    2. I Shot Santa ( User Karma: 89 ) says:

      Re-reading this one, I can’t believe I called that a question. I just get so ticked at feminists. Under feminists, women went from being goddesses to just meat. JimBob who was raised to open doors for women and still can’t figure out how that oppresses them.

  24. scpat ( User Karma: 2 ) says:

    In regards to managing downloaded videos, articles, etc. Besides sorting the files into a folder structure I would recommend using “tags” that make sense for you and that you can type into the finder to easily locate them in the future.

  25. Fawlty Towers says:

    You do realize that:

    a) the correct translation is completely different than what
    the subtitles say in this video and have nothing whatsoever
    to do with Bin Laden?

    b) the original video was recorded BEFORE the alleged Bin Laden
    death in 2011?

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Back to Top