lanugo

von Verfall erzittern
After skimming some of the posts - the most telling being one linking to an interview with an obnoxious journalist and sympathetic Thatcher biographer who dutifully churns out the usual anti-Iranian fearmongering and nonchalantly equates criticising Israel with Anti-Semitism - I think it's safe to say that anyone interested in objective and non-compromised analysis of current events should stay clear of this twitter page and look elsewhere (e.g. globalresearch.ca or landdestroyer.blogspot.com). My only explanation for why someone would compile all this rather crude disinformation passing off foreign meddling and sedition in souvereign states as a legitimate pro-democracy struggle is that the person in question has either fallen victim to the official propaganda campaign himself or is a willful agent of that very perception management machinery instilling into us all that manichean crap about evil regimes vs. progressive forces.
 

crackerjack

Well-known member
After skimming some of the posts - the most telling being one linking to an interview with an obnoxious journalist and sympathetic Thatcher biographer who dutifully churns out the usual anti-Iranian fearmongering and nonchalantly equates criticising Israel with Anti-Semitism - I think it's safe to say that anyone interested in objective and non-compromised analysis of current events should stay clear of this twitter page and look elsewhere (e.g. globalresearch.ca or landdestroyer.blogspot.com). My only explanation for why someone would compile all this rather crude disinformation passing off foreign meddling and sedition in souvereign states as a legitimate pro-democracy struggle is that the person in question has either fallen victim to the official propaganda campaign himself or is a willful agent of that very perception management machinery instilling into us all that manichean crap about evil regimes vs. progressive forces.
Yes, I believe that exactly sums Craner up. He's also Welsh.
 

craner

Beast of Burden
Presumably, that guy's talking about the interview with Claire Berlinski, which is primarily about Turkey, and very interesting to read if you are interested in Turkey and its relationship with Iran and the Arab states. She's not obnoxious; you just don't like her views. Or have you actually met her?
 

Mr. Tea

Shub-Niggurath, Please
Staff member
Clearly a stooge. Any Turkish woman that wasn't spitting halva in your face must be a NATO cutiepie.
 

craner

Beast of Burden
I must say, I cannot say anything to defend my twitter feed; nobody reads it and rightfully so. It's supposed to be an adjunct to my blog, but I'm just bad at it: too prolix, too lazy, not witty enough.

I have some amazing stuff to go on the blog, mind you, but I just can't seem to finish any of it. Bits of writing begun, sketched out, half written. Ground-breaking, beautifully written things about Gulnara Karimova, the Aliyev Clan, the MEK, Yulia Tymoshenko, Condoleeza Rice, Dagestan, British law firms in North Korea, the Communist Party of Wales, the former Soviet Aerospace programme at Baikonur, Scooter Libby, Lukashenko's moustache. You just won't believe how good some of this stuff is. If it ever gets finished, it'll be like Penman on Jacko, Hersh on Kissinger, Hitch on Clinton, Mailer on Marilyn, Miller on Greece, Shawcross on Cambodia, Burchill on Diana...only better!
 

padraig (u.s.)

a monkey that will go ape
so normally I just ignore kooky message board politics guys but this is a bit much

I think it's safe to say that anyone interested in objective and non-compromised analysis of current events should stay clear of this twitter page and look elsewhere (e.g. globalresearch.ca or landdestroyer.blogspot.com)
when I'm looking for objective + non-compromised analysis of current events one of the places I make sure -not- to look is any website whose blogroll includes Prison Planet + various other Alex Jones endeavors, not to mention other New World Order fetishizing crazy persons like Webster Tarpley or Jim Corr. or any website whose list of major contributors includes Michel Chussudovsky or this guy. seriously, it only takes about 5 minutes of backtracking any of these wingnuts before it inevitably descends into the same dreary morass of nuttiness revolving around Lyndon LaRouche, 9/11 truth, Slobodan Milosevic apologists (or Mugabe or Khaddafi or whatever shitty dictator is currently resisting Western imperialism* apologists), global warming denialism/AIDS/etc (+ sometimes Holocaust) denialism, and so on. if you have an actual reality-based radical view of the world these dudes especially suck because they make you look crazy by association to people who can't tell the difference, i.e. most people.

sorry this has nothing to do with Craner - whose politics, from the little I know of them I wouldn't exactly rush to defend, although tbf he is well-read + has interesting points to make sometimes especially about more obscure kinds of geopolitics things most people don't know very much about - I just felt it was a duty not to let that crazy ish slip in under the radar. a debunking which should be scottdisco's job really but who knows where he is nowadays (scott? you hear me bro?).
 

padraig (u.s.)

a monkey that will go ape
*just in case it's not clear, Western imperialism, in it's many forms both overt + subtle, still sucks it hard. imperialism in general (let's not leave China out, or anybody else) sucks it hard. but that doesn't mean shitty dictators don't suck just as hard in their own unique + shitty way.
 

craner

Beast of Burden
I'm not an Imperialist. I'm simply interested in corrupt, powerful and/or glamorous women, and nuclear weapons that haven't been accounted for. Ukraine is particularly interesting to me, as it combines the two.
 

lanugo

von Verfall erzittern
so normally I just ignore kooky message board politics guys but this is a bit much



when I'm looking for objective + non-compromised analysis of current events one of the places I make sure -not- to look is any website whose blogroll includes Prison Planet + various other Alex Jones endeavors, not to mention other New World Order fetishizing crazy persons like Webster Tarpley or Jim Corr. or any website whose list of major contributors includes Michel Chussudovsky or this guy. seriously, it only takes about 5 minutes of backtracking any of these wingnuts before it inevitably descends into the same dreary morass of nuttiness revolving around Lyndon LaRouche, 9/11 truth, Slobodan Milosevic apologists (or Mugabe or Khaddafi or whatever shitty dictator is currently resisting Western imperialism* apologists), global warming denialism/AIDS/etc (+ sometimes Holocaust) denialism, and so on. if you have an actual reality-based radical view of the world these dudes especially suck because they make you look crazy by association to people who can't tell the difference, i.e. most people.

sorry this has nothing to do with Craner - whose politics, from the little I know of them I wouldn't exactly rush to defend, although tbf he is well-read + has interesting points to make sometimes especially about more obscure kinds of geopolitics things most people don't know very much about - I just felt it was a duty not to let that crazy ish slip in under the radar. a debunking which should be scottdisco's job really but who knows where he is nowadays (scott? you hear me bro?).
Granted that the work of these authors is probably not devoid of falsehoods, biases and speculation it strikes me as rather ignorant to outright dismiss it just because they are operating from a fringe where certain sensitive topics are not placed under a taboo. Your denunciation of these particular authors and their subject matter - which, by the way, also compromises non-conspirative topics such as drone warfare, the military contractor business, cyber warfare, et. al. - bears all the signs of the exasperation of someone whose neatly arranged version of reality is contested by contravening facts and opinions.

Please tell me: what constitutes a "credible" source for you? The nimbus of "quality journalism", meaning the kind published by the five remaining major news corporations not owned by Murdoch but some other tycoon? Self-imposed abstinence from controversial topics (i.e. every author taking the official version of 9/11 for the sacrosanct truth is credible - which would exclude Robert Fisk and Daniel Ellsberg)? And how exactly is such a newspaper as the NYT not compromised by providing Obama, Cameron, Sarkozy with an op-ed to disseminate their usual worn-out PR/newspeak lingo in defense of the NATO invasion in Libya? After all, it was this very statement and the declarations made therein which were then used by Sarkozy to justify France's violations of the UNSCr. 1973. If providing the forum for the justification of arbitrary power abuses doesn't discredit a medium then I don't know what does.
 
Last edited:

IdleRich

IdleRich
"Granted that the work of these authors is probably not devoid of falsehoods, biases and speculation it strikes me as rather ignorant to outright dismiss it just because they are operating from a fringe where certain sensitive topics are not placed under a taboo."
That's what you did to the blog in the original piece though isn't it? Precisely because they were, in your eyes, filled with biases and speculation.
Regardless of anyone's particular bias I would expect them to be able to master the basics of putting together an argument that is at least heading towards consistent but yours are so stupid that you make me feel the need to get involved and act like a teacher trying to correct a primary school child's spelling so that it's at least at a level that is worth the other children bothering with.
 

padraig (u.s.)

a monkey that will go ape
bears all the signs of the exasperation of someone whose neatly arranged version of reality is contested by contravening facts and opinions
here's the stock answer these dudes always give. the issue isn't their theories, it's that the rest of us are simply unable to unshackle our minds from their New Order mental bonds. unfortunately all those poorly edited 12000 word diatribes about the globalists are blowing exactly no one's mind, tho I agree that they are exasperating. in any event you're barking up the wrongest of wrong trees. I grew up in the anarchopunk scene and all its loose associations + fellow travelers. I've met tons of dudes about a million times loopier than a bunch of paranoid old white guys who behold the pale horse from their strange little corners of the internet.

incidentally, no, I don't uncritically accept everything I read in the NYT or any other mainstream outlet, but I've had enough experience with independent media - credible independent media I mean, not conspiracy theorizing - not to trust that infallibly either. you want to make it out as if the only choice is between CNN + Alex Jones etc but very clearly it is not. 9/11 "truth" is its own endless rabbit hole that I really have no desire to dive down into, so I'll just say that it seems very sad to me, in multiple ways, more than anything else. Ellsberg I have total respect for but just b/c you respect someone doesn't mean they're always right.
 

Mr. Tea

Shub-Niggurath, Please
Staff member

luka

Well-known member
Staff member
th way its written shows you wrote it to sell so why did you not sell it? i dont lik to see you write like that but if you must then at least sell the things. it doesnt have your usual glamour. the story could be intresting i suppose but the writing is banal which must be intentional.
 

craner

Beast of Burden
where do you get your information from?
Their own websites, parliamentary records and legal reports, a couple of books (particularly Masoud Banisadr's memoir), newspaper and magazine archives, Human Rights Watch, and so on.
 
Top